The Epistle of the Hebrews : translation and brief commentary

i.W^^

"''flfj

fVi

^^h A^

i.i-

'SJ.':'l m:2 . .;a*»w/.

(50rttell Utttoeraitg BItbtarg

Sttiaca, Neui ^otk

THE GIFT OF

ALFRED C, BARNES

1889

Date Due

( ■

'■ ; fit

^1 —

PRINTED IN

U. 3, A.

ft^

NO. 23233

Cornell University Library
BS2775 .B79

Epistle of the HegrSiililimMM^^

olln

3 1924 029 294 646

The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029294646

THE

EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

TRANSLATION AND BRIEF COMMENTARY

BY

Rev. p. BOYLAN, M. A.

PRINTED FOk THE USE OF THE SCRIPTURE CLASS,
ST. PATRICK'S COLLEGE, MAYNOOTH "

DUBLIN

M. H. GILL AND SON; LTD.

1922

Nihil obstat:

Joannes Canonicus Waters,

Censor Theol. Depot.

Imp];imi potest:

t'EDUARDUS,
Archiep.' Dablinen, Hiberniae Primas.

DuBLiNii, die lof Maii, 1922.

.,.',/■•■ ■ '

\!

1?^

PRINTED BY ADOLF HOT.ZHAUSEN
in Vienna (Austria).

Preface.

This brief study of the Epistle to the Hebrews is an exti;act
from a detailed study of the Epistle which I have ready, and hope
to publish in > the near futjire. My purpose in preparing this little
book has bqei> to put in the hands of njy students at Maynooth
a summary of the. exegetical work covered, by the class-lectures on
the. Epistle. The full treatment of the important critical; and -
theological problems which are connected with Hebrews is reserved
for the Jarger work. It was at first intended that these notes and
the translation should be printed , for private use only. Since,
however, no relijlble Catholic cohantientary in English on the
Epistle exists, I have decided to follovv the advice of some friends,
and make this little , work, in spite of .its. incompleteness," as an
outline text-book intended for students who are followirig a course
of lectures on the Epistle, accessible to the general public;

P. boylan:

St. Patrick's College,

Maynooth.
May- ig22. ■

Epistle to the Hebrews

INTRODUCTION.

General argument of the, Epistle.

The Epistle consists of two sections^ one mainly doctrinal,
I, i^io, i8, and the other , mainly exhortative, lo, 19 — 13, ig.

In the doctrinal, section the wciteir seeks to establish the-
superiority of the Ne^jv Testament to tt(e Old. This he does in
the first place, by showing that Christ, the Mediator of the New
Testament,, is, as Son of Godj far exalted above the mediators of
the Old Testament, the Angels and Moses. If. the Mediator of the
New Testament is superior to the, mediators of the Old Dispensation,
the New Testament must be as exalted above the Qld as its Mediator,
is afapve the mediators of the Old.

The author seeks then, further, to infer from thei superiority
of the Priesthood of Christ to that of Aaron, the superiority of the
New Dispensation to the Old. The Priesthood of Christ is eternal,
and its functions are exercised in a heavenly Sanctuary, while ]the
P,riesthood of Aaron was intended to last, only for a time, and its.
Sanctuary vyas but a t^pe of the heavejily Sanctuary in vvhich
Christ functions as High Priest. Moreover Christ by his ' sacrifice
has made complete and eternal atonentient for sin, while the Jewish
High Priests had to, renew their atoning sacrifices year by year,
thus showing that those sacrifices were essentially inconiplete. '

In the exhortative sectjon the readers are reminded of their
.duty of holding firmly to ,the glorious blessings which Christ has"
put within their reach. TheySvill be severely punished if they are
disloyal to Christ. The author points to t^e persecutions which
they have alreacly endured as a reason -for perseverance in their
faith, and he. encourages them by quoting the example of the heroic
f^aith' of the Saints of the Old Dispensation. Christ Himself <has
given the greatest of all examples of patient endurance in suffering.
: (10, 19—12, 18.) , - •■'■^^'. '

The author them gbes on to urge his readers to the practice
of brotherly charity. He warns them against taking any part in

._ VI —

non-Ghristian sacrificial banquets — the, Christians having them-
selves an altar from which the servants of the Tabernacle
(the Jews) are excluded. "He exhorts them to share in the
humiliations of Christ, and ' joyfully to make profession of their
faith. It is a d,uty of Christians, he says, to be generous in alriis-
giving, and to be obedient and loyal te their religious superiors.,
,(i3, I— 19.),

Authorship of Epistle.

The tradition of the Eastern Church has always regarded
the Apostle St. Paul as immediately or mediately the author of the
Epistle. The tradition of the Western Church has not been so
uniform on this question. .While the Epistle was knovvn and freely
used apparently as apostolic, by Clement of Rome, it does not
appear in the Muratorian Fragment, nor in the Canon of Mommsen.
' St. Cyprian speaks of Paul as having written to seven Christina
communities — omitting, it would seem, the Hebrews. The
Presbyter Caiiis mentions only i3 letters of St. Paul, and other
early Western writers are apparently ignorant of Hebrews. Not
until the second quarter of the 4th century does this Epistle get
full recognition as a Pauline writing in the Western Church.

Though the traditional Catholic view makes St. Paul the
-author of Hebrews, the sense in which that authorship is to be
understood has been frem the days of Origen a matter of dispute.
In modern times there is a strong tendency among Catholic writers
to ascribe to St. Paul the conception and planning of the Epistle
and to explain the obvious iifferences of this Epistle from the
other Pauline letters in language, style, and thought by ascribing
the literary form and tone of the letter to the work of some friend
or associate of the Apostle — to whom St. Paul entrusted the
literary shaping of the Epistle. The names of St. Luke, Barnabas,
Clement of Rome, ApoUos, and Aristion have been mentioned in
this' connection.

Modern Protestant criticism is unwilling to accept the Pauline
authorship of, the Epistle in any sense. Yet even among liberal
Protestants there is a tendency to look for the author of the
Epistle among the friends of St. Paul. Critics have put forward as
sol6 authors of "Hebrews" Barnabas, ApoUos, the Deacon Philip,
Aquila and Priscilla, etc.

- vir —

Time and place of composition.

The attitude of the writer in compaHng the Priesthood of
Christ with the Levitical Priesthood has been usually regarded as
proving that the worship in the Temple was Still beiftg carried on
at. the time when the Epistle was written. Otherwise, it has been ,
argued, there would have been no need to warn, the readers against
the seductiveness of Jewish sacriiicial worship. The concluding
verses ,of the letter' seem to point to the time immediately
following St. Paul's • release from the first Roman imprisonment
(about 63 A. D.) as the likely date of the letter.

The oldest tradition makes Rome the place of its composition.
Codex A has at the end of the Epistle the note oito 'Pi&nr,;. The
Syriac version (Peshitta) says that the letter was written in Italy;'
This view of the Syrian translatqr is due, probably, to i3, 24 —
but the evidence of that verse is iiot decisive.

Destination of the Epistle.
The title "To the Hebrews" is very old — much older than
the time of Clement of Alexandria. The author's reasoning
throughout the letter seems to imply that he wrote' for Jewish-
Christian readers, and tradition has sought those readers in
Palestine. It Ms obvious that the Epistle is not interided for Jewish-
Christians in general, for the definitely individual traits ascribed
to the coDjimunity addressed must have . belonged to some small
well 'defined group in some particular locality. It is not necessary
to hold that the letter was addressed to the Church of Jerusalem —
even if it must be admitted that the destination of the Epistle
was Palestine. There were several Christian communities in
Palestine before 63 A, D. Admitting that the Epistle was acldrfissed
to a Jewish-Christian church .in the East critics have, argued for
such different destinations of the Epistle' as Jamnia, Caesarea in
Palestine, Antioch, , Cyprus, etc'

' ' The Biblical Commission in, a decree given June 24lh. 1914 teaches that

'Hebrews' is to be included among the genuine Canonical letters of St. Paul and'
answers in the negative the question: Utrum Paulus Apostolus ita hujus Epistolae
auctor censendus sit ut affirmari debeat ipsum earn totam non solum, Spiritu;Sancto
concepisSe et eypressisse, verum etiam ea forma donasse qua prostat.

'Thus 'the ■ coitcipere and [exprimere are ascribed to St. Paul, tut the formal
arrangement of the Epistle may be due to someone else.

— 1

Chapter i . ,

Contrast between the revelation given by , Christ and that given in
the old dispensation; the superiority of Christ to the angels, i — 4.

(i) God having spoken of olden time to the fathers througb
the prophets by many partial revelations, and. various methods of
revelation, (2) hath spoken to us in this End-period by one who
is Son, whom He hath set up as heir of all things; by whom also
He created the worlds (or, 'ages').

. (3) He being the flashing-forth of His glory,, and the very
expression of His being, sustaineth all things by His (God's), word
of power: and having achieved purification from sin, hath taken
His seat at the right hand of Majesty on high, (4) having attained
a rank as much superior to the angels as the name whjch He hath
inherited surpasseth them. ,

I — 4., The revelation of the old dispensation was given fragmentarily, piece-
meal, by many different kinds of messengers-prophets,, seers, legislators, etc. — ,
and by a great variety of manifestations -^ words, dreams, visions, sytobolical
actions, etc. — but the new revelation has been given all at once, and completely,
by a single Messenger, who was not a mere prophet, poet, or lawgiver,, but the
very Son of God Himself. This complete reyelatior^' forms a turning point in the
history of the. world:, it brings to, a clos.e the period of the prophets, and begins
the Messianic age.

As Demiurgos the Son has been made sovereign disposer and dispenser of
all things. He is more than a messenger of God, for He is the the very copy, the
manifest expression of God's substance, the irradiation of God's glory. He did not
merely preach against sin, like the prophets, but effected its removal; and having;
performed this divine act,' He was entitled to take His place at the right hand of
God as the equal in divinity of His P'ather.

The revelation of Christ has been so complete because He is a' complete
and all-sided showing forth' of the Father. Christ is not a mere link, or Mediator
between God and men. He is Creator of the world, and conserves it. He can purify
from sin. Hence He is, in the fullest sense, divine, and, therefore, rightly takes
His place at His Father'* side. The servants and messengers of God stand before
Him, but the Son sits at the right hand of God. (Cf. Ps. 109.) The revelation
on Sinai was giveii, according, to Jewish belief, by angels; but Christ, with His,
name of Son is far above the angels, and, therefore, His revelation must be greater
than theirs. (Cf. Acts 7, 38. 53; Gal. 3, 19.)

1

Scriptural proof of Christ's superiority to the angels. Vv. 5—i4-
{Cf.Col.2,i8; I, 1 6; Hebr. r3, 8.)

(5) For to which of the angels hath He ever said: 'Thou
art my Son; this day I have begotten Thee';

and again; 'I will be to him Father, and he will be to Me
Son';

(6) and again, when He bringeth the Firstborn into the
world, He saith: 'All the angels of God shall worship him.'

(7) And of the angels He saith: 'Who maketh His angels
winds, and His servants flames of fire.' (8) But of the Son (He
saith): 'Thy throne, o God, is forever; a sceptre of justice is the
sceptre of thy sovereignty. Thou hast loved justice, and hated
iniquity; hence hath God, thy God, anointed thee more than thy
fellows with the oil of gladness.'

5—8. The glory of Christ as the bearer of the new revelation is the chief
thought of this section; We have here again the same succession of ideas as in
verses I — 4, the Sonship of Christ, His glory, and His rewards of royar splendour
in heaven.

The arguments for the superiority of Christ to the Angels are:

(a). Though the angels are at times called sons of God, they are never so
called in the same way in which Psalm 2 'gives the title of 'Son' to Christ.

The second psalm is taken Messianically throughout the , New Testament.
See Acts 4, 25. 28; i3, 33; Apoc. 2, 27 f.; 12, 5; ig, 15. The quotation, 'I will
be to him father, etc' is taken from 2 Kings 7, 14. The words are the divine-
promise given to David by the prophet Nathan. The 'him' refers primarily to the
successors of David, but indirectly to the Messias.

(b). The second argument is that God commands the angels to worship
Christ. The text referred 10 is, probably, Ps. 96 — Adorate emn omnes angeli ejus.
The bringing of the Firstborn into the world may refer to the description of the
coming of the Lord to Judgment which is contained in Ps. 96. (Cf. also Deut. 32
43 in Septuagint.) - ,

(c). The angels are put on the same level as the inanimate things of nature;
they are mere instruments of God, like lightning and wind, and the other blind
powers of nature, ready for all kinds of service, essentially changeable in character.
(Ps. io3, 4.) But of the Son it is said (Ps. 44) that His throne abides for ever;
and He Himself is called God. He is an eternal ruler like God Himself. God has
anointed him with the oil of gladness, an oil of coronation that will bring more
gladness than it usually brings to kings anointed.

(lo) And, 'Thou didst in the beginning make firm the
earth, o Lord, dn the waters; and the works of Thy hands are
the heavens.- (ii) They shall pass away; but Thou abidest for,
ever; and they shall grow old like a garment, (12) and like a
mantle Thou wilt roll them up, and they shall be replaced,. But
Thou art ever the same, and Thy years shall never run out'.

(i3) But to which of the angels hath He ever said: 'Be
seated thou at my right hand until I make thy foes a foot-stool
beneath thy feet.'

(14) Are they not all ministering spirits, sent unto ministration
for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?

10 — 14 (d). The fourth argument is that Christ is the omnipotent God
who has created all things, and whose being and power can never diminish. He
is beyondand above all time and change. The heavens shall pass away and be
replaced like an old and worn-out garment, but the Son of God remains for ever
the same. (Ps. loi, 26 — 28.) He sits for ever by the Father's side. The enemies
He has defeated are the foot-stool of his feet. (Ps. 109, I.) No angel has ever had,
or ever can have, glory like this. Christ is God: the angels are but creatures. •

(e). The final argument is the determination of the true place of the angels.
Christ has achieved purification from sin, and salvation for men. The chief function
of the angels is to give help to those who are called to share in that salvation'.
They are not authors of salvation, but mere instruments of Christ in bringing men
to share in salvation'.

1*

4 --

Chapter 2.

Exhortation based on the foregoing, i — 5.

(i) Hence we must all the more earnestly give heed to what
has been heard, that we may not drift away (from our duty).

(2) For if the Word which was spoken by the angels proved
stedfast, and every transgression, and every act of disobedience
received a jiist requital, (3) how shall we escape (destruction) if
we disregard so great a salvation — a salvation that was first
proclaimed by the Lord, and was then, handed on to us in trust-
worthy fashion by those that heard, (4) God adding testimony
by signs and wonders, and manifold deeds of power, and distri-
butions of the Holy Spirit according to His will?

I — 4. Three lessons are here taught, (a) Ardent devotion to the Faith is
necessary, (b) Indifference will bring punishment, (c) The Apostolic prea/:hing has
been fully guaranteed by the testimony of God, and deserves the fullest adherence.

If the neglect of the old dispensation which was proclaimed by angels, and
greatly inferior to the new, was so severely punished, how great shall be the
punishment for neglect of the perfect revelation of Christ? This revelation has been
given, almost in our. own days, by Christ Himself, and those who heard Him
have handed on His words to us, and the faith with which' they first received the
Gospel has been strengthened by their own experiences of the working of its
power. The Holy Spirit has also constantly manifested by miracles the divine origin
and the divine power of the Gospel. The Gospel, ' then, is a revelation given by
Christ, testified to by God, and confirmed by the operations of the Holy Spirit.

Note the familiar Pauline' thought that the Gospel contains' in itself salvation.
It is a power unto salvation for everyone that believeth. (Roms. i, 16.) To miss
that salvation would be a more dreadful evil than any that was implied in the
sanctions of the Old Testament Law.

The 'distributions of the Spirit' are the charisms which were such a striking
feature of early Christianity. They showed the hving presence in the Church of
the Holy Spirit. The outpourings of the Spirit are said to have taken place
acc9rding to the will of God. They thus served as guarantees of the truth of the
Christian teaching. The writer appears to imply that the charisms were a familiar
experience both for himself and his readers.

— '5 —

The temporary humiliation of Christ is not a difficulty against,
but, in reality, an additional proof of, His exaltation j vv. 5 — 18.

(5) For not to the Angels hath He made subject the future
world: of which we speak.

(6) Rather, hath one somewhere testified as follows:

What is man that Thou art ijiindful of him?
Or man's son that Thou visitest him?

(7) Thou hast made him but a little lower than the angels;

With glory and honour Thou hast, crowned him:
Thou hast set him over the works of Thy hands:

(8) Thou hast put all things' beneath his feet.

5 — 8a. It is clear fi;om many passages in the Epistle that, the readers were
tempted to find difficulties against Christianity in the humiliations and death of Christ,
that they were suffering from the scandalum crucis. This section of the Epistle
{2, 5 — 18) bhows how the heavenly' glory of Jesus is to be recdriciled with His
humiliations among' men. That glory demanded, in fact, as a necessary precondition
the sufferings of Jesus on earth. It Qould not be attained except by sorrow and
humiliation, and these, therefore, were necessary features of the life of the Messias. -
This is the real solution of the problem of a suffering Messias. , (Of. Luke 24, 26 f.)

It was not to angels that God made subject the coming world, th« age of
completion and perfection, the Messianic period, but, as the context seems to suggest,'
to man. The sublime dignity of man, and in particular of the Ideal Man, is shown
forth in PsSlm ,8, which the writer accepts as Messianic. The Psalm expresses, on
the one hand, a sort of inferiority of man, and, on the other, a sort of royal dignity
as belonging to him. This is important for the author, for he wishes to show that
both huiniliatton and glory are necessary features of the Ideal Man, Christ.' The' Psalm
does not make mere man but the perfect Man ruler of the oc/.oujxevr] rj 'pEXJ^ouoa.
^ For other Pauline applications of Ps. 8, 8 to Christ, see I Cor. 15, 26 — 28; Ephe^.
I, 22. In I Cor; 6, 2 and Apoc. 3, 21 we have the idea that Christ and the Saints
will judge the world. /

The jjpaxii ti of verse 7 has often been taken as referring directly to phrist
in the psalm,; and has been, therefore, translated, 'for a little while.' (See note in
my 'Psalms'.)

(8 b.) Now in subjecting all things to him He left nothing
that is not subject to him. And yet, at present, we do not see
all things made subject!

(9) But Him who, for a little time, was made lower than
the Angels, Jesus that is, we see crowned with glory and honour
because of the sufferings of death, that He, by God's grace, might
taste death for all.

8 b— 9. Since all things are not now subject to mere man, some other kind
of Man must be referred to in the Psalm. The connection of 8 b with she following
is easier if we read oiSjctu; supposing that the g was accidentally omitted before the 0.
The meaning would then be: 'But now we nowise see things subjected to him'
(i. e. to man). But if all things are not subject to any mortal man, and if the
Scriptures must be fulfilled, we should seek the fiilfilment of the Psalm-passage
in what is referred to in verse 9.

The pp«X" ■i^' °f ^- 9 obviously refers directly to Jesus, and must here be
translated 'for a little time', — the period, that is, of the earthly life of Jesus,
during which He seemed to be less than the angels.

What Psalm 8 said, thenj was true of one Man. Through humiliation Jesus
has risen to glory. The ,glory' and ,honour' are the divine attributes which belong
to Jesus as the reward of His sufferings. To be a little less than the Angels, or
'to be for a time less than the Angels', would be for mere man a distinction, but
for Jesus it was a humiliation — a humiliation, however, which was the prelude
and means to glory. Only through death could Jesus reach that glory — to the
, end that His death might bring advantage to all.

The thought in 9 b might be illustrated, perhaps, by the case of a prince
who, at the wish of the King, should become an ordinary private soldier, and win
by the faithful discharge of a private soldier's duties the highest promotion. The
life and work of the prince would serve as a stimulating example to the army in
general. So the life of suffering which Christ endured,' and the glory which He has
thereby acquired should serve as a stimulus to Christians to be firm and earnest
in the spiritual' combat. Obviously the writer wishes thus to encourage his readers
t(p resist the pessimism of the moment. Even though the 'present time' was subject,
apparently, to the rule of powers that differed greatly from the Ideal Man, yet the
Christians must not lose faith and courage. What Jesus has attained by His death
is open to each man to attain in such measure as humanity can reach it.

But why vns it ordained that the glory of Jesus should come only through
humiliation? The answer is givpn in what follows.

(ro) For it behoved Him on account of whom all things
are, and through whom all things are, when He was bringing
many sons to glory, to make perfect through suffering, the author
of their salvation.

10. All things are because, and through, God. Hence the sufferirigs of Jesus
must have been divinely willed. But why? '

Men are sons of God, and brethren of the Archegos. The solidarity of the
Archegos (Christ) with the Sons made it necessary that He and they should follow
the same road of sorrow to glory. Hence we should not be scandalised either at
our own griefs or at the sorrows of Christ. The 'glory' and the 'salvation' are
different aspects of the same thing. Archegos might mean, in the abstract,
pioneer — the pioneer of their salvation, i. e. the first to attain it. It really means
. here, however, -the Author of their (the many sons') salvation. The many sons are
brought to perfection in and with the perfectioning of the Au;:hor of their salvation.
Thus the fate of Jesus and that of the many affect each other mutually. The con-
crete explanation of this fact begins in verse 14.

