Skip to main content

Full text of "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews : with notes and introduction"

See other formats 


•'•mmnmrrw^m^^i^n^mmm^^'rmmmmmmm-m 


mm 


■■^s^ 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  witli  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/epistleofpaulapoOOfarruoft 


CI)e  Camiritrfle  MMt  for  ^ti)ooIs 


THE   EPISTLE   OF   PAUL   THE  APOSTLE 
TO   THE 

HEBREWS. 


Honliou:    C.  J.  CLAY  and  SONS, 

CAMBRIDGE   UNIVERSITY   TRESS    WAREHOUSE 

AVE    MARIA    LANE. 


(Tambritise:    DEIGHTON,   BELL,   AND   CO. 
Heipjia;   F.  A.  BROCKHAUS. 


Zft  OTamibritcje  3SiftIe  for  ^tliool^ 
antr  Colltfles* 

General  Editor  :— J.  J.  S.  PEROWNE,  D.D., 
Dean  of  Peterborough. 


THE    EPISTLE    OF   PAUL   THE   APOSTLE 

TO    THE 

HEBREWS, 

JFini  AZOTES  AND  INTRODUCTION 


BY 

THE  VEN.  F.  W.  FARRAR,  D.D. 

ARCHDEACON    OF    WESTMINSTER. 


EDITED  FOR    THE  SYNDICS  OF  THE    UNIVERSITY  PRESS. 


©ambritige : 

At    THE   UNIVERSITY   TRESS. 
1888 

l.lll  Rights  reseix'cd.l 


rRIXTED    BY    C.    J.    CLAY,    M.A.    &    SONS, 
AT    THE    UNIVERSITY    PRESS. 


PREFACE 
BY    THE    GENERAL  EDITOR. 

The  General  Editor  of  TJic  Cambridge  Bible  for 
Schools  thinks  it  right  to  say  that  he  does  not  hold 
himself  responsible  either  for  the  interpretation  of 
particular  passages  which  the  Editors  of  the  several 
Books  have  adopted,  or  for  any  opinion  on  points  of 
doctrine  that  they  may  have  expressed.  In  the  New 
Testament  more  especially  questions  arise  of  the 
deepest  theological  import,  on  which  the  ablest  and 
most  conscientious  interpreters  have  differed  and 
always  will  differ.  His  aim  has  been  in  all  such 
cases  to  leave  each  Contributor  to  the  unfettered 
exercise  of  his  own  judgment,  only  taking  care  that 
mere  controversy  should  as  far  as  possible  be  avoided. 
He  has  contented  himself  chiefly  with  a  careful 
revision  of  the  notes,  with  pointing  out  omissions,  with 


6  PREFACE. 

suggesting  occasionally  a  reconsideration  of  some 
question,  or  a  fuller  treatment  of  difficult  passages, 
and  the  like. 

Beyond  this  he  has  not  attempted  to  interfere, 
feeling  it  better  that  each  Commentary  should  have 
its  own  individual  character,  and  being  convinced 
that  freshness  and  variety  of  treatment  are  more 
than  a  compensation  for  any  lack  of  uniformity  in 
the  Series. 

Deanery,  Peterborough. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGES 
I.       IXTRODUCTION. 

Chapter  I.     Character,  Analysis,  and  Object  of  the 

Epistle  to  the  Hebrews     9—25 

Chapter  IT.     Where  was  the  Epistle  written  ?  and  to 

whom  ?    25 — 28 

Chapter  IIP.     The  Date  29 

Chapter  IV.     Style  and  Character  of  the  Epistle 29 — 32 

Chapter  V.     Theology  of  the  Epistle 32 — 41 

Chapter  VI.     The  Author  of  the  Epistle  41 — 49 

Chapter  VII.     Canonicity  49 — 50 

II.    Text  and  Notes 51 — 194 

III.     Index 195—196 


The  Text  adopted  in  this  Edition  is  that  of  Dr  Scrivener's 
Ca7nbridge  Paragraph  Bible.  A  few  variations  from  the  ordi- 
nary Text,  chiefly  in  the  spelling  of  certain  words,  and  in  the 
use  of  italics,  will  be  noticed.  For  the  principles  adopted  by 
Dr  Scrivener  as  regards  the  printing  of  the  Text  see  his  Intro- 
duction to  the  Paragraph  Bible,  published  by  the  Cambridge 
University  Press. 


INTRODUCTION. 


The  old  line, 

*'  Qtiis,  quid,  tibi,  quibus  aiixiliis,  acr,  qitomodo,  quandoV 
Who?  what?  where?  with  what  helps?  why?  how?  when? 

has  sometimes  been  quoted  as  summing  up  the  topics  which  arc 
most  necessary  by  way  of  "  introduction  "  to  the  sacred  books. 
The  summary  is  not  exhaustive  nor  exact,  but  we  may  be  guided 
by  it  to  some  extent.  We  must,  however,  take  the  topics  in 
a  different  order.  Let  us  then  begin  with  '■  qtiidf  and  ^  curV 
What  is  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews?  with  what  object  was  it 
written?  for  what  readers  was  it  designed?  Of  the  ' nbi?'  and 
^  qnando  .?'  we  shall  find  that  there  is  little  to  be  said  ;  but  the 
answer  to  ^ qiiomodo  F'  '  how  ?'  will  involve  a  brief  notice  of  the 
style  and  theology  of  the  Epistle,  and  we  may  then  finally  con- 
sider the  question  quis  ?  who  was  the  writer  ? 

CHAPTER  I. 

CHARACTER,  ANALYSIS,  AND  OBJECT  OF  THE  EPISTLE  TO 
THE  HEBREWS. 

It  has  been  sometimes  said  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
is  rather  a  treatise  than  an  Epistle.  The  author  is  silent  as  to 
his  own  name  ;  he  begins  with  no  greeting;  he  sends  no  special 
messages  or  salutations  to  individuals.  His  aim  is  to  furnish 
an  elaborate  argument  in  favour  of  one  definite  thesis  ;  and  he 
describes  what  he  has  written  as  "a  word  of  exhortation"  (xiii. 
22).     Nevertheless  it  is  clear  that  we  must  regard  his  work  as 


INTRODUCTION. 


an  Epistle.  It  was  evidently  intended  for  a  definite  circle  of 
readers  to  whom  the  author  was  personally  known.  The  mes- 
sages and  the  appeals,  though  not  addressed  to  single  persons, 
are  addressed  to  the  members  of  a  single  community,  and  the 
tone  of  many  hortatory  passages,  as  well  as  the  definiteness  of 
the  remarks  in  the  last  chapter,  shew  that  we  are  not  dealing 
with  a  cyclical  document,  but  with  one  of  the  missives  de- 
spatched by  some  honoured  teacher  to  some  special  Church. 
It  is  probable  that  many  such  letters  have  perished.  It  was 
the  custom  of  the  scattered  Jewish  synagogues  to  keep  up 
a  friendly  intercourse  with  each  other  by  an  occasional  inter- 
change of  letters  sent  as  opportunity  might  serve.  This  custom 
was  naturally  continued  among  the  Christian  Churches,  of  which 
so  many  had  gathered  round  a  nucleus  of  Gentile  proselytes  or 
Jewish  converts.  If  the  letter  was  of  a  weighty  character,  it 
was  preserved  among  the  archives  of  the  Church  to  which  it 
had  been  addressed.  The  fact  that  this  and  the  other  Christian 
Epistles  which  are  included  in  the  Canon  have  defied  the 
ravages  of  time  and  the  accidents  of  change,  is  due  to  their  own 
surpassing  importance,  and  to  the  overruling  Providence  of 
God. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  one  of  many  letters  which 
must  have  been  addressed  to  the  various  Christian  communities 
in  the  first  century.  Passing  over  for  the  present  the  ques- 
tion of  the  particular  Church  to  whose  members  it  was  ad- 
dressed, we  see  at  once  that  the  superscription  "  to  the  He- 
brews " — whether  it  came  from  the  hand  of  the  writer  or  not — 
correctly  describes  the  class  of  Christians  by  whom  the  whole 
argument  was  specially  needed.  The  word  '  Hebrews,'  like  the 
word  '  Greeks,'  was  used  in  different  senses.  In  its  wider  sense 
it  included  all  who  were  of  the  seed  of  Abraham  (2  Cor.  xi.  22), 
the  whole  Jewish  race  alike  in  Palestine  and  throughout  the 
vast  area  of  the  Dispersion  (Phil.  iii.  5).  But  in  its  narrower 
sense  it  meant  those  Jews  only  who  still  used  the  vernacular 
Aramaic,  which  went  by  the  name  of  '  Hebrew,'  though  the 
genuine  Hebrew  in  which  the  Old  Testament  was  written  had 
for  some  time  been  a  dead  language.     In  a  still  narrower  sense 


INTRODUCTION. 


the  designation  *  Hebrews  '  was  confined  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Judaea.  The  letter  itself  sufficiently  shews  that  the  Hebrews,  to 
whom  it  is  addressed,  were  Jewish  concerts  to  Christianity. 
Although  the  writer  was  of  the  school  of  St  Paul,  and  adopts 
some  of  his  phrases,  and  accords  with  him  in  his  general  tone 
of  thought,  yet  throughout  this  Epistle  he  ignores  the  very 
existence  of  the  Gentiles  to  an  extent  which  would  have  been 
hardly  possible  in  any  work  of  "the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles" 
(Acts  xviii.  6;  Gal.  ii.  7,  9 ;  2  Tim.  i.  11),  and  least  of  all 
when  he  was  handling  one  of  his  own  great  topics — the  con- 
trast between  Judaism  and  Christianity.  The  word  Gentiles 
{Wvrj)  does  not  once  occur  nor  are  the  Gentiles  in  any  way 
alluded  to.  The  writer  constantly  uses  the  expression  "the 
people"  (ii.  17;  iv,  9;  v.  3;  vii.  5,  11,  27;  viii.  10;  ix.  7,  19; 
X.  30;  xi.  25;  xiii.  12),  but  in  every  instance  he  means  "the 
chosen  people,"  nor  does  he  give  the  slightest  indication 
that  he  is  thinking  of  any  nation  but  the  Jews.  We  do  not 
for  a  moment  imagine  that  he  doubted  the  call  of  the  Gen- 
tiles. The  whole  tendency  of  his  arguments,  the  Pauline  cha- 
racter of  many  of  his  thoughts  and  expressions,  even  the  funda- 
mental theme  of  his  Epistle,  that  Judaism  as  such — Judaism  in 
all  its  distinctive  worship  and  legislation — was  abrogated,  are 
sufficient  to  shew  that  he  would  have  held  with  St  Paul  that 
'all  are  not  Israel  who  are  of  Israel,'  and  that  'they  who  are  of 
the  faith  are  blessed  with  the  faithful  Abraham.'  But  while  he 
undoubtedly  held  these  truths, — for  otherwise  he  could  not 
have  been  a  Christian  at  all,  and  still  less  a  Pauline  Christian, — 
his  mind  is  not  so  full  of  them  as  was  the  mind  of  St  Paul. 
It  is  inconceivable  that  St  Paul,  who  regarded  it  as  his  own 
special  Gospel  to  proclaim  to  the  Ge?i(iles  the  unsearchable 
riches-  of  Christ  (Eph.  iii.  4—8),  should  have  written  a  long 
Epistle  in  which  the  Gentiles  do  not  once  seem  to  cross  the 
horizon  of  his  thoughts  ;  and  this  would  least  of  all  have  been 
possible  in  a  letter  addressed  "to  the  Hebrews."  The  Jews 
regarded  St  Paul  with  a  fury  of  hatred  and  suspicion  which 
we  find  faintly  reflected  in  his  Epistles  and  in  the  Acts  (Acts 
xxi.  21 ;  I  Thess.  ii.  15;  2  Cor.  xi.  24;  Phil.  iii.  2).     Even  the 


12  INTRODUCTION. 


Jewish  Christians  looked  on  the  most  characteristic  part  of  his 
teaching  with  a  jealousy  and  alarm  which  found  frequent  ex- 
pression both  in  words  and  deeds.  It  would  have  been  some- 
thing like  unfaithfulness  in  St  Paul,  it  would  have  been  an 
unworthy  suppression  of  his  intenscst  convictions,  to  write 
to  any  exclusively  'Hebrew'  community  without  so  much  as 
distantly  alluding  to  that  phase  of  the  Gospel  which  it  had 
been  his  special  mission  to  set  forth.  The  case  with  the  writer 
of  this  Epistle  is  very  different.  He  was  not  only  a  Jewish 
Christian,  but  a  Jewish  Christian  of  the  Alexandrian  school. 
We  shall  again  and  again  have  occasion  to  see  that  he  had 
been  deeply  influenced  by  the  thoughts  of  Philo.  Now  Philo, 
liberal  as  were  his  philosophical  views,  was  a  thoroughly  faithful 
Jew,  He  never  for  a  moment  forgot  his  nationality.  He  was 
so  completely  entangled  in  Jewish  particularism  that  he  shews 
no  capacity  for  understanding  the  universal  prophecies  of  the 
Old  Testament.  His  LOGOS,  or  Word,  so  far  as  he  assumes  any 
personal  distinctness,  is  essentially  and  preeminently  a  Jewish 
deliverer.  Judaism  formed  for  Philo  the  nearer  horizon  beyond 
which  he  hardly  cared  to  look.  Similarly  in  this  Epistle  the 
v/riter  is  so  exclusively  occupied  by  the  relations  of  Judaism  to 
Christianity,  that  he  does  not  even  glance  aside  to  examine  any 
other  point  of  difference  between  the  New  Covenant  and  the 
Old.  What  he  sees  in  Christianity  is  simply  a  perfected  Ju- 
daism. Mankind  is  to  him  the  ideal  Hebrew.  Even  when  he 
speaks  of  the  Incarnation  he  speaks  of  it  as  *a  taking  hold'  not 
'of  humanity'  but  'of  the  seed  of  Abraham'  (ii.  i6). 

In  this  Epistle  then  he  is  writing  to  Jewish  Christians,  and  he 
deals  exclusively  with  the  topics  which  were  most  needful  for 
the  particular  body  of  Jewish  Christians  which  he  had  in  view. 
All  that  we  know  of  their  circumstances  is  derived  from  the 
letter  itself.  They  like  the  writer  himself,  had  been  converted 
by  the  preaching  of  Apostles,  ratified  '  by  signs,  and  portents, 
and  various  powers,  and  distributions  of  the  Holy  Spirit'  (ii.  3, 4). 
But  some  time  had  elapsed  since  their  conversion  (v.  12).  Some 
of  their  original  teachers  and  leaders  were  already  dead  (xiii.  7), 
They  had  meanwhile  been   subjected  to  persecutions,  severe 


INTRODUCTION.  13 


indeed  (x.  32 — 34),  but  not  so  severe  as  to  have  involved  mar- 
tyrdom (xii.  4).  But  the  afflictions  to  which  they  had  been  sub- 
jected, together  with  the  delay  of  the  Lord's  Coming  (x.  36,  37), 
had  caused  a  relaxation  of  their  efforts  (xii.  12),  a  sluggishness 
in  their  spiritual  intelligence  (vi.  12),  a  dimming  of  the  bright- 
ness of  their  early  faith  (x.  32),  a  tendency  to  listen  to  new  doc- 
trines (xiii.  9,  17),  a  neglect  of  common  worship  (x.  25),  and  a  tone 
of  spurious  independence  towards  their  teachers  (xiii.  7,  17,  24), 
which  were  evidently  creating  the  peril  of  apostasy.  Like  their 
ancestors  of  old,  the  Hebrew  Christians  were  beginning  to  find 
that  the  pure  spiritual  manna  palled  upon  their  taste.  In  their 
painful  journey  through  the  wilderness  of  life  they  were  begin- 
ning to  yearn  for  the  pomp  and  boast  and  ease  of  Jewish  exter- 
nalism,  just  as  their  fathers  had  hankered  after  the  melons  and 
fleshpots  of  their  Egyptian  servitude.  They  were  casting  back- 
ward glances  of  regret  towards  the  doomed  city  which  they  had 
left  (xiii.  12).  That  the  danger  M'as  imminent  is  clear  from  the 
awful  solemnity  of  the  appeals  which  again  and  again  the  writer 
addresses  to  them  (ii.  i — 4;  iii.  7 — 19;  vi.  4 — 12;  x.  26 — 31;  xii. 
15 — 17),  and  which,  although  they  are  usually  placed  in  juxta- 
position to  words  of  hope  and  encouragement  (iii.  6,  14 ;  vi.  11; 
x.  39;  xii.  18 — 24;  &c.),  must  yet  be  reckoned  among  the  sternest 
passages  to  be  found  in  the  whole  New  Testament. 

A  closer  examination  of  the  Epistle  may  lead  us  to  infer  that 
this  danger  of  apostasy — of  gradually  dragging  their  anchor  and 
drifting  away  from  the  rock  of  Christ  (ii.  i) — arose  from  two 
sources;  namely — (i)  the  influence  of  some  one  prominent 
member  of  the  community  whose  tendency  to  abandon  the 
Christian  covenant  (iii.  12)  was  due  to  unbelief,  and  whose  unbe- 
lief had  led  to  flagrant  immorality  (xii.  15,  16)  ;  and  (2)  from  a 
tendency  to  listen  to  the  boastful  commemoration  of  the  glories 
and  privileges  of  Judaism,  and  to  recoil  before  the  taunt  that 
Christians  were  traitors  and  renegades,  who  without  any  com- 
pensatory advantage  had  forfeited  all  right  to  participate  in  the 
benefits  of  the  Levitic  ritual  and  its  atoning  sacrifices  (xiii. 
10,  &c.). 

In  the  communities  of  Jewish  Christians  there  must  have 


14  INTRODUCTION. 


been  many  whose  faith  and  zeal — not  kindled  by  hope,  not  sup- 
ported by  patience,  not  leavened  with  absolute  sincerity,  not 
maintained  by  a  progressive  sanctification — tended  to  wax  dim 
and  cold.  And  if  such  men  chanced  to  meet  some  unconverted 
Jew,  burning  with  all  the  patriotism  of  a  zealot,  and  inflated 
M'ith  all  the  arrogance  of  a  Pharisee,  they  would  be  liable  to  be 
shaken  by  the  appeals  and  arguments  of  such  a  fellow-country- 
man. He  would  have  asked  them  how  they  dared  to  emanci- 
pate themselves  from  a  law  spoken  by  Angels  ?  He  would  have 
reminded  them  of  the  heroic  grandeur  of  Moses  ;  of  the  priestly 
dignity  of  Aaron ;  of  the  splendour  and  significance  of  the 
Temple  Service  ;  of  the  disgrace  incurred  by  ceremonial  pollu- 
tion; of  the  antiquity  and  revealed  efficacy  of  the  Sacrifices  ;  of 
the  right  to  partake  of  the  sacred  offerings ;  above  all,  of  the 
grandeur  and  solemnity  of  the  Great  Day  of  Atonement.  He 
would  dwell  much  on  the  glorious  ritual  when  the  High  Priest 
passed  into  the  immediate  presence  of  God  in  the  Holiest  Place, 
or  when  "  he  put  on  the  robe  of  honour  and  was  clothed  with 
the  perfection  of  glory,  when  he  went  up  to  the  holy  altar,  and 
made  the  garment  of  holiness  honourable,"  and  '*the  sons  of 
Aaron  shouted,  and  sounded  the  silver  trumpets,  and  made  a 
great  noise  to  be  heard  for  a  remembrance  before  the  Most 
High"  (Ecclus.  1.  5 — 16).  He  would  have  asked  them  how 
they  could  bear  to  turn  their  backs  on  the  splendid  history  and 
the  splendid  hopes  of  their  nation.  He  would  have  taunted 
them  with  leaving  the  inspired  wisdom  of  Moses  and  the  vene- 
rable legislation  of  Sinai  for  the  teaching  of  a  poor  crucified 
Nazarene,  whom  all  the  Priests  and  Rulers  and  Rabbis  had 
rejected.  He  would  have  contrasted  the  glorious  Deliverer 
who  should  break  in  pieces  the  nations  like  a  potter's  vessel 
with  the  despised,  and  rejected,  and  accursed  Sufferer— for  had 
not  Moses  said  "  Cursed  of  God  is  every  one  who  hangeth  on  a 
tree"  ? — whom  they  had  been  so  infatuated  as  to  accept  for  the 
Promised  Messiah ! 

We  know  that  St  Paul  was  charged — charged  even  by  Christ- 
ians who  had  been  converted  from  Judaism — with  '■'■apostasy 
from  Moses"  (Acts  xxi.  21).     So  deep  indeed  was  this  feeling 


INTRODUCTION.  15 


that,  according  to  Eusebius,  the  Ebionites  rejected  all  his  Epi- 
stles on  the  ground  that  he  was  "an  apostate  from  the  Law." 
Such  taunts  could  not  move  St  Paul,  but  they  would  be  deeply 
and  keenly  felt  by  wavering  converts  exposed  to  the  fierce  flame 
of  Jewish  hatred  and  persecution  at  an  epoch  when  there  arose 
among  their  countrymen  throughout  the  world  a  recrudescence 
of  Messianic  excitement  and  rebellious  zeal.  The  object  of  this 
Epistle  was  to  shew  that  what  the  Jews  called  "Apostasy  from 
Moses"  was  demanded  by  faithfulness  to  Christ,  and  that 
apostasy  from  Christ  to  Moses  was  not  only  an  inexcusable 
blindness  but  an  all-but-unpardonable  crime. 

