NEW p iii

TESTAMENT
COMMENTARY
Exposition of Hebrews

William Hendriksen
and
Simon J. Kistemaker

BAKERBOOKS
A DIVISION OF BAKER BOOK HOUSE CO GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN 49516
p iv

Originally published in separate volumes:

Hebrews © 1984 by Simon J. Kistemaker
Published by Baker Books
a division of Baker Book House Company
P.O Box 6287, Grand Rapids, MI 49516–6287
12 volume set, first available 2002
ISBN 0–8010-2606–7
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means—for example, electronic, photocopy, recording—without the
prior written permission of the publisher. The only exception is brief quotations in printed reviews.
ISBN 0–8010-2079–4
Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture references in Hebrews are taken from the Holy Bible, New
International Version®. NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978 by International Bible Society. Used by
permission of Zondervan Bible Publishers. All rights reserved.

PV CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS
PREFACE
INTRODUCTION
COMMENTARY
1. Jesus’ Superiority and His Role as Savior and High Priest, part 1 (1:1–14)
 2. Jesus’ Superiority and His Role as Savior and High Priest, part 2 (2:1–18)
3. Jesus’ Superiority to Moses, part 1 (3:1–19)
4. Jesus’ Superiority to Moses, part 2 (4:1–13)
5. Jesus’ High Priesthood (4:14–5:10)
6. Exhortations (5:11–6:20)
7. Jesus: High Priest like Melchizedek (7:1–28)
8. Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice, part 1 (8:1–13)
9. Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice, part 2 (9:1–28)
10. Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice, part 3 (10:1–18) and More Exhortations (10:1–39)
11. The Heroes of Faith (11:1–40)
12. Admonitions and Exhortations, part 1 (12:1–29)
13. Admonitions and Exhortations, part 2 (13:1–25)
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

P VI ABBREVIATIONS
ASV American Standard Version
ATR Anglican Theological Review
BA Biblical Archaeologist
Bauer Walter Bauer, W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and Frederick Danker, A
Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 2d ed.
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BF British and Foreign Bible Society, The New Testament, 2d ed.
Bib Biblica
BibLeb Bibel und Leben
Bov Jose M. Bover, Novi Testamenti Biblica Graeca et Latina, 4th ed.
BS Bibliotheca Sacra
CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly
CTJ Calvin Theological Journal
I Clem. First Epistle of Clement
Dial. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho
Epid. Irenaeus, Epideixis
EvQ Evangelical Quarterly
ExpT Expository Times
GNB Good News Bible
Heresies Irenaeus, Against Heresies
HTR Harvard Theological Review
Interp Interpretation
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JB Jerusalem Bible
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
JTS Journal of Theological Studies
KJV King James Version
LB The Living Bible
LCL Loeb Classical Library edition
LXX Septuagint
Merk Augustinus Merk, ed., Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine, 9th ed.
MLB The Modern Language Bible p viii
Moffatt The Bible: A New Translation by James Moffatt
NAB New American Bible
NASB New American Standard Bible
NEB New English Bible
Nes-Al Eberhard Nestle; Kurt Aland, rev., Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th
ed.
NIDNTT New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology
NIV New International Version
NKJV New King James Version
NovT Novum Testamentum
NTS New Testament Studies
Phillips The New Testament in Modern English
4Q Florilegium Collection of biblical texts from Qumran Cave 4
1QSa Rule of the Congregation (serekh hayaḥad) from Qumran Cave 1
RefR Reformed Review
RSV Revised Standard Version
RV Revised Version
ScotJT Scottish Journal of Theology
SB H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus
Talmud und Midrasch
StTh Studia Theologica
Talmud The Babylonian Talmud
TB Tyndale Bulletin
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
TR Textus Receptus: The Greek New Testament According to the Majority
Text
Tyn H Bul Tyndale House Bulletin
TS Theological Studies
TZ Theologische Zeitschrift
WH B. F. Westcott and Fenton Hort, The New Testament in the Original
Greek
WTJ Westminster Theological Journal
ZNW Zeitschrift für die Neuentestamentliche Wissenschaft
ZPEB Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible
ZTK Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche

P IX PREFACE
When Dr. William Hendriksen died in January 1982, he had completed commentaries in the New
Testament Commentary series on the four Gospels and on all of Paul’s epistles with the exception of
I and II Corinthians. He set the goal of writing as many commentaries as he was able.
I have been given the challenge to continue this task. Although my style may differ somewhat
from that of Dr. Hendriksen, the format, design, and purpose are those of my predecessor. My
commentary on Hebrews has been written for the benefit of the pastor and the lay person.
The commentary on the text itself is free from technical terms and phrases, so that the lay
person can read the explanation of a text without difficulty. For the student who knows Greek, I
have placed the explanation of Greek words, phrases, and constructions at the conclusion of each
section of the text.
Introductory statements, comments about doctrinal considerations, and a summary are part of
every chapter. And throughout the commentary the reader finds numerous practical helps and
applications. Last, a Scripture index in the concluding pages proves to be of great value for quick
reference and consultation.
Spring 1984
Simon J. Kistemaker px

Introduction p 2
Outline
A. What Are the Characteristics of Hebrews?
B. Who Wrote This Epistle?
C. What Is the Message of Hebrews?
D. Why Was This Letter Rejected in the Early Centuries?
E. When Was Hebrews Written?
F. Who Were the First Readers?
G. How Can Hebrews Be Outlined? p 3

If there is one book of the New Testament that exhorts the Christian to remain faithful “in the last
days,” it is the Epistle to the Hebrews. This epistle has a special message for a day marked by
apostasy; it addresses the believer who, facing unbelief and disobedience, must stand firm in the
faith. The letter to the Hebrews, then, is an exhortation to faithfulness. Granted that Hebrews
teaches the superiority of Christ over angels, Moses, Joshua, Aaron, and Melchizedek, the
exhortations that are freely interspersed among the doctrinal sections set the tone. The admonitions
reveal the warm heart and deep concern of the pastor-writer.
Constantly in the epistle the author pleads with the reader to remain faithful to the gospel and
not to drift away (2:1; 3:12; 4:11; 6:11–12; 10:22–25; 12:25). He stresses corporate responsibility:
fellow believers are exhorted to take care that not one believer is allowed to turn away from the
living God (3:12–13; 4:1, 11). The consequences of falling away are indeed unimaginable, for, says
the writer, “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (10:31).
The writer of Hebrews counsels the believer to listen obediently to the Word of God (4:2–3, 6,
12). He exhorts the believers to “worship God acceptably with reverence and awe” (12:28). And he
concludes that “our God is a consuming fire” (12:29)—in case this exhortation is disregarded.
In an age in which apostasy is commonplace and “the secret power of lawlessness is already at
work,” as Paul puts it in II Thessalonians 2:7, the message of Hebrews is most relevant. We simply
cannot ignore the warning that accompanies “such a great salvation” (2:3), because we are unable to
escape if we do. Therefore, we do well to listen attentively.

A. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF HEBREWS?

Many translations of the Bible call Hebrews “the Epistle to the Hebrews.” But is this New
Testament book really an epistle? If we compare it with the epistles of Paul, James, Peter, Jude, and
John, we must say that it is not. Greetings customary in these letters—with the exception of I John
—are absent in Hebrews.
1. Letter or Epistle?
In the letter itself, however, the writer includes a few references to the conduct and possessions of
the readers (6:10; 10:32–34). And in chapter 13 p 4 he becomes rather intimate with the recipients.
He calls Timothy “our brother” and mentions that Timothy, having been released from prison, will
accompany him to visit the readers (13:23). The letter ends with greetings (13:24), and therefore in
view of this last chapter Hebrews is indeed a letter.
The beginning of Hebrews has something in common with the First Epistle of John. Both have
an introduction that in many respects serves as a summary statement for the succeeding chapters.
The name of the author is absent in Hebrews and in I John. Also, specific mention of the addressees,
greetings, and prayers are missing. These elements are characteristic of the rest of the New
Testament epistles.
To say that Hebrews is a treatise in order to avoid the use of the words epistle or letter is not too
satisfactory. A treatise consists of an exposition of or discourse on one topic, but Hebrews teaches a
number of doctrines and intersperses them with pastoral exhortations. We admit that whatever word
is used to describe this book of the New Testament, difficulties remain. One solution to the problem
is to call the book Hebrews, as some of the more recent translations do. Yet Hebrews itself is one of
the general Epistles of the New Testament.
As an epistle Hebrews is similar to some of the writings of Paul; it contains doctrine and
exhortation. Paul’s custom, however, is to set forth doctrine first; toward the end of his epistles,
Paul gives his exhortations. Hebrews differs in this respect. The writer mingles doctrine and
pastoral admonition; for example, in the midst of his teaching on the Son’s superiority to the angels,
the author exhorts the reader to “pay more careful attention” to the Word of God (2:1–4).
2. Pastoral or Doctrinal?
Is Hebrews a pastoral or doctrinal epistle? We can easily answer, “It is both.” Yet we admit that on
balance the purpose of the writer of Hebrews is to convey a pastoral exhortation to the recipients.
He strengthens his admonitions with doctrines about Christ’s superiority, the priesthood, the
covenant, and faith.
Nowhere in the entire New Testament except in the letter to the Hebrews are the doctrines of
Christ’s priesthood and the covenant explained. We find but a passing reference to the priesthood of
Christ in Romans 8:34, “Christ Jesus, who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the
right hand of God and is also interceding for us.” Paul merely mentions the intercessory work of
Christ and thus implies Christ’s priesthood. But in all his epistles Paul refrains from writing about
this doctrine. Although Paul’s theological training included the doctrine of the covenant as an
integral part of Old Testament teaching, he mentions the word covenant nine times (Rom. 9:4;
11:27; I Cor. 11:25; II Cor. 3:6, 14; Gal. 3:15, 17; 4:24; Eph. 2:12). In Galatians 4:24 he is
somewhat specific: “These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two
covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is
Hagar.” Yet even in p 5 this setting, Paul’s treatment is rather scant. The writer of Hebrews, on the
other hand, teaches the doctrines of the priesthood and the covenant in full.
3. Revelation and Inspiration
The author gives the reader God’s revelation. For him the primary author of Scripture, namely, the
Holy Spirit, is all important, for God addresses the reader through his Word. Thus, not the
secondary author but God is the speaker in the introductory phrases to the numerous quotations
from the Old Testament. In chapter 1, God is the One who utters the citations from the Psalms, the
Song of Moses (Deut. 32:43, LXX1), and II Samuel 7:14. With variations the phrase God says
occurs constantly (1:5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13; 2:12, 13; 3:7; 4:3; 5:5, 6; 7:21; 8:8; 10:5, 15, 17; 13:5). And
because the secondary author is unimportant for the writer of Hebrews, his own name also has been
deleted, perhaps purposely, in this letter. By focusing attention on the Triune God as speaker, the
author teaches that Scripture is divinely inspired. He has heard not the voice of man but the voice of
God.
Interestingly, however, when the author quotes from the Old Testament he uses the Greek
translation (the Septuagint) of the Hebrew text. And this translation in places differs from the
original. Here are two examples. First, Psalm 8:5 has: “You made him a little lower than the
heavenly beings [or: than God],” and Hebrews 2:7 reads: “You made him a little [or: for a little
while] lower than the angels.” Second, the wording of Psalm 40:6 is: “Sacrifice and offering you
did not desire, but my ears you have pierced.” However, Hebrews 10:5 gives this reading:
“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me.”
Why did the author use a translation that differed from the Old Testament text? Possibly the
writer did not know Hebrew, had learned the Scriptures through a Greek translation, and wrote to
readers who themselves used this translation. Does this mean that the so-called Septuagint
translation was inspired? Of course not. The Hebrew text of the Old Testament, not the translation,
was inspired by God. But this does not mean that the writer of Hebrews was forbidden to quote
from a translation, even from one that showed some variation. However, at the moment the author
wrote his letter, the inspiration of the epistle, including the Old Testament quotations, took place.
Guided by the Holy Spirit, the writer was free to take his material from a translation that differed
from the Hebrew text; he did not have to correct the translation to make it conform to the reading of
the Hebrew original. He wrote to Hebrews who were familiar with the Septuagint; that, for them,
was the Bible.
4. The Old Testament
We who are accustomed to owning personal copies of the Bible should not think that this was true
for the readers of Hebrews in the second half of the first century. Copies of the Old Testament books
were kept in the local synagogue and church. These were used during the worship services for the
p 6 instruction of the people. But the people attending the worship services did not possess these
books. They treasured the Word in their hearts and minds by committing the psalms and hymns to
memory. Also they learned messianic passages of the Old Testament by heart. They sang the well-
known psalms and hymns in church or at home, and they recited particular verses from the Old
Testament.
The author of Hebrews chose his citations carefully. For instance, in chapter 1, five quotations
are from familiar psalms, one from the Song of Moses, and one from a messianic passage. The
author appeals to the memory of his readers and thus communicates the Word clearly and
effectively.
5. Style
A final characteristic of Hebrews is the choice of words, the balanced sentences, the rhetorical
rhythm in the original Greek, and the excellent style. Even in translation the reader today perceives
something of the magnificence of the author’s literary ability. Take, for example, the author’s pithy
definition of faith: “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see”
(11:1). Or analyze this sentence for balance: “If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have
received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of
judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God” (10:26–27). The author reveals
himself as an educated person who chose his words carefully and who was thoroughly familiar with
the teaching of the Old Testament.

1 LXX Septuagint
 B. WHO WROTE THIS EPISTLE?
When questioned about the authorship of Hebrews, the third-century theologian Origen said, “But
who wrote the epistle, to be sure, only God knows.” And that was in A.D. 225. If scholars at the
dawn of the Christian era did not know who wrote Hebrews, we certainly will not rise above them.
1. Apollos
Of course, scholars have suggested possible candidates, but they must resort to hypotheses. Martin
Luther, for example, thought that Apollos was the author of Hebrews. He based his hypothesis on
Acts 18:24–26, “Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was
a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of
the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the
baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him,
they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.”
Luther pointed out that Alexandria was a great educational center, where Apollos learned to
express himself masterfully in the Greek language. Apollos used the Septuagint translation of the
Old Testament because the Septuagint was first published in Alexandria. p 7
Apollos had become acquainted with the Christian faith, had heard Paul preach in Ephesus, and
had been instructed “in the way of God more adequately” by Priscilla and Aquila. He possessed a
“thorough knowledge of the Scriptures,” “taught about Jesus accurately,” and became an
outstanding speaker. For Martin Luther, Apollos was most qualified to write the Epistle to the
Hebrews.
The hypothesis is attractive indeed and answers many questions. However, the silence of the
centuries is telling. We would expect that Clement of Alexandria, about A.D. 200, says something
about this matter, but he omits the name Apollos. Instead Clement ascribes Hebrews to Paul.
2. Paul
Was Paul the author of Hebrews? For centuries numerous people have accepted the Pauline
authorship of this epistle. From the first publication of the King James Version in 1611 to the
present, many people have taken the title verbatim: “The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the
Hebrews.” But in the margin of some Bibles of this version the reader is told: “Authorship
uncertain, commonly attributed to Paul.”
The uncertainty of Pauline authorship stems from the difference between the epistles of Paul
and Hebrews. To begin with the language of Hebrews, we see a distinct difference. Nothing in
Hebrews reminds us of the style, diction, word choice, and material of Paul’s letters. The language
in Hebrews simply is not that of Paul.
The doctrines expressed in Hebrews find no echo in any of Paul’s epistles. Usually in these
letters cross-references to major doctrines are evident. Not so in Hebrews. The doctrines of Christ’s
priesthood and the covenant are prominent in Hebrews, but absent from the letters of Paul.
The use of names referring to Jesus in Hebrews differs from that of Paul. In his earlier epistles
Paul refers to the Lord as Jesus Christ, but in his later epistles this combination is reversed: Paul
calls him Christ Jesus. He seldom writes Jesus (II Cor. 11:4; Phil. 2:10; I Thess. 4:14). The author
of Hebrews, by contrast, repeatedly calls the Lord by his given name Jesus (2:9; 3:1; 4:14; 6:20;
7:22; 10:19; 12:2, 24; 13:15). Three times the author of Hebrews uses the combination Jesus Christ
(10:10; 13:8, 21), and only once he says Lord Jesus (13:20). The Epistle to the Hebrews, however,
lacks the combination Christ Jesus.
The most significant point in considering whether Paul wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews has to
do with Hebrews 2:3. The writer, who includes himself in his warning to pay attention to the Word
of God, says, “This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those
who heard him.” In schematic form, we have the following sequence:
This salvation which
1. was first announced by the Lord
2. by those who heard him
3. was confirmed to us p 8
The conclusion may be drawn that the writer had not heard the Lord personally but had to rely
on the reports of others. Paul, of course, states categorically that he did not receive the gospel from
anyone but Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:12). Paul heard the voice of Jesus on the Damascus road (Acts 9:4;
22:7; 26:14). And Jesus spoke to him afterward (Acts 18:9–10; 22:18–21). Paul, therefore, could
not have written the words of Hebrews 2:3.
3. Barnabas
Tertullian, around A.D. 225, suggested that Barnabas was the writer of Hebrews. He did this in light
of Barnabas’s credentials given in Acts 4:36–37: “Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles
called Barnabas (which means Son of Encouragement), sold a field he owned and brought the
money and put it at the apostles’ feet.” As a Levite, Barnabas was fully acquainted with the
Levitical priesthood. Besides, he came from the island of Cyprus where he presumably learned the
Greek language well. He was familiar with the church and its needs. Thus, he was eminently
qualified to write the Epistle to the Hebrews, according to Tertullian. The weakness of this position
is that it has not found any support in the history of the canon. Tertullian has not gained any
followers and his suggestion has been viewed as a curiosity.
4. Priscilla
Last among the names that have been proposed for solving the question of authorship is the name of
Priscilla. She with her husband Aquila instructed Apollos (Acts 18:26). But Priscilla could not have
written Hebrews because in the original Greek of Hebrews 11:32, the writer uses a participle with a
masculine ending when he refers to himself: “I do not have time to tell about Gideon.…”
What is the conclusion of the matter? We simply say with Origen, “But who wrote the epistle, to
be sure, only God knows.” In the final analysis, authorship is not important. The content of the
epistle is what matters.

C. WHAT IS THE MESSAGE OF HEBREWS?

A cursory glance at the Epistle to the Hebrews tells the readers that its content is strengthened by
numerous quotations from the Old Testament; next, the author constantly exhorts the readers
pastorally; and last, the development of the doctrinal part follows a logical sequence. We begin our
survey of the content with a discussion of the Old Testament citations in Hebrews.
1. Old Testament Quotations
Estimates of the number of direct quotations in the Epistle to the Hebrews vary. For example, some
scholars count all the direct citations and come to p 9 a total of thirty-six.1 Others find twenty-four
direct quotations from the Old Testament and add another five passages “which are used verbally
though not formally quoted.” They recognize twenty-nine citations.2
Although we realize that the author of Hebrews did not have to provide introductory statements

1 Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1952), vol. 1, p. 331.
2 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1950), pp. 469–74.
for each Old Testament quote, we still think that a direct citation is one with an introductory
formula. We find twenty-six quotations, to which we add five that lack an introduction. This brings
the total to thirty-one passages.
The Psalter was a favorite book for the writer of Hebrews. One-third of his direct quotations
have been taken from the Book of Psalms. Most of them are located in Hebrews 1. One citation
comes from the Hymn of Moses, Deuteronomy 32, in the Septuagint version.
Direct Quotations

Old Testament

1. Psalm 2:7 1:5a; 5:5

2. II Samuel 7:14 1:5b

3. Deuteronomy 32:43 1:6b

4. Psalm 104:4 1:7

5. Psalm 45:6–7 1:8–9

6. Psalm 102:25–27 1:10–12

7. Psalm 110:1 1:13

8. Psalm 8:4–6 2:6–8a

9. Psalm 22:22 2:12

10. Isaiah 8:17 2:13a

11. Isaiah 8:18 2:13b

12. Numbers 12:7 3:2, 5

13. Psalm 95:7–11 3:7–11

14. Genesis 2:2 4:4

15. Psalm 110:4 5:6; 7:17, 21

16. Genesis 22:17 6:14

17. Genesis 14:17–20 7:1–2

18. Exodus 25:40 8:5

19. Jeremiah 31:31–34 8:8–12

20. Exodus 24:8 9:20

21. Psalm 40:6–8 10:5–7

22. Deuteronomy 32:35a 10:30a

23. Deuteronomy 32:36a; Psalm 10:30b

135:14a

24. Isaiah 26:20; Habakkuk 2:3–4 10:37–38 p 10

25. Genesis 21:12 11:18

26. Proverbs 3:11–12 12:5–6

27. Exodus 19:12–13 12:20

28. Deuteronomy 9:19 12:21

29. Haggai 2:6 12:26

30. Deuteronomy 31:6 13:5

31. Psalm 118:6 13:6

 Hebrews
The writer of Hebrews appeals to his readers by quoting familiar passages from the Old
Testament. These passages presumably had been memorized by the readers, so that when they heard
the Epistle to the Hebrews read to them in a worship service, they could relate to its content. The
Old Testament Scriptures, therefore, were of great importance to the author and the readers of this
epistle. In the words of the writer, “the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-
edged sword” (4:12). And that Word has been quoted, alluded to, and used in Hebrews more than in
any other New Testament book.
2. Pastoral Admonitions
Repeatedly the author admonishes his readers to “pay more careful attention” to the Word of God
(2:1). He calls that word preached to the Israelites in the desert “the gospel” (4:2), and he states that
these rebellious people died in the desert because they failed to combine the Word they had heard
with faith.
Is the epistle predominantly pastoral? Or is it doctrinal? Differently stated, the question is
whether the author’s admonitions result in theological teaching or, vice versa, whether doctrines
lead to admonitions.3 If we look at the numerous passages that exhort the readers, we see a
remarkable consistency in approach. The author writes pastorally and encourages the Hebrews to
remain faithful to God and his Word. “See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving
heart that turns away from the living God” (3:12). This admonition is the key to understanding the
pastoral concerns of the writer. It is basic to the warnings that precede and follow. In sequence, here
are a number of admonitions that make up the content of the Epistle to the Hebrews:
2:1–4 “We must pay more careful attention, therefore”

3:1 “Therefore, holy brothers, … fix your thoughts

on Jesus”

3:12–19 “See to it, brothers”

4:1–3 “Therefore, … let us be careful”

4:11 “Let us, therefore, make every effort”

4:14–16 “Therefore, … let us hold firmly to the faith” p

11

6:1–3 “Therefore let us leave the elementary

teachings”

6:11–12 “We want each of you to show this same

diligence”

3 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok, 1955),
p. 43.
10:19–39 “Therefore, brothers, … let us draw near to
God”

12:1–28 “Therefore, … let us throw off everything that

hinders”

13:1–25 “Keep on loving each other as brothers”

The appeal of the writer comes to the readers in phraseology that borders on repetition. The
message is clear: keep the faith, be obedient, remain strong, come to God, and claim your salvation.
The author warns the reader against the sin of unbelief that eventually takes its toll and ends in
apostasy.
As the writer exhorts so he teaches. He expresses his concern that the readers obey the Word of
God, and thus he exhorts them. He also wants his readers to know the Word, and thus he teaches
them.
3. Doctrinal Sequence
In the opening verses of his introduction (1:1–2), the author defines the extent and the range of the
Word of God: in the Old Testament era God spoke through his prophets; in New Testament times,
he has spoken through his Son. He expected his people to obey his Word when it was
communicated to them “by angels” (2:2), for disobedience resulted in “just punishment.” How
much more, then, are the people of the New Testament era to obey God’s Word that was proclaimed
not by angels but by the Son of God. And this Son is far superior to the angels because he is the
Prophet who spoke the Word (1:2), the Priest who “provided purification for sins” (1:3), and the
King who “sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven” (1:3). Furthermore, this Prophet,
who is Priest and King as well, demands strict obedience to the Word that proclaims salvation (2:3).
The superiority of the Son of God in relation to the angels is confessed in psalm and song. The
psalm and hymn writers portray the Son as King, God, Creator, and one whose “years will never
end” (1:12). In distinction from the angels, the Son took upon himself man’s human nature (2:14)
and is not ashamed to call his people brothers and sisters, for he and they “are of the same family”
(2:11–12). Because of this close identity with his brothers and sisters, Jesus became their “merciful
and faithful high priest in service to God,” and thus he made “atonement for the sins of the people”
(2:17). For this reason, says the writer of Hebrews, I exhort you to “fix your thoughts on Jesus, the
apostle and high priest whom we confess” (3:1).
Jesus is greater than Moses. Moses was a faithful servant in God’s house; Jesus is a faithful son
over God’s house (3:5–6). In the time of Moses the Israelites refused to obey God’s Word and
consequently perished in the desert (3:17). The believer today is exhorted to listen to “the gospel”
and to make every effort to enter the rest God has promised (4:3, 6, 11). Take the living and active
Word of God to heart, counsels the author, because it may be compared with a double-edged sword
(4:12).
Also, Jesus is far greater than Aaron. Aaron was a high priest, but a p 12 sinner; Jesus is the
great high priest, yet without sin (5:3; 4:14–15). Jesus became high priest in the order of
Melchizedek (5:10). The readers should have known this fact by searching the Scriptures.
Therefore, the author of Hebrews reproves them for their indolence (5:11–13). He exhorts them to
advance in the “teachings about Christ” (6:1); refusal to advance leads to spiritual death (6:4–6, 8).
He encourages the believers with the reassuring word that God is true to his promise. That promise
God confirms with an oath, so that his word is unchangeable (6:17–18).
The writer shows the readers from the Old Testament Scriptures that Jesus, belonging to the
high-priestly order of Melchizedek, is superior to the Levitical priests (chap. 7). Priests in the
Aaronic order were appointed by law, were sinners, and were subject to death (7:23, 27–28). When
God swore an oath, Jesus became priest and thereby indicated the unchangeableness of his priestly
office (7:21). He is sinless and is priest forever.
Jesus is priest-king, but he does not serve in an earthly tabernacle; he has gone to serve in “the
true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man” (8:2; see also 9:11, 24). There in the Most Holy
Place he obtained eternal redemption for his people, and there he serves as “the mediator of a new
covenant” (9:15). Christ offered himself once for all and thereby “made perfect forever those who
are being made holy” (10:14) and have the law of the new covenant in their hearts and written on
their minds.
The second part of the epistle begins with 10:19 and is pastoral throughout. The writer
encourages the readers “to draw near to God,” to meet together for worship, and to await the
coming Day (10:22, 25). Once more he stresses that deliberate sin cannot be forgiven (6:4–6;
10:26–29). The result of willful sin is that one “fall[s] into the hands of the living God” (10:31).
Chapter 11 is a consideration of the heroes of faith depicted in the Old Testament. The author
has been selective and devotes most of the discussion to Abraham the father of believers (11:8–19).
He exhorts the readers to fix their attention on Jesus, the “author and perfecter” of their faith (12:2),
to strengthen their “feeble arms and weak knees” (12:12), and “to live in peace with all men and to
be holy” (12:14). Chapter 12 concludes with an exhortation to “worship God acceptably with
reverence and awe” (12:28). The last chapter of Hebrews is a series of concluding exhortations with
an eloquent benediction (13:20–21) and personal greetings (13:22–25).

D. WHY WAS THIS LETTER REJECTED IN THE EARLY

CENTURIES?
1. First Century
The history of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Christian church of the first few centuries is rather
varied. The letter was accepted in the West and quoted by Clement of Rome in his epistle, known as
I Clement, to the church of Corinth. First Clement was written about A.D. 96 and contains segments
from Hebrews (see especially I Clem. 36:1–5; 17:1, 5; 19:2; 27:2; 43:1; p 13 56:2–4). Clement’s
use of Hebrews in the last decade of the first century is sufficient evidence that the Epistle to the
Hebrews circulated widely.
2. Second Century
Irenaeus, about A.D. 185, quotes from Hebrews. He was bishop of the churches of Vienne and Lyon
in southern France. Tertullian, a North African writer who died in A.D. 225, quotes Hebrews 6:4–8.
He introduces the lengthy quotation as follows:

For there is extant withal an Epistle to the Hebrews under the name of Barnabas—a man
sufficiently accredited by God.… Warning, accordingly, the disciples to omit all first principles, and
strive rather after perfection, and not lay again the foundations of repentance from the works of the
dead.…4
The church of the West (Italy, France, and Africa), during the latter part of the second century,

4 Tertullian, “On Modesty,” Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), vol. 4,
chap. 20, p. 97.
had reservations about the place of Hebrews in the canon of the New Testament. For example, the
list of New Testament books known as the Muratorian Canon that presumably dates from A.D. 175
does not include the Epistle to the Hebrews.
The reason for these reservations can be traced to the doctrinal controversies of the second and
third centuries. In A.D. 156, Montanus, a self-proclaimed theologian from Asia Minor, practiced
asceticism and expected his followers to live a life of holiness. He applied Hebrews 6:4–6 to anyone
who indulged in worldly matters and thus denied such a person the possibility of repentance. Then
in A.D. 250 Emperor Decius instigated persecutions against the Christians, many of whom under
duress denied the Christian faith. Novatian, a native of Phrygia in Asia Minor, used Hebrews 6:4–6
against all Christians who had fallen away because of these persecutions. Novatian was of the
opinion that it was impossible for them to come to repentance; they were cut off from the church
and denied readmission. The application of this Scripture passage in the rigorous manners of the
Montanists and the Novatians did not meet with approval in the church. Because of these schismatic
movements and their abuse of this particular passage, the Epistle to the Hebrews was not placed
among the canonical books of the New Testament in the West.
3. Third Century
The church of the East (Egypt and Syria), however, applied the rule that for a New Testament book
to be canonical it had to be apostolic. The Epistle to the Hebrews was thought to be written by Paul,
who was an apostle, and therefore Hebrews was accepted as canonical. Already in A.D. 175
Pantaenus said that Paul omitted his name in the epistle for several reasons: his modesty, p 14 his
respect for the Lord, and the superabundance of his writing.5 Although these reasons are
unconvincing, they indicate that Pantaenus harbored a degree of uneasiness about Pauline
authorship.
His successor Clement of Alexandria, in approximately A.D. 200, expresses the same
uneasiness.

And as for the Epistle to the Hebrews, [Clement] says indeed that it is Paul’s, but that it was written
for Hebrews in the Hebrew tongue, and that Luke, having carefully translated it, published it for the
Greeks.… The [words] “Paul an apostle” were naturally not prefixed. For, says he, “in writing to
Hebrews who had conceived a prejudice against him and were suspicious of him, he very wisely did
not repel them at the beginning by putting his name.”6

An Alexandrian papyrus manuscript, listed as P46 and dated approximately A.D. 200, places the
Epistle to the Hebrews among those of Paul. In fact, Hebrews comes after Romans and before I
Corinthians. And Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, writes in A.D. 367 about Hebrews and places it
between II Thessalonians and I Timothy.
In the Western church, Hebrews was eventually accepted in the fourth century. Some scholars
ascribed it to Paul, but others doubted whether Paul was the author. At any rate, the councils of that
century placed Hebrews in the canon. The Council of Hippo Regius in A.D. 393 provides this
interesting note: “Thirteen epistles of Paul, and one by the same to the Hebrews.” And the Council
of Carthage in A.D. 397 includes Hebrews in the epistolary of Paul and simply ascribes fourteen
epistles to Paul.

5 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.14.4 (LCL).

6 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.14.2–3 (LCL).
 E. WHEN WAS HEBREWS WRITTEN?
Because of I Clement, we can say that Hebrews was composed before A.D. 96. In that year Clement
of Rome wrote his epistle to the Corinthian church and incorporated a number of quotations and
allusions from Hebrews in his epistle. The outer limit of dating the Epistle to the Hebrews is sure:
sometime before A.D. 96. To determine a starting point for the composition of the epistle is difficult.
1. Internal Evidence
In Hebrews 2:3, the author places himself among the readers as second-generation Christians. That
is, he himself had not heard the gospel from the lips of Jesus but with the readers had to rely on the
preaching of those who had heard Jesus. The author, then, was a follower of the apostles, many of
whom could still be alive at the time the writer composed his epistle. Numerous passages in
Hebrews reflect a time in which the Christians’ ardent love for Christ had waned and the enthusiasm
of a former period had disappeared. p 15
The readers of Hebrews were in danger of drifting away from the gospel they had heard (2:1).
Some of them might run the risk of being hardened by the deceitfulness of sin (3:13). Some were in
the habit of no longer attending the worship services (10:25). Others were faltering in their spiritual
zeal (12:12).
The author rebukes the readers for having failed to learn the doctrines of Scripture. “In fact,
though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths
of God’s word all over again” (5:12). Also their leaders who had taught the Word of God had died
(13:7).
In earlier days the readers had endured persecution after they “had received the light” (10:32).
They had experienced suffering, insults, and confiscation of their property (10:33). The author fails
to provide an indication when the persecution took place. Although we are inclined to think of the
time following the burning of Rome in A.D. 64—after which the Neronian persecutions were
instigated—the author says nothing more than “remember those earlier days.”
The frequent exhortations—to pay attention (2:1), to encourage one another (3:13), to persevere
(10:36), to run with perseverance (12:1), and to resist sin (12:4)—leave the impression that the
recipients of the epistle lived in a period of religious peace. They no longer seemed to suffer for
being Christians, as they had on earlier occasions. And because of the peaceful times, religious
backsliding had become a distinct threat to the people to whom Hebrews was addressed.
2. Historical Setting
If we look at the historical setting of the second half of the first century, we note that Nero acceded
to the imperial throne in A.D. 54. A decade later the persecutions against the Christians began; they
lasted until Nero committed suicide in A.D. 68. Within a year in short succession, Galba, Otho, and
Vitellius ruled the Roman empire. But in A.D. 69 Vespasian, who at the time functioned as general
of the Roman army that surrounded the city of Jerusalem, became emperor. He loved peace and
stability; he was a virtuous man, upright in character.7 During his ten-year rule, peace returned to his
worldwide domain, and consequently persecutions against the Christians belonged to history.
Vespasian’s son, Titus, who took his father’s place as general of the army in Judea, also
followed in his footsteps as emperor in A.D. 79. His brief reign of two years was marked by the
same desire for peace and tranquility. When Titus’ brother, Domitian, began to rule the empire in
A.D. 81, the peaceful trend established by Vespasian and continued by Titus endured for the next
decade. Toward the end of his reign, Domitian introduced persecutions that may have caused the
exile of John to the isle of Patmos (Rev. 1:9). p 16
History verifies that a decline of religious fervor occurs more often in a period of peace and
prosperity than in times of persecution and hardship. I venture to say that the Epistle to the Hebrews
reflects a period of sustained peace during which the Christians had relaxed spiritually. The writer

7 Michael Grant, The Twelve Caesars (New York: Scribner’s, 1975), p. 219.
of the epistle, then, felt obliged to write words of exhortation and occasional rebuke. His reference
to the persecution the readers had endured in “those earlier days” may refer to that of Nero in the
years A.D. 64–68. The epistle probably was written in the early 80s.
3. Religious Context
However, a much more weighty consideration relates to the author’s discussion of the high
priesthood of Christ. When the writer is about to discuss the topic of Jesus as high priest in the order
of Melchizedek, he says that this subject “is hard to explain because you are slow to learn” (5:11).
The word hard had overtones that reverberated in the Hebrew community. For the Jew, the Aaronic
priesthood was sacrosanct because God had ordained it by law (7:11–12). No Jew would dare
suggest that the Levitical priesthood ought to be “set aside because it was weak and useless” (7:18)
and assert that “the law made nothing perfect” (7:19). Should he say such a hard thing, he would
bring the wrath and indignation of the Hebrew community on his head.
The fact that the author of the epistle boldly writes about the setting aside of the Levitical
priesthood can best be understood when we place the time of composition a decade or more after
the destruction of the temple and the cessation of the Aaronic priesthood. The writer, therefore, had
the freedom to express himself on this matter without incurring the anger of the Jewish people.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons that the other New Testament writers refrained from discussing
the priesthood of Christ. For example, in spite of the vow of purification that Paul took to show the
Jews in Jerusalem that he was living in obedience to the law (Acts 21:22–26), he was accused of
teaching doctrines against the Jewish people, the law, and the temple (Acts 21:28). What Paul could
not do regarding the priesthood, the writer of Hebrews was able to do in a time in which the
priesthood and the law concerning it belonged to the past.
Nowhere in the Epistle to the Hebrews do we find any mention of the temple in Jerusalem. The
writer discusses the tabernacle and priesthood of the forty-year period in the wilderness. Because he
deletes any reference to the temple or the destruction of Jerusalem, he may imply that the priestly
services had come to an end. And for that reason, he turns his attention to the initial stages of the
Levitical priesthood and the construction of the tabernacle.
The conclusion to these observations is that a date for Hebrews of a decade after the destruction
of the Jerusalem temple and the cessation of the priesthood is not at all improbable. Perhaps
Hebrews was composed between A.D. 80 and 85.

P 17 F. WHO WERE THE FIRST READERS?

The recipients of the Epistle to the Hebrews were Jewish Christians. Where these Hebrews lived,
the author fails to say. If he had only given some indication as to the epistle’s place of destination,
we would not need to work with a hypothesis. Many place names have been suggested: Jerusalem,
the Qumran settlement near the Dead Sea, Alexandria, Rome—to mention no more.
1. Israel
If we accept a date of composition after A.D. 70, automatically Jerusalem and the Qumran
community are ruled out. After the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem, they eventually
renamed it Aelia Capitolina and forbade the Jews from resettling there. Also, the Qumran
community evacuated during the years of Roman occupation.
2. Alexandria
Scholars who favor Alexandria as the place where the Hebrews lived base their supposition on the
fact that Alexandria for centuries had been the home of many Jewish people. Here the Septuagint
originated to aid the Greek-speaking Jews in their Scripture reading. And according to Acts 18:24,
Alexandria was the place from which Apollos came. But no writer of the first few centuries testifies
to an Alexandrian destination or to a possible authorship of Apollos. We need to look elsewhere for
a place of destination.
3. Rome
Many factors point to Rome. The final greeting of the epistle mentions Italy. “Those from Italy send
you their greetings” (13:24). Granted that the preposition from can be interpreted to mean in—that
is, “those who are in Italy send you their greetings”—the commonly understood meaning away
from Italy seems to be preferred. Christians from Italy who were away from their homeland
conveyed greetings to their loved ones in Italy, presumably Rome.
Did the writer of Hebrews address his letter to the same congregation that received Paul’s letter
to the Romans? Not necessarily. Many congregations flourished in the imperial city in view of the
early beginnings of the church in Rome. (For example, archaeologists have unearthed a funerary
inscription in Rome that bears the name of a Christian lady, known as Pomponia Graecina, who was
buried in A.D. 43.) We assume that in the course of time the church continued to increase in
numbers. The author of Hebrews makes a distinction between “leaders” and “people” when he
writes, “Greet all your leaders and all God’s people” (13:24). He seems to leave the impression that
he addresses his epistle to a particular congregation in Rome.
Next, Clement of Rome quoted from the epistle soon after it was written. Although the letter
could have been composed elsewhere and in time brought p 18 to Rome, a letter addressed to the
Hebrews in Rome would circulate among the congregations in that city and thus be available to
Clement.
And last, Jewish people were most numerous in the imperial city, as Roman historiographers
and Flavius Josephus attest. An inscription bearing the word Hebrews and dating from the second
century after Christ has been found in Rome.
We feel comfortable with the choice of Rome, although we admit that we can only use a
hypothesis. And yet the accumulated facts seem to point to this choice. Perhaps the intention of the
author of Hebrews in omitting the place of destination may have been to indicate that his epistle has
a message for the church universal. Especially in our day in which we hear the expression the end
time repeatedly, the message of the Epistle to the Hebrews is most relevant.

G. HOW CAN HEBREWS BE OUTLINED?

A concise outline of Hebrews can easily be committed to memory with the following seven points:
1:1–4 1. Introduction

1:5–2:18 2. Jesus Is Superior to Angels

3:1–4:13 3. Jesus Is Greater Than Moses

4:14–7:28 4. Jesus Is the Great High Priest

8:1–10:18 5. Jesus Is the Mediator of a New Covenant

10:19–12:29 6. Jesus’ Work Is Applied by the Believer

13:1–25 7. Conclusion

Here is a more detailed outline:

1:1–2:18 Jesus’ Superiority and His Role as Savior and
High Priest

A. Introduction

B. Jesus’ Superiority to Angels 1:5–14

C. Jesus, Savior and High 2:1–18

Priest

3:1–4:13 Jesus’ Superiority to Moses

A. A Comparison of Jesus and 3:1–6

Moses

B. A Warning Against Unbelief 3:7–19

C. An Invitation to Enter God’s 4:1–13

Rest

4:14–5:10 Jesus’ High Priesthood

A. Encouragement for the 4:14–16

Readers

B. Enablement of the High 5:1–3

Priest

C. Fulfillment of the High- 5:4–10 p 19

priestly Office
5:11–6:20 Exhortations

A. Do Not Fall Away 5:11–6:12

B. Hold on to God’s Promise 6:13–20

7:1–28 Jesus: High Priest like

Melchizedek

A. Melchizedek, King and 7:1–10

Priest

B. Melchizedek’s Superior 7:11–19

Priesthood

C. Christ’s Superior Priesthood 7:20–28

8:1–10:18 Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice

A. The Heavenly Sanctuary 8:1–2

B. Jesus the Mediator 8:3–6

C. God’s New Covenant 8:7–13

D. The Earthly Sanctuary 9:1–10

E. Jesus’ Sacrificial Blood 9:11–28

F. Jesus’ Effective Sacrifice 10:1–18

10:19–39 More Exhortations

A. An Exhortation to Persevere 10:19–25

B. A Warning to Pay Attention 10:26–31

 C. A Reminder to Continue 10:32–39

11:1–40 The Heroes of Faith

A. A Definition of Faith 11:1–3

B. Three Examples of Faith: 11:4–7

Abel, Enoch, and Noah

C. The Faith of Abraham 11:8–19

D. The Faith of Isaac, Jacob, 11:20–22

and Joseph

E. The Faith of Moses 11:23–29

F. Faith at Jericho 11:30–31

G. Known and Unknown 11:32–40

Heroes of Faith

12:1–13:25 Admonitions and Exhortations

A. Divine Discipline 12:1–13

B. A Divine Warning 12:14–29

C. Communal Obligations 13:1–6

D. Ecclesiastical Duties 13:7–17

E. Prayers and Benedictions 13:18–21

F. Final Greetings 13:22–25 p 20

1:1–4
 Commentary

p 22 1. Jesus’ Superiority and His Role as Savior and High Priest, part
1
1:1–14 p 24
Outline
1:1–4 A. Introduction

B. Jesus’ Superiority to Angels

1:5 1. Psalm 2:7

1:5 2. II Samuel 7:14

1:6 3. Deuteronomy 32:43

1:7 4. Psalm 104:4

1:8–9 5. Psalm 45:6–7

1:10–12 6. Psalm 102:25–27

1:13 7. Psalm 110:1

A. Introduction
1:1–4

1 1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but
in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he
made the universe. 3 The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being,
sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the
right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4 So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has
inherited is superior to theirs.
The writer of Hebrews dispenses with the usual greetings and salutations that are typical of Paul’s
letters and those of James, Peter, John, and Jude. (The First Epistle of John does not give any
greetings in the introduction nor in the conclusion, and for that reason is technically not an epistle.)
In the conclusion of Hebrews, however, the author uses the first person pronoun I a few times;
mentions that if Timothy, who has been released from prison, arrives soon, he will accompany the
writer on a visit to the recipients of the epistle; and conveys greetings to all God’s people.
Why would the writer not address the readers in the customary way by making himself known,
specifying the addressees, and pronouncing a salutation of grace, peace, and mercy? The answer
must be that the author wants to focus attention primarily on the ultimate revelation of God—Jesus
Christ, his Son. This revelation is contrasted with the piecemeal revelation that God, through the
prophets, gave to the forefathers for many centuries. The author stresses the theme of the person,
offices, and function of Jesus, the Son of God.
The writer does not address the original readers by name or place even though he intimately
uses forms of the first person pronoun (“we,” “us,” and “our”) throughout his epistle. The title of
the epistle may have been added later, for the writer nowhere in his letter refers to Hebrews. We
may assume that the epistle, although written to a specific congregation originally, was intended for
the church universal. The message conveyed is addressed to the church of all ages and places. To
put it differently, if there is any epistle in the New Testament that addresses the church universal in
the days prior to Jesus’ return, it is the Epistle to the Hebrews. p 26
The failure of the author to identify himself at all in his writing is in keeping with the time in
which he lived. It was customary for a writer to display modesty by omitting his name; for example,
the Gospel writers do not refer to themselves by name, and among the writers of epistles, John
refrains from using his name in the three letters attributed to him.
The author of Hebrews does not call attention to himself or to the recipients of his epistle, but to
Jesus, who completed through his appearance the revelation of God to man.
1. In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in
various ways.
In sonorous tones and in a somewhat musical setting, the author begins his epistle with an
introductory sentence that is elegant in style, diction, and word choice. Some translators have tried
to convey the dignity and alliteration of the original, but most of them have been ineffectual in
capturing the exact intonation of the opening sentence of Hebrews.1
God spoke to the forefathers in the ages preceding the birth of Jesus and communicated to them
his revelation. God is the originator of revelation. He is the source, the basis, the subject. God used
the prophets in the Old Testament era to make his Word known to the people. But he was not
limited to speaking through the prophets; this first verse states that God brought his revelation to his
people at many times and in various ways. The words times and ways have a prominent place in the
original Greek: they stand first in the sentence. Among the forefathers who received God’s
revelation were Adam, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Moses. God spoke
to Adam “in the cool of the day” (Gen. 3:8); to Abraham in visions and visits—in fact, Abraham
was called God’s friend (James 2:23); to Jacob in a dream; to Moses “face to face” (Exod. 33:11) as
a man speaks with a friend.
Through the prophets, from Moses to Malachi, God’s revelation was recorded in written form as
history, psalm, proverb, and prophecy. The prophets were all those saints called by God and filled

1 Among the translations that most successfully reflect the emphasis and the alliteration of the
original are the Dutch translation of 1637, Staten Vertaling (“God, voortijds veelmaal en op velerlei
wijze tot de vaderen gesproken hebbende door de profeten, heeft in deze laatste dagen gesproken
door de Zoon”) and the Spanish translation of 1602 (“Dios, habiendo hablado muchas veces y en
muchas maneras en otro tiempo á los padres por los profetas, en estos postreros días nos ha hablado
por el Hijo”).
with his Spirit to speak the Word as a progressive revelation that intimates the coming of Christ. In
his first epistle, Peter refers to them:

The prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the
greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was
pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. It was
revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that
have now been told you by those p 27 who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent
from heaven. [1:10–12]
The prophet did not bring his own message, his own formulation of religious truth. Inspired by
the Holy Spirit, he spoke the Word of God, which did not have its origin in the will of man (II Peter
1:21) but came from God (Heb. 3:7).
2a. But in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son.
Although the contrast between the times before the coming of Christ and the appearance of
Christ as the completion of God’s revelation is striking in verses 1 and 2, the continuity of this
revelation is also significant. Both parts of God’s revelation form one unit because there is but one
Author. There is but one God who reveals, and there is but one revelation. The Word spoken by God
to the forefathers in the past does not differ basically from the Word spoken to us by his Son.
Yet in many ways the contrast between the first and the second verse is obvious. We may show
the contrast graphically:
God has spoken
in the

OLD TESTAMENT ERA

how? at many times

and

in various ways

when? in the past in these last days

to whom? to our forefathers to us

by whom? through the prophets by his Son

NEW TESTAMENT ERA

The figure appears to be incomplete: the “how” on the Old Testament side does not have a New
Testament counterpart. The phrase “at many times and in various ways” lacks a parallel. The writer
is pointing out that the fullness of revelation is unique, final, and complete. He is not implying that
the piecemeal revelation given through the prophets was inferior and that the revelation provided by
the Son was without variation. Not at all. The many-sided revelation of God that came repeatedly to
the forefathers in the ages before the birth of Christ was inspired by God. It was a progressive
revelation that constantly pointed toward the coming of the Messiah. And when Jesus finally came,
he brought the very Word of God because he is the Word of God. Therefore, Jesus brought that
Word in all its fullness, richness, and multiplicity. He was the final revelation. As F. F. Bruce aptly
remarks, “The story of divine revelation is a story of progression up to Christ, but there is no
progression beyond Him.”2 p 28
Jesus himself did not write a single verse of the New Testament; men designated by him and
filled with the Spirit wrote God’s revelation. Jesus, the living Word, speaks to us because no one
else possesses equal authority; “for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we
must be saved” (Acts 4:12). By his Son, God addresses all believers. In these last days God has
spoken to us by his Son. The phrase in these last days is set over against the phrase in the past and
refers to the age in which the fulfillment of the messianic prophecies has taken place. This age waits
for the liberation “from its bondage to decay” to be “brought into the glorious freedom of the
children of God” (Rom. 8:21).
In the first two verses of Hebrews there is a contrast between the prophets, who were a distinct
group of people chosen and appointed by God to convey his revelation, and the Son of God, who
surpasses all the prophets because he is Son. In fact, all the emphasis in verse 2 falls on the word
Son.3 There is, strictly speaking, only one Son of God; all others are created sons (angels) and
adopted sons (believers). As God has spoken by his Son, so the Son has spoken by the apostles who,
inspired by the Holy Spirit, wrote the books of the New Testament. The new revelation that God has
given us in his Son is a continuation of the revelation given to the forefathers. God’s revelation,
completed in his Son, is a unit, a harmonious totality in which the Old is fulfilled in the New.
2b. Whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
To express the excellence of the Son of God, the writer of Hebrews describes what God has
done.
God appointed his Son heir of all things. An heir rightfully inherits whatever the father has
stipulated in his will. As the one and only Son, Jesus thus inherits everything the Father possesses.
Incomprehensible! Unfathomable!
The time when God appointed the Son heir of all things cannot be determined. The Son may
have been appointed heir in God’s eternal plan. Or Jesus may have been appointed heir when in the
fullness of time he entered the world, or when he pronounced the Great Commission: “All authority
in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Matt. 28:18).
The writer of Hebrews immediately clarifies the term all things by saying that God made the
universe through his Son. The phrase obviously refers to the creation account in the first chapters of
Genesis. Many people think that the New Testament, which speaks about redemption, has nothing
to say about creation. However, the New Testament is not entirely silent on this subject; both Paul
and the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews teach that Jesus was active in the work of creation. In
his discussion about the supremacy of Christ, Paul teaches: “For by him all things were created …;
all things p 29 were created by him and for him” (Col. 1:16). And John in his Gospel confirms the
same truth: “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been
made” (1:3).4
Through his Son, God made the universe. It is impossible for man to understand the full import
of this statement, but complete understanding is not the objective at this point. However, it is
important to recognize the majesty of the Son of God, who was present at creation and is the

2 F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New
Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), p. 3.
3 The R.S.V. gives the literal translation by a Son. But the noun is used in an absolute sense of
the word and is equivalent to a proper name. See John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New
Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 339. The
definite article in the Greek is omitted, as it is in Heb. 1:5; 3:6; 5:8; and 7:28.
4 See also Ps. 33:6; Rom. 11:36; I Cor. 8:6; Rev. 3:14.
sovereign Lord of all created things. He is God.
The word universe signifies primarily the cosmos, the created world in all its fullness, and
secondarily all the stars and planets God has created. But the meaning is much more comprehensive
than this, because it involves all the events that have happened since the creation of this world. It
concerns the earth and its history throughout the ages. The word has been interpreted as “the sum of
the ‘periods of time’ including all that is manifested in and through them.”5 It refers not to the world
as a whole but to the entire created order that continued to develop in the course of time.
3. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being,
sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat
down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.
a. “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory.” The word radiance is to be preferred to variations
of the word reflection, which many translations provide.6 The moon receives its light from the sun
and simply reflects these light beams to the earth. The moon itself does not possess nor emanate
light, because it does not produce light. The sun as a heavenly body radiates its light in all its
brightness and power to the earth. By way of comparison, we may see Christ as the radiant light
coming from the Father as sunlight emanates from the sun.7
Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12); he is light, and in him there is no darkness.
He radiates the light of God’s glory, perfection, and majesty. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes observes that
Jesus’ radiance “is not so much … the glory of the Son’s deity shining through his humanity, but …
the glory of God being manifested in the perfection of his manhood completely attuned as it was to
the will of the Father.”8
Jesus’ radiance is derived from the Father, even though he himself is the light. The Son causes
the radiance of the Father to shine forth. As John writes in the prologue to his Gospel, “We have
seen his glory, the glory of p 30 the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and
truth” (1:14). The Son’s radiance, therefore, is an extension of God’s glory.
b. “And the exact representation of his being.” The Son is the perfect representation of God’s
being. That is, God himself stamped upon his Son the divine imprint of his being. The word
translated as “exact representation” refers to minted coins that bear the image of a sovereign or
president. It refers to a precise reproduction of the original. The Son, then, is completely the same in
his being as the Father.9 Nevertheless, even though an imprint is the same as the stamp that makes
the impression, both exist separately. The Son, who bears “the very stamp” (R.S.V.) of God’s
nature, is not the Father but proceeds from the Father and has a separate existence. Yet he who sees
the Son has seen the Father, as Jesus explained to Philip (John 14:9).
The word being is really a parallel of the word glory, for both terms describe the essence of

5 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1950), p. 8.
6 GNB, MLB, Moffatt, NAB, R.S.V..
7 Gerhard Kittel, TDNT, vol. 1, p. 508; Ralph P. Martin in NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 290, writes,
“On balance, the act[ive] sense of ‘radiance’ is to be chosen in preference to ‘reflection.’ ”
8 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 41–42.
9 The writer of the Wisdom of Solomon says of wisdom: “For she is a breath of the power of
God, and a pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty; therefore nothing defiled gains entrance
into her. For she is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an
image of his goodness” (7:25–26, R.S.V.). The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, ed. Bruce M.
Metzger (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965).
. .S.V. Revised Standard Version
God.10 Although existing separately, the Son, as the exact representation of the Father’s being, is a
perfect copy of God’s nature. The Son is the mediator who possessed God’s glory by nature before
he assumed his mediatorial role. The Son bears the exact imprint of the Father’s being from eternity.
c. “Sustaining all things by his powerful word.” The Son is not only the Creator of the universe
(1:2); he is the upholder of all things as well (1:3). The two passages complement each other and
reveal the divine power of the Son. He speaks, and by his word all things are sustained, preserved,
upheld.
This part of the verse in the original is closely connected to the preceding portion by means of
the particle and,11 which unfortunately many translations omit. It directly ties the participial phrase
to the verb is in the first part of the sentence.
The first part of the verse stresses the person of Christ; the second, the work of Christ. From a
discussion about the being of the Son, the writer proceeds to an explanation of the Son’s activity,
which involves caring for all things. In fact, the word that has been translated as “sustaining”
basically means carrying. That word in itself signifies a forward motion, although not in the sense
of an Atlas whose movement is torturously slow because the weight of the globe nearly crushes
him.
The Son carries “all things” to bring them to their destined end. And he does this by a mere
utterance (“by his powerful word”). Christ, the ruler of the universe, utters a word, and all things
listen in obedience to his voice. No other motions are necessary, for the spoken word is sufficient.
d. “After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right p 31 hand of the Majesty
in heaven.” This sentence indicates a sequence in the redemptive deeds of Christ.
He performed his mediatorial work by completing and yielding his earthly life as a sacrifice on
the cross for the removal of sins. In a rather pithy phrase the high-priestly work of Christ is
summarized: Christ himself “provided purification for sins.” According to the Mosaic law the high
priest had to make atonement on the Day of Atonement to cleanse the people of Israel of all their
sins (Lev. 16:29–34). The Aaronic high priest was a sinner and therefore did his work imperfectly,
whereas Christ as the sinless One and the true High Priest completed the work of purification
perfectly. The high priest in the Old Testament era needed animal sacrifices, first to cleanse himself
and afterward to remove the sins of the people. Christ was simultaneously the High Priest and the
sacrifice when he offered himself for the purification of the sins of his people. The Son once for all
offered himself up on the cross in order to atone for our sins. The plural is used for the concept sin
(see Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14; II Peter 1:9).
After his mediatorial work was completed, the Son ascended to heaven and took his rightful
place of honor next to God the Father. In typical Hebraic style, perhaps to avoid offending any of
his Jewish readers, the author refers to God as the Majesty in heaven. Of course, elsewhere in the
epistle he freely uses God’s name.
e. “He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven” (cf. Rom. 8:34; Eph. 1:2; Col. 3:1).
The expressions sat down and the right hand must not be taken literally, but rather symbolically.
The idea of sitting at the right hand of someone signifies a privilege granted to a highly honored
person. In this instance it means that the Son now has authority to rule his worldwide kingdom on
earth and is enthroned above all spiritual powers “in heavenly places.” The kingdom belongs to him
and God has given him “the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee
should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ
is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:9–11).
4. So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to
theirs.
The writer of Hebrews has portrayed the Son as

0 0 Helmut Köster, TDNT, vol. 8, p. 585.

1 1 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 13.

1. the Prophet through whom God has spoken
2. the Creator who made the universe
3. the Heir of all things
4. the Representation of God’s being
5. the Upholder of all things
6. the Priest who provided purification for sins
7. the King who sat down at his place of honor
Now the author compares the Son with angels, those created beings that constantly surround the
throne of God. They of all creatures are closest to p 32 God; they serve as his messengers; they are
appointed to be busy in the work of providing man with God’s revelation and in the work of
redeeming fallen man (Acts 7:38, 53; Gal. 3:19; Heb. 2:2). In many respects, angels are higher than
man, who was crowned with glory and honor as king in God’s creation (Ps. 8:5).
Even if angels are in a certain sense higher than man, they are in no sense superior to the Son,
because “he has inherited” a name that is superior to theirs. Thus far the Son has not been
introduced by name, either as Jesus or as Christ. The name of the Son does not refer to a specific
personal name but to his designation as the Son. He is known as the Son of God, the one and only
Son. He is also Lord and Savior. The prophet Isaiah calls him “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (9:6). By contrast, angels are referred to as “messengers” (Ps.
104:4); they are designated “ministering spirits” (Heb. 1:14).
The name of the Son came to him by inheritance, because the Father appointed him heir (Heb.
1:2). The angels have been created to be servants and are excluded from being heirs. They minister
to those who shall inherit salvation (Heb. 1:14), but they themselves do not share in any inheritance.
Angels may be called “sons of God” (Job 1:6; 38:7), “mighty ones” (Ps. 29:1), or “holy ones”
(Ps. 89:6), but remain created beings, in contrast to the Son, who is their Creator.
Christ inherited the name, which was foreordained in the counsel of God; and when he
completed his mediatorial work on earth, he received the inheritance so that he could say, “All
authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Matt. 28:18). The permanence of his
inheritance can be seen in Paul’s description of the resurrection and the ascension of Christ, who is
seated at the right hand of God “in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and
dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come”
(Eph. 1:20–21).

Doctrinal Considerations in 1:1–4

The revelation that God had given to the believers in the Old Testament era was completed in
the New Testament era by the Son of God. There are not two revelations, one for the Old Testament
believers and one for New Testament believers. God’s revelation is one, although given in two
phases. During the first phase God’s revelation came often and in a variety of ways. The second
phase constitutes the fulfillment of God’s revelation in the person of his Son. The Old Testament is
the promise of the coming of the Son; the New Testament is the fulfillment of that promise. These
familiar lines summarize the unity of God’s revelation in the Scriptures:
The New is in the Old concealed,
The Old is in the New revealed.
The writer of Hebrews demonstrates his high regard for the Scriptures by stating unequivocally
that God is the author of his revelation. God spoke in the past and p 33 has now spoken in his Son.
And because it is God who has spoken, no one ought to question the authority of his written Word.
God has spoken last of all in his Son, and that revelation is final.
The threefold office of prophet, priest, and king is spelled out in the first few verses of this brief
introduction. The Son is the Prophet, for God in these last days has spoken in him; he is the Priest
who has provided purification for sins; and he is the King who sustains the world by his powerful
word and is seated at the right hand of God in heaven. These few introductory verses are a summary
of what the writer is about to teach in the remainder of his letter.
The author’s teaching about the supremacy of Jesus Christ (Heb. 1:4) is preceded by three
verses that stress the divinity of the Son. The theme in Hebrews 1:3 is similar to that which Paul
develops in Colossians 1:15, 17, 20.
Hebrews 1:3 Colossians 1:15, 17, 20

The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the He is the image of the invisible God, the
exact representation of his being, sustaining all firstborn over all creation.
things by his powerful word. He is before all things, and in him all things
hold together.

After he had provided purification for sins, he and through him [God was pleased] to reconcile
sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in to himself all things, whether things on earth or
heaven. things in heaven, by making peace through his
blood, shed on the cross.

The construction of Hebrews 1:3–4 indicates that the verses were an early Christian confession,
perhaps used for liturgical and catechetical purposes. The short participial phrases in the original
remind the reader of similar confessions that are recorded in Philippians 2:6–11 and I Timothy 3:16.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:1–4

Verse 1
λαλήσας—aorist active participle, which may denote concession.
ἐν τοῖς προφήταις—the preposition ἐν is followed by the instrumental dative. Because of the
definite article, the word προφήταις should be taken in its broadest possible sense.

Verse 2
ἐπʼ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων—although translated as “in these last days,” the Greek
literally says, “at the end of these days.” The adjective ἐσχάτος is singular.
ἐλάλησεν—aorist active, to be taken in the culminative sense. Note that, as in verse 1, the verb
λαλεῖν is used instead of λέγειν to indicate that the emphasis falls on the act of speaking and not on
the content.
ἐν υἱῷ—the preposition ἐν implies a locative and an instrumental meaning. The definite article
is lacking because the absolute sense of the noun is stressed: Jesus Christ is the one and only Son. p
34
κληρονόμος—the word is a combination of κλῆρος (lot) and νέμομαι (I possess) with the
meaning one who received by lot. The word occurs fourteen times in the New Testament, three of
which are in Hebrews (1:2; 6:17; 11:7).

Verse 3
ὤν—present active participle of εἰμί, denoting time.
ἀπαύγασμα—the noun is derived from the verb ἀπαυγάζω (I emit brightness). A related noun is
αὐγή (brightness). The ending -μα in ἀπαύγασμα generally indicates the result of an action.
 χαρακτήρ—from χαράσσω (I engrave, inscribe). The noun refers to the exact expression, the
precise reproduction of an original. See I Clement 33:4. A related noun is χάραγμα (a stamp or
imprinted mark); this word is used in Acts 17:29; Revelation 13:16, 17; 14:9, 11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20;
20:4.
ὑπόστασις—the word finds its root in ὑφίσταμαι (I stand under). The meaning of the noun
includes the idea of substance, nature, or essence.
φέρων—present active participle denoting time.
τε—an adjunct particle that links this clause closely to the preceding one.
τὰ πάντα—note the definite article used to emphasize the concept by making it all-inclusive.
τὸ ῥῆμα—the use of τὸ ῥῆμα instead of ὁ λόγος stresses the act of speaking more than the
content of the spoken word.
ποιησάμενος—aorist middle participle. The aorist is used to show that the Son accomplished the
task of purification; the middle indicates that he himself was the agent.

Verse 4
τοσούτῳ—the dative of degree of difference, followed by ὅσῳ. See Hebrews 7:20–22; 10:25.
The word is a pronoun of degree referring to size and quantity.
κρείττων—comparative adjective.
γενόμενος—aorist middle participle that may have a causal or a temporal meaning.
τῶν ἀγγέλων—genitive of comparison. The definite article points to the class or the category of
angels.
διαφορώτερον—comparative form from διάφορος (excellent, surpassing). The word is derived
from the verb διαφέρω (I bear or carry through).
κεκληρονόμηκεν—perfect active indicative to state that the inheritance has been, is, and will be
in effect.

p 35
B. Jesus’ Superiority to Angels
1:5–14

5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,

“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father”?
Or again,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son”?
6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
“Let all God’s angels worship him.”
7 In speaking of the angels he says,
“He makes his angels winds,
his servants flames of fire.”
8 But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above
your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”
10 He also says,
“In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations
of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12 You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.”
13 To which of the angels did God ever say,
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet”?
14 Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?

5. For to which of the angels did God ever say,

“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father”?
Or again,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son”?
The reader of Hebrews is immediately struck by the numerous citations from the psalms that the
author uses to strengthen his teaching about the superiority of Jesus Christ. In the first chapter alone
he includes five quotations from the Psalter and two from other books. And in the following
chapter, quotations from the Psalms occur rather frequently; they almost become the hallmark of
this epistle.
The recipients of the letter had become familiar with the Psalms in the local worship services in
which the congregation sang “psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). They
possessed a store of knowledge that had been communicated orally in the worship services and
committed to memory. “It is not surprising at all that the author [of Hebrews], in an attempt to reach
perfect communication, strengthens not only his whole Epistle with quotations from the Psalter
known in the liturgy of the Church: indeed in his first chapter he avails himself of five passages
from the Psalms p 36 and one from the Hymn of Moses (Deut. 32).”12 The quotations are from
Psalm 2:7 and II Samuel 7:14 in verse 5; Deuteronomy 32:43 (according to the readings in the Dead
Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint) in verse 6; Psalm 104:4 in verse 7; Psalm 45:6–7 in verses 8–9;
Psalm 102:25–27 in verses 10–12; and Psalm 110:1 in verse 13.
1. Psalm 2:7

2 2 Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Van
Soest, 1961), pp. 14–15.
 1:5
For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your
Father”? The writer obviously links this verse to verse 4, in which he introduces the teaching of the
Son’s superiority to angels. He does not intend to by-pass the significance of the first three verses,
but in verse 4 he makes the point of comparing the Son with the angels and stating his superiority.
With the help of quotations from the Old Testament, specifically from the Book of Psalms, the
author indicates that the Son has fulfilled the Scripture passages that he quotes.
One of these passages, Psalm 2, is probably of Davidic origin. This assumption is predicated on
information in Acts 4:22–26, which indicates that the Jerusalem church handed down an ancient
tradition concerning the authorship of this psalm.13 The Jewish people understood Psalm 2 to be
messianic, and their use of the psalm in the synagogue reflected that understanding.14 The
individual writers of the New Testament also interpreted messianically all the quotations and
references from the second psalm. For example, when Paul preached in Pisidian Antioch, he said,
“What God promised our fathers he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is
written in the second Psalm: ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father’ ” (Acts 13:32–33).
Quotations from Psalm 2 are given in Acts 4:25–26; 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; 5:5; Revelation 2:26–27;
19:15. Allusions to verses 2, 7, 8, and 9 can be discerned in Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, Hebrews,
II Peter, and Revelation.
As Psalm 2:7 asks, did God ever say to any of the angels, “You are my son; today I have
become your Father”? The answer to this rhetorical question obviously is negative, even though
angels are called sons of God (see especially Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). The status described in this verse
has never been conferred on the angels, and no angel has ever been given the title Son of God
anywhere in the Scriptures.15
In the same way, Solomon, the son of David, never completely fulfilled the words of the psalm.
Why, for example, would a son of a king receive the p 37 title son? It would be more fitting to call
him king at the time of his accession to the throne (as in Psalm 2:6, “I have installed my King on
Zion, my holy hill”). This son is a type of the Son of God. The believers in the Old Testament era,
then, were given a representative who foreshadowed the Messiah.
Obviously the earthly king, called Son, was unable to fulfill the words of Psalm 2, for the
passage referred to the Messiah who in the fullness of time gave the psalm its ultimate significance.
(In the prophecy of Isaiah, the Messiah is revealed as a Son: “for to us a child is born, to us a son is
given” [9:6]). The words of Psalm 2 apply ultimately to the Son of God. His appointment to the
office of Son—specifically, his appearance in the flesh—is reflected in the clause “today I have
become your Father.” (The word today ought not be taken literally but should be understood
generally to refer to the time of Jesus’ work on earth.) But the clause does not say that at the
moment of Jesus’ birth he became the Son or at the time of his resurrection (Acts 13:33) God
became his Father. Rather, the words I have become indicate that God the Father from eternity has
begotten and continues to beget the Messiah, his Son. The Athanasian Creed of the fourth century

3 3 Jan Ridderbos, De Psalmen, 2 vols. (Kampen: Kok, 1955), vol. 1, p. 21.

4 4 SB, vol. 3, pp. 675–77; 1QSa 2.11.

5 5 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 20. The title Son of God is never given to a person in the Old
Testament. Only the nation Israel is called “my son” (Hos. 11:1) and “my firstborn son” (Exod.
4:22).
summarizes this succinctly in its twenty-first and twenty-second articles:

The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten, the Son is of the Father alone; not made
nor created, but begotten.16
The words of Psalm 2:7 could have been fulfilled by neither David nor Solomon but only by Jesus
Christ.
Or again. The writer uses a second selection from the Old Testament to show that God has
never been called Father of angels and that no angel ever addressed God as Father. Archangels,
including Michael and Gabriel, never experienced that honor.
2. II Samuel 7:14
1:5
I will be his Father, and he will be my Son. The context of the quotation reflects David’s desire to
build a house for the Lord God. The word of the Lord is given to Nathan the prophet, who informs
David that not he but his son is to build God’s house. Declares the Lord, “He is the one who will
build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his
father, and he will be my son” (II Sam. 7:13–14; I Chron. 17:12–13). The words of the Lord were
directed to David’s son Solomon, who indeed built the temple in Jerusalem. But through his
mediatorial work the Son of God completely overshadowed Solomon.
The author of Hebrews evidently chose this Old Testament passage because p 38 of its
messianic significance. The allusions to II Samuel 7 in the New Testament (especially in Luke
1:32–33; and in John 7:42) indicate that the passage was applied to the Messiah.17
3. Deuteronomy 32:43
1:6
6. And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels
worship him.”
From a well-known messianic psalm and a similar passage from a historical book the writer of
Hebrews turns to the Hymn of Moses, recorded in Deuteronomy 32 and used in temple services and
local synagogues. The Jews considered the concluding verses of this hymn to be messianic.18
This quotation is introduced by the phrase and again, which is followed by the clause “when
God brings his firstborn into the world.” The subject is God the Father, who brings his Son into the
world. But when did or will this take place? The question remains: should the translation from the
Greek read, “And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world” or “But when God shall
bring again his firstborn into the world”?19

6 6 The Nicene Creed states, “[I believe] … in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all worlds.” And the Belgic Confession says, “We believe that
Jesus Christ … is the Son of God, not only from the time that he assumed our nature but from all
eternity” (art. 10).

7 7 In 4Q Florilegium, II Sam. 7:14 is quoted and interpreted in a way that calls attention to
the Messiah.

8 8 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok,

1955), p. 69.

9 9 See ASV, NASB. A number of commentators, including Westcott, Grosheide, Franz

 The first translation is a reference to the birth of Jesus, when a multitude of the heavenly host
praised God in the fields near Bethlehem (Luke 2:13). The second translation is an amplification of
Jesus’ discourse on the end of the age. At the end of time “he will send his angels with a loud
trumpet call” (Matt. 24:31); that is, the angels of God will worship the Son when he returns at the
close of this age. However, why does the writer of Hebrews speak of a second coming of Jesus
when he has not said anything in the immediate context about Christ’s first coming? It seems more
appropriate to prefer the first translation, for it logically follows the quotations in verses 5 and 6.
The word firstborn in verse 6 (see also Luke 2:7; Rom. 8:29; Col. 1:15, 18; Heb. 11:28; 12:23;
Rev. 1:5) qualifies the word Son and is a title given to Jesus. We cannot determine when that title
was given, because the writers who use the term apply it to creation, resurrection, dignity, and
honor. The psalmist records a blessing upon David when God said, “I will also appoint him my
firstborn” (Ps. 89:27). The Son, as the firstborn, enters the inhabited world of men. The word world
is Hellenic and was used in ordinary speech to refer to the populated world.20
a. The quotation itself shows that “not only is the Son greater than angels, p 39 but He is
worshipped by angels.”21 The Son is the Creator of the angels, and God orders these creatures to
show homage to his Son. The angels, because they are created, must serve the Son and “those who
will inherit salvation” (Heb. 1:14).
b. The origin of the quotation seems to be a Greek translation of the Hymn of Moses (Deut.
32:43). The translation based on the Hebrew text is rendered:
Rejoice, O nations, with his people,
for he will avenge the blood of his servants;
he will take vengeance on his enemies
and make atonement for his land and people.
The Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls show an addition to the first line of the verse.
Rejoice, O nations, with his people,
and let all the angels worship him,
for he will avenge the blood of his servants.
In the Septuagint version of Psalm 97:7 (Ps. 96:7, LXX) we read the exhortation: “Worship him[,]
all you his angels.” The translation based on the Hebrew text reads, “Worship him, all you gods!”
c. The Hymn of Moses is quoted and alluded to more than any other portion from the Book of
Deuteronomy. The writer of Hebrews quotes twice from this hymn (Heb. 1:6; 10:30). In his letter to
the Romans, Paul cites the hymn three times (Rom. 10:19; 12:19; 15:10). Allusions to this hymn are
found in Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Ephesians, Hebrews, I
John, and Revelation. John records in Revelation 15 that the victorious saints were given harps by
God and “sang the song of Moses the servant of God” (Rev. 15:3). This reference to the heavenly
use of the Hymn of Moses reflects its liturgical use in the church on earth. And in the church on
earth the hymn was sung in languages other than Hebrew. The Jews living in dispersion used the
Greek rendition of this song, from which the author of Hebrews quoted a line that describes the
superiority of the Son over the angels.
The addressee in Deuteronomy 32:43 is the Lord God, who must be worshiped by his angels.

Delitzsche, and R. C. H. Lenski, feel that the Greek word order should be followed. Scholars who
think that the adverb again modifies the verb bring interpret the clause as a reference to the return
of Christ; others think that the clause refers to the resurrection.

0 0 TDNT, vol. 5, p. 157; NIDNTT vol. 1, p. 519.

1 1 Bengel, Gnomon, vol. 4, p. 344.

X XX Septuagint
This homage the writer of Hebrews (having clearly established the divinity of Jesus) transfers to the
Son. The quotation reinforces the author’s teaching about the deity of Christ.

Doctrinal Considerations in 1:5–6

Angels do not share in God’s promises; they have no part in the inheritance that is accorded to
believers (“we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ”; Rom. 8:17). Scripture does not
say that any angel is God’s Son; therefore an angel, p 40 although exalted by being in the presence
of God, is in no way equal to, nor can in any way be compared to, the Son of God.
The writer of Hebrews quotes from the Hymn of Moses as it was rendered in the Septuagint.
The Greek translation of Deuteronomy 32 was well known to him and his audience because in the
dispersion the Jews used the Septuagint in the synagogues. The early Christians adopted the liturgy
with variations to express the Christian emphasis.
The author’s use of a quote from the Septuagint that is without an exact equivalent in the
Hebrew text in our possession does not mean that the doctrine of inspiration has been undermined.
The Holy Spirit, who is the primary author of Scripture and inspired every human writer, directed
the author of Hebrews to select a quote from the Hymn of Moses in the Greek. When the author
incorporated the line into his epistle, that line became inspired Scripture.
The word today (v. 5) is not limited to designating a specific time but ought to be understood in
a broader sense. For example, the declaration of Christ’s sonship was effective not only on the day
of his resurrection, but also on the day of his ascension and his session at the right hand of God the
Father (Heb. 1:4).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:5–6

Verse 5
οἱ ἄγγελοι—in the Septuagint the phrase ἄγγελοι θεοῦ occurs frequently. The definite article
points to the angels as a class.
υἱός—without the definite article the noun is to be understood in the absolute sense: “My Son
you are”; not “You, too, are my son.”
μου … σύ, ἐγὼ … σε—the use of the personal pronouns shows the emphasis the writer wishes
to express in this rather short sentence.
γεγέννηκα—the use of the perfect of γεννάω conveys the idea of a completed state, constitutes
a declaration of sonship, and relates an action that continues perpetually and eternally.

Verse 6
εἰσαγάγῃ—the aorist active subjunctive of εἰσάγω. The aorist signifies single occurrence of an
action but says nothing about the time itself.
προσκυνησάτωσαν—the verb προσκυνέω means “to bow down, to show respect, to worship by
falling down.” The verb form is the aorist active imperative, which implies command as well as
consent.

4. Psalm 104:4
1:7
7. In speaking of the angels he says,
“He makes his angels winds,
 his servants flames of fire.”

The contrast between the Son of God and the angels is evident to the writer. Nowhere in Scripture
are angels given a title that indicates they are p 41 equals of the Son. Instead, as creatures they are
servants of God and stand ready to do his bidding.
Psalm 104 is a nature psalm, well known to Jewish and early Christian worshipers, who sang the
psalm in synagogues and churches. In the liturgy of the synagogue the psalm was sung on Friday
evenings and Saturday mornings.22 The synoptic Gospels quote Psalm 104:12 (Matt. 13:32; Mark
4:32; Luke 13:19). The great multitude that praises God in heaven makes use of Psalm 104:35 (Rev.
19:1, 3, 6). In the early church the psalm was not unknown.
The writer of Hebrews quotes from the Greek translation of this psalm because of the key word
angels. In most translations of Psalm 104:4, the word angels does not appear. The verse is translated
He makes winds his messengers,
flames of fire his servants.23
The psalmist ascribes splendor and majesty to God, who as the Creator “stretches out the heavens
like a tent and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters” (Ps. 104:2–3). Clouds and
winds stand at his call because they are (figuratively) his means of transportation. Winds are his
messengers; bolts of lightning, his servants. God is in perfect control of his creation.
However, in the Septuagint, the word angels is predominant because it is the first of two direct
objects (that is, the word angels comes before the term winds, not vice versa). For the writer of
Hebrews, who had the Greek translation at his disposal, the text read: “He makes his angels winds,”
not “He makes winds his messengers.”
The writer uses the quotation from Psalm 104 to emphasize the subservient state of the angels.
They are like winds and bolts of lightning, which are part of God’s creation and completely
obedient to his will. The text compares angels to winds and flames of fire to indicate that their
deeds are as transient as changes in nature.
God uses angels to execute his will, and they serve him in a mighty way, forceful as the wind
and destructive as a streak of lightning. When their task is completed, however, they return to him
as humble and obedient servants. Although they perform mighty deeds, they remain lowly
attendants.
The comparison between the Son and the angels is a further elaboration of the first four verses
of chapter 1. God appointed the Son “heir of all things, and through [him] made the universe” (Heb.
1:2). The words he makes in the sentence he makes his angels winds point to the Creator who made
all things and who by implication relegates angels to the status of created beings.
p 42 5. Psalm 45:6–7
1:8–9
8. But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.”

The contrast between angels and Son is expressed most characteristically by means of the two
quotations from the Psalter.

2 2 Ernst Werner, The Sacred Bridge (London: D. Dobson, 1959), p. 150.

3 3 English translations have the reading messengers, although footnotes may give the word
angels as an alternative. The LXX as well as the Targum Jonathan and the ancient rabbis read Ps.
104:4, “He makes his angels winds.” See SB, vol. 3, p. 678.
 The first quoted psalm (104) is a nature psalm that extols the works of God in creation and in
the fourth verse, according to the Greek translation, speaks about the angels’ role as servants.
The second psalm (45) portrays an earthly king who celebrates his wedding. After the
introduction (v. 1), the psalmist describes the excellence and grace of the king (vv. 3–4), his victory
in battle (v. 5), his rule of justice and righteousness (vv. 6–7), and his joy in his palace and in the
daughters of kings (vv. 8–9). The second part of this psalm (vv. 10–15) concerns the bride and her
companions. The conclusion follows in verses 16–17.24
The psalm is typological of the Messiah. Only in the advent of the Son of God is the description
of the king’s wedding completely fulfilled. The Jewish rabbis understood this psalm as a nuptial
hymn composed for the occasion of the marriage of a king of Israel.25 An Aramaic translation or
paraphrase, Targum Jonathan (which dates from the first centuries of the Christian era), gives this
rendition of Psalm 45:2: “Your beauty, O king Messiah, is greater than that of the sons of men.”26
That Christians of the first and second centuries considered that Jesus Christ fulfilled the words of
the psalm is obvious from the context and the application in Hebrews 1 and from such writers as
Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, who quote Psalm 45:6–7 numerous times.27
The person addressed in the first chapter of Hebrews is called the Son; thus far no other name
has been given to him. The author of the epistle writes, “But about the Son he [God] says.” The
Son, divine and eternal (as the author has shown earlier), is the king seated at the right hand of the
Majesty in heaven.
The writer selects verses 6–7 of Psalm 45 and applies them to the Son to emphasize the deity of
the Son. These particular words form the core of p 43 Psalm 45 because of their message to the
king: “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever” (v. 6). The reference to the perpetual
stability of the king’s throne may point to the Davidic line.
Of much greater importance is the appellation O God, which teaches the divinity of the Son.
The question raised by translators of Psalm 45:6 and Hebrews 1:8 is whether the word God is an
address or a predicate construction that should be translated “Your throne is God.”28 According to
ancient translations of Psalm 45:6, the address O God makes excellent sense, and the author of
Hebrews uses this address to express the deity of Christ.29
To reveal the stability of the king’s throne—that is, the throne of the Son—the writer of
Hebrews quotes the rest of the verse: “and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.” The

4 4 Ridderbos, Psalmen, vol. 2, p. 32.

5 5 John Calvin and other scholars have interpreted the psalm as describing a wedding of King
Solomon. The Jerusalem Bible, in a footnote to Ps. 45, states, “According to some scholars, this
psalm may be a secular song to celebrate the marriage of an Israelite king, Solomon, Jeroboam II, or
Ahab (whose bride was a Tyrian princess, 1 K 16:31). But Jewish and Christian tradition understand
it as celebrating the marriage of the messianic King with Israel.…”

6 6 For further details consult SB, vol. 3, pp. 679–80. Franz Delitzsch, in his Commentary on
the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 1, pp. 76–77, “regards the forty-
fifth Psalm as a not merely typico-Messianic, but as a directly prophetico-Messianic Psalm.”

7 7 Justin, Dial. 63, 56, 86; and Irenaeus, Heresies, 3.6.1; 4.33.11; Epid. 47.

8 8 Some translations apparently wish to avoid reference to the divinity of the king. Examples
are NEB (“Your throne is like God’s throne, eternal”); GNB (“The kingdom that God has given you
will last forever and ever”); and Moffatt (“Your throne shall stand for evermore”).

9 9 These ancient translations include the Sahidic and the Vulgate. Refer to James Moffatt,
Epistle to the Hebrews, International Critical Commentary series (Edinburgh: Clark, 1963), p. 13.
scepter in the hand of the Son is a scepter of righteousness to administer justice and equity. Says
John Calvin, “But righteousness in the kingdom of Christ has a wider meaning; for he by his
Gospel, which is his spiritual scepter, renews us after the righteousness of God.”30
9. “You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you
above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.”
The divine kingship could not be assumed by any Israelite monarch; only the Son of David,
Jesus Christ, fulfilled the words of the psalm. He has loved righteousness and hated wickedness, as
he demonstrated during his earthly ministry. The question, however, is whether the words of the
quotation can be applied to a particular event or period in Jesus’ ministry. We ought not limit the
verse to designating any particular moment in the life of Christ, but rather understand it as a
description of his nature. Jesus loves righteousness and desires that the people in his kingdom also
love righteousness and hate wickedness. Righteousness is the foundation of his kingdom. Thus he
exhorts his followers to seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness (Matt. 6:33).
It is because of Christ’s love for righteousness that God has anointed Jesus with the oil of joy.
Obviously, Jesus Christ is the Anointed of God from eternity to eternity. There is no particular
moment at which Jesus began his love for righteousness and after which he was anointed.
We do well to understand the phrases scepter of righteousness and oil of joy as Hebraic idioms
that were translated literally into Greek. p 44
a. Thus, the phrase scepter of righteousness actually means that the king holds in his hand a
scepter, which symbolizes royal authority. The king can hold out the scepter to invite someone to
approach his throne, or he can sway his scepter to demand silence. By means of this instrument the
king rules. How does the king execute his rule? Justly!
b. Likewise, the phrase oil of joy is not a symbolic description of either the baptism of Jesus in
the Jordan River or his ascension and session at the right hand of God; rather, it describes the
constant administration of his just rule. The application of his justice fills him with joy and
happiness, and constitutes his anointing. It is the anointed Son who, set above his companions,
shares his happiness with them (Isa. 61:3).
c. The word companions implies that the companions of Jesus share in his righteousness and
joy. The word is used not of angels but of Jesus’ followers, who “share in the heavenly calling”
(Heb. 3:1).31 “Hence he is the Christ, we are Christians proceeding from him, as rivulets from a
fountain.”32 Therefore Jesus is not ashamed to call his companions brothers (Heb. 2:11). They, too,
“have an anointing from the Holy One,” says John in his first epistle. And he continues, “As for
you, the anointing you received from him remains in you” (I John 2:20, 27).
A sixteenth-century catechism asks the penetrating question, “But why are you called a
Christian?” and gives the revealing answer:
Because by faith I am a member of Christ
and so I share in his anointing.
I am anointed
to confess his name,
to present myself to him

0 0 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 46.

1 1 Moffatt, in Hebrews, p. 14, understands the term companions to refer to “angels (Heb.
12:23) rather than human beings (Heb. 3:14).”

2 2 Calvin, Hebrews, p. 46.

 as a living sacrifice of thanks,
to strive with a free conscience
against sin and the devil in this life,
and afterward to reign with Christ
over all creation
for all eternity.33

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:7–8

Verse 7
πρὸς μέν … πρὸς δέ—the contrast between verse 7 and verse 8 is clear and unequivocal because
of the particles μέν and δέ. The contrast is between the angels on the one hand and the Son on the
other. The preposition πρός followed by the accusative case conveys the idea with reference to.
τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ πνεύματα—the two accusatives are double, depending on p 45 the present
participle ποιῶν, which conveys the thought that God is constantly using and sending them. Of the
two direct objects, ἀγγέλους has the definite article and therefore comes first in translation.
τοὺς λειτουργοὺς πυρὸς φλόγα—the double accusative gives priority to the word λειτουργούς
because of the definite article; φλόγα, therefore, takes second place. The singular accusative φλόγα
(from φλόξ) is used collectively. The reading πυρὸς φλόγα seems to be an integral part of the New
Testament wording; the combination of πῦρ and φλόξ occurs six times (Acts 7:30; II Thess. 1:8;
Heb. 1:7; Rev. 1:14; 2:18; 19:12).

Verse 8
τὸν υἱόν—the definite article preceding υἱόν is balanced by the definite article in the
introduction of verse 7, καὶ πρὸς μὲν τοὺς ἀγγέλους.
σου/αὐτοῦ—the reading αὐτοῦ is supported by excellent witnesses, although the text of Psalm
45:7 (Ps. 44:7, LXX) reads σου. The word αὐτοῦ is preferred by some commentators: F. W.
Grosheide, Ceslaus Spicq, and B. F. Westcott. “Thus, if one reads αὐτοῦ the words ὁ θεός must be
taken not as vocative (an interpretation that is preferred by most exegetes), but as the subject (or
predicate nominative), an interpretation that is generally regarded as highly improbable.”34

6. Psalm 102:25–27
1:10–12
10. He also says,
“In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.”

The sixth quotation from the Old Testament is taken from Psalm 102:25–27. The psalm, actually a
prayer of a believer who is grieving for Zion, ends with a song of praise about the unchangeableness

3 3 Heidelberg Catechism, question and answer 32.

X XX Septuagint

4 4 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New
York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 663.
of God. The writer of Hebrews applies this song of praise to Christ, the eternal Son of God. The
author needed the words of this psalm to explain the introduction to his epistle: “But in these last
days [God] has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom
he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his
being, sustaining all things by his powerful word” (Heb. 1:2–3). The sixth quotation therefore was
prompted by the introduction, in which the writer set forth the doctrine of the eternity of the Son,
through whom everything was created and through whom all things are sustained. What formerly
was said of Israel’s God has now been applied to Jesus Christ. The Son of God is Creator and
Upholder of the universe and as such is far superior to angels. For that reason, the writer of
Hebrews emphasizes the pronoun you to express the contrast between the “Lord, [who] laid the
foundations of the earth, in the beginning” and the angels, who serve only as God’s messengers.
In the original Hebrew text of Psalm 102:25, the address Lord is lacking; p 46 the Greek
translators supplied the word, which was used as a title of respect by those who addressed Jesus.
The author of Hebrews, who relied on the Greek translation of the Old Testament, understandably
applied this section of Psalm 102 to the Christ, because the title Lord appeared in the Greek text.
The phrase in the beginning immediately calls to mind the creation account in Genesis. And the
words “laid the foundations of the earth” are a figure of speech, a synonym for creation.35 The
creation of the heavens and the earth is recorded in Genesis 1. It is but natural that for reasons of
balance and completion the psalmist says, “And the heavens are the works of your hands.” Paul
summarized all of these comments by saying of the Christ that “by him all things were created:
things in heaven and on earth” (Col. 1:16).
11. “They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12. You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.”
The message of this portion of the psalm is the unchangeableness of God, a characteristic that
the writer of Hebrews ascribes to the Son. Everything changes, deteriorates, passes away—except
the Creator. Henry F. Lyte captured the thought when he wrote:
Change and decay
in all around I see;
O Thou who changest not,
abide with me.
Although heaven and earth have been created by the Son who is eternal, they do not share his
eternity. They are and will remain temporal. The heavens and certain parts of the earth (for example,
the mountains) seem to exhibit timelessness. Yet they are subject to change, as Isaiah prophesies:
“Lift up your eyes to the heavens, look at the earth beneath; the heavens will vanish like smoke, the
earth will wear out like a garment and its inhabitants die like flies. But my salvation will last
forever, my righteousness will never fail” (51:6).
Everything the Creator has made bears the mark of time. The psalmist uses the illustration of a
garment that changes, gradually deteriorates, is eventually rolled up and discarded. The Creator,
however, lives forever; he is the same because his years never end. His years never end inasmuch as
they never began. The Son has no beginning and no end. Certainly this can never be said of angels,

5 5 Job 38:4; Ps. 24:2; 89:11; 104:5; Prov. 8:29; Isa. 24:18; 48:13; 51:13, 16; Mic. 6:2; Zech.
12:1.
who may live eternally in the presence of God. Their beginning dates from the moment the Son
created them.
p 47 The citation from Psalm 102 teaches the distinguishing characteristics of the Son: he is the
Creator, almighty, unchangeable, and eternal. The preexistence of the Son is indicated by the phrase
in the beginning; his permanence, by the clause you remain the same; and his eternity, by the words
your years will never end.36

Doctrinal Considerations in 1:10–12

The comparison in verses 10, 11, and 12 is between the Creator and his creatures. That which is
created shall perish, but the Creator transcends time and space and therefore remains forever.
He who is unchangeable is far superior to that which is changeable.
The contrast between the Son and the perishable heaven and earth is intensified by means of the
frequent use of personal pronouns (for instance, “they will perish, but you remain”; italics added).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:10–12

Verse 10
σύ—the first word in the sentence receives the emphasis. The author has deliberately taken this
second person pronoun from its original place and has given it prominence by putting it first in the
sentence.
κατʼ ἀρχάς—the phrase in the beginning (ἐν ἀρχῇ; John 1:1) differs from κατʼ ἀρχάς in number.
The former, in the singular, denotes a point in time; the latter, in the plural, seems to refer to periods
of time.

Verse 11
διαμένεις—some manuscripts accent the verb as a future active indicative διαμενεῖς, but this
tense does not suit the context. The present tense, referring to the permanence of the Son, is
contrasted with the passing nature of heaven, earth, and the objects of the earth (robe and garment)
expressed in future tenses. The verb διαμένεις is a compound with a perfective connotation,
denoting the Son’s eternity.

Verse 12
ἑλίξεις—the word is the future active indicative of ἑλίσσω (I roll up; Rev. 6:14). A few
manuscripts have the reading ἀλλάξεις, the future active indicative of ἀλλάσσω (I change), most
likely because of ἀλλαγήσονται, the second future passive indicative, which occurs shortly
thereafter.
ὡς ἱμάτιον—although the phrase is omitted in some manuscripts, its inclusion receives strong
support from early and varied witnesses. Says Metzger, in his Textual Commentary, p. 663, “The
absence of the words from most witnesses is the result of conformation to the text of the
Septuagint.”

p 48 7. Psalm 110:1
1:13

6 6 Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, p. 20.
 13. To which of the angels did God ever say,
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet”?

This introductory sentence resembles the one in Hebrews 1:5. Interestingly, the author of the epistle
begins his series of seven quotations with the question, “For to which of the angels did God ever
say,” and ends the series with the same rhetorical question, which expects a negative answer. The
first six quotations lead to the climax in the last one, taken from Psalm 110:1. No angels have ever
been given the honor of sitting at God’s right hand, although their work may be important. Nowhere
does God ever honor an angel by giving him a reward for services performed; nowhere does God
promise an angel any gift, distinction, or rank. An angel is an angel and will remain an angel. By
contrast, the Son, “after he had provided purification for sins, … sat down at the right hand of the
Majesty in heaven” (Heb. 1:3). The Son took his place of honor in answer to the Father’s invitation
to sit at his right hand.
Of all the psalm quotations in the New Testament, Psalm 110:1 is quoted and alluded to most
often. It is quoted in Matthew 22:44 and the parallel places Mark 12:36 and Luke 20:42–43, as well
as in Acts 2:34–35 and Hebrews 1:13. Writers allude to Psalm 110:1 in Matthew 26:64; Mark 14:62;
16:19; Luke 22:69; Romans 8:34; I Corinthians 15:25; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; and
Hebrews 1:3; 8:1; 10:12.
a. Jesus himself, in discourse with the Pharisees on the identity of Christ, the Son of David,
quoted Psalm 110:1 and asked the revealing question: “If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he
be his Son?” (Matt. 22:45). Obviously, Jesus is the Messiah.37
b. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, quoted Psalm 110:1 and, ruling out a possible reference to
David, concluded, “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you
crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36).
c. And Paul, in the resurrection chapter of I Corinthians, applied Psalm 110:1 to Christ, who “
‘has put everything under his feet’ ” (I Cor. 15:27).
The command sit at my right hand is addressed not to David but to Christ, p 49 who is elevated
to a place of honor, seated next to God the Father. Angels are never asked to be seated; they stand
around the throne ready to do God’s bidding in the interest of “those who will inherit salvation”
(Heb. 1:14).
The words sit at my right hand are not only a symbolic description for the seat of honor; they
also conjure up a picture of an oriental court in which the king, seated on his throne, is surrounded
by servants. The servants stand in the presence of the king to show their deference. To be asked by
the king to take a seat next to him on his right is the greatest honor one could hope to receive. “To
sit near the king at any time, is the emblem of being on terms of familiarity and friendship with him,
for all but his peculiar favourites stand in his presence; but to sit near him when on the throne, is an
emblem of rank, and dignity, and power in the kingdom. A seat on the right hand and a seat on the
left of the king are just other words for the two most dignified stations in the kingdom.”38 The

7 7 This particular citation from the psalms occupied a prominent place in the writings of the
Fathers. Clement of Rome borrowed a passage from Heb. 1 and quoted Ps. 110:1 together with Ps.
2:7 (I Clem. 36:5); the verse is also mentioned in the Epistle of Barnabas (12:10). Justin Martyr
cited Ps. 110:1 many times (Dial. 32, 33, 56, 82, 127; Apol. 1.45), as did Irenaeus (Heresies, 2.28.7;
3.6.1; 3.10.6; 3.12.2; Epid. 48, 85). During the first century, Ps. 110:1 was understood messianically
in the ancient synagogues. (See especially SB, vol. 5, pp. 452–65.) Also, Billerbeck, in his appendix
on Ps. 110:1, argues convincingly that the Jews in the first century of the Christian era interpreted
the psalm messianically.

8 8 John Brown, An Exposition of Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), pp. 66–
mother of John and James, the sons of Zebedee, asked Jesus whether one of her two sons might sit
at his right side and the other at his left side in his kingdom (Matt. 20:21).
Of the two seats, one on the left hand and one on the right hand, that on the right hand of the
king is more honorable. This is the place Jesus received when he completed his mediatorial work:
He ascended into heaven,
and sits at the right hand
of God the Father Almighty.
—Apostles’ Creed
We do not need to think of Jesus continuously seated at the right hand of the Father. Stephen,
before he was dragged out of Jerusalem to be killed, said, “Look, … I see heaven open and the Son
of Man standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:56; italics added). Jesus does not quietly spend
his time sitting or standing. He is preparing a place for his followers and is subjugating his enemies.
“Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet” (Ps. 110:1; Heb. 1:13).
The expression “your enemies a footstool for your feet” describes an oriental military practice.
A victorious king or general would place his feet on the neck of a defeated king (Josh. 10:24; Isa.
51:23) to demonstrate his triumph over his enemy. Jesus “must reign until he has put all his enemies
under his feet” (I Cor. 15:25). When the last enemy, death, has been destroyed, Jesus “hands over
the kingdom to God the Father” (I Cor. 15:24).
14. Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?
From the throne of God and from the seat of honor, commands are given to angels to work in
behalf of and for the benefit of the believers, who will inherit salvation. Whereas Jesus sits
enthroned in majesty and grandeur, p 50 angels are ministering spirits. They must obey and serve.
Not a single angel is excluded. Even archangels, including Gabriel and Michael, are sent by God to
work in the interest of the saints (Luke 1:11–38; Jude 9).
Scripture teaches that angels are ministering spirits, “sent to serve those [the people of God]
who will inherit salvation.” Angels announce the law of God (Acts 7:53; Gal. 3:19; Heb. 2:2);
deliver messages to God’s people (Isa. 6:6–7; Dan. 8:18–19; 9:20–23; 10:12, 14; Luke 1:18–19);
minister to the needs of the people of God (I Kings 19:5, 7; Ps. 91:11–12; Matt. 18:10; Acts 7:38;
12:15; I Cor. 11:10); are appointed guardians of cities and nations (Ezek. 9:1; Dan. 10:13, 20–21;
11:1; 12:1); and will gather the elect at the time of Christ’s return (Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27).
However, the angels have not been commissioned to teach or preach to the elect. Nor are they given
power to govern God’s people, although the angels stand in the presence of God and share his plans
(Zech. 1:12–13).
The angels constitute a numberless host, for John relates in Revelation that he “heard the voice
of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand” (Rev.
5:11; see also Dan. 7:10). Their work continues until the time of the judgment, when Jesus, sitting
on his throne, will say to the elect: “Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your
inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world” (Matt. 25:34).
The reference to salvation as an inheritance that the elect will receive on judgment day ought to
be understood in the broadest possible sense. When the elect are in the presence of Christ, they will
no more experience death, mourning, crying, or pain (Rev. 21:4). They will enter a blessed and
glorious state reserved for them and given to them for eternity. They shall be with Christ forever.
That is the fullness of inherited salvation.
In this quotation the contrast between the Son and the angels has been brought to a climax:
Jesus is sitting on the throne and is sending the angels to serve the believers. The contrast indeed is
striking. In spite of their holiness, their status, and their dignity, the angels continue to function as
ministering spirits to the inheritors of salvation. In a sense, therefore, angels are inferior to the
saints.

67. Italics his.

 Doctrinal Considerations in 1:13–14
In contrasting the Son with the angels, the writer of Hebrews begins and ends his set of seven
quotations with rhetorical questions that expect a negative answer. The response to the question,
“For to which of the angels did God ever say” (v. 5) is: to no one. The same is true of the question
in verse 13. However, in the concluding verse of chapter 1, the writer poses a rhetorical question
that expects a positive answer. “Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will
inherit salvation?” The answer is: Yes, all of them are.
The Son has been given the place of highest honor; that is, he is seated next to God the Father.
The throne of God is the throne of Jesus, who rules until all his enemies are conquered.
All angels are ministering spirits. Obviously, the text speaks only of the angels p 51 that have
not fallen into sin. Every angel, regardless of status, has been ordered to minister to the needs of the
saints.
The saints do not have to doubt their salvation. Their inheritance is waiting for them when they,
in the last day, stand before the judgment throne.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:13–14

Verse 13
εἴρηκεν—the perfect active indicative is used here in distinction from the aorist active
indicative εἶπεν in Hebrews 1:5. For the use of the perfect see Hebrews 4:3, 4; 10:9; 13:5. Also
consult Acts 13:34.
κάθου—the present middle imperative, second person singular of κάθημαι indicates that the
Son is indeed seated next to God the Father and is told to continue to do so.
ἐκ δεξιῶν μου—the adjective δεξιός is given in the neuter plural with the noun μέρη (parts)
understood. The Greeks used this expression idiomatically, although often in the singular ἡ δεξιὰ
[χείρ] (the right hand).
ἕως ἂν θῶ—the temporal construction with the aorist active subjunctive of τίθημι shows the
finality of the matter.

Verse 14
οὐχὶ—the strengthened form of οὔ. It introduces a rhetorical question that expects an
affirmative reply.
πάντες—because of its position in the sentence, the adjective πάντες is emphatic.
ἀποστελλόμενα—the present passive participle in the neuter plural modifying πνεύματα
indicates that angels are constantly being sent out to aid the saints.
διά—the author of Hebrews could have used ὑπέρ (in behalf of). Instead he chose διά with the
accusative to show cause.
τοὺς μέλλοντας—although the verb μέλλω is found with the future infinitive (Acts 12:6; Gal.
3:23; Rev. 3:2), it is generally followed by the present infinitive (eighty-four times in the New
Testament). The present active participle (“those who are to inherit salvation”), in the context of
Hebrews 1:14, conveys the idea of an action that must or certainly will take place.

Summary of Chapter 1
The central figure in chapter 1 is the Son of God, who is introduced not by name but rather as
Creator of the universe, Redeemer of his people, and King who rules at God’s right hand. The
author of Hebrews formulates themes that he develops in the remainder of his epistle.
The Son of God is superior to angels, says the author of Hebrews. He writes not to discredit
angels, but to direct attention to the exalted position of the Son. He proves his point by quoting from
the Old Testament seven times, chiefly from the Book of Psalms. The author shows that the Son of
God is eternal and unchangeable, and rules in royal splendor, seated at God’s right hand. Angels, by
contrast, are ministering spirits who are told to serve the elect people of God.

p 52 2. Jesus’ Superiority and His Role as Savior and High Priest, part
2
2:1–18 p 54
Outline
C. Jesus, Savior and High Priest

2:1–4 1. An Exhortation

2:5–9 2. Jesus Is Crowned with Glory and

Honor

2:10–13 3. Jesus and His Brothers

2:14–18 4. Jesus Is like His Brothers p 56

C. Jesus, Savior and High Priest

2:1–18

2 1 We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2
For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just
punishment, 3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first
announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. 4 God also testified to it by signs,
wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.
5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6 But there is
a place where someone has testified:
“What is man that you are mindful of him,
the son of man that you care for him?
7 You made him a little lower than the angels;
you crowned him with glory and honor
8 and put everything under his feet.”
In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see
everything subject to him. 9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned
with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for
everyone.
10 In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything
exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. 11 Both the one who makes men
holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers. 12
He says,
“I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the presence of the congregation I will
sing your praises.”
13 And again,
“I will put my trust in him.”
And again he says,
“Here am I, and the children God has given me.”
14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might
destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—15 and free those who all their lives were held
in slavery by their fear of death. 16 For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. 17 For
this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and
faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18
Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

1. An Exhortation
2:1–4
One of the links between the first and the second chapters is the author’s direct and indirect
references to the threefold offices of Christ: prophet, priest, and king. In the first chapter, the writer
describes the Son as the person through whom God spoke prophetically (1:2), a high priest who
“provided purification for sins” (1:3), and the one who in royal splendor “sat down at the right hand
of the Majesty in heaven” (1:3). The author continues this emphasis in the second chapter by
portraying Christ as “the Lord” who as a prophet announces salvation (2:3), the king crowned “with
glory and honor” (2:9), and “a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God” (2:17).
In chapter 1, the author introduces Jesus as “Son” (vv. 2, 5) or “the Son” (v. 8); in the next
chapter he refers to Christ as “the Lord” (2:3) and “Jesus” (2:9).1 In succeeding chapters the author
uses these and other names more frequently.
Throughout his epistle the writer intertwines teaching and exhortation, doctrine and advice
about practical matters. After providing an introductory chapter about the superiority of the Son, the
author explains the significance of that chapter in a unique and practical manner. In the exhortation
he reveals himself to be a loving, caring pastor who seeks the spiritual well-being of all who read

1 Throughout the epistle the following names are used: Son (1:2, 5, 8; 3:6; 5:8; 7:28); Lord
(2:3; 7:14); Jesus (2:9; 3:1; 6:20; 7:22; 10:19; 12:2, 24; 13:12, 20); Christ (3:6, 14; 5:5; 6:1; 9:11,
14, 24, 28; 11:26); Jesus Christ (10:10; 13:8, 21); Jesus the Son of God (4:14); and the Son of God
(6:6; 7:3; 10:29). See the section on divine names in B. F. Westcott’s Commentary on the Epistle to
the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950), pp. 33–35.
and hear the words of this epistle.
1. We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not
drift away.
In this verse the author reminds us that we have been given a portrait of Christ’s eminence and
greatness and, therefore, ought to listen to what he says. For the higher a person stands in rank, the
greater authority he exerts, and the more he demands the listener’s attention. The original, emphatic
and expressive, is conveyed well in the New English Bible: “Thus we are bound to pay all the more
heed to what we have been told, for fear of drifting from our course.” Obviously, refusal to pay
attention to the spoken word has detrimental consequences that can lead to ruin. The difference
between hearing and listening may be acute. To hear may mean merely to perceive sounds that do
not necessarily require or create action. To listen means to pay thoughtful attention to sounds that
enter the ear and then p 57 evoke positive results. A child may be told by his parents to attend to
some household chore and, if the task is somewhat disagreeable, may dawdle. He has heard his
parents clearly but at the moment fails to listen. There is no response.
The author of Hebrews says that we—and he includes himself—must direct our minds toward
listening attentively to the divine message.2 The words may not immediately slip from one’s mind
because of sloth and failure to pay attention; yet there is always the danger that the words will fall
into disuse.3 Moses taught the people of Israel their creed (“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the
LORD is one,” Deut. 6:4) and the summary of the Ten Commandments (“Love the LORD your God
with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength,” Deut. 6:5). He instructed the
people to impress the words of the creed and the law on their children, to talk about them
constantly, to tie them on hands and forehead, and to write them on houses and gates (see Deut.
6:7–9).
2. For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience
received its just punishment …
The expression the word spoken by angels refers to the law that God gave to the Israelites from
Mount Sinai. Although the Old Testament in general and Exodus in particular give no indication
that God used angels to convey the law to the people of Israel (Exod. 20:1; Deut. 5:22), Stephen in
his address before the Sanhedrin (Acts 7:35–53) and Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians (3:19)
mention the instrumentality of angels. There is, of course, a reference to angels, present at Mount
Sinai, in the blessing that Moses pronounced on the Israelites before he died (Deut. 33:2).4 It is
conceivable that oral tradition preserved this information for Stephen, Paul, and the writer of
Hebrews.
The text indicates that God was the actual speaker, even though he made use of his messengers,
the angels. The Word—that is, the Old Testament law—was binding because behind this Word
stood God who made a covenant with his people at Mount Sinai. It is God who gives binding
validity to his Word, for he is true to his word.5 He is the covenant-keeping God of his people. The
Word of God (Heb. 1:1–2) remains the same and constitutes one revelation that was entrusted to
God’s people at various and successive p 58 times. That is, the law of God came to the Israelites by
angels from Mount Sinai; the gospel was proclaimed by the Lord.

2 The author constantly includes himself in the admonitions by using the first person plural
verb forms. He recognizes his own frailty and avoids claiming spiritual superiority for himself.
3 The verb drift away may be a nautical term.
4 The Septuagint adds the words “on his right hand angels were with him” to Deut. 33:2.
Also, the Targum, the Midrash, the Talmud, and liturgical hymns sung in the ancient synagogues
reflect the view that angels mediated the law. See Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Epistle to
the Hebrews, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 1, p. 96.
5 Otto Michel, Der Brief an die Hebräer, 10th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht,
1957), p. 63.
 The Old Testament provides numerous instances that show that “every violation and
disobedience received its just punishment.” Instead of mentioning specific examples from Old
Testament history, the author of Hebrews stresses the principle that transgressing the divine law
results in righteous retribution. Every violation is evil; every act of disobedience, an affront to God.
3a. How shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation?
The key word in this part of the sentence, which began with the preceding verse, is “salvation.”
The term has already been used in 1:14, in which the readers are told that all angels are ministering
spirits that serve believers (the heirs of salvation). The value of salvation ought never be
underestimated, for its price was the suffering and death of Jesus. He is called the author of
salvation who brings many sons to glory (2:10). Therefore, the believer’s salvation is immeasurably
great.
As verse 2 states, the message of the Old Testament could not and cannot be violated without
suffering the consequences. How much more, then (this verse says), ought we to treasure our
salvation. If we ever ignore the message concerning our redemption, it is impossible for us to
escape God’s wrath and subsequent punishment. The more precious the gift, the greater the penalty
if it is ignored.
3b. This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those
who heard him.
The focus of chapter 2, like that of chapter 1, is Jesus, the Son of God, who is Lord even over
angels. And verses 2–3 are an example of the principle of arguing from the lesser to the greater, a
method the author employs repeatedly in his epistle.6 These verses remind the readers of the
teaching about the Son’s superiority (1:4–14); the author’s method of argument emphasizes the
contrast between angels, who mediated the law, and Jesus, who proclaimed the gospel. Angels
merely served as God’s messengers when they were present at Mount Sinai, but the Lord has come
with the message of salvation, which he proclaimed and which his followers have confirmed by the
spoken and written Word.
In this verse (3b) the emphasis is on Jesus, whose word is sure. It is true that the angels brought
“the message,” whereas Jesus brought “salvation.” The author, however, employs a figure of speech
called metonymy (in which a concept is brought to mind by the use of a word that describes a
related idea. An example is Abraham’s comment to the rich man who wants to keep his five brothers
out of hell: “They have Moses and the Prophets” [ p 59 Luke 16:29]. The intent is to say that they
have the Old Testament.). Thus the word salvation refers to the gospel of salvation proclaimed by
Jesus. This single word encompasses the doctrine of redemption in Christ and in a sense refers to
the New Testament. Jesus came not to annul the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matt.
5:17). The Old and New Testaments are God’s written revelation to man, although the fullness of
redemption comes to expression in the New. Jesus, whose name is derived from the name Joshua
(salvation), was first in proclaiming the riches of salvation. From the moment of his public
appearance to the day of his ascension, Jesus unfolded the full redemptive revelation of God. He,
who came from heaven and therefore is above all, was sent by God to testify “to what he has seen
and heard” (John 3:32). His message of full and free salvation “was the true origin of the Gospel.”7
However, perhaps the readers would say that they did not hear Jesus proclaim his message, for
Jesus’ earthly ministry lasted only three years, chiefly in Israel. Countless people never had the
opportunity to listen to him. The author of Hebrews immediately counters this objection by saying
that the message “was confirmed to us by those who heard him.” He himself had not had the
privilege of being in Jesus’ audience; he too had had to listen to those followers who had heard the
word spoken by Jesus.

6 The hermeneutical principle a minore ad maius (from the lesser to the greater) was
originally formulated by Rabbi Hillel (died c. A.D. 20) as qal wa-homer (light and heavy). The
implication is that particulars that are applicable in the case of minor things certainly hold true for
major things. See, for example, Heb. 9:13–14.
7 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 39.
 This statement tells us that these followers were faithful witnesses of the words and works of
Jesus. They testified as eyewitnesses to the veracity of the events that had happened and the
message that had been preached (Luke 1:1–2). And the author indicates that he and the readers of
his epistle belong to the second generation of followers; they had not heard the gospel from Jesus
himself. This fact rules out the possibility of apostolic authorship of the letter to the Hebrews.
Because the author states that he and his readers had to rely on the reports of the original followers
of Jesus, it is reasonable to assume that some decades had passed since the ascension of Jesus.
4. God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy
Spirit distributed according to his will.
The writer of the epistle assumes that his readers are quite familiar with the gospel, in either oral
or written form, and have a knowledge of the beginning and the development of the Christian
church. For that reason he does not elaborate on the proclamation of the gospel by Jesus (1:3) and
the apostles and does not specify what the “signs, wonders, various miracles, and gifts of the Holy
Spirit” are. He assumes that his readers are well acquainted with the history of the church,
specifically the spread of the gospel accompanied by supernatural signs and wonders. His reference
to the gifts of the Holy Spirit seems to imply that the readers are aware of those gifts mentioned in I
Corinthians 12:4–11.
Signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Spirit supplemented the proclamation p 60 of God’s
Word in the first few decades of the rise and the development of the Christian church. The Book of
Acts is replete with vivid examples of miracles: Peter healed the crippled man at the temple gate
called Beautiful (3:1–10), rebuked Ananias and Sapphira (5:1–11), restored a bedridden paralytic
(9:32–35), and raised Dorcas from the dead (9:36–43).
Apparently the words signs and wonders were somewhat of a stock phrase referring to either the
end of the world (when miracles and portents would take place) or the time of the initial growth of
the church. The words signs and wonders were used as synonyms, especially in Acts, where this
phrase signs and wonders occurs nine of the twelve times it appears in the New Testament.8
Moreover, the phrase occurs in the first fifteen chapters of Acts, which relate the early growth and
spread of the church (2:19, 22, 43; 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 7:36; 14:3; 15:12). It is found in Jesus’
eschatological discourse (Matt. 24:24; Mark 13:22) and in Jesus’ word spoken to the royal official
of Capernaum (John 4:48).
The terms miracles and miraculous describe the supernatural deeds of Jesus as recorded
especially in the synoptic Gospels (Matt. 7:22; 11:20, 21, 23; 13:54, 58; 14:2; 24:24; Mark 6:2, 14;
13:22; Luke 10:13; 19:37; 21:25 [“signs”]). Peter also used the expression in his sermon at
Pentecost: “Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs,
which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know” (Acts 2:22). The word miracles
(or powers) occurs also in Acts 8:13; 19:11; Romans 8:38; 15:13; I Corinthians 12:10, 28, 29; II
Corinthians 12:12; Galatians 3:5; Hebrews 6:5; and I Peter 3:22. Among the gifts of the Holy Spirit
listed by Paul in I Corinthians 12:4–11 is the gift of “miraculous powers” (I Cor. 12:10).
And gifts of the Holy Spirit [are] distributed according to his will. It does not matter
whether we interpret the phrase according to his will as referring to the Holy Spirit or to God the
Father. The parallel verse, I Corinthians 12:11, says that the Spirit “gives them [the gifts] to each
man, just as he determines.” Ultimately God is the one who testifies to the veracity of his Word. If
we understand the words according to his will to include signs, wonders, and miracles, then God
himself is the agent who used these divine powers “for the distinct purpose of sealing the truth of
the Gospel.”9

8 Bauer, p. 748.
9 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 56.
 Practical Considerations in 2:1–4
The author is not an ivory-tower theologian; he reveals the heart of a pastor who cares for the
church. He warns the readers and the hearers of his epistle to pay close attention to the Word of
God. Effectively he includes himself in the warnings and the exhortation.
This passage is a continuation of Hebrews 1:1–2. In the gospel that is proclaimed p 61 by the
Lord and confirmed by those who heard him, the full revelation of God has now been made known.
The message, whether communicated by the angels or proclaimed by the Lord, constitutes God’s
revelation to man.
In Hebrews 2:1–3 the writer uses many key words that even in translation show a definite
sequence:10
we

have heard who heard him

the message confirmed by those

spoken announced

by angels by the Lord

salvation

Repeatedly the author warns the reader not to turn away from the living God (3:12) and writes
that it is dreadful “to fall into the hands of the living God” (10:31), “for our God is a consuming
fire” (12:29). Neglect of the Word of God does not appear to be a great sin; yet the writer, by
contrasting this sin with the disobedience of people in the Old Testament era, teaches that ignoring
God’s Word is a most serious offense. Because God has given us his full revelation in the Old and
New Testaments, it is impossible for us to escape the consequences of disobedience or neglect.to us
Salvation announced by the Lord is far greater than God’s law that was announced to the
Israelites at Mount Sinai. Christ takes away the veil that covers the hearts of those who read the Old
Testament (II Cor. 3:13–16).
Signs, wonders, and various miracles were performed only by Jesus and by the apostles who
had received authority to act during the establishment and growth of the early church. The gifts of
the Holy Spirit, however, are still with the church today.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 2:1–4

Verse 1
περισσοτέρως—a comparative adverb of περισσός, which in itself is already a comparative; in
effect, the idea of a double comparative is present.