Verse 1 apparently implies that, as sorrow is a necessary feature of human
life, so it had to be a feature of the life of the Archegos. It is clear that the path
of pain was the path foreordained by God as the path which Jesus must tread to
glory. Hence the sufferings of Jesus should make no problem for Christians.

■ The verse implies also that the purpose of creation was to bring man to glory.

JC0XX0U5 u'.ob; is equivalent to uTOp itocvtb? of v. 9. (Cf. Mark 10, 45; Roms 8, 29.)

'AyayovTO has been taken in the translation with mzw. -The reference is to
God — not immediately to the Archegos. Many commentators, however, prefer to
■ take aY*Y°'^™ along with ap)(rjYov.

TeXeiouv means primarily to lead to the goal. Derived meanings are (a),- to
bring to glory, -and (b), to bring to completeness (mainly in ethical sense). Here it
is obviously equivalent to the 'crowned with glory' of verse 9. There can, of course,
be no question here of any perfectioning of inner, personal qualities of the God-man.

Compare with this verse generally Ephes. 2, 5 — 7. Chrys. says: It behoved
Him who has the care of all things and brought things into being to give up His
Son for the salvation of the others — one for many. 'AXX', oux etTCEv ouxio;, aXXa,
Aia KaOiiflaTcov ith.z\S><sm, Seizvu; oTi icaOibv 6TCp two; oOz Ixeivov infikii [io'vov, aXKk
■/.ai auto; XajjucpoTepo? yi'vETai xai lEXEioTEpo;. And this he says to the faithful en-
couraging them. Kai yap XpioTo; toxe iSo^dioGj) ote "e'tcsOev. Chrys. , then goes on to
reject the idea of Christ receiving the 'glorification' as something altogether new:
ezeTv7)v ycip xf^i ti^; 9u<jEto; eIyev asi, oOSev ;cpooXaP(iv.'

(ii) For He that maketh holy and those who are made
holy are all from One. '

Wherefore He is not ashajned to call them brothers, when He says :
(12) 'I will praise publish Thy name to my brethren;
I will praise Thee in the midst of the Assembly.'

(i3) And again: 'I will trust in Him.'

And again: 'Behold, I and the other children whom- God
hath' given to, me.' .

II — 13. Verses 11— l3 emphasise the close connection- of Jesus and Christians
through the common origin of both. The One from whom they , spring is God,
ncSt Adam. i

The proof of the oneness of Jesus with Christians is derived from Scripture ,
pass£(ges in which the Redleeraer spealis of men as His brethren and children. The
first passage is from Psalm 21, 23 — a psalm which Jesus referred to Himself as
He hung on the cross.

The second passage is from Isaias 8, lyf., which is also accepted as Mes-
sianic in Luke, 2, 34., Though the words appear in the book of Isaias as the words
of the prophet himself, they are here put in the mouth of the Messias, either
because the author, regarded Isaias as a type of the Messias, or because he looked
on the words as a ditect utterance of the Messias. In the Psalm-passage the Messias
appears as praising .God along with other men, thus showing that He too like other
men, depended on God's help.

The Isaian passage conveys the idea that the Messias trusts, believes, and
hopes, and is, thus, a man like other men. The Messias here associates Himself in
His religious life with the men (children) whom God has entrusted to His care.

The Isaian passage is quoted after the Septuagint. In the second part of the
passage the Sept. and the Masoretic texts differ. The author has divided the second
part of the vgrse, like the Greek, into two sections, making two assertions. The Hebrew
runs: 'I and the children which God hath given to me shall be signs and portents', etc.

Since, then Christ thus puts Himself on a level generally ^\ ith other men,
it was right that He should share with men in suffering, and be made perfect by
suffering. Verse 14 will make still clearer why Jesus must be one with men in
sorrow, as in all else.

'Ay(«?eiv is a favourite word of St. Paul. He uses it in the sense of 'purifying',
'dedicating'. Christ is represented as carrying on this work of sanctifying unceasingly.

(14) Since now children share in blood and 'flesh, He hath
likewise shared therein, that He might by death destroy him who
hath power oyer death, that is, the devil,

(15) and set free all those who had been kept in slavery
throughoiit their whole life by the fear of death.

(16) For He indeed taketh not hold of angels, but He taketh
hold of the seed of Abraham.

' 14 — 16. Through their common, origin children have a common nature,
and that nature is, in the case of men, liable to pain and death. Christ by His
Incarnation became a sharer in that nature, and He became, thus, also liable to
death. It was, however, the purpose of the Incarnation that Christ by His own death >

, should overcome the prince of death, and establish the freedom of man which
had been destroyed by the ever-present fear of death. Though the primary purpose
of the death' of Christ was to overcorae death itself, the author says that Christ
died to overcome him who has power over death. This reference' to the devil would

■ suggest more clearly the origin of death and of the fear of death, and it 'would
also set forth the death of Christ as a personal victory over Satan, the. 'prince of
this world'. The devil got his power over fjeath through sin (Gen. 3, ift". ; Wlsd.
3, 24. Cf. John 8, 44; I John 3, 8. 12). By destroying sin Christ has destroyed
death, and has deprived of his power him who use'd death as his servant. If Satan
brings men to death, the death of Christ brings them to life, and therefore to
freedom from the fear of death. (Cf. i. Thess. 4, 12.) Death had been the utmost
effeqt of Satan's power ; it now ■ becomes the chief instrument of his . defeat. ' The
defeat of Satan was brought about by the, full atonement for sin which was, made
by the' death of Christ. We have here the ultimate motive of the Incarnation. Men
were to be freed from the fear of death and from Satan. This could only be
brought about by the action of One of like nature with' men and able to make
atonement, who would be willing to undertake the task of setting them free. Hence
Christ became man.

The fear of, death is abundantly illustrated in the O.T.Christ's death and

resurrection have given death a new , meaning, ahd stripped it of its terrors.

' ■ 1 ■ I ■

Angels did not stand under the devil's power, aild Christ did not,, therefore
need to assume ('take hold of) their nature. The seed of Abraham are all who are
tempted, and tried, and who trust, as Abraham did. Becoming a man meant for
Christ becoming a means for bringing men to God, i. e. a Priest. This leads on
to the following. ; ' ',

^ Cf. Chrysostom : 8t' ou ixpcttTjaeM 6,SiaPoXog, Side tofjtou ^vifii], xat b'nep itaxupbv ijv duT(|i

lO

(17) Hence it behoved Him to be made like unto the
brethren in all respects that He might become a merciful and
faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, so as to atone
for the sins of the people.

(18) For because He hath suffered, being tempted Himself
thereby. He can give help to those who are tempted.

17 — 18. We have here another reason for the humiliation of Christ — that
He might thereby come to have full and sympathetic understanding of our miseries,
and needs. In all essential points, zaTa icavra, He was one in constitution with men,
and He was one with them also in all that followed from that constitution, such as
sufferings and trials. He was thus eminently fitted to be a Mediator between men
and God, a High Priest. As sin is not a necessary part of a High Priest's equipment,
it is not included in the 'all things'. (Cf. ch. 4, 15.) Christ, being like men in all essential
features, .is a merciful and faithful High Priest in everything which has to do with
religious matters, with man's relations to God, ra ;cp6; tbv Sso'v. The most important
of a High Priest's functions was the offering of atoning sacrifices for sin, and for
the Jewish High Priest the chief offering of atoning sacrifice took place on the great
Day of Atonement. The ritual of Atonement Day is kept closely in view by the
author throughout his exposition of the Priesthood of Christ.

The readers of the Epistle were tempted, it would seem, to despair because
of their griefs, just as Jesus was 'tempted' by His (Luke 22, 28). Hence He can
sympathise with them, and give them suitable help. Thus we see here again that
what might have appeared as a token of weakness in Christ may be set forth as
the chief reason for trusting in Him.

The contrast between the temporary humiliation of Jesus, as compared with
the angels, and His superiority to them- as Son of God is, then, here further ex-
plained as due to the need of His sharing in the griefs and sorrows of human
nature in order that_ He mi'ght rescue men from sin and death. What follows
immediately is an exhortation to loyalty towads Jesus the high Priest.

In V. 18 Iv 0) can be taken either as (a) h toutw b (cf. Roms. 14, 22), or
(b) as h TouTu, on (cf. Roms. 8, 3: John 16, 3o). The main emphasis is on
neipaoOei;. IleipajEaOai is to be taken in a wide sense here as Including all the
sorrows of life and death with the temptations that went with them. Christ in
Luke 22, 28 calls His sufferings jtEip«o[j.ot.

II —

Exhortation to loyalty towards Jesus, the High Priest, 3, 1—4, i3.

Chapter 3.

Loyalty for the sake of the loyalty of Jesus, which is expounded
by contrast with the loyalty of Moses, 3, i — 6.

(i) Wherefore, holy brethren, sharers in a heavenly calling,
give heed to the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus —
(2) how true He is to' Him that hath made Hinj, just like Moses
in all His house.

I — 2. .What seemed to be weakness in Je§us is, as explained, a proof of His
greatness, and -a real source of comfort to Christians. Hence we' must be His loyal
followers. The reference to Moses may be intended to meet a further difficulty of^
the readers. Moses, the founder of the Old Testament dispensation, may have
seemed to them,, in some ways, a more imposing and successful figure than JesuSi
Even though Jesus was higher than the angels. He might yet seem to be less great
than Moses. ^ ^

The readers are brethren of Christ. Hetice they ^re at once 'brethren' and
'holy'. They have received a call to heavenly things, and that call is due to the
Apostolate of Jesus, and their holiness is due to His act of Atonement as High
Priest. Jesiis is both 'Apostle and Priest — for He brings God to men and men to
God. The readers are asked to look especially on the loyalty of Jesus towards Him
who made Him, i. e., fitte4 Him out in His humanity for His mission, or (better)
invested Him with His office.^ Moses was expressly praised for his loyalty in the
Old Testament (Numbers, 12, 6f.), and here the loyalty of Jesus is- set above, the
-loyalty of Moses. Moses is faithful in all the house of God: Christ is faithful
over all that house, (v! 6.) Neither Moses nor Jesus was associated with merely
a part of the house, as other messengers of God were, but with the' whole ;
house (with the whole divine economy in regard to the 'house').

The 'House' here is the family of God in general, including the Jewish and
Christian communities. The 'house' , of the New Test, is the continuation of that
of the Old.

For the 'House of God' compare i Thess. 3, 15; i Peter 4, 17; Ephes. 2,
21 f.; Osee 8, I.

Moses was not officially High Priest; yet he performed the duties of a High
Priest towards God's house (the faithful of Israel) in perfect, fashion.

' Cf. I Kings 12, 5 for raieiv in the sense of investing with office.

— 12

(3) But this One is esteemed yvorthy of greater honour as
compared with Moses in the same proportion as the builder has,
greater honour tha'n the house. (4) For every hotise is built by
some one, but the builder of the universe is God-

(s) And Moses was faithful in the whole house as servant
to testify what was to be spoken; (6) but Christ (is faithful) as
Son over' His house: and we are His house if we hold unshakeably
[firni to the end] confidence and the boasting of our hope.

3—4. It is implied here, that Moses was a part of God's House, that he was
a part of the system entrusted to his care. The house of which Moses was a part
was the house of Jesus, since it was the; house of God. In the first chapter of the
Epistle Jesus is described ?is the Creator of the worlds: here He appears as the
builder of the 'House', Of community, of God.

,,j Verse 4 looks like a p'hilosophical reflection thrown in, a proof of God's
ejjjstence inserted by the way. It may, however, be intended to convey that the ■
position of Jesus as builder of the house, and the position of Moses as part of
that house, ultimately depend on the ordering of God's will.

5 — 0. There are two points here: (a) Moses was loyal as a servant, but

Jesus was loyal as a Son over God's house. Cf. Matt. 21, 3y. (b). The duty of

Moses was to arinounce beforehand the blessings which Christ was to bring. The

Mosaic dispensation pointed, that is, beyond itself to the Christian, and the latter

- contains the blessings which the former foreshadowed.

There is here a further reason to inspire the readers ' of the Epistle with
confidence. They are the House of God and the house of Christ. They, must,
therefore, put aside all despondency and maintain unlimited trust in Jesus.

'Firm to the end' is, perhaps, an interpolation from verse 14. It emphasises
the thought, however, that we are of the house of God and Christ only if we
hold fast to Christ with serene and untroubled confidence.

'Boasting of our hope' = boasting which is rooted in hope (the hope of
which we boast). The 'hope' is of course the Christian hope, the hope of the
glory reserved for the children of God. Hitherto they had rightly boasted of that
hope; now they are tempted to give uptheir hope and their boasting. Cf. Roms. 5, 2.
If, in spite of all difficulties, the readers hold fast to the hope of which they have
hitherto boasted, they remain the community, or house, of the Son of God.

'— i3 —

A further reason for confidence. The punishment of want of
loyalty in the contemporaries of Moses, j — ig.

(7) Hence, as the Holy Spirit saith: To-day, if ye hear His
voice, "(8) harden not your hearts ,as at the Provocation on the
day of the Temptation in the desert, (g) when your fathers tried
me with tests, and saw my works for forty years (10) ^and I said;
'They are evermore going astray in their heart.' But they paid ho
heed to my ways, (ii)so that I sware.m my anger: 'They shall
not enter into my rest,' , ,

(ra)' See, therefore, brethren, that there be not in any of
you an evil heart of, unbelief (shown) in falling away from the
living God; (i3) but rather encourage each other each day so
long as it is still called 'To-day' (so long as 'To-day' may still
be said), so that none of you may be hardened by the deceit of
sin. (14) For we are the comrades of Christ, provided only that
we hold firm the beginning of confidence even to the end. '

7 — 14. Even though the Israelites had seen , the wonders performed by, God
in the desert for 40 years, they still fsiiled in loyalty, and tried to frustrate the plans
of God. Similarly the Christians have seen the wonders that accompanied the first
preaching of the Faith, and yet are inclined. tO' despair and rebel. The raurmurers
in Israel were shut out from the 'Rest' of Wie Promised Land as a punishment for
their failure to understand God's ways. This should serve as a warning to Christians. .
The danger against which each one of them is warned is that of falling away from
God. It is, further, pointed out that each one has a responsibility for his brother
in this matter. Each must encourage his brother so long as ir is still ,To7^day' —
' that is, the interval between cortversion and judgment. The 'deceit of sin' , Is: the
attempt of sin to convincB them that it is folly to hold fast to Christ. It is only
by holding firmly to Christ that the wiles of sin can be defeated, and Christians
be shown to be true comrades of Christ.

In the Hebrew text exacerbatio and tentatio appear as place-names, Nleribah
and Massah (cf. Ps. 95(94), 8; Ex. 17, 1—7; Num. 20,, i— 13; Num. 14) and in
Psalm 95 (94) the 40 years appears as the timfe during which God w!(S angry,
rather than as the time during which God dispensed His merties. It has been often
suggested that the reference to 40 years here is a hint that these words -were written
at the close of the period 40 — 70 A. D. ■ |

The itarajcauoi;, the occupation of Palestine, was a precondition of Messianic
salvation, but not that salyation itself. The 'Rest' is still to be secured. If the
present generation sins, it also may be shut out froni the 'Rest'.

OrcdoTOsis ihv. 14 means confident expectation. It is parallel to jiapp»|o!a and
x«uxiC-« tr)S iX^tiSo;. The 'beginning of confidence' means" beginning i n confidence ;
i. e.. Christian life must begin with confidence in Christ, and that confidence must
go on to the end.

— ,14 —

(is) When it is said; 'To-day if ye hear His voice, harden
not your hearts as at the Provocation, (i6) vs^ho, I ask, were they
who heard (the voice), and embittered (God)? Were they not all
who were led forth by Moses from Egypt?

(17) With whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not
with those who had sinned, whose bodies had fallen in the desert.

(18) To whom did He swear that they should not enter into
His rest? Was it not to those who had been disobedient?

(19) And we see that they could not enter in because of
(their) unbelief.

15 — 19. In verses 15 — 19 we have a commentary on the passage from
Ps. 94. In verse 15 the construction is taken as, 'When it is said etc., who were
those addressed?' This implies the taking of tivs; of v. 16 as an interrogative, (rivE?)
and not as an jndefinite pronoun (tivs;). Verses 17 and 18 support this view of
tive;. It is also the opinion of the oldest exegetes. Read, therefore, tIve; = qui,
not -nvE? = quidam.

This generation has seen even greater wonders from the hand of God than
did the generation of those who came forth from Egypt. Let us, then, take care
that we are ' not overtaken by a punishment even greater than that which befel the
generation of the Exodus, whose bpnes were left to bleach in the desert. In the
case of the Israelites, those who angered God were the same who had received
His favours. Their 'bones bleaching in the desert were the lasting tokens of God's
wrath. Though the desert was merely a place to be passed through on the way to
the Land of Rest (Palestine), it became the grave of a whole generation. By their
own unbelief the Israelites shut themselves out from the peace and rest of the
Promised Land.

The 'increduW of the Vulgate obscures the distinction between amdiEfv and
aTOiOEfv: the Old- Latin has contumaces. The disobedience, towards God was
iiltimately rooted in unbelief, — want of faith in the goodness and power, of God.

The concluding verse (19) reinforces the warning in verse 12.

— 15 —

Chapter 4.

A TParning not to risk the loss of the heavenly Rest, ^, i — ii.

I

(i) Let us, then, be filled with dread lest, while the promise
of entering into His Rest still holds good, any one of you should
be found to be left behind.

(2) For we too have received glad tidings, just like those.
Yet the word of preaching was of no use to those, since it was
not united with faith for those who heard.

(3) For we are entering into the Rest — we who have
believed — as He hath said: 'So that I sware in my wrath:
They shall not enter into my Rest;' though the works were com-
plete since the beginning of the world. (4) For He hath said
somewhere concerning the seventh day:. 'And God rested on the
seventh day from all His works;' (5) and here again: 'They
shall not enter into my Rest.'

I — 5. As the Israfelites of old had received a promise of Rest, which was
still unfulfilled, that promise still holds good. Hence the Rest may be forfeited
now as then. Let them take care that no one of them hear fram the Judge the
sentence: 'Too late!'

The Christians are, as regards the promise of the Rest, in the same position
as the ancient Israelites, and what happened of' old , to the Israelites may happen
now to the Christians. To make the promise of the Rest effective the Christian
must take it to himself by faith, for without that faith the word of the new preaching
may remain as external to the Christians as was the message of the ancient
preaching to the Israelites.

Verses 3 — 4 show 'that the 'Rest' still really existed. At the close of the
work of creation God entered on His Rest, and since God swore- concerning His
Rest during the lime of the desert wanderings, that Rest must have still existed
at that time. It' cannot be said that the Israelites failed to enter into the Rest be-
cause the latter did not exist: it existed, in fact, from the -close of the Creation.
. Since, then, those to whom the Rest was offered did not accept it, it remains
still accessible, for, as wp can infer from His oath, God does not wish to keep
His Rest altogether for Himself.

uo-uEperv in V. I means to come too late, or to fall short of — Cf. ch. 12, 15.
8o:i£rv has here an objective sense — 'be found to be' (not 'think themselves to be').

In V. 2 there are several readings. The translation here given renders the
reading truvzEZEpaojAsvos. The 'word' was not fully assimilated wijh those who hear^
it: vi\ TCicrtEi is t^e instrumental dative. The word would be assimilated by faith.

— i6 —

(6) Since then it follows that some enter into it, and since
those who formerly received the glad tidings, did not enter in
because of disobedience, (7) He again determines a 'To -Day',
speaking through David after so long a time, as was said before:
'To-day if ye hear my voice, harden not your hearts', (8) for if
Josue had brought them to rest He would not subsequently have
spoken of another day.

(9) Hence a Sabbath-rest still awaits the people of God;
(10) for he who entereth into his rest hath on his part rest from
his works, just as God hath, from His own. (11) Let- us, then,
earnestly strive to enter into that Rest, tha^ no one may come to
destruction after that fashion of disobedience.

6-7^8. It is clear that the Rest is intended for some^ at least, and it is also
clear that those for whom the Rest was first intended did ilot enter into it. Hence
we find God again, long subsequently to the period of the Exodus, speaking of a
new time-limit for entering the Rest, and issuing, as it were, a new invitation to
men to snter His Rest. The 'To-day' of the Psalpi-passage is spoken of in the
Davidic period, which was several centuries later than the Mosaic period. It must,
therefore, refer tt) a date much later than that of the wamiijg given in the desert.

The Rest in question" could not 'be merely the occupation of Palestine, for
while that occupation was carried out in the time of Josue, the Psalm-text shows
that .long after the time of Josue, the Rest was still spoken of as not yet attained.

9 — II, The Sabbath-rest is kept, ,then, for the Messianic age. That Sabbath-
rest is a sharing in the Sabbath-rest of God which began with the close of Creation.
Just as God's Rest followed His labour, so the Sabbath-rest to be reached by
Christians can only be secured by labour: it is not, therefore,, a privilege belonging
inalienably to everyone who has accepted the faith. It is to be noted that in con-
temporary Jewish theology the Messianic time was usually compared to a Sabbath-rest.