If  such  were  the  dangerous  influences  to  which  the  Hebrew 
community  here  addressed  was  exposed,  it  would  be  impossible 
to  imagine  any  better  method  of  removing  their  perplexities, 
and  dissipating  the  mirage  of  false  argument  by  which  they  were 
being  deceived,  than  that  adopted  by  the  writer  of  this  Epistle. 
It  was  his  object  to  demonstrate  once  for  all  the  inferiority  of 
Judaism  to  Christianity;  but  although  that  theme  had  already 
been  handled  with  consummate  power  by  the  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles,  alike  the  arguments  and  the  method  of  this  Epistle 
differ  from  those  adopted  in  St  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Galatians 
and  the  Romans. 

The  arguments  of  the  Epistle  are  different.  In  the  Epistles  to 
the  Galatians  and  the  Romans  St  Paul,  with  the  sledge-hammer 
force  of  his  direct  and  impassioned  dialectics,  had  shattered  all 
possibility  of  trusting  in  legal  prescriptions,  and  demonstrated 
that  the  Law  was  no  longer  obhgatory  upon  Gentiles.  He  had 
shewn  that  the  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  meats  was 
to  the  enlightened  conscience  a  matter  of  indifference  ;  that  cir- 
cumcision was  now  nothing  better  than  a  physical  mutilation  ; 
that  the  Levitic  system  was  composed  of  "weak  and  beggarly 
elements  ;"  that  ceremonialism  was  a  yoke  with  which  the  free 
converted  Gentile  had  nothing  to  do ;  that  we  are  saved  by  faith 
and  not  by  works  ;  that  the  Law  was  a  dispensation  of  wrath  and 
menace,  introduced  "for  the  sake  of  transgressions"  (Gal.  iii.  19; 
Rom.  V.  20) ;  that  so  far  from  being  (as  all  the  Rabbis  asserted) 
the  one  thing  on  account  of  which  the  Universe  had  been  created, 


i6  INTRODUCTION. 


the  Mosaic  Code  only  possessed  a  transitory,  subordinate,  and 
intermediate  character,  coming  in  (as  it  were  in  a  secondary  way) 
between  the  Promise  to  Abraham  and  the  fulfilment  of  that 
promise  in  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  To  him  therefore  the  whole 
treatment  of  the  question  was  necessarily  and  essentially  po- 
lemical, and  in  the  course  of  these  polemics  he  had  again  and 
again  used  expressions  which,  however  unavoidable  and  salutary, 
could  not  fail  to  be  otherwise  than  deeply  wounding  to  the  in- 
flamed susceptibilities  of  the  Jews  at  that  epoch.  There  was 
scarcely  an  expression  which  he  had  applied  to  the  observance 
of  the  Mosaic  law  which  would  not  sound,  to  a  Jewish  ear,  depre- 
catory or  even  contemptuous.  No  Jew  who  had  rejected  the 
Lord  of  Glory,  and  wilfully  closed  his  reason  against  the  force 
of  conviction,  would  have  been  able  to  read  those  Epistles  of  St 
Paul  without  something  like  a  transport  of  fury  and  indignation. 
They  would  declare  that  pushed  to  their  logical  consequences, 
such  views  could  only  lead  (as  in  fact,  when  extravagantly  per- 
verted, they  did  lead)  to  Antinomian  Gnosticism ;  and  the  re- 
action against  them  might  tend  to  harden  Jewish  Christians  in 
those  Ebionite  tendencies  which  found  expression  a  century 
later  in  the  Pseudo- Clementine  writings.  Those  writings  still 
breathe  a  spirit  of  bitter  hatred  against  St  Paul,  and  are  "the 
literary  memorial  of  a  manoeuvre  which  had  for  its  aim  the  ab- 
sorption of  the  Roman  Church  into  Judaeo-Christianity." 

Now  the  arguments  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  turn  on 
another  set  of  considerations.  They  were  urged  from  a  different 
point  of  view.  They  do  not  lead  the  writer,  except  in  the  most  in- 
cidental and  the  least  wounding  manner,  to  use  expressions  which 
would  have  shocked  the  prejudices  ofhis  unconverted  countrymen 
He  does  not  touch  on  the  once-burning  question  of  Circumcision. 
It  is  only  towards  the  close  of  his  Epistle  (xiii.  9)  that  he  has 
occasion  to  allude,  even  incidentally,  to  the  distinction  of  meats. 
His  subject  does  not  require  him  to  enter  upon  the  controversy 
as  to  the  degree  to  which  Gentile  proselytes  were  obliged  to  ob- 
serve the  Mosaic  Law.  He  is  nowhere  compelled  to  break  down 
the  bristling  hedge  of  Jewish  exclusiveness.  If  he  proves  the 
boundless  superiority  of  the  New  Covenant  he  does  not  do  this  at 


INTRODUCTION. 


17 


the  expense  of  the  majesty  of  the  old.  To  him  the  richer 
privileges  of  Christianity  are  the  developed  germ  of  the  Mosaic 
Dispensation,  and  he  only  contemplates  them  in  their  relation 
to  the  Jews.  He  was  able  to  soothe  the  rankling  pride  of  an 
offended  Levitism  by  recognising  Levitism  as  an  essential  hnk 
in  an  unbroken  continuity.  The  difference  between  the  Law  and 
the  Gospel  in  the  controversial  theology  of  St  Paul  was  the  dif- 
ference of  an  absolute  antithesis.  In  this  Epistle  the  difference 
is  not  of  kind  but  of  degree.  The  difference  of  degree  was  indeed 
transcendent,  but  still  it  represented  a  progress  and  an  evolu- 
tion. His  letter  is  therefore,  as  Baur  says,  "a  thoroughly  original 
attempt  to  establish  the  main  results  of  St  Paul's  teaching  upon 
new  presuppositions  and  in  an  entirely  independent  way." 

All  this  advantage  arose  from  the  point  of  view  at  which  he 
was  able  to  place  himself  His  Alexandrian  training,  his  Jewish 
sympathies,  the  nature  of  his  immediate  argument,  led  him  to 
see  in  Judaism  not  so  much  A  law  as  a  system  of  worship.  The 
fact  that  the  Jews  who  were  trying  to  pervert  his  Christian  con- 
verts had  evidently  contrasted  the  humility  and  the  sufferings  of 
Christ  with  the  sacerdotal  magnificence  of  the  Jewish  hierarchs, 
enabled  him  to  seize  on  Priesthood  and  Sacrifice  rather  than 
on  Levitic  ordinances  as  the  central  point  of  his  treatment.  Hence 
his  whole  reasoning  turns  on  a  different  pivot  from  that  of  St 
Paul.  The  main  thing  which  he  has  to  shew  is  that  Christianity 
is  the  perfect  fulfilment  of  a  Type.  It  is  therefore  not  only  need- 
less for  him  to  disparage  the  Type,  but  he  can  even  extol  its 
grandeur  and  beauty  as  a.  type.  The  antitheses  of  St  Paul's 
controversy  are  of  necessity  far  more  sharp  and  hard.  To  him 
the  contrast  between  the  Law  and  the  Gospel  was  a  contrast 
between  an  awful  menace  and  a  free  deliverance  ;  between 
the  threat  of  inevitable  death  and  the  gift  of  Eternal  life. 
To  St  Paul  the  Law  was  an  ended  servitude,  a  superfluous 
discipline,  a  broken  fetter,  a  torn  and  cancelled  bond  (Rom. 
viii.  2 ;  Gal.  iii.  24,  25  ;  iv.  9,  25 ;  Col.  ii.  14,  &c.) :  to  this  writer 
the  Mosaic  system,  of  which  the  Law  was  only  a  part,  was  a 
needless  scaffolding,  a  superannuated  symbol.  To  St  Paul  the 
essence  of  the  Old  Dispensation  was  summed  up  in  the  words 

HEBREWS  2 


INTRODUCTION. 


"  He  that  doeth  them  shall  live  by  them^''  which,  taken  alone,  in- 
volved the  exceptionless  and  pitiless  conclusion  '  since  none 
have  ever  perfectly  obeyed  them,  all  shall  perish  by  them': 
to  this  writer  the  essence  of  Mosaism  was  the  direction  which 
bade  Moses  to  "  make  all  things  after  the  pattern  shewed  him  in 
the  Mount'''  (Heb.  viii.  5).  Hence  the  contrast  between  Judaism 
and  Christianity  was  not,  in  the  view  of  this  writer,  a  contrast 
between  Sin  and  Mercy,  between  Curse  and  Blessing,  between 
Slavery  and  Freedom,  but  a  contrast  almost  exclusively  (so  far 
as  the  direct  argument  was  concerned)  between  Type  and  Anti- 
type, between  outline  and  image,  between  shadow  and  substance, 
between  indication  and  reality.  Thus  St  Paul's  argument  may 
be  described  as  mainly  ethical,  and  this  writer's  as  mainly  meta- 
physical. The  Alexandrian  philosophy  with  which  he  was 
familiar  had  led  him  to  hold  that  the  reality  and  value  of  every 
material  thing  and  of  every  outward  system  depended  on  the 
nearness  with  which  it  approximated  to  a  Prse-existent  ideal. 
The  seen  world,  the  world  of  phenomena,  is  but  a  faint  adumbra- 
tion of  the  unseen  world,  the  world  of  Noumena,  the  world  of 
Ideas  and  of  Archetypes  (see  infra  §  v.  3). 

From  this  different  line  of  his  argument  rises  the  complete  difc 
ference  of  his  method.  The  attitude  which  St  Paul  was  forced  to 
adopt  was  not,  and  could  not  be  conciliatory.  At  the  beginning 
of  the  warfare  between  Judaism  and  Christianity  the  battle  had  to 
be  internecine  till  the  victory  had  declared  itself  on  one  side  or  the 
other.  It  was  as  impossible  for  St  Paul  to  dwell  on  the  grandeur 
and  significance  of  the  Judaic  system  as  it  would  have  been  for 
Luther  to  write  glowing  descriptions  of  the  services  rendered  to 
humanity  by  the  Medieval  Papacy.  It  was  not  until  Luther 
had  published  his  De  captivitate  Babylonica  that  Protestant 
writers,  secure  in  their  own  position,  might  without  danger  dwell 
on  the  good  as  well  as  on  the  evil  deeds  which  the  Popes  have 
done.  Similarly,  until  St  Paul  had  written  his  two  great  contro- 
versial Epistles,  a  Jewish  Christian  could  hardly  speak  freely  of 
the  positive  value  and  greatness  of  the  Levitic  Law.  A  Jew, 
reading  for  the  first  time  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  would  be 
favourably  impressed  with  the  evident  love  and  sympathy  which 


INTRODUCTION.  19 


the  writer  displays  towards  the  Tabernacle,  its  ministers,  and  its 
ritual.  He  would  without  difficulty  concede  the  position  that 
these  were  typical.  He  would  thus  be  led,  insensibly  and  with- 
out offence,  into  a  consideration  of  the  argument  that  these 
symbols  found  in  Christ  their  predestined  and  final  fulfilment 
(x.  i).  When  he  had  been  taught,  by  a  method  of  Scriptural 
application  with  which  he  was  familiar,  that  a  transference  of  the 
Priesthood  had  always  been  contemplated,  he  would  be  prepared 
to  consider  the  Melchisedek  Priesthood  of  Christ.  When  he 
saw  that  a  transference  of  the  Priesthood  involved  of  necessity  a 
transference  of  the  Law  (vii.  11,  12),  he  would  be  less  indignant 
when  he  was  at  last  confronted  with  such  an  expression  as  the 
annulmejit  of  the  Law  (vii.  18).  The  expressions  ultimately 
applied  to  the  Law  are  as  strongly  depreciatory  as  any  in  St 
Paul.  The  writer  speaks  of  its  "  weakness  and  unprofitableness" 
(vii.  18) ;  describes  it  as  consisting  in  "carnal  ordinances";  and 
declares  that  its  most  solemn  sacrifices  were  utterly  and  neces- 
sarily inefficacious  (ix.  13 ;  x.  4).  But  the  condemnation  is  relative 
rather  than  absolute,  and  the  reader  is  not  led  to  this  point  until 
he  has  seen  that  the  legal  institutions  only  shrink  into  insignifi- 
cance in  comparison  with  the  finality  and  transcendent  supre- 
macy of  the  dispensation  of  which  they  were  (after  all)  the 
appointed  type. 

The  method  adopted  added  therefore  greatly  to  the  inherent 
effectiveness  of  the  line  of  controversy.  It  involved  an  Irony  of 
the  most  finished  kind,  and  in  the  original  sense  of  the  word. 
There  was  nothing  biting  and  malicious  in  the  irony,  but  it  re- 
sembled the  method  often  adopted  by  Socrates.  Socrates  was 
accustomed  to  put  forward  the  argument  of  an  opponent,  to  treat 
it  with  the  profoundest  deference,  to  discuss  it  with  the  most 
respectful  seriousness,  and  all  the  while  to  rob  it  step  by  step  of 
all  its  apparent  validity,  until  it  was  left  to  collapse  under  the 
weight  of  inferences  which  it  undeniably  involved.  In  this 
Epistle,  though  with  none  of  the  dialectical  devices  of  the  great 
Athenian,  we  are  led  by  a  somewhat  similar  method  to  a  very 
similar  result.  We  see  all  the  antiquity  and  glory  of  Mosaism. 
The  Tabernacle  rises  before  us  in  its  splendour  and  beauty.   We 


INTRODUCTION. 


see  the  Ark  and  the  Cherubim,  and  Aaron's  rod  that  budded, 
and  the  golden  pot  of  manna,  and  the  wreaths  of  fragrant  in- 
cense. We  see  the  Levites  in  their  white  ephods  busy  with  the 
sacrificial  victims.  We  watch  the  High  Priest  as  he  passes  with 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats  through  the  sanctuary  into  the 
Holiest  Place.  We  see  him  come  forth  in  his  "golden apparel" 
and  stand  before  the  people  with  the  jewelled  Urim  on  his 
breast.  And  while  the  whole  process  of  the  solemn  and  gorgeous 
ritual  is  indicated  with  loving  sympathy,  suddenly,  as  with  one 
wave  of  the  wand,  the  Tabernacle,  its  Sacrifices,  its  Ritual,  and 
its  Priesthood  seem  to  have  been  reduced  to  a  shadow  and  a 
nullity,  and  we  recognise  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  far  above  all 
Mediators  and  all  Priests,  and  the  sole  means  of  perfect,  confi- 
dent, and  universal  access  to  the  Inmost  Sanctuary  of  God's 
Presence  !  We  have,  all  the  while,  been  led  to  recognise  that, 
by  faith  in  Christ,  the  Christian,  not  the  Jew,  stands  forth  as  the 
true  representative  of  the  old  traditions,  the  child  of  the  glorious 
forefathers,  the  predestined  heir  of  the  Eternal  Realities. 

And  thus  the  Epistle  was  equally  effective  both  for  Jews  and 
Christians.  The  Jew,  without  one  violent  wrench  of  his  prejudices, 
without  one  rude  shock  to  his  lifelong  convictions,  was  drawn 
along  gently,  considerately,  skilfully,  as  by  a  golden  chain  of  fine 
rhetoric  and  irresistible  reasoning,  to  see  that  the  New  Dispensa- 
tion was  but  the  glorious  fulfilment,  not  the  ruinous  overthrow, 
of  the  Old ;  the  Jewish  Christian,  so  far  from  being  robbed  of 
a  single  privilege  of  Judaism,  is  taught  that  he  may  enjoy  those 
privileges  in  their  very  richest  significance.  So  far  from  being 
compelled  to  abandon  the  viaticum  of  good  examples  which  had 
been  the  glory  of  his  nation's  history,  he  may  feed  upon  those 
examples  with  a  deeper  sympathy :  and  so  far  from  losing  his 
beneficial  participation  in  Temples  and  Sacrifices,  he  is  admitted 
by  the  blood  of  the  only  perfect  Sacrifice  into  the  inmost  and 
the  eternal  Sanctuary  of  which  the  Temple  of  his  nation  was 
but  a  dim  and  perishable  sign. 

The  Epistle  falls  into  two  divisions  : — I.,  chiefly  Didactic  (i. — 
X.  i8)  ;  II.,  chiefly  Hortative  (x.  i8 — xiii.  25). 

The  general  analysis  of  the  Epistle  is  as  follows  : 


INTRODUCTION. 


It  was  the  constant  boast  of  the  Jews  that  their  Law  was 
given  by  Angel-ministers,  and  on  this  ground,  as  well  as  on  the 
historic  grandeur  of  Moses,  Aaron,  and  Joshua,  they  claimed 
for  it  a  superiority  over  every  other  dispensation.  The  writer, 
therefore,  after  laying  down  his  magnificent  thesis  that  the 
Gospel  is  God's  full  and  final  Revelation  to  man  (i.  1—4),  pro- 
ceeds to  compare  the  Old  and  the  New  Covenants  under  the 
double  aspect  of  (I)  their  ministering  agents  (i.— viii.),  and  (II) 
their  advantageous  results  (ix. — x.  18). 

I.     Christ  superior  to  the  mediators  of  the  Old  Covenant. 

a.  The  infinite  superiority  of  Jesus  to  the  Angels  is  first 
demonstrated  by  a  method  of  Scriptural  illustration  of  which 
the  validity  was  fully  recognised  by  all  Jewish  interpreters 
(i,  ^ — 14).  After  a  word  of  warning  exhortation  (ii.  i — 4)  he 
shews  that  this  superiority  is  not  diminished  but  rather  en- 
hanced by  the  temporary  humiliation  which  was  the  voluntary 
and  predestined  means  whereby  alone  He  could  accomplish  His 
redemptive  work  (ii.  5 — iS). 

/3.  And  since  the  Jews  placed  their  confidence  in  the  mighty 
names  of  Moses  and  of  Joshua,  he  proceeds  to  shew  that  Christ 
is  above  Moses  by  His  very  nature  and  office  (iii.  i — 6).  Then 
after  another  earnest  appeal  (iii.  7—19)  he  proves  more  inci- 
dentally that  Christ  was  above  Joshua,  in  that  He  led  His  people 
into  that  true,  final,  and  Sabbatic  rest  of  which,  as  he  proves 
from  Scripture,  the  rest  of  Canaan  was  but  a  poor  and  imper- 
fect type  (iv.  I — 10). 

•y.  But  since  he  regards  the  Priesthood  rather  than  the 
Law  as  the  central  point  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  he  now 
enters  on  the  subject  which  is  the  most  prominent  in  his 
thoughts,  and  to  which  he  has  already  twice  alluded  (ii.  17; 
iii.  i),  that  Christ  is  our  High  Priest,  and  that  His  High 
Priesthood,  as  an  Eternal  Priesthood  after  the  order  of  Mel- 
chisedek,  is  superior  to  that  of  the  Aaronic  High  Priests.  The 
development  of  this  topic  occupies  nearly  six  chapters  (v.  i— 
X.  18). 

He  first  lays  down  the  two  qualifications  for  every  High 
Priest,  (i)  that  he  must  be  able  to  sympathise  with  those  for 


INTRODUCTION. 


whom  he  ministers  (v.  i — 3),  and  (2)  that  he  must  not  be  self- 
called,  but  appointed  by  God  (v.  4):  both  of  which  qualifications 
Christ  possessed  (v.  5 — 10). 

But  it  is  a  characteristic  of  his  style,  and  it  furthered  his  main 
purpose,  to  mingle  solemn  passages  of  warning,  exhortation, 
and  encouragement  with  his  line  of  demonstration.  Here, 
therefore,  he  pauses  on  the  threshold  of  his  chief  argument, 
to  complain  of  their  spiritual  dulness  and  backwardness  (v.  11 — 
14);  to  urge  them  to  more  earnest  endeavours  after  Christian 
progress  (vi.  i — 3) ;  to  warn  them  of  the  awful  danger  and  hope- 
lessness of  wilful  apostasy  (4 — 8) ;  to  encourage  them  by  an  ex- 
pression of  hope  founded  on  their  Christian  beneficence  (9 — 
10);  and  to  stir  them  to  increased  zeal  (11,  12)  by  the  thought 
of  the  immutable  certainty  of  God's  oathbound  promises  (13 — 
18),  which  are  still  further  assured  to  us  by  the  Melchisedek 
Priesthood  of  Christ  our  Forerunner  within  the  Veil  (19,  20). 

Reverting  thus  to  the  comparison  of  Christ's  Priesthood  with 
the  Levitic  Priesthood  (to  which  he  had  already  alluded  in  v. 
6,  10),  he  shews  that  the  High  Priesthood  of  Christ,  being  "after 
the  order  of  Melchisedek,"  was  superior  to  that  of  Aaron, 

1.  Because  it  is  eternal  not  transient  (vii.  i — 3). 

2.  Because  even  Abraham  paid  tithes  to  Melchisedek 
(4-6). 

3.  Because  Melchisedek  blessed  Abraham  (7). 

4.  Because  the  Levitic  Priests  die,  while  Melchisedek  stands 
as  the  type  of  an  undying  Priesthood  (8). 

5.  Because  even  Levi  may  be  said  to  have  paid  tithes  to 
Melchisedek  in  the  person  of  his  ancestor  Abraham  (9,  10). 