0 0 The diagram is from Pierre Auffret, “Note sur la structure littéraire d’ HB II. 1–4, ” NTS 25
(1979): 177. Used by permission of Cambridge University Press.
 προσέχειν—the present active infinitive is durative; it needs the words τὸν νοῦν to complete the
thought: it is necessary to hold the mind to [a matter].
παραρυῶμεν—the second aorist passive subjunctive, first person plural, παραρρέω (παρά and
ῥέω, to flow past). The passive voice may be translated “in order that we may not be carried past”
or (intransitively) “in order that we do not drift away.” The latter is preferred. The author does not
say that the readers are actually drifting away. The aorist indicates that the danger lies before them
and may at once overtake them. The possibility of drifting—hence the subjunctive—is not at all
imaginary. p 62

Verse 2
ὁ λόγος—the word λόγος is used for the giving of the law at Mount Sinai; one would expect the
term ὁ νόμος (the law). The choice of λόγος to describe the law was made, as Westcott puts it, “to
characterise it as the central part of the Old Revelation round which all later words were
gathered.”11
πᾶσα παράβασις καὶ παρακοή—the adjective πᾶσα governs both nouns. παράβασις refers to the
overt deed; παρακόη, the underlying motive. παράβασις, because of the -σις ending of the word,
shows that the deed itself is in a state of progression. Transgressing the law is a degenerative
process. Of course the lawbreaker must take full responsibility for his behavior.
μισθαποδοσίαν—a combination of μισθός (pay, wages) and ἀποδίδωμι (I recompense). The
word can mean “reward” (10:35; 11:26) or “punishment” (2:2).

Verse 3
ἐκφευξόμεθα—the future middle active indicative, first person plural, translated in the active
voice, expresses finality.
ἀμελήσαντες—the privative ἀ (not) and the verb μέλω (I care for) in the aorist active participial
form may be rendered “neglecting, being unconcerned about something, ignoring.” The participle
denotes condition: if we ignore.
ἀρχήν—the Lord is the originator of the gospel. Jesus Christ is the ἀρχή (Col. 1:18) and the
ἀρχηγός (Heb. 2:10; 12:2).
ἐβεβαιώθη—the verb is used twice in the epistle (2:3; 13:9); the adjective βέβαιος (firm,
reliable, stable), five times (2:2; 3:6, 14; 6:19; 9:17). The aorist passive shows that an action was
done once for all, and that it was done by others.

Verse 4
συνεπιμαρτυροῦντος—the compound consists of the verb μαρτυρέω (I bear witness) and two
prepositions, σύν (together) and ἐπί (upon). The present active participle implies continued action.
God continues to testify. The genitive case is the genitive absolute construction.
τε καί—the combination of these conjunctions is used to connect two corresponding concepts;
in this verse the conjunctions connect two synonyms.
μερισμοῖς—only in Hebrews is this word used, apart from extrabiblical literature. Here it means
“distribution”; in 4:12 the word is translated “division.” The subject of the distribution—that is, the
agent—is the Holy Spirit.
θέλησιν—in the New Testament, Hebrews 2:4 is the only place where this word occurs. The
noun θέλημα (will) is the accepted term. The difference is that the -σις ending shows continued
action; hence, θέλησις may be translated “willing.” The noun ending -μα indicates result, that which
is completed or settled.

1 1 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 37.

 2. Jesus Is Crowned with Glory and Honor
2:5–9
5. It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. p
63
After inserting a pastoral word of exhortation and admonition, the writer of the epistle continues
the theme he set forth in chapter 1: the superiority of the Son. The angels are creatures subject to
their Creator, the Son of God. Angels, as the writer said in 1:14, are ministering spirits sent to serve
the believers who will inherit salvation. And in the world to come, not the angels, but the Son, will
rule.
This reference to the world to come may surprise us, because from our perspective the Bible
speaks primarily about the present world. When we think of the world to come, we imagine Jesus’
return and the restoration of the earth. The author of Hebrews, however, looks at the salvation that
believers will inherit in the world to come and makes it part of the messianic age in which Jesus
rules supreme. This age began when Jesus took his seat at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven
(1:3). That is what the author is referring to when he says, “about which we are speaking.”
Why does the writer teach that the world to come will not be subject to angels? The author and
the original readers were accustomed to reading the Old Testament in the Greek translation, the
Septuagint. This translation differs from the Hebrew text: “When the Most High gave the nations
their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the people according to the
number of the sons of Israel” (Deut. 32:8). The Greek translation relies on another Hebrew reading,
which was discovered at Qumran.12 The text in the Septuagint reads, “according to the number of
the angels of God.”
Moreover, in Hebrews the writer frequently used quotations from the Psalter and from hymns.
By this method he reminded his readers of psalms and hymns that they had memorized during
childhood. The Song of Moses (Deut. 32), most likely in the wording of the Septuagint, was
familiar to them. Because his readers were accustomed to the wording of the Greek texts, the author
acquainted them with the truth that the world to come will be subject not to angels but to the Son.
6a. But there is a place where someone has testified.
Verse 5 is a negative declaration that makes the reader ask to whom the world to come will be
subject. The author wishes to answer by letting Scripture speak. However, instead of merely
introducing the quotation from Psalm 8, he writes, “But there is a place where someone has
testified.” He does not reveal ignorance, for as a theologian he knows the Scriptures thoroughly. He
wants to call attention not to the place from which the quotation is taken or to David who wrote
Psalm 8, but to the content and meaning of the citation. For the author, the Word of God is central. p
64
6b. What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him?
a. In Psalm 8 David first describes the glory of the heavens, the work of God in creation. He
looks at the work of God’s hands—the heavens, the moon, and the stars, all set in their places.
b. David then compares these heavenly bodies to man, who is nothing but a speck of dust; yet
God is mindful of him and cares for him. Not size and volume but worth and value count, for man
has been made in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:26–27). Man was given authority over the
fish in the sea, the birds of the air, and all creatures that move on the ground.
c. Although this fact is not mentioned in the psalm, we know that because of Adam’s fall into sin
man’s condition changed: he became mortal. David does not mention the mortality of man, but

2 2 See P. W. Skehan, “A Fragment of the ‘Song of Moses’ (Deut. 32) from Qumran,” BASOR
136 (1954): 12–15. The R.S.V., JB, and NAB have the reading sons of God. The footnote in the JB
explains: “The ‘sons of God’ (or ‘of the gods’) are the angels, Jb 1:6+, the heavenly courtiers, cf. v.
43 and Ps 29:1; 82:1; 89:6, cf. Tb 5:4+; in this context they are the guardian angels of the nations,
cf. Dn 10:13+. But Yahweh himself takes care of Israel, his chosen one, cf. Dt 7:6+. ‘God’ Greek;
Hebr. ‘Israel.’ ”
merely writes about the seeming insignificance of man (Ps. 8:4). Nonetheless, man’s purpose (“to
fill the earth and subdue it and to rule over all God’s creatures”) remains, even after sin entered the
world.
d. Furthermore, God commanded Noah and his sons to “be fruitful and increase in number and
fill the earth. The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of
the air, upon every creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea” (Gen.
9:1–2). Abraham also was given authority to rule. These names, then, are representative: Adam, the
head of the human race; Noah, the head of post-flood humanity; Abraham, the father of many
nations. Thus David, aware of the insignificance of man, can nevertheless speak of man’s authority
to rule God’s great creation.
7–8a. “You made him a little lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and honor
and put everything under his feet.”
One of the reasons that the author of the epistle chose verses 4–6 of Psalm 8 may have been that
in the Septuagint, which he used, the word angels appeared. (The Hebrew text, in translation, reads,
“You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings [or: than God],” Ps. 8:5). If the readers relied
on the Greek translation, they then needed to reexamine the author’s statement that the world to
come will not be subject to angels, for this translation meant that man had been placed on a lower
level than the angelic beings.
The words you made him a little lower do indicate that God has brought man from a higher to a
lower position. Man shared immortality with the angels until his fall into sin.13 At the time of the
resurrection, man once again will be equal to the angels: he will be immortal (Matt. 22:30).
However, the term a little can be understood to mean either degree (man’s position in God’s
creation) or time (for a short while). In Psalm 8:5 (8:6, LXX) the word signifies degree, but in the
context of Hebrews 2 the reference p 65 to time is definitely to be preferred. By applying the text to
Jesus (Heb. 2:9), the author seems to favor the temporal interpretation of the term a little.14
This interpretation means that for a little while, man is placed on a lower level than the angels.
Does this indicate that angels are superior to man and have been given authority to rule? Nowhere
in Scripture do we read that God has honored angels in the way that he has honored man. Only man
has been crowned with “glory and honor.” This expression points to man’s exalted position: king
over God’s creation.15
Everything that God has made is placed “under [man’s] feet.” In Hebrews 2:5 the verb to
subject was used; now, in this last line of the psalm citation, the author seeks to convey the thought
that all things, including angels, are subject to man. In the world to come, the author intimates,
angels do not rule man; on the contrary, they, as “ministering spirits sent to serve those who will
inherit salvation” (1:14), are subject to man.
8b. In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at
present we do not see everything subject to him.
What is man that he should be
Loved and visited by Thee,

3 3 John Brown, An Exposition of Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), p. 93.

X XX Septuagint

4 4 Many translations have adopted this explanation. See, among others, the NASB, NAB,
NEB, JB, MLB, GNB, and R.S.V..

5 5 The clause “you made him ruler over the works of your hands” (Ps. 8:6) is omitted
because of the distinct “probability that the longer reading may be the result of scribal enlargement
of the quotation (Ps. 8:7 LXX).” Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New
Testament (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), pp. 663–64.
 Raised to an exalted height,
Crowned with honor in Thy sight!
How great Thy Name!
With dominion crowned he stands
O’er the creatures of Thy hands;
All to him subjection yield
In the sea and air and field.
How great Thy Name!
—Psalter Hymnal
Psalm 8 speaks of man’s rule over God’s creation. At the time man received the mandate to rule
all that God had made (Gen. 1:28), nothing was left outside of man’s control. He was responsible to
God alone. The mandate was given to Adam as the king of creation. He stood at the pinnacle of
creation, for God had left nothing that was not subject to him. Such was man before the fall into sin.
Yet verse 8 is, in one sense, ambiguous. Does the writer think of Christ or of man in this
particular verse? It is possible that the author meant to say: God put everything under Christ,
although at present we do not see everything p 66 subject to Christ. Conversely, some translations
of this text show that the emphasis should be on man. They read, “But in fact we do not yet see all
things in subjection to man.”16
Because of the phrase son of man in Hebrews 2:6 and the apparent similarity between the
quotation from Psalm 110:1 in Hebrews 1:13 (“a footstool for your feet”) and the last line of the
citation from Psalm 8:6 in Hebrews 2:8 (“and put everything under his feet”), it is possible to
interpret 2:8b messianically. However, it is preferable to interpret the psalm citation as referring first
to man and second to Christ. B. F. Westcott puts it rather succinctly when he comments on Psalm 8:
“It is not, and has never been accounted by the Jews to be, directly Messianic; but as expressing the
true destiny of man it finds its accomplishment in the Son of Man and only through Him in man. It
offers the ideal (Gen. 1:27–30) which was lost by Adam and then regained and realised by
Christ.”17 Certainly Jesus Christ fulfilled the words of Psalm 8, but the original intent of the psalm
was to call attention to man’s rule in God’s creation.
In time, Psalm 8 was interpreted messianically by Paul (I Cor. 15:27; Eph. 1:22). Jesus had
quoted the psalm (8:2) when he heard the children in the temple area shout, “Hosanna to the Son of
David” (Matt. 21:15–16). And the writer of Hebrews, who was fully acquainted with the Old
Testament, may have used Daniel 7:13–14 (with its description of the Son of man who was given
authority and dominion) and Luke 22:69 (Jesus’ word to the Sanhedrin that “the Son of Man will be
seated at the right hand of the mighty God”) to make the theological transition from Psalm 110:1 to
Psalm 8:4–6.18
9. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory
and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for
everyone.
a. Jesus fulfilled the message of Psalm 8: “Being found in appearance as a man, he humbled

6 6 See the NEB, GNB, and Moffatt.

7 7 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 42.

8 8 In a perceptive article (“The Son of Man in the Epistle to the Hebrews,” ExpT 86 [11,
1975]: 328–32) Pauline Giles writes, “The fact that the Son of Man is not used outside the gospels
as a title for Jesus, except in the passage under consideration [Heb. 2:6], in Stephen’s vision
recorded in Acts 7:55, 56, and in the Apocalypse, does not necessarily imply that it was unknown or
unimportant.” See also Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews
(Amsterdam: Van Soest, 1961), pp. 81–82.
himself and became obedient to death” (Phil. 2:8). Because of his humiliation, especially his death
and burial, he was made lower than the angels for a little while. Jesus, then, is portrayed as man,
who in effect has accomplished what the first Adam because of sin failed to do. Jesus became man,
suffered, died, and was buried. After his humiliation was completed, he was no longer “lower than
the angels.” His state of exaltation came to full realization when he was crowned with glory and
honor; that is, when he ascended to heaven to take his seat at the right side of the Majesty in heaven
(Heb. 1:3). Jesus rules supreme as king of the universe! p 67
Because of man’s disobedience in Paradise and the curse God placed upon him (Gen. 3:17–19),
sinful man could never fully experience the state that is described in Psalm 8. But, says the author
of the epistle, we see Jesus. He suffered death and gained the victory. He wears the crown of glory
and honor, and rules the universe. In fact, even though the author does not explicitly state it, all
things are subject to Christ (see I Cor. 15:27; Eph. 1:22). Jesus said, “All authority in heaven and on
earth has been given to me” (Matt. 28:18).
b. Christ is introduced as Son in the first chapter; here he is called Jesus. By using the personal
name Jesus, the author of the epistle draws attention to the historical setting of Jesus’ suffering and
death. We assume that the name was vivid in the minds of the first readers of the epistle because of
the steady preaching of the gospel. These readers were acquainted with the details of the life, death,
resurrection, and ascension of Jesus.
c. The name Jesus calls to mind the concept salvation. Jesus, the Savior, gained glory and honor
for himself and life eternal for his people. The death of Jesus was purposeful in that it provided
benefits, as the author writes, “for everyone.” This expression does not imply universal salvation,
for the writer in the broader context mentions that “many sons” (not all the sons) are brought to
glory (2:10) and that they are called Jesus’ brothers (2:11–12).
Jesus accomplished the redemption of his people by tasting death, so that his people may live
and rule with him. The text does not say that Jesus died, but that he tasted death for everyone. This
phrase is not just a Hebraic idiom for the verb to die, which also occurs in Matthew 16:28; Mark
9:1; Luke 9:27; and John 8:52.19 The words to taste death are “a graphic expression of the hard and
painful reality of dying which is experienced by man and which was suffered also by Jesus.”20
Jesus experienced death in the greatest degree of bitterness, not as a noble martyr aspiring to a
state of holiness, but as the sinless Savior who died to set sinners free from the curse of spiritual
death.
d. The phrase by the grace of God has been replaced in some manuscripts by the words apart
from God. The evidence for this latter reading, although not strong, indicates that the phrase may be
a reference to Jesus’ death on the cross when he cried out, “My God, my God, why have you
forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46).21 The reading apart from God gains support when we see that p 68
twelve of the thirty-eight New Testament uses of the Greek word for “apart” occur in the Epistle to

9 9 Brown, Hebrews, p. 101.

0 0 Johannes Behm, TDNT, vol. 1, p. 677. Also consult Erich Tiedtke, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 271;
SB, vol. 1, p. 751; and Bauer, p. 157.

1 1 Some translations (JB, NEB) provide an explanatory footnote on this point. And some
commentators have chosen the reading apart from God as the original text. Among them is Hugh
Montefiore, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1964), pp. 58–
59. Gunther Zuntz, in his Schweich lectures published in The Text of the Epistles (London: Oxford
University Press, 1953), pp. 34–35, argues cogently for the adoption of the reading apart from God.
In his opinion, the accepted reading “yields what can only be called a preposterous sense in stating
that Jesus suffered ‘through the grace of God.’ ” Also see J. K. Elliott, “Jesus apart from God (Heb.
2:9),” ExpT 83 (11, 1972): 339–41; and R. V. G. Tasker, “The Text of the ‘Corpus Paulinum,’ ” NTS
1 (3, 1954–55): 180–91.
the Hebrews. On the other hand, the phrase by the grace of God—with slight variations—is
common in the Gospels and in the Epistles.
On the basis of the author’s intent, if that can be ascertained, we could defend the reading apart
from God. And we could argue that it is easier to explain how in the original the word grace was
substituted for the term apart than to explain the converse. But the fact that the earliest manuscript,
dating back to A.D. 200, has the reading grace is significant. A solution to this rather difficult
problem is often sought in conjecture. One theory is that a scribe reading Hebrews 2:8 (“God left
nothing that is not subject to him”) added a note in the margin that said, “nothing apart from God.”
He did so because of Paul’s comment in I Corinthians 15:27 (“For he ‘has put everything under his
feet.’ Now when it says ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include
God himself, who put everything under Christ”). According to this theory, then, the note eventually
became part of the text when the word grace was substituted for the term apart.22 Perhaps the
conjecture ought to be taken seriously; yet the phrase by the grace of God needs interpretation.
e. What is meant by the phrase “tasting death for everyone by the grace of God”? The grace of
God is equivalent to the love of God (by analogy to Rom. 5:15; II Cor. 8:9; Gal. 2:20–21; Eph. 1:7;
2:5, 8; Titus 2:11; 3:7). In the words of John Calvin, “The cause of redemption was the infinite love
of God towards us, through which it was that he spared not even his own son.”23

Doctrinal Considerations in 2:5–9

Angels surround the throne of God and constantly behold the glory of the Lord. They are
immortal, do not marry, and in a sense are superhuman because of their power and might.
Nevertheless, God has given man dominion over the works of his hands. Authority over every
living creature in the world was given to man, not to angels.
In Hebrews 1, the author stresses the divinity of Christ; in the second chapter, he emphasizes
Christ’s humanity. Jesus Christ, in his divine and human natures, was able to fulfill the mandate
originally given to Adam. Christ shall have dominion.
Because Christ accomplished his work of atonement and therefore claimed the p 69 crown of
glory and honor, he is the rightful ruler of God’s creation. And by his death he has obtained
dominion not only for himself but also for all his followers. We have become heirs and coheirs with
Christ.
The parallel between Paul’s quote from Psalm 8:6 (and his interpretation in I Corinthians 15:27
and Ephesians 1:22) and the citation of Psalm 8:4–6 by the author of Hebrews in 2:6–8 (and his
interpretation) is striking. A key term in both I Corinthians 15 and Hebrews 2 is the verb to subject.
Both writers demonstrate that God is the agent, that Christ has taken the place of the first man, and
that time elapsed before Christ’s work came to completion.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 2:5–9

2 2 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 664. Also consult F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the
Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1964), p. 32, n. 15. Conjectures, of course, have been proposed before. F. Bleek, in Der Brief an die
Hebräer (Berlin: Dummler, 1828–40), suggested that the Greek text of the original was not very
clear, so that a scribe who was copying the word made a mistake by reading one expression for
another.

3 3 Calvin, Hebrews, p. 61.

 Verse 5
οἰκουμένην—the form is actually the feminine present passive participle from οἰκέω (I dwell).
The form may be completed with the noun γῆ (earth). The term refers to the inhabited world.
μέλλουσαν—the present active participle from μέλλω (I am about to, I am at the point of). As a
participle it has the connotation about to happen. The participle has already been introduced in
Hebrews 1:14.

Verse 6
μιμνῄσκῃ—the form is a second person singular, middle (deponent), indicative of μιμνῄσκομαι
(I remind myself, remember, care for, am concerned about).
ἐπισκέπτῃ—a somewhat synonymous term; a second person singular, middle (deponent),
indicative of ἐπισκέπτομαι (look at, visit [especially visiting sick people], look after, care for). Here
it signifies “God’s gracious visitation in bringing salvation.”24 The quotation is punctuated in two
ways: as two questions (Bov, Nes-Al, [25th ed.], BF, KJV, RV, and ASV) or as a single question (TR,
WH, Nes-Al [26th ed.], R.S.V., NEB, NIV, MLB, NAB, and JB).
υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου—the term is used here without definite articles, although in the Gospels and
Acts it is always with the two definite articles ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. The phrase does not occur in
Paul’s epistles. In Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 it is written without the definite articles as a quote
from Daniel 7:13.

Verse 8
ὑποτάξαι—the aorist active infinitive shows single occurrence.
τὰ πάντα—the definite article τά makes the earlier πάντα (2:8a) all-inclusive; it encompasses
the whole of God’s creation.

4 4 Bauer, p. 298.

v ov Jose M. Bover, Novi Testamenti Biblica Graeca et Latina, 4th ed.

l es-Al Eberhard Nestle; Kurt Aland, rev., Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th ed.
F F British and Foreign Bible Society, The New Testament, 2d ed.
V JV King James Version
V V Revised Version
V SV American Standard Version
R R Textus Receptus: The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text
H H B. F. Westcott and Fenton Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek
l es-Al Eberhard Nestle; Kurt Aland, rev., Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th ed.
. .S.V. Revised Standard Version
B EB New English Bible
V IV New International Version
B LB The Modern Language Bible
B AB New American Bible
B B Jerusalem Bible
 ἀνυπότακτον—derived from α-privative and ὑποτάσσω (I subject). It is a verbal adjective with
a passive interpretation: it is not made subject.
ὑποτεταγμένα—the form is a perfect passive participle in the neuter plural accusative. The
perfect points to an act of God with lasting consequences. p 70

Verse 9
τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου—the noun with the -μα ending constitutes the result of an action—in
this case, suffering. It is debatable whether the genitive should be taken subjectively (suffering that
is characteristic of death) or objectively (suffering that leads to death).
παντὸς—the adjective in the genitive singular can either be masculine (everyone) or neuter
(everything). The context seems to favor the masculine usage.
χάριτι θεοῦ—the manuscript evidence is early and weighty, whereas the evidence for the
reading χωρὶς θεοῦ is late and somewhat scanty—three minuscules and the testimony of church
fathers.

3. Jesus and His Brothers

2:10–13
10. In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom
everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.
In Hebrews 2:9 the author briefly states that Jesus suffered the agony of death—he tasted death
—for everyone. In the next verse he explains the term everyone by designating those who are saved
as “many sons” and by referring to Jesus as “the author of their salvation.” The Son suffered the
pains of death, which the sons should have experienced, and was crowned with glory and honor
afterward. Because of the redemptive work of the Son, the sons are led into the glory with which the
Son is crowned.
a. The subject in verse 10 is God, for whom and through whom everything exists. The wording
obviously echoes Romans 11:36, where Paul in a doxology writes, “For from him and through him
and to him are all things.” The honor, however, is shared with Jesus, as is evident from I
Corinthians 8:6: “Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for
whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through
whom we live.”25 (See also Col. 1:16–17.)
b. Jesus is presented as “the author of their [the sons’] salvation.” He is actually going ahead of
them because he is the pioneer, the founder of salvation.26 In Hebrews 12:2 Jesus is called “the
author and perfecter of our faith.” God made him pass through gruesome suffering to bring about
perfection. It was God’s will that his Son had to suffer in order to effect the salvation of many sons.
And when the Son completed his suffering, he became the founder of their salvation. He received
the appointment to lead p 71 the elect out of a life of slavery in sin to a life of eternal happiness in
which they are considered sons and heirs with Christ.
c. The sequence in Hebrews 2:10 presents a transposition of four concepts, which can be put in

5 5 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, R. C. H. Lenski, Ceslaus Spicq, and Westcott directly and
indirectly quote or borrow from Thomas Aquinas, who describes God as the efficient cause and the
final cause of all things. Says Hughes, “All creation flows from God and all creation flows to God.”
Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), p. 98.

6 6 Hans Bietenhard, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 168; Gerhard Delling, TDNT, vol. 1, p. 488.
Translations vary: “their leader in the work of salvation” (NAB); “the leader who would take them
to their salvation” (JB); “the leader who delivers them” (NEB); “the pioneer of their salvation”
(R.S.V.); and “the Leader of their salvation” (MLB).
the following scheme:27
many sons to glory the author’s suffering

and and

their salvation his perfection

But how can Jesus be made perfect? He is without sin or blemish. The word perfect must be
understood to mean achieving the highest goal. In the context of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the
term to make perfect signifies that Jesus removed the sins of his people from the presence of God
and thus by his sacrificial death on the cross consecrated the “many sons.” The perfection of Jesus,
therefore, points to the work of salvation he performed on behalf of his people.28 In 10:14, for
example, the author of the epistle writes that “by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those
who are being made holy.”
11. Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family.
So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.
This verse constitutes an explanation of the preceding thought, in that the work of perfecting the
“many sons” is a work of holiness. This work of holiness is performed by and through the members
of God’s family: Jesus, the one who makes men holy, and those who are made holy. This verse
clearly teaches the humanity of Jesus (by implying his identification with the human race) and
alludes to his divinity (by noting his sanctifying work).
Jesus is the one who makes men holy, and he continues to do so until the end of time. He is the
one who removes the sin of the world (John 1:29) and constantly serves as high priest on behalf of
his people. The sanctification of his people is not an isolated event but a lifelong process. The path
of sanctification lies in obedience to doing God’s will, and that obedience is out of gratitude. But,
we may ask, can holy people do God’s will perfectly? A sixteenth-century catechism states, “No. In
this life even the holiest have only a small beginning of this obedience.”29 If we fall into sin, our
holiness is soiled. However, there is no need to stay unclean, for Jesus Christ, who shares our
human nature, stands ready to cleanse us and make us holy.
The bond of humanity that links the one who makes holy to those who are made holy is further
defined by the word brothers. In this holy family the spiritual relationship supersedes the human
aspect. Jesus died for his p 72 own people; he redeemed them from the curse of sin; he forgives
their sins; he leads them to glory; and, because of his sacrificial work, he is not ashamed to give
them the name brothers. The implication is that we, in turn, may call Jesus our brother. What a
privilege to be called brothers of the Son of God! He who is seated at the right hand of the Majesty
in heaven condescends to sinful man and unashamedly calls him brother (Matt. 28:10; John 20:17).
12. He says,
“I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the presence of the congregation I will

7 7 John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5 vols.
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 360.

8 8 The group of words related to the verb perfect occurs in the Epistle to the Hebrews rather
frequently (nineteen times). The verb to make perfect is used nine times in this epistle (2:10; 5:9;
7:19, 28; 9:9; 10:1, 14; 11:40; 12:23) out of twenty-four occurrences in the entire New Testament.

9 9 Heidelberg Catechism, answer 114.

 sing your praises.”
To prove his bold assertion that Jesus calls his followers brothers, the author gleans a verse from
the messianic twenty-second psalm. Interestingly, he puts the words of this particular text on the
lips of Jesus and introduces the quotation with the words he says. In chapter 1 of Hebrews, God is
the speaker; in chapter 2 Jesus utters verses from Psalm 22:22 and Isaiah 8:17–18 (quoted in v. 13)
with divine authority.
The Messiah proclaims the name of his brothers in the midst of the congregation—that is, in the
church. By calling attention to the place in which he will testify, the Messiah limits the appellation
brothers to those who spiritually make up the church, the body of believers. The psalmist exhorts
those who fear the Lord to praise him (Ps. 22:23), for he says:
[The Lord] has not despised or disdained
the suffering of the afflicted one;
he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help. [Ps. 22:24]
The Messiah is speaking not only in the first part of Psalm 22, well known because of Jesus’
words spoken on the cross, but also in the last part of the psalm. This Scripture is fulfilled by the
Christ, who rejoices in the midst of his people, the church, of which he is the head. He defends his
brothers, upholds them, and listens to their prayers. They can put their trust in him.
13. And again,
“I will put my trust in him.”
And again he says,
“Here am I, and the children God has given me.”
At this point in the discussion, the writer turns to the prophecy of Isaiah and takes two lines
from Isaiah 8:17–18. “I will put my trust in him” is the last part of verse 17; “here am I, and the
children God has given me” forms the first portion of verse 18. Isaiah testifies that he “will wait for
the Lord, who is hiding his face from the house of Jacob.” And the children God has given him “are
signs and symbols in Israel from the LORD Almighty, who dwells on Mount Zion.”
The context of these two citations is quite important. Chapters 7, 8, and 9 of Isaiah are decidedly
messianic in tenor. For example, the name Immanuel p 73 occurs in Isaiah 7:14 and 8:8, 10. And the
birth of a Son is mentioned in Isaiah 7:14–17 and 8:1–4.
Also, the sentence “I will put my trust in him” was incorporated into psalm and spiritual song (II
Sam. 22:3; Ps. 18:2; Isa. 12:2) and constituted part of the heritage of God’s people.
Further, the words of the prophet Isaiah become the words of Christ. The prophet and the
Messiah say that they put their trust in God; the prophet and his children, as well as Christ and his
brothers, stand before God. (The children the Lord gave Isaiah are the remnant of faithful Israel.
The brothers of Jesus form the church.) As Isaiah was surrounded by his God-fearing countrymen,
so Christ is in the midst of his people. And as the faithful remnant in Isaiah’s day were God’s sign
and symbol in a world of unbelief, so the church today functions as lightbearer in a dark and sinful
world. Thomas Benson Pollock prayed:
Jesus, with thy Church abide;
Be her Savior, Lord and Guide,
While on earth her faith is tried:
We beseech Thee, hear us.
May her lamp of truth be bright;
Bid her bear aloft its light
Through the realms of pagan night:
We beseech Thee, hear us.
 Doctrinal Considerations in 2:10–13
Throughout chapter 2 God is the primary subject: he testified (2:4); he left nothing that is not
subject to man (2:8); and he makes perfect the author of salvation (2:10).
The author of salvation is Jesus, crowned with honor and glory because of his suffering and
death on behalf of his people.
The world of unbelief rejects the path of suffering and death that Jesus undertook, but in the
sight of God Jesus’ course of action was most fitting.
Because of his sacrificial death on the cross, Jesus leads his people to glory and identifies
himself with them. Together they form the family of God.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 2:10–13

Verse 10
ἔπρεπεν—the imperfect active indicative, third person singular impersonal use of πρέπω
expresses that which is proper and acceptable. The same form occurs in Hebrews 7:26. Consult
Matthew 3:15; I Corinthians 11:13; Ephesians 5:3; I Timothy 2:10; and Titus 2:1 for other forms
and usages.
ἀγαγόντα—the participle, in the aorist active accusative singular from ἄγω (I lead, bring),
agrees with the noun τὸν ἀρχηγόν. The aorist is ingressive.
τὸν ἀρχηγόν—as a compound (ἀρχή and ἄγω), the term is related to the preceding p 74
participle. Gerhard Delling claims that ἀρχηγός means the same thing as τελειωτής and refers to
the “crucifixion as the causative presupposition of πίστις.”30

Verse 11
ὁ ἁγιάζων—the present tense of this participle in the active voice illustrates the work that Jesus
progressively performs. The present passive participle ἁγιαζόμενοι shows that sanctification is a
process whose implied agent is Jesus and whose subjects are the believers.

Verse 12
ἐκκλησίας—since the word ἐκκλησία is part of the quotation from Psalm 22:22, the author of
Hebrews employs this term instead of the more familiar συναγωγή. In the Septuagint, including the
Apocrypha, the word ἐκκλησία occurs 100 times; by contrast, συναγωγή, 225 times.31

Verse 13
πεποιθώς—the second perfect active participle in conjunction with ἔσομαι forms a future
periphrastic construction.

4. Jesus Is like His Brothers

2:14–18

0 0 TDNT, vol. 1, p. 488, n. 4.

1 1 Lothar Coenen, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 292.

14. Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his
death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15. and free
those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.
In an earlier verse (2:11) the author of Hebrews has demonstrated that Jesus and his people
belong to the same family; the implication is that Jesus has assumed our human nature.
Now the author indicates that the necessity of delivering his people from their enemies, death
and Satan, meant that Jesus had to become man. He had to have a body of flesh and blood and had
to be fully human in order to set his people free. Delivering his followers from the curse of sin and
the clutches of the devil demanded nothing short of taking the place of those whom God had given
him but who stood condemned because of their sin.
Bearing shame and scoffing rude,
In my place condemned He stood,
Sealed my pardon with His blood;
Hallelujah! What a Savior!
—Philip P. Bliss p 75
a. Because Jesus is divine, it would have been impossible for him to deliver us from sin unless
he himself shared in our humanity. Jesus shared our human nature and, although he was sinless,
lived a full life with its weaknesses, ills, desires, needs, and temptations (Heb. 4:15).
Jesus became fully human in such a manner that he is related to us. He is our blood relative. In
the original Greek the word order is reversed (“blood and flesh,” rather than “flesh and blood”);
possibly this is an idiom. But the prominence of the word blood indicates that the ties that bind us
are blood ties. We can say of Jesus that he is one of us. He is our brother.
b. God the Father desired that Jesus be born of the Virgin Mary, ordained that he should suffer
and die, and set him free from the bondage of death by raising him from the dead (Acts 2:23–24).
Thus God expressed his love toward his people by delivering his own Son to die a shameful death.
And the Son willingly suffered and died in humiliation on behalf of his brothers and sisters, the
members of the household of God.
c. The result of Christ’s death is twofold: he conquered Satan and set his people free from the
fear of death. Satan desired the destruction of God’s creation in general and man in particular. After
the fall Satan had the power of death over Adam and his descendants and used death as a weapon
against us. He had the privilege of coming before God in heaven to accuse the believers (see Zech.
3:1–2), and stood ready to execute the verdict pronounced upon the guilty and to destroy man, who
was condemned to death. He, the murderer from the beginning (John 8:44), desired man’s death in
the fullest sense of the word: physical death and spiritual death (separation from God). He wanted
to serve as the angel of death by wielding the power of death.
However, not Satan but God pronounced the curse of death on the human race when Adam and
Eve fell into sin. And Satan, who is an angel created by God, is a servant of God. Without
permission from God, Satan is unable to do anything.
Jesus, the Son of God, was present at creation, for through him God made the universe (Heb.
1:2). He alone would be able to destroy Satan, and he could do this by means of his death on the
cross. That is, Jesus defeated Satan by using the weapon of death. Jesus paid the penalty of sin by
giving his life and set us free from the curse of death. And by paying this penalty for us, Jesus took
the weapon of death out of Satan’s hands. Jesus took away the fear of death.
d. Of course, all men die, including believers, so that Satan still appears to rule supreme.
However, the curse of God no longer rests upon the family of God, for Jesus removed it. All those
who are his people no longer fear death, for they are free from the bondage of death. We know that
nothing, not even death, can “separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord”
(Rom. 8:38–39). By contrast, all those who do not know Jesus as their Lord and Savior face eternal
death and thus are eternally held in slavery. Only Jesus sets man free from this slavery. p 76
Since the death of Jesus on Calvary’s cross, death has lost its power and its effect. Through
death the Christian enters not hell but heaven. And because Jesus’ human body was resurrected, the
believer’s body also shall come forth from the grave in the last day. The believer knows the words
of Jesus: “I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and
Hades” (Rev. 1:18).
16. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants.
The author of Hebrews is bringing his discourse on Jesus’ superiority to angels to a conclusion.
He does so by appealing to a self-evident truth: Jesus redeems not angels but the spiritual
descendants of the father of believers, Abraham. The name Abraham obviously must be understood
to mean that all those who put their faith in Jesus are Abraham’s descendants.
The translations of this verse vary because of the main verb in the sentence. For example, the
King James Version reads, “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him
the seed of Abraham.” And the Revised Standard Version says, “For surely it is not with angels that
he is concerned but with the descendants of Abraham.”32 The New International Version, on the
other hand, translates, “For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants.”
If Jesus had been an angel, he would be expected to come to the aid of fellow angels. But he
helps men instead, thereby giving ample proof of his identity.33 As the God-man he has come to
help Abraham’s spiritual children because he has identified himself with them. Jesus is the author
not of the salvation of angels, but of the salvation of Abraham’s descendants. And they receive his
help.
17. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might
become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make
atonement for the sins of the people.
In this verse the writer of Hebrews explains the necessity of Christ’s identification with man. In
order to be of help to sinful man, Jesus had to become like his brothers in all but one way: he was
sinless. Full identification was necessary; he was under divine obligation to become like his
brothers. In a sense the author of Hebrews repeats himself, for earlier in chapter 2 he has introduced
the thought of identity (vv. 9, 14, 15). But now he shows that Jesus had to become man in order to
assume his role as a merciful and faithful high priest.
In this verse the term high priest occurs for the first time in Hebrews. In no other book of the
New Testament is Jesus described as high priest. Only in Hebrews is the doctrine of Jesus’ high
priesthood fully developed (2:17–18; p 77 3:1; 4:14–16; 5:1–10; 6:20; 7:14–19, 26–28; 8:1–6;
9:11–28; 10). The writer calls attention to two of Jesus’ high-priestly characteristics: mercy and
faithfulness (see 7:26 for additional characteristics).34
a. The adjective merciful occurs only twice in the New Testament: once in the Beatitudes
(“Blessed are the merciful,” Matt. 5:7) and once in Hebrews 2:17. In Matthew we read that mercy is
to be expressed from man to man; those who practice mercy are promised the mercy of God. In
Hebrews 2:17, Jesus is depicted as the high priest who represents man before God, averts God’s

2 2 Other versions read “takes to himself” (NEB) or “took to himself” (JB). The NASB broke
rank and translated, “For assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the seed of
Abraham.” In Sir. 4:11 the same Greek verb is used: “Wisdom exalts her sons and gives help to
those who seek her” (R.S.V.).

3 3 Montefiore, Hebrews, p. 66.

4 4 R. C. H. Lenski, following Martin Luther, translates the adjective merciful as a predicate

and the word faithful as an attributive. “Hence he was obliged in all respects to be made like his
brothers in order to be merciful and a faithful High Priest.…” The Interpretation of the Epistle to
the Hebrews and of the Epistle to James (Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), p. 92.
wrath, heals the brokenhearted, lifts up the fallen, and ministers to the needs of his people.
b. Whereas mercy is directed to man, faithfulness is directed to God. Jesus is a faithful high
priest in service to God. Westcott aptly remarks that the word faithful actually has two meanings: a
person is faithful in performing his duties and is trustworthy toward persons who rely on him.35
Usually the two meanings merge.
After noting these two characteristics of Christ’s high priesthood, the author mentions the
purpose of Christ’s high priesthood: he makes atonement for his people.36 The term atonement is a
theological one with profound meaning; it is often explained by other, even more difficult, terms
such as “propitiation” and “expiation.”
In the context of Hebrews the word atonement means that Jesus as high priest brought peace
between God and man. God’s wrath was directed toward man because of his sin, and man because
of sin was alienated from God. Jesus became high priest. And as the high priest once a year on the
Day of Atonement entered the Holy of Holies, he sprinkled blood—first for himself and then for the
people—to remove (literally, to cover) sin. In the same way, Jesus offered himself so that the
shedding of his blood covered our sins. Thus we might be acquitted, forgiven, and restored. Jesus
brought God and man together in inexpressible harmony. In the words of Paul, “Since we have been
justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:1).
The marvel of it all is that in the act of reconciliation God himself took the initiative. God,
although angry because of man’s sin, appointed his Son to become high priest and sacrifice in order
to remove sin by his death on the cross. Thus, through Christ the relationship between God and man
is restored. “For if, when we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of
his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!” (Rom. 5:10).
p 78
18. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are
being tempted.
That Jesus’ humanity is genuine can be demonstrated, says the author of Hebrews, by the fact
that Christ was tempted. He personally experienced the power of sin when Satan confronted him
and when the weaknesses of our human nature became evident. Jesus experienced hunger when he
was tempted by Satan in the wilderness, thirst when he asked the woman at Jacob’s well for water,
weariness when he slept while the storm raged on the Sea of Galilee, and sorrow when he wept at
the grave of Lazarus.
As high priest, through his sacrificial work, Jesus removed the curse of God that rested on man.
Because of the forgiveness of sin, God’s love flows freely to the redeemed, and Jesus stands ready
to help. Those who are being tempted may experience the active support of Jesus. They can expect
nothing short of perfect understanding from Jesus, because he himself suffered when he was
tempted.
Of course, Jesus did not share with us the experience of sin; instead, because of his sinlessness,
Jesus fully experienced the intensity of temptation. He is able and willing to help us oppose the
power of sin and temptation. As he said to the sinful woman in the house of Simon the Pharisee,
“Your sins are forgiven.… Go in peace” (Luke 7:48, 50), so also Jesus shows his mercy, peace, and
love to us. He is our sympathetic High Priest.

Doctrinal Considerations in 2:14–18

“Now the prince of this world will be driven out,” said Jesus when he predicted his death after

5 5 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 57.

6 6 A study on the word atonement by C. H. Dodd (JTS 32 [1931]: 352–60) elicited strong
reactions from Leon Morris (ExpT 62 [1951]: 227–33) and R. R. Nicole (WTJ 17 [1955]: 117–57).
his triumphal entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday (John 12:31).
Jesus became fully human like his brothers, yet remained the Son of God. Athanasius
formulated this doctrine in creedal form:
30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
is God and man.
31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of the substance of
his mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father as touching his Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching his
manhood.
34. Who, although he is God and man, yet he is not two, but one Christ.
The writer of Hebrews develops progressively the doctrine of Christ’s high priesthood.37 In 2:17
we read that Jesus “had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a
merciful and faithful high priest” (italics added). In 5:10 the writer says that once Jesus was made
perfect, he “was designated by God to be high priest” (italics added). And after Jesus had entered
the inner sanctuary, “he … bec[a]me a high priest forever” (6:20; italics added). p 79

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 2:14–18

Verse 14
κεκοινώνηκεν—the perfect active indicative, third person singular, from κοινωνέω (I share,
take part, contribute) shows the continued sharing of flesh and blood by every generation from the
days of Adam until the present.
παραπλησίως—the form of this adverb occurs only once in the New Testament, although it is
frequently used in other literature. It is translated “similarly,” and “it is used in situations where no
differentiation is intended.”38
μετέσχεν—the aorist active indicative, third person singular, of μετέχω (I share, participate) is
synonymous with κοινωνέω. The aorist points to a definite time in history. It is followed by the
partitive genitive τῶν αὐτῶν. Also see Hebrews 7:13.
καταργήσῃ—the verb in the aorist active subjunctive, third person singular, conveys the
meaning destroy, abolish, bring to an end. The subjunctive is expressed in a purpose clause
introduced by ἴνα; the aorist indicates a single occurrence. See the parallel verses of I Corinthians
15:26; II Thessalonians 2:8; and II Timothy 1:10.

Verse 15
ἀπαλλάξῃ—the aorist active subjunctive, third person singular of ἀπαλλάσσω (I free, release) is
a compound verb expressing an intensive meaning—the verb ἀλλάσσω means “I change.”

Verse 16
ἐπιλαμβάνεται—the compound verb has a directive sense: ἐπί points to the goal in giving aid
and λαμβάνομαι denotes the act of receiving support. The verb is translated “to take hold of, grasp,
catch,” but in a figurative sense it means “to be concerned with, take an interest in, help.” It is used

7 7 Bengel, Gnomon, vol. 4, pp. 367–68.

8 8 Bauer, p. 621.
of God, who takes the hand of his people in order to help them.39

Verse 17
ὅθεν—this adverb occurs fifteen times in the New Testament, six of which are in Hebrews
(2:17; 3:1; 7:25; 8:3; 9:18; 11:19). The word is a compound of the neuter relative pronoun referring
to place or fact and the suffix -θεν, which signifies motion away from a place. It is translated “for
this reason”; that is, “from the available information the following conclusion is drawn.”
ὤφειλεν—the imperfect active indicative, third person singular, of ὀφείλω (I owe, must, ought)
is followed by the aorist passive infinitive ὁμοιωθῆναι (to be made like). The word signifies that
because of law, duty, custom, or convention, an obligation is placed on a person to attend to a matter
under consideration. A distinction, then, between ὀφείλω and δεῖ is that the first expresses
obligation; the second, necessity.
ἱλάσκεσθαι—the present tense of the infinitive indicates that the work of atoning p 80 is a
continuing activity. Man is being reconciled to God. Says Westcott, “The love of God is the same
throughout; but He ‘cannot’ in virtue of His very nature welcome the impenitent and sinful: and
more than this, He ‘cannot’ treat sin as if it were not sin.”40
τοῦ λαοῦ—contrasted with τὸ ἔθνος (the nation, the people), the word generally refers to God’s
elect people.

Verse 18
πέπονθεν—from the verb πάσχω (I suffer), the perfect active indicative, third person singular,
brings out the lasting effect of Jesus’ suffering.
πειρασθείς—the author of Hebrews has a penchant for using participles describing Jesus and his
people (see 2:11). The aorist passive, nominative masculine singular πειρασθείς points to the earthly
ministry of Jesus in general and to his temptation in the desert in particular. The present passive
πειραζομένοις (dative plural), on the other hand, points to the continued and varied temptations
God’s people endure.
βοηθῆσαι—in light of the immediate context (2:16), the aorist infinitive of βοηθέω (I help,
come to the aid of) is a synonym of ἐπιλαμβάνομαι.

Summary of Chapter 2
The Epistle to the Hebrews is characterized by teaching and pastoral admonition—the writer is a
teacher and a pastor. As a spiritual overseer he constantly admonishes his readers to listen
attentively and obediently to God’s Word. He shows a genuine concern for the spiritual well-being
of the recipients of his letter.
One of those readers perhaps asked if Jesus, the divine Son of God, is unacquainted with human
nature. The answer is given in the form of a lengthy quotation from Psalm 8. Jesus “was made a
little lower than the angels” but now, because of his death, resurrection, and ascension, is “crowned
with glory and honor.” Jesus fulfilled the words of Psalm 8 and through this fulfillment has obtained
salvation for his people. No angel could have fulfilled the task that Jesus accomplished by “tast[ing]
death for everyone.” He is one with his brothers because together they constitute the family of God.
Jesus, the Son of God, is truly human and fully identifies with his brothers. Because of this identity,
Jesus has “become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God.” He sets his people free
from sin and stands with them in their times of trial and temptation. Jesus sympathetically and at the

9 9 Delling, in TDNT, vol. 4, p. 9, says that the verb in Heb. 2:16 means “to draw someone to
oneself to help,” and thus to take him into the fellowship of one’s own destiny.

0 0 B. F. Westcott, The Epistles of Saint John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966), p. 87.
same time intimately understands the problems believers face.

p 81 3. Jesus’ Superiority to Moses, part 1

3:1–19 p 82
Outline
3:1–6 A. A Comparison of Jesus and Moses

B. A Warning Against Unbelief

3:7–11 1. Scripture

3:12–15 2. Application

3:16–19 3. Summation

A. A Comparison of Jesus and Moses

3:1–6

3 1 Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and
high priest whom we confess. 2 He was faithful to the one who appointed him, just as Moses was faithful in
all God’s house. 3 Jesus has been found worthy of greater honor than Moses, just as the builder of a house
has greater honor than the house itself. 4 For every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of
everything. 5 Moses was faithful as a servant in all God’s house, testifying to what would be said in the
future. 6 But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage
and the hope of which we boast.

In the span of two chapters, the author of Hebrews has demonstrated from the pages of the Old
Testament that Jesus is superior to angels. Someone among the Hebrews who received the epistle
might ask whether Jesus is greater than Moses. The Jews thought that no one was greater than
Moses, for he gave the people of Israel two tablets of stone on which God had written the law
(Exod. 34). The angels, by contrast, were only intermediaries at the time the law was given (Acts
7:38, 53).
In the preceding chapter the writer described Jesus as high priest (Heb. 2:17) but did not
compare him with Aaron. The comparison between Jesus and Moses in this chapter in a sense
parallels the comparison of Jesus and the angels.
 1. Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus,
the apostle and high priest whom we confess.
The word therefore links chapter 3 to the immediately preceding discourse on the unity Jesus
has with his brothers. Together they belong to the family of God. The brothers are holy because they
are made holy by Jesus (Heb. 2:11), and on that account Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.
In 3:1 these people are, for the first time in Hebrews, specifically addressed as “holy brothers.”
The adjective holy reveals that the brothers have been sanctified and may enter the presence of God,
for sin has been removed through the suffering and death of Jesus. The term brothers also applies to
the author of Hebrews. In fact, he is one of them in the family of God (Heb. 3:12; 10:19; 13:22).
The recipients of the epistle are also sharers in the heavenly calling. This is a unique calling, a
heavenly invitation to enter the kingdom of God ( p 84 Rom. 11:29; Eph. 1:18; 4:1, 4; Phil. 3:14; II
Thess. 1:11; II Tim. 1:9; II Peter 1:10).
The privilege of being called by God is coupled with a command. The charge is not difficult and
complicated, and the brothers are able to comply with it. They are asked to fix their thoughts on
Jesus and to do this diligently. Apparently the readers of the epistle are not doing this at the
moment, for they seem to drift away. Already in Hebrews 2:1 the writer exhorts them to “pay more
careful attention” to the gospel they have heard, for knowledge about Jesus is essential. As the
author prepares to teach about Jesus, he does not call Jesus the Christ, the Son of God, the Son of
man, or Lord and Savior, but calls him the apostle and high priest. Interestingly, the word apostle
appears first in this verse, even though we would have expected the expression high priest to have
precedence because of its use in Hebrews 2:17.
The term apostle refers to the one whom God has sent—a concept repeatedly used by the
evangelist John in his Gospel (3:17, 34; 5:36–38; 6:29, 57; 7:29; 8:42; 10:36; 11:42; 17:3) and even
in his first epistle (I John 4:10). The word apostle has the deeper meaning of ambassador. The
apostle is not merely sent: he is empowered with the authority of the one who sends him.1
Furthermore, he can and may speak only the words his superior gives him. He is forbidden to utter
his own opinions when they are at variance with those of the one who sends him. Jesus, then,
proclaims the very Word of God. He brings the gospel, the good news.
Whereas the term apostle relates by comparison to Moses, the designation high priest is
reminiscent of Aaron. The separate functions of these two brothers are combined and are fulfilled in
the one person of Jesus. And in his work Jesus is greater than both Moses and Aaron.
The congregation that received the author’s epistle confessed the name of Jesus. I do not think
that the church of that time had a standard confession apart from the saying Jesus is Lord (I Cor.
12:3) and a few hymns (Phil. 2:6–11; I Tim. 3:16; II Tim. 2:11–13). After all, the author of Hebrews
instructs his readers about the apostleship and high priesthood of Jesus. In subsequent years,
however, a carefully worded confession may have begun to circulate in the early churches.
2. He was faithful to the one who appointed him, just as Moses was faithful in all God’s
house.
God the Father appointed Jesus to be the mediator between God and man and to bring the good
news of salvation to sinful humanity. God appointed him to be apostle and high priest and expected
him to faithfully execute his task, which Jesus did. p 85
The translation employs the past tense, “he was faithful” (italics added). However, the author,
by using a present participle in the original, intimates that the work God appointed Jesus to do did
not terminate when his earthly task was complete, but continues in heaven. Jesus continues to be
faithful in his high-priestly work of intercession and in preparing a place for his people (John 14:3).

1 The Hebrew term shaliach is an equivalent of the Greek apostolos. See Otto Michel, Der
Brief an die Hebräer, 10th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1957), p. 94; Philip
Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), p.
127; Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, p. 64; Karl
Heinrich Rengstorf, TDNT, vol. 1, pp. 414–16; Erich von Eicken and Helgo Lindner, NIDNTT, vol.
1, pp. 126–28.
He remains faithful in loving and in perfecting the church of which he is the head. Paul states this
eloquently: “In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the
Lord” (Eph. 2:21).
However, the first recipients of the epistle perhaps asked, “Was not Moses faithful to God?”
They knew the words God spoke to Aaron and Miriam in the presence of Moses:
When a prophet of the LORD is among you,
I reveal myself to him in visions,
I speak to him in dreams.
But this is not true of my servant Moses;
he is faithful in all my house. [Num. 12:6–7]
Observe this parallel:
Jesus was faithful to God who appointed him
Moses was faithful to God in all his house2
The parallelism takes on added meaning when we interpret the word house not literally but
figuratively. The term house is a synonym for the family of God. Moses ministered faithfully to the
church of God in the desert during the forty-year journey. Then what is the difference between Jesus
and Moses? That question the writer answers in the next verse.
3. Jesus has been found worthy of greater honor than Moses, just as the builder of a house
has greater honor than the house itself.
In this verse the author returns his attention to Jesus and deems him worthy of greater honor
than Moses. Certainly both Jesus and Moses have been faithful to God, but the difference between
the two goes beyond the virtue of faithfulness. Already the writer has called Jesus apostle and high
priest; Moses never filled this twofold office. But that point is not under discussion at the moment.
To demonstrate this truth the writer uses an illustration from the building trade, an example whose
validity everyone acknowledges.
As we know, the builder of a house has greater honor than the house itself has. When a house or
a building is erected, people may admire the p 86 beauty of the structure and speak words of praise,
but they reserve tribute and honor for the architect and for the builder. The architect and the builder
stand, figuratively, above the structure they have created. They stand on a different level. By
analogy, the author says, God is the architect; Jesus is the builder of God’s house; Moses is a
servant in God’s house.
By making the comparison between Jesus and Moses the author does not minimize the work of
Moses. His faithfulness is not in question; indeed, Scripture reveals that God honored Moses in
many ways. God himself appeared to Moses face to face (Exod. 33:11) and conferred on him the
gift of a long life—to be precise, 120 years. And when Moses died in Moab, God buried him (Deut.
34:6). But the writer of Hebrews is saying that there is no comparison between Jesus and Moses
because we really are talking about two different categories. Jesus constructs the spiritual house of
God; Moses was a faithful servant in all God’s house. Jesus is the founder of God’s household
(which has its beginning in creation) and Moses himself belongs to that household. In addition, the
seat of honor at God’s right hand belongs to Jesus. Jesus has been honored by God because through
him God made the universe (Heb. 1:2).
4. For every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of everything.

2 A number of manuscripts (among them papyri documents, Codex Vaticanus, and the Coptic
versions) omit the word all. Conversely, leading manuscripts (including Codices Sinaiticus,
Alexandrinus, Ephraemi, and Bezae, along with the Vulgate, some Old Latin versions, and all the
Syriac versions) attest to the reading all. Understandably, a few of the more recent translations do
not include the adjective all, either: see the R.S.V., NEB, and GNB. Other translations include the
adjective: see the NAB, JB, NIV, and NASB.
 This verse is an explanatory comment and may be placed in parentheses.3 A house does not
grow as a plant does; it is an inanimate object that needs a builder. Every house has a builder. The
word house may be understood literally, as in verse 3; or it can be used figuratively to refer to the
family living in the house.
The emphasis in verse 4 falls on the last part of the sentence. The change of subject is
introduced by the conjunction but. God is the builder of everything. At first the meaning of this
clause seems incongruous with the context, which speaks about Jesus. We would have expected a
statement that Jesus builds the house, instead of the comprehensive remark that God builds
everything. Of course, no one disputes the truth of the remark, and it directs our attention to God’s
sovereignty.
The author of Hebrews thus far has shown that he does not make a clear distinction between
God and the Son. Rather he teaches that God works through the Son; for example, in creation (Heb.
1:2). Also, God makes Jesus perfect through suffering (Heb. 2:10). God the Father, then, builds
everything through his Son. And because Christ constructs God’s house, he is worthy of greater
honor than Moses.
5–6a. Moses was faithful as a servant in all God’s house, testifying to what would be said
in the future. But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house.
a. The author repeats what he already said in Hebrews 3:2. There he p 87 compares Moses and
Jesus; here he contrasts the two. He literally quotes the Septuagint version of Numbers 12:7,
although the word order varies.
b. Moses is called a servant; Christ, a son. The contrast is heightened by the use of two different
prepositions: Moses was a servant in God’s house, whereas Christ is a son over God’s house.
c. The author chooses the term servant to describe Moses. Note that he does not call Moses a
slave or an attendant. This word (servant) occurs frequently in the Old Testament, but only once in
the original Greek of the New Testament (Heb. 3:5). It means that a person is in service to someone
who is superior. Also, it connotes one who wishes to serve, in contrast to a slave who must serve.
d. Moses proved faithful in the function God had given him and served honorably with
distinction (Josh. 1:1–4). Christ also is faithful, although he occupies a different position. He is the
son to whom God has given authority over the house; that is, the household of God (Heb. 10:21).
e. Moses functioned as a prophet and was a prototype of Jesus, the great prophet (Deut. 18:15,
18). He testified to what would be said in the future, specifically the gospel that Jesus proclaimed as
the fullness of God’s revelation (Heb. 1:2).4
6b. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast.
The metaphor that describes the people of God as a house or a building occurs rather frequently
in the New Testament (I Cor. 3:16; 6:19; II Cor. 6:16; I Peter 2:5). We are the house of God, says
the author of Hebrews. This means that now the believers in Jesus Christ, not the Jews, constitute
the household of God (Eph. 2:19–22; I Tim. 3:15). Only Christians acknowledge Christ Jesus as the
chief cornerstone. For only in him “the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments
and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow” (Col. 2:19).
There are two limitations.
a. “If we hold on to our courage.” We can no longer be part of the house unless we have
courage. For the Hebrew Christians the temptation to return to Judaism was not at all imaginary.

3 See, for example, the R.S.V. and Moffatt.

4 Numerous commentators, including John Calvin, Franz Delitzsch, B. F. Westcott, Hugh
Montefiore, and Hughes, interpret the clause to refer to the message “which was first announced by
the Lord” (Heb. 2:3).
They were exhorted to hold on to their faith in Christ against fierce opposition from their Jewish
countrymen. But Gentile Christians, too, must be vigilant in the face of persecution (I Thess. 2:14).
The word courage is significant for the Christian because it relates to his boldness, openness, and
frankness in preaching and teaching the gospel.
b. “And the hope of which we boast.”5 If the readers of this epistle do not p 88 hold on to the
hope of which they boast, then they are no longer part of the, household of God. Later in the epistle
the writer explains what he means by hope. He speaks of the unchangeable nature of God’s purpose
and the impossibility that God would lie. Says the author, “We who have fled to take hold of the
hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged. We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and
secure” (Heb. 6:18–19).
As God is true to his purpose and being, so the Christian must be a true reflection of his Creator
and Redeemer. If he fails, he ceases to be part of God’s house. Therefore, throughout the epistle, but
especially in Hebrews 10:23, the author exhorts his readers to be true to their calling: “Let us hold
unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful.”

Doctrinal Considerations in 3:1–6

In the first verse of Hebrews 3, two titles are given to the recipients of the epistle and two to
Jesus. Jesus has called the recipients brothers and they confess his name, just as he is not ashamed
to declare their names.
The structure of Hebrews 3:1 can be represented in a diagram:6
BROTHERS

holy

and sharers in the heavenly

calling

fix your thoughts on

JESUS

the
apostle and
high priest whom

WE

5 On the basis of a number of influential manuscripts (including Codices Sinaiticus,

Alexandrinus, Ephraemi, and Bezae) the KJV, NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB, and Phillips add the phrase
firm [or: steadfast] unto the end. Note also that the phrase occurs in Heb. 3:14, where in the original
it is grammatically correct; this is not the case in Heb. 3:6.
6 Consult Pierre Auffret’s interesting “Essai sur la structure littéraire et l’interprétation
d’Hébreux 3, 1–6, ” NTS 26 (1980): 380–96.
 confess

Verses 2–6a of Hebrews 3 display a remarkable parallelism in which the symmetry is lucid and
logical. See the following outline.
3:2 Jesus faithful

3:3 Jesus greater honor Moses

builder house

3:4 God builder

3:5 Moses faithful servant house

3:6a Christ faithful son house

houseMoses

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 3:1–6

Verse 1
κατανοήσατε—the aorist active imperative, second person plural of the compound intensive
verb (from κατά [down] and νοέω [I put my mind to]) conveys p 89 the message of thoroughly and
carefully noticing someone or something; in this case, Jesus. See Hebrews 10:24.

Verse 2
τῷ ποιήσαντι—a literal translation of this aorist active participle in the dative singular is “to the
one who made” him and could refer to the humanity of Jesus. It is better to translate the participle as
“to the one who appointed” him. Then it relates to the office of Christ as apostle and high priest.

Verse 5
θεράπων—the word belongs to the family of the verb θεραπεύω (I serve, venerate, care for,
cure). The Septuagint uses the noun as a translation of ’ebed (attendant, servant); the noun θεράπων
denotes willing service, whereas δοῦλος or παῖς indicates slavish submission.

Verse 6
παρρησίαν—translated “boldness, frankness, openness, confidence,” the noun is a combination
of πᾶν (all) and ῥῆσις (speech, word), from ἐρῶ (I speak). It conveys the meaning, therefore, of
having the freedom to speak to everyone.7

p 90
B. A Warning Against Unbelief
3:7–19

7 So, as the Holy Spirit says:

“Today, if you hear his voice,
8 do not harden your hearts
as you did in the rebellion,
during the time of testing in the desert,
9 where your fathers tested and tried me
and for forty years saw what I did.
10 That is why I was angry with that generation,
and I said, ‘Their hearts are always going astray,
and they have not known my ways.’
11 So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’ ”
12 See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living
God. 13 But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened
by sin’s deceitfulness. 14 We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we
had at first. 15 As has just been said:
“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts
as you did in the rebellion.”
16 Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? 17 And with
whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the desert? 18
And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? 19 So we
see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.

One of the stylistic devices that the author uses to introduce a quotation of the Old Testament is the
formula God says or the Holy Spirit says. The writer refers to the Old Testament writer as only a
mouthpiece of God (see, for example, Heb. 4:7). That is, God is the primary author of Scripture,
and man is the secondary author through whom God speaks.8 Scripture, for the author of Hebrews,
is God’s Word, and that Word is divine. He indeed has a high view of Scripture.
Many times in his epistle the author quotes a passage from the Old Testament without a smooth

7 Hans-Christoph Hahn, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 734.

8 The author of Hebrews introduces God as speaker in 1:5 (Ps. 2:7); 1:7 (Ps. 104:4); 1:13 (Ps.
110:1); 5:5 (Ps. 2:7). Christ is the speaker in 2:12 (Ps. 22:22); 2:13 (Isa. 8:17); 10:5–7 (Ps. 40:6–8).
And the Holy Spirit is the speaker in 3:7–11 (Ps. 95:7–11); 10:15–17 (Jer. 31:33–34).
transition in the context. The author first quotes Scripture, subsequently explains it by applying the
words to the readers of his epistle, and afterward at times supports his application with examples
taken from biblical history.
Consider, then, the third chapter of Hebrews. In the first six verses the author, in drawing a
comparison between Jesus and Moses, declares that Jesus is worthy of greater honor than Moses.
Then, without a transition, the writer quotes Psalm 95:7–11. He explains and applies the psalm
citation in verses 12–15. And to buttress his application, he provides historical examples (vv. 16–
19).
1. Scripture
3:7–11
In the temple ritual and in the synagogue worship services, the use of Psalm 95 was well
established. Both Psalms 95 and 96 were known as the psalms of invitation to worship. We may
assume that these psalms were a significant part of the early Christian liturgies as well.9
a. 7–9. So, as the Holy Spirit says:
“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts
as you did in the rebellion,
during the time of testing in the desert,
where your fathers tested and tried me
and for forty years saw what I did.
David, whose name is mentioned later in Hebrews 4:7, does not speak. But the Holy Spirit
speaks, addressing both the people of God in Old Testament times and the readers of the Epistle to
the Hebrews. And it is because of the Holy Spirit, as the author of Hebrews teaches, that Scripture is
divinely p 91 inspired and addresses people throughout the centuries (see I Tim. 3:16; II Peter 1:20–
21).10 The Holy Spirit speaks to man by means of the inspired Word of God.
Today. God’s Word is “living and active[,] sharper than any double-edged sword” (Heb. 4:12).
At no point does Scripture become outdated and irrelevant. God spoke to the people of Israel in the
desert; David composed Psalm 95, through which God addressed the Israelites; the author of
Hebrews quotes a number of verses from that psalm and says that the Holy Spirit speaks to those
reading his epistle. God’s Word still speaks to us today.
If you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts. The reference is to the original hearers and
singers of Psalm 95, and is expressed in the form of a wish in the original Hebrew but in the Greek
is given as a conditional sentence. The sentence means: If you should hear God’s voice, listen to
what he has to say to you. Do not be like your forefathers who turned a deaf ear to the voice of God.
Therefore, God is saying to you, “Do not harden your hearts. That is, don’t ever ignore my voice,
for that spells trouble.” James in his epistle puts it succinctly: “You adulterous people, don’t you
know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of
the world becomes an enemy of God” (4:4).
The phrase harden not your hearts is Semitic in origin, but no one has difficulty understanding
its meaning. In our culture we use the concept deaf and say that someone, by ignoring the speaker,
deliberately refuses to hear. Nevertheless, by doing this the person takes full responsibility for his
willful neglect and refusal to hear.
As you did in the rebellion, during the time of testing in the desert. God speaks to his people
Israel, and he calls to mind what happened in the desert during the forty-year journey. He even

9 Ernst Werner, The Sacred Bridge (London: D. Dobson, 1959), pp. 131, 145, 157. Also see
Ismar Elbogen, Der Jüdische Gottesdienst (Frankfurt: Kaufmann, 1931), pp. 82, 108, 113.

0 0 SB, vol. 3, p. 684.

refers to place names: Meribah and Massah (Ps. 95:8). In the Septuagint, these two names are
translated rebellion and testing respectively. The history lesson, however, is to the point. After the
people of Israel (at the beginning of their journey) had left the Desert of Sin near Rephidim, they
lacked water. When they quarreled with Moses, God told him to strike a rock. He did, and water
gushed forth. Moses called the place Massah, which means testing, and Meribah, which is the word
for quarreling (see Exod. 17:7). Near the completion of their forty-year journey, the people of Israel
quarreled again because of thirst. This time Moses lost his temper, struck the rock twice instead of
speaking to it as God had said, and forfeited his place as leader of the Israelites. Consequently he
was not allowed to enter the Promised Land. Moses called the place Meribah (Num. 20:13).
Where your fathers tested and tried me and for forty years saw what I did. From the first
year through the fortieth year, the people of Israel tried the patience of God. The history of the
Israelites’ forty years in the wilderness is replete with examples of the unbelief and faithlessness of
young p 92 and old.11 Yet amidst the rebelliousness of the people of Israel, God showed his mighty
acts: a pillar of fire by night to shield them from the desert cold, a cloud by day to protect them
from the sun’s burning rays, manna to satisfy their hunger, and water out of the rock to quench their
thirst; furthermore, their clothes and shoes did not wear out (Exod. 13:21; 16:4–5; 17:6; Deut. 29:5).
The Lord God of Israel was their rock and shield for forty years.12
b. 10. That is why I was angry with that generation,
and I said, “Their hearts are always going astray,
and they have not known my ways.”
11. So I declared on oath in my anger,
“They shall never enter my rest.”
God’s patience was taxed to the limit by those rebellious people. His anger flared. God was
incensed with that generation.13 Twice God addressed the obstinate Israelites and spoke to them
directly.
Their hearts are always going astray, and they have not known my ways. The exact words
spoken by God are found in Numbers 14 and Deuteronomy 1, where Moses records the historical
narrative of Israel’s rebellion. When the people refused to enter the Promised Land, wanted to

1 1 Israel’s history was recounted often by psalmists. For example, see Ps. 78:40–42, where
the psalmist speaks of Israel’s rebellion in the wilderness and of putting God to the test because the
Israelites did not remember God’s power. And the prophet Amos asks, “Did you bring me sacrifices
and offerings forty years in the desert, O house of Israel?” (Amos 5:25; Acts 7:42).

2 2 A number of writers see in the words forty years an allusion to Jerusalem and the
destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, for that event marked the end of a forty-year period of rebellion
against Jesus by the obstinate Jews of “this generation.” Among those who hold this view are F. F.
Bruce, Delitzsch, Hughes, Thomas Hewitt, Westcott, and Theodor Zahn. However, there is no
explicit reference in the epistle to the temple and its destruction. Writes Hugh Montefiore, “Our
author is throughout his Epistle strangely uninterested in contemporary references” (The Epistle to
the Hebrews [New York and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1964], p. 76). Therefore, I do not think, on
the basis of the reading this generation instead of that generation, that we have the assurance that
the author in this text wished to indicate when he wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews.

3 3 Although the Hebrew text lacks the demonstrative pronoun before the noun generation in
Ps. 95:10, the Septuagint reads “that generation.” In the New Testament the textual evidence (the
papyri manuscripts and leading codices) is very strong for the reading this generation. Among the
translations the RV, ASV, NASB, and Phillips read “this generation”; the others (KJV, NKJV, NEB,
NAB, JB, GNB, MLB, NIV, R.S.V., and Moffatt) have “that generation” or a variant that is similar
in meaning.
return to Egypt, and chose another leader, God said to Moses: “How long will these people treat me
with contempt? How long will they refuse to believe in me, in spite of the miraculous signs I have
performed among them?” (Num. 14:11).
The Israelites did not rebel against God once: after the return of the spies, they put God to the
test ten times (Num. 14:22) and refused to listen to his voice. Their hearts were filled with unbelief,
and their eyes were blind to the miracles God performed.
They shall never enter my rest. Because the people of Israel treated God with contempt, God
solemnly swore: “Not a man of this evil generation shall p 93 see the good land I swore to give
your forefathers” (Deut. 1:35; see also Num. 14:23). God took the promise of rest away from the
unbelieving Israelites and told them they would die in the desert. Their children of twenty years and
younger would be allowed to enter the land God had promised to the forefathers.
The land the Israelites were to possess is called a rest, for there they would have a permanent
and safe dwelling (Deut. 12:9). The land of Israel would be given to those who had not spurned
God. In his anger God swore that all the others would not see the land but would die in the desert.
God was saying that he would cease being God—as it were—before he would let those rebellious
Israelites enter the land of Canaan.
In the context of the Israelites’ possession of the land, the concept rest was fulfilled only in a
limited sense. The way of life for the wandering nomad had ended and the career of the valiant
soldier ceased when the land was conquered. However, the word rest has a much deeper meaning,
which the author subsequently explains in Hebrews 4.
2. Application
3:12–15
The quotation from the psalm is now applied to the recipients of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and its
meaning is especially significant for the people who are in danger of turning away from God. The
psalm citation serves as an introduction to a stirring appeal not to fall away from the living God. In
a sense, Hebrews 3:12 may be called the summary of the pastoral exhortations in the epistle.
12. See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away
from the living God.
The connection between Hebrews 3:6b and 3:12 is quite natural if we read the lengthy quotation
from Psalm 95 as a parenthetical comment. This passage is an illustrative, historical reminder of the
obstinate Israelites who died in the desert and were denied entrance to the land God had promised
them.14 The readers are exhorted to hold on to their courage and hope as members of the household
of God. They cannot turn their backs on Christ in unbelief, for turning away from Christ is falling
away from God.
For Christians, therefore, the experience of the rebellious Israelites must serve as a warning that
should not be taken lightly. Christians must thoroughly examine themselves and one another to see
whether anyone has a sinful, unbelieving heart.
The author of Hebrews knows from Scripture that a falling away from God finds its origin,
development, and impetus in unbelief. Unbelief—characterized by mistrust and unreliability—first
comes to expression in disobedience, which in turn results in apostasy. The signs of apostasy are
hardening p 94 of the heart and an inability to repent (Heb. 3:13; 4:1; 6:6; 10:25–27; 12:15). The
following series of contrasts can be made:
unbelief — faith

disobedience — hearing obediently

4 4 The controversy continues: should the first word of Heb. 3:7, so, be taken with the
command do not harden your hearts (Heb. 3:8) or with Heb. 3:12?
neglect — steadfastness

apostasy — entrance to life

hardening — salvation

The heart of someone who turns away from God is described as sinful, which means evil or
wicked. God does not take the sin of unbelief lightly, for he knows that its origin lies in man’s evil
heart. “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” (Jer. 17:9).
Furthermore, the author of Hebrews indicates that it is possible to find persons with sinful,
unbelieving hearts in the fellowship of the Christian church.
Whoever turns from the living God
must fall;
It’s he who shares his guilt, his lot
with all:
Family, kin, nation, state,
small and great.
Whoever forsakes God is forsaken;
Whoever rejects God is rejected.
Frequent voices daily claim:
Man who’s come of age will settle
down
But they who say so without God
drown.
—Nicholaas Beets
13. But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may
be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.
Other portions of Scripture use various metaphors to describe the church. We read that the house
of God consists of living stones (I Peter 2:5), not of individual bricks cemented together by mortar.
The household to which the believers belong is like a body that is made up of many parts; all the
many parts form one body (I Cor. 12:12). Furthermore, all the parts should have equal concern for
each other.
These examples provide the background for the exhortation in verse 13. We also are urged to
“encourage one another and build each other up” (I Thess. 5:11) so that no member of the church
will fall away. If the church were faithful to Jesus individually and collectively, the danger of
apostasy would recede to the perimeter of the church. To put it figuratively, we as individual
believers, united by faith, have the obligation to expel the forces of unbelief from the sacred
precincts of the church, the body of Christ. What p 95 salvation, what joy in heaven over one sinner
who repents, what victory over Satan if we daily encourage one another and uphold each other in
the faith!
All one body we,
One in hope and doctrine,
One in charity.
—Sabine Baring-Gould
In addition, all of the members of the church are told to exhort one another daily. This in itself is
a call to faithfulness. And all members ought to teach and admonish one another with all wisdom
(Col. 3:16; see also Acts 14:22; Heb. 10:25).
The author of Hebrews links the exhortation to the lengthy quote from Psalm 95 with the single
word Today. He calls to mind the experience of the nation Israel in the wilderness; he intimates that
the present is a period of grace that God extends until death terminates man’s earthly life. And the
termination of life may come rather suddenly for some people.
Moreover, the moment will come when God will cease to warn sinful man. When that moment
arrives, the day of grace has changed into the day of judgment. Therefore, while there is still time,
we are obligated to encourage one another daily, so that no one falls into the deceitful trap of sin.
Finally, the author notes that Satan sends sin as a deceptive agent, singling out individuals here
and there, seeking to lead believers astray (Matt. 13:22; Mark 4:19; Rom. 7:11; II Cor. 11:3; Eph.
5:6; Col. 2:8; II Thess. 2:3, 10; II Peter 2:13). Sin enters deceptively by enticing the believer to
exchange the truth of God for a lie. Sin presents itself as something attractive and desirable.
Because of its appearance—“Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” (II Cor. 11:14)—sin is
an extremely dangerous power confronting the believer. It always attacks the individual, much as
wolves stalk a single sheep.
The author of Hebrews is fully aware of sin’s deceptive power directed toward individuals. For
this reason he stresses the need to pay attention to every person in the church; repeatedly he says
“none of you”—that is, not a single one of you (Heb. 3:12–13; 4:1).
Sin is regarded as an agent that hardens man’s heart. Note that the verb to harden is presented in
the passive voice: “so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.” Hardening is
demonstrated by a refusal to hear the voice of God and a determined desire to act contrary to
everything classified as faith and faithfulness. As a sly, deceptive agent of Satan, sin enters the heart
of man and there causes the growth and development of unbelief, which becomes evident in
hardening of the spiritual arteries.
14. We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at
first. 15. As has just been said:
“Today, if you hear his voice,
p 96 do not harden your hearts
as you did in the rebellion.”15
The parallel between Hebrews 3:6 and Hebrews 3:14 is striking. The imagery in verse 6 is of the
house of God over which Christ has been placed as son and of which we are part. In verse 14 the
same relationship is described as a sharing in Christ.16 And the courage and hope that we should
“hold on to” (v. 6) are identified as “the confidence we had at first” (v. 14).
Only those believers who unwaveringly continue to profess their faith in Jesus are saved. Only
faith keeps the believers in a living relationship with Jesus Christ. As the writer says in Hebrews
11:6, “Without faith it is impossible to please God.” Faith is the basic substance of our sharing in
Christ. “Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see” (Heb. 11:1). The

5 5 Punctuation and paragraph division play a role in Greek texts and English translations.
Thus, the Nes-Al text places Heb. 3:14 between dashes to indicate a parenthetical thought. The
NKJV, MLB, GNB, and NIV end the paragraph with Heb. 3:15. The NASB, R.S.V., Moffatt, ASV,
KJV, JB, NAB, and RV end the paragraph with Heb. 3:19. The NEB, Martin Luther, Zahn, R. C. H.
Lenski, Delitzsch, Spicq, and Bruce begin a new paragraph with Heb. 3:15.

6 6 The common translation is “share in Christ.” Other versions translate the Greek as
“Christ’s partners” (NEB) or “partners of Christ” (NAB), or “co-heirs with Christ” (JB).
phrase being sure is equivalent to “confidence” (Heb. 3:14); this confidence is the basis upon which
our faith rests.
What does the author mean when he says, “if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had
at first” (italics added)? John Albert Bengel aptly says, “A Christian, so long as he is not made
perfect, considers himself as a beginner.”17 This confidence is the continual clinging to Christ in
faith. As long as our faith in Christ is foundational, we are safe and secure as members of God’s
household.
To remind us once more of the daily necessity to listen attentively and obediently to the voice of
God, the author quotes the now-familiar statement from Psalm 95, “Today, if you hear his voice, do
not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion.” Constantly God addresses us by means of his
Word, and he expects us who live by faith to give him our undivided attention.
3. Summation
3:16–19
In a concluding paragraph, the author asks a number of rhetorical questions relating to the Israelites
who perished in the desert because of unbelief. In a series of self-explanatory questions, the writer
makes it clear that unbelief ends in death.
16. Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of
Egypt?
In this first question the author directs attention to the message of the lengthy quotation from
Psalm 95, and by means of the second question he provides the answer to the first question. These
people had seen the miracles God performed; they had experienced the goodness of God. Day by
day p 97 they ate manna, and they could see the presence of God in the pillar of fire by night and in
the cloud by day.
By implication the author conveys the message already stated in Hebrews 2:2: “For if the
message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just
punishment, how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation?”
17. And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose
bodies fell in the desert?
Would the behavior of the Israelites have improved in the course of forty years? The answer to
this question is given in Exodus and Numbers: Exodus 17 records the first rebellion at the beginning
of the forty-year period and Numbers 25 records the grievous sin of immorality at the end of that
period. The Israelites had not changed: they remained rebellious and obstinate. The only exceptions,
of course, were Joshua and Caleb, who demonstrated their faith and were privileged to conquer and
possess the land.
18. And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who
disobeyed?
When the writer asks, “Was it not with those who sinned?” (v. 17), he parallels this question
with the clause “if not to those who disobeyed” (v. 18). The verbs sinned and disobeyed are
synonyms: the first verb represents the action followed by just punishment; the second verb reveals
the root of the evil. Disobedience is a refusal to hear the voice of God and an obstinate refusal to act
in response to that voice. Disobedience is not merely a lack of obedience; rather it is a refusal to
obey.
19. So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.
The author states, in conclusion, that the rebellious Israelites, in an example that needs no
imitation, had to perish in the desert because of unbelief, a sin of openly defying God, refusing to
believe, and exhibiting disobedience.
Unbelief is the root of the sin of provoking God. Unbelief robs God of his glory and robs the

7 7 John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5 vols.
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 376. His italics.
unbeliever of the privilege of God’s blessings. Because of unbelief, rebellious man is denied
entrance into the rest that God provides for the members of his household.

Practical Considerations in 3:7–19

Our salvation is of the highest importance and may never be taken lightly. We must heed the
admonitions that the author of Hebrews gives us in the form of illustrations from Israel’s past
(Exod. 17:7; Num. 20:13; Deut. 33:8; Ps. 106:32).
According to Numbers 1, the census of the Israelites took place in the second year after the
people came out of Egypt, and the total number of men twenty years and older who were able to
serve in Israel’s army was 603,550 (Num. 1:46). Double this number (this assumes an equal number
of women who were twenty years or older) and divide the total by the number of days the Israelites
spent in the wilderness during those thirty-eight years. The result is nearly ninety deaths per day in
consequence of God’s curse (Num. 14:23; Deut. 1:34–35). A daily reminder of God’s anger! p 98
All sins are deviations from the law that God has given his people. The Israelites deliberately
chose to follow their own desires and wishes; they demonstrated their devious nature in action and
word, in mind and heart. Their attitude stemmed from an evil heart.
Believers have a corporate and an individual responsibility to care for the spiritual well-being of
their fellow men. They must consider this responsibility a holy obligation and exhibit utter
faithfulness, even if the fruit of their fidelity is not always evident.
We are sharers in Christ when we have accepted the gospel in faith and obedience and show in
our lives that what we believe in our hearts we confess with our mouths (Rom. 10:10). Those who
consistently fail to confess never shared in Christ and consequently fail to know Christ as their
Savior.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 3:7–19

Verse 7
τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον—the use of the definite articles before the noun and the adjective occurs in
Hebrews 9:8 and 10:15; but also see Hebrews 2:4 and 6:4, where the definite articles are lacking.
And see Hebrews 9:14 and 10:29.
ἀκούσητε—the aorist active subjunctive, second person plural of ἀκούω (I hear) indicates the
probability that the audience may hear. Also note that the verb is followed by the genitive case
φωνῆς instead of the accusative. The genitive calls attention to the sound of the voice and does not
necessarily imply understanding or listening obediently to what is said.

Verse 8
σκληρύνητε—the negative prohibition in the aorist subjunctive conveys the meaning that the
recipients of the letter had not yet hardened their hearts, but that the possibility was not imaginary.

Verse 12
ἔσται—after the negative μήποτε we would expect the subjunctive. The author uses the future
indicative ἔσται in order to express the urgency of listening to his exhortation and the distinct
possibility of apostasy.
θεοῦ ζῶντος—definite articles are lacking to focus attention on the absolute power of God to
create, uphold, and govern the world. (See II Cor. 3:3; 6:16; I Tim. 4:10; Heb. 9:14; 10:31; 12:22; I
Peter 1:23; Rev. 7:2.)
 Verse 13
τὸ σήμερον—note the definite article in the neuter singular. The use of τὸ (instead of the usual
phrase ἡ σήμερον ἡμέρα) tells the reader that the quotation of Psalm 95 is intended. p 99

Verse 14
ὑπόστασις—in the New Testament ὑπόστασις occurs five times (II Cor. 9:4; 11:17; Heb. 1:3;
3:14; 11:1). In Hebrews the word is theologically important and is translated “being” (1:3),
“confidence” (3:14), and “being sure” (11:1).

Verse 18
εἰσελεύσεσθαι—the future middle infinitive is used because of the quotation (Heb. 3:11). The
future is the equivalent of an aorist in the sense of a single occurrence.

Summary of Chapter 3
In the first two chapters of the epistle, the author of Hebrews compared Jesus and the angels. In
chapter 3 he compares Jesus and Moses. The Jews revered Moses because of his close relationship
with God. Moses’ career was characterized by faithfulness—no one disputes that fact. However,
with a fitting illustration of servant (Moses in God’s house) and Son (Jesus over God’s house), the
writer of Hebrews clearly demonstrates the superiority of Jesus.
Psalm 95:7–10 is a unique citation, filled with disheartening information about Israel’s rebellion
and apostasy in the wilderness. The author of Hebrews warns his readers not to fall into the trap of
unbelief which leads to a falling away from the living God. The writer stresses the corporate
responsibility of the Christian community in warning the individual believer not to turn away from
God but to continue to be strong in the faith. The author applies the words of Psalm 95:7–10
directly to his hearers; for him the message is a matter of eternal life or eternal death. In a sense,
Hebrews 3:12 may be called one of the nerve centers of the epistle.

p 100 4. Jesus’ Superiority to Moses, part 2

4:1–13 p 102
Outline
C. An Invitation to Enter God’s Rest

4:1–5 1. God’s Rest

4:6–11 2. God’s Day

4:12–13 3. God’s Word

 C. An Invitation to Enter God’s Rest
4:1–13

4 1 Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found
to have fallen short of it. 2 For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message
they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith. 3 Now we who
have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,
“So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’ ”
And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world. 4 For somewhere he has spoken about the
seventh day in these words: “And on the seventh day God rested from all his work.” 5 And again in the
passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.”
6 It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them
did not go in, because of their disobedience. 7 Therefore God again set a certain day, calling it Today, when a
long time later he spoke through David, as was said before:
“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts.”
8 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. 9 There
remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 10 for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from his
own work, just as God did from his. 11 Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one
will fall by following their example of disobedience.
12 The word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to
dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 13 Nothing in all
creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom
we must give account.

1. God’s Rest
4:1–5
In the third chapter of his epistle, the writer of Hebrews quotes at length from Psalm 95 and speaks
of the unbelievers who were cursed by God and died in the desert. Although the author speaks of
the unbelievers in chapter 3, he addresses the believers in chapter 4. The admonition of 3:12–14 is
now resumed and is substantially enlarged in 4:1–11. The question that is raised is this: Is the
promise of entering God’s rest, given to the Israelites p 104 but forfeited because of unbelief, still
valid in our time? The answer is a resounding yes. The message of entering the rest that God
promises is the same and still calls for acceptance in faith. The assurance is that “we who have
believed enter that rest” (Heb. 4:3).
1. Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none
of you be found to have fallen short of it.
The first word therefore is rather significant because it looks backward to the quotation and the
interpretation of Psalm 95, and points forward to the believers who read the Epistle to the Hebrews.
The message of 4:1 can be summarized in three words: fear, promise, failure.
a. Fear
The author is a pastor who, filled with concern, strives for the spiritual well-being of his people. He
does not want to see a single member of the church fall into the same sin (i.e., unbelief) that was
displayed by the Israelites who died in the desert. The author is a shepherd, so to speak, who
watches over every sheep in the flock.
But the writer is not the only one in the church to care for the members of the congregation. He
exhorts the recipients of his epistle to be equally concerned. Thus he writes, “Let us be careful.” He
shares his pastoral concerns with all the members—all are responsible for the welfare of the church.
To be concerned about one’s own salvation is commendable; to pray for one’s fellow man is
praiseworthy; but to strive for the salvation of everyone within the confines of the church is
exemplary. We ought to take careful note of members who may be drifting from the truth in doctrine
or conduct and then pray with them and for them. We are constantly looking for spiritual stragglers.
Says Philip Edgcumbe Hughes in his commentary on this point, “There is no attitude more
dangerous for the church than that of unconcern and complacency.”1
Most translations have the reading let us fear or some variation, denoting something that causes
concern and anxiety in a person’s heart (Acts 23:10; 27:17, 29; II Cor. 11:3; 12:20; Gal. 4:11).
b. Promise
God’s promises remain the same for all times and for every generation because God is true to his
Word (Deut. 3:18–20; Josh. 1:12–18; 21:45; 23:14; I Kings 8:56; Ps. 89:1; I Cor. 1:9; Heb. 6:18).
On the basis of this scriptural truth, I prefer the translation “since the promise of entering his rest
still stands.” We have the assurance that God’s promise is still valid today and did not come to an
end with the Israelites in the desert. And because of the certainty that the promise of God still
stands, we must have special care for and interest in the spiritual growth and development of fellow
believers.
Some translations describe the duration of the promise of entering God’s rest: “while the
promise of entering his rest remains.” Others express the concessive idea, namely, “although there
is still left a promise to enter into p 105 his rest.”2 These translations are to the point and accurate—
they stress the continuing validity of God’s promise to his people. This promise is in a specific
sense still incomplete and open.3 In other words, the promise will lose its significance only at the
end of time when in fact the last of the believers has entered God’s rest.
c. Failure
For the Israelites on their way to the land of Canaan, for David who composed Psalm 95, for the
writer of Hebrews and his readers, and for us today the promise of God is firm and spans the
centuries. This does not mean, however, that God is obligated to fulfill his promise when faith is
lacking. When man fails God by not believing in his Word, God turns the promise into a threat and
a curse as he did during Israel’s journey in the wilderness.
What then does the writer of Hebrews imply when he tells his readers that they have the
promise of entering God’s rest? The answer must be that the idea of rest has taken on a much
broader meaning, because when the word rest was first used it referred to entering Canaan. The

1 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1977), p. 155.
2 R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of
James (Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), p. 125.
3 Bauer, p. 413, translates the phrase “a promise that is still open.”
concept included rest from harassment by Israel’s enemies in neighboring countries; spiritually it
related to a blessed life spent in harmony with the law of God. When David spoke of rest, he lived
safely in his palace at Jerusalem. For the recipients of the epistle, the term rest had spiritual
significance.
In the congregation that originally received the epistle, the possibility that someone had fallen
short of appropriating God’s promise seems to have been real. The expression to have fallen short
may have been borrowed from the sports arena; it conveys the meaning of being left behind in the
race and thus failing to reach the goal.4 When someone does not reach the goal, he cannot give even
the appearance of having arrived. In the eyes of the spectators in the arena, the contestant has failed.
He cannot receive a prize and in many cases even forfeits sympathy.
This type of failure to claim the promise of God’s rest may not be found in the church. The
writer is direct in his appeal “that none of you be found to have fallen short” (italics added; see also
3:12; 4:11). The entire congregation ought to be vigilant about possible lack of interest in spiritual
matters. No one may let his guard down. No one may be lost. Responsibility for one another’s
spiritual interest is the obligation of every believer.
2. For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they
heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith. p 106
The conjunction for links the concept of the promise, given to the Israelites but still valid today
(v. 1), with that of the gospel preached to the nation Israel in the desert and to us.
Highlights in verse 2 are the following points.
a. The Word of God, although a continuous revelation from the first book in the Bible to the last,
is the same. It is good news for the Israelite and for the Christian.
b. The clause “we also have had the gospel preached to us” receives a certain degree of
emphasis. The writer does not say, “We have received the gospel.” Instead, he states that the Word
has been preached to us for a considerable time so that we are fully evangelized.
c. The Israelites traveling from Egypt to Canaan also had the Word preached to them over an
extended period.
d. However, the gospel news (I Thess. 2:13) that the desert travelers heard did not do them any
good, because they failed to pay attention.
e. Those who heard the Word did not combine it with faith (Rom. 10:16–17). And that was their
downfall.
The last clause in 4:2, depending on the wording in a number of ancient manuscripts, varies in
translation. There are two usual ways of translating the clause. One of these is, “because it [the
Word] was not united by faith in those who heard.”5 This translation is by far the more prevalent,
frankly because it fits the context and is readily understood. The manuscript evidence, however,
favors the second translation, “because they did not share the faith of those who listened.”6 The
implication is that among the Israelites in the desert were two people who obeyed the Word of God:
Joshua and Caleb. It is rather strange that the writer is not more explicit; he leaves the reader to fill
in the historical details and to draw the necessary conclusions.
Differences exist and the difficulties in the passage are undeniable, but in both translations the
emphasis is on the faith that was not shared. During the entire period in which the Israelites had the
Good News preached to them, they refused to accept it in faith. Their refusal was not a momentary

4 Joseph H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (New York, Cincinnati,
and Chicago: American Book Company, 1889), p. 646, says the expression means “to fall short of
the end.” William L. Lane (NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 954) speaks of a “broad range of nuances” for the
sixteen times that the word occurs in the New Testament. The primary meaning is to arrive too late
for an appointed meeting or event. The secondary nuance, obviously a consequence of the first, is
that of failure and of lacking something.
5 Representative translations are KJV, NKJV, ASV, NASB, MLB, and R.S.V..
6 See, for example, RV, NEB, JB, NAB, and GNB.
reaction but a continuous rejection of God’s written and spoken Word.
God fulfills his promises only in those who accept his Word in faith and trust, whether that
happens to be Joshua, Caleb, or “the soul that on Jesus has leaned for repose.” No one among the
Israelites could complete the desert journey and enter the Land of Promise except the one who
demonstrated true faith in God. And no one shall enter God’s eternal rest unless his faith is anchored
in Jesus, the Son of God.
3. Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,
“So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’ ”
And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world. p 107

After comparing the Israelites who wandered in the desert and the recipients of his epistle, the
writer of Hebrews confidently asserts, “Now we who have believed enter that rest.” He does not use
the future tense (“we will enter”). He says, “We who have believed enter,” and thus affirms that
God’s promise has become reality according to his divine plan and purpose.7 At the moment—in
principle but not yet in full realization—we are entering that rest. As long as we keep our eyes fixed
on “Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith” (Heb. 12:2), we enjoy the rest God has promised,
and eventually we shall be with him eternally.
This point raises the following questions.
a. Who enters that rest? The author is quite specific. We; that is, those of us who have believed
and have demonstrated our faith in Christ by professing his name (Acts 4:32; 16:31; Rom. 10:9; I
Thess. 2:13). And we enter because God’s promise still stands.
As God’s promise does not lose its validity, so God’s threat remains true for everyone who does
not accept God’s Word in faith. God’s Word prevails because he has spoken:
“So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’ ”
These words not only apply to Israel’s experience in the wilderness, but also remind readers of the
epistle that God’s promise and threat are equally valid today.
b. What is God’s rest? The writer of Hebrews has expected this question, it seems. The next
sentence, “And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world,” indicates that.8 The
author explains the word rest in his own inimitable way by quoting an expression from Genesis 2:2,
which he cites in 4:4. This expression (the words his work), along with the rest of the sentence,
anticipates the reference to the Genesis account. (It is significant that the writer of Hebrews
constantly quotes from the Old Testament Scriptures.9 He never appeals to the words of Jesus or the
teachings of the apostles, although he was acquainted with the gospel [Heb. 4:2]. For him and for
the recipients of his epistle, the writings of the Old Testament were authoritative.)
After the world was created, the author tells us, God initiated a new period—a period of rest.
God rested from his work of creation at the conclusion of the sixth day. Whereas for the six days of
creation the concluding words are “there was evening, and there was morning,” for the seventh day
p 108 these demarcations of time are lacking. With the seventh day, then, the period of God’s rest

7 Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, pp. 81–
82.
8 Numerous texts and translations combine the sentence with the preceding quote and divide
the two only by a comma (see Nes-Al; BF; and KJV, RV, ASV, and R.S.V. as examples). Other
translators are of the opinion that the sentence should stand separately, serving as a bridge between
the quote from Ps. 95 and the one from Gen. 2:2.
9 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok, 1955),
p. 113.
began.
4. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “And on the
seventh day God rested from all his work.” 5. And again in the passage above he says, “They
shall never enter my rest.”
Once before, in 2:6, the author has expressed himself rather vaguely about a Scripture passage.
He does this deliberately to focus attention not on the precise location of the reference, but on the
words themselves. Every reader knows that a reference to the seventh day comes from the creation
account in Genesis. The quoted words, however, are more important: “And on the seventh day God
rested from all his work.”
The term rest merits attention, especially if we think of Jesus’ words when the Jews persecuted
him for healing an invalid on the Sabbath: “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I,
too, am working” (John 5:17). Rest for God does not mean idleness; rather it is a cessation from the
work of creation. God continues to enjoy this rest now that the work of his creation is completed.
On the combined strength of the two Old Testament passages—one from Psalm 95 and one from
Genesis 2:2—the author concludes that only those persons who believe enter God’s rest. This rest,
to be sure, has become a reality for the believer. Unbelievers have no access to the rest God
provides, for by spurning God’s Word they have forfeited the privilege of entering his rest.
Note the author’s repeated reference to the solemn oath God swore: “They shall never enter my
rest” (Heb. 3:11, 18 [with minor variations]; 4:3, 5). This recurring warning ought not be taken
lightly by the reader. And no one can ever say, “It will never happen to me.” If the Israelites,
entering the land of Canaan, had listened to words spoken by Moses (Deut. 28:1–14) and obeyed
the commands of God, they would have been the recipients of all the blessings God had promised.
They would have been honored above all the nations of the earth, and they would have enjoyed rest
by living in God’s favor and grace. For them, life in Canaan would have been living in the presence
of God. But one generation after the death of Joshua and the elders who outlived him, the people
turned their backs on the God of their fathers (Josh. 2:10), and the promise of God turned into a
threat and a curse. It is for this reason, vividly documented by historical fact, that the author of
Hebrews repeats the verse they shall never enter my rest.

Practical Considerations in 4:1–5

The exhortations in 4:1–3 are in effect an application of the lesson learned from history. As in
chapter 3 the unbelieving Israelites were mentioned, so in chapter 4 the believers are addressed. The
call to faithfulness and mutual care is earnest and sincere.
The gospel is proclaimed to believers and unbelievers, so that no one can claim the excuse of
not having heard the promise of God. Man’s failure to listen to God’s p 109 Word does not
terminate the promises: for the unbeliever these become threats; for the believer they remain
promises which in due time are fulfilled.
Believers, because of firm faith, enter God’s rest, which is a spiritual state of being in the
presence of God. The Genevan Reformer John Calvin had a motto, Coram Deo (in the presence of
God). The believer by faith lives in harmony with his God. As Calvin puts it: “The highest
happiness of man is to be united to his God.”10

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:1–5

Verse 1

0 0 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 96.
 φοβηθῶμεν—the author includes himself in the exhortation and thus identifies himself with the
readers. The aorist subjunctive expresses the exhortation to watch over one another’s spiritual
welfare. The author tells the reader to do so without delay.
ἐπαγγελίας—in the epistle this noun occurs fourteen times and the verb an additional four
times. There seems to be word play involved in the Greek when the author speaks of promise
(ἐπαγγελία) and preaching the gospel (εὐαγγελίζομαι). The latter verb appears only two times in
Hebrews (4:2, 6). The noun ἐπαγγελία is in the genitive absolute construction with a causal
connotation.

Verse 2
εὐηγγελισμένοι—together with the verb ἐσμεν, the perfect passive participle forms a
periphrastic construction that expresses the idea of a continuous activity that began in the past and
lasts into the present. Note that the personal pronoun ἡμεῖς is not used, in order to place emphasis
on the verb instead.
ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς—the genitive is qualitative in nature (see also Rom. 10:17; I Thess. 2:13)
and is related to the aorist active, dative plural participle ἀκούσασιν.

Verse 3
οἱ πιστεύσαντες—the aorist active participle and the preceding definite article modify the main
verb εἰσερχόμεθα. The aorist is ingressive.
γενηθέντων—the aorist passive (deponent) participle in the genitive and the words τῶν ἔργων
form a genitive absolute construction.

2. God’s Day
4:6–11
The emphatic threat “they shall never enter my rest” does not rule out God’s honoring his promise
to those who believe. Some enter God’s rest.
6. It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel
preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience. 7. Therefore God again
set a certain day, calling it Today, when a long time later he spoke through David, as
was said before:
“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts.”
Note these observations. p 110

a. Unalterable fact
From biblical history the reader knows that Joshua and Caleb entered the land of Canaan. They put
their trust in God, who kept his Word. They were privileged to enter the Land of Promise, because
God does not break his Word. This fact remains throughout the ages and is unchangeable.
Thus the reader of these verses is exhorted to enter God’s rest, because God is true to his Word
and does fulfill his promise. A careful reading of the first part of 4:6 shows that the thought
expressed is somewhat incomplete. That is, the introductory clause, “it still remains that some will
enter that rest,” needs a concluding remark, perhaps in the form of an exhortation. And this
exhortation is given in 4:11, “Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest.”11 If we accept

1 1 John Brown, in The Epistle to the Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), p.
207, labels Heb. 4:6b–10 parenthetical and maintains that the writer chooses this structure “to
God’s Word in faith and do his will obediently, the promise of rest will be fulfilled for us, too. That
fact is unquestionable.
b. Just reward
Some enter God’s rest; others are denied entrance. This is not a matter of injustice nor of favoring
one party over another. Rather, the author of Hebrews perceives that the distinction is just. Says he,
“Those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience.”
Those people who heard the voice of God from Sinai and who were given the law of Moses refused
to accept the promise. They were without excuse, for although they heard the gospel, they chose to
disobey. They received their due when entrance into Canaan was denied. Their unbelief turned into
disobedience; heart and hand were willfully opposed to God and his Word.
c. Repeated promise
God remains in control; he rules and overrules. His promise, which the Israelites ignored and which
was consequently nullified, God repeats. “Therefore God again set a certain day, calling it Today.”
The word Today emphasizes the characteristics of relevance, timeliness, and newness. The text
indicates that God set a certain day and mentions that “a long time later he spoke through David.”
God spanned the centuries from desert life to Davidic rule, from Moses recording Israel’s history in
the Pentateuch to David composing his songs for the Psalter.12 He makes his promise available
today, which is the time for embracing the gracious offer of salvation. God appeals to readers:
Today, if you hear [my] voice,
do not harden your hearts.

d. Timeless validity
Why is the promise of God always valid? In at least three different verses of chapter 4 the author
gives the answer: God has p 111 spoken (vv. 3, 4, 7). The simple phrase as God has said, which in
the original Greek is in the perfect tense, signifies that what God says has permanent validity (see
also Heb. 1:13; 10:9; 13:5). No matter how many centuries elapse, God’s Word spans the ages; his
message is just as clear, firm, and sure today as it was when first uttered. God’s Word is divinely
inspired and, as Paul says, “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”
(II Tim. 3:16).
8. For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day.
The writer clearly appeals to biblical history, specifically to the books of Deuteronomy and
Joshua. God promised rest to the wandering Israelites when Moses declared, “But you will cross the
Jordan and settle in the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, and he will give
you rest from all your enemies around you so that you will live in safety” (Deut. 12:10; also see
Deut. 3:20; 5:33).
This promise was fulfilled literally when Joshua addressed the people of the tribes of Reuben
and Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh: “Now that the LORD your God has given your brothers rest
as he promised, return to your homes in the land that Moses the servant of the LORD gave you on
the other side of the Jordan” (Josh. 22:4; see also Josh. 1:13, 15; 21:44; 23:1).
The writer demonstrates once again that he knows the Old Testament Scriptures thoroughly, and

establish the principle on which this exhortation proceeds.”

2 2 The Hebrew Bible does not have a superscription for Ps. 95. The Septuagint ascribes the
psalm to David. The author of Hebrews quotes exclusively from the Septuagint; this translation
was, for him and his readers, Scripture. Thus he considered David the composer.
as an expert theologian he formulates the conditional sentence: “For if Joshua had given them rest
—and we know that God fulfilled this promise—God would not have spoken later about another
day, as he does in Psalm 95.” In other words, the rest of which God speaks is a spiritual rest and has
much greater significance than living safely in Canaan.
The rest that God intended for his people transcends the temporal and attains the eternal. It is a
spiritual rest that is effected by the gospel, whether proclaimed in Old Testament or New Testament
days. It is a rest from sin and evil. As Zacharias Ursinus, with the help of Caspar Olevianus, aptly
expressed it:
that every day of my life
I rest from my evil ways,
let the Lord work in me through his Spirit,
and so begin already in this life
the eternal Sabbath.13
9. There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 10. for anyone who enters
God’s rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his.
From Psalm 95 the author has shown that the rest that the Israelites enjoyed in Canaan was not
the rest God intended for his people. The intended p 112 rest is a Sabbath-rest, which, of course, is a
direct reference to the creation account (Gen. 2:2; see also Exod. 20:11; 31:17) of God’s rest on the
seventh day.14
For the believer the Sabbath is not merely a day of rest in the sense that it is a cessation of work.
Rather it is a spiritual rest—a cessation of sinning. It entails an awareness of being in the sacred
presence of God with his people in worship and praise. John Newton captured a glimpse of what
Sabbath-rest is to be when he wrote:
Safely through another week
God has brought us on our way;
Let us now a blessing seek,
Waiting in His courts today;
Day of all the week the best,
Emblem of eternal rest.
The day of rest is indeed an emblem of eternal rest! During our life span on earth, we celebrate the
Sabbath and realize only partially what Sabbath-rest entails. In the life to come, we shall fully
experience God’s rest, for then we will have entered a rest that is eternal. “ ‘Blessed are the dead
who die in the Lord from now on.’ ‘Yes,’ says the Spirit, ‘they will rest from their labor, for their
deeds will follow them’ ” (Rev. 14:13).
Who then enters that rest? Only those who die in the Lord? The answer is: All those who in faith
experience happiness in the Lord because they are one with him. Jesus prays for those who believe
in him, “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you” (John 17:21). In
God we have perfect peace and rest.
My heart, Lord, does not rest
Until it rests in Thee.
—Augustine
However, the text indicates that whoever enters God’s rest does so only once. He enters that rest

3 3 Heidelberg Catechism, answer 103.

4 4 H. W. Attridge, in defining God’s rest, speaks of type and antitype—rest in Canaan is the
antitype of God’s rest upon completing the week of creation. Refer to “Let us strive to enter that
rest: The logic of Hebrews 4:1–11, ” HTR 73 (1980): 279–88.
fully when his labors are ended. He then enjoys uninterrupted heavenly rest from which death,
mourning, crying, and pain have been removed; at that time God’s dwelling will be with men; he
will live with them and be their God, for they are his people (Rev. 21:4).
11. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by
following their example of disobedience.
Hebrews 4:6 serves as an introduction to 4:11. With the introductory clause, verse 11 reads:
“Since therefore it remains for some to enter, let us, then, make every effort to enter that rest.” The
intervening verses must be understood as a parenthetical thought.
a. “Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest.” From now on, p 113 says the author,
let us exert ourselves to enter God’s rest. Let us not take that rest for granted but earnestly strive to
live in harmony with God, to do his will, and to obey his law. Paul in his Epistle to the Philippians
puts the same thought in different words: “Continue to work out your salvation with fear and
trembling” (2:12). This eagerness ought to be the hallmark of every believer and the password of
the church. We are not to be fanatical, but are to demonstrate inner assurance in obedience to God’s
Word. The writer of Hebrews does not cease to warn and to exhort his readers. He is utterly serious
when he says, “In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your
blood” (Heb. 12:4).
b. “So that no one will fall.” The key word in this clause is the term fall, which of course is a
direct reminder of the desert journey of the Israelites as it is recorded in the Pentateuch and in Psalm
95. These people sinned, and as a consequence of God’s curse, their bodies fell in the desert. The
word fall must be taken in a broader sense than referring only to physical death; it includes falling
away spiritually and thus being completely ruined. Those who fall have lost their salvation and
deserve eternal destruction.
As a pastor watching over his flock, the writer of Hebrews admonishes his readers to take care
of one another spiritually. He stresses the responsibility of each believer toward the individual
members of the church. No one in the Christian community should be neglected and thus, left to
himself, be allowed to fall (see Heb. 3:12; 4:1).
c. “By following their example of disobedience.” The disobedient Israelites who perished in the
desert became an example to their descendants. They became the object lesson of how not to live in
the presence of God. Fathers would teach their children (Ps. 78:5–8) what the consequences of
disobedience were for the rebellious Israelites on the way to the land of Canaan. And they would
warn them not to follow this example.
Implicitly the author of Hebrews is saying to his readers: If any of you falls by following the
example of the Israelites in the wilderness, he himself will be an example to his contemporaries, and
everyone will take his failure as a warning not to make the same mistake. Rather, the reader must do
everything in his power to walk the pathway of obedience and to exhort his brother and sister in the
Lord to do likewise.
Unbelief leads to willful disobedience, which results in an inability to come to repentance. And
what is the conclusion? The answer is forthright and to the point: eternal condemnation. Therefore,
says the writer, let us make every effort to enter God’s rest.

Doctrinal Considerations in 4:6–11

If Joshua, leading the Israelites into the land of Canaan, had given them rest, the psalmist would
not have had to repeat the promise of rest (Ps. 95:11). The rest promised in Psalm 95 and explained
in 4:10 is a copy of God’s rest; this rest is p 114 attained by the believer in personal repentance and
an ardent dedication to obey God. When the believer rests from his evil works, he enters the
Sabbath-rest granted to the people of God.
God commands us to remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy and, referring to the creation
week and his rest on the seventh day, instructs us to follow his example (Exod. 20:8–11; also see
Deut. 5:12–15). The noun rest does not convey the thought of idleness but rather of peace. “It stands
for consummation of a work accomplished and the joy and satisfaction attendant upon this. Such
was its prototype in God.”15
One of the motifs in the Epistle to the Hebrews is the author’s recurring use of statements that
describe a condition contrary to fact (see Heb. 4:8; 7:11; 8:7). The writer employs a conditional
sentence in each instance and shows that in the Old Testament era rest (Heb. 4:8) and covenant
(Heb. 8:7) were incomplete. Perfection, he writes, could not be attained (Heb. 7:11). But Christ
brought fulfillment to promise and prophecy when he delivered the fullness of God’s revelation.
The name Joshua (Heb. 4:8) is equivalent to the name Jesus in the Greek New Testament.
Joshua, the son of Nun, led the Israelites across the river Jordan into the Land of Promise where
they enjoyed rest and peace from wandering and warfare. Jesus leads his people into the presence of
God and grants them the eternal Sabbath-rest.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:6–11

Verse 6
ἀπολείπεται—the compound verb has a directive connotation: “to leave behind.” In 4:6 and 9 it
has the meaning to remain. The present tense expresses lasting validity.
εὐαγγελισθέντες—the aorist passive participle (compare Heb. 4:2) is preceded by the definite
article οἱ to indicate a definite group. Between the article and the participle stands the adverb
πρότερον (formerly) for emphasis.
ἀπείθειαν—in Hebrews 3:12 and 19 the noun ἀπιστία occurs; in Hebrews 4:6 and 11 the noun
ἀπείθεια. The former (unbelief) leads to the latter (disobedience). Disobedience comes to
expression in obstinate opposition to God’s will.

Verse 7
ὁρίζει—from the noun ὅρος (boundary) the verb ὁρίζω (I mark, define) is derived. The English
derivative is the word horizon.
προείρηται—a few manuscripts have the perfect active προείρηκεν (he has said before).

Verse 8
εἰ—this conditional clause is contrary to fact. If Joshua had given the Israelites rest—but he did
not provide permanent rest—God would not have spoken later about another day as he did in Psalm
95. p 115
ἐλάλει—in this statement that is contrary to fact, the use of the imperfect tense is eloquent
testimony that God’s promise is valid for all generations and that God repeats his offer of eternal
rest. For the use of the verb λαλέω, see 1:1, 2.

Verse 9
σαββατισμός—the verb σαββατίζω (I keep the Sabbath) is the basis of the noun σαββατισμός,
which occurs only once in the New Testament. The ending -μός signifies the progressive act of
keeping the Sabbath.
τῷ λαῷ—modified by the genitive τοῦ θεοῦ (the people of God), the noun refers to the believers

5 5 Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954), p. 156.

in the Christian community; that is, the people God has elected for himself (Acts 15:14; 18:10;
Rom. 9:25; I Peter 2:10; and see Hos. 1:6, 9; 2:23).

Verse 10
ὁ εἰσελθών—the participle in the aorist indicates that entrance into God’s rest happens once.
ὥσπερ—in 4:10 and the immediate broader context, the Greek word order is highly significant.
Note that the first word and the last word in the sentence receive the emphasis. Also, the author
frequently arranges words in the original Greek (see, for instance, the adjective ἄλλης, which
modifies the noun ἡμέρας in Heb. 4:8) in such a way as to accentuate them, much the same as we
italicize words for emphasis. Last, the enclitic particle περ adds force to the word ὡς. It means
“thoroughly,” “indeed,” “in fact.”

Verse 11
σπουδάσωμεν—this is one of the twelve hortatory subjunctives the author employs in Hebrews.
Ten of these are in the present tense; the other two (Heb. 4:1, 11), in the aorist tense.

3. God’s Word16
4:12–13
In the last section of the author’s discussion about the rest of God that is reserved for the believers,
the focus is on the power of God’s Word (v. 12) and on man’s inability to hide from that Word (v.
13). Because of the rather striking word order and word choice in these verses, the assumption is
that the writer has borrowed a line or two from a poem, circulating in the early church, about the
Word of God. This is a possibility. The effect of these two verses, however, is to give the discussion
about Sabbath-rest a fitting conclusion by appealing to the nature and authority of the Word of God.
12a. The word of God is living and active.
The writer reminds the reader that God’s Word cannot be taken lightly; for if the reader does not
wish to listen, he faces no one less than God himself (see Heb. 10:31; 12:29). The Bible is not a
collection of religious p 116 writings from the ancient past, but a book that speaks to all people
everywhere in nearly all the languages of the world. The Bible demands a response, because God
does not tolerate indifference and disobedience.
In their interpretation of verse 12a, some scholars assert that the phrase Word of God is a
reference to Jesus.17 This view is difficult to maintain, even though such a reference exists in
Revelation 19:13 (where the rider on the white horse is called the Word of God). The phrase Word
of God occurs at least thirty-nine times in the New Testament and almost exclusively is the
designation for the spoken or written Word of God rather than the Son of God. In the introductory
verses of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the writer clearly states that God spoke to the forefathers in the
past, and in the present he spoke to us in his Son (Heb. 1:1–2). In Hebrews Jesus is called the Son of

6 6 Paragraph division differs in Greek texts and translations. Heb. 4:11–13 is taken as a
complete paragraph in Merk, Nes-Al, R.S.V., MLB, NKJV, and Moffatt. On the other hand, the
United Bible Society (3d ed.), GNB, NAB, NEB, JB, and NIV put 4:11 with the preceding
paragraph and place 4:12–13 separately.