In verse ti th« exhortation of verse i is repeated. By disobedience the
desert-generation came to destruction. Let not a similar misfortune befall us;

Note hpw the 'Rest' comes to be identified with the <r«|3(3«Tio[j.o'; (v. 9). The
'To-day- of verse 7 is, the 'To-day' of Ps. 94, and the 'To-day' still holds good
for the time between David and the present (Christian) period. The reasoning implies
the; Messianic character of Ps. 94. The 'Rest' of the period following the occupation
of Palestine, though it was not the genuine 'Rest' of God, was symbolical of that
'Rest'. The true 'Rest' is a sharing in the Sabbath of the Creator.

— 17 —

The Word of God as the guarantee of the promise of the Rest,

12 — 13.

(12) For living is tiie word of God, and energising, and
keener than any two-edged sword, and penetrating even to the
division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and a judge of
the thoughts afid opinions of the heart.

(i3) And no creature is hidden before Him: everything is
revealed and laid bare before the eyes of Him to Whom we must
give reckoning.

12, The 'word' here is not directly the divine Logos, the Second Divine Person.
It is tlie word of revelation and promise given to men by God. As the word of
the living God it is itself living ■ — the living and vivifying breath, as it were, of
God, living like the light that streams from the sun, or , the lightning that flashes
from the skies. It is not a mere sound, but a productive, creative force. It brings
grace and favour, or condemnation — for it is a two-edged sword. A ipaterial
sword cleaves material things, but the sword of God's word cleaves even, t(^, that
mysterious point where soul and spirit are fitted together: it reaches jhe, division

-of joints and marrow, penetrating thus the most hidden depths of our being. It reaches
also into the most secret recesses of our' souls, discerning the emotions and ^ the
tendencies of the" heart. No thought, even the most hidden, can escape its light.

1 3. A word powerful like this cannot be evaded; it must produce its effect; it
rhust be fulfilled. If naught can be concealed from the penetrating power of the
word of God, and it becomes a judge of our inner being, that rhust be still more
true of Goci Himself. - '

The auTou in v. l3 refers to God — not to the word. TEtpa^rjXKjjiEva is from
zpctfjjKXoi which, apparently, means the bending back of the head, of a sacrificial
victim so as to expose fully the neck. Before God we sh4I stand utterly naked.
With Him we reiust deal — ad' quern nobis sermo.

This passage (12. 1 3) is rhythmic in character, and hfis something of the
quality of the Wisdom of Solomon. The word is here alihost treated as a Person.
Conipare the following' passages. Is. 55, lof. : ~Wisd.. 18, 15; Prov. 5, 4: Ephes. 6,
17: Wisd. 7, 22 f.: 2 Tim. 3, 16. There is no need to look here for borrowings
from Philo.

The High Priesthood of Jesus, 4, 14 — lO, iS.
Jesus as High Priest with full personal experience, 4, 14 — 16.

(14) Since we have, then, a High Priest who hath passed
through the heavens, Jesus the Son. of God, let iis hold firmly
to the confession. (15) For we have not a High Priest who is
unable to realise in Himself our weaknesses, but rather one who
hath been tried in every way like us, without sin.

(16) Let us, therefore approach with corifidence to the throne
of grace, so that we 'may receive mercy, and find grace unto help
in due season.

14 — 16. The theme of Jesus as High Priest is here resumed. It will occupy
the greater portion of the remainder of the Epistle. As the Jewish High Priest passed
through the Tabernacle on the feast of Atonement, so Jesus has passed through the
heavens, into the presence of the Father. It is our duty to hold firmly to our
loyalty towards such a glorious High Priest. Even though this High Priest is the
Son of God He is not cold and distant towards us. Rather is He full of sympathy
for our needs. From His, own experience He has learned how miserably weak
men are, but He has, of course, learned this apart from sin. Since He was our
comrade in grief and suffering. He has compassion on us, and, therefore, He opens
up for us the way to the throne of gracfe, where He, the great High Priest, secures
for us mercy and favour when we need therh.

Hence we are not like the Israelites of old who approached the Lord in fear
and trembling: we can approach to the throne of God with confidence; for the
throne of justice has become a throne of grace, since Christ has taken His seat at
the right hand of the Father.

The thought of Jesus as High Priest must have been a familiar one in the
early Church, and particularly, among the readers of the Epistle. One can imagine
that among the Jews the dignity of the High Priest was respectW as almost divine.
Here, as throughout the Epistle, the writer has mainly in view the functions of
the Jewish High Priest on the ' Atonement Day when he contrasts the position and
functions of the new High Priest with those of the old.

The 'temptations' of Jesus were such as might arise from external things
or liormal disturbances of His inner self, but ne*er such as arise in us through
concupiscefnce. No temptation in Him was in any way due to sinful tendency. It
is possible to take x<"pU afi«pi:!a« as a limitation of zara jcavra, or of xa6' 6(ioiot»]i:a.
The throne of grace is obviously the thrpne of God, not the throne of Christ.
ESxaipos suggests that the help will be given when needed — in the hour of
temptation and struggle.

IIpocripxEoOai is a favourite word of the author: Gf. 7, 2<; 10, i. 22; II, 6;'
12, 18. 22.

' -^ 19

Chapter 5.

Jesus as a true High Priest possessing all the qualities demanded
of the Aaronite High Priest, 5, / — 10.

(i) For every High Priest, being taken from among men, is
appointed as a representative of men in the things that i;efer to
God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins (2) as one who
can be mild with' the ignorant and erring, since he himself is
encompassed with weakness, (3) and because lOf it must make
offerings for sin on behalf of the people and on his own behalf.

(4) And none taketh the honour but . one who has been
called by God, just as Aaron.

1 — 4. The first quality required in a true Higii priefet is -similarity in nature
with those for whom he acts as priest. Hence if Jesus were God and not also man,
He would be inferior as a Mediator to the Jewish High Priests. To be a High
Priest it was, therefore, necessary that He should become Man. In the second place,
a High Priest should be capable of understanding and sympathising with human
frailties, and of distinguishingthe different kinds of sins in iregard to their malice
and deliberation.^ Thirdly a High Priest must have received a call to act^ as Priest.'
The author will proceed in the verses that follow (5 — 10) to show that all those
qualities are fully present in Jesus.

A High Priest must be taken from among men, for only a man can be
representative of men. The 'gifts' and 'sacrifices' pover the whole class of
sacrificial offerings. As a rule the Jewish High Priest offered sacrifice only on
Sabbaths and feast-days: but the author has here in view chiefly the sacrifice on
the Day of Atonement. (Cf. Leviticus ch. 1 6.)

RUTpioTcaOeiv suggests the mean betvfreen apathy 'and unbridled passion: it is
not the same as su^jtaSsIv, but implies calm understanding of, and kindness towards
the erring. 1

The Jewish High Priest was clad with fraihy as with a garment, and therefore,,
had to offer for himself, as well as for. others, on Atonement Day.

Since all men are sirjful no man, as such, can have the right of mediating
between -men and God. Even Aaron, the first High Priest, had to be called. Christ
was sinless, and yet He did not of himself assume the rank of High Priest, but
waited to be called or appointed; for as one standing between God' and man the
priest must be capable of representing mart, and must be also established by God
as official mediator.

> The Levitical theology distinguished carefully fretween sins of ignorance and ^ins
which were committed 'with raised-up hand' (conscious opposition to the Law); for sins
committed in ignorance (the difvo^^nota of ch. g, 7) atonement liad to be made. (Cf. Leviticus 4,
i3ffj and chap. 16.) '

2*

. __ 20 —

(s) So, too, Christ hath not taken to Himself the honour of
becoming High Priest, but He who said to Him: 'Thou art my
Son; this day I have begotten Thee.'

(6) As He elsewhere saith: 'Thou art Priest forever according;
to the order of Melchisedech'.

5 — 6. No man can appoint himself a priest, or officialmediator, between God
and men. Neither can men appoint a man to this office. The appointment, or call,
must come from God. So, it was even with the Son of God. Jesus was necessarily
made a Priest when He became man, for by His incarnation He became of necessity

' a Mediator between' God and men. Though Jesus was Son of God from all eternity, .
the words of Psalm 2 hete addressed to Him by the Father: 'Thou art my Son;
this day I have begotten Thee,' are taken as' spoken to Him at the moment of the
Incarnation. This declaration of the Father is, then, practically equivalent to a
declaration of the Priesthood of Christ. The appointment of Jesus as Priest is
clearer still in the text of Psalm no (log), 4: 'Thou art a priest for ever according
to the order of Melchisedech.' TJhough Jesus is here declared to be a Priest, not
a High Priest, yet His Priesthood, as the Priesthood of the Son of God, could

.npt be other than a High Priesthood. Though the following verses 9 and 10 seem
to imply that it was not until after the Resurrection that the. Priesthood of Jesus
, was made complete, the teaching of this Epistle is that the offering' on Calvary
wis a genuinely priestly offering, and that therefore, Jesus performed priestly functions
on, earth. Verse 10 may be taken as meaning that, though Jesus performed priestly
functions on earth, yet the official seal was not set on His Priesthood, as it were,
until after the Ascension. Christ is a Priest secundum ordinem Melchisedech, «ri

Ti^ii can mean 'position', 'post', 'rank', 'prescript, 'ordinance' (Cf. 7, 11.
15. 17); in the Psalm-text cited it, represems the Hebrew dibhrah which in the
context of the Psalm, means 'fashion', 'manner'. In ch. 7, 15 of this Epistle the
phrase is rendered in the Greek -mxi. r^jv 6|xoioo,™ M, 'according to the likeness of
Melchisedech'. In ch. 7, i, the ta?t; of Melchisedech is contrasted witti the loJ^i;
of Aaron, and seems ro mean there a norm, or rule, governing the priesthood.

The Melchisedech-priesthood given to Jesus is peculiar in several ways-
(a It IS given to Jesus alone; (b) it is eternal; (c) it is associated with kingship.
All, these things follow from an analysis of the Scripture references to Melchisedech
(,Gt. ch. 7). Patristic writers have usually seen in the bread and wine offered by
Melchisedech (Gen. 14, ,8; Proferens panem et vinum, erat enim Sacerdos Dei
Altisstrm, the Greek being, li^vsy.sv Sp^ou; x«i oU.- r> Ss l.psb; too 8«u rou OAJaxou

and the Hebrew brought forth bread and wine: and he was a priest of

El Elyon) a type of the Eucharistic sacrifice, and » further point of resemblance «
between the priesthoods of Christ and Melchisedech;, but the author does not make
any use of this, point of comparison in this Epistle.

(7) Who (i. e. Ghrist) in the ,days of His' flesh offered up
prayer and supplications to Him who could save Him from death,
with a loud cry and tears, and was heard because of (His) rever-
ential fear (8) and though He was Son, He learned obedience
from that which He suffered: (9) and, Himself made perfect. He
became for all who obey Him the author of eternal salvation,
(10) designated by God as High Priest 'according to the order
of Melchisedech'.

7 — 10. The expressions in verse 7 refer more naturally to the Agony in the
Garden than to the Crdcifixion. The verse is connected with the preceding by the
thought that the urgency of Christ's prayer in the Agony proves that He did not
assume the rank of High' Priest out of any spirit of overweening pride. In the
Agony He was deeply humiliated. This verse and the following should be carefully,
compared with the celebrated passage in Philippians .2, 5 ff. ,

The 'who' obviously refers ba'ck to the chief subject of vv. 5 — 6. 'Who
could save Him from death ' suggests the object of Jesus' petition : the resignatipn
of Jesus to the Father's will is also, probably, conveyed in the description of the
latter as SuvajiEvo; atojeiv. ' 1

Pro sua reverentia, , aitb t^; eOXapEiois, has been interpreted in two ways:
(a) From fear ^ away from fear, i. e. He was heard, and was rescued from
the fear of death: (b") Fear =. reverential fear, i.e., He was heard because of
the reverential fear "through which He submitted Himself fully to the divine^ will.
It was not so much for rescue firom death as for perfect union with the 'divine
will, that Jesus prayed ,in His Agony. Hence dm tt]; Eu?io:[3£{a; states the reason
why He ; was heard. He was heard inasmuch as the perfect union with the Father's
will which He sought was attained. The second interpretation is accepted- here in
translation.

Christ as man surrendered Himself absolutely to God, and thus did He,
though He was the Creator of fhe world, learn obedience through, suffering.. The
perfect self-surrender of Christ made Him perfect, as Man, and His sacrifice of
obedience became a source of grace and perfection -for His followers. The biblical
designation of Christ' as High Priest confirms all this. , As a High Priest He can
atone for the sins of His people, and thus become the apj^rjyds or a'aio; of their
aiuxripia — their rescue from sin, and' their investiture with grace. Notice how
apXtEpsu;, 'High Priest', is here substituted for 'priest' in the Psalm-passage.

' The npoaayopEuEiv of v. jo is probably to be thought of as following the
Resurrection. See above on. v. 5. icpoaayopsuOsi; means ,n6t merely 'named', or
'called', but 'recognised as'.

TeXeimGei; of V. 9 does not imply that Jesus as a person possessed originally
no more than a relative moral perfection. Some coram, take the word as niaking
a contrast with 'the days of the flesh' and as expressing, therefore, the heavenly
glory of the Risen Christ; The word tsXeiouv does not necessarily imply a progress
from a less perfect state: it may simply express the condition of one who has
arrived at a goal, or of one who is mature.

22

Difficulty of putting the matter plainly because of the dispositions
and condition of the readers, 5, // — 6, 8.

(11) On that point (the High-Priesthood of Christ) we have
much to say, and it is difficult to expound it, for yt have grown
dull of hearing. (12) For while, as regards time, ye ought novv
to be teachers, ye still need someone to teach you the simplest
elements of the oracles of God, and ye have become such that
ye need milk and not solid food.

(i3) For everyone who lives on milk is untrained in ordinary
speech — for he is a child: (14) but to grown people belongeth
solid food, since they, because of age, have their senses trained
to distinguish good from evil.

II — 14. The difficulty of making plain all the meaning of the Priesthood of
Jesus arises from the fact that, instead of acquiring an ever increasing sharpness of
spiritual perception, the readers have been growing duller of sense. It is so long
since they were instructed in the faith that they ought now to be, advanced enough
to act as teachers: yet they still need instruction in the simplest elements.

It is probably better to read in v. 12 riva 'someone', taking it with the
infinitive oiSctoxeiv, than -uiv*, 'which' (interrogative), taking it with '^xoiyv.a.. They
require someone to teach them the elements, not, 'they require to learn which are
the elements.'

The oxoiyfia. t^; apx% ^^e the a. b.' c, the very beginnings. The 'oracles
of God' are the words spoken by Christ. In the beginning of ch. 6 we are told
what the 'milk' was. The 'solid food' is obviously the teaching concerning the
Priesthood of Christ.

It may, perhips, be inferred from this passage that the readers have already
for a long time been Christians. May it also be inferred that their chief danger
was spiritual insensibility?

Xofo; Si/.aiooiv»)5 means ordinary, or correct, speech: viJTCio; yap laTiv bears
out this meaning. It might, less probably, be taken as the solid food of the perfect,
viz. the preaching of justice. The whole context, however, favours the other
explanation — the speech which is customary among the full grown.

Xoy. Sizaioouvr); may be taken as a Hebraism, 'of justice' being = 'just': just
means due, or normal.

The readers are unable to distinguish good and evil: they lack spiritual per-
ception: they are not in earnest with their faith. Yet men will not willingly remain
viimo;: they will prefer to be full grown, and to be fit for solid food.

To this solid food the writer will now pass on.

(For 'milk' as symbol of elementary teaching cf. I Cor. 3 2:1 Pet. 2, 2.)

— 23

Chapter 6.

(i) We will then put aside the first principles of Chris,tian
teaching, and press on to perfection, not laying again a foundation
of repentance .from dead works, and of belief in God, (2) of the
doctrine of baptisms, of the laying on of hands, of the resurrection
of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

1-^2. The readers are not lacking in elementary knowledge, but in earnestness,
and in keenness of spiritual perceplion, Tliey are, indeed, in some sense, 'full-
grown', and, so he will give them the solid food of higher teaching. The 'we' in
'we will put aside', and 'we will press on', is the we of authorship: it does not
include the readers.

6 -ri); apXTis Tou XpioTou Xdyo; is elementary teaching of which Christ is the
theme. The writer is; determined not to impart this again — even though some
of his reaclers, possibly, might need it.

Oe[jieXiov may be taken with the six genitives that follow it, as in the trans-
lation aboye. It is also possible to take [ictavoia;, nicrtEto; and Si8a)(fi5 as depeijdent
on OejjieXiov, and the other genitives as dependent on oiBaj^ij?. A third possibility
exists of taking SiSa)(^^s alotie as depending on OEjilXiov, and the remaining genitives
as depending on SiSaxrj?. For 'dead works', cf. 9, 14: they are works done by
those who are not possessed of the supernatural life.;^ It is the Pauline teaching
that life prior to Baptism is a condition of death. In Roms. I, 20 ff. St. Paul gives
a vivid description of the condition and attitude of those in the Pagan world who
might be regarded as the doers of 'dead works'.

It has been conjectured that the reference to faith in Qod' here shows that
the Epistle was addressed to Gentile 'Christians, since the Jews would be possessed
of that, faith before conversion to Christianity, The faith, however, which is here"
meant is specifically Christian faith, which' for the Jews, as well as for the pagans,
was something entirely new.

There is some difficulty in explaining the plural 'baptisms.' The plural may
be intended to suggest the different immersions which were a feature of the rite
of Christian Baptism. Or, a contrast with Jewish Baptisms, or with the Baptism
of John (cf. John 3, 25 ff.; Acts, 18, 25; 19, 3) may be intended.

Laying on of hands is here separated , from baptism, and evidently- refers to
the sacrament of Confirmation. ' The Resurrection and the Judgment were clearly
themes of elementary instruction. These points of fundamental Christian instruction
here mentioned must have been of very special importance for the readers of the
Epistle — why we do not know.

— 24 --

(3) And this we will do, if indeed God permitteth it. (4) For
it is impossible to renew again to penance those who have been
once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have
become sharers in the Holy Spirit, (5) and have tasted the glorious
word of God, and the powers of a future v^orld, (6) and then
have fallen away; since they crucify again for themselves the Son
of God and make Him an object of mockery.

3-6. The 'this' which the author will do is 'the pressing on to the more perfect
things' of. verse i. If the readers have fallen away so much as to disregard the
primary truths and principles of Christianity, their condition is hopeless. In verse 4
the author describes the blessings of the Christian calling. The 'enlightenment'
spoken of reminds us of the transition from being sons of darkness to the condition
of sons of light which is involved in conversion to the faith, according to Col. i, i3.
(Cf. -10, 32; Ephes. I, 19;- 3, 9; 2 Tim. i, ic") The enlightenment in question does
not affect the understanding merely, but the whole being. The transformation qf
men into creatures of light is effected at baptism. ,

The ,heavenly gift' is the grace of redemption, the whole complex of the
blessings of redemption — and- not mprely one of those blessings. By the imposition
of hands the readers hati become sharers in the Holy Spirit — especially by re-
ceiving the charisms. 'Tasting the word of God' means experiencing the consoling
effects of the Gospel. (The idea of 'tasting' may have been derived from Ps. 33, 9.)
The 'powers of the coming world' are the new vital energies of the Christian
period: they include all the wondrous powers of healing and blessing which
characterised the Messianic period.

' In verse 6 the author wishes to say that when the Christian life, with its
fulness of blessing, has been abandoned,' it is impossible for the preacher or
missionary to build it up again in those who have cast it aside. It is impossible
to rouse erstwhile Christians from their second death. They crucify Christ, as far
as they can (they approve of His Crucifixion), and make Him an object of mockery.
The return to the Faith of such conscious perverts is impossible because they will
not return. For these Christ has become an object of hate and mockery — instead
of a source of light and strength. It is useless to put the elementary truths before
such ,,men again.

Early exegesis understood tptoti^eoOai and «v«x«iv(^£iv as referring to Baptism.
Since Baptism cannot be repeated, the Christian life cannot be begun over again
by Baptism ( — though it might, of course, begin again by penance). It cannot,
hpwever, be proved that 9(u'ui?EoO«i refers in Biblical language to Baptism. Notice
that the Latin renders avazoiiviI^Eiv by renovari, instead of renovare. The impossibility,
however, affects the preacher.

— '25 —

(y) For a soil which hath drunk in the abundant rain thaf
has fallen on it, and bringeth forth u'seful produce for those by
whom it is tilled, receiveth a blessing from God.

(8) But if it beareth thorns and thistles, it is worthless, and
is nigh unto a cursej and its end is to be burned.

. The' hope which overcomes , all things. 6, g — 20.

,(9) But we are persuaded. Beloved, of better things in your
regard; and of things helping towards salvation — ^ven when we
speak thus.

(10) For God is not unjust so as- to forget your works dnd
the love which ye have shovvn towards His name, when ye
m-inistered, and minister to the saints.

7 — 10. The sense of the comparison is that {he readers who have received the
rich gifts of God's grace, receive still greater gifts when they bear a harvest of
faith and love. Buth when, in spite 'of graces received, they bring forth naught
but sin, they are Valueless in God's sight, and, in the end, God's curse will fall
upon them. (Cf. Genesis i, 1 1 ; 3, lyf.) The nearness of the curse implies that it
is not yet quite at hand. (Cf. Matt. I, 12, 3if.)