6.  Because  David's  reference  to  Melchisedek  shews  the 
contemplated  transference  of  the  Priesthood,  and  therefore  of 
the  Law  (11,  12).  This  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  Christ  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  not  of  Levi  (13,  14).  The  Melchisedek 
Priesthood,  being  eternal,  could  not  be  connected  with  a  law 
which,  being  weak  and  profitless,  perfected  nothing  (15 — 19). 

7.  Because  the  Melchisedek  Priesthood  was  founded  by  an 
oath  (20 — 22). 

8.  Because  the  Levitic  priests  die,  but  Christ  abideth  for 
ever  (23 — 25). 


INTRODUCTION.  23 

II.  Having  thus  compared  the  two  orders  of  Priesthood,  he 
pauses  for  a  moment  to  dwell  on  the  eternal  fitness  of  Christ's 
Priesthood  to  fulfil  the  conditions  which  the  needs  of  humanity 
require  (26 — 28).  Into  this  passage,  in  his  usual  skilful  manner, 
he  introduces  the  comparison  of  the  two  forms  of  sacerdotal 
ministry  which  he  develops  in  the  next  three  chapters  (viii.  i — 
X.  18). 

a.  For  the  Tabernacle  which  the  Levitic  Priests  serve  is — 
even  on  their  great  Day  of  Atonement — only  the  shadow  of  an 
eternal  reality  (viii.  i — 6).  The  eternal  reality  is  the  new  Cove- 
nant, which  had  been  promised  by  Jeremiah,  in  which  the  Law 
should  be  written  on  men's  hearts,  and  in  which  all  should 
know  the  Lord ;  and  the  very  fact  that  a  new  covenant  had 
been  promised  implies  the  annulment  of  the  old  (viii.  7 — 13). 

j3.  The  Old  Tabernacle  was  glorious  and  symbolic  (ix.  i — 5), 
yet  even  the  High  Priest,  on  the  greatest  day  of  its  ritual,  could 
only  enter  once  a  year  into  its  inmost  shrine,  and  that  only  with 
the  imperfect  and  symbolic  offerings  of  a  burdensome  exter- 
nalism  (6 — 10).  But  Christ,  the  Eternal  High  Priest  of  the 
Ideal  Archetype,  entered  into  the  Heavenly  tabernacle  (11)  with 
His  own  blood,  once  for  all ;  and  for  ever  (12,  13),  offered  Him- 
self as  a  voluntary  and  sinless  offering,  eternally  efficacious  to 
purge  the  conscience  from  dead  works  (14) ;  and  so  by  His  death 
became  the  mediator  of  a  new  and  transcendent  covenant,  and 
secured  for  us  the  eternal  inheritance  (14,  15).  For  a  'Cove- 
nant '  may  also  be  regarded  as  a  *  Testament,'  and  that  in- 
volves the  fact  of  a  Death  (16,  17).  So  that  just  as  the  Old 
Covenant  was  inaugurated  by  the  sprinkling  of  purifying  blood 
over  its  Tabernacle,  its  ministers,  its  book,  its  people,  and  the 
furniture  of  its  service,  in  order  to  secure  the  remission  of  trans- 
gressions (18 — 22),  the  heavenly  archetype  of  these  things,  into 
which  Christ  entered,  needed  also  to  be  sprinkled  with  the  blood 
of  that  better  sacrifice  (23)  which  has  provided  for  us,  once  for 
all,  an  all-sufficient  expiation  (24 — 28).  Then,  in  one  grand 
finale,  in  which  he  gathers  the  scattered  elements  of  his  demon- 
stration into  a  powerful  summary,  he  speaks  of  the  impotence 
of  the  Levitic  sacrifices  to  perfect  those  who  offered  them — an  im- 


24  INTRODUCTION. 


potence  attested  by  their  constant  repetition  (x.  i — 4) — and  con- 
trasts them  with  that  perfect  obedience  whereby  (as  illustrated  in 
Ps.  xl.  6,  7)  Christ  had  annulled  those  sacrifices  (5 — 9).  Christ 
sanctified  us  for  ever  by  His  offered  body  (10).  He  did  not 
offer  incessant  and  invalid  offerings  like  the  Levitic  Priests 
(11),  but  one  perfect  and  perfecting  sacrifice,  as  a  preliminary 
to  His  eternal  exaltation  (12 — 14),  in  accordance  with  the  pro- 
phecy of  Jeremiah  (xxxi.  33,  34),  to  which  the  writer  had  already 
referred  (15 — 18). 

III.   The  remainder  of  the  Epistle  (x.  19 — xiii.  17)  is  mainly 
hortatory. 

He  has  made  good  his  opening  thesis  that  God  'in  the  end  of 
these  days  has  spoken  unto  us  by  His  Son.'  This  he  has  done  by 
shewing  Christ's  superiority  to  Angels  (i.  5 — ii.  16)  and  to  Moses 
and  Joshua  (iii.  i — iv.  16) ;  His  quahfications  for  High  Priesthood 
(v.  I — lO)  ;  the  superiority  of  His  Melchisedek  Priesthood  over 
that  of  Aaron  (vii.  i — 28) ;  and  the  superiority  of  the  ordinances 
of  His  New  Covenant  over  those  of  the  Old  (viii.  i — x.  15).  He 
has  thus  set  forth  to  the  wavering  Hebrew  Christians,  with  many 
an  interwoven  appeal,  incontrovertible  reasons  why  they  should 
not  abandon  the  better  for  the  worse,  the  complete  for  the  im- 
perfect, the  valid  for  the  inefficacious,  the  Archetype  for  the 
copy,  the  Eternal  for  the  transient.  It  only  remains  for  him  to 
apply  his  arguments  by  final  exhortations.  This  he  does  by  one 
more  solemn  strain  of  warning  and  encouragement  (x.  19 — 39), 
which  leads  him  into  a  magnificent  historic  illustration  of  the 
nature  of  faith  as  manifested  by  works  (xi.).  This  served  to 
shew  the  Jewish  Christians,  that,  so  far  from  being  compelled  to 
abandon  the  mighty  memories  of  their  past  history,  they  were 
themselves  the  true  heirs  and  the  nearest  representatives  of 
that  history,  so  that  their  unconverted  brethren  rather  than 
themselves  were  aliens  from  the  Commonwealth  of  Israel 
and  strangers  from  the  Covenants  of  promise.  The  Epistle 
closes  with  fervent  exhortations  to  moral  steadfastness  and  a 
holy  Christian  walk  in  spite  of  trial  and  persecution  (xii.  i — 14). 
This  is  followed  by  a  warning  founded  on  the  great  contrast 
which  he  has  developed  between  the  Old  and  New  Covenants 


INTRODUCTION.  25 

(15—29).  He  gives  them  special  directions  to  be  loving,  hospi- 
table, sympathetic,  pure,  contented,  and  gratefully  recognizant  of 
their  departed  teachers  (xiii.  i — 9).  Then  with  one  more  glance 
at  the  difference  between  the  New  and  the  Old  Dispensations 
(10 — 15),  he  adds  a  few  more  affectionate  exhortations  (16 — 19), 
and  ends  with  brief  messages  and  blessings  (23 — 25). 

We  see  then  that  the  whole  Epistle  forms  an  argument  a 
minori  ad  majus.  If  Judaism  had  its  own  privileges,  how  great, 
a  fortiori,  must  be  the  privileges  of  the  Gospel  !  Hence  the 
constant  recurrence  of  such  expressions  as  "a  better  hope"  (vii. 
19);  "a  better  covenant"  (vii.  22)  ;  "a  more  excellent  ministry" 
(viii.  6) ;  "a  better  and  more  perfect  Tabernacle"  (ix.  11),  "better 
sacrifices"  (ix.  23)  ;  "better  promises"  (viii.  6).  It  may  almost 
be  said  that  the  words  "by  how  much  more"  (ix.  14  ;  Tocrovra 
KpeiTTCdv...o(Tcp,  i.  4,  Kad'  oaov,  vii.  20,  otro),  viii.  6,  ttocto),  x.  29)  are 
the  keynote  of  the  entire  treatment.  It  was  a  style  of  argument 
of  which  the  Jews  had  often  studied  the  vahdity ;  for  the  first  of 
the  seven  famous  Middoth  or  'rules  of  interpretation' elaborated 
by  the  great  Rabbi  Hillel  was  called  "Light  and  Heavy" 
("lOini  ^p)  which  is  nothing  but  the  deduction  of  the  greater 
from  the  less  ;  a  mode  of  argument  which  our  Lord  Himself  had 
used,  on  more  than  one  occasion,  in  His  controversies  with  the 
Pharisees  (Matt.  x.  29). 

We  know  nothing  of  the  effects  produced  by  the  Epistle  upon 
the  particular  community  of  Christians  to  which  it  was  ad- 
dressed, but  we  feel  that  if  they  could  retrograde  into  Judaism 
after  meditating  on  these  arguments  their  apostasy  must  in- 
deed have  been  of  that  moral  and  willing  character  for  which, 
humanly  speaking,  there  was  little  hope. 

CHAPTER  II. 

WHERE   WAS   THE    EPISTLE   WRITTEN.^    AND   TO   WHOM? 

I.     Ubi?    Where  was  the  letter  written  ? 
The  question  cannot  be  answered.     The  only  possible  clue  to 
any  answer  Ues  in  the  words  "they  of  Italy  salute  you"  (xiii.  24). 


26  INTRODUCTION. 


But  this  furnishes  us  with  no  real  clue.  "They  of  Italy"  means 
simply  "the  Italians."  The  salutation  might  be  sent  from  any 
city  in  the  world  in  which  there  were  Jewish  Christians,  or  even 
Gentile  converts,  whose  home  was  or  once  had  been  in  Italy. 
It  is  however  a  little  strange  that  many,  both  in  ancient  and 
modern  times,  should  have  assumed  from  this  passage  that  the 
letter  was  written  in  Italy.  There  would  indeed  be  nothing 
against  this  in  the  use  of  the  preposition  dnb,  but  if  the  letter 
were  written  from  Rome  or  Italy  it  would  be  strange  to  say 
"those  of  Italy  salute  you."  If  I  wrote  from  Paris  or  Vienna 
to  an  English  friend  in  Russia  or  elsewhere  I  might  naturally 
say  "our  English  friends  salute  you,"  but  hardly  if  I  wrote  from 
London  or  any  town  in  England.  Nothing  in  the  way  of  rea- 
sonable conjecture  can  be  deduced  from  a  reference  so  absolutely 
vague.  Nor  again  can  we  found  any  conclusion  on  the  fact  that 
Timothy  was  known  to  these  Hebrew  Christians.  There  was  a 
constant  intercourse  by  letters  and  messengers  between  the  small 
and  suffering  communities  of  early  Christians,  and  Timothy  was 
probably  known  by  name  to  every  Church  in  Proconsular  Asia, 
in  Palestine,  in  Greece,  in  Italy,  and  in  the  islands  and  along 
the  shores  of  the  entire  Mediterranean. 

2.     To  whom  was  this  Epistle  written? 

We  have  seen  that  the  writer  evidently  had  some  one  com- 
munity in  view.  This  is  proved  by  the  specific  character  of  his 
messages  and  admonitions.  Even  if  the  last  four  verses  were  a 
special  postscript  to  some  particular  Church  we  should  draw  the 
same  conclusion.  We  must  therefore  reject  the  supposition  of 
Euthalius  and  others  that  it  was  addressed  'to<z//the  converted 
Hebrews  of  the  Circumcision' — "les  Juddo-chr^tiens  en  gdndral 
considerds  au  point  de  vue  thdorique"  (Reuss).  Where  then 
did  these  Hebrew  Christians  reside?  To  what  city  was  the 
letter  originally  sent  ?  The  genuine  superscription  gives  us  no 
help,  for  it  is  simply  "To  the  Hebrews." 

a.  The  general  tradition,  originated  by  some  of  the  Greek 
fathers  (e.g.  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret),  assumes  that  the  letter 
was  addressed  to  the  Palestinianjews,and  specially  to  the  Church 
of  Jerusalem.     This  was  partly  deduced  from  the  erroneous 


INTRODUCTION.  27 

notion  that  the  members  of  the  Mother  Church  were  exclusively 
designated  by  the  title  of  "the  saints."  Ebrard  supposes  that  it 
was  written  to  encourage  Christian  neophytes  at  Jerusalem,  who 
were  rendered  anxious  by  being  excluded  from  the  Temple 
worship  and  from  participation  in  the  sacrifices.  No  doubt  this 
supposition  would  suit  such  expressions  as  those  in  xiii.  10,  13, 
and  much  of  the  Epistle  would  have  had  a  deep  interest  for 
those  who  were  daily  witnesses  of,  and  possibly  even  worshippers 
in,  the  services  of  the  Temple.  Yet  the  opinion  is  untenable. 
The  Judaists  of  Palestine  would  be  little  likely  to  welcome  the 
letter  of  a  Hellenist,  who  apparently  knew  no  Hebrew,  and  who 
only  quotes  the  Septuagint  even  when  it  differs  from  the  sacred 
text  (e.g.  i.  6,  x.  5);  nor  would  they  feel  any  special  interest  in  a 
half-Gentile  convert  like  Timothy.  Further,  it  would  hardly  be 
true  of  them  that  "they  had  not  yet  resisted  unto  blood"  (xii.  4). 
Again,  they  were  little  likely  to  have  forgotten  their  dead  leaders 
(xiii.  7) ;  they  had  received  the  Gospel  first-hand,  not  second- 
hand ;  and  many  of  them  may  even  have  heard  the  Gospel 
from  the  Lord  Himself  (ii.  3).  Nor  were  they  in  a  position  to 
minister  to  the  saints  (vi.  10),  since  they  were  themselves 
plunged  in  the  deepest  poverty.  Least  of  all  is  it  probable  that 
an  Alexandrian  Hellenist,  of  the  school  of  one  so  little  acceptable 
to  the  Palestinian  Judaists  as  that  of  St  Paul,  would  have 
ventured  not  only  to  address  them  in  a  tone  of  authority,  but 
even  to  reproach  these  Churches  of  the  earliest  Saints  in  words 
of  severe  rebuke  for  their  ignorance  and  childishness  (v.  ii — 

14). 

j3.  The  Church  of  CORINTH  is  perhaps  excluded  by  ii.  3, 
which  seems  to  refer  to  some  community  founded  by  one  of  the 
original  Twelve  Apostles. 

y.  That  the  letter  was  addressed  to  the  Church  of  Alexan- 
dria is  by  no  means  improbable.  It  has  been  supposed  that  there 
is  an  allusion  to  this  Epistle  in  the  Muratorian  Canon  under  the 
name  of  'an  Epistle  to  the  Alexandrians  ;'  and  in  the  Manuscript 
D  is  a  reading  (iv  rfj  Tvarpibi)  in  Acts  xviii.  25,  which  implies  that 
ApoUos,  the  probable  writer  of  the  Epistle,  had  been  converted 
to  Christianity  in  Alexandria.     This  opinion,  with  the  modifica- 


28  INTRODUCTION. 


tion  that  it  was  addressed  to  Jewish  Christian  ascetics  in  Alex- 
andria (Dr  Plumptre),  or  to  a  section  only  of  the  Alexandrian 
Church  (Hilgenfeld),  has  been  widely  accepted  by  modern 
critics.  There  are  however  several  objections  to  this  view. 
(i)  The  Church  of  Alexandria  is  believed  to  have  been  founded 
by  St  Mark,  and  not  by  one  of  the  Twelve.  (2)  Alexandria  is 
a  Church  with  which  neither  St  Paul  nor  Timothy  had  any 
direct  connexion.  (3)  The  Epistle  is  not  heard  of  in  the  Alex- 
andrian Church  till  nearly  a  century  later.  (4)  The  authorship  of 
the  Epistle  was  not  certainly  known  in  the  school  of  Alexandria, 
which  indeed  did  more  than  any  other  school  to  originate  the 
mistaken  impression  that  it  was  written  by  St  Paul. 

8.  Some  critics  have  supposed  that  it  was  addressed  to  the 
Jewish-Christian  community  at  Rome.  The  suggestion  suits 
the  references  in  ii.  3;  xiii.  7,  9;  x.  32.  It  also  suits  the  fact  that 
the  writer  seems  to  have  been  acquainted  with  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  (see  x.  30 ;  xiii.  i — 6,  9 — 20),  and  that  the  Roman  Church 
was  from  the  first  aware  that  the  Epistle  was  not  written  by 
St  Paul.  But  this  view  is  excluded  by  the  very  probable  conjecture 
that  Timothy  had  been  imprisoned  at  Rome  during  his  last  visit 
to  St  Paul  (xiii.  23) ;  by  the  silence  of  St  Clement  as  to  the  author ; 
by  the  absence  of  any  trace  that  Apollos  had  ever  visited  Rome  ; 
by  the  fact  that  the  persecutions  to  which  allusion  is  made  had, 
for  some  time,  expended  their  severity  (x.  32)  ;  as  well  as  by  the 
certainty  that  the  Church  of  Rome,  more  than  any  other,  had 
been  deluged  with  the  blood  of  martyrdom  (xii.  4) ;  and  by  the 
absence  of  all  allusion  to  the  Church  of  the  Gentiles. 

€.  Other  isolated  conjectures — as  that  it  was  addressed  to 
Ravenna  (Ewald),  or  Jamnia  (Willib.  Grimm),  or  Antioch  (Hof- 
mann) — maybe  passed  over;  but  it  may  be  worth  considering 
whether  it  was  not  addressed  to  the  Jewish  Christians  at  Ephe- 
SUS.  They  must  have  been  a  numerous  and  important  body, 
and  both  Apollos  and  Timothy  had  laboured  among  them. 


INTRODUCTION.  29 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE   DATE. 

Quando  ?  The  date  at  which  the  Epistle  was  written  cannot 
be  fixed  with  precision.  All  that  we  can  say  is  that  it  was  cer- 
tainly written  before  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  a.d.  70.  This  con- 
clusion is  not  mainly  founded  on  the  use  of  the  present  tense  in 
speaking  of  the  Temple  services  (ix.  6,  7;  x.  i,  «S:c.),  because 
this  might  conceivably  be  due  to  the  same  figure  of  speech 
which  accounts  for  the  use  of  the  present  tense  in  speaking  of 
the  Jewish  ministrations  in  Josephus,  Clemens  Romanus,  Justin 
Martyr,  and  even  in  the  Talmud.  It  is  founded  on  the  whole 
scope  of  the  argument.  No  one  who  was  capable  of  writing  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  at  all  (there  being  no  question  oi  pseud- 
onymity  in  this  instance)  could  possibly  have  foregone  all  men- 
tion of  the  tremendous  corroboration — nay,  the  absolutely  demon- 
strative force — which  had  been  added  to  his  arguments  by  the 
work  of  God  in  History.  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  came  as 
a  divine  comment  on  all  the  truths  which  are  here  set  forth. 
While  it  in  no  way  derogates  from  the  permanent  value  of  the 
Epistle  as  a  possession  for  all  time,  it  would  have  rendered 
superfluous  its  iimnediate  aim  and  object.  The  seductions  of 
Judaism,  the  temptation  to  apostatise  to  the  Mosaic  system, 
were  done  away  with  by  that  awful  Advent  which  for  ever  closed 
the  era  of  the  Old  Dispensation.  We  therefore  infer  that  the 
Epistle  was  written  when  Timothy  was  (apparently)  liberated 
from  prison,  soon  after  the  martyrdom  of  St  Paul,  about  the 
close  of  A.D.  67  or  the  beginning  of  A.D.  68. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

STYLE   AND   CHARACTER   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

I.     The  notion  that  the  Epistle  was  a  translation  from  the 
Hebrew  is  found  in  St  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  is  repeated 


30  INTRODUCTION. 


by  Eusebius,  Jerome,  Theodoret,  and  by  many  others  down  to 
recent  times.  It  seems  to  have  originated  in  the  attempt  to 
account  for  the  marked  differences  of  style  which  separate  it 
from  the  writings  of  St  Paul.  But  this  conjecture  is  wholly 
devoid  of  probability.  St  Clement  couples  it  with  the  sugges- 
tion that  it  was  translated  by  St  Luke,  because  the  style  has 
some  points  of  resemblance  to  that  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 
But  St  Luke  (as  we  shall  see)  cannot  have  been  the  author, 
and  the  notion  that  it  was  written  in  Aramaic  is  now  gene- 
rally abandoned.  No  writing  of  antiquity  shews  fewer  traces 
of  being  a  translation.  The  Greek  is  eminently  original  and 
eminently  polished.  It  abounds  in  paronomasise  (plays  on 
words,  i.  i;  ii.  8;  v.  14;  vii.  3,  19,  22,  23,  24;  viii.  7,  8;  ix.  28; 
X.  29,  34 — 38,  39  ;  xi.  27  ;  xiii.  14,  &c.).  It  is  full  of  phrases,  and 
turns  of  idiom,  which  could  scarcely  be  rendered  in  Hebrew 
at  all,  or  only  by  the  help  of  cumbrous  periphrases.  The  nume- 
rous quotations  which  it  contains  are  taken  not  from  the  He- 
brew but  from  the  LXX.,  and  the  argument  is  sometimes  built 
on  expressions  in  which  the  LXX.  differs  from  the  original  (i.  6, 
7;  ii.  7;  x.  5).  It  touches  in  one  passage  (ix.  15)  on  the  Greek 
meaning  of  the  word  diaOiJKi],  '  a  testament,'  which  has  no  equi- 
valent in  the  Hebrew  Berith,  'a  covenant^'  The  hypothesis 
that  the  Epistle  was  not  originally  written  in  Greek  violates 
every  canon  of  literary  probability. 