7 7 Among recent defenders of this view is James Swetnam in “Jesus as Logos in Hebrews
4:12, 13, ” Bib 62 (2, 1981): 214–24. The view, although prevalent in the early church and in the
Middle Ages, is rejected by modern commentators. Bertold Klappert (in NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 1113)
writes, “This word of God, which had its beginning in the words of Jesus (Heb. 2:3) is decisively
grounded in the exaltation of Jesus to the right hand of God (Heb. 1:5ff.) and in his installation as
eschatological high priest (Heb. 7:1ff.).”
God, but never the Word of God.18
In the original Greek, the participle living stands first in the sentence and therefore receives all
the emphasis. This participle describes the first characteristic of God’s spoken and written Word:
that Word is alive! For example, Stephen, reciting Israel’s history in the desert, says that Moses at
Mount Sinai “received living words” (Acts 7:38), and Peter tells the recipients of his first epistle
that they “have been born again … through the living and enduring word of God” (I Peter 1:23).
A second characteristic is that the Word of God is active. That is, it is effective and powerful.
(The original Greek uses a word from which we have derived the term energy.) God’s Word, then, is
energizing in its effect. No one can escape that living and active Word. Just as God’s spoken Word
brought forth his beautiful creation, so his Word recreates man dead in transgressions and sins (Eph.
2:1–5). As in the wilderness some Israelites refused to listen to God’s Word while others showed
obedience, so today we see that “the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing,
but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (I Cor. 1:18).
The Bible is not a dead letter, comparable to a law that is no longer enforced. Those people who
choose to ignore the message of Scripture will experience not merely the power of God’s Word but
its keen edge as well.
12b. Sharper than any double-edged sword.
In the ancient world, the double-edged sword was the sharpest weapon available in any arsenal.
And in verse 12b, the author of Hebrews likens the Word of God to this weapon. (In a similar
passage [Rev. 1:16] we read about the “sharp double-edged sword” coming out of the mouth of
Jesus as John p 117 saw him on the island of Patmos. Whether this means that the tongue resembles
a dagger is an open question.) The symbolism conveys the message that God’s judgment is stern,
righteous, and awful. God has the ultimate power over his creatures; those who refuse to listen to
his Word face judgment and death, while those who obey enter God’s rest and have life eternal. Let
no one take the spoken and written Word for granted; let no one ignore it; let no one willfully
oppose it. That Word cuts and divides, much as the scalpel of a surgeon uncovers the most delicate
nerves of the human body.
However, the Word of God also provides protection. Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians equates
the Word with the sword of the Spirit—that is, part of the Christian’s spiritual armor (6:17).
12c. It penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the
thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
I do not think that the writer of Hebrews is teaching the doctrine that man consists of body, soul,
and spirit (I Thess. 5:23). Of course, we can make a distinction between soul and spirit by saying
that the soul relates to man’s physical existence; and the spirit, to God.19 But the author does not
make distinctions in this verse. He speaks in terms of that which is not done and in a sense cannot
be done.
Who is able to divide soul and spirit or joints and marrow? And what judge can know the
thoughts and attitudes of the heart? The author uses symbolism to say that what man ordinarily does
not divide, God’s Word separates thoroughly. Nothing remains untouched by Scripture, for it
addresses every aspect of man’s life. The Word continues to divide the spiritual existence of man
and even his physical being. All the recesses of body and soul—including the thoughts and attitudes
—face the sharp edge of God’s dividing sword. Whereas man’s thoughts remain hidden from his
neighbor’s probing eye, God’s Word uncovers them.
God’s Word is called a discerner of man’s thoughts and intentions. In the Psalter David says:

8 8 Says Henry Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary, 4
vols. (Grand Rapids: Guardian, 1976), vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 83, “Every where He is the Son of God, not
His Word.” See also Hugh Montefiore, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York and Evanston:
Harper and Row, 1964), p. 87.

9 9 For a complete discussion on trichotomy, see William Hendriksen, I–II Thessalonians,

New Testament Commentary series (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1955), pp. 146–50.
 O LORD, you have searched me
and you know me.
You know when I sit and when I rise;
you perceive my thoughts from afar.
You discern my going out and my lying down;
you are familiar with all my ways. [Ps. 139:1–3]
And Jesus utters these words:

As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not
come to judge the world, but to save it. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not
accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day. [John 12:47–48] p
118

The Lord with his Word exposes the motives hidden in a man’s heart. In his epistle the author
stresses the act of God’s speaking to man. For instance, the introductory verses (Heb. 1:1–2)
illustrate this fact clearly. And repeatedly, when quoting the Old Testament Scriptures, the writer
uses this formula: God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit says (consult the many quotations, for example, in
the first four chapters). The Word is not a written document of past centuries. It is alive and current;
it is powerful and effective; and it is undivided and unchanged. Written in times and cultures from
which we are far removed, the Word of God nevertheless touches man today. God addresses man in
the totality of his existence, and man is unable to escape the impact of God’s Word.
13. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid
bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.
The emphasis in 4:12–13 shifts from the Word of God to God himself. If God’s Word uncovers
everything, then it follows that God himself is fully aware of all things. It is therefore impossible for
man to hide his sinful motives in the dark corners of his heart. God knows. He sees everything; even
darkness is as light to him (Ps. 139:12).
Moreover, the past, the present, and the future are all alike to God. While we are bound to time
and place, God dwells in eternity and transcends all that he has made in his great creation. He
created the magnificent constellations in outer space and hung the stars in place. He also created the
tiny spider that busily weaves its web. If then his eye is on the sparrow, does he not know the
hidden motives of man? Before we open our mouths to speak, God already knows. If we remain
silent, he discerns.
No creature is hidden from God’s sight, because with God everything is light—there is no
darkness. Man, the pinnacle of God’s creation, is invited to walk in that light, so that he may see
clearly. Consider these verses:

Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path. [Ps. 119:105]
I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light
of life. [John 8:12]
The unbeliever seeks to hide from God but is unable to do so (Jer. 23:24). Secret sins man can
hide from his fellow man, but before God sinful man is “uncovered and laid bare.” This latter
expression, in the original Greek, refers to the neck. The precise meaning of the word, however, is
not clear. Perhaps it indicates that a sinner will have his head pushed up and back so that his face
and neck will be exposed to view.20 Whatever the interpretation may have been, the expression
itself is sufficiently clear in context. It is synonymous with the word uncovered and indicates that

0 0 Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark,
1877), vol. 1, p. 216.
God’s all-seeing eye rests upon everything. p 119
The clause “to whom we must give account” is rather interesting. The books must be audited,
and all the bills, payments, and receipts handed over to be checked. Man must give an account of
himself before God, the auditor. The books of man’s conscience are open before God’s eyes.
Nothing escapes him.
In the last day sinners may call to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the
face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!” (Rev. 6:16). In the final
judgment, everyone must give an account of himself. Only those who are in Christ Jesus will hear
the liberating word acquitted.

Doctrinal Considerations in 4:12–13

In a sense, 4:12 is a summary statement of earlier references to the spoken and written Word of
God. Whether spoken or written, God’s Word is a unity. The same voice speaks with clarity and
authority to every generation. It addressed the Israelites in the desert, the citizens of Israel in
David’s day, and the recipients of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the first century. That voice still
speaks today.
The Word of God is living and powerful in the hearts and lives of the believers. Unbelievers,
however, brazenly reject the very Word that addresses them. They echo the words of William Ernest
Henley:
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate;
I am the captain of my soul.
Paul writes to the Corinthians that his preaching is to the one the smell of death, to the other the
fragrance of life (II Cor. 2:16). And Calvin observes that God “never promises to us salvation in
Christ, without pronouncing, on the other hand, vengeance on unbelievers, who by rejecting Christ
bring death on themselves.”21
The expression double-edged sword ought not be taken literally and thus interpreted to mean
that one edge is directed toward believers and the other toward unbelievers. The writer uses
symbolism to imply that the Word of God does indeed “cut to the heart” (Acts 2:37).
God’s knowledge is all-comprehensive, including self-knowledge and complete understanding
of all events, past, present, and future.22 Scripture repeatedly refers to God’s omniscience (see Deut.
2:7; I Sam. 16:7; I Chron. 28:9, 12; Job 23:10; 24:23; 31:4; 37:16; Ps. 1:6; 33:13; 37:18; 119:168;
139:1–4).
Hebrews 4:12 teaches that God’s Word “judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” Here, as
elsewhere in the epistle, there is no reference to Christ as the judge. Quoting Deuteronomy 32:36
(“The Lord will judge his people” [Heb. 10:30]), the writer concludes, “It is a dreadful thing to fall
into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:31). p 120

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:12–13

Verse 12
ζῶν—the use of the present active participle teaches that the Word of God does not merely

1 1 Calvin, Hebrews, pp. 102–3.

2 2 Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 67.

exist; it must be understood as “having in itself energies of action”23 (see I Peter 1:23).
ἐνεργής—a variant reading in Codex Vaticanus reads ἐναργής (clear, evident). As an adjective
from the verb ἐνεργέω (I am effective), ἐνεργής means “effective, powerful.”
τομώτερος—this adjective in the comparative occurs once in the New Testament; it is derived
from τομός (sharp), which in turn is from the verb τέμνω (I cut).
δίστομος—the compound adjective double-edged (δίς [twice] and στόμα [mouth]) appears in
the Septuagint in Judges 3:16 and Proverbs 5:4; and in the New Testament in Hebrews 4:12 and
Revelation 1:16; 2:12; 19:15 (variant reading).
διϊκνούμενος—this present middle participle from the deponent verb διϊκνέομαι (I penetrate)
occurs once in the New Testament, but see Exodus 26:28 in the Septuagint. The form is a compound
of the preposition διά (through) and the verb ἵκω or ἱκνέομαι (I come, reach, arrive at).
μερισμοῦ—from the verb μερίζω (I divide), the noun—because of the ending -μός—shows
progressive action. In Thayer’s Lexicon, preference is given to translating the word passively: “even
to the division, etc., i.e. to that most hidden spot, the dividing line between soul and spirit, where the
one passes into the other.”24

Verse 13
τετραχηλισμένα—as a perfect passive participle of τραχηλίζω (I seize the neck; I expose by
bending back), the word has been interpreted in numerous ways. The basic meaning is “to expose.”
Because the verb occurs only once in the New Testament, the exact meaning cannot be ascertained.
ὁ λόγος—the noun λόγος appears at the beginning of 4:12 and at the end of 4:13. The latter
evidently is in the form of an idiom, “we must give an account,” while the former refers to the Word
of God.

Summary of Chapter 4
The focus in chapter 4 is not so much on the unbelieving Israelites who refused to obey God as it is
on the believers who in faith enter God’s promised rest. The unbelieving desert travelers failed to
listen to God’s voice and perished on the way to the land God had promised. The Christian who
lives by faith enters into God’s rest, the Sabbath-rest for the people of God. And this entrance into
rest can be accomplished only by listening obediently to the gospel.
The first thirteen verses of this chapter form an introduction to the author’s discussion about the
high priesthood of Jesus the Son of God. Already in 2:17–18 the author introduced this subject,
which in succeeding chapters he fully develops and explains.

p 121 5. Jesus’ High Priesthood

4:14–5:10 p 122
Outline
4:14–16 A. Encouragement for the Readers

3 3 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1950), p. 102.

4 4 Thayer, Lexicon, p. 400. His italics.

5:1–3 B. Enablement of the High Priest

5:4–10 C. Fulfillment of the High-priestly Office

A. Encouragement for the Readers

4:14–16

4 14 Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God,
let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize
with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without
sin. 16 Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find
grace to help us in our time of need.

In his series of illustrations establishing the excellence of Jesus, the writer now contrasts Jesus with
Aaron, the high priest. In Hebrews 2:17 and 3:1, the author introduced Jesus as high priest. With
occasional digressions,1 the author writes extensively about the office and work of the high priest
(see Heb. 5:5, 10; 6:20; 7:26; 8:1; 9:11; 10:21).
14. Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus
the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess.
Note the following points:
a. Because of his sonship, Jesus already is great.
b. Thus, being high priest does not make Jesus great.
c. Jesus excels because he is divine.
d. Only Jesus has gone through the heavens.
e. The difference, therefore, between Jesus and Aaron is immeasurable.
The adverb therefore ought not be understood to refer to the immediately preceding context but
to Hebrews 2:17, where the subject of Christ’s priesthood is first introduced.2 The author, who
briefly referred to the “high priest p 124 whom we confess” in Hebrews 3:1, now is ready to explain
the significance of Jesus’ priesthood.

1 The chapter division is somewhat infelicitous at this juncture. Martin Luther in his Bible
translation boldly begins chapter 5 at Heb. 4:14. Most commentators believe that the concluding
verses of chapter 4 should be interpreted with the following chapter on the high priesthood of
Christ.
2 Franz Delitzsch prefers to connect the word therefore with the exhortation: “Let us
therefore, having a great high priest who hath passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God,
hold fast by our confession” (Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols. [Edinburgh: Clark,
1877], vol. 1, p. 217). However, the adverb therefore in the Greek has a variety of meanings, which
should be determined on the basis of context, “and at times it may be left untranslated.” (See Bauer,
p. 592.) Indeed, a number of translations delete the adverb.
 Since we have a great high priest. The emphasis falls on the term great, which also occurs in
Hebrews 10:21 (“since we have a great priest over the house of God”) and Hebrews 13:20 (where
Jesus is called “that great Shepherd of the sheep”). The adjective great indicates that Jesus is
superior to earthly high priests and shepherds.3 He is the great high priest, not the one who entered
the Most Holy Place once a year and sprinkled blood to atone first for his own sins and then for
those of the people. Jesus, as the great high priest, excels earthly high priests.
Who has gone through the heavens. The Jewish high priest entered the inner sanctuary of the
temple once a year and stood momentarily in the very presence of God. Jesus, by contrast, has
entered the heavens and is always in the presence of God (Heb. 9:24). He has been raised from the
dead, has ascended to heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father. He has gone through and
is “exalted above the heavens” (Heb. 7:26). He is majestic in power and glory because he is the Son
of God, human and divine.
Let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. The author of Hebrews uses the earthly name of
Jesus to focus attention on his ministry, suffering, death, resurrection, and ascension. Jesus could
not be in heaven as the great high priest without having performed his priestly work on earth.
Once more the writer of Hebrews intersperses his teaching with exhortation. This exhortation
can be connected logically with the first part of the verse (“since we have a great high priest who
has gone through the heavens”). Characteristically, the author includes himself in the exhortation
when he writes, “Let us hold firmly to the faith we profess” (see also Heb. 3:1; 10:23).
What then is this faith we profess? Is it a formulated confession of faith? Perhaps. But as Philip
Edgcumbe Hughes writes, faith “is the belief that is both inwardly entertained by the heart and
outwardly professed before men.”4 This is, of course, a paraphrase of Romans 10:10, “For it is with
your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are
saved.” This faith we must continue to profess with heart and mouth, joyfully, openly, so that our
fellow man, too, may hear about Jesus the Son of God.
15. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but
we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin.
The recipients of the epistle might have raised an objection to the author’s teaching: Because
Jesus is the Son of God and is exalted in heaven, far p 125 removed from man’s daily toils and
struggles, his priesthood is of little consequence. The author, however, anticipates objections and in
Hebrews 4:15 counters them. Not so, he says, for when I introduced the teaching I stated that we,
the brothers of Jesus, have a high priest who is merciful and faithful. And “because he himself
suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted” (Heb. 2:18).
The writer makes his point by stating this truth negatively and positively.
a. Negatively
The double negative—we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize—expresses a
positive idea: yes, we have a highly exalted high priest who can descend to our level.
The original recipients of Hebrews knew that the teaching about Jesus’ high priesthood was
articulated for the first time in this epistle. Perhaps they had to endure hardship, persecution, and
isolation from the Jews if they professed the high priesthood of Jesus. They may have wondered:
Would the exalted high priest understand their weaknesses if they failed to profess him publicly?

3 C. P. Sherman (“A Great High Priest,” ExpT 34 [1922]: 235) demonstrates from the Hebrew
that two terms were used: “the great priest” and “the chief priest.” Ceslaus Spicq, in L’Epître aux
Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, p. 92, notes that in the time between the
accession of Herod the Great and the destruction of the temple there were no fewer than twenty-six
high priests.
4 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1977), p. 171.
Would he understand their situation? Yes, the author assured them, the heavenly high priest is able
to sympathize. If we confess his name publicly, he suffers with us when others reproach, scorn, and
insult us.
b. Positively
Jesus is not only fully divine; he is also fully human and thus understands our weaknesses and our
temptations. Furthermore, Jesus himself experienced weaknesses and temptations. At the onset of
his ministry, he was tempted by Satan; he coped with thirst, weariness, desertion, and
disappointments throughout his earthly ministry.
Jesus, fully acquainted with human nature, is “touched with the feeling of our weaknesses,” as
B. F. Westcott puts it.5 He has been tempted—in extent and range—in every way. Nothing in human
experience is foreign to him, for he himself has endured it. And he has been tempted just as
intensely as we are. The author adds the qualifying phrase yet was without sin.
When he was in the wilderness, Jesus experienced hunger, and the devil tempted him by asking
him to make bread out of stones (Matt. 4:2–3). While hanging on the cross, he was mocked by chief
priests, teachers of the law, and elders, who said, “Let him come down now from the cross … for he
said, ‘I am the Son of God’ ” (Matt. 27:42, 43). He endured the full range of temptations, although,
as the writer notes, without sinning. Sin is the only human experience in which Christ has no part.
The temptations we endure are given to us in accordance with what we are able to bear. God’s
watchful eye is always upon us, so that we do not succumb. Says Paul:

No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let
you be tempted beyond what you can bear. p 126
But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it. [I Cor.
10:13]
We, however, will never be able to fathom the depth of the temptations Jesus endured. Yet he
withstood the depth, as well as the force, of these temptations. He overcame them as the sinless
One.
Is Jesus (the sinless One) able to sympathize with us (weakened by sin) in our temptations?
Because of his sinless nature, says John Albert Bengel, “the mind of the Savior much more acutely
perceived the forms of temptation than we who are weak,” not only during his earthly ministry but
also during his service as the exalted high priest.6 He anticipates temptations we are going to face,
sympathizes fully with us, and “is able to help [us] who are being tempted” (Heb. 2:18).
16. Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive
mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.
What encouraging words! The writer throughout his epistle exhorts the readers numerous times,
but in this particular verse he has a special word for us. This time he does not exhort believers to
rectify their way of life; he commends us for coming in prayer to God and urges us to do so
confidently.
a. “Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence.” The invitation to approach the
throne of grace implies that the readers are already doing this. The author also uses the same verb in
Hebrews 10:22 (“let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith”). He later
repeats the same invitation in slightly different wording (see Heb. 7:25; 10:1; 11:6; 12:18, 22).

5 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1950), p. 107. And John Calvin classifies as infirmities the physical as well as the spiritual: “fear,
sorrow, the dread of death and similar things.” See Calvin’s Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1949), p. 108.
6 John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5 vols.
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 384.
 The verb approach may have a religious connotation, because it often referred to the priests
who in their cultic service approached God with sacrifices (Lev. 9:7; 21:17, 21; 22:3; Num. 18:3).7
In Hebrews 4:16 the writer urges us to come near to the throne of grace in prayer, for the only
sacrifice a believer can bring is a broken and a contrite heart (Ps. 51:17). The great high priest has
brought the supreme sacrifice in offering himself on the cross on behalf of his people. The merciful
and faithful high priest invites the weak and tempted sinner to come to the throne of grace.
What is meant by the phrase throne of grace? This is an explicit reference to the kingship of the
Son of God (Heb. 1:2–4). Jesus sits at the right hand of God and has been given full authority in
heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18). But the word grace implies that the reference is also to the
priesthood of Christ. The sinner who comes to the throne of grace in repentance and faith indeed
finds the forgiving grace of Jesus. p 127
Moreover, we are exhorted to come to the throne with confidence; that is, we may come boldly
(Heb. 3:6; 10:19, 35), not rashly or in fear of judgment, but “in full confidence, openness to God
and in the hope of the fullness of the glory of God.”8 Jesus invites his people to approach freely,
without hesitation. He holds out the golden scepter, as it were, and says, “Come!”
b. “So that we may receive mercy and find grace.” Although the terms mercy and grace are
often interpreted as being synonyms, their difference ought to be noted. Westcott makes the
distinction succinctly:

Man needs mercy for past failure, and grace for present and future work. There is also a difference
as to the mode of attainment in each case. Mercy is to be “taken” as it is extended to man in his
weakness; grace is to be “sought” by man according to his necessity.9
The mercy of God is directed to sinners in misery or distress; they receive God’s compassion
when they approach him. And whereas God’s mercy extends to all his creatures (Ps. 145:9), his
grace, as the writer of Hebrews indicates in Hebrews 4:16, extends to all who approach the throne
of God. Mercy is characterized as God’s tender compassion; grace, as his goodness and love.10
c. “To help us in our time of need.” Help is given at the right moment in the hour of need. The
author is not saying that the help is constant, but rather that it alleviates the need of the moment.
That need may be material, physical, or spiritual. When we call on the name of the Lord in faith and
approach the throne of God, he will hear and answer. He stands ready to help (see Heb. 2:18).
This aid, in the form of grace, comes when temptation seems to sway us. God provides the
means to find a way out of our temptations. God is faithful (I Cor. 10:13).

Doctrinal Considerations in 4:14–16

When the writer states that Jesus “has gone through the heavens” (v. 14), he implies that Jesus
has entered the presence of God the Father. The Aaronic high priest, by entering the Most Holy

7 Spicq, Hébreux, vol. 2, p. 94. James Moffatt asserts that the verb applies to a court or to
authority. See his Epistle to the Hebrews, International Critical Commentary series (Edinburgh:
Clark, 1963), p. 60.
8 Hans-Christoph Hahn, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 736. This sense of assurance, writes Heinrich
Schlier, “works itself out in the confidence and openness which [causes one] not [to] be ashamed
when [he] stands before the Judge” (TDNT, vol. 5, p. 884).
9 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 109. Also see Otto Michel, Der Brief an die Hebräer, 10th ed.
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1957), p. 124.

0 0 Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), pp. 71–72.
Place once a year, stood in the presence of God. Because Jesus appears before God the Father in
heaven, he transcends the Aaronic high priest. Therefore, the author of Hebrews calls him the
“great high priest” (italics added).
The use of the plural noun heavens in the original Greek is rather common in p 128 the Epistle
to the Hebrews (Heb. 1:10 [Ps. 102:25]; 4:14; 7:26; 9:23; 12:23, 25). It is possible that the plural,
which is also common in the Septuagint and in the New Testament (especially in Matthew’s
Gospel), conveys in the Epistle to the Hebrews the idea of completeness. However, the author uses
the word heaven in the singular, too (Heb. 9:24; 11:12; 12:26 [Hag. 2:6]).
In rabbinic writings and in apocryphal literature, the conception of a multilayered heaven is
somewhat common. In fact, Paul even speaks of knowing a man “caught up to the third heaven”
and “to paradise” (II Cor. 12:2, 4). It seems that Paradise is located in either the third or the seventh
heaven. Speculations about the heavenly Jerusalem, the location of God’s throne, and the heavenly
altar are numerous.
Because of the scarcity of information on this point in the Epistle to the Hebrews, we do well to
refrain from speculation. In 4:14, it is implied that God’s dwelling place is not in heaven; that is,
“not within his creation to which heaven belongs, but above the heavens.”11 Jesus has transcended
the heavens, has come to the throne of God, and has taken his place at God’s right hand as the great
high priest.
If Jesus endured temptations during his earthly ministry as the Son of God, how do we
understand the author’s teaching that he “has been tempted in every way, just as we are” (v. 15;
italics added)? Herman N. Ridderbos, commenting on Jesus’ temptation in the desert, raises this
question in a slightly different form: Could Jesus fall into sin or was the temptation imaginary?
Although Jesus as God’s Son surpassed Satan and therefore could not fall, Jesus was not necessarily
immune to temptation.12 We admit that for us it is difficult to understand how the Son of God, who
could not sin, was tempted just as we are. From our limited perspective, we are unable to explain
the difficulty inherent in the biblical teaching about Jesus’ sinlessness and temptation.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:14–16

Verse 14
ἔχοντες—in the context of the verse, the present active participle may express cause.
διεληλυθότα—the perfect active participle, accusative singular masculine, derives from διά
(through) and ἔρχομαι (I go). It denotes completed action in the past with lasting results for the
present.
κρατῶμεν—a hortatory subjunctive, as a present active from κρατέω (I hold firmly, I keep
faithfully; see Rev. 2:25; 3:11). p 129

1 1 Hans Bietenhard, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 195.

2 2 Herman N. Ridderbos, Mattheüs, Korte Verklaring, 2 vols. (Kampen: Kok, 1952), vol. 1,
p. 68. Geerhardus Vos, in The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1956), p. 103, asserts that for Christ “there was as much real appeal to sin … as there is with us, but
in His case there was no issue of sin.” R. Williams argues that Jesus had to have actual participation
in the experience of sinning in order to share fully in the human weaknesses of man. Next, Jesus
had to subject himself to the process of learning obedience and thus achieve sinlessness when he
offered himself on the cross. See Williams’s article in ExpT 86 (1974): 4–8. Of course, this
reasoning controverts Scripture’s unequivocal teaching about Jesus’ sinlessness (Isa. 53:9; John
8:46; II Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; 7:26; I Peter 1:19; 2:22).
 Verse 15
συμπαθῆσαι—in the New Testament the verb appears only twice: in Hebrews 4:15, referring to
Jesus, and in Hebrews 10:34, referring to the recipients of the epistle. In extrabiblical literature it
occurs numerous times. The aorist tense is constative; that is, the action of the verb does not refer to
duration but rather to entirety.
πεπειρασμένον—the perfect passive participle, instead of the aorist passive πειρασθείς (see
Heb. 2:18), indicates continued action in the past until its culmination—Jesus’ death.
χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας—the last two words in this sentence emphasize the contrast between man, who
is tainted by sin, and Jesus, who is sinless. The adverb χωρίς, serving as a preposition, controls the
genitive singular ἁμαρτίας.

Verse 16
προσερχώμεθα—we are exhorted, with the hortatory subjunctive, to approach the throne of
grace. The present tense suggests that we in fact are doing so.
λάβωμεν … εὕρωμεν—the verse shows chiasmus with two verbs and two nouns. The noun
mercy follows the verb to receive, and the noun grace precedes the verb to find. Both verbs are in
the aorist tense.

B. Enablement of the High Priest

5:1–3

5 1 Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in matters related to
God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are
going astray, since he himself is subject to weakness. 3 This is why he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins,
as well as for the sins of the people.

After encouraging his readers, the author continues his teaching ministry by defining the
qualifications for the one who serves as high priest. The obvious reference is to the institution of the
Aaronic priesthood (Heb. 5:4); the high priest’s appointment, duties, and obligations were divinely
stipulated and were to be meticulously observed.
1. Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in
matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.
Three points require our attention.
a. A high priest is selected. The writer constructs a beautifully balanced sentence in which he
describes the selection, appointment, and duty of a high priest. According to the law of Moses
(Exod. 28–29, Lev. 8–10, and Num. 16–18), only Aaron and his sons were permitted to serve at the
altar. “The priesthood was therefore a fraternity fenced round with irremovable barriers, for they
had been fixed forever by natural descent.”13 From what p 130 we are able to learn about the
selection process, a high priest was chosen from the members of relatively few influential priestly
families. He did not serve actively as high priest for any length of time, as is evident from the
Gospels and the Acts (John 18:13; Acts 4:6). The author of Hebrews, however, is not interested in
historical details. Rather, he identifies the principle: the high priest is selected from among men. He
writes in terms of biblical regulations and not historical aberrations.

3 3 Emil Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, 5 vols.
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1885), vol. 1, div. 2, p. 209.
 b. A high priest is appointed. Note the passive voice of the verb that is used to describe the
process of selection and appointment. The writer wishes to indicate that the high priest does not
appoint himself, but by implication is appointed by God. The high-priestly office, therefore, is
based on a divine calling (Heb. 5:4), especially in view of the high priest’s work. That is, a sinful
high priest is appointed to represent sinful people in matters related to God.
c. A high priest is to offer sacrifices. In the original Greek, the phrase matters related to God is
used in Hebrews 2:17, where the author specifies that this includes the high priest’s work of
“mak[ing] atonement for the sins of the people.” This work consists of representing men before God
when the people come with gifts and sacrifices. They bring these gifts and sacrifices to the high
priest so that he can offer them to God for the sins of the people.
The author of Hebrews explains this concept in a subsequent verse. The phrase gifts and
sacrifices occurs again in Hebrews 8:3 and is abridged in the next verse where only the term gifts
appears. In using this condensation, the author seems to imply that the two terms are synonyms, for
every gift to God offered for sin is essentially a sacrifice. These gifts, then, the high priest presents
to God to remove sin, to bring about reconciliation, and to gain access into God’s grace (Rom. 5:2).
The high priest is the intermediary between God and his people.
2. He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he
himself is subject to weakness.
The high priest, representing man before God, may never lose patience with the one he
represents, in spite of that man’s sins and shortcomings. As intercessor, the high priest must exercise
moderation in expressing anger or sorrow concerning errors and faults of his fellow man. The high
priest in the Old Testament era was a type of mediator whose fulfillment came in Jesus Christ.
However, not every sin can be brought to the high priest for remission. The writer of Hebrews is
specific, for he says that the high priest deals gently with those who are ignorant and who go astray.
Nothing is said about sin committed purposely to grieve God. By implication, the high priest must
know the difference between sins perpetrated to vex God (Ps. 95:7–11) and sins committed because
of weakness. Sins of ignorance usually result from a lack of paying attention to God’s
commandments, whereas intentional sins stem from a rebellious heart and mind fully acquainted
with the law of God (Num. 15:22–31; also see Lev. 4, 5, and 22:14). p 131
The high priest ought to deal gently with the people but should neither overlook or condone sin
nor rank himself above the people. He himself daily confronted temptation and, because of his own
human weakness, committed sin. Because the high priest had to cope with his own sinful nature, he
was an equal of the people who sought his intercession for the sins they committed in weakness.
Moreover, because of his ability to identify with his fellow man, he could deal gently with them in
leading them to God.
The writer of Hebrews portrays the weakness, which the high priest shares with the people he
helps, as something that clings to him as a garment covers his body. The realization of his own
weakness and yielding to temptation causes the high priest to be moderate in expressing anger or
grief.
3. This is why he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of the people.
Verse 3 is an explanatory note in which the writer emphasizes what he already has stated in the
preceding verse, where he pointed to the weakness of the high priest. Now, making an obvious
reference to Leviticus 9:7 and 16:6, 15–16, he says that Aaron is told to sacrifice a sin offering and
a burnt offering for himself and for the people. The writer of Hebrews indicates the obligation that
the high priest has to offer a sacrifice for himself and the people he represents.
We should remember that, although the author is drawing a parallel between the Levitical high
priest and Jesus the great high priest, not everything in the comparison is equal. The most
significant difference is that Jesus “does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own
sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered
himself” (Heb. 7:27).
For the moment, however, the author speaks of high priests in the Old Testament era. He alludes
to the ritual of the annual entrance of the high priest into the Most Holy Place on the Day of
Atonement; that is, on the tenth day of the seventh month, Tishri (approximately equivalent to
October). According to Leviticus 16, Aaron had to
1. offer a bull for his own sin offering to atone for his own sin and the sin of his household,
2. enter the Most Holy Place with incense,
3. sprinkle the blood of the bull on the atonement cover of the ark,
4. cast lots over two live goats brought by the people,
5. kill one of the goats for a sin offering for the nation, and sprinkle its blood inside the Most Holy
Place,
6. place his hands on the head of the live goat and confess the sins of the people, and
7. send the live goat away into the wilderness.14 p 132
The high priest made intercession for his people by praying that God might forgive the sins he
himself and they had committed:
O God, I have committed iniquity,
transgressed, and sinned before thee,
I and my house.
O God, forgive the iniquities and
transgressions and sins which
I have committed and transgressed
and sinned before thee,
I and my house.15

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 5:1–3

Verse 1
λαμβανόμενος—the present passive participle indicates continuity. The term of office for the
high priest was relatively short, and upon termination a successor had to be appointed. The passive
voice shows that a man could not appoint himself to this office.
καθίσταται—the form is a present passive indicative, third person singular, from καθίστημι and
καθιστάνω (I appoint, put in charge, ordain; see Heb. 7:28; 8:3). The verb should not be interpreted
as a middle, for the words τὰ … θεόν do not lend themselves as a direct object.

Verse 2
μετριοπαθεῖν—although the verb is related to συμπαθέω (Heb. 4:15), it ought not be considered
a synonym.16 In the New Testament it occurs only once. In the writings of Philo, Plutarch, and
Josephus the word means “to restrain or moderate one’s anger.”
τοῖς ἀγνοοῦσιν καὶ πλανωμένοις—the use of only one definite article indicates that the two
participles ἀγνοοῦσιν (present active) and πλανωμένοις (present passive) describe one group of
people. The active voice refers to the mental and spiritual condition of the readers; the passive voice
implies an agent.
περίκειται—this compound verb is the present passive of περί (around) and ξεῖμαι (I lie). The

4 4 Charles L. Feinberg, “Day of Atonement,” ZPEB, vol. 1, p. 414.

5 5 Mishna, Moed Yoma 3.8, ed. H. Danby (London: Oxford University Press, 1967), p. 165.

6 6 Wilhelm Michaelis, TDNT, vol. 5, p. 938.

word appears in Mark 9:42, Luke 17:2, and Acts 28:20, as well as Hebrews 5:2 and 12:1.

Verse 3
ὀφείλει—the verb, in the present active, expresses obligation or necessity. Someone may be
obligated, because of legal, conventional, or divine necessity, to act or to be the object of action
(e.g., receive punishment). In the context of this verse it means the high priest, because of his office,
ought to present sacrifices for himself and for the people.

p 133
C. Fulfillment of the High-priestly Office
5:4–10

4 No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was. 5 So Christ also did
not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him,
“You are my Son:
today I have become your Father.”
6 And he says in another place,
“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”
7 During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to
the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. 8 Although he
was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of
eternal salvation for all who obey him 10 and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of
Melchizedek.

Scholars debate whether Hebrews 5:4 ought to be bracketed with the preceding or the following
verse. Does the paragraph end with verse 4, or does a new one begin with that verse? Verses 4 and 5
form a unit for the simple reason that they show parallelism—just as Aaron was, so Christ was also.
Therefore, it may be preferable to begin a new paragraph with verse 4.
4. No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron was. 5.
So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God
said to him,
“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father.”
6. And he says in another place,
“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”
In these verses the author of Hebrews focuses on the priesthood of Christ by highlighting the
following points.
a. The honor of the office. The office of high priest is an honor that God conferred upon the
person who assumed the duties of the office. The high priest, from the time of Aaron to the
destruction of the temple in A.D. 70, enjoyed proper recognition from the Hebrew community.
Without a doubt, next to the civil leader the high priest held the highest office in the land.
The author, however, stresses that no one takes the honor upon himself for self-gratification. No
one fills the office of the high priest merely for the sake of entering into the presence of God on the
Day of Atonement, of receiving the respect of the Israelite community, or of wearing the beautiful
high-priestly robe and turban (Lev. 8:7–9). The honor associated with the office derives from
fulfilling the duties assigned to the high priest. He is to serve God on behalf of the people. He is
their representative. He fulfills the mediatorial role of pleading for the remission of sin. p 134
b. The calling by God. Moreover, a high priest must be called by God to this honorable office.
Of course, this does not mean that there were no exceptions in Israel’s history.17 But the author of
Hebrews is not interested in aberrations; he mentions the name of Aaron to call to mind that God
inaugurated the high priesthood in Aaron.
In contemporary terms, this means that no one but he who has been called by God ought to
assume the office of minister of the gospel. A seminary president once addressed an incoming class
of students and, after words of welcome, said to these aspiring theologians: “Unless the Lord has
called you to study for the ministry, we don’t want you here.”
Anyone inducted into sacred office must be called by God. If this is not the case, he is an affront
to God and a provocation to his people. That is, he elevates himself above the people he wants to
represent; exhibits a haughty instead of a humble spirit; and, because his concept of holiness is
deficient, has a perverted perception of God.
c. Similarity with a difference. The parallelism between Aaron and Christ is expressed in terms
of the office they fill. Note, for example, that the author does not use the name Jesus but uses
Christ, the name that describes the office and duty of the Son of God. As Aaron was called and
appointed by God (Exod. 28; Num. 16–17) to serve as high priest, so “Christ also did not take upon
himself the glory of becoming a high priest.” Note that the term honor in Hebrews 5:4 is a synonym
of the word glory.
Yet the difference between Aaron and Christ is profound, because God (as this verse implies)
has crowned Christ with glory and honor as high priest. Jesus did not presumptuously appropriate
the office of high priest.
d. The Son of God. The author of Hebrews seems to anticipate that someone may raise the
objection that Jesus and Aaron, apart from a few similarities pertaining to the office of high priest,
have very little in common. That is true, says the writer; and once more he quotes Psalm 2:7, where
God says to the Son:
You are my Son;
today I have become your Father.
The first time the author uses the quotation to compare the Son with angels (Heb. 1:5). Now the
psalm citation indirectly contrasts Christ and Aaron. Jesus is the Son of God, and yet he is called
and appointed by God to serve as high priest. p 135
In Hebrews 4:14, the writer combines the two concepts of sonship and high priesthood. Says
Geerhardus Vos, “He gives exceptionally high value to the high priesthood of Christ, and derives its
eminence from the Sonship.”18
Now it is true that Psalm 2 stresses the royal status of the Son, who received the nations as his

7 7 The history of the high priesthood in Israel from the time of Aaron to the destruction of
Jerusalem in A.D. 70 has been recorded, although in summary form, by Josephus in Antiquities of
the Jews 20.10 (LCL). Numerous men, from the second century before Christ to the cessation of the
priesthood, were neither of Aaronic descent nor appointed by God. See especially Schürer, History
of the Jewish People, vol. 1, div. 2, pp. 195–202. F. F. Bruce, in The Epistle to the Hebrews, New
International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), p. 92, n.
19, lists names and terms of office of persons who were appointed high priest by civil rulers.
inheritance and who rules them with an iron scepter. How then, someone objects, can the Christ be
high priest as well? The author expects the question and, as he has done before, uses the Old
Testament to give an answer and prove his point.
e. The priest of God. The idea of a king-priest appears in the Old Testament at various places.
The first reference we note is Genesis 14:18, where Melchizedek is introduced as king of Salem and
priest of God Most High. Next, in Psalm 110:1 David speaks of royalty: “Sit at my right hand until I
make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” In Psalm 110:4 the reference is to priesthood: “You
are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” Finally, Zechariah, who symbolically refers to the
Branch (i.e., the Messiah), writes what the Lord Almighty says:

It is he who will build the temple of the LORD, and he will be clothed with majesty and will sit and
rule on his throne. And he will be a priest on his throne. And there will be harmony between the
two. [6:13]
The writer of Hebrews was thoroughly familiar with the teaching of the Old Testament. In order
to be precise as to the type of priesthood Jesus assumed, he quotes Psalm 110:4, “You are a priest
forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” We should note that just as God addresses the Son in Psalm
2:7, so he speaks to him in Psalm 110:1 and 4. Thus God announces the kingship and the priesthood
of his Son. “The Epistle to the Hebrews stands alone among the New Testament books in calling
Christ priest.”19 The cause for this neglect may perhaps be found in the history of the Jewish
people. Throughout the ages the Jews had expected a king from David’s house. This king would
deliver them from foreign oppression. And this king, because David’s line was from the tribe of
Judah, could not be a priest; priests were descendants of Aaron in the tribe of Levi. Therefore, Jesus
was known as king. At his birth the wise men called him “king of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2), and this
appellation was commonplace during the trial and crucifixion of Jesus. He was not known as priest.
Already in the first chapter of Hebrews, the author quoted Psalm 110:1 as irrefutable evidence
of Christ’s kingship. Now in chapter 5 he cites Psalm 110:4 to describe the unique function and
purpose of Christ’s priesthood. He makes it clear, although he explains the details in chapter 7, that
Jesus’ priesthood differs from that of Aaron. Jesus is “a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”
p 136
7. During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud
cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his
reverent submission.
The writer of Hebrews wants to prove that Jesus did not become a priest after his ascension, but
that already during his life on earth the Lord offered up prayers and petitions. The reference to
Jesus’ earthly life seems to be related to his suffering at Gethsemane. In one sentence the literary
artist portrays Jesus in spiritual agony.
a. Setting
Although the author has mentioned the name Jesus in preceding chapters (Heb. 2:9; 3:1; 4:14), in
the present passage he clearly has the Gospel account in mind. He does not quote any specific
words of Jesus, but the references are to the experience at Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–46; Mark
14:32–42; Luke 22:39–46) and to the so-called little Gethsemane incident (John 12:27).
Admittedly, the Gospel writers do not tell us whether Jesus in Gethsemane prayed with loud

8 8 Vos, Teaching, p. 77.

9 9 Ibid., p. 91. The term priest occurs 31 times in the New Testament, 14 of which appear in
Hebrews, The word high priest is featured 123 times in the Gospels, Acts, and Hebrews. The
expression does not occur in the Epistles and Revelation. In Hebrews it is used 18 times. In short, it
is the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews who develops the doctrine of the priesthood of Christ.
cries and tears. However, we may infer from the words of Jesus that his agony was intense.
Matthew and Mark report that Jesus said, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of
death” (Matt. 26:38; Mark 14:34), and Luke writes that Jesus’ agony was so acute that “his sweat
was like drops of blood falling to the ground” (Luke 22:44).
b. Function
At first the phrase offered up prayers and petitions seems to be somewhat liturgical. However, the
expression, describing Jesus’ mediatorial work in the Garden of Gethsemane, must be understood to
connote sacrificial activity—Jesus with prayer and petition functioned as priest. On behalf of
sinners, whose sin he had taken upon himself, he prayed to God.
The prayers and petitions Jesus uttered cannot accurately be called offerings and have little
resemblance to the work of the priest at the altar. But if we consider the function of Jesus’ earthly
life, especially the last days of his life, we see him offering himself as the sacrificial Lamb of God
to atone for the sins of his people. In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus prayed, “My Father, if it is
possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will” (Matt. 26:39) and “My
Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done”
(Matt. 26:42). These prayers and petitions are far removed from liturgical worship. They reveal the
depth of Jesus’ spiritual and even physical agony expressed by the “drops of blood falling to the
ground.”
Jesus as the sin-bearer faced the wrath of God against sin. “God made him who had no sin to be
sin for us” (II Cor. 5:21). And because of our sins, Christ stood before God as the most wicked of all
transgressors. He stood alone as our substitute. The words of Ben H. Price capture this thought
poetically:
It was alone the Savior prayed
In dark Gethsemane;
Alone He drained the bitter cup
And suffered there for me. p 137
Alone, alone, He bore it all alone;
He gave Himself to save His own,
He suffered, bled and died alone, alone.

c. Manner
That the evangelists do not record that Jesus uttered his prayers and petitions “with loud cries and
tears” does not imply that Jesus’ prayers to God were quiet. In fact, his words from the cross were
uttered in a loud voice (Matt. 27:46, 50; Mark 15:34, 37; Luke 23:46). Jesus saw the cup of God’s
wrath handed to him; he felt the curse of God (Gal. 3:13); and he realized that God’s judgment was
pronounced upon him. He faced death, which for him was not only physical death. If Jesus had died
a martyr’s death on a cross outside Jerusalem, it would hardly be noteworthy, because numerous
people have met equally violent deaths.
However, Jesus died the so-called second death (Rev. 2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8). What Jesus
experienced in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross was eternal death. His cry, “My God, my
God, why have you forsaken me?” reflected complete separation from God. And that is death
unimaginable. We cannot fathom the depth of Jesus’ agony when he experienced eternal death. We
can only describe it, as the author of Hebrews does. We conclude by saying that Jesus in his
separation from God experienced hell itself.
d. Addressee
Throughout his earthly ministry Jesus spent much time in prayer, calling God his Father. The
intimate relation between Father and Son is especially evident in the high-priestly prayer recorded
in John 17. Jesus’ prayers uttered in Gethsemane and from the cross also were directed to the Father
(Matt. 26:39, 42; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42; 23:34, 46).
Jesus addressed his prayers “to the one who could save him from death.” Many questions can be
raised at this point. We could ask why Jesus prayed for deliverance from death when he knew that
he was sent to give his life “as a ransom for all men” (I Tim. 2:6). Jesus himself, as the Second
Person of the Trinity, had agreed to the decree to redeem mankind by sending the Son of God to
earth. His prayer, therefore, did not arise out of ignorance. From one point of view, Jesus knew that
the Father had commissioned him to redeem the world through the Son’s sacrificial death. From
another point of view, Jesus saw the horrors of enduring the indescribable agonies of being forsaken
by God and experiencing eternal death.
Jesus fully submitted to the Father’s will to enter death in order to remove the curse, fulfill the
sentence pronounced against him, and redeem his people. Because of Christ’s atoning work and
victory over death and the grave, we shall never know the weight of sin, the severity of the curse,
the penalty of judgment, or the meaning of eternal death and hell. We have been acquitted and set
free because of Jesus, our high priest.
In Gethsemane Jesus prayed that the will of God might be accomplished in respect to the bitter
cup of death Christ had to drink. Although this will was done, God did not leave his Son, for “God
raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death
to keep its hold on him” (Acts 2:24).
p 138 e. Answer
The prayers and petitions of Jesus were heard. In Luke 22:43 we read, “An angel from heaven
appeared to him and strengthened him.” This verse follows immediately the account of Jesus’
prayer for the removal of the cup. The fact, however, is that the cup of agony was not removed.
After Jesus prayed more earnestly, presumably the same prayer, “his sweat was like drops of blood
falling to the ground” (Luke 22:44). The question must be raised whether the appearance of the
angel constituted support for Jesus or a prolonging of his agony.20
How did God answer Jesus’ prayer for deliverance from death? The author of Hebrews does not
answer this question directly; instead he writes, Jesus “was heard because of his reverent
submission.” And here is the answer. Jesus accompanied his prayer with the request that the will of
God might prevail. Thus, he reverently submitted to the Father’s will. He experienced death, but
God raised Jesus from the dead (Gal. 1:1).
Translations disagree about the correct rendering of the last clause of Hebrews 5:7. Some give
the reading because of his godly fear. Others say, “because of his reverent submission.”21 The
author of Hebrews uses the same Greek word in Hebrews 12:28, where the translation is
“reverence.” Moreover, the term occurs only in the Epistle to the Hebrews and nowhere else in the
New Testament. On the basis of consistent use in Hebrews, we do well, perhaps, to understand the
word to mean “reverent submission.” Westcott comments that the expression “marks that careful
and watchful reverence which pays regard to every circumstance in that with which it has to
deal.”22 Jesus’ life was marked by true submission to his Father’s will, for even in Gethsemane he
prayed that God’s will might be done.
8. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9. and, once made
perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him 10. and was designated

0 0 Klaas Schilder shows that after the arrival of the angel Jesus began to sweat drops of
blood. The coming of the angel caused intensified anguish. Refer to Christ in His Sufferings
(reprint; Minneapolis: Klock and Klock, 1978), p. 358.

1 1 The earliest translations in Latin that show the difference are the Old Latin, which reads a
metu (from fear), and the Vulgate, which has pro sua reverentia (because of his reverence).

2 2 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 127.

by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek.
Verses 8–10 are closely connected with the preceding verse. Indeed, in the original Greek the
main verb in verses 7 and 8 is “he learned.” That is where the emphasis falls in this passage.
Therefore, numerous translations end verse 7 not with a period, but with a comma. This is correct,
for the two verses are closely related and form a unit. Incidentally, the stress on the main verb, “he
learned,” gives added support to the reading because of his reverent submission.
Consider these questions.
a. Would Jesus have to learn obedience? The author introduces this subject by mentioning the
divinity of Jesus first and stating this fact concessively: p 139 “although Jesus was the Son of God.”
He does not say that because Jesus was divine he had to learn obedience. Jesus did not have to learn
anything concerning obedience, for his will was the same as God’s will. However, in his humanity
Jesus had to show full obedience; he had to become “obedient to death—even death on a cross!”
(Phil. 2:8). As one version has it: “son though he was, he learned obedience in the school of
suffering.”23
b. What was the obedience Jesus had to learn? Translations, for reasons of style and diction,
speak of obedience. In the original Greek, however, a definite article precedes the noun so that it
reads “the obedience”; that is, the well-known obedience expected from the Lord.
When we interpret this verse we are not to think in terms of contrasts. It is true that sinful man
needs to correct his ways by listening to God’s Word and turning from disobedience to obedience.
But Christ, the sinless One, did not learn by unlearning. Rather, through his active and passive
obedience, Christ provides eternal life for the sinner and a discharge of man’s debt of sin. Says Paul
in Romans 5:19, “For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners,
so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.”
c. How was Jesus made perfect? The question is legitimate, for Jesus, as the Son of God, is
perfect from eternity. But in his humanity, “Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with
God and men” (Luke 2:52). We see his development in the school of obedience. As the burden
becomes more taxing for Jesus, so his willingness to assume the task his Father has given him
increases.
In the Garden of Gethsemane and on Calvary’s cross, he endured the ultimate tests. Jesus was
made perfect through suffering. His perfection “became the source of eternal salvation for all who
obey him.” The author of Hebrews in effect repeats the thought he expressed in Hebrews 2:10—
Jesus, made perfect through suffering, leads many sons to glory. Perfection, therefore, must be seen
as a completion of the task Jesus had to perform.
d. What does the writer mean by “the source of eternal salvation”? The writer of Hebrews calls
Jesus the “author” of salvation (Heb. 2:10) and the “source” of salvation. These two expressions are
synonymous. Jesus is the captain, the chief, the originator, and the cause.
When the author uses the word source, he does not open a discussion on the primary cause of
salvation; God the Father commissioned his Son to effectuate salvation. Instead the writer uses the
term source in the context of his discussion about the high priesthood of Christ. By accomplishing
his redemptive work, especially in Gethsemane and at Golgotha, Jesus is the source of eternal
salvation (Isa. 45:17). Only those people who obey him will share in the salvation Jesus provides. F.
F. Bruce describes the concept of p 140 obedience adequately when he writes, “The salvation which
Jesus has procured, is granted ‘unto all them that obey him!’ There is something appropriate in the
fact that the salvation which was procured by the obedience of the Redeemer should be made
available to the obedience of the redeemed.”24
e. How does the author of Hebrews conclude his discussion about the priesthood of Christ? He

3 3 See the NEB for this translation. Kenneth Taylor paraphrases this verse: “And even though
Jesus was God’s Son, he had to learn from experience what it was like to obey, when obeying meant
suffering” (LB).

4 4 Bruce, Hebrews, p. 105.

states that God designated Jesus to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek. That is significant,
because this section about the high priesthood of Christ, beginning with Hebrews 4:14, is presented
in terms of Aaron’s priesthood. The section continues and concludes with a clear reference to the
priesthood of Melchizedek.
Note the following observations.
Not the writer of Hebrews but God designates Christ as high priest in the order of Melchizedek
(Ps. 110:4). The writer of Hebrews searches the Old Testament and shows that God addresses his
Son as high priest.
The topic of the high priesthood of Christ is important to the author of Hebrews. He introduces
the subject in Hebrews 2:17; after a discussion about Israel’s disobedience in the desert and the
meaning of rest the author returns to the subject in Hebrews 4:14–5:10; and the theme eventually is
fully treated in Hebrews 7.
We also note that Jesus fulfilled the priestly duties of Aaron when he, in his submission and
suffering, brought the task God had given him to completion. Thus Jesus became “the source of
salvation for all who obey him.” This could never be said of Aaron or any of the high priests who
succeeded him.
The subject of Christ’s high priesthood in the order of Melchizedek is deep. In fact, the writer of
Hebrews calls it “hard to explain” (Heb. 5:11), although after a pastoral word to his readers he does
explain it fully.

Doctrinal Considerations in 5:4–10

In chapter 1 the author introduces the Son as king when he quotes Psalm 110:1 in Hebrews 1:13.
But the subject of Jesus’ kingship does not need to be explored; the priesthood of Jesus needs
attention because the author of Hebrews portrays Jesus as mediator. That role of mediator was given
not to a king, but to the priest. In other words, the author explains the priestly office of Christ by
quoting directly from the Old Testament.
Among the writers of the New Testament, only the author of Hebrews, an expert student of the
Scriptures, teaches the doctrine of Christ’s priesthood. Paul, for example, touches on the
intercessory work of Jesus (Rom. 8:34) and the concept of mediator (I Tim. 2:5–6). Nowhere in his
epistles does he discuss the teaching of Jesus’ priesthood. That has been done by the writer of
Hebrews.25 p 141
Did God appoint Jesus to serve as the Aaronic high priest or to function as a priest in the order
of Melchizedek? The Scriptures teach that Christ was appointed in the order of Melchizedek and
that he could not serve as priest in the order of Aaron because he belonged to the tribe of Judah and
not to the tribe of Levi (Heb. 7:14–17). And yet through his sacrificial death Jesus fulfilled the
responsibilities of the Levitical priesthood.
The duties of the Aaronic high priest were to become thoroughly familiar with man’s spiritual
weakness, to represent him before God, and to offer sacrifices and gifts to God on his behalf. The
high priest on the Day of Atonement shed the blood of a sacrificial animal for himself and for the
people. Jesus offered himself as “for all time one sacrifice for sins” (Heb. 10:12). Later he sat down
as priest and king at the right hand of God.
In Hebrews 5:7–8 the author stresses two conditions that Jesus as high priest has to fulfill: he
must bring an offering, and he must learn obedience. The author of Hebrews deliberately repeats the
theme about the priesthood of Christ in Hebrews 2:11–18; 5:5–10; and 7:23–28.

5 5 Peter calls believers a “holy priesthood” (I Peter 2:5), and John refers to them as “a
kingdom and priests” (Rev. 1:6). But neither John nor Peter speaks of the priesthood of Christ. See
also John 17:19; Rom. 5:2; I Peter 3:18; and I John 2:1.
 Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 5:4–10

Verse 4
καλούμενος—this present passive participle, from καλέω (to call), is followed by the agent by
God. It constitutes a call to an office; its parallel is in Hebrews 5:10 (“was designated by God to be
high priest”).
καθώσπερ—the combination of καθώς (just as) and οὕτως (so; see Heb. 5:3) shows contrast
and comparison. The two adverbs indicate a link between verses 4 and 5. Note the stress particle
περ, which has been added to καθώς as an enclitic.

Verse 5
οὕτως—this adverb finds its antecedent in the preceding καθώσπερ.
γεγέννηκα—the perfect active indicative of γεννάω (to beget). See Hebrews 1:5.

Verse 7
τε καί—two nouns or concepts of similar import are often combined by the adjunct τε with καί.
The nouns prayers and petitions therefore are synonyms.
ἱκετηρία—the substantivized adjective in the feminine used to be followed by either the noun
ἐλαία (olive tree, olive branch) or the noun ῥάβδος (rod, staff, stick). Around this branch or rod
wool was wound, and then it was used by a suppliant.
σῴζειν—the present active infinitive (to save) must be seen in relation to the noun σωτηρία
(salvation; Heb. 5:9). Also, the present tense testifies to God’s constant power to save his Son from
death.
ἀπὸ τῆς εὐλαβείας—the preposition ἀπό is causal. The noun εὐλαβείας, preceded by the
definite article, can mean either reverential fear toward God (see Heb. 12:28, where the word is
translated “reverence”) or piety. Still others prefer the translation fear; that is, horror. p 142

Verse 8
υἱός—the definite article has been omitted deliberately to express the absolute relationship of
Father and Son. That is, there is only one Son.
ἔμαθεν…ἔπαθεν—it is obvious that the author has a play on words in mind. The first verb is the
aorist active from μανθάνω (I learn) and the second is the aorist active of πάσχω (I endure).

Verse 9
τελειωθείς—the author of Hebrews used the verb τελειόω (to complete, finish, perfect) at least
three times of Jesus (2:10; 5:9; 7:28). Here the aorist passive participle is given, which refers to
Jesus’ sacrificial work in Gethsemane and on the cross.
ὑπακούουσιν—note the use of the present tense of the active participle. Not only does the verb
have the meaning of obeying, but also in the broader context it conveys the idea of believing in
Christ.

Verse 10
προσαγορευθείς—the verb in the aorist passive participle form occurs only once in the New
Testament. However, it appears frequently in extracanonical literature and means “to call, name,
designate.”
 Summary of Chapter 5
In the religious life of the Jew, no man received greater esteem than the high priest. Under his
supervision were the priests who were commissioned to take charge of routine tasks. The high
priest, man’s representative before God, entered the Most Holy Place once a year on the Day of
Atonement and sprinkled blood for the remission of sin. Aaron was the first high priest to enter into
the presence of God behind the curtain in the ancient tabernacle.
However, Jesus is superior to Aaron because Jesus “has gone through the heavens.” That is, he
entered into the very presence of God, whereas the high priests were accustomed merely to entering
the symbolical presence in the tabernacle or temple once a year. In his glorified human nature, Jesus
has entered the presence of God. Fully acquainted with human weaknesses and temptations, he
intercedes in our behalf when we approach the throne of God in prayer.
The author of Hebrews depicts Jesus in his role of high priest, fulfilling the responsibilities of
the high priesthood of Aaron and assuming the priesthood in the order of Melchizedek.26 As a priest
in the order of Melchizedek, p 143 Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice for sin. This fulfilled the
requirements of the Old Testament sacrificial system.
God appointed Jesus as high priest not when Jesus entered heaven, but prior to his coming to
earth. According to Psalm 110:4 (“You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek”; italics
added), Jesus’ priesthood is eternal. He was already priest before he began his earthly life.

p 144 6. Exhortations
5:11–6:20 p 146
Outline
A. Do Not Fall Away

5:11–14 1. Slow Learners

6:1–3 2. Elementary Teachings

6:4–6 3. No Repentance

6:7–12 4. Blessings of God

B. Hold on to God’s Promise

6 6 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok,

1955), p. 132. The question is raised whether Jesus could be both sacrifice and priest at the same
time. In his dying he presents himself as a sacrifice to God. But note that Jesus did not commit
suicide; rather his life was taken. Thus he became a sacrifice for sin.
6:13–15 1. The Promise to Abraham

6:16–20 2. Heirs of the Promise

A. Do Not Fall Away

5:11–6:12

5 11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn. 12 In fact,
though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s
word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not
acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use
have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.
6 1 Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying
again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, 2 instruction about
baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3 And God permitting,
we will do so.
4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who
have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the
coming age, 6 if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the
Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.
7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is
farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in
danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case—things
that accompany salvation. 10 God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown
him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. 11 We want each of you to show this same
diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure. 12 We do not want you to become lazy, but to
imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.

1. Slow Learners
5:11–14
A teacher knows that not every student is quick to learn, is perceptive, and is blessed with a
retentive memory. Numerous times the teacher has to repeat his lessons and exercise patience with
students who by nature are slow learners. The writer of Hebrews interrupts his explanation of
Christ’s priesthood in order to admonish his readers to be better students of the Word.
11. We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn.
12a. In fact, though by this time you ought to be p 148 teachers, you need someone to teach
you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again.
An experienced teacher senses when the students are no longer absorbing the lesson material.
He knows that students do not always advance in their learning skills and that sometimes a word of
rebuke or correction is very much in place. The words of the author of Hebrews are sharp and
pointed. Something has gone drastically wrong in the learning process. By all standards the readers
should have graduated, but they have failed their examinations because of a lack of interest,
diligence, and adequate preparation.
The author had planned to continue his teaching on the high priesthood of Jesus in the order of
Melchizedek.1 However, the material is too advanced for his readers, his theology is too deep, and
his students are too lazy. The subject matter, says the writer, is difficult to explain, not because of
the writer’s lack of skill, but because of the readers’ inability to comprehend. The writer becomes
rather personal and says, “You are slow to learn.” The author, then, is forced to divert his attention
from the topic of the priesthood.
How many years are needed in preparation for teaching the Christian faith? The author does not
specify the number of years, but he points out that by the time of his writing the readers should have
been teachers. The time allotted to learn the teachings of the faith has been ample; his readers are
under obligation to pay dividends—they ought to be able to teach others the teachings of God’s
Word. But they are unable to do so.
The Christian church must grow in order to exist. Those who have heard the gospel and have
accepted it in faith are required to share their knowledge with others who need instruction. When
the writer of Hebrews says, “By this time you ought to be teachers,” he is not speaking about
professionally qualified educators. Rather, he addresses himself to the believer who has heard Bible
stories and has been taught the doctrine of salvation, but nevertheless fails to put his ability to work
in leading others to a knowledge of salvation in Christ. What a disappointment when a Christian
who is given the opportunity to witness for Christ and teach the gospel declines because he feels
inadequate! The author of Hebrews speaks to this situation.
You need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. What
an admonition! What a rebuke! Writers of catechisms in the time of the Reformation incorporated
three Christian documents into their teachings: the Apostles’ Creed, the Ten Commandments, and
the Lord’s Prayer. These they considered the ABC’s of the Christian faith. If a believer knew how to
explain the basic doctrines of these three elements of Christian belief, he was expected to testify for
Christ and teach others.
Although we do not know exactly what the writer of Hebrews means by “elementary truths of
God’s word,” we do not go amiss if we say: the basic p 149 teachings of the Bible.2 Of course, he
enumerates the elementary teachings of Christ in Hebrews 6:1–2. The author states that if his
readers do not know even the elementary truths, someone has to teach them anew.
12b. You need milk, not solid food! 13. Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is
not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14. But solid food is for the mature,

1 The word this in verse 11 is rather general and may be interpreted as “this subject” (JB) or
“this matter” (GNB).
2 See Acts 7:38; Rom. 3:2; I Peter 4:11; these verses relate to the Old Testament. The
expression in Heb. 5:12 is broader in scope.
who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.
The rebuke of the author is comparable to Paul’s stern remarks to the believers in Corinth:
“Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you
milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready” (I Cor. 3:1–2).
Milk is given to the very young, and when they are older they receive solid food. The babes in the
faith cannot digest the solid food of God’s Word; they need spiritual milk instead.3
If there is anything a child dislikes, it is to be called a baby. That is too degrading and goes
against his innate desire: to grow up! He wants to become independent. He looks ahead and
compares himself constantly with those children who are older and more mature.
The author of Hebrews calls the reader of his epistle “an infant.” To him it is incredible that
adults in the faith are still nurtured on spiritual milk, not solid food. He uses the word infant to put
his readers to shame.4 As a pastor, he is not afraid to rebuke them, to admonish them, and to direct
them to a higher level of development. They must realize that growth demands solid food. They will
never advance on a diet of milk.
Anyone who lives on milk … is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. The
writer keeps on rebuking his readers. Drawing a logical inference from the illustration of babies
who exist on milk alone, the author indicates that just as infants do not know the difference between
right and wrong, so the recipients of his letter are unacquainted with “the teaching about
righteousness.” A mere infant is unaccustomed to making decisions about correct conduct because
he needs to be taught on a daily basis (I Cor. 14:20; Eph. 4:14). Of course, we must understand that
the writer is using a metaphor in order to make this point.
I do not think that the phrase teaching about righteousness within the context of figurative
language was meant to convey theological truth.5 Elsewhere in the New Testament (for example, I
Cor. 1:30), the word righteousness is p 150 understood implicitly or explicitly as God’s
righteousness—a concept that is commonly stressed in Paul’s letters.6 We, however, ought to look at
the phrase in question not from a theological perspective but from a contextual point of view.7
The contrast between infants and adults is shown in verse 14: “But solid food is for the mature,
who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.” Adults need solid food,
not a diet of milk, for nourishment. The writer calls adults mature people—those who are constantly
making decisions concerning ethical conduct. Their mental and spiritual training is perpetually put
to use when they distinguish between good and evil. These people from childhood to maturity have
trained and continue to train their spiritual and moral senses. Adults are repeatedly confronted with
moral decisions that need to be made. And because of their experience, adults are able to make wise
choices in distinguishing between good and evil.
Adults gain experiential knowledge that is still absent in children. As children mature they, too,

3 Hans Kropatschek, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 269.

4 The JB uses the word baby, and the KJV, NKJV, and Moffatt have “babe.”
5 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Ceslaus Spicq, and B. F. Westcott interpret the phrase
theologically. In an explanatory footnote, the JB points out, “ ‘The doctrine of righteousness’ like
‘God’s oracles’ can mean either the O.T., cf. 2 Tm. 3:16, or the whole body of doctrine. Here it
seems to mean all that Christ taught about the righteousness of God as applied to mankind, Rm.
3:21–26, and especially about his own priesthood of mediation, prefigured by Melchizedek, the
‘king of righteousness’, 7:2.”
6 Horst Seebass, in a study on the word righteousness, concludes: “Hebrews shows scarcely
any Pauline influence.” Refer to NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 365.
7 The various interpretations of the phrase “not acquainted with the teaching about
righteousness” range from “the righteousness of God revealed in Christ” to “[lacking] experience of
moral truth.” Consult, for further details, Hugh Montefiore, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York
and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1964), p. 103.
will acquire the moral sense of discriminating between good and evil; and for them, too, this skill of
differentiating will become second nature.
The author uses the metaphor of milk for infants and solid food for adults to spur his readers to
spiritual and intellectual activity. He wants to have them understand the biblical implications of
Jesus’ high priesthood.

Practical Considerations in 5:11–14

We should guard against being critical of the original recipients of the epistle, for we ourselves
show the same characteristics. We who have heard the gospel proclaimed for numerous years—
many of us since childhood—often do not demonstrate spiritual discernment. Although we have
God’s revelation in the Old and New Testaments, we remain slow learners.
Surveys conducted by local pastors or by Christian agencies invariably reveal that church
members do not know the basic principles of Scripture or, if they do know, they are unable to apply
these basic teachings.
The ABC’s of the Christian faith are readily mastered by any sincere believer who, in turn,
should be capable of imparting this elementary knowledge to people unacquainted with the gospel.
On this elementary level the Christian church fails to communicate effectively and thus stymies
growth and development.
Yet the corporate responsibility of the church is to formulate the teachings of the Christian faith.
The doctrines of God, man, Christ, salvation, the church, and the end of the age belong to the entire
church and not merely to a few gifted theologians p 151 who have been instrumental in drafting the
precise wording of these doctrines. The church as a body of believers is the responsible agent in
formulating, adopting, teaching, and defending these doctrines of the faith. Therefore, the individual
Christian is exhorted to progress beyond the level of “the elementary truths of God’s word.”

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 5:11–14

Verse 11
νωθροί—the adjective in the nominative masculine plural, translated “lazy” or “slow to learn,”
occurs twice in the epistle (5:11; 6:12). It also appears in the Septuagint (Prov. 22:29; Sir. 4:29;
11:12) and in I Clement 34:1, where it refers to a “lazy and careless workman.”
γεγόνατε—the use of the perfect tense of γίνομαι (I become) indicates a state that the recipients
had acquired in the course of time.
ταῖς ἀκοαῖς—the plural of ἀκοή (the act of hearing) refers specifically to the ears. The dative is
a dative of respect.

Verse 12
καὶ γάρ—the combination of καί and γάρ is rather emphatic and is equivalent to “in fact” or
“yes, indeed.”
τὰ στοιχεῖα—the noun is used four times by Paul (Gal. 4:3, 9; Col. 2:8, 20), twice by Peter (II
Peter 3:10, 12), and once in Hebrews. It is derived from στοῖχος (row, rank, line, course). In
Hebrews the noun signifies basic lines or principles of elementary doctrines.
ἡ ἀρχή τῶν λογίων—the presence of the definite article before ἀρχή (beginning) points to that
which is basic. In translation the noun ἀρχή serves adjectivally with λογίων, and is translated
“elementary truths.”

Verse 14
ἕξις—a noun derived from the verb ἔχω (I have [future, ἕξω]) and given the meaning of
exercise, practice, or skill. The -σις ending of the noun indicates process or constant activity. In the
New Testament this noun occurs only once; in other literature, half a dozen times.
τὰ αἰσθητήρια—a noun in the neuter plural (translated “senses”) that is derived from
αἰσθάνομαι (I perceive). The noun is rendered “themselves” (NIV); “faculties” (R.S.V.); or
“perceptions” (NEB).
γεγυμνασμένα—the perfect middle participle of γυμνάζω (I exercise, train). The perfect tense
shows continuity from the past into the present, and the middle indicates an agent acting upon
oneself.
διάκρισις—derived from the verb διακρίνω (I differentiate, discriminate), the noun with the -σις
ending reveals a process or an activity in respect to distinguishing “good from evil.”

p 152 2. Elementary Teachings

6:1–3
A cursory reading of this passage indicates that the author seems to have had second thoughts. In
5:12–14 he states that his readers cannot digest solid food and must live on milk. In 6:1–3 he tells
them “to go on to maturity” and proceeds to prepare them to receive deeper spiritual truths. But
upon closer examination we see at work an expert psychologist who rouses his audience by
inducing shame. The effect of his remarks about their spiritual eating habits is expected to be
positive. His readers want to reach maturity, and the author prudently places himself at their level
and, in effect, says that he is one with them in striving for maturity.
1. Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not
laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, 2.
instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal
judgment.
Instead of teaching the elementary truths of God’s Word once more (see 5:12), the author urges
his readers to go beyond these truths. They are not ignorant of the basic teachings of Christian
doctrine; they need to be stimulated to progress in their understanding of the faith. They ought to
review the elementary teachings about Christ, so that they are ready to receive further instruction.8
The introductory word therefore is retrospective.9 In the preceding verses, the writer contrasts
the spiritually weak believer with the mature Christian. And the model he holds before his readers is

V IV New International Version

. .S.V. Revised Standard Version
B EB New English Bible
8 J. C. Adams, “Exegesis of Hebrews vi.1f.,” NTS 13 (1967): 378–85.
9 John Brown, in An Exposition of Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), p. 274,
suggests that the word therefore is not retrospective but prospective. That is, according to Brown,
the author regards the recipients who are spiritually immature (5:11–14) as the same people who are
depicted in 6:4–6. However, the author uses the adverb therefore (δίο) in the Greek nine times (3:7,
10; 6:1; 10:5; 11:12, 16; 12:12, 28; 13:12) and seems to give the adverb the meaning consequently.
that of the believer who strives for maturity. He exhorts them to go on to perfection after having left
the elementary teachings behind. Actually the author is saying, “Let us … go forward to adult
understanding” (Phillips), and together we are able to do this. The verb (“let us go on”) that the
author employs is a key word because it conveys the idea of actively exerting oneself to make
progress. He includes himself and places himself on his readers’ level even though he, as the
teacher, really occupies a higher position than the recipients of his letter. This implies that the writer
has not yet achieved maturity in spiritual matters. Therefore, the author does not explain the
“elementary teachings about Christ” but merely outlines them.
A. Foundation of
1. repentance
2. faith in God p 153
B. Instruction about
1. baptisms
2. laying on of hands
3. resurrection of the dead
4. eternal judgment10
a. “Not laying again the foundation.” Does the author refer to a standard of instruction in the
church of the first century? Perhaps. F. F. Bruce points out that the items listed among the
elementary teachings are as much Jewish as they are Christian.11 We assume that these doctrines
were given much more prominence in the Christian church than in the Jewish synagogue. These
truths also may have been used as a catechism that new converts were required to learn before they
were fully accepted.
Because the readers know that to be members in the church they must have a foundation of
repentance and faith, the writer states that it is not necessary to lay that foundation anew. He is
spelling out for his audience the difference between the basic doctrines (which he calls a
foundation) and the deeper truths of Scripture (which believers ought to study in order to progress
in their spiritual lives). He concludes that because of their membership believers already have laid
the foundation.12
b. “The foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death.” The first component of the

s hillips The New Testament in Modern English

0 0 Another categorization is threefold: repentance and faith; baptisms and laying on of hands;
and resurrection and judgment. However, I understand the word instruction as an accusative in the
Greek; that is, in apposition to the term foundation. The manuscript evidence for the accusative
form is weighty. Bruce M. Metzger’s explanation in A Textual Commentary on the Greek New
Testament (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 666—that copyists had
changed the word teaching from a genitive to an accusative for stylistic reasons—does not seem
very satisfactory.

1 1 F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New
Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), pp. 112–13.

2 2 Consult the article by Jürgen Blunck in NIDNTT, vol. 1, pp. 660–62.

Christian’s spiritual foundation is repentance (Acts 2:38; 3:19). This means turning away from
something that is detrimental to one’s being. Basically repentance constitutes a negative action, in
this case a change of mind that results in no longer performing “acts that lead to death.”
Repentance, then, is an activity that involves the mind and thinking of a person—a complete
turnabout in the life of the believer. No longer does he show an interest in activities that lead to his
destruction. He now shuns the effects of sin that bring about death (Rom. 5:12, 21; 6:23; 7:11).
Consequently, it would not be necessary for the author to ask his readers to lay the foundation of
repentance again.
c. “And of faith in God.” Laying a foundation of faith in God was a positive action that
believers had taken when they accepted Christ in faith. They turned from their “acts that lead to
death” to life in Christ through faith. We would expect the author to write “faith in Christ” instead
of “faith in p 154 God,” for Jewish converts to Christianity did not need to be instructed in the
doctrine of faith in Israel’s God. The difficulty disappears, however, when we realize that
throughout his epistle the author speaks of God as revealed in Christ (3:1–6; also see Acts 20:21; I
Thess. 1:9–10). Indirectly, the author reminds the reader of Jesus’ word, proclaimed at the
beginning of this ministry: “The time has come.… The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe
the good news” (Mark 1:15). This twofold message from the lips of Jesus is repeated by the
apostles. For example, Peter on the day of Pentecost called the people to repentance, and as a result
three thousand believers were added to the church (Acts 2:38, 41).13
Of course, faith is a prominent theme in Hebrews. Chapter 11 with its brief definition of faith
and list of the heroes of faith is eloquent testimony to the author’s interest in this theme. For the
writer, faith constitutes complete trust as demonstrated by Joshua, who because of his faith entered
the land God had promised (4:8). Everyone who puts faith in the gospel, says the author of
Hebrews, enters God’s rest (4:2–3).14
d. “Instruction about baptisms.” Next to the foundation of repentance and faith comes the
instruction about baptisms, laying on of hands, resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. The
first phase in the believer’s instruction is the teaching concerning baptisms. Interestingly enough,
the writer uses not the common Greek word baptisma (baptism), but rather the term baptismos
(washing; Mark 7:4; Heb. 9:10).15 Furthermore, the word is in the plural.
What is the writer saying? Use of the plural provides sufficient reason to assume that he calls
attention to washings other than Christian baptism. What these washings are has been debated at
length by numerous scholars. I mention only a few interpretations:
1. purification ceremonies (Qumran)
2. triple immersion in the name of the Trinity
3. multiplicity of baptismal candidates
4. baptisms of water, blood, fire, and the Holy Spirit
5. Levitical washings and Christian baptism16
The New Testament does refer to the baptism of John the Baptist (Matt. 3:7; Mark 11:30; Luke
7:29; John 3:23; 4:1; Acts 1:22; 10:37; 18:25) that was still practiced more than twenty-five years

3 3 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 132.

4 4 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity, 1981), p.
597.

5 5 In the Greek text also see the variant reading in Col. 2:12 and the TR reading of Mark 7:8.

6 6 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes provides an interesting and almost complete list of possible
interpretations. See his Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1977), pp. 199–202.
after his death (Acts 19:3). Also there is the Jewish rite of baptism for proselytes. p 155
The word baptismos (which signifies “the act alone,” whereas baptisma is “the act with the
result”) is a Jewish-Christian term.17 The expression in the plural probably expresses a “contrast
between Christian baptism and all other religious washings … known to the readers.”18
Finally, the four Gospels and Acts mention the baptism with the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:11 and
parallels; Acts 1:5; 11:16). Although this particular form of baptism is different from the washing
that the word baptismos describes, it has significance for the next phase of instruction, the
imposition of hands.
e. “The laying on of hands.” In Acts the imposition of hands results in the outpouring of the
Holy Spirit. For example, Peter and John visited the believers in Samaria and placed their hands on
the Samaritans, who as a consequence received the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:17). Ananias put his hands
on Saul (Paul), who received both his sight and the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17). In Ephesus, Paul laid
his hands on some disciples of John the Baptist who were recipients of the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:6).
Other passages show that the practice of laying hands on someone relates to the ceremony of
ordination to service: ministering to the needs of the poor (Acts 6:6); proclaiming the gospel (Acts
13:3); or pastoring the church (I Tim. 4:14; II Tim. 1:6).
Apart from the instances that mention the imposition of hands in connection with healing (Matt.
9:18; Mark 5:23; 6:5; 7:32; 8:23; Luke 13:13; Acts 28:8) and with Jesus blessing the children (Matt.
19:13, 15; Mark 10:16), the New Testament is silent.
What did the practice of laying hands on a believer mean to the first recipients of the Epistle to
the Hebrews? John Calvin declares that baptized children, after a period of instruction in the faith,
received another rite—that of laying on of hands. This rite was intended as confirmation of their
baptism and originated in the time of apostles.19 This may very well be the explanation of the
practice, although substantiating evidence is scarce.
f. “The resurrection of the dead.” The next phase in the believer’s instruction is his knowledge
concerning the resurrection of the dead. Already in Old Testament times the doctrine of the
resurrection was known (Ps. 16:10; Isa. 26:19; Ezek. 37:10; Dan. 12:2). In the days of Jesus and the
apostles, the general public knew the teaching about the resurrection from the dead (John 11:24),
and the Pharisees separated themselves from the Sadducees because the two groups disagreed about
this doctrine (Acts 23:6–7).
Jesus taught the doctrine of resurrection by claiming it for himself: “I am the resurrection and
the life” (John 11:25); the apostles made this teaching the foundation of their gospel proclamation
(Acts 1:22; 2:32; 4:10; 5:30; p 156 10:40; 13:37; 17:31–32; 26:23). The author of Hebrews also
refers to this doctrine directly (11:35) and indirectly (2:14–15).
g. “And eternal judgment.” The two doctrines of the resurrection and of eternal judgment are
logically related, but I do not think that we should explain the first as the resurrection of the
righteous and the second as the judgment on the wicked. The author does not provide sufficient
information, and therefore we do well to understand the words as general references to these
teachings.
Hebrews 6:2 is the only text in the New Testament that gives the reading eternal judgment. The
passage that is somewhat similar is Acts 24:25, which says, “Paul discoursed on righteousness, self-
control and the judgment to come.” That Jesus returns “to judge the living and the dead” is a basic
teaching eventually formulated in the three ecumenical creeds: the Apostles’, the Nicene, and the
Athanasian.
3. And God permitting, we will do so.

7 7 Albrecht Oepke, TNDT, vol. 1, p. 545.

8 8 G. R. Beasley-Murray, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 149.

9 9 Calvin, Hebrews, p. 134.

 The text because of its brevity fails to communicate clearly what the author intends to say. Thus
it has been explained in various ways.
a. The writer plans to visit the readers after the release of Timothy (13:23); then, arriving with
Timothy, he will instruct them in the elementary truths about Christ. The objection to this
interpretation is indirectly supplied by the author himself, who wants his readers to advance to
maturity. Why would he teach them elementary articles of faith after teaching them doctrines that
are “hard to explain” (5:11)?
b. The pronoun we is used editorially—the author refers to himself as he does in 5:11. However,
the main verb in the preceding verses is in the first person plural (“let us … go on to maturity”; 6:1),
and the writer counts himself an equal of the recipients of his epistle. Using the editorial we in 6:3,
therefore, would break the flow of thought.
c. The main verb let us … go on receives the emphasis in 6:1. The author, after stating the
exhortation, simply and positively indicates that he and his readers will fulfill the exhortation. He
adds the clause and God permitting. That is, although the writer of Hebrews takes his task of
teaching and pastoring seriously, God has to open the hearts of the people who receive instruction in
the truths of God’s Word. In fact, this clause may be understood as an introduction to 6:4–6, where
the author teaches that for some people repentance has become an impossibility.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:1–3

Verse 1
ἀφέντες—the second aorist active participle in the nominative plural from the verb ἀφίημι (I
give up). Because of its close relationship to the main verb φερώμεθα, the participle may be
understood to connote exhortation (let us leave).
τελειότης—this noun occurs twice in the New Testament—Hebrews 6:1 and p 157 Colossians
3:14—and means “perfection, maturity.” It is derived from the verb τελειόω (I bring to an end) that
appears nine times in Hebrews, more than in any other New Testament book. The noun τελειότης in
context is the opposite of νήπιος (5:13)
φερώμεθα—the present middle subjunctive, first person plural of the verb φέρω (I carry). The
subjunctive is hortatory; the present tense indicates that the author and readers of Hebrews are
indeed going to do this; and the middle shows a reflexive action. Interpreting the verb in the passive
voice (let us be carried [by God]) seems to diminish emphasis on human responsibility.

Verse 2
ἐπίθεσις—a noun derived from ἐπιτίθημι (I put or lay upon). The -σις ending points to the
activity or the ceremony of the imposition of hands.
ἀνάστασις—this noun has its roots in the verb ἀνίστημι (I rise up). Especially in Acts and in the
Epistles, the noun is followed by the noun νεκρῶν, with variations.

Verse 3
ποιήσομεν—this verb from ποιέω (I do) is in the first person plural, future active indicative.
The textual variant is ποιήσωμεν—the first person plural, first aorist active subjunctive. Manuscript
evidence favors the reading of the future indicative. And this reading is more appropriate in the
context than the exhortation let us do so.20

0 0 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 666. However, Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad
have chosen the aorist subjunctive reading. See The Greek New Testament According to the
Majority Text (Nashville and New York: Thomas Nelson, 1982), p. 656.
 ἐπιτρέπῃ—the form is the third person singular, present active subjunctive of ἐπιτρέπω (I allow,
permit). Although the context and even the verb tense differ, a similar construction occurs in I
Corinthians 16:7.

3. No Repentance
6:4–6
In chapters 3 and 4 the author of Hebrews discussed the sin of unbelief that resulted in apostasy.
Now in one lengthy sentence (6:4–6) he develops that teaching in greater detail. The emphasis in
this sentence falls on the main verb to be brought back to repentance (v. 6), which is introduced
negatively by the phrase it is impossible.
4. It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly
gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5. who have tasted the goodness of the word of God
and the powers of the coming age, 6. if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance,
because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to
public disgrace.
Throughout the epistle the writer has admonished his readers to accept the Word of God in faith
and not to fall into the sin of unbelief that results p 158 in eternal judgment (2:1–3; 3:12–14; 4:1, 6,
11; 10:25, 27, 31; 12:16–17, 25, 29). In 6:4–6 he does not address the recipients of his letter, but
instead he states a truth that emerges from an earlier reference to the Israelites’ perishing in the
desert because of their unbelief. This truth also applies to the Hebrews, even though the author
omits the personal reference in 6:4–6.
Before we discuss the details of the passage, we need to look at the major points that divide the
text. We ask three questions.
a. Who are the people mentioned in 6:4–6? They are those characterized by four participles that
in the original Greek display poetic rhythm: enlightened, tasted, shared, tasted. There is no
particular connection among these participles, although some commentators like to see a sequence
of baptism, Lord’s Supper, ordination, and perhaps even proclamation in this verse.
Those who have once been enlightened. From the second century to the present, writers have
associated the verb enlightened with baptism.21 Added weight is given to this interpretation by the
restrictive word once. And in the broader context of the passage, the term baptisms does appear in
6:2. We can point out many similarities between baptism and enlightenment. For example, the early
Christian practice of scheduling baptisms at daybreak utilizes the symbolism of the receding night
of sin and the rising sun that illumines the baptismal candidate, who enters a new life.
But the verb enlightened also has other meanings. The author uses the word again in 10:32,
where the expression seems to be synonymous with “knowledge of the truth” (Heb. 10:26). Besides
the two occurrences in Hebrews, the verb appears nine times in the New Testament and has a
broader meaning than a reference to baptism (Luke 11:36; John 1:9; I Cor. 4:5; Eph. 1:18; 3:9; II
Tim. 1:10; Rev. 18:1; 21:23; 22:5).
Who have tasted the heavenly gift. Suppose that someone has attended the worship services of
the church, has made profession of faith, has been baptized, and has taken part in the active life of
the church; he has tasted the broken bread and taken the cup offered to him at the celebration of the
Lord’s Supper. Then this new convert has indeed tasted the heavenly gift.
To limit the interpretation of this phrase (“tasted the heavenly gift”) however, is decidedly
narrow.22 The New Testament itself provides a broader explanation. Jesus identifies himself as the

1 1 The first to identify enlightenment with baptism was Justin Martyr, First Apology 61.12–
13; 65.1. In place of the verb enlightened, the Syriac Peshitta has “who have once descended to the
baptismal pool.”

2 2 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

“gift of God” when he talks to the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4:10). Peter designates the
Holy Spirit the gift of God (Acts 2:38; 8:20; 10:45; 11:17). And in his epistles, Paul mentions “the
gift of grace” and “the gift of righteousness.” He associates these gifts with Jesus Christ (Rom.
5:15, 17; II Cor. 9:15; Eph. 3:7; 4:7). p 159
Who have shared in the Holy Spirit. The original Greek indicates the close connection
between the preceding clause and this one. In the general context of 6:4, we may see a link between
the phrase the laying on of hands (Heb. 6:2) and the sharing in the Holy Spirit, especially if we
understand the heavenly gift to be the Holy Spirit.23
Sharing in the Holy Spirit implies that this is done in fellowship with other believers. And the
Spirit of God manifests himself in various spiritual gifts given to the members of the church (I Cor.
12:7–11).
Who have tasted the goodness of the word of God. The writer of Hebrews does not specify
the extent of the Word, only that the Word is good. When God speaks, man receives a good gift.
Once more the writer of Hebrews uses the verb to taste to indicate the enjoyment of receiving this
gift. This enjoyment consists in hearing the Scriptures proclaimed and in obtaining spiritual
nourishment from that Word.
And the powers of the coming age. The continuation of tasting the Word of God is
experiencing the powers of the age to come. First, note that the author uses the plural form powers.
That is, they are part of the “signs, wonders and various miracles” that he has mentioned earlier
(2:4). These powers belong to the coming age, but already in this age they are evident. The writer
does not say what these powers are, although we note that they are directed toward the advancement
of the church throughout the world.
The phrase the coming age (with slight variations) occurs only six times in the New Testament:
three times in the Gospels (Matt. 12:32; Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30) and three times in the Epistles
(Eph. 1:21; 2:7; Heb. 6:5). Because the New Testament writers use this phrase rather infrequently,
we ought to exercise prudence in interpreting it. In principle we are able to experience in the present
age the powers that belong to the future age.24 When the coming age dawns, we shall fully realize
the supernatural powers we now are allowed to observe.
The author of Hebrews has described a number of experiences some persons have had. In a
sense he is deliberatively vague, for he merely lists phenomena but does not clarify who
experiences them. He continues, however, and relates what happens to these people.
b. What happens to the people mentioned in 6:4–6? The author adds a participle that many
translators preface with the conditional particle if.25
If they fall away. I am not sure that the author intends to say that the Hebrews will never be
apostate. In the preceding chapters he spoke of apostasy and illustrated this by quoting from Psalm
95. The Israelites who in the desert fell away had put blood on the doorpost in Egypt and eaten the
p 160 Passover lamb; they had left Egypt, consecrated their first-born males to the Lord, and crossed
the Red Sea; they could see the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night; they had tasted
the waters of Marah and Elim and daily ate the manna God provided; they had heard the voice of
God from Mount Sinai when God gave them the Ten Commandments (see Exod. 12–20). Yet these

1950), p. 148, states: “Any special interpretation, such as the Eucharist or more generally
forgiveness, peace and the like, falls short of the general idea which is required here.”

3 3 Bruce, Hebrews, p. 121.

4 4 Hermann Sasse, TDNT, vol. 1, p. 206. Also consult George E. Ladd, A Theology of the
New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), p. 576.

5 5 The KJV, NKJV, R.S.V., and NIV have the conditional “if”; the RV, ASV, NASB, Moffatt,
GNB, and NAB have “and then …”; JB has “and yet in spite of this”; and the NEB reads “and after
all this.”
same Israelites hardened their hearts in unbelief, and because of their disobedience they fell away
from the living God (Heb. 3:12, 18; 4:6, 11). The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews teaches that
apostasy that rises from unbelief results in a hardening of the heart and an inability to repent (3:13;
4:2; 6:6; 10:26; 12:15).
On the other hand, the writer speaks encouraging words to the recipients of his epistle. In the
extended context he writes: “Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better
things in your case—things that accompany salvation” (6:9).
What does the passage (6:4–6) mean for the original readers of Hebrews? Does the author
merely sound a warning or does he think that the Israelites’ example would be imitated by the
people he addresses in his letter? The constant, repetitive, and heartfelt warnings of the author prove
conclusively that apostasy can occur (3:12–13; 4:1, 11; 12:15). Repeatedly he places before the
readers the responsibility of guarding the spiritual well-being of each other, “so that no one will fall
by following their [the Israelites’] example of disobedience” (4:11).
A distinction must be made at this point. The author speaks about falling away, not about falling
into sin. For example, Judas fell away from Jesus and never returned to him; Peter fell into sin but
soon afterward saw the resurrected Jesus. The two concepts (apostasy and backsliding) may never
be confused. In 6:6, the author refers to apostasy; he has in mind the person who deliberately and
completely abandons the Christian faith.26
Apostasy does not take place suddenly and unexpectedly. Rather it is part of a gradual process, a
decline that leads from unbelief to disobedience to apostasy. And when the falling away from the
faith happens, it leads to hardening of the heart and the impossibility of repentance.27 The author,
using the example of the Israelites, has shown the process that results in apostasy (3:18; 4:6, 11).
If the Israelites in the days of Moses deliberately disobeyed the law of God and “received its
just punishment” (2:2; and see 10:28), “how much more severely do you think a man deserves to be
punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot” (10:29)?
Where do the recipients of the epistle fit into this process? The author chides them for being
slow to learn (5:11), lazy (6:12), and feeble (12:12). p 161 Constantly he exhorts them to strengthen
their faith (4:2; 10:22–23; 12:2). If their faith continues to weaken, they will fall prey to unbelief
that leads to disobedience and apostasy.
It is impossible … to be brought back to repentance. We notice at least two items in this
passage that are purposely vague. First, in the preceding verses (5:11–6:3) and the following verses
(6:9–12), the writer uses the first and second person plural pronouns we and you, but in verses 6:4–6
the third person plural pronouns those and they occur. Second, the subject of the verb to be brought
back is missing. The writer does not reveal the identity of the implied agent. Is he saying that God
does not permit (6:3) a second repentance? Or does he mean that a person who has fallen away from
the living God cannot be restored to repentance because of the sinner’s hardened heart? Although
the writer does not provide the answer, we assume that both questions could receive an affirmative
response.
The use of the pronoun we in the broader context of 6:4–6 demonstrates that God never fails the
believer who in faith trusts in him. God makes “the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to
the heirs of what was promised” (6:17), and he does so by swearing an oath. And the heirs of the
promise are the author and readers of the Epistle to the Hebrews.
Is the Christian church unable to bring a hardened sinner back to the grace of God?28 Again the
writer does not provide an answer in the context of the passage. In another connection, however, he

6 6 Falling away “must consist in a total renunciation [italics his] of all the constituent
principles and doctrines of Christianity,” writes John Owen in An Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in
4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace, 1960), vol. 5, p. 86.

7 7 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok,

1955), p. 44.
repeats the general sentiment of 6:4–6 and writes: “If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have
received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left” (10:26). The author does not say
anything about restoring a hardened sinner; what he refers to is the impossibility of removing sin
because the person sins deliberately. The word deliberately received all the emphasis in the original
Greek because it stands first in the sentence. If a person who is familiar with “the elementary
teaching about Christ” sins deliberately, restoration by way of repentance is an impossibility.
c. Why is this so? The writer of the epistle gives two reasons: “to their loss they are crucifying
the Son of God all over again” and they are “subjecting him to public disgrace.”
Of course the author obviously is using a metaphor; those who have fallen away do not literally
crucify the Son of God and put him to open shame. Note that the writer uses not the personal name
Jesus or the official name Christ, but rather the appellation Son of God to express on the one hand
the divine exaltation of the Son and on the other hand the utter depravity of the sinner who has
turned away from, as well as against, the Son of God.
The one who has fallen away declares that Jesus ought to be eliminated. As the Jews wanted
Jesus removed from this earth and thus lifted him up p 162 from the ground on a cross, so the
apostate denies Jesus a place, banishes him from this earth, and metaphorically crucifies the Son of
God again. Thus he treats Jesus with continuous contempt and derision and knowingly commits the
sin for which, says the author of the epistle, there is no repentance (6:6) and no sacrifice (10:26).
The sinner can expect God’s judgment that will come to him as a “raging fire that will consume the
enemies of God” (10:27).

Doctrinal Considerations in 6:4–6

The connection between verses 3 and 4 should not be overlooked. The words God permitting
must be seen in relation to the phrase it is impossible. Of course, Jesus said in regard to salvation
that “with God all things are possible” (Matt. 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 18:27). The context here,
however, differs. God changes the heart of sinful man to make him receptive to the gospel. But God
does not permit willful sin to go unpunished. Thus it is impossible to bring such a person to
repentance.
The Old Testament, at various places, speaks about the consequences of sinning willfully
against God. For example, in Numbers 15:30–31, God says, “Anyone who sins defiantly, whether
native-born or alien, blasphemes the LORD, and that person must be cut off from his people.
Because he has despised the LORD’s word and broken his commands, that person must surely be cut
off; his guilt remains on him.”
Acquainted with the teachings of the Old Testament on this subject, the writer of Hebrews
compares the man who sinned by rejecting the law of Moses with someone “who has trampled the
Son of God under foot” and “has insulted the Spirit of grace” (10:29). He poses a rhetorical
question: Will not the person who has offended the Son of God and the Holy Spirit receive more
severe punishment than the one who rejected the law of Moses?29 The answer is: Of course.
God does not permit anyone to despise willfully his Son, his Word, and his Spirit. Deliberately

8 8 Verlyn D. Verbrugge, in “Towards a New Interpretation of Hebrews 6:4–6, ” CTJ 15

(1980): 70, interprets the passage to refer to the congregation the author addresses. Thus he inserts
the word us in verse 6: “It is impossible for us to restore to repentance those who have fallen away.”

9 9 Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, p. 586.

sinning against God in full awareness and knowledge of God’s divine revelation constitutes sin
against the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:32; Mark 3:29; Luke 12:10).30 This sin God does not forgive.
Theological questions about the genuineness of repentance and faith of people who fall away
from Christ remain unanswered. The writer refuses to judge people; instead he warns them not to
fall into the same error that the Israelites in the desert committed. He encourages his readers to grow
spiritually and continue to obey God’s Word.
We face a mystery when we see God leading the chosen nation of Israel out of Egypt and then
destroying the people who were twenty years old and more in the desert (Num. 14:29); when we see
Jesus spending a night in prayer before he appointed Judas as one of his disciples (Luke 6:12, 16)
and later declaring that Judas was “doomed to destruction” (John 17:12); and when we see Paul
accepting p 163 Demas as a fellow evangelist who years later deserted Paul because Demas “loved
this world” (II Tim. 4:10).
The writer of Hebrews observes that disobedient Israelites died in the desert because of
unbelief. By analogy, the possibility that individuals who have professed the name of Christ will fall
away is real (Matt. 7:21–23). Is it possible for true believers to turn away from Christ? Constantly
the author exhorts the recipients of his epistle to remain faithful, for God is faithful. God does not
break his good promises to his people. “God is not unjust” (6:10). Therefore, says the writer,
“imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised” (6:12).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:4–6

Verse 4
ἀδύνατον—this adjective in the neuter singular appears four times in Hebrews (6:4, 18; 10:4;
11:6). As the first word in a lengthy sentence, it receives great emphasis. Note that ἀδύνατον is far
removed from its complement ἀνακαινίζειν in 6:6.
ἅπαξ—the word occurs fourteen times in the New Testament, eight of which are in Hebrews. Its
placement in 6:4 is significant: between the definite article (those) and the participle (have been
enlightened). The word is contrasted with πάλιν (6:6).
φωτισθέντας—it is noteworthy that the first five participles, excluding μέλλοντος (6:5) in 6:4–
6 are in the aorist tense and that the last two participles (6:6) are in the present tense. φωτισθένταςis
used twice in Hebrews (6:4; 10:32).
γευσαμένους—closely connected to the preceding participial phrase with the adjunct τε is the
clause “who have tasted the heavenly gift.” The aorist middle participle from the verb γεύομαι (I
taste) governs the noun gift in the genitive case. In 6:5 the same participle takes the accusative case
of the noun word. To maintain that the use of the genitive is partitive and that of the accusative
holistic in these two instances is not without difficulty. For example, the accusative case is also used
in John 2:9 for “the water that had been turned into wine.” A holistic interpretation in that verse is
impossible.31 Therefore, I suggest that the variation in Hebrews 6:4, 5 is stylistic.
γενηθέντας—the aorist passive participle is deponent and is therefore translated in the active
voice.

Verse 5
ῥῆμα—the word is described as καλόν (good). Generally the translation goodness of the word is

0 0 “No apostasy could be more final than this,” writes Guthrie, New Testament Theology, p.
596.

1 1 Grosheide, Hebreeën, pp. 144–45.

given to indicate that “the gospel and its promises [are] full of consolation.”32 See the Septuagint
reading of Joshua 21:45; 23:15; Zechariah 1:13.

Verse 6
παραπεσόντας—this compound in the aorist active participial form occurs once in the New
Testament; it appears in the Septuagint reading of Ezekiel 14:13; 15:8. It is synonymous with the
verb ἀποστῆναι (to fall away) in Hebrews 3:12. p 164
ἀνακαινίζειν—not the aorist tense but the present tense is used in this active infinitive to
express the progressive idea of the verb. It is introduced by the adjective ἀδύνατον (6:4) and
signifies the impossibility of renewing the fallen sinner. The verb occurs in early Christian literature
“in connection with regeneration and baptism.”33
ἀνασταυροῦντας—this active participle, as well as the one that follows, is in the present tense.
The tense of the participles reflects the reason why repentance is impossible. Consequently the
translation of the participles expresses cause. The prefix ἀνά signifies “again.”
παραδειγματίζοντας—the word is a compound from the preposition παρά (beside) and δείκνυμι
(I show). It can have a favorable connotation in the sense of “to set forth as an example” and a
negative connotation of “to subject to public disgrace.” Like the preceding participle, the word
appears only once in the New Testament (with the exception of the variant reading in Matthew
1:19).

4. Blessings of God
6:7–12
7. Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for
whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8. But land that produces thorns and thistles is
worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
In the agrarian society of the first century, people lived much closer to the land than many of us
in our day. When the writer of Hebrews depicts the rainfall, the crops, the thorns, and the thistles,
his readers readily understand the significance of the author’s illustration. We are more analytical
and like to see the comparison presented schematically.
Land
that drinks in the rain
often falling on it
and
that produces a crop that produces thorns and thistles

useful to those is worthless

for whom it is and

farmed in danger of

2 2 Joseph H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (New York, Cincinnati,
and Chicago: American Book Company, 1889), p. 332.

3 3 Johannes Behm, TDNT, vol. 3, p. 451.

receives the blessing being cursed.

of God. In the end it will be burned.

Note the following observations.

a. The rain keeps falling on the land as a continual blessing from God; the land drinks in the
rain.
b. One part of the land is being cultivated, and as a result of this diligent labor it keeps on
producing the fruit of the field to nourish the people; in full view of everyone God is blessing the
land, the laborers, and the persons receiving the crops. p 165
c. Although the rain keeps falling on the other part of the land, too, no one tills the field, sows
seed, and plants seedlings. The owner of the field does not seem to show interest in his land, and
therefore thorns and thistles have taken the place of fruit-bearing crops. The useless land eventually
will be cleared of these thorns and thistles by burning them.
d. The contrast between productive land and worthless land is expressed in a few places in the
Old Testament (Gen. 1:11–12; 3:17–18; Isa. 5:1, 6).
e. Verses 7–8 serve to illustrate the teaching of verses 4–6. When we look at the illustration, we
can see the broad lines of the picture; however, the details are somewhat obscure and cannot be
distinguished. The lines are these: God’s blessings, in the form of rain, keep falling on the land. The
structure of the land, together with the diligent labor of the workers, brings forth a crop; but in the
absence of laborers working the field, the rain nourishes only thorns and thistles that grow in
abundance. By analogy, believers and those who have fallen into unbelief receive continual
blessings. If the heart of man is evil, all the blessings of God do not make him prosper spiritually.
Instead, God’s blessings, when they are rejected by an unbelieving heart, eventually are turned into
a curse. And the unbeliever stands condemned.
f. The purpose of the author’s illustration is to warn the recipients of his letter that merely
observing, tasting, and experiencing the blessings of God cannot save a person unless genuine
spiritual rebirth has taken place. When rebirth is evident and God’s blessings are received with
thanksgiving, spiritual life develops and brings forth fruit. The words of Jesus (“by their fruit you
will recognize them” [Matt. 7:20]) tell the story. Not the rain alone, but the rain and the labor
expended in tilling the land, determine the crop that the land produces.
9. Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your
case—things that accompany salvation. 10. God is not unjust; he will not forget your work
and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them.
The pastor-teacher speaks words of tender love to his people. He addresses them as dear friends
and by this term conveys his pastoral love to them. The writer wants to relate that in his opinion the
readers are heirs of the promise of salvation. The recipients of his epistle ought not think that they
are the apostates described in the preceding passage. All that the author wants to do in these verses
is to warn them to avoid unbelief. Now he encourages his readers by assuring them that they are to
receive better things that pertain to their salvation.
Speaking in the plural (the first person we), the author says “we are confident.” Presumably he
employs the word we editorially, as he has done at other places (for example, 5:11).34 He instills
assurance in the hearts and p 166 minds of the readers, and as a faithful pastor he ministers to the
needs of his people. He does not drive them to despair. He looks at the positive marks the readers

4 4 R. C. H. Lenski, in The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of
James (Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), pp. 189–90, thinks that the pronoun we refers to persons who
were with the author when he wrote his epistle.
display in their labor of love. Therefore, he writes that he is absolutely positive about their glorious
future, for they will receive “things that accompany salvation.” What these better things are the
author does not say. The context seems to indicate that he contrasts the miserable destiny of the
apostate and the glorious inheritance of the believer. Believers are sure of better things to come—
things closely associated with salvation.
Someone could raise the question of fairness concerning man’s destiny. God is just, counters the
writer. He knows exactly what he is doing because he has your spiritual well-being in mind always.
He remembers your labor performed in his service as you, out of loving concern, helped others in
need.
Scripture teaches that God will forgive wickedness and will no longer remember the sins (Jer.
31:34) of those people who know the Lord and who have his law written on their hearts. Sin God
forgets, but deeds of kindness done in the interest of his people he remembers. These deeds may be
forgotten by those who perform them, whether these consist of feeding the hungry, welcoming
strangers, clothing the poor, or visiting the sick and the prisoner. Jesus’ word is to the point: “I tell
you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me” (Matt.
25:40). The labors of love ultimately are performed for Jesus, and deeds of kindness God does not
forget.
One of the characteristics of the writer is that he introduces a subject at one point and returns to
it later at another place where he provides additional information. In 6:10 he merely states that his
readers have done works of love. In 10:32–34 he reminds them of having endured suffering when
they helped those who were persecuted, of sympathizing with those in prison, and of rejoicing when
their property was confiscated.
The readers demonstrated their love for their neighbors when troubles and hardship were
evident, and they continued to show unselfish love. This love is the fruit of a regenerated heart that
is always ready to serve God’s people. Their lives exemplify the field that brings forth a crop useful
for God’s people, in marked contrast to the author’s picture of a field overgrown with thorns and
thistles.
God is just. He does not forget to bless that which is good and to punish that which is evil. On
those who have fallen away and have hardened their hearts, he brings judgment; on those who
reflect God’s virtues, he showers his blessings. And what are these blessings? In this earthly life the
believer receives strength to withstand temptation and trials so that his faith continues to grow and
develop; in the life of the coming age these blessings consist of being with Jesus eternally and fully
appropriating the reality of salvation.
11. We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your
hope sure. 12. We do not want you to become p 167 lazy, but to imitate those who through
faith and patience inherit what has been promised.
As a true pastor the writer is concerned about the spiritual life of the individual church member.
Throughout his epistle he has taken an interest in the individual (3:12; 4:1, 11) and has stressed the
corporate responsibility of the church. He is not satisfied that many believers are developing
spiritually; he wants everyone to make progress. Thus he proves to be an imitator of Jesus, who
does not wish to see any of his people wander. In short, he is the shepherd tending the spiritual
flock.
Once again the author employs the plural pronoun we editorially. What he desires (“we want”)
is that everyone individually show the same diligence in ministering in love to the needs of God’s
people. He fears that some members of the church are deficient in the virtue of hope. This
deficiency will be detrimental to the spiritual development of the believer.
In Hebrews 6:10–12 the writer features three well-known virtues: love, hope, and faith.
Mentioned frequently in the New Testament, these three virtues are integrally related to one
another.35 To use an illustration, the Christian’s spiritual growth is supported by the tripod of faith,

5 5 Paul mentions the triad in Rom. 5:1–5; I Cor. 13:13; Gal. 5:5–6; Col. 1:4–5; I Thess. 1:3;
5:8. Peter cites these qualities in I Peter 1:21–22. And the writer of Hebrews refers to them in 6:10–
hope, and love. When one of the legs of this tripod bends, the other two legs will fall, and spiritual
development ceases.
The apostles constantly urge the believers to grow spiritually. For example, Peter, in his second
epistle, encourages his readers to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus
Christ” (3:18) and to “be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure” (1:10). When
the writer of Hebrews exhorts his readers about making their hope sure, he puts into service the
word diligence, which “expresses something of the greatness of the Christian’s responsibility for the
development of his life.”36 Believers must show this diligence “to the very end,” says the writer.
Many desire to have full assurance but fail to put forth any effort toward diligence.
Admonishing the recipients of his letter not to become lazy, the writer resorts to sound
psychology. Earlier he indicated that they had not progressed beyond “the elementary truths of
God’s word” (5:12) and were still infants in the faith. In 6:12 he does not say that they have been
lazy; rather, he exhorts them and says, “We do not want you to become lazy.” He speaks words of
encouragement. He is positive in his evaluation; he exhorts them to imitate those who are inheriting
the promises through faith and patience; he directs their attention to the saints who have
appropriated God’s promises. Claiming these promises always calls for faith and patience.
Although the writer does not specify in 6:12 who the inheritors are, the p 168 context reveals
that he is thinking of Old Testament saints—Abraham (6:13) and the heroes of faith (chap. 11)—
and saints of his own day.
Believers are inheritors of God’s promises. The word inherit calls attention to the dividing of a
legacy; an inheritor is entitled to possess part of that legacy. The legacy in this case consists of
God’s promises given to all believers. The author of Hebrews tells the readers to imitate the saints
in their faithful trust, perseverance, and zeal. He introduces the subject of faith, hope, and love in
6:10–12; and true to form he elaborates on and fully discusses the topic in 10:22–24, 35–39; and 11.

Doctrinal Considerations in 6:7–12

The Christian is familiar with the themes of faith and love, but the theme of hope does not
receive the attention the other two topics do. In our day of instant success, hope may seem
outmoded. But in the days of Jesus and the apostles, this concept was relevant. Except for Mark,
James, II Peter, Jude, and Revelation, the motif of hope appears in all the books of the New
Testament. Paul stresses the concept more than any other New Testament writer.37 Hope teaches
endurance and an eager anticipation of that which will become reality. God promises eternal life to
everyone who believes in his Son, and the believer expects the promise of eternal life to be fulfilled.
Thus hope arises from and supports faith. “There can be no hope without faith in Christ, for hope is
rooted in him alone. Faith without hope would, by itself, be empty and futile.”38
To make his teaching graphic, interesting, and practical, the author applies illustrations taken
from the world in which his readers lived. His illustration from agrarian life is apt and speaks to the
recipients of his letter because they are able to relate to his teaching.

12 and 10:22–25.

6 6 Wolfgang Bauder, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 1169.

7 7 The noun hope occurs forty-eight times in the New Testament, thirty-one of which are in
Paul’s epistles and five in Hebrews. The verb hope appears thirty-one times, nineteen times in
Paul’s letters and once in Hebrews.

8 8 Ernst Hoffmann, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 242.

 Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:7–12

Verse 7
γῆ—this noun in the nominative singular lacks the definite article, yet it is qualified by
participles and adjectives. It is the subject of the verb μεταλαμβάνει (it shares) and is the unifying
factor in both verses 7 and 8.
εὔθετον—a two-ending adjective in the accusative singular; it modifies the noun βοτάνην
(crop). The adjective is a compound derived from εὖ (well) and θετός (placed; an adjective from the
verb τίθημι [I place]). The word contrasts with ἀδόκιμος (worthless) in the next verse. Note also
that εὐλογίας (blessing) is contrasted with κατάρας (curse). p 169

Verse 8
ἀδόκιμος—this two-ending adjective is derived from the privative ἀ (not) and δόκιμος
(accepted; from the verb δέχομαι [I accept]). Some translations give the reading rejected; however,
because this is not a moral issue, it is better to translate the word as “worthless.”
κατάρας—a noun in the genitive singular. It is genitive because of the adverbial preposition
ἐγγύς (near). The noun is composed of κατά (down) and ἀρά (curse).

Verse 9
πεπείσμεθα—the use of the perfect passive (from πείθω, I persuade) instead of the perfect
active πεποίθαμεν (we trust) is significant because it expresses the passive idea. The writer
indicates that he has gained confidence in his readers on the basis of a lengthy investigation.39
ἐχόμενα—a participial form (present middle neuter plural accusative) from the verb ἔχω (I
have, hold).40 In the middle the meaning is to hold oneself to something. The participle, then,
signifies closeness, accompaniment, or associations; it controls the genitive case of the word
σωτηρίας (salvation).

Verse 10
ἐπιλαθέσθαι—the aorist middle from ἐπιλανθάνομαι (I forget) is followed by the genitive case
of ἔργον (work); verbs of remembering and forgetting govern the genitive. The aorist is constative.
ῆ̔ς—the genitive case of the relative pronoun in the feminine gender is attracted to the
antecedent ἀγάπης on which it depends.
διακονήσαντες—the aorist tense of this active participle relates to a past event. The present
tense of διακονοῦντες refers to the deeds of love performed in the time when the author wrote his
epistle.

Verse 11
πληροφορίαν—this noun occurs twice in Hebrews (6:11; 10:22), and twice in Paul’s epistles
(Col. 2:2; I Thess. 1:5). It is derived from the verb πληροφορέω (I fulfill, convince fully) and means
“full assurance.”

9 9 Grosheide, Hebreeën, p. 148.

0 0 A. T. Robertson, in A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical

Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 485, points out that many verbs in the passive voice
“retain the accusative of the thing.”
 B. Hold on to God’s Promise
6:13–20

13 When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to swear by, he swore by
himself, 14 saying, “I will surely bless you and give you many descendants.” 15 And so after waiting
patiently, Abraham received what was promised.
16 Men swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said and puts an end to
all argument. 17 Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of
what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath. 18 God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in
which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly
encouraged. 19 We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary
behind the p 170 curtain, 20 where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a
high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.

1. The Promise to Abraham

6:13–15
If there is anyone in Old Testament times who exemplifies the concept hope, it is Abraham.
“Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations” (Rom.
4:18). Exhorting his readers to have the full assurance of hope, the author illustrates his admonition
by calling attention to Abraham. The patriarch known as the father of believers demonstrates that
faith and hope are interrelated. Faith gives birth to hope, and hope in turn strengthens faith.
13. When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to
swear by, he swore by himself, 14. saying, “I will surely bless you and give you many
descendants.”
Illustrations can be more effective at times than plain teaching. Earlier in chapter 6, the author
illustrated the hardness of the unbeliever’s heart by using the example of worthless land that was
about to be cursed and burned (vv. 7–8). Once more he resorts to an illustration. What better
example can he hold before the Hebrews than the life of faith and hope that Abraham lived?
Abraham was seventy-five years old when he received the promise: God would make him into a
great nation in the land he would show Abraham (Gen. 12:1–9). God appeared to him at Shechem
and promised to give the land to Abraham’s offspring (Gen. 12:6–7). God repeated this promise
after Abraham and Lot separated (Gen. 13:14–17).
Some years later, Abraham wanted to make Eliezer of Damascus his heir, because God still had
not given Abraham a son. God told Abraham that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars
in the sky (Gen. 15:5). When Abraham was eighty-six years old, Ishmael was born (Gen. 16:16);
but God told him that Isaac, not Ishmael, was the fulfillment of the covenant promise (Gen. 17:21;
21:12). Isaac was born when Abraham was a hundred years old (Gen. 21:5).
Abraham put his hope in God and trusted that God would keep his promise to make Abraham
into a great nation. He waited twenty-five years for God to fulfill that promise. Sixty years after the
birth of Isaac, Jacob and Esau were born (Gen. 25:26). When these children were 15 years old,
Abraham died at the age of 175 (Gen. 25:7). At the time of his death, Abraham had one son of the
covenant (Isaac) and one grandson of the covenant (Jacob).
God tested Abraham’s faith on a mountain in the region of Moriah by p 171 telling him to
sacrifice his son Isaac. God rewarded that faith by reiterating, on oath, the promise that Abraham
had received: “I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the
sky and as the sand on the seashore” (Gen. 22:17). God gave Abraham this sworn promise not
because he was God’s friend (James 2:23), but because Abraham “was singled out as a pattern and
example for all believers.”41 As the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews asserts at the conclusion of
chapter 11, Abraham was commended for his faith, yet he did not receive “what had been
promised” (v. 39). That is, Abraham and all the other heroes of faith lived by faith and hoped for the
coming of Christ. But they were not given the privilege of seeing the fulfillment of this promise.
The recipients of the epistle, however, no longer lived with the promise. For them Christ fulfilled it.
God spoke to Abraham in human terms when he addressed the father of believers: “I swear by
myself, declares the LORD, … I will surely bless you” (Gen. 22:16, 17). God did not have to swear
to guarantee the trustworthiness of his Word; his Word is true, and God will keep his promise. But
God adapted himself to the ways of man and swore by himself (Exod. 32:13; Ps. 95:11; Isa. 54:9).
The writer of Hebrews notes that man always swears by someone greater than himself; however,
God has no one to excel him. Therefore, “he swore by himself.” The author constantly makes
comparisons in his epistle. In this instance, however, he admits that “there was no one greater for
[God] to swear by.”
God in a sense identified himself with his Word when he swore and gave Abraham the promise.
The solemn promise came directly in response to Abraham’s faith, but its fulfillment would take
centuries. When the fulfilling of a promise takes time, it needs added assurance in order to ward off
doubt.
Abraham could see fulfillment of the promise only in Isaac, but that was only the beginning of
all that God meant by the promise. Therefore, God swore an oath. The oath assured Abraham that
God would keep his Word in spite of the years of waiting that were in store for the recipients of the
promise. Abraham indeed would have numerous descendants.
15. And so after waiting patiently, Abraham received what was promised.
Abraham waited for twenty-five years to see the promise of Isaac’s birth fulfilled. But he never
saw the descendants promised him on oath when God said, “I will surely bless you and give you
many descendants.” The father of believers saw only a partial fulfillment.42
Is there a conflict between 6:15 and 11:39? Hardly. At the end of the author’s discussion of the
heroes of faith he says, “These were all commended p 172 for their faith, yet none of them received
what had been promised” (11:39). When we consider still another passage of Scripture, we gain
additional insight. Although the full intent of Jesus’ word concerning Abraham is uncertain, Jesus in
his controversy with the Jews told them: “Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my
day; he saw it and was glad” (John 8:56).43 Abraham waited patiently for God’s specific promise to
him (Isaac’s birth), saw the next generation when Jacob and Esau were born, and claimed the
promise of the coming of the Messiah for himself. Abraham was not only a man of faith, but also a
man of hope.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:13–15

1 1 Owen, Hebrews, vol. 3, p. 223.