Note that aSo'/.ip.o? is a genuinely Pauline word.

(9) What he has said is Only a warning against what might happen, not a
threat of something immediately impending. The writer's hope in his readers is
istill strong. It is. based" on their generous charity, which shows the genuineness
of their faith.

The address 'Beloifed' is intended to remove the sting of hardness and
severity in the preceding. ' , , '

The 'better things' and the 'things helping to salvation' refer to the general
religious condition of the readers. They are lilie the fruitful" soil, and they are not
iiigh unto a curse. The writer is convinced that there is some relation between
the, works of men and the grace of God; and that God cannot forget their charity
towards the 'Saints'. The motive ,of' charity shown towards the Saints must
ultimately be the love of God (love of His name). It has been suggested that
there might be here some implication of a collection made by. -the readers for the
Christians of Jerusalem. , But these were not the only Cliristians who were called
'saints'. Cf. ch. 10, 32 — 34. , ,

— 26 —

(ii) But we desire that each one of you should show the
same zeal jn regard to the fulness of hope to the end, (12) that
ye may not grow dull, but rather be imitators of those who by
faith and perseverance inherit the promises.

God's blessing as guarantee of success, i3 — ig.

(i3) For when God gave Abraham a promise, since He could
swear by no greater one He sware by Himself, (14) saying: 'I will
surely bleas thee, and I will surely multiply thee'.

(15) And so he, after patient waiting, attained the promise.

II — 12. Those addressed are good in many ways. Yet they need to be more
zealous. They are somewhat indifferent, and they are dull in spiritual comprehension.
Hence the example of genuinely earnest Christians is held up before them. The
readers are exhorted to be as confident in hope as they are z?alous and energetic
in works of charity. They are exhorted to put unquestioning trust in the promises
of God, imitating thus the heroes of faith in the Old Dispensation, and the fervent
followers of Ch'rist in the New. They must look beyond the trials of this life to
the certain hope of the future, keeping up thus 'the boasting of their hope'.

i3. There cannot be any ground of fear lest the blessings of the Christian
Dispensation should prove unattainable. They can surely be attained by patient
fidelity in the things of the Christian life. In this Abraham is an example. He was
the first to receive explicitly the promise — the promise which contained in itself
all the others. God strengthened His promise by an oath : and as He was Himself
supreme above all things, He swore by Himself.

, 14 — 15- God promised Abraham blessing and increase. Abraham enduring in

hope lived to see the promise, in part at least, fulfilled. For the promises made to
Abraham see Gen. 12, 2f.; i3, 16; 15, 5ff.; 17, sff.; 22, i6f. The words of the
oath in Gen. 22, 16 are not here exactly quoted.

In verse 14 the Latin nisi represents the Greek e fiijv, which is frequent
in the Septuagint : it is the vulgar form of the classical ^ [jltjv : it would seem as
if it were intended to reproduce an 'im lo\ of the Hebrew (though this is not in
the Masoretic text of Gen. 22, 16 f.) — which would correctly introduce an
affirmative oath.

— 27 —

(i6) For men swear by a greater one, and the oath is to
them a surety beyond all contradiction. (17) Hence God, wishing
to put before the heirs of the promise still more clearly the
unchangeableness of His will, gave guarantee with an oath.-

(18) So that by two unchangeable things, in which God
cannot by any possibility Speak falsely, we have a sure consplation
when we have sought refuge in seizing the hope offered (to us):
(19) in which we have a sure anchor of the soul which reacheth
even behind the veil, (20) whither, as Forerunner^ Jesus for us
hath entered in, having become a High Priest for ever accordiug
to the order of Mekhisedech.

16 — 20. An oath among men has two results, a negative, and a positive.
On the one hand it puts an end to all contradiction or gainsaying. On the other
hand it confirms that in favour of which it is prbnout;ced. The oath of God referred
to here is the same as that in verse 14. The two unchangeable things are the pro-
mise and the oath.. The will, or plan, of God here spoken of, is the plan to give
a blessing to all through the seed of Abraham.

■'When we have sought refuge in seizing etc.', that is, 'when we fled for
refuge (at the due moment) to take hold of.' We cast aside, every consideration
except that of laying hold of the hope which Jay before us. (Cf. Ch. 12, i. 2.)

Hope in the fulfilment of God's word is compared with an anchor which
reaches over into the unseen world, and unites us firmly with it. That other world
is not a mere fancy: it is a reality, since Jesus has entered into it as our, Forerunner.
Moreover He helps us to arrive there, acting for" us as a High Priest according to
the order of Mekhisedech. The veil behind which the hope reaches is the veil which
. shuts us out from the presence of God — like the veil which hung before, the Most
Hply Place. Into the Most Holy Place of the heavenly Tabernacle our hope reaches,
and thither Jesus helps us to come by offering to God His sacrifice of Himself.

Here we have arrived again at the theme broached in 5, 10, — the Mel-
chisedech-l'ike High Priesthood of Jesus. The three following chapters will treat
of this theme. 'The thought of Jesus as Priest is mainly connected with His self-
oblation on Calvary. That sacrifice marked the beginning of a new epoch, and it
was, therefore, natural that the author should look for a type of Christ|s Priest-
hood outside, and beyond, the limits of the Aaronite priesthood.

In 4, 14 — 5, 10 it is shown that Jesus possesses the qualities of a High
Priest, and now the author goes on to show how greatly the Priesthood of Jesus
exceeded that of the Jews. It is a new Priesthood, typified and symbolised, not by
the Levitical priesthood' but by that of Mekhisedech. The fi^re of Melchisedecn
appears here enveloped in mystery.

28 —

The priesthood of Melchisedech, 7, i-^io.

Chapter 7

(i) For this Melchisedech King of Salem, Priest of God Most
High, who met Abraham when he was returning from the defeat
of the kings and blessed him, (2) to whom also Abraham gave
tithes of all things, who is, in the first place, explained 'as 'King
of justice,' and, in the next place, as 'King of Salem,' i. e.,
'King of Peace,' (3) fatherless, motherless, without genealogy,
without beginning of days or end of life but made like unto the
Son of God, remains Priest for ever.

_i_

I — 3. The author has hitherto shown that Jesus possesses all the features of a
genuine high Priest. He now goes on to show that the Priesthood of Jesus surpasses
the priesthood of Levi and Aaron. But yet, the priesthood of Jesus is not something
unconditionally new and unexpected; it is the fulfilment of something which served
as its type in the ancient period. This something is the priesthood of Melchisedech.

Great iniporta'nce is attached to the comparison of Melchisedech with Christ.
The author's method of exegesis recalls that of Philo. He aims at citing every'
detail which emphasises the importance of Melchisedech, and using the points thus
secured as a -basis for inference concerning the Priesthood of Christ. The Scripture
material on which he/works is taken from Genesis 14, "17 — 20, and Psalm, 1 10 (109), 4.
The Scripture data dealing with thp positive features pf Melchisedech — his kingship,
priesthood,' receiving of tithes — are first considered. Then the author derives
further arguments from the szVence ' of Scripture about the origin and destiny of
Melchisedeeh. {Cf. supra ch. 5, 5 — 6.) '

The name of Melchisedech ('King of Justice'), and that of his city Salem
(= 'Peace') prove that justice and peace must be associated with his person.^ The
meeting with Abraham described in Gen. 14 is looked on as a turning-point in his
career. The silence of Scripture as to his parents makes him — as far as the text
of Scripture goes — like unto the Son of God. That his priesthood is for ever" is
inferred ffom the absence of all Scripture reference to his death.

Melchisedech was King; he was also Priest of the Supreme God; when he
met Abraham he .exercised a function of his priesthood in blessing the patriarch,
and the patriarch in acepting the blessing, acknowleged the priestly rights of
Melchisedech. Like the Messias M. is king of justice and peace, and like the .Messias
also, he is fatherless and motherless. The priestly rigths of an Aaronite priest
depended' on his genealogy, but M. needed no genealogy — his priesthood is
altogether personal. M. is like Christ — without beginning or end. Since his days
do not end, neither does his Priesthood.

It is best to take the participles in verse 3 as expressing attributes of M.
Salem^ is taken a's = Shalom, 'peace'. For Shalem, as name of Jerusalem cf.— besides
Gen. 14, 18 — Ps. 76 (75), 3. 'Justice' and 'Peace' are essential features of the Messianic
rule (cf. Zach. 9, 9; Mai. 3, 20; Is., 9, 5, etc.). The 'made like to the Son of God',
is to be referred,! probably, to (jdjte etpj^rjv ^[jispojv [j.t)TE ^10^5 xi\z% tiw^.

— 29 —

(4) But consider how great he is to whotn Abraham the
Patriarch gave tithes of the best portions (of the booty)!

(5) And they who, as descendants of Levi, receive the priest-
hood, have a command ito exact tithes from the people according
to the Law, — that is from their own brethren, though these,
also have come from the loins of Abraham.

(6) But he who. deriveth hot his descent from them hath
exacted tithes from Abraham, and blessed the bearer of the promises.

(7) Beyond all dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.

(8) And here men subject to death receive tithes; but there
one. of whom it is testified that' he liveth. (g) And through
Abraham Levi, the receiver of tithes, js also, so to speak, made
subject to tithes, (10) for he was still in the loins of his father
when Melchisedech met him.

4. The argument is here hi.stolfical. Abraham, the great Patriarch, actually
gave to Melchisedech of the best' of the booty — 'of the top of the heap' ^- and
this was a payment of tithes. '

S — 7. The dignity of Melchisedech is shown especially in his relations towards
Abraham in the tithing and blessing. The right to exact tithes from their brethren
belonged to the Levites by the Law, and implied that they had a privileged position
as compared with their brethren^ If, then, Melchisedech exacted tithes from Abraham,
he must have been greater than Abrahain (and Melchisedech could have no privilege'
through the Law, for it did not yet exist). The blessing of Abraham by Melchisedech.
proves also the superiority of the latter. Yet it is obvious ■ that the dignity of
Melchisedech depended nowise on law or convention. It was purely personal.

8. In Abraham, the ancestor of the Levites, the latter pujed tithes to
Melchisedech, and thus admitted the inferiority of their priesthood to his. It is also,
probably, the thought of the author that the Levitical priesthood, in paying tithes
to Melchisedech, paid them somehow 16 Christ. Christ is the true Melchisedech,
King of peace, of whom the King of Salem was but a foreshadowing.

Of Melchisedech the Scripture testifies (by silence) that he lives ever: but the
Levites were only ajcoOvTioxovrsj avOptorcoi, 'dying ipen', that is, not merely" mortal men,
but men actually seen t6 die from generation to generation. It is in his unending
existence, as we hive seen, that Melchisedech is chiefly likened to Christ.

The thought of Psalm 72 (71) should be closely compared with verses i — 10.

— 3o —

The Levitical Priesthood and the Priesthood of Christ, 7, 11—28.

(11) Now if perfection iiad been reached through the Levitical
priesthood — for the people had received a Law concerning it
[the Levitical priesthood] — what would be the need that another
Priest according to the order of Melchisedech should be set up,
and that there should be question of one not according to the
order of Aaron?

(12) For when the priesthood is cha;nged, there taketh place
also of necessity a change of the Law, (i3) for He of whom that
is said belonged to another tribe, from which no one did service
at the altar.

(14) For it is well known that Our Lord sprang from Juda —
a tribe about which Moses said nothing that would refer to priests.

(15) But this is still more clear if another Priest is set up
after the likeness of Melchisedech, (16) who has not become so
according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to
the power of an indissoluble life. (17) For it is testified of Him:
'Thou art a Priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech.'
1 -^ '. '. '

n — '\2. There would have been no need of another priesthood if the Levitical
priesthood had been a,ble to bring about perfection. The Levitical priests were the
representatives of the Law, and drew their authority from the Law, and they
themselves maintained and guarded the Law. Hence when the Levitical priesthood
failed, the Law which they stood for failed.

1 3. The Levitical priesthood has failed in fact — as we gather from the
words: 'A Priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech'. Christ is that
Priest, and yet, He is no Son qf Aaron, but a son of Juda. And the men of Juda
had no right to the priesthood in ancient Israel.

Even though the Levitical priesthood was set up and guaranteed by the Law,
it is, clear from Psalm no (109) that the Levitical priesthood was not destined to
bring perfection, for the Priest announced, in the Psalm was to be of a new type,
non-Levitical. Since Priesthood and Law hung together, a new priesthood implied
a new Law. In verse 14 it is to be noted that the origin of Christ from Juda is
declared to be well known.

15 — '7- The Priesthood of Christ depends nowise on the Law, for it is
after the fashion of that of Melchisedech.. Only the sons of Levi could be priests
in Israel, so that the Levitical priesthood depended on carnal descent according to
the Law. But the Priesthood of Christ stands by virtue of a life Which endures
for ever. The life of Christ was essentially indissoluble. (Cf. 9, 14.)

In verses n — 17 the author argues, that the Levitical Priesthood was not
intended to be permanent, because it was imperfect. This appears (a) from the
setting up of a Priest according to another order (vv. 11-14); (b) from the.general
'fleshly' character of the Aaronite Priesthood.

— 3i —

(i8) For the rejection of an earlier command taketh place
because of its powerlessness and uselessness. (19), — for indeed the
Law brought nothing to perfection. It was the prelude to a' better
hope, through which we draw nigh unto God.

(20) And in proportion as He, not without an oath, [hath
become Priest] — for those have , become priests without an oath,
(21) but He with an oath through Him who said, to Him: 'The
Lord hath sworn and will not repent Him: Thou art a Priest
forever, — (22) in the same proportion hath Jesus become the
surety of a better Testament.

(23) And they, have. been made priests many in number,
since they were prevented by death from, remaining: (24) but He,
because He remaineth for ever, , hath an unchangeable Priesthood.
(25) Wherefore He can at all times save those who approach God
through Him, since He liveth always to make intercession for them.

18 — 19. The Law has not been merely changed, but abrogated — and that
because of its want .of real worth and its failure. It was not however, altogether
worthless, for it led to a higher hope, and to an approacli to God. It is here
insinuated that the Priesthood of Chi-ist has actually made possible that approach.

20—22. Here we have a further proof of the superiority of Christ's Priest-
hood. It was set up with an oath, and that, oath contained a promise of eternal
'endurance.

The word Testament (iia^^xr^)^ seems here to imply a system of divine
economy, a system of grace regulating the relations of men with God. It has
certain features in common witli a will or testament; (a) it depends wholly on the
good will of the Founder — as a will depends on the pleasure 0/ the Testator;
(b) it is concerned with the distributioil and application of benefits; (c) it is made
to depend on the fulfilrnent of certifin conditions on the part of the recipients.' It
is thus right to speak of the Old and New Testaments, as well as of the Old
and New Covenants. The New Testament has been established with, an oath, and
Jesus is the guarantor that the promises included in that Testament will be fulfilled.

23 — 25. These verses indicate another superiority of the Priesthood of Christ.
The Levitical priesthood was in itself merely temporary; in the individuals who
possessed it it was still less enduring. One after another they died, and their
places had to be taken by others. But Christ never dies, and hence His Priesthood
does not pass from one bearer to another. For this reason He can always give
rescuing help, since He is an ever-living Priest, interceding for men.

' In the papyri texts and in inscriptions 8ia6:QX7) means will, or testament. It has tliis
meaning generally in the xoiv-^. Yet, though aoii-fimi is the ordinary and correct word for
compact, agreement, or covenant, BiaB^xi) is used in the Septuagint to render b^rith
(= Covenant) and it has the meaning of 'compact' in. certain older Greek profane texts. Its
true, and fundamental meaning may be (as Moulton sayS) dispositio i. e. an artangement
made by one party wliich the other may accept or reject but cannot alter. A will is such a
dispositio, and so is in reality, what in Hebrew is called a J><'rith. Cf. infra g, lb f.

— 32 —

Jesus as the. perfect High Priest, 26 — 28.

(26) And just such a High priest was fitted for our needs —
holy, pure, undefiled, set apart from sinners and made higher than
the heavens, (27) who hath not need daily, like the high priests,
to offer sacrifice, first of all, for his own sins, and, in the second
place, for those of the people: for this He did onc6 for all when
He offered Himself..

. (28) For the Law seteth up as high priests men who have
weakness, but the word of the oath which followed the Law (set up)
one who. is a Son, for ever perfected.

26^28. Having established the superiority of the Priesthood of Christ to the
Levitical Priesthood, the author returns to the thought of Jesus as High Priest, and
finds Him to be perfect in every respect in that office.

Our need cried out for a Hig'h Priest who should be altogether holy, and
pure, and God-pleasing, and have no contact whatever with evil, — a High Priest
who should stand quite apart from sinners, and have access to the immediate
presence of God. It was^ necessary that we should have a High Priest who would
ijiot need to make sacrifices in, atonement for any sins of His own — as the Jewish
High Priest had to do on Atonement Day. Stich a High Priest we have in Jesus.

It is true that the Jewish High Priest did not offer sacrifice daily, but the
writer is thinking here, on the one hand, of the daily sacrifices offered by the
Jewish priests generally [which, perhaps, might be) regarded, in a sense, as offered
somehow by (because through the authorisation of) the High Priest], and, on the
other, of the sacrifice offered by the High Priest alone on Atonement Day. Jesus
offered sacrifice for the people — but He did so once for all. The one sacrifice
sufficed for Christ, for while the Mosaic priests were but weak men, Christ is a
High Priest appointed by oath, and a Son of God in Whom there is no sin, or
tendency to sin.

In verses I — lo the author had argued in historical fashion that the day of
the Levitical Priesthood was over, that the Levitical system had been abrogated.
In verses 21 — 28 he deals in dialectic fashion with those who would maintain a
foolish Jewish conservatism. The problem here is 'Aaron or Jesus', and we may
assume that actual difficulties of the readers are here kept in view. The abrogation
of the Levitical Priesthood is shown first negatively, and then positively.

'The negative argument runs through verses 11 — 19a. The abrogation appears,

(a) from the establishment of a priesthood of ? different order, 11 — 14;

(b) from the general character of the Old Testament priests, 15—17; -

(c) from the essential imperfection of the Law, 19 a.

The positive argument is derived from the perfection of the New Testament
Priesthood;

(a) by an inference from the higher kind of testification to the New Testament
Priesthood (oath) to its higher excellence, 19 b— 22; (b) by a consideration of the
person of Christ — who is eternal, has fulness of power and all the qualities of
an ideal High Priest, 2 3-^28.

'— 33 —

The work of Christ as High Priest, 8, i — lO, iS.
The new Covenant- and Christ its Servant, 8, i — 13.

(i) The chief point of the matter under discussion is: we have
such a High Priest \ylio hath talien His seat at the' right hand of
Majesty in heaven (2) as priestly servant of the Sanctuary, and of
the true Tabernacle, which the Lord, and not man, hath set up.

(3) For every High Priest is appointed to offer gifts and
sacrifices; hence this one also must have something to offer.

(4) Now if He were on earth He would not, be a priest,
since there are men who offer gifts according to the Law, (5) who
serve a mere shadow and, type' of things heavenly, — as Moses
when he was about' to complete the Tabernacle was instructed :
'Behold — so He said — thou shalt make all things according to
the type wliich was. shown to thee on the mountain.'

I — 2. KEcpoiXaiov refers to th^ actual object under discussion. The Christians
have a great advantage over the Jews in having a High Priest such as this, whose,
pjace is not on earth, but in heaven. In heaven His work is to act' as tSv aj-itov
XEiToupYo'5 which, apparently means 'servant', or 'steward' of the sanctuary. As
TO Syia in this Epistle usually means the Sanctuary, so also here, since it is obviously
parallel to azrivij. This Tabernacle where Christ carries on His priestly function^
has been set up by God, and not by man.

The ideal perfection of the Priesthood of Jesus is here established partly
by a consideration of the place where His priestly functions are performed, (8, i — 5),
and partly from the whole character and form of His priestly activities , (8, 6 — 13).

3 — 5. Christ, like every other High Priest, has to offer gifts, and sacrifices.
This He cannot do in the earthly .Sanctuary (Tabernacle, or Temple), since there
the legally appointed priests have that duty. As a High Priest, therefore, He must
setve in heaven. That" which He brings for ofFeritig is Himself. Verse 4 refers,
obviously, to functions of the Levitical priesthood alone, not to priestly acts of a
non-Levitical kind performed by Jesus during His earthly life. Christ could not be
a legal, or Levitical, priest on earth, for He was, of the tribe of Juda (cf. 7, 14);

Hence His proper sphere of action as Priest must be in Heaven. ' If the
sacrificial service were still being carried on at Jerusalem when this was written,
. these words would have a more definite meaning for the first readers.

The Priesthood, of Jesus is as far above that of the Levites as the substance
is above the shadow. The Tabernacle itself, for service in which the Levitical
priesthood was established, was but a copy, a mere shadowj of things heavenly.
This appears from God's words to Moses. Hence the priesthood of the" Old Testament
served a .mere shadow. Jesus as Priest serves in the heavenly Sanctuary itself.

- ,34 -

(6)' But now He hath attained a service the more excellent^
in the same proportion as He is also the Mediator of a better"
Testament, which hath received legal force on the basis of more
important promises.

(7) For' if fhat first had been without defect^ place for a
second would not be sought.