2.  The  style  of  the  Epistle  attracted  notice  even  in  the  ear- 
liest times.  It  is  as  different  as  possible  from  the  style  of  St 
Paul.  "  Omnibus  notis  dissidef  said  the  great  scholar  Erasmus. 
More  than  a  thousand  years  ago  Origen  remarked  that  it  is 
written  in  better  and  more  periodic  Greek.  In  its  rhythm  and 
balance  it  has  been  described  as  "elaborately  and  faultlessly 
rhetorical."  The  style  of  St  Paul,  whenever  his  emotions  are 
deeply  stirred,  is  indeed  eloquent,  but  with  a  fervid,  spontane- 
ous, impassioned   eloquence,  which  never  pauses  to  round  a 

^  Heb.  ix.  16.  Calvin  says  with  his  usual  strong  sense,  "Ata^ij'xij 
ambiguam  apud  Graecos  significationem  habet;  berith  autem  Hebraeis 
non  xi\'i\foedus  significat;  haec  una  ratio  sano  judicii  hominibus  sufficiet 
ad  probandum  quod  dixi,  Graeco  sermone  scriptam  fuisse  epistolam." 


INTRODUCTION. 


31 


period  or  to  select  a  sonorous  expression.  He  constantly  min- 
gles two  constructions  ;  breaks  off  into  personal  allusions  ;  does 
not  hesitate  to  use  the  roughest  terms;  goes  off  at  a  word;  and 
leaves  sentences  unfinished.  He  writes  like  a  man  who  thought 
in  Aramaic  while  he  expressed  himself  in  Greek.  The  style  of 
this  writer  bears  the  stamp  of  a  wholly  different  individuahty. 
He  writes  like  a  man  of  genius  who  is  thinking  in  Greek  as 
well  as  writing  in  it.  He  builds  up  his  paragraphs  on  a  wholly 
different  model.  He  delights  in  the  most  majestic  amplifica- 
tions, in  the  most  effective  collocation  of  words,  in  the  musical 
euphony  of  compound  terms  (see  in  the  original  i.  3;  viii.  i;  xii. 
2,  &c.).  He  is  never  ungrammatical,  never  irregular,  never  per- 
sonal ;  he  never  struggles  for  expression ;  he  never  loses  him- 
self in  a  parenthesis ;  he  is  never  hurried  into  an  unfinished 
clause.  He  has  less  of  burning  passion,  and  more  of  conscious 
literary  self-control.  As  I  have  said  elsewhere,  the  movement 
of  this  writer  resembles  that  of  an  Oriental  Sheykh  with  his 
robes  of  honour  wrapped  around  him ;  the  movement  of  St  Paul 
is  that  of  an  athlete  girded  for  the  race.  The  eloquence  of  this 
writer,  even  when  it  is  at  its  most  majestic  volume,  resembles 
the  flow  of  a  river ;  the  rhetoric  of  St  Paul  is  like  the  rush  of  a 
mountain-torrent  amid  opposing  rocks. 

3.  The  writer  quotes  differently  from  St  Paul,  St  Paul  often 
reverts  to  the  original  Hebrew,  and  when  he  uses  the  LXX. 
his  quotations  agree,  for  the  most  part,  with  the  Vatican 
Manuscript.  This  writer  (as  I  have  already  observed)  follows 
the  LXX.  even  when  it  differs  from  the  Hebrew,  and  his  cita- 
tions usually  agree  with  the  Alexandrian  Manuscript.  St  Paul 
introduces  his  references  to  the  Old  Testament  by  some  such 
formula  as  "  as  it  is  written,"  or  "  the  Scripture  saith  "  (Rom.  ix. 
ly ;  i.  17),  whereas  this  writer  adopts  the  Rabbinic  and  Alexan- 
drian expressions,  "He  saith"  (i.  5,  6;  v.  6  ;  vii.  13),  "He  hath 
said"  (iv.  3);  "Some  one  somewhere  testifieth"  (ii.  6);  "as  the 
Holy  Spirit  saith,"  or  "He  testifieth"  (ii.  6;  iii.  7;  x.  15;  vii. 
17) — forms  which  are  not  used  by  St  Paul. 

4.  Again,  he  constructs  his  sentences  differently,  and  com- 
bines them  by  different  connecting  particles  (see  in  the  original 


32  INTRODUCTION. 


ii.  i6  to  iii.  i6,  &c.);  and  has  at  least  six  special  peculiarities  of 
style  not  found,  or  found  but  rarely,  in  St  Paul— such  as  the 
constant  use  of  "all;"  the  verb  "to  sit"  used  intransitively 
(i.  3  ;  viii.  i) ;  the  phrase  "  even  though  "  {iavirep)  ;  "  whence  " 
{o6ev),  used  in  the  sense  of  "wherefore;"  "to  perpetuity"  in- 
stead of  "always;"  and  his  mode  of  heightening  the  compara- 
tive by  a  following  preposition. 

5.  Once  more,  St  Paul  usually  speaks  of  the  Saviour  as 
"our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  or  "Christ  Jesus  our  Lord"— forms 
which  occur  sixty-eight  times  in  his  Epistles  ;  this  writer,  on  the 
other  hand,  usually  refers  to  Him  as  "Jesus,"  or  "the  Lord,"  or 
"Christ,"  or  "our  Lord"  (vii.  14),  or  "the  Lord"  (ii.  3),  or, 
once  only,  as  "our  Lord  Jesus"  (xiii.  20),  whereas  the  dis- 
tinctive Pauline  combination,  "Christ  Jesus,"  does  not  occur 
once  (see  note  on  iii.  i).  The  explanation  of  this  fact  is  that, 
as  time  went  on,  the  title  "  Christ "  became  more  and  more  a 
personal  name,  and  the  name  "Jesus"  (most  frequently  used  in 
this  Epistle,  ii.9;  iii.  i ;  vi.  20;  vii.  22 ;  x.  19;  xii.  2,  24;  xiii.  12) 
became  more  and  more  connotative  of  such  supreme  reverence 
and  exaltation  as  to  need  no  further  addition  or  description. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THEOLOGY  OF  THE  EPISTLE. 

The  author  of  this  Epistle,  though  he  is  writing  exclusively 
to  Jewish  Christians,  and  though  he  shews  himself  eminently 
Judaic  in  his  sympathies,  is  yet  distinctly  of  the  same  school 
as  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles. 

Of  the  four  great  topics  which  occupy  so  large  a  place  in  St 
Paul's  Epistles — the  relation  of  Judaism  to  Christianity,  the 
redemptive  work  of  Christ,  justification  by  faith,  and  the  call  of 
the  Gentiles— the  first  forms  the  main  topic  of  this  Epistle  ; 
the  second  occupies  one  large  section  of  it  (v.  i — x.  18);  and 
the  third  is  involved  in  one  entire  chapter  (xi.).  The  fourth  is 
indeed  conspicuously  absent,  but  its  absence  is  primarily  due 


INTRODUCTION. 


33 


to  the  concentration  of  the  Epistle  upon  the  needs  of  those 
readers  to  whom  it  was  addressed.  He  says  expressly  that 
Christ  died  on  behalf  of  every  man  (ii.  9),  and  no  one  has  ever 
doubted  respecting  his  full  belief  in  the  Universality  of  the 
Gospel.  As  the  circumstances  which  occasioned  the  composi- 
tion of  the  Epistle  furnished  no  opportunity  to  dwell  upon  the 
subject,  he  leaves  it  on  one  side.  It  is  probable  that  even  in 
the  most  bigoted  of  the  Jewish  Christian  communities  the  rights 
of  the  Gentiles  to  equal  participation  in  the  privileges  of  the 
Gospel  without  any  obligation  to  obey  the  Levitic  law  had 
been  fully  established,  partly  by  the  decree  of  the  Synod  of 
Jerusalem  (Acts  xv.  1—29),  and  partly  by  the  unanswerable 
demonstrations  of  St  Paul. 

It  need  hardly  be  said  that  the  writer  of  this  Epistle  is  at  one 
with  St  Paul  upon  all  great  fundamental  doctrines.  Both  of 
the  sacred  writers  speak  of  the  heavenly  exaltation  of  Christ 
(Eph.  iv.  10;  Heb.  ix.  24) ;  of  His  prevaihng  intercession  (Rom. 
viii.  34;  Heb.  vii.  25);  of  the  elementary  character  of  the  cere- 
monial Law  (Gal.  iv.  3;  Heb.  vii.  19);  of  Christ  as  "the  end  of 
the  Law"  (Rom.  x.  4;  Heb.  x.  4 — 7);  and  of  a  multitude  of 
other  deep  religious  truths  which  were  the  common  heritage  of 
all  Christians. 

But  while  he  deals  with  the  same  great  topics  as  the  Apostle 
of  the  Gentiles,  he  handles  them  in  a  very  distinct  manner,  and 
with  considerable  variation  of  theological  terminology. 

a.  In  his  mode  of  dealing  with  the  Old  and  New  Covenants 
we  have  already  seen  that  he  starts  from  a  different  point  of 
view.  He  does  not  mention  the  subject  of  circumcision,  so 
prominent  throughout  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  ;  and  while 
his  proof  that  Christ  is  superior  to  Moses  only  occupies  a  iew 
verses  (iii.  i — 6),  he  devotes  a  large  and  most  important  part  of 
his  letter  to  the  proof  that  Christ's  Priesthood  is  superior  to 
that  of  Aaron,  and  that  it  is  a  Priesthood  after  the  order  of  Mel- 
chisedek — whom  St  Paul  does  not  so  much  as  name.  Indeed, 
while  in  this  Epistle  the  titles  Priest  and  High  Priest  occur  no 
less  than  32  times,  in  accordance  with  their  extreme  prominence 
in  the  theological  conceptions  of  the  writer,  it  is  remarkable 

HEBREWS  ■} 


INTRODUCTION. 


that  neither  word  occurs  so  much  as  once  in  all  the  13  Epistles 
of  St  Paul. 

^.  In  speaking  of  the  Redemptive  work  of  Christ  he  is  evi- 
dently at  one  with  St  Paul  (ix.  15,  22),  but  does  not  enter  so 
fully  upon  the  mysteriotis  aspect  of  Christ's  death  as  an  ex- 
piatory sacrifice.  As  though  he  could  assume  all  which  St 
Paul  had  written  on  that  subject,  he  leaves  (as  it  were)  "  a  gap 
between  the  means  and  the  end,"  asserting  only  again  and 
again,  but  without  explanation  and  comment,  the  simple  fact 
that  Christ  offered  Himself  as  a  sacrifice,  and  that  man  was 
thereby  sanctified  and  purified  (ii.  11 ;  ix.  13,  14;  x.  2,  10,  14, 
22).  In  his  favourite  conception  of  'perfectionment'  {tcleiosis) 
he  seems  to  include  justification,  sanctification,  and  glorifica- 
tion. His  conception  of  Christ  is  less  that  of  a  Crucified  and 
Risen  Redeemer,  than  that  of  a  sympathising  and  glorified 
High  Priest.  And  the  result  of  His  work  is  described  not  as 
leading  to  a  mystic  oneness  with  Him,  but  as  securing  us  a  free 
access  to  Him,  and  through  Him  into  the  Inmost  Sanctuary  of 
God. 

y.  Again,  there  is  a  difference  between  the  writer  and  St 
Paul  in  their  use  of  the  terms  Justification  and  Faith.  In  St 
Paul  the  term  'Justification  by  Faith'  succinctly  describes  the 
method  by  which  the  righteousness  of  God  can  become  the 
justification  of  man — the  word  for  'righteousness'  and  'justifi- 
cation '  being  the  same  idikaiosiine).  But  in  this  Epistle  the 
word  'righteousness'  is  used  in  its  simple  and  original  sense  of 
moral  rectitude.  The  restilt  of  Christ's  redemptive  work,  which 
St  Paul  describes  by  his  use  of  dikaiosime  in  the  sense  of  'justifi- 
cation,' this  writer  indicates  by  other  words,  such  as  '  sanctifica- 
tion,' 'purification,'  and  ' bringing  to  perfection.'  He  does  not 
allude  to  the  notion  of  '■'■imputed'^  righteousness  as  a  condition 
freely  bestowed  by  God  upon  man,  but  describes  'righteousness' 
as  faith  manifested  by  obedience  and  so  earning  the  testimony 
of  God  (xi.  4,  5).  It  is  regarded  not  as  the  Divine  gift  which 
man  receives,  but  as  the  human  condition  which  faith  produces. 
The  phrase  "to  justify,"  which  occurs  28  times  in  St  Paul, 
is  not  once  found  in  this  Epistle.     The  writer,  like  St  Paul, 


INTRODUCTION. 


35 


quotes  the  famous  verse  of  Habakkuk,  "The  just  shall  live  by- 
faith  "  (perhaps  in  the  slightly  different  form,  "  My  just  man 
shall  live  by  faith  i")  but  the  sense  in  which  he  quotes  it  is  not 
the  distinctive  sense  which  it  bears  in  St  Paul — where  it  implies 
that  '  the  man  who  has  been  justified  by  that  trust  in  Christ 
which  ends  in  perfect  union  with  Him  shall  enjoy  eternal  life,' — 
but  rather  in  its  simpler  and  more  original  sense  that  '  the  up- 
right man  shall  be  saved  by  his  faithfulness.'  For  '  faith '  when 
used  by  St  Paul  in  the  sense  peculiar  to  his  writings,  means  the 
life  in  Christ,  the  absolute  personal  communion  with  His  death 
and  resurrection.  But  the  central  conception,  "  in  Christ " — 
Christ  not  only  for  me  but  in  me — is  scarcely  alluded  to  by  the 
author  of  this  Epistle.  He  uses  the  word  'faith'  in  its  more 
common  sense  of  'trust  in  the  Unseen.'  He  regards  it  less 
as  the  instrument  of  justification  than  as  the  condition  of  access 
(iii.  14;  iv.  2,  16;  vi.  i  ;  vii.  25  ;  x.  i,  22;  xi.  i,  6). 

S.  Again,  one  of  the  characteristics  of  this  Epistle  is  the 
recurrence  of  passages  which  breathe  a  spirit  peculiarly  severe 
(ii.  I — 3;  iv.  I ;  vi.  4 — 8  ;  x.  26 — 31 ;  xii.  15 — 17),  such  as  does 
indeed  resemble  a  few  passages  of  Philo,  but  finds  no  exact 
parallel  even  in  the  sternest  passages  of  St  Paul.  Luther  speaks 
of  one  of  these  passages  as  "a  hard  knot  which  seems  in  its 
obvious  import  to  run  counter  to  all  the  Gospels  and  the  Epistles 
of  St  Paul."  Both  Tertullian  and  Luther  missed  the  real  signi- 
ficance of  these  passages,  but  the  very  interpretation  which 
made  the  Epistle  dear  to  the  Montanistic  hardness  of  Tertul- 
lian made  it  displeasing  to  the  larger  heart  of  the  great  Re- 
former. 

e.  But  the  most  marked  feature  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
is  its  Alexandrian  character,  and  the  resemblances  which  it  con- 
tains to  the  writings  of  Philo,  the  chief  Jewish  philosopher  of  the 
Alexandrian  school  of  thought : — 

I.  Thus,  it  is  Alexandrian  in  its  quotations,  which  are  (i)  from 
the  Septuagint  version,  and  (2)  agree  mainly  with  the  Alexan- 

^  The  "my"  is  found  in  the  LXX.  sometimes  after  "just,"  some- 
times after  "faith;"  and  is  read  after  "just"  in  X,  A,  N,  and  after 
"faith"  in  D.     See  note  on  Heb.  x.  38. 


36  INTRODUCTION. 


drian  manuscript  of  that  version,  and  (3)  are  introduced  by  for- 
mulae prevalent  in  the  Alexandrian  school  (see  supra  IV.  §  3). 

2.  It  is  Alexandrian  in  its  unusual  expressions.  Many  of  these 
(e.g.  'in  many  parts'  i.  I,  'effluence'  i.  2,  'hypostasis'  i.  3, 
'servant'  {thcj-apon)  iii.  5;  'place  of  repentance'  xii.  17;  'con- 
firmation' vi.  16  ;  'issue'  {ekbasis)  xiii.  7,  &c.),  are  common 
to  this  Epistle  with  the  Alexandrian  Bookof  Wisdom.  So  great 
indeed  is  the  affinity  between  these  books  in  their  sonorous  style, 
their  use  of  compound  terms,  their  rare  phrases,  and  their  accu- 
mulation of  epithets  that  they  are  mentioned  in  juxtaposition  by 
Irenasus  (Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  26},  and  nearly  so  in  the  Muratorian 
Canon.  The  writers  of  both  had  evidently  studied  Philo,  and  it 
has  even  been  supposed  by  some  that  Philo,  and  by  others  that 
the  writer  of  this  Epistle,  also  wrote  the  Book  of  Wisdom. 

3.  It  is  Alexandrian  in  its  method  of  dealing  with  Scripture. 
In  the  important  section  about  Melchisedek  the  whole  structure 
of  the  argument  is  built  on  two  passing  and  isolated  allusions  to 
Melchisedek,  of  which  the  second  was  written  nine  hundred  years 
after  the  death  of  the  Priest-king.  They  are  the  only  allusions 
to  him  in  the  Jewish  literature  of  more  than  1500  years.  Yet 
upon  these  two  brief  allusions — partly  by  the  method  of  allegory, 
partly  by  the  method  of  bringing  different  passages  together 
(iii.  II  ;  iv.  8,  9),  partly  by  the  significance  attached  to  names, 
(vii.  2),  partly  by  the  extreme  emphasis  attributed  to  single  v.ords 
(viii.  13),  partly  by  pressing  the  silence  of  Scripture  as  though  it 
were  pregnant  with  latent  meanings  (i.  5;  ii,  16;  vii.  3) — the 
writer  builds  up  a  theological  system  of  unequalled  grandeur. 
But  this  whole  method  of  treatment  is  essentially  Rabbinic  and 
Alexandrian.  That  it  was,  however,  derived  by  the  writer  from 
his  training  in  the  methods  of  Alexandrian  and  not  of  Rabbinic 
exegesis  arises  from  the  fact  that  he  is  ignorant  of  Hebrew,  and 
that  the  typical  resemblance  of  Melchisedek  to  the  Logos  or 
Word  of  God  had  already  excited  the  attention  of  Philo,  who 
speaks  of  the  Logos  as  "  shadowed  forth  by  Melchisedek"  and 
as  "  the  great  High  Priest."  {Leg.  Allcg.  iii.  25,  26  ;  De  Somn. 
i.  38.) 

4.  It   is  Alexandrian  in  its  fundamental  conception  of  the 


INTRODUCTION.  37 


antithesis  between  the  world  of  fleeting  phenomena  and  the 
world  of  Eternal  Realities,  between  the  copies  and  the  Ideas, 
between  the  shadows  and  the  substance,  between  the  visible 
material  world  and  the  world  of  divine  Prte-existent  Archetypes. 
The  school  of  Philo  had  learnt  from  the  school  of  Plato  that 
"  earth 

Is  but  the  shadow  of  heaven,   and  things  therein 

Each   to  the  other  like  more  than  on   earth  is  thought." 

Hence  (as  I  have  said)  the  writer  seizes  on  the  passage  "  See  that 
thou  make  all  things  according  to  the  pattern  shewed  thee  in  the 
Mount"  (viii.  5  ;  ix.  23).  To  him  the  contrast  between  the  Old  and 
New  Covenants  turns  on  the  fundamental  antithesis  between  the 
Shadow  and  the  Reality.  Levitism  was  the  shadow,  Christianity 
is  not  a  shadow  but  a  substantial  image  ;  the  absolicte  reality — to 
w^iich  Christianity  is  so  much  nearer  an  approximation,  of  which 
Christianity  is  so  much  closer  a  copy — is  in  the  world  to  come. 
The  Mosaic  system,  as  concentrated  in  its  Tabernacle,  Priesthood, 
and  Sacrifices  is  only  "a  copy"  (viii.  5) ;  "a  shadow"(x.  i),  "a  para- 
ble" \y^.  9) ;  '  a  prasfiguration'  (ix.  24)  ;  whereas  Christianity  is  by 
comparison,  and  by  virtue  of  its  closer  participation  in  the  Idea, 
*  the  type,'  '  the  perfect,'  '  the  genuine'  (viii.  2)  '  the  very  image' 
(x.  i).  The  visible  world  (xi.  3)  is  "this  creation"  (ix.  11);  it 
is  "made  with  hands"  (ix.  11);  it  is  capable  of  being  touched 
and  grasped  (xii.  18);  it  is  but  a  quivering,  unstable,  transient 
semblance  (xii.  27)  :  but  the  invisible  world  is  supersensuous, 
immaterial,  immovable,  eternal.  It  is  the  world  of  "  Heavenly 
things"  (ix.  23),  the  archetypal  world,  the  true  "  House  of  God" 
(x.  21),  "the  genuine  Tabernacle"  (viii.  2),  "the  City  which  hath 
the  foundations"  (xi.  10),  the  true  "fatherland"  (xi.  14),  "the  hea- 
venly Jerusalem"  (xii.  22),  "the  kingdom  unshaken"  and  that  "can- 
not be  shaken"  (xii.  27,  28).  And  this  invisible  world  is  the  world 
of  the  heirs  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  so  now,  and  it  will  be  so  yet  more 
fully.  In  the  True  Temple  of  Christianity  the  Visible  and  the 
Invisible  melt  into  each  other.  The  salvation  is  now  subjec- 
tively enjoyed,  it  will  hereafter  be  objectively  reahsed  (vi.  4,  5  ; 
xii.  28). 