2 2 Ernst Hoffmann, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 73. The writer of Hebrews “ascribes to the patriarchs
an understanding of the promise which looks far beyond all historical foreshadowings and partial
fulfillments, to an eternal consummation (11:10–16).”

3 3 Ceslaus Spicq, in L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, p.
160, mentions the possibility of Abraham’s receiving some type of revelation about the birth of the
Savior. Leon Morris, however, in his Gospel of John, New International Commentary on the New
Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), p. 472, more cautiously suggests “that
Abraham’s general attitude to this day was one of exultation, rather than [that Jesus referred] to any
one specific occasion in the life of the patriarch.”
 Verse 13
ἐπαγγειλάμενος—the aorist middle participle from ἐπαγγέλλομαι (I promise) appears three
times in Hebrews (6:13; 10:23; 11:11). In verb form it occurs once (Heb. 12:26). The aorist tense of
the participle may be understood to be contemporaneous with the aorist of the main verb ὤμοσεν
(he swore).44 Because God repeated his promise to Abraham, it is advisable not to be too dogmatic
but to understand that the aorist tense of the participle refers to all the incidents relating God’s
promise to Abraham.
εἶχεν—the imperfect active indicative of ἔχω (I have, hold) combined with the infinitive ὀμόσαι
(to swear) has the meaning was able, could (see, for example, Matt. 18:25).

Verse 14
εὐλογῶν—this present active participle of εὐλογέω (I bless) together with the future active
εὐλογήσω represents a Hebrew infinitive absolute construction that has been carried into the Greek
because it is used in the Septuagint. In the Hebrew the combination of participle and verb
strengthens the concept expressed; in the Greek the participle is redundant. Also in the sequence
πληθύνων πληθυνῶ (multiplying, I will multiply) the emphatic use of the participle is evident. The
redundancy is avoided in translation by rendering the participle as “surely”: “I will surely bless you
and I will surely multiply you.”

Verse 15
μακροθυμήσας—the aorist active participle from μακροθυμέω (I have patience), a compound
construction from μακρός (long) and θυμός (passion), expresses Abraham’s patient expectation. The
participle describes Abraham’s spiritual disposition. p 173
ἐπέτυχεν—the verb ἐπιτυγχάνω (I obtain, attain) occurs four times in the New Testament
(Rom. 11:7; Heb. 6:15; 11:33; James 4:2), always in the aorist active tense. It is a compound from
ἐπί (on, toward) and τυγχάνω (I obtain, get). The compound is more intensive than the simple verb.

2. Heirs of the Promise

6:16–20
After providing the illustration that portrays Abraham as the recipient of the promise, the author of
the epistle applies the teaching of the promise to all believers. As God assured Abraham of the
veracity of his Word and therefore swore an oath, so also for the believers, called heirs of the
promise, God confirms the promise with an oath.
16. Men swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said
and puts an end to all argument.
As the Scriptures reveal, Jewish people resorted quickly to swearing an oath. They might swear
by heaven (Matt. 5:34; 23:22; James 5:12), by the earth (Matt. 5:35; James 5:12), by the temple
(Matt. 23:16), by Jerusalem (Matt. 5:35), or in the name of the Lord God (Gen. 14:22; Deut. 6:13;
10:20; Judges 21:7; Ruth 1:17; Jer. 12:16).
Most of the oaths were sworn in the name of God or that which was associated with God
(heaven, the temple, or Jerusalem). That does not mean that the Jew identified God with the objects
used as substitutes, but rather that the Jew of Jesus’ day did not take his oaths seriously. Jesus
forbade the swearing of an oath (Matt. 5:33–37) because of this sinful practice. He taught that a
man’s word must be unquestionably true so that, as a consequence, oaths would no longer be

4 4 Grosheide, Hebreeën, p. 153.

necessary.
In a court of law, however, the judge administers an oath in order to uphold the truth. Indeed,
“men swear by someone greater than themselves” when they invoke the name of God. They appeal
to God because he is the ultimate truth, and thus in case they break the oath they risk divine
revenge. In court the truth must be spoken by defendant, plaintiff, and their lawyers.45 The oath,
then, settles the truth in any dispute.
17. Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the
heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath.
Once again we read an argument that leads from the lesser to the greater. The Epistle to the
Hebrews is replete with examples of this type of argument. Man, by appealing to God, establishes
the truth in a particular matter. How much more significant, by comparison, is the oath God himself
swears to confirm the certainty of fulfilling his promises to those who have received p 174 them.
The message that the author of Hebrews conveys is that man can depend on the utter truthfulness of
God.
Actually the oath God swears is superfluous, for God himself is truth. Man because of sin
confirms the truth of his words by invoking God’s name, but God does not need to establish the
truth. Jesus’ prayer to the Father testifies to this: “Your word is truth” (John 17:17).
Why, then, does God swear an oath? He wants to effectively show the heirs of the promise that
they can rely fully on his Word. Accommodating himself to human customs, God swears an oath.
He is conscious of man’s weak faith. Therefore, to give man added assurance of the complete
reliability of God’s Word, God provides the extra affirmation.
Reading Genesis 22:16–17, we receive the impression that God gave the promise to Abraham,
for he is the one who obtains the blessing. “I will surely bless you,” God says to Abraham. But the
writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews makes the divine blessing applicable to all believers by calling
them heirs of the promise. That means that God’s promise to Abraham transcends the centuries and
is in Christ as relevant today as it was in Abraham’s time (Gal. 3:7, 9, 29). The oath God swore to
Abraham was meant for us to strengthen us in our faith.
When the author writes, “God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear,”
he reminds us that the purpose of God is to make us heirs. Furthermore, according to God’s will,
this purpose has been determined in eternity (Eph. 1:4–5, 11).46 God’s purpose to save the believers
in Jesus Christ is firm, unchanging, and inviolable.
No believer ought to doubt God’s will to save him, for God gives him perfect assurance that the
nature of God’s purpose is unchanging. The believer, who has eternal security because of this
unchanging will of God, can sing Fanny J. Crosby’s hymn:
Blessed assurance, Jesus is mine!
O what a foretaste of glory divine!
Heir of salvation, purchase of God,
Born of His Spirit, washed in His blood.
Hebrews 6:17 teaches that God not only made the promise to believers but also is the guarantor
of the promise. God makes the promise of salvation, and at the same time he becomes the

5 5 The author of Hebrews borrows terminology from Egyptian civil law. Refer to Adolf
Deissmann, Bible Studies (Winona Lake, Ind.: Alpha Publications, 1979), p. 107.

6 6 Dietrich Müller (NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 1018) writes, “The purpose of divine election far
precedes the act of historical election.” Gottlob Schrenk explains that “the purpose of his will”
encompasses the foreordination and predestination mentioned in Eph. 1:4–5, 11 and in effect “has
the final word.” TDNT, vol. 1, p. 635.
intermediary who ensures that the promise is fulfilled. The word intermediary implies that there are
two other parties: the one who gives the promise and the one who receives it. Between these two
parties stands God as guarantor.
18. God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is p 175 impossible for
God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged.
The available evidence accumulates, as the author notes. God has given his unchangeable
promise and he confirmed this promise with an unchangeable oath. Besides noting these “two
unchangeable things,” the writer declares that God cannot lie. These statements have a built-in
redundancy, for God by nature is the personification of truth. “God is not a man, that he should lie,
nor a son of man, that he should change his mind” (Num. 23:19; see also I Sam. 15:29; Ps. 33:11;
Isa. 46:10–11; Mal. 3:6; James 1:17).
If then God accommodates himself to man’s custom of swearing an oath to establish the truth,
the implication is that when a Christian refuses to accept this oath-confirmed promise of salvation
and turns to sin or another religion, he risks being blasphemous.47 This person intimates that God’s
Word cannot be trusted and that God is a perjurer.
But in this verse the writer stresses the positive, for he returns to the use of the first person
plural. Says he, “We who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly
encouraged.” The author directs his lesson on the unchangeableness of God’s purpose to us who
believe the Word of God, and he writes to encourage us in our flight from sin. The words we who
have fled are somewhat vague because the writer does not provide specific place names or
circumstances. However, the general context indicates that we who believe have escaped the power
of willful unbelief and thus we turn to God “to take hold of the hope offered to us.” We are the
people who “for refuge to Jesus have fled.”
As true heirs of the promise, we take hold of the hope that God offers us. We have fled as
fugitives and cling to the one who offers new life. The author uses a figure of speech by which a
single word conveys an entire concept.48 That is, we must understand that the word hope refers to
the one who gives that hope. God himself has provided hope through the promises of his Word. And
we whom the author of Hebrews exhorts “to make [our] hope sure” (6:11) are invited to appropriate
the hope that God places in full view before us.
Taking hold of hope is not something that we do halfheartedly. On the contrary, we must attain
the hope offered to us with the strong encouragement that we receive from God’s Word. In short,
God holds out to us hope and at the same time strenuously urges us to accept and appropriate it.
19. We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner
sanctuary behind the curtain.
The author, true to form, introduces a certain topic rather briefly in order p 176 to explain it
fully in subsequent verses. In a brief exhortation he presents the subject hope (6:11); after
discussing the absolute dependability of God’s promise to the believer, he explains the significance

7 7 Spicq, Hébreux, vol. 2, p. 162.

8 8 The figure is called metonomy. Louis Berkhof, in Principles of Biblical Interpretation

(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1950), pp. 83–84, explains the figure as “a mental [relation] rather than a
physical one.” He provides the example of Paul’s reference to the Holy Spirit—“Quench not the
Spirit” (I Thess. 5:19, KJV)—by which Paul intends to describe “the special manifestations of the
Spirit.”
of hope (6:18–19). Hope, says the writer, is like an anchor; it gives stability and security to the soul.
The imagery is vivid and telling. The author paints a picture of a boat, battered by the waves but
held in place by an unseen anchor that clings to the bottom of the sea. So man’s soul, buffeted by
winds and waves of doubt, has a secure anchor of hope firmly fixed in Jesus.49 This anchor gives
stability to man’s soul, and that includes “the whole inner life of man with his powers of will,
reason, and emotion.”50 We relate to the image of an anchor and express our feelings in the words
of Priscilla J. Owens:
We have an anchor that keeps the soul
Steadfast and sure while the billows roll;
Fastened to the Rock which cannot move,
Grounded firm and deep in the Savior’s love.
But the Hebrews of Old Testament times and the Jews of the first century had a dislike for the
sea. A reflection of this fact is that the word anchor never occurs in the Old Testament; and only
four times in the New Testament, three of which appear in the account of Paul’s shipwreck (Acts
27:29, 30, 40). Therefore the author rather abruptly switches metaphors and mentions the veil of the
Most Holy Place. The recipients of the Epistle to the Hebrews were much more attuned to the
worship services of tabernacle and temple; they knew the construction of the sanctuary; and the
clause “it enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain” was meaningful to them.
The author of the epistle has come to the end of his exhortation that began after he had
introduced Jesus as “high priest in the order of Melchizedek” (5:10). He returns to the subject of the
high priesthood of Christ with a reference to “the inner sanctuary behind the curtain.” The words
immediately reminded the readers of the Day of Atonement, when the high priest entered into the
presence of God (Lev. 16:2, 12). Moreover, the Hebrews knew from the gospel proclaimed to them
that at Jesus’ death the curtain of the temple was torn from top to bottom, exposing the Most Holy
Place to the view of all who were inside the temple. They understood the reference to the inner
sanctuary figuratively and associated it with heaven. Already the writer had called attention to this
fact when he wrote, “We have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son
of God” (4:14).
20. Where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high
priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek. p 177
Our hope is pinned on Jesus, who has entered the heavenly sanctuary. An anchor lies unseen at
the bottom of the sea; our hope lies unseen in the highest heaven. “For in this hope we were saved,”
writes Paul. “But hope that is seen is no hope at all” (Rom. 8:24). Our anchor of hope has absolute
security in that Jesus in human form, now glorified, has entered heaven. And he has entered heaven
in his humanity as a guarantee that we, too, shall be with him. This guarantee is indicated by the
phrase who went before us. (In the Greek the equivalent expression is the word prodromos, which
means “forerunner.”) He goes ahead and we follow. Also note that the name Jesus and not Christ
(5:5) occurs—a distinct reminder of the earthly life of the Lord. Jesus ascended in his glorified
human body to heaven and entered the presence of God. As Jesus’ human body has come into God’s
presence, so our bodies will enter heaven.51 That is our hope.

9 9 “The anchor of hope was a fairly common metaphor in the late Greek ethic,” writes James
Moffatt in his Epistle to the Hebrews, International Critical Commentary series (Edinburgh: Clark,
1963), p. 89. Westcott adds that the symbol of the anchor, often with that of a fish, occurred on
gravestones. Hebrews, p. 163.

0 0 Günther Harder, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 684.

1 1 George E. Rice, “The Chiastic Structure of the Central Section of the Epistle to the
Hebrews,” Andrews University Seminary Studies 19 (1981): 243.
 Jesus “has become a high priest forever.” This rather short sentence is filled with meaning.
a. Jesus has become a high priest. He did not become high priest when he ascended into heaven.
Rather, he took his place at the right hand of God the Father because he accomplished his atoning
work on the cross. He indeed was the sacrificial Lamb of God offered for the sin of the world; as
the writer of Hebrews puts it, “Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people”
(9:28).
b. Jesus has become a high priest. The writer has called Jesus high priest in Hebrews 2:17; 3:1;
4:14–15; and 5:5, 10. He will explain the concept high priest in succeeding chapters, but in 6:20 the
author stresses that Jesus entered heaven as high priest, as the one who atoned for the sins of God’s
people. He opened the door to heaven because of his high-priestly work.
c. Jesus has become a high priest forever. An Aaronic high priest served in the capacity of high
priest for a limited duration. Jesus serves forever. The high priest entered the Most Holy Place once
a year. Jesus is in heaven forever. “Because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood”
(7:24). Constantly he intercedes for us (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25; 9:24).
By his death on the cross, Jesus fulfilled the responsibilities of the Aaronic priesthood. But as a
high priest he had to belong to a different order. The writer of Hebrews showed that according to
Psalm 110:4 God designated Jesus as high priest forever in the order of Melchizedek (5:6, 10). The
writer will explain this topic in the next few chapters.

Doctrinal Considerations in 6:13–20

Joshua told the elders, leaders, judges, and officials of Israel that God had fulfilled all the
promises given to them (Josh. 23:14). Every promise God has fulfilled.
Not only Joshua but also every believer can testify that God keeps his Word. The p 178 promises
made to our spiritual forefathers are repeated and given to us in our generation. To Abraham God
said, “I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your
descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants
after you” (Gen. 17:7). Throughout Scripture we read the promise I will be your God. Because of
the redeeming work of Christ, believers are in that covenant God made with Abraham and are
Abraham’s spiritual offspring (Gal. 3:16).
God’s Word is sure. God does not lie, as Paul explicitly states (Titus 1:2). In the Epistle to the
Hebrews God’s promise is reinforced—as if it needed support—by an oath sworn by God himself.
The point is that God’s Word is absolutely reliable. After exhorting the recipients to make their hope
sure (6:11) and by encouraging them to have their hope anchored in Jesus, the writer continues his
exposition about the high priesthood of Christ. This doctrine is basic to the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:16–20

Verse 16
μείζονος—the comparative adjective from μέγας (great) is in the genitive singular case because
the verb ὀμνύω (I swear) is followed by the preposition κατά, which demands the genitive. The
gender of the comparative is either masculine or neuter; the masculine means “someone,” and the
neuter “something.” Although it is possible to use the translation something, we do well to translate
the adjective as “someone.”
ἀντιλογία—this noun derived from ἀντί (against) and λέγω (I speak) occurs four times in the
New Testament (Heb. 6:16; 7:7; 12:3; Jude 11).

Verse 17
 ἐν ῷ̔—although the nearest antecedent is the preceding noun ὅρκος (oath), this relative pronoun
is dependent on the content of 6:16. Some translators give the prepositional phrase the meaning and
so, thus, or wherein; others leave it untranslated.
βουλόμενος and βουλή—the choice of the present middle participle, nominative singular of
βούλομαι (I want) together with the noun βουλή (decision, purpose) is deliberate; these two are
coupled together for reinforcement. The present participle denotes God’s desire to make known the
decision that he had made beforehand.
τὸ ἀμετάθετον—this substantivized verbal adjective is a compound consisting of ἀ (un-, not),
μετα (after), and τίθημι (I place, put). The verb μετατίθημι (I change, transfer) occurs in Hebrews
7:12; 11:5. The verbal adjective implies a passive idea with overtones of necessity: that which
cannot be changed. In the New Testament, the word is used only by the author of Hebrews in 6:17,
18.
ἐμεσίτευσεν—the aorist active indicative of μεσιτεύω (I mediate) occurs once in the New
Testament. It relates to the adjective μέσος (middle) and the noun μεσίτης (mediator).

Verse 18
πραγμάτων—this noun appears eleven times in the New Testament, three of which are in
Hebrews (6:18; 10:1; 11:1). Derived from πράσσω (I practice), the p 179 noun in 6:18 means
“facts.” The two facts are the promise and the oath. The preposition διά (through, by means of)
requires the genitive case.
τὸν θεόν—a few major Greek manuscripts (for example, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Bezae)
omit the definite article to express the meaning for one who is God. However, the rest of the
manuscripts, including a papyrus document, have the definite article.
καταφυγόντες—the second aorist active participle of the verb καταφεύγω (I flee for refuge) has
a perfective connotation;52 that is, “to escape completely.”
κρατῆσαι—the first aorist infinitive of κρατέω (I hold faithfully) is constative; that is,
comprehensive. The infinitive is closely linked to the preceding participle καταφυγόντες.

Verse 19
ἀσφαλῆ τε καὶ βεβαίαν—these two descriptive adjectives modify the noun ἄγκυραν. The
presence of the particle τε with καί conveys the meaning not only … but also. ἀσφαλῆ is an
adjective derived from ἀ (un-, not) and σφάλλω (I cause to fall, fail). The adjective βεβαίαν is
featured five times in Hebrews (2:2; 3:6, 14; 6:19; 9:17) out of a total of nine times in the New
Testament (Rom. 4:16; II Cor. 1:6; II Peter 1:10, 19).
τὸ ἐσώτερον—the comparative adjective of the adverb ἔσω (within) may be translated “the
inner part” of the sanctuary. Some scholars interpret the adjective as a preposition that controls the
genitive case of καταπετάσματος. We do well to translate the phrase as “the inner sanctuary behind
the curtain.”

Verse 20
πρόδρομος—this noun appears once in the New Testament. Its roots are in πρό (before) and
τρέχω, ἔδραμον (I run, ran), and it refers to Jesus, who has entered heaven to prepare a place for
those who believe in him (John 14:3).
γενόμενος—in Hebrews 2:17 the author gives the aorist subjunctive form γένηται (“that [Jesus]
might become”); in 6:20 γενόμενος is the aorist middle participle, translated “he has become.” The
aorist is culminative. Jesus’ mission on earth has been culminated, yet his activities as interceding
high priest continue.

2 2 Robertson, Grammar, p. 827.

 Summary of Chapter 6
The chapter which begins at 5:11 and ends at 6:20 is a lengthy pastoral exhortation. It is an
interlude. Before the author explains the doctrine of the high priesthood of Christ in the order of
Melchizedek, he exhorts his readers to faithfulness. First, he admonishes them because of their
dullness in learning the basic doctrines of God’s Word. Next, he delineates what these elementary
teachings are: repentance, faith, baptism, ordination, resurrection, and judgment. He exhorts the
recipients of his letter to advance in their understanding of these teachings.
Throughout the epistle the author warns the Christians against the sin of p 180 unbelief (3:12;
4:1, 11; 10:26, 29; 12:15, 28–29). He describes the rebellious Israelites who perished in the desert
because of this sin (3:16–19). In 6:4–6 the author pursues that same theme by referring to those
persons who have hardened their hearts after receiving a knowledge of the truth. These people
continue to crucify Jesus and to despise him. They do so in open rebellion. For such persons, says
the author, there is no possibility of being brought back to repentance. They are lost forever.
This observation serves as a warning to the readers not to fall into the sin of unbelief, but to
demonstrate their diligence in exhibiting the qualities of faith, hope, and love. The author singles
out the virtue of hope and encourages them to make hope a priority in their spiritual lives. He
commends them for their loving care shown to people in need and assures them that they are the
recipients of the blessings of salvation. He exhorts them to cultivate hope. He points to Jesus, the
forerunner who has entered heaven as high priest and who by his presence in heaven guarantees
them entrance.
Hope is anchored in the finished work of Christ, who atoned for the sins of his people.

p 181 7. Jesus: High Priest like Melchizedek

7:1–28 p 182
Outline
A. Melchizedek, King and Priest

7:1–3 1. The History of Melchizedek

7:4–10 2. The Significance of Melchizedek

B. Melchizedek’s Superior Priesthood

7:11–12 1. Imperfection of the Levitical

Priesthood

7:13–14 2. Inappropriate Service for Judah’s

Descendant
7:15–19 3. Indestructible Life

C. Christ’s Superior Priesthood

7:20–22 1. By Oath

7:23–25 2. For Eternity

7:26–27 3. In Sacrifice

7:28 4. To Perfection

A. Melchizedek, King and Priest

7:1–10

7 1 This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham
returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, 2 and Abraham gave him a tenth of
everything. First, his name means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king
of peace.” 3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life,
like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.
4 Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! 5
Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people
—that is, their brothers—even though their brothers are descended from Abraham. 6 This man,
however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed
him who had the promises. 7 And without doubt the lesser person is blessed by the greater. 8 In the
one case, the tenth is collected by men who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be
living. 9 One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, 10
because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.
1. The History of Melchizedek
7:1–3
After an interlude of exhortations and admonitions, the author returns to the topic of Christ’s
priesthood that was introduced in 2:17; 3:1; 4:14; and especially 5:6, 10. In chapter 7, he begins to
explain the significance of the quotation from Psalm 110:4 (“You are a priest forever, in the order of
Melchizedek,” 5:6; see also 6:20). The heart of the doctrinal section of the Epistle to the Hebrews
lies in the discussion of the high priesthood of Christ recorded in chapter 7. All of the preceding
material in this chapter is introductory.1
1. This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham

1 Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Van
Soest, 1961), p. 98.
returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, 2. and Abraham gave him a tenth of
everything. First, his name means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means
“king of peace.” p 184
Melchizedek is not familiar to us, for his name occurs only twice in the Old Testament (Gen.
14:18; Ps. 110:4). Although the historical account in Genesis 14 provides more information than
Psalm 110, the details nevertheless are not elaborate.
First, the name Melchizedek has the same ending as that of Adoni-Zedek, the king of Jerusalem
who is mentioned in Joshua 10:1, 3. The first part of the name (Melchi) means “my king” and the
second part (zedek) means “righteous”—that is, “my king is righteous.” The author of Hebrews
interprets the name as “king of righteousness” (7:2).
Melchizedek was king of Salem at the time Abraham defeated the forces of Kedorlaomer. Upon
Abraham’s return from the northern part of Canaan, Melchizedek met him and offered him bread
and wine. We are told that Melchizedek was a priest of God Most High, that he blessed Abraham,
and that he received a tenth of the spoils Abraham had gathered (Gen. 14:18–20).
Both the Genesis account and the Epistle to the Hebrews portray Melchizedek as a historical
figure who was a contemporary of Abraham.2 Melchizedek was king of Salem, a city generally
identified with Jerusalem (Ps. 76:2),3 and he was priest of God Most High. In the Gentile world of
Abraham’s day, traces of true worship of God the “Creator of heaven and earth” remained (Gen.
14:19). Melchizedek served Abraham’s God and “had carried on the tradition from the time of
Paradise when mankind recognized only one true God.”4
Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of the spoils. Although Genesis 14:20 (“Then Abram gave
him a tenth of everything”) is very brief, the author of Hebrews reasons from the silence of
Scripture and constructs his argument on the significance of the king-priest Melchizedek. The
Genesis account teaches that Abraham had sworn an oath to God that he would not keep any of the
spoils for himself (Gen. 14:22–23). Abraham recognized Melchizedek as God’s representative and
therefore by giving Melchizedek a tenth he brought the tithe to God.
Melchizedek as king-priest was God’s representative, for he was king of righteousness as his
name implies. He was a king who established and promoted righteousness in his kingdom. Also, he
was king of Salem, and the p 185 word Salem means “peace.” Of course, the two characteristics,
righteousness and peace, are messianic (see Isa. 9:6–7). They describe Jesus, who according to
Psalm 110:1 and 4 fills the roles of priest and king.
3. Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life,

2 Jewish writers, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and early Christian authors interpret Melchizedek’s
person in various ways, from an angel (i.e., an eschatological deliverer) to a historical figure. See
“Excursus I: The Significance of Melchizedek,” in Philip Edgcumbe Hughes’s Commentary on the
Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 237–45. For a detailed bibliography
see Bruce A. Demarest’s “Melchizedek, Salem,” in NIDNTT, vol. 2, pp. 590–93. Also see his
History of Interpretation of Hebrews 7:1–10 from the Reformation to the Present (Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1976).
3 The name Salem is identified by some writers with Salim near Aenon (John 3:23), where
John the Baptist stayed. However, Josephus associated Salem with the city of Jerusalem (see his
Jewish Wars 6.438 and his Antiquities of the Jews 1.180, LCL).
4 Gerhard Charles Aalders, Bible Student’s Commentary: Genesis, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1981), vol. 1, p. 289.
like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.
We ought not take this verse literally, for the author, reasoning from silence (Gen. 14:18–20), is
comparing Melchizedek with the priests who descended from Aaron. The writer expected a priest to
establish and prove his priestly descent. During the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, the priests
determined on the basis of the law of Moses that only the descendants of Aaron were to serve as
priests in the sacrificial system (Exod. 28 and 29; Lev. 8, 9, and 10; Num. 16, 17, and 18; Ezra
2:61–63; Neh. 7:63–65).
We can understand that belonging to this close-knit community of priests was a unique
privilege; a priest presented sacrifices from the people to God and served as an intermediary
between man and God. “Thus a priest is one who brings men near to God, who leads them into the
presence of God.”5 A prerequisite for holding the office of priest, therefore, was a proven genealogy.
This genealogy was of the greatest importance. For example, the Jewish historian Josephus assures
his readers that he was born into a priestly family, that he can prove his descent, and that he has
found his genealogy recorded in “public registers.”6
Melchizedek, by contrast, does not have a genealogy; the names of his father and mother are
lacking. Yet this man is priest of God Most High. Melchizedek’s age is not mentioned either. Yet for
all the other persons prominent in the history of salvation genealogical information is supplied (for
example, Adam lived 930 years [Gen. 5:5]; Noah, 950 years [Gen. 9:29]; and Abraham, 175 years
[Gen. 25:7]). Melchizedek, therefore, is unique. He does not fit into the genealogies recorded in
Genesis. He seems to belong to a different class.
What the author of Hebrews has written about Melchizedek applies directly to the Son of God.
In comparing Melchizedek with Jesus, the author uses the word like (7:3, 15) because he sees a
similarity. He does not say that these two are identical; he only compares and discerns resemblance.
Melchizedek was a historical figure, in the writer’s opinion; but because genealogical references
that would classify him as a member of the Levitical priesthood are not available, he states that
Melchizedek “remains a priest forever.” p 186

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:1–3

Verse 1
τοῦ ὑψίστου—this form is an adjective in the superlative, but is understood to indicate rank: in
the highest degree. The adjective serves the purpose of describing the only true God whom both
Abraham and Melchizedek worship (Gen. 14:19–20, 22). It occurs thirteen times in the New
Testament, nine times in the Gospel of Luke and Acts, and once in Hebrews (7:1).
κοπῆς—although the word occurs once in the New Testament, from its usage in the Septuagint
(Gen. 14:17; Deut. 28:25; Josh. 10:20; Jth. 15:7) the meaning is clear. Derived from the verb κόπτω

5 Geerhardus Vos, The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1956), p. 94.
6 Josephus, Life 1.6 (LCL). Emil Schürer, in A History of the Jewish People in the Time of
Jesus Christ, 5 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1885), vol. 1, div. 2, p. 210, writes: “The primary requisite
in a priest was evidence of his pedigree.” Italics his.
(I cut), it refers to a slaughter, or figuratively to a defeat.

Verse 3
ἀπάτωρ ἀμήτωρ—these two nouns appear only in Hebrews 7:3, in classical Greek literature,
and in Philo. The nouns refer to orphans, foundlings, illegitimate children, and disowned sons or to
gods who came into being without father or mother. Philo uses these words in his allegorical
interpretation on the origin of the high priest.7 In Hebrews 7:3, we note the additional word
ἀγενεαλόγητος (without genealogy) used climactically by the author of Hebrews to show that in the
early chapters of Genesis, where genealogies are frequent, a priestly genealogy for Melchizedek is
missing. The three Greek words, therefore, must be understood in the historical setting of Genesis.
ἀφωμοιωμένος—the perfect passive participle of the verb ἀφομοιόω (I make similar) expresses
duration; the compound form makes the participle emphatic. Note that Melchizedek is compared
with the Son of God, not the Son of God with Melchizedek.8 That is, the focus is on the eternal Son
of God. Also note that the author of Hebrews writes not “Jesus” or “Christ” but “Son of God.” The
appellation stresses his eternal rather than temporal existence.
διηνεκές—this neuter adjective is derived from the verb διαφέρω (I carry through) in its aorist
form διήνεγκα; it means “continuous, uninterrupted.” Only the writer of Hebrews employs the
word (7:3; 10:1, 12, 14).

2. The Significance of Melchizedek

7:4–10
In chapter 7 the writer of Hebrews presents an exegesis of Psalm 110:4 (“You are a priest forever, in
the order of Melchizedek”), which is quoted in 5:6 and referred to in 5:10 and 6:20. Stating the
quotation in summary form, the author explains it in reverse order. He begins with the name
Melchizedek and places it in a historical context (7:1–3); in the next section he discusses the words
priest (7:4–10) and priestly order (7:11–12); he devotes p 187 two verses to the personal pronoun
you (7:13–14); and he elaborates on the expression forever in the next ten verses (7:15–25).9
4. Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the
plunder! 5. Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth
from the people—that is, their brothers—even though their brothers are descended from
Abraham.
Having placed Melchizedek in historical perspective, the author wants the readers to pay
particular attention to the greatness of this priest who received tithes from and blessed Abraham. In
the minds of his Hebrew audience Abraham was considered a great man; he was called the friend of
God (II Chron. 20:7; Isa. 41:8; James 2:23) and the father of the nation Israel, the patriarch (Isa.
51:2). The writer stresses the word patriarch to underscore the greatness of Abraham.
However, someone greater than Abraham appeared at the time when Abraham returned
victoriously from defeating four kings in northern Canaan and from setting five kings free.
Abraham had reached a pinnacle in his leadership career in the southern part of Canaan. But upon
his return, Abraham paid tribute to Melchizedek by giving him a tenth of the plunder. Literally the
text reads: “Abraham gave him a tenth of the top of the heap.” Abraham gave him the best!
Even though customs and cultures differ with respect to tithing, we have no difficulty
understanding that the one who receives the tithe (Melchizedek) is greater than the one who gives

7 Gottlob Schrenk, TDNT vol. 5, pp. 1019–21. Also see Otfried Hofius, “Father,” NIDNTT
vol. 1, p. 616.
8 John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, edited by Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5
vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 403.
9 Kistemaker, Psalm Citations, p. 118.
the tithe (Abraham). The readers of the Epistle to the Hebrews had to acknowledge the superiority
of Melchizedek.10 They were acquainted with the command on tithing specified in the law of Moses
(Lev. 27:30–33; Num. 18:21, 24, 26–29; also see Deut. 12:17–19; 14:22–29; 26:12–15).
Perhaps we may parallel the tithing of the ancients and our paying taxes. All of us are familiar
with taxes, although the tax laws vary from time to time and from area to area. Similarly the rules
on tithing recorded in the Old Testament vary and may reflect changing circumstances in the
development of the Israelite nation.11 However, the writer of Hebrews is not interested in stressing
differences in tithing; his intention is to stress the receiving of the tithe.
“The law requires,” says the writer, that the priests gather the tithe. He mentions the name of
Levi, not that of Aaron, in order to show that the work of collecting the tithe belonged to the entire
tribe of Levi—the Levites p 188 and the priests.12 According to the law, the Levites were to gather
the tithe and they in turn would give a tenth to the priests (Num. 18:28).
We make three observations.
a. In 7:4–10, the author of the epistle employs names representatively: Abraham is called the
patriarch—the head of a nation and the father of believers; Levi, whose descendants become priests,
is the tribal head.
b. Levi stands closer genealogically to Abraham than to Aaron, so the author is able to refer to
the rest of the Israelites as “their brothers [who] are descended from Abraham.”
c. Because of the writer’s exegetical method of explaining the quotation from Psalm 110:4, the
word priest assumes added importance in the present context. This particular term has great
significance in the author’s discourse on the priesthood of Christ.
In verses 4 and 5 the author presents a series of contrasts: the priests as descendants of Levi are
more respected than the rest of the people; father Abraham is greater than his descendants;
Melchizedek, because he received the tithe, is superior to the patriarch Abraham.
6. This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from
Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. 7. And without doubt the lesser person is
blessed by the greater.
Already before Abraham met Melchizedek, God had given the patriarch the promises (Gen.
12:2–3; 13:14–17) and had blessed him. Abraham became the great-grandfather of Levi, whose
descendants became priests in Israel.
Melchizedek, by contrast, had no genealogy and had not received the promises. He stood alone
in all his grandeur as king of Salem and priest of God Most High. Abraham, fully aware of
Melchizedek’s stature, offered him tithes and in return received blessing when Melchizedek said:
Blessed be Abram by God Most High,
Creator of heaven and earth.
And blessed be God Most High,
who delivered your enemies into your hand. [Gen. 14:19–20]
This priest of God Most High did not exact tithes from Abraham as Levitical priests imposed a
tithe on their fellow Israelites in later years. Of his own accord Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth
of the spoils, because he recognized him as God’s representative. And this representative imparted a

0 0 Jewish writers identified Melchizedek with Shem the son of Noah, who may have been a
contemporary of Abraham (Gen. 11:11). If Shem were living at the time of Abraham, he would be
more venerable than the patriarch. Consult Nedarim 32b, Nashim, and Sanhedrin 108b, Nezikin,
Talmud, vol. 3.

1 1 Gerald F. Hawthorne, “Tithe,” NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 852.

2 2 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok,

1955), p. 166.
divine blessing on Abraham.
Simple logic tells us, says the writer, that “the lesser person is blessed by the greater.” This fact
is evident in three instances: the blessing that Isaac pronounced on Jacob, that Jacob gave his sons,
and that Moses bestowed upon the Israelites (Gen. 27:27–29; 48:15–16; 49; Deut. 33). Sons do not
p 189 bless their fathers, but dying fathers pronounce blessings on their sons. In the case of
Melchizedek blessing Abraham, we see that the king-priest delivers the blessing of God Most High
to the patriarch. Abraham had given Melchizedek a tithe of the plunder because Abraham saw he
was God’s representative.13 In return this representative invoked God’s blessing upon Abraham.
Melchizedek functioned as God’s mouthpiece and, therefore, was greater than Abraham. He acted in
the capacity of priest, and that made him superior to Abraham.
8. In the one case, the tenth is collected by men who die; but in the other case, by him who
is declared to be living. 9. One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth
through Abraham, 10. because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of
his ancestor.
In our age and culture we are somewhat puzzled when we read 7:8–10. If the author of Hebrews
presents an explanation of Genesis 14:18–20, and if on the basis of the silence of Scripture he reads
matters pertaining to Melchizedek, Abraham, and Levi into the text, we have difficulty
understanding him.
The author, however, is a trained theologian who applies logic in a manner differing from ours.
He reasons like a rabbi of the first century. He uses a methodology in explaining the Scriptures that
is strictly rabbinical. He is a typical Jewish-Christian author who, filled with the Holy Spirit, writes
the inspired Word of God.
Two points stand out in the author’s presentation.
a. The permanent priesthood of Melchizedek. The exact wording is that Melchizedek “is
declared to be living.” Does this mean that Melchizedek never died? If he were a supernatural
being, he would be the Son of God. But the writer says that Melchizedek was “like the Son of God”
(7:3). Although Scripture is silent about the death of Melchizedek, we nonetheless conclude that he
died. Yet in the two places (Gen. 14:18–20; Ps. 110:4) in which his name is mentioned Melchizedek
(in relation to his priesthood) is described as “living.” This means that the priesthood of
Melchizedek is permanent.
b. By contrast, there was a succession of Levitical priests. A priest might assume his priestly
duties “as soon as the first signs of manhood made their appearance,” but according to rabbinical
tradition “he was not actually installed till he was twenty years of age.”14 The period of service for
a priest might cover twenty to thirty years, but the end would come. The writer of p 190 the epistle
describes the priests as “men who die.” Their term of office is limited.
“One might even say” is an expression that occurs only once in the New Testament. What is
being said is rather unusual, because Levi, the great-grandchild of Abraham, is said to have paid
Melchizedek a tithe. The use of the name Levi must be understood figuratively, for Levi himself did
not collect tithes—his descendants did. Also Abraham, who paid the tenth to Melchizedek,
functions as a representative; he represents the tribe of Levi that was appointed to collect the tenth.
From our perspective, the author’s reasoning may be somewhat difficult to accept. And yet the
Bible is replete with examples of representatives whose actions affected the lives of their
descendants. For example, Joshua made a peace treaty with the Gibeonites that bound the Israelites

3 3 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 161. Also see
Hans-Georg Link’s article “Blessing” in NIDNTT, vol. 1, pp. 206–15.

4 4 Schürer, History of the Jewish People, vol. 1, div. 2, p. 215. Note also that the following
passages imply that a priest was installed at age thirty and served until he reached the age of fifty:
Num. 4:3, 23, 30, 35, 39, 43, 47; also see I Chron. 23:3. Num. 8:23–26 speaks of Levites twenty-
five years of age. And I Chron. 23:24, 27; II Chron. 31:17; and Ezra 3:8 mention the twenty-year-
old priest.
for centuries (Josh. 9:15). In the same way, Abraham represented the Levitical priesthood, which
was entrusted with the task of gathering the tithes of the people, and in this capacity Abraham
offered the tithe to Melchizedek. The Levitical priesthood paid homage to the priesthood of
Melchizedek.
Consider also the time when Melchizedek met Abraham. The meeting took place years before
the birth of Isaac and more than a century before Levi was born. Abraham, then, represented Levi
and his descendants. The author of Hebrews modestly writes, “Because when Melchizedek met
Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.” The point is that Melchizedek’s priesthood is
to be preferred to that of Levi.

Doctrinal Considerations in 7:1–10

In this section (7:1–10) the author stresses the principle of life with reference to Melchizedek
and to Levi. Melchizedek is portrayed as a person “without beginning of days or end of life” (7:3)
and as one “who is declared to be living” (7:8). Because of his likeness to the Son of God and
because he thus is a type of Christ, Melchizedek lives on scripturally although not historically. The
author of Hebrews bases his theological observations on the scriptural references to Melchizedek.
The principle of life the author applies to Levi as well, but in a different way. The descendants
of Levi entrusted with the task of collecting the tithe are subject to death; they are “men who die”
(7:8). But Levi, as the tribal head, existed “in the body of his ancestor” (7:10) at the time
Melchizedek met Abraham.
In Hebrews 7:1–10 the writer purposely avoids speaking about Christ. He places the greatness
of Melchizedek in historical perspective in order to compare Christ with the king-priest in
succeeding verses. The superiority of the Son of God, however, the author demonstrates by saying
that Melchizedek is “like the Son of God” (7:3).
The focus, then, is on the greatness of Melchizedek, who surpassed the patriarch Abraham. To
underscore the position of Abraham the author notes that the patriarch “had the promises” (7:6).
Abraham represents the line of believers. For example, Abraham is listed first in the genealogy of
Jesus recorded in Matthew 1. Abraham is the father of believers. Yet Melchizedek, says the writer of
Hebrews, transcends him because Melchizedek received Abraham’s tithe. p 191
Paying the tithe to the priest of God Most High was Abraham’s acknowledgment that God
himself had given him the victory in the conflict and the plunder of the battlefield (Gen. 14). Thus
he paid the tithe to God’s representative.
The principle of tithing God instituted by law (for example, Num. 18:21) and enjoined the
Israelites to comply. The tithe represents a tenth part of that which God gives the tither. In Old
Testament times, the tithe sustained the priest, the Levite, and the services at the sanctuary. In the
New Testament, Jesus teaches that “the worker deserves his wages” (Luke 10:7); Paul repeats this
rule both indirectly and directly when he writes concerning the financial support of those who
proclaim the gospel (I Cor. 9:14; 1 Tim. 5:17–18).15 The New Testament, however, lacks specific
injunctions about tithing.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:4–10

Verse 4
θεωρεῖτε—this verb can be either the present indicative or the present imperative. In view of the

5 5 John Owen, An Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace,

1960), vol. 3, p. 354.
verb’s position in the sentence—it stands first and thus receives emphasis—the present imperative
is preferred. The verb θεωρέω conveys the meaning of looking intently at someone or something
for the purpose of intellectual study.
ἀκροθινίων—the genitive neuter plural is a compound from ἄκρος (the highest) and θίς, θινός
(heap). For example, the flour at the top of the heap was considered the best part. The noun
ἀκροθίνια means “first fruits.”
πατριάρχης—this is a compound noun derived from πατριά (nation) and ἄρχω (I rule). The
word appears four times in the New Testament and describes David (Acts 2:29), the twelve sons of
Jacob (Acts 7:8, 9), and Abraham (Heb. 7:4). The author of Hebrews places the noun, preceded by
the definite article, at the end of 7:4 for emphasis.

Verse 5
τὴν ἱερατείαν—this noun, translated “priestly office,” occurs twice in the New Testament, here
and in Luke 1:9. (Its synonym ἱερωσύνη appears four times in Hebrews [7:11, 12, 14 (variant
reading), 24]). The word “expresses the actual service of the priest and not the office of
priesthood.”16
λαόν—in the Epistle to the Hebrews this noun generally refers to the church (see 2:17; 4:9;
10:30; 11:25; 13:12) and is qualified by the phrase of God. In 7:5, the author explains the word
people by adding the note that is, their brothers.

Verse 6
δεδεκάτωκεν—the perfect active indicative from the verb δεκατόω (I collect tithes) reflects the
permanence of the action—the lasting effect of the tribute to Melchizedek. The tense of this verb
stresses the significance of the deed. p 192
εὐλόγηκεν—the perfect active indicative from the verb εὐλογέω (I bless) is translated as a
simple past tense he blessed. The perfect tense, however, expresses the permanence of
Melchizedek’s blessing. Hebrews 7 features numerous verbs in the perfect tense (see vv. 6, 9, 11,
16, 20, 23, 26, 28).

Verse 8
ῶ̔δε μὲν … ἐκεῖ δέ—unfortunately this precise balance in grammatical structure with here and
there has been omitted for stylistic reasons in numerous translations.
ἀποθνῄσκοντες—the present tense of this active participle from the verb ἀποθνῄσκω (I die) has
been chosen and placed deliberately before the noun ἄνθρωποι (men). The word order in the Greek
is unique. Literally translated, 7:8 reads: “And here on the one hand tithes dying men receive, there
on the other hand it is declared that he lives.”

B. Melchizedek’s Superior Priesthood

7:11–19

11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was
given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek,
not in the order of Aaron? 12 For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the
law. 13 He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever

6 6 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1950), p. 176.
served at the altar. 14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses
said nothing about priests. 15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek
appears, 16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of
the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is declared:
“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”
18 The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19 (for the law made nothing
perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

1. Imperfection of the Levitical Priesthood

7:11–12
One of the recurring motifs in the Epistle to the Hebrews is that of God introducing a new order and
thereby bringing the old order to an end. In 4:8 Joshua’s concept of rest is completely
overshadowed by God’s rest. In 8:13 the first covenant is declared obsolete because the new
covenant has taken its place. And in 7:11–12 the Levitical priesthood (which was established by
divine law) has been superseded by the priesthood of Melchizedek; this necessitates a change in that
law.
11. If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the
basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come
—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?
The old order changeth,
yielding place to new. p 193
Thus wrote Alfred Tennyson about the death of King Arthur. These two lines, although from a
different setting, capture the thought of Hebrews 7:11. The termination of the Levitical priesthood
did not take place when Jesus died on the cross. The Aaronic order came to an end with the
destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. The new order, however, was inaugurated with Jesus’ death and
existed simultaneously with the Levitical priesthood until Jerusalem was destroyed.
The Aaronic priesthood that had served the nation Israel since the exodus proved to be a failure
in procuring salvation for God’s people. That is, says the writer of the epistle, because “the blood of
goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify”
the people and cleanse them only on the outside (9:13). The priests could not cleanse the soul from
sin. Inwardly the burden of guilt and the stain of sin remained. Only the blood of Christ, says the
author, will “cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living
God” (9:14).
The Levitical priesthood was established centuries after that of Melchizedek (Gen. 14:18–20).
God had not forgotten the priestly order of Melchizedek, for through David he spoke of this order
again in Psalm 110:4.
No one therefore could ever say that the order of Melchizedek was replaced by the Levitical
priesthood. The fact that God himself in David’s psalm declares that his Son (see Ps. 110:1 and
Matt. 22:41–45) is priest forever in the order of Melchizedek is irrefutable evidence of the
superiority of this priesthood (Ps. 110:4). By implication, contends the author, the Levitical
priesthood did not attain perfection. It was meant to be provisional, for it was superseded by an
entirely different order—that of Melchizedek.
Even though the author of Hebrews bases his argument on Scripture and puts it to his readers in
the form of a question, the matter itself was a sensitive one for the Jewish religious structure of his
day. Under the administration of the Levitical priesthood the law was given to the people. The law
was then inseparably linked to the religious hierarchy of Israel. Anyone who dared to change the
Aaronic priesthood was accused of tampering with the law of Moses. And anyone who was accused
of speaking contrary to the law could be killed. In fact, Stephen was put to death because, so his
accusers said, he spoke against the law (Acts 6:13). Paul was beaten by an angry mob that shouted,
“This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against our people and our law and this place”
(i.e., the temple; Acts 21:28).
God, however, did not give the people his law in order to displace the Aaronic priesthood; the
priesthood itself was linked to the law. Without the priesthood there was no law! That is basic. The
priests taught God’s law and his promises. These men with all their imperfections were the mainstay
of Israel’s faith, for the very words of God were entrusted to them (Rom. 3:2).
12. For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law.
In this sentence the first word for is significant because it tells us how the p 194 change will take
place. In the preceding verse we are told that the Aaronic priesthood was unable to reach perfection.
In 7:12 we learn that a change in the law must accompany the change in the priesthood.
We ought to look at the verse, however, through the eyes of a person of Jewish descent in the
first century of the Christian era. The law of God was valid eternally and could not be terminated.
The apocryphal literature of that era, as well as the rabbinical books of somewhat later date, speak
of the lasting validity of the law.17 Jesus, in a certain sense, reflected that sentiment when he said: “I
tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a
pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished” (Matt. 5:18). But
Jesus fulfilled the law (Matt. 5:17), not to set it aside but to effect a change.
If then a change of the law had to occur, God himself would have to accomplish the change.
And this is exactly what God did when, centuries after the law was given, he said through David,
“The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever, in the order of
Melchizedek’ ” (Ps. 110:4). God changed the law by appointing his Son high priest in another order
and confirming the change with an oath (Heb. 7:28). With the coming of Christ the priestly order
was transformed and transferred.18 With his once-for-all sacrifice, Christ fulfilled the law and made
the Levitical priesthood obsolete.
2. Inappropriate Service for Judah’s Descendant
7:13–14
No one could ever object to Jesus’ high priesthood in the order of Melchizedek by saying that the
Levitical order had superseded the priesthood of Melchizedek. Psalm 110:4 is ample proof that God
himself centuries later appointed his Son, by oath, in the priestly order of Melchizedek.
13. He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that
tribe has ever served at the altar. 14. For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and
in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.
The Hebrews would have no difficulty accepting the messianic teaching of Psalm 110, with its
distinct reference to the royal office of the Messiah. Also the Scriptures clearly taught them that the
Christ was to come from David’s family (II Sam. 7:12; Ps. 89:3–4; Jer. 23:5) and from the town of
Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2; Matt. 2:6; and see John 7:42). And when the Gospels in written form began to
circulate, the genealogies of Jesus recorded in Matthew 1:1–17 and Luke 3:23–38 showed his royal
descent from the line of David.
To make Jesus, who belongs to the tribe of Judah, serve at the altar is contrary to the law.
Remember that Uzziah king of Judah “entered the temple of the LORD to burn incense on the altar
of incense” and was stricken p 195 with leprosy (II Chron. 26:16–21).19 God had appointed the

7 7 SB, vol. 1, pp. 244–46.

8 8 Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, p. 190.

9 9 Both David and Solomon, belonging to the tribe of Judah, offered sacrifices on several
descendants of Levi to minister first at the tabernacle and later at the temple (Num. 1:50–53; 3:10,
38; 4:15, 19–20). Anyone from another tribe who approached the sanctuary would be put to death.
Psalm 110:4, in the context of the Epistle to the Hebrews, teaches two points. First, God
overruled the law concerning the Levitical priesthood, because he as the maker of the law had the
authority to change it. Second, belonging to the priestly order of Melchizedek is entirely different
from being a descendant of any of the tribes of Israel.
Jesus descended from the tribe of Judah (Ps. 132:11; Isa. 11:1, 10; Luke 1:32; Rom. 1:3; Rev.
5:5). But his descent could attest only to his royalty. Moses said nothing about priests from the tribe
of Judah, and therefore Jesus would trangress the Mosaic law if he assumed the priestly functions
given to the descendants of Aaron.20
As a descendant of David, Jesus established not an earthly kingdom, but a spiritual kingdom.
Similarly, Jesus did not inaugurate another priestly order to replace the Aaronic priesthood here on
earth. Jesus is the “great high priest who has gone through the heavens” (Heb. 4:14). His priesthood
is spiritual, heavenly, eternal.
3. Indestructible Life
7:15–19
Jesus’ priesthood finds its origin not in the Levitical order but in the order of Melchizedek. The
writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews purposely states that Jesus was confirmed as priest not by
proving his descent from Levi but by demonstrating the indestructibility of his life.
15. And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears,
16. one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but
on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17. For it is declared:
“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”
We who live in a different era and in another culture are unable to fathom the turmoil that must
have taken place when Jew and Christian realized the Levitical priesthood had definitely ended in
A.D. 70. After Jesus’ ascension, Christians continued to attend the prayer services and festivals at the
temple in Jerusalem (Acts 3:1; 20:16; 21:26). The end of an era, however, had come p 196 because
Jesus by his death on the cross had fulfilled the law. Jesus had become the great high priest, but not
in the Aaronic order; he appeared as a priest like Melchizedek.
The Christian community had to realize the significance of Jesus’ sacrifice in relation to the
Levitical priestly order. When the author told the Hebrews that he had much to say about Jesus’
priesthood in the order of Melchizedek, he mentioned that his teaching was hard to explain (5:11).
The time had come for believers of Jewish descent to understand the implications of Jesus’ sacrifice
on the cross: by his once-for-all sacrifice, Jesus had fulfilled the demands of the law and thus ended
the need for sacrifices. The Levitical priesthood then was obsolete. Because the author’s
contemporaries were conditioned to think of the priesthood only in terms of the Levitical order, his
emphasis on the priesthood of Christ was indeed “hard to explain” and no doubt hard to accept.

occasions (see II Sam. 6:13, 17–18; 24:25; I Kings 3:4; 8:62–64). But the sacrifices apparently were
performed by the priests at the request of David or Solomon.

0 0 In an interesting study Philip Edgcumbe Hughes traces the descent of the Messiah from
Levi and Judah from the teaching of the Dead Sea Sect; The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs;
and the writings of Irenaeus, Origen, and Cyprian. See his Hebrews, pp. 260–63. Also consult R. H.
Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, 2 vols. (Oxford:
Clarendon, 1913), vol. 2, pp. 282–367. And see M. deJonge’s article “Christian Influence in the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs” in Studies on the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, ed. M.
deJonge (Leiden: Brill, 1975), p. 222.
 The Aaronic priestly order terminated because of Christ’s sacrificial death; the priesthood of
Christ, however, continues. We should note that the writer calls Jesus a “priest like Melchizedek”;
he uses the term priest, not high priest. Concludes Geerhardus Vos: “Where a comparison with
Aaron is expressed or implied, Christ is called High Priest (2:17; 4:14; 5:1; 7:26, 28; 8:13; 9:11–
12). When the comparison is between Christ and the Levitical order, He is called priest.”21
Christ’s priesthood is different for two reasons.
a. Jesus did not have to base his priesthood on a genealogy that proved his descent from Aaron.
He was like Melchizedek in that no ancestry is mentioned.
b. A priest in the Levitical order served on a temporary basis because he eventually died. By
contrast, Jesus is a priest forever. That is, as an only priest—no other priests are serving with him—
he lays claim to “the power of an indestructible life.” A Levitical priest served because an external
law gave him the privilege of service; Jesus serves because of an inward power that characterizes an
endless life.22
The expression indestructible life is unique in the New Testament. Although Jesus offered
himself as a sacrifice on the cross, his life did not end. He conquered death and lives forever,
presently seated at God’s right hand in heaven (Heb. 1:3). Through his unique sacrifice he fulfilled
the responsibilities of the Aaronic priesthood, and through his endless life he assumes the
priesthood in the order of Melchizedek.
Lest someone object to the priesthood of Christ, the writer once again quotes Psalm 110:4 and
introduces the psalm citation with the words for it is declared. The implied agent is God himself.
God has appointed Jesus high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek. The author purposely
repeats himself, for he has quoted and alluded to Psalm 110:4 a number of times p 197 (5:6, 10;
6:20; 7:11; also see 7:21, where he stresses the permanence of Jesus’ priestly office by referring to
the oath God swore).
18. The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19. (for the law
made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.
This rather lengthy sentence falls into three parts that show balance and contrast. The first part
has an explanatory clause that is placed within parentheses.
a.     the former regulation—a better hope

b.   is set aside—is introduced

c. because—by which

it was weak and useless—we draw near

(for the law made

1 1 Vos, Teaching, p. 94.

2 2 “The ‘law’ is an outward restraint: the ‘power’ is an inward force,” observes Westcott in
Hebrews, p. 184.
 nothing perfect)

a. The first part of the contrast consists of the adjective former and the noun regulation. The
word former actually means “introductory” or “that which precedes.” The implication is that the
introductory regulation is temporary and will be succeeded by that which is permanent. The author
of Hebrews continues to explain the significance of a tentative regulation that must yield to
something that is abiding. The regulation was intended for the members of the priesthood; the hope
(anchored in Jesus Christ, 6:19–20) is for every believer.
In the second part of this sentence, the adjective better emphasizes the quality of the hope.
Although hope was present during the era of the Levitical priesthood, after the sacrifice of Christ
hope has taken on a new dimension.23 The author speaks of better hope in the sense of a true, living,
new, and perfect hope. It is the hope that the believer has in Jesus Christ through his gospel. And
that good news for the believer—forgiveness of sins, eternal life, and entrance to heaven—
constitutes the better hope that surpasses “the former regulation.”
b. The second part of the contrast concerns the action of both regulation and hope: the one is set
aside, the other is introduced. For the writer to state categorically that the divine command about the
Levitical priesthood was discarded and to add that “the law made nothing perfect” called for
courage. A believer trained in Old Testament law considered the command about the priesthood in
particular and the law in general sacrosanct.
But the author is able to write these words in full confidence. He indicates that the “former
regulation” was introductory to something much better. In fact, the “better hope” has arrived and the
time has come to put the substitute away. In his providence God instituted the Levitical priesthood.
The priests offered animal sacrifices so the people might obtain remission of sin. These p 198
sacrifices by themselves could not cleanse the consciences of the believers (9:14) and were
inadequate to atone for sin; they pointed to Christ. After Jesus as the Lamb of God brought the
supreme sacrifice that “takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), the need for animal sacrifices
offered by the priests was eliminated.
“A better hope is introduced.” The author does not say to whom or to what we are introduced,
but the context reveals that we are brought into the presence of Jesus our high priest. The believer
no longer needs to approach God through the services of a mortal priest. He can go directly to Jesus
Christ, for through him he has direct access to the throne of grace (4:14–16). His hope, then, is
centered in Jesus Christ, his Savior and Lord.
c. The third element in the contrast gives the cause and the means. The Levitical priesthood was
discarded because the regulation “was weak and useless”; and by a better hope we have access to
God.
We nowhere read that the Levitical priesthood and the accompanying regulation were of no
value. They had their rightful place in the era prior to the coming of Christ. However, the command
with its bearing on the priesthood was “weak and useless.” It was incapable of removing the curse
God had pronounced upon the human race; it could not effect eternal salvation for the believer.
David testified to the inadequacy of animal sacrifices when he confessed his sin to God: “You do
not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings” (Ps. 51:16).
The command was external and pertained to the duties performed by the priests; it was unable,

3 3 The adjective better occurs eighteen times in the original Greek of the New Testament
(twelve of which occur in the Epistle to the Hebrews—1:4, 6:9; 7:7, 19, 22; 8:6; 9:23; 10:34; 11:16,
35, 40; 12:24).
however, to lead the believer into the presence of God.
What the law could not do, for it made nothing perfect (Rom. 8:3), Jesus did by his perfect
sacrifice on the cross: he opened the way to God. In the capacity of high priest Jesus, by entering
the Most Holy Place, reconciled God and man. Therefore the believer has full communion with
God.

Doctrinal Considerations in 7:11–19

In the desert of Sinai God delivered the Ten Commandments to the Israelites to make them into
“a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6; also see I Peter 2:9). Although the people
affirmed the objective to live obediently before God (“We will do everything the LORD has said,”
Exod. 19:8; 24:3), they never attained perfection. The Israelites were sinners whose transgression
had to be removed.
“Israel, in its sinful life, could not exist before God; it needed atonement provided by another
life. Yet the lives of the sacrificial animals could not accomplish this atonement.”24 Also the
priesthood, instituted to lead the Israelites in a life of consecration and perfection, failed. That God
later declared on oath the inauguration of a priest in the order of Melchizedek (Ps. 110:4) proved the
weakness of the Aaronic priesthood. p 199
God himself imposed his law on the Israelites. As lawgiver he stood above the commandments
and ordinances he had enacted. Thus at the proper time he could supplant a particular law—the one
pertaining to the Levitical priesthood—and institute a new order. The priesthood in the order of
Melchizedek differed radically from that of Aaron. It was not based on law, although it was
confirmed by oath (Ps. 110:4). Rather it is a spiritual priesthood, fulfilled in Jesus Christ and settled
in heaven (Heb. 4:14; 6:20; 7:26; 8:1; 9:11; 10:21).
Jesus’ priesthood is distinct from the priestly order of Levi’s descendants. His priesthood
coincides with his kingship (Ps. 110:1–2) and therefore is royal. Jesus is king and priest at the same
time. Aaron and his heirs could be only priests.
The brevity of life of the priests in the order of Aaron testified to the passing character of the
Levitical office. The priestly genealogies were silent witnesses to the transitory nature of the
priesthood. By contrast, the priesthood of Jesus is eternal.25

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:11–19

Verse 11
τελείωσις—the ending -σις reveals a process of the act of reaching perfection. The noun stems
from the verb τελειόω (I accomplish, make perfect).
ὁ λαός—the definite article with the noun conveys the idea that the law was given, via the
priesthood, to all the people of God.
νενομοθέτηται—the perfect passive, third person singular, of the verb νομοθετέω (I enact laws)
marks the time when the law was given and expresses the lasting significance of the event.
ἕτερον—of the five times the author uses this adjective, three refer to Jesus’ priesthood (7:11,
13, 15). The author stresses the dissimilarity of Christ’s priestly office and the Levitical priesthood.

4 4 S. G. DeGraaf, Promise and Deliverance, trans. H. Evan Runner and Elisabeth Wichers
Runner, 3 vols. (Saint Catharines: Paideia, 1977), vol. 1, p. 301.

5 5 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 183.

 Verse 12
νόμου—a change in the priesthood necessitated a change in the law. Jesus became high priest
not in the Levitical order (on the basis of law), but in the τάξις (order) of Melchizedek.
μετάθεσις—together with the present passive participle μετατιθεμένης (genitive absolute) this
noun with its ending -σις denotes a process of change.

Verse 13
μετέσχηκεν—the perfect active, third person singular of the verb μετέχω (I partake) directs
attention to a point in time in which Jesus became a descendant of Judah. The perfect signifies
continuous validity; the active voice shows that Jesus voluntarily became man.
προσέσχηκεν—the author has a penchant for choosing cognate expressions. This verb, from
προσέχω (I apply myself to), demands a supplied ἑαυτόν (himself) and a dative for the object
(altar). p 200

Verse 14
πρόδηλον—this adjective from πρό (openly) and δῆλος (evident) is closely related to
κατάδηλος (thoroughly evident) in verse 15.
ἀνατέταλκεν—the perfect active, third person singular, of ἀνατέλλω (I rise, descend from) is
related to ἀνατολή in Luke 1:78, where the reference to the rising of the sun is a metaphor of the
Messiah’s coming.

Verse 16
ἐντολῆς σαρκίνης—the adjective σαρκίνης modifying the noun commandment points to the
lineage that a priest had to prove before he could assume office.
γέγονεν—from the verb γίνομαι (I become), the perfect active demonstrates the endless
duration of Christ’s priesthood.

Verse 18
ἀθέτησις—this noun appears also in 9:26. It derives from the privative ἀ (not) and the verb
τίθημι (I place). With the ending -σις it denotes a process of annulling a commandment. Also, it is a
juridical term.

Verse 19
ἐπεισαγωγή—this compound noun consists of ἐπί (toward), εἰς (into), and ἀγωγή (leading). It
means “an introduction.” The word occurs only in this verse in the entire New Testament.

C. Christ’s Superior Priesthood

7:20–28

20 And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, 21 but he became a priest with
an oath when God said to him:
“The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
‘You are a priest forever.’ ”
22 Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.
23 Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24
but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely
those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
26 Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted
above the heavens. 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first
for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered
himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law,
appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

1. By Oath
7:20–22
The Aaronic priesthood was instituted by divine law; Christ’s priesthood, by divine oath. A law can
be annulled; an oath lasts forever. p 201
True to form, the author first introduces a new concept with a simple word or phrase, then
returns to it later to give a complete explanation. In 7:22 he mentions the word covenant; in the next
two chapters he explains the doctrine of the covenant to the fullest extent.
20. And it was not without an oath! Others become priests without any oath, 21. but he
became priest with an oath when God said to him:
“The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
‘You are a priest forever.’ ”
22. Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.
The first word and is significant. It provides additional proof of the superiority of Christ’s
priesthood. The proof comes from the first part of Psalm 110:4. The author of the epistle quotes and
alludes to this psalm citation a number of times (5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 17) to call attention to the
priesthood of Christ in the order of Melchizedek.
How did Christ become a priest? Psalm 110:4 unequivocally states that God swore an oath when
he appointed Christ. This is unique. God told Moses to consecrate Aaron and his sons to the
priesthood and stipulated, “The priesthood is theirs by a lasting ordinance” (Exod. 29:9). But God
did not swear an oath; he only administered an ordinance. No law was enacted when God appointed
Christ to the priesthood of Melchizedek. Instead God swore an oath.
By human standards Christ, not God, should have sworn the oath of office. For example, when a
government official is about to assume his task, he is sworn in. The appointee declares on oath that
he will execute his duties to the best of his ability in accordance with the laws of the land.
In this instance, however, God purposely takes the initiative and swears an oath. He confirms
his promise to Abraham by swearing an oath to guarantee that his purpose does not change (Gen.
22:16; Heb. 6:13). A second time, when God installs his Son as priest in Melchizedek’s order, he
swears an oath to vouch for the unalterable nature of the appointment. When God’s people confess
sin, God changes his mind (see for example Exod. 32:14). But when God swears an oath, his
purpose is unchangeable. Because he swore an oath when he instituted Christ’s priesthood, that
priesthood is eternal.
What is the purpose of confirming Christ’s priesthood with an oath? “Because of this oath,” says
the writer, “Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.” Two concepts the author
introduces. One is embodied in the word guarantee (which appears once in the entire New
Testament) and the other in the word covenant (an expression that recurs seventeen times in the
epistle).
Even though the term guarantee is unique, its synonym mediate is not (Gal. 3:19–20; I Tim. 2:5;
Heb. 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). These two words in the epistle are interchangeable, and the writer uses them
to stress God’s absolute reliability p 202 in fulfilling the covenant he has made with his people. God
has appointed his Son not merely to be the guarantor who represents man to God. In addition, Jesus
is the believer’s guarantee that all God’s promises will be fulfilled. That is, no promise God has
made to us can ever be broken, for Jesus gives the assurance that his perfection will be our
perfection,26 our bodies “will be like his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21), and his ascension guarantees
our entrance into heaven (John 14:3).
Note that the author uses the name Jesus purposely. This name summarizes the work of our
Savior—he saves “his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). The writer places the name last in the
sentence (in the Greek) to give it full emphasis.
The second concept that the author introduces is contained in the noun covenant, qualified by
the adjective better. In context the adjective actually means “eternal.” The covenant God makes
with his people is an agreement that has two parties, promises, and a condition. The parties are God
and his people. The promises are: “I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts,”
says God, “I will be their God, and they will be my people” (Jer. 31:33; Heb. 8:10). And the
condition is faith.
Why is this covenant called “better”? In the old covenant that God made with the Israelites at
Mount Sinai, Moses acted as mediator between God and his people. But Moses could never
guarantee the covenant. In the new covenant Jesus is both mediator and guarantor because of his
atoning work. Jesus guarantees the fullness of God’s covenant with us.
To Thee, O Lord, alone is due
All glory and renown;
Aught to ourselves we dare not take,
Or rob Thee of Thy crown.
Thou wast Thyself our Surety
In God’s redemption plan
In Thee His grace was given us,
Long ere the world began.
—Augustus M. Toplady
(Revision by Dewey Westra)

2. For Eternity
7:23–25
In this passage, the author states an additional reason that Jesus’ priesthood differs from that of
Aaron: the Levitical priesthood attests to its transitoriness by the deaths of those who held the
priestly office; Jesus, who is eternal, fills an everlasting office as intercessor for “those who come to
God.”
23. Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from
continuing in office; 24. but because Jesus lives forever, he p 203 has a permanent priesthood.
25. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he
always lives to intercede for them.
These verses form one lengthy sentence in the Greek text. They convey three basic ideas that
can be described in the terms problem (v. 23), person (v. 24), and purpose (v. 25).
a. The problem relates to the length of the priest’s term in office. By law, the Aaronic priesthood
would “continue for all generations to come” (Exod. 40:15), but in reality the priestly office was
temporal. Every priest was subject to death, and therefore a seemingly endless succession of priests
emerged. Death determined the extent of the high priest’s service, for death is no respecter of
persons. The high priest was powerless in the face of death.
A somewhat literal translation of the first part of this verse reads, “and they that have become

6 6 Oswald Becker, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 372. Also see Herbert Preisker, TDNT, vol. 2, p. 329.
priests are many.”27 The list of names of high priests who served for long or short periods of time is
extensive,28 but the concluding comment for every one of them is this: “and he died.”
b. Next, the author contrasts the Levitical priesthood with the person of Jesus. What a contrast
when we look at Jesus! The priests were many; Jesus is the only priest. Their term of office was
limited by death; “Jesus lives forever.” The Aaronic high priest was overcome by death; Jesus
conquered death.
The writer of Hebrews has chosen the name Jesus to illuminate the earthly life of our Lord. This
name describes his birth, ministry, suffering, death, resurrection, and ascension. However, Jesus is
no longer a citizen of this earth; his residence is in heaven, where he abides forever. Because of his
eternity, Jesus’ high priesthood is unchangeable. That is, no one can terminate his priestly office.
Death is conquered. And God has sworn an oath that his Son will serve as priest forever in the order
of Melchizedek. No one can take Jesus’ place, for he is the one and only high priest.
c. What purpose does Jesus’ permanent priesthood serve? In fact, it serves many purposes. First,
“he is able to save completely those who come to God through him.” Jesus is a Savior who does his
work completely, fully, and to perfection.29 He sets man free from the curse of sin and accomplishes
restoration between God and man; through Jesus man is united with his God (John 17:21).
Second, Jesus as eternal high priest lives not for himself, but for the people who look to him for
help (2:17–18; 4:14–16). He is their Mediator, truly God and truly man. Without ceasing he pleads
for us; standing between p 204 God and man, he constantly intercedes for those who come to God
in prayer (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 9:24). God grants us everything we need for the furtherance of his
name, his kingdom, and his will. He answers our prayers for daily sustenance, remission of sin, and
protection from the evil one.
Third, Jesus taught: “No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). The writer of
Hebrews repeats this very thought and reminds his readers that prayers to God must be offered in
the name of Jesus.
Fourth, knowing that Jesus is always praying for us in heaven, we long to be with him. We have
the assurance that as he lives eternally before God so shall we live forever with him. Presently we
come to God in prayer, but at the end of our earthly stay he will take us home to be with him
eternally.

Doctrinal Considerations in 7:20–25

When God swears an oath he establishes the absolute dependability and trustworthiness of his
word. His oath is somewhat different from that of man. Man swears by God to testify of his
innocence, to declare his intention to keep a vow, and to speak the truth before a court of law. God
swears by himself—because there is no one greater by whom he can swear—to give further
substance to his promise (with Abraham, Gen. 22:16), to his covenant (with Israel’s forefathers,
Deut. 4:31), and to his confirmation of his Son’s priesthood (Ps. 110:4). When God adds an oath to

7 7 The context of 7:23 calls for a translation in the past tense. This is exactly what most
translators have used. The exception is the NEB: “Those other priests are appointed in numerous
succession, because they are prevented by death from continuing in office.”

8 8 See Josephus, Antiquities 20.10 (LCL).

9 9 Numerous translators understand the first clause of 7:25 to refer to time rather than to
extent or degree. Thus GNB, NASB, NAB, R.S.V., and Moffatt have the reading “he is able to save
forever” (with individual variations; italics added).
what he has said, his word is unalterable.
Christ’s priesthood is unchangeable because it is not bound to a law. The Levitical priesthood
instituted by law was open to transgression and violation. Christ’s priesthood in the order of
Melchizedek was confirmed by oath and therefore is inviolable.30
When the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews mentions the concept salvation, he always links
it directly to the atoning work of Jesus. Thus the salvation Christ offers the believers is eternal (5:9);
it is described as great (2:3); and its author has been made “perfect through suffering” (2:10).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:20–25

Verse 20
ὁρκωμοσίας—this combination of ὅρκος (oath) and ὄμνυμι (I swear) occurs four times in the
New Testament (Heb. 7:20 [twice], 21, 28). In Hebrews 6:16 the author writes the noun and the
verb separately (see Luke 1:73; Acts 2:30; James 5:12). The preposition (adverb) χωρίς governs the
genitive case.
οἱ μέν—this construction balanced by ὁ δέ in the next verse expresses contrast: priests over
against Jesus. The author employs this device three times (7:18–19; 7:20–21; and 7:23–24).
εἰσὶν … γεγονότες—the perfect middle participle of γίνομαι (I become) combined with a form
of the verb to be, εἰσὶν (present active), constitutes a periphrastic construction. See also 7:23. p 205

Verse 22
διαθήκης—this noun derived from the verb διατίθημι (I decree) appears seventeen times in
Hebrews out of a total of thirty-three times in the New Testament. The author of Hebrews develops
the doctrine of the covenant chiefly in chapters 8 and 9.
ἔγγυος—only in this verse does ἔγγυος occur in the New Testament. See also the Septuagint,
where it appears three times (Sir. 29:15, 16; II Macc. 10:28). It conveys the idea of guarantor and is
a synonym of μεσίτης (mediator).

Verse 23
διά—this preposition followed by the neuter article τό and the present passive infinitive
κωλύεσθαι (to be hindered) expresses the reason that the number of priests increased: they were
prevented from continual service by death (θανάτῳ).
παραμένειν—the complementary infinitive, present active, of παραμένω (I continue in office).
This compound verb referring to priests on earth is set in opposition to the simple present active
verb μένειν (to remain) referring to Jesus (v. 24)

Verse 24
ἀπαράβατον—as a verbal adjective the word expresses a passive idea: “it cannot be
transgressed.” This compound finds its origin in ἀ (not), παρά (beyond), and βαίνω (I go, walk,
step).

Verse 25
ζῶν—the present active participle from ζάω (I live) may denote cause: because he lives.
ἐντυγχάνειν—Jesus lives for the purpose of making intercession. The word occurs only five
times in the New Testament (Acts 25:24; Rom. 8:27, 34; 11:2; Heb. 7:25) but frequently in other

0 0 Walther Günther, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 585.

sources. The basic meaning of the verb is “to approach someone with a petition.” In this verse the
present active infinitive is introduced by εἰς τό.

3. In Sacrifice
7:26–27
After explaining the quotation from Psalm 110:4, the author of Hebrews presents a comprehensive
summary. He gives a full description of our only high priest Jesus Christ and compares his perfect
sacrifice with the daily sacrifices offered by the Levitical priests. Jesus’ death on the cross was a
once-for-all event.
26. Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from
sinners, exalted above the heavens.
The writer has arrived at a peak in his discussion of Christ’s priesthood. He looks back at the
magnificence of Jesus’ position and describes his greatness in the one word such. He stands in awe
of the magnitude of the work of salvation performed by our heavenly high priest. And he looks
forward. p 206 The author diverts his attention to the needs of the believers on earth and includes
himself in the expression our need. He realizes that Jesus is not a distant high priest, enthroned in
heaven, far removed from the daily needs of his people. Jesus is eminently suited to be our high
priest.
Why is Jesus qualified to meet our needs? He is sinless. With respect to his character, he is holy,
blameless, and pure. And regarding his status, he is separated from sinners and exalted above the
heavens.
The author lists five characteristics.
a. Holy

Jesus is holy. That means he is like God and in every aspect without sin.31 He is incomparably pure
and as God’s high priest he fulfills the will of God flawlessly. His chief desire is to glorify God’s
name and to extend God’s rule.
b. Blameless
The adjective holy concerns the inner disposition of Jesus; the word blameless relates to his external
life. Note the implied contrast between Jesus, who is blameless, and the Aaronic high priests,
tainted by sins, who were blameworthy. Aaron had to bring a “sin offering to make atonement for
himself and his household” (Lev. 16:11) before he could function as a high priest for the people of
Israel. Jesus, however, is completely sinless and therefore free from guilt and blame.
c. Pure
The environment of sin has a way of touching everyone entering that environment. Sin defiles the
person it touches. Although Jesus lived on earth and ministered to sinful people, he himself
remained undefiled. He may be compared with a physician who works among the sick at the time of

1 1 Horst Seebass, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 238. Also see Friedrich Hauck, TDNT, vol. 5, p. 492.
an epidemic, but who is immune. Jesus is unstained by sin.
d. Set apart
The reason that Jesus remains untouched by sin lies in the act of separation. Jesus has been
separated from sinners by God. Although he fully shares our humanity, he does not participate in
our sin. He is therefore different. Although he was called a friend of sinners (Matt. 11:19), he
himself remained without sin. I think that interpreting the phrase set apart from sinners to refer only
to the ascension of Jesus is one-sided.32 As our heavenly high priest Jesus sympathizes with us in
our weaknesses, because he has been tempted just as we are tempted. He knows our problems,
because he is one of us—except that he is sinless (2:14; 4:14–15).
e. Exalted
Already in Hebrews 1:3, the author referred to Jesus’ exaltation by depicting him seated “at the
right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” In 7:26 the writer describes the position of Christ in
comparable terms. He says that Jesus has been “raised to greater heights than the heavens.”33 Paul
also speaks of Christ’s exaltation: “He who descended is the very one who p 207 ascended higher
than all the heavens” (Eph. 4:10). The meaning is clear: Jesus occupies the highest position
imaginable.
27. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for
his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when
he offered himself.
Sometimes we have to make a trite remark to convey a fundamental truth. Thus we say that
verse 27 follows verse 26 in order to point out that 7:26 is introductory to the next verse. This
simple fact is frequently overlooked, and explanations of 7:27a are varied.
For example, one explanation is that the phrase day after day means “year after year.” That is,
once a year on the Day of Atonement the high priest enters the Most Holy Place. Therefore the
phrase refers to the annual sacrifices on that particular day. However, the writer is fully acquainted
with the Mosaic stipulations, for he indirectly mentions the Day of Atonement in 9:7, 25 and 10:1,
3. Why would he write “day after day” when in fact he meant once a year?
Another explanation relates the phrase day after day to the daily grain offering and burnt
sacrifice offered by Aaron and his sons (Lev. 6:14–16; Exod. 29:38–42; Num. 28:3–8). Although
the explanation has merit, difficulties surround this interpretation.34
A third possibility is to interpret the phrase as a reference to the daily offerings in general and to
the Day of Atonement in particular.35 This explanation is all-inclusive and, in a sense, moves from
the lesser sacrifices to the greater sacrifice on the Day of Atonement.
The contrast in 7:27 is between Jesus and the Aaronic high priest, and because of the

2 2 For example, Bengel in his Gnomon, vol. 4, p. 409, explains the phrase in one short
sentence: “He was separated when he left the world.” From the Babylonian Talmud we learn that
the high priest would separate himself from his house for seven days before the Day of Atonement
and take up residence in one of the rooms of the temple. See Yoma 1:1, Seder Moed, Talmud, vol. 3.
And see SB, vol. 3, p. 696.

3 3 Bauer, p. 850.

4 4 The writers of SB, vol. 3, p. 698, point out that the order of presenting the offerings was
first for the sins of the high priest and then for the sins of the people of Israel (Lev. 16:6–19; Heb.
7:27). According to the practice that prevailed in later years, the burnt offering for the sins of the
people came first and the grain offering for the high priest last.

5 5 Hughes, Hebrews, p. 277.

introductory verse (26) the emphasis falls on the negative: Jesus “does not need to offer sacrifices
day after day.” Our heavenly high priest is completely different; he is sinless, blameless, spotless.
He has no need to offer a sacrifice for himself either on a daily or an annual basis. He is set apart
from sinners. He is holy.
High priests appointed to represent sinful people were themselves defiled by sin. Coming before
God, they were fully conscious of their own sins which in effect nullified their efforts to serve God.
To become efficient, they had to offer animal sacrifices that removed their own sins. Then they
brought sacrifices to God for the sins of the people. God told them that the blood of an animal
atoned for sin. They had to admit that the constant repetition of these offerings was a clear
indication that these sacrifices could not cope with the enormity of sin. The Aaronic priesthood
displayed the marks of temporality and basic ineffectiveness. It had to be replaced by a priest who is
eternal and by an offering that is effective. p 208
Jesus, the Savior of his people, “sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.”
He offered himself because God asked him to make this supreme sacrifice and thus atone for the
sins of his people. God told the Israelites to sacrifice animals as substitutes; he gave his Son as the
substitute. God forbade the people of Israel the practice of offering human beings to idols (Lev.
18:21; 20:2–5; II Kings 17:17, 19; Ezek. 20:31); he himself offered his only Son (John 3:16).
Jesus voluntarily died on the cross and by his death presented himself as the once-for-all
sacrifice. The expression once for all reveals that the Levitical system has come to an end. The
author of Hebrews introduces this thought and explains the details in a subsequent chapter.
4. To Perfection
7:28
The time has come for a concluding statement. The writer summarizes his teaching on the eternal
priesthood of Jesus before he begins a new topic: the covenant.
28. For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after
the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.
The Epistle to the Hebrews is an epistle of contrasts. And this verse is no exception. Note the
structure:

For —

the law appoints — the oath appointed

as high priests men — the Son

who are weak — who has been made perfect

forever

but
The law given by God to Moses has been compared with the oath God swore centuries later. In
both instances—the giving of the law and the swearing of the oath—God appoints. First he appoints
a high priest; then he appoints the Son. The institution of the priesthood took place in the early part
of the forty-year period in the wilderness. The oath was given in a subsequent century (Ps. 110:4).
The law appoints “as high priests men who are weak.” The term weak does not refer to physical
ailments, for Jesus shared our weaknesses when he was on earth (4:15). Rather, it relates to our
sinful condition and is therefore synonymous with sin. God appoints high priests who are weak
because of their sinful state. He knew that these men would succumb to sin and reveal their moral
weakness.
The writer has chosen the term weak perhaps purposely to make a distinction between sin
committed in weakness and sin perpetuated deliberately. A high priest who sinned intentionally
could not remain in office. For premeditated and willful sin, God does not provide atonement (Heb.
9:7).
God placed sinful high priests in office by law; he appointed his Son as high priest by oath. The
superiority of the Son to the Aaronic high priests p 209 the writer of Hebrews succinctly
demonstrates, for the swearing of the oath was of greater importance than the giving of the law. A
law can be repealed; an oath stays forever. The Son is not subject to weakness or change, because
he “has been made perfect forever.”
The expression Son reminds us of chapter 1, where the author teaches the Son’s superiority to
creation, including the angels (1:2, 3, 5, 8; also see 3:6; 4:14; 7:3). The Son is eternal; high priests
are mortal and therefore temporal. The Son is sinless and consequently perfect; high priests are
sinners and in need of redemption. The Son because of his suffering on the cross has been made
perfect (2:10). Because of this perfection “he is able to save completely those who come to God
through him” (7:25).

Doctrinal Considerations in 7:26–28

Jesus our high priest is holy. This adjective holy in the original Greek appears only eight times
in the New Testament (Acts 2:27; 13:34–35; I Tim. 2:8; Titus 1:8; Heb. 7:26; Rev. 15:4; 16:5); five
are quotations from and allusions to the Old Testament. The word is unique, and for this reason the
author of Hebrews uses it to portray the holiness of Jesus. When it is applied to men—for example,
in Titus 1:8 Paul writes that among other requirements an elder must be holy—the term implies a
participation in Jesus’ holiness.36
Jesus has taken a place that is higher than the heavens. Before coming to earth, Christ was in
heaven. But after his atoning work was completed and he ascended to heaven, he was “exalted
above the heavens.” The idea expressed by the author is set forth in a comparative way: Christ is
not in heaven but in a place that is even higher than the heavens.
The author of Hebrews teaches that Jesus is priest and at the same time became sacrifice. Christ
in his once-for-all offering of himself on the cross fulfilled the responsibility of the priesthood of
Aaron (9:25–26). By his death he put an end to the offerings for the sins of the people (7:27; 9:12;
10:10, 18). By oath appointed, Jesus serves as high priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.
The Aaronic high priest could never present a genuine sacrifice as requested by God. A genuine
sacrifice could be brought only by Jesus, who had the power to defeat death (2:15; 9:27–28) and the
ability to show perfect obedience (5:8–10).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:26–28

Verse 26
ὅσιος—this adjective, related to the noun ὁσιότης (devoutness) and the adverb ὁσίως (in a holy
manner), conveys the idea of partaking of God’s holiness.
ἀμίαντος—derived from the privative ἀ (not) and the verb μιαίνω (I stain; defile), this verbal
adjective has a passive connotation in the sense of “he cannot be defiled.” The word denotes moral

6 6 Westcott understands the concept holy as “a particular moral position.” See his Hebrews, p.
194.
purity, especially with reference to the high priest (see p 210 also Heb. 13:4, where the word is used
in the context of marriage). Undefiled, according to John Albert Bengel, means to derive “no stain
from other men.”37
κεχωρισμένος … γενόμενος—the first participle is the perfect passive from χωρίζω (I
separate); the second is the aorist middle from γίνομαι (I become). The perfect tense denotes the
lasting state which delineates a difference between Christ and man. The use of the aorist tense
implies that there was a time in which Jesus was not exalted above the heavens.

Verse 27
ἀναφέρειν—the present active infinitive is a compound of ἀνά (up; again) and φέρω (I bring).
The verb is paralleled by προσφέρω (I offer), which occurs nineteen times in Hebrews; ἀναφέρω
appears four times. In 9:28 both verbs are used. Westcott makes the following distinction: “From
these usages [in the Septuagint] it appears that in ἀναφέρειν (to offer up) we have mainly the notion
of an offering made to God and placed upon His altar, in προσφέρειν (to offer) that of an offering
brought to God. In the former the thought of the destination of the offering prevails: in the latter that
of the offerer in his relation to God.”38

Verse 28
τῆς μετὰ τὸν νόμον—the definite article τῆς specifies the oath God swore: after the law was
given. The author of Hebrews places the word of the oathswearing (ὁ λόγος) over against the law (ὁ
νόμος). God gave the Israelites his law in the days of Moses; he swore an oath in the time of David
(Ps. 110:4).
τετελειωμένον—this perfect passive participle from the verb τελειόω (I complete)
communicates the idea of permanence. The passive voice intimates that God is the agent. The Son
has been made “perfect through suffering” (2:10). The writer of Hebrews purposely uses the term
υἱόν (son) without the definite article to express the absolute significance of Jesus’ sonship. Only
Jesus is the Son of God, “made perfect forever.”

Summary of Chapter 7
Melchizedek, mentioned only twice in the entire Old Testament (Gen. 14:18; Ps. 110:4), is the focus
of attention in the first part of Hebrews 7. The author of the epistle demonstrates his theological
skills as he explains the priesthood of Christ in the order of Melchizedek.
From a modern point of view the writer’s arguments appear to be somewhat labored. He seems
to be reading more into the Old Testament passages that mention Melchizedek than the passages
actually say. But the original readers were Hebrews. They believed that the divinely instituted
Levitical priesthood was inviolable. They knew that the priesthood of Aaron had to be perpetual,
because God himself had ordained the priesthood by law.
The author of Hebrews counters the objections of readers of the Old p 211 Testament Scriptures
by discussing the differences between the Aaronic priesthood and the superior order of
Melchizedek. These differences consist of the absence of a genealogy for Melchizedek; the homage
and tithe Abraham paid Melchizedek; and the confirmation of Melchizedek’s priesthood by divine
oath centuries after the Levitical priesthood was established by law.
The evidence that shows God’s design in terminating the temporal priesthood of Aaron and
inaugurating the eternal priesthood of Melchizedek is irrefutable. Jesus, to whom the author
indirectly referred and who at last is mentioned by name, has become high priest in Melchizedek’s

7 7 Bengel, Gnomon, vol. 4, p. 409. Italics his.

8 8 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 197. Also consult Konrad Weiss, TNDT, vol. 9, pp. 61, 66.
order and is a “guarantee of a better covenant” (7:22).
Already in earlier passages the author describes the characteristics of the high priest (2:17–18;
4:14–15; 5:1–5). In 7:26–28 the writer centers his explanation of the heavenly high priest on
holiness, sinlessness, sacrifice, and perfection. The theme of Jesus’ perfection, introduced in 2:10
and implied in 7:11, culminates in the words: “the Son … has been made perfect forever.”

p 212 8. Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice, part 1

8:1–13 p 214
Outline
8:1–2 A. The Heavenly Sanctuary

B. Jesus the Mediator

8:3 1. High Priest

8:4–6 2. Service

8:7–13 C. God’s New Covenant

A. The Heavenly Sanctuary

8:1–2

8 1 The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand
of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2 and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the
Lord, not by man.

The claims to Jesus’ priesthood the author expounded in chapter 7. In Hebrews 8, he explains the
task of the high priest, Jesus Christ, and alludes to Psalm 110:1.
1. The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at
the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2. and who serves in the sanctuary, the
true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.
The preceding chapter delineates the surpassing excellence of Christ’s priesthood in the order of
Melchizedek. The author of Hebrews provides the readers with a lucid exposition of Psalm 110:4.
However, he does not want them to lose sight of the first verse of that psalm. That verse portrays
Jesus as king. Jesus, therefore, is the king-priest, as Psalm 110 clearly teaches. Although the writer
has stressed the importance of Jesus’ priesthood in the Melchizedekian order, he desires his readers
to recognize Jesus’ kingship, too. Hence, he writes the introductory clause, “the point of what we
are saying is this,” and asserts that our high priest sat down at the right hand of God and serves in
the true tabernacle.1
In the introduction of the Epistle to the Hebrews the author implicitly mentions the priesthood
and the kingship of the Son (1:3; also see 1:13). After completing his priestly duties, Jesus “sat
down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” In Hebrews 10:12 and 12:2 the writer returns to
this same theme: Jesus is priest and king.
In typical Hebraic form, the writer’s choice of the phrase of the Majesty in p 216 heaven is a
substitute for the word God. Jesus sat down in the place of honor: at the right hand of God.
The verb to sit down is significant. “Sitting was often a mark of honour or authority in the
ancient world: a king sat to receive his subjects, a court to give judgment, and a teacher to teach.”2
The Book of Revelation in particular describes God, who sits on the throne (4:2, 10; 5:1, 7, 13;
6:16; 7:10, 15; 19:4; 21:5), and Jesus, who shares that throne (1:4–5; 3:21; 7:15–17; 12:5).
The throne of God and the sanctuary (the true tabernacle) bring king and high priest together
into one place. This is not at all surprising if we think of the tabernacle in the desert, where God
placed his throne in the Most Holy Place (Lev. 16:2). God took up residence behind the veil in the
Tent of Meeting. In Revelation 16:17, temple and throne are mentioned together: “… out of the
temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, ‘It is done!’ ” Justice and mercy flow forth from
the throne and the sanctuary, from the king and the high priest.
By his sacrificial death, Jesus finished his atoning work on earth. Upon his ascension, he entered
the presence of God (the sanctuary) and sat down at God’s right hand. Says the writer of Hebrews,
Jesus “serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.”
Three matters come to mind when we consider Hebrews 8:2.
a. Jesus is serving in the sanctuary. His ministry in the heavenly sanctuary is superior to the
priestly service on earth (8:5–6) because he is the only high priest who has ascended to heaven. God
did not need to descend to earth to accept a sacrifice offered by priests. God had appointed the
heavenly high priest by oath to serve eternally in God’s sanctuary. Jesus brought his once-for-all
offering and, entering the true sanctuary, began his priestly ministry in the presence of God.3
b. Jesus serves in the sanctuary that is the true tabernacle. The writer of Hebrews does not leave
the reader in doubt regarding the identity of tabernacle and sanctuary and their place. In the next
chapter he explains the term tabernacle: Christ “went through the greater and more perfect
tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation” (9:11). And he adds: “For
Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven
itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence” (9:24).4 Tabernacle and sanctuary are the same.
c. Jesus serves as high priest in the true tabernacle. This true tabernacle p 217 has been set up by
the Lord, as the writer reminds us. What he means is that God gave Moses a copy of the tabernacle

1 Most translations use the word point (with variations) in Heb. 8:1. Thus RV and ASV have
“chief point”; the NAB, NASB, NEB, NKJV, MLB, and R. C. H. Lenski have “main point”; JB has
“great point”; GNB, “whole point”; and NIV, Moffatt, and R.S.V. simply “point.” However, the KJV
features the term the sum; and Phillips, “to sum up.”
2 Richard Thomas France, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 588. Also see Carl Schneider, TDNT, vol. 3, p.
442.
3 Leopold Sabourin, “Liturge du sanctuaire et de la tente véritable (Héb. VIII 2),” NTS 18
(1971): 87–90.
4 For a systematic presentation of the various interpretations of the expression the true
tabernacle, see Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 283–90. See also the same material published under the title “The
Blood of Jesus and His Heavenly Priesthood in Hebrews. Part III: The Meaning of ‘The True Tent’
and ‘The Greater and More Perfect Tent,’ ” BS 130 (1973): 305–14.
which the Lord God showed him (Exod. 25:9, 40). The copy was on earth; the true tabernacle is in
heaven. Does Scripture mention a tabernacle in heaven? Yes, Isaiah says that he saw “the Lord
seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the temple” (Isa. 6:1; see also
Mic. 1:2). That sanctuary has not been erected by man, but by God. God would never have set it up
if he had not appointed Christ to serve in that tabernacle. After his atoning work was accomplished,
Jesus entered God’s sanctuary and there represents the interests of all his people. From God’s
tabernacle flow blessings that surpass any blessings from the Levitical sacrificial system.

B. Jesus the Mediator

8:3–6

3 Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to
have something to offer. 4 If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer
the gifts prescribed by the law. 5 They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven.
This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make
everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” 6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as
superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on
better promises.

3. Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for
this one also to have something to offer. 4. If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for
there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law.
An effective teacher repeats his lesson often in the same words. The writer of Hebrews is no
exception, for 8:3 is a virtual repetition of 5:1. Besides, the author continues his descriptive method
of teaching by presenting contrast. Note the contrast in 8:3.
1. High Priest
8:3

for —

every high priest — for this one also

is appointed — it was necessary

to offer — to have to offer

both gifts and sacrifices — something

and so
The New International Version omits the first word for that has its counterpart in and so. Although
the term high priest is qualified by the adjective every, the text conveys the implication that there
had been a long succession of high priests. Over against the numerous high priests stands Jesus. The
author of Hebrews does not refer to him by name; he says “this one” in order to remind the reader
of the priest-king serving in the heavenly sanctuary. p 218
The contrast between the continual offerings of the high priest in the form of “both gifts and
sacrifices” and the single offering, simply mentioned as “something,” is significant. What this
“something” consists of the author does not specify in 8:3, but in 9:14 he elaborates. Also, in the
original Greek the two verbs to offer delineate the difference, in that the first one, pertaining to
every high priest, indicates continuous occurrence. The second to offer verb, used with reference to
Jesus, shows a single event.
2. Service
8:4–6
In 8:4 the author continues his use of contrasts with a conditional sentence that is contrary to fact.
That is, the two parts of the sentence demand counterparts which are implied.

“If he were on earth” — but he is in heaven

“he would not be a priest” — but he is our priest

The sanctuary in which Christ serves as high priest is in heaven, not on earth. During his
ministry on earth he could not be priest at all because he belonged to the tribe of Judah, rather than
the tribe of Levi. However, the writer of the epistle does not state or imply that Christ could not
bring his once-for-all offering on Calvary’s cross.5 He only notes that those who are part of the
Levitical priesthood offer gifts that are “prescribed by the law.” Jesus did not belong to the priestly
clan of Levi and therefore could not serve at the altar. Instead, he serves in the true tabernacle, in the
presence of God.
5. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why
Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make
everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.”
The contrast continues. This verse explains the service, the building, and the pattern of the
tabernacle on earth; the next verse portrays Jesus as the mediator of a better covenant. Hebrews 8:5
describes the construction of the earthly sanctuary. Three main points stand out.
a. “Copy and shadow.” Jesus entered the heavenly sanctuary in God’s presence, but the priests
served God in the tabernacle that the Israelites constructed in the time of Moses.6
The two words copy and shadow, although different in meaning, complement each other; one
provides what the other lacks. The term copy denotes substance, and the noun shadow may be
understood as a “reflection … of p 219 the heavenly original.”7 We receive the mental picture of the
heavenly original casting a shadow on the earth. But this shadow has form and substance.
The writer of Hebrews intends to say that the priests who served in the sanctuary had to realize
the limitations: the tabernacle structure was but a copy and the sacrifices were only a shadow. In the

5 Geerhardus Vos, The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1956), p. 113.
6 Throughout his epistle the writer directs the reader’s attention to the period that the nation
Israel spent in the desert. The temple he never mentions; rather, the tabernacle is for him the place
of worship (Heb. 8:2, 5; 9:2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 21; 13:10).
7 Heinrich Schlier, TDNT, vol. 2, p. 33. Also see Ralph P. Martin, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 291.
following chapter, where he elucidates the significance of sacrifices, the author explains the
meaning of 8:5. Says he: “It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified
with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ
did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself,
now to appear for us in God’s presence” (9:23–24; also see 10:1).
b. “Build the tabernacle.” If Moses built a tabernacle according to a copy of a heavenly original,
what then is the appearance and the function of the heavenly sanctuary? Speculation about a
heavenly sanctuary originated with, and at the same time fascinated, Jewish teachers in the time of
the apostles and afterward.8 They speculated on what Moses was permitted to observe when God
instructed him. Did Moses see more than what is recorded in Exodus 33:18–23 (when God showed
him the glory of the Lord)?9
No tabernacle of the same proportions as Moses built exists in heaven. Scripture fails to give
any dimensions of the celestial tabernacle. Nor do we have the liberty to say that the heavenly
tabernacle exists only in the mind of God. Avoiding either extreme, we ought to take note of the
following Scripture passages where God instructed Moses to build the tabernacle:
1. “See that you make them according to the pattern shown you on the mountain” (Exod. 25:40).
2. “Set up the tabernacle according to the plan shown you on the mountain” (Exod. 26:30).
3. “Make the altar hollow, out of boards. It is to be made just as you were shown on the mountain”
(Exod. 27:8).
4. “The lampstand was made exactly like the pattern the LORD had shown Moses” (Num. 8:4).10
Because the Bible is a book about man’s redemption and not a revelation about heaven, we
ought to let the Scripture speak. Where the Scriptures are p 220 silent, we must be reticent. All we
know is that Christ entered the heavenly sanctuary that is not manmade (Heb. 9:24). Its earthly
counterpart was the ancient tabernacle that Moses erected according to the pattern God showed him.
c. “The pattern.” Moses received from God the blueprints for the construction of the tabernacle
and was repeatedly told to follow the instructions carefully (Exod. 25:40; also see Acts 7:44).
What precisely did Moses see when God gave him the pattern? To put it differently: Did Moses
receive only the pattern, or did he see the original? If he were given the blueprint of the tabernacle,
then he received, in effect, a plan from which he had to build a model—the tabernacle in the
desert.11
We do not know what Moses saw when God gave him the pattern for the earthly tabernacle.
Scripture tells us that our high priest Jesus Christ has gone “through the greater and more perfect
tabernacle that is not manmade, that is to say, not a part of this creation” (Heb. 9:11). This

8 For instance, see the writings of Philo, Life of Moses 2.76; Allegorical Interpretation 3.102.
And the Talmud, Kodashim, vol. 1, relates a saying from Rabbi Jose ben Judah: “An ark of fire and
a table of fire and a candlestick of fire came down from heaven; and these Moses saw and
reproduced, as it is written, ‘And see that thou make them after their pattern, which is being shown
thee in the mount’ ” (Menachoth 29a). Also see SB, vol. 3, pp. 702–4.
9 John Owen, in his Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace,
1960), vol. 6, pp. 44–45, remarks: “Whether this representation were made to Moses by the way of
internal vision, as the temple was represented unto Ezekiel, or whether there were an ethereal fabric
proposed unto his bodily senses, is hard to determine.”

0 0 The construction of the temple of Solomon followed a plan David gave Solomon in
writing. “ ‘All this,’ David said, ‘I have in writing from the hand of the LORD upon me, and he gave
me understanding in all the details of the plan’ ” (I Chron. 28:19; also see v. 12).

1 1 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok,

1955), p. 189. See also Leonhard Goppelt, TDNT, vol. 9, p. 258.
information is a source of comfort for us because we know that as our heavenly high priest, Jesus
intercedes for us. He is our mediator.
6. But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is
mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.
This verse is actually a continuation of 8:4, with the pronoun he (i.e., Jesus) as the subject of the
sentence. Although the author of Hebrews contrasts Jesus with the Levitical priests, in 8:6 the
primary emphasis is upon the difference in covenants rather than the difference in ministry. The
author somewhat abruptly introduces the concept of covenant that he mentioned in 7:22. He is ready
now to explain the implications of the new covenant that is superior to the old covenant. And he
shows that the Christ is the mediator of this new covenant.
Twice in this verse the word superior occurs: the ministry Jesus has obtained is superior to that
of the priests, and the new covenant is superior to the old one.
What is the ministry Christ has received?12 The word ministry relates to the work in the
tabernacle or sanctuary. If Jesus had merely fulfilled the responsibilities of the Aaronic priesthood
with his personal sacrifice, his work would be incomplete. Jesus fulfilled the obligations of the
Levitical priesthood and ushered in the era of the high priest in the order of Melchizedek. The old
system has yielded its place to the new, and in that new covenant Jesus has become the mediator.
In Old Testament times, high priests served as mediators between God p 221 and man. They
were mediators on the basis of the old covenant God had made with his people, but this covenant
has become obsolete (8:13) because the new one has taken its place. In succeeding verses the author
explains why the new covenant is superior to the old one.
However, the author gives a preliminary reason as to why the new covenant is better than the
old. Says he, “It is founded on better promises.” By implication, the promises given by God to his
people in earlier days were inadequate. The promises of the old covenant went together with the law
of Moses; new covenant promises include God’s law put in the minds and written on the hearts of
his people, the teaching of knowledge of the Lord, and the forgiving of sin (8:10–12).

Doctrinal Considerations in 8:1–6

When Jesus told the disciples in the upper room on the eve of his death, “And if I go and
prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I
am” (John 14:3), his promise included sitting with Christ on his throne (Rev. 3:21). Christ “has
made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father” (Rev. 1:6). Believers are kings
and priests with Christ. What a glorious promise!
Christ’s divine kingship differs from that of earthly kings. His kingship is one of service: he
intercedes for his people; that is, he presents the prayers and praises of his people before the throne
of God.13 He guarantees a place for his people in his Father’s house. Christ is the king-priest who
rules and serves his people.
The Levitical priests served God in the sanctuary erected by man. Incidentally, the writer of the
epistle consistently quotes from and alludes to passages of the Old Testament that mention the
tabernacle. Never does he mention the temple in Jerusalem. Even in Hebrews 13, where he
continually exhorts the readers and addresses his contemporaries, he refers to the tabernacle
(13:10), the high priest who takes animal blood into the Most Holy Place (“but the bodies are

2 2 The term ministry belongs to a word group that includes, in the original Greek, the verb to
serve (10:11), the noun ministry (8:6; 9:21), the noun servant (1:7; 8:2), and the adjective serving
(1:14).

3 3 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1950), p. 229.
burned outside the camp” [13:11]), and to Jesus, who “suffered outside the city gate” (13:12). The
context for the author’s teaching is the experience of the Israelites in the wilderness. That means the
writer refers to the beginning of the nation Israel when God made a covenant with the Israelites at
Mount Sinai, gave his people the law, and instituted the Levitical priesthood.
Jesus, having fulfilled the responsibilities of the Aaronic priesthood, serves God eternally in
“the true tabernacle” as high priest in the order of Melchizedek. Thus his priesthood is superior to
that of the sons of Levi. Jesus by his sacrificial death fulfilled the demands of the Old Testament
law and therefore made the old covenant obsolete. The new covenant, sealed with the blood of
Christ, is superior to the old one (Matt. 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; I Cor. 11:25). p 222

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:1–6

Verse 1
κεφάλαιον—this neuter substantivized adjective, without the definite article, means “the main
point” or “the summary.” The first meaning is preferred.
ἐπὶ τοῖς λεγομένοις—the preposition ἐπί followed by the dative case may be translated
“about”14 or “in addition to.”15 The definite article τοῖς and the present passive participle
λεγομένοις are in the neuter dative plural case. The author uses the present tense to stress the
significance of his discussion—“the things that are being said.”

Verse 2
τῶν ἁγίων—the neuter genitive plural adjective with the definite article is substantivized and
refers to the sanctuary. The author does not distinguish between tabernacle and Most Holy Place
(but see 9:3).
λειτουργός—the difference between the two word groups represented by the verbs λειτουργέω
(I serve in a public office or religious ministry) and λατρεύω (I serve) is not very pronounced in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, because both word groups relate to the worship of God.16

Verse 3
δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίας—the phrase is a repetition of Hebrews 5:1.
προσενέγκῃ—the aorist tense signifies single occurrence. The verb is the aorist subjunctive
active of προσφέρω (I offer). The use of the subjunctive is futuristic.17

Verse 5
κεχρημάτισται—the perfect passive indicative of the verb χρηματίζω (I admonish, instruct)
denotes instruction given by God to man in the form of revelation. This divine revelation often was

4 4 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical

Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 605.

5 5 Bauer, p. 287. Also see Harvey E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the
Greek New Testament (New York: Macmillan, 1957), p. 107.

6 6 R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p.
126. See also Klaus Hess, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 549–53; and Hermann Strathmann, TDNT, vol. 4,
pp. 58–65 and 215–22.

7 7 Robertson, Grammar, p. 928.

conveyed as a warning. The perfect tense implies lasting validity.
ὅρα ποιήσεις—the present active imperative ὅρα and the future active indicative are placed next
to each other without the use of καί. The words, as a quotation, are from Exodus 25:40, with minor
variation.

Verse 6
τέτυχεν—the verb τυγχάνω means “I hit the mark” and, more generally, “I attain.” The use of
the perfect indicates duration. p 223
ὅσῳ—this relative adjective lacks the corresponding adjective τοσούτῳ. Compare Hebrews 1:4.
ἥτις—the indefinite relative pronoun takes the place of the simple relative pronoun. It denotes
cause and thus gives the reason why the new covenant is superior to the old one.
νενομοθέτηται—see Hebrews 7:11.

C. God’s New Covenant

8:7–13

7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.
8 But God found fault with the people and said:
“The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant I made with
their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them,
declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will make with the
house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”
13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging
will soon disappear.

One of the author’s characteristics is to quote lengthy passages from the Old Testament (for
example, in 2:6–8 [Ps. 8:4–6]; 3:7–11 [Ps. 95:7–11]; and 10:5–7 [Ps. 40:6–8]). Usually he explains
and applies these passages in the succeeding context. However, when he quotes Jeremiah 31:31–34
in 8:8–12, he refrains from giving an explanation in the following chapter—instead, he quotes the
passage again, in 10:16–17. The author puts the quotation in the present context to prove his point
that God has revealed the replacement of the old covenant by the new.
7. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no p 224 place would have
been sought for another. 8a. But God found fault with the people and said …
Unfulfilled conditional sentences appear repeatedly in the Epistle to the Hebrews (see among
others 4:8, 7:11, and 8:4). Also in 8:7 the sentence is conditional. The argument demands an implied
response: “if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant” (but there was, for it was
inadequate), then “no place would have been sought for another” (but God indeed confirmed the
new covenant in Jeremiah 31:31–34).
For the author of the epistle, the Old Testament had not lost its validity when New Testament
revelation overshadowed it. Not at all. For him, the Old Testament remained the living Word of God
(1:1). But the coming of Christ and his ministry brought fulfillment to promise and prophecy.
Therefore the writer explains the passage from Jeremiah 31 in the light of Jesus’ coming. When
Christ came into the world, he abolished the old and established the new. The author employs the
terms first and second (“another” in the NIV).18
Speaking through David, in Psalm 110:4 God revealed the superiority of Melchizedek’s
priesthood; this superiority is also revealed through Jeremiah’s prophecy. In this prophecy God also
revealed the superiority of a new covenant. God himself instructed his people in the Old Testament
Scriptures, but these truths remained hidden until the author of Hebrews employed them in his
teachings.
Did God make a mistake when he established a covenant that had to be replaced in later years?
No, God’s word is true and without error. The fault in the first covenant did not lie with God but
with the people who were God’s covenant partners. They did not keep the conditions stipulated in
the covenant, and therefore “God found fault with the people.”19 However, if the people were to
blame for not keeping the covenant stipulations, the covenant itself could still be faultless. But in
quoting Jeremiah 31:31–34, the author of the epistle shows the weakness of the first covenant: it
was not put in the minds or written on the hearts of the people (8:10).20 Therefore, the old covenant
had to be replaced by the new.
8b. “The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
9. It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand p 225
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them,
declares the Lord.”

V IV New International Version

8 8 The author has a penchant for the use of the adjective first. See 8:7, 13; 9:1, 2, 8, 15, 18;
10:9.

9 9 “The context does not seem to indicate that the intrinsic nature of the commandments was
changed, but rather the mode of reception of the covenant,” says Thomas McComiskey in NIDNTT,
vol. 2, p. 145.

0 0 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 187.
 A covenant is drawn up when two parties agree on a contract. The contract spells out
stipulations that the parties must honor and a condition that, in case either party fails to meet the
requirements of the contract, the contract loses its binding force.
In 8:8b–9, a description of the old covenant is given: the two parties are mentioned; the
stipulations of the covenant are implied; and the condition is applied.
a. Two parties
Twice in the first part of the quotation the prophet Jeremiah uses the phrase declares the Lord. The
Lord God of Israel made a covenant with his people when he led them out of Egypt and had them
stand at the foot of Mount Sinai to receive his law (Exod. 20:1–17). The first party in the covenant
is God. He initiated it; he addressed the people of Israel at the beginning of their nationhood; and he
turned away from them when they failed to remain faithful to the Sinaitic covenant.
God declared that he would “make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of
Judah,” but he did not disclose when the new contract would be signed. The reference the time is
coming is decidedly indefinite. In historical perspective, the prophecy of Jeremiah could not have
been directed to Israel’s restoration after the exile, because the Old Testament indicates that the old
covenant was in force after the exile.21 The prophecy, therefore, heralds the coming of the Messiah
and the establishing of the new covenant in his blood (see Matt. 26:28 and parallels).
The phrases house of Israel and house of Judah call attention to the reunification of the nation
Israel; however, because the ten tribes of Israel failed to return after the exile, the phrases ought to
be understood in a more universalistic sense to include both Jews and Gentiles.
b. Implied stipulations
The old covenant God made with the people of Israel was God’s promise that he would be their
king. As king, God demanded obedience from his people. For this reason he gave them the law at
Sinai and told them that they would be “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6).
The Israelites were asked to obey God’s law with heart, soul, and strength (Deut. 6:5) and thus
to demonstrate their constant love for God. They listened to God’s commandments but neglected to
obey him. The law remained something external, for it was not written on their hearts.
Consequently, they refused to remain faithful to God’s covenant.
c. Applied condition
God’s response to the rebellious Israelites was to turn away from them. The relation between God
and his people at first had been p 226 intimate. God said, “I took them by the hand to lead them out
of Egypt.” God wanted his people to walk with him hand in hand, in full assurance and confidence.
But when the Israelites decided to walk alone, to disobey God’s law, and to ignore his voice calling
them to himself, he “turned away from them.”22 That is, God neglected them by leaving them to
their own willful ways. Instead of demonstrating tender loving care for his covenant people, God
assumed an attitude of unconcern for obstinate covenant breakers. By turning away from them God
made it known that the time for a new covenant would come. He remains a covenant God.
10. “This is the covenant I will make with the
house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.

1 1 Gerhard Charles Aalders, De Profeet Jeremia, Korte Verklaring, 2 vols. (Kampen: Kok,
1954), vol. 2, p. 88.