(8) For censuring them He saith: 'Behold days are coming,'
saith the Lord, 'when I shall make with the house of Israel and
the house of Juda a new covenant — (9) not according to the
covenant which I made with their fathers on the day when I took
their hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt. For
they did not abide by my covenant, and I, on my part, took no
further interest in them.'

6 — 10. Though Christ could not be legally a Priest on earth, He holds a
Priesthood indefinitely superior to all earthly priesthoods — His Priesthood in the
heavenly Sanctuary. That Priesthood is as much higher than the Levitical as the
New Dispensation is superior to the Old. In 7, 20 — 22 the author proved the
superiority of the New. Testament from the superiority of Christ: here he derives a
proof of the superiority of Christ's Priesthood from the greater excellence of the

-New Dispensation. The aim of the writer is to reach a point from which he can
argue authoritatively with his readers. This point is the announcement of a new
covenant by Jeremias. That announcement in itself, apart from the previous argument
in ch. 7, 'establist;es the superiority, of the New Dispensation. And from this
superiority it is fair to infer the superiority of the Priest of the New Dispensation
to the Priest of the Old. Thus there is here no circulus vitiosus in the
strict sense.

Moses was the Mediator ((jlesitt];) of the Sinaitic Covenant. But surely a Will
or Testament does not require a Mediator! In 7, 22 Christ is called the ^Yyuo;,
'surety' or 'guarantor" of the New Covenant or Testament. Propably the writer is

'here thinking of the two meanings, of S'.aOrjxr). Though it is difficult to think of a
mediator of a will, Jesus was certainly a Mediator — by His preaching, sufferings,
death, and the application of the merits of Calvary — of the new Covenant, and
not merely its 'surety'. Moses was a Mediator, but Aaron was the great High Priest:
Christ is both Moses and Aaron in regard to the New Dispensation. Tht references
of Christ to the New Covenant at the Last Supper (Matt, 26, 28 . i Cor. 11, 26)
may have been before the writers mind when setting down this passage.

The Law did not bring true perfection, and so it had to be superseded. The
presence in the Old Covenant of defect is. established by God's words to Jeremias,
(Jer. 3i,3i — i^. In Hebrew 38, 3i— 84). The second Covenant is not modelled on
the first, for the latter was set aside by the failure of the people to do their part.
The writer doe? not quote the Jeremian text with verbal accuracy.

- 35- -

(lo) 'For this is the Covehant which I will set up' with the
House of Israel after those days,' saith the Lord :

'I will put my laws into their mind,

And upon their heart will I write them:

And I will be to them a God,

And they shall be to me a people,
(ii) And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen,

And every man his brother, saying: 'Know the Lord,'

Because all shall/know me.

From the least to. the greatest among them. ,
".- (12) F"or I will be compassionate towards their evildoings,

And I will no longer remember their sins.'
(i3) When he saith a 'New' (Covenant) He hath declared
antiquated the Former (Covenant). That which is antiquated and
old is nigh unto destruction.

' ■■ ' : ) ' ■

10 — 13. The new covenant will not be written on tables of stone, but on
the hearts of men. It will, therefore, be internal. It will remove all separatioil
between God and men. It will exclude the possibility of the knowledge of God
becoming the monopoly of any class. It will be full of the spirit of graciousness and
forgiveness. Thus the New Covenant promised in jeremias will contain spirituality
(as opposed to mere outwardness), union with God, true knowledge of things
divine, and forgiveness of sin. This promised Covenant is better than the Sinaitic,
and must altogether supersede the latter.

Even in the days of Jeremias, when this prophecy was spoken, the Sinaitic
Covenant was actually superseded. This was effected by God's use of the word
'New' in regard to the Covenant that was forecasted. The application of the epithet
'New' to the promised Covenant was practically a formal declaration that the Sinaitic
Covenant was antiquated, and 'that which is antiquated and waxeth aged is nigh
unto vanishing'.

'Those days' in v. 10 are the days intervening between the time of Jeremias
and the coming of the Messias. With verses 9 and 10 compare Gals. 3, igf.

Verse 11 is not to be understood in the modern sense of an immediate
experience of God, or of a knowledge of God based on immediate personal experience.
The sense is merely that the knowledge of God will be a common possession of
all. Roms. 10, 17 says that faith comes from hearing, that is, that faith is the result
pf a combination of God's grace and the hearing of the message of preachers. The
Jeremian text must not be understood as excluding any of the ordinary ministrations
of a priesthood, or as implying the <:oming of " time when men shoulcj . learn of
God and His ways by a mysterious universal self-revelation of God out of all relation
with external forms of religion, Chrys. quotes Habacuc 2, 14 thus: %Xi\<s^!}ixcl:\. v
Y^ Tou Yvuivai xov Kupiov m; liStop ;toXu xaia/.«Xu(j/ai OaXaaas; (Hebr. has . . . will be
filled with the knowledge of the glory of Yahweh etc.). Cf. Is. 11, 9.

> 3*

— 36 —
Chapter 9.

The fulness of the priestly power in Jesus, g, i — lo.

(i) The first (Covenant) had indeed laws of worship, and the
Sanctuary — though an earthly one.

(2) A Tent waS prepared, the fore-tent-that is, in which were
the lamps.tand and the shew-bread, that which is called, the Holy
'Place : (3) but behind the second veil the tent which is called the
Holy of Holies.

1 — 3. The author wishes to give In tbese and the following verses an idea of the '■
splendour which surrounded the ancient Jewish worship. He bases his description
of that worship not on his own personal experience of the Temple-worship of the
day, but on the detailed afccount of the Sanctuary of the wilderness and its furniture
contained in Exodus 25, 23 — 40; 26, 3$. 36.

The Tabernacle with its three parts, vestibule, Holy Place, and Most Holy
Place, is here regarded as consisting of two tents, the outer, which is the Holy
Place, and the inner which is the Most Holy Place. (Consideration of the vestibule
was nowise necessary for the author's plan), in the outer tent, or Holy Place, the
author puts the seven-branched candlestick, ^ or (more rightly) lampstand, and the
table with the shew-bread. In front of the Holy Place hung a veil. A second veil
hung between the Holy Place and the innermost' shrine (the Holy of Holies, or
D'bhir). It - is interesting to note that the author does not include the altar of
incense of Exod.. 30 among the furi^iture of the outer tent. If the author had chiefly
in view the text of Exodus 25 and 26 it would be easy to understand why he
omits here the altar of incense, for it is not included among the objects found in
the Holy Place until Exodus 3o. Even in Exodus 3o the altar of incense is put in
very close relation with the innermost shrine. It is possible that the writer of the
Epistle possessed very defliijte traditional information' in regard to the position of
the altar of incense, or in regard to the time of its introduction, which led him to
omit it from among the objects present in the Holy Place. The text of 3 Kings
6, 22 seems to say that the altar of incense was actually in the innermost shrine;
and Exod. 3o says that the altar of incense was to be placed 'before the veil which
is in front of the Ark'. Since, then, the textual evidence as to the precise position of
the altar pf incens'e was thus obscure, the author must not be regarded as having
made any mistake in omitting that altar from among the furniture of the Holy Place.

It is clear from the mention of <rzr;v^ in verse 2 that we should supply in
verse I SiaSijxr). AixaitipiaTa Xarpela; = ordinances concerning worship, lo" r£ Syiov'
xoojiisidv is not the same as to ie ayiov to xoojj.ixdv. The adjective seems to limit the
noun — a Sanctuary, but an earthly, visible, one. From the description of the
Tabernacle in this context it cannot be inferred tiiat the Temple was not still existing
at the time the Epistle was written. The author simply takes as the unquestionable '
basis of his treatment the authentic Scripture account of ancient Jewish worship
which was fullest in regard to the liturgy of the Tabernacle,

-, 37 -

(4) having (which contained) a golden altar of incense, and
the Ark of the ' Covenant altogether covered with gold wherein
were a golden pot contaiiiitjg the manna, and the rod of Aaron
that budded, and the tables of the Covenant; (5) and above it
Cherubim of glory overshadowing the Mercy-seat — to speak of
vvhich in detail is not now in place.

4 — 5- The Most Holy Place, the innermost shrine, or, as it is called in the
Hebrew text, the D'bkir, is known otherwise to have contained the Ark with the

.tables of the Law, the pot of manna, the rod of Aaron, and the Cherubim. Here
we learn in addition that it contained what is called a j(putJouv OufnaTrjpiov.' It has
been customary to render this 'golden altar of incense', and this rendering is supported
by the Syriac and the Old Latin versions. The Vulgate, however, renders thwibuluni
aureum — which need not mean more than a golden censer, such as the High
Priest may have used in the ceremonies of the Day of Atonement. It has been said
that the phrase )(puoouv ?5(ouoa Oufiiarripiov suggests rather the peculiarly intimate
connection which existed between the Altar of incense and the innermost shrine thaii
the fact t"hal is was actually tp tie seen there. Yet k'j^oucia is the only word in the
text which expresses the relation to the inner shrine of the Ark, and the other objects
enumerated, and the Ark and the other objects named (apart from the altar of
incense) were certainly present in the Most Holy Place. Whatever, .then,, tbe Xf'"^""^
Bu(j.iaT»)piov is, it is t£entiotied here definitely as a portion of the furniture of the
Most Holy Place. In tlje Septuagint the word Ouixiatrjpiov is always equivalent to
^censer' — never, when standing alone, to 'altar of incense'. Leviticus 16, izshows
that a golden incense- pan, or censer, was used by the High Priest in the ceremonies
of Atonement Day. The incensing of the Most Holy Place was the first iritual action

> performed on the Feast of Atonement, and it is not unreasonable to suppose that
the golden censer used in the ceremonies of that feast was kept in the innermost '
shrine during the year. ■

If we accept the view that eufiioc-ojpiov is an incetise-pan which was kept in
the D'blfir, we are left with the difficulty that the important Altar of incense in
the Holy Place (Exod. 3o) is not mentioned. But, as already suggested, the difficulty
of deciding, on the basis of the, Pentateuch, the precise location of the; altar may
have decided the writer to omit it from among the objects prominent in the
Tabernacle. ,

The iXaor/jpiov was the cover (the kapporeth) of the Ark. It was called
iXajTjjpiov, or 'Mercy-seat', because it was sprinkled with the blood of the victims
on Atoiiement Day. It was overshadowed by the Cherubim, who are called 'the
Cherubim of glory' because the revelation of God's glory was peculiarly connected
with them. ' , , ,

The author has not time to discuss the furniture and arrangement of the
Tabernacle in detail.

— 38 —

(6) But when these things have been thus prepared, the priests
enter in to the first tent continually to perform the acts of worship.

(7) But into the second there entered once a year ohly the
High Priest alone — not without blood, which he offereth for himself
and for the ignorances of the people.

(8) Thus doth the Holy spirit show forth that the way- into
the ^anctiiary was not yet made clear, so long as the first Tabernacle
was yet standing.

' 6 — 7. The author here passes from the description of the places of worship
to' the worship itself. In the outer tent, the Holy Place, the priests served daily and ,
freely. The inner shrine was entered by one priest only — the High Priest —
and that on one day only in the year. Even then — on that single , occasion —
the High Priest did not enter without atoning blood. On the Feast of Atonement
the High Priest actually entered the inner shrine several times, so that we must
talte hv£, tou iviauTou as meaning one day in the year.

The present eioiaciiv in verse 6 might seem to indicate that the service in
the Holy Place was still going on, but, though good arguments can be advanced in
favour of the view that the Epistle was written before the fall of Jerusalem, the
use of the present tense in v. 6 is due to the fact that the author is quoting what
is prescribed in the text of Scripture, rather thaq describing what is actually taking
place. This particular verse is of no special importance, therefore, in dating the
Epistle.

Note the designed contrasts between Sujtavuo; and ocTca? t. Iviautou, o5 lEpei; and
|jio'vo;, 6 ap)(iipEU{, and between the free entrance of the priests and the entrance
'not without blood' of the H. Priest, ayvorijia is an offence committed through x
ignorance, or an error due to culpable ignorance : the word implies a reference to
the distinction made in the Law between sins intentionally committed and sins
unintentionally committed (Lev. 4, i3; Numbers 15, 22— 3i. Cf. this Epistle 5, 2;
10, ,26). On ayvorKAa-ucjv Chrys. says: ouz Etav afiaptrjfiaTtov «XX' avvo»i(iar(uv "v« [ji^
|J.EY« 9povii<j(octiv. El Y«p xai [J.yj h.wi 5)(j.»pTE5, ipyjoiv • aXX' axuv i^yvoJiaa;, zai toutou
oOSei; EOT! xaOapo';.

8. This "ceremonial legislation showed that the way into the presence of God
was not 'thrown open freely to all in the Old Dispensation. The Old Testament
permits no immediate intercourse with God. The outer tent, the Holy Place, excludes '
all but the priests: the inner tent, the Most Holy Place, excludes all but the High
Priest; and even the High Priest may enter it on one day , only in the year, and
must carry with him atoning blood. Thus the Tabernacle might be said, in a
sense, to serve rather as a barrier between men and God, than as a means by
which men might approach to God. While, then, the Tabernacle was, on the one
hand, the chief token and means of man's desire to worship the true God, it
indicated that man could ngt carry out that purpose freely and fully.

- 39 -

(g) Which (the first Tabernacle) is a parable for the present
time.

According to this quality of the former tent gifts and sacri-
fices are offered which are incapable of perfecting in conscience
him that worships, since they refer only to food and drink, (lo) and
different washings — mere fleshly ordinances imposed until the
time of better order.

g. It is perhaps best to take ^ti;, (as in the translation) , as referring to the
Ttptitr) (j/.»jvri. The first Tent, the Tent of the wilderness, was, in its whole being,
a sort of parable, something without independent value and meaning. But there is
a. difficulty in the explanation of 'the present time'. Usually the Messianic, or
Christian, period is spoken of as 'the future world'. On that analogy 'the present
time' would be the Old Testament period. If we take 'the present time', then, as
referring to the 'period of the Old Dispensation, the thought of verse 9 in connection
with the preceding would be that the Tabernacle arrangement, precluding as it did
free access to God, was a parable, or symbol, of the entire Old Dispensation. The
Mosaic system of itself could not procure access to God. But i^ is easier
in the context to refer 'the present time' to the period beginning with the birth of
Christ, the time of the great 'To-day' (Ch. 4).' The sense would then be,, that the
whole system of the Old Testament was but a type or shadow of the Christian period.

xci8' 5]v is best taken also as referring to the Ttpur/j azrjvTJ. The chs|racter of
the sacrifices of the Old Testament corresponded to that of the Tent; they could
not produce perfect union fetween rnen and God. They could not perfect a nian
in conscience, and free him from the sense of his own guilt of sin. This is explained,
when it is said that the laws about the offerings in the Tabernacle were §iz«iti)(jLa™
aapxhi. They were, that is, the objects of ordinances which dealt with the flesh and
with external life merely. Food and drink and washings cannot affect the inner
self, and produce union with God. Hence the decrees dealing with sacrifices could
not have a permanent validity: they could bind only until the xaipb; SiopOtisEw;,
the time of reform, that is, the Christian period; when a better system of grace
should be established. The Tabernacle has ceased to have any value since the
coming of the better time, and hence,' the sacrificial system' of the {Tabernacle
must cease.

AidpGmoi; means right order, and then, betterirlg or reform.

Compare with the thoug&t here Mark 7, 4 and i Peter 3, 21,'

The Pp(o[i«Ta and ito'cxata suggest the laws which declared, certain kinds of
foods and drinks as unclean, and therefore,, prohibited. (Cf. Lev. n, 84. 36; Aggaeus 2,
1 2' f. -etc.) For the 'washings' see Mark. 7, 4; Exod. 29, 4; Num. 8, 7 etc.

Mdvov . ... Si/iaititiara oapzo; (ilxpt /.«ipou , SiopOiiscuj OTizsi(i£va is taken
here as in apposition to oujpa re zai Ouoiai.

In the 'time of better order', there corresponds to the better type of Sanctuary
a more perfect offering.

— 4° —
The triumphant Priesthood of Christ, g, ij — 28.

(11) But Christ having come as High Priest of the future^
good things, hath entered into the Sanctuary once for all through
the greater and more perfect. Tabernacle which hath not been
made by h|ands, that is, doth not 6elong to this creation, (12) not
through the blood of goats an/1 calves, but through his own blood,
having attained everlasting salvation.

II— 12. Christ is contrasted with all that preceded Him. He is the High
Priest of 'the future good things', of the Messianic time of blessing : He owns 'the
future', and He begins a new world-period. With Him a single sacrifice sufficed;
it was an eternal sacrifice. Further, the Tabernacle through v^hich He passed when
He lyas bringing into the innermost shrine His sacrificial ofFe»ing, ,is not of man's
handiwork : neither does is , belong at all to this world. It also is eternal. The
offering presented by Christ differs greatly from the offering* of the High Priest on
the Feast of Atonement. Christ's offering is the greatest of all offerings — the blood
of the Son of God. While the Jewish High Priests brought naught but the blood
of animals, the blood of unreasoning and unwilling animal victims, into the Most
Holy Place, Christ bore into the Most Holy Place of heaven, into the living presence
of the Father, His own infinitely precious blood. Thus did He receive a salvation
that would endure (unlike that received on Atonement Day by the High Priest)
not for a year merely, but for ever.

The Tabernacle which Jesus passed through bearing His blood, was the
tabernacle of the heavens. Possibly there is in the writer's mind the idea that Jesus
' passed up through the lower heavens into the presence of God. There is no question
here of passing through a veil as in 10, 20, where it is said that Jesus passed
through the veil of His own flesh. The writer has in view all the time the cere-
monial of Atonement Day. After the Resurrection Christ passed though the heavens
as the Jewish High Priest passed through the different portions of the Tabernacle
on the Day of Atonement. While the Jewish priest entered into ,the inner shrine
with the blood of animals, Christ entered the heavenly shrine with His own blood.
The Jewish Priest entered year by year : Christ entered once for all. Christ did not
need; to enter a second time into the innermost shrine because by His sacrifice He
attained an eternal salvation. After Christ's death and offering to the Father no
further sacrificial act was needed.

The Vulgate assistens in v. 1 1 is a misleading translation' of TtapayevdiJievos
This word refers to the appearance of Jesus in the world. The creation to which ,
the Tabernacle traversed by Jesus does not belong is the world around us.-

1 The reading (leUivtoiv, which is very strongly supported, is here accepted - against
T(BVO|jiSv(uv which is very difficult to explain.

— 41, —

(i3) For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkled
ashes of a heifer sanctifieth the unclean unto purity of flesh,
(14) by how much more will the blood of Christ, who by the
Eternal Spirit hath offered Himself unblemished unto God, purify
our conscience from dead works unto the service of the living
God?

i3, — 14. Even the rites ' of the Old Law, external as they were, could produce
purification,, though it was only purification of the flesh. , How much more Will
not the sacrifice of Christ produce purification? Here we have not a mere vicarious
animalvictim offered by Christ, but Christ Himself offered by Himself. The offering
of Himself through the Eternal. Spirit is not merely the , self-oblation on Calvary : it
includes, also the subsequent presentation of Himself as Victim to the Father in
heaven. ] , '•

As on the Feast of Atonement it was not sufficient that the victim' should
be slain, but it was also necessary that its blood should be carried behind| the veil
.into the intlermdst shrine, so also, analogously, had the blood of the Victim of
Palvary to be carried into the Divine Presence; and the sacrifice of Jesus was not
therefore, fully completed (as compared with the Atonement sacrifice) until Jesus
had risen from the dead, and had appeared before the Father in the innermost
Sanctuary of heaven, bringing with Him the merits of His cross and passion. The
self-oblation on Calvary and the presentation of Himself as Victim to the Father
are regarded as forming a sort of unity (though elsewhere, as, for instance, in 10,
lo, the offering on. Calvary is looked on as the sacrificial act).

In this view of the text the Eternal Spirit is the divine power which dwelt
in Jesus'. It was that indwelling power of divinity that enabled Jesus* to ris? from
among the dead, and thus, to be at once sacrifice and priest. The Spirit itl question
is then the same as the 'indissoluble life' of 7, 6.

' As the offerings of the Old Law were required to be without blemish in
the physical sense, so is Jesus also an unbleniished victim, • — but in the' higher
ethical sense. !.■

The 'dead works' are those done in a state of alienation from God. There
may possibly be a suggestion in the use of the expression 'dead works' of the rites
prescribed in the Old Law for removing impurity contracted by coming into contact
with the dead: in the New Dispensation Christ purifies us from sin, and enables
us to perform living works which are suitable for' the worship of the living God.
The living God may not be duly worshipped by those who are infected with the
deadly taint of sin; — as Chrys. says: Here , he shows on tov VE/.pa Ipya I'^ovta
oux hi SouXeueiv tw ^fiivxi 9eSi.

^hese verses were intended to be an encouragement to those who were
inclined to be scandalised at the death of. Christ.

— 42 —

(i5) For this, then, is He the Mediator of a New Testament,
that, a death having taken place unto the remission of the trans-
gressions which were (committed) under the first Covenant
(Testament), those who are called may receive the promise of the
eternal inheritance.

(i6) For where there is a Testament the death of the Testator
must be established, (17) for a testament becometh valid when
death occureth, since it hath no force as long as the testator liveth.