38  INTRODUCTION. 


5.  But  the  Alexandrianism  of  the  Epistle  appears  most 
clearljrin  the  constant  parallels  which  it  furnishes  to  the  writings 
of  Philo.  We  have  already  called  attention  to  some  of  these, 
and  they  will  be  frequently  referred  to  in  the  notes.  Even  in 
the  general  structure  and  style  of  the  Epistle  there  are  not  only 
a  multitude  of  phrases  and  expressions  which  are  common  to 
the  writer  with  Philo,  but  we  notice  in  both  the  same  perpetual 
interweaving  of  argument  with  exhortation  ;  the  same  methods 
of  referring  to  and  dealing  with  the  Old  Testament ;  the  same  ex- 
clusive prominence  of  the  Hebrew  people ;  the  same  sternness  of 
tone  in  isolated  passages  ;  and  the  same  general  turns  of  phrase- 
ology (see  Bleek's  notes  on  i.  6  ;  ii.  2  ;  v.  1 1 ;  vi.  i,  &c.).  If  we  find 
in  Heb.  ii.  6,  "  someone  somewhere  testified"  and  in  iv.  4,  "  He 
hath  spoken  somewhere  thus,"  we  find  the  very  same  phrases  in 
Philo  {De  Plattt.  %2i  ;  De  Ebriet.  §  14,  &c.).  If  we  find  in  Heb. 
vii.  8,  "being  testified  of  that  he  liveth,"  we  find  also  in  Philo, 
"  Moses  being  testified  of  that  he  was  faithful  in  all  his  house" 
(comp.  Heb.  iii.  2).  If  in  Heb.  xiii.  5  we  have  the  modified  quo- 
tation, "  I  will  never  leave  thee,  nor  will  I  ever  in  any  wise  for- 
sake thee,"  we  find  it  in  the  very  same  form  in  Philo  {De  Confiis. 
Lingu.  §  33). 

We  may  here  collect  a  few  passages  of  marked  resemblance. 

i.     Heb.  i.  3,  "who  being  the  efifluence  of  His  glory..." 
Philo  De  Opif.  Hfufidi  §  51.     "Every  man... having  become 
an  impress'on  or  fragment  or  effluence  of  the  blessed  nature." 
ii.     Heb.  i.  3,  'the  stamp  of  His  substance.' 
Philo  {Quod  det.  pot.  §  23)  speaks  of  the  spirit  of  man  as  "  a 
type  and  stamp  of  the  divine  power,"  and  {De  Plant.  §  5)  of  the 
soul,  as  "  impressed  by  the  seal  of  God  of  which  the  stamp  is  the 
everlasting  Word." 

iii.     Heb.  i.  6,  "the  First-begotten." 
Philo  {De  Agriciilt.  §  12)  speaks  of  the  Word  as  "the  firstborn 
Son,"  and  {De  Confns.  Liitgit.  §  14)  as  '  an  eldest  Son.' 

iv.    Heb.  i.  2.  "  By  whom  also  He  made  the  worlds"  (fl'/^/Mj). 
Philo  DeMigr.  Abraham.  §  i,  "  You  will  find  the  Word  of  God 
the  instrument  by  which  the  world  {kosiJios)  was  prepared." 


INTRODUCTION.  39 


V.  Heb.  xi.  3,  "that  the  worlds  {aionas)  were  made  by  the 
utterance  of  God." 

Philo  {De  Sacrif.Abcl,  §  18),  "  God  in  saying  was  at  the  same 
time  creating." 

vi.  Heb.  i.  3,  "And  bearing  all  things  by  the  utterance 
of  His  power." 

Philo  {Quis  Rcr.  Div.  Hacr.  §  7),  "  He  that  beareth  the  things 
that  are." 

vii.  Heb.  iii.  3,  "in  proportion  as  he  that  buildeth  the  house 
hath  more  honour  than  the  house." 

Philo  {pe  Plant.  §  16),  "  Being  so  much  better  as  the  pos- 
sessor is  better  than  the  thing  possessed,  and  that  which  made 
than  the  thing  which  is  made." 

viii.  Heb.  iv.  12,  13,  "  For  living  is  the  Word  of  God  and 
efficient  and  more  cutting  than  any  two-edged  sword,  and  pierc- 
ing to  the  division  both  of  soul  and  spirit,  both  of  joints  and 
marrow." 

Philo  {Quis  Rer.  Div.  Haer.  §  28),  commenting  on  Abraham's 
"dividing  the  sacrifices  in  the  midst,"  says  that  "God  did  thus 
with  His  Word,  which  is  the  cutter  of  all  things,  which,  whetted 
to  its  keenest  edge,  never  ceases  to  divide  all  perceptible  things, 
but  when  it  pierces  through  to  the  atomistic  and  so-called  indi- 
visible things,  again  this  cutter  begins  to  divide  from  these  the 
things  that  can  be  contemplated  in  speech  into  unspeakable  and 
incomprehensible  portions;"  and  farther  on  he  adds,  that  the 
soul  is  "  threefold,"  and  that  "  each  of  the  parts  is  cut  asunder," 
and  that  the  Word  divides  "the  reasonable  and  the  unreason- 
able." Elsewhere  {De  Cheficb.  §  9)  he  compares  the  Word  to  the 
fiery  sword.  Philo  is  applying  the  metaphors  philosophically,  not 
religiously,  but  it  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  the  resemblance 
between  the  passages  is  merely  accidental. 

ix.  Heb.  iv.  12,  "and  is  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and 
intents  of  the  heart." 

Philo  {De  Leg.  Alleg.  iii.  59),  "And  the  Divine  Word  is  most 
keen-sighted,  so  as  to  be  capable  of  inspecting  all  things." 


40  INTRODUCTION. 


X.  Heb.  vi.  5,  "tasting  that  the  utterance  of  God  is 
excellent." 

Philo  {De  Pi'oftig.  §  25),  "  The  souls,  tasting  (the  utterance  of 
God)  as  a  divine  woxd^ijogos)  a  heavenly  nurture."  (Comp.  Z?^ 
Leg.  Allfg.  iii.  60.) 

xi.     Heb.  iii.  6,  "whose  house  are  we."' 
Philo  {De  Somn.  i.  23^  "  Strive,  oh  soul,  to  become  a  house  of 
God." 

xii.  Heb.  vi.  13,  "since  He  could  not  swear  by  any  greater 
He  sware  by  Himself" 

Philo  {^De  Leg.  Alleg.  iii.  72).  "  Thou  seest  that  God  swear- 
cth  not  by  another,  for  nothing  is  better  than  Hun,  but  by  Him- 
self who  is  best  of  all." 

xiii.  Heb.  vii.  27,  "who  hath  not  need,  daily,  like  those 
High  Priests..." 

Philo  {De  Spec.  Legg.  §.  23^  "The  High  Priest... offering 
prayers  and  sacrifices  day  by  day." 

xiv.  Heb.  ix.  7,  "once  in  the  year  only  the  High  Priest 
enters." 

Philo  {Leg.  ad  Caj.  §  39),  "  into  which  once  in  the  year  the 
great  Priest  enters." 

XV.  We  might  add  many  similar  references  ;  e.g.  to  Abel's 
blood  (xii.  24) ;  Noah's  righteousness  (xi.  7);  Abraham's  obedi- 
ence, in  going  he  knew  not  whither  (xi.  8)  ;  the  faithfulness  of 
Moses  (iii.  2,  5);  milk  and  solid  food  (v.  12 — 14);  the  fact  that 
sacrifices  are  meant  to  call  sin  to  remembrance  (x.  3) ;  the  stress 
laid  on  the  word  "To-day"  (iii.  7 — 15).  But  it  will  be  sufficient 
to  add  a  few  passages  in  which  Philo  speaks  of  the  Logos  as 
High  Priest. 

xvi.     Heb.  iv.  14,  "  Having  then  a  great  High  Priest..." 
Philo  {De  Somn.  i.  38),  "The  great  High  Priest  then,"  &c. 

xvii.  Heb.  iv.  15,  "without  sin,"  vii.  26,  "Holy,  harmless, 
undefiled." 

Philo  {De  Profug.  §  20),  "  For  we  say  that  the  High  Priest  is 
not  a  man  but  the  Divine  Word,  with  no  participation  in  any 


INTRODUCTION.  41 

sin  whether  voluntary  or  involuntary."    Id.  §  21,  "It  is  his  nature 
to  be  wholly  unconnected  with  all  sin." 

xviii.     Heb.  iv.  15,  "  able  to  be  touched  with  a  feeling  of  our 
infirmities." 

Philo  {^De  Profiif;.  §  18),  "not  inexorable  is  the  Divine,  but 
gentle  through  the  mildness  of  its  nature." 

xix.     Heb.  vii.  25,  "  living  to  make  intercession  for  them." 

Philo  {De  Aligr.  Abraha?n,  §  21),  "But  these  things  He  is 
accustomed  to  grant,  not  turning  away  from  His  suppliant 
Word." 

XX.     Heb.  V.  10,  "After  the  order  of  Melchisedek." 

Philo  {De  Leg.  Alleg.  iii.  26),  "  For  the  Logos  is  a  Priest,"  &c. 
who,  as  he  proceeds  to  say,  brings  righteousness  and  peace  to 
the  soul,  and  has  his  type  in  Melchisedek  "the  Righteous  King" 
and  the  King  of  Salem,  i.e.  of  Peace.  See  also  De  cotigr. 
qicaerend.  eriidit.  grat.  §  iS. 

xxi.     Heb.  vii.  3,  "  without  father,  without  mother." 

Philo  {De  Profiig.  §  20),  ''  For  we  say  that  the  High  Priest  is 
not  a  man  but  the  Divine  word... wherefore  I  think  that  He  is 
sprung  from  incorruptible  parents. ..from  God  as  His  Father,  and 
from  Wisdom  as  His  mother." 

For  these  and  other  passages  see  Siegfried  Philo  vo7i  Alex- 
andria 321 — 330  and  Glrorer's  Philo  uiid  die  Alex.  Theosophie 
i.  163 — 248. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE   AUTHOR   OF   THE   EPISTLE. 

We  now  come  to  the  question  Quis  ? — who  wrote  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews? 

In  our  Authorised  Version  and  even  in  the  Revised  Version — 
which  does  not  however  profess  to  have  reconsidered  the  super- 
scriptions of  the  Epistles — we  find  the  heading  "  The  Epistle  of 
Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Hebrews."     Now  the  .writer  was  un- 


42  INTRODUCTION. 


doubtedly  a  Paulinist,  i.e.  he  belongs  to  the  same  school  of 
thought  as  St  Paul.  Besides  the  common  phrases  which  form 
part  of  the  current  coin  of  Christian  theology  he  uses  some 
which  are  distinctively  Pauline.  He  had  been  deeply  influenced 
by  the  companionship  of  the  Apostle  and  had  adopted  much  of 
his  distinctive  teaching.  This  is  universally  admitted.  The  stu- 
dent who  will  compare  ii.  lo,  vi.  lo,  x.  30,  xii.  14,  xiii.  i — 6,  18, 
20  with  Rom.  xi.  36;  i  Thess.  i.  3;  Rom.  xii.  19,  18,  i — 21; 
2  Cor.  iv.  2  ;  Rom.  xv.  33  respectively,  and  who  will  observe  the 
numerous  other  resemblances  to  which  attention  is  called  in  the 
following  notes,  will  have  sufficient  proof  of  this.  The  writer 
uses  about  fifty  words  which  in  the  N.  T.  only  occur  in  the 
Epistles  of  St  Paul  or  in  his  speeches  as  recorded  by  St  Luke, 
and  in  the  last  chapter  the  resemblances  to  St  Paul  are  spe- 
cially numerous.  On  the  other  hand,  after  what  we  have  already 
seen  of  the  differences  of  style,  of  method,  of  culture,  of  indi- 
viduality, of  theological  standpoint,  and  of  specific  terminology 
between  the  writer  of  this  Epistle  and  St  Paul,  we  shall  be  com- 
pelled to  admit  not  only  that  St  Paul  could  not  possibly  have 
been  the  actual  luriter  of  the  Epistle — a  fact  which  was  patent 
so  far  back  as  the  days  of  Origen — but  that  it  could  not  even 
indirectly  have  been  due  to  his  authorship.  The  more  we 
study  the  similarities  between  this  and  the  Pauline  Epistles — 
and  the  more  strongly  we  become  convinced  that  the  writers 
were  connected  in  faith  and  feeling — the  more  absolutely  incom- 
patible (as  Dean  Alford  has  observed)  does  the  notion  of  their 
personal  identity  become.  And  this  is  exactly  the  conclusion 
to  which  we  are  led  by  a  review  of  the  ancient  evidence  upon 
the  subject.  The  Early  Western  Church  seems  to  have  known 
that  St  Paul  did  not  write  the  Epistle.  In  the  Eastern  Church 
the  obvious  and  superficial  points  of  resemblance  gave  currency 
to  the  common  belief  in  the  Pauline  authorship,  but  the  deeper- 
lying  differences  were  sufficient  to  convince  the  greatest  scholars 
that  (at  the  best)  this  could  only  be  admitted  in  a  modified 
sense. 

The  Epistle  was  known  at  a  very  early  period  and  is  very 
largely  used  and  imitated  by  St  Clement  of  Rome,  in  his  letter 


INTRODUCTION.  43 

to  the  Corinthians  {circ.  A.D.  96),  and  yet  he  nowhere  mentions 
the  name  of  the  author.  He  would  hardly  have  used  it  so 
extensively  without  claiming  for  his  quotations  the  authority  of 
St  Paul  if  he  had  not  been  aware  that  it  was  not  the  work  of 
the  great  Apostle. 

In  the  Western  Church  no  single  writer  of  the  first,  second, 
or  even  third  century  attributed  it  to  St  Paul.  St  Hippolytus 
(t  A.D.  235  ?)  and  St  Irenaeus  (t  A.D.  202)  are  said  to  have 
denied  the  Pauline  authorship^,  though  Eusebius  tells  us  that 
Irenaeus  (in  a  work  which  he  had  not  seen,  and  which  is  not 
extant)  quoted  from  it  and  from  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon.  The 
Presbyter  Gaius  did  not  number  it  among  St  Paul's  Epistles. 
The  Canon  of  Muratori  [chr.  A.d.  170)  either  does  not  notice 
it,  or  only  with  a  very  damaging  allusion  under  the  name  of  an 
'  Epistle  to  the  Alexandrians  forged  in  the  name  of  Paul  with 
reference  to  the  heresy  of  Marcion.'  Yet  Marcion  himself 
rejected  it,  and  Nov  ATI  AN  never  refers  to  it,  frequently  as  he 
quotes  Scripture  and  useful  as  it  would  have  been  to  him. 
Tertulltan  (t  A.D.  240)  representing  perhaps  the  tradition  of 
the  Church  of  North  Africa,  ascribes  it  to  Barnabas.  This 
testimony  to  the  non-Pauline  authorship  is  all  the  weightier 
because  TertuUian  would  have  been  only  too  eager  to  quote  the 
authority  of  St  Paul  in  favour  of  his  Mcntanism  had  he  been 
able  to  do  so.  St  Cyprian  (f  A.D.  258)  never  alludes  to  it. 
Victorinus  of  Pettau  (f  303)  ignores  it.  The  first  writer  of  the 
Western  Church  who  attributes  it  to  St  Paul  (and  probably  for 
no  other  reason  than  that  he  found  it  so  ascribed  in  Greek 
writers)  is  Hilary  of  Poictiers,  who  died  late  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury (t  A.D.  368).  St  Ambrose  indeed  (f  397)  and  Philastrius 
{circ.  A.D.  387)  follow  the  Greeks  in  ascribing  it  to  St  Paul, 
though  the  latter  evidently  felt  some  hesitation  about  it.  But  it 
is  certain  that  for  nearly  four  centuries  the  Western  Church 
refused  in  general  to  recognise  the  Pauline  authorship,  and  this 
was  probably  due  to  some  tradition  on  the  subject  which  had 
come  down  to  them  from  St  Clement  of  Rome.     If  it  had  been  ' 

1  Stephen  Gobar  ap.  Phot.  Bibl.  Cod.  232. 


44  INTRODUCTION. 


written  by  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  St  Clement  of  Rome, 
who  was  probably  a  friend  and  contemporary  of  St  Paul,  would 
have  certainly  mentioned  so  precious  a  truth  at  least  orally  to 
the  Church  of  which  he  was  a  Bishop.  If  he  said  any  thing  at 
all  upon  the  subject  it  can  only  have  been  that  whoever  was  the 
author  Si  Paul  was  not. 

Accordingly,  even  down  to  the  seventh  century  we  find  traces 
of  hesitation  as  to  the  Pauline  authorship  in  the  Western 
Church,  though  by  that  time  a  loose  habit  had  sprung  up  of 
quoting  it  as  'the  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Hebrews.'  This  was 
due  to  the  example  of  St  Jerome  (f  420)  and  St  Augustine 
(t  430).  These  great  men  so  far  yielded  to  the  stream  of  irre- 
sponsible opinion — which  by  their  time  had  begun  to  set  in 
from  the  East — that  they  ventured  popularly  to  quote  it  as 
St  Paul's,  although  when  they  touch  seriously  upon  the  question 
of  the  authorship  they  fully  admit  or  imply  the  uncertainty 
respecting  it.  Their  hesitation  as  to  the  Pauline  authorship  is 
incidentally  shewn  by  the  frequency  with  which  they  quote  it 
either  without  any  name,  or  with  the  addition  of  some  caution- 
ary phrase.  That  the  Epistle  is  attributed  to  St  Paul  by  later 
authors  and  Councils  is  a  circumstance  entirely  devoid  of  any 
critical  importance. 

It  was  from  the  Eastern  Church  that  the  tendency  to  accept 
the  Epistle  as  St  Paul's  derived  its  chief  strength.  The  Alex- 
andrian School  naturally  valued  an  Epistle  which  expressed 
their  own  views,  and  was  founded  upon  premisses  with  which 
they  were  specially  familiar.  Apart  from  close  criticism  they 
would  be  naturally  led  by  phenomena  which  lay  on  the  surface 
to  conjecture  that  it  might  be  by  St  Paul ;  and  (as  has  frequently 
happened)  the  hesitations  of  theological  scholarship  were  swept 
away  by  the  strong  current  of  popular  tradition.  But  this  tra- 
dition cannot  be  traced  farther  back  than  an  unsupported  guess 
of  the  Presbyter  Pantaenus  about  the  middle  of  the  Second 
Century.  St  Clemens  of  Alexandria  (in  a  lost  work,  quoted  by 
Eusebius)  says  that  the  "blessed  Presbyter"  had  endeavoured  to 
account  for  the  absence  of  St  Paul's  name  (which  is  found  in  every 
one  of  his  genuine  Epistles)  by  two  reasons.     St  Paul,  he  said, 


INTRODUCTION.  45 

had  suppressed  it  "  out  of  modesty,"  both  because  the  Lord  was 
the  true  Apostle  to  the  Hebrews  (Heb.  iii.  i),  and  because  he  was 
writing  to  the  Hebrews  "out  of  superabundance"  being  himself 
the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  Neither  reason  will  stand  a  moment's 
consideration:  they  are  desperate  expedients  to  explain  away  an 
insuperable  difficulty.  For  if  St  Paul  had  written  "to  the 
Hebrews"  at  all,  there  is  no  single  writer  who  would  have  been 
less  likely  to  write  anonymously.  Calvin  rightly  says  "  Ego  ut 
Paulum  agnoscam  auctorem  adduci  nequeo.  Nam  qui  dicunt 
nomen  fuisse  de  industria  suppressum  quod  odiosum  esset  Judaeis 
nihil  afferunt.  Cur  enim  mentionem  fecisset  Timothei?  &c."  It 
never  occurred  to  any  Apostle  to  consider  that  his  title  was  an 
arrogant  one,  and  the  so-called  "Apostolic  Compact"  no  more 
prevented  St  Paul  from  addressing  Jews  than  it  prevented  St 
Peter  from  addressing  Gentiles.  The  fact  that  Eusebius  quotes 
this  allusion  to  Pantaenus  as  the  earliest  reference  to  the 
subject  which  he  could  find,  shews  that  in  spite  of  the  obvious 
inference  from  x.  34  (and  especially  from  the  wrong  reading 
"my  bonds")  there  was  no  tradition  of  importance  on  the 
subject  even  in  the  Eastern  Church  during  the  first  two  centu- 
ries. St  Clemens  of  Alexandria  is  himself  (t  a.d.  220) 
equally  unsuccessful  in  his  attempts  to  maintain  even  a  modi- 
fied view  of  the  Pauline  authorship.  He  conjectures  that  the 
Epistle  was  written  in  Hebrew,  and  had  been  translated  by 
St  Luke;  and  he  tries  to  account  for  its  anonymity  by  a  most 
uncritical  and  untenable  surmise.  St  Paul  he  says  did  not 
wish  to  divert  the  attention  of  the  Jews  from  his  arguments, 
since  he  knew  that  they  regarded  him  with  prejudice  and  sus- 
picion. This  singular  notion — that  St  Paul  wished  to  entrap 
the  attention  of  his  readers  unawares  before  revealing  his 
identity — has  been  repeated  by  writer  after  writer  down  to 
the  present  day.  But  no  one  can  read  the  Epistle  with  care 
without  seeing  that  the  writer  was  obviously  known  to  his 
readers,  and  intended  himself  to  be  known  by  them.  No 
Apostolic  Church  would  have  paid  any  attention  to  an  anony- 
mous and  unauthenticated  letter.  The  letters  were  necessarily 
brought  to  them  by  accredited  messengers;    and  if  this  letter 


46  INTRODUCTION. 


had  been  written  by  St  Paul  to  any  Hebrew  Community  the 
fact  would  have  been  known  to  them  in  the  first  halfhour  after 
the  messenger's  arrival. 