2 2 The translation of Jer. 31:32b in the Hebrew text (“because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to them, declares the LORD”) differs from the reading in Heb. 8:9b, which is
based on the Septuagint.
 I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11. No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12. For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”
The description of the new covenant is positive; the stipulations are not implied but clearly
stated in the form of four promises (8:6).
a. Written law
For the third time in this lengthy quotation Jeremiah writes “declares the Lord.” God himself makes
the new covenant with the people who belong to the messianic age. That is, Jew and Gentile as
believers make up “the house of Israel.” The era of the old covenant, characterized by the
exclusiveness of the nation Israel, has made way for a new age in which all nations are included
(Matt. 28:19).
Who belongs to the house of Israel? All those people, says God, in whose minds I will put my
laws and upon whose hearts I will write them. The expressions minds and hearts (parallel terms)
represent man’s inner being. God’s people experience the permeating power of God’s Word, so that
his law becomes a part of their conscience. That conscience is directed to the law of God, much the
same as a compass needle invariably points north.
b. Covenant God
Throughout Scripture God’s recurring message to his people is the promise: “I will be their God,
and they will be my people” (see, for example, Exod. 6:7; Lev. 26:12; Jer. 7:23; 11:4; II Cor. 6:16;
Rev. 21:3). God wanted to make the Israelite nation his special people; they were his “treasured
possession.” However, Israel could lose this favored status if the p 227 people refused to keep the
law of God. The covenant stipulated that God’s people would live a life of obedience.
In New Testament times, too, God addresses the believers in Jesus Christ and gives them the
covenant promise: “I will be [your] God, and [you] will be my people.” In this new covenant, God
is inseparably united with his people because God’s law has been inscribed on their hearts. He
communicates with his people through his revelation, and they communicate with him through
prayer. He encourages them to approach the throne of grace with confidence (Heb. 4:16), and he
makes it known that his name has been written on their foreheads (Rev. 14:1; 22:4). He wants to
have them address him as Father, for they are his children.
Ye children of God’s covenant,
Who of His grace have heard,
Forget not all His wondrous deeds
And judgments of His word.
The Lord our God is God alone,
All lands His judgments know;
His promise He remembers still,
While generations go.
—Psalter Hymnal

c. Universal knowledge
The next promise flows from the preceding promises. The knowledge of the Lord shall be universal.
In the history of Israel, God’s revelation came piecemeal “through the prophets at many times and
in various ways” (Heb. 1:1), and in one instance the Book of the Law was discovered in the temple
of the Lord. While the Book of the Law gathered dust, the people lived in ignorance (II Kings 22; II
Chron. 34:14–28). Ignorance of God’s revelation was appalling, and God’s prophets repeatedly
registered their complaints (see Isa. 1:3; Jer. 4:22; Hos. 4:6).
What a difference in New Testament times! Knowledge of the Lord will be universal, covering
the earth “as the waters cover the sea” (Isa. 11:9; Hab. 2:14). The need for individual teaching—“a
man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother,” “from the least of them to the greatest”—will
disappear because all people will know the Lord. Filled with the knowledge of the Lord, even
novices in the faith are able and equipped to witness for him. All those who have the law of God in
their hearts and minds acknowledge God’s grace and mercy. They know that their sins have been
forgiven and that their record has been wiped clean.
d. Complete remission
When God forgives sin, he does so by never remembering man’s sin again. That means that when
forgiven, man is like Adam and Eve in Paradise: without sin. Man, forgiven by God, is accepted as
if he had never sinned at all. God says, “I will remember [his] sins no more.” In the new covenant,
grace and mercy are freely given to all God’s children. God gives these blessings in the name of his
Son, who is the mediator of a new covenant. This new covenant established through the death of
Jesus on the cross is the believer’s guarantee that his sins are forgiven and forgotten. p 228
13. By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete
and aging will soon disappear.
God himself introduced the word new when he said, “I will make a new covenant with the house
of Israel and with the house of Judah” (8:8). In Christ the new covenant has become reality;
consequently, the old covenant has become obsolete. God himself told his people, at first through
the prophecy of Jeremiah and then in New Testament times through the writer of Hebrews. The Jew
of the first century, therefore, had to realize that the era of the covenant God made with his people
at Sinai had ended.
Already in the days of Jeremiah, approximately six hundred years before the birth of Christ,
God spoke of a new covenant. By implication, the existing covenant was then already “obsolete and
aging.”23
What then is the difference between the old and the new? For one thing, in the days of the old
covenant the sinner repeatedly had to present animal offerings to the Lord God to obtain remission
of sin. In the new covenant sinners are forgiven through the one-time sacrifice of Jesus. Their
offerings consist of dedicated lives that express gratitude to God and joyfully keep his commands.
The old covenant was rather restrictive; it was made with Israel, God’s special people. The new
covenant embraces all nations; all those who believe in Jesus Christ are his “treasured possession.”
Therefore, with the coming of Pentecost, the new covenant made its presence felt. The old covenant
had to be put away.
The writer of Hebrews, however, does not specify a time or describe circumstances when the
old covenant will disappear. His conclusion to chapter 8 is rather general: “and what is obsolete and
aging will soon disappear.”

Doctrinal Considerations in 8:7–13

3 3 Hughes ventures the idea that 8:13 is an oblique reference to the temple services prior to
the destruction of Jerusalem. He sees this reference, then, as a silent witness to the time when the
epistle was written—before A.D. 70.
 The old covenant was based on the law of God given to the Israelites during the first part of
their wilderness journey. Although the law which was basic to the covenant was perfect, it could not
make man perfect (Heb. 7:11, 19). Because of the inherent weakness—not in the covenant, as such,
but in man—God inaugurated a new covenant. The new came forth out of the old and for a while
both covenants existed side by side: the new took over when the old began to disappear (8:13).
The inadequacy of the old covenant was completely overshadowed by the adequacy of Christ.
Christ became the mediator of this new covenant that was superior to the old covenant. The writer
of Hebrews employs comparative adjectives to indicate the difference between old and new:
Christ’s superior ministry, the superior covenant, and the better promises (8:6). Jesus is “the
guarantee of a better covenant” (7:22; italics added). p 229
Whereas the old covenant was an external manifestation of God’s grace, the new covenant
involves the individual believer. God made the old covenant with the nation Israel and gave the
people his laws written on tablets of stone. He establishes the new covenant with the believer in
Christ and writes God’s law on the believer’s heart. With this law written on his inmost being, the
believer has an intimate relationship with God through Christ.
The new covenant has two parties: God and his people. To be precise, the people of God are the
true believers who have experienced genuine repentance and who demonstrate saving faith in
Christ. God gives his people the promise: “I will be [your] God, and [you] will be my people”
(8:10). God assumes that his people will keep the demands of his law written on their hearts, that
they will always show their love and obedience to him, and that they will grow in their knowledge
of salvation. God will not forget his promise. In fact, “He cannot and may not break His covenant;
He has committed Himself to maintaining it with a freely given and precious oath: His name, His
honor, His reputation depends on it.”24

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:7–13

Verse 7
εἰ—this conditional particle, followed by the imperfect indicative ῆ̓ν in the protasis and οὐκ ἄν
in the apodosis, introduces the contrary-to-fact condition.
τόπος—the word place refers to the history of redemption.

Verse 8
μεμφόμενος—together with ἄμεμπτος (blameless) in 8:7, the present middle participle derives
from μέμφομαι (I find fault). The participle can take either αὐτούς as direct object or αὐτοῖς. The
external manuscript evidence for either reading is about equally divided. The reading αὐτοῖς can
also be connected with the verb λέγει (he said to them).
συντελέσω—the future active indicative from συντελέω (I fulfill) differs from the Septuagint
text (Jer. 38:31), which reads διαθήσομαι (from διατίθημι, I decree, ordain). In this rather lengthy
citation—the longest in the entire New Testament—numerous variations from the Septuagint text
appear. Whether these variations originated during the process of copying the text or because of
liturgical usage in the church is difficult to determine.25
καινήν—the adjective is used with διαθήκη in I Corinthians 11:25 and II Corinthians 3:6, in
addition to Hebrews 8:8. The adjective conveys the idea of newness that comes forth out of the old

4 4 Herman Bavinck, Our Reasonable Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), pp. 274–75.

5 5 Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Van
Soest, 1961), pp. 41–42.
and may even exist alongside the old: the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Verse 9
ἐπιλαβομένου μου τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν—the genitive absolute construction consists of the aorist
middle participle from ἐπιλαμβάνομαι (I take hold of) and the personal p 230 pronoun μου from
ἐγώ (I). The participle governs the genitive case of τῆς χειρός (the hand); the pronoun αὐτῶν is
possessive. The construction of this phrase is somewhat unusual.26
ἠμέλησα—the aorist active indicative of ἀμελέω (I neglect, disregard), derived from ἀ (not) and
μέλω (I care for). The verb is expressive. See also Matthew 22:5, I Timothy 4:14, and Hebrews 2:3.

Verse 11
γνῶθι τὸν κύριον—the second aorist active imperative of γινώσκω (I know) expresses the
concept of learning the commandments of God. The verb is followed by εἰδήσουσιν, the future
perfect of οἶδα (I know), understood as a simple future indicative. The contrast between γινώσκω
and οἶδα is significant in this verse. The first means acquiring knowledge, the second possessing
knowledge.

Verse 13
ἐν τῷ λέγειν—the articular present infinitive with the preposition ἐν is in the dative case. The
dative expresses time; that is, “while he is saying.”
πεπαλαίωκεν—from the verb παλαιόω (I make old), the perfect active suggests action with
lasting result. The active, not the passive, is used to indicate that God has declared the covenant old.
ἀφανισμοῦ—this noun, translated as “disappearance,” derives from the verb ἀφανίζω (I make
invisible), which is a compound of ἀ (not) and φαίνω (I appear). The genitive case is dependent on
the adverb ἐγγύς (near), which is pressed into service as a preposition.

Summary of Chapter 8
In some ways chapter 8 is an extended commentary on 7:22, where the author introduces the
concept covenant. He explains the word by quoting at length from a prophetic passage in the Book
of Jeremiah. Yet he fails to interpret the term covenant. He does that in the following chapter (9:15–
22). The quotation from Jeremiah 31:31–34, however, serves the purpose of showing the readers
that God himself in the days of Jeremiah had already declared the covenant made with Israel to be
obsolete.
The author, as a careful teacher of theology, utilizes the Old Testament Scriptures to show that
God revealed the appearance of the new covenant centuries before the birth of Christ. Just as God
himself appointed Christ as high priest in the order of Melchizedek, so he established a new
covenant of which Christ would be the high priest.
The old order of the Levitical priesthood eventually had to come to an end. The sanctuary at
which the priests served was “a copy and shadow of what is in heaven.” By contrast, the sanctuary
at which Jesus serves as high p 231 priest is the true tabernacle in the presence of God himself. The
earthly sanctuary was temporal; the heavenly sanctuary is eternal.
As the heavenly tabernacle is superior to the earthly sanctuary, so the new covenant, of which
Jesus is the mediator, is superior to the old covenant. The new covenant is better because of the
promises God gives to his people. And Jesus, who is the mediator of this new covenant, guarantees
these promises: to know God, to treasure his revelation, and to experience complete forgiveness of
sin.

6 6 Robertson, Grammar, p. 514.

 p 232 9. Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice, part 2
(9:1–28) p 234
Outline
D. The Earthly Sanctuary

9:1–5 1. The First Covenant and the

Tabernacle

9:6–10 2. The High Priest and the Most Holy

Place

E. Jesus’ Sacrificial Blood

9:11–14 1. Christ’s Blood Cleanses Our

Consciences

9:15 2. Christ’s Death and the First Covenant

9:16–22 3. Christ’s Blood Procures Forgiveness

9:23–28 4. Christ’s Perfect Sacrifice

D. The Earthly Sanctuary

9:1–10

9 1 Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. 2 A tabernacle was
set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread; this was called the Holy
Place. 3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, 4 which had the golden altar of
incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that
had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 5 Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory,
overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.
6 When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry
on their ministry. 7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never
without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8 The
Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as
the first tabernacle was still standing. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts
and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter
of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new
order.
 1. The First Covenant and the Tabernacle
9:1–5
Every chapter in the Epistle to the Hebrews has its own central message. For example: chapter 5,
Christ is superior to Aaron the high priest; chapter 7, Christ is high priest in the order of
Melchizedek; and chapter 9, Christ offers himself as a sacrifice once for all.
Although the topic of the covenant has become an integral part of the epistle at this point, the
author nevertheless has to link the topic to the continuing discussion of the priesthood of Christ. In
chapter 9 the author of Hebrews brings together these two strands and weaves them into a grand
design. He portrays the construction of the tabernacle of the desert period, enumerates the various
furnishings inside the sanctuary, and mentions the Most High Place with the ark and the cherubim.
1. Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary.
The writer of Hebrews contrasts the old and new covenants in the last p 236 verse of the
preceding chapter. Consistently he calls the old covenant the first (8:7, 13; 9:1, 15, 18). Because he
has already spoken of the tabernacle Moses was told to build (8:5), he now has to show a
connection between covenant and tabernacle.
As a trained theologian the writer has the Old Testament Scriptures at hand. The first covenant
was confirmed by the people of Israel just before Moses received the design for the construction of
the tabernacle (Exod. 24). The design for the tabernacle and its contents, the regulations for
worship, and the construction of the “earthly sanctuary” are recorded in succeeding chapters.
Incidentally, the descriptive adjective earthly must be understood as the counterpart of the
description greater and more perfect that is applied to the “tabernacle that is not man-made” (9:11;
also see 8:2).
The covenant, says the writer, includes two matters.
a. “Regulations for worship.” God did not leave the practice of worship to the invention of the
Israelites. With the design for the tabernacle, God also gave Moses the detailed ordinances for
divine worship (see, for instance, Exod. 29, 30). In other words, Moses passed on to the Israelites
God-ordained regulations for worship.
b. “Earthly sanctuary.” Rules for worship and the mandate for the erection of the sanctuary are
closely connected in Exodus 25–30. And even in Hebrews 9:1, the phrases regulations for worship
and earthly sanctuary are joined by a connective particle that is translated “and also.”
The word sanctuary may have been chosen for stylistic reasons. The writer uses the term
tabernacle in the next verse, but throughout his epistle he refrains from employing the expression
temple. Some commentators see this choice of words as a clear indication that when the author
wrote Hebrews, the Jerusalem temple already had been destroyed. Other commentators say that the
choice is a matter of basics: the tabernacle is basic to the temple. Although this comment is
commendable, I think that the determinative factor in the writer’s choice of words, at least for
chapters 8 and 9, is the close link between the confirmation of the covenant (Exod. 24) and the
mandate to construct the tabernacle (Exod. 25–27).
2. A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table and the
consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. 3. Behind the second curtain was a room
called the Most Holy Place, 4. which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark
of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and
the stone tablets of the covenant.
Mainly from passages in Exodus 16, 25, 26, and 30, as well as in Numbers 17, the author
gleaned the information for his description of the interior and furniture of the tabernacle. Note that
he describes the tabernacle as a structure with two rooms: the first room is called the Holy Place,
and the second room is known as the Most Holy Place.
a. The first room
In the Holy Place, the larger of the two rooms, were the lampstand, the table, and the consecrated
bread. The lampstand, according p 237 to Exodus 25:31–39, was a most beautifully crafted piece of
furniture. It was made of seventy-five pounds (thirty-four kilograms) of gold, consisting of a base
and shaft from which six branches extended—three to one side of the shaft and three to the other. At
the top of these six branches and shaft were cups decorated “like almond flowers with buds and
blossoms” (Exod. 25:34). The lampstand was placed on the south side of the Holy Place (Exod.
40:24).
The table, made of acacia wood, was about 3¾ feet (about 1.1 meters) long and 2¼ feet (about
0.7 meter) wide. It was covered with pure gold (Exod. 25:23, 24), and the “bread of the Presence”
(Exod. 25:30) was placed on it. The table was located on the north side of the Holy Place (Exod.
40:22).
Twelve loaves of bread, representing the twelve tribes of Israel, were placed on this table (Lev.
24:5–9). The bread was known as “the bread of presentation” or “consecrated bread” (see Matt.
12:4; Mark 2:26; Luke 6:4). The author of the epistle mentions table and bread in the same breath to
indicate that they belong together.
b. The second room
Inside the tabernacle was another curtain that separated the Most Holy Place from the Holy Place.
This room contained, according to the writer of Hebrews, “the golden altar of incense and the gold-
covered ark of the covenant.” Questions about these two items have caused much debate. We shall
consider them in sequence.
1. “The golden altar of incense.” The altar for burning incense was made of acacia wood and
covered with pure gold. It was square, about 1½ feet (about 0.5 meter) in length and width and
about 3 feet (about 0.9 meter) high (Exod. 30:1–6). God instructed Moses to “put the altar in front
of the curtain that is before the ark of the Testimony” (Exod. 30:6), and this is exactly what Moses
did (Exod. 40:26). The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, however, states that the altar was with
the ark in the Most Holy Place, but this is contrary to the divine instructions Moses received and
followed. See the diagram of the tabernacle (Fig. 1).
Obviously, we face a problem that is not easy to solve. Some commentators are rather quick in
saying that the author must have made a mistake or was

p 238

unacquainted with the description of the interior of the tabernacle.1 But that is hardly plausible in
view of the detailed knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures he exhibits in his epistle.
Admittedly, the author could have been influenced by the description of Solomon’s temple in which
the altar “belonged to the inner sanctuary” (I Kings 6:22). However, the author of Hebrews makes
no mention of Solomon’s temple. In the postexilic temple the altar of incense was located in the
Holy Place, not in the Most Holy Place (Luke 1:11). Zechariah was a priest (not a high priest) who
“was chosen by lot … to go into the temple of the Lord and burn incense” (Luke 1:9). He could
serve only in the Holy Place.2
Other commentators take the expression the altar of incense to mean “censer,” that is, a

1 Hugh Montefiore, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York and Evanston: Harper and Row,
1964), p. 145, writes: “Possibly our author has made a slight slip and placed the altar in the wrong
part of the Tent.” Myles M. Bourke in “The Epistle to the Hebrews,” The Jerome Biblical
Commentary, vol. 2, The New Testament and Topical Articles (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-
Hall, 1968), p. 396, states: “It seems that the author has made a mistake here, caused probably by
the fact that he was not speaking from personal knowledge of the Temple, which replaced the
Mosaic Tabernacle, but was merely repeating, and in this case misinterpreting, the description of the
Tabernacle found in Exodus.”
2 For comments of Jewish contemporaries see Philo in The Life of Moses 2.101 (LCL);
Josephus, Jewish Wars 5.21 and Antiquities of the Jews 3.147, 198 (LCL); and Talmud, Yoma 47a;
Moed 3. SB, vol. 3, p. 737.
container for burning incense. This interpretation, which was common in the Middle Ages and the
time of the Reformation (see the Bible translations of that day), is based on the translation of the
Greek word for “altar of incense.”3 In II Chronicles 26:19 and Ezekiel 8:11, the translation is
“censer.” The interpretation, then, is that the high priest used the container for burning incense once
a year and that he left it permanently in the Most Holy Place. Thus the censer was always with the
ark in the inner sanctuary. This view does not seem to remove the difficulties we face. The passages
in Exodus 30 and 40 speak of an altar, not of a censer. Also, the altar of incense filled an important
function in the Holy Place. Every morning and every evening Aaron or one of his male descendants
had to burn incense on the altar (Exod. 30:7–8). The altar of incense was much more significant
than a censer.
However, on the Day of Atonement the high priest had “to take a censer full of burning coals
from the altar before the LORD and two handfuls of finely ground fragrant incense and take them
behind the curtain” (Lev. 16:12). On that special day, once a year, the censer became the extension
of the altar of incense. The smoke of the incense had to conceal the atonement cover of the ark, so
that the high priest would not die (v. 13). The function of the altar could not be obstructed by a
curtain separating the Most Holy Place from the Holy Place. Thus, the censer momentarily entered
behind the curtain as an extension of the altar of incense.
We should also note that on the Day of Atonement the high priest cleansed p 239 the altar of
incense by sprinkling animal blood on the horns of the altar (Exod. 30:10). Once a year the altar
was “most holy to the LORD” (v. 10) and could be mentioned with the ark of the covenant.
In Hebrews 9 the author stresses the prominence of the Day of Atonement (v. 7). For him, the
altar of incense and the ark were the most important objects.
2. “The gold-covered ark of the covenant.” A chest made of acacia wood, the ark was 3¾ feet
(about 1.1 meters) long, 2¼ feet (about 0.7 meter) wide, and 2¼ feet (about 0.7 meter) high. It was
completely covered with pure gold. It was permanently located in the Most Holy Place except when
the Lord God told the Israelites to continue their wilderness journey. Then the priests were to carry
the ark. Later, except when the ark was in Philistine cities and in the houses of Abinadab (I Sam. 4
and 6) and Obed-Edom (II Sam. 6:10–12), the ark remained in the tabernacle and subsequently the
temple.4
The ark “contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of
the covenant.” These objects came from Israel’s history. First, the jar filled with manna was placed
“before the LORD to be kept for the generations to come” (Exod. 16:33). The author of Hebrews
used the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew text, for that translation has the reading gold jar. Only
the author conveys the information that the gold jar had a place inside the ark.
The second item was Aaron’s staff that “had not only sprouted but had budded, blossomed and
produced almonds” (Num. 17:8). This staff was put “in front of the Testimony” (v. 10). The Old
Testament provides no information about depositing the staff inside the ark. If the ark indeed
contained this rod, it would have had to conform to the size of the ark. When the ark was placed in
the temple of Solomon, it contained nothing “except the two stone tablets that Moses had placed in
it at Horeb” (I Kings 8:9; II Chron. 5:10). Because of Scripture’s silence, we are unable to draw any
conclusions on these matters.
The two stone tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments were to be placed in the ark. And
this was exactly what Moses did (Deut. 10:1–5). The author of Hebrews calls the ark and the tablets
covenant objects. That is, both the ark and the Ten Commandments testified to the covenant
relationship God had with the Israelites. The ark symbolized God’s sacred presence in the midst of
his people and gave visual meaning to God’s promise, “I will be your God.” The two stone tablets
were a constant reminder to the people of Israel to keep the law of God, so that in obedience they
could be his people.

3 The KJV and RV read “golden censer.”

4 After the exile, the rebuilt temple seemed to have had nothing at all in the Most Holy Place.
Josephus, Jewish Wars 1.152–53; Antiquities 14.71, 72 (LCL).
 5a. Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover.
The writer returns to his description of the lid of the sacred chest. It was p 240 made of pure
gold and measured 3¾ feet (about 1.1 meters) by 2¼ feet (about 0.7 meter). On top of the cover
were two angels, called cherubim, made of hammered gold. These two faced each other, with wings
outspread covering the ark, and looked down toward the ark (Exod 25:17–22; 37:6–9).
God placed cherubim at the east side of the Garden of Eden “to guard the way to the tree of life”
(Gen. 3:24). The posture of the cherubim on the cover of the ark projects the idea of guarding the
way to God. Between the two cherubim God dwells, for from that place Moses heard God speak
(Num. 7:89). God is “enthroned between the cherubim” (I Sam. 4:4; II Sam. 6:2; II Kings 19:15; Ps.
80:1; 99:1; Isa. 37:16).
The expression cherubim of the Glory, an obvious reference to God’s glory, represents a glimpse
of the heavenly glory. As Paul puts it in his First Epistle to Timothy: “God … alone is immortal and
… lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see” (6:15–16).
With their outspread wings the cherubim were “overshadowing the place of atonement.”
Another translation for “atonement cover” is “mercy seat.” God appeared “in the cloud over the
atonement cover” (Lev. 16:2), and no one, not even the high priest, was permitted to approach God.
Who then might come before God? Only on the Day of Atonement might the high priest come
sprinkling the blood of a bull seven times on the atonement cover (Lev. 16:14). The lasting
ordinance was: “Atonement is to be made once a year for all the sins of the Israelites” (v. 34). God
showed mercy once a year.
5b. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.
The author is vitally interested in showing the insufficiency of gifts and sacrifices brought to
God, for they could not “clear the conscience of the worshiper” (9:9). He is eager to discuss the
sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice (9:11–14). Therefore, he somewhat abruptly discontinues the
consideration of the tabernacle furniture. An extended discussion on this topic would not suit the
author’s purpose.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:1–5

Verse 1
εἶχε—the descriptive imperfect active indicative of ἔχω (I have, hold) relates to the entire span
of history in which the old covenant functioned.
ἡ πρώτη—the noun must be supplied. The context seems to suggest the word διαθήκη (see
8:13). Some manuscripts have the reading σκηνή (tabernacle).
δικαιώματα—this noun belongs to the family that has the basic root δικ (show, point).5 The
noun translated “regulations” lacks the definite article (see 9:10). The -μα ending of the singular
expresses the result of an action; that is, God spoke to the Israelites and laid down divine
regulations.
p 241 λατρείας—this noun can be either a genitive singular as an objective genitive (for
worship) or an accusative plural (see 9:6, which has the definite article). The genitive singular is
preferred.

Verse 2
σκηνή—the position of this noun is unique: without the definite article it stands first in the
sentence and thus receives all the emphasis it needs. The noun, however, is defined by the definite
article and adjective ἡ πρώτη. The adjective conveys the idea of two rooms in one tabernacle, not

5 Bruce M. Metzger, Lexical Aids for Students of New Testament Greek (Princeton, N.J.:
published by the author, 1969), p. 54.
two tabernacles.
ἅγια—the accent mark indicates that this substantivized adjective is the neuter plural, not the
feminine singular, which is ἁγία. The adjective lacks the definite article (see also 9:24). The writer
of Hebrews builds a sequence of τὸ ἅγιον (9:1), ἅγια (9:2), and ἅγια ἁγίων (9:3). Says Norman H.
Young, “It is best to take verse 2 as a neuter plural and allow the use of this form for a description
of the outer tent (as in verse 2) as exceptional.”6

Verse 3
μετά—this preposition controls the accusative case of τὸ καταπέτασμα as an accusative of
place. For the use of καταπέτασμα, see Hebrews 6:19. This noun is modified by the adjective
δεύτερον, which implies a first curtain of less importance than the second.
ἅγια ἁγίων—the definite articles are lacking. See the Septuagint reading of Exodus 26:33; I
Kings 6:16; 7:50; 8:6; II Chronicles 4:22; 5:7.

Verse 4
ἔχουσα—as a feminine present participle of ἔχω (I have, hold), it takes θυμιατήριον (altar) and
κιβωτόν (ark) as direct objects. The participle does not differentiate and treats both objects alike.
περικεκαλυμμένην—a perfect passive participle derived from the compound περί (around) and
καλύπτω (I cover). In 9:4, the author emphasizes the beauty of the Most Holy Place by using the
noun gold once and the adjective golden twice.

Verse 5
αὐτῆς—the antecedent of this pronoun is τὴν κιβωτόν (9:4). It is in the genitive case because of
the adverb ὑπεράνω (above) used as a preposition.
κατασκιάζοντα—this present active participle from κατασκιάζω (I overshadow) has a single
occurrence in the New Testament. It is an intensive compound with the meaning “covering the lid of
the ark completely with shade.” And last, the participle is plural, because its subject χερουβίν is a
transliterated plural.

p 242 2. The High Priest and the Most Holy Place

9:6–10
The author of Hebrews in 9:6–10 places in sharper focus the contrast alluded to in 9:1. He shows
that the “regulations for worship” were external and consequently temporal. And he notes that the
high priest entered the Most Holy Place only once a year; priests had no access to the inner
sanctuary. As representatives of the people, priests and high priests faced limitations.
6. When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the
outer room to carry on their ministry. 7. But only the high priest entered the inner room, and
that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins
the people had committed in ignorance.
From a description of tabernacle and sanctuary furniture, the author moves to an explanation of
the duties of priests and high priest. He notes that “the priests entered regularly into the outer room
to carry on their ministry.” The Old Testament teaches what these duties were: to burn incense every
morning and evening (Exod. 30:7–8), to tend to the lamps of the lampstand “from evening till
morning” (Exod. 27:21), and to replace the twelve loaves on the table each Sabbath (Lev. 24:8–9).
The New Testament teaches that according to a custom of that day, priests were chosen by lot to

6 Norman H. Young, “The Gospel According to Hebrews 9, ” NTS 27 (1981): 198. James
Swetnam, in “Hebrews 9:2, ” CBQ 32 (1970): 205–21, gives the interpretation that “what the author
has in mind when he uses the word hagia is the elements of the eucharistic bread” (p. 208).
enter the temple and burn incense (Luke 1:9).
However, because priests were not allowed to go beyond the Holy Place, they did not have
access to God. That privilege was given to the high priest. But even he was restricted in
approaching God. First, of all the people in Israel, he alone was appointed to enter the presence of
God. Next, he was permitted to come before God only once a year, that is, on the Day of Atonement
(the tenth day of the seventh month—about the end of September to the beginning of October [Lev.
23:26; Num. 29:7]). On this particular day, the high priest entered the Most Holy Place. A third
restriction was that he might never enter without the sacrificial blood of an animal: the blood of a
bull at first and then the blood of a goat (Lev. 16:14–15). The high priest, therefore, went into the
inner sanctuary twice. The last stipulation concerned sin. The high priest sprinkled the blood of the
bull on and in front of the cover of the ark (called the atonement cover) as a sin offering for himself
and his household (Lev. 16:11, 14). He offered this blood to God for the purpose of covering his sin
and the sin of his family. After that, he entered the Most Holy Place again, but now with the blood
of a goat. This he sprinkled on and before the atonement cover. This offering covered the sins of the
people (vv. 15–16).
Whereas the Old Testament teaches that the high priest made “atonement for the Most Holy
Place because of the uncleanness and rebellion of the Israelites, whatever their sins [had] been”
(Lev. 16:16, italics added), the author of Hebrews writes that the high priest offered sacrifices “for
the sins the people had committed in ignorance” (Heb. 9:7, italics added). The Old Testament p 243
makes a clear distinction between sins committed unintentionally (that is, in ignorance) and those
sins man commits defiantly. Unintentional sins will be forgiven; intentional sins cannot be forgiven,
for the man who commits them “blasphemes the LORD” (Num. 15:22–31, especially v. 30). The
writer of Hebrews underscores the consequences of intentional sin (see 3:16–19; 6:4–6; and 10:26–
27). He also mentions the duties of the high priest, who “is able to deal gently with those who are
ignorant and are going astray” (5:2). The good news is that God forgives sin. Nevertheless, access
to God was restricted when the old covenant was in force.
8. The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet
been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing.
The author’s high view of Scripture is expressed once more. In Hebrews 3:7 he introduced the
Holy Spirit as speaker of a psalm citation (see also 10:15). The Spirit speaks and interprets the Word
of God. He discloses the meaning of the Word (John 14:26; 15:26) and guides the believer in the
truth.7 The Holy Spirit makes it plain that he is involved in the work of redemption.
We note two things.
a. The way to God’s presence was not yet opened during the time of the old covenant. That
means the people were not allowed to enter the tabernacle; only the priests went into the outer
sanctuary to perform their duties. The priests, however, were forbidden to appear before God in the
inner sanctuary; only the high priest, as the representative of the people and the priests, might enter
the Most Holy Place once a year. Apart from this single exception, God had effectively separated
himself from man. A curtain veiled the way to God.
b. The Holy Spirit indicated that “the way into the Most Holy Place had not … been disclosed”
until the coming of Jesus. By his death, the Son of God opened the way to God. When Jesus died on
Calvary’s cross, “the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom” (Matt. 27:51; Mark
15:38). Although the Most Holy Place was empty at the time of Jesus’ death, the tearing of the
curtain signified that the separation between God and man had ended.
This separation would not end “as long as the first tabernacle was still standing.” The word first
may mean first in rank. If this is the interpretation of “first,” the word refers to the inner sanctuary.
But because of the tearing of the curtain, the first room had ceased to exist separately. The first and
second rooms became one, and man gained access to God without priestly mediation.
We can also understand the expression first to mean the earthly sanctuary made by Moses in the

7 The tense of the participle showing in Heb. 9:8 can be translated either in the past tense
(NAB, NIV) or in the present tense (JB, GNB, MLB, R.S.V., NEB, Phillips, NASB).
desert. The implied second sanctuary, then, is the heavenly “tabernacle set up by the Lord” (Heb.
8:2; see also 9:11). p 244
Of the two interpretations, the second seems to be more in line with the author’s train of
thought. He exhorts the believers to approach God, for “we have confidence to enter the Most Holy
Place by the blood of Jesus” (10:19).
9. This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being
offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper.
Some translations take the words “this is an illustration for the present time” parenthetically.8
But this is not necessary if we understand the antecedent of the word this to be “the first
tabernacle.” This structure and all that is represented served as an illustration—the original Greek
has the word parable. What does the illustration prove? It shows that the sacrificial system of the
first tabernacle period failed to bring perfection because “the gifts and sacrifices being offered were
not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper.”
The writer sees the first tabernacle as an illustration of that which is real. The illustration itself,
then, is not identical to reality. To make this clear to the reader, the author introduces the word
conscience. That is a significant word, for man’s conscience is the barometer of his moral
sensitivity to deeds performed. Before the death of Christ, believers driven by a guilty conscience
brought gifts and sacrifices to God. But these offerings, given to the priest who served as
intermediary, did not quiet the awakened conscience of the worshiper. Gifts and sacrifices failed to
remove guilt that continued to bother the believer’s conscience. They could not clear the conscience
of the sinner who came to God with offerings. They were unable to make the worshiper whole,
perfect, and complete with respect to his conscience.
Therefore, the illustration points to reality. Gifts and sacrifices made the believer outwardly
clean, ceremonially, but the blood of Christ removes sin, cleanses the conscience, and makes man
whole. That is reality (see Heb. 9:13–14).
10. They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external
regulations applying until the time of the new order.
What do these gifts and sacrifices accomplish? The first thing we must keep in mind is that they
were on the same level as divine injunctions that regulated the life of the Old Testament believer.
These commandments pertained to the daily practices of eating, drinking, and staying clean
outwardly. Next, these regulations were imposed on the believer by God when he spoke through
Moses. God gave the Israelites rules concerning clean and unclean foods (Lev. 11; see also Heb.
13:9), grain offerings and drink offerings (Num. 6:15, 17; 28:7–8), and matters of cleanliness (Num.
19:13). These rules and regulations are only external. The writer stresses the word only to mean
“that and nothing more.” We see that the author has returned to the subject of external regulations
that he introduced in 9:1.
To return to the question: “What do these external rules accomplish?” We p 245 must say they
were not unprofitable. God gave them to his people for their own benefit and well-being; also he
gave them the assurance that they were his special people who lived in harmony with his laws and
rules. But apart from these objectives the external regulations did not advance the believer in his
search for the cleansing of his soul. External rules achieve external objectives. A God-fearing
Israelite could abstain from unclean food, cleanse himself from defilement, offer acceptable gifts
and sacrifices to God; yet he remained within the structure of the old covenant. Keeping the
commandments actually became a preventive action on the part of the Israelite; this enabled him to
stay within the nation Israel and to continue as a member of God’s people. But the external
ceremonial rules and regulations were not meant to cleanse the believer’s conscience and to renew
him spiritually.
In both verses 9 and 10, the author employs the word time—“for the present time” and “until the
time of the new order.” Both verses convey the idea of a limited period: the first use refers to the
time in which we see the first tabernacle as an illustration of reality; the second relates to the

8 See the R.S.V., NEB, and Moffatt.

coming of the messianic age in which the new order prevails.

Practical Considerations in 9:1–10

We know that the Jewish people of Jesus’ day were burdened by the numerous manmade laws
they had to observe (Matt. 23:3–4). For instance, on one particular Sabbath, Jesus’ disciples picked
ears of grain, rubbed them in their hands, and ate the kernels of grain (Luke 6:1 and parallels). In
the eyes of the Pharisees, the disciples had transgressed the commandment “Remember the Sabbath
day by keeping it holy” (Exod. 20:8). They were guilty on two counts: first, they had violated the
manmade law “you shall not harvest on the Sabbath” when they picked the ears of grain; and
second, they had rubbed the ears of grain in their hands in violation of the manmade law “you shall
not thresh on the Sabbath.”
Although we may smile at practices current in first-century Palestine, we ought to be careful not
to elevate our traditions to the level of law and enforce them rigidly. Especially with traditions
relating to worship services, we have a tendency to be unbending. Although many of our traditions
have become sacred, we should be careful not to stress external observances of certain practices at
the expense of internal attitudes and needs. “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and
contrite heart, O God, you will not despise” (Ps. 51:17).
Through the faithful preaching of God’s Word, man’s conscience must become increasingly
sensitive. As a compass needle constantly points north, so our consciences always must turn to
Scripture first. Our spiritual forefathers, discussing matters pertaining to life or conduct, used to ask,
“What does the Bible say?” That question is still valid today.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:6–10

Verve 6
κατεσκευασμένων—the perfect passive participle in the genitive absolute construction derives
from the intensive compound verb κατασκευάζω (I prepare p 246 thoroughly). The perfect tense
denotes the resultant state of those things that had been arranged.
διὰ παντός—the noun χρόνου (in the genitive case) should be supplied to make the phrase
complete, but it was never used. The expression means “always, continually, regularly.”
εἰσίασιν—this present active indicative form is from the compound verb εἰς (into) and εἶμι (I
go).

Verse 7
ἅπαξ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ—the genitive of time is introduced by the adverb ἅπαξ (once). This adverb
appears fifteen times in the New Testament, eight of which are in Hebrews.
ἀγνοημάτων—apart from three occurrences in the Septuagint, this noun appears only once in
the New Testament. The -μα ending indicates the result of an action; the privative ἀ (not) combines
with the verb γνοέω (from γινώσκω, I know). The genitive case depends on the preposition ὑπέρ.

Verse 8
δηλοῦντος—the present active participle in the genitive absolute construction from δηλόω (I
make known) is followed by the indirect discourse clause with the accusative subject τὴν ὁδόν (the
way) and the perfect passive infinitive πεφανερῶσθαι (from φανερόω, I reveal).
τῶν ἁγίων—because the adjective can be either masculine or neuter, it can be interpreted to
mean “saints” (masculine) or “holy things” (neuter). The context favors the use of the neuter with
the translation Most Holy Place. The genitive is objective.
ἐχούσης—with the noun σκηνῆς (tabernacle) it forms the genitive absolute construction.

Verse 9
ἐνεστηκότα—the perfect active participle derives from ἐνίστημι (I am present, have come).
τελειῶσαι—the aorist active infinitive from τελειόω (I complete, perfect) governs the
accusative present participle τὸν λατρεύοντα (the worshiper). The aorist is ingressive.

Verse 10
μόνον—an adverb. The meaning is “only that and nothing more.” As a first word in the
sentence, it is rather emphatic.
διορθώσεως—derived from διά (through) and ὀρθός (straight), this noun in the genitive case
conveys the idea of making something thoroughly straight, of bringing about a reformation.

p 247
E. Jesus’ Sacrificial Blood
9:11–28

11 When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and
more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by
means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood,
having obtained eternal redemption. 13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on
those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14 How much more,
then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse
our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the
promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed
under the first covenant.
16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in
force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why
even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every
commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and
branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the
covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the
tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be
cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but
the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a man-made
sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s
presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the
Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Then Christ would have had to suffer many
times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away
with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28
so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to
bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

1. Christ’s Blood Cleanses Our Consciences

9:11–14
Repetition is the mother of learning. This is a basic rule that the author of Hebrews applies
consistently. He introduced the theme of the high priest’s entering the Most Holy Place in 9:7; he
expands it in 9:11–12; and he summarizes it in 9:25.9 Christ offered his own blood to obtain
redemption for his people.
11. When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went
through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a
part of this creation. 12. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he
entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal
redemption. p 248
These two verses form one beautifully constructed, balanced sentence.10 The basic thought is
that Christ went through the tabernacle (v. 11) and entered the Most Holy Place (v. 12).
Commentators have been puzzled by the identity of the tabernacle: what does the author of
Hebrews mean by the phrase greater and more perfect tabernacle?
Let us note the following points as we seek an answer.
a. Arrival
The author returns to his theme that Jesus is high priest (2:17; 3:1; 4:14; 5:5, 10; 6:20; 7:26–28;
8:1–2). He purposely introduces Jesus as Christ (not as Jesus or Son) to show that he is the Messiah,
the One whom Israel expected to come. And he states that Christ’s arrival has indeed occurred, for
Christ has appeared as high priest.
The text can be translated in two ways. Some translations read, “Christ came as high priest of
the good things that are already here.” Other translations have the reading “of the good things to
come.” The one translation relates to the present; the other, to the future.
How do we resolve the difficulty? That is, which of the two translations is to be preferred? The
reading good things to come is similar to the wording of Hebrews 10:1. Possibly a scribe copying
9:11 may have been influenced by the reading of 10:1. The more difficult reading is the one that
lacks an immediate parallel and therefore is preferred—in this case “the good things that are already
here.”
What are these good things that Christ has provided? The author of Hebrews does not say. But
we assume that he intimates the close fellowship that God has with his people, the knowledge of
God and his law in the hearts and minds of his people, and the remission of sin that God has given
his people (8:10–12). The blessings Christ has brought since his coming are innumerable; for this
reason the author speaks in general terms and writes “the good things that are already here.”
b. Destiny
Christ “went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made.” We ought to
note that the writer has chosen the official title Christ and not the personal name Jesus. He places
the emphasis, then, on the official function of Christ as high priest.

9 Young, “The Gospel According to Hebrews 9, ” p. 199.

0 0 In the original Greek, verses 11 and 12 form one lengthy sentence that has been carefully
constructed. See the article by Albert Vanhoye, “Par la tente plus grande et plus parfaite …” in Bib
46 (1965): 1–28. Also see James Swetnam’s article, “The Greater and More Perfect Tent. A
Contribution to the Discussion of Hebrews 9:11, ” in Bib 47 (1966): 91–106.
 Also we note that 9:11 has a parallel in 8:1–2, “We do have such a high priest, who sat down at
the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, and who serves in the sanctuary, the true
tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man.” And 9:11 has another parallel in 9:24, “For Christ did
not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now
to appear for us in God’s presence.” These passages reveal that “the greater and more perfect
tabernacle” is in heaven, that is, in the presence of God. We ought not take the words went through
literally in the sense that Christ passed through the tabernacle to another place. In 4:14 the author of
Hebrews writes that “we have a great high priest who has gone p 249 through the heavens.” He
wishes to convey the thought that Jesus has gone into heaven.
The writer expresses himself rather pointedly by saying that the greater and more perfect
tabernacle is not manmade, “that is to say, not a part of this creation.” In the early centuries of the
Christian era, Bible interpreters understood the word tabernacle in 9:11 to mean Christ’s body, but
the author of Hebrews rules this out by his explanatory comment that the tabernacle is “not a part of
this creation.” Anything belonging to God’s creation, even the visible sky, is ruled out by the
author’s pointed comment. God’s dwelling in heaven, where angels surround his throne and the
numberless multitudes of saints sing his praises, is uncreated; it does not belong to creation revealed
to us by God’s Word and work. The tabernacle that Moses built and God filled with his glory (Exod.
40:35) differs from “the greater and more perfect tabernacle” in heaven. The heavenly tabernacle
gives the saints free access to God because no veil separates God and man. Christ opened the way
to God on the basis of his mediatorial work on earth.
c. Means
How did Christ enter heaven? By means of his death on the cross! The writer puts it this way: “He
did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once
for all by his own blood.”
The expression goats and calves is a reminder of the Day of Atonement. On that day, once a
year, the high priest entered the Most Holy Place with the blood of a bull and of a goat. The high
priest had to sprinkle the blood of the bull as an atonement for his own sins and the blood of the
goat as an atonement for the sins of the people (Lev. 16:11–17). The implication is that the blood of
animals effected forgiveness and reconciliation.
How different with the great high priest Jesus Christ! Christ “entered the Most Holy Place once
for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption.” He is high priest and sacrifice at the
same time. He is the people’s representative before God. He sheds his blood in behalf of his people.
Obviously, the writer depicts the atoning work of Christ figuratively. That is, when Jesus died
on the cross, he did not enter the Most Holy Place of the temple. And when he cried, “It is finished”
(John 19:30), he did not need to take his blood into the heavenly tabernacle.11 Christ completed his
atoning work on Calvary’s cross. When he suffered and died on the cross, in a sense he entered the
Most Holy Place of the temple. God affirmed this by tearing the curtain of the temple in two from
top to bottom (Mark 15:38).
d. Purpose
The purpose for Christ’s sacrificial death is summarized in the clause having obtained eternal
redemption. After his figurative entrance into the Most Holy Place of the temple in Jerusalem, he
once for all, on the strength of his own sacrificial blood shed on the cross, procured redemption of
everlasting p 250 validity for all his people. Christ obtained this redemption for himself, that is, for
the benefit of his people.12 He bought his people with the price of his blood; he redeemed them with

1 1 Leon Morris, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 12, Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1981), p. 86.

2 2 Burkhard Gärtner, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 529.

his death. Their redemption became eternally valid when Christ figuratively entered the Most Holy
Place. “In bringing many sons to glory,” writes the author of Hebrews, “it was fitting that God …
should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering” (2:10).
13. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are
ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14. How much more,
then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to
God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living
God!
These two verses show contrast—characteristic of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The author states
a fact that relates to the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament era. God had stipulated by law how
sinners might be cleansed and restored to holiness. He had ordained these laws to sanctify those
who were ceremonially unclean. But merely observing these laws affected the sinner only
externally, not internally. Those who were sprinkled, as the text says, were cleansed with respect to
their bodies. Their consciences, however, remained unaffected.
In the preceding verse (v. 12) the writer already mentioned “the blood of goats and calves.” The
reference, of course, is to the stipulations the high priest had to observe on the Day of Atonement
(Lev. 16). In addition, the author now describes the practice of sprinkling the unclean person with
water of cleansing (Num. 19). A red heifer in perfect condition and that had never been harnessed
had to be slain and burned. As it was being burned, the priest had to throw cedar wood, hyssop, and
scarlet wool onto the heifer. The ashes then were gathered and kept for use in the ceremony of
sprinkling the water of cleansing.
Anyone who had touched a dead body was considered unclean for seven days. Ashes from the
burned heifer were put into a jar; fresh water was poured over them; and with hyssop dipped into
the water, an unclean person was sprinkled on the third and seventh days.
Allegorical interpretations of this passage (Num. 19) are numerous. For example, the heifer
symbolizes the propagation of life; ashes are an antidote to pollution; the colors of the red heifer
and of the scarlet wool portray vitality; cedar wood stands for durability; and hyssop is the emblem
of cleansing. However, fanciful elucidations are highly subjective and ultimately of little value. We
do well to look at the author’s purpose for introducing the matter of “the blood of goats and bulls
and the ashes of a heifer.”
The author contrasts two incidents: the ceremonial acts performed by the believer to secure
cleansing and the shedding of the blood of Christ. The p 251 religious observance of the Day of
Atonement, although significant in itself, nevertheless fostered an external perception of the
sacrifices. This became especially evident in the act of sprinkling the water of cleansing on the
person who was declared unclean because of defilement. A person who had touched a dead body
was considered unclean, but water of cleansing sanctified him. The thought that uncleanness was
something external and not internal prevailed. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees on one occasion when he
said, “Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed
and wickedness” (Luke 11:39).
The argument that the author develops proceeds from the lesser to the greater. The lesser part is
the ceremonial act of using the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer to sanctify a sinner
externally. The greater part is that the blood of Christ cleanses the sinner’s conscience to make him
an obedient servant of God. Unquestionably, sin is an internal matter that issues from the heart of
man. The writer of Proverbs calls the heart “the wellspring of life” (4:23). And Jesus describes the
heart as the source of evils: “For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual
immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and
folly” (Mark 7:21–22). The act of cleansing man from sin must begin with his inner being; as the
author of Hebrews writes, “our consciences.” How are our consciences cleansed? I call attention to
the following phrases.
a. “The blood of Christ.” Although the blood of animals in a sense served the same function as
did the blood of Christ, the contrast introduced by “how much more” is so immense that we cannot
speak of a comparison. The blood of Christ is the agent that cleanses the conscience of man, that
breaks him from “acts that lead to death,” and that makes man willing and ready to serve God.
Christ’s blood cleanses man from sin. Robert Lowry sang:
For my cleansing this I see—
Nothing but the blood of Jesus;
For my pardon this my plea—
Nothing but the blood of Jesus.
b. “Through the eternal Spirit.” Some translations render the word spirit with a capital letter,
and others use a lower-case letter. In the original Greek all the letters were written uniformly, so that
we cannot determine whether the author of Hebrews meant one or the other.
What can we learn from the theological context of this passage? What do the Scriptures say?
Again, we cannot be certain as to the exact intention of the author as we view the rest of Scripture.
The four Gospels say nothing about the Holy Spirit’s role in the suffering of Christ. On the other
hand, when Jesus preached in his hometown synagogue at Nazareth, he read from the prophecy of
Isaiah, “The Spirit of the Lord is on me” (Luke 4:18; Isa. 61:1; and see Isa. 42:1). Says Donald
Guthrie, “The statement in Hebrews p 252 is a logical deduction from the gospel portrait of
Jesus.”13 Even though we would have been more certain if the author had written “Holy Spirit”
instead of “eternal Spirit,” we know that Jesus was indeed led by the Holy Spirit. For example,
Luke writes: “Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the
desert, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil” (Luke 4:1–2).
c. Christ “offered himself unblemished.” As high priest, Christ presented himself as a sacrifice.
He offered himself to God spontaneously and blamelessly. But unlike the Aaronic high priest who
had to sacrifice an animal to remove his own sin, the sinless Christ offered his body for the sins of
his people. He laid down his life for his sheep. As John, describing the death of Jesus on the cross,
testifies, Jesus “bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (19:30). Jesus willingly, purposefully, and
conscientiously faced death and offered himself to God.
Why did Christ offer himself to God? To “cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death.”
In 6:1 the author introduced the phrase “from acts that lead to death.” The wording implies the
destructive effects of sin in the life of the believer. That is, the blood of Christ effectively cleanses
man’s conscience by turning him from a life that leads to spiritual death to a life spent in love and
obedient service for God. The believer keeps God’s commandments not because of obligation but
out of a sense of gratitude for what Christ in God has done for him. The believer, saved from a life
of sin that leads to death, now lives a life of service for his living God.

Doctrinal Considerations in 9:11–14

The biblical doctrine of atonement encounters opposition voiced by those advocates who
portray God as a God of love. They contend that God could not have demanded that Christ shed his
blood in order to appease an angry God.14 They object to a “blood theology” because, they say, it
runs contrary to the love of God. However, the love of God does not annul his justice. Man is a

3 3 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity, 1981), p.
568. Also see F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International Commentary of the New
Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), p. 205.

4 4 Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 382.

sinner who because of sin stands condemned before God. Of his own free will, Christ took the place
of sinful man and paid the penalty for him. By shedding his own blood, Christ endeavored to obtain
eternal redemption, that is, “to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him” (9:28). The writer
of Hebrews unequivocally teaches the doctrine of atonement. Says he, Christ “entered the Most
Holy Place once for all by his own blood” (9:12).
In this section and in other parts of his epistle, the author of Hebrews teaches the unique
doctrine that Christ became priest and sacrifice. Christ became subject and object at the same time:
he served at the altar as priest and was laid on the altar as sacrifice. Christ shed his blood as
sacrifice on Calvary’s cross and figuratively p 253 as high priest entered the Most Holy Place of the
temple. Scripture teaches that the offering of his sacrifice was completed on earth; in the capacity of
high priest, Christ entered “the greater and more perfect tabernacle” in heaven, that is, the presence
of God.
The writer of Hebrews deletes numerous details from the laws concerning the Day of
Atonement and the ceremonial cleansings for persons declared unclean. He purposely omits these
details to put in stark relief the contrast between the external observance of religious ceremonies
and the inner transformation of a man cleansed by the blood of Christ. That, for him, is the
difference between life in the days of the old covenant and that in the era of the new covenant.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:11–14

Verse 11
παραγενόμενος—this aorist middle (deponent) participle of the verb παραγίνομαι (I arrive,
appear) shows that Christ served as high priest before his ascension to heaven. The participle,
expressing a temporal connotation, points to the entire ministry of Christ. The preposition παρά
(alongside of) strengthens the main verb γίνομαι and gives it direction.
γενομένων—the aorist middle participle from γίνομαι (I am, become) has a variant in a number
of leading manuscripts. The variant is μελλόντων—(present active participle of μέλλω (I am about
to). The first reading, however, seems to have a better geographical representation of manuscripts
and is therefore preferred. See also 10:1 for similar wording of the second reading.
χειροποιήτου—a compound adjective consisting of the noun χείρ (hand) and the noun ποιητής
(a maker). The adjective occurs six times in the New Testament and generally is used with reference
to buildings; that is, temples (Mark 14:58; Acts 7:48; 17:24; Eph. 2:11; Heb. 9:11, 24).

Verse 12
τὰ ἅγια—the substantivized adjective in the neuter plural preceded by the definite article stands
for the sanctuary and even the Most Holy Place in tabernacle and temple.
λύτρωσιν—this noun conveys the meaning ransom, deliverance, redemption and appears three
times in the New Testament (Luke 1:68; 2:38; Heb. 9:12). In the context of Hebrews 9 the word
connotes as much ransom as redemption. See also 9:15.

Verse 13
εἰ—the particle introduces a simple fact conditional clause that expresses certainty. The
apodosis to this lengthy sentence is given in 9:14.
ῥαντίζουσα—the feminine present active participle from the verb ῥαντίζω (I sprinkle) modifies
the noun σποδός (ashes), which is feminine. Perhaps it is best to link the participle only to the noun
ashes and not to the preceding noun τὸ αἷμα (blood). p 254

Verse 14
πόσῳ μᾶλλον—the combination of these two words always introduces a so-called dative of
degree of difference. The difference lies in the comparison stated in the two parts of the conditional
sentence, beginning with εἰ γάρ (for if).
αἰωνίου—some manuscripts have the variant reading ἁγίου (holy) that removes the ambiguity
created by the reading eternal. However, the manuscript evidence lacks the strength to give the
reading holy authenticity.
καθαριεῖ—the future tense from the verb καθαρίζω (I cleanse) expresses certainty because its
fulfillment is expected.
ἡμῶν—to determine whether the reading should be it ἡμῶν (our) or ὑμῶν (your) is not easy,
because the manuscript evidence is equally divided. Perhaps the author’s use of exhortations in the
broader context favors the translation our.15 On the whole, although the difference itself is
insignificant, the author seems to include himself whenever he addresses the recipients of his
epistle.

2. Christ’s Death and the First Covenant

9:15
Weaving his artistic verbal cloth, the author of Hebrews is ready to bring in the concepts of
mediator and covenant. In chapter 8, especially verse 6, he introduced the role of mediator that
Jesus has been given. Having explained Christ’s death and its effect in chapter 9, he now develops
the significance of this mediatorial role in relation to the covenant that God has made with his
people.
15. For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may
receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free
from the sins committed under the first covenant.
When the author writes “for this reason,” he wants us to look at verses 13 and 14 specifically
and the preceding context generally. In these two verses, the writer contrasts the sacrifices of the
first covenant with the sacrifice of Christ that introduces a new relationship. In verse 15, the author
summarizes and says, “Christ is the mediator of a new covenant.”
Before we proceed any further, we ought to take note of the institution of the first covenant,
recorded in Exodus 24. Moses read the Law of God to the Israelites, who responded, “Everything
the LORD has said we will do” (v. 3). Then burnt offerings and fellowship offerings were presented
to God, and blood was sprinkled on the altar. Moses then read the Book of the Covenant to the
people, who said, “We will do everything the LORD has said; we will obey” (v. 7). Thereupon
Moses, sprinkling blood on the people, said, “This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has
made with you in accordance with all these words” (v. 8). p 255
Here are the characteristics of this covenant:
1. The covenant God made with his people had two parties: God and the Israelites entered into a
solemn commitment on the basis of the content of the Book of the Covenant.
2. The covenant was sealed by the death of animals that were offered to God. The blood of those

5 5 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New
York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 668.
 animals was sprinkled on altar and people.
3. The covenant was ratified by the people who promised obedience to God.
Why did this covenant become obsolete? The author quotes a lengthy passage from Jeremiah 31
in chapter 8, and in the first part of the next chapter he explains that the regulations of the first
covenant were external (9:1, 10). “The gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the
conscience of the worshiper” (9:9). Sins committed against God, as a violation of the covenant
promise, could not be erased from man’s conscience by presenting gifts and offerings to God. The
blood of animals sacrificed to atone for man’s transgressions sanctified him outwardly, but inwardly
man struggled with a guilty conscience.16 The first covenant, then, needed to be replaced.
By his sacrifice on the cross, Christ validated the new covenant that he instituted at the time he
celebrated the Passover with his disciples. He said: “This cup is the new covenant in my blood,
which is poured out for you” (Luke 22:20; also see the parallel passages in Matt. 26:28; Mark
14:24; and I Cor. 11:25).
Christ has become the mediator of this new covenant (12:24). He stands between God and man.
By his death he removes sin and guilt, and thus all “those who are called may receive the promised
eternal inheritance.” Through the mediatorial work of Christ, they who are effectively called inherit
salvation. And that inheritance is eternal.
What is the meaning of “new” in the expression new covenant? First, the new comes forth out of
the old. That is, the new covenant has the same basis and characteristics as the old covenant. Next,
in both covenants, sacrifices were presented to God; but whereas the sacrifices offered to atone for
the transgressions of the people in the time of the first covenant could not set the sinner free, the
supreme sacrifice of Christ’s death redeemed God’s people and paid for their sins. Moreover, in the
structure of the first covenant, the mediator (i.e., the high priest) was imperfect. In the new covenant
Christ is the mediator who guarantees the promise of salvation. God puts his laws in the minds and
writes them on the hearts of his redeemed people, so that as a result they know God, experience
remission of sin, and enjoy covenantal fellowship with him. p 256

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:15

Verse 15
γενομένου—the aorist middle (deponent) participle of the verb γίνομαι (I am, become) in the
genitive singular is part of the genitive absolute construction with the noun θανάτου (death). The
aorist denotes single occurrence.
ἐπί—as a preposition with the dative it expresses time or occasion and is translated “under.” The
B
GN translation is, “while the first covenant was in effect.”
παραβάσεων—this articular noun in the genitive plural of παράβασις (transgression) is used
figuratively: it refers to the sinner who committed the transgression.
κεκλημένοι—of all the New Testament epistles, only Hebrews has the perfect passive participle
of καλέω (I call). The use of the perfect expresses the all-inclusive extent of the call.

3. Christ’s Blood Procures Forgiveness

9:16–22

6 6 “The implication is that these transgressions were the reason for the lack of efficacious
reception of the heritage connected with the first diatheke.” See James Swetnam, “A Suggested
Interpretation of Hebrews 9:15–18, ” in CBQ 27 (1965): 380.
B NB Good News Bible
The word covenant implies sin. Sin necessitates the making of a new covenant and the shedding of
blood. The shedding of blood leads to death and remission of sin.
16. In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17.
because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who
made it is living.
At times a word can have two entirely different meanings that can be distinguished only by the
context in which they are used. For example, the word letter may mean either “one of the letters of
the alphabet” or “an epistle.” In English this one word serves two meanings; in other languages two
different words express these meanings.
In the original Greek one word (diathēkē) serves the purpose of conveying the concepts
covenant and will or testament. In 9:15 the context is a religious setting, and the word means
“covenant”; the author speaks of the new covenant of which Christ is the mediator and of the first
covenant which, by implication, has been superseded. In the next two verses (16 and 17), the writer
switches from the religious setting to a legal framework.17 Now he introduces the concept of a last
will. A lawyer draws up a will for a client who apportions his belongings to various people and
agencies. But this last will becomes valid only upon the death of the person who made it. While the
person is living, the will is nothing but a document, even though a lawyer testifies to its legality.
Also this will may be changed and rewritten, but the moment the maker of the will dies, the words
in the will are unalterable.
How do verses 16 and 17 relate to 9:15? What is the connection between the word covenant and
the word will? In verse 15 the author teaches that Christ, the mediator of a new covenant, died a
sacrificial death to redeem p 257 those who will receive their promised inheritance. In the following
two verses, he states that the death of the maker of a will validates this document. The implication is
that the maker of the covenant is God, who has also made a will. Christ, the Son of God, is not the
maker of a covenant or a will. Functioning as a mediator and as a guarantor, he sees that the
conditions of the covenant are met and that its promises are honored. Christ died to fulfill these
conditions. But at the same time, Christ’s death validates the last will and testament, so that
believers indeed “may receive the promised eternal inheritance” (9:15). Christ is their guarantor.
In a sense, verses 16 and 17 serve as an analogy. But analogies have their limitations, and so
does this one. Upon his death, a person leaves his possessions to his heirs; these heirs themselves
face death and in time die. Christ, however, died but rose from the dead; the heirs receive an eternal
inheritance and live with him forever.18
18. This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19. When
Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of
calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and
all the people. 20. He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you
to keep.” 21. In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything
used in its ceremonies. 22. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with
blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
Two matters stand out: first, the expression first covenant relates to the same phrase in 9:15.
Therefore the two intervening verses, given in the form of an analogy, may be placed within
parentheses.19 Second, in verses 18–22 the word blood appears six times. Because of this repetition

7 7 Johannes Behm, TDNT, vol. 2, p. 131.

8 8 R. C. H. Lenski in The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of
James (Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), p. 307, cautions not to press the analogy too far. Also see
Bruce, Hebrews, p. 213.

9 9 Geerhardus Vos, The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1956), p. 40.
it receives emphasis in this section. We shall examine the term blood in the context of each verse in
which it occurs.
a. “Not put into effect without blood.” The institution of the first covenant is recorded in Exodus
24. Moses read the law of God to the people, presented burnt offerings and fellowship offerings to
God, sprinkled the blood of young bulls (sacrificed in these offerings) on the altar and on the
people, read the Book of the Covenant to the people, and said, “This is the blood of the covenant
that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exod. 24:8). The writer of
Hebrews observes that this first covenant was sealed with blood.20 And he notes the connection
between the first and the second covenants: Christ shed his blood and thus sealed this p 258 new
covenant with his blood. His death made the new covenant valid and effective.
b. “The blood of calves.” If we compare the biblical account of the institution of the first
covenant, recorded in Exodus 24, with the description in Hebrews 9:19, we must conclude that the
writer of Hebrews relied on oral tradition, extrabiblical material, or the five books of Moses.
Perhaps he gained his material from various passages of these books. The differences are
pronounced:

Exodus 24:5–6, 8 Hebrews 9:19

Then [Moses] sent young Israelite men, and [Moses] took the blood of calves [and goats],21
they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed together with water, scarlet wool and branches
young bulls as fellowship offerings to the of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the
LORD. Moses took half of the blood and put it people.
in bowls, and the other half he sprinkled on the
altar … [and] on the people.

On the Day of Atonement the priests offered a young bull and a goat (Lev. 16:3–28). The author
of Hebrews, therefore, could have combined the account of the sacrificial ceremony of the Day of
Atonement with that of the institution of the first covenant. Also, he may have gleaned the phrase
“scarlet wool and branches of hyssop” from the description of the ceremony of the cleansing of a
person with an infectious skin disease (Lev. 14:4, 6). In these verses the expression scarlet yarn and
hyssop occurs. Then, in the passage that describes the water of cleansing, hyssop, scarlet wool, and
water are mentioned (Num. 19:6, 9, 18).
According to the Exodus account, Moses sprinkled the blood of young bulls on the altar and on
the people. He read to the people from the Book of the Covenant. We may assume that he sprinkled
blood on this book, too. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes surmises that “on the day of solemn ratification
of the former covenant, Moses would have sprinkled not only the altar he had built and the people
but also the book he had written.”22
c. “The blood of the covenant.” From a New Testament perspective we immediately see a

0 0 John Murray, The Covenant of Grace (London: Tyndale, 1953), p. 27.

1 1 Most translations include the words and goats. The NIV omits them, no doubt on the basis
of the principle that “in general the shorter reading is to be preferred.” Editions of the Greek New
Testament support the inclusion of the disputed words, although they are put in brackets to indicate
a measure of uncertainty.

2 2 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1977), p. 376.
resemblance between the words of Moses cited by the author of Hebrews and the words spoken by
Jesus when he instituted the Lord’s Supper.
Moses said to the Israelites, “This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you
in accordance with all these words” (Exod. 24:8).
p 259 The writer of Hebrews has Moses say, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has
commanded you to keep” (Heb. 9:20). The variation of “the LORD has made with you” and “God
has commanded you” is one of form, not of content.
We would have expected the author of Hebrews to refer directly to the well-known words
spoken by Jesus at the institution of the Lord’s Supper and repeated whenever this supper is
celebrated. Jesus said, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many” (Mark
14:24). The purpose for Christ’s shed blood is given more explicitly in Matthew’s Gospel: “for the
forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). The connection between the words that Moses spoke when the
first covenant was instituted and the words that Jesus uttered when he brought into practice the
celebration of the Lord’s Supper is plain. Perhaps because of the self-evident link, the writer of
Hebrews has left the missing details for the readers of his epistle to supply.
d. “Sprinkled with the blood.” Once again we note a difference between the Old Testament
account (Exod. 40:9–11) and the words of the author of Hebrews (9:21). When Moses set up the
tabernacle, God told him to “take the anointing oil and anoint the tabernacle and everything in it;
consecrate it and all its furnishings, and it will be holy” (Exod. 40:9). The writer of Hebrews,
however, asserts that Moses “sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its
ceremonies” (9:21). In the account of the ordination of Aaron and his sons, we read that Moses
killed a bull and with the blood purified the altar. Already he had consecrated the tabernacle and
everything in it, including the altar, with oil; he even anointed Aaron with oil (Lev. 8:10–15).
Because of this parallel account in the Book of Leviticus, we can safely assume that the writer with
his intimate knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures relied on the account of Leviticus more
than that of Exodus.
Josephus comments on the inaugural ceremonies of the tabernacle and the ordination of Aaron
and his sons. He, too, speaks of purifying Aaron and his sons and their garments “as also the
tabernacle and its vessels, both with oil that had been previously fumigated … and with the blood of
bulls and goats.”23 Josephus, like the author of Hebrews, is fully acquainted with the biblical record
in Leviticus 8. Yet both writers contend that Moses purified with the sprinkled blood the tabernacle
and its vessels. That information is not found in Leviticus; most likely it had come to them by oral
tradition.
e. “Cleansed with blood.” The writer of Hebrews testifies that his constant emphasis on
purification with blood is not his own idea. He bases it on the law of God. Says he, “In fact, the law
requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood” (9:22). That law is recorded in Leviticus
17:11 where God through Moses says to the Israelites: “For the life of a creature is in the blood, and
I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes
atonement for one’s life.” p 260
Note that the author writes, “The law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood”
(italics added). The term nearly leaves room for exceptions, because some items might be cleansed
by water or by fire (see Lev. 15:10 and Num. 31:22–24).
f. “Shedding of blood.” The second part of Hebrews 9:22 is even more direct: “and without the
shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” These two—the pouring out of blood and the
forgiveness of sin—go hand in hand. The one does not exist without the other. The first part of the
verse implies that exceptions were permitted, for the author says that “nearly everything” needs to
be cleansed with blood. But in the second half of the verse, the writer does not allow exceptions. He
posits negatives: without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
The absolute demand for blood to secure remission of sin responds to the terms of the covenant.
Transgression of the laws of the covenant that were agreed upon and ratified by the Israelites

3 3 Josephus, Antiquities 3.206 (LCL).

constitutes a serious offense. This sin can be removed only by death, that is, the substitutionary
death of an animal whose blood is shed for the sinner.
The new covenant, instituted by Christ on the eve of his death, is sealed in his blood that has
been shed on Calvary’s cross for remission of sin. Jesus’ words, “This is my blood of the covenant,
which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28), are clearly echoed in the
second part of Hebrews 9:22.

Doctrinal Considerations in 9:16–22

When God promised Abraham that he would bless him and give him numerous descendants, he
confirmed his promise with an oath. The oath that God swore made his promise unalterable (Gen.
22:16–17; Heb. 6:16–17). When God made a covenant with his people, he gave it to them as a last
will and testament. To make this will valid for his people, God’s Son died. Upon Christ’s death, the
will became effective, and its wording, unalterable.
God made a covenant with sinful people. He instructed them to sacrifice animals whose shed
blood would cleanse them from sin. But because the people of Israel did not remain faithful to the
covenant God had made with them, through the prophet Jeremiah he announced that he would make
a new covenant with people upon whose minds and hearts his law was written (Jer. 31:31–34; Heb.
8:8–12).
Christ became the mediator of this new covenant, and through his faithfulness, he fulfilled its
demands. For the sins of his people he shed not the blood of animals but his own. The writer of
Hebrews posits God’s demand for restitution of a broken covenant agreement by saying, “Without
the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (9:22). The counterpart of this statement is the
Christian’s jubilation, “Because Christ shed his blood, I have been forgiven!” p 261

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:16–22

Verse 16
φέρεσθαι—the present passive infinitive of φέρω (I carry) means “to bring news by announcing
it.” The translation to announce is therefore acceptable: “The death of a testator must be
announced” (Moffatt).

Verse 17
ἐπὶ νεκροῖς—the Greek is rather descriptive by saying that a will is made valid on the basis of
corpses; that is, when death has occurred.
μήποτε—the use of the negative participle μή instead of οὐ is noteworthy, for it shows that the
author expects debate on the validity of a will.

Verse 18
ἐγκεκαίνισται—this compound verb in the perfect passive indicative (from ἐγκαινίζω, I renew,
initiate) portrays the lasting effect of the first covenant from the day God initiated it in the Sinai
desert to the time Christ instituted the new covenant on the eve of his death.

Verse 19
λαληθείσης—the genitive absolute construction governs this aorist passive participle of λαλέω

t offatt The Bible: A New Translation by James Moffatt

(I speak) and the adjective πάσης (every) and noun ἐντολῆς (commandment). The words ἐντολή
and ὁ νόμος (the law) are virtually synonymous in this context. Moses react them to the people
from the scroll.

Verse 22
σχεδόν—an adverb derived from the verb ἔχω (I have, hold), that is, “to be held near,” and thus
“nearly, almost.” The word appears three times in the New Testament (Acts 13:44; 19:26; Heb.
9:22).
αἱματεκχυσίας—the author coins a noun from the noun αἷμα (blood) and the verb ἐκχύνω (I
pour out). These two words also occur in Jesus’ declaration, “This is my blood of the covenant,
which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28, italics added; see also Mark
14:24 and Luke 22:20).
ἄφεσις—this noun includes the concept sins. It refers to the forgiveness of sins, and as such it is
an echo of Matthew 26:28.

4. Christ’s Perfect Sacrifice

9:23–28
Characteristic of the author’s style is his frequent repetition of a certain theme. For example, in
chapter 8 he wrote that as high priest Christ entered the heavenly sanctuary (8:2). He repeats this
theme in the next chapter. p 262 Christ came as high priest, he says, and “went through the greater
and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made” (9:11). Once more he returns to this theme in the
following verses (9:23–28).
23. It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these
sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
In this text two matters stand out: the copies of heavenly things and the heavenly things
themselves. The copies, of course, are the earthly sanctuary and everything pertaining to it; the
heavenly sanctuary is in the presence of God. We shall consider these two successively.
a. “Copies of the heavenly things.” The author says that the purification of the tabernacle, altar,
utensils, and scroll was necessary. The word necessary indicates that the law requires that these
items be purified. And that is exactly what the author states in the preceding verse (9:22). He
concludes that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” God himself instructed the
people of Israel, through Moses, to cleanse themselves from sin by shedding the blood of animals at
the altar of the sanctuary. This blood was adequate to allow the high priest to enter the Most Holy
Place of the tabernacle, but a better sacrifice was needed before a mediator could appear in God’s
presence in heaven.
b. “The heavenly things themselves.” The tabernacle built by Moses was “a copy and shadow of
what is in heaven” (8:5). The heavenly sanctuary is “the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is
not man-made” (9:11). Christ entered this sanctuary after he had shed his blood on Calvary’s cross.
The author of Hebrews now refers to the blood of Christ as “better sacrifices.” The plural term
sacrifices stands for the singular “blood of Christ.” The adjective better marks the difference
between earthly things and heavenly things; that is, the blood of animals cleansed the tabernacle and
everything pertaining to it, so that the high priest might enter the Most Holy Place. The blood of
Christ cleanses the heavenly things, so that he might enter heaven in God’s presence (9:24).
Was it necessary to cleanse heavenly things? The heavenly sanctuary is not manmade and
therefore is untainted by sin. It does not need to be cleansed. Before we are able to answer the
question, we must understand the expression heavenly things in a spiritual sense. The true sanctuary,
says the author of Hebrews, is heaven itself (9:24), and heaven is the place where God and his
people dwell together. It is the place where the people of God serve him by offering themselves as
living sacrifices. Then why does the author write that the heavenly things had to be cleansed?
Heaven became a sanctuary for God’s people only when the blood of Christ was shed for them.
Christ’s blood, then, became the basis for their entrance into heaven.
Without Christ’s blood God does not open heaven for us and does not accept our living
sacrifices. We stand condemned before God in our sins, and heaven remains closed to us. However,
the blood of Christ has made p 263 heaven into a sanctuary for us, so that we may live there. At the
same time, it remains God’s dwelling place.
The blood of Christ provides remission of our sins but also sanctifies our presence in heaven. It
makes us more delightful than angels and our service of praise more acceptable than that of the
angels. We are God’s adopted sons and daughters who are “heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ”
(Rom. 8:17).
Moreover, Christ’s shed blood gives heaven itself added significance. Not only is heaven the
sanctuary for God’s people, but it is also the place where its inhabitants testify of Christ’s
redeeming love, his marvelous grace, and his sanctifying power. To Christ they sing a new song,
recorded in Revelation 5:9–10:
With your blood you purchased men for God
from every tribe and language and people and nation.
You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God.
24. For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one;
he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence.
Even though God caused the veil in the temple to split from top to bottom at the time of Jesus’
death (Matt. 27:51), Jesus himself never entered “a manmade sanctuary.” When the author of
Hebrews spoke of “better sacrifices” (9:23), he made a comparison between the animal sacrifices
and the blood of Christ. Although we readily see that Christ’s sacrifice is better, we see that in
essence the comparison is inadequate.
Animal sacrifices were temporary measures; the high priests, mortal; and the sanctuary, a
manmade copy. By contrast, Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice is permanent; our high priest, eternal;
and the heavenly sanctuary, the true one.
The writer of the epistle first notes which sanctuary Christ did not enter, namely, a manmade
copy of the original. The high priest once a year entered the Most Holy Place of this earthly
sanctuary to enter the presence of God on behalf of the people. Second, the author notes that Christ
“entered heaven itself” and, by implication, the true sanctuary. He entered heaven as high priest to
represent us in the presence of God. Only once a year the Levitical high priest spent a few moments
in the Most Holy Place as man’s representation before God; however, Christ, always in God’s
presence, constantly represents us as our attorney-at-law (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25; I John 2:1).
25. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters
the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26a. Then Christ would have
had to suffer many times since the creation of the world.
By drawing a parallel with the Levitical high priest, the author of Hebrews underscores the
profound differences between Christ’s priesthood and the p 264 Levitical priesthood. The writer is
questioned, as it were, by a Jewish reader who poses a number of arguments.
a. As high priest Christ could never have entered the Most Holy Place of an earthly sanctuary.
He belonged to the tribe of Judah, not to the tribe of Levi.
True, that is why he entered heaven.
b. A Levitical high priest annually offered sacrificial blood before God in the Most Holy Place.
If Christ is high priest, he will have to do the same in heaven.24
Correct, but Christ offered himself on the cross. He shed his blood at Calvary, not in the
heavenly sanctuary.

4 4 The NIV correctly inserts the phrase did he enter heaven. The sentence in the Greek is
incomplete and needs to be supplemented with the inserted phrase to achieve balance and to
complete the meaning.
 c. The high priest offered the sacrifices of a bull and a goat on the Day of Atonement, but Christ
offered himself only once.
Yes, but apart from those people who were raised from the dead, man cannot die twice.
d. On the Day of Atonement the high priest presented animal blood to God, but Christ offered
his own blood.
True; if Christ had offered blood other than his own, he would have been identical to the
Levitical high priest. Note that the high priest could not present his own blood as a sacrifice,
because he himself was a sinner. Christ, the sinless One, could and did offer his own blood for
sinners.
e. Once a year the high priest went in and out of the Most Holy Place, but Christ entered the
heavenly sanctuary only once.
Exactly. If Christ had to leave heaven and come to earth to die once more—which is absurd—
his atoning work would be worthless. Christ’s sacrifice is unique.
The writer of Hebrews sums up the matter in one telling statement: If Christ had to offer himself
again and again, he “would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world.” And
that, of course, cannot be. Rather, Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is so effective that it removes the
sins of all the Old Testament believers. His sacrifice is retroactive and goes back to the creation of
the world, that is, to the time that Adam fell into sin. Thus, Christ’s sacrifice is valid for all
believers, whether they lived before or after the coming of Christ. His sacrifice is for all times.
26b. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the
sacrifice of himself.
After making a statement that obviously could not be true, the author now describes
conclusively the reason for Christ’s coming into the world: “to do away with sin.” The adverb now
refers not to time but to reality. The writer in effect is saying: “This is how it is.”
Why did Christ appear on this earth? In simple terms: to cancel sin. He p 265 removed the debt
of sin that was written on the believer’s account. Christ’s coming brought an end to that debt. And
the account now shows the word paid.
How did Christ remove sin? He himself became the sacrifice that was required to pay for the
sins of the whole world (I John 2:2). As Christ’s forerunner, John the Baptist, put it: “Look, the
Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). Christ had no substitute. He
sacrificed himself as a substitute for sinners. By his death he paid the debt “to take away the sins of
many people” (9:28).
What is the significance of Christ’s appearance? The Levitical high priest year after year entered
the inner sanctuary. His entrance into God’s presence had only a temporal effect. By contrast,
Christ’s appearance is a single occurrence —it happened once for all. He entered heaven once, that
is, at the time of his ascension. The effect of his single appearance lasts forever.
When did Christ come? The author of Hebrews writes, “at the end of the ages.” This does not
have to refer to the end of time, because in the same context the writer says that Christ will appear a
second time (v. 28). The expression apparently points to the total impact of Christ’s coming and the
effect of his atoning work. And because of his triumph over sin, we live in the last age.
27. Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28. so Christ was
sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to
bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
The writer of the epistle has a fondness for the word once; he uses it eight times (6:4; 9:7, 26,
27, 28; 10:2; 12:26, 27).
In the contrast expressed in these two verses, the term once takes a prominent place: “man is
destined to die once” and “Christ was sacrificed once.” Because of Adam’s sin God pronounced the
sentence of death upon the human race (Gen. 3:19). Every person faces death once, with the
exception of those people who were raised from the dead. No one can escape death. By becoming
human, Christ was placed under the same death sentence. He, too, died once.
By implication, man receives the death penalty because of sin. The author of Hebrews indicates
as much by adding the clause “and after that to face judgment.” Death and judgment follow each
other in logical sequence, for man must appear in court to account for sin. “For God will bring
every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil” (Eccl. 12:14).
The exact time of the judgment the writer of the epistle purposely omits. He calls attention not
to judgment as such but to Christ who “will appear a second time.” His concluding remark is that
Christ brings “salvation to those who are waiting for him.” And that is most important. The writer
does not minimize the significance of the judgment. He introduces the topic here; in p 266 the next
chapter he applies it.25 He says that if we “deliberately keep on sinning,” then all that is left is “a
fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God” (10:26,
27).
In the comparison that characterizes verses 27 and 28, the emphasis falls on Christ. The Messiah
was sacrificed once; and he will appear again.
At the conclusion of his teaching about the atoning work of Christ, the author writes that Christ
was sacrificed. In the context of this chapter, the writer has made it clear that Christ offered himself
as a sacrifice for sin. Therefore, the words was sacrificed must be understood within the context in
which they are used: Christ offered himself for the purpose of removing the sins of many people.
Already Isaiah prophesied about the redemptive work of Christ. In the well-known chapter on
the suffering Messiah, Isaiah writes: “My righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their
iniquities.… For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (53:11–12).
Not only has Christ completed his atoning work as high priest; he has also given us the promise
that he will return. The Scriptures are very explicit about the return of Christ; it is a promise that is
mentioned again and again. When Christ returns, says the author of Hebrews, he comes not to
remove sin. That task he finished when he came the first time. When he comes again, he brings
salvation to those who are awaiting him.
The last part of verse 28 expresses a note of joy and happiness: Christ is coming! They who are
eagerly expecting his return constantly pray the petition found at the conclusion of the New
Testament and uttered in response to Jesus’ promise, “Yes, I am coming soon.” They pray, “Amen.
Come, Lord Jesus” (Rev. 22:20).
Joyfully the believers look forward to the day of Jesus’ return, for then the Lord will dwell
forever with his people, as he has promised. Upon his return he will bring full restoration to all who
eagerly await him. When Christ dwells forever with his people, they experience salvation full and
free.

Doctrinal Considerations in 9:23–28

The Epistle to the Hebrews is an epistle that features contrasts; in every chapter and in
numerous verses, the author compares Christ with angels, Moses, Aaron, or the Levitical
priesthood. In this particular section, he shows the unsurpassable excellence of the high-priestly
work of Christ. A high priest was appointed to represent the people before God, but the actual time
he spent in God’s presence was minimal; it occurred only once a year on the Day of Atonement.
Our great high priest entered heaven once and stays forever in the presence of God as our mediator,
advocate, intercessor, and guarantor.
Moreover, the high priest had to present animal blood before God in the Most Holy Place. His
own blood would have been unworthy because he himself was a p 267 sinner. But even animal
blood had only a limited effect, for the high priest had to appear before God every year again with
additional blood. The writer of Hebrews somewhat later observes, “It is impossible for the blood of
bulls and goats to take away sins” (10:4). The sacrifice of Christ’s blood, however, has lasting
effect. It terminates the ruling power of sin in the mind of man (Rom. 8:2).26 Christ’s blood cleanses
the church, so that he is able to present it “without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish … holy and

5 5 Guthrie, New Testament Theology, p. 863.

blameless” (Eph. 5:27). And the blood of Christ wipes the record clean: a sinner forgiven by God
stands before him as if he had never sinned at all.
Last, the Levitical high priest, after performing his duties in the inner sanctuary, reappeared to
the people he had represented before God. But when Jesus returns from the heavenly sanctuary, he
comes to restore his people by granting them the gift of salvation. When Christ comes again, “he
will appear as the perfecter of salvation” for all those who put their trust in him and await his
return.27

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:23–28

Verse 23
ἀνάγκη—this noun appears four times in Hebrews (7:12, 27; 9:16, 23) and expresses a
condition imposed by a law or binding obligation. It is stronger than the verb πρέπει (it is fitting)
and similar to δεῖ (it is necessary). The noun stands first in the sentence to receive emphasis.

Verse 24
ἐμφανισθῆναι—the aorist passive infinitive of ἐμφανίζω (I make visible) expresses the
culminative idea. Christ’s appearance is once for all and has lasting significance.

Verse 26
ἔδει—the use of the imperfect active indicative in this clause is the same as in a conditional
sentence that expresses unreality. The first part (protasis) of the conditional sentence is lacking. The
writer gives only the last part (apodosis).28
πεφανέρωται—the perfect passive indicative of φανερόω (I reveal, appear) refers to “Christ
previously hidden from view in heaven but after his incarnation made visible on earth as a man
among men.”29 p 268

Verse 27
κρίσις—the author has chosen a word that reveals action, that is, the process of judging. By
contrast, the noun κρίμα shows the result of this judicial activity; it is the verdict, the sentence of
condemnation.

Verse 28
ὁ Χριστός—note the use of the definite article. Although the noun occurs without the article in

6 6 John Owen, An Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace,

1960), vol. 6, p. 403.

7 7 Johannes Schneider and Colin Brown, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 215.

8 8 “When a condition is assumed as unreal and refers to present time, the imperfect tense is
used both in the protasis and apodosis in normal constructions.… [In] Heb. 9:26 … we only have
apodosis.” A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical
Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 887.

9 9 Joseph H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (New York, Cincinnati,
and Chicago: American Book Company, 1889), p. 648.
9:24, here the emphasis on Christ’s designation, the Messiah, is pronounced.
προσενεχθείς … ἀνενεγκεῖν—the author has a play on words with two verb forms that find
their roots in φέρω (I bear), πρός (toward), and ἀνά (up).

Summary of Chapter 9
To point out the supremacy of Christ’s priesthood, the author of Hebrews presents a description of
the earthly tabernacle, its contents, and the priestly ministry in and around this sanctuary. The
sacrifices, however, were external observances, for they were unable to cleanse the guilty
conscience of the sinner.
With the blood of animals man could not obtain redemption, for he remained unclean. How
different the sacrifice of Christ! By his one offering, Christ cleansed the sinner’s conscience, led
him from death to life, and became the mediator of the new covenant.
In this chapter the author presents an exposition on the meaning of the covenant. Because sin
affected the stipulations of the first covenant, God told Moses to sacrifice animals and to sprinkle
their blood on the tabernacle, its contents, and on the people. “Without the shedding of blood there
is no forgiveness.”
When Christ came in the official capacity of high priest and mediator of the new covenant, he
offered himself once for all and entered the heavenly sanctuary to appear in behalf of the believers
in the presence of God. By his death on the cross, Christ removed “the sins of many people.”
The chapter ends with the promise that Christ will return, not to remove sin as a high priest, but
to bring salvation to those who wait for him in faith. Jesus is coming again.

p 269 10. Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice, part 3

(10:1–18)
and More Exhortations
(10:19–39)

P 270 JESUS: HIGH PRIEST AND SACRIFICE

Outline

Jesus: High Priest and Sacrifice (continued)

F. Jesus’ Effective Sacrifice

10:1–4 1. Shadows of Reality

10:5–10 2. Jesus Christ Set Aside the Shadows to

Establish Reality
10:11–14 3. Jesus Offered One Sacrifice

10:15–18 4. Covenant, Law, and Forgiveness

More Exhortations
A. An Exhortation to Persevere

10:19–22 1. In Full Assurance of Faith

10:23 2. By Professing Hope

10:24 3. Toward Expressing Love

10:25 4. In Attending the Worship Services

B. A Warning to Pay Attention

10:26–27 1. To the Knowledge of the Truth

10:28–31 2. To God’s Judgment

C. A Reminder to Continue

10:32–34 1. As in the Past

10:35–39 2. So in the Present p 271

F. Jesus’ Effective Sacrifice

10:1–18

10 1 The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this
reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw
near to worship. 2 If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have
been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3 But those sacrifices are an
annual reminder of sins, 4 because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:
“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but a body you prepared for me;
6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings
you were not pleased.
7 Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written
about me in the scroll—
I have come to do your will, O God.’ ”
8 First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you
pleased with them” (although the law required them to be made). 9 Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to
do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. 10 And by that will, we have been made holy
through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same
sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for
sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. 13 Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his
footstool, 14 because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.
15 The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:
16 “This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds.”
17 Then he adds:
“Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more.”
18 And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.

1. Shadows of Reality
10:1–4
The author of Hebrews is about ready to furnish additional proof from Scripture that Jesus had
come to set aside the numerous offerings for sin. p 272 God had prepared a body for Jesus, who
appeared to do God’s will. And by his sacrifice Christ effectively removed sin. The difference
between the sacrifices offered during the Levitical era and the one and only sacrifice of Christ is
profound.
1. The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities
themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after
year, make perfect those who draw near to worship.
As is characteristic of the epistle, contrast is a predominant feature in this verse. Here the law,
presumably the entire Old Testament, is depicted as a shadow of the real things. That is, the author
of Hebrews contrasts earthly institutions with heavenly realities. He already introduced this contrast
when he mentioned the sanctuary in the desert. He called it “a copy and shadow of what is in
heaven” (8:5).
The word shadow has numerous connotations. Here are a few familiar ones: the shadow of the
umbrella protected them from the hot sun; fleeting shadows dart across the field; this man cannot
stand in the shadow of his predecessor; the shadow of the sundial indicates the time of day.
 The author of Hebrews employs the term shadow in the sense of an indicator of “the good
things that are coming.” The wording is similar to that of 9:11, “the good things that are already
here.” The writer fails to explain what he means by the words good things that are coming. We
assume that he means the blessings of salvation (see Isa. 52:7; Rom. 10:15).
The noun shadow, however, stands for the dim representation of the real things; the writer calls
them “the realities themselves.” What he actually means is this: these realities bask in the heavenly
light and cast a shadow (as an indicator) upon practices stipulated by Old Testament law. We know
that these practices pertained to the sacrifices offered to God year after year. The law prescribes the
ritual, for example, for the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement. But this legislated worship failed to
make the worshiper holy. “The law is only a shadow,” writes the author.
What then are the realities themselves? Simply put, they are the atoning work of Christ and its
consequences. Later the writer says, “Because by one sacrifice [Christ] has made perfect forever
those who are being made holy” (10:14). In Christ, then, we inherit the good things to come.
How vast the benefits divine
which we in Christ possess!
We are redeemed from guilt and shame
and called to holiness.
—Augustus M. Toplady
The sacrifices of the Levitical system were unable to perfect the worshiper. That observation
minimizes not the Old Testament law, which God himself enacted, but the effectiveness of the
sacrifices. p 273
2. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have
been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3. But those
sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, 4. because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and
goats to take away sins.
The author’s rhetorical question demands a positive answer: yes, they would have stopped. But
among the people of Israel who lived before and after the exile, the art of offering sacrifices to God
had become a mechanical deed. It was no longer a matter of a personal relationship with God. A
mechanical conception of the act of sacrificing animals to God controlled the mind of the
worshipers. The act of shedding blood seemed to them to secure forgiveness of sins.
The Jews should have known, however, that these animal sacrifices were totally inadequate.
Animal sacrifices were mere substitutions, nothing more. Although God had instituted these
practices so that man would not have to offer his own life, they were only substitutes. The writers of
the Old Testament Scriptures voice God’s dissatisfaction with the sacrificial system. They write that
the significance of a sacrifice to God ought to be found not in the animal that was offered but in the
worshiper’s heart that was broken and contrite (I Sam. 15:22; Ps. 40:6; 50:8–10; 51:16–17; Isa.
1:10–12; Jer. 7:21–23; Hos. 6:6; Amos 5:21–23).
God takes sin seriously. He is not satisfied with a sacrifice that is presented to him without a
broken and a contrite heart. He desires a life of obedience and dedication to doing his will.1
Believers in Old Testament times knew that an animal sacrifice would not be able to cleanse
them from sin. Every year on the Day of Atonement the high priest would enter the Most Holy
Place with blood of a slain animal. But the high priest could never say to the worshipers: “This
blood has removed your sins once for all, and therefore this sacrifice has been the last.” No, the
annual return of the high priest from the inner sanctuary on the Day of Atonement proved that the
sacrifices were inadequate and ineffective. The worshipers continued to feel guilty for their sins.
The covenant that God had made with the people of Israel had one serious deficiency: it was
unable to take away the consciousness of sin. “The main deficiency in the old covenant was that it

1 Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Van
Soest, 1961), p. 126.
could not accomplish forgiveness.”2 The blood of sacrificial animals cannot take away sin. Only the
blood of Christ, shed once for all, removes sin and cleanses man’s consciousness of guilt. The
sacrifice of Christ put an end to the sacrifices stipulated by Old Testament law. “Christ is the end of
the law,” says Paul (Rom. 10:4). The writer of Hebrews intimates a variant: “Christ is the end of
old-covenant sacrifices.” By offering himself as sacrifice, Christ marked the end of the p 274
Levitical priesthood with its sacrifices and offerings, and terminated the validity of the first
covenant.
2. Jesus Christ Set Aside the Shadows to Establish Reality
10:5–10
5. Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:
“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but a body you prepared for me;
6. with burnt offerings and sin offerings
you were not pleased.
7. Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written about me
in the scroll—
I have come to do your will, O God.’ ”

The contrast between the Levitical sacrificial system and Christ’s sacrifice is summarized in the
expression therefore. “When Christ came into the world” is actually a Semitic way of saying “when
Christ was born.”3 Especially in the Gospel of John, the phrase refers to Christ’s coming in human
form to his people (1:9; 6:14; 12:46; 16:28; 18:37).
The author of Hebrews introduces a psalm quotation that comes from David. However, the
author makes the quotation messianic by putting it on the lips of Christ. Note the emphasis the
writer places on the fact that Christ speaks: “he said” (10:5), “then I said” (10:7), “first he said”
(10:8), and “then he said” (10:9). With this quotation the author bases his teaching on the Scriptures
of the Old Testament. In this quotation, Christ says that he offers himself to do the will of God. And
that is the essential meaning of true sacrifice.
Before we come to the purpose of the quotation in the context of this chapter, we should note
these points.
a. Parallelism
The words of Psalm 40:6–8 display typical Hebraic parallels common in the wisdom literature of
the Old Testament. The author of Hebrews is fully aware of this literary device, because in his
explanation of the quoted words he changes the poetical lines to prose (10:8–9).
In parallel columns, here is the quotation in somewhat abbreviated form:
Sacrifice —

and offering and sin offerings

you did not desire — you were not pleased

2 Julius Schniewind and Gerhard Friedrich, TDNT, vol. 2, p. 284.

3 German scholars aptly refer to this linguistic similarity. See SB, vol. 2, p. 358; Edward
Riggenbach, Der Brief an die Hebräer (Leipzig and Erlangen: Deichert, 1922), p. 300; Gustaf
Dalman, The Words of Jesus (Edinburgh: Clark, 1909), p. 172; and Otto Michel, Der Brief an die
Hebräer, 10th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1957), p. 223.
but a body you prepared — here I am, I have come to

for me do your will p 275

with burnt offerings

These three parallel expressions constitute the message Christ brings. The last lines, of course,
are completely dissimilar in wording; the meaning about doing the will of God, in the body God
prepared for Christ, is clear.
b. Difference
The difference in wording between Hebrews 10:5 (“but a body you prepared for me”) and Psalm
40:6 (“but my ears you have pierced”) appears formidable. It stems from the Greek translation, the
Septuagint, which the writer of Hebrews used exclusively in quoting from the Old Testament. For
him and for his readers, the Septuagint version was Scripture. We have no knowledge how the
difference arose. Attempts to explain this difference by referring to Exodus 21:6 and Deuteronomy
15:17 are not at all convincing. In these passages a law is prescribed concerning a servant who
voluntarily decides to stay with his master for life and as a sign of servanthood has his ear lobe
pierced. Not the outer ear but the inner ear is important. Therefore, Isaiah 50:5 is more helpful. The
prophet writes, “The Sovereign LORD has opened my ears, and I have not been rebellious.” The
prophet listens obediently to God’s voice to do his will. And that is the meaning of the words “but
my ears you have pierced.”
c. Meaning
The two lines “sacrifice and offering” and “with burnt offering and sin offerings” are not merely
eloquent poetry but also indicate the totality of Jewish sacrifices. Although God told the people of
Israel to offer sacrifices, he took no pleasure in these offerings. Telling are the words of Samuel to
Saul recorded in I Samuel 15:22:
Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices
as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD?
To obey is better than sacrifice,
and to heed is better than the fat of rams.
God is not satisfied only with sacrifices. Sacrifices are but substitutes. Instead he wants genuine,
devoted service. He delights in perfect obedience to his will.
God prepared a body for Christ, and Christ showed complete submission to his Father’s will.
The psalmist says that God pierced—that is, opened—the ears. The author of Hebrews adopts the
reading “a body you prepared for me.”4 Both readings signify the same thing: ears have been
opened so one may hear and obey God’s will. Whereas the one word—ears—is more specific, the
other—body—is more general. But both convey the same meaning.
Why did the writer of Hebrews quote Psalm 40:6–8? He found in this quotation the best proof to
show the reality that puts aside the shadow of the Levitical sacrifices. The sacrifices, only shadows,
are not important; obedience p 276 to God’s will counts. God delights in obedience (Rom. 12:1–2).
Moreover, the words “Here I am, I have come to do your will, O God” have been recorded “in the

4 The writer of Hebrews quotes from the Septuagint because this translation was familiar to
him. In his epistle he provides no indication that he was familiar with the Hebrew text. The
Septuagint reading, however, presents the basic meaning of the Hebrew original, even though the
words differ.
scroll.”5 That is, the psalmist already testifies to scriptural warrant for the coming of Christ in
human form. Although no references are provided, we assume that the psalmist had in mind the
books of Moses. And last, in this quotation Christ speaks directly in the first person singular
—“Here I am … I have come to do your will, O God”—about his work of redemption.
8. First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not
desire, nor were you pleased with them” (although the law required them to be made). 9. Then
he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the
second. 10. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of
Jesus Christ once for all.
As he has shown in other places, the author is an expert in understanding the meaning of the Old
Testament Scriptures (see, for example, 2:8–9; 3:16–19; 7:2–3). After quoting Psalm 40:6–8, he
presents a brief commentary on these verses. He turns the poetry of the psalm citation into prose
and comes to the heart of the matter. He divides the quotation into two parts.
First, Christ said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire,
nor were you pleased with them.” The first part, then, expresses the thought that God found no
pleasure in the offerings his people presented to him. The author immediately adds the concessive
statement, “although the law required them to be made.”
But let us go back to the beginning of human history recorded in Genesis. God looked with
favor on the offering that Abel brought him, but with disfavor on Cain’s offering. Why was Abel’s
offering—“fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock”—acceptable, and the offering of
Cain—“some of the fruits of the soil”—unacceptable (Gen. 4:3–5)? The writer of Hebrews answers
by saying, “By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended
as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings” (11:4).
The author of Hebrews asserts not that God has an aversion to offerings presented to him, but
that sacrifices offered without faith and obedience are an abomination (Isa. 1:11–14; Amos 5:21–
22). Through Hosea God says to Israel, “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of
God rather than burnt offerings” (6:6).
Second, Christ said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” The term will appears four times
in the context of this chapter (10:7, 9, 10, 36). It occurs only once more in Hebrews, in the
benediction (13:21). The will of p 277 God is central in the life of Christ, and the author of Hebrews
exhorts his readers to persevere and do the will of God.
God takes no delight in sacrifices. He is pleased with the unfaltering trust and obedience of his
children. Christ, the Son of God, came into this world for the purpose of showing submission and
learning “obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal
salvation for all who obey him” (Heb. 5:8–9).
The author summarizes the two statements of Christ in one pithy sentence, “He sets aside the
first to establish the second.” Christ offered himself as a sacrifice for sin on Calvary’s cross. By this
act he terminated the Levitical sacrificial system—he set it aside. Next he showed his faithfulness to
God by doing his will, and thus he established the second. Doing the will of God caused Jesus to
pray in the agony he experienced in the Garden of Gethsemane, “Father, if you are willing, take this
cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42). Christ fully submitted to God’s will
in perfect obedience.
And what is the effect of that will? The author succinctly includes all believers by saying, “And
by that will, we have been made holy.” Salvation originates not in man, but in God. By his will we
are separated from the world and called to holiness. The implication is that we were alienated from
God and lived in a world of sin. Because of God’s will, this has changed: “we have been made
holy.” The verb indicates that at a given moment, someone acted in our behalf to sanctify us, and we
have become pure. The writer of Hebrews already referred to this act when he wrote of God’s will
to make the author of salvation perfect through suffering. “Both the one who makes man holy and

5 Representative translations of this phrase are “in the scroll of the book” (JB), “roll of the
book” (R.S.V.), “volume of the book” (KJV), and “the book of the Law” (GNB).
those who are made holy are of the same family” (2:11). The one who makes men holy is Jesus
Christ.
Rather pointedly the author writes, “Through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for
all.” Apart from the last chapter of Hebrews, where the combination Jesus Christ appears twice
(13:8, 21), the double name occurs only once in the instructional part of the epistle—in the present
context. The writer wants to stress that both the human (Jesus) and the divine (Christ) natures were
involved in making us holy. Moreover, Jesus Christ performed the act of sanctification in our behalf
by sacrificing his body. This is the only place in the epistle where the author mentions the bodily
sacrifice of Jesus. The purpose for the stress on the “sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ” is to
demonstrate the reality of his physical death. It is also a reflection of the Septuagint wording of the
psalm citation, “but a body you prepared for me” (Heb. 10:5).
And last, the sacrifice of Christ’s body is the counterpart of the animal sacrifices of the Levitical
system. The difference, however, between the bodily sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifices of animals
is profound: Christ’s sacrifice was once for all; animal sacrifices were countless. Next, Christ
offered his own body as a sacrifice; the worshiper in the era of the first covenant offered substitutes.
Then also, Christ presented his body voluntarily; animals p 278 were sacrificed forcibly against
their will.6 Christ’s obedience to his Father’s will effected our liberation from the power of sin and
conformed us to a life dedicated to God’s service. Thus we reflect God’s holiness and perfection as
we respond to Jesus’ exhortation, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt.
5:48; see also Lev. 11:44–45; 19:2; 20:7; I Peter 1:16).

Doctrinal Considerations in 10:1–10

For readers of Jewish origin who considered the law of God their most precious possession, the
author’s assertion—“the law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming”—must have been
astounding. If the law was their treasured possession, it would be difficult to imagine that far more
desirable things were in store for them. The writer of Hebrews calls these things “the realities
themselves,” and he explains that they consist of Christ and his redemptive work. Writing to Jewish
readers in Colosse about religious observances, Paul says almost the same thing. He writes, “These
[regulations] are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ”
(Col. 2:17).
By quoting and applying the verses from Psalm 40, the author of Hebrews shows that Christ has
come to do God’s will. In doing that will, Christ offered his body as a sacrifice, fulfilled the
requirements of the Aaronic priesthood, and terminated the Levitical sacrifices. If Christ had
fulfilled only the demands of the Aaronic priesthood, however, there would not have been a new
covenant. The writer of Hebrews teaches that after Christ had offered himself without blemish to
God, he became the mediator of a new covenant. He cleansed the consciences of the members of
this covenant, “so that we may serve the living God!” (9:14). This refers to a higher priesthood that
is eternal; it is called the priesthood in the order of Melchizedek. Christ fulfilled the requirements of
this priesthood in his dedication to do God’s will.
When Christ came into the world, “he [set] aside the first to establish the second” (Heb. 10:9).
The author of Hebrews uses the terms first and another, new, or second when he discusses the
covenant (8:7, 13; 9:1, 15, 18). Explaining the psalm quotation in 10:8–9, the writer first quotes the
words about the sacrificial system of the Aaronic priesthood and then cites the words pertaining to
Christ’s perfect obedience to God’s will. These two verses, in effect, describe the two covenants and
the two phases of Christ’s priesthood. To atone for the sins of his people (2:17), Christ had to

6 James Denney, The Death of Christ (London: Tyndale, 1960), pp. 122, 131. Also see F. F.
Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New Testament series
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), p. 234; and Leon Morris, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary,
vol. 12, Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), p. 100.
sacrifice his body once for all (10:10). He fulfilled the demands of the first covenant and terminated
the first phase of his priesthood; that is, the Aaronic priesthood. Christ established the second
covenant when he came to do God’s will. Then he also established the second phase of his
priesthood, the one of Melchizedek. The Aaronic priesthood typifies Christ’s passive obedience; the
priesthood of Melchizedek, Christ’s active obedience. p 279

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:1–10

Verse 1
κατʼ ἐνιαυτόν—the noun ἐνιαυτός (year) is preceded by the preposition κατά, which gives it a
distributive meaning annually.
εἰς τὸ διηνεκές—the compound adjective derives from διά (through) and ἠνεκής (from ἤνεγκα,
the aorist of φέρω, I carry, bear); it means “carrying through” or “continually.” In the New
Testament the phrase appears only in Hebrews (7:3; 10:1, 12, 14).

Verse 2
ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄν ἐπαύσαντο—this is the second part (apodosis) of a second class (contrary-to-fact)
conditional sentence.7 The first part (protasis) is lacking and has been supplied as “otherwise” (JB,
R.S.V.), “were matters otherwise” (NAB), and “if it could” (NEB, NIV).

Verse 3
ἀνάμνησις—a noun with a -σις ending to denote a process. It derives from the verb
ἀναμιμνήσκω (I remind), occurs four times in the New Testament (Luke 22:19; I Cor. 11:24, 25;
Heb. 10:3), and “denotes an unassisted recalling.”8

Verse 7
ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου—the noun κεφαλίς is a diminutive of the noun κεφαλή (head). It referred
to the knob of a rod that held a scroll (βιβλίον); eventually the noun κεφαλίς was used to designate
the scroll itself.
γέγραπται—the perfect passive from the verb γράφω (I write) signifies resultant state with
lasting effect.

Verse 8
ἀνώτερον—an adverb in the comparative degree from ἄνω (above); thus a higher place in the

7 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical

Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 963.
B B Jerusalem Bible
. .S.V. Revised Standard Version
B AB New American Bible
B EB New English Bible
V IV New International Version
8 Joseph H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (New York, Cincinnati,
and Chicago: American Book Company, 1889), p. 40.
written column.
αἵτινες—this indefinite relative pronoun has a concessive connotation and may be translated
“although.”

Verse 9
εἴρηκεν—the perfect active of the deficient verb λέγω (I say) is the main verb of the sentence.
The perfect tense indicates completed action with continuing result. p 280

Verse 10
ἡγιασμένοι ἐσμέν—the perfect periphrastic construction of the perfect passive participle of
ἁγιάζω (I make holy) and the present tense of εἰμί (I am) express action with lasting effect. The
participle is descriptive.

3. Jesus Offered One Sacrifice

10:11–14
11. Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he
offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12. But when this priest had
offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.
The quotation from Psalm 40:6–8 included the work of the high priest on the Day of Atonement
and the daily duties of every priest. “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings”
comprise the entire sacrificial system carried out by the high priest and priests. The author of
Hebrews, therefore, highlights the work of the priest and contrasts it with the redemptive
accomplishment of Christ. The contrast is complete:
Verse 11 Verse 12

Day after day But9

every priest this priest

stands sat down

he offers when [he] had offered

again and again for all time10

9 In the original Greek the two particles men and de express contrast in verses 11 and 12.
They could be translated as “on the one hand” and “on the other hand,” but the NIV has omitted a
translation for men (v. 11) and gives de as “but” (v. 12).

0 0 The phrase for all time can be taken with the clause when he had offered or with the main
verb sat down. The majority of translations take the phrase with the clause (NIV, NEB, MLB,
R.S.V., ASV, RV, NKJV, KJV, and Phillips); others translate it with the main verb (JB, NAB,
Moffatt).
the same sacrifices one sacrifice

which can never for sins

take away sins

Day after day the rituals at the sanctuary continued, for when the one priest offered the last
sacrifice at the conclusion of a day, the next priest made preparations for the first sacrifice the next
morning. Literally rivers of animal blood flowed because of these continual sacrifices; and the
succession of the priests, who served by division and were chosen by lot (Luke 1:8–9), seemed to
be unending. Innumerable priests had served in times before Jesus’ appearance and many served
during his ministry. The work of the priest was essentially futile; he had to do the same thing over
and over again, and thus his work was never finished. He could never sit down to take p 281 a rest
from his labors. As the writer of Hebrews puts it, “Every priest stands” (italics added). In the
sanctuary the furniture included table, lamp, altar of incense, and the ark, but no chair. Furthermore,
the sacrifices offered by the Levitical priest were powerless to free man from sin. The words take
away actually mean to take away sins that completely envelop man and from which only Christ can
free him.
By contrast, after offering his one sacrifice for all time Christ sat down because he had finished
his redemptive task and terminated the Levitical priesthood. His sacrifice effectively removes sin
and breaks the power of sin. He entered a period of rest after accomplishing his work, much the
same as God rested from his labors upon concluding his work of creation.11
Christ entered heaven and took his seat of honor at the right hand of God. He was fully entitled
to that place as the priest who has fulfilled his task of removing sin and as the king who has
conquered sin and death. What a difference between the priest who performed his religious duties at
the sanctuary and Christ, who sat down next to God.

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 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 Majesty in the holy of holies, His work accomplished, and He awaiting its
reward.12
13. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, 14. because by one
sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.
The Lord unto His Christ has said,
Sit Thou at My right hand
Until I make Thine enemies
Submit to Thy command.
—Psalter Hymnal

1 1 Michel, Hebräer, p. 266. Luke’s description of “the Son of Man standing at the right hand
of God” (Acts 7:56) ought not be forced, because of the symbolism involved.

2 2 Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark,
1877), vol. 2, p. 161.
 Psalm 110:1 appears frequently in the Epistle to the Hebrews as a direct quotation or an allusion
(1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2). Because of Jesus’ interpretation and application of this verse in answer
to the question of the Pharisees, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” (Matt.
22:42 and parallels) and frequent allusions to this quotation in Paul’s epistles (Rom. 8:34; I Cor.
15:25; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1), I assume that Psalm 110:1 was a basic tenet of faith in the early church.
The author of Hebrews employs this verse almost verbatim; he modifies the wording to fit the
context of his writing. p 282
Since the time of his ascension, Christ has been “waiting for the moment when his enemies will
be made his footstool.”13 He waits for the appropriate time, much the same as a farmer waits for the
land to yield its produce in harvest season (James 5:7; also see Heb. 11:10). His enemies are all
those who oppose Christ’s dominion, authority, and power. “The last enemy to be destroyed is
death” (I Cor. 15:26). Christ waits for the final destruction of his enemies.
The conquering of Christ’s enemies is not as important as the one offering by which he
perfected for all times “those who are being made holy.” The author of Hebrews teaches the same
truth repeatedly. In 2:11 he writes, “Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made
holy are of the same family.” In 10:10 he refers to the will of God and says, “And by that will, we
have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” And last, he
speaks of “the blood of the covenant that sanctified” the sinner (10:29).
When does sanctification take place? The use of the present tense of 2:11 and 10:14 seems to
indicate that making someone holy is a process, not a once-for-all act. “We have been made holy”
(10:10) but are exhorted to “make every effort … to be holy” (12:14). We see that sanctification is
something received but not yet achieved.14
The sacrifice of Christ, unique in itself, brought about holiness for the believer. That is, every
believer receives these benefits of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross: his sins are forgiven; his
conscience is cleansed; he has peace with God, assurance of salvation, and the gift of life eternal.
Christ has perfected the believer forever.15 But even though the author writes that Christ “has made
perfect forever those who are being made holy,” he shows in other passages the work of perfection
is not yet complete in the recipients of his epistle. They are encouraged to resist sin, endure
hardship, and submit to discipline (12:4, 7, 9). Perfection, in a sense, is here already and is also not
yet here. We have this certainty, however, that we are perfected in Christ, who removed our sin by
his sacrifice.
4. Covenant, Law, and Forgiveness
10:15–18
In a few verses the writer of Hebrews brings the teaching part of his epistle to a close. He
summarizes the scriptural teachings of Jeremiah 31:33–34, quoted in chapter 8, and draws the
conclusion that forgiven sin is forgotten. p 283
15. The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:
16. “This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.

3 3 Ernst Hoffmann, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 245.

4 4 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity, 1981), p.
661, asserts, “The N[ew] T[estament] is more concerned with the process of sanctifying or of
becoming sanctified than with debating the nature of sanctification.”

5 5 John Owen, An Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace,

1960), vol. 6, p. 493. Owen writes that the purpose of Christ in offering himself was to sanctify the
believer first and afterward to perfect him.
 I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds.”
Once again the author demonstrates his high view of Scripture. He quotes two verses from the
prophecy of Jeremiah and ascribes them to the Holy Spirit. In chapter 8, he introduces God as the
speaker for this particular passage, but that is nothing new for the author of Hebrews. He introduces
either God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit as speaker. For him the Old Testament Scriptures are divine
and are ascribed to the Triune God. God through the Spirit is the author of Scripture (see II Peter
1:19–21).
The writer repeats two verses from the passage quoted from Jeremiah 31:31–34 in chapter 8.
The wording is not entirely the same, but the meaning is identical. The first verse (Jer. 31:33) gives
the heart of the quotation: God’s promise to establish a new covenant with his people. The author
has chosen this text to illustrate that with the coming of Christ and the completion of his sacrificial
work, the era of the new covenant has commenced. God makes a new covenant with his people,
puts his laws in their hearts and writes them on their minds. Believers redeemed by Christ live a life
of gratitude by keeping God’s commandments. These laws are an integral part of their covenant
relationship to God.
17. Then he adds:
“Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more.”
This second verse (Jer. 31:34) differs considerably from the Old Testament wording. However,
we ought not judge the author by modern standards, but we should understand that the author,
guided by the Holy Spirit, had the freedom to vary the wording. The meaning remains the same.
These two selected verses from the prophecy of Jeremiah accentuate the accomplishment of
Christ’s atonement. The Old Testament believers experienced God’s forgiving grace, for David
writes, “I acknowledged my sin to you … and you forgave the guilt of my sin” (Ps. 32:5). And he
says elsewhere, “As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from
us” (Ps. 103:12). What is new in the prophecy of Jeremiah, quoted in Hebrews, is that God
remembers sins no more in the time of the new covenant. God has forgiven the believer’s sins
through the one sacrifice of Christ and therefore will never recall them. Sins are forgiven and
forgotten.
18. And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin.
For the Christian, because he has never known the ritual of animal sacrifices, the words “there is
no longer any sacrifice for sin” are somewhat matter-of-fact. But for the person of Jewish descent in
the second half of the first century, these words must have struck with thunderous finality. The age-
old Levitical system of presenting sacrifices to God was rendered pointless p 284 with the death of
Christ. To be sure, the termination took place in A.D. 70 when the Roman army destroyed the
sanctuary in Jerusalem.
Christ’s sacrifice was final, for it brought an end to all sacrifices for sin. What man was unable
to do because of his sin, the curse of death, and his inability to keep the law of God, Christ did. He
paid the penalty, removed the curse, and lived a life of perfect obedience. With characteristic brevity
B. F. Westcott lists three consequences of sin:
debt which requires forgiveness,
bondage which requires redemption,
alienation which requires reconciliation.16
Forgiveness of sins consists of God’s pardoning sinners on the basis of Christ’s sacrifice and

6 6 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1950), p. 316.
accepting sinners as sons or daughters who have never sinned at all.17 Set free from the slavery of
sin, they have received the gift of life eternal (John 17:3) because they belong to the new covenant
of which Christ is the mediator. And the terms of his new covenant call for only one sacrifice
offered by Jesus Christ.

Doctrinal Considerations in 10:11–18

In these last few verses, the didactic part of his letter, the writer summarizes his thoughts and
concludes that the daily sacrifices are inconsistent with the priesthood of Christ.18 He reintroduces
selected verses from Jeremiah 31:31–34 to stress the significance of the new covenant and the
complete remission of sin.
More implicitly than explicitly, the author teaches that all three persons of the Trinity are
involved in the work of atonement. At the right hand of God the Father, the Son takes his seat upon
completion of his sacrificial work on earth. The Holy Spirit testifies to the establishing of the new
covenant that God has made with people whose sins have been forgiven through the bodily sacrifice
of Jesus Christ.
Jesus teaches his disciples the Lord’s Prayer, to which he adds the comment: “For if you forgive
men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not
forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins” (Matt. 6:14–15). The author of
Hebrews, guided by the words of Jeremiah’s prophecy, teaches that God forgives and forgets man’s
“sins and lawless acts.” The counterpart of this doctrine is that we must not only forgive our fellow
man who sins against us. After we have forgiven him we must forget the wrong he has committed.
We, too, must live by the principle that forgiven sin is forgotten sin. p 285

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:11–18

Verse 11
ἕστηκεν—the perfect active indicative of the verb ἵστημι (I set, place; stand) has the force of a
present tense.
λειτουργῶν—a present participle used circumstantially from the verb λειτουργέω (I perform a
religious duty) can best be translated as a finite verb preceded by “and.”
αἵτινες—the indefinite relative pronoun is concessive, “although.”
περιελεῖν—this compound second aorist infinitive from αἱρέω (I take away, remove) has a
perfective idea in the sense of “to take away altogether.”19

Verse 13
τὸ λοιπόν—the neuter singular used adverbially from λείπω (I leave) has the meaning the
future, from now on.

7 7 R. C. Trench in his Synonyms of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p.
119, comments on man’s forgiveness: “He, then, that is partaker of the [forgiveness], has his sins
forgiven, so that, unless he brings them back upon himself by new and further disobedience (Matt.
18:32, 34; II Peter 1:9; 2:20), they shall not be imputed to him, or mentioned against him any
more.”

8 8 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 230.

9 9 Robertson, Grammar, p. 617.

 τεθῶσιν—because of the temporal conjunction ἕως (until) this verb has been placed in the
subjunctive. It is an aorist passive from the verb τίθημι (I place).

Verse 14
τετελείωκεν—the perfect active indicative from τελειόω (I finish, bring to an end) depicts the
completed state of the action.
ἁγιαζομένους—this same participle also appears in 2:11. It is a present passive participle with
an implied agent.