,5_I7. The writer here wishes to show why the death of Jesus was necessary
for man's redemption. The thought of Jesus as a (jleoi-ci); is a harking back to 8, 6. It
can scarcely be connected immediately with the preceding verses, for it was not by
His entrance into the innermost Sanctuary of heaven that Jesus became a (ieoit/)?:
•nor did He become so ^mply because . His bidod purifies fronj sin. It seems best
then to refer, Sia toSjto to OTtcu;.

Meoit:/); is not the same here as mediator of a covenant simply. Moses was
Mediator of a Covetiant, yet he did not, on that account, die. Christ's aim in
becoming |j.£aiTr]; was, according to this passage, to bring men to the blessedness
that was promised to them. (The 'promise of the eternal inheritance' means the
eternal inheritance promised.)

In verses 16 and 17 the author keeps in view, apparently the two meanings
of SiaSVl, 'will' and 'covenant' (both connected, as has been said, by the general
idea dispositio, 'arrangement'). He seems, hovs;ever, to take the word here primarily
in its sense of 'will'. It is obvious that a will can become effective and binding
only after the death of the testator. That death must be legally established (olpeaBai;
intercedat does not give the full sense). If, then the New Testament, as a will, is
to be binding, the Testator who made it must die.

But the New Dispensatipn is both Covenant and Will, and hence Christ can
be spoken of both as a Mediator and Testator. As a Covenant the New Dispensation
has been made possible, 'mediated', by. Jesus. And as sacrifices of victims went
■Jvith the making of covenants, so the blood of Jesus became the blood that ratified
the New Covenant. That blood is not merely the seal of the Covenant, but the
price of all the blessings granted by God to men as a result of the Covenant which
Jesus has brought about, and sealed with His own blood.

But the New Dispensation is also a Will, and depended for its validity on
the death of the Testator, Jesus. It is true to say that every blessing of the
Messianic era was conditional on the death of Jesus. Thus the New Testament,
like a genuine will, demanded for its full validity, or binding force, the death of
Jesus, the Mediator of the new pact between men and God, and the 'Heir' of the
Messianic blessings who has disposed of them by a Testament, it follows clearly
from the reasoning here that the death of Jesus, instead of being a token of weakness
was an essential condition of the establishment of the Messianic Covenant, and,
therefore, of taan's salvation.

- 43 -

(i8) Hence even the first (Covenant, or Testament) was not
dedicated without blood (ig) for, when every command had been
read forth for all the peqple by Moses according to the Law, he
took the blood of calves and goats together with water and scarlet
wool and hyssop, and sprinkled the book itself and all the people,
and said: (20) This is the blood of the Covenant which God hath
established with you. (21) The Tabernacle, too, and all the vessels
for divine worship he sprinkled likewise, with blood (22) and with
blood' is almost everything, purified according to the Law, and
without the shedding of blood there is no pardon.

18 — 20. As in the case of covenants generally, so in the case of the Sinaitic
Covenant, the slaying of victitns was necessary. The viriter adds -a number of
details to the narrative in Exodus 24, 3 ff. Exodus does not mention goats, nor
water, nor scarlet wool, nor hyssop. The sprinkling of the Book of the Covenant
is also an addition to the details in Exod. 24. The author is here. probably drawing
on traditional sources of information. It is to be noted that the Tabernacle was
not yet erected when the Sinaitic Covenant was established, and hence, verse 21
jefers to an event which could not have taken place until some time after the
protnulgation of the Covenant. Josephus (Ant. 3, 6) says that the Tabernacle was
consecrated with blood on the Day of Atonement; but the text of Exodus ■ says
nothing . about such a consecration with, blood.

The consecration of the Tent and the sacred 'vessels with blood is, explained
by the principle that blood is the only recognised means of purification, and of
cleansing froni sin. This principle appears commonly in Jewish Theology in the
form, D'J? KjIK iTlBS pN, 'There is no, atonement except by blood'.

Note the similarity between the words quoted' in. verse 20 and the words
of Institution in Matt. 26, 28: 'This is my blood of the Testament which is poure,d
out for many unto the remission of sin'. The author does not imply in this context
that a true atonement for sin was possible in the -Old Dispensation taken by hself.

It has beeil often argued that the author has in view throughout the passage
vv. 15 — 23 the idea of- a Covenant chiefly, rather than that of a will. Hence it
has been said that oti vezpoi; in v. 17 refers to. the ; slaying of animals which
accompanied the setting up of covenants. (That slaying is supposed, to be ithplied
in the technical Hebrew expression k'arath b'rith, 'cut a - covenant' = esta()lish a
covenant; the 'cutting', or destruction, of the victims was accepted as due fate for
themselves by the contracting parties, should they prove disloyal to the pact). In
this sense the shedding of blood was necessary for all covenant-making, and was
therefore, a feature -of the setting tip of the .Sinaitic Covenant.

How Christ could be at once Mediator of a Covenant, and Testator who
disposes of the Messianic blessings has just been, explained. It is \ true that 'the
future good things' have been disposed of by Christ as His own possession (or
'inheritance'), and it is true also that He made possible the setting up of the New
Covenant, and that He sealed it by His blood (He being the victim that was slain
to make the ceremony of the establishing of the New Covenant complete).

— 44 — •

(23) It was necessary, therefore that the copies of that which
is in heaven should be purified by such things as these;, but the
heavenly things themselves by better sacrifices than these.

(24) For Christ hath, not entered into a Sanctuary made by
hands, a mere type of the true, but into heaven itself to appear
now before the face of God on our behalf. (25) Nor [hath He
entered, heaven] to offer Himself often, as the High Priest entereth
annually into the Sanctuary with strange blood. (26) For then He
should have often suffered from the beginning of the world. But
now once for all at the close of the ages hath He appeared unto
the setting aside of sin by His sacrifice. (27). And as it is appointed
to all men once' to die, and thereafter cometh judgment, (28) so
also will Christ, offered once to bear the sins of many, appear a
second time out of all relation to sin unto salvation for those
who wait for Him.

23-7-28. Since the Old Testament is a mere type of the New there must be in '
the New Testament a higher and better 'purification than the purification by animal-
blood of the Tabernacle and its .vessels. So in the new system we have the true
purification from the uticleanness of sin, through the blood of the infinitely perfect
.victim, Christ, the Son of God. The heavenly Tabernacle cannot be purified like the
earthly, but the undeanness which would prevent ,men from entering it can
be wholly removed through the merits of Christ's death.

The Tabernacle- and Temple were made by human hands; but heaven is the
immediare work of God's hands. The Jewish High Priest entered on Atonement
Day. into a shadowy presence: our High Priest enters into the real Presence. The
atonement of the Jewish High Priest was annually repeated because imperfect: but
the death of Christ wa^ an all-complete and perfect atonement, and does not need
to be repeated. Hence Christ need not come forth again from the Sanituary of
heaven. He remains there as an intercessor for us with the Father.

If the sacrifice of Christ had been incomplete. He, like the Jewish priests,
would have had to enter often into the inner shrine with atoning blood. But while
the atoning blood which the Jewish priests bore into the D'bhir wsls foreign blood,
the blood which Jesus carried into the Presence was His own. Had He, then, needed
often to offer, he must often have died. But a man can die but once, and Jesus,
as a man like the rest, cannot die again in the same fiesh. Lest it might seem,
however, that Jesus failed to reproduce any important feature of the Jewish High
Priests, it is shown that, thopgh He cannot die again, and does not need to enter
the inner shrine (again. He, nevertheless, will come forth like the Jewish Priest once
more. But His coming will have no connection with sini it will be a coming in
glory in which Christ will show Himself to those who wait for Him — as the
Jews were wont to wait for the coming forth of the High Priest, — a coming
throug'h which salvation will be conapleted for men.

— 45 —

Chapter lo.

The complete and eternal sufficiency of Christ's atoningdeath, lo, i-iS.

(i) For the Law, having only the shadow of t^ie future good
things, not the reality (or, the genuine image) of the things, is
never able to perfect those who approach by the annual sacrifices
which are constantly offered. (2) For would they not otherwise
have ceased to be offered, since the worshippers once purified
would no longer have any consciousness of sin.

(3) Yet by them is produced > annually a reminder of sin.

(4) For it is imjsossible that the blood of bulls and goats
should take away sin.

I. Note the emphatic, position of oziav: slziov means here either the original
as compared with its copy, or {he image which really represents a thing as , con-
' trasted with the mere shadow cast by a thing. The things (7cpa'Y|J.ai:a) are the same
as 'the future good things', — the blessings of the Christian period., The Ljiw
merely suggested, or foreshadowed, perfection: it never attained it. No repetition
or intensification of a mere shadow can produce the thing itself that casts the
shadow. While the author is thus making a general statement about the character
of the Mosaic Law, he, is still thinking chiefly of thp rites of Atonement Day.

'Those who aporoach' includes all the, worshippers who gathered together
for the celebrafion of the' ritual of Atonement Day.

Verse 2 is 'best taken- as a question 7- giving a reason for the preceding.
If the sacrifices of Atonement Day had produced real purification, they would not
have needed to be repeated, for ther people, then, would have had no recurring
consciousness of sin. The constantly repeated sacrifices showed an ever-present or
ever returning sense of guilt unremoved, of atonement incomplete. Here the thought
which is uppermost in the writer's mind is the completeness' of the atonement of
Christ — the Author of eternal salvation. , 1 <

3. 7"he Old Testament sacrifices had, however, the positive value that they
served to remind inen of their sin, and of the need of atonement. They kept alive
in men the consciousness of guilt, and the longing for redemption. They served
as z«Tr)Yopia eSoSevEia?, ouy. ,10x605 otiSei^i;, as Chrys. puts it.

4, This principle the author supposes to be perfectly clear to his readers.
Between the offerings, and the result, or effect, in question there is, and can be,
no proportion. The death of an irrational creature cannot be regarded as per se a
real atonement for man's sins. Such a victim is unwilling to die, and is incapable
of realising in any fashion the purpose of its death when it is offered in sacrifice.
Hence the anithal sacrifices of the Old Law were nothing more than symbols of a
sacrifice which could effect purification, and it was only as such symbols that they
could produce any genuine effect, But the writer's purpose here is not to inquire
into the purifying power belonging to the sacrifices of the Old Testament as a
divinely established system, but only to point out that there is per se no relation
between the shedding of an animal's blood and the atoning for human sin.

- 46 -

(5) Hence He saith when entering into ttie world:

(6) Sacrifice and offering Thou hast not desired,
But a body Thou preparedst for me.

In holocausts and sin-offerings Thou hadst no pleasure.

(7) Then 1 said: Lo, I am come

(in the volume it is written of me)
To do, o God, Thy will.

5 — 7. The lext of Psalm Sg, 7 — g which is here quoted is not handed down in
the same form in the Hebrew and Greelc tradition. Yet the general sense of the
passage is clear, and is substantially alike in Hebrew, Greek, and Vulgate. It contrasts
with the system of Old Testament sacrifices the sacrificial will of Christ — the
absolute submissioii of the will of Jesus to that of the Father in the Messianic
work which the Father had given Him to do. The sacrifice of obedience, the
unconditional submission of the will of the Messias, was the sacrifice in which the
Father really took pleasure.

'When entering into the world' refers not to the entering into public life of
Our Lord, nor to any other period during the earthly life of Jesus, but to the
Incarnation itself. The words are regarded here as having a sort of dramatic character,
as being the expression of Jesus' abiding attitude of submission and obedience,
rather than as a solemn utterance of Our Lord at some particular^ point of time.
The sacrifice which Jesus offered is to take the place not merely of the sacrifice
of Atonement Day, but of all Jewish sacrifices — the 'holocausts' and 'sin offerings',
the 'sacrifices' and 'offerings'.

The text as quoted teaches that the body of Jesus was fashioned to be, as
it were, the instrument by which the sacrificial will of the IMessias should express
itself. I The whole passage proves that the sacrifice of Jesus was well-pleasing to
the Father for three reasons: (a) it was worthy of God's majesty, for it was the
sacrifice of the Son of God; (b) it was a fit and proper sacrifice of atonement for
man's sins, since it involved the offering of a human body — of a body specially
fashioned for that sacrifice; (c) the sacrifice was an expression of the most absolute
submission to the divine wilL

'In the volunae it js written of me' is to be read as a parenthesis. The roll
or volume, is the Old Testament in general as a Book of Prophecy. ,

The text ot the Hebrew reads, 'Ears Thou hast digged for me': the Vulgate
has, Aures . . . perfecisti mihi. Both of these text-forms convey the idea of the
complete obedience of Christ. (SSe Commentary on Psalms). The whole purpose
of the coming of the Megsias, ' according to the Psalm-text, was to carry out the
will of the Father. Cf. John 5, 19; 8, 28. The highest offering to God is the
offering of the will, and Jesus made that offering without reserve. Cf. the celebrated
passage Philippians 2, 5 — 9.

— 47 —

(8) While He saith earlier: 'Sacrifices and offerings, and
holocausts and sin-offerings Thou desiredst not, nor hadst pleasure
in,' — which yet are all offered according to the Law, (9) He
saith, in the next place: 'Lo, I am come to do Thy will;' He
annuleth the first in order to make valid the second.

(10) In virtue of this will we are sanctified through the
offering of the body of Jesus once for all.

(11) And every priest standeth forth daily to minister, offering
often the same sacrifices which can never take away sin. (12) But
He, having offeredione sacrifice for sin hath taken His seat for ever
at the right hahd of God, (i3) waiting, for the rest, until the
enemies have been made the foot-stool of His feet. (14) For by a
single offering He hath forever perfected those who are made holy.

(15) The Holy Spirit testifieth unto us. For, after having
said: (16) 'This is the Testament which I will set up with them
after these days,' the Lord saith:

'I will put my laws upon their heart;

And upon their mind 1 will write them.

(17) And their sins and their evildoings I will remember no
more.'

(18) Now where there is remission of sin, there is no longer
offering for sin.

8 — II. The Psalm-text proves that the fulfilment of God's will by Christ
has taken the place of the Old Testament sacrifices. By Christ's sacrifice, fulfilling
as it did absolutely the Father's will, we are sanctified once for all. Verse 10 again
emphasises the thought that the body of Jesus was specially fashioned' for His
sacrifice. The 'will' in v. 10 is the will of the Father: it is the causa prima o(
our salvation: the sacrifice of the' cross is the causa secundd of that salvation.

12 — 14. Christ is compared here with the ordinary Jewish priests who had
to make the daily offerings. They offered standing, and their offerings were con-
stantly the same. Christ offered but once, and then took His seat at God's right
hand, showing thus that His chi,ef work was finished. A contrast is intended
between the standing of the Jewish priests and the sitting pi Jesus: the sense is
not, however, that Christ does not continue a priestly. activity in heaven. The rest
of Christ in heaven is complete only as compared with the daily offerings of the
Jewish priests. (Cf. 8, 3 f.) ^

JlEpiEXEni in V. 1 1 means to take awa)' something which envelops' like a
garment. l3. The-waiting for the defeat of the foes is derived from Ps. 1 10 (109), i. 2.

15 — 18. The author quotes again the passage from Jer. 3i, 33 in order to
show that in .the New Dispensation there is union with God and reconciliation.
Because of this there will be no further need for the offering of atoning sacrifices.
^\'hat they might be expected to accomplish has been already achieved.

-^ 48 -

Second part of the Epistle. Practical application, of the truths
which have been set forth, lo, ip — 13, 25.

Chapter 10, igff.

(19) Since we now, brethren, have unembarassed freedom
unto the entering in to the Sanctuary in virtue of the blood of
Jesus, (20) which He hath inaugurated for us, a new and living
way through the veil, that is to say. His flesh, (21) and (since we
have) a great High Priest over the House of God, (22) let us come
forward with a true heart in full assurance of faith, purified through
tlie sprinkling of heart from an evil conscience, and with body
cleansed in pure water. (28) Let us hold fast inflexibly to the
confession of hope, for, trustworthy is He who hath given the
promise. (24) And let us give heed to each other with a view
to the stirring up of charity and of good works; (25) not abandoning
our assembly, as is the custom of some, but exhorting (each other),
and this all the more as ye see the Day drawing nigh.

I 19 — 25. We possess two things; (a) free entrance into the Sanctuary; (b) a

great High Priest. In the Old Dispensation only the High Priest could enter the
inner shrine of the Tabernacle; now all have the right, of entrance into the real
Sanctuary through the blood of ' Christ. Note that the author says that we have
7u«ppr]oi« i. c. fullest, most unlimited right of entering in (ei; -rijv e%oSov) to the
Sanctuary. The Jewish High Priest, could enter into the D'bMr only one day in
the year, and that 'not "without blood': our right of entrance into the Sanctuary is
unlimited, and, it is in virtue of the blood of Jesus. The rjv of v. 20 may refer to
Ttotppijoia or to e'icoSos. Jesus first traversed the way to the Sanctuary, and thus
lOpened up that way for us. That way has been made for us new, (i. e. it was
hitherto unknown, and it never grows ^old), and living (i. e. it consists in union
with a Person: it is a way that strengthens and does not weary those that traverse
it). The) veil is primarily the veil that hung before the D'bMr of the Tabernacle.
The flesh of Christ, His body, was a sort of veil or hindrance between Him and
the Father. Hence it had to be broken through, that Jesus might pass into the full
light of the Father's presence.

In that presence He is our High Priest. Let us, then, draw nigh to Him in
confidence with upright hearts and fulness of faith, cleansed and purified like the
priests of old ! We all have the right to enter the inner shrine, and we must, therefore,
m^ke ourselves ready to enter it with all that care of preparation which was demanded
from the High Priest on the Day of Atonement. We must hold fast to the firm
hope of Salvation which our most trustworthy Master has given to us.
' Nor may we think merely of ourselves, for Christianity implies a duty of

brotherly care for others. Christians may not hold themselves aloof from the
gatherings of the brethren, nor refuse to help and encourage the brethren — par-
ticularly ast the Day of Christ's coming is not far off for any Christian.

The washing of the body in v. 22 refers to the Sacrament of Baptism. The '
water is called 'pure' because of its purifying effect.

— 49 —

(26) For if we sin willingly after having received knowledge
of the truth, there remains no further sacrifice for sin, (27) but a
terrible expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will
devour the adversaries.

(28) He that setteth at naught the Law of Moses dieth without
compassion on (the word of) two or three witnesses.

(29) Of how much sorer 'punishment shall he' be deemed
deserving who hath trodden under foot, the Son of God, and hath
regarded as common the blood of the Testament through which
he- was sanctified, ^nd hath insulted the Spirit of grace? '

(30) Forwe know Him who hath said: 'Vengeance is mine;
I will make requital'. And again 'The Lord will judge His people'/

(3i) It is a dreadful thing to 'fall into the hands of the
living God!

26 — 3i. Verse 26 is a parallel to, and' complement of, 6, 6. In 6, 6 apostasy
was considered chieBy on its psychological side— as it presented difficulties for
the preacher and others whose duty it was to bring (jack apostates to the 1 Faith :
here it is^ooked at as it affects the salvation of those who give way to it. In
the Old Dispensation certain sins' were punished by death. These were sins committed
'with raised up hand', that is, with full ■ deliberation and rnalice. In practice the
only sins put in this class were blasphemy, idolatry, and false prophecy— all of
them, in a sense, sins of apostasy. As the sin of apostasy was piinished with death,
in the Mosaic system, so the author, writing for Jewish Christians, very naturally

' 'threatens the sin of apostasy, with eternal punishment.

For those who fall away, after having received full knowledge of the Faith,
there is no further atoning sacrifice (since' they have rejected the sacrifice of Christ),
but only the terrors of divine judgment, and the tortures, of fire. If they set aside
the atonement of Christ they cannot find another. '•

If death was the sanction of the Mosaic Laws what shall be fit punishment
for the conscious rejection of Christ? He who with full knowledge and malice,

• 'with hand upraised', rejects Christ and His faith; treads Him under footj sneers
at His blood (regards it as unclean), and wantonly sets aside His lave— \yhat
punishment shall.be meted out to him? It is not the community that can avenge
such a crime. The Jewish coinmunity carried out the sentences on those Who
violated the Law of Moses, but here the insult is directly against the Spirit of God,
and God alone can properly reqilite it. But how fearful it is to fall into the hands
of an angry and avenging ,God? With \r. 29 should be compared Matt. 12, 3i;
Ephes. 4, 3o; and Acts 5, 3. '

The quotation ip verse 3o, '"Vengeance is mine. I will make requital', is
from Deut. 32, 35 f.: it appears in the same form (which differs both from Hebrew
and Septuagint) in Roms. 12, I'g. The second quotation in the same verse is from ,
Ps. 133 (134), 14.

4

— so —

Perseverance in persecution, lo, S2 — 5p.
(32) Be mindful of^ the days gone by, in which, after the
reception of enlightenment, ye endured a great struggle of sorrows,
(33) partly being made . a gazing-stock through insults and
oppression, and partly claiming fellowship with those who met
that fate.

(34) For ye have suffered along with those who were im-
prisoned, and ye have borne with joy the plunder of your
possessions, in the knowledge that ye had a better and a lasting
possession.

(35) Cast not, then, your confidence away, for it hath a great'
reward; (36.) For ye have need of perseverance that ye may
accomplish to the full the will of God, and thus carry off the promise,

' (37) For still but a little time and 'He that is to come will
come, and will ijot tarry.'