Origen  again  in  a  popular  way  constantly  quotes  the  Epistle 
as  St  Paul's ;  but  when  he  seriously  entered  on  the  question  of 
the  authorship,  in  a  passage  quoted  by  Eusebius  from  the  begin- 
ning of  his  lost  Homilies  on  the  Epistle,  he  admits  that  the  style 
is  much  more  polished  than  that  of  St  Paul,  and  while  he  says 
that  the  Pauline  character  of  the  thoughts  furnishes  some  ground 
for  the  tradition  that  St  Paul  wrote  it,  he  adds  that  the  "history" 
which  had  come  down  about  it  was  that  it  was  "written"  by 
Clement  of  Rome,  or  by  Luke  ;  but,  he  says,  "who  actually 
wrote  the  Epistle  God  only  knows."  Origen's  authority  has 
repeatedly  been  quoted  as  though  it  were  decisively  given  in 
favour  of  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  Epistle.  But  if  any  one 
will  examine  the  passage  above  referred  to  he  will  see  that  it 
represents  a  conflict  between  historical  testimony  and  scholar- 
like criticism  on  one  side,  and  loose  local  tradition  on  the  other. 
Origen  was  glad  to  regard  the  Epistle  as  being  in  some  sense  St 
Paul's,  and  did  not  like  to  differ  decidedly  from  Pantaenus, 
Clemens,  and  the  general  popular  view  prevalent  in  his  own 
Church;  but  he  decidedly  intimates  that  in  its  present  form  St 
Paul  did  not  write  the  Epistle,  and  that  it  can  only  be  regarded 
as  belonging  to  "the  School  of  Paul." 

Lastly,  Eusebius  of  Caesarea  shews  the  same  wavering  hesi- 
tation. He  so  far  defers  to  indolent  and  biassed  custom  as  con- 
stantly to  quote  the  Epistle  as  St  Paul's,  but  in  one  passage  he 
seems  to  approve  of  the  opinion  that  it  had  been  translated  from 
Hebrew,  and  in  another  he  says  that  it  would  not  be  just  to 
ignore  that  "some  have  rejected  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
saying  that  it  is  opposed  by  the  Church  of  Rome  as  not  being 
by  St  Paul." 

It  is  hardly  worth  while  to  follow  the  stream  of  testimony  into 
a'^es  in  which  independent  criticism  was  dead  ;  but  in  the  six- 
teenth century  with  the  revival  of  scholarship  the  popular  tra- 
dition once  more  began  to  be  set  aside.  Cardinal  Cajetan, 
Erasmus,  Luther,  Calvin,  Melanchthon,  and  even  Estius  were  all 


INTRODUCTION.  47 


more  or  less  unfavourable  to  the  direct  Pauline  authorship.  In 
modern  times,  in  spite  of  the  intensely  conservative  character 
of  Anglican  theology,  there  are  very  few  critics  of  any  name  even 
in  the  English  Church,  and  still  fewer  among  German  theo- 
logians, who  any  longer  maintain,  even  in  a  modified  sense,  that 
it  was  written  by  St  Paul. 

Who  then  was  the  writer  ? 

From  the  Epistle  itself  we  can  gather  with  a  probability  which 
falls  but  little  short  of  certainty  the  following  facts  (some  of 
which  it  will  be  observed  tell  directly  against  the  identity  of  the 
writer  with  St  Paul). 

1.  The  writer  was  a  Jew,  for  he  writes  solely  as  a  Jew,  and  as 
though  the  Heathen  world  were  non-existent. 

2.  He  was  a  Hellenist  for  he  quotes  from  the  LXX.  without 
any  reference  to  the  original  Hebrew,  and  even  when  it  differs 
from  the  Hebrew  (i.  6,  x.  5). 

3.  He  was  familiar  with  the  v/ritings  of  Philo,  and  has  been 
deeply  influenced  by  Alexandrian  thought. 

4.  He  was  'an  eloquent  man  and  mighty  in  the  Scrip- 
tures.' 

5.  He  was  a  friend  of  Timotheus. 

6.  He  was  known  to  his  readers,  and  addresses  them  in  a 
tone  of  authority. 

7.  He  was  not  an  Apostle,  but  classes  himself  with  those  who 
had  been  taught  by  the  Apostles  (ii.  3). 

8.  He  was  acquainted  with  the  thoughts  of  St  Paul,  and  had 
read  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 

9.  Yet  his  tone  while  harmonious  with  that  of  St  Paul  is 
entirely  independent  of  it. 

10.  He  wrote  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

11.  His  references  to  the  Tabernacle  rather  than  to  the 
Temple  seem  to  make  it  improbable  that  he  had  ever  been  at 
Jerusalem. 

Further  than  this  it  is  at  least  a  fair  assumption  that  any 
friend  and  scholar  of  St  Paul  who  was  a  man  of  sufficient  learn- 
ing and  originality  to  have  written  such  an  Epistle  as  this,  would 
be  somewhere  alluded  to  in  that  large  section  of  the  New  Testa- 


48  INTRODUCTION. 


ment  which  is  occupied  by  the  writings  and  the  biography  of  St 
Paul. 

Accordingly  there  is  scarcely  one  of  the  companions  of  St 
Paul  who  has  not  been  suggested  by  some  critic  as  a  possible 
or  probable  author  of  this  Epistle.  Yet  of  these  all  but  one 
are  directly  excluded  by  one  or  more  of  the  above  indica- 
tions. Aquila  could  not  have  written  it,  for  he  seems  to  have 
been  of  less  prominence  even  than  his  wife  Priscilla  (Acts  xviii. 
l8;  2  Tim.  iv.  19).  TiTUS  was  a  Gentile.  Silas  was  a  Hebraist 
of  Jerusalem.  Barnabas  was  a  Levite,  and  the  other  Epistle 
attributed  to  him  (though  spurious)  is  incomparably  inferior  to 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The  genuine  Epistle  of  St  Clement 
of  Rome  shews  that  he  could  not  have  written  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  which  indeed  he  largely  quotes  on  a  level  with  Scrip- 
ture. The  Gospel  of  St  Mark  is  wholly  unlike  this  Epistle 
in  style.  The  style  of  St  Luke  does  indeed  resemble  in  many 
expressions  the  style  of  this  writer ;  but  the  Epistle  contains 
passages  (such  as  vi.  4 — 8,  x.  26 — 29,  &c.)  which  do  not  seem  to 
resemble  his  tender  and  conciliatory  tone  of  mind,  and  apart 
from  this  St  Luke  seems  to  have  been  a  Gentile  Christian  (Col, 
iv.  10 — 14),  and  not  improbably  a  Proselyte  of  Antioch.  The 
resemblances  between  the  two  writers  consist  only  in  verbal  and 
idiomatic  expressions,  and  are  amply  accounted  for  by  their 
probable  familiarity  with  each  other  and  with  St  Paul.  But  the 
idiosyncrasy  is  different,  and  St  Luke  has  nothing  of  the  stately 
balance  or  rhetorical  amplitude  of  this  Epistle.  Tlmothy  is 
excluded  by  xiii.  23.  No  one  else  is  left  but  that  friend  and 
convert  to  whom  by  a  flash  of  most  happy  insight  LUTHER 
attributed  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle — Apollos. 

Apollos  meets  every  one  of  the  necessary  requirements,  (i) 
He  was  a  Jew.  (2)  He  was  a  Hellenist.  (3)  He  was  an  Alex- 
andrian. (4)  He  was  famed  for  his  eloquence  and  his  powerful 
method  of  applying  Scripture.  (5)  He  was  a  friend  of  Timotheus. 
(6)  He  had  acquired  considerable  authority  in  various  Churches. 
(7y  He  had  been  taught  by  an  Apostle.  (8)  He  was  of  the 
School  of  St  Paul ;  yet  (9)  he  adopted  an  independent  line  of  his 
own  (i  Cor.  iii.  6).     (10)  We  have  no  trace  that  he  was  ever  at 


INTRODUCTION.  49 


Jerusalem ;  and  yet,  we  may  add  to  the  above  considerations,  that 
his  style  of  argument — like  that  of  the  writer  of  this  Epistle — 
was  specially  effective  as  addressed  to. Jewish  hearers.  The 
writer's  boldness  of  tone  (Acts  xviii.  26)  and  his  modest  self- 
suppression  (i  Cor.  xvi.  12)  also  point  to  Apollos.  The  various 
allusions  to  Apollos  are  found  in  Acts  xviii.  24 — 28 ;  i  Cor.  iii. 
4 — 6,  xvi.  12  ;  Tit.  iii.  13  ;  and  in  every  single  particular  they 
agree  with  such  remarkable  cogency  in  indicating  to  us  a  Christ- 
ian whose  powers,  whose  training,  whose  character,  and  whose 
entire  circumstances  would  have  marked  him  out  as  a  man 
likely  to  have  written  such  a  treatise  as  the  one  before  us,  that 
we  may  safely  arrive  at  the  conclusion  either  that  Apollos 
wrote  the  Epistle  or  that  it  is  the  work  of  some  author  who  is  to 
us  entirely  unknown. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

CANONICITY. 

The  Canonicity  of  the  Epistle — that  is  its  rght  to  be  placed  in 
the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture — rests  on  the  fact  that  it  has  been 
accepted  both  by  the  Eastern  and  Western  Churches.  It  was 
known  from  the  earliest  ages ;  was  probably  alluded  to  by  Justin 
Martyr  ;  was  largely  used  by  St  Clement  of  Rome  ;  is  quoted  on 
the  same  footing  as  the  rest  of  Scripture  by  many  of  the  Fathers  ; 
and  both  in  the  earlier  Centuries  and  at  the  Reformation  has 
been  accepted  as  authoritative  and  inspired  even  by  those  who 
had  been  led  to  the  conclusion  that  the  current  opinion  of  the 
Church  after  the  third  century  had  erred  in  assigning  it  to  the 
authorship  of  St  Paul.  Its  right  to  be  accepted  as  part  of  the 
Canon,  and  not  merely  to  possess  the  deutero-Canonical  and 
inferior  authority  which  Luther  assigned  to  it,  is  all  the  more 
clearly  established  because  it  triumphed  over  the  objections 
which  some  felt  towards  it.  Those  objections  arose  partly  from 
the  sterner  passages  (especially  vi.  4 — 6),  which  were  misinter- 
preted as  favouring  the  merciless  refusal  of  the  Novatians  to  re- 
admit  the  lapsed   into    Church   privileges ;     and  partly   from 

HEBREWS  4 


so  INTRODUCTION. 


inability  to  understand  the  phrase  "to  Him  that  made  Him"  in 
iii.  2,  But  in  spite  of  these  needless  difficulties  which  are 
mentioned  by  Philastrius  late  in  the  fourth  century,  the  Epistle 
has  been  justly  recognised  as  a  part  of  sacred  Scripture — 
"marching  forth,"  as  Delitzsch  says,  "in  lonely  royal  and  sacred 
dignity,  like  the  great  Melchisedek,  and  like  him  without 
lineage — ayeveakoy-qTo^.'"  Even  those  who  like  Erasmus  and 
Calvin  were  unable  to  admit  its  Pauline  authorship,  were  still 
agreed  in  "embracing  it,  without  controversy,  among  the  Apos- 
tolical Epistles."  They  said  with  St  Jerome,  "Nihil  interesse 
cujus  sit,  diwi  ecclesiastici  viri  sit,  et  quotidie  ecclesiar-uin 
lectione  celebretur,"  It  is  no  small  blessing  to  the  Church  that 
in  this  Epistle  we  have  preserved  to  us  the  thoughts  of  a  deep 
thinker  who  while  he  belonged  to  the  School  of  St  Paul  ex- 
presses the  views  of  that  School  with  an  independent  force, 
eloquence,  and  insight  far  surpassing  that  of  every  Christian 
treatise  which  is  not  included  in  the  Sacred  Canon. 


G 


THE    EPISTLE    OF    PAUL   THE   APOSTLE 


HEBREWS. 


OD,  who  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners  spake  in  1 
time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the  prophets,  hath  in  these  2 


"The  EpisUe  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Hebrews."  This  title 
is  wholly  without  authority.  The  original  title  if  there  was  one  at  all, 
probably  ran  simply  ''  to  the  Hebrews  "  as  in  i<.  A,  B,  K,  and  as  in 
the  days  of  Origen.  In  various  MSB.  the  Epistle  is  found  in  different 
portions.  In  D,  K,  L,  it  stands  as  here.  In  N,  A,  B,  C,  it  is  placed 
after  2  Thess.     (See  for  fuller  information  Bleak  Hebraerbrief,  p.  45.) 

Ch.  I.  Finality  and  transcendence  of  God's  final  reve- 
lation IN  Christ  (i — 4).  Illustrations  of  Christ's  pre- 
eminence above  Angels  (5 — 14). 

1 — 4.     Thesis  of  the  Epistle. 

1.  God,  who  at  sandiy  times  and  in  divers  mannej-s  spake']  It  is 
hardly  possible  in  a  translation  to  preserve  the  majesty  and  balance 
of  this  remarkable  opening  sentence  of  the  Epistle.  It  must  be  re- 
garded as  one  of  the  most  pregnant  and  noble  passages  of  Scripture. 
The  author  does  not  beghi,  as  St  Paul  invariably  does,  with  a  greeting 
which  is  almost  invariably  followed  by  a  thanksgiving ;  but  at  once,  and 
without  preface,  he  strikes  the  key-note,  by  stating  the  thesis  which  he  in- 
tends to  prove.  His  object  is  to  secure  his  Hel^rew  readers  against  the 
peril  of  an  apostasy  to  which  they  were  tempted  by  the  delay  of  Christ's 
personal  return,  by  the  persecutions  to  which  they  were  subjected, 
and  by  the  splendid  memories  and  exalted  claims  oi  the  religion  in 
which  they  had  been  trained.  He  wishes  therefore,  not  only  to 
v/arn  and  exhort  them,  but  also  to  prove  that  Christianity  is  a  Co- 
venant indefinitely  superior  to  the  Covenant  of  Judaism,  alike  in 
its  Agents  and  its  Results.  The  words  "How  much  more,''''  "A  better 
covenant,''''  "a    more  excellent  name,"  might  be  regarded  as  the  key- 


52  HEBREWS,   I.  [v.  2. 

notes  ofthe  Epistle  (iii.  3,  vii.  19,  20,  22,  viii.  6,  ix.  23,  x.  34,  xi.  40,  xii.  24, 
&c.)-  In  many  respects,  it  is  not  so  much  a  letter  as  an  address. 
Into  these  opening  verses  he  has  compressed  a  world  of  meaning, 
and  has  also  strongly  brought  out  the  conceptions  of  the  contrast 
between  the  Old  and  New  Dispensations— -a  contrast  which  involves 
the  vast  superiority  of  the  latter.  Literally,  the  sentence  may  be 
rendered,  "  In  many  portions  and  in  many  ways,  God  having  of  old 
spoken  to  the  fathers  in  the  prophets,  at  the  end  of  these  days  spake 
to  us  in  a  Son."  It  was  God  who  spoke  in  both  dispensations;  of 
old  and  in  the  present  epoch :  to  the  fathers  and  to  us ;  to  them  in  the 
Prophets,  to  us  in  a  Son;  to  them  "in  many  portions"  and  therefore 
"fragmentarily,"  but — as  the  whole  Epistle  is  meant  to  shew — to  us 
with  a  full  and  complete  revelation;  to  them  "in  many  ways,"  "mul- 
tifariously," but  to  us  in  one  way — namely  by  revealing  Himself  in 
human  nature,  and  becoming  "a  Man  with  men." 

God]  In  this  one  word,  which  admits  the  divine  origin  of  Mosaism, 
the  writer  makes  an  immense  concession  to  the  Jews.  Such  expressions 
as  St  Paul  had  used  in  the  fervour  of  controversy — when  for  instance 
he  spoke  of  "the  Law"  as  consisting  of  "weak  and  beggarly  ele- 
ments"— tended  to  alienate  the  Jews  by  utterly  shocking  their  preju- 
dices; and  in  very  early  ages,  as  we  see  from  the  "  Epistle  of  Barnabas" 
some  Christians  had  developed  a  tendency  to  speak  of  Judaism  with  an 
extreme  disparagement,  which  culminated  in  the  Gnostic  attribution  of 
the  Old  Testament  to  an  inferior  and  even  malignant  Deity,  whom  they 
called  "the  Demiurge."  The  author  shared  no  such  feelings.  In  all 
his  sympathies  he  shews  himself  a  Hebrew  of  the  Hebrews,  and  at  the 
very  outset  he  speaks  of  the  Old  Dispensation  as  coming  from  God. 

■who\  There  is  no  relative  in  the  Greek.  Instead  of  "  who. ..spake... 
hath  spoken...  "  the  force  of  the  original  would  be  better  conveyed 
by  "  having  spoken... spake." 

ai  sundry  titties']  In  the  Greek,  one  vfotd  pohimeros  "in  many 
parts."  The  nearest  English  representative  of  the  word  is  "frag- 
mentarily," which  is  not  meant  as  a  term  of  absolute  but  only  of 
relative  disparagement.  It  has  never  been  God's  method  to  reveal  all 
His  relations  to  mankind  at  once.  He  revealed  Himself  "in  many 
portions."  He  lifted  the  veil  fold  by  fold.  First  came  the  Adamic 
dispensation;  then  the  Noahic;  then  the  Abrahamic;  then  the  Mosaic; 
then  that  widening  and  deepening  system  of  truth  of  which  the  Prophets 
were  ministers;  then  the  yet  more  advanced  and  elaborate  scheme 
which  dates  from  Ezra  ;—they?«a/ revelation,  the  "fulness"  of  revealed 
truth  came  with  the  Gospel.  Each  of  these  systems  was  indeed  frag- 
mentary, and  therefore  (so  far)  imperfect,  and  yet  it  was  the  best  possible 
system  with  reference  to  the  end  in  view,  which  was  the  education 
of  the  human  race  in  the  love  and  knowledge  of  God.  The  first  great 
truth  which  God  prominently  revealed  was  Hi?  Unity;  then  came  the 
earliest  germ  of  the  Messianic  hope ;  then  cam.  the  Moral  Law ;  then 
the  development  of  Messianism  and  the  belief  in  Immortality.  Isaiah 
and  Ezekiel,  Zechariah  and  Malachi,  the  son  of  Sirach  and  John  the 
Baptist,  had  each  his  several  "  portion  "  and  element  of  truth  to  reveal. 
But  all  the  sevenfold  rays  were  united  in  the  pure  and  perfect  light 


V.  2.]  HEBREWS,   I.  53 

when  God  had  given  us  His  Son ;  and  when,  by  the  inbreathing  of  the 
Spirit,  He  had  made  us  partakers  of  Himself,  the  last  era  of  revelation 
had  arrived.  To  this  final  revelation  there  can  be  no  further  addition, 
though  it  m.ay  be  granted  to  age  after  age  more  and  more  fully  to 
comprehend  it.  Complete  in  itself,  it  yet  works  as  the  leaven,  and 
grows  as  the  grain  of  mustard  seed,  and  brightens  and  broadens  as 
the  Dawn.  Yet  even  the  Christian  Revelation  is  itself  but  "a  part;" 
"we  know  in  part  and  prophesy,"  says  St  Paul,  "in  part."  Man, 
being  finite,  is  only  capable  of  partial  knowledge. 

in  divers  mattfters]  The  "sundry"  and  "divers"  of  our  A.  V. 
are  only  due  to  the  professed  fondness  for  variety  which  King  James's 
translators  regarded  as  a  merit.  The  "many  manners"  of  the  older 
revelation  were  Law  and  Prophecy,  Type  and  Allegory,  Promise  and 
Threatening;  the  diverse  individuality  of  many  of  the  Prophets,  Seers, 
Warriors,  Kings,  who  were  agents  of  the  revelation;  the  method  of 
various  sacrifices  ;  the  messages  which  came  by  Urim,  by  dreams,  by 
waking  visions,  and  "face  to  face"  (see  Num.  xii.  6;  Ps.  Ixxxix.  19; 
Hosea  xii.  10;  2  Pet.  i.  21).  The  mouthpiece  of  the  revelation  was 
now  a  Gentile  sorcerer,  now  a  royal  sufferer,  now  a  rough  ascetic,  now 
a  polished  priest,  now  a  gatherer  of  sycomore  fruit.  Thus  the  separate 
revelations  were  not  complete  but  partial;  and  the  methods  not  simple 
but  complex. 

spake]  This  verb  (lalein)  is  often  used,  especially  in  this  Epistle,  of 
Divine  revelations  (ii.  2,  3,  iii.  5,  vii.  14,  &c.). 

in  time  past]  Malachi  the  last  Prophet  of  the  Old  Covenant  had  died 
more  than  four  centuries  before  Christ. 

tmfo  the  fathers]  That  is  to  the  Jews  of  old.  The  writer,  a  Jew 
in  all  his  sympathies,  leaves  unnoticed  throughout  this  Epistle  the  very 
existence  of  the  Gentiles.  As  a  friend  and  follower  of  St  Paul  he  of 
course  recognised  the  call  of  the  Gentiles  to  equal  privileges,  but  the 
demonstration  of  their  prerogatives  had  already  been  furnished  by  St 
Paul  with  a  force  and  fulness  to  which  nothing  could  be  added.  This 
writer,  addressing  Jews,  is  not  in  any  way  thinking  of  the  Gentiles. 
To  him  "the  people"  means  exclusively  "  the  people  of  God"  in  the 
old  sense,  namely  Israel  after  the  flesh.  It  is  hardly  conceivable  that 
St  Paul,  who  was  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  and  whose  writings  were 
mainly  addressed  to  them,  and  written  to  secure  their  Gospel  privileges, 
should,  even  in  a  single  letter,  have  so  completely  left  them  out  of 
sight  as  this  author  does.  On  the  other  hand  he  always  tries  to  shew 
his  "  Hebrew "  readers  that  their  conversion  does  not  involve  any 
sudden  discontinuity  in  the  religious  history  of  their  race. 

by  the  pj-ophcts]  Rather,  "m  the  Prophets."  It  is  true  that  the 
^^  by"  may  be  only  a  Hebraism,  representing  the  Hebrew  II  in  i  Sam. 
xxviii.  6;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  2.  We  find  ev  '^  in"  used  of  agents  in  Matt. 
ix.  34,  "/«  the  Prince  of  the  demons  casteth  He  out  demons,"  and 
in  Acts  xvii.  31.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  writer  may  have  meant 
the  preposition  to  be  taken  in  its  proper  sense,  to  imply  that  the 
Prophets  were  only  the  organs  of  the  revelation;  so  that  it  is  more 
emphatic  than  5ia,  "by  means  of."  The  same  thought  may  be  in  his 
mind  as  in  that  of  Philo  when  he    says  that    "the  Prophet  is  an  in- 


54  HEBREWS,   I.  [v.  2. 

last  days  spoken  unto  us  by  his  Son,  whom  he  hatli  ap- 

lerpreter,  while  God  from  within  whispers  what  he  should  utter." 
"The  Prophets,"  says  St  Thomas  Aquinas,  "did  not  speak  of  them- 
selves, but  God  spoke  in  them."  Comp.  1  Cor.  xiii.  3.  The  word 
Prophets  is  here  taken  in  that  larger  sense  which  includes  Abraham, 
Moses,  &c. 