Verse 18
ὅπου—an adverb of place which lacks the corresponding adverb ἐκεῖ (there) to complete the
balance of the sentence.
περί—this preposition is followed by the genitive case of the noun ἁμαρτία (sin) and means
“concerning.”

P 286 MORE EXHORTATIONS

A. An Exhortation to Persevere
10:19–25

19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a
new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21 and since we have a great priest
over the house of God, 22 let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our
hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let
us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. 24 And let us consider how we
may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. 25 Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in
the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

1. In Full Assurance of Faith

10:19–22
The epistle basically consists of two parts: a dogmatic section (1:1–10:18) and a practical section
(10:19–13:25). In the first segment exhorting is the exception; teaching the rule. In the last segment
the emphasis is on exhorting and admonishing, with some teaching in chapter 11.
The triad faith, hope, and love stands out clearly in verses 22, 23, and 24. The author discusses
the meaning of faith in chapter 11. With numerous admonitions he counsels his readers to hope—
that is, to persevere and endure (chap. 12). Love is expressed in helping one another; chapter 13
features many instructions about putting love to work. In a sense, the three verses that include the
triad present a brief summary of the next three chapters.
19. Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the
blood of Jesus.
The word therefore looks back to the preceding section with its lengthy discussion of the once-
for-all sacrifice of Christ and the forgiveness of sin. The author invites the readers to approach God
because, he says, “we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place.” These words echo an earlier
exhortation, “Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence” (4:16).
The designation Most Holy Place is deliberately chosen. In Old Testament times only the high
priest was permitted to enter the inner sanctuary once a year as representative of the people. He
entered into God’s presence to sprinkle blood on the ark to atone for sin. In New Testament times
we have access to God because Jesus shed his blood for our sins and because at his death “the
curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom” (Matt. 27:51). We are even encouraged to
come into God’s presence with confidence.
Note that the author of Hebrews writes, “by the blood of Jesus.” He uses the name Jesus as a
reminder that Jesus saves his people from sin (Matt. 1:21) and that Jesus “is not ashamed to call
them brothers” (Heb. 2:11). The writer, too, belongs to the family of Jesus and for that reason
addresses his readers as “brothers” (see 3:1, 12; 13:22).
20. By a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body.
Translators of the original text of the New Testament are usually guided by a simple rule of
thumb: “Translate Greek as it comes.” That is, the sequence of the Greek text is carried over more
or less into the translation. The translation of Hebrews 10:20 conveys the meaning that the
expression body clarifies the noun curtain. However, other translators and commentators do not
follow the above-mentioned rule. Understanding the text differently, p 287 they want to interpret it
as follows: “By the new, living way which he has opened for us through the curtain, the way of his
flesh.”20 In other words, the word flesh has become an explanation of “way,” not of “curtain.”
Jesus, then, inaugurated “a new and living way” that consists of his humanity.
To achieve a smooth translation, however, the translators have had to supply the expression way
in the phrase the way of his flesh. The original does not say this. The remark perhaps could be made
that if the author of Hebrews had wanted to give an explanation of “a new and living way,” he
would have done so. Now the evidence appears to favor an explanation for the term curtain.21
The term way is described as “new and living.” Unfortunately the translation of “new” is
incomplete, for the Greek word actually means “just slaughtered.” It is a term relating to religious
sacrifices. The adjective living signifies that the way Christ has opened up for us is not a road
without an exit: a dead-end street. Rather, this road leads us to salvation, into the very presence of
God.
Christ has dedicated the way by opening the curtain, “that is, his body.” At his death the curtain
to the Most Holy Place had to be torn from top to bottom. Likewise the body of Jesus had to be
broken, and his blood had to be shed to open for us the way to God. By his sacrifice on the cross,
Christ has removed the veil between God and his people.
21. And since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22. let us draw near to God
with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a
guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water.
The believer has been given double assurance that he may approach God, first, because he has
confidence through the shed blood of Christ and, second, because Jesus is the “great priest over the
house of God.” Should there be any hesitation at all in the mind of the believer, the writer of
Hebrews is saying, let him look to the one and only great priest, Jesus Christ (4:14).
We are exhorted to come to God; in this earthly life we do so in prayer. The great priest takes

0 0 NEB. See also Westcott, Hebrews, p. 320; Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2
vols. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, p. 316: Hugh Montefiore, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New
York and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1964), p. 173.

1 1 Numerous short studies on this verse have been published, including those by Joachim
Jeremias, “Hebräer 10, 20: tout’ estin tes sarkos autou, (Heb. 10, 20): Apposition, Dependent or
Explicative?” NTS 20 (1974): 100–104; and G. M. M. Pelser, “A Translation Problem. Heb. 10:19–
25, ” Linguistics and Bible Translating. Neotestamentica 9 (1974): 53–54.
our prayers and as intercessor presents them for us to God. This priest has been given the
responsibility of caring for the church, that is, the house of God (3:6). Christ’s priestly task
continues even after his atoning work on earth is finished (John 19:30). He has been appointed as
the mediator of the new covenant (8:6), and “he is able to save completely those who come to God
through him, because he always lives to intercede for them” (7:25). p 288
Believers are absolutely secure because they have a great priest representing them. This great
priest never loses sight of those who belong to the house of God, for he and they belong to the same
family (2:11).
Even though the author is not explicit, we are exhorted to approach God. In the parallel passage
(4:16) he tells us to come to the throne of grace in prayer. The writer now takes this parallel a step
further and describes how we are to draw near to God in prayer. Besides having confidence we must
come with “a sincere heart in full assurance of faith.”
The author stresses that the heart must be sincere if faith is to be genuine. The word sincere
describes the heart of a person who is honest, genuine, committed, dependable, and without deceit.
When the believer’s heart is sincere, faith is evident in full assurance. The believer has complete
confidence in God, because he fully accepts the truth of the gospel. By contrast, doubt keeps the
believer from approaching God. Doubt insults whereas faith exalts.
When the author of Hebrews writes that we draw near to God with “hearts sprinkled to cleanse
us from a guilty conscience” and with “bodies washed with pure water,” he refers to the internal
(hearts) and the external (bodies). The phrase washed with pure water reminds us of baptism. But
baptism by itself is only an external act objectively experienced. Its counterpart is the sprinkling of
our hearts with the blood of Christ (Heb. 9:14). This sprinkling is an internal act that is subjectively
appropriated.22 We are exhorted to approach God with body and soul cleansed from sin.
The heart is the center of our moral life. Says the writer of Hebrews, “Our hearts [are] sprinkled
[with the blood of Christ] to cleanse us from a guilty conscience.” That blood sets the believer free.
He now may freely approach the throne of grace because his conscience is clear. In faith he has
claimed for himself forgiveness of sin through Christ. He knows that Christ has removed forever the
guilt that hindered him from coming to God.
Baptism was not unknown to the Jew. The law of Moses stipulated that the high priest on the
Day of Atonement should bathe himself before putting on his garments to enter the sanctuary (Lev.
16:4; see also Exod. 29:4; Lev. 8:6). And Ezekiel prophesies that God will sprinkle clean water on
his people to cleanse them from spiritual impurities (Ezek. 36:25). In his epistle the writer of
Hebrews mentions “pure water” used to wash our bodies. That water symbolically cleanses the
believer from sin. “Christ loved the church [the house of God] and gave himself up for her to make
her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word” (Eph. 5:25–26).
2. By Professing Hope
10:23
23. Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. p 289
Here is the second exhortation. In the preceding verse the writer tells the readers to draw near to
God. Now he exhorts them to “hold unswervingly to the hope we profess.” In the preceding passage
he introduces the concepts of baptism and remission of sin. Now he speaks of confession of hope as
a natural consequence of baptism.
We assume that in the early church a basic confession existed either in the form of “Jesus is
Lord” (I Cor. 12:3) or as a trustworthy saying (I Tim. 3:16; II Tim. 2:11–13). Whether the writer of
Hebrews has a particular confession in mind is not certain, but he makes it clear that his readers
hold to a confession (3:1; 4:14; 10:23; 13:15). The content of this confession is the expectation that
Christ will fulfill all the promises he has made and that all those who profess the name of Christ

2 2 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok,

1955), p. 240. Also see Bruce, Hebrews, p. 250.
possess these promises. The author states that we profess hope, a virtue he has emphasized
throughout his epistle (3:6; 6:11, 19; 7:19; 10:23). Hope relies on faith and looks to the future.
Faith is therefore placed in God alone who is able to fulfill the promises he has made, for God is
faithful. We are told to keep on voicing our hope and to do so unfalteringly. God himself unfailingly
has honored his promises. In fact, to make his promises unbreakable, God added an oath (Heb.
6:17). “He can as soon cease to exist as cease to be faithful to His promise.”23 The God who saved
the believer through the sacrificial death of Christ has promised never to leave “the soul that on
Jesus has leaned for repose.” And God is faithful, for he promises the believer,
Never will I leave you;
never will I forsake you. [Heb. 13:5]

3. Toward Expressing Love

10:24
24. And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds.
This is the third exhortation and the third virtue of the triad faith (v. 22), hope (v. 23), and love
(v. 24). Earlier in the epistle the author elaborated on this triad (6:10–12). In harmony with the
conclusion of Paul’s letter of love (I Cor. 13:13) and other passages where he mentions the triad
(Rom. 5:1–5; Gal. 5:5–6; Col. 1:4–5; I Thess. 1:3; 5:8; and see I Peter 1:21–22), the writer of
Hebrews shows that love is the greatest because it reaches out to others. Love is communal. For
man, love extends to God and one’s neighbor. Moreover, “God demonstrates his own love for us in
this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8).
Carefully consider how we may ardently incite one another to love and to do good works, says
the writer. Put your mind to work to find ways to provoke—in the good sense of the word—each
other to increase your expressions p 290 of love that result in doing noble works.24 Jesus’ summary
of the law, that is, the royal law (James 2:8), “Love your neighbor as yourself,” often is abbreviated
to “Love yourself.” But this royal law extends beyond the neighbor to God himself Deeds done in
love for the neighbor honor God the Father. Therefore, keeping and fulfilling the second part of the
summary, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 22:39), actually constitute keeping and fulfilling
the first part of the summary, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul
and with all your mind” (Matt. 22:37). And Paul calls the commandment to love one another a
“continuing debt” (Rom. 13:8). “Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law,” he concludes (v. 10).
4. In Attending the Worship Services
10:25
25. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage
one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
One of the first indications of a lack of love toward God and the neighbor is for a Christian to
stay away from the worship services. He forsakes the communal obligations of attending these
meetings and displays the symptoms of selfishness and self-centeredness.
Apparently some members of the Hebrew congregation to whom the epistle originally was
addressed showed a disregard for attending the religious services. They did so willfully by deserting
the “communion of the saints.” From sources dating from the first century of the Christian era, we

3 3 John Brown, An Exposition of Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), p. 464.

4 4 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 325, expresses his disappointment in our inability to translate the
Greek adequately. We translate “good deeds,” but the original emphasizes that the deeds themselves
are noble.
learn that a lack of interest in the worship services was rather common. The Didache, a church
manual of religious instruction from the latter part of the first century, gives this exhortation: “But
be frequently gathered together seeking the things which are profitable for your souls.”25
In an earlier chapter the author of Hebrews warns the readers not to follow the example of the
disobedient Israelites in the desert, and not to turn away from the living God (3:12). The author
exhorts the readers to “encourage one another daily … so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s
deceitfulness” (3:13). He realizes that among some of the members spiritual zeal has declined.
Therefore once more he says, “But let us encourage one another” (10:25). Not only the writer of
this epistle but also all the members of the church have the communal task of encouraging one
another daily. Together we bear the responsibility, for we are the body of Christ.
p 291 As Christians we must look to the future, that is, to the day when Jesus returns. The closer
we come to that day, the more active we should be in spurring one another on in showing love and
doing deeds acceptable to God. We would have appreciated more information about “the Day,” but
the author is as brief as other writers of the New Testament who mention it (see, for example, Matt.
25:13; I Cor. 3:13; I Thess. 5:4). Says Philip Edgcumbe Hughes: “When spoken of in this absolute
manner, ‘the Day’ can mean only the last day, that ultimate eschatological day, which is the day of
reckoning and judgment, known as the Day of the Lord.”26

Practical Considerations in 10:19–25

Of the well-known triad faith, hope, and love, hope seems to be neglected. Writers of the New
Testament, however, do not neglect it, for they mention it as many times as faith and love. The
Christian in his spiritual life appears to stress the virtues of faith and love, but he says little about
hope.
Yet hope guides the believer, for it provides him freedom from the fear of death. He keeps his
eyes on Jesus, who has conquered the power of death. He knows that in Jesus he has salvation,
righteousness, eternal life, and the assurance of resurrection from the dead. That hope will be
realized when Jesus returns.
Christianity is a religion of love that reaches out and brings people together. Sports,
performances on the stage or screen, and politics draw large crowds. But Christianity holds people
together because it emphasizes participation in worship, praise, and work. Christians need each
other to strengthen the wonderful bond of love they share in Jesus Christ.
The author’s exhortation to “spur one another on toward love” precedes his remarks about
church attendance. When the believer attends the worship service, he expresses his love for Jesus.
He realizes that Jesus, the head of the church, is present at the service and desires his presence. To
say it somewhat differently, the head of the church cannot function without the body. The believer is
part of the body of Christ, which Christ presents “to himself as a radiant church, without stain or
wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless” (Eph. 5:27).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:19–25

5 5 The Didache (The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1), 16.2, p. 333 (LCL). Also see the Epistle of
Barnabas (The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1), 4.10, p. 353 (LCL). Even in Jewish sources the same
concern is expressed. Rabbi Hillel said, “Separate not thyself from the community” (Aboth 2.4, p.
14, Talmud). And Josephus writes in a similar vein; see his Antiquities of the Jews 4.203–4 (LCL).

6 6 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1977), p. 416.
 Verse 19
ἔχοντες—this present active participle from ἔχω (I have) denotes cause. It indicates why the
believer may draw near to God.
εἴσοδον—from the combination of εἰς (into) and ἡ ὁδός (the way); this noun can mean either
the act of entering or entrance. The context favors the first meaning.τῶν ἁγίων is an abbreviated
form of τά ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων and refers to the Most Holy Place (see Heb. 9:2, 12).

Verse 20
p 292
πρόσφατον—a compound adjective from πρό (before) and σφάζω (I slay). This term in time
signified something new or recent.
σαρκός—this genitive singular noun stands in apposition to the antecedent καταπετάσματος
(curtain). To link the genitive σαρκός to the accusative ὁδόν is difficult and grammatically unsound.

Verse 22
προσερχώμεθα—the present middle subjunctive has a variant reading in the form of the present
middle indicative. The external evidence (manuscripts) and the internal evidence (context) favor the
present subjunctive. This is the first of three hortatory subjunctives; the other two are κατέχωμεν (v.
23) and κατανοῶμεν (v. 24).
ῥεραντισμένοι—together with λελουσμένοι the participle features the perfect tense and the
passive voice.27 The action of the verbs (ῥαντίζω, I sprinkle; and λούω, I wash) occurred in the past
but has lasting effect in the present.

Verse 24
ἀλλήλους—this reciprocal pronoun appears only here in the entire epistle. It seems to relate
much more to the noun παροξυσμόν (provoking, encouraging) than to the verb κατανοῶμεν (let us
consider), even though the verb governs the pronoun as a direct object.

Verse 25
ἐγκαταλείποντες—the present active participle shows that the staying away from the meetings
happened. The compound form of the verb indicates a forsaking, that is, an abandoning of the
congregation.
ἐπισυναγωγήν—according to Walter Bauer, this noun does not differ from the noun
συναγωγή.28
ἑαυτῶν—this is the abbreviated koine Greek form for ἡμῶν αὐτῶν and is simply translated
“our.”

p 293
B. A Warning to Pay Attention
10:26–31

26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins
is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.
28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29

7 7 Robertson, Grammar, p. 486, calls them passive verbs with rather remote accusative.

8 8 Bauer, p. 301.
How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God
under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has
insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again,
“The Lord will judge his people.” 31 It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

1. To the Knowledge of the Truth

10:26–27
Forsaking the congregation at worship leads to serious consequences. The author warns the
believers that the sequel to sinning deliberately is falling “into the hands of the living God” (10:31).
26. If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth,
no sacrifice for sins is left, 27. but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire
that will consume the enemies of God.
The word deliberately stands first in the original Greek, and as the opening word of the sentence
it receives all the emphasis. The term occurs only twice in the New Testament, here and in I Peter
5:2. It refers to something done intentionally.
In the Old Testament the distinction is made between sins committed unintentionally and sins
committed intentionally. The first can be forgiven; the second cannot. Moses writes, “But anyone
who sins defiantly, whether native-born or alien, blasphemes the LORD, and that person must be cut
off from his people” (Num. 15:30; see also Lev. 4:2, 22, 27; 5:15, 18; Num. 15:24 for unintentional
sins).
The author of Hebrews is rather specific. He writes concerning a person who sins intentionally
and who keeps on doing this in open rebellion against God and his Word. To reach his readers in a
pastoral manner, he even includes himself in the warning not to sin defiantly. He is not talking about
a believer who falls into sin unintentionally and finds forgiveness in God’s grace and mercy. Rather,
he points to the same sin that Jesus calls the sin against the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:32; Mark 3:29)
and that John describes as “a sin that leads to death” (I John 5:16). Although he employs different
terms, the writer virtually repeats the same thought he expressed in 3:12 and 6:4–6, where he speaks
of falling away from the living God.
Those who turn away from God and “have received the knowledge of the truth” can never say
that they sinned in ignorance. The phrase knowledge of the truth relates to God’s revelation in
general and the gospel in particular (see I Tim. 2:4; II Tim. 2:25; 3:7; Titus 1:1). They who at one
time received this truth, but now have turned against God and his revelation, are without excuse.
Nothing can save them. They know that Christ’s sacrifice is the only sacrifice that removes sin. If
they deliberately reject Christ and his atoning work, they reject salvation. For them, says the writer,
“no sacrifice for sins is left.”
What then is left? “Only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume
the enemies of God.” A decision against Christ taken deliberately can only result in judgment. And
judgment is not merely something that happens at the end of time. Evidence already is being
gathered p 294 and presented to the jury in preparation for the judgment day. And that is a fearful
expectation!
The emphasis falls on the adjective fearful. The word occurs three times in the New Testament,
all in this epistle (10:27, 31: 12:21). This adjective is translated “fearful,” “dreadful,” and
“terrifying.” In all three instances its use pertains to meeting God. The sinner cannot escape God’s
judgment and, unless he has been forgiven in Christ, faces an angry God on that dreadful day.
Not only the judgment awaits the sinner who will receive the verdict, but also the execution of
that verdict. The author vividly portrays the execution as a raging fire that will consume all those
who have chosen to be enemies of God. Actually he echoes the words of Isaiah’s prophecy, “Let the
fire reserved for your enemies consume them” (Isa. 26:11).
2. To God’s judgment
 10:28–31
28. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three
witnesses.
Let no one think that God deals lightly with his enemies and shows them mercy. If anyone
deliberately rejected the law of Moses in Old Testament times, that person was put to death without
mercy. God instructed the Israelites to banish the sin of apostasy by killing the person who willfully
despised God’s commandments and turned to idols instead. “Then all Israel will hear and be afraid,
and no one among you will do such an evil thing again” (Deut. 13:11; see also vv. 1–10 and 17:2–
7). This was a warning to Israel to keep God’s law and to serve him wholeheartedly.
Should someone break the commandments, he would not be killed. Only when two or three
witnesses verified that he had intentionally despised God and rejected the law of Moses would this
offender be put to death. The stipulation that a person be tried on the testimony of two or three
witnesses was a rule observed and applied in biblical times (Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15; Matt.
18:16; John 8:17; II Cor. 13:1). Appeal of the sentence would not be granted. The writer of Hebrews
summarizes the essence of the verdict in the words without mercy. According to God’s instructions,
the guilty person had to be killed, and the example was to serve as a deterrent.
29. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has
trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the
covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?
Once again the author of Hebrews employs the device of contrast. He sets the times of the old
covenant over against those of the new covenant. He compares the penalty of physical death with
the much more severe sentence of spiritual death. And he differentiates between rejecting the law of
Moses and despising the Son of God and the Spirit of God. He asks the reader to reflect on this
difference. p 295
The sinner who rebels against God in the times of the new covenant rejects the person of Christ,
the work of Christ, and the person of the Holy Spirit. And thus he has committed the unpardonable
sin. The writer delineates this sin in three parts.
a. Person of the Son of God. Note that the author again employs the title of Christ, which he
used extensively at the beginning of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The title is the highest accorded to
Christ. No one can be compared to this Son, for he excels all: angels, Moses, Aaron, and
Melchizedek.
What does the sinner do? He tramples under foot this Son of God. To trample something under
foot is what we do when we get rid of a bothersome insect.29 Thus the sinner figuratively takes the
exalted Son of God and grinds him into the dirt.
b. Work of the Son of God. The second part is even more significant because it relates to the
meaning and purpose of the new covenant. Jesus inaugurated this covenant by his blood to cleanse
his people and sanctify them (Matt. 26:28 and parallels).
Jesus shed his precious blood and paid the supreme sacrifice. But this shed blood means nothing
to the rebellious sinner. He regards Jesus’ blood as the blood of any other human being and Jesus’
death as that of any other mortal. He considers Jesus to be a mere man whose death has no
significance and whose redemptive work has no value.
The author contrasts the defiant sinner within the Israelite community with the Christian who
has abandoned the church; his point is that ignorance cannot be used as an excuse. The sinner
knows the Christian faith, for he was sanctified by the blood of the covenant. That is, at one time he
professed his faith in Christ, listened to the preaching of the Word of God, and partook of the holy
elements when he celebrated the Lord’s Supper. But his faith was not an internal fulfillment. In
word and deed he now repudiates his relationship to Christ’s work. He breaks with his past.

9 9 The expression trample under foot (or variants) is common in the Old Testament (see, for
example, II Kings 9:33; Isa. 26:6; Dan. 8:10; Mic. 7:10; Mal. 4:3). In the New Testament it occurs
five times (Matt. 5:13; 7:6; Luke 8:5; 12:1; Heb. 10:29).
 c. Person of the Holy Spirit. The third clause in the description of the unpardonable sin relates to
insulting the Spirit of grace (Matt. 12:32; Mark 3:29). The sinner intentionally insults the person of
the Holy Spirit. In his conduct, the sinner points out the stark contrast between insults hurled at the
Holy Spirit and grace granted by the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is the source of grace (Zech. 12:10).
Insulting the third person of the Trinity is the height of sin that cannot be forgiven. Says John
Calvin, “To treat him with scorn, by whom we are endowed with so many benefits, is an impiety
extremely wicked.”30 God himself confronts the sinner and metes out punishment.
30. For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” p 296 and again, “The
Lord will judge his people.” 31. It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Understandably believers are grieved when they hear about and see the conduct of a person who
leaves the Christian community by scornfully rejecting the Son of God and insulting the Holy
Spirit. They know that vengeance belongs to God, for this is the teaching of his Word.
The author of Hebrews takes the words “It is mine to avenge; I will repay” from the Song of
Moses (Deut. 32:35).31 This song was well known to the readers because they sang it in their
worship services. The wording differs somewhat in the original Hebrew and its Greek translation;
therefore, scholars have made the suggestion that “the citation in this form may have been
stereotyped by apostolic example in the language of the primitive church.”32 The citation occurs in
the selfsame wording in Romans 12:19. We may assume that it circulated in the early church as a
proverbial saying.
The second quotation comes from both the Song of Moses (Deut. 32:36) and the Book of
Psalms (Ps. 135:14). “The Lord will judge his people,” writes the author of Hebrews. The intent is
to emphasize that judgment is unavoidable. In an earlier setting the writer speaks of the coming
judgment (9:27; and see 10:27) and presents it in the form of an accepted truth.
God will judge his people; no one escapes his judgment. Those whose faith is rooted in Jesus
Christ find a God of grace and mercy. Their sins have been forgiven because of the Son’s sacrifice
on the cross. And they will hear the verdict acquitted. But they who have spurned the person and
work of Christ and have arrogantly despised the Holy Spirit face the infinite wrath of God, the
judge of heaven and earth.
When a sinner repents of his sin, approaches the throne of God, and pleads for mercy, God hears
and answers. David experienced this when he sinned against God by counting the number of
fighting men in Israel and Judah. Said David, “Let us fall into the hands of the LORD, for his mercy
is great” (II Sam. 24:14; see also I Chron. 21:13). The sinner who breaks God’s law purposely to
grieve God has passed the stage of repentance (Heb. 6:4–6). He falls “into the hands of the living
God” (also see Heb. 3:12), and that confrontation is indescribable. The writer of Hebrews says it is
dreadful.

Practical Considerations in 10:26–31

Preaching sermons on hellfire appears to be something that happened in the past but not today.
This type of preaching is considered an oddity of the eighteenth century; it should not be heard from

0 0 Calvin, Hebrews, p. 248.

1 1 The writer of Hebrews usually quotes the Septuagint translation, but not here. The
Septuagint has, “In the day of vengeance, I will repay.”

2 2 Delitzsch, Hebrews, vol. 2, p. 190. Also see K. J. Thomas, “The Use of the Septuagint in
the Epistle to the Hebrews” (Ph.D. diss., University of Manchester, 1959), p. 122. Perhaps the
phraseology of the citation prevailed in an oral tradition on which the writers of the Targums and
the writers of the New Testament relied.
a twentieth-century pulpit. p 297
True. Sermons ought to proclaim the gospel of salvation, the call to repentance, the assurance of
pardon, and the message of reconciliation between God and man. Proportionally, Scripture says
little about God’s burning wrath that consumes his enemies. If Scripture sets the example, we
should follow its practice.
Nevertheless, no preacher may fail to warn the people of the dire consequences of turning away
from the living God. The recurring theme of the Epistle of Hebrews is one of warning God’s people.
Note these three texts:
3:12 “See to it, brothers, that none of you has a
sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from
the living God.”

4:1 “Therefore, since the promise of entering

[God’s] rest still stands, let us be careful that
none of you be found to have fallen short of it.”

4:11 “Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter

that rest, so that no one will fall by following
their example of disobedience.”

The terrifying consequences of living a life of intentional sin ought to be mentioned in sermons.
In Hebrews we read that every believer has the responsibility to seek the spiritual welfare of his
fellow Christians. We may call this corporate responsibility because it is our mutual task. And
pastors may refer to hellfire in their sermons, for such a warning also belongs to the full message of
God’s revelation.
As the pastor warns the wayward, so he encourages the faint-hearted. A believer may lack the
assurance of salvation, fearing that he has committed the sin against the Holy Spirit. But the
unpardonable sin cannot be attributed to a person who doubts his or her salvation. Only the person
who demonstrates an open and deliberate hatred toward God, divine revelation, and Christ’s
accomplished work of salvation has committed that sin. The doubter, then, needs words of
encouragement. He should be invited to repeat the reassuring words of Paul, “Yet I am not ashamed,
because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have
entrusted to him for that day” (II Tim. 1:12).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:26–31

Verse 26
ἑκουσίως—an adverb derived from the adjective ἑκών (voluntary, willing, of one’s own free
will).
ἁμαρτανόντων—the genitive absolute construction with a present active participle denoting a
condition. The first person plural pronoun ἡμῶν completes the construction. Note that the present
participle (indicating duration) and not the aorist participle (depicting a single occurrence) is used.
τὴν ἐπίγνωσιν—the compound noun is preceded by the definite article and has a perfective
connotation; that is, the compound noun is more precise than the noun γνῶσις (knowledge).
ἐπίγνωσιν has the meaning recognition, acknowledgment.

Verse 27
 τις—this indefinite pronoun, usually translated “someone” or “something,” should be taken with
the adjective φοβερά. It strengthens the adjective and means “a very fearful expectation.”33 p 298
ἐκδοχή—the noun has its origin in the verb ἐκδέχομαι (I expect, await). It appears only here in
the New Testament. The noun controls two objects in the genitive case: judgment and fire.
ζῆλος—although translations treat this word as an adjective (raging; NIV, JB), it is a noun that
means “jealousy”; that is, the fierceness of fire.

Verse 28
ἀθετήσας—the aorist active participle from ἀθετέω (I nullify, reject) conveys the idea of
annulling the law of Moses, resulting in a complete break with the old covenant.
ἐπί—this preposition may be translated “in the presence of.”

Verse 29
ποσῷ—the dative case points out the degree of difference between physical death and eternal
punishment. It introduces the hermeneutical rule of contrast “from the lesser to the greater.”
ἀξιωθήσεται—the future passive of ἀξιόω (I consider worthy) controls the genitive case
τιμωρίας (punishment). The verb usually has the positive connotation of receiving rewards; here it
means deserving punishment.
ἡγησάμενος—the aorist middle participle of ἡγέομαι (I think, regard) and ἡγιάσθη (the aorist
passive of ἁγιάζω, I make holy) are a play on words in the Greek text.

Verse 31
τὸ ἐμπεσεῖν—an aorist infinitive of the directive compound ἐμπίπτω (I fall into). The aorist
shows single occurrence. It is succeeded by the preposition εἰς (into).
ζῶντος—the present active participle from the verb ζάω (I live) describes God as distinct from
manmade idols that are dead.

C. A Reminder to Continue
10:32–39

32 Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you stood your ground in a great
contest in the face of suffering. 33 Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other
times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34 You sympathized with those in prison and
joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and
lasting possessions.
35 So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded. 36 You need to persevere so that
when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. 37 For in just a very little
while,
“He who is coming will come and not delay.
38 But my righteous one will live by faith.
And if he shrinks back,

3 3 Robertson, Grammar, p. 743. Italics his.

V IV New International Version

B B Jerusalem Bible
 I will not be pleased with him.”
39 But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved.

1. As in the Past
10:32–34
As a pastor sensitive to the needs to his people, the author changes his remarks from admonition to
praise, from reproof to commendation. He p 299 heartily approves of the works of love and mercy
they showed to those who were persecuted and those who lost their possessions. The writer draws a
parallel to his warning against falling away (6:4–6) and to his tribute to the readers for their
demonstration of love and their willingness to help (6:9–11).
32. Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you stood your
ground in a great contest in the face of suffering.
Times of hardship, persecution, and suffering remain indelibly fixed in man’s memory.
Memories come to mind with the simple question, “Do you recall?” Yes, the readers vividly
remembered those early days when at first they had professed their faith and received the sacrament
of baptism. In those days they received the light (6:4). But as soon as they had become Christians,
they faced hostility.
Especially in Jewish circles the sign of Christian baptism indicates the breaking point, and
Jewish converts to the Christian religion are excommunicated and subject to abuse and insult, if not
persecution. The recipients of the Epistle to the Hebrews had experienced first hand suffering for
their faith in Jesus. And they had not forgotten this “great contest,” even though the present was
calm and peaceful. They recalled the intensity and the duration of this difficult period in their
lives.34 Their faith was tested, and they emerged victoriously in spite of and because of the
suffering they endured. Not only had they personally endured hardship, but also they had reached
out in love to others who experienced similar treatment.
33. Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you
stood side by side with those who were so treated.
The readers of this epistle knew what it meant to be objects of public ridicule and persecution.
The text indicates that these conditions persisted for an extended period. Wherever the church
begins to develop and grow, opposition can be expected. The “Hebrews,” who were known as
traitors to the Jewish faith, had become the target of abuse. In effect, they were treated as outlaws.
As aliens in a foreign land, they were deprived of legal protection. Persecution was their lot. To
them the Beatitudes of Jesus were especially meaningful. “Blessed are those who are persecuted
because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult
you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me” (Matt. 5:10–11).
They stood side by side with those who endured the same hostility. They demonstrated the love
of Christ to fellow church members who faced harassment, maltreatment, and deprivation. The
members of the congregation stood together in aiding one another in the hour of need.
34. You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your
property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions.
Christians are expected to visit the prisoners. Jesus commends the righteous for having visited
the captives: “I was in prison and you came to visit p 300 me” (Matt. 25:36; also see vv. 39, 43, 44).
Prisoners depended on relatives, friends, and acquaintances for food, clothing, and other needs (see,
for example, Acts 23:16; 24:23; 27:3; II Tim. 4:13). The writer of Hebrews exhorts his readers to
“remember those in prison as if you were their fellow prisoners” (13:3).
Moreover, the readers of the epistle were obedient to the words of Jesus, “Do not store up for
yourselves treasures on earth.… But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven” (Matt. 6:19, 20).

4 4 Michel, Hebräer, p. 239.

Cheerfully they gave up their property when, presumably, governmental authorities confiscated
their goods. Their lasting possession was stored up for them in heaven, and in that knowledge they
rejoiced. These readers lived in harmony with the precepts that Jesus taught in the gospel (Matt.
5:12; Luke 6:23; James 1:2).
The author of Hebrews seems to develop a sequence of the events that had occurred in the lives
of his readers. First, they had endured a period of suffering when they “had received the light” (v.
32). Then they were exposed to public insult and persecution (v. 33). Also, they supported fellow
believers who suffered similar abuse. And last, they had lost their property, perhaps in a time of
political or religious turmoil (v. 34).
We would appreciate seeing a chronicle of events with exact dates and places. But the writer of
Hebrews provides no historical information on when and where events took place. Therefore, we
can work only with hypotheses that by nature are quite subjective.
The author’s remark that the readers were in the category of second-generation Christians (2:3)
makes an early date for persecution somewhat difficult to accept. For example, the persecution
following the death of Stephen (Acts 8:1) may have occurred in A.D. 32. And the persecution that
resulted in the death of James, brother of John, and the imprisonment of Peter (Acts 12:1–3) can be
dated rather accurately for April A.D. 44. Both Stephen and James died in Jerusalem.
Rome witnessed the expulsion of the Jews in A.D. 49 during the reign of Emperor Claudius.35
We can be reasonably sure that Jewish Christians were involved in this persecution—Luke mentions
Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:1–2).36 How severe the terms of this edict may have been is not
known. Eventually those who were expelled returned to Rome (Rom. 16:3).
Then, following the burning of Rome in A.D. 64, Nero instigated severe persecutions directed
primarily against the Christians.37 Christians were p 301 publicly oppressed when they faced wild
animals in the arena or were burned at the stake. Because the author of Hebrews fails to provide any
hints when the recipients of his letter endured persecution and loss of property, we assume that the
events resulting from Claudius’s decree and from Nero’s cruel tactics mark the background of
10:32–34. As I already noted, the writer appears to develop somewhat of a sequence in these verses.
The one event follows the other. Now he looks back into history and asks his readers to recall the
hardships they had experienced.
2. So in the Present
10:35–39
35. So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.
If the readers suffered for their Christian faith in earlier days, will they at present throw away
the confidence they showed in the face of persecution? Apparently time has elapsed, and the
believers are living in a period of peace and safety. Their boldness in confessing their faith in Christ
has fallen into disuse. And because they have not exercised their gift of confidence, they are ready

5 5 Suetonius, Claudius, 25.4 (LCL). “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the
instigation of Chrestus [another form of Christus], he expelled them from Rome.”

6 6 F. F. Bruce, New Testament History (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1980), p. 297.

7 7 Tacitus, Annals 15.44 (LCL). Bruce, Hebrews, p. 267, rules out identifying the persecution
of the Hebrews with the Neronian persecution. Says he, “It could never have been said to Roman
Christians after A.D. 64 that they had ‘not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin’; that is
precisely what they had done, and right nobly.” Bruce, then, links the Hebrew persecution to the
decree of Claudius. However, the clause “you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your
blood” (Heb. 12:4) must be seen in the context of the imagery used in verses 1–3. The clause should
not be taken out of context and applied to historical references of an earlier chapter.
to discard it.
Faith must be confessed boldly and confidently. In difficult circumstances the believer puts his
faith in God and readily confesses the name of his Lord and Savior. But in a time of ease the
Christian faces no necessity of taking a stand. His faith wavers and declines. Writes the author of
Hebrews, “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him
must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him” (11:6). The
confidence he expresses does not relate to the freedom we have in coming to God in prayer (4:16)
or with a sincere heart (10:19, 22). Rather, the author wants the readers to exhibit their confidence
or courage toward man (see also 3:6).
God will richly reward the believer who courageously confesses his faith. He rewards the
Christian not because he has deserved the reward in the sense of having merited or earned it. God
dispenses his gifts to those who earnestly seek him, not in terms of counting “human values and
achievements, but [in terms of] a joyful hopefulness” that God has promised.38
36. You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive
what he has promised.
The writer shows tact and pastoral concern. He exhorts the readers to persevere; as in the past
they stood their ground in the face of suffering (10:32), so now they ought to persevere in doing the
will of God. When he writes the phrase the will of God, he immediately reminds the recipients of
the obedience of Christ, who came to do the will of God (10:7, 9–10). The exhortation, then, is to
follow Christ in obediently keeping the commandments. And when they persevere in faithfulness to
God’s will, they will “receive what he has promised.” p 302
The expression promise is a key word in the Epistle to the Hebrews.39 It stands for forgiveness
of sins, in terms of the new covenant, but especially for complete salvation in Jesus Christ.40 God’s
promise to man is unbreakable. What God has promised, the believer will receive.
37. For in just a very little while,
“He who is coming will come and not delay.
38. But my righteous one will live by faith.
And if he shrinks back,
I will not be pleased with him.”
Steeped in the Old Testament Scriptures, the author cites prophecy to support his exhortation to
persevere. Whether the introduction to the quotation, that is, the words “in just a very little while,”
was purposely taken from Isaiah 26:20 is debatable. Isaiah 26 is a song of praise that was chanted or
read in the worship services of the ancient synagogue and of the early Christian church.41 However,
the phrase “in just a very little while” also appears in nonbiblical Greek literature and may simply
be a colloquial expression. The meaning of the phrase expresses the thought that the period of
waiting will not be long. In fact, the adverb very makes the phrase all the more pointed.
The author of Hebrews has taken a quotation from the prophecy of Habakkuk and has given it a
decidedly messianic interpretation. He follows not the Hebrew text but the Septuagint translation,

8 8 Paul Christoph Böttger, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 143.

9 9 The noun promise occurs fifty-three times in the New Testament, fourteen of which are in
Hebrews (4:1; 6:12, 15, 17; 7:6; 8:6; 9:15; 10:36; 11:9 [twice], 13, 17, 33, 39). The verb appears
fifteen times, four of which are in Hebrews (6:13; 10:23; 11:11; 12:26).

0 0 Ernst Hoffmann, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 73.

1 1 Ernst Werner, The Sacred Bridge (London: D. Dobson, 1959), p. 140. The early church
used nine songs taken from the Old Testament and five from the New Testament. See Kistemaker,
Psalm Citations, p. 47.
and for his own purposes introduces some changes. A comparison of the passage in parallel columns
is helpful:

Habakkuk 2:3b, 4 Hebrews 10:37b, 38

3b. Though it [the revelation] linger, wait for it; 37b. He who is coming will come and will not
it will certainly come and will not delay. delay.

4. “See, he is puffed up; his desires are not 38. But my righteous one will live by faith. And
upright—[Septuagint: And if he shrinks if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with
back I will not be pleased with him.] but the him.
righteous will live by his faith.”

Although the text of Habakkuk relates to the revelation, the writer of Hebrews makes the
wording personal and applies it to the Messiah. The phrase he who is coming is a descriptive title of
Christ (see Matt. 11:3; p 303 Luke 7:20; Rev. 1:4, 8; 4:8). Christ comes quickly and will not delay.
When the time arrives for his return, God’s revelation will be fulfilled.
Habakkuk prophesies against the Babylonians and portrays them as haughty people who are
ruthless and a law unto themselves (Hab. 1:6–7). He refers to them collectively and says, “See, he is
puffed up; his desires are not upright.” In the Septuagint the reading is, “And if he shrinks back I
will not be pleased with him.” The contrast is between the godless Babylonian and the righteous
Israelite who put his faith in God.
The writer of Hebrews turns the two sentences around. He inserts the personal pronoun my and
writes, “But my righteous one shall live by faith.” Because Paul also uses this line, although without
the pronoun (Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11), we assume that these words were familiar to the early
Christians. The author adds the second part—“and if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with
him.” The order, therefore, is reversed.
The difference between Habakkuk’s prophecy and the wording of Hebrews is that in the
prophecy the Babylonian is contrasted with the Israelites: the one is godless; the other, a devout
believer. In Hebrews, “my righteous one” is the same person who shrinks back. In rearranged form
the quotation addresses the recipient of the epistle.
The righteous person who perseveres does not receive God’s promise on the basis of keeping
the law and doing the will of God. He receives the promise by faith.42 The object of faith, of course,
is understood. The believer places his faith in Jesus Christ. Out of a relationship of trust and
confidence, the believer lives.43
In the face of opposition, persecution, and temptation, the believer ought to stand firm in his
faith. Should he shrink back in fear, should he abandon his faith, and should he eventually turn
away, God “will not be pleased with him.” Instead God’s displeasure will rest upon him because he
has forsaken the author of his salvation.
The quotation from Habakkuk, then, contains a warning to remain true to God. That does not

2 2 Grosheide, Hebreeën, p. 253. The writer of Hebrews avoids advocating works

righteousness whereby man earns his salvation. Man is declared righteous on the basis of faith in
Christ.

3 3 A few manuscripts have transposed the personal pronoun and have the reading, “But the
righteous will live by faith in me.”
mean that the recipients of Hebrews are forsaking their Lord. On the contrary, the author
encourages them by writing reassuring words.
39. But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe
and are saved.
As in many other passages, the author identifies himself with the readers. He places himself on
their level when he uses the personal pronoun we. He points out two classes: “those who shrink
back” and “those who believe.” The first group perishes; the second is saved.
The pastor-writer encourages his people. He gives them words of comfort p 304 and assurance.
He says, “We belong to those people who believe and are saved.” He knows the readers of his
epistle and is confident that they will continue to believe. And the people realize that the person
who shrinks back faces eternal condemnation, whereas he who believes obtains salvation. The
contrast is clearly delineated. No one can plead ignorance, for the one road leads to destruction; the
other, to life.
In the concluding verses of chapter 10, the author introduces the concept faith. He sets the tone
for a lengthy discussion about the heroes of faith by tracing sacred history from Abel to the
prophets.

Practical Considerations in 10:32–39

“You … joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property.” This statement seems
incongruous, unreal. All of us have a natural inclination to cherish and protect our own belongings.
We are not unwilling to help people in need. Indeed we give cheerfully. But we certainly do not
shout for joy when our possessions are taken from us.
When Jesus asks us to love our enemies, to do good to those who hate us, to bless those who
curse us, and to pray for those who mistreat us (Luke 6:27–28), we readily consent. And when he
continues and asks us to turn the other cheek when someone strikes us (Luke 6:29), we nod our
heads and are willing to endure physical abuse. But when Jesus says, “Give to everyone who asks
you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back” (Luke 6:30), we object. Our
belongings are valuable to us, and we certainly make our unhappiness known when someone takes
them from us. Jesus, however, wants us to cling not to earthly but to heavenly possessions.
Treasures laid up in heaven are lasting; those on earth are fleeting.
The recipients of Hebrews understood and applied the words of Jesus. When their possessions
were taken away and when their property was confiscated, they realized they “had better and lasting
possessions” in heaven.
When a member of the Jewish community converts to Christianity, a period of conflict begins in
his family, household, and locale. The Hebrew or Jew who becomes a Christian faces alienation,
especially when he receives the sacrament of baptism. The temptation to renounce Christ and return
to the fold of Judaism is real, for being surrounded once more by relatives and friends signifies an
end to persecution and hardship. The Epistle to the Hebrews is a letter of encouragement and
admonition to all those who have confessed Christ as their Savior. Let no one shrink back and
renounce Christ. Turning one’s back on him leads to condemnation and destruction. Do true
believers fall away? No. By his Word and Spirit, God enables them to remain faithful to the end.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:32–39

Verse 32
τὰς πρότερον ἡμέρας—the use of the definite article and the position of the adverb πρότερον
(earlier) reveal that much time has elapsed since the occurrence of events to which the author
alludes.
p 305 φωτισθέντες—the aorist passive from φωτίζω (I bring light to) may be understood
spiritually to refer to accepting the truth of the gospel and being baptized (see John 1:9; Eph. 1:18;
Heb. 6:4).

Verse 34
δεσμίοις—this noun has been subject to change. Writes Bruce M. Metzger: “The reading that
best explains the origin of the others is δεσμίοις [prisoners], which is supported by good
representatives of both the Alexandrian and the Western types of text, as well as several Eastern
witnesses. Through transcriptional oversight the first iota was omitted, resulting in the reading
δεσμοῖς [bonds]. Then, in order to improve the sense, copyists added a personal pronoun, either
αὐτῶν [their], referring to those mentioned in ver[se] 33b, or μου [my], in imitation of the
statements of Php 1:7, 13, 14, 17; Col 4:18.”44
ὕπαρξιν—the collective noun is actually the equivalent of the more commonὑπάρχοντα
(property).

Verse 35
μὴ ἀποβάλητε—the aorist subjunctive preceded by the negative particle conveys the idea that
the readers of the epistle were not throwing away their confidence. The writer only warns them
never to think about doing this. The aorist subjunctive as imperative is balanced by the present
imperative ἀναμιμνήσκεσθε (v. 32).
ἥτις—as an indefinite relative pronoun it has a causal connotation.

Verse 36
ὑπομονῆς—the noun derived from the verb ὑπομένω (I remain, endure) is introduced by
ὑπεμείνατε (v. 32).
κομίσησθε—in 6:15 the synonym ἑπέτυχεν appears (also see 11:33). The verbκομίζω (in the
middle: I receive, obtain) has the meaning of personally appropriating the promise. Its synonym
ἐπιτυγχάνω (I attain, obtain) is a more general term.

Verse 39
ἡμεῖς—this personal pronoun stands first in the sentence, receives all the emphasis, and
supports the verb ἐσμέν that is understood in the second part of the verse. The sentence is perfectly
balanced to feature the opposites in the contrast.
ὑποστολῆς—a noun derived from ὑποστέλλω (in the middle: I shrink) has its counterpart in
πίστεως. And the noun ἀπώλειαν (destruction) from ἀπόλλυμι (I destroy) is balanced by
περιποίησιν ψυχῆς (saving of the soul).

Summary of Chapter 10
The first section of chapter 10 is actually a continuation of the theme and content of the preceding
chapter. In chapter 9 the author writes of the p 306 unique sacrifice of Christ, and in the first
eighteen verses of chapter 10 he summarizes the teachings concerning this unique sacrifice. That is,
Christ came to set aside the shadows of the Levitical priestly service. By his death he established
the era of the new covenant.
Quoting Psalm 40:6–7, the writer of Hebrews underlines the significance of Christ’s sacrifice

4 4 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New
York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 670.
over against animal sacrifices. Christ came to do the will of God. That is important, for God takes
no pleasure in sacrifices and offerings of animals that were devoted to God as substitutes to atone
for man’s disobedience.
The difference between the sacrificial system of the old covenant and that of the new covenant
is the repetitive nature of presenting sacrifices in the one, and the once-for-all offering in the other.
The sacrifice of Christ is sufficient to sanctify his people. They have God’s law written on their
hearts and minds. And they know that because of Christ’s perfect sacrifice, their sins have been
forgiven.
The second part of chapter 10 is also the beginning of the second part of the epistle. This
segment features exhortations and admonitions. The readers are exhorted to enter the presence of
God because Christ has opened the way by shedding his blood.
The writer encourages the believers to remain true to their confession; he challenges them to
demonstrate their love in word and deed; and he admonishes them to seek the fellowship of the
saints at worship.
He calls their attention once more (see 3:16–19; 6:4–6) to the sin of falling away from God. He
describes the horrible consequences of deliberately sinning against God. The warning against
unbelief, “See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from
the living God” (3:12), is a recurring refrain in the epistle. In the present section the same warning,
although in different wording, is given twice.
But besides warning the people, the author also encourages them. As a loving pastor, he tells
them that God will richly reward their faith. They ought to persevere in doing the will of God and
live by faith. Because of their faith in God, they are saved.
The chapter ends with the introduction of the concept faith. And faith is the subject of the next
chapter.

p 307 11. The Heroes of Faith

11:1–40 p 308
Outline
11:1–3 A. A Definition of Faith

11:4–7 B. Three Examples of Faith: Abel, Enoch,

and Noah

C. The Faith of Abraham

11:8–10 1. The Promised Land

11:11–12 2. The Promised Son

11:13–16 3. The Promise

11:17–19 4. The Test of Faith

11:20–22 D. The Faith of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph

E. The Faith of Moses

11:23–26 1. Moses’ Childhood and Position

11:27–29 2. Moses’ Leadership

11:30–31 F. Faith at Jericho

G. Known and Unknown Heroes of Faith

11:32–35a 1. Those Who Triumphed

11:35b–38 2. Those Who Suffered

11:39–40 3. Commendation

A. A Definition of Faith
11:1–3

11 1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. 2 This is what the
ancients were commended for.
3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not
made out of what was visible.

The writer delights in recounting the history of the heroes of faith recorded in Scripture. Before he
cites examples, however, he composes a brief definition of faith. He does not write a dogmatic
exposition. Instead he formulates a few clear, straightforward sentences.
1. Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
As we study this verse, let us note the following points:
a. Faith
The word faith in the New Testament has many aspects. For example, when the Judean Christians,
whom Paul had sought to destroy, spoke of their belief in Christ, they said, “The man who formerly
persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy” (Gal. 1:23). Faith, then, is a
confession, much the same as we call the Apostles’ Creed the articles of our Christian faith.
However, this is not the meaning of faith that the writer of Hebrews conveys.
For the evangelists who wrote the Gospels, Jesus Christ is the object of faith. John summarizes
this emphasis when he states the purpose of his Gospel, namely, “that you may believe that Jesus is
the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31). Also,
the Acts show that in the first century, “a personal faith in Jesus was a hallmark of the early
Christians.”1
Still another aspect of faith is Paul’s emphasis on appropriating, that is, claiming salvation in
Jesus Christ. Paul contends that God puts the sinner right with him through faith: “This
righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe” (Rom. 3:22). And
Paul explains that faith comes from hearing the Word proclaimed (Rom. 10:17).
p 310 The author of Hebrews recognizes these same aspects of faith featured by other writers of
the New Testament. However, his use of the concept faith must be understood primarily in the
context of the eleventh chapter of his epistle. The heroes of faith have one thing in common: they
put their undivided confidence in God. In spite of all their trials and difficult circumstances, they
triumphed because of their trust in God. For the author, faith is adhering to the promises of God,
depending on the Word of God, and remaining faithful to the Son of God.
When we see chapter 11 in the context of Hebrews, the author’s design to contrast faith with the
sin of unbelief (3:12, 19; 4:2; 10:38–39) becomes clear. Over against the sin of falling away from
the living God, the writer squarely places the virtue of faith.2 Those people who shrink from putting
their trust in God are destroyed, but those who believe are saved (10:39).
b. Assurance
What is true faith? In 1563 a German theology professor, Zacharias Ursinus, formulated his
personal faith:
True faith—
created in me by the Holy Spirit through the gospel—
is not only a knowledge and conviction
that everything that God reveals in his Word is true,
but also a deep-rooted assurance
that not only others, but I too,
have had my sins forgiven,
have been made forever right with God,
and have been granted salvation.
These are gifts of sheer grace
earned for us by Christ.3
The author of Hebrews expresses that same assurance in much more concise wording: “Faith is
being sure of what we hope for.” The expression being sure of is given as “substance” in other
translations.4 The difference between these translations arises from understanding the original Greek

1 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity, 1981), p. 588.
2 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok. 1955),
p. 255.
3 Heidelberg Catechism, answer 21.
4 See, for example, the KJV, NKJV, and NEB. Other translations have “confidence” (Phillips,
Lenski), “we are confident” (Moffatt), or “guarantee” (JB). The RV, ASV, R.S.V., NASB, NAB, and
word hypostasis subjectively or objectively. If I am sure of something, I have certainty in my heart.
This is a subjective knowledge because it is within me. Assurance, then, is a subjective quality. By
contrast, the word substance is objective because it refers to something that is not part of me.
Rather, substance p 311 is something on which I can rely. As one translation has it, “Faith is the
title-deed of things hoped for.”5 That, in fact, is objective.
To come to a clear-cut choice in the matter is not easy, for the one translation does not rule out
the other. The translation confidence or assurance has gained prominence, perhaps because 3:14
also has the same word: “We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the
confidence we had at first.” In the case of 11:1, even though the objective sense has validity, the
subjective meaning is commended.
The author teaches the virtue of hope wherever he is able to introduce the topic (3:6; 6:11, 18;
7:19; 10:23). Hope is not an inactive hidden quality. Hope is active and progressive. It relates to all
the things God has promised to believers: “all things of present grace and future glory.”6
c. Certainty
Although the brief statement on faith consists of only two phrases, they are perfectly balanced. Note
the structure:
Faith
is
being sure of certain of

what we hope for what we do not see

In short, assurance is balanced by certainty. These two nouns are in this text synonymous.
Certainty, then, means “inner conviction.”7 The believer is convinced that the things he is unable to
see are real. Not every conviction, however, is equal to faith. Conviction is the equivalent of faith
when certainty prevails, even though the evidence is lacking. The things we do not see are those
that pertain to the future, that in time will become the present. Even things of the present, and
certainly those of the past, that are beyond our reach belong to the category of “what we do not
see.” Comments B. F. Westcott, “Hope includes that which is internal as well as that which is
external.”8 Hope centers in the mind and spirit of man; sight relates to one of his senses (Rom.
8:24–25).
Faith, therefore, radiates from man’s inner being where hope resides to riches that are beyond

MLB have “assurance.” Helmut Köster, in TDNT, vol. 8, pp. 586–87, argues that the term
hypostasis (substance) refers to “the reality of the goods hoped for, which have by nature a
transcendent quality.” Or, “among the meanings that can be authenticated the one that seems to fit
best here is realization … in faith things hoped for become realized, or things hoped for become
reality.” See Bauer, p. 847. Both Köster and Bauer favor understanding hypostasis subjectively.
5 James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament
Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources (London: Hodder and Stoughton,
1930), pp. 659–60.
6 John Owen, An Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace,
1960), vol. 7, p. 7.
7 Bauer, p. 249.
8 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1950), p. 350.
his purview. Faith demonstrates itself in confident assurance and convincing certainty.
2. This is what the ancients were commended for.
A somewhat literal translation of this verse reads, “It is for their faith that p 312 the men of old
[the elders] stand on record” (NEB).9 The faith demonstrated by the ancients gained them God’s
approval. The term ancients, more literally “elders,” refers to the same group of people listed as
“forefathers” in 1:1. All of them have one thing in common: their faith. For that faith they are
commended by God.
The writer of Hebrews begins his list of the heroes of faith with Abel and Enoch. For both of
these illustrations, he uses the verb to commend. In verse 4 we read, “By faith [Abel] was
commended as a righteous man,” and in verse 5, “For before [Enoch] was taken, he was
commended as one who pleased God.” It would not be necessary for the author to say that everyone
mentioned in the list was commended. All the ancients whose names are recorded in sacred history
experienced God’s favor because of their faith. For their faith they were recognized by God and by
his people.
3. By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is
seen was not made out of what was visible.
At first sight we are inclined to read verse 3 with verse 1 and consider verse 2 the logical
heading of the list of the men of faith. But we have no justification for rearranging the author’s
design. He begins his illustrations of demonstrating faith with a comment about creation. No one
was present at creation to observe the formation of the world. “Where were you when I laid the
earth’s foundation?” God asks Job (38:4). By using the plural we understand, the author includes
himself and all his readers in the confession that God created the world.
The first declaration in the long list of the verses beginning with “by faith” is so rich in meaning
that we do well to discuss this verse phrase by phrase. Before we enter upon a full discussion,
however, we should note that verse 3b is translated in two ways. That is, the negative adverb not is
placed either before the verb to make or before the word appear—apart from variations in
translating this verse. The verse can he translated either “so that what is seen was not made out of
what was visible”10 or “so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear.”11
Translators are about equally divided on this particular issue. We shall discuss the matter as it
presents itself in the sequence of the verse.
a. “By faith.” This is the first occurrence in a series of twenty-one uses of the phrase by faith.
After these the author tells the readers that he lacks the time to write about additional Old testament
saints who also showed their faith (11:32–38). “These were all commended for their faith” (11:39).
b. “We understand.” The author and his readers are able to understand p 313 God’s creation by
faith. Although we are unable to observe that which is invisible, in our minds we recognize the
power of God. Understanding creation—even in a limited sense—means that we reflect in faith on
the relationship of Creator to creation.12 In Romans 1:20 Paul provides a striking parallel that even
in translation is close.

B EB New English Bible

9 The expression elder describes a person who is both aged and dignified. Spanish-speaking
people honor a gentleman by calling him “don.” Not every gentleman, however, receives this title;
it is given to him who has gained the respect of the community.

0 0 Among the translations that negate the verb to make are the KJV, NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB,
NIV, and JB.

1 1 The translations that negate “to appear” include the R.S.V., NEB, NAB, GNB, MLB,
Phillips, and Moffatt.

2 2 Günther Harder, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 128.

 Romans 1:20 Hebrews 11:3

For since By faith we understand

the Creation of the world that the universe was formed

God’s invisible qualities… at God’s command,

have been clearly seen, being understood from so that what is seen, was not made out of what
what has been made was visible

c. “The universe was formed.” Translations vary from “world” or “worlds” to “universe” (see
Heb. 1:2). The concept includes “the whole scheme of time and space” (Phillips). Moreover, God
gave form, shape, and order to the universe. According to the creation account in Genesis, “God
created the heavens and the earth” (1:1) and then proceeded to give structure and variety to a
formless and empty earth.
d. “At God’s command.” We are immediately reminded of the six commands God spoke at the
time of creation (Gen. 1:3, 6, 9, 14, 20, 24). “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made,”
says the psalmist (Ps. 33:6). Purposely God created the world in such a manner that man can
understand its origin only by faith. God made the world by his command. “For he spoke, and it
came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm” (Ps. 33:9).
e. “So that what is seen.” The author of Hebrews refers to that which visibly exists in God’s
creation—that is, light, sky, stars, earth, and countless other things.13 Man is able to see all these
entities with his physical eyes. These things, however, have not been made of what can be observed.
f. “Was not made out of what was visible.” Because no one was present at the time of creation,
eyewitness reports do not exist. Man must rely on what God has revealed to him about the creation
of the universe and the formation of the world. And by faith man ascertains that creation originates
with God.
How should verse 3 be translated? I have adopted the translation that negates the verb to make,
for this translation appears to favor the flow of the argument. The word visible implies that at one
time this creation did not exist and therefore is not eternal. Creation has a beginning. Moreover,
prior to creation, the invisible prevailed.14 We would have been happy to receive more revelation
concerning this point, but the author of Hebrews p 314 provides no further information where God’s
revelation is silent. We do well not to speculate (Deut. 29:29).

Practical Considerations in 11:1–3

s hillips The New Testament in Modern English

3 3 John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5 vols.
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 445.

4 4 Grosheide, Hebreeën, p. 260.

 Chapter 11 is the chapter about faith in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Earlier in the letter the author
introduces the concept faith when he speaks of the disobedient Israelites. These people heard the
message of the gospel, but they “did not combine it with faith” (4:2). They persevered not; instead
they followed their own willful way. The writer stresses the aspect of perseverance of faith (10:36)
and places faith conspicuously over against unbelief. Faith, then, is the confidence the believer
expresses when he faces blatant unbelief.
This unbelief surrounds the believer especially when the origin of the world becomes the topic
of discussion. Modern man refuses to accept the creation account recorded in Genesis. For him the
teaching of evolution solves problems and answers questions. Because this doctrine is a substitute
for the biblical account of creation, man rejects God and his Word. Countering unbelief, the
Christian unwaveringly maintains his faith. He confidently teaches the creation account that God
has revealed in Scripture.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:1–3

Verse 1
ἐλπιζομένων—this present passive participle in the plural lacks the definite article to give the
participle a broader range. The case is genitive—not subjective but objective. The present tense
implies continued activity.
ὑπόστασις—a compound noun, derived from ὑπό (under) and ἵστημι (I stand), it has been
translated as “substance,” “being” (Heb. 1:3), or “confidence” (Heb. 3:14).
οὐ βλεπομένων—the present passive participle is preceded by the negative particle οὐ, not μή.
The use “of οὐ with the participle means that the negative is clear-cut and decisive.”15 The present
tense is descriptive. The genitive case is objective.

Verse 3
νοοῦμεν—closely linked to πίστις, the verb νοέω (I perceive with my mind) discloses that faith
is not blind assent but engages man’s intellect and mind.
ῥήματι θεοῦ—both nouns appear without a definite article. In the following passages the
definite article occurs: Luke 22:61; John 3:34; 8:47; Acts 11:16. The absence of the article, the use
of ῥῆμα instead of λόγος, and the reference to the creation account make the translation at God’s
command unique.
εἰς τὸ μὴ … γεγονέναι—“we have a clear example of result,”16 not of purpose. The use of the
perfect infinitive shows permanence. That which has been created has lasting validity and stability.
The definite article need not precede the infinitive without any intervening words (see, for example,
Mark 5:4; Acts 8:11; I Peter 4:2). p 315 For this reason, the negative particle μή fits in better with
the infinitive construction than with the preposition and participle ἐκ φαινομένων.

B. Three Examples of Faith: Abel, Enoch, and Noah

11:4–7

5 5 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical

Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), pp. 1137–38.

6 6 Ibid., p. 1003.
4 By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man,
when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead.
5 By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found,
because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God. 6
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he
exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.
7 By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By
his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.

The contrast between faith and unbelief is exemplified in the lives of the forefathers. The writer
presents the positive element faith; nevertheless, by mentioning the name Cain, he introduces an
example of disobedience and unbelief.
4. By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended
as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even
though he is dead.
The author places the name of Abel, and by implication that of Adam, at the beginning of his list
of Old Testament saints. Adam’s son Abel occupies a special place in sacred history, for even Jesus
calls him righteous (Matt. 23:35; Luke 11:51).
With reference to Abel, note the following points:
a. Abel presented a “better sacrifice” than did his brother Cain. As a tiller of the soil, Cain
brought some of its fruits. Abel, the shepherd, sacrificed the fat of “some of the firstborn of his
flock” (Gen. 4:4). Is the word better (literally, “greater”) an indication that animal sacrifices were
more acceptable to God than were the fruits of the field? No. We should look not at the gifts but at
the giver. The historical context is quite explicit. In Genesis 4:6–7 we read: “Then the LORD said to
Cain, ‘Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be
accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you,
but you must master it.’ ”
The Septuagint version of verse 7 reads, “Did you not sin when you offered [your sacrifice]
correctly, but did not divide it correctly?”17 Throughout his epistle the author of Hebrews shows
that he depends on this Greek p 316 translation of the Old Testament. But the author’s choice of
version is not at issue. The fact remains that Cain’s attitude toward God was sinful. In effect, God
pleaded with him to repent, to change his way of life, and to conquer sin. However, the writer
introduces Cain’s name only for contrast; he is interested in Abel’s faith. Notice, for example, that
the expression by faith occurs three times in this verse (NIV).
b. Abel was a “righteous man.” He lived in harmony with God and man and therefore became
known as a righteous man. How God communicated with Abel is not known. One assumes that as
God spoke directly with Cain, so he addressed Abel. There is no reason to resort to interpretations
that hold that God communicated through symbols, such as fire that came down from heaven to
consume Abel’s sacrifice or smoke that ascended from this sacrifice.18 The Genesis account
provides no further information on how God “looked with favor on Abel and his offering” (4:4).
God looked on Abel’s heart and was pleased with the motives of the giver. As Paul puts it, “God

7 7 Clement of Rome says the same thing: “If thou offeredst rightly, but didst not divide
rightly, didst thou not sin?” The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, I Clem. 4:4 (LCL).
V IV New International Version

8 8 Speculation about why Abel’s sacrifice was better than Cain’s has occupied numerous
commentators from ancient times to the present. One of Rembrandt’s paintings portrays the two
brothers as they present their offerings to God. The smoke of Abel’s sacrifice spirals heavenward;
that of Cain’s fails to ascend.
loves a cheerful giver” (II Cor. 9:7).
c. Even after his death, Abel is a constant witness. The text (“he still speaks, even though he is
dead”) can be interpreted to refer to Abel’s blood. God says to Cain, “Your brother’s blood cries out
to me from the ground” (Gen. 4:10; see also Matt. 23:35; Luke 11:51; Heb. 12:24). But the writer of
Hebrews stresses the concept faith, not the avenging of Abel’s blood. The difficulty of relating faith
to blood that has been shed ought not be bolstered by a quick reference to Revelation 6:10, where
the souls under the altar cry out, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the
inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?” Not the blood of Abel, but the faith of Abel is
important; therefore, the reference to the souls under the altar is of little consequence. The author
places Abel before the readers as a righteous man who lived by faith (Heb. 10:38). Abel is at the top
of the list of the Old Testament heroes of faith. Even after his death, his example encourages people
to seek the Lord, because he rewards those who earnestly seek him. Abel, then, is the father of
believers of the time before Abraham. His faith in God still speaks as a constant witness.
5. By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could
not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended
as one who pleased God.
As Abel showed his love toward God, so Enoch, a member of the seventh generation in the
family of Adam (Gen. 5:1–24; Jude 14), served the Lord. The writer of Hebrews chooses Enoch as
the next person who exemplified a life of true dedication to God. The Genesis account is rather
brief: p 317

When Enoch had lived 65 years, he became the father of Methuselah. And after he became the
father of Methuselah, Enoch walked with God 300 years and had other sons and daughters.
Altogether, Enoch lived 365 years. Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God
took him away. [5:21–24]
Whereas the information about Abel comes to us in the form of a historical account, the details
concerning Enoch are recorded in a genealogy. Yet the facts are sufficiently clear. All the other
people mentioned in the genealogy are described by the same refrain, “and then he died.” But
“Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death.” And the writer introduces this
sentence with the expression by faith. Because of his faith, Enoch did not face death but was
translated to glory.
When the author says, “Enoch was taken from this life,” he actually repeats the conclusion of
the Genesis account. The conclusion rests on the clause Enoch walked with God, which appears
twice in his genealogy.19 What does the phrase walk with God mean? It means that a person lives a
spiritual life in which he tells God everything (see Gen. 6:9). Enoch lived a normal life of rearing
sons and daughters, but his entire life was characterized by his love for God. For this reason God
took him to heaven.
Note that the author writes the phrase was (or: had) taken three times. Enoch’s faith was so
strong and his relationship to God so close that he was kept from dying. The curse of death
pronounced upon Adam and his descendants did not prevail against Enoch, for God transformed
him. Enoch “was commended as one who pleased God.”20
6. And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must
believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

9 9 In the intertestamental period, several writers mentioned Enoch. For example, in Sir. 44:16
we read, “Enoch pleased the Lord, and was taken up; he was an example of repentance to all
generations” (R.S.V.). See the extracanonical books Wis. 4:10; Jub. 4:17–21; 10:17; I En.

0 0 The author of Hebrews takes the Old Testament quotation of Gen. 5:24 not from the
Hebrew text but from the Greek translation.
 This text teaches a spiritual truth that touches the spiritual life of every believer. It is one of the
most eloquent expressions of faith and prayer in the Epistle to the Hebrews. By comparison, Paul’s
declaration that “everything that does not come from faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23) is short. In one
beautifully constructed verse, the writer of Hebrews communicates the method of pleasing God, the
necessity of believing his existence, and the certainty of answered prayer.
a. How do we please God? By walking with him in faith! We must fully trust God and confide
in him as our closest friend. “Without faith it is impossible to please God.” The word impossible is a
reminder of Hebrews 6:4. It conveys the idea that faith is the indispensable ingredient for pleasing
God. p 318
b. Why do we pray to God? When the believer prays to God, he must believe that God exists.
Although God’s existence is an established truth for the believer, repeatedly he will ignore God by
failing to pray to him. God, however, desires that the believer pray continually.
c. How do we seek God in prayer? Earnestly, in full confidence! The sinner receives pardon; the
suppliant, mercy; and the righteous, peace. God invites us to come to him in full assurance that he
will hear and answer prayers. “So,” says the writer, “do not throw away your confidence; it will be
richly rewarded” (10:35).
Rewards can never be earned. In his sovereign goodness, God grants rewards not in terms of
payments, but as blessings on his people. God grants us the gift of life eternal. “No human action
can in any way counterbalance this in value.”21 God’s rewards to us are free, for he is sovereign.
7. By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save
his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that
comes by faith.
One person demonstrated his faith in God in a world of unbelief, and that person was Noah. In
the historical account of the flood, we read that God told Noah about an impending flood that would
destroy life because of man’s great wickedness. God warned Noah that he would wipe out men,
animals, and birds when a period of 120 years had ended (Gen. 6:1–7). Noah found favor in God’s
eyes, for “he walked with God” (Gen. 6:8–9). Like his ancestors, Abel and Enoch, he put his full
trust in God.
God instructed Noah to build an ark of specific and adequate size to hold his family and all the
animals and birds that God wanted to keep alive. God informed Noah “about things not yet seen”
(see Heb. 11:1).
Although the Scripture bears no record of the ridicule, the harassment, and the delays Noah had
to endure while he built a huge ship, presumably on dry land, we can be sure that he felt the rough
edge of unbelief. Jeers, taunts, and scorn constituted his daily diet of opposition.
Noah stood alone in the midst of a hostile world. Apart from the immediate members of his
family, he could not find any support. To believe in God amid fellow believers is relatively easy.
But to have no one to lean on except God is the true test of faith. Noah believed and “in holy fear
built an ark to save his family.” On the one hand he expressed deep reverence to God, and on the
other hand he was terrified because of the coming destruction. He was filled with holy fear at the
prospect of God’s judgment on the sinful world. For if he had not believed God’s warning, he would
not have been afraid. His faith drove him to fear and to build. Obediently he followed the
instructions God gave him. He constructed the ark and by doing so demonstrated his firm
confidence in God. His faith became his testimony p 319 that condemned the unbelieving world
around him. Noah’s faith stood diametrically opposed to the unbelief of the world.
Scripture describes Noah as a righteous man (Gen. 6:9). Ezekiel writes of the possibility that
God would send a famine to a country that sins against him; should Noah, Daniel, and Job be in that
country, “they could save only themselves by their righteousness” (Ezek. 14:14, 20). And Peter calls
Noah “a preacher of righteousness” (II Peter 2:5). The writer of Hebrews says that Noah “became
heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.” No prophet ever preached such a message of doom as

1 1 Paul Christoph Böttger, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 143. Also see John Calvin, Epistle to the
Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 272.
Noah did for such an extended time—120 years. Moreover, Noah preached to the entire world of
that day.
By his faith Noah inherited the gift of righteousness. His ancestor Abel “was commended as a
righteous man” (Heb. 11:4). Noah, however, became the possessor of righteousness; that is, his way
of life was a pattern of righteousness always in opposition to unbelief. His life was a constant
example of obedience to God’s will. Throughout his righteous life, Noah found God’s favor. By
faith he pleased God.

Practical Considerations in 11:4–7

The heroes of faith who preceded Abraham were true pioneers: Abel, Enoch, and Noah. These
men stood virtually alone in their contest of faith; unbelief and disobedience surrounded them and a
believing community to support them did not exist.
Consider Abel, for instance. His father and mother had fallen into disobedience and were driven
out of Paradise. His brother refused to listen to the voice of God and became a servant of sin (Gen.
4:7). Abel, by contrast, desired to serve God and to do God’s will. He put his trust in the Lord. He
was a solitary figure, a true pioneer, a child of God.
We know very little about the world in which Enoch lived. The writer places Enoch’s name in a
genealogy and refrains from writing historical details. Nevertheless, he singles out Enoch’s
characteristic: Enoch walked with God. All the other persons mentioned in the genealogy (Gen.
5:3–32) lack this description. Only Enoch is known as a man of faith.
And last, Noah walked with God (Gen. 6:9). He, too, stood (with his own family) as a pioneer
of faith. The world forsook him, yet he remained faithful.
Note the following:
For his faith Abel paid the price of his life.
Because of his faith Enoch was taken from this life.
By faith Noah saved his own family’s life.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:4–7

Verse 4
πλείονα—the accusative singular, masculine and feminine, comparative adjective of πολύς
(much, many) signifies not quantity but rather quality. The translation better is therefore preferred.
p 320
αὐτοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ—a variant of this reading (αὐτοῦ τῷ θεῷ), in spite of its manuscript support,
“provides no satisfactory sense.”22 The genitive τοῦ θεοῦ and the present active participle
μαρτυροῦντος form the genitive absolute construction.
διʼ αὐτῆς—this feminine singular pronoun can refer to either the antecedent πίστις (faith) or
θυσία (sacrifice). Because of the writer’s emphasis on faith, the New International Version and the
New English Bible relate both διʼ ῆ̔ς and διʼ αὐτῆς to πίστις.

Verse 5
ηὑρίσκετο—the imperfect passive of εὑρίσκω (I find) expresses repeated action in the past. That
is, the people kept on looking for Enoch.

2 2 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New
York: United Bible Societies, 1975), pp. 671–72.
 μεμαρτύρηται—the use of the perfect tense reveals continued action from the past to the
present.

Verse 7
βλεπομένων—artistically the author of Hebrews links this verse to the introductory statement
(v. 1). Note, however, that in verse 1 the negative particle precedes the participle, whereas here it is
μηδέπω (not yet).
διʼ ῆ̔ς—three antecedents in the feminine precede the relative pronoun ῆ̔ς. They are πίστις,
κιβωτός, and σωτηρία. As in verse 4, the context favors the word faith.

p 321
C. The Faith of Abraham
11:8–19

8 By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went,
even though he did not know where he was going. 9 By faith he made his home in the promised land like a
stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same
promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God.
11 By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was enabled to
become a father because he considered him faithful who had made the promise. 12 And so from this one
man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the
sand on the seashore.
13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised;
they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and
strangers on earth. 14 People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15 If
they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 Instead,
they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their
God, for he has prepared a city for them.
17 By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the
promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18 even though God had said to him, “It is through
Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19 Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead, and
figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death.

1. The Promised Land

11:8–10
Abraham is known as the father of believers, and thus the writer of Hebrews devotes much time and
space to this patriarch. Abraham lived with promises God had given him, and in faith he accepted
their reality.
8. By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance,
obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. 9. By faith he made his
home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac
and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. 10. For he was looking forward to
the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God.
Abraham’s faith triumphed in at least three different instances. First, God asked him to go to a
land that he would show Abraham and give to him as an inheritance. Yet of that land, which proved
to be Canaan, Abraham never owned a foot of ground except the burial plot he bought for Sarah, his
wife (Gen. 23:3–20; Acts 7:5). Second, God promised that he would make of Abraham a great
nation. When he reached his one hundredth birthday, his son Isaac was born; and fifteen years
before Abraham’s death, his grandsons Jacob and Esau entered the world. But Abraham never saw
“descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore” (Heb.
11:12). Also, God called Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac, for God wanted to test Abraham’s faith.
And that faith triumphed.
One other observation. Noah received instructions to build an ark to save his family from
impending doom. Although he had to wait for 120 years before the flood came, he nevertheless saw
the fulfillment of God’s warning and the result of his own faith. Abraham, however, received two
promises—the inheritance of the Promised Land and the formation of a mighty people as his
descendants. But he never saw these promises fulfilled in his lifetime, even though he lived for 175
years. Abraham, to be sure, lived by faith.
As we consider Abraham’s faith in respect to the Promised Land, we note:
a. A place
A more literal translation of the first part of verse 8 is, “By faith, while he was being called,
Abraham obeyed to go out to a place which he was about to receive as an inheritance.” As soon as
God called, Abraham responded obediently and was ready to do the Lord’s bidding. “Leave your
country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you” (Gen. 12:1).
In faith Abraham left, not knowing where the Lord would lead. What a break with his kinsfolk!
Abraham could not even inform his relatives where he was going, because he did not know.
What were the reasons for Abraham’s departure? God wished to fulfill his promise to Abraham
to make him into a great nation, to bless him, and to p 322 make Abraham’s name great (Gen. 12:2–
3). God also called Abraham to make his own name great. Through the patriarch, God revealed
himself as the faithful covenant God who keeps his promises.
b. A land
Abraham received God’s promise that he would become heir of a place God would give him. That
place was the land of Canaan, the land of the promise. Abraham traveled from Haran to Canaan,
leaving his relatives behind in Paddan Aram. He lived in the southern part of Canaan in tents. He
remained an alien and in a sense an outsider who had little in common with the local population.23
That Abraham lived in a tent indicated that he was a wandering herdsman who possessed countless
animals, but no land.
Yet God had promised the land to Abraham, and he repeated the promise to Isaac and to Jacob.
For three generations the heirs of the land lived in faith with a promise. Not until the twelve tribes
of Israel entered the land under the leadership of Joshua were they able to claim the promise and
make the land their own.
c. A city
Abraham’s stay in Canaan was as temporary as the pegs he drove into the ground to keep his tents
pitched. He constantly moved from place to place, and so did his son and his grandson. His stay
may have been temporary, but his faith was enduring.
Abraham’s faith in God reached beyond the promise of a place or a land, even though God had
promised the land to him and his descendants. Abraham knew that earthly possessions are
temporary; he always kept his eye of faith on “the city with foundations, whose architect and
builder is God.”
In the land of fadeless day
Lies the city foursquare;
It shall never pass away,

3 3 Hans Bietenhard, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 690, defines an alien as “one who lives among
resident citizens without having citizen rights yet enjoying the protection of the community.”
 And there is no night there.
—John R. Clements
The father of believers walked with God; “he was called God’s friend” (James 2:23). In faith he
knew that the city God had designed and built has everlasting foundations (Rev. 21:14, 19). He
looked forward to the new Jerusalem, “the city of the living God” (Heb. 12:22), to which all
believers come to find accommodation.
Abraham knew that his earthly dwelling could not be compared with the heavenly city of which
God himself was architect and builder. In faith he envisioned the eventual gathering of all believers
for the feast of redemption. He anticipated the coming and the work of the Christ, for in him all
believers are one with the Son and the Father.
By faith Abraham, although living in tents, looked to the permanent city. For him this city
marked the fulfillment of the promises God had made. p 323 Therefore Abraham looked not at the
process of salvation, but at its conclusion.
2. The Promised Son
11:11–12
The author of Hebrews follows the historical sequence of the Genesis account. He moves from the
promise of the land to the promise of the son.
11. By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was
enabled to become a father because he considered him faithful who had made the promise. 12.
And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars
in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore.
The translation of the New International Version differs sharply from others. At first sight the
reader may regard the translation of verse 11 as a radical departure from the well-known wording of
that text. The Revised Standard Version provides a representative reading of verse 11: “By faith
Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him
faithful who had promised.” The New American Standard Bible has “ability to conceive” instead of
“power to conceive,” but adds this informative marginal note, “Literally, power for the laying down
of seed” (italics in original). That literal translation is the essence of the problem because the
italicized phrase “is used of the sexual function of the male.”24 In other words, the subject of verse
11 is Abraham, not Sarah.
Explanations for this curious problem are numerous, and the translations themselves reflect
them. Here are a few explanations:
a. The writer of Hebrews places the expression and Sarah herself near the beginning of the
original Greek sentence, immediately after the phrase by faith. He seems to indicate, by the
nominative case, that Sarah is the subject of the sentence. The translators of the New International
Version and the Good News Bible have inserted the name Abraham to show that the patriarch is the
logical subject and that the name Abraham suits the broader context.
b. The Greek idiom, translated literally and modestly as “power for the laying down of seed,”
always refers to the male and not to the female. Therefore, to translate the idiom as “power to
conceive” is contrary to linguistic usage. It fails to do justice to the original text and appears to be
an accommodation to the presence of the name Sarah.
c. Many commentators take the approach that as husband and wife are one so Abraham and
Sarah should be mentioned together. They contend that the original Greek for the words Sarah
herself may be read as a dative. The reading then is, “By faith he [Abraham] also, together with

4 4 Friedrich Hauck, TDNT, vol. 3, p. 621. Also see Joseph H. Thayer, A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament (New York, Cincinnati, and Chicago: American Book Company,
1889), p. 330.
Sarah, p 324 received power to beget a child.”25 Plausible as this explanation may be, the fact
remains that manuscript evidence cannot provide definite proof for this reading.
d. Still others suggest that the subject of verse 11 is Sarah and that the idiom “power for the
laying down of seed” actually means “she received power to establish a posterity.”26 The difficulty
this suggestion meets is that Abraham, not Sarah, is the father and founder of the nation Israel.
e. Perhaps we should understand the words “and Sarah herself was barren” to be a parenthetical
thought of the author. If the words referring to Sarah had not been in the text, no one would have
difficulty translating and interpreting the text. Verse 11 expresses the thought that Abraham “was
enabled to become a father” and is a natural introduction to verse 12. To delete the clause about
Sarah is unthinkable because of manuscript support for these words. But to understand it as a
parenthetical comment is feasible and sensible.27
Also Paul comments on Abraham’s faith in God, who would make him “the father of many
nations.” Says Paul, “Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as
dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah’s womb was also dead” (Rom.
4:19). Abraham trusted that God would honor his promise. God is faithful.
The result of Abraham’s faith is that from one man numerous descendants were born. The
author of Hebrews knows that his readers are fully acquainted with the history of the patriarch.
Therefore, he minimizes his allusions to that history. He says that Abraham was “as good as dead”
and that his offspring were “as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the
seashore” (Gen. 15:5; 22:17; 32:12; Exod. 32:13; Deut. 1:10; 10:22).
Both Abraham and Sarah were well advanced in age—Sarah considered herself “worn out” and
her husband “old” (Gen. 18:12). That Abraham married after Sarah’s death and had six children
(Gen. 25:1–2) has no bearing on this matter. The author of Hebrews is interested in the fulfillment
of the promise of God: Isaac, the son of the promise (Gen. 21:12; Rom. 9:7; Heb. 11:18). p 325
Countless descendants of Abraham formed the nation Israel. And through Abraham all nations
on earth were blessed (Gen. 12:3; Gal. 3:8). But more significantly, Abraham’s descendants
ultimately are all believers (Rom. 9:6–8; Gal. 3:7–9, 16, 29; 4:28). All believers in Christ call
Abraham their father, for in effect, the promised Son is the Christ, not Isaac.
3. The Promise
11:13–16
In Old Testament times believers looked for the coming of Christ. These believers lived by faith,
not by sight, for they were the recipients of the promise.
13. All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the

5 5 F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New
Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), p. 302. Also see R. C. H. Lenski, The
Interpretation of the Epistle of the Hebrews and of the Epistle of James (Columbus: Wartburg,
1946), p. 393; Otto Michel, Der Brief an die Hebräer, 10th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and
Ruprecht, 1957), p. 262; and Leon Morris, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 12, Hebrews
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), p. 119.

6 6 Thomas Hewitt, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960), p. 175. Also
see Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1977), p. 473; and Bauer, p. 409.

7 7 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 672, reports on the deliberations of the Editorial

Committee: “Appreciating the lexical difficulty, but unwilling to emend the text, a majority of the
Committee understood the words [and Sarah herself was barren] to be a Hebraic circumstantial
clause, thus allowing [Abraham] (ver. 8) to serve as subject of [he received] (‘by faith, even though
Sarah was barren, he [Abraham] received power to beget.…’).”
things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted
that they were aliens and strangers on earth.
When the author says “all these people,” he means the people who were recipients of the
promise, namely, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, and Jacob. God gave Abraham the promise about the land
and repeated it to Isaac and to Jacob. Yet the patriarchs remained tent-dwellers who lived in the land
as “aliens and strangers.” They received the promise of innumerable offspring; yet when they died,
the patriarchs had only sons and grandsons. In short, “they did not receive the things promised.”
Their faith, however, sustained them, for they believed that God would honor his word and
eventually fulfill the promises he had made.
The patriarchs discerned the fulfillment of God’s promises in the future. In faith they welcomed
this fulfillment, although from a distance. That is, with their eyes of faith, they saw God’s goodness
in fulfilling promises in his time. But with their physical eyes they saw “that they were aliens and
strangers on earth.” The list of those believers who considered themselves “aliens and strangers on
earth” is extensive. For example, Moses received the promise that the nation Israel would possess
Canaan, but he himself never entered the land; he was permitted to see it from one of the
mountaintops of Moab (Num. 27:12; Deut. 3:27; 32:49; 34:1–4). Throughout his life Moses was a
wanderer who moved from Egypt to Midian and eventually to the border of Canaan. Moses
“persevered because he saw him who is invisible” (Heb. 11:27). To the day of his death, he
remained an alien and a stranger.
14. People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own.
Believers know that this earthly scene is transitory and their heavenly home abiding. Therefore,
they fully recognize their temporary stay on earth and long for their eternal dwelling in heaven.
Believers do not flee this world (John 17:11, 14). This world, redeemed by Christ, is the Christian’s
workshop. And whatever honest and honorable occupation the believer pursues, God will bless.
Nevertheless, this present earth shall pass away, but according p 326 to God’s promise, “we are
looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness” (II Peter 3:13).
15. If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had
opportunity to return. 16. Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one.
Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.
The author of Hebrews intimates that the patriarchs would have had many opportunities to
return to their country of origin; to be sure, Abraham had left Ur of the Chaldeans, “the land of his
birth” (Gen. 11:28). They could have retraced their steps and moved from Canaan via Haran to
Mesopotamia.
Had the patriarchs indeed contemplated returning to their native country, they would have
broken faith with God and would have lost the promise God had given them. Abraham had been
called away from the land of his father and forefathers, who “worshiped other gods” (Josh. 24:2).
He could not return because he had responded in faith to God. Therefore, for Abraham and his son
and grandson to retrace their steps to the land of Abraham’s origin was unthinkable. In obedience to
God’s call, the patriarch had entered Canaan, and in full reliance upon his God, he stayed in the
Promised Land. Isaac and Jacob showed the same obedience, for Jacob, after spending a number of
years in Paddan Aram, returned to the southern part of Canaan. Also, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob,
and Joseph were buried in the land of the promise.
The other side of the proverbial coin is that the patriarchs sought not an earthly heritage but a
heavenly one. Says the writer of Hebrews, “They were longing for a better country.” They had their
sight set, in faith, on a heavenly country. They looked for life eternal with God who had given them
the promises. And their faith was rewarded, for Jesus himself, in answering the Sadducees’ question
about the resurrection, said, “But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God
said to you, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God
of the dead but of the living” (Matt. 22:31–32; and see Mark 12:26–27; Luke 20:37–38; Exod. 3:6;
4:5).
God is God of the living. Everyone who puts his faith in God enters that heavenly country
mentioned by the author of the epistle. And God is not ashamed to be his God. What an honor to be
called children of God! God permits us to bear his name, for he already has prepared a place for us.
We are privileged above all others because “our citizenship,” as Paul puts it, “is in heaven” (Phil.
3:20). All who in faith long for the heavenly city that God has prepared receive celestial citizenship
(John 14:2; Rev. 21:2). “We are hence to conclude, that there is no place for us among God’s
children, except we renounce the world, and that there will be for us no inheritance in heaven,
except we become pilgrims on earth.”28
p 327 4. The Test of Faith
11:17–19
After departing somewhat from his theme of Abraham’s faith with the introduction of a few verses
as a parenthetical thought (vv. 13–16), the writer of Hebrews returns to this theme. He summarizes
and concludes his remarks on Abraham’s faith on the basis of a vividly historical incident:
Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac.
17. By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had
received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, 18. even though God had
said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 19. Abraham reasoned
that God could raise the dead, and figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from
death.
Genesis 22 contains the story of Abraham’s greatest test of faith. This story reveals Abraham’s
readiness to obey God at the expense of Isaac, to cling to God’s promises even though obedience to
God’s command would nullify it, and to believe that God would raise Isaac from the dead. We note
three points.
a. Obedience
Abraham’s faith had triumphed when God directed him to the land of the promise and when God
gave him Isaac, the son of the promise. But had Abraham reached a plateau of faith? Was his faith
dormant and inactive?29 Would Abraham be able to submit to a much greater test of faith? Would he
be willing to offer his son Isaac as a sacrifice to God?
The writer of Hebrews says that God tested Abraham and implies that the test lasted from the
moment God called him to sacrifice Isaac on one of the mountains of Moriah until the angel of the
Lord stopped him from slaying Isaac. God tested Abraham to see whether the patriarch’s love for
God was stronger than his fatherly love for his son Isaac. Therefore, God asked Abraham to
sacrifice his son at a place far removed from where they lived. Presumably Sarah may not have
been informed about God’s command to sacrifice Isaac.
If God had taken Isaac’s life by natural or even accidental death, Abraham’s faith would have
been severely tested. But God asked Abraham to take Isaac and with his own hands kill his son for a
sacrifice to God. Job could say, “The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away” (1:21); but
Abraham would have to say, “The Lord has given me a son and wants me to give him back as a
sacrifice.”
Abraham obeyed. He fully complied with God’s request. In fact, if God had not intervened,
Isaac would have been killed. Abraham showed his unwavering faith in God in humble obedience to
God’s word. He demonstrated his love for God above anyone else, even his son Isaac.
b. Promise
That Abraham responded not in blind faith and slavish obedience p 328 is clear from the second part
of verse 17 and verse 18. Abraham had received God’s promises, especially this word: “It is through

8 8 Calvin, Hebrews, p. 285.

9 9 Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vol. (Paris: Gabalda, 1953), vol. 2, p. 352.
Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned” (Gen. 21:12; also see Rom. 9:7). Abraham knew that in
Isaac the promise of the multitude of descendants would be fulfilled. Descendants of Isaac would
include all the spiritual offspring of Abraham.30 Thus, with the death of Isaac, the line of believers
would be terminated.
The author of Hebrews writes that Abraham “was about to sacrifice his one and only son” (v.
17). Certainly Abraham had Ishmael, but this son belonged to the Egyptian servant Hagar. Isaac, not
Ishmael, was the heir, the son of the promise.31 If Isaac’s life were to end, the salvation of the world
would not take place. For through Isaac, God’s promise of salvation would come to realization.
Actually, the promise remained in effect, for God prevented Abraham from terminating Isaac’s life
and from nullifying the promise. Abraham was about to kill his son, but God said, “Do not lay a
hand on the boy. Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not
withheld from me your son, your only son” (Gen. 22:12).
c. Power
In genuine faith Abraham believed that God would raise Isaac from the dead. He knew that God’s
power is unlimited and that God can make that which is dead come back to life. Abraham himself
had experienced that: he who was “as good as dead” (Heb. 11:12) was able to procreate a son
through God’s power. Abraham’s faith reached a mountaintop of trust in God when he said to his
servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then
we will come back to you” (Gen. 22:5). He knew that Isaac would return with him. He believed that
God would give life to the dead (Rom. 4:17), even though no one as yet had been raised from death.
Of course, Isaac did not die, someone may say, and therefore a resurrection from the dead did
not take place. The author of Hebrews anticipates this observation, and to avoid any
misunderstanding he adds the phrase that is translated as “and figuratively speaking.” Because
Abraham’s obedience was complete, Isaac had no way of escape. Only God’s direct intervention
saved his life, and thus “figuratively speaking” he was brought back to life.
What is the meaning of the expression figuratively speaking? Is Isaac a figure of Jesus Christ?
Both have the designation one and only son. Both were appointed to be a sacrifice, except that for
Isaac a ram served as substitute. Commentators in the early church and the Middle Ages were apt to
see a parallel between Isaac and Christ and to say that Isaac prefigured Christ.32
However, a word of caution is in order. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews nowhere
regards “the sacrifice and salvation of Isaac as a type of p 329 Christ’s death and resurrection,” and
“the idea is nowhere found in the New Testament.”33 No one disputes the well-known truth that the
New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old Testament. But we ought to avoid making a writer say
more than he intends to convey.
The conclusion of this matter is that the author of Hebrews stresses the unique faith of Abraham.

0 0 James Swetnam, Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Light of the
Aqedah (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981), pp. 95–96, 128. Says Swetnam, “The spiritual ‘seed’
is composed of all those who believe that God can give eternal life” (p. 129).

1 1 James M. Bulman, “The Only Begotten Son,” CTJ 16 (1981): 64.

2 2 Hughes in Hebrews, pp. 484–85, tabulates the christological interpretations from the first
century through the sixteenth.

3 3 Hugh Montefiore, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York and Evanston: Harper and Row,
1964), p. 200. Swetnam in Jesus and Isaac speaks of a foreshadowing (p. 123). He adds, however,
that “Abraham was not aware of the Christological aspects of his actions” (p. 127). And Bauer
explains the offering of Isaac “as a type (of the violent death and of the resurrection of Christ),” p.
612.
By faith Abraham offered his son Isaac and received him back from the dead. The writer implies
that Isaac actually never died, and therefore the incident must be understood figuratively and not
literally. In this sense Abraham received Isaac back from death.

Practical Considerations in 11:8–19

God called Abraham “to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance” (v. 8). That was
not easy for Abraham, for he had to leave his relatives and go to an unknown land. The patriarch
believed God and obeyed his Word. God still calls men and women to leave their loved ones and
their familiar surroundings to bring the gospel to people living in other lands. These men and
women serve “in the army of the Lord.” Obediently they respond to God’s call and give their time
and talent in complete dedication to God. These “soldiers of the cross” are indeed aliens and
strangers in foreign lands.
In a sense, all Christians are strangers on this earth. The Bible warns us not to attach ourselves
too firmly to this earthly scene. Scripture tells us that this earth really is not our home. The Christian
looks and longs for his eternal home. He sings,
I am a stranger here,
within a foreign land;
My home is far away,
upon a golden strand;
Ambassador to be
of realms beyond the sea,
I’m here on business
for my King.
—E. T. Cassel
Faith has its counterpart in obedience. Faith and obedience are two sides of the same coin.
Abraham learned that faith and obedience go together, especially at the time when God called him
to sacrifice his son Isaac.
Note this sequence: Abraham believed and loved God, who promised him a son. After many
years of waiting, Abraham received this promised son and loved him. Then God called Abraham to
sacrifice Isaac. If Abraham sacrificed Isaac, he would keep God but lose his son. If he disobeyed
God, Abraham would keep his son but p 330 lose God. Abraham chose to obey God, and thus he
placed the problem of losing his son of the promise in the hands of God. He believed that God could
raise Isaac from death. In short, Abraham’s life with God bore the motto Trust and Obey.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:8–19

Verse 8
καλούμενος—this present passive participle of καλέω (I call) depends on the main verb
ὑπήκουσεν, which is the aorist active of ὑπακούω (I obey). The present tense shows duration; the
aorist, single occurrence. At the time God was calling, Abraham obeyed.

Verse 9
παρῴκησεν—both this verb in the aorist active and the aorist active participle κατοικήσας
derive from the verb οἰκέω (I dwell, inhabit). The prepositions παρά and κατά modify the meaning
of the verb. The first one expresses a temporary idea; the second one denotes permanence.
 Verse 10
ἐξεδέχετο—the preposition ἐκ in this compound verb indicates direction. The verb in the
imperfect middle (deponent) exhibits continued action in the past. Abraham was constantly
“looking forward” to the heavenly city God had prepared for him.
δημιουργός—derived from δήμιος (public) and ἔργον (work), this compound rises above the
interpretation public worker; it means “builder, designer, architect.” It is synonymous with κτίστης
(creator). Writers of both the Old Testament and the New Testament prefer to use the verb to create
and derivatives rather than the term employed in this verse, a fact that is evident from the single
occurrence of this compound noun in the entire New Testament.

Verse 11
στεῖρα—numerous Greek texts and translations omit this adjective (barren). The Editorial
Committee of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament, however, by majority vote
regarded the deletion as an omission caused by a scribe who was copying an earlier manuscript that
had the adjective.34 Therefore, the text of the United Bible Society and Nestle-Aland include this
adjective.

Verse 12
νενεκρωμένου—from the verb νεκρόω (I put to death), the participle in the genitive case is
appositive to ἑνός (one) and in the perfect tense shows duration of time. p 331

Verse 13
κατὰ πίστιν—only twice (11:7, 13) in the entire epistle does this construction occur. The author
of Hebrews used these two instances as synonyms of the expression πίστει.
λαβόντες—the aorist active participle is one of four aorist participles in verse 13. They are
“receiving,” “seeing,” “greeting,” and “admitting.” The main verb ἀπέθανον (they died) attains
significance.

Verse 15
εἰ μέν—the contrary to fact conditional sentence with the imperfect conveys the meaning “of an
unreal hypothesis in the past of a continuous nature.”35 That is, if the patriarchs had kept on
thinking of their fatherland, they would have had ample opportunity to return. Verse 15 shows
contrast with verse 16 in the use of μέν … δέ. These two verses comprise one unit. The adverb νῦν
(now) “serves to contrast the real state of affairs with an unreal conditional clause.”36 The
translation instead serves verse 16 well.

Verse 17
προσενήνοχεν—this perfect active verb from προσφέρω (I offer) is followed by the imperfect
active προσέφερεν. The perfect tense reveals that the sacrifice actually took place in the
demonstration of Abraham’s willingness and obedience. The imperfect, by contrast, points to
Abraham’s attempt to sacrifice Isaac.
πειραζόμενος—the present passive participle of the verb πειράζω (I try) has the meaning of

4 4 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 673.

5 5 Robertson, Grammar, pp. 921, 1015. Robertson calls the construction “a classical idiom,
though uncommon.”

6 6 Bauer, p. 546.
being put to the test to prove a person’s faith (see John 6:6).

Verse 19
ὅθεν—an adverb from the relative pronoun ὅ and the enclitic θεν indicating motion away from
a place or a deduction on the basis of reality. The adverb occurs six times in Hebrews (2:17; 3:1;
7:25; 8:3; 9:18; 11:19) and conveys the meaning therefore.
ἐκομίσατο—the aorist middle of κομίζω (I carry away) is much more precise than a form of the
verb λαμβάνω (I receive), for it signifies recovering something that is one’s possession. In a sense,
Isaac belonged to Abraham.

p 332
D. The Faith of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph
11:20–22

20 By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in regard to their future.

21 By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of Joseph’s sons, and worshiped as he leaned on the
top of his staff.
22 By faith Joseph, when his end was near, spoke about the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt and gave
instructions about his bones.

The son, grandson, and great-grandson of Abraham span the generations and centuries by faith. In
their old age, with death approaching, the patriarchs Jacob and Joseph passed on blessings and
instructions concerning the Promised Land.
20. By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in regard to their future.
In this verse and the next two verses, the author unfolds an interesting description of the
patriarchal blessings. Note that in the case of Abraham’s sons, not Ishmael but Isaac received the
blessing. Isaac was the son of the promise. In the next generation, not Esau, the first-born, but Jacob
received the covenant blessing that God had given to Abraham and his descendants. Next, not
Reuben, Jacob’s first-born, but Joseph received the blessings in his sons Manasseh and Ephraim.
And last, not Manasseh, Joseph’s first-born, but Ephraim received the choice blessing. God’s
electing love is independent of the rules and regulations concerning the right of the first-born (Deut.
21:15–17). The reason that the names of the patriarchs Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph appear in the list of
the heroes of faith is that they exhibited their faith in God.
Isaac knew that he was the recipient of God’s favor. God appeared to him and repeated the
promise he had made to Abraham: “I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the
sky and will give them all these lands, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be
blessed” (Gen. 26:4). And when Isaac sent Jacob on his way to Paddan Aram, he blessed his son
with a similar blessing. Said he, “May God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and increase
your numbers until you become a community of peoples. May he give you and your descendants
the blessing given to Abraham, so that you may take possession of the land where you now live as
an alien, the land God gave to Abraham” (Gen. 28:3–4). Isaac virtually repeated the words of the
ancient promise first given to Abraham. For this reason the author of Hebrews lists Isaac among the
men of faith. Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in faith (Gen. 27:27–28, 39–40). Jacob, not Esau,
however, continued in the line of faith, as the writer notes afterward (Heb. 12:16–17).
Even though Isaac was an old man when he blessed his sons, his hour of death came more than
forty years later (Gen. 27:2; 35:28–29). He lived to be 180 years old. His son Jacob pronounced the
patriarchal blessing on the sons of Joseph when he was ill and expected the end of his life (Gen.
48:1, 21).
 21. By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of Joseph’s sons, and worshiped as he
leaned on the top of his staff.
The writer of Hebrews omits any reference to the blessings that Jacob pronounced on his sons as
the patriarch predicted the future (Gen. 49). Instead he selects the incident when Jacob blessed
Joseph’s sons as a demonstration p 333 of Jacob’s faith. That historic moment was indeed
significant. Note these points:
a. In his first act of blessing, Jacob addressed Joseph and repeated the words of the promise God
had given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God had told Jacob, “I am going to make you fruitful and
will increase your numbers. I will make you a community of peoples, and I will give this land [of
Canaan] as an everlasting possession to your descendants after you” (Gen. 48:4). This was the
patriarchal blessing passed on from one generation to the next.
b. When Joseph with his two sons came to Jacob, he received the blessing of the first-born. He
received a double portion not of Jacob’s herds and flocks, but of the promised land of Canaan. Not
Joseph himself, but each of his two sons Manasseh and Ephraim received this blessing. They
became two tribes in Israel because Jacob accepted Manasseh and Ephraim as his own sons (Gen.
48:5).
c. Blessing the two sons of Joseph, Jacob functioned as king of the Promised Land. The
patriarch crossed his arms and granted the blessing of the first-born not to Manasseh but to Ephraim
(Gen. 48:12–20). In the course of time, the tribe of Ephraim indeed became a leader in Israel. In
faith, Jacob looked into the future and was given prophetic insight. He knew that God would fulfill
the patriarchal blessing in the sons of Joseph.
d. Convinced that God would fulfill his promise, Jacob gave Joseph instructions to bury him in
the cave of Machpelah in the land of Canaan (Gen. 47:29–31; 50:12–14). Jacob’s grave in the
Promised Land would serve as a testimony and an encouragement to his descendants that they, too,
would enter their inheritance.
e. Jacob worshiped his God as he leaned on his staff.37 He fully acknowledged God’s power and
presence in the development of the patriarchal blessing. He worshiped in faith.
22. By faith Joseph, when his end was near, spoke about the exodus of the Israelites from
Egypt and gave instructions about his bones.
Of all Joseph’s earlier trials and experiences in which his faith had been tested, the writer of
Hebrews selects none. He is interested in the promise of God that Abraham’s descendants would
inherit the land of Canaan. Therefore, the words Joseph spoke to his brothers at the end of his life
are important. He said, “I am about to die. But God will surely come to your aid and take you up out
of this land to the land he promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” (Gen. 50:24). The golden
thread of the promise binds the patriarchs in faith that transcends the generations.
At the age of seventeen (Gen. 37:2), Joseph was sold to Midianite merchants p 334 who took
him from his native land to Egypt. Joseph returned briefly to Canaan for the burial of his father
Jacob (Gen. 50:4–14). He had lived at the court of Pharaoh, had married an Egyptian, and had the
Egyptian name Zaphenath-Paneah. Nevertheless, Joseph remained true to the God of his fathers,
and when he knew that the end of his life was near, he prophesied concerning the patriarchal
blessing. He predicted the exodus of Jacob’s descendants from Egypt. And in faith he told these
descendants to carry his bones from Egypt to Canaan (Gen. 50:25). When the exodus occurred,
“Moses took the bones of Joseph with him” (Exod. 13:19). “And Joseph’s bones, which the
Israelites had brought up from Egypt, were buried at Shechem” (Josh. 24:32) within the land
allotted to the tribe of Ephraim.
Joseph’s command to bury his bones in Canaan was not an act of nostalgia or superstition, but

7 7 The sentence “and [he] worshiped as he leaned on the top of his staff” is a quotation from
Gen. 47:31. The NIV at this verse has the word staff in the text with the footnote, “Israel bowed
down at the head of his bed.” The difference in wording centers on one Hebrew noun which, with
the same consonants but with varying vowels, can mean either “staff” or “bed.” The Septuagint
features the term staff. As he does elsewhere, the writer of Hebrews follows this translation.
an act of faith. Prophetically he spoke of the exodus and in faith saw that his remains would be
carried to the Promised Land. He believed that God would fulfill his word.

Practical Considerations in 11:20–22

What a joy to see the “faith of our fathers” spanning the generations! The author of Hebrews
lists the names of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. Each belonged to the covenant that God had made with
Abraham when God said, “I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and
you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of
your descendants after you” (Gen. 17:7). God keeps his word throughout the generations.
When parents see the love of the Lord in their children, who express a desire to do his will, their
hearts are filled with gratitude to God. To see the next generation take up the torch of faith is an
evident sign of God’s faithfulness.
But when parents see their sons and daughters turn away from God and his Word, in spite of the
training in home, church, and perhaps school, their parental hearts grieve. Isaac and Rebekah
endured constant grief when Esau lived a life of disobedience (Gen. 26:34–35). And on his
deathbed Jacob pronounced a curse on Simeon and Levi (Gen. 49:7). Salvation cannot be inherited;
it is a gift of God. Parents of spiritually wayward sons and daughters need to pray that God in his
grace will give them this gift. By exercising their faith, they trust in God’s unlimited power to save
their prodigal son or daughter.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:20–22

Verse 20
καί—although some leading manuscripts omit this conjunction, external textual evidence for its
inclusion is strong. The translators of the New International Version have omitted it. Other
translations include it and take it either as a connective or as an emphatic: “By faith Isaac blessed
Jacob and Esau, even regarding things to come” (NASB). p 335

Verse 22
τῆς ἐξόδου—the writer of Hebrews employs this noun with the definite article as a technical
term for the exodus of the Israelites. The term occurs frequently in the Septuagint as a designation
for Israel’s departure from Egypt. In the New Testament it appears in three places: in Luke 9:31 and
II Peter 1:15, it refers to death; and in Hebrews 11:22, to the exodus.

E. The Faith of Moses

11:23–29

23 By faith Moses’ parents hid him for three months after he was born, because they saw he was no ordinary
child, and they were not afraid of the king’s edict.
24 By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. 25 He
chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time.

B ASB New American Standard Bible

26 He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was
looking ahead to his reward. 27 By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king’s anger; he persevered because he
saw him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and the sprinkling of blood, so that the destroyer
of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel.
29 By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land; but when the Egyptians tried to do so,
they were drowned.

1. Moses’ Childhood and Position

11:23–26
Abraham is the father of believers, but Moses is the father of the nation of Israel. The author of
Hebrews devotes five sections that begin with the formula by faith to Moses (vv. 23, 24, 27, 28, 29).
The first of these instances relates to Moses’ parents; the last, the people of Israel.
23. By faith Moses’ parents hid him for three months after he was born, because they saw
he was no ordinary child, and they were not afraid of the king’s edict.
The writer of Hebrews opens the Book of Exodus and reads about the cruel command of
Pharaoh to kill all the Hebrew male children at birth. A Levite and his fianceé, Amram and
Jochebed, decide to get married. Subsequently they are blessed with the birth of a son. Now they
face the possibility of losing their child. They act boldly in faith. Seeing that their son is a most
attractive child, they defy the king’s command. What gives Amram and Jochebed the courage to
disobey? Most likely, they see in their strikingly handsome son a sign of God’s approval (see Exod.
2:2; Acts 7:20).38 And because of God’s favor they continue to exercise their faith. They hide Moses
p 336 for three months until necessity dictates that they devise new ways to protect him. Unafraid of
the king and his men, they decide to hide Moses among the reeds of the Nile River.39 God protects
Moses royally when the daughter of Pharaoh tells Jochebed to nurse the child and pays her for the
service. When Moses is old enough to leave his parental home, he enters the royal palace of
Pharaoh. God honors the faith of Moses’ parents, because he protects Moses by having him live in
the palace of Pharaoh who had given orders to destroy the male babies of the Hebrews.
24. By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s
daughter.
Stephen relates that Pharaoh’s daughter took Moses “and brought him up as her own son.” He
concludes, “Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in speech
and action” (Acts 7:21–22). Apparently Stephen had access to a source of oral tradition, for he
states that Moses was forty years old when he decided to throw in his lot with the Hebrew slaves. In
spite of his training at Pharaoh’s court, Moses put his faith in Israel’s God and severed his ties with
Pharaoh’s daughter. He refused to be recognized as an Egyptian prince, for he knew himself to be a
descendant of Abraham, a son of the covenant that God had made with the patriarch, and a Hebrew
who longed to be free. He identified with the oppressed Hebrew slaves.
The author of Hebrews writes that Moses by faith “refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s
daughter.” The title son of Pharaoh’s daughter was prestigious in Egypt and entailed power and

8 8 Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews 2.201–16 (LCL) relates that Moses’ father had a
vision. God exhorted him not to despair, because Moses would deliver the Hebrew race from
Egyptian bondage. John Brown in An Exposition of Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust,
1961), p. 539, asserts that the writer of Hebrews concurs with the Jewish belief of a special
revelation to which Josephus refers.
9 9 In his commentary on the faith of Moses’ parents, Calvin writes, “We must, however,
remark, that the faith here praised was very weak; for after having disregarded the fear of death,
they ought to have brought up Moses; instead of doing so, they exposed him” (Hebrews, p. 293). I
cannot agree with this observation, for it appears to militate against the concluding part of Heb.
11:23, “they were not afraid of the king’s edict.” Faith banishes fear.
privileges. To break the tie with the daughter of Pharaoh and to choose to be identified with the
mistreated Hebrew slaves called for faith and courage. Moses acted not rashly in youthful fervor but
maturely as a man who at the age of forty was fully educated. Deliberately he associated with “the
people of God,” the Hebrews.
25. He chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the
pleasures of sin for a short time.
In God’s providence, Moses received training that enabled him to become a leader of a nation.
He was uniquely qualified to lead the nation Israel out of Egypt to the Promised Land. Thus he
regarded himself as God’s appointed deliverer of Israel. Says Stephen, “Moses thought that his own
people would realize that God was using him to rescue them, but they did not” (Acts 7:25).
Although Moses had been trained, he was not yet ready to govern the nation Israel. His own people
were not yet ready to accept him.
Moses, however, had cast his lot with the Israelites. His people, not the Egyptians, were the
recipients of God’s promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Should he have sided with the
Egyptians and turned his back on the p 337 people of God, he would have committed the sin of
apostasy. In the words of the writer of Hebrews, he would have turned “away from the living God”
(3:12). The choice Moses faced, then, was not so much between either being mistreated or enjoying
the pleasures of Egypt as between either associating with the people of God or falling into the sin of
apostasy.40 Moses chose mistreatment and identified himself with God’s people.
Moses could have taken a halfway position. As the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, he might have
said that his influence would be incalculable in setting the Israelites free. In earlier times Joseph had
wielded his power and authority in the interest of Jacob and his descendants. No one would have
chided Moses if he had stayed in Egypt. But Joseph by faith predicted the exodus and made his
brothers promise to take his bones with them for burial in Canaan. Likewise Moses sided with the
Hebrew slaves and renounced his royal title son of Pharaoh’s daughter.
26. He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of
Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward.
This verse relates three main thoughts.
a. Christ
The writer is rather explicit in his wording, for he refers to the Christ, in the original Greek.
Elsewhere in his epistle he says, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
Because Christ transcends the centuries, the author of Hebrews confidently asserts that Moses
endured disgrace for the sake of Christ. Moses considered disgrace for Christ of greater significance
than all the glittering riches of Egypt. The writer, therefore, implies that even though Moses never
used the name Messiah, he was fully aware of his presence and his coming.
Nevertheless, the reader of this passage faces some problems in interpreting it. For instance,
Moses had no idea of the person and work of Christ as we know Jesus from the pages of the New
Testament. Moses had the promises God had given to his ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
These promises related to the growth of the nation Israel, the inheritance of Canaan, and the coming
of the Christ. Moses saw the fulfillment of the promise that Abraham’s descendants would be “as
numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore” (Heb. 11:12; see also
Gen. 15:5; 22:17; 32:12). And he realized that the time for the exodus and the return to Canaan was
imminent. That he believed in the coming Deliverer is not in question. The problem of
understanding the meaning of the word Christ centers on Christ’s place in the context of the Old
Testament.
Some commentators seek an explanation in symbolism. They point to the fulfillment of the
prophecy in which God says, “out of Egypt I called my son” (Hos. 11:1) and see an identification of
Christ with the nation Israel. Both of them came forth out of Egypt. Others understand the
expression the Anointed (the Messiah) to refer in a collective sense to Israel (Ps. 89:50–51). Still

0 0 Spicq, Hébreux, vol. 2, p. 357.

others think that Christ accompanied the Israelites during the time of p 338 the exodus and the
journey to the Promised Land (I Cor. 10:4). Based on Scripture, all these comments are helpful in
understanding the text at hand. However, we ought not expect more from a text than the author
intends to convey.41
b. Comparison
The emphasis falls on this comparison: “disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the
treasures of Egypt.” This is a comparison of spiritual riches and earthly treasures. The words of the
Beatitudes readily come to mind: “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and
falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your
reward in heaven” (Matt. 5:11–12).
To insult is a passion that originates in man’s sinful heart. Man directs this passion against his
fellow man, especially the person who is righteous. And insult directed against man is ultimately
directed against God. We know that the Israelites endured daily abuse from their ruthless Egyptian
taskmasters (Exod. 1:11–14). God saw the misery of the Israelites, heard their cries, and was
concerned about their suffering (Exod. 3:7). Moses deliberately sought identity with these Hebrew
slaves because he believed that God would set his people free and fulfill his promises. Moses knew
that gaining spiritual objectives for the cause of God’s people was incomparably better than
becoming heir to the riches of Egypt. He pursued his spiritual objectives, even though that pursuit
resulted in scorn, derision, abuse, and disgrace. Moses, however, “was looking ahead to his
reward.”
c. Compensation
Although Scripture clearly teaches that no man is able to earn salvation, the term reward (for
example, see Heb. 10:35; 11:6) appears repeatedly. That is, God rewards man on the basis of divine
sovereignty and not because of merit. “Every claim to one’s deserts must fall silent in the face of the
demand for total obedience.”42 But Jesus’ word is reassuring to every believer who seeks to do
God’s will. Jesus said, “And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones
because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward” (Matt. 10:42). In
his sovereign grace God rewards anyone who diligently seeks him in faith. And that is exactly what
Moses did in Egypt. He looked to God for his reward.
2. Moses’ Leadership
11:27–29
27. By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king’s anger; he persevered because he saw him who
is invisible.
What does the writer mean when he writes “he left Egypt”? Moses left Egypt twice. The first
time he fled because he feared for his life after he p 339 had killed an Egyptian (Exod. 2:14–15).
Between the first and the second time lies a forty-year period (Acts 7:30).
Considering the flow of the author’s thought in respect to the flight of Moses in chapter 11, we
note that he selects significant incidents that underscore Moses’ faith. He begins with the act of faith
exercised by Moses’ parents (v. 23). In the next section he presents Moses as a man of faith at
Pharaoh’s court. The summary of this period of Moses’ life begins with the formula by faith. Then,

1 1 Hewitt, Hebrews, p. 181. Johannes Eichler and Colin Brown suggest that Moses identified
himself with Israel’s lot and considered Israel God’s anointed. “This interpretation has the further
advantage of being compatible with all the other instances of faith in Heb. 11 drawn from OT
history.” NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 835.