(38) 'But my just one will live by faith, and if he shrinketh
back my soul hath no pleasure in him.'

(39) But our way is not that of shrinking back to destruction,
but of faith unto the winning of life.

32 — 39. Looking back on the early days of their faith they will be rejoiced at
the. patience with which they endured their trials as Christians. The enlightenment of
the faith was followed (at what interval! is not here stated) by days of trial and
persecution. The Christians become an object of amused interest to their enemies,
because of their griefs and apparent defeat. Some of them were cast into prison and
the rest felt as if they also share4 in that imprisonment. In the case of others their
i worldly goods, were plundered — but they bore their loss with joy, for it was for the
honour' of the Christian name. If their young faith endured s<j much, what of the
present when their faith is of long standing, and ought to be stedfast? Their splendid
confidence of the early days is a reason for renewing that confidence now— let them
renew it, or, at least, npt cast aside the confidence which they still possess. It
seems, however, that their confidence is threatened, and they have the sorest need
of perseverance that they may attain the fulfilment of God's promises.

The quotations in vv. Sy. 38 are from Isaias 26, 20 and Habacuc 2, 3. 4.
The author quotes the Septuagint text of Habacuc with a certain freedom. The
faith in qHiestion includes the confidence with which the difficulties incident to the
profession and practice of the faith are patiently borne. When a man who is just
loses confidence, and shrinks back, God will have no more of him.

But the readers have not yet begun- to fall back. They are still, in spite of
all difficulties, pressing onwards with confidence unto the winning of eternal life.

Verses 32 ff. are important for the destination and date of this Epistle. If it
may be admitted that the text does not necessarily imply that the trials and perse-
cutions referred to befell the readers very soon after their Conversion, the conditions
of the church in Palestine after the outbreak of Agrippa's persecution may be in
the mind of the writer in these verses.

— 51 — ' '

Chapter I'l. .

The nature and value of Faith. •

(i) Faith is an assurance of things hoped for, a conviction
of things invisible.

I. Since faith is the basis of Christian salvation, as the copclusion of
chapter lo has. pointed out, it is necessary for the author to explain its nature and
to exemplify its value and power. Faith is described as a confidence in, or firm
grasping of, things hoped for. Since things hoped for are still in the future the
faith here described bears a necessary relation to the future. Bu,t this faith is not
a mere vague expectation of .things to come: it is a firm conviction that certain
things actually exist and can be attained. .The objects of faith are, however, not
merely things hoped for, but things unseen. Though things hoped for must belong
to the future, things unseen may be in the past, present, or future. Faith implies,
jherefpre, an attitude of hope, and an attitude of conviction as to the existence of
things unseen. It is a combination of will-activity and intellectual activity: it com-
bines confident hope with intellectual assent or conviction. It is obvious that the
author does not here intend to give an exact' definition of faith, but only to emphasize

.^ important aspects . of the practical" faith which iS the basis of the every-day life, of
believers. The description of faith contains no immediate reference to God, or to
the authority or credibility of His word. The description reminds us of St. Paul's .

, words in Roms. 8, 24 : T^ y^P eXtciSi latiOjjjjLEV ■ eXjci; Se j3XEJto[j.£vr] ouz sariv eXjti;,

The two chief aspects of faith — trust and conviction — are ^expressed very

clearly here and there throughout the chapter, — for instance in verses 3, 6, 7, 8,

. 27. Somethimes faith appears to be confidence in God's power to do wondrous
works, for Instance, verses 17, 29, 3o: sornetimes again it is identified apparently
with practical piety (the life of faith as in vv. 4 and 5).

uTcdo-caoi; may be taken either objectively or subjectively. Subjectively it would
be on the same level as reiori; in verse 3, and would have the meaning 'firm con-
fidence'. The Greek exegetes' took it objectively in the sense of 'basis', or ''sub-
strate'— as that which gives substance or reality to the objects of hope, or as that
which enables men to treat as_ real the things that are unseen. Taken irnus
objectively the text states rather what faith does than, what it is.

?XsY)(os has per se an objective sense— 'proof, faith being its own proof, as

. it Were, for the believer. Moulton suggested 'title-deed' as a possible meaning of
fiitdcrraai; : that explanation would make it exactly parallel to the usual sense of
eXsyj^o?. It seems, however, better to take Ojcooraai; in the subjective sense, and then
it is natural to take eXsv^o; not as 'a proof, but as implying rather the situation
of one to whom a thing has been proved, a persuasion (faith supplying, of course,
the persuasion).

1 Cf. Chrys.: ^jieiSt] fap td iv iXictot (ivuic6aiaTa stvat Soxet ■?] nictt? 6Ti6oiaoiv aoiol^
Xapt^staf fiaXXov 8fe ou )(ap(?ETat, akV ahza ioTLV 0'j6[a aStiuv.

- . ■ ' 4*

— 52 —
The heroes of Faith. The primitive period, 2—j.

(2) Because of it (i. e. Faith) the forefathers have received
'due meed of praise.

(3) Through faith we know? that the world was fashioned
by God's word, so that from things invisible tiiat which is visible
hath come.

(4) By faith Abel bffered to God a better sacrifice than Cain
in virtue thereof it was testified of him that he was just, since
God gave testimony concerning his gifts.

And by jt (i. e. faith) he speaketh still though dead.

',(5) By faith was Henoch snatched away, so that he saw not
death; and he was not found, for God had snatched him away:
for even before he was taken away he received the testimony
that he ,had pleased God.

2^5. The very first pages of Scripturq show the importance of faith. They
show that the origin of the visible world out of invisible factors can only be
grasped by faith; without the teaching of Scripture,, which is accepted by faith, the
origin of the world would be a riddle.

In the translation above [irj has been taken with the participle. The invisible
things are, then, the creative word of God, through which as Genesis teaches, the
visible world was brought into being. But the jiij can also be taken with the
infinitive, and then we get the same thought in negative form — things visible have
not sprung from things visible. The cosmos, that is, is not a mere re-grouping of
material things already existing. But it is more in harmony with veVse to take [jt^
with the participle. The cosmos has sprung from the invisible word of God. Note
that the author speaks of creation as the fashioning of 'worlds', as in ch. i, 2.

Abel offered to God a more pleasjng sacrifice than Cain, for he was led by
faith to offer a ipore pleasing material of sacrifice, and he offered it, through faith,
with his whole heart. Because of his faith, then Abel received from God the
Scripture testimony that he was just, i. e., pious. Cf. Genesis 4, 4 f. 1

After the death of Abel his blood made appeal to the justice of God, and
the appeal was heard. The successful appeal of his blood, as described in Scripture,
may be the point of the reference in verse 4, for we hear of the voice of Abel's
blood in 12, 24. But it is possible, on the other hand, that the speaking of the
dead Abel is the appeal of his life generally, as described in Genesis, with its
Ipsson of faith.

Of Henoch the Scripture testifies that he walked with God, and that God
took him away (Gen. 5, 22—24). The good-pleasure of God is the ground of his
being taken away, and the ground of God's good pleasure was Henoch's faith.

- 53 -

(6) For, without faith it is impossible to please (Him"). For
he that approacheth unto God must believe that He existeth, and
that He giveth reward to those who seek Him.

(7) By faith Noah, having' been informed by an oracle
concerning things not yet visible^ with reverential care prepared

■ an ark for the rescue of his house; and by it (i. e. faith) he judged
the world, and became an heir of the justice which is according
to faith.

6. This is the principle which underlies the inference from God's satisfaction
with Henoch to the faith of the latter. F^ilh, then, essentially refers to two things,
the existence of God and God's readiness to reward His servants. Faith is thus, as
was said in v. i, a confidence in things hoped for and a persuasion of, things
unseen. The verse states the minimum of faith-content which is required for sal-
vation. The precise clearness of the faith required for salvation is not stated here._
It is obvious that no one can please God unl?ss he draw nigh to Him; and it is
equally obvious that it is only by faith that one can begin to approach to God.
Faith is the beginning of the movement which tends towards, God as terminus.
It is implied in the verse that the acceptance of God's existence through faith
is. necessary; a merely rational or scientific knowledge is not enough. There csin
be no freedom in the asteent given to a merely scientific conclusion, and hence
such assent as is required for merit cannot be given on the basis of certainly
attained scientific facts.

'To seek God' means to worship Him.

Henoch was certain of the existence of, God although he did not see Him,
and he was also certain of reward, though he could not grasp the reward otherwise
than by hope.

7. Noah accepted as true the oracle concerning the coming Deluge; in the
sure hope of rescue for himself and his family, he built the ark, thus, judging
(condemning) the pride and carelessness of his contemporaries. His faith saved him,
and he thus became an heir of the justification according to faith. (Genesis 6, 9 :
cf. Roms. 4, i3f.) There is here clear reference to the Pauline theory of the
connection of faith and justice (the justice which has nothing to do with the works
of the Law). ,Why is .Noah called the 'heir' of this justice.? 'Heir' may mean simply
owner, or possessor, so that the meaning may be that Noah by his faith acquired
the justice which is through faith — not that He inherited: any justice from preceding

,' patriarchs. The justice which Noah thus received would be second justification
and we should then have an explanation of the, Scripture words which precede and
those which follow immediately the announcement of the Deluge,' that Noah was a
just and perfect man before God. (Gen. 6, 9; 7, I.) His ready acceptance of God's
oracle, and his wijlingness to act on it at once would naturally lead to an increase
of his justice (cf. Estius on this verse).

— 54 —

Faith of the Patriarchs, 8 — 22.

(8) By faith was Abraham obedient, going forth to a place
which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went forth not
l^nowing whithe^ he was going.

(9) By faith he settled in the Land of Promise as in a
foreign land, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the co-heirs
of the sanie' promise, (10) for he loolced for the city with firm
foundations, of which God is the Architect and Builder.

(11), By faith, too, Sara received power for the conception (?)'
of seed, in spite of her age, because she lobked on Him who had
given the promise as faithful."^ (12) Henfce there has sprung from
one — and him too already dead — (issue) like the stars of
heaven in number, and like the countless sands on the sea-shore.-

8 — 10. At the word of God Abraham went forth from his home, not knowing
the goal of his journey but trusting in the word of God. It was a great act of faith
to regard the land in which, through God's command, he settled as the sure inherit-
ance of his race, for l^e himself and his sons were but nomads there dwelling in
tents. Yet he endured confidently the troubles of his nomad life, for his sure hope
was set on a city that would have strong foundations, unlike the tent in which he
dwelt.. The city with foundations is clearly the heavenly Jerusalem (12, 22), the
future city of i3, I4'(cf. Gal. 4, 26; Apoc. 21, 2). Abraham, that is, felt himself to
be a stranger and sojourner on earth whose real home was heaven. Thus his whole
attitude was "dominated by faith.

II — 12. Sara also appears as an instance of faith, for though she laughed,
she feared. Though she was already ninety (Gen. 17, 17) she received the power
to conceive.

The difficulty hpe is that kaxa^aKi\ ajtepfiatos is usually employed in reference
to the male function. Westcott suggests that the phrase is here used because Sara
is considered as cooperating in the act of generation with Abraham. The zaraPoX^
aicsp|x«TO? was efficacious because Sara, as a reward of her faith, was enabled to
cooperate . efficaciously. The basis of her faith was her conviction of the trusts
worthiness of God who had given the promise of an heir. '

Abraham was, as far is powers of begetting were concerned, already as good
as dead. He was a hundred years old. Yet his progeny became as countless as the
stars, or as the sands on the sea-shore (cf. Gen. 22, 17).

' It has been proposed to take (xai) auri) Sdppa as a gloss." If it were removed the
difficulty of the technical phrase -wza^Mi oit^pjiatoj being used in reference to a woman'
would disappear, and further, the begetting of Isaac would then be ascribed to the faith of
Abraham, As Sara displays more increduliiy than faith in the narrative of Genesis the
omission of her name here would make the whole context more intelligible. '

It has been also proposed to read aunj Zappa as a dative, 'Abraham along with Sara'
and to take xataPoXi] oitipnato; as 'capacity for generation'. This view also would make
Abraham the sole subject of the verse.

— 55 —

(i3) According to faith all these died without receiving the
promises, but only seeing and greetifag them from afar, and '
acknowledging that they (themselves) ■ were but strangers and sq-
journers on earth.

(14) For those who say such things make it plain that they
search for a fatherland; (15) and if they were thinking of the one
[fatherland] whence they had come forth, they would have had the
opportunity to return. (16) But now they long for a better one —
that is, a heavenly: hence God is not a'shamed to call Himself
their God, for He hath prepared for them a. city.

(17) By faith Abraham offered Isaac when he was put to the
test, and he who had received the promises offered his only son, —
(18) he to , whom it .had been said: 'In Isaac thy seed shall be
named'; (ig) for he reasoned that God hath power to raise him up
even from among the dead : Whence he received him back in parable.

1 3— 19. Multiplied as were the sons of Abraham, they had to die without
seeing the promises fulfilled. Yet they died according to faith ; their death corresponded
to. their faith, and in dying they did not regard themselves as deceived in regard
to the unfulfilled promises. In the far off distance they could see the blessings which
were surely to come. ^ ' '

They knew that' earth was not their real home. Certainly their home was
not Chaldea whence Abraham had come, for they might have returned thither at
, any time. It was, therefore, a better home that they sought. (With the home-
'sickness of the Patriarchs compare Ephes. 2, 19. Gf. also i Peter, i, i ; 2, 11). The
author implies that through Christ we have ceased to be homeless, — having become
through Him fellow-citizens of the saints, and members of God's household.!

The promises made to Abraham had been all based on Isaac: yet he was
ready to sacrifice Isaacj for he 'reasoned' that the Lord of life and death would
still make good His word. His hope was not deceived. God gave him back his
son. He received him back 'in parable' '^ which may mean that the offering of
■his son had been only a 'parable', i. e., an inner experience of Abraham, or that
the receiving back was a 'parable', or pledge, of something yet unseen — the
growth of the race. It has been also suggested that the 'parable' in question consists
in the fact that Isaac bekame a token or parable of the resurrection, since he was
an example of God's power to raise the dead to life. Isaac was, in a sense already dead.

OapaPoXT) has been taken by some in the sense of danger, as if it were from
itixp«,SaXXo[jiat, to put oneself in peril (like iap«j3oXEuo[A«i). The sense would then be
that Abraham had received Isaac back in time of danger. But- this sense of jtapaPoXij
is unlikely in a Biblical text.

oOtv is, perhaps,, best taken in a local sense,' 'whence', that is, from among
the dead. > ' ,

_ 56 -

(20) By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in regard to
future things.

(21) By faith the dying Jacob blessed each of the sons of
Joseph, and worshipped leaning* on the top of his staff. i

(22) By faith Joseph,' when Hearing his end, gave thought to
the Exodus of the sons of Israel, and gave directions concerning
his bones

The Mosaic period, 23 — 3i.

(23) By faith Moses was kept in concealment by his parents
for three months after his birth, because they saw that the child
was comely; and they were not afraid of the king's decree.

(24) By faith did Moses, when he had grown to man's estate,
refuse to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, (25) preferring
to bear shame with the people of God rather than to enjoy a
fleeting experience of sin.

20—23. Both Isaac and ■ Jacob' when giving blessing accepted the certainty
of the future, good, things. It is noticeable that Isaac's blessing is given to Jacob
and Jacob's to the house of Josepii — i. e., in neither case to the first-born., a
sure token that the blessing had to do with things invisible. The strength of Jacob's
faith is further indicated by the reverence he showed as he leaned on the top of
his staff — a position which was difficult and painful for an old man like hira.

It was his firm belief in the coifiing glory of the race that made Joseph
think as he lay dying, of the Exodus, and of the n,eed of having his own remains
carried to the Promised Land.

Verse 31 as it stands, seems to mean that Jacob was' so eager and full of
faith, that though forced to lean on his staff for age and faeblemess, he yet made
sign of reverence to God (jcpooEzuvrjoEv). The Hebrew text of Gen. 47, 3i says:
'He did homage towards the head of his bed.' Here the picture is one of Jacob
sitting upright on his couch during the blessing and bowing towards the head of
the couch as an act ,of. reverence to God. The Heb. text reads mittah, 'couch', but
■ the Septuagint text supposes the reading matteh, 'staff' (3 Kings i, 47 supports
mittah). There is no reference in the Septuagint text to an act of homage paid bv
Jacob to a staff of Joseph in supposed recognition of Joseph's superiority, for,
while Genesis does mention a staff of Jacob (32, 10) it, mentions nowhere else a
staff of Joseph.

23—25. It was atj act of faith — against all human calculation — to hide
Moses so long in contempt of the royal decree. The beauty gave a human motive
for the deed, but it could give no guarantee of final success. It was Faith that gave
that guarantee.

Moses' refusal, to identify himself with his Egyptian patrons, arid to share in
their pleasures,' and his determination to identify himself with his own people cou^d
be due only to his confident faith in God's promises.

— 57 —

(26) For he considered the shame of Christ to be greater
wealth than the treasures of the Egyptians: for he looked forward
to the reward.. ' 1

(27) By faith he left Eigypt haying nd fear of the royal wrath.
He stedfastly bided his time like one who seeth the invisible.

(28)' By faith he carried out the Pasch, and the outpouring
of blood, so that theJ)estroyer of the first-born might not touch them.

(29) By faith he traversed the Red Sea as through dry land,
whereas the jEgyptians, making trial of, it, were swallowed up.

(30) Through faith fell the walls of Jericho after they had
been for seven days encompassed (3i). Through faith the harlot
Rahab was not destroyed with the disobedient, because she , had
received the spies in peace. ' '

26 — 3o. The shame of Christ is explicable only from the New Testament.
The use of the, phrtee- here implies the •fundamental unity of the Old and the New
Testaments ^ through their sharing in the experience of their common Head.
What Moses endured was the same in Icind as what the Christian readers of the
Epistle endure.' If they have tribulations these are a tolien that they belong to
Christ, and a guarantee of future reward.

Moses' first flight from Egypt was diie to his fear of Pharaoh's wrath: hence
his second departure, at the time of the Exodus, is here referred to.' Like one
who saw an invisible army ■ defending Israel he had no fearj The events at the
Pasch, and at the 'blood-sprinkling' had given Moses a specimen of God's power ;^
these ceremonies he had carried out trusting in God's word. In that sime trust
he' and his people traversed the Red Sea. It was Faith that made the contrast,
between Israel and Egypt, Israel boldly, crossing and reaching safety through its
■ faith,, while the Egyptians were overwhelmed in their disbelief. ,

The seven-day march round Jericho wtis a great act of faith. It was through
faith that Rahab treated the spies so well." The pfeople of Jericho are called dis-
obedient .because they , refused' to receive the Israelites as heaven-sent in spite of
their being miraculously led.

Since, Rahab could not know much, of the nature of the God of Israel, it
is important to -consider her case in the light of the principle laid down in verse
6 above.

' The' unity of the O. and N. is implied again^ in a way which reminds one of this
verse (2b) in i Cor. lo, 4. the patristic exegetes are inclined to explaii] tlie 'shame, of Christ,'
by taking MosCs here as a type of Christ; asJesils was to sufFeV at the hands of His own
people, so IWoses, as type of Christ, had to endure opposition and insult from the Israelites
of his d,ay. ' , ,

2 See Exod. 2, i4f. and 13, 3jS.

' For the sprinkling of the cjoor-posts with blood and th? 'Destroyer' (the Destroying
Angel) see Exod. 12. . _>,

' Cf. Jos. 6, 17 £F. She appears in the genealogy of Our Lord in. Matt. i. 5-

— 58 - ,
Summary of the times subsequent to Joshue, 32 40.
(32) What shall I further say? Time will fail me if I go on
to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephte, David, Samuel, and the
prophets, (33) who overthrew kingdoms, practised righteousness,
received promises, closed the mouths of lions, (34) extinguished
the nlight of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, came to strength J
out of weakness, were strong in battle, routediarmies of alien foes.
(35) Women received bacjk their dead hy a resurrection; others
allowed themselves to be beaten to death, refusing to accept release
that they might attain a better resurrection. (36) Others had
experience of mockery and stripes-yea even of fetters and dungeons :
(37) they were stoned; they were sawn asunder; (they were tempted);
they died by the murderous sword; they went about in sheep-
skins and goat-skins, in need, tribulation, and misfortune — (38)
they of whom the world was hot worthy, wandering in desolate
places, and mountains, in caves, and in crevices of the earth.

(General conclusion and transition to the present condition of
I Christians.)

(3g) And all these though they received approving testimony
of faith,' have not carried off the fulfilment of the promise, (40)
for God in regard of us had something greater in view, so that
they did not come to perfection apart from us.

32 — 38. The author deals first sutnraarily with the period of the Judges,
itings and Prophets. It is not profitable to seek to identify every reference in the
enumeration of victories of faith heTe given. The 'practice of. justice' may refer to
the just dealings of the prophets and kings. The 'reception of promises' is probably
to be taken as referriiig to David. Daniel closed the mouths of lions. The streng-
thening of weakness was true in the case of Samson. The women who received
back their dead were the widow of Sarepta (3 Kings 17, 23), and the Sunamite
(4 Kitjgs 4, 36). Eleazar, the seven brothers, and their mother are instances of
'beatings' sc. (2 Mace. 6, 26 f. 7, 9. 14).' Zachary,' the son of Yoyada, and Jeremias
were stoned. Isaias was sawn asunder.^ The youths in the Furnace overcame the
might of fire.