2.  Hath...spoken'\  Rather,  "spake."  The  whole  revelation  is 
ideally  summed  up  in  the  one  supreme  moment  of  the  Incarnation. 
This  aoristic  mode  of  speaking  of  God's  dealings,  and  of  the  Christian 
life,  as  single  acts,  is  common  throughout  the  New  Testament,  and 
especially  in  St  Paul,  and  conveys  the  thought  that 

"Are,  and  were,  and  will  be  are  but  is 
And  all  creation  is  one  act  at  once." 

The  word  "spoke"  is  here  used  in  its  fullest  and  deepest  meaning  of 
Him  whose  very  name  is  "the  Word  of  God."  It  is  true  that  this 
author,  unlike  St  John,  does  not  actually  apply  the  Alexandrian  term 
"  Logos"  ("Word")  to  Christ,  but  it  always  seems  to  be  in  his  thoughts, 
and,  so  to  speak,  to  be  trembling  on  his  lips.  The  essential  and  ideal 
Unity  which  dominated  over  the  "many  parts"  and  "many  modes" 
of  the  older  revelation  is  implied  in  the  most  striking  way  by  the  fact 
that  it  was  the  same  God  who  spake  to  the  Fathers  in  the  Prophets  and 
to  us  in  a  Son. 

in  these  last  days\  The  better  reading  (X,  A,  B,  D,  E,  &c.)  is  "at 
the  end  of  these  days."  The  phrase  represents  the  technical  Hebrew 
expression  be-acharith  ha-yihnii/i  (Num.  xxiv.  14).  The  Jews  divided 
the  religious  history  of  the  world  into  ^^  this  age"  {Olam  hazzeh)  and 
"the  future  age"  (Olam  habba).  The  "future  age"  was  the  one  which 
was  to  begin  at  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  whose  days  were  spoken 
of  by  the  Rabbis  as  "the  last  days."  But,  as  Christians  believed  that 
the  Messiah  had  now  come,  to  them  the  former  period  had  ended. 
They  were  practically  living  in  the  age  to  which  their  Jewish  contem- 
poraries alluded  as  the  "age  to  come"  (ii.  5,  vi.  5).  They  spoke  of  this 
epoch  as  "the  fulness  of  the  times"  (Gal.  iv.  4) ;  "the  last  days"  (Ja.  v, 
3);  "the  last  hour"  (i  John  ii.  18);  "the  crisis  of  rectification"  (Heb. 
ix.  to);  "the  close  of  the  ages"  (ix.  26).  And  yet,  even  to  Christians, 
there  was  one  aspect  in  which  the  new  Messianic  dispensation  was  still 
to  be  followed  by  "  a  future  age,"  because  the  kingdom  of  God  had  not 
yet  come  either  completely  or  in  its  final  development,  which  depended 
on  the  Second  Advent.  Hence  "the  last  crisis,"  "the  later  crises" 
(i  Pet.  i.  5  ;  I  Tim.  iv.  i)  are  still  in  the  future,  though  they  thought  that 
it  would  be  a  near  future;  after  which  would  follow  the  "rest,"  the 
"Sabbatism"  (Heb.  iv.  4,  ro,  11,  xi.  40,  xii.  28)  which  still  awaits  the 
people  of  God.  The  indistinctness  of  separation  between  "this  age" 
and  "  the  future  age"  arises  from  difTerent  views  as  to  the  period  in  which 
the  actual  "days  of  the  Messiah"  are  to  be  reckoned.  The  Rabbis  also 
sometimes  include  them  in  the  former,  sometimes  in  the  latter.  But  the 
writer  regarded  the  end  as  being  at  hand  (x.  13,  25,  37).     He  felt  that 


V.  2.]  HEBREWS,   I.  55 

pointed  heir  of  all  things,  by  whom  also  he  made  the  worlds ; 

the  former  dispensation  was  annulled  and  outworn,  and  anticipated 
rightly  that  it  could  not  have  many  years  to  run. 

by  his  Son\  Rather,  "in  a  Son."  The  contrast  is  here  the  7?f/a^?t?« 
rather  than  the  Person  of  Christ,  "  in  Him  who  was  a  Son."  The  pre- 
position "m"  is  here  most  applicable  in  its  strict  meaning,  because 
"in  Him  dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily."  "The 
Father,  that  dwelleth  in  me.  He  doeth  the  works"  (John  xiv.  ro).  The 
contrast  of  the  New  and  Old  is  expressed  by  St  John  (i.  17),  "  The  Law 
was  given  by  Moses,  but  grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ."  In 
Christ  all  the  fragments  of  previous  revelation  were  completed ;  all  the 
methods  of  it  concentrated ;  and  all  its  apparent  perplexities  and  con- 
tradictions solved  and  rendered  intelligible. 

he  hath  appomted'\  Rather,  "  He  appointed."  The  question  as  to 
the  special  act  of  God  thus  alluded  to,  is  hardly  applicable.  Our  tem- 
poral expressions  may  involve  an  inherent  absurdity  when  applied  to 
Him  whose  life  is  the  timeless  Now  of  Eternity  and  in  Whom  there  is 
neither  before  nor  after,  nor  variableness,  nor  shadow  cast  by  turning, 
but  Who  is  always  in  the  Meridian  of  an  unconditioned  Plenitude  {Ple- 
ronid).     See  Jas.  i.  17. 

heir  of  all  things']  Sonship  naturally  suggests  heirship  (Gal.  iv.  7) 
and  in  Christ  was  fulfilled  the  immense  promise  to  Abraham  that  his 
seed  should  be  heir  of  the  world.  The  allusion,  so  far  as  we  can  enter 
into  these  high  mysteries  of  Godhead,  is  to  Christ's  mediatorial  king- 
dom. We  only  darken  counsel  by  the  multitude  of  words  without 
knowledge  when  we  attempt  to  define  and  explain  the  relations  of  the 
Persons  of  the  Trinity  towards  each  other.  The  doctrine  of  the  trepi- 
Xwpr/trtj,  circuminsessio  or  communicatio  idiomatum  as  it  was  technically 
called — that  is  the  relation  of  Divinity  and  Humanity  as  effected 
within  the  Divine  Nature  itself  by  the  Incarnation — is  wholly  beyond 
the  limit  of  our  comprehension.  We  may  in  part  see  this  from  the  fact 
that  the  Son  Himself  is  (in  ver.  3)  represented  as  doing  what  in  this 
verse  the  Father  does.  But  that  the  Mediatorial  Kingdom  is  given  to 
the  Son  by  the  Father  is  distinctly  stated  in  John  iii.  35;  Matt,  xxviii. 
r8  (comp.  ii.  6 — 8  and  Ps.  ii.  8). 

by  whom]  i.e.  "by  whose  means;"  "by  whom,  as  His  agent."  Comp. 
"All  things  were  made  by  Him  "  (i.e.  by  the  Word)  (John  i.  3). 
"By  Him  were  all  things  created"  (Col.  i.  16).  "By  Whom  are  all 
things"  (i  Cor.  viii.  6).  What  the  Alexandrian  theosophy  attributed  to 
the  Logos,  had  been  attributed  to  "Wisdom"  (see  Prov.  viii.  22 — 31) 
in  what  was  called  the  Chokhmah  or  the  Sapiential  literature  of  the 
Jews.  Christians  were  therefore  familiar  with  the  doctrine  that  Crea- 
tion was  the  work  of  the  Prse-existent  Christ;  which  helps  to  explain 
verses  10 — 12.  We  find  in  Philo,  "You  will  discover  that  the  cause  of 
it  (the  world)  is  God... and  the  Instrument  the  Word  of  God,  by  whom 
it  was  equipped  {kateskeuasthe)"  De  Cherub.  (0pp.  I.  i6'2);  and  again 
"  But  the  shadow  of  God  is  His  Word,  whom  lie  used  as  an  Instru- 
ment in  making  the  World,"  De  Leg.  Alleg.  (Opp.  I.  106). 


56  HEBREWS,   I.  [v.  3. 

3  who  being  the  brightness  of  his  glory,  and  the  express  image 

alsol  He  who  was  the  heir  of  all  things  was  also  the  agent  in  their 
creation. 

he  tnade  the  ivorlds\  Literally,  "the  aeons"  or  "ages."  This  word 
"aeon"  was  used  by  the  later  Gnostics  to  describe  the  various  "ema- 
nations" by  which  they  tried  at  once  to  widen  and  to  bridge  over  the 
chasm  between  the  Human  and  the  Divine.  Over  that  imaginary 
chasm  St  John  had  thrown  the  one  wide  arch  of  the  Incarnation  when 
he  wrote  "the  Word  became  flesh."  In  the  N.T,  the  word  "aeons" 
never  has  this  Gnostic  meaning.  In  the  singular  the  word  means 
"an  age;"  in  the  plural  it  sometimes  means  "ages"  like  the  Hebrew 
olamhn.  Here  it  is  used  in  its  Rabbinic  and  post-biblical  sense  of 
"the  world"  as  in  xi.  3,  Wisd.  xiii.  Q,  and  as  in  i  Tim.  i.  17  where 
God  is  called  "the  king  of  the  world"  (comp.  Tob.  xiii.  6).  The  word 
kosmos  (x.  5)  means  "the  material  world"  in  its  order  and  beauty; 
the  word  atones  means  the  world  as  reflected  in  the  mind  of  man  and 
in  the  stream  of  his  spiritual  history;  oikoiiniene  (i.  6)  means  "the 
inhabited  world." 

3.  the  brightness]  The  substitution  of  "effulgence"  for  "bright- 
ness" in  the  Revised  Version  is  not,  as  it  has  been  contemptuously 
called,  "a  piece  of  finery,"  but  is  a  rendering  at  once  more  accurate 
and  more  suggestive.  It  means  "efflux  of  light" — "Light  of  (i.e. 
from)  Light"  (^^  effulgentia"  not  ^^  repercussus")  Grotius.  It  implies 
not  only  resemblance — which  is  all  that  is  involved  in  the  vague  and 
misleading  word  "brightness,"  which  might  apply  to  a  mej-e  reflexion: 
—  but  also  "origin"  and  "independent  existence."  The  glory  of 
Christ  is  the  glory  of  the  Father  just  as  the  sun  is  only  revealed  by  the 
rays  whi'ch  stream  forth  from  it.  So  the  "Wisdom  of  Solomon"  (vii. 
26) — which  offers  many  resemblances  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
and  which  some  have  even  conjectured  to  be  by  the  same  author — 
speaks  of  wisdom  as  "the  effulgence  of  the  everlasting  light."  The 
word  is  also  found  in  Philo  where  it  is  applied  to  man.  This  pas- 
sage, like  many  others  in  the  Epistle,  is  quoted  by  St  Clement  of 
Rome  (ad  Cor,  36). 

of  his  glory\  God  was  believed  in  the  Old  Dispensation  to  reveal 
Himself  by  a  cloud  of  glory  called  "the  Shechinah,"  and  the  Alexan- 
drian Jews,  in  their  anxious  avoidance  of  all  anthropomorphism  and 
anthropopathy — i.e.  of  all  expressions  which  attribute  the  human  form 
and  human  passions  to  God — often  substituted  "  the  Glory"  for  the  name 
of  God.  Similarly  in  1  Pet.  i.  17  the  Voice  from  God  the  Father  is  a 
Voice  "from  the  magnificent  glory."  Comp.  Acts  vii.  55;  Lk.  ii.  9. 
St  John  says  "God  is  Light,"  and  the  indestructible  purity  and  impal- 
pable essence  of  Light  make  it  the  best  of  all  created  things  to  furnish 
an  analogy  for  the  supersensuous  light  and  spiritual  splendour  of  the 
Being  of  God.  Hence  St  John  also  says  of  the  Word  "we  beheld  His 
glory"  (i.  14);  and  our  Lord  said  to  Philip  "he  who  hath  seen  Me 
hath  seen  the  Father"  (xiv.  9).     Comp.  Lk.  ix.  29. 

the  express  image]     Rather,    "the    stamp"  {character).     The   R.  V. 


V.  3-]  HEBREWS,   I.  57 

of  his    person,    and  upholding  all  things  by  the  word  of 

renders  this  word  by  "very  image"  (after  Tyndale),  and  in  the  margin 
by  "impress."  I  prefer  the  word  "stamp"  because  the  Greek  ^'cha- 
1-acter"  like  the  English  word  "stamp,"  may,  according  to  its  derivation, 
be  used  either  for  the  impress  or  for  the  stamping-tool  itself.  This 
Epistle  has  so  many  resemblances  to  Philo  that  the  word  may  have 
been  suggested  by  a  passage  (0pp.  i.  332)  in  which  Philo  compares 
man  to  a  coin  which  has  been  stamped  by  the  Logos  with  the  being  and 
type  of  God ;  and  in  that  passage  the  word  seems  to  bear  this  unusual 
sense  of  a  "stamping- tool,"  for  it  impresses  a  man  with  the  mark 
of  God.  Similarly  St  Paul  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  (i.  15)  — 
which  most  resembles  this  Epistle  in  its  Christology — called  Christ  "the 
image  {eikon)  of  the  invisible  God;"  and  Philo  says,  "But  the  word  is 
the  image  (eikon)  of  God,  by  Whom  the  whole  world  was  created,"  De 
Monarcii.  (0pp.  II.  ii^). 

of  his  person'^  Rather,  "of  His  substance"  or  "essence."  The 
word  hypostasis,  substantia  (literally  that  which  " statids  under'")  is,  in 
philosophical  accuracy,  the  imaginary  substratum  which  remains  when  a 
thing  is  regarded  apart  from  all  its  accidents.  The  word  "person"  of 
our  A.  V.  is  rather  the  equivalent  \.o  prosopon.  Hypostasis  only  came  to 
be  used  in  this  sense  some  centuries  later.  Perhaps  "Being"  or  "Es- 
sence," though  it  corresponds  more  strictly  to  the  Greek  ousia,  is  the 
nearest  representative  which  we  can  find  to  hypostasis,  now  that  "sub- 
stance," once  the  most  abstract  and  philosophical  of  words,  has  come 
(in  ordinary  language)  to  mean  what  is  solid  and  concrete.  It  is  only 
too  possible  that  the  word  "substance  "  conveys  to  many  minds  the  very 
opposite  conception  to  that  which  was  intended  and  which  alone  corre- 
sponds to  the  truth.  Athanasius  says,  "-Hypostasis  is  essence"  [oixrla); 
and  the  Nicene  Council  seems  to  draw  no  real  distinction  between  the 
two  words.  In  fact  the  Western  Church  admitted  that,  in  the  Eastern 
sense,  we  might  speak  of  three  hypostaseis  of  the  Trinity ;  and  in  the 
Western  sense,  of  one  hypostasis,  because  in  this  sense  the  word  meant 
Essence.  For  the  use  of  the  word  in  the  LXX.  see  Ps.  xxxviii.  6, 
Ixxxviii.  48.  It  is  curiously  applied  in  Wisd.  xvi.  21.  In  the  technical 
language  of  theology  these  two  clauses  represent  the  Son  as  co-eternal 
and  co-substantial  with  the  Father. 

upholding  all  things']  He  is  not  only  the  Creative  Word,  but  the 
Sustaining  Providence.  He  is,  as  Philo  says,  "the  chain-band  of  all 
things,"  but  He  is  also  their  guiding  force.  "In  Him  all  things  sub- 
sist" (Col.  i.  17).  Philo  calls  the  Logos  "the  pilot  and  steersman  of 
everything." 

by  the  zvord  of  his  power']  Rather,  "by  the  utterance  {rhcmati)  of 
His  power."  It  is  better  to  keep  "word"  for  Logos,  and  "utterance" 
for  rheina.  We  find  "  strength"  (Kparos)  and  "force"  {laiQi^)  attributed 
to  Christ  in  Eph.  vi.  10,  as  "power"  (Su^a/its)  here. 

when  he  had  by  himself  purged  our  sins]  Rather,  "after  making 
purification  of  sins."  The  "by  Himself"  is  omitted  by  some  of  the  best 
MSS.  (K,  A,  B),  and  the  "our"  by  many.     But  the  notion  of  Christ's 


58  HEBREWS,   I.  [v.  4- 

his    power,    when    he    had    by   himself   purged    our   sins, 

sat    down    on   the    right   hand   of  the    Majesty   on  high; 

4  being  made   so  much    better  than  the  angels,  as  he  hath 

independent  action  (Phil.  ii.  7)  is  involved  in  the  middle  voice  of  the  verb. 
On  the  purification  of  our  sins  by  Christ  (in  which  there  is  perhaps  a 
slight  reference  to  the  "  Day  of  Atonement,"  called  in  the  LXX_._"the 
Day  of  Purification"  Ex.  xxix.  36),  see  ix.  12,  x.  12;  i  Pet.  ii.  24; 
2  Pet.  i.  9  (comp.  Job.  vii.  21,  LXX.). 

sat  down]  His  glorification  was  directly  consequent  on  His  voluntary 
humiliation  (see  viii.  i,  x.  12,  xii.  2  ;  Ps.  cix.  1),  and  here  the  whole 
description  is  brought  to  its  destined  climax. 

on  the  right  hand]  K's.  the  place  of  honour  comp.  viii.  i ;  Ps.  ex.  1  •, 
Eph.  i.  20.  The  controversy  as  to  whether  "the  right  hand  of  God" 
means  "everywhere" — which  was  called  the  "Ubiquitarian  controversy" 
—is  wholly  destitute  of  meaning,  and  has  long  fallen  into  deserved  ob- 
livion. ^     J  ,,      T> 

of  the  Majesty]  In  x.  12  he  says  "  at  the  right  hand  of  God.  But 
he  was  evidently  fond  of  sonorous  amplifications,  which  belong  tothe 
dignity  of  his  style ;  and  also  fond  of  Alexandrian  modes  of  expression. 
The  LXX.  sometimes  went  so  far  as  to  substitute  for  "  God"  the  phrase 
"the//rtc«"  where  God  stood  (see  Ex.  xxiv.  10,  LXX.). 

on  high]  Literally,  "in  high  places;"  like  "Glory  to  God  in  the^ 
highest"  Lk.  ii.  14  (comp.  Job  xvi.  19);  and  "in  heavenly  places," 
Eph.  i.  10  (comp.  Ps.  xciii.  4,  cxii.  5).  The  description  of  Christ  in 
these  verses  differed  from  the  current  Messianic  conception  of  the  Jews 
in  two  respects,  i.  He  was  divine  and  omnipotent.  2.  He  was  to 
die  for  our  sins.  ^^ 