2 2 Böttger, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 141.

describing Moses’ faith in three sentences, the author mentions Moses’ refusal to be called son of
Pharaoh’s daughter, his choice to identify with the people of God, and his decision to endure
disgrace rather than enjoy royal treasures (vv. 24–26). Next the writer selects Moses’ departure from
Egypt as an example of an act of faith (v. 27). Also, the account of the institution of the Passover,
whereby the first-born of Israel were saved, depicts Moses as a man of faith (v. 28). And last, the
crossing of the Red Sea represents the faith of Moses and the Israelites (v. 29). The writer of
Hebrews, then, enumerates specific events from the life of Moses in which his faith triumphed.
Was Moses’ flight from Egypt after he killed an Egyptian an act of faith? The Exodus account
relates that Moses was afraid and that Pharaoh tried to kill him (Exod. 2:14–15). If Moses left Egypt
in fear, we have difficulty believing that his flight was an act of faith. Why would the author of
Hebrews select this incident as an example of Moses’ trust in God? Moreover, the writer adds that
Moses did not fear the anger of the king. This observation makes the interpretation of Moses’ flight
to Midian rather complicated.
By contrast, after Moses had waited forty years in Midian, God called him and spoke to him
from the burning bush. He instructed Moses to go to Pharaoh and to bring the people of Israel out of
Egypt (Exod. 3:10). This was an assignment that demanded faith. Moses repeatedly objected until
God reassured him that the elders of Israel would listen to him (v. 18), that God would “make the
Egyptians favorably disposed” to the Israelites (v. 21), that Moses would perform miracles (Exod.
4:1–9), and that Moses’ brother Aaron would accompany him (vv. 14–16). After receiving these
divine instructions, Moses became a man of faith who was unafraid of Pharaoh. The responsibility
of leading the people of Israel out of Egypt was assigned to Moses in his capacity of Israel’s leader.
Furthermore, the entire verse—“By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king’s anger; he persevered
because he saw him who is invisible”—refers to all the confrontations Moses had with Pharaoh in
his effort to gain freedom for God’s people.43 That “he left Egypt” is then the culmination of a
series of events. One of these events is the institution of the Passover, to which the author of
Hebrews pays particular p 340 attention in the next verse.44 And the clause “not fearing the king’s
anger” covers the period of the ten plagues and Pharaoh’s pursuit of the Israelites to the waters of
the Red Sea (Exod. 14:5–28).45 Moses is the man of faith, who tells the people not to be afraid, to
stand firm, and to see the Lord fight for them (vv. 13–14). By faith Moses was unafraid, for he
knew that God was on his side.
The words “he persevered because he saw him who is invisible” take on added meaning against
the setting of Moses’ experience of seeing the burning bush in Midian. Also, God spoke to Moses
repeatedly in Egypt. During the wilderness journey, “the LORD would speak to Moses …, as a man
speaks with his friend” (Exod. 33:11; also see Num. 12:7–8). Although Moses was not permitted to
see the face of God, he did see his back (Exod. 33:23). The abiding presence of God, especially
during Moses’ trying days in Egypt, strengthened Moses’ faith. Because of God’s instructions,
Moses was able to persevere in faith and accomplish his task to lead the people of Israel out of
Egypt.
From the general context of the account in Exodus, the author of Hebrews moves to a specific
incident: the institution of the Passover celebration.
28. By faith he kept the Passover and the sprinkling of blood, so that the destroyer of the

3 3 Spicq, Hébreux, vol. 2, p. 359. Lenski in Hebrews, p. 411, notes that Moses’ fearlessness
toward Pharaoh is described in Exod. 10:28–29.
4 4 Some commentators find the order of events in Heb. 11:27–28 difficult to explain because
the Passover observance (v. 28) took place before the actual departure from Egypt (v. 27).
Grosheide in Hebreeën, p. 274, remarks that the writer of Hebrews departs from a strict
chronological order more often (see 11:21).
5 5 The NEB translation is, “By faith he left Egypt, and not because he feared the king’s
anger.” In their respective commentaries on this verse, Bruce and Hughes favor the NEB translation
and apply it to Moses’ flight from Egypt into Midian.
firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel.
“By faith,” writes the author of Hebrews. In selecting the mountaintop experiences of Moses’
life of faith, the author takes the incident of the institution of the Passover feast. This experience
was different from the preceding instances. For the first time the Israelites themselves were
involved, for they with Moses had to exercise their faith in God. Second, this experience was
essentially spiritual. In the days of Abraham, God instituted the sacrament of circumcision. When
the Israelites were about to leave Egypt, God inaugurated the Old Testament sacrament of the
Passover. And he appointed Moses to instruct the people of Israel to implement this sacrament.
Moses’ task of instructing a nation of slaves in the meaningful celebration of the Passover was an
act of faith. To understand the meaning of the phrase by faith, we must note the following points:
a. Institution of Passover
God told Moses to keep the Passover and to sprinkle the blood of the lamb that was slain. The word
Passover is a popular translation of the Hebrew original which may mean “to pass over by sparing”
someone.46 Obviously, the word relates to the Exodus account, where Moses p 341 instructs the
elders of Israel to slaughter the Passover lamb. They had to put some of the blood of the lamb on
the top and sides of the doorframe of the houses of the Israelites. “When the LORD goes through the
land to strike down the Egyptians,” said Moses, “he will see the blood on the top and sides of the
doorframe and will pass over that doorway, and he will not permit the destroyer to enter your
houses and strike you down” (Exod. 12:23).
Moses instituted the festival of Passover as an annual event. On the fourteenth day of the month
Nisan (approximately March-April), each family had to select and kill a year-old male lamb,
without blemish, at sundown (Exod. 12:5; Lev. 23:5; Deut. 16:6). The blood of the lamb had to be
smeared on the doorposts and lintel of the house. The lamb was roasted and eaten with unleavened
bread and bitter herbs. Everything had to be eaten that evening. If food was left, it had to be burned
(Exod. 12:10; 34:25). The meal had to be eaten in haste. And the festival had to be observed as “a
lasting ordinance” (Exod. 12:14).47
b. Sprinkling of blood
Before the Israelites were to leave Egypt, they had to sacrifice a lamb and put some of its blood on
the doorposts and lintel of their house. God would go throughout the land of Egypt and strike down
every first-born of man and animal. But if a house had the blood of a lamb on its doorpost and
lintel, God would spare its inhabitants. Moses listened obediently to God’s instructions and in faith
passed them on to the Israelites. Could he expect the Israelites to obey the command of God? If they
failed to listen, they would suffer the death of their first-born. And Moses himself put full
confidence in God. If the blood of the lamb proved to be ineffective in protecting the first-born from
the destructive power of the angel of death, his role as leader of the people would end abruptly. To
establish Moses’ authority in spiritual matters, the people of Israel would have to see that not one
first-born died in those houses where the blood of a lamb had been sprinkled. How many first-born
among the Israelites were spared? We know that the nation numbered 603,550 men who were
twenty years or older (Num. 1:45). Moses’ faith stood the test when numberless first-born of man
and animal were saved.

6 6 Thayer, Lexicon, p. 493. However, Ludwig Koehler points out that the meaning of the
Hebrew original is “not yet etymologically explained at all satisfaction [sic].” Lexicon in Veteris
Testamenti Libros (Leiden: Brill, 1953), p. 769.
7 7 Literature on the subject of Passover is extensive. A few representative studies are Judah
Benzion Segal, The Hebrew Passover from the Earliest Times to A.D. 70 (London: Oxford
University Press, 1963); Jakob Jocz, “Passover,” ZPEB, vol. 4, pp. 605–11; Joachim Jeremias,
“Pascha,” TDNT, vol. 5, pp. 896–904; and Bernd Schaller, “Passover,” NIDNTT, vol. 1, pp. 632–34.
 c. Salvation of first-born
Why would God strike down the first-born of the Egyptians and protect those of the Israelites?
Certainly not because of any merit in the nation Israel. Within a relatively short time, all the
Israelites of twenty years and older would hear the verdict: all of them would perish in the
wilderness, except Joshua and Caleb (Num. 14:29–30). God spared the first-born because the
Israelites believed God and obeyed his word. Their first-born were spared because the atoning
blood of the Passover lamb was p 342 sprinkled on the entrance of their homes. The Israelites had to
see physically and spiritually that salvation comes from the Lord.
The festival of Passover became the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. The Passover lamb in the
New Testament times was Jesus Christ, who gave his life as the Lamb of God to take away the sin
of the world (John 1:29, 36; I Peter 1:19). Christ Jesus “gave himself as a ransom for all men” (I
Tim. 2:6).
The author of Hebrews says nothing about the work of Christ at this point. He depicts the life of
faith of Moses and the Israelites. Their keeping of the Passover feast was the beginning of an
observance that would lead to and end in the sacrifice of the Lamb of God. Covered by his blood,
countless believers are saved.
29. By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land; but when the Egyptians
tried to do so, they were drowned.
In the eighth century John of Damascus composed a hymn in which he gave expression to the
joy the Israelites experienced after crossing the Red Sea.
Come, ye faithful, raise the strain
Of triumphant gladness;
God hath brought his Israel
Into joy from sadness;
Loosed from Pharaoh’s bitter yoke
Jacob’s sons and daughters;
Led them with unmoistened foot
Through the Red Sea waters.
—translated by John Mason Neale
Israel expressed joy and gladness in the so-called Song of Moses (Exod. 15:1–18), and no
wonder—faith had triumphed. The Israelites looked back upon the waters of the Red Sea and saw
that the Lord had fought for them and had given them the victory (Exod. 14:14).
But what of Israel’s faith in crossing the Red Sea? Instead of acting in faith they cowered in
fear. No faith is evident in their complaint against Moses: “Was it because there were no graves in
Egypt that you brought us to the desert to die? What have you done to us by bringing us out of
Egypt? Didn’t we say to you in Egypt, ‘Leave us alone; let us serve the Egyptians’? It would have
been better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the desert!” (Exod. 14:11–12). And the fact
that the Israelites, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the desert because of their lack of faith in God
makes the phrase by faith rather general.
The writer of Hebrews has already spoken about the lack of faith of the Israelites. Candidly he
asks, “Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt?”
(3:16). But because of the faith of those who genuinely believed in the promise that God would save
the nation Israel from the imminent attack of the Egyptian military forces, God led his people safely
to the other side of the Red Sea. From the Exodus p 343 account we learn that Moses’ faith was
undaunted. By faith he knew that the Lord would deliver the Israelites and the Egyptians would
meet defeat (14:13–14).48

8 8 In his commentary on Hebrews, Brown queries whether the faith of the Israelites when
they crossed the Red Sea was saving faith. He writes “that the faith of the revelation made to Moses
respecting the Israelites obtaining a safe passage through the Red Sea, was not what we ordinarily
 The contrast with respect to faith and unbelief is not between the faithful minority and the
complaining, terrified Israelites. Rather, the contrast is between the nation Israel that expressed faith
in God and thus was victorious and the unbelieving king and army of Egypt who perished in the
waters of the Red Sea. The Israelites listened to Moses’ instructions; they saw the Red Sea divided
and the path through the sea as dry land; they noticed that the pillar of cloud had shifted from being
in front of them to being behind them; and in the light of that cloud they reached the other shore.
The Egyptians tried to do exactly the same thing. But it was not the same.49 The Egyptian army
spent the night in darkness; they followed the Israelites into the sea; they experienced difficulties in
driving their chariots; and they suddenly saw the waters of the Red Sea rising. All of them drowned;
“not one of them survived” (Exod. 14:28). They had entered the Red Sea without faith in Israel’s
God. When they realized that the Lord was fighting for the Israelites, it was too late.
The Israelites were victorious because they had listened to the instructions God had given to
Moses. They had acted in faith. But this act of faith is indeed the only one recorded. The writer of
Hebrews chooses this act in view of Moses’ trust in God. The next act relates to the fall of Jericho’s
walls, but that happened forty years later when the next generation had taken the places of their
parents. This generation differed from the one that left Egypt. Whereas the people leaving Egypt
failed to trust the Lord, the new generation faithfully executed divine instructions.

Practical Considerations in 11:23–29

Among the heroes of faith stand Amram and Jochebed, the father and mother of Moses. They
put their full confidence in God when they married, when children were born, and when hiding the
infant Moses became an impossible task. Moses’ resourceful parents exercised their faith, used their
imagination, and demonstrated their courage when they constructed a simple basket made of
papyrus reeds, tar, and pitch. They placed the three-month-old Moses in the basket, had Moses’
sister watch him, and put the basket among the reeds of the Nile. Undoubtedly they knew that
Pharaoh’s daughter would bathe along the riverbank. When Pharaoh’s daughter found the infant,
Moses’ sister offered to find a nurse for the child. Thus Jochebed was asked to nurse the child, was
paid for her services, and was assured of Moses’ safety. p 344
By faith parents are able to protect their children from the constant attack of evil in our society.
They realize that Satan “prowls around like a roaring lion” seeking to destroy their children (I Peter
5:8). Parents resist the devil by standing firm in their faith. They build spiritual homes in which they
train their children to fear and love the Lord. With their children, they faithfully attend the worship
services of a church true to Scripture. And with ingenuity, wherever God gives opportunity and
occasion, they provide Christian day school education for their children. And, of course, they spend
much time in prayer in behalf of their sons and daughters.
The first few years of his life Moses spent in the slave hut of his godly parents. Amram and
Jochebed taught him to fear God. But when the day came to take Moses to the royal palace, they
knew that he would be educated in the culture of the Egyptians and in a pagan religion. Humanly
speaking, they had lost a son to the secular world of that day. But the amazing fact is that Moses
loved God and “chose to be mistreated along with the people of God” (Heb. 11:25). Instead of being
called “son of Pharaoh’s daughter,” he was called “friend of God.”
What happened? Joseph had been the second-in-command in Egypt (Gen. 41:43). In a similar
fashion, Moses faced the prospect of ascending the Egyptian throne. Instead Moses associated with
God’s people and turned his back upon the “treasures of Egypt.” Why? Because Moses believed
God! In faith he accepted God’s promises. In every situation he sought God, trusted him, and knew
that God “rewards those who earnestly seek him” (Heb. 11:6). As a child of God, Moses talked to

term saving faith” (p. 566).

9 9 Bengel, Gnomon, vol. 4, p. 454; “when two do the same thing, it is not the same thing.”
and trusted in his heavenly Father. And God blessed him.
Although times, customs, and circumstances today differ from those of Moses’ day, spiritual
choices are the same. Young people today must make the same choice Moses made in ancient
Egypt. Earnestly and sincerely they ought to seek God in prayer, strive to do his will, ask for
wisdom, and cling to his promises.
After the exodus, the people of Israel knew God not only as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, but as the Lord God, who had brought them out of Egypt, the land of slavery (see Exod.
20:2). Today God’s people know him as the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 15:6; II Cor. 1:3;
11:31; Eph. 1:3; I Peter 1:3). That is, because of his Son Jesus Christ, God is the Father of everyone
who believes in Jesus.50 Moses “regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the
treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward” (Heb. 11:26). In the New
Testament we have received God’s complete revelation and know that “Jesus Christ is the same
yesterday and today and forever” (Heb. 13:8).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:23–29

Verse 23
ἀστεῖον—this two-ending adjective is a derivative of the noun ἄστυ (city) and is the opposite of
the adjective ἄγροικος (rustic).51 It occurs in the Septuagint text of Exodus 2:2; Judges 3:17; Judith
11:23; and Susanna 7; and in the New Testament text of Acts 7:20 and Hebrews 11:23. The
adjective has perplexed translators, as p 345 is evident from the many translations: “proper child”
(KJV), “goodly child” (RV, ASV), “fine child” (JB, NEB), “beautiful child” (R.S.V., NAB, GNB, MLB,
NASB, Moffat, NKJV), and “no ordinary child” (NIV). The word may designate someone who is “fair

0 0 Herman Veldkamp, Zondagskinderen, 2 vols. (Franeker: Wever, n.d.), vol. 1, p. 113.

1 1 Thayer, Lexicon, p. 81.

V JV King James Version

V V Revised Version
V SV American Standard Version
B B Jerusalem Bible
B EB New English Bible
. .S.V. Revised Standard Version
B AB New American Bible
B NB Good News Bible
B LB The Modern Language Bible
B ASB New American Standard Bible
V KJV New King James Version
V IV New International Version
to look on and comely.”52

Verse 24
υἱὸς θυγατρὸς Φαραώ—the phrase is devoid of definite articles to emphasize the dignity of
Moses’ status. He bore the title son of Pharaoh’s daughter.

Verse 25
ἑλόμενος—as a second aorist middle participle from αἱρέω (I take; in the middle: I choose,
prefer), this form is modified by the adverb μᾶλλον (rather). The adverb is somewhat redundant
with the participle in the middle voice, not in the active voice. The aorist tense of the participle
coincides with that of the main verb ἠρνήσατο (he refused) in the preceding verse. The contrast
with the aid of μᾶλλον … ἤ features the durative present infinitives συγκακουχεῖσθαι (to suffer
with) and ἔχειν (to have).
The durative idea is expressed in the adverb πρόσκαιρον (for a while) and the noun ἀπόλαυσις
(enjoyment), which shows progression in the -σις ending. The noun ἁμαρτίας is an objective
genitive; it is descriptive of the noun enjoyment and is the equivalent of “sinful enjoyment.”

Verse 26
ἡγησάμενος—from the verb ἡγέομαι (I consider), this aorist middle participle expresses action
that is simultaneous with that of the main verb ἠρνήσατο in verse 24.
The Greek word order is significant because it shows emphasis. The words of greater value
stand first, and the phrase in opposition, “disgrace for the sake of Christ,” appears last in this part of
the sentence. The genitive of τοῦ Χριστοῦ is objective.
μισθαποδοσίαν—the noun occurs three times in Hebrews (2:2; 10:35; 11:26). Only in this verse
does it have the definite article which takes the place of a possessive pronoun: his reward.

Verse 27
κατέλιπεν—the compound in the second aorist active is directive. The verb is often used to
indicate abandoning a heritage, giving up riches, and leaving one’s native land.53
μὴ φοβηθείς—the aorist passive participle denotes cause. The New English Bible even inserts
the conjunction and, an addition which has no manuscript support: “By faith he left Egypt, and not
because he feared the king’s anger.”
ὁρῶν—although the main verb ἐκαρτέρησεν (he persevered) is in the aorist, the participle from
ὁράω (I see) is in the present tense. p 346

Verse 28
πεποίηκεν—this verb from ποιέω (I make, do), in combination with the word πάσχα, means “to
keep the Passover” (see Exod. 12:48, LXX; Matt. 26:18; and the expression τοῦτο ποιεῖτε in Luke
22:19; I Cor. 11:24, 25). The verb, however, in the perfect active indicative, has two objects
(“Passover” and “the sprinkling of blood”). Admittedly, the verb suits the first object better than the
second.54 The perfect tense, to be sure, relates to the institution of the Passover feast that was

2 2 R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 388.

3 3 Spicq, Hébreux, vol. 2, p. 359.

X XX Septuagint

4 4 Lenski, Hebrews, p. 412.

celebrated annually afterward and became the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper in New Testament
times.
τὰ πρωτότοκα—by using the neuter plural, the author indicates that he wants the noun,
preceded by the definite article, understood in the widest possible sense to include male and female,
man and animal.
θίγῃ—the verb θιγγάνω (I touch) appears three times in the New Testament (Col. 2:21; Heb.
11:28; 12:20). In these passages it occurs as the aorist active subjunctive. The verb governs the
genitive case.

Verse 29
διέβησαν—the subject of the verb must be supplied; it is intimated by the use of αὐτῶν in the
preceding verse. The verb derives from διαβαίνω (I go through), is a directive compound, and is
culminative aorist.
ῆ̔ς πεῖραν λαβόντες—although the feminine relative pronoun in the genitive case follows the
noun γῆς (land), it finds its antecedent in θάλασσαν (sea). The noun πεῖραν (attempt) and the aorist
participle of λαμβάνω (I take) are an idiomatic expression for “experiencing.”

F. Faith at Jericho
11:30–31

30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell, after the people had marched around them for seven days.
31 By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were
disobedient.

The writer of Hebrews deliberately by-passes the forty-year journey from Egypt to Canaan. He
wants to indicate that the people of Israel refused to exercise faith and that, devoid of faith, they
perished in their disobedience. Except for Joshua and Caleb, all the Israelites who were twenty
years or older died in the desert. Their sons and daughters demonstrated faith in Israel’s God when
they conquered the fortress city of Jericho.
30. By faith the walls of Jericho fell, after the people had marched around them for seven
days.
The story of Jericho’s fall is well known (Josh. 6:1–24). Joshua, the successor of Moses,
received God’s promise: he and all the Israelites would take possession of the land from Lebanon to
the Negev desert, and from the river p 347 Euphrates to the Mediterranean Sea. Repeatedly God
instructed Joshua to be strong and courageous (see Josh. 1:6–7, 9).
Joshua and the Israelites put their faith in God, and because of their faith they were prosperous
and successful. Whereas their fathers had refused to follow the pillar of cloud into the Promised
Land (Deut. 1:32–36), they, by contrast, trusted the Lord God, crossed the Jordan, and conquered
Jericho.
Jericho was strategically located on the eastern flank of Canaan. Nomadic tribes from the desert
to the east would cross the Jordan and invade the land. The heavily-walled city of Jericho filled with
mighty warriors prevented the invaders from entering the main valleys that provided access to the
central part of Canaan.55 The city itself was comparatively small; it had a circumference of 600

5 5 Howard M. Jamieson highlights the commercial interests of Jericho’s citizenry. Because of

their proximity to the Dead Sea, the citizens traded salt, bitumen, and sulphur. Also, agricultural
meters and measured approximately 225 by 80 meters.56
Because of their access to fresh water and storehouses of food, the people of Jericho could bide
their time behind the massive city walls. However, the people of Israel received God’s promise to
Joshua: “See, I have delivered Jericho into your hands, along with its king and its fighting men”
(Josh. 6:2). God told the Israelites to march around the city once every day for six days and on the
seventh day seven times. And on that last day, when the priests sounded their trumpets on the
seventh time around, Joshua commanded the people to shout, “for the LORD has given you the
city!” (6:16). They had to devote the city to God as a first-fruit offering of their conquest. God
brought down the walls of Jericho, which was situated on a volcanic rift prone to earthquakes.57
Regardless of the means by which God destroyed Jericho, the fact remains that Joshua and the
people of Israel put their faith in him. That is the point the writer of Hebrews makes: “By faith the
walls of Jericho fell.” Faith in God can move mountains.
The writer of Hebrews could have chosen to recount the incident in which the sun stood still in
the middle of the sky for a full day (Josh. 10:13) at the request of Joshua. That feat was an act of
faith. Says the writer of Joshua, “There has never been a day like it before or since, a day when the
LORD listened to a man” (10:14). But the author of Hebrews excludes this incident and mentions the
destruction of Jericho instead. By implication he cites the faith of the people of Israel. Purposely,
however, he places the faith of the p 348 immoral and pagan prostitute Rahab next as a contrast to
the faith of the Israelites.
31. By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with
those who were disobedient.
Both James and the author of Hebrews refer to Rahab and call her forth-rightly “the prostitute”
(James 2:25). Matthew lists her name as the mother of Boaz in Jesus’ genealogy (Matt. 1:5). She
was one of Jesus’ forebears because she believed in Israel’s God.58
Faith knows no barriers. Consider the evidence against Rahab, for she was
a pagan Canaanite,
a prostitute, and
a woman.
Rahab’s faith triumphed. Her fellow citizens were destroyed, but she and her extended family
lived because of her faith in Israel’s God (Josh. 2:8–13; 6:25). God did not condone her sinful
practice of prostitution; instead he granted her grace and salvation. And although in Israel the man,
not the woman, was heir of God’s promises, in matters of faith distinctions disappear (Gal. 8:28).

products abounded because of the fresh water available in the area. See his article “Jericho” in
ZPEB, vol. 3, pp. 451–55.

6 6 Marten H. Woudstra, The Book of Joshua, New International Commentary on the Old
Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981), p. 109. Also see Martin Noth, The Old
Testament World, trans. Victor I. Gruhn (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966), p. 147.

7 7 John J. Bimson, Redating the Exodus and Conquest (Sheffield: Journal for the Study of the
Old Testament, 1978), p. 129. Archaeologists have discovered debris of walls that resemble those of
medieval castles and of brown, black, and red-colored ashes of burnt material (see Josh. 6:24).
Bimson concludes that the excavated city “would fit excellently as the large walled city which the
biblical narrative says Joshua faced on crossing the Jordan” (p. 128).

8 8 Donald J. Wiseman, “Rahab of Jericho,” Tyn H Bul 15 (1964): 8–10. Woudstra, in The
Book of Joshua, mentions that the Targums call Rahab an innkeeper. This expression “in the
Targums always receives an unfavorable sense” (p. 69, n. 7). Also see Josephus, Antiquities 5.7–9
(LCL).
 Rahab believed Israel’s God. She received no promise of salvation, no gospel of faith and
repentance, and no assurance of acceptance. She had heard the reports about the exodus from Egypt,
the conquest of the land east of the Jordan, and the destruction of the Amorites. Her confession of
faith was based on the works of God. She said, “The LORD your God is God in heaven above and
on the earth below” (Josh. 2:11). Hers was a simple but basic confession. She believed in God and
trusted in him to deliver her from the impending destruction of her people and her city.
The author of Hebrews writes, “By faith the prostitute Rahab … was not killed with those who
were disobedient.” By using the expression disobedient, the writer places the inhabitants of Jericho
on the same level as the rebellious Israelites who perished in the desert. He asks, “And to whom did
God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed?” (3:18). Unbelief
results in disobedience; faith in obedience. Rahab believed and welcomed the spies into her home.
At great personal risk she protected them from the king’s soldiers, who knew that the spies were in
Rahab’s house. Rahab not only believed; she also put her faith to work in the interest of God’s
people (James 2:25). And last, she trusted God that at the time of the siege of Jericho her life and
those of the members of her family would p 349 be spared (Josh. 2:14–21).59 We see somewhat of a
parallel in the case of the Philippian jailer who asked Paul and Silas, “Men, what must I do to be
saved?” They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household”
(Acts 16:30–31).
Joshua spared the life of Rahab’s family and placed them “outside the camp of Israel” (Josh.
6:23). Nevertheless, because of her faith, Rahab was welcomed by the Israelites, married Salmon,
and became the mother of Boaz, who was the great-grandfather of David (Ruth 4:21; Matt. 1:5–6).

G. Known and Unknown Heroes of Faith

11:32–40

32 And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David,
Samuel and the prophets, 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what
was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the
sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign
armies. 35 Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be
released, so that they might gain a better resurrection. 36 Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others
were chained and put in prison. 37 They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the
sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated— 38 the world
was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground.
39 These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. 40 God
had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

1. Those Who Triumphed

11:32–35a
The list of individuals mentioned as heroes of faith is coming to a close, but not because the author

9 9 Clement of Rome refers at length to Rahab and the spies. However, when he comments on
the scarlet cord (Josh. 2:21), he gives it New Testament fulfillment. He writes, “And [the spies]
proceeded to give her a sign, that she should hang out a scarlet thread from her house, foreshowing
that all who believe and hope on God shall have redemption through the blood of the Lord. You see,
beloved, that the woman is an instance not only of faith but also of prophecy” (The Apostolic
Fathers, vol. 1, I Clem. 12:7–8, LCL).
has depleted his sources. He simply lacks the time to enumerate additional heroes. Instead of
describing their deeds of faith, the writer merely records the names of those stalwarts known from
Scripture.
32. And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson,
Jephthah, David, Samuel and the prophets.
Ever since the beginning of the epistle, the author modestly refrained from mentioning himself.
Here, however, for the first time he uses the first person singular pronoun I. In the concluding part
of his epistle, he refers to himself again in the first person singular (13:19, 22, 23). p 350
“What more shall I say?” He hesitates in view of the numberless examples of men and women
who lived by faith. He takes a sample of names: some of them belong to the period of the judges;
others, to that of the kings. To be sure, the author fails to present the names in chronological order.
He should have said Barak (Judges 4–5), Gideon (Judges 6–8), Jephthah (Judges 11–12), Samson
(Judges 13–16), Samuel (I Sam. 1–16), and David (I Sam. 16–31; II Sam.; I Kings 1–2:12). But the
writer of Hebrews has no intention of listing the names chronologically. In effect, he follows the
order Samuel gave in his farewell speech to the people of Israel: “Then the LORD sent Jerub-Baal
[also called Gideon], Barak, Jephthah and Samuel, and he delivered you from the hands of your
enemies on every side, so that you lived securely” (I Sam. 12:11). We have no indication why
Samuel and the author of Hebrews follow a sequence differing from the chronological one.
The names appear in the sequence of three pairs: Gideon before Barak, Samson before Jephthah,
and David before Samuel. The first one named in each set seems to be the more popular.60
a. Gideon fought with only three hundred men against the multitude of Midianite soldiers. By
following faithfully the instruction from God, Gideon became a hero of faith. With his God Gideon
was always in the majority (Judges 7:7).
b. Barak refused to do battle with Sisera and Jabin’s army unless the prophetess Deborah went
with him (Judges 4:8). With the prophetess to guide him, Barak fought the Canaanites and defeated
them (Judges 4:16; and see 5:1).
c. Samson captures the imagination of everyone relishing physical prowess. But his love affair
with Delilah not only deprived him of his strength; it also placed a permanent blot on his name. Yet
Samson displayed unshakable faith in Israel’s God when he prayed for strength to mete out justice
to his enemies. God heard his prayer. “Thus [Samson] killed many more when he died than while he
lived” (Judges 16:30).61
d. Jephthah’s name is indissolubly tied to his rash vow that compelled him to sacrifice his only
daughter (Judges 11:39–40). Nevertheless, Jephthah was filled with the Spirit of God. God used him
to defeat the Ammonites and to punish the tribe of Ephraim. He was a man of faith.
e. David stands at the head of the kings of Israel. Because he trusted God, David was enabled to
conquer his enemies, build his kingdom, and strengthen the people of Israel. He was Israel’s
statesman and spiritual leader.
f. Samuel was a prophet, who was called a seer (I Sam. 9:9). He stands p 351 first among the
prophets and was an outstanding leader in Israel. The people turned to him, for they knew that
God’s favor rested on him.62 God answered his prayers offered in faith. Said Samuel, “As for me,
far be it from me that I should sin against the LORD by failing to pray for you” (I Sam. 12:23).
The author no longer provides a commentary on the lives of the heroes of faith. Instead he
summarizes categories of deeds of faith.

0 0 Henry Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary, 4 vols.
(Grand Rapids: Guardian, 1976), vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 228.
1 1 James C. Moyer evaluates Samson: “His life is a negative example of a charismatic leader
who came to a tragic, yet heroic, end. Nevertheless, his partial victory over the enemy was reason to
be named with the heroes of the faith (Heb. 11:32).” ZPEB, vol. 5, p. 252.

2 2 Samuel J. Schultz, The Old Testament Speaks (New York: Harper and Row, 1960), p. 122.
 33. Who through faith conquered kingdoms,
administered justice, and
gained what was promised.63
Although the author omits details, the common denominator he supplies is the expression
through faith. This expression is a slight variant of the constantly recurring term by faith. The writer
seems to intimate that the readers themselves ought to furnish details from their own knowledge of
the Bible.
a. Who “conquered kingdoms”? Certainly Joshua did when he took possession of the Promised
Land. The description is even more apt for David. He conquered the nations surrounding Israel and
thus extended the borders of the Promised Land in fulfillment of God’s sacred oath. God had sworn
that he would give the land to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He had promised
Moses that this land would extend from Lebanon in the north to the Negev in the south, and from
the river Euphrates in the east to the Mediterranean Sea as the western border (Deut. 1:7–8). David
fulfilled that promise through faith.
b. Who “administered justice”? The names of the judges in Israel come to mind, especially the
name of Samuel. The people of Israel said that Samuel had not cheated or oppressed anyone (I Sam.
12:4). Kings of Israel and Judah administered justice in behalf of the people, as Scripture attests:

David reigned over all Israel, doing what was just and right for all his people. [II Sam. 8:15]
When all Israel heard the verdict [Solomon] had given, they held the king in awe, because they saw
that he had wisdom from God to administer justice. [I Kings 3:28]
Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, appointed judges in the land and told them, “Consider carefully what
you do, because you are not judging for man but for the LORD, who is with you whenever you give
a verdict. Now let the fear of the LORD be upon you. Judge carefully, for with p 352 the LORD our
God there is no injustice or partiality or bribery.” [II Chron. 19:6–7]
c. Who “gained what was promised”? Because the expression promises is in the plural, I think
that the author intends to call to mind numerous promises God had made to his people. Already the
writer spoke of Abraham, who after waiting for the son of the promise received Isaac (Gen. 21:1–2;
Heb. 6:15). At the end of his life, Joshua said to the elders, leaders, judges, and officials of Israel,
“You know with all your heart and soul that not one of all the good promises the LORD your God
gave you has failed. Every promise has been fulfilled; not one has failed” (Josh. 23:14). Indeed,
God’s promises to his people are innumerable, as the Scriptures themselves testify.
The author continues to enumerate the deeds of faith performed by his people. They are the
heroes of faith,
who shut the mouths of lions,
34. quenched the fury of the flames,
and escaped the edge of the sword.
a. Among the biblical examples of people who fought lions is Samson, who tore a lion to pieces
with his bare hands because “the Spirit of the LORD came upon him in power” (Judges 14:6). Also,
David told Saul that while David was keeping the sheep of his father Jesse, he would rescue a sheep
from the mouth of a lion or a bear and kill the wild beast (I Sam. 17:34–37). David testified that
God delivered him from the paw of the lion. And from the lions’ den, Daniel answered King Darius:

3 3 Westcott in Hebrews, p. 377, neatly categorizes verses 33–34 into the literary symmetry of
three triplets. The first triplet includes “material victory, moral success in government, spiritual
reward.” The second triplet describes personal escape from “wild beasts, physical forces, human
tyranny.” The last triplet describes the characteristics of “strength, the exercise of strength, the
triumph of strength.”
“O king, live forever! My God sent his angel, and he shut the mouths of the lions” (Dan. 6:21–22).
Centuries later Paul wrote, “But the Lord stood at my side … and I was delivered from the lion’s
mouth” (II Tim. 4:17).
b. The three friends of Daniel withstood the heat of the fiery furnace. Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego, accompanied by someone who looked “like a son of the gods” (Dan. 3:25), walked
around in the fire.64 Nebuchadnezzar confessed that God “sent his angel and rescued his servants!
They trusted in him” (v. 28).65
c. Who escaped the edge of the sword? On numerous occasions David fled to safety when he
was pursued by Saul. Elijah fled the murderous Jezebel and went to Mount Horeb in the Sinai
Peninsula (I Kings 19:8–10). Elisha heard that the king of Israel wanted to kill him during the
famine in besieged Samaria (II Kings 6:31–32). p 353
Still other heroes of faith received divine aid in overcoming weaknesses. They were the people
whose weakness was turned to strength;
and who became powerful in battle
and routed foreign armies.
a. Who was weak and became strong? Of course, Samson. Just before he died, God
strengthened him to execute the superhuman feat of pushing the pillars of the temple of Dagon from
their places (Judges 16:29–30). Hezekiah prayed to God when Isaiah told him that he would die.
God answered his prayer and granted Hezekiah fifteen additional years (Isa. 38:1–8; II Kings 20:1–
6; II Chron. 32:24). And when the weak remnant of the exiles returned from Babylonian captivity,
God gave the leaders Nehemiah and Ezra and the people strength to rebuild the city of Jerusalem
and the temple.
b. Who were the mighty in battle? And who put foreign armies to flight? Here are a few names
and examples:

So David triumphed over the Philistine with a sling and a stone; without a sword in his hand he
struck down the Philistine and killed him. [I Sam. 17:50]
Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, faced a vast army from Edom. The king defeated the enemy
because God fought for his people (II Chron. 20:1–30).
Hezekiah, king of Judah, knew that a mighty Assyrian army had taken all the fortified cities of
Judah and was marching toward Jerusalem. Because of Hezekiah’s faith in God, an angel of the
Lord struck down 185,000 Assyrian soldiers in one night (II Kings 19:35; II Chron. 32:21).
Sennacherib, king of Assyria, withdrew his army and returned to Nineveh.
35a. Women received back their dead, raised to life again.
In the Old Testament we read that both Elijah and Elisha raised boys from the dead and gave
them back to their mothers. The widow of Zarephath, who was not of Israel, believed. When she
received her son from Elijah, she said, “Now I know that you are a man of God and that the word of
the LORD from your mouth is the truth” (I Kings 17:24). The Shunammite woman came to Elisha
because she knew that this “man of God” would be instrumental in raising her son from the dead (II

4 4 Edward J. Young, The Prophecy of Daniel: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

1949), p. 94. Also see John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation (Chicago:
Moody, 1971), p. 191.

5 5 Mattathias, the father of Judas Maccabeus, addressed his sons when he was about to die.
He enumerated the heroic deeds of many persons who are also mentioned by the author of Hebrews;
for example, he referred to Abraham, Joseph, Joshua, and David. Says Mattathias, “Hananiah,
Azariah, and Mishael [the Hebrew names for Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego] believed and
were saved from the flame” (I Macc. 2:59, R.S.V.).
Kings 4:8–37).
The New Testament provides the example of the widow of Nain who received her son when
Jesus raised him from the dead (Luke 7:11–15). Mary and Martha received their brother Lazarus
when Jesus called him forth from the grave (John 11:1–44). And the widows in Joppa welcomed
Dorcas back when Peter raised her to life (Acts 9:36–41).
2. Those Who Suffered
11:35b–38
In the next few verses the author summarizes the physical suffering that the heroes of faith endured.
They were martyrs for God’s cause. By faith they conquered even though they lost their lives. p 354
35b. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better
resurrection.
The instrument on which people were tortured in ancient times was called the tympanum.
Presumably it consisted of a large wheel on which victims were stretched out. Then they were
beaten to death.66 In the Maccabean period during the first part of the second century before Christ,
an almost ninety-year-old scribe named Eleazar was put on the rack and endured blows that led to
his death. Said Eleazar, “It is clear to the Lord in his holy knowledge that, though I might have been
saved from death, I am enduring terrible sufferings in my body under this beating, but in my soul I
am glad to suffer these things because I fear him” (II Macc. 6:30, R.S.V.). In this same period seven
brothers and their mother were tortured by King Antiochus Epiphanes. They were put to death one
after the other. One theme of this gruesome tale is that the martyrs believed in the “everlasting
renewal of life” (II Macc. 7:9; also see vv. 14, 23, 29, 36).67
Accounts from the dark days of persecution that led to the Maccabean revolt were well known
to the Jewish people whom the author of Hebrews addressed. These martyrs suffered and died
because of their faith. They looked for a better resurrection. That is, they did not expect to return to
this earthly life. A better resurrection, however, is an everlasting renewal of life in the presence of
God.
Saints of the Old Testament era had a vague idea about the doctrine of the resurrection. But
during the immediate centuries before Christ’s coming to earth, the teaching of a resurrection after
this life developed. And later when Jesus was about to raise Lazarus, Martha expressed this doctrine
when she said, “I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day” (John 11:24). By faith
believers endured suffering and hoped for a better resurrection in the life hereafter.
36. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison.
The author of Hebrews moves from specific incidents to the more general occurrences of
jeering, flogging, and being chained and imprisoned. From the New Testament we learn that
jeering, flogging, and imprisonment were rather common. Jesus had to endure the sneers of Jews
and soldiers. He suffered flogging during his trial at the court of Pontius Pilate. The apostles
repeatedly spent time in prison. For example, Paul writes to the Corinthians, “I have worked much
harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death
again and again” (II Cor. 11:23).
The recipients of the Epistle to the Hebrews had experienced public insult and persecution.
They themselves had seen the inside walls of a prison (10:33–34). They knew that their trust in God
would be richly rewarded. p 355
Old Testament examples of people who were mocked, scourged, or imprisoned include the
prophet Michaiah, who was slapped in the face and sent to prison for predicting the future (I Kings

6 6 Thayer, Lexicon, p. 632.

. .S.V. Revised Standard Version

7 7 Bruce M. Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Oxford University Press,
1957), p. 147.
22:24–28). Jeremiah was beaten by the officials of King Zedekiah and placed in prison for a long
time (Jer. 37:14–21; also see 20:1–3; 38:1–13). And at the time of the Maccabean revolt, King
Antiochus Epiphanes had the seven brothers and their mother tortured “with whips and cords” (II
Macc. 7:1, R.S.V.).
Once again the writer of Hebrews becomes specific in listing the types of suffering that
believers had to bear. He puts three of them in brief succession.
37a. They were stoned;
they were sawed in two;
they were put to death by the sword.
a. Because stones are plentiful in Israel, the practice of throwing stones to kill someone was
common. The law of Moses specified that a blasphemer had to be stoned by the community (Lev.
24:14–23). Naboth the Jezreelite, although he was innocent, was put to death by the scheming
Jezebel (I Kings 21:10–15). Also, prophets of the Lord God met a similar fate. Zechariah, son of
Jehoiada the priest, died in the courtyard of the Lord’s temple during the reign of Joash, king of
Judah (II Chron. 24:21–22; Matt. 23:35; Luke 11:51). That the practice of stoning the prophets had
been quite prevalent in ancient Israel is evident from Jesus’ remark in his discourse of the seven
woes. “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I
have longed to gather your children together” (Matt. 23:37).68
b. Nowhere in Scripture is there a parallel to the clause “they were sawed in two.” Tradition is
strong that the prophet Isaiah was cut in half with a wooden saw.69 This happened during the reign
of King Manasseh. The Old Testament has no record of this incident.
c. Prophets who were killed by the sword are the contemporaries of Elijah. Complains the
prophet to God, “The Israelites have rejected your covenant, broken down your altars, and put your
prophets to death with the sword” (I Kings 19:10). King Jehoiakim in the days of Jeremiah struck
down with the sword the prophet Uriah. This prophet prophesied in the name of the Lord and
predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (Jer. 26:20–23). And John the Baptist died at the hand of
Herod’s executioner because he had told Herod, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s
wife” (Mark 6:14–29).
Many of the unknown heroes of faith were living in miserable conditions p 356 and sordid
circumstances. 37b. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and
mistreated— 38a. The world was not worthy of them. The prophet Elijah is an example of those
servants of God who lived in abject poverty. His lifestyle became a message of God’s impending
judgment on Israel. Elijah’s appearance suited his prophetic calling. He was depicted as “a man
with a garment of hair and with a leather belt around his waist” (II Kings 1:8). His successor Elisha
inherited his coat, and in successive generations a garment of hair was the distinctive attire of a
prophet (Zech. 13:4). With this apparel the prophet proclaimed a message of repentance and faith in
God. John the Baptist, dressed in “clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his
waist” (Mark 1:6), preached “a baptism of repentance” (v. 4). The darker hair of a camel or of a
goatskin gave the prophet’s garment more of a mournful appearance than did the lighter colored
sheepskins.70
These prophets of old, persecuted and mistreated, were the world’s refugees. Their adversaries

. .S.V. Revised Standard Version

8 8 Jews in Egypt, objecting to Jeremiah’s admonitions, stoned him to death. Consult

Tertullian, Scorpion Antidote 8; and Jerome, Against Jovinian 2.37.
9 9 Captives were put to work and cut wood and stone (II Sam. 12:31; I Chron. 20:3). But the
cruelty of cutting a person in two seems to have been inflicted only on Isaiah. For Jewish sources
see Yebamoth 49b and Sanhedrin 103b, Talmud. Early Christian references are Justin Martyr, Dial.
120; Tertullian, Of Patience 14; also see the apocryphal book the Ascension of Isaiah.
denied them bread to eat and water to drink. Consider the plight of Elijah. He depended on the
ravens to supply him with bread and meat, and he obtained drinking water from the brook Kerith (I
Kings 17:2–6). King Ahab sent search parties to every nation and kingdom to find Elijah, so that he
might put the prophet to death (I Kings 18:9–10). In the eyes of Ahab, Elijah was not worthy to live
on the face of the earth.
The text, however, says the exact opposite: “the world was not worthy of them.” That is, God’s
enemies cannot be compared with God’s servants. These servants are great in honor and stature.
King Ahab cannot be measured against Elijah, and King Herod is no match for John the Baptist. By
their faith, believers tower above an unbelieving world in which God has placed them for man’s
benefit.
Referring to the prophets of the Old Testament era, the writer of Hebrews says, 38b. They
wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. Obadiah, in charge
of King Ahab’s palace, “hid a hundred of the LORD’s prophets in two caves, fifty in each, and
supplied them with food and water” (I Kings 18:13; and see v. 4). Elijah fled into the Negev desert
(I Kings 19:4). For him the land of Israel was no longer safe.
Caves were rather numerous in Israel (I Sam. 13:6). As fugitives, David and his men had no
difficulty finding shelter from their pursuers or from the elements of nature (I Sam. 24:1–13).
Constantly they endured the hostilities of Saul and his soldiers.
The believer is always surrounded by an unbelieving world. He is often lonely but never alone,
for Jesus is his faithful companion in life. Confesses Henry F. Lyte, p 357
Man may trouble and distress me,
’Twill but drive me to Thy breast;
Life with trials hard may press me,
Heaven will bring me sweeter rest.

3. Commendation
11:39–40
The author has come to the end of his discourse on the heroes of faith. Throughout the chapter the
expression by faith is the golden thread that characterizes the life and deeds of God’s people. He
concludes this chapter by commending these heroes of faith and by including the readers of his
epistle in God’s blessing.
39. These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been
promised.
In this text the writer stresses a positive element and a negative. We consider them in sequence.
a. Positive
The word choice in the first part of this verse reminds us of the beginning of the chapter. After the
brief definition of faith, the author writes, “This is what the ancients were commended for” (11:2).
Then he provides examples of those who have been commended: Abel (v. 4) and Enoch (v. 5). He
seems to imply that all the other people he mentions are commended for their faith—all the known
and unknown believers. And who commends these saints? God, of course.71 God forgets none of his
children. He recognizes everyone who acts in faith, because he has promised to be the God of his
people (see, for instance, 8:10). As Father of his children, he expects them to put their trust in him.
Instinctively a child puts full confidence in his parents and sometimes expects a parent to perform

0 0 Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark,
1877), vol. 2, p. 289.

1 1 Lothar Coenen, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 1047.

impossible feats. So God wants the believer to come in faith and ask for seemingly impossible
things. Why? Because God takes pleasure in commending the believer for his faith.
b. Negative
Although believers in Old Testament times received words of praise for exercising their faith, and
although many promises that God had given them were fulfilled in their lifetime, they failed to
obtain that which had been promised. They saw some promises come true, but not the one promise
of the coming of Christ. The writer of Hebrews already stated that the Old Testament believers saw
and welcomed the promises in Christ from a distance (11:13). These believers looked forward to a
heavenly country where God himself had prepared a place for them. At the conclusion of this
chapter, the author once more testifies that although the saints received divine approval for their
faith, they did not obtain that which had been promised.72 p 358
What, precisely, did these Old Testament believers not receive? They had the promise of the
coming of the Messiah and salvation in him. They were the heirs of the messianic prophecies (Gen.
3:15; 49:10; Num. 24:17; II Sam. 7:13; Job 19:25; Ps. 2:6–12; 16:10; 22:1; 45:6–8; 110:1; and
numerous passages in the books of the prophets). But all these believers died before Jesus appeared
on earth. To be sure, they died in faith and entered heaven. Nevertheless, they entered the presence
of God with the promise that they had received and in expectation of its fulfillment. Their
understanding of the plan of salvation was vague and incomplete. With the revelation God had
given them, they tried to understand the mystery of redemption.73 Peter testifies to this when he
writes, “Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you,
searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which
the spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories
that would follow” (I Peter 1:10–11).
The author of Hebrews ends the chapter by including the readers of his epistle in the discussion
of faith and the promise of salvation in Christ. Before he began this discussion, he already had
exhorted his readers to persevere in faith, “so that when you have done the will of God, you will
receive what he has promised” (10:36). He brings the Old Testament saints and New Testament
believers together in Jesus Christ. He considers them one family, and “a family is not complete
unless all its members are present.”74
40. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be
made perfect.
Here the pastor speaks not with words of exhortation or admonition. Rather, he teaches his
readers the unity and continuity of the believers of both the Old Testament and New Testament
eras.75 He is saying that they (the heroes of faith) and we (believers in Jesus Christ) are one. In the
next chapter the writer brings the “great cloud of witnesses” and the readers of his epistle together
in Jesus (12:1–2). Jesus is the originator, the author, and the captain of faith. He leads the believer to
perfection.
Says the writer, “God had planned something better for us.” In view of its repeated use in

2 2 The R.S.V. expresses the concessive idea in verse 39 more directly: “And all these, though
well attested by their faith, did not receive what was promised” (italics added).

3 3 Owen, Hebrews, vol. 7, p. 215. Also consult Brown, Hebrews, p. 593.

4 4 Montefiore, Hebrews, p. 212.

5 5 Consult Hughes, Hebrews, p. 517. He quotes Moffatt, who writes, “The conclusion of the
whole matter rather is (vv. 39, 40) that the reward of their faith had to be deferred till Christ arrived
in our day. The [perfection] is entirely wrought out through Christ, and wrought out for all. It covers
all God’s People (compare 12:23), for now the Promise has been fulfilled to these earlier saints.”
Hebrews, we know that the word better relates to the era of fulfillment in Jesus Christ.76 That is,
believers who belong to the Christian era have become recipients of the promised salvation in
Christ. The Old Testament believers look forward to this fulfillment. Because we look back p 359
upon the accomplished work of Christ, by faith we are able to appropriate the fullness of salvation.
In other words, we are privileged above the saints who had only the promise.
What is the significance of Christ’s coming for the Old Testament believers? The author puts it
this way: “Only together with us would they be made perfect.” During the time of the old covenant
(Heb. 8:6–7), believers were unable to reach perfection. With his coming, Christ brought “many
sons to glory” (2:10) and made them perfect (10:14). Through his atoning work, Christ caused Old
Testament and New Testament believers to share in his perfection (12:23).77
Christ, then, perfects believers, for he is the perfecter of their faith (12:2). No believer can ever
make himself perfect, because this work belongs to Christ. However, this does not mean that man
should remain idle. Not at all. The author of Hebrews spurs his readers on to perseverance in the
faith. Both Old and New Testament believers not only share the perfection Christ provides; they
also have a common faith. And as the heroes of faith diligently exercised their faith, so the readers
of the Epistle to the Hebrews must persevere. The saints of the Old Testament era serve the New
Testament believers as incentives to persevere in faith. In the unity we have with them, we know
that through faith we inherit the promise of salvation (6:12; 13:7).

Practical Considerations in 11:32–40

The word saint makes us think of a person who walks around with hands folded, with eyes
turned heavenward, and with a halo around his head. Somehow we get the impression that he is not
one of us. But when the author of Hebrews takes us to the art gallery of the Old Testament and
shows us the portraits of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel, and numerous other
people, he confronts us with paintings of people in action. These saints are our brothers and sisters
in faith. The paintings are scenes of battles, feats of courage, and instances of suffering. The
dominant people in these portraits are ordinary men and women. They have one thing in common,
and that is faith.
These people are saints, and because of this common faith, we are intimately related. We belong
to the same family, for their trials and triumphs are ours, too. And just as they depended on divine
help, we also trust in the Lord for aid. They spent their time in prayer; so do we. We pray and work
for the coming of Christ’s kingdom; as the second petition of the Lord’s prayer has it, “your
kingdom come” (Matt. 6:10). And thus as prayer partners and coworkers for God (I Cor. 3:9), we
ourselves are saints who put faith into practice.
Ever since childhood we have been told not to boast about ourselves. Solomon said it well: “Let
another praise you, and not your own mouth; someone else, and not your own lips” (Prov. 27:2).
But we must not only listen to what the author of Hebrews tells about our spiritual possessions; we
must also tell everyone about p 360 them. In fact, we have to brag about them because they are so
much better than the possessions of the Old Testament believers. We have a better salvation (6:9), a
better hope (7:19), a better covenant (7:22), better promises (8:6), and better and lasting possessions
(10:34). We are privileged sons and daughters of God, heirs and coheirs with Christ (Rom. 8:17).
We may not keep silent. God wants us to talk about our riches in Christ, so that others, too, may

6 6 In the original Greek, the comparative adjective better appears nineteen times in the New
Testament, thirteen of which are in the Epistle to the Hebrews (1:4; 6:9; 7:7, 19, 22; 8:6 [twice];
9:23; 10:34; 11:16, 35, 40; 12:24).

7 7 Reinier Schippers, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 64. Also see Guthrie, New Testament Theology, p.
597.
share our spiritual wealth.
By contrast, the Old Testament believers, mentioned in Hebrews 11, had only fragments of
God’s revelation. With these bits and pieces, they persevered in faith. We, who have God’s full
revelation in Jesus Christ, ought to strive more earnestly to do the will of God (Heb. 10:35). “A
small spark of light led them to heaven; when the sun of righteousness shines over us, with what
pretence can we excuse ourselves if we still cleave to the earth?”78

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:32–40

Verse 32
λέγω—an instance of the deliberative subjunctive in a rhetorical question.
διηγούμενον—the present middle participle (from διηγέομαι, I relate) modifies the accusative
singular personal pronoun με. The gender of the participle is masculine.

Verse 33
διὰ πίστεως—this construction is a variant of πίστει, much the same as κατὰ πίστιν (v. 13).
Compare also διʼ ῆ̔ς (vv. 4, 7) and διʼ αὐτῆς (v. 4).
κατηγωνίσαντο—derived from καταγωνίζομαι (I overcome), this verb in the aorist middle is a
compound with perfective force.79 The compound consists of κατὰ (down) and ἀγωνίζομαι (I
fight).
ἐπέτυχον—a verb in the aorist active from ἐπιτυγχάνω (I obtain) governs a genitive case.

Verse 34
παρεμβολάς—the accusative plural of the compound noun παρεμβολή derives from παρά
(along), ἐν (in), and βάλλω (I throw). Here it refers to an army that is placed in line of battle.
ἀλλοτρίων—from ἄλλος (another), with the meaning belonging to another. The secondary
meaning is “foreign,” that is, “enemy.”

Verse 36
ἕτεροι—in verse 35 the term ἄλλοι occurs. Although the two words are quite often
differentiated, here they are synonymous.
πεῖραν ἔλαβον—see verse 29. p 361

Verse 37
ἐπρίσθησαν—from πρίζω (I cut in two with a saw), the aorist passive form perhaps has led to
dittography in the word ἐπειράσθησαν (they were tempted). But the expression they were tempted,
sometimes appearing before the verb they were sawed in two and sometimes after it, breaks the
sequence of those verbs used for describing the administration of the death penalty. In short,
ἐπειράσθησαν does not fit the context. Conjectural emendations of this form are numerous.80

8 8 Calvin, Hebrews, p. 308.

9 9 Robertson, Grammar, p. 606.

0 0 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 674. The editions of the United Bible Society and Nes-
Al delete the word; many translations (R.S.V., GNB, JB, NAB, NEB, NIV, and Moffatt) do the
same. Editions that retain the word are TR, Bover, Merk, BF, and Nes-Al (25th ed.); so do the KJV,
 Verse 39
μαρτυρηθέντες—the aorist passive participle of μαρτυρέω (I testify) has a concessive
denotation.
διὰ τῆς πίστεως—see verse 33. The definite article takes the place of the possessive pronoun
their.
τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν—some manuscripts, perhaps because of verse 13, have the plural. The singular
also appears in 9:15 and 10:36.

Verse 40
προβλεψαμένου—the aorist middle participle from the compound πρό (before) and βλέπω (I
see) is with τοῦ θεοῦ a genitive absolute construction and has a causal meaning. In the middle voice
the verb means “to provide.”
ἵνα—the conjunction seems to introduce a result clause instead of a purpose clause.
τελειωθῶσιν—from τελειόω (I complete), this form is the aorist passive subjunctive. The verb
occurs nine times in Hebrews out of a total of twenty-three times in the New Testament. The
negative μή appears to negate χωρὶς ἡμῶν more than the verb itself.

Summary of Chapter 11
What is faith? The author answers this question by giving the readers first a brief definition and
then the application of faith in the lives of many believers. The definition is not designed to be
comprehensive; rather, it is introductory in nature. Using examples taken from life, the writer
demonstrates the characteristics and qualities of faith.
After an initial reference to the origin of the world, the author chooses his illustrations from
specific periods of history. First, from the period between creation and the flood he selects the
names of Abel, Enoch, and Noah. These people lived by faith and experienced intimate fellowship
with God. With these examples, the writer depicts a gradual progression: Abel’s faith p 362
eventually resulted in physical death; Enoch’s faith brought translation to glory; and Noah’s faith
provided salvation for him, his family, and the animals.
Then, from the period of the patriarchs, the author selects incidents from the life of Abraham.
He shows Abraham’s obedience relative to traveling to the land of Canaan, the birth of a son, and
the sacrifice of Isaac. The patriarchs died without seeing the promises of God fulfilled: they longed
for life eternal in a heavenly city. Also, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph looked to the future.
From the time of the exodus from Egypt to the conquest of Canaan, the writer gleans events
from the life of Moses: his birth, childhood, education, and departure from Egypt. He also relates
the faith of the Israelites in crossing the Red Sea and in marching around Jericho’s walls. A brief
remark on Rahab’s faith concludes his comments about that era.
When the author comes to the period of the judges, kings, and prophets, he lists only some
representative names. He summarizes the types of trials and triumphs that believers endured and
enjoyed. Although he refrains from providing details, he intimates a relation between these persons
and deeds of faith.
In his conclusion, the writer discloses that the Old Testament saints and the readers of his epistle
share a common faith and together reap the benefits of a fulfilled promise. Believers are made
perfect through the work of Christ.

NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB, and MLB. J. B. Phillips expands the verb into a clause: “they were
tempted by specious promises of release.”
 p 363 12. Admonitions and Exhortations, part 1
12:1–29 p 364
Outline
A. Divine Discipline

12:1–3 1. Look to Jesus

12:4–6 2. Accept Correction

12:7–11 3. Endure Hardship

12:12–13 4. Be Strong

B. A Divine Warning

12:14–17 1. Live in Peace

12:18–21 2. Consider Mount Sinai

12:22–24 3. Look at Mount Zion

12:25–27 4. Apply the Prophecy

12:28–29 5. Worship God

A. Divine Discipline
12:1–13

12 1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything
that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us.
2 Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured
the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. 3 Consider him who
endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.
4 In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. 5 And you
have forgotten that word of encouragement that addresses you as sons:
 “My son, do not make light of the Lord’s discipline,
and do not lose heart when he rebukes you,
6 because the Lord disciplines those he loves,
and he punishes everyone he accepts as a son.”
7 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his
father? 8 If you are not disciplined (and everyone undergoes discipline), then you are illegitimate children
and not true sons. 9 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for
it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live! 10 Our fathers disciplined us for a
while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, that we may share in his holiness. 11 No
discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness
and peace for those who have been trained by it.
12 Therefore, strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees. 13 “Make level paths for your feet,” so that
the lame may not be disabled, but rather healed.

1. Look to Jesus
12:1–3
Using a series of examples taken from the history of God’s people, the author continues to exhort
his readers. Earlier he exhorted them to persevere in doing the will of God (10:36); now he tells
them to run the race with perseverance and to look to Jesus. Believers in the Old Testament era had
only the promise. In New Testament times believers have the fulfillment of the promise and
therefore see Jesus.
1. Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off
everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance
the race marked out for us.
The contemporaries of the first readers of Hebrews had developed an p 366 interest in sports.
Athletes contended in a local stadium, while spectators sat on the tiered seats around the arena.
Although Christians perhaps were not fully involved (because the games provided an excuse for
pagan excesses), they were thoroughly familiar with the sports of their day. From the world of
sports, the author borrows the imagery of spectators, apparel and condition of contestants, and the
contest itself.
Note these points:
a. Cloud
The author places himself on the same level as that of the readers. He is one with them, for he is a
contestant, too. With his fellow contestants, he looks up at the stands and sees a multitude of
spectators. The writer of Hebrews calls them “a great cloud of witnesses.” This may be an idiomatic
expression that means the same as our term a host of people. The word witness, however, has two
meanings. First, it refers to a person who watches the scene before him; his eyes and his ears tell
him what is happening. Next, the word means that a person is able to talk about what he has seen
and heard.
The witnesses are not silent. In fact, the writer of Hebrews says of Abel, “And by faith he still
speaks, even though he is dead” (11:4). The heroes of faith mentioned in chapter 11 speak, but they
do so through the pages of Scripture.1 They cheer us on, so to speak, for the race we run concerns
the cause of Christ. Through their biblical voices they encourage us in our contest of faith.2 The

1 R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of
James (Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), p. 424.
2 Scripture teaches elsewhere (Rev. 7:9, for example) that the saints in heaven surround the
throne of the Lamb. From the term witness, however, we cannot exclude the idea spectator,
witnesses surround us, for they have an interest in our achievement (11:40).
b. Hindrance
“Let us throw off everything that hinders,” writes the author. He looks at the clothes we wear and
the physical condition we are in. When we run a race, we dress in suitable sportswear designed to
provide minimum weight and maximum comfort. And to qualify as runners, we strive to lose extra
body fat by strengthening our muscles. That which is bulky in our bodies must disappear, for it
hinders us in the race that we run.
What are the impediments that hinder us? Jesus says, “Be careful, or your hearts will be
weighed down with dissipation, drunkenness and the anxieties of life” (Luke 21:34). Paul instructs,
“But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy
language from your lips” (Col. 3:8; also see James 1:21; I Peter 2:1).3 p 367
c. Sin
A hindrance in itself is not a sin, but because it impedes a contestant a hindrance can become sin.
Sin entangles, much as a flowing robe that reaches down to the ground would entangle a runner in
ancient times. Put this impediment aside, says the author of Hebrews. “Let us strip off anything that
slows us down or holds us back, and especially those sins that wrap themselves so tightly around
our feet and trip us up.”4
The writer is rather specific. He calls sin the sin. What does he mean? He refrains from
answering this question, but other passages of Scripture suggest that the sin of covetousness ranks
chief among man’s transgressions. Remember that Eve fell into sin because she desired to gain
wisdom (Gen. 3:6). The last commandment in the Decalogue forbids covetousness (Exod. 20:17;
Deut. 5:21). And this commandment actually serves as a summary to point out that the preceding
commandments implicitly are directed against man’s covetousness. In his letter to the Colossians,
Paul calls evil desires and greed idolatry (3:5; also see Eph. 4:22). Even though the author of
Hebrews refers to the sin, he himself leaves the precise meaning an open question. The intent of his
exhortation is that we ought to avoid sin, for it impedes our movement in the race that we must run.
d. Race
When the writer exhorts us to “run with perseverance the race marked out for us,” he echoes the
words of Paul: “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (II Tim.
4:7). Paul spoke these words at the end of his life when he knew he was approaching the finish line
and the “crown of righteousness” waiting for him.5
We, the contestants, must run the race with perseverance. Our objective is to come to the finish
line. But as we keep on running the course that God laid out before us, we keep our eye of faith
fixed on Jesus. He encourages us to persevere in the contest, for he himself has run the same race.

although the emphasis may be more on testifying than on viewing. Says B. F. Westcott, “They are
spectators who interpret to us the meaning of our struggle, and who bear testimony to the certainty
of our success if we strive lawfully (II Tim. 2:5).” Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950), p. 391. Also consult F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën
en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok, 1955), p. 283. And see Hermann Strathmann, TDNT, vol.
4, p. 491.
3 That the impediment hindering the athlete has general significance is evident from the
wording “everything that hinders” (italics added).
4 The paraphrase of Kenneth Taylor (LB) is quite descriptive at this point.
5 In his epistles Paul frequently employs the imagery of a race (I Cor. 9:24–26; Gal. 2:2; Phil.
2:16).
Jesus is the one who strengthens the runner and enables him to endure.
2. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set
before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne
of God.
The main emphasis in this verse lies in the opening clause. All the other clauses describe Jesus
in respect to his work, endurance, and position.6 Notice that the author introduces the name Jesus so
the readers will concentrate on his earthly life.
a. “Fix our eyes on Jesus.” Immediately the refrain of the invitational hymn composed by Helen
H. Lemmel comes to mind: p 368
Turn your eyes upon Jesus,
Look full in his wonderful face;
And the things of earth will grow strangely dim
In the light of his glory and grace.
As contestants engaged in running the race, we have no time to look around. We must keep our
eyes focused on Jesus and must do so without distraction. The writer of Hebrews does not place the
name Jesus among those of the heroes of faith; he gives him special recognition, for he calls him
“the author and perfecter of our faith.” Jesus is “the author of [our] salvation” (2:10), who as
forerunner has entered the heavenly sanctuary (6:19–20) and has opened “a new and living way” for
us that leads to this sanctuary (10:20).7 He is the Beginning and the End, the Alpha and the Omega
(Rev. 1:17; 21:6; 22:13). And he whom God perfected through suffering (Heb. 2:10) perfects his
brothers and sisters who have placed their trust in him. As originator and perfecter of our faith,
Jesus has laid its foundation in our hearts and in time brings faith to completion. He can do this
because he is able, and he will do this because he is our brother (Heb. 2:11–12). In a similar vein,
Paul encourages the Philippians when he says that God “who began a good work in you will carry it
on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (1:6). Therefore, “turn your eyes upon Jesus.”
b. “Joy set before him.” How do we interpret the word joy? Does the writer mean that Jesus
exchanges heavenly joy for earthly sorrow? Or does he mean that because of the joy awaiting Jesus
after his death, Christ willingly “endured the cross”? Some scholars think that Jesus chose death on
the cross in place of the joy of heavenly bliss he enjoyed in the presence of God (II Cor. 8:9; Phil.
2:6–7). They are of the opinion that this is what the author means to say.8 Other scholars disagree.
They believe that the intent is to convey this message: To obtain the joy God had planned for him,
Jesus obediently suffered the agony of death.9
The evidence appears to favor the second interpretation. The context in general and the phrase
set before him in particular support this approach. That is, God destined the path of suffering for
Jesus (Isa. 53:4–6) and afterward filled him with joy (Ps. 16:11; Acts 2:28). The clause “for the joy

6 In his article “Chiasmus, Creedal Structure, and Christology in Hebrews 12:1–2” (Biblical
Research 23 [1978]: 37–48), E. B. Horning examines the structure of verses 1 and 2 and concludes
that the passage shows an inverse parallelism with nine clauses, of which the center line is “keeping
our eyes on Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of the faith.”
7 Otto Michel, Der Brief an die Hebräer, 10th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht,
1957), p. 291.
8 Consult, for example, Westcott, Hebrews, p. 397; Grosheide, Hebreeën, p. 286; John Calvin,
Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 313; Murray J. Harris, NIDNTT, vol. 3,
p. 1180; and P. Andriessen and A. Lenglet, “Quelques passages difficiles de l’Épître aux Hébreux
(5:7, 11; 10:20; 12:2),” Bib 51 (1970): 215–20.
9 For instance, refer to Ceslaus Spicq, L’Épître aux Hébreux, 3d ed., 2 vols. (Paris: Gabalda,
1953), vol. 1, p. 387; Lenski, Hebrews, p. 428; and Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the
Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 523–24.
set before him” seems to point to the future. It relates to Jesus’ exaltation when he was glorified
after his death on the cross.
c. “Endured the cross.” In his epistle the author seldom speaks directly p 369 about the earthly
life of Jesus. In fact, this is the only time he mentions the word cross. That term, together with the
verb endured, mirrors the entire passion narrative of Jesus’ trial and death. Jesus stood alone during
his trial before the high priest and before Pontius Pilate. Jesus endured the agony of Gethsemane
alone. And he alone bore the wrath of God at Calvary. In his suffering Jesus visibly demonstrated
his faith in God. In obedience he sustained the anguish of death on the cross.
d. “Scorning its shame.” The Jews who demanded Jesus’ crucifixion wanted to place him under
the curse of God. They knew that God had said, “Anyone who is hung on a tree is under [my]
curse” (Deut. 21:23; see also Gal. 3:13). They wanted Jesus to experience the utmost shame. He
took the curse upon himself to set his people free and to experience with them the joy God had set
before him. Indeed, the author and perfecter of our faith triumphed when he sat down at God’s right
hand.
e. “And sat down.” With a few strokes of his pen, the writer provides an account of Jesus’ life,
death, resurrection, and ascension. The crowning point, of course, is Jesus’ enthronement at the
right hand of God. That place of honor belongs to him and will be his for all eternity. The author
repeatedly quotes and alludes to Psalm 110:1: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a
footstool for your feet” (1:13). He develops a definite progression of thought.10 Note these verses:
1:3 “he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in
heaven”

8:1 “who sat down at the right hand of the throne of

the Majesty in heaven”

10:12 “he sat down at the right hand of God”

12:2 “sat down at the right hand of the throne of

God”

Jesus accomplished his task on earth, assumed his place in heaven, and now assures the believer
of divine assistance in the race marked out for him.
3. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you will not grow
weary and lose heart.
Look carefully at the entire life of Jesus, says the author of Hebrews to his readers, and consider
what he had to encounter. He literally tells them to compare their lives with that of Jesus and to take
careful note of all that Jesus had to endure. Jesus came to fulfill the messianic prophecies, and
therefore he came to his own people; “but his own did not receive him” (John 1:11). Instead, Jesus
met willful unbelief and unmitigated opposition. He endured the hatred of a sinful world set against
the truth of God. If, then, Jesus experienced such opposition, would not his followers share the same
lot (John 17:14)?
The writer reveals himself to be an excellent pastor. He knows the tendency to look at the
Christian and not at the Christ. Introspection causes spiritual weariness and discouragement, but
looking at Jesus renews the p 370 Christian’s strength and boosts his courage. Therefore, directing
attention to Jesus, the author exhorts the Christian to consider the suffering Christ sustained not

0 0 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 396.

only on the cross but throughout his ministry. When the Christian realizes that Jesus withstood the
hatred of sinful men for the sake of the believer, the Christian ought to take courage. Then his own
problems become easier to bear, and he, too, will be able to continue and eventually complete the
race marked out for him.11

Practical Considerations in 12:1–3

We are individualists who take pride in our achievements. But sometimes this attitude,
commendable as it is, can develop into a complex. That is, we think that we are alone in this world,
for we are the only Christians who have kept the faith. We feel somewhat like the prophet Elijah,
who complained that he was the only one left (I Kings 19:10). As a consequence, discouragement
sets in.
We are not alone, however. First, consider the countless multitudes that have kept the faith and
have been translated into glory. The writer of Hebrews describes them as “a great cloud of
witnesses.” Next, we must look to Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith. He is always near us
and ready to help. And last, we are part of the body of Christ, the church. We have numberless
brothers and sisters who are fighting the good fight of faith.
Yet, as runners engaged in a race, we are individuals. Every believer must run the race that God
has set out for him. And everyone has his own set of obstacles, his own track, and his own
capabilities. To run the race God has given us, we must put aside everything that hinders us. The
clothing of a long-distance runner consists of shirt, shorts, and shoes, and weighs less than a pound.
On the track of faith, we are told to travel far. Therefore we must travel light.
The Christian’s life of faith is more than one outstanding feat, a single accomplishment, and a
sudden burst of spiritual energy. The believer looks to Jesus without distraction, for then he
perseveres and lives a life of holiness. Then he progresses as he travels the road of sanctification.
We bear our cross, but we do not carry the cross Jesus bore. He carried the cross alone. We carry
ours by unwaveringly looking at him. From his exalted position in heaven at God’s right hand,
Jesus enables us to persist, to endure, and to be faithful to God and his Word.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:1–3

Verse 1
τοιγαροῦν—a combination of τοί (or τῷ), γάρ, and οὖν that functions as “a particle introducing
a conclusion with some special emphasis or formality, and generally p 371 occupying the first place
in the sentence.”12 It means “therefore,” “consequently,” “then.”
καὶ ἡμεῖς—although translations fail to render the exact equivalent of the Greek, the
combination of these words is emphatic: we ourselves, too.
τοσοῦτον—this correlative adjective denotes quantity. By contrast, the adjective τοιαύτην (v. 3)
denotes quality.

1 1 Apparently the words grow weary and lose heart were current in the world of sports.
Writes James Moffatt, “Aristotle uses both to describe runners relaxing and collapsing, once the
goal has been passed.” See his Epistle to the Hebrews, International Critical Commentary series
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1963), p. 199.

2 2 Joseph H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (New York, Cincinnati,
and Chicago: American Book Company, 1889), p. 627.
 ἔχοντες—denoting cause, this is a present active participle.
νέφος—literally the word means “cloud,” but as an idiom we may translate it as “throng” or
“host.”
μαρτύρων—besides the double meaning the expression μάρτυς has (witnessing by eye or ear;
and testifying God’s truth), in the New Testament it conveys the idea martyr (Acts 22:20; Rev. 2:13;
17:6).
ὄγκον—apparently derived from φέρω (I carry) in the aorist ἐνεγκεῖν.13
ἀποθέμενοι—the aorist middle participle from the compound verb ἀπό (away) and τίθημι (I
place) means “laying aside from yourselves every weight.”14
εὐπερίστατον—because this verbal adjective appears once in the New Testament, a
modification (εὐπερίσπαστον, easily distracting) occurs in two major manuscripts. The compound
derives from εὖ (well), περί (around), and ἵστημι (I stand).
τὴν ἁμαρτίαν—even though the author uses the definite article, places a verbal adjective
between the definite article and the noun, and gives the noun in the singular, he fails to
communicate the nature of ἁμαρτία; instead, he points to sin itself.
τρέχωμεν—the hortatory subjunctive, because of the present active first person plural, reveals
that the readers already are engaged in the race.

Verse 2
ἀφορῶντες—the compound present active participle from ἀπό (away) and ὁράω (I see)
signifies that we ought to look to Jesus without distraction; that is, everything else takes second
place. The present tense is durative.
ἀρχηγόν—in the New Testament the noun occurs four times (Acts 3:15; 5:31; Heb. 2:10; 12:2)
and in each passage refers to Jesus. He is the ruler, leader, author, prince. The genitive τῆς πίστεως
is objective.
κεκάθικεν—although manuscript P46 has the aorist active indicative ἐκάθισεν, the perfect
active indicative appears to be the original reading. The perfect tense relates the action that
happened in the past and is effective for the present and future.

Verse 3
τοιαύτην—it denotes quality (cf. v. 1).
τὸν ὑπομεμενηκότα—the use of the definite article directs attention to Ἰησοῦν (v. 2). The
participle, from ὑπομένω (I remain), is the perfect active; it reveals that p 372 Jesus endured
opposition in the past, but that even in the present the effects are evident.
ἑαυτόν—the manuscript evidence favors the reading αὐτόν or even αὐτούς. However, the
reading of the reflexive pronoun in the singular, although poorly supported by manuscripts, fits the
context of the passage.15
ἐκλυόμενοι—the present passive participle, denoting manner, depends on the aorist active
subjunctive κάμητε (from κάμνω, I am weary). The expression ταῖς ψυχαῖς (your souls), as a dative
of respect, must be construed with the participle, not the verb.

3 3 Ibid., p. 437. Also refer to Philo, Allegorical Interpretation 3.45 (LCL); and Josephus,
Jewish Wars 4.319; 7.443 (LCL).

4 4 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical

Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 810. Also see Robert Hanna, A Grammatical Aid to the
Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), p. 412.
5 5 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New
York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 675.
 2. Accept Correction
12:4–6
Sin is a power that is universal in its opposition to God and his revelation. The writer of Hebrews
portrays it as a personified force that man confronts and fights. Sin affects everyone and everything.
Jesus is the only one who was not influenced by sin, for he conquered sin. The author exhorts his
readers to look at Jesus (v. 2) and to strive against sin.
4. In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your
blood.
The metaphor in this verse—“resisted to the point of shedding your blood”—comes from the
sports arena. The author goes from one sport to the other, from the imagery of the race to that of
boxing.16 In boxing, blood flows from the faces of the contestants when they withstand vicious
blows. At times serious injuries result in death.
The imagery of withstanding the opponent to the point of shedding blood serves as a parallel to
the readers’ struggle against sin. No specific sin is mentioned. Sin, however, with its mysterious
power is a formidable opponent that must be resisted unto death. Martin Luther, who frequently
encountered the power of Satan and sin, exhorts the Christian in his well-known hymn:
Let goods and kindred go,
This mortal life also;
The body they may kill,
God’s truth abideth still,
His kingdom is forever.
The text itself reveals nothing about the political world in which the readers lived. In earlier
days they had stood their ground when they had been p 373 publicly insulted, had been persecuted,
and had seen their property confiscated (Heb. 10:32–34). But those days belonged to the past, and
the writer repeatedly indicates that the recipients of the epistle were enjoying a period of rest and
ease that had caused spiritual relaxation.
The writer admonishes rather than exhorts the readers that they should resist sin to the point of
shedding blood. The possibility of persecution on account of their faith in Jesus was real. If Jesus
endured the persecution and shed his blood, his followers ought not entertain illusions of being
exempt.
Our fathers, chained in prisons dark,
Were still in heart and conscience free;
How sure will be their children’s peace
If they, like them, contend for thee!
—Frederick W. Faber
5. And you have forgotten that word of encouragement that addresses you as sons:
“My son, do not make light of the Lord’s discipline,
and do not lose heart when he rebukes you,
6. Because the Lord disciplines those he loves,
and he punishes everyone he accepts as a son.”

6 6 John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5 vols.
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 462. The paragraph division differs in Bible translations; for
example, JB places verse 4 with the preceding verses to show continuation of the imagery from
sports. The GNB, NKJV, R.S.V., NEB, and TR include verse 3 with the following section on
discipline. The NIV, Nes-Al, and the United Bible Societies editions begin a new paragraph at verse
4.
 Believers in the first century had access to the Scriptures when they attended the worship
services. There they memorized passages from the Old Testament, especially those from the Psalter,
Proverbs, and Prophets. The New Testament reveals that Proverbs 3 was well known; writers quote
from and allude to it more than any other chapter of this book.17 When the author of Hebrews calls
to mind Proverbs 3:11–12, he refers to a text that was basic to training believers in the church. But
the readers were slow to learn (Heb. 5:11) and had forgotten the passage from Proverbs 3. The
writer, then, spells it out for them.
We note the following points:
a. Jesus
The readers ought to recall the word of encouragement from Proverbs 3 that addresses them as sons.
They are sons because of Jesus, the Son of God. Throughout his epistle the writer of Hebrews has
indicated the importance of the Son and its implications for the sons (see especially 2:10–11). The
one exists for the others. As Son of God, Jesus had to suffer, learn obedience, and become “the
source of eternal salvation for all who obey him” (5:8–9). To be sure, the suffering of Christ is
unique; it cannot and need not be repeated by his followers. However, the principle of discipline
remains the same. Scripture addresses the followers of Jesus as sons, and thus they can expect
correction and rebuke.
b. Sons
The writer says that the Word of God addresses God’s children p 374 and encourages them. God
speaks to his sons and daughters through his Word. He says, “My son, do not make light of the
Lord’s discipline, and do not lose heart when he rebukes you.” That is, believers should see and feel
the hand of God in their difficulties. The use of the expression not make light of suggests that they
ought to view discipline as coming directly from God. If the readers of the epistle take discipline
lightly, they will also think lightly of the suffering Jesus had to endure. However, they have to take
God’s corrective measures most seriously and understand that God gives his children adversities for
their spiritual well-being. When they accept good as well as trouble from God (Job 2:10), they will
not become discouraged and lose heart. Then they know that God is their Father.
c. Father
God, as our heavenly Father, “disciplines those he loves, and he punishes everyone he accepts as a
son.” The last part of this quotation comes from the Septuagint. The Old Testament reads, “Because
the LORD disciplines those he loves, as a father the son he delights in” (Prov. 3:12). The variation
affects the wording but not the intent of the verse.
Discipline, then, is a privilege that God extends to those he loves. This almost sounds
contradictory until we see that discipline is not extended to the ungodly. They receive his judgment.
God disciplined his people Israel as a consequence of their transgressions, but he displays patience
and forebearance with his enemies until the measure of their iniquity is full (Gen. 15:16; Matt.
23:32; I Thess. 2:16). Discipline is a sign that God accepts us as his children.
Does God punish his children? He does send us trials and hardships designed to strengthen our
faith in him. Adversities are aids to bring us into a closer fellowship with God. But God does not
punish us. He punished the Son of God, especially on Calvary’s cross, where he poured out his
wrath on Jesus by forsaking him (Ps. 22:1; Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34). As sin-bearer, Jesus bore
God’s wrath for us, so that we who believe in him will never be forsaken by God. God does not
punish us, because Jesus received our punishment. We are disciplined, not punished.
Moreover, we should accept God’s rebuke, discipline, and castigation as evidence of his love to

7 7 Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Van
Soest, 1961), p. 51. Also refer to Nes-Al, Appendix 3; Philo, Preliminary Studies 175 (LCL); I
Clem. 56:2 (The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, LCL); and SB, vol. 3, p. 747.
us. If we do this, we demonstrate that we indeed are his children and as a result grow in faith and
trust.

Practical Considerations in 12:4–6

Jesus employs a metaphor about tending a vineyard when he says that he is the true vine and his
Father the gardener (John 15:1). What is the work of this gardener? “He cuts off every branch in me
that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more
fruitful” (v. 2). When a gardener has finished pruning, a vine has only its essential branches left. At
the end of the next growing season, the gardener reaps an abundant harvest.
God plunged job into grief when he allowed Satan to take the lives of Job’s ten children. Job
lost all his earthly possessons. His wife told him to curse God and p 375 die, and his friends proved
to be the world’s most wretched comforters. Yet Job’s faith triumphed; he knew that his Redeemer
lived; and he received from God “twice as much as he had before” (Job 42:10).
In a time of permissiveness, Solomon’s proverb points out a basic flaw: “He who spares the rod
hates his son” (Prov. 13:24). The reverse is that “he who loves him is careful to discipline him.”
God loves us and therefore disciplines us. He removes hindrances to our spiritual development to
make us partakers of his holiness and sharers in his rewards.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:4–6

Verse 4
ἀντικατέστητε—the second aorist indicative, second person plural, is composed of two
prepositions, ἀντί (against) and κατά (down), and the verb ἵστημι (I stand). Followed by the
prepositional phrase πρὸς τὴν ἁμαρτίαν the verb is directive as well as intensive. The aorist is
ingressive. Note the assonance in this verse: four words begin with the vowel ἀ.
ἀνταγωνιζόμενοι—in the main verb (ἀντικατέστητε) and in this participle the preposition ἀντί
appears. The author has chosen these two forms to express the seriousness of fighting sin. The
participle in the present middle (deponent) signifies continuity.

Verse 5
ἐκλέλησθε—from the verb ἐκλανθάνομαι (I forget), the perfect tense reveals that not a
temporary loss of memory but an inability to recall is meant. The perfect expresses that an act
accomplished in the past has lasting results. Verbs of forgetting (and remembering) have a direct
object in the genitive case.18
ἥτις—an indefinite relative pronoun, although used as a relative pronoun, has its antecedent in
παρακλήσεως.
ὀλιγώρει—the verb in the present active imperative has the participle μή. This combination
means that the action is in progress but must be discontinued.

Verse 6
παιδεύει—the present active indicative form exhibits progress in the activity of training a child
(παῖς).
μαστιγοῖ—derived from the verb μαστιγόω (I scourge), the present active indicative implies that

8 8 Robertson, Grammar, p. 508.

God indeed strikes with a whip.

3. Endure Hardship
12:7–11
How does the writer of Hebrews apply the quotation from Proverbs 3:11–12? He knows that every
son and daughter of God endures periods p 376 of hardship. Whether God’s children experience the
pain of accident, misfortune, or loss, they need encouragement.
7a. Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons.
In times of affliction, says the author, keep in mind that all your setbacks come from God; he is
training you in godliness and has accepted you as sons. The adversities you encounter are blessings
in disguise, for behind your difficulties stands a loving Father who is giving you what is best. God’s
children, then, must always look beyond their trials and realize that God himself is at work in their
lives.
Translators differ in their reading and understanding of the Greek text of this verse. Here are the
three representative translations:
KJV “If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons.”
R.S.V. “It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons.”
NIV “Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons.”
The King James Version, based on a variant Greek reading, translates this verse as a conditional
sentence. The evidence for the reading is rather weak.
A common translation is that given by the Revised Standard Version. The verse is a statement of
fact and informs the reader that the recipients of Hebrews endured suffering as discipline.
The New International Version renders the verse as a command. The author-pastor tells his
readers what they must do. The choice is difficult, but the general context of the first part of this
chapter features many sentences as commands (imperatives).
7b. For what son is not disciplined by his father?
The question is rhetorical. Of course a son submits to his father’s rule; otherwise he would not
be a true son.
The concept discipline in ancient Israel was not limited to describing physical punishment but
included the concept education.19 That is, the father as head of the household taught his children the
law of God, the tradition of the elders, and the skills of a trade. Education was meant to inculcate
obedience to God’s law, respect for authority, and a love for their national heritage.
The point of verse 7 is that God himself is educating his children. The writer employs the
illustration of a human father teaching his son. In a similar way God himself is giving his children
moral and spiritual training. In the case of the recipients of Hebrews, the writer relates that they
made light of the training God gave them. Therefore, the readers needed a pastoral admonition to
submit to discipline. God trains them as sons, so that they may take their place next to the Son of
God.
8. If you are not disciplined (and everyone undergoes discipline), then you are illegitimate
children and not true sons. p 377

V JV King James Version

. .S.V. Revised Standard Version
V IV New International Version

9 9 Georg Bertram, TDNT, vol. 5, p. 604; and Dieter Fürst, NIDNTT, vol. 3, pp. 776–77. Also
consult Günther Bornkamm, “Sohnschaft und Leiden,” Judentum, Urchristentum, Kirche (1960):
188–98.
 This verse can be interpreted to mean that the readers were illegitimate children, spiritually. But
that is not the case, because the writer has already stated that they are sons of God (vv. 5–7). He
presents his argument in the form of a simple conditional sentence that expresses reality. He rebukes
the people on account of their carelessness in accepting divine discipline. Certainly God gave them
spiritual training, but they had failed to pay attention to what God was teaching them. This careless
attitude toward discipline placed them in the same category as illegitimate children. These children
had no claim to inheritance; they were a source of shame and embarrassment to their father; and
they were denied the discipline, coaching, and grooming that true sons received.
Careful training within a family setting has always been an accepted norm, and people are
expected to receive training as part of their development in social graces. Not to accept discipline is
a mark of rebellion against authority. The readers of the epistle, however, had shown disregard for
this norm and had slighted God who disciplined them. They had to be told to observe the norm,
accept discipline, and behave like sons. Should they continue to neglect God’s teaching, they would
be regarded as illegitimate children. These children have no claim to spiritual sonship and to a
spiritual inheritance—that is, salvation—to which the writer of Hebrews repeatedly refers (1:14;
6:12; 9:15; 12:17). In short, sons need instruction.
9. Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for
it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live!
In the preceding verse the author addresses the readers directly by using the second person
plural pronoun you. In verse 9 the wise counselor includes himself and says “we.” Again he
introduces an illustration from family life. He does so by comparing human fathers with God, the
heavenly Father. Thus we note two parts:
a. “We have all had human fathers.” The writer speaks in general terms and refrains from
mentioning exceptions, for example, orphans. In family circles the head of the household is the
father; he trains the children to behave and to conduct themselves properly.
Reflecting on his own youth, the author declares that children accept discipline without
question. Did we resist our fathers when they corrected us? Of course not! We respected them in
harmony with the commandment, “Honor your father and your mother” (Exod. 20:12; Deut. 5:16).
As the time-worn saying has it, “A father is someone you look up to—no matter how tall you
grow.”
b. “We submit to the Father of our spirits and live.” As he has done many times in his epistle,
the writer employs the expression how much more to illustrate the extent of his comparison (2:2–3;
9:14; 10:29; 12:25). He follows the teachings of Jesus, who compared human fathers’ giving good
gifts with the heavenly Father’s giving good gifts (Matt. 7:11; Luke 11:13).
The contrast is explicit and implicit in the last part of the verse: p 378

human fathers —

bodies — spirits

death — life

Father
We ought to avoid reading too much into verse 9, for the author wishes only to convey that he is
comparing the human with the divine, and mortality with immortality. He intimates that obedience
to God results in eternal life, for he is our heavenly Father. Comments F. F. Bruce, “As ‘the fathers
of our flesh’ are our physical (or earthly) fathers, so ‘the Father of (our) spirits’ is our spiritual (or
heavenly) Father.”20
10. Our fathers disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us
for our good, that we may share in his holiness.
The comparison continues. Children are in their parental home for the time of childhood and
adolescence. The years in which they receive parental discipline are relatively few; they end when
the child becomes an adult. Fathers (and mothers) seek that which is best for their children, but
often make mistakes. Their skills in rearing sons and daughters are limited, for they have to learn by
doing. With the best of intentions, they sometimes fail in either method or purpose. In disciplining
their children, parents frequently lack wisdom; corrective measures are at times too severe, and at
other times are abandoned. Punishment is administered in many instances not in love but in anger.
Parents who are honest with themselves and with their children admit their shortcomings.
What a difference when we consider God’s discipline! He never makes a mistake, always
chastens in love, scourges us, and at the same time comforts us. His discipline does not end when
we have reached adulthood. Throughout our earthly life he trains us; although we often disappoint
him, he never forsakes us. His patience toward us seems unlimited in spite of our lack of progress.
God has a definite purpose in mind for disciplining us. He wants us to “share in his holiness.”
Whereas human fathers train their children to conduct themselves appropriately, God disciplines us
for holiness. That is, he wants us to become like him, perfect and holy (Matt. 5:48; Lev. 11:44–45;
19:2; 20:7; I Peter 1:15–16). God prepares us for life eternal. Therefore, we cheerfully accept God’s
discipline, for we know that the adversities we experience are for our spiritual welfare. As Paul says
to the Corinthian believers, “For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal
glory that far outweighs them all” (II Cor. 4:17).
11. No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a
harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it. p 379
Once more the author uses the device of contrast. This time he contrasts discipline of the present
with results garnered in the future. Whatever discipline you experience at the moment, he tells his
readers, whether it is physical, psychological, or spiritual discipline administered by God or man, it
does not seem to be pleasant.
We do not relish correction, even though we readily acknowledge that discipline is a necessary
part of our development. Discipline that is painful comes in many forms: spankings, suspension of
privileges, loss of possession, departure of a loved one, serious injury, illness, unemployment, and
persecution. When these adversities strike, we experience pain; our first reaction to affliction is not
one of joy. We know that James writes, “Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials
of many kinds” (1:2, italics added). But joy arrives later when we are able to look back and see the
benefits we have received from these trials.
The message of Hebrews is the same. The suffering you encounter is painful, says the writer,
but when the period of distress has ended, you will be able to see results: “a harvest of
righteousness and peace.” Your reward will be a right relationship with God and man in which
peace reigns supreme. You are the peacemakers. Says James, “Peacemakers who sow in peace raise
a harvest of righteousness” (3:18).
Who receives these blessings? They are “for those who have been trained by” discipline. Those
who willingly have endured hardship as discipline and who have submitted themselves to the will
of God in their lives are the recipients of righteousness and peace. They have been trained, writes
the author. At the conclusion of this section he employs the expression train. He borrowed the word
from the world of sports to remind the readers that they are engaged in a contest that demands
perpetual training.

0 0 F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, International Commentary on the New Testament
series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), pp. 359–60. For the expression Father of our spirits,
compare Num. 16:22; 27:16; Rev. 22:6.
 Practical Considerations in 12:7–11
To be sure, the addressees are sons, for this is the term the author uses. His intention, however,
is not to give the impression that daughters are excluded from discipline. Rather, he employs the
terminology of his day and expresses himself according to the norms of his culture. By addressing
the men, he includes the women. They, too, are the recipients of God’s discipline.
When God sends sorrow or sickness, we often hear those afflicted ask, “Why me?” They search
their hearts and minds and try to find out why God is displeased with them, why he sends them
adversity. Scripture speaks directly to these questions and gives this answer: “Because the Lord
disciplines those he loves.”
Guido de Brès, author of the Belgic Confession of Faith, was executed on the last day of May
1567, in Belgium. Just before he was brought to the gallows, he wrote a letter to his wife in which
he said, “O my God, now the time has come that I must leave this life and be with you. Your will be
done. I cannot escape from your hands. Even if I could, I would not do it, for it is my joy to
conform to your will.” This martyr had learned to endure hardship as discipline by submitting
joyfully to God’s will. p 380
“Spare the rod, and spoil the child.” Some fathers may have the mistaken notion that they need
not discipline their offspring. In their view discipline is the opposite of love and thus should never
be applied. When a lack of discipline leads to licentiousness, the results can be tragic for the child,
for his parents, and for society. God, however, disciplines his sons and daughters because he loves
them. He trains them in this earthly life and prepares them for eternity. Already in this life they
harvest the fruits of righteousness and peace, and in the life to come they share God’s holiness.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:7–11

Verse 7
εἰς—with the accusative this preposition denotes cause.
παιδεύει—this verb (third person singular, present active indicative) has the synonym διδάσκω
(I teach). The verb παιδεύειν “suggests moral training, disciplining the powers of man, while
διδάσκειν expresses the communication of a particular lesson.”21

Verse 8
εἰ—the force of the conditional sentence with the present indicatives ἐστε (in the protasis and
apodosis clauses) is strong. The simple fact condition states reality that is tempered by the phrase ῆ̔ς
μέτοχοι γεγόνασιν πάντες. The perfect tense of γεγόνασιν (from γίνομαι, I become) expresses the
general truth of the statement.
ἄρα—introducing a conclusion, this conjunction is emphatic.

Verse 9
μὲν … δέ—in verses 9, 10, and 11 the author uses this literary device to show contrast.
εἴχομεν—the imperfect tense from ἔχω (I have) is best translated in the perfect: “have had.”
πολὺ μᾶλλον—the combination of the accusative singular πολύ with the adverb μᾶλλον is akin
to the expression πολλῷ μᾶλλον—the dative of degree of difference.

Verse 10
ὀλίγας ἡμέρας—the accusative of time answers the question, “How long?”

1 1 Westcott, Hebrews, p. 400.

 εἰς τὸ μεταλαβεῖν—with the preposition εἰς and the definite article, the aorist infinitive
connotes purpose. The infinitive has a synonym in μέτοχοι (v. 8).

Verse 11
εἰρηνικόν—adjectives with the suffix -ικος convey the idea “belonging to, pertaining to, with
the characteristics of.”22 The adjective εἰρηνικός therefore pertains to peace, but also means
“bringing peace.” p 381
γεγυμνασμένοις—the perfect middle participle in the dative plural derives from γυμνάζω (I
exercise). The perfect tense indicates progress that was initiated in the past and continues to the
present. The dative is the indirect object.

4. Be Strong
12:12–13
This section about discipline is now coming to an end. With a pastoral exhortation and additional
imagery about athletics, the author concludes his remarks. As in many other passages, he supports
his teaching by alluding to the Scriptures.
12. Therefore, strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees. 13. “Make level paths for your
feet,” so that the lame may not be disabled, but rather healed.
On the basis of what he wrote in the preceding verses, the writer says conclusively, “Therefore.”
This is what you must do, he exhorts: “Strengthen your feeble arms [literally, hands] and weak
knees.” Apparently he employs a proverbial saying, because the expression feeble hands and weak
knees occurs elsewhere. First, in the messianic passage that describes the joy of the redeemed,
Isaiah jubilantly encourages the believers: “Strengthen the feeble hands, steady the knees that give
way; say to those with fearful hearts, ‘Be strong, do not fear; you God will come, he will come with
vengeance; with divine retribution he will come to save you’ ” (35:3–4). I assume that this
messianic chapter of Isaiah’s prophecy was well known to the people who worshiped in the
synagogues or churches of the first century.23
Second, Eliphaz the Temanite reminds Job of his influence. “Think how … you have
strengthened feeble hands. Your words have supported those who stumbled; you have strengthened
faltering knees” (Job 4:3–4). And third, the writer of Ecclesiasticus describes the life of an unhappy
husband: “Drooping hands and weak knees are caused by the wife who does not make her husband
happy” Sir. (25:23, R.S.V.).
The author of Hebrews speaks as a coach to the members of a sports team, and he uses sayings
that are familiar to them. Although the race is not yet finished, the runners are tired. They need an
encouraging word from their coach, who utters the proverbial saying, “Strengthen your feeble arms
and weak knees.”
The coach continues and says, “Make level paths for your feet,” This is a quotation from
Proverbs 4:26 that is completed with the parallel statement “and take only ways that are firm.”
However, the writer of Hebrews adds his own rejoinder to the line from Proverbs. Says he, the
reason for making the track level for the footrace is “that the lame may not be disabled, but rather
healed.” Before a runner sets himself to a footrace, he examines the track p 382 carefully. He
realizes that unevenness can make him vulnerable to a fall. He is in danger of spraining his ankle
and consequently of being disqualified from the race. Especially when fatigue sets in, the possibility

2 2 Bruce M. Metzger, Lexical Aids for Students of New Testament Greek (Princeton, N.J.:
published by the author, 1969), p. 43. His italics.

3 3 Isa. 35 was understood as a messianic prophecy (see Matt. 11:5; Mark 7:37; Luke 7:22).

. .S.V. Revised Standard Version

of sustaining injury is real. For that reason, the paths should be leveled.
Not all the runners are in perfect physical condition. Some are handicapped—that is, lame. Yet
in spite of their condition—whether this condition arose before or during the race is of no account—
they must persist, continue, and eventually complete the race.24 By encouraging these handicapped
runners and by removing dips and bumps in the road, the able-bodied athletes perform a distinct
service. The result will be that the weak also reach the finish line.25 If the paths are not leveled, the
lame will be disqualified.
What idea is the author conveying with these illustrations from the world of sports? He stresses
the necessity and obligation of corporate responsibility that the believers have. In earlier passages
he instructed the readers to take this responsibility seriously:
3:13 “But encourage one another daily, as long as it
is called Today, so that none of you may be
hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.”

4:1 “Therefore, since the promise of entering his

rest still stands, let us be careful that none of
you be found to have fallen short of it.”

4:11 “Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter

that rest, so that no one will fall by following
their example of disobedience.”

6:11 “We want each of you to show this same

diligence to the very end, in order to make your
hope sure.”

The body of Christ consists of many parts, as Paul reminds us (I Cor. 12:12–27). All the parts of
the body form a unit, and no part exists for itself. As a result, each part is accountable to the whole,
and the whole takes care of the individual parts. The “strong ought to bear with the failings of the
weak” (Rom. 15:1).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:12–13

Verse 12
διό—this inferential conjunction contracted from διά (because of) and ὅ (which) occurs nine
times in Hebrews (3:7, 10; 6:1; 10:5; 11:12, 16; 12:12, 28; 13:12).
τὰς παρειμένας χεῖρας—the perfect passive participle in the feminine plural (from παρίημι, I
relax, loosen) is used as a descriptive adjective and modifies the p 383 noun χείρ (hand). In this

4 4 Donald A. Hagner suggests, “Where there is weakness and drooping limbs there may also
be lameness.” See his Hebrews, Good News Commentary series (New York: Harper and Row,
1983), p. 205.

5 5 Hughes chooses the translation of the KJV, “lest that which is lame be turned out of the
way.” He interprets the clause by applying it to Hebrew Christians who might turn from the true
path and thus commit “themselves to the irremediable sin of apostasy” (Hebrews, p. 535).
instance, the part stands for the whole—that is, the word hand may mean “arm.”26
παραλελυμένα—this perfect passive participle derived from the compound παρά (on the side
of) and λύω (I loose) as a descriptive adjective qualifies the noun γόνυ (knee). Both this participle
and the one preceding are in the perfect tense, signifying a completed action with lasting effect.
ἀνορθώσατε—a first aorist active imperative, second person plural (from the compound verb
ἀνορθόω, I erect, restore strength) strictly speaking applies better to γόνατα than χεῖρας.

Verse 13
τροχιάς—from the verb τρέχω (I run), this noun in the accusative plural signifies wheel tracks
or paths. A related noun is τροχός (wheel).
ποιεῖτε—the external and internal evidence favors the present active imperative, not the aorist
active imperative ποιήσατε.
ἐκτραπῇ—in the aorist passive subjunctive, third person singular, this verb derived from
ἐκτρέπω (I turn away) “is often taken here, because of the context, as a medical technical term be
dislocated.”27 The combination ἵνα μή with the subjunctive expresses negative purpose.
ἰαθῇ—the aorist passive subjunctive, third person singular (from ἰάομαι, I heal, cure) is indeed
passive in spite of the deponent.

p 384
B. A Divine Warning
12:14–29

14 Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord.
15 See to it that no one misses the grace of God and that no bitter root grows up to cause trouble and defile
many. 16 See that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his
inheritance rights as the oldest son. 17 Afterward, as you know, when he wanted to inherit this blessing, he
was rejected. He could bring about no change of mind, though he sought the blessing with tears.
18 You have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom
and storm; 19 to a trumpet blast or to such a voice speaking words that those who heard it begged that no
further word be spoken to them, 20 because they could not bear what was commanded: “If even an animal
touches the mountain, it must be stoned.” 21 The sight was so terrifying that Moses said, “I am trembling
with fear.”
22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. You have
come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose
names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the judge of all men, to the spirits of righteous men
made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better
word than the blood of Abel.
25 See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who
warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? 26 At
that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth but
also the heavens.” 27 The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created
things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain.
28 Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship
God acceptably with reverence and awe, 29 for our God is a consuming fire.

6 6 Bauer, p. 880.

7 7 Ibid., p. 246.
 1. Live in Peace
12:14–17
In clear speech and in direct commands, the pastor-author tells the readers how to live holy lives
before God. In fact, he tells them what to do, what to avoid, and what to learn from history. Besides,
his remarks are echoing teachings from many parts of Scripture.
14. Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one
will see the Lord.
This verse sets a positive tone and is introductory to the rest of the passage. Let us look at this
passage point by point.
a. What to do
The first command is: pursue peace! Keep on pursuing one goal—that is, peace; do not rest until
you have attained it. When spiritual life flourishes in the family circle and in the congregation,
peace holds the members together. But when disharmony stunts the spiritual life of family or
congregation, peace has left, just as a fleeting shadow skips across the fields. Pursuing peace
implies banning quarrels. “Live in peace with all men,” says the writer. What do the words all men
mean? Do they include enemies? According to Jesus’ teaching, the answer is yes. Jesus said, “Love
your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven”
(Matt. 5:44–45). And they who are called sons of God are the peacemakers (Matt. 5:9). “The peace
makers are the true Israel and acknowledged by God as His children.”28
A recurring refrain in the Old Testament as in the New is the command to live at peace with one
another. David exhorts the Israelites, “Turn from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it” (Ps.
34:14; see also I Peter 3:11). In his Epistle to the Romans, Paul stresses the pursuit of peace twice:
“If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (12:18) and “Let us
therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace” (14:19).29 Peace is attained through close
communion with Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6; Col. 3:15).
The second command is: pursue holiness. Peace and holiness are two sides of the same coin.
Holiness is not the state of perfection already attained. Rather, the word in the original Greek refers
to the sanctifying process that occurs in the life of the believer. To put it differently, the believer
reflects p 385 God’s virtues. In so doing, he becomes more and more like Christ who through the
Holy Spirit continues to work in the believer’s heart. As the writer of Hebrews says, Jesus is the one
who makes the believer holy (2:11). Therefore, we as believers must do everything in our power to
obtain holiness.
The conclusion to these two commands is this: without peace and holiness no one will see the
Lord. Only the pure in heart, says Jesus, will see God (Matt. 5:8; compare I John 3:2). A holy God
can have communion only with those who are at peace with him (Rom. 5:1) and those who have
been made holy through the work of Christ (Heb. 2:10; 10:10, 14; 13:12). God’s holy wrath is
directed against those who are unholy (Heb. 10:29). The unrighteous person cannot stand the sight
of Christ’s appearance, for his wrath is terrible (Rev. 6:15–17). Isaiah says that angels cover their
faces in the presence of God (6:2); how then could an unholy person see God?
15. See to it that no one misses the grace of God and that no bitter root grows up to cause
trouble and defile many.
Now comes the warning; the author instructs us what not to do.

8 8 T. W. Manson, The Sayings of Jesus (London: SCM, 1950), p. 151.

9 9 Additional passages that refer to pursuing peace are Mark 9:50; II Cor. 13:11; I Thess.
5:13; II Tim. 2:22. Also consult Hartmut Beck and Colin Brown, NIDNTT, vol. 2, pp. 780–83; and
Werner Foerster, TDNT, vol. 2, pp. 411–17.
 b. What to avoid
First, the writer reasserts the corporate responsibility of the believers. “See to it that no one misses
the grace of God” (compare 3:12; 4:1, 11). As members of the body of Christ we are responsible for
each other. We have the task of overseeing one another in spiritual matters, so that we may grow
and flourish in the grace of God and not come short of it. That is, no one should be allowed to
straggle, for if this happens he becomes Satan’s prey and will miss God’s grace (II Cor. 6:1; Gal.
5:4). Mutual supervision within the entire body stimulates the spiritual health of the individual
members. Avoid, therefore, the indifference to one another manifested by Cain, who asked, “Am I
my brother’s keeper?” (Gen. 4:9). Instead we should ask each other about our spiritual well-being,
although perhaps not in the quaint wording of the Methodist preacher who inquired, “How is it with
thy soul, brother?” But certainly as members of Christ’s body we must put similar questions to our
brothers and sisters in the Lord.
Second, if mutual oversight is neglected, other problems arise. Missing the grace of God
becomes falling into apostasy. And falling into apostasy is equivalent to serving other gods. The
author of Hebrews more or less quotes from the Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 29:18 (v. 17,
LXX), where Moses tells the Israelites: “Make sure there is no man or woman, clan or tribe among
you today whose heart turns away from the LORD our God to go and worship the gods of those
nations; make sure there is no root among you that produces such bitter poison.”
The roots of many weed plants spread rapidly and produce plants in all the places where the
roots grow. These roots develop undetected; the resultant rapid multiplication of plants is quite
unsettling. Roots and plants spell trouble for crop-producing plants that are then deprived of
necessary nutrients and as a result yield a reduced harvest.
With this picture borrowed from the world of agriculture, the author of Hebrews looks at the
church and compares a person who has missed the p 386 grace of God (and has fallen away) with a
bitter root. Such a person causes trouble among God’s people by disturbing the peace. With his
bitter words, he deprives the believers of holiness. Says the writer, he defiles many. The verb defile
actually conveys the idea of giving something color by painting or staining it.30 Avoid such
bitterness, for it will defile you. “To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and
do not believe, nothing is pure” (Titus 1:15).
16. See that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold
his inheritance rights as the oldest son.
Third, the author tells the readers to avoid immorality. He uses the example of Esau and calls
him a godless person. Esau was trained in the godly home of Isaac and Rebekah, but he deliberately
chose to live a life that grieved his parents. He married two Canaanite women who were a source of
grief to his parents (Gen. 26:35). Scripture does not condemn Esau for marrying these women and
does not call him a fornicator. Instead the Bible reports that when Esau noticed his father’s grief, he
married a daughter of Ishmael son of Abraham (Gen. 28:9).
How do we interpret the term immoral? Some commentators understand it literally and argue
that Esau’s married life was tantamount to fornication.31 But Scripture fails to provide the evidence.
Others understand the word immoral spiritually and say that Esau committed spiritual adultery. But
Scripture teaches that spiritual adultery is committed by the nation Israel, not by individuals. And
still others hold that Jewish tradition and legend affirm that Esau was a fornicator.32 However, we
do well to rely on the information in Scripture, even though tradition has a value all its own.

X XX Septuagint

0 0 R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 110; J.
I. Packer, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 447; and Friedrich Hauck, TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 644–46.

1 1 Hughes, Hebrews, p. 540. Also consult Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Epistle to the
Hebrews, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 2, pp. 333–34; and Spicq, Hébreux, vol. 2, p. 401.
 The New International Version solves the problem by separating the two adjectives immoral and
godless. The first adjective applies to the readers, for in the next chapter the writer repeats his
admonition. Says he, “Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God
will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral” (Heb. 13:4). The author describes Esau not as
an immoral but as a godless person. The second adjective, then, applies to Esau who had no regard
for God’s blessing and promise which he, as the first-born, would receive. He despised his birthright
and displayed utter indifference to the spiritual promises God had given to his grandfather Abraham
and his father Isaac.33 He refused to follow in the footsteps of his forefathers, and thus his name is
omitted from the list of p 387 the heroes of faith. His brother Jacob, however, is mentioned because
he blessed Joseph’s sons and transmitted God’s promises to them.
What does the writer of Hebrews teach? Simply this: abstain from immorality and avoid
godlessness.
17. Afterward, as you know, when he wanted to inherit this blessing, he was rejected. He
could bring about no change of mind, though he sought the blessing with tears.
In the conclusion of the passage the author reminds the readers of what they should learn from
history.
c. What to know
Throughout his epistle, the writer has warned the readers not to turn away from the living God
(3:12), for the result of such a deed is disastrous. He used two examples, one from Old Testament
history and one from his own time. First he took the illustration of the rebellious Israelites who
because of their unbelief died in the desert (3:16–19). Next he pointed to some of his own
contemporaries who had heard the Word preached and had received the sacraments of baptism and
the Lord’s Supper, but had fallen away of their own accord. For these people, said the author,
repentance is impossible (6:4–6; compare 10:26–31).
Now once more the writer returns to this subject. Taking the example of Esau, he shows that
Esau deliberately rejected the faith of his father and his grandfather by despising his birthright;
therefore, he himself was rejected. God rejected him. Moreover, that rejection was final and
irrevocable. Years after he had sold his birthright, his father Isaac wanted to give him the blessing,
but was unable to do so (Gen. 27:30–40). Suddenly Esau realized that God had by-passed him, but
his heart had hardened so much that “he could bring about no change of mind.” Repentance was
impossible for him. The author adds that Esau “sought the blessing with tears.” According to the
Genesis account, Esau showed no sign of penitence, only anger toward his brother Jacob. Hence
with his tears he sought not repentance, but only the blessing.34
The lesson is obvious. We must know that unbelief leads to hardening of the heart and to
apostasy. He who has fallen away from the living God finds that God has rejected him. Therefore,
we must strive for peace and holiness, avoid immorality and godlessness, and know that falling into
the hands of the living God is most dreadful (Heb. 10:31).

Practical Considerations in 12:14–17

2 2 SB, vol. 3, pp. 748–49.

3 3 Esau’s indifference to God’s promise can be seen in his remark to Jacob, “Look, I am
about to die. What good is the birthright to me?” (Gen. 25:32). His only concern was for temporal
matters. See Gerhard Charles Aalders, Bible Student’s Commentary: Genesis, 2 vols. (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), vol. 2, p. 82.
4 4 The KJV has this reading: “though he sought it carefully with tears” (italics added). The
term it can refer to repentance or to the blessing. The historical context favors the latter.
 Society today fosters individualism, and this trait, unfortunately, has also taken hold in the
church. Even though we lustily sing, “We are not divided, all one body we,” each one goes his own
way.
Scripture teaches that the church members need spiritual care and oversight. p 388 The pastor is
called overseer and shepherd of God’s flock (Acts 20:28; I Peter 5:2–3). He needs to know us
personally and somewhat closely. I favor the practice of the pastor who, accompanied by an elder or
a deacon, visits every family and every individual once a year. The pastoral visit, then, is strictly for
the purpose of helping one another spiritually. The intent is not to embarrass anyone or to meddle in
someone’s private business, but to inquire tactfully about spiritual needs, to speak a word of
encouragement, to help and support. These annual visits strengthen the bond of unity in the church.
As every farmer knows, neglect causes weeds to grow and multiply. Similarly, neglect of
pastoral duties in a congregation causes church members to drift away. And a member who is
drifting eventually separates himself from the church. The truth of the matter is that separation from
the church inevitably leads to separation from God.
The message of the Epistle to the Hebrews is relevant today. As members of the body of Christ,
we must do everything in our power to prevent fellow members from drifting away from God and
his Word. We have the solemn responsibility to guard against signs of unbelief and disobedience, to
promote peace and holiness, and to further the cause of unity and harmony in the church. Peter puts
it succinctly: “But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (II Peter
3:18).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:14–17

Verse 14
διώκετε—the second person plural, present active imperative exhorts the readers to actively
continue their pursuit of peace.
τὸν ἁγιασμόν—preceded by the definite article, this noun as direct object of the main verb
expresses the process of sanctification, not the state or the fact of sanctification. Nouns ending in
-μος describe action.35

Verse 15
ἐπισκοποῦντες—derived from ἐπισκοπέω (I oversee), the present active participle functions in
an imperatival construction. The word itself has derivatives in English: “episcopal” and “bishop.”
ἐνοχλῇ—the present active subjunctive from ἐνοχλέω (I cause trouble) is part of a negative
purpose clause. The compound consists of ἐν (in) and ὄχλος (crowd). The form ἐν χολῇ as an
alternative reading is a conjecture.
μιανθῶσιν—the aorist passive subjunctive, third person plural (from μιαίνω, I stain, paint;
pollute) suggests finality because of the aorist tense.

Verse 17
ἴστε—although this form may be either imperative or indicative, the context favors the
indicative. The form itself is a literary term from οἶδα (I know) in the second person plural. It
occurs three times in the New Testament (Eph. 5:5; Heb. 12:17; James 1:19). p 389
ἀπεδοκιμάσθη—the author seems to take pleasure in word play: in verse 16 Esau sold (ἀπέδετο)
his inheritance; in verse 17 he was rejected (ἀπεδοκιμάσθη) by God. The form is the aorist passive,
third person singular, from ἀποδοκιμάζω (I reject).

5 5 Metzger, Lexical Aids, pp. 42–43.

 ἐκζητήσας—the participle in the aorist active from ἐκζητέω (I seek out, search for) is intensive
because of the compound form.