39—40. These were' all heroes of faith, and yet, they did not attain the
Chi-istian blessings. These were reserved for us. The 'promise' here is the coming
of the Redeemer, and the blessings which He was to bring.

' Tujutavi^Eiv is a variously described punishment: it resembled, probably, breaking'
on the wheel ; cf. the Vulgate, distenti sunt.

» Cf. Matt. 2i,35;a3, 37.

' The word enetpAoOijcav is, as Westcott say, 'foreign to the context'. The reading
litp'/|oOYioav('theY were burned') has been suggested as a likely emendation. Cf. 2 Mace. B. 11 ; 7, 3ff.

— • 59' —

Chapter 12.

Exhortation to patient endurance in suffering unto holiness, 12, i — //.

(i) Let us then, since we have such a cloud of witnesses
about us, set aside every encumbrance and the sin which enmesheth
us, and run on enduringly the course which still lies before us,
(2) looking towards the Leader and Consummator of faith, Jesus,
who, for the sake of the joy that lay before Him, endured the cross,
and heeded not shame, and hath taken His seat at the right hand
of the throne of God.

(3) Consider then Hinrl who hath endured such a grievous
opposition of sinners against Himself, so that ye may not grow
weary and lose heart.

I — 2. All the history of Israel furnishes us a lesson, and sets a model before
us. Like the ancient Jews, 'the Christian is inclined to murmur. This tendency, he
must put aside, and follow in all things his leader Jesus. If Jesus took no heed of
the shame, He had to ' endure, the Christian should have strength and courage to
bear his small trials.

The 'cloud' suggests the immensity of the multitude of witnesses. 'Witness'
means here one who, tells what he has experienced. The Christian life is conceived
here in true Pauline fashion as a contest in the arena. All encumbrances that
would impede us in the race of the Christian life must be cast aside, and our
whole energy should be bent on securing victory in the contest.

"Oyjio? means a burden. 'EuTcepioTatos is uncertain in meahiftg. Chrys. takes it
as = 'encompassed', 'surrounded'. The text suggests that sin is a sort of heavy or
awkward garment that impedes movement. Apparently there is present also the..
thought of sin as a mesh.

TpE')(^a)jji£v etc. obviously refers to a contest in running. The Christian cannot
shirk the contest; it is his life. Nor must he merely begin it; he must carry it
through. Jesus supplies the motive and the source of strength for Ihe race. He is
the model of faith under trial: He is also the model of the faith which persists to
the end.

The phrase avti trj? jcpozsijiEVJ); auTo) X"P"5 is Usually explained by the Greek
Fathers as meaning that Jesus set aside the glory and happiriess which were His
right, iti order to take up the cross. Others take the joy as the future blessedness
which Jesus would enjoy as a reward for His. endurance of the cross. The joy
would bfe thus,, in a sense, the athlete's reward. 'Avt! in this view, would mean 'for
the sake of '. Cf. Philippi 2, S ff.

3. The readers' should estimate their own difficulties by comparing them
with those of Jesus. He had to bear an opposition of sinners which He had nowise
deserved. The (ivtiXoyia found its final expression in the Crucifixion. Note how
the idea of an athletic context appears at the end of v. 3.

— 6o —

(4') Ye have not' yet resisted unto blood in the struggle with
sin, (5) and yet ye have forgotten the exhortation which appeals ;
to you as sons:

'My son, despise not the discipline of the Lord, and lose not
courctge when thou art punished by Him, (6) for whom the Lord
loveth He chasteneth, and He scourgeth every son whom He receiveth.'

(7) Unto training ye endure: as with sons God dealeth with-
you. For where is there a son that his father doth not discipline ?
(8) If ye are without discipline in which all have had a share,
ye are bastards and not sons.

(9) Further, we had fathers of our flesh as discipliners, and
we had reverence for them. Shall we not be much more subject
to the Father of spirits, and live? (10) For those disciplined us
for a little time according to their own ideas, but This One to
our welfare, that we may be made sharers "in His holiness.

(11) For eyery discipline seemeth, for the moment, not to
bring joy but grief. But afterwards it bringeth the peaceful fruit
of justice to those who have been exercised therein.

'(12) Therefore brace up the hands that have grown helpless,
and the knees that totter, and make straight paths for your feet,
so that that which is lame may not miss the path completely, but
be cured. >

4 — 6. The reference 10 resistance to blood may mean that no serious perse-
cution^ has yet brolten out against them. Or the sense may he that their struggle
with sin has not been really severe. The quotation is from Prov. 3, i f. The sorrows
of life are but a proof of God's love. He punishes as a Father.

7. uicoji.lvet£; is, probably, better taken as indicative. E!; naiSEiav is the better
supported readitjg,' but it is difficult to take TtaiStia as = 'training' here, while in
the immediately preceding it ^= 'punishment', 'discipline'. It has beep proposed to
read e! instead of eis, so that the sense, would be: ,When ye have to endure
punishment, God dealeth with you', etc. A son is never without discipline. -Cf.
Roms. 8, 16—28. .

9. The contrast here is between fathers of the flesh, and the Father of spirits.
The Father of spirits is Father of the human spirit: to Him life is due, and to Him
also subjection is due. 'The discipline of thi fathers of the flesh is but for a little
while, and it is gijided by purely personal considerations. God's discipline is unto our
objective advantage, and the result of it is our participation in God's holiness.

II — 12- The readers are not to be discouraged by their present sufferings.
The 'fruit of justice' is conformity with God's will. Against the tendency of the
readers to grow feeble he 'quotes Is. 3s, 3. The straight path .is the one that courage
selects — straight, that is, on to the goal.

XuXd? is one so lame that he cannot run freely ; such a one would be heavily
handicapped in the contest referred to in verses i ff. Ixrptov is used here in an
ethical sense, 'to turn away from the straight path'.

— 6i —

(14) Follow after peace with all, and after holiness — without
which no one shall see • the Lord, (15) taking care that no one
hold himself far from the grace of God, that no root of bitterness
shoot forth and cause trouble, and the many be tainted thereby;
(16) that no one be an adulterer or a common fellow like Esau,
who gave up his birthright for a single meal. (17) For ye know
that afterwards, when he wished to inherit the blessing, he was
rejected, for Jie found no place for rescinding, thqugh he sought
with tears.

Climax of the Epistle. Culmination of its doctrine and exhortation,

i

(18) For ye have not approached unto a mountain which
one may touch, and vvhich burns With fire, unto mist and darkness,
and storm-wind, (19) unto the clang of trumpets, and the sound
of words — whereat the listeners prayed 'that no word more be
spoken to them, (20) for they endured not the command: 'If even
a beast touch 'the molintain, let it be stoned;' (21) and — so dreadful
was that which appeared — Moses skid : 'I am full of fear and trouble.'

, 14 — 21. Peace with all Christians is to be sought. Holiness is the true ideal of
the Christian life. Not one of the brethren can be- suffered to go astray. , Such a
one might become , a root of bitterness, i.e. a source of infection, for the rest. No
one of the brethren ttust be permitted to turn away from God, for such a one
would then become an 'adulterer' in the Old Testament sense (one who turns aside
from' the servite of God), and would sell his birthright of Christian nobility for
'the passing , advantage of escaping the troubles pf the Christian life. A sinner of
that kind would become, in the end, like Esau, and would have tO' share in Esau's
bitter and hopeless regrets.

A pipijXos is one who thinks only of common, or material, advantages — one
who is unspiritual, godless, worldly. A wopvp? is one wl;o sells- himself for money
unto ev'fl things.

■ Esau found no means of rescinding the affair, i, e., the decree of his own
rejection. Metovoik, is not here necessarily ethical conversion. The meaning may be
that Esau could not induce his father to chatige his mi'nd. ■ There is no suggestion
that God rejected a repentance of Esau. ' '

■ The Old Testament was giyen in circumstances of dread and fear (cf. Exod
19, 16—19; Deut. 4,; if.; 5, 22f.) Not so the New. On the one side is terror and
tumult: on the other rest and peace. The words of the people praying that they
might no more have to listen to the actual voice of God are in Deut. 5, 22. The
saying here attributed to, Moses, is ndt to be found in Scripture. The author must
have derived it fronii tradition.

_ 62 -

(22) But ye have approached unto Mt. Sion, and the City of
the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to the myriads of angels,
' a festive throng, (23) to the community of the first-born who are
registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of the
perfect just, (24) and to the Mediator of the New Testament, and
to that Blood of Sprinkling which speaketh better than Abel.

(25) Take heed that ye reject not Him that speaketh; for if
they did not escape who rejected Him that gave revelation on earth,
how much less we, when we turn our back on Him (who speaketh)
from heaven, (26) whose voice at that time shook the earth : but
now He hath given a promise to this effect: 'Once again I will
bring to trembling, not the earth alone, but the heavens too/

(27) The 'once again' points to the change of that which is shaken
as that of something created, so that that which is not shaken may abide.

(28) Therefore, since we receive an immovable kingdom, let
us be thankful, and thus give pleasing service to God with reverence
and fear; (29) for our God is a devouring fire.

22 — 24. Mt. Sion is tliought of as the permanent dwelling of God, and as
the source whence comes every blessing for Israel. The writer speaks here, however,
of the heavenly Sion — of which Jerusalem is a symbol. The 'community of the
first-born' == the men of the New testament community — who have the right
of primogeniture as compared with the rest of men. Even though they are not
yet in heaven their names are inscribed there. 'Judge' means here rather otie that
rescues and rules than one that condemns and punishes. Note that the New Testament
is here Called vEa aud not as usual -/.aivrj: it is a covenant that has taken the place
of the Old Testament. The glory of the New Testament suggested here and in thfe ^
following appears as a mdtive for not falling away from it. The blood of Christ
calls for mercy: that of Abel for vengeance.

25 — 29. The Jews refused to listen to God speaking on Sinai — on the
pretence that they were afraid; in this the Christians must not imitate them. If
they do they will not escape the penalty due to that conduct — just as the Jews
could not escape the punishment which they deserved.

The Oracle-giver on Sinai and He who speaks from heaven are the same,
viz., God. The Sinstitic revelation was given km y%; the new covenant has ieen
given KTc" oupavuv. This contrast is connected with the general contrast between
the two covenants.

At Sinai there was a great upheaval of earth: when another upheaval comes,
it will affect heaven as well as earth. In the one case the trembling was local: in
the other it will be universal — just as the scope of the Law was limited, while
that of the Gospel is universal. The result of the second catastrophe will be that
rest and stability will follow it for everything that survives it: and thereafter there
will be no other great upheaval. Thus the mighty catastrophe, which is to come,
apparently, towards the close of the second period, will have for its chief effect
not destruction, but the separation of the permanent from the changeable. In v. 26
Aggaeus is quoted. Since we are to possess the unchangeable, ' we should be
grateful rather than timorous; and we should show our gratitude in due worship
of God. Our grateful worship must not, however, be wanting in reverence, for
our God is the God of the Old Testament — a devouring fire.

— 63 —

Chapter 1 3.

Exhortation to brotherly love and to purity, i — 6.
(i) Brotherly love must abide. (2) Forget not hospitality for
through it some: have harboured angels unawares.

(3) Remember, as fellow-prisoners, those in prison, and the
■ persecuted, as men who also are in the body.

(4) Let marriage be in honour with all, and let the marriage-
bed be undefiled : for God will judge the unchaste and adulterous.

(5) Let your character be free from the craving for money,
.and be content with 'what you have. He Himself hath said:
'I will never abandon nor desert thee' — (6) so that yve may take
comfort and say: 'The Lord is my helper; 1 shall not fear what
man can do to me.'

Exhortation to resolute confession of Christ,
and abandonment of Judaism, y—i6.
{7) Be mindful of your leaders who spoke to you the word
of God. Consider the close of their career, and imitate their faith.

I — 4. Brotherly love is active in the community to which the Epistle is
addressed, as we see from 6, 10 and 10, 33 f. It was particularly needful when there
was danger of faith growing cold. Jesus had foretold that in, time of trial brother
would stand against brother. Hence the exhortation is here in place. One form of
charity practised by Jew and Gentile was hospitality. Yet, in time of persecution
hospitality might be associated whit great perils. There was thus some need of ;
exhorting to the practice of it. The writer reminds his readers of such cases as
Abraham, Lot, Manoah, Tobias etc. It might be possible to fentertain' an angel
unawares. Those who, are maltreated should be cared for by the brethren, who-
may find themselves soon in like case. All the brethren arS of the same nature, and
all will suffer similarly in like misfortunes.

The older exegesis found in the passage dealing with marriage a reference
to false theories of asceticism which declared marriage to be unworthy of a Christian,
But more likely we have here simply an exhortation to purity of married life.

5 — 6. Avarice is here forbidden as well as impurity. Tpo'jco; may riiean,
'manner of life', 'way of thinking', 'form of mind', 'character'. There is no need
for anxiety about tlie future, as can be seen from Ps. 117, 6, which the -writer
quotes from some peculiar text-form of his own.

7, The readers are exhorted to be faithful to those, from whom they first
heard the Gospel, and to imitate their lives and their faith. The death of those
leaders was the fitting crown of their lives. The term riyoufiEvo; has been taken by
some as indicating that the Epistle was addressed to Rome, because ^Clement of
Rome uses that term for the heads of the Roman Church. But Clement had read
this E.pistle, and fiyoufiEvo; is similar, -in meaning to 7tpEo|3uTEpo;, ijtiaxoTtoe, n6ip.r]V
TcpoVarafiEVo;.

^ 64 -

(8) Jesus Christ is yesterday and to-day the same, and also
for ever.

(9) Do not be led away by manifold and strange teachings,
for is good that the heart be made firm by grace and not by foods,
from which they have no profit who occupied themselves therein.

(10) We have an altar from which they are not entitled to
eat who serve the Tabernacle. (11) For the bodies of the animals'
whose blood is carried by the High Priest into the Most Holy Place,
are burned outside the camp. (12) Therefore, Jesus also, that He
might purify the people by His own blood, suffered outside the gate.

(i3) Let us then go forth to Him outside the camp, and bear
His shame. (14) For we have here no abiding city, but seek for
one to come.

(15) Thrc)ugh Him, then, let us at all times offer sacrifice
of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that praise Him name.

(16) Kindness and deeds of charity forget not, for in such
sacrifices God taketh pleasure.

8 — 16/ JesXis whom the Apostles preached remains ever the same. There is,
then, no room for new doctrines, and there is, above all, no room for new and
strange teachings about different kinds of foods. It is useless to try to reconcile
Christianity with Judaism, by seeking to introduce Jewish sacrificial banquets among
Christians; as a prelude to the reestablishment of Judaisni. Foods are of no import-
ance, but only the grace which makes the heart firm. They who serve the Tabernacle
(i. e., either .the Jewish priests alone', ot the whole Jewish community as such)
were not permitted jto eat the flesh of the victims on the Feast of Atonement. It
had to be burned outside the camp. Jesus, as the fulfilment of the type of the victims
of Atonement Day, was immolated outside the city. His offering was a complete
atonement, and has abrogated all the Jewish sacrifices. Let us, then, shake off the
trammels of Judaism, and go forth to Jesus, and share in His shame. We have not
here a lasting city, but look forward to a heavenly one. For this let us thank God,
offering to Him the sacrifice of our praise; and offering to Him also the sacrifice of
love and care for the brethren. These sacrifices are to be offered through Christ.

The emphasis in verse 10 is laid on the fact that the Jews, remaining within
the 'Tent' (their own faith), cannot share in the Christian altar which is outside
the tent. The Christian altar is outside the Tent because the Atone.ment-type was
completely fulfilled in the death of Jesus. It is possible that verse 10 refers directly
rather to the' appropriation of the fruits of the sacrifice of the Cross by grace, than
to the enjoyment of the Eucharistic sacrificial food ; yet as the fruits of Christ's
death are appropriated in a very special way in the Holy Eucharist, the latter is
most likely referred to in the eating of the altar.

In the early Church, and in ' the Middle Ages, and ■ generally in iriodern
Catholic exegesis v. 10 is usually referred directly to the Eucharistic banquet. Yet
many Catholic writers of all periods take Ouoiaori^piov in a figurative sense, and
Trent does not use the verse as a proof of the sacrificial character of the Eucharist.
Hence the passage may be freely discussed. (See Estius on this verSe.)

- '65 -

Exhortation to reveirence ioivards the hads of the community, 17 — 25.

...(17) Ob?y your superiors and be subject to them, for thev
watch over your souls as men who must fender an account —
that they may carry through their task with. gladness, and not with
'sighs; for that is of no profit to you.

(18) Pray for us, for we are convinced that we have a good
conscience, since we are striving , to walk rightly in all things.
(19) All the more, however, do 1 exhort you to do- this so' that
I may be quickly restored to you.

(20) But the God of peace, who hath brought up from among
the dead the great Pastor of the sheep, Our Lord Jesus, by the
blood of the eternal covenant, (21) may He make you ready in
every good t'hing to carry out His will, while He Himself accom-
plisheth in you what is pleasing to Him through Jesus Christ — ^
to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

17. As praise and brotherly charity' are a sacrifice to God, so also is due
submission to superiors. They liave a heavy responsibility,, and should be loyally-
supported. There is an obligation on Christians to make easy the task of their
superiors. Making difficulties for them is disastrous for. those who do so.

Verse 18 seems to hint (hat there were, or might be, suspicions .about the
writer aipong his readers. The writer is confident, however, that the great mass of
the community will support him, and he longs to see them again. The context
might, perhaps, be taken as itnplying that he had beeui a ^yoijisvo; among them.'
Verses 30 and 21 form a sort of conclusion to the Epistle. The time? are
troubled, and so the writer guides tlie thought of his readers towards the God of
peace, towards Jesus the Good Shepherd, His resurrection, the Covenant in His
blood, and towards the need of that equipment 'with grace which is necessary for
the fulfilment of Gpd's will, so that they may find therein a S9urce of consolation,
and a reason for thankfulness to God.

The blotod of Jesus is the blood of an eternal covenant, anc( Jesus, by His
resurrection has been constituted a Shepherd of our souls for ever. All God's
dealings are carrie(l out, as it were, through Jesus the Shepherd who has given His
life for His flock.

Verse 2b ibrings together the chief fruits of faith in the Messias — that faith
which, is being threatened, among the readers of the Epistle. The writer may have
had in view Is. 63, 1 1 f. when writing this verse. For Jesus as our ap)(moi|jir|v
cf. 1 Peter 5, 4. Commentators are not agreed as to- whether h aijiarr is to be read
with TOijjiEva or with aixyaymt: the fbrmer grouping would imply that Jesus'became
Chief Pastor through His. sacrifice, the latter that He was raised- up because this
blood was the blqod of an eternal covenant — the shedding of this blood being a
pje-condition of His Resurrection, exaltation and appointment as Mediator. The
dbxotogy in v. 21 is addressed directly to Jesus.

— 66 —

Epilogue) 22 — 2$.

(22) But 't exhort j6\x brethren, bear with the. word of
exhortation^ for I have written but briefly \o you.

(23) Know ye that our Isrother Timothy has set out on d

journey. As soon as he arrives I shall see you with him.

1 ■

(24) Greet all your superiors, and all the saint
They of Italy sajute you.

(25) Grace be with you all. Amen.'

Verse 22 is, apparently, an apology for the brevity of the lejler. Much' more
might have been written on the itiiportant matter^ discussed., but the writer hopeS'
that his readers will feel no offence at the brevity of his treatment — vast as the
iSiibjec^s are with which he has dealt. , ' ,

23. He derives consolatioii frbin the hope of meeting Timothy again, and
of visiting , his readers along with Timotliy. Does this mean that the presence of
Timothy was calculated to secure a more friendly reception for, the writer?

24. His special greeting is for the heads of, the community, but he greets
the whole community as well, giving its members th'e early Palestinian designation
0/ the Christians — ^ 'Saints'. ' '

■ ' The aitb T^; 'IraXijx; has been generally explained as implying that the letlfer

was written in Italy. The phrase might, however, refer to Italian Christians who
(Were with the writer at the time <>f the sending of the letter. It is probal>Iy
better to take the verse as meaning that thosfi who are in Italy sentf greetinglfrbm
Italy; for, if the Italians were merely a group ot Italians, present with the writer in
some place outside Italy, it wbuld be strange' that he mentions no others as joining
in the greetings. We know no early community outside Italy which consisted ei-^
clusively of Italians. It isi strange that no' greetings are sent to private individuals!
The word ctjtoXsXujilvov has been usually understood as 'discharged . from
prison', or 'set free from a charge'. But the sense given in the translation is possible!
(See Moulton, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, p. 66.) The word includes,
together with the idea of having ^et out on a journey, the further' idea of being
sent on a particular mission. We ' know nothing of the journey of mission in
question. But neither do we know anything of a charge made against Timothy,
or of an imprisonment of Tinnothy. - ' - ^ >

25. The Epistle ends with the familiar Pauline blessing. The visiter wished
for his readers the best and highest that they -could receive — the gift of grace.

*k*

;^r^:\

E"*X^;!:-