2. Consider Mount Sinai

12:18–21
At first appearance, it seems the author introduces an entirely new topic: the contrast between
Mount Sinai and Mount Zion. But this is not quite the case, for the topic is already introduced in
elementary form in the brief clause “without holiness no one will see the Lord” (12:14). As the
readers strive for peace and holiness, they ought to know the difference between the time of the old
covenant and that of the new covenant. They are different from the Israelites who received the Ten
Commandments at Mount Sinai. Therefore, the writer says, 18. you have not come to a mountain
that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom and storm.
The context of the word choice and the contrast with verse 22 demand that the concept Mount
Sinai be understood. In the better Greek manuscripts, the term mountain is omitted, and many
translations show this omission.36 However, similarity with Deuteronomy 4:11 is telling. Moses
reflects on the experience at Sinai and recalls for the benefit of the Israelites, “You came near and
stood at the foot of the mountain while it blazed with fire to the very heavens, with black clouds and
deep darkness” (see also Exod. 19:18; Deut. 5:22–23).
The focus is not so much on the place itself as on the appearance of God who revealed his
majesty and power. The Israelites had consecrated themselves outwardly by washing their clothes
(Exod. 19:10–11). Inwardly they trembled with fear when they looked at the mountain, for they had
come to “darkness, gloom and storm.” In these awesome aspects of nature, God appears to his
people and expects them to increase their reverence for him.37 The author of Hebrews confirms this
point when at the conclusion of this passage he writes, “Let us be thankful, and so worship God
acceptably with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire” (12:28–29).
The Israelites saw the spectacle of fire, smoke, clouds, and an electrical storm; they also were
witnesses 19a. to a trumpet blast or to such a voice p 390 speaking words. They fully understood
that the fiery storm raging at the top of Mount Sinai was much more than a display of natural forces.
God himself was present and made himself heard by the sound of the trumpet (Exod. 19:16;
20:18).38 Then God spoke to the people and gave them the Decalogue—that is, the covenant (Deut.
4:13). God came to the Israelites with this covenant so that the fear of God himself might reside in
his people to keep them from sinning (Exod. 20:20). The overwhelming sight and the thunderous
voice of God struck mortal fear into the hearts of the people, so that those who heard it begged no
further word be spoken to them (see also Exod. 20:19; Deut. 5:25–26).
Scripture reveals that the people at Mount Sinai heard the voice of God, but the words he spoke
failed to penetrate the hearts and minds of the Israelites. They asked Moses to listen to all that God

6 6 Despite the weak manuscript attestation, TR includes the word mountain. Translations
vary: the R.S.V., JB, Moffatt, and Phillips omit it; the RV, ASV, and NASB print the word mount or
mountain in italics to indicate that the Greek text provides no (or insufficient) support; the MLB,
NAB, NKJV, and NIV have the word mountain (“mount,” KJV) without notation; the NEB is rather
expansive and approaches a paraphrase: “Remember where you stand: not before the palpable,
blazing fire of Sinai.” And the GNB has, “You have not come, as the people of Israel came, to what
you can feel, to Mount Sinai.”

7 7 John Owen, An Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4 (Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace,

1960), vol. 7, p. 311.

8 8 At the time of Christ’s return, the trumpet will sound from the heavens (see Matt. 24:31; I
Cor. 15:52; I Thess. 4:16).
would tell him and then relay the commandments to them. They were willing to listen and obey, but
the spectacle was too much for them (Deut. 5:27–28).
The Israelites were awestruck, 20. because they could not bear what was commanded: “If
even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned.” The author of Hebrews chose this
particular passage from Exodus 19:13, that renders the general meaning but not the exact wording,
to demonstrate the majesty of God’s holiness. No one might touch God’s holy mountain, not even
an animal that strayed near it. Should man or animal touch the mountain, God said, “he shall not be
permitted to live” (Exod. 19:13). The Israelites had to execute the person or animal by stoning him
to death or by shooting him with arrows. They were not allowed to touch him.
The stress, then, is on God’s holiness. God wanted the people to be aware of his sacred majesty.
The Israelites were filled with fear and terror. Even Moses, to whom God would speak as to a
friend, was afraid (Exod. 33:11). 21. The sight was so terrifying that Moses said, “I am
trembling with fear.” Moses was the intermediary between God and man, for he was God’s
spokesman. Nevertheless, at the sight of God’s majesty and on hearing God’s voice utter the Ten
Commandments, Moses was one with the people and shook with fear.
The accounts recorded in Exodus 19–20 and Deuteronomy 4–5 are silent about the fear of
Moses. And Moses’ statement on being afraid (“I feared,” Deut. 9:19) occurs partially in the context
of God’s anger expressed against the Israelites when they had worshiped the golden calf. Possibly
the author of Hebrews had access to an oral tradition, much the same as Stephen had received the
information that “Moses trembled with fear” at the sight of the burning bush (Acts 7:32). And Paul,
in mentioning Jannes and Jambres, may have used the same tradition (II Tim. 3:8).39 When God
reveals his p 391 holiness to man, fear and trembling result. Isaiah saw the Lord God “seated on a
throne, high and exalted,” and cried out, “Woe to me! I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips,
and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty”
(6:1, 5). So Moses trembled with fear at Mount Sinai when he saw God’s majesty and glory in
awesome display.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:18–21

Verse 18
οὐ—as the first word in the sentence, this negative particle receives emphasis, especially with
the contrast of ἀλλά (v. 22).
προσεληλύθατε—derived from the compound προσέρχομαι (I approach), the perfect active
indicative, second person plural is repeated in verse 22. The perfect shows lasting results. The word
proselyte derives from this verb form.
γνόφῳ καὶ ζόφῳ καὶ θυέλλῃ—the lack of definite articles in this verse emphasizes the
characteristics of the nouns. Note the use of rhyme in the first two nouns γνόφος (darkness) and
ζόφος (gloom). A θύελλα is a whirlwind.

Verse 19
σάλπιγγος ἤχῳ καὶ φωνῇ ῥημάτων—the absence of definite articles for these four nouns is
designed to stress their characteristics. The nouns are placed in chiastic order. Also note that the
term ῥῆμα “usually relates to individual words and utterances” and λόγος “can often designate the

9 9 According to Shabbath 88b, Talmud, Moses ascended Mount Sinai and feared the
consuming breath of the angels. Michel, Hebräer, p. 315, refers to rabbinic traditions. Haggadic
formulations similar to Heb. 12:21 appear in I En. 89:30 and I Macc. 13:2. Consult Kistemaker,
Psalm Citations, p. 53.
Christian proclamation as a whole in the N[ew] T[estament].”40
ῆ̔ς—this feminine singular relative pronoun in the genitive has its antecedent in φωνή and is
construed with οἱ ἀκούσαντες. The use of the genitive with the verb ἀκούω depicts the hearing, not
the understanding of the voice that spoke.

Verse 20
ἔφερον—the imperfect active tense of φέρω (I bear) is descriptive.
κἄν—as a contraction of καὶ ἐάν, the word introduces the future more vivid condition that has
the aorist active subjunctive θίγῃ (from θιγγάνω, I touch) in the first clause and the future passive
indicative λιθοβοληθήσεται (from λιθοβολέω, I stone) in the second.
τοῦ ὄρους—the genitive case depends upon the preceding verb.

3. Look at Mount Zion

12:22–24
The author is a literary artist who develops his argument with contrast and balanced clauses.
Although the two sections (vv. 18–21 and 22–24) of the argument fail to correspond at every point,
the second portion itself consists of seven parts (two in verse 22, three in verse 23, and two in verse
24). p 392
22. But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living
God. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23. to the
church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the judge
of all men, to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, 24. to Jesus the mediator of a new
covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.
a. “Mount Zion, … the heavenly Jerusalem.” What a difference between the description of
Mount Sinai and that of Mount Zion! What a contrast! The first scene is one of doom and dread; the
second scene portrays life and joy. In the first portion of the argument Mount Sinai is not even
mentioned, for the Israelites were not to stay there. In the second part, Mount Zion is described as
“the heavenly Jerusalem” and as “the city of the living God.”
The verb have come intimates that the readers of Hebrews have arrived at a permanent place.
That is, the temporary conditions of the old covenant have ended, and the everlasting terms of the
new covenant now prevail. That the expression Mount Zion ought to be understood spiritually and
not literally is evident from the explanation “the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God.”
The new Jerusalem is the place where Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant, dwells.41
Zion, founded on the mountains,
God, thy Maker, loves thee well;
He has chosen thee, most precious,
He delights in thee to dwell;
God’s own city,
Who can all thy glory tell?
—Psalter Hymnal
Mount Zion is the highest elevation in the city of Jerusalem. As a fortress it was fiercely
defended by the Jebusites, who were defeated at last by David. In time, the fortress, including the
surrounding area, was called the city of David, but poets and prophets used the name Zion and
designated it God’s dwelling place (see, for instance, Ps. 2:6; 20:2; 99:2; 135:21; Isa. 4:3–5; Jer.

0 0 Otto Betz, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 1121.

1 1 Eduard Lohse, TDNT, vol. 7, p. 337. Also consult Helmut Schultz, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 329.
8:19).
The writer of Hebrews employs the adjective heavenly to signify that the place he mentions is
not the southeast corner of Jerusalem, but the heavenly Zion where God dwells with all the saints
(Rev. 14:1; 21:2). The citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem are known as sons and daughters of Zion.
It is the place where “God himself will be with them and be their God” (Rev. 21:3). The heavenly
Jerusalem excels its earthly counterpart, for sin and death are banished eternally in heaven; the city
has no need of sun or moon, “for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp” (Rev.
21:23). The living God lives among his people forever. p 393
What an honor to live in that city! Consider this: Moses was given the honor of climbing Mount
Sinai and being with God for forty days and forty nights (Exod. 34:28). We shall be with him in
heaven always. Mount Sinai is a windswept, uninhabited mountain; the new Jerusalem is a city
populated by the saints who dwell permanently in Zion with their living God (Gal. 4:26; Phil. 3:20).
b. “Thousands upon thousands of angels.” Already Abraham looked “forward to the city with
foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Heb. 11:10; cf. 13:14). That city is the habitation
of countless angels as well. Certainly the New International Version has the translation “thousands
upon thousands of angels,” but this is an expression that appears in Revelation 5:11 and stands for
countless thousands.42 “Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels,” says John, “numbering
thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand.” This “joyful assembly” of angels
sings a song of glory, honor, and praise to the Lamb (see also Dan. 7:10).
Translations differ on the exact position of the Greek word translated as “assembly.” Depending
on the placing of a comma, the word assembly or its equivalent is taken either with angels or with
“the church of the firstborn” in the next verse (v. 23).43 Commentators are divided on this matter.
However, it appears that the translation “thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly” is
preferred because the author of Hebrews “perhaps intended to offset any thought that angels were
angels of judgment.”44 Angels were commissioned to deliver the law at Mount Sinai (Acts 7:53;
Gal. 3:19; cf. Deut. 33:2; Ps. 68:17); by contrast, they constitute a joyful assembly at Mount Zion,
the heavenly Jerusalem (see Rev. 5:11–13). In heaven angels rejoice when they see that one sinner
repents (Luke 15:10). They are sent out to serve all those who inherit salvation (Heb. 1:14).
c. “Church of the firstborn.” When the writer of Hebrews says to the readers, “You have come to
Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God,” and then mentions the festive
gathering of an immense number of angels, he could be misunderstood. Because he places the scene
in heaven, the readers might say that they as yet have not come to the heavenly Jerusalem. But
when he says, “[You have come] to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven,”
he definitely addresses the readers. They are the ones who belong to the new covenant, and their
names already have been recorded in the Book of Life (see also Luke 10:20; Phil. 4:3; Rev. 3:5;
13:8; 20:12). p 394
That the believers belong to the church on earth is evident from the clause “the spirits of
righteous man made perfect.” They are still sinners, and their spirits have not yet been glorified to
join the church in heaven. They are on earth; their names, however, are written in heaven.

2 2 Bauer, p. 529.

3 3 Editors of Greek New Testament editions put a comma after the word angels and therefore
show that the expression assembly ought to be part of the following verse. These translations have
adopted the punctuation of the Greek editions of the New Testament: KJV, NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB,
GNB, NEB, and Phillips. Translators of the R.S.V., NAB, JB, MLB, NIV, and Moffatt, however,
take the term assembly or festal gathering (or a variant) with the phrase thousands upon thousands
of angels.

4 4 Donald Guthrie, Hebrews, Tyndale New Testament Commentary series (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1983), p. 261. Also consult Lenski, Hebrews, p. 456.
 What is meant by the expression first-born? The New Testament shows repeatedly that Jesus is
the first-born. Of the nine occurrences of this word (Matt. 1:25; Luke 2:7; Rom. 8:29; Col. 1:15, 18;
Heb. 1:6; 11:28; 12:23; Rev. 1:5), seven refer to Jesus. One passage (Heb. 11:28) relates to Egypt’s
first-born slain by the angel of death, and the other passage (Heb. 12:23) concerns believers. The
privilege of the first-born is that he is able to lay claim to the inheritance. Christ is therefore the
heir, and we are coheirs with him (Rom. 8:17). We value our birthright, whereas Esau despised it
(Heb. 12:16). We are first-born because of Christ who makes us holy, and we who are made holy
belong to the same family (Heb. 2:11).45
Recording the names of the first-born males in Israel was done at God’s command. Moses
counted all their names and made a list (Num. 3:40). In heaven all the names of those believers
included in the new covenant are written in the Book of Life.46
d. “God, the judge.” God is judge of all men, and no one is higher than God. At Mount Sinai he
came to Israel to give the people his law and to make a covenant with them. There he did not appear
as judge, only as lawgiver.
Here the readers of Hebrews learn that God is judge of all men, and (by implication) that
everyone must appear before him. Seated at Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, God summons his
people to the judgment seat, not to condemn them, but to justify them. God declares them righteous
because of his Son who paid their debt (II Tim. 4:8). God’s right hand is filled with righteousness,
says the psalmist (Ps. 48:10). God rewards his people by renewing them after his image of true
righteousness, holiness, and knowledge (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10).
e. “Spirits of righteous men.” Who are these “spirits of righteous men made perfect”? Some
commentators are of the opinion that these spirits belong to Old Testament believers; others think
that the writer refers to New Testament saints who have died.47 But all believers of both Old
Testament and New Testament times, who have been translated to glory, are declared righteous.
They have been made perfect on the basis of Jesus’ work; he is “the author and perfecter of our
faith” (Heb. 12:2). p 395
What then is the relation between the saints on earth and the saints in heaven? The saints in
glory have been perfected, for they are set free from sin. Their souls are perfect; their bodies wait
for the day of resurrection. In principle, the believers on earth share in the perfection Christ gives
his people. They enjoy the prospect of joining the assembly of the saints in heaven. Only death
separates the church below from the church above. When death occurs the believer obtains the
fulfillment of Christ’s atoning work (Heb. 2:10).
f. “Jesus the mediator.” In earlier chapters the writer explained the covenant (7:22; 8:6, 8–12;
9:4, 15–17, 20; 10:16, 29); once more he reminds the readers that Jesus is the mediator of a new
covenant. He purposely uses the name Jesus to bring into focus the suffering, death, resurrection,
and ascension of Jesus.
At Mount Sinai Moses served as mediator between God and man; and with respect to the
covenant God made with his people, Moses was the intermediary. But Mount Sinai represents that
which is temporary: Moses died, and the first covenant eventually came to an end. To be sure, God
replaced it with a new covenant (Jer. 31:31–34; Heb. 8:8–12), and Jesus became the mediator of it.
The readers of the epistle observed that the establishing of a new covenant was relatively recent. It
occurred when Jesus died on Calvary’s cross (also see Matt. 26:28). Moreover, the readers ought to

5 5 Karl Heinz Bartels, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 669. Also see Wilhelm Michaelis, TDNT, vol. 6, p.
881.
6 6 Although the writer has the readers of his epistle in mind, he has not excluded those saints
who died before the coming of Christ (see Heb. 11:39–40).

7 7 Bruce, Hebrews, p. 378, for example, argues that “they are surely believers of pre-
Christian days.” By contrast, Bengel in Gnomon, vol. 4, p. 473, asserts that they “are New
Testament believers.”
look not to Moses, who mediated the old covenant, but to Jesus. As mediator of the new covenant,
he calls the believer to joyful and thankful obedience; he removes the burden of guilt and cleanses
the sinner’s conscience; he grants him the gift of eternal life; and he functions as intercessor in
behalf of his people.
g. “Sprinkled blood.” When Moses formally confirmed the first covenant at Sinai, he sprinkled
blood on the altar, the scroll, the people, and even the tabernacle (Exod. 24:6–8; Heb. 9:17–22).
Sprinkled blood signified forgiveness of sin, for “without the shedding of blood there is no
forgiveness” (Heb. 9:22). Jesus inaugurated the new covenant by shedding his blood once for all at
Golgotha. Because of that sprinkled blood, believers enter the presence of God as forgiven sinners
(Heb. 10:22; I Peter 1:2).
You have come, says the author, “to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood
of Abel.” The comparison is somewhat unequal. The blood of Abel called for revenge, and God
placed a curse upon Cain for killing his brother Abel (Gen. 4:10–11). The blood of Christ removed
the curse placed upon fallen man and effected reconciliation and peace between God and man.
Abel’s blood is the blood of a martyr that evokes revenge. The blood of Jesus is the blood of the
Lamb of God who “takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).
The deliberate contrast accentuates the significance of Jesus’ blood that proclaims the gospel of
redemption. The blood of Jesus sets the sinner free. And that is the better word the author wishes to
convey. p 396

Practical Considerations in 12:22–24

“Why do you go to church on Sunday?” Your answer may be: “Because I want to worship the
Lord my God together with his people.” You may also say: “I attend the worship services because
the blood of Jesus shed for me has cleansed me from all my sins. I enter the very presence of God as
a forgiven sinner cleansed by the blood of the Lamb.”
Sermons about the blood of Jesus are few. Certainly on Good Friday pastors describe the
suffering and death of Christ, and the people sing “Alas! and did my Savior bleed.” But neither
preacher nor parishioner dwells on the concept Jesus’ blood. The thought of blood is too gruesome.
The repulsiveness of blood causes us to turn to pleasantries instead, and thus we miss the message
of Jesus’ “blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel” (italics added).
What is the message of the blood? It tells me that Jesus removed the curse, lifted the burden of
guilt, and forgave my sins. It assures me that I have peace with God and that I have been set free to
live a life of obedience. It tells me that God loved me so much that he had his Son die for me.
I go to church not to hear a theological lecture or to receive some pastoral advice on how to
avoid conflict, but to learn that the blood of Jesus daily speaks to me and brings me the message of
salvation. I have been delivered from the bondage of sin because of Jesus’ blood. Throughout the
week, but especially on Sundays, I am reminded of the words of an Italian hymn, translated by
Edward Caswall,
Grace and life eternal
In that blood I find;
Blest be his compassion,
Infinitely kind!

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:22–24

Verse 22
ὄρει καὶ πόλει—in this passage (vv. 22–24) the author omits the definite articles before the
nouns to stress their characteristics and qualities instead of categorical designations. The noun πόλει
stands in apposition to ὄρει and describes permanence. The datives are the dative of place.

Verse 23
ἀπογεγραμμένων ἐν οὐρανοῖς—the noun ἀπογραφή appears in Luke 2:2 and Acts 5:37, where
it means “census.” Derived from the compound verb ἀπογράφω (I register), the perfect passive
participle shows that the registration has taken place and that its effect continues to remain valid.
Note the use of the plural οὐρανοῖς (see also 1:10; 4:14; 7:26; 8:1; 9:23; 12:25).
καὶ κριτῇ θεῷ πάντων—word order rules that the translation should be “and to a judge who is
God of all” (R.S.V.) instead of “to God, the judge of all” (NIV). Arguments for one or the other
translation divide commentators and translators. For the phrase judge of all, see Genesis 18:25.
τετελειωμένων—the perfect tense in the passive participle from τελειόω (I complete) p 397
discloses lasting effect. This is the last time the writer uses a form (noun, verb, or adjective) from
this verb family. The perfect tense appears in three verses (7:28; 10:14; 12:23).

Verse 24
νέας—in preceding passages (8:8, 13; 9:15), the writer described the covenant as καινή. Here it
is νέα. Writes R. C. Trench, “νέος refers to time, καινός to the thing.”48 The covenant that is καινή
originates in the old covenant, whereas the covenant that is νέα can be described as recent.
ῥαντισμοῦ—literally translated, the expression is “to the blood of sprinkling.” The noun occurs
twice in the New Testament (Heb. 12:24; I Peter 1:2). Of the six instances the verb ῥαντίζω (I
sprinkle) appears in the New Testament, four are in Hebrews (9:13, 19, 21; 10:22).

4. Apply the Prophecy

12:25–27
The Epistle to the Hebrews displays one overriding characteristic: contrast. At times the author
employs the comparison “how much more” or “how much less” (see, for instance, 9:14; 12:9). In
this particular passage he contrasts earth with heaven, the old revelation with the new revelation,
and “they” and “them” with “we” and “us.”
25. See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they
refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who
warns us from heaven?
Note that the writer addresses three groups of people: you (the readers), they (the Israelites), and
we (the author and the readers).
a. Throughout this epistle, the warning against turning a deaf ear to God has sounded clearly in
the ears of the addressees. Think, for example, of the direct warning: “See to it, brothers, that none
of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God” (3:12). This admonition
has been repeated in various forms in the letter, and every time it calls the readers to pay close
attention.
The writer does not accuse the readers of rebellion. He does not say that they are guilty of
refusing to listen to God’s voice. Rather, he addresses them pastorally and exhorts them to heed the
Word of God when they hear it. He reminds them of how the Israelites died in the desert.

. .S.V. Revised Standard Version

V IV New International Version

8 8 Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, p. 225. The French language makes the
distinction between novelty and new: “une invention est nouvelle, une expression neuve” (Trench’s
italics).
 b. Avoiding details, the author selects a few key words to describe the plight of the Israelites.
They received their just punishment when they rebelled against God (2:2; 3:16–19; 4:2; 10:28).
They could not escape when they refused to heed God’s warnings. The time came when God
pronounced the verdict that every person who was twenty years old and older would die p 398 in the
desert (Num. 14:29). Escape was impossible. As God’s representative, Moses had warned the
Israelites repeatedly, but they had repudiated the spoken word. They failed to realize that rejecting
God’s Word is tantamount to rejecting God.49 If then history reveals the dire consequences of
Israel’s rebellion in the desert, how much less will we escape?
c. The author includes himself in the comparison. He conveys the thought in the form of a
condition, “if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven” (see 10:26 for a similar
inclusion). If we do not listen to the voice of Jesus who warns us from heaven, escape is even less
possible than it was for the Israelites. The contrast is between the piecemeal revelation of God,
communicated to the people by Moses on earth, and the full revelation in Jesus Christ that “was first
announced by the Lord” (Heb. 2:3). Indeed, “how shall we escape if we ignore such a great
salvation?” Jesus continues to speak to his people through his servants, the ministers of the gospel,
for “in these last days [God] has spoken [and continues to speak] to us by his Son” (1:2).
26. At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will
shake not only the earth but also the heavens.”
Again the writer reminds the readers of the experience at Mount Sinai. From numerous places
throughout the Old Testament Scriptures, they learned that the shaking of the mountains when God
gave his people the Decalogue was an extraordinary event.50 The speaker obviously is God, whose
voice shook the mountain and made the people tremble with fear. But the same voice also utters a
promise that has recurring and lasting significance. Through the prophet Haggai, God spoke to the
Israelites concerning the rebuilt temple and said, “In a little while I will once more shake the
heavens and the earth, the sea and the dry land. I will shake all nations, and the desired of all
nations will come, and I will fill this house with glory” (2:6–7). From the literature of the Jewish
rabbis, we learn that this particular passage was considered to be messianic.51
The prophet predicted a shaking of the heavens and the earth. The writer transposes the terms
heaven and earth to show the sequence of the effect of Christ’s work. The earth shook when Jesus
died and when he arose (Matt. 27:51; 28:2), but more importantly the preaching of the gospel and
the outpouring of the Holy Spirit shook the entire world. The heavens also experienced change: the
angelic hosts sing Christ’s praises (Rev. 5:12); angels rejoice when one sinner repents (Luke 15:10);
angels are sent out to minister to the needs of the believers on earth (Heb. 1:14); and angels long to
look p 399 into the mystery of salvation (Eph. 3:10; I Peter 1:12). It is Christ, therefore, who is at
the center of this upheaval on earth and in heaven. He will cause heaven and earth to shake when he
appears a second time (Matt. 24:29; II Peter 3:10).
27. The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken—that is, created
things—so that what cannot be shaken may remain.
Every now and then, the writer provides somewhat of a commentary on Old Testament
quotations he cites. Here he lifts out the expression once more and explains it by saying that created

9 9 Hagner, Hebrews, p. 216. Because the writer of Hebrews uses the expression on earth, he
seems to say that it was Moses who warned the Israelites. This is the view, for instance, of Moffatt,
Hebrews, p. 220, and Hugh Montefiore, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York and Evanston:
Harper and Row, 1964), p. 234. Some commentators, including Bruce, Hebrews, p. 381, assert that
God is the speaker. Apart from the divine appearance at Mount Sinai, God speaks to the people
through Moses.
0 0 Consult Exod. 19:18; Judges 5:4–5; Ps. 68:7–8; 77:18; 114:4, 7.

1 1 See the Talmud, Sanhedrin 97b, p. 659; SB, vol. 3, p. 749; Kistemaker, Psalm Citations, p.
54.
things can be shaken and thus are temporary. They will be removed. Permanent things are those that
cannot be shaken.
What kind of a commentary is this? In fact, the reader needs a commentary on the author’s
explanation before he is able to understand the intent. First, the writer comments on the entire
quotation from Haggai 2:6, not just the expression once more. Next, in the original Greek he
reminds the reader that he used the term removing earlier (7:12), where it is translated as “change.”
“For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law.” An example,
then, of temporary things is the Levitical priesthood that came to an end when it was replaced by
the eternal priesthood of Christ. Also, the prophet Isaiah foresees the end of this present world when
he transmits what the Sovereign Lord says: “Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The
former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind” (65:17; also see 66:22). And
last, the only things that survive this world are those that are unshakable and eternal. The kingdom
of Jesus Christ cannot be shaken.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:25–27

Verse 25
βλέπετε—the present active imperative, second person plural of βλέπω (I see) introduces a
negative command.
παραιτήσησθε—the negative particle μή with the aorist passive subjunctive from παραιτέομαι (I
reject, refuse) denotes a command not to begin to reject God. By contrast, μή with a present
imperative implies that an action that must be stopped is already in progress.
τὸν λαλοῦντα—the present active participle preceded by the definite article in the masculine
accusative singular refers to God (see Heb. 1:1–2). The present tense signifies repeated and
continued speech. Attention is drawn to the fact that God speaks (λαλεῖν), not to the content of his
words, for then the verb λέγειν is used.52
εἰ—this particle introduces a simple fact condition that expresses reality. To make the reality
even more certain and vivid, the author writes the negative particle οὐκ (not). Normal usage
demands the word μή. p 400
ἐξέφυγον—the compound form intensifies the meaning of the verb φεύγω (I flee). The aorist
tense reveals single occurrence.
ἐπὶ γῆς—this prepositional phrase has its counterpart in ἀπʼ οὐρανῶν and relates to the present
active participle χρηματίζοντα. The participle is understood in the second part of the verse.
ἀποστρεφόμενοι—from ἀποστρέφω (I turn away), the participle is in the present middle and
denotes condition: “if we turn away.”

Verse 26
τότε, νῦν δέ—contrast is the author’s penchant. Here it is the then over against the now.
ἐπήγγελται—the perfect middle from ἐπαγγέλλομαι (I promise) connotes that the promise,
although made in the past, is valid for the present. Therefore, the writer introduces the verb with the
phrase νῦν δέ.

Verse 27
τὸ δέ—the neuter nominative singular article takes the quotation ἔτι ἅπαξ as its noun (see also
Eph. 4:9). The writer has commented on quotations in numerous places (see 2:8–9; 3:15; 4:3–7;
10:8–10).

2 2 Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, p. 287.

 μετάθεσιν—derived from the verb μετατίθημι (I change), the word has a -σις ending that
signifies process.
ὡς πεποιημένων—this phrase is actually an explanatory note. The particle ὡς means “that is,”
and the perfect passive participle is in apposition to σαλευομένων, which is the present passive
participle.

5. Worship God
12:28–29
The last two verses of the chapter flow forth from the immediately preceding paragraph. At the
same time, however, they form the conclusion.
28. Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful,
and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe.
What a statement! “We are receiving a kingdom.” If there is a kingdom, there is also a king. And
a king makes his rule known to his subjects, for they are part of the kingdom. We are receiving the
governing rule, the administration, so to speak, of Jesus Christ. The writer of Hebrews already
mentioned that we have come “to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant” (12:24). That covenant
relation becomes reality when we receive the kingdom, the rule of Christ. As a trustworthy saying
has it, “If we endure, we will also reign” with Christ (II Tim. 2:12). That is not at all surprising, for
both the Old Testament and the New reveal that “the saints of the Most High will receive the
kingdom and will possess it forever” (Dan. 7:18; see also Rev. 1:6; 5:10). Jesus confers a kingdom
on us and grants us the honor of sitting on thrones (Luke 22:29–30; Rev. 20:4–6). p 401
The kingdom we receive is unshakable; it remains forever; it is eternal (Dan. 7:14). Those in the
kingdom, then, cannot be shaken, remain forever, and partake of eternity. The privileges Christ
grants his people are unbelievably rich. God told the Israelites at Mount Sinai that if they kept his
covenant, they would be for him “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:5–6). That
kingdom, however, came to an end because it was temporary. How different for us, the New
Testament believers, who are in the new covenant! We receive “a kingdom that cannot be shaken.”
Moreover, we are in the process of receiving an unshakable kingdom. Jesus taught us to pray for
the coming of his kingdom (Matt. 6:10; Luke 11:2). His kingdom is here; at the same time we admit
that it has not yet come. Hence we pray the well-known petition of the Lord’s Prayer, “your
kingdom come.”
Because of the royal recognition we receive, we are exhorted to give thanks—“let us be
thankful.” The literal translation of this clause is, “let us have grace.”53 However, usage indicates
that the words have grace form an idiomatic expression that means “give thanks.”54 Luke uses this
idiom in relating the parable of the farmer and his servant (Luke 17:9), and Paul employs it in his
pastoral Epistles (I Tim. 1:12; II Tim. 1:3).
Let us live a life of thankfulness, says the author of Hebrews, and by doing so let us worship
God. Giving thanks in word and deed and worshiping God are two sides of the same coin. Worship
is not limited to a formal worship service on Sunday. Horatius Bonar understood this when he
wrote,
So shall no part of day or night
From sacredness be free,
But all my life, in every step,

3 3 This is the translation in the KJV, NKJV, RV, and ASV. The JB has “let us therefore hold
on to the grace”; and the NAB, “we … should hold fast to God’s grace.”

4 4 With variations, numerous translations have this reading. Consult John Brown, An
Exposition of Hebrews (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), p. 668. Also see Bauer p. 878.
 Be fellowship with Thee.
How do we worship God acceptably? The writer reminds us of Enoch who walked with God,
pleased him, and was commended for his faith (11:5; also see 13:21). Our worship must be pleasing
to God on the one hand, and on the other we must approach him with reverence and awe (5:7). And
the reason for serving God with reverence and fear is expressed in the concluding verse of this
chapter.
29. For our God is a consuming fire.
These words were spoken by Moses when he exhorted the Israelites not to serve idols. “For the
LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God” (Deut. 4:14; see also 9:3). Even though Christ
has granted us unusual privileges, we must be aware of God’s awesomeness and holiness. Therefore
we worship him with reverence and awe. p 402

Practical Considerations in 12:28–29

The author of Hebrews tells us to worship God acceptably with reverence and awe. But if we
take note of worship conducted throughout the world, we conclude that God cannot be averse to
variety because he is worshiped in numerous ways. This observation is correct only inasmuch as we
worship God in harmony with his Word.
The Word of God ought to take the central place in a worship service, for through the reading
and the preaching of his Word God makes his will known to his people. The sermon, then, is the
main part of worship. God speaks, and we listen. Preaching must be the proclamation of God’s
Word and should never be replaced by discourses on unrelated topics. The preacher as Christ’s
ambassador delivers the message his sender has entrusted to his care. When preaching takes place,
God’s people worship.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:28–29

Verse 28
βασιλείαν—without the definite article the noun expresses the qualities and characteristics of
the kingdom.
ἀσάλευτον—as a verbal adjective the word modifies the noun βασιλείαν, expresses inability,
and serves as a passive.
παραλαμβάνοντες—this present active participle must be understood in the causal sense. The
present indicates continued action.
ἔχωμεν … λατρεύωμεν—although textual evidence supports either the indicative or the
subjunctive reading, the context favors the subjunctive which then is translated as a hortatory
subjunctive.

Verse 29
καὶ γάρ—five times the author uses this combination to show emphasis (4:2; 5:12; 10:34; 12:29;
13:22).
καταναλίσκον—a present active participle from the compound verb κατά (down) and ἀναλίσκω
(I consume, destroy). The compound exhibits intensity.

Summary of Chapter 12
This is a chapter of exhortations, commands, and applications. It is a rather practical chapter in
which the pastor exhorts us, the believers, to live a Christian life. In his own direct manner, the
writer exhorts us to stimulate our Christian hope by enduring hardship and affliction. He begins by
encouraging us to exercise perseverance, to look to Jesus, to struggle against sin, to submit to
discipline, and to overcome weakness.
He encourages us to pursue peace and holiness and warns us against apostasy, immorality, and
godlessness. Esau serves as an example, for as Isaac’s first-born he should have received the
birthright with its spiritual implications. Instead he despised this right and consequently rejected
God. p 403 Before he continues to write about the subject of apostasy, the author contrasts the fear
and dread of the Israelites who received the law at Mount Sinai with the joy and perfection of
believers who come to the city of God at Mount Zion.
Once again he exhorts us to listen to the voice of God. Failure to heed his Word results in
punishment. As the Israelites who rejected God did not escape, so we who have God’s revelation
through Jesus will not escape if we fall away.
Therefore, the writer says, we ought to live thankful lives because we are part of the everlasting
kingdom of Jesus Christ. By living thankfully, we serve God in acceptable worship with deep
respect and veneration.

p 404 13. Admonitions and Exhortations, part 2

13:1–25 p 406
Outline
13:1–6 C. Communal Obligations

D. Ecclesiastical Duties

13:7–8 1. Remember Your Leaders

13:9–11 2. Avoid Strange Teaching

13:12–16 3. Strive for Holiness

13:17 4. Obey Your Leaders

13:18–21 E. Prayers and Benedictions

13:22–25 F. Final Greetings

 C. Communal Obligations
13:1–6

13 1 Keep on loving each other as brothers. 2 Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some
people have entertained angels without knowing it. 3 Remember those in prison as if you were their fellow
prisoners, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering.
4 Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer
and all the sexually immoral. 5 Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you
have, because God has said,
“Never will I leave you;
never will I forsake you.”
6 So we say with confidence,
“The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid.
What can man do to me?”

The sequence of exhortations which the author began in the preceding chapter continues. Some
commentators are of the opinion that the exhortations in this section are unrelated.1 Others see the
hand of a literary artist at work in the construction of this passage.2 The writer mentions the topic
love in its expression in society: among the brothers, for strangers, for prisoners, and for the
underprivileged. The second topic concerns the home, in which marriage and morality are upheld;
and the third subject is contentment based on confidence in God.
1. Keep on loving each other as brothers. 2. Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so
doing some people have entertained angels without p 408 knowing it. 3. Remember those in
prison as if you were their fellow prisoners, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves
were suffering.
The practical application of Christian love in the context of the society in which the readers
lived is fourfold.
a. In the Christian community brothers and sisters care for one another, and a spirit of brotherly
love and affection prevails. In a world rife with hostility against the Christian church, love for each
other within the community needs constant encouragement. B. F. Westcott makes this telling
observation: “The love of the Jew for his fellow Jew, his ‘brother,’ was national: the Christian’s love
for his fellow-Christian is catholic. The tie of the common faith is universal.”3 Christians recognize

1 James Moffatt refers to them as “a handful of moral counsels.” See his Epistle to the
Hebrews, International Critical Commentary series (Edinburgh: Clark, 1963), p. 224. Looking at the
entire chapter, Donald Guthrie labels its content “a series of apparently disconnected exhortations
and other incidental teaching.” See his commentary on The Letter to the Hebrews, Tyndale New
Testament Commentary series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), p. 266.
2 Otto Michel, Der Brief an die Hebräer, 10th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht,
1957), pp. 328–29. Michel detects four sets of admonitions: showing brotherly love and hospitality
(vv. 1–2), visiting prisoners and those who are mistreated (v. 3), honoring marriage and wedding
vows (v. 4), avoiding greed and fostering contentment (vv. 5–6). Albert Vanhoye, in “La question
littéraire de Hébreux 13:1–6” (NTS 23 [1977]: 121–39), sees a much more elaborate threefold
structure in the first six verses (vv. 1–3, 4, 5–6).
3 B. F. Westcott, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1950), p. 429.
each other as brothers and sisters in the Lord, for together they form the worldwide community of
believers. The writers of the New Testament repeatedly admonish the Christians to cultivate
brotherly love (Rom. 12:10; I Thess. 4:9; Heb. 13:1; I Peter 1:22; II Peter 1:7). To express the
concept brotherly love, they use the word philadelphia. The members of the church in Philadelphia
in effect demonstrated this love (Rev. 3:7–13).
b. The writer of Hebrews counsels the readers to extend their love from their own circle to all
men. They are to entertain strangers; that is, by opening their homes to travelers, they show the love
of Christ. In ancient times, hotels as we know them today were nonexistent, and the inns had the
reputation of being unsafe.4 Travelers were dependent on local residents to provide lodging and
offer hospitality.
The readers of Hebrews have apparently become indifferent to the needs of the traveler;
however, the writer exhorts them to be mindful of their fellow man who needs a roof over his head.
He reminds them of Abraham, Lot, Gideon, and the parents of Samson, who entertained angels
(Gen. 18:1–15; 19:1–22; Judges 6:11–23; 13:3–21). Providing food and accommodation for a
stranger is an act of kindness. Furthermore, Christians who entertain a stranger in their own home
have an opportunity to introduce him to the gospel of Christ. If the traveler accepts Christ in faith,
he will spread the good news along the way.
Providing hospitality was considered a virtue in the first-century Christian church. In his letter
to the Romans, Paul writes, “Practice hospitality” (12:13). And in his pastoral Epistles Paul
stipulates that an overseer in the church must be hospitable (I Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:8; also see I Peter
4:9) and that among their good deeds widows must be able to list hospitality (I Tim. 5:10).5
c. “Remember those in prison as if you were their fellow prisoners.” Earlier in his epistle, the
writer commends the readers for their loving care of p 409 prisoners (10:34). Visiting prisoners was
a common practice in ancient times. Jesus refers to it in his discourse on the sheep and the goats: “I
was in prison and you came to visit me” (Matt. 25:39, 43). And Luke writes about Paul’s
imprisonment in Caesarea and in Rome (Acts 24:23; 28:16). Paul was given much freedom, was
allowed to have his own rented house in Rome, “and welcomed all who came to see him” (Acts
28:30).
Prisoners depended on relatives and friends to provide food, clothing, and other necessities. The
numerous references to Paul’s experiences as a prisoner reveal that his friends came to take care of
his needs (Acts 24:23; 27:3; 28:10, 16, 30; Phil. 4:12; II Tim. 1:16; 4:13, 21). Prisoners, then, had to
be remembered; otherwise they suffered hunger, thirst, cold, and loneliness.
Travelers came to the homes of the recipients of Hebrews and received hospitality. By contrast,
the author now admonishes his readers to leave their homes, go to the prisoners, and empathize with
them. The writer tells them to take care of these prisoners “as if you were their fellow prisoners.”
Show them the love of Christ by ministering to their needs!
d. The last exhortation is to remember the people who are mistreated. The words remind us of
another passage: “Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times
you stood side by side with those who were so treated” (10:33). The admonition need not refer only
to what the readers of Hebrews had done in the past. The suffering of the underprivileged is
universal. Does the author leave the impression that the unity of the Christians is all-important? A
more literal translation of the text—remember “those who are ill-treated, since you yourselves also
are in the body” (NASB)—perhaps supports this interpretation. And a cross-reference to Paul’s
discourse on the unity of the body of Christ points in that direction (I Cor. 12:26). However, it is
better to think especially of the physical body, because mistreatment pertains to physical suffering.

4 “It is common knowledge that inns existed in Greek times and throughout the period of the
Roman empire. Generally they were considered bad, the traveler being subject not only to
discomfort, but also robbery and even death.” Robert C. Stone, “Inn,” ZPEB, vol. 3, p. 280.
5 Hans Bietenhard, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 690.
B ASB New American Standard Bible
Therefore, the translation “as if you yourselves were suffering” is appropriate.
The admonitions to extend a helping hand to the stranger, the traveler, the prisoner, and the
sufferer actually are exhortations to fulfill the command to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev.
19:18; Matt. 22:39; Mark 12:33; Luke 10:27; Rom. 13:9; Gal. 5:14; James 2:8).
4. Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge
the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.
From the second part of the summary of the law (“Love your neighbor as yourself”), the writer
proceeds to the commandment “You shall not commit adultery” (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18).
Moreover, he moves from the social sphere to the private circle of husband and wife. Love for the
neighbor, whoever he may be, most effectively flows forth from a home in which husband and wife
work together in mutual love. When marriage is honored in the home, love emanates to society in
numerous ways. For this reason the author stresses the necessity of maintaining the sanctity of
married life.
In the New Testament nearly every writer discusses marriage, because a stable marriage is a
building block in the structure of society. Also, in this chapter of exhortations, the author of
Hebrews instructs the readers concerning p 410 holy living within the bonds of marriage.6 He is
actually saying, “Let marriage be precious to all of you.” Marriage is a treasure we receive from
God who has instituted it. Therefore, marriage must be honored by all.
The clause “and the marriage bed kept pure” is a euphemism. The author warns the people not
to break the marriage vow by committing adultery. Marriage is sacred, and defilement of it is sin.
Why is having sexual relations outside the bonds of matrimony sin? Here is the answer: “God will
judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.”
The world in which we live considers loose living inconsequential: sex is fun, not sin. But in
God’s eyes illicit sex is sin that deserves punishment.7 The writer of Hebrews clearly speaks to
offenders and warns them of God’s judgment (10:30–31). What kind of punishment does God
administer? Scripture says that “neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male
prostitutes nor homosexual offenders … will inherit the kingdom of God” (I Cor. 6:9–10; Eph. 5:5;
Rev. 21:8; 22:15). They perish in their sin. Christians, then, must set the example of living sexually
pure lives (I Thess. 4:7) and keep the commandment “You shall not commit adultery.”
5a. Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have.
The next commandments in the Decalogue are “You shall not steal” and “You shall not covet”
(Exod. 20:15, 17; Deut. 5:19, 21). In a sense the commandments to which the author alludes are
closely related; they uncover man’s desire for someone’s wife, possessions, and property.8 The
Christian must uproot “the love of money,” because it leads to all kinds of evil (I Tim. 6:10). Paul
counsels Timothy in these pithy words, “But godliness with contentment is great gain” (I Tim. 6:6).
And he himself confesses: “I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. I know what it
is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content”
(Phil. 4:11–12). Certainly Scripture does not teach that the Christian ought to seek a life of poverty.
God told Adam to fill the earth and subdue it (Gen. 1:28), but he warns man against the love of
money, for that attitude leads to greed, and greed is idolatry (Col. 3:5).

6 In the original Greek the verb to be is to be supplied in the first part of verse 4. Some
translations supply the indicative verb is (“Marriage is honorable,” KJV, NKJV, NEB); others have
the translation “Let marriage be held in honor” or a variant (R.S.V., ASV, NASB, NAB, JB, MLB,
GNB, NIV). The latter is preferred because the general context has many verbs in the imperative
mood.
7 John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 7th ed., 5 vols.
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 4, p. 494. Says Bengel, “He most of all punishes them, whom man
does not punish.”
8 Paul discloses that immoral people commit sexual sins, as well as sins of theft and greed
(Rom. 1:26–29; I Cor. 5:10–11; 6:9–10; Eph. 5:3–5; Col. 3:5–6).
 5b. Because God has said,
“Never will I leave you;
never will I forsake you.” p 411

The choice is simple: either love the Lord your God or love money. “You cannot serve both God
and Money” (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13). Instead of worshiping that which is created (money),
Christians are exhorted to worship the Creator and to put their trust in him.
Introducing an Old Testament quotation with the words God has said, the author is true to form.
For him God is the author of Scripture, and the voice that speaks is the voice of God. To find the
exact wording of the quotation in the Old Testament, however, is not easy. Rather, the text itself
appears in varying form in many places, and always signals God’s faithfulness and assurance. Jacob
fled from his brother Esau and in a dream heard God say to him, “I am with you … I will not leave
you” (Gen. 28:15). Near the end of his life, Moses encouraged the Israelites and said, “For the
LORD your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you” (Deut. 31:6, 8). When
Joshua began his work as leader of the Israelites, God said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you”
(Josh. 1:5). And last, when David instructed Solomon to build the temple, he encouraged him with
these words, “Do not be afraid or discouraged, for the LORD God, my God, is with you. He will not
fail you or forsake you” (I Chron. 28:20).9
I conclude that because of its frequent usage the quotation had become proverbial. In all
probability, the words were part of the liturgy in the ancient synagogue and early church. The
people, then, were quite familiar with this text.10
6. So we say with confidence,
“The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid.
What can man do to me?”
Once again the author places himself on the same level with his readers, for together they
confess their confidence and trust in God. They recite the words from Psalm 118:6 and do so
courageously. For them the quotation is a confession of faith. If we look at the passages liturgically,
we notice that in the Old Testament text in the preceding verse, God is the speaker. The testimony of
faith in the lines from Psalm 118:6 is the response of the people. Apparently this psalm citation
belonged to the liturgy of synagogue and church.11 The New Testament writers frequently quote
from this psalm, p 412 interpret it christologically, and indicate that it served as a source of joy and
happiness for God’s people.
“What can man do to me?” Nothing, because the Lord is my helper. The forces of unbelief
cannot do anything unless the Lord gives them permission. The believer, however, need not be
afraid when God is on his side. The Scottish reformer John Knox fearlessly stood his ground against
formidable opposition and said, “A man with God is always in the majority.”

9 The quotation coincides to a degree with the Septuagint (Deut. 31:6). The text of Heb.
13:5b, however, appears verbatim in Philo, Confusion of Tongues 166 (LCL). To say that the author
of Hebrews borrowed the wording from Philo does not explain why Philo’s version differs from the
Septuagint. Interestingly, both Philo and the author of the epistle introduce the quotation with the
information that God is the speaker.

0 0 In his Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), vol. 2,
p. 374, Franz Delitzsch writes, “We may rather conclude that, in the liturgical or homiletical usage
of the Hellenistic synagogues, the passage Deut. 31:6 assumed this shape.” Also see Simon J.
Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Van Soest, 1961), p.
56; and Gerhard Kittel, TDNT, vol. 1, p. 465.

1 1 Ernst Werner, The Sacred Bridge (London: D. Dobson, 1959), p. 57. Compare Michel,
Hebräer, p. 333.
 Practical Considerations in 13:1–6
Pastors living next door to the church building often receive visits from idle wanderers who
look for a quick handout of money, food, or clothing. Should the pastor supply the necessities of life
and show hospitality to the outcasts of society? Scripture teaches that the apostles did not think that
it was right “to neglect the ministry of the Word of God” to take care of the needy (Acts 6:2). They
appointed seven men and turned the responsibility of caring for the poor over to them.
Society today differs remarkably from that of the first century when prisoners could freely
receive visitors. These prisoners depended on visitors to supply them with their daily needs. Today
this is no longer the case. Certainly we should still visit prisoners. However, we ought to extend and
expand the concept prisoner to include the shut-ins and the elderly who are confined to a bed, a
hospital room, or a private home. These people welcome visits, treasure moments of fellowship, and
are thankful for the attention they receive.
And last, in a world saturated with sex, the Christian who lives by the commandment “You shall
not commit adultery” appears to be out of touch with reality. Not so. When God created man and
woman, he set the rules for marital relations. And these rules have not been invalidated. God wants
his people to make his commandment known in the society in which he has placed them. The
apostles faced a sexually perverted world when they began to preach the gospel of salvation. They
faithfully preached and taught the rules for wholesome living. That is one of the reasons that we
read so much about marriage in the New Testament, for God’s Word transformed society in the first
century. It will do so again in our age. Keep the commandment, and live a pure and wholesome life!

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:1–6

Verse 2
φιλοξενίας—this noun and the preceding φιλαδελφία are related, for both have the same base
as φίλος. Hospitality is the practical result of brotherly love. The genitive case depends on the main
verb.
μὴ ἐπιλανθάνεσθε—the present middle imperative preceded by the negative particle μή
discloses that the readers of the epistle had become lax in showing hospitality. They no longer
provided shelter for the traveler.
ἔλαθόν τινες ξενίσαντες—a Greek idiom that reveals a transposition of words in p 413 which
the main idea is conveyed in the participle and the secondary thought in the verb. The phrase stands
for λαθόντες ἐξένισαν.12

Verse 3
μιμνῄσκεσθε—the present middle imperative governs the genitive case of τῶν δεσμίων (the
prisoners). Verbs of forgetting and remembering take a genitive case as direct object.
ἐν σώματι—because of the absence of the definite article, the author does not intimate that he
refers to the members of the body of Christ. Rather he is thinking of the physical bodies of
believers.

Verse 4
ἐν πᾶσιν—this adjective can be either masculine or neuter in the dative plural. Even though the

2 2 Bengel, Gnomon, vol. 5, p. 412. Also consult A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek
New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 551.
neuter fits the context (“in all respects”),13 translators prefer the masculine (“by all”).
ὁ θεός—these words appear last in the sentence to receive emphasis.

Verse 5
ἀφιλάργυρος—a compound verbal adjective derived from ἀ (not), φίλος (friendly), and
ἄργυρος (silver).
οὐ μή σε ἀνῶ—in this particular line five negatives appear. The Greek cannot express the idea
any more forcefully. In English the lines from the well-known hymn “How Firm a Foundation”
come close: “That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake, I’ll never, no never, no never
forsake!”

Verse 6
ὥστε—with the accusative ἡμᾶς as subject of the present infinitive λέγειν, this is a result clause.
οὐ φοβηθήσομαι—in the future passive indicative from φοβέω (I fear), this form means “I shall
not be afraid” in the durative sense.

p 414
D. Ecclesiastical Duties
13:7–17

7 Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and
imitate their faith. 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
9 Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings. It is good for our hearts to be strengthened by
grace, not by ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those who eat them. 10 We have an altar from
which those who minister at the tabernacle have no right to eat.
11 The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering, but the bodies
are burned outside the camp. 12 And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy
through his own blood. 13 Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore. 14 For here
we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come.
15 Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that
confess his name. 16 And do not forget to do good and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God is
pleased.
17 Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an
account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.

1. Remember Your Leaders

13:7–8
Three times in this chapter the author stresses the word leaders: “remember your leaders” (v. 7),
“obey your leaders” (v. 17), and “greet all your leaders” (v. 24). In the first instance, the concept
leadership is related to Jesus Christ himself.
7. Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of
their way of life and imitate their faith. 8. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and
forever.
The author of Hebrews employs the verb Paul uses when he writes, “Remember Jesus Christ,

3 3 R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of
James (Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), p. 471.
raised from the dead, descended from David” (II Tim. 2:8). The verb means “call back to mind that
which you know about a person.” The writer exhorts his people to think of those leaders whom
death has taken away. The expression leader is rather broad and somewhat vague, so that it fails to
contribute anything to our understanding of the historical background of the Epistle to the
Hebrews.14 The word itself gives no assurance that the author had apostles in mind. That
probability, however, is not excluded. Whether the author referred to Paul and Peter is speculation.
What we do know is that the leaders “spoke the word of God” to the people. They were, then,
preachers of the gospel of Jesus Christ and had been instrumental in building the church, that is, the
body of Christ. These founding fathers had passed away, but the readers still remembered their
labors.
The next command is to “consider the outcome of their way of life.” The verb consider actually
means to “look at again and again,” to “observe carefully.”15 The author urges the people to look
attentively at the lives these leaders lived and at the totality, that is, the result, of their lives.
“Observe how they closed a well-spent life” (MLB). Look at their lives from beginning to end!
And the third command follows: “Imitate their faith.” The writer wishes to leave the impression
that these leaders were to be considered heroes of faith, similar to those listed in chapter 11. Follow
in their footsteps; perform deeds of faith, and speak words of faith. We are not told whether these
leaders suffered martyrdom. That is not the point. The readers of the epistle must imitate their faith.
Faith is all-important. “We more easily contemplate p 415 and admire the happy death of godly men
than imitate the faith by which they have attained to it.”16
In this fast-changing world, nothing seems dependable and permanent. Leaders come, and
leaders go. One leader, however, is unchangeable: Jesus Christ. Says the author, “Jesus Christ is the
same yesterday and today and forever.” More sermons have been preached on this text than on any
other verse from Hebrews, so that this verse almost has attained confessional status in the church.
First, note that the writer uses both names, “Jesus” and “Christ.” The name Jesus embraces the
work and word of God’s Son on earth. He has come to save his people from their sin. The name
Christ is the official title that expresses the divinity of the Son. The double name occurs only three
times in Hebrews (10:10; 13:8, 21).
Next, not only Christ’s divinity but also his changelessness the author explains in the first
chapter of his epistle. For instance, quoting Psalm 102:27, he says, “But you remain the same, and
your years will never end” (1:12; and see 7:24).
Furthermore, note the sequence of time: past, present, and future. The term yesterday relates to
the mediatorial work of Jesus on earth, proclaimed and confirmed to the readers by those who heard
him (2:3). The expression today refers to the intercessory work Jesus performs in heaven, where he
represents the believer in God’s presence (Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25; 9:24). And the word forever
pertains to the priesthood of Christ. He is priest forever (5:6; 6:20; 7:17, 21, 24, 28).
For the readers of the epistle, Jesus is the same. That implies faith on the part of the believers,
for they can depend on him because he remains true to himself. He is the first and the last, the one
“who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty” (Rev. 1:8).

4 4 Clement of Rome and the writer of Hermas feature the expression (with a slight variation)
in their writings. Consult I Clem. 1:3; 21:6; 44:5, Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1 (LCL); and Hermas,
Visions, 2.2.6; 3.5.1; 3.9.7, Apostolic Fathers, vol. 2 (LCL).

5 5 Bauer, p. 54.

B LB The Modern Language Bible

6 6 Bengel, Gnomon, vol. 4, p. 495.

 Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:7–8

Verse 7
τῶν ἡγουμένων—the definite article designates the group of leaders. The present tense of the
middle participle (from ἡγέομαι, I lead) expresses the function of the leader. The noun ἡγόυμενος
refers to a ruler (Sir. 17:17), prince (Sir. 41:17), governor (Acts 7:10), military leader (I Macc.
9:30), and spiritual leader (Acts 15:22).
οἵτινες—as an indefinite relative pronoun, the word connotes cause and description.
ἐλάλησαν—the aorist tense indicates action accomplished in the past. The verb λαλέω (I speak)
depicts the mode of speech; the verb λέγω (I speak), its content.
ἀναθεωροῦντες—dependent on the main verb μιμεῖσθε (present middle imperative), this
present active participle assumes the imperative mood. The compound p 416 can be either directive
(to look up) or intensive (to look at again). The intensive is preferred.

Verse 8
ὁ αὐτός—with the definite article the intensive personal pronoun in the attributive position
means “the same.” The verb to be is understood in this short sentence.

2. Avoid Strange Teaching

13:9–11
At first glance, the exhortations and admonitions in this segment seem rather unrelated. However,
the author reveals a definite sequence. Leaders proclaimed the word of God; they taught the gospel.
And that word is as abiding as Jesus Christ is changeless. Therefore, do not depart from the doctrine
of Christ.
9. Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings. It is good for our hearts to be
strengthened by grace, not by ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those who eat them.
Some of the readers were susceptible to teaching that was different from and contrary to the
Word of God. Influenced by that teaching, they were “carried away,” as the author says. We assume
that this development had not yet become a great concern, for this is the only reference to it in the
entire epistle. But because of the danger of drifting away from the moorings of the Christian faith,
the writer warns the people against “all kinds of strange teachings.” He does not say what these
teachings are. However, from other parts of the New Testament, we learn that in the second half of
the first century, traveling philosophers were influencing the people with teachings opposed to the
apostolic doctrine. Paul warns the Ephesian elders to be on guard against savage wolves. Says he,
“Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples
after them” (Acts 20:30). And he rebukes the Galatians for “turning to a different gospel—which is
really no gospel at all” (1:6–7). Then, he admonishes the Colossians to avoid being taken “captive
through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic
principles of this world rather than on Christ” (2:8; compare Eph. 4:14). Moreover, these Colossians
were told by some philosophers to observe self-imposed rules on food, drink, festivals, celebrations,
worship, and discipline. Paul concludes, “These [rules] are all destined to perish with use, because
they are based on human commands and teachings” (2:22).17 These teachings, therefore, were
varied and of foreign origin. To interpret the verse as a reference only to p 417 Jewish law is
unwarranted and contrary to the remainder of the verse that mentions “ceremonial foods.”18
The contrast in the last half of the verse is between the spiritual and the material. “It is good for

7 7 For additional references to false teachings, consult Eph. 5:6; I Tim. 1:3–7; 4:1–3; 6:3–5;
II Tim. 2:18; 4:3–4; Titus 3:9; II Peter 2:1–3, 9–22; II John 7–10; Jude 5–16; Rev. 2:2, 6, 14–16,
20–24.
our hearts to be strengthened by grace, not by ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those who
eat them.” Grace is placed over against foods. Even though the term grace is not defined, we are not
amiss in understanding it as the grace of God. Throughout his epistle the writer has spoken of this
divine grace (2:9; 4:16; 10:29). He has even explained the term in the context of living peaceful and
holy lives (12:14–15). The grace of God provides inner strength for the believer and benefits him
spiritually.
But teachers of a strange philosophy think that by adhering to strict dietary regulations they are
able to advance spiritually. The New International Version has rendered the last part of the verse
somewhat freely, “by ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those who eat them.” The original
has only the noun foods.19 Nevertheless, the general context allows for the explanatory adjective
ceremonial. Also, the original has the reading “which are of no value to those who walk.” That is,
those who adhere to food regulations receive no benefit from them. And no wonder. Paul tells the
Romans who are passing judgment on one another regarding eating habits, “Do not allow what you
consider good to be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and
drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (14:16–17). To the Corinthians he
writes, “But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if
we do” (I Cor. 8:8). Philip Edgcumbe Hughes summarizes the matter cogently: “Food goes into the
stomach for the strengthening of the body; but only grace strengthens the heart, that is, the vital
center of man’s being and personality and the source of his conduct and character.”20
10. We have an altar from which those who minister at the tabernacle have no right to eat.
If in verse 9 the emphasis is on that which is spiritual, so much more is this the case in verse 10.
The author of Hebrews speaks figuratively when he uses the word altar. It has a connotation that is
different from the ordinary meaning of a structure made out of stones. In a sense, we do exactly the
same thing when we say that at a meeting held in a stadium the evangelist extended the altar call.
Now the term altar call in that setting has nothing to do with the altar. Rather it describes people
who at the invitation of the evangelist come forward and make a decision to commit their lives to
Christ. p 418
For the writer, the altar is the cross on which Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice to God.21 And
to the Christian the cross is a symbol that represents the completed work of redemption. As the
author of Hebrews repeatedly confirms, Christ offered his sacrifice once for all (9:25, 26, 28; 10:9,
12, 14). The clause we have an altar, then, stands for the cross, which symbolizes the redemption
Christ offers his people.
The second part of the verse—“from which those who minister at the tabernacles have no right
to eat”—is open to interpretation. First, the reference is to the Levitical priests who were told to
take the “hides, flesh and offal” of a bull and a goat and burn them outside the camp (Lev. 16:27).
But this reference is too restrictive, for the phrase “those who minister at the tabernacle” seems to

8 8 F. F. Bruce writes, “The strange teaching which laid such insistence on food was probably
some form of syncretistic gnosis, perhaps with Essene or quasi-Essene affinities.” See his Epistle to
the Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1964), p. 398.

9 9 Johannes Behm, TDNT, vol. 1, p. 643; Hans Kropatschek, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 268.

0 0 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1977), p. 574. His italics.

1 1 A. Snell, “We Have an Altar,” Reformed Theological Review 23 (1964): 16–23. John Owen
asserts, “The altar which we now have is Christ alone, and his sacrifice. For he was both priest,
altar, and sacrifice, all in himself” (his italics). See his Exposition of Hebrews, 7 vols. in 4
(Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace, 1960), vol. 7, p. 438.
include all Jewish worshipers who came to the tabernacle. Note that the writer says at, not in, the
tabernacle. Next, Christians could be accused of having no altar and hence no real religion.22 But
after the destruction, the Jews no longer had an altar either. Nevertheless, the writer of Hebrews can
say, “We have an altar, that is, spiritually speaking, the cross of Jesus Christ.” Then, does the author
intimate that only Christians can partake of the holy elements at the celebration of Communion,
from which Jews are excluded? If this is true, we in effect make the Christian communion table the
equivalent of the altar. Certainly the believer partakes spiritually of the Lord’s body and blood when
he eats and drinks the holy elements. And the identification of the celebration of the Lord’s Supper
with the altar is most attractive. By doing so, however, we affirm that we have a visible and tangible
altar. This is not what the author of Hebrews means. He places the sacrificial work of Christ over
against the animal sacrifices of Old Testament times. In 13:10, when we consider it in the light of
the entire epistle, the writer’s intent is to show the superiority of Christ’s work to that of the Aaronic
priesthood.23
11. The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering,
but the bodies are burned outside the camp.
Repetition is one of the trademarks of Hebrews. In earlier chapters the author writes about the
Day of Atonement when the high priest sacrifices a bull and a goat and takes their blood into the
inner sanctuary of the tabernacle (5:3; 7:27; 9:7). In his description of the duties performed on the
Day of Atonement, the writer explains the purpose of these sacrifices. These p 419 animals were
slaughtered as a sin offering for the people. The removal of sin is the dominant feature of the
religious duties the high priest and his helpers carried out on that special day.
The high priest offered a “bull for his own sin offering to make atonement for himself and his
household” (Lev. 16:6). Then he sacrificed one goat as a sin offering for the people, and the other
goat he sent away “into the desert as a scapegoat” (vv. 10, 22). He sprinkled the blood of the bull on
the ark inside the Most Holy Place for his own sin and the blood of the goat for the sin of the
people.
Sent into the desert, the live goat carried all the sins of the people (v. 22). The man who released
the goat had to wash his clothes and take a bath before entering the camp (v. 26). The bodies of the
bull and the goat had to be taken outside the camp and burned (v. 27). The person who burned the
hides, flesh, and offal of these animals had to wash his clothes and take a bath before he could
return to camp (v. 28). All this was done to point out that sin pollutes. The sacrifices themselves
were considered polluted, even though the blood of these animals was sprinkled on the ark in the
Most Holy Place. Hence, the priests were not allowed to eat the flesh of these sacrifices because
these animals represented sin.
The implied contrast is that the sacrifice of Christ on the cross has removed sin once for all for
all his people. By his death he ended the ceremonial rituals of the Day of Atonement, because he
entered the heavenly sanctuary to represent the believer in the presence of God.

Practical Considerations in 13:9–11

Any gardener knows that after he has prepared his garden and has sown vegetable or flower
seeds, the weed seeds germinate, grow, and develop much faster. Weeds flourish while the garden
plants cope with setbacks of weather and disease.

2 2 Irenaeus, Heresies 4.17–18. Also consult Bruce, Hebrews, p. 400.

3 3 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity, 1981), p.
781. Roman Catholic scholars identify the altar with the celebration of the Eucharist. Also, Michel
advocates that the words eat, body, and altar can best be understood within the context of the
Eucharistic liturgy. See his Hebräer, p. 343.
 This simple illustration aptly portrays the religious scene today. Evangelical churches are
growing, but their growth seems insignificant compared with that of sects and cults. Sects have
often been called “the unpaid bills of the Christian church.” They prosper and develop; nothing
seems to hinder them: they have their origin in Christianity, but they refuse to have anything to do
with the church. Their message is no longer the direct teaching of the Old and New Testaments.
Additional teaching or “revelation” is not only central; it also serves to reinterpret the Bible and is
even called Scripture in some instances. Cults, of course, have their roots in movements other than
the Christian faith. Adherents teach philosophies and modes of life that are unrelated and foreign to
the Christian. Therefore, the admonition of the author of Hebrews is as relevant today as when he
wrote it: “Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings.”
What then is basic? God’s revealed Word stands forever. As Peter says, it is “the living and
enduring word of God” (I Peter 1:23) that is preached. Furthermore, throughout the centuries the
Holy Spirit has led the church in understanding God’s p 420 truth revealed in Scripture. Differences
do exist and doctrinal emphases vary, but those believers who hold to the historic Christian faith
confess that their faith is rooted in God’s abiding and changeless Word. Christians form the body of
the Lord Jesus Christ and find their common unity in him. Anticipating differences of opinion in the
church, Paul writes to the Philippians and to us, “All of us who are mature should take such a view
of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you” (3:15).

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:9–11

Verse 9
ξέναις—as an adjective in the dative plural modifying the noun διδαχαῖς (teachings), it relates
to something that is new, in the sense of foreign (see Acts 17:18). The dative case is the dative of
means.
μὴ παραφέρεσθε—the present passive imperative preceded by the negative particle μή shows
that some people were indeed being carried away by strange teachings. The present tense is
iterative; that is, the phenomenon occurred more often.
οἱ περιπατοῦντες—from the verb περιπατέω (I walk), the present active participle with the
definite article represents a group of people other than the readers of the epistle. In context the term
is idiomatic and can best be paraphrased in translation.

Verse 11
ζῴων—this noun in the genitive plural (from ζῷον, animal) is preceded by the relative pronoun
ὧν. The word itself is unique in referring to the animals (bull and goat) that were sacrificed on the
Day of Atonement.
περί—the sequence of the prepositions is noteworthy in this verse: περί (for; almost in the sense
of “for the sake”), εἰς (into), and διά (by, through [agency]).
κατακαίεται—the use of the compound verb is to stress the intensive idea (to consume, burn
up). The present tense in this verb with the preceding εἰσφερέται is a literary device of the author
(compare 9:6–7).

3. Strive for Holiness

13:12–16
Paragraph divisions are somewhat difficult to determine, as a cursory comparison of translations
reveals. Whatever the division, the flow of thought from verses 9–16 is continuous. I have separated
verses 9–11 from 12–16 to emphasize the theme of holiness.
 12. And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his
own blood.
On the basis of the preceding verse the author of Hebrews makes a comparison. He compares
the implied purpose of the sacrifices made on the Day p 421 of Atonement to the suffering Jesus
experienced on the cross. As he explains in earlier parts of his epistle, Jesus’ sacrifice is once for all
and incomparably superior. To speak, then, of a parallel in these verses is only partly accurate; only
the phrase outside the city gate is equivalent to “outside the camp.” The comparison in general
points to Jesus’ work to make his people holy.
The writer assumes that the readers are fully acquainted with the gospel. In his epistle he seldom
alludes to Jesus’ life on earth (5:7–8; 10:12; 12:2). Here he describes the place where Jesus suffered
—outside the city of Jerusalem. He writes that Jesus suffered; he implies the agony Jesus endured
on Calvary’s cross.
The high priest annually entered the Most Holy Place, sprinkled animal blood, and atoned for
the sin of the people. Jesus became sin for us (II Cor. 5:21), bore the curse that rested upon us (Gal.
3:13), and according to the law was condemned to die outside the city gate (John 19:17–18).24 For
instance, the son of the Israelite woman who blasphemed the name of the Lord had to be taken
outside the camp, and the people were to stone him to death (Lev. 24:11–16, 23; also see Num.
15:35). Achan was taken outside the camp to the valley of Achor where the Israelites stoned him
(Josh. 7:24–26; cf. Acts 7:58).25 Because of man’s sin, Jesus had to suffer outside the city gate
where he endured God’s wrath.
Outside the city gate of Jerusalem, Jesus paid for our sins by suffering the agony of hell on the
cross when he cried, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34).
Through the shedding of his blood, Jesus removed the sin of his people and made them holy. That
is, by fulfilling the stipulations concerning the removal of sin on the Day of Atonement (Lev.
16:26–28), Jesus cleansed his people and sanctified them. The author of Hebrews briefly
summarizes the purpose of Jesus’ suffering: “to make the people holy through his own blood.” In
many places he has explained this point and therefore has no need to elaborate on it now (see 2:11;
10:10, 14; 12:14).
13. Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore. 14. For here we
do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come.
Statement after statement in this particular section is conclusive (“and so,” v. 12; “then,” v. 13;
“for,” v. 14; “therefore,” v. 15). On the basis of this teaching p 422 in general and the message of the
preceding verses in particular, the author exhorts the readers to go to Jesus “outside the camp.”
First, we look at the exhortation from a Jewish point of view. The Jewish Christian must leave
the family structure in which he learned the precepts and commandments, the ceremonies and
traditions, the prejudice and pride of the Jew. He is asked to go to Jesus upon whom the Jewish
people invoked God’s curse by hanging him on a cross (Deut. 21:23). To go to one who bears the
curse of God is to share “the disgrace he bore.”26 By choosing for Christ, the Jew rejects Judaism

4 4 If Golgotha is located at the present-day cemetery where, according to tradition, Jesus was
crucified, we can see an interesting confirmation of the parallel “outside the city gate” and “outside
the camp.” Michel, Hebräer, p. 345. However, we cannot be absolutely certain about the location of
Golgotha.

5 5 Bruce, in his commentary on Hebrews (p. 403), makes the interesting observation that
because the people worshiped the golden calf, sin had defiled the camp of the Israelites. Moses,
therefore, would pitch a tent outside the camp where God would meet him and speak to him face to
face (Exod. 33:7–11). Hughes also mentions this incident. See his Hebrews, p. 581. And consult
Helmut Koester, “Outside the Camp: Hebrews 13:9–14, ” HTR 55 (1962): 299–315.

6 6 Colin Brown says that the author “sees a heightened symbolism in the crucifixion of Jesus
and thus faces expulsion, alienation, and at times persecution. The author of Hebrews reminds the
readers of the suffering, public insult, and persecution they had endured in earlier days when they
became Christians (10:33).
Next, every reader is exhorted to go to Jesus who was cursed by God, because through Jesus we
have access to God.27 We identify with him, for through him we are made holy (Isa. 52:1l; Ezek.
20:41; II Cor. 6:17). He bore disgrace to set us free from the guilt of sin and to remove the curse
from us. That means that the world of sin vents its hatred against us for going to Jesus (John 17:14).
Christians are not taken out of the context of a sinful world but are placed in it to be witnesses for
Christ. In his list of the heroes of faith, the writer notes that Moses “regarded disgrace for the sake
of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his
reward” (11:26). Christians bear the name of Christ and are commanded by him to deny themselves,
take up their cross, and follow him (Matt. 10:38; 16:24). The Christian keeps his eye of faith fixed
on Jesus (12:2). He knows that this present world will not remain unchanged, but will pass away.
“For here we do not have an enduring city.” The words echo an earlier statement of the author
when he discussed those people who lived by faith but who did not see the promises fulfilled in
their lifetime. “And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth” (11:13). They
longed for a better country, a heavenly country, much the same as Abraham looked forward to a
heavenly city (11:10; and see 12:22). Thus, the writer repeats his former remarks, by saying
conclusively, “We are looking for the city that is to come.” Do Christians live in an ethereal world
detached from the pressing realities of everyday life? Certainly not! Christians are to be “the salt of
the earth” and “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:13, 14). Wherever God in his providence has placed
them, they are to be Christ’s ambassadors (II Cor. 5:20). They are to represent Christ by boldly
speaking the Word he has given them. Yet they know the brevity of life and the fleeting nature of
this p 423 world. Therefore, they look and long for their eternal dwelling: “a city that is to come.”
15. Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit
of lips that confess his name.
First in the sentence stands the phrase through Jesus. That is significant. Because of the once-
for-all sacrifice of Jesus, the need for offering sacrifices to God had ended. Are Christians, then,
without sacrifices and without a priest to present these offerings to God? No.
We are exhorted to go to Jesus outside the camp. He is our eternal, faithful, and merciful high
priest. He represents us in the presence of God, and he prays for us. To come to God the Father we
must go through the Son (John 14:6). Set free from the burden of guilt and sin, we want to express
our thanks to God. This we do through Jesus. We offer to God not the material sacrifices that Christ
made superfluous but the continual confession of praise and thanks. Whereas Jesus offered himself
once, we present our praises continually. Our entire life ought to be a song of adulation expressed in
words and deeds.
The Israelites expressed their thankfulness by offering cakes of bread to the Lord as a sacrifice
of thanksgiving (Lev. 7:12). But Christians show by a dedicated life of obedience their thankfulness
to God. The Ten Commandments are not a set of dos and don’ts; rather, for the Christian, they are
rules for thankful living.
How then do we live before God? Paul and Peter have something to say on this subject:

Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices,
holy and pleasing to God. [Rom. 12:1]
Give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus. [I Thess. 5:18]

outside Jerusalem.” See NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 965. Also consult David Hill, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 29;
and Joachim Jeremias, TDNT, vol. 6, p. 922.

7 7 F. W. Grosheide, De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus (Kampen: Kok,

1955), p. 314.
You also, like living stones, are built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual
sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. [I Peter 2:5]
The author of Hebrews specifies what the sacrifice of praise should be: “the fruit of lips that
confess his name.” The expression fruit of lips comes from Hosea 14:2, where the prophet urges the
people of Israel to return to the Lord and pray, “Forgive all our sins and receive us graciously, that
we may offer the fruit of our lips.” And the phrase confess his name may be taken from the
Septuagint translation of Psalm 54:6, “I will praise [confess] your name, O LORD.” God reveals
himself in his name, and therefore his name is revelation. The psalmist makes God’s revelation
known to the people. Similarly the author of Hebrews intimates that a life of praise should be a
continual confession of God’s name.
16. And do not forget to do good and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God is
pleased. p 424
Living a holy life consists of loving the Lord with heart, soul, and mind, and of loving one’s
neighbor as oneself. The early Christians illustrated their love for the Lord by devoting themselves
to the teaching of the gospel, the worship services, communion, and prayer (Acts 2:42). But they
also showed their love for their fellow man by sharing everything they had (Acts 4:32). In fact, they
took care of the poor so that “there were no needy persons among them” (v. 34). Love for the Lord
has its counterpart in love for the neighbor. These two go hand in hand. When we say that we love
the Lord, we must be ready to help our neighbors in need. This is what the Macedonian believers
did. Says Paul, “Entirely on their own, they urgently pleaded with us for the privilege of sharing in
this service [showing generosity] to the saints” (II Cor. 8:3–4).
The readers of the Epistle to the Hebrews had neglected their ministry to the needy (see also
13:2). Praising God in the local worship service they observed, even though some people stayed
away (10:25). But praise and love were not always put to practice in relieving the needs of the poor
(6:10; 10:33–34). The writer tells the readers “to do good and to share with others.” He sees these
deeds of love and mercy as sacrifices of praise. And with these sacrifices God is pleased.
When the author says that God is pleased with good deeds, he reminds us of his description of
Enoch’s life. Enoch was commended for his intimate fellowship with God (11:5). Also we are
reminded of our duties to care for the needy, for if we keep the royal law—“Love your neighbor as
yourself” (James 2:8)—we do well and please God.

Practical Considerations in 13:12–16

“Do good,” says the writer of Hebrews. Do we have to be reminded to do good? Doing good
ought to be the Christian’s way of life. But, sad to say, at times we forget, and our worship becomes
lip service and not life commitment. If our Christian religion is nothing more than talk, it is dead.
Words and deeds are two sides of the same coin. God wants us to praise him with both lips and life.
In a word game, arranging the letters g o o d is relatively simple. The same set of letters,
however, can also be divided into two words that read, “Go do!” That means translating the word
into deed. I must go and do to be good in the sight of God.
When I attended elementary school, the teacher used to mark my papers with the comment
good. Of course, that meant I had learned my lesson well but not well enough to receive the
comment excellent. Scripture does not use that remark.28 When the servants appeared before the
master with ten and four talents respectively, they heard him say, “Well done, you good and faithful
servant!” (Matt. 25:21, 23, italics added). Being good Christians means that we look for
opportunities to do the things that please God and that bring joy to our fellow man. p 425

8 8 Herman Veldkamp, Zondagskinderen, 2 vols. (Franeker: Wever, n.d.), vol. 1, p. 32.

 Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:12–16

Verse 12
ἁγιάσῃ—the aorist active subjunctive from the verb ἀγιάζω (I make holy) has been occasioned
by τὰ ἅγια (the Most Holy Place) in the preceding verse. The subjunctive stands in a purpose
clause. The aorist is constative.
τὸν λαόν—this is the last time in the epistle that the author uses the expression the people. In
the thirteen times it occurs, it refers to God’s people.

Verse 15
οὖν—this inferential conjunction is “absent from several early and important witnesses. It is
difficult to decide whether copyists added the word, which seems to be needed at this point, or
whether it was accidentally omitted in transcription.”29
αἰνέσεως—the noun derived from the verb αἰνέω (I praise) shows by its nominative singular
ending αἴνεσις that this is an action noun that denotes progress. This feature is amplified by the
prepositional phrase διὰ παντός (continually).
ὁμολογούντων—as a present active participle, the word stands in apposition to χειλέων (lips),
from which it takes the genitive case. It is followed by the dative case τῷ ὀνόματι (his name),
which is the direct object of the participle. The difference between the simple verb ὁμολογέω and
the compound verb ἐξομολογέω is insignificant.

Verse 16
τῆς δὲ εὐποι ί̈ας καὶ κοινωνίας—although a few manuscripts have a definite article before
κοινωνίας, the preferred reading omits it. Because the article is not repeated, the second noun is
descriptive of the first.30
τοιαύταις—an adjective in the dative plural feminine, describing quality. The dative expresses
cause.31
ὁ θεός—note the position of the noun. It stands last for emphasis.

4. Obey Your Leaders

13:17
This verse has no connection with the preceding verses. We need to go back to verse 7 where the
same expression your leaders occurs. And in verse 24 the writer once more employs that
expression.
17. Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men
who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that
would be of no advantage to you. p 426
In this particular verse, the author emphasizes three points.
a. Obedience demanded

9 9 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London and New
York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 676.

0 0 Henry E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament
(New York: Macmillan, 1957), p. 147.

1 1 Robertson, Grammar, p. 532.

Those leaders who had spoken the Word of God in earlier days were no longer present. They must
be remembered for their conduct and faith, says the author of Hebrews (13:7). Successive leaders
have taken their place. The writer is not interested in the status of these leaders—he gives no hint
whether they were elders, overseers, preachers, or teachers. Rather, he asks the reader to obey them.
A lack of obedience prevailed among some of the readers. Note, for example, the author’s
admonition not to “be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings” (13:9). The leaders needed
help and encouragement. Thus the appeal to obey them and to submit to their authority is timely. Of
course, the readers could question whether this authority was self-imposed by the leaders or
delegated to them by Christ. If a leader is a dedicated minister of the Word of God, he proves
thereby that Christ has given him authority. And if Christ has entrusted him with the task of
assuming leadership, the people need not question his authority (Acts 20:28; Eph. 4:11; I Peter 5:1–
3).
b. Care provided
The leaders have taken their God-given task seriously. “They keep watch over you.” They literally
lost sleep over the spiritual welfare of the believers. They know the word God spoke to the prophet
Ezekiel: “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; so hear the word I speak
and give them warning from me. When I say to a wicked man, ‘You will surely die,’ and you do not
warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man
will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood” (3:17–18).
The leaders stay with the congregation, are vigilant in caring for the members, nurture them
spiritually, ward off deceitful attacks, and administer discipline when necessary. Writes John Calvin,
“The heavier the burden they bear, the more honour they deserve; for the more labour any one
undertakes for our sake, and the more difficulty and danger he incurs for us, the greater are our
obligations to him.”32 These leaders are accountable to God, for he is their overseer. That is not to
say that the members are not held accountable. Certainly they are. They, too, are told to work
together harmoniously so that the task of the leaders is a joy and not a burden.
c. Joy experienced
Throughout his epistle the author has stressed the corporate responsibility of the believers. To
mention one example, he exhorts the readers to encourage one another, “so that none of you may be
hardened by sin’s deceitfulness” (3:13). In a similar fashion, as a body they are to respond to their
leaders, for then there is joy in the interpersonal relationships in the church. They receive the Lord’s
blessings by obeying the leaders God has given them. If they all respond favorably the work of their
leaders becomes increasingly joyful.
When the members refuse to obey and fail to respect their leaders, the work in the church
becomes burdensome. The members ought to realize p 427 that neither they nor the leaders own the
church. The church belongs to Jesus Christ, to whom the readers are responsible. Should they make
the work and life of the leaders difficult, they would be the losers. The leaders can testify before the
Lord that they warned the wayward person who chose not to turn from his sin. That person will die
in his sin, but the leaders are free from blame (Ezek. 3:19). Ultimately, then, the Lord avenges and
judges his people (Heb. 10:30; Deut. 32:35–36; Ps. 135:14). Pastorally and prudently the writer of
Hebrews observes that a sad instead of a glad report on the spiritual conduct of the readers will not
be advantageous to them.

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:17

2 2 John Calvin, Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), p. 353.
 Verse 17
ὑπείκετε—with πείθεσθε this form is a present imperative. It derives from the verb ὑπείκω (I
submit to authority) that appears only here in the entire New Testament. The verb is classical Greek.
ἀγρυπνοῦσιν—this verb from ἀγρυπνέω (I keep awake, keep watch) occurs in the Gospels
(Mark 13:33; Luke 21:36) and Paul’s epistles (Eph. 6:18; as a noun in II Cor. 6:5; 11:27). The verb
describes an absence of sleep due to an alert mind.
ἀποδώσοντες—preceded by the participle ὡς and the noun λόγον (account), this future active
participle of ἀποδίδωμι (I render) denotes purpose.33
ἵνα ποιῶσιν—here is an instance of result instead of purpose.

E. Prayers and Benedictions

13:18–21

18 Pray for us. We are sure that we have a clear conscience and desire to live honorably in every way. 19 I
particularly urge you to pray so that I may be restored to you soon.
20 May the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our
Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, 21 equip you with everything good for doing his will, and may
he work in us what is pleasing to him, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

The conclusion to the epistle is rather personal. Earlier, in two succeeding sentences, the author
refers to himself in the first person singular—“And what more shall I say? I do not have time”
(11:32). Now he uses the first person plural, as well as the singular, and requests prayer.
18. Pray for us. We are sure that we have a clear conscience and desire to live honorably in
every way. 19. I particularly urge you to pray so that I may be restored to you soon.
Apparently the writer was one of the leaders in the church that receives p 428 his epistle.
Tension between him and the readers developed, perhaps because of his teachings about the
priesthood of Christ. These doctrines were hard for Jewish believers to accept, for they were
accustomed to thinking of the priesthood in terms of the duties of the Levitical priests only.
Probably the author’s direct warnings against apostasy were not readily heeded by some members
of the church. The author has put his teachings and admonitions in an epistle addressed to the
readers. He realizes that the letter itself will not remove tension. However, he reduces it by putting
himself in debt to them.
a. Prayer
The request for prayer is similar to those in Paul’s epistles and fits into the spiritual climate of the
first century (Rom. 15:30; II Cor. 1:11–12; Eph. 6:19; Col. 4:3–4; I Thess. 5:25; II Thess. 3:1). The
writer places himself in the position of one who asks a favor. He knows that if the readers pray for
him, the bond of unity between himself and the recipients of his letter is strengthened. And if they
pray, they indicate that the message he conveys has been well received.
The first person plural in this verse can be understood literally. However, its close connection
with the next verse, where the first person singular is used, seems to favor the interpretation that we

3 3 Robertson feels that the participle “is as much cause as purpose.” See his Grammar, p.
1128. And Robert Hanna asserts that the participle “expresses a subjective motive, meaning ‘with
the thought that they must.’ ” See his Grammatical Aid to the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids:
Baker, 1983), p. 414.
and us should be understood editorially. That is, the author speaks about himself. Also, in the
broader context, he does not mention other leaders (but see 13:23).
b. Clear conscience
The original text has the word for, which links the request for prayer to the reason that prompted the
request. The sentence, then, is as follows: “Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear
conscience.” The writer is trying to say to the readers that he is aware of their uneasiness about his
instruction and exhortations, but he himself bears no ill will. He can understand that some of the
readers are not pleased with abolishing Levitical precepts because of the tradition of the fathers. But
in his own heart the writer is persuaded that his conscience is clear. He has dedicated himself to the
service of the Lord and therefore he desires to live honorably in every respect. He wants to help the
readers and be of service to them as a faithful pastor. In short he is saying, “Trust me.” The readers
can be assured that their pastor is not leading them in the wrong direction with his teachings about
priesthood and covenant.
Nowhere in the New Testament is the break with the traditions of the Old Testament era spelled
out so clearly as in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Whether the writer is too progressive in his teachings
may have been a relevant point of discussion among the readers whose religious and cultural roots
are in Jewish tradition. Certainly the letter writer is no traditionalist who upholds the practices of
the past. His task is to explain God’s progressive revelation to the readers. He knows that his
pastoral work has been and is performed honorably. He expresses the desire that he may be
permitted in the near future to continue his pastoral duties among the readers. As he sees his
relationship to the readers, his conduct has been above reproach.
c. Special request
Once more the author asks the readers to pray for him. p 429 But now he makes a specific request:
“Pray that I may be restored to you soon.” The New International Version gives the reading “I
particularly urge you to pray.” But this translation is open to misunderstanding. For it could be
interpreted to mean that all people, particularly the writer, urge the readers to pray. The original,
however, expresses a repetitive idea in the sense of more: “I urge you all the more” (NASB) to pray
in my behalf. The writer intimates that he wishes more and more to urge communal prayer for their
eventual reunion. His desire is to be with the members of the church as soon as possible.
Where is the writer? What keeps him from visiting the readers? To these and similar questions
we have no answer; and we do well not to speculate. To put it differently, at one time the readers
knew exactly what the writer meant. With the passing of time the explanatory comments that were
needed to understand these personal remarks were lost. What is important, however, is that we
realize the significance of the author’s special request: he desires that the church ask God for a
speedy reunion of pastor and people. When this happens, the writer knows that the bond of peace
and harmony is strong. He prays for unity in the Lord. Hence he utters the pastoral benediction that
is unique, for it is a summary of many elements in his epistle (see 7:14, 16, 22; 9:12, 15; 11:5–6;
12:28; 13:16).
20. May the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back
from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, 21. equip you with everything
good for doing his will, and may he work in us what is pleasing to him, through Jesus Christ,
to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
In the immediately preceding verses (vv. 18–19), the author requests prayer for himself. Now he
offers a prayer for the people he addresses. What a moving prayer! The wealth of theology and
language in this benediction that virtually concludes his epistle compares favorably with the beauty
and fullness of the first few verses of the introduction with which the author begins his epistle. The
author is a literary artist and a masterful theologian.
In the first part (v. 20) of the benediction, note the following points:

B ASB New American Standard Bible

 a. “God of peace.” The writer puts the subject God first. He describes God as “the God of
peace.” That is meaningful, for he is the one who creates peace in the hearts and lives of people.
Peace comes from God. Note the author does not pray, “May the peace of God,” but “May the God
of peace.” God, then, is the peacemaker who is able to dispel distrust and dissent. And God grants
the gift of peace to his people, so that they in turn are able to effect peace among their fellow men.
Paul prays these words—“the God of peace”—rather frequently in benedictions at the conclusion of
his epistles (see Rom. 15:33; 16:20; II Cor. 13:11; Phil. 4:9; I Thess. 5:23; II Thess. 3:16). The
formula, therefore, seems to have been quite common in the early church.
b. “Brought back from the dead.” God brought Jesus back from the dead, says the author of
Hebrews. The doctrine of Jesus’ resurrection is fundamental p 430 to the Christian faith, for one of
the requirements for holding the office of apostle was to be a witness of the resurrection (Acts
1:22). In their preaching, testifying, and writing, the apostles proclaimed the resurrection of Jesus.
Even though Paul was not a disciple of Jesus, as were the other apostles, he encountered the
resurrected Jesus on the Damascus road. Therefore, in his writings Paul teaches the resurrection and
at the same time affirms his apostleship (see Gal. 1:1).
The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews mentions the resurrection of Jesus once, in the
benediction. Indirectly he includes this doctrine when he introduces the topic of Christ’s exaltation
at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven (1:3). He writes about the “great high priest who has gone
through the heavens” (4:14) and he supposes that the readers will understand that Jesus rose from
the dead and ascended to heaven. And in his summation of fundamental Christian doctrines, he lists
the resurrection of the dead (6:2). Last, he alludes to the possibility of God’s raising Isaac from the
dead (11:19) and the actuality of women receiving the dead who were raised to life (11:35). He
cannot claim to be a witness of Jesus’ resurrection. As a second-generation believer, he heard the
gospel from the immediate followers of Jesus (2:3). The author, then, briefly states that God raised
Jesus from the dead and links this reference to Jesus’ office.
c. “Shepherd of the sheep.” The words “the great Shepherd of the sheep” remind us of Jesus’
teaching that he is the good shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep (John 10:11; also see Isa.
63:11). In effect, the metaphor of the shepherd who dies for his sheep is equivalent to that of the
high priest who offers himself as a sacrifice for his people. Especially the adjective great is telling,
for the writer of Hebrews calls Jesus the great high priest (4:14). The two concepts, then,
complement each other, although as Guthrie observes, “There is a tender aspect to the shepherd
figure which is not as vivid in the high priest.”34 Peter depicts Jesus as the Chief Shepherd (I Peter
5:4). This great shepherd shed his blood and laid down his life for his sheep—in other words, his
people—to obtain for them eternal redemption and to establish with them the eternal covenant that
God had promised.
d. “Blood of the eternal covenant.” Through the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, God
announces his intention to establish an everlasting covenant with his people (Isa. 55:3; 61:8; Jer.
32:40; 50:5; Ezek. 16:60; 37:26). This covenant is everlasting because it is sealed in blood—to be
precise, the blood of the Messiah. In the messianic prophecy of Zion’s king who enters Jerusalem
on a donkey (Zech. 9:9; also see Matt. 21:5 and parallels), God promises his people deliverance
“because of the blood of my covenant” (Zech. 9:11).
Two major themes dominate the epistle: the high-priestly work of Christ, summarized in the
expression blood, and the covenant that is eternal. In this verse, once again and for the last time
these themes are highlighted. God’s p 431 covenant with his people will remain forever. That
covenant has been sealed with Christ’s blood which was shed once for all (9:26; 10:10).
e. “Our Lord Jesus.” These three words—four words in the original—appear last to receive all
the emphasis in the verse. A literal translation of the verse is, “Now the God of peace, who brought
up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even
Jesus our Lord” (NASB).
In addition to using the given name Jesus, which calls to mind the earthly ministry and

4 4 Guthrie, New Testament Theology, p. 388.

humanity of Christ, the author of Hebrews designates him “Lord” (2:3; 7:14). Although the title
Lord occurs infrequently in Hebrews, its use in the Christian world was common, for it served as a
brief confession of faith (for example, see I Cor. 12:3). In the benediction at the end of his epistle,
the author wants to emphasize the sovereignty of Jesus. As in the introduction where he briefly
points to the priestly and kingly offices of Christ (1:3), so in his benediction he combines in one
sentence a reference to the priesthood and kingship of Jesus.
In the second part of the benediction (v. 21), we note these considerations:
a. “May God … equip you.” The first part of the benediction consists of a summary of what
God has done in Christ; the second reveals what God is doing in Christ’s people. In this section the
author utters a prayer in behalf of the readers and asks God to equip them to do his will. The verb to
equip actually means to make someone complete. It connotes the act of restoring—that is,
perfecting—something. Some translations have the reading “may the God of peace … make you
perfect” (NEB; also consult KJV; RV; ASV). God strengthens man so that shortcomings may be
overcome.35 He supplies us with every good thing so that we may be able to do his will.
A plaque with simple wording adorns a wall in our family room. Every member of the family
can testify to the truthfulness of the wording. Here is the text:
The will of God
can never lead you
where the grace of God
cannot keep you.
b. “May [God] work in us.” In preceding verses the writer encourages the reader to live a life
that is pleasing to God (11:5–6; 12:28; 13:16). A person who lives such a life is commended by God
himself and is rewarded (II Cor. 5:9–10). But man looks to God for help, direction, and wisdom.
And because of the eternal covenant he has made with us through Jesus Christ, he grants us
assistance. The writer of Hebrews prays that God may work in us to do that which pleases him. And
Paul, writing to the church in Philippi, formulates the human and the divine in salvation. Says he,
“Work out your p 432 salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and
to act according to his good purpose” (Phil. 2:12–13).
Why is God willing to work in us? The author is almost repetitious in the wording of this
benediction. He spells out that through Jesus Christ—note the combination of the two names (also
see 10:10; 13:8)—God himself works in us and equips us to do his will. Through Jesus Christ,
therefore, we are in God, and God works in us (John 17:21).
c. “To whom be glory.” Translations vary, because in the original Greek it is not clear whether
glory ought to be attributed to God or to Jesus Christ. Some commentators think that because God is
the subject in the benediction, the author means to say that God should receive the glory. Moreover,
in greetings and benedictions glory is given to God (Rom. 11:36; 16:27; Gal. 1:5; Eph. 3:21; Phil.
4:20; I Tim. 1:17; Jude 25). But some of them ascribe glory to Jesus Christ (II Tim. 4:18; II Peter
3:18; Rev. 1:6; 4:11). In the benediction in Hebrews, the flow of the sentence seems to indicate that
Jesus Christ should receive the glory. Obviously the formula itself is the stock phrase “glory for

B ASB New American Standard Bible

B EB New English Bible
V JV King James Version
V V Revised Version
V SV American Standard Version

5 5 Reinier Schippers in NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 350, states that in the New Testament the meaning
of the verb in question is “to prepare, establish, form, and equip.”
ever and ever. Amen.” And, therefore, the writer may not have intended a clear choice. For him they
are the familiar words at the conclusion of a benediction. Amen, so let it be!

Practical Considerations in 13:18–21

The psalmists teach us that prayer is praise. God is to be praised for his work in creation and
redemption. But prayer also concerns the practical matters of life, as Jesus teaches us in the Lord’s
Prayer. After three petitions about the name, the kingdom, and the will of God, he teaches us to pray
for daily bread, forgiveness of sin, victory in temptation, and deliverance from evil. God is
interested in everything we do. We have the privilege of praying not only for ourselves, but also for
our fellow man. We may bring all our needs to God in prayer.
What a friend we have in Jesus,
All our sins and griefs to bear!
What a privilege to carry
Everything to God in prayer!
O what peace we often forfeit,
O what needless pain we bear,
All because we do not carry
Everything to God in prayer!
—Joseph Scriven
When someone is making a decision, we often advise him, “Let your conscience be your guide.”
But if a conscience is seared by sin, it is of little help in making the right choices. Jonathan Edwards
compared man’s conscience with a sundial: “As the sundial cannot make the hour known when the
sun does not shine upon it, so conscience is not a plain or safe guide to duty unless it is enlightened
by God’s Word.” Man’s conscience should be directed to the Scriptures, much the same as the
needle of a compass invariably points north. p 433

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:18–21

Verse 18
προσεύχ εσθε—first in the sentence, this verb is an imperative in the present tense, middle as a
deponent. The present tense expresses continued action: keep on praying.
πειθόμεθα—the same verb, although in the second person plural, appeared in 13:17. There the
meaning is “obey;” here it is “persuaded.” Some translators (including those of the NIV) omit the
postpositive conjunction γάρ in their versions. The word should be maintained, for the conjunction
makes the author’s intent clear.
ἔχομεν—the repeated use of the first person plural in pronoun and verb appears to be the
editorial “we.”36
ἀναστρέφεσθαι—as a present passive infinitive from ἀναστρέφω (I turn back), the verb means
“to conduct oneself in life” (see Heb. 10:33).

Verse 19
τάχιον—this comparative adverb, like περισσοτέρως (all the more), “appears to have a true

V IV New International Version

6 6 Robertson, Grammar, pp. 677–78.

comparative sense in this verse, ‘more quickly,’ or ‘sooner.’ ”37
ἀποκατασταθῶ—from the compound ἀποκαθίστημι (I restore), this verb is the aorist passive
subjunctive. The subjunctive is used because of the indirect command structure of παρακαλῶ and
ἵνα.

Verse 20
ὁ ἀναγαγών—the articular aorist active participle, derived from ἀνάγω (I bring up), may
connote either bringing someone up from the dead or bringing him back from the dead.
τὸν μέγαν—the position of the adjective together with the definite article is rather emphatic.
ἐν αἵματι—the instrumental use of the preposition reflects Semitic form in this instance current
in the Septuagint. The noon αἷμα lacks the definite article.

Verse 21
καταρτίσαι—this is one of the few occurrences of the optative mood—one of the sixty-seven
instances in the New Testament. The form is the first aorist active optative of καταρτίζω (I restore).
The subject of the verb is ὁ θεός. The sentence conveys a wish.
εἰς τὸ ποιῆσαι—the preposition εἰς with the articular infinitive expresses purpose. The aorist
tense of the infinitive is constative.
ποιῶν—in a few major manuscripts this participle is preceded by αὐτῷ. However, p 434 the
pronoun is unintelligible and “may be a homiletic expansion.”38 Therefore, we do well to delete it.
ἡμῖν—because of the preceding form ὑμᾶς, a number of Greek manuscripts have the reading
ὑμῖν. By applying the rule that the more difficult reading is the more original, we are able to explain
the presence of the second person plural pronoun better than that of the first person plural pronoun.
Thus we favor the reading ὑμῖν.
ῷ̔—the relative pronoun in the dative singular, as indirect object, has its nearest antecedent in
the immediately preceding Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. For this reason, we apply the words to Jesus and not to ὁ
θεός, the subject of the sentence.

F. Final Greetings
13:22–25

22 Brothers, I urge you to bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written you only a short letter.
23 I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I will come with
him to see you.
24 Greet all your leaders and all God’s people. Those from Italy send you their greetings.
25 Grace be with you all.

The last few verses of this epistle are too brief to tell us something about the time and circumstances
in which the letter was written. The names of Timothy and of Italy, although interesting, are of very

7 7 Hanna, Grammatical Aid, p. 415. Also see Friedrich W. Blass and Albert Debrunner, A
Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, rev. and trans. Robert
W. Funk (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), sec. 244 (1).

8 8 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 676.

little help in this respect. The author is not giving us newsworthy items. Rather, he is writing a
“word of exhortation.” That is the purpose of his “short letter.”
22. Brothers, I urge you to bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written you only a
short letter.
In this somewhat personal section of the epistle, the author addresses the readers as brothers
(3:1, 12; 10:19). He follows the custom of his day and therefore ought not be faulted for failing to
mention the feminine gender.
A second time he says “I urge” (see 13:19), but now almost apologetically as he explains what
he wants the readers to do. Says he, “Bear with my word of exhortation.” Actually, he tells the
readers to put up with his word of exhortation; or, in less colloquial terms, he is asking them to
listen carefully to what he has to say.
What does the expression word of exhortation mean? Throughout his epistle the writer has been
a faithful pastor to his people by exhorting them to listen attentively and obediently to the Word of
God. Although at first glance his letter may seem to be a doctrinal treatise, the epistle consists of
pastoral admonitions that are supported by teachings derived from a sound knowledge of the Old
Testament. The conclusion that we draw therefore is that the Epistle to the Hebrews indeed is a
word of exhortation written by a dedicated pastor who watches over the spiritual well-being of his
people. p 435 Besides admonishing them, the pastor also teaches them new truths concerning Jesus
Christ. They may have objected to these teachings and perhaps to his exhortations. Therefore he
urges them to listen to him as he addresses them in this word of exhortation (compare Acts 13:15).
“For I have written you only a short letter.” The tone is apologetic. A few times in the body of
his letter the author shortened his remarks (5:11; 9:5; 11:32) and stated that he lacked time even
though he had much to say. The letter itself can easily be read in one sitting; let us say, during a
worship service. Moreover, the adjective short need not be taken literally.
Last, the word letter is significant. The writer speaks of a letter, not a theological treatise. He
wants to communicate the truth and chooses the form of a letter. The exhortations, the personal
remarks (especially those in the last part of chapter 13), and the greetings make this writing a letter.
23. I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released. If he arrives soon, I
will come with him to see you.
Actually this verse has the appearance of a postscript at the end of the letter. As the New English
Bible has it, “I have news for you.”
“Our brother Timothy has been released.” Is this person Paul’s faithful fellow worker? Perhaps.
Certainly we do not have proof. But because the writer calls Timothy “our brother,” indications are
that he is Paul’s companion. In early Christian literature, only the coworker of Paul bears the name
Timothy. A few times Paul calls Timothy “our brother” (II Cor. 1:1; Col. 1:1; I Thess. 3:2; Philem.
1). He invites Timothy, a native of Lystra, to accompany him on his second missionary journey
(Acts 16:1–3). Timothy traveled widely, helped Paul in writing letters (for example, II Corinthians),
served as Paul’s good will ambassador to Corinth, and was the pastor of the church at Ephesus. In
short, Timothy was well known.
Timothy had been in Rome during Paul’s first imprisonment (Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1; Philem. 1).
From Rome Paul wrote the so-called prison Epistles (Ephesians, Philemon, Colossians, and
Philippians). During Paul’s second imprisonment at Rome, he urged Timothy to come to him
quickly (II Tim. 4:9).
We have no information about Timothy’s imprisonment. The writer of Hebrews only states,
“Our brother Timothy has been released.” Presumably he had been imprisoned for his Christian
testimony and was released. The author is not sure what plans Timothy may have, but one thing is
certain: “If he arrives soon, I will come with him to see you.” Where Timothy will arrive and at
what place the writer resides is not known. Whether the author needed Timothy’s moral support in
respect to the Jewish Christians who received his letter remains an open question.
24. Greet all your leaders and all God’s people. Those from Italy send you their greetings.
Three times the leaders attract attention. First, they are to be remembered and imitated (v. 7).
Then they are to be obeyed because they have authority (v. 17). And now they receive greetings. At
the conclusions of letters, writers p 436 generally add salutations. Paul, Peter, and John in their
respective epistles convey greetings.
The author of Hebrews, however, makes a distinction between leaders and God’s people by
repeating the adjective all. If he had said, “Greet all your leaders and people,” he would have given
the impression that the letter was addressed to one particular church. Apparently the writer sends
greetings to all the church leaders, and he greets all God’s people who formed a segment of the
church. This segment, then, consists of a group of Jewish Christians called Hebrews.39
Where did the readers live? A hasty answer would be Rome. The writer says, “Those from Italy
send you their greetings.” If the expression those from Italy had only one meaning, we would be
able to decide whether the readers lived in Rome or not. The expression can mean, first, that the
author writes from Rome to a group of Christians living outside of Italy. He includes his Italian
friends in Rome in the greetings he sends to the group. This view was commonly held by the church
fathers. And numerous Greek manuscripts had a subscription at the end of the epistle that said,
“Written to the Hebrews from Italy [Rome] by Timothy” (KJV).40 Needless to say, subscriptions
were added by scribes at a later date.
The second interpretation is that the author addressed his epistle to Christians at Rome from a
place outside Italy. His friends who hail from Italy send greetings to their relatives and
acquaintances in Rome. This seems to be an acceptable interpretation, and scholars generally
advance this theory.
Whether we accept the first or the second interpretation, the fact remains that we have to work
with hypotheses because the text itself is not clear.
25. Grace be with you all.
The final greeting is customary. Paul writes either “the grace of the Lord Jesus [Christ] be with
you [all]” (Rom. 16:24; I Cor. 16:23; II Cor. 13:14; I Thess. 5:28; II Thess. 3:18) or “the grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit” (Gal. 6:18; Phil. 4:23; Philem. 25), or “grace be with you
[all]” (Col. 4:18; I Tim. 6:21; II Tim. 4:22; Titus 3:15). Some manuscripts add the word Amen;
others delete it. The addition of the word is easier to explain than its deletion. Therefore, the New
International Version ends the Epistle to the Hebrews with “Grace be with you all.”

Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:22–25

Verse 22
ἀνέχεσθε—instead of the infinitive ἀνέχεσθαι featured in a few manuscripts, the better reading
is the present middle imperative (compare 13:19, where the infinitive p 437 occurs with
παρακαλῶ). The compound verb ἀνά (up) and ἔχω (I have, hold) corresponds to the idiom to put
up with. The verb governs the genitive case in τοῦ λόγου.
καὶ γάρ—this emphatic combination appears only five times in the entire epistle (4:2; 5:12;
10:34; 12:29; 13:22). It means “for indeed.”
διὰ βραχέων—the preposition διά is followed by the plural adjective in the genitive case. The

9 9 Grosheide, Hebreeën, pp. 27–28. Westcott notes that “the letter was not addressed
officially to the Church, but to some section of it.” See his Hebrews, p. 451.
V JV King James Version

0 0 In his Textual Commentary, p. 678, Metzger lists the variant readings of the subscriptions.
Some are rather lengthy. For example, here is the reading of Manuscript 431: “This Epistle to the
Hebrews was written from Italy by the apostle Timothy who was sent to them by the blessed Paul in
order that he might set them on a straight path.”
adjective actually modifies the understood noun λόγων (words). The literal translation of the
idiomatic expression “in few words” is better understood adverbially—that is, “briefly.”
ἐπέστειλα—from ἐπιστέλλω (I write a letter), this aorist active indicative is the so-called
epistolary aorist. The writer places himself in the time of the recipient of the letter and thus views
the act of writing as having taken place in the past.

Verse 23
γινώσκετε—because the word stands first in the sentence, this verb is the present active
imperative, not the present active indicative. It can best be translated as “I want you to know” (NIV).
ἐὰν τάχιον ἔρχηται—the particle ἐάν introduces a conditional sentence with a subjunctive verb
ἔρχηται in the protasis and a future middle indicative ὄψομαι in the apodosis. The first part of the
sentence expresses uncertainty. For the comparative adverb τάχιον, see verse 19.

Verse 24
ἀσπάσασθε—the aorist middle imperative from the verb ἀσπάζομαι (I greet) derives from σπάω
that is preceded by the intensive ἀ and means “I draw to myself,” in the middle voice. Generally a
greeting was expressed by embracing and kissing. Here the greeting is conveyed by a letter.

Summary of Chapter 13
The last chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews gives the letter a personal touch. The writer reveals
his pastoral concerns for the believers and makes his desire known to be in their midst again.
The content of this chapter does not consist of some loosely connected exhortations. The writer
encourages the readers to express their Christian love in the social context of their day: love for the
brothers and sisters in the Lord, love toward the traveler in need of a roof over his head at night, and
loving compassion and empathy for prisoners and people who are mistreated. From the love for the
neighbor in the narrow and broad senses, the writer moves to the love in the home; that is, the bond
of marriage, the husband’s relationship to his wife and vice versa. He includes the admonition not to
love money, but to be content and trust God. The first section of this last chapter, then, delineates
the requirements of the summary of the law, in reverse order: love your neighbor as yourself, and
love the Lord your God.
In the second part of the chapter the author enumerates some ecclesiastical duties and concerns.
He begins with an exhortation to remember those p 438 leaders whose service on earth has ended.
Imitate their faith, he says, and look at the lives they lived. From the topic of church leaders the
author goes to that of doctrine. Stay away from doctrines that deviate from the truth. Rather,
consider the work of Jesus, who suffered and died in disgrace outside the city gate. Thankfulness
for salvation comes to expression by confessing God’s name, doing good deeds, and sharing with
others. Church leaders and church members ought to work together harmoniously so that the
obedience of the members is a source of joy to the leaders.
The last section of the chapter includes a personal request for prayer, a beautifully worded
benediction, an announcement of the writer’s intended visit accompanied by Timothy, greetings to
leaders and people of the church, and greetings from Italian friends. The letter ends with the final
greeting, “Grace be with you all.”

V IV New International Version

 P 439 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Commentaries
Alford, Henry. Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary. 4 vols. Vol. 4, pt.
1, Prolegomena and Hebrews. 1875. Grand Rapids: Guardian, 1976.
Bengel, John Albert. Gnomon of the New Testament. Edited by Andrew R. Fausset. 7th ed. 4 vols.
Vol. 4. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1877.
Bleek, F. Der Brief an die Hebräer. 2 vols. Berlin: F. Dummler, 1828–40.
Bristol, Lyle O. Hebrews: A Commentary. Valley Forge: Judson, 1967.
Brown, John. An Exposition of Hebrews. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1961.
Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Hebrews. New International Commentary on the New Testament
series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.
Buchanan, George W. To the Hebrews. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1972.
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949.
Davidson, A. B. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1882.
Davies, J. H. A Letter to the Hebrews. London: Cambridge University Press, 1967.
Delitzsch, Franz. Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. 2 vols. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark,
1877.
Gouge, William. Commentary on Hebrews. 1655. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1980.
Grosheide, F. W. De Brief aan de Hebreeën en de Brief van Jakobus. Kampen: Kok, 1955.
Guthrie, Donald. Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1983.
Hagner, Donald. Hebrews. Good News Commentary series. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1983.
Héring, J. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Translated by A. W. Heathcoat and P. J. Allock from French
original of 1955. London: Epworth, 1970.
Hewitt, Thomas. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960.
Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1977.
Jewett, Robert. Letter to Pilgrims: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. International
Critical Commentary series. 1924. New York: Pilgrim, 1981.
Lang, G. H. The Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Paternoster, 1951.
Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and of the Epistle of James.
Columbus: Wartburg, 1946.
Michel, Otto. Der Brief an die Hebräer. 10th ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1957.
Moffatt, James. Epistle to the Hebrews. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. and
T. Clark, 1963. p 440
Montefiore, Hugh. The Epistle to the Hebrews. New York and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1964.
Neil, W. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Torah Commentaries. London: SCM, 1955.
Owen, John. An Exposition of Hebrews. 7 vols. in 4. Evansville, Ind.: Sovereign Grace, 1960.
Peake, A. S. Hebrews. Century Bible. New York: Henry Frowde; Edinburgh: T. C. and E. C. Jack,
1914.
Pink, Arthur W. An Exposition of Hebrews. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1954.
Riggenbach, Edward. Der Brief an die Hebräer. Leipzig and Erlangen: Deichert, 1922.
Schneider, Johannes. The Letter to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.
Snell, A. New and Living Way. London: Faith Press, 1959.
Strathmann, Hermann. Der Brief an die Hebräer. Das Neue Testament Deutsch. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1937.
Spicq, Ceslaus. L’Épître aux Hébreux. 3d ed. 2 vols. Paris: Gabalda, 1952–53.
Westcott, B. F. Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950.
Windisch, J. Der Hebräerbrief. Tübingen: Mohr, 1931.

Studies
Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.
Bruce, F. F. “The Kerygma of Hebrews.” Interpretation 23 (1969): 3–19.
_____. “Recent Literature on the Epistle to the Hebrews.” Themelios 3 (1966): 31–36.
Buchanan, George W. “The Present State of Scholarship on Hebrews.” In Christianity, Judaism and
Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at Sixty, edited by J. Neusner, vol. 1, pp.
299–330. Leiden: Brill, 1975.
Deissmann, Adolf. Bible Studies. Winona Lake, Ind.: Alpha Publications, 1979.
Elbogen, Ismar. Der Jüdische Gottesdienst. Frankfurt: Kaufmann, 1931.
Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1970.
_____. New Testament Theology. Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity, 1981.
Harrison, E. F. “The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews.” BS 12 (1964): 333–40.
Hoekema, A. A. “The Perfection of Christ in Hebrews.” CTJ 9 (1974): 31–37.
Kistemaker, Simon J. The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Amsterdam: Van Soest,
1961.
Ladd, George E. A Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.
Morris, Leon. The Gospel of John. New International Commentary on the New Testament series.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970.
Ridderbos, Herman N. Mattheüs. Korte Verklaring. 2 vols. Kampen: Kok, 1952.
Ridderbos, Jan. De Psalmen. 2 vols. Kampen: Kok, 1955.
Schürer, Emil. A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ. 5 vols. Edinburgh: T. and
T. Clark, 1885.
Smalley, S. S. “Atonement in Hebrews.” Evangelical Quarterly 33 (1961): 126–35.
Vos, Geerhardus. Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954.
_____. The Teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956.
Werner, Ernst. The Sacred Bridge. London: D. Dobson, 1959.

p 441 Tools
Aland, Kurt, et al. The Greek New Testament. 3d ed. United Bible Societies, 1975.
Bauer, W., W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F. W. Danker. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New

S S Bibliotheca Sacra
J TJ Calvin Theological Journal
 Testament. 2d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.
Berkhof, Louis. Principles of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1950.
Brown, Colin, ed. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. 3 vols. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1975–78.
Danby, H., ed. Mishna, Moed Yoma. London: Oxford University Press, 1967.
Epstein, I., ed. The Babylonian Talmud. 18 vols. London: The Soncino Press, 1948–52.
Hanna, Robert. A Grammatical Aid to the Greek New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983.
Hodges, Zane C., and Arthur L. Farstad. The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text.
Nashville and New York: Nelson, 1982.
Josephus, Flavius. Loeb Classical Library Series. London: Heinemann; New York: Putnam, 1966–
76.
Kittel, Gerhard, and Gerhard Friedrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.
Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Vols. 1–9. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964–76.
Merk, Augustinus. Novum Testamentum. 9th ed. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964.
Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. London and New York:
United Bible Societies, 1975.
Nestle, E., and Kurt Aland. Novum Testamentum Graece. 26th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung,
1981.
Phillips, J. B. The New Testament in Modern English. New York: Macmillan, 1958.
Philo. Loeb Classical Library Series. Vol. 1–6. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press;
London: Heinemann, 1966–71.
Robertson, A. T. A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research.
Nashville: Broadman, 1934.
Strack, H. L., and P. Billerbeck. Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. 5
vols. München: Beck, 1922–28.
Thayer, Joseph H. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. New York, Cincinnati, and
Chicago: American Book Company, 1889.
Zuntz, Gunther. The Text of the Epistles. London: Oxford University Press, 1953.2

2 Kistemaker, S. J., & Hendriksen, W. (1953-2001). Vol. 15: New Testament commentary :
Exposition of Hebrews. New Testament Commentary (iii–441). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.