4.  being  made]  Rather,  "becoming,"  or  '' proving  himself  to  be. 
The  allusion  is  to  the  Redemptive  Kingdom  of  Christ,  and  the  word 
merely  qualifies  the  "better  name."  Christ,  regarded  as  the  Agent  or 
Minister  of  the  scheme  of  Redemption,  became  mediatorially  superior  to 
the  Angel-ministrants  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  as  He  always  was  superior 
to  them  in  dignity  and  essence. 

so  mnch]  The  familiar  classical  oo-y...TO(royTy  (involving  the__Com- 
parison  and  contrast  which  runs  throughout  this  Epistle,  iii.  3,  vii.  20, 
viii.  6,  ix.  27,  x.  25)  is  not  found  once  in  St  Paul. 

better]  This  word,  common  as  it  is,  is  only  thrice  used  by  St  Paul 
(and  then  somewhat  diff'erently),  but  occurs  13  times  in  this  Epistle  alone 
(vi.  9,  vii.  7,  19,  22,  viii.  6,  ix.  23,  x.  34,  xi.  16,  35,  40,  xii.  24). 

so  much  better  than  the  angels]  The  writer's  object  in  entering  upon 
the  proof  of  this  fact  is  not  to  check  the  tendency  of  incipient  Gnostics 
to  ivorship  Angels.  Of  this  there  is  no  trace  here,  though  St  Paul  in  his 
letter  to  the  Colossians,  raised  a  warning  voice  against  it.  Herethe 
object  is  to  shew  that  the  common  Jewish  boast  that  "they  had  received 
the  law  by  the  disposition  of  Angels"  involved  no  disparagement  to  the 
Gospel  which  had  been  ministered  by  One  who  was  "far  above  all 
principality,  and  power,  and  might,  and  dominion,  and  every  name  that 


V.  5-]  HEBREWS,    I.  59 

by  inheritance  obtained  a  more  excellent  name  than  they. 
For    unto    which    of  the    angels    said    he    at    any    time,  s 

is  named,  not  only  in  this  world,  but  also  in  that  which  is  to  come" 
(Eph.  i.  ii).  Many  Jews  held,  with  Philo,  that  the  Decalogue  alone 
had  been  uttered  by  God,  and  that  all  the  rest  of  the  Law  had  been 
spoken  by  Angels.  The  extreme  development  of  Jewish  Angelology  at 
this  period  may  be  seen  in  the  Book  of  Enoch.  They  are  there  called 
"the  stars,"  "the  white  ones,"  "the  sleepless  ones."  St  Clement  of 
Rome  found  it  necessary  to  reproduce  this  argument  in  writing  to  the 
Corinthians,  and  the  4th  Book  of  Esdras  illustrates  the  tendency  of  mind 
which  it  was  desirable  to  counteract. 

hath  by  inheritance  obtaitted]  Rather,  "hath  inherited."  Comp. 
Lk.  i.  32,  35.  "Wherefore  God  also  hath  highly  exalted  Him  and 
given  Him  a  name  which  is  above  every  name"  (Phil.  ii.  9).  He  does 
not  here  seem  to  be  speaking  of  the  eternal  generation.  Christ  inherits 
His  more  excellent  name,  not  as  the  Eternal  Son,  but  as  the  God-Man. 
Possibly  too  the  writer  uses  the  word  "inherited"  with  tacit  reference 
to  the  prophetic  promises. 

a  more  e.xcellent  name  than  they]  Not  here  the  name  of  "the  only- 
begotten  Son  of  God"  (John  iii.  18),  which  is  in  its  fulness  "a  name 
which  no  one  knoweth  save  Himself"  (Rev.  xix.  12),  The  "name"  in 
Scripture  often  indeed  implies  the  inmost  essence  of  a  thing.  If,  then, 
with  some  commentators  we  suppose  the  allusion  to  be  to  this  Eternal 
and  Essential  name  of  Christ  we  must  understand  the  word  "  inherit- 
ance" as  merely  phenomenal,  the  manifestation  to  our  race  of  a  prse- 
existent  fact.  In  that  view  the  glory  indicated  by  the  name  belonged 
essentially  to  Christ,  and  His  work  on  earth  only  manifested  the  name 
by  which  it  was  known.  This  is  perhaps  better  than  to  follow  St 
Chrysostom  in  explaining  "inherited"  to  mean  "always  possessed  as 
His  own."  Comp.  Lk.  i.  32,  "He  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  the 
Highest." 

)nore  excellent... than]  This  construction  (Trapa  after  a  comparative) 
is  not  found  once  in  St  Paul's  Epistles,  but  several  times  in  this  Epistle 
(i.  4,  ii.  9,  iii.  3,  ix.  23,  xi.  4,  xii.  24).  It  should  be  observed,  as  bearing 
on  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle,  that  in  these  four  verses  alone  there 
are- no  less  than  six  expressions  and  nine  constructions  which  find  no — or 
no  exact — parallel  in  St  Paul's  Epistles. 

5 — 14.     Illustrations  from  Scripture  of  the  superiority  of 
Christ  to  Angels. 

5.  For]  The  following  paragraphs  prove  "the  more  excellent  name." 
By  His  work  on  earth  the  God-man  Christ  Jesus  obtained  that  superiority 
of  place  in  the  order  and  hierarchy  of  salvation  which  made  Him  better 
than  the  Angels,  not  only  in  intrinsic  dignity  but  in  relation  to  the 
redemption  of  man.  In  other  words  the  universal  heirship  of  Christ 
is  here  set  forth  "  not  as  a  metaphysical  but  as  a  dispensational  pre- 
rogative." That  it  should  be  nccessaiy  for  the  writer  to  enter  upon  a 
proof  of  this  may  well  seem  strange  to  us;  but  that  it  waj-  necessary  is 


6o  HEBREWS,   I.  [v.  5. 

Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  begotten   thee? 

proved  by  the  earnestness  with  which  he  devotes  himself  to  the  task. 
To  us  the  difficulty  lies  in  the  mode  of  proof,  not  in  the  result  arrived 
at ;  but  his  readers  were  unconvinced  of  the  result,  while  they  would 
have  freely  admitted  the  validity  of  this  method  of  reasoning.  The  line  of 
proof  has  been  thoroughly  studied  by  Dr  W.  Robertson  Smith,  in  some 
papers  published  in  the  Expositor  for  1881,  to  which  I  am  indebted 
for  several  suggestions.  "There  is  nothing  added,"  he  says,  "to  the 
intrinsic  superiority  of  Christ's  being,  but  He  occupies  towards  us  a 
position  higher  than  the  angels  ever  held.  The  whole  argument  turns, 
not  on  personal  dignity,  but  on  dignity  of  function  in  the  administration 
of  the  economy  of  salvation."  It  may  be  due  to  this  Epistle  that  we 
find  in  later  Jewish  books  (like  the  Jalknt  Shimeoni)  such  sentences  as 
"The  King  Messiah  shall  be  exalted  above  Abraham,  Moses,  and  the 
Ministering  Angels"  (see  Schottgen,  p.  905). 

For  tinto  which  of  the  angels  said  he  at  any  time'X  The  "  He"  is  God. 
This  indirect  mode  of  reference  to  God  is  common  in  the  Rabbinic 
writings.  The  argument  here  is  from  the  silence  of  Scripture,  as  in 
i.  13,  ii.  16,  vii.  13,  14. 

Thou  art  my  Son... '\  The  quotation  is  from  Ps.  ii.  7  (comp.  Ps.  Ixxxix. 
20,  26,  27).  The  author  does  not  need  to  pause  in  order  to  prove  that 
this,  and  the  other  passages  which  he  quotes,  apply  to  the  Christ ;  still 
less  to  prove  that  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God.  All  Christians  held  the 
second  point;  the  first  point  would  have  been  at  once  conceded  by 
every  Jewish  reader.  Many  of  the  Jews  adopted  the  common  view  of 
the  Rabbis  that  everything  in  the  Old  Testament  prophecies  might  be 
applied  to  the  Messiah.  St  Peter,  in  Acts  xiii.  33,  also  applies  this 
verse  to  Christ,  and  the  great  Rabbis,  Kimchi  and  Rashi,  admit  that 
the  Psalm  was  accepted  in  a  Messianic  sense  in  ancient  days._  The 
Divinity  of  Christ  was  a  truth  which  the  writer  might  assume  in  ad- 
dressing Christians. 

It  must  therefore  be  observed  that  these  passages  are  not  advanced  as 
proofs  that  Jesus  was  the  Son  of  God— which,  as  Christians,  the  readers 
in  no  wise  disputed — but  as  arguments  ad  hominem  and  ex  concessis.  In 
other  words  they  were  arguments  to  those  whom  the  writer  had  irrimc- 
diately  in  view,  and  who  had  no  doubt  as  to  the  premisses  on  which  he 
based  his  reasoning.  He  had  to  confirm  a  vacillating  and  unprogressive 
faith  (vi.  12,  xii.  25),  not  to  convince  those  who  disputed  the  central 
truths  of  Christianity. 

Our  own  conviction  on  these  subjects  rests  primarily  upon  historical 
and  spiritual  grounds,  and  only  depends  in  a  very  subordinate  degree  on 
indirect  Scriptural  applications.  Yet  even  as  regards  these  we  cannot 
but  see  that,  while  the  more  sober-minded  interpreters  have  always  ad- 
mitted that  there  was  a.  primary  historic  mem\ngm  the  passages  quoted, 
and  that  they  were  addressed  in  the  first  instance  to  David,  Solomon, 
&c.,  yet  (i)  there  is  a  "pre-established  harmony"  between  the  language 
used  and  its  fulfilment  in  Christ;  (2)  the  language  is  often  so  far  beyond 
the  scope  of  its  immediate  application  that  it  points  to  an  ideal  and 


V.  5-]  HEBREWS,  1.  6i 

And  again,   I  will  be   to  him  a  Father,  and  he  shall 

distant  fulfilment ;  (3)  it  was  interpreted  for  many  centuries  before 
Christ  in  a  Messianic  sense ;  (4)  that  Messianic  sense  has  been  amply- 
justified  by  the  slow  progress  of  history.  There  is  surely  some  medium 
between  regarding  these  passages  as  soothsaying  vaticinations,  definitely 
and  consciously  recognised  as  such  by  their  writers,  and  setting  them 
aside  as  though  they  contained  no  prophetic  element  at  all.  In  point 
of  fact  the  Jews  themselves  rightly  looked  on  them  as  mingling  the 
present  and  the  future,  the  kingly-theocratic  and  the  Messianic.  No 
one  will  enter  into  their  real  meaning  who  does  not  see  that  all  the 
best  Jewish  literature  was  in  the  highest  sense  prophetic.  It  centred 
in  that  magnificent  Messianic  hope  which  arose  immediately  from  the 
connexion  of  the  Jews  with  their  covenant  God,  and  which  elevated 
them  above  all  other  nations.  The  divine  character  of  this  confident 
hope  was  justified,  and  more  than  justified,  by  the  grandeur  of  its 
fulfilment.  Genuine,  simple,  historical  exegesis  still  leaves  room  in  the 
Old  Testament  for  a  glorious  and  demonstrable  Christology.  Although 
the  old  aphorism — N'oviim  Testaiiienttim  in  I'^etere  latet,  Vetus  in  Nozo 
patet—h&s  often  been  extravagantly  abused  by  allegoric  interpreters, 
every  instructed  Christian  will  admit  its  fundamental  truth.  The  germ 
of  a  highly-developed  Messianic  prophecy  was  involved  from  the  first 
in  the  very  idea  of  a  theocracy  and  a  separated  people. 

this  day  have  I  begotten  thee]  St  Paul  says  (Rom.  i.  4)  that  Jesus  was 
"determined"  or  "constituted"  (6pi(jdiuTo%)  Son  of  God,  with  power, 
l>y  resurrection  from  the  dead.  The  aorist  in  that  passage  points  to  a 
definite  time — the  Resurrection  (comp.  Acts  xiii.  33).  In  other  senses 
the  expression  "to-day"  might  be  applied  to  the  Incarnation  (Lk.  i. 
31),  or  to  the  Ascension,  or  to  the  Eternal  Generation.  The  latter  ex- 
planation however, — which  explains  "to-day"  of  "God's  eternal  now" 
the  iiHitc  stans  of  eternity — though  adopted  by  Origen  (who  finely  says 
that  in  God's  "to-day"  there  is  neither  morning  nor  evening)  and  by  St 
Augustine — is  probably  one  of  the  "afterthoughts  of  theology."  Calvin 
stigmatises  it  as  a  "frivola  Aiignstini  argutia"  but  the  strongest  argu- 
ment in  its  favour  is  that  Philo  has  a  somewhat  similar  conception. 
The  words,  however,  originally  applied  to  the  day  of  David's  complete 
inauguration  as  king  upon  Mount  Sion.  No  one  time  can  apply  to  the 
Eternal  Generation,  and  the  adoption  of  Philo's  notion  that  "to-day" 
means  "for  ever,"  and  that  "  all  Eternity"  is  God's  to-day  would  here 
be  out  of  place.  Possibly  the  "  to-day  "  is  only,  so  to  speak,  an  acci- 
dental part  of  the  quotation  :  in  other  words  it  may  belong  rather  to  the 
literal  and  primary  prophecy  than  to  its  Messianic  application.  The 
Church  shews  that  she  understood  the  word  "  to-day  "  to  apply  to  the 
Resurrection  by  appointing  the  second  psalm  as  one  of  the  special 
psalms  for  Easter-day. 

/  will  be  to  him  a  Father]  2  Sam.  vii.  14  (LXX.).  The  words  were 
primarily  applicable  to  Solomon,  but  the  quotation  would  not,  without 
further  argument,  have  helped  forward  the  writer's  end  if  he  had  not 
been  able  to  assume  with  confidence  that  none  of  his  readers  would  dis- 


62  HEBREWS,   I.  [v.  6. 

6  be   to    me    a    Son?      And   again,    when    he  bringeth  in 
the   firstbegotten    into   the   world,  he    saith,    And   let   all 

pule  his  typological  method  of  exegesis.  It  is  probable  that  the  pro- 
mise to  David  here  quoted  is  diiectly  connected  with  the  passage  just 
adduced  from  Ps.  ii. 

he  shall  be  to  me  a  Son^  The  quotation  (comp.  Philo  De  Leg. 
Allegor.  in.  8)  though  primarily  applied  to  Solomon,  has  the  wider 
sense  of  prophesying  the  advent  of  some  perfect  theocratic  king. 
The  "Angels"  it  might  be  objected  are  called  "Sons  of  God" 
in  Gen.  vi.  2;  Job  i.  6,  ii.  i,  xxxviii.  7;  Dan.  iii.  1^.  In  these 
passages,  however,  the  Alexandrian  manuscript  of  the  LXX.  which 
this  author  seems  to  have  used  (whereas  St  Paul  seems  to  quote  from 
another  type  of  manuscript — the  Vatican),  has  "angels"  and  not 
"sons."  If  it  be  further  urged  that  in  Ps.  xxix.  i,  Ixxxix.  7,  even  the 
Alexandrian  MS.  also  has  "sons"  we  must  suppose  either  that  the 
writer  means  to  distinguish  (i)  between  the  higher  and  lower  senses 
of  the  word  "  son  ;  "  or  (2)  between  "  Sons  of  Elohim  "  and  "  Sons  of 
Jehovah,''''  since  Elohim  is  so  much  lower  and  vaguer  a  name  for  God 
than  Jehovah,  that  not  only  Angels  but  even  human  beings  are  called 
Elohim;  or  (3)  that  he  did  not  regard  the  name  "  sons  "  as  in  any  way 
characteristic  of  angels.  He  shews  so  intimate  a  knowledge  of  the 
Psalms  that — on  this  ground  alone,  not  to  dwell  on  others — the  sup- 
position that  he  forgot  or  overlooked  these  passages  is  hardly  ad- 
missible. 

6.  And  again,  when  he  bringeth  iti  the  firstbegotten  into  the  world^ 
The  older  and  literal  rendering  is  as  in  the  R.  V.,  ^'and  when  he,  again, 
shall  have  brought  in...'"  The  A.  V.  takes  the  word  "again  "  (palin)  as 
merely  introducing  a  new  quotation,  as  in  ver.  5,  and  in  ii.  13,  iv,  5,  &c. 
The  word  "again,"  says  Bp.  Wordsworth,  serves  the  purpose  of  inverted 
commas  (see  Rom.  xv.  10 — 12).  In  that  case  it  is  displaced  by  an 
accidental  hyperbaton  or  trajection,  as  this  transmission  of  a  word  into 
another  clause  is  called.  If  however  the  "  again  "  belongs  to  the  verb 
it  can  only  be  explained  of  Christ's  second  coming  to  judge  the  world 
(Matt.  xxv.  31)  unless  the  writer,  assuming  the  point  of  view  of  the 
ancient  prophet,  alludes  to  the  Resurrection.  But  since  the  mere  dis- 
placement of  the  palin  is  certainly  possible,  it  is  better  to  accept  this 
simple  explanation  than  either  to  adopt  these  latter  theories  or  to 
suppose  that  there  had  been  some  previous  and  premundane  presentation 
of  the  Son  to  all  created  beings.  Hypotlieses  nan  Jingo  is  a  rule  even 
more  necessary  for  the  theologian  than  for  the  scientist. 

bringeth  in]  The  Greek  verb  is  in  the  aorist  subjunctive  {elffcLyciyrj), 
r.nd  means  "shall  have  brought  in,"  exactly  as  in  Ex.  xiii.  5,  1 1  (where 
the  same  word  occurs  in  the  LXX.)  and  as  in  Lk.  xvii  10,  "when  ye 
shall  have  done  all  that  is  commanded  you  "  [TroLricv^^)- 

the  firstbegotten]  Rather,  "first-born."  This  title  (see  Ps.  Ixxxix. 
27)  was  always  applied  in  a  Messianic  sense  to  Christ  as  "the  first-born 
of  all  creation"  (Col.  i.  15;  and  the  first-born  of  many  brethren  (ii. 
10,  11). 


V.  7-]  HEBREWS,    I.  63 

the   angels  of  God  worship  him.     And  of  the  angels  7 
he    saith,    Who    maketh    his   angels  spirits,    and  his 

into  the  world'\  The  Greek  word  here  used  is  not  kosmos  the  ma- 
terial world,  but  oikoujiiene  "the  habitable  world." 

he  saithl  The  language  of  the  Scriptures  is  regarded  as  a  permanent, 
continuous,  and  living  utterance  (iii.  7,  v.  6,  viii.  8,  9,  10,  x.  5,  &c.). 

And  let  all  the  angels  of  God  worsliip  him']  It  is  doubtful  whether 
the  quotation  is  from  Ps.  xcvii.  7  "worship  Him  all  ye  gods  {Elohim)" — 
where  the  word  Elohim  is  rendered  "  angels "  in  the  LXX.  as  in  Ps. 
viii.  5 — or  rather  from  Deut.  xxxii.  43,  where  there  is  an  "and,"  and 
where  the  LXX.  either  added  these  words  or  found  them  in  the  Hebrew 
text.  The  Messianic  application  of  the  word  is  natural  in  the  latter 
passage,  for  there  Jehovah  is  the  speaker,  and  if  the  '■^ him  "  is  applied  to 
the  ideal  Israel,  the  ideal  Israel  was  the  Jasher  or  "  upright  man,"  and 
was  the  type  of  the  Messiah.  The  Apostles  and  Evangelists  always 
describe  Christ  as  returning  "with  the  Holy  Angels"  (Matt.  xxv.  31; 
Mark  viii.  38),  and  describe  "  all  Angels  and  authorities  "  as  "  subject 
unto  Him"  (i  Pet.  iii.  22;  Rev.  v.  11 — 13). 

7.  And  of  the  angels  he  saith]  Rather,  "  And,  with  reference  to  the 
Angels,  He  saith."  He  has  shewn  that  the  title  of  "  Son  "  is  too 
special  and  too  super-eminent  to  be  ever  addressed  to  Angels ;  he  pro- 
ceeds to  shew  that  the  Angels  are  but  subordinate  ministers,  and  that 
often  God  clothes  them  with  "the  changing  gamient  of  natural  phe- 
nomena "  transforming  them,  as  it  were,  into  winds  and  flames. 

Who  viaketh  his  angels  spirits,  and  his  ministers  a  flame  of  fire] 
Rather,  "  who  maketh  His  Angels  winds,"  for  the  Angels  are  already 
"  spirits  "  (ver.  14).  This  must  be  the  meaning  here,  though  the  words 
might  also  be  rendered  "  Who  maketh  winds  His  messengers,  and  fiery 
flame  His  ministers."  This  latter  renderings  though  grammatically 
difficult,  accords  best  with  the  context  of  Ps.  civ.  4  where,  however,  the 
Targum  has  "  Who  maketh  His  messengers  swift  as  winds,  His  minis- 
ters strong  as  flaming  fire."  The  Rabbis  often  refer  to  the  fact  that 
God  makes  His  Angels  assume  any  form  He  pleases,  whether  men 
((ien.  xviii.  2)  or  women  (Zech.  v.  9)  or  wind  or  flame  (Ex.  iii.  2; 
2  K.  vi.  17).     Thus  Milton  says  : 

"  For  spirits  as  they  please 

Can  either  sex  assume,   or  both  ;    so  soft 

And  uncompounded  is  their  essence  pure ; 

Not  tied  or  manacled  with  joint  or  limb 

Nor  founded  on  the  brittle  strength  of  bones, 

Like  cumbrous  flesh;    but  in  what  shape  they  choose 

Dilated  or  condensed,   bright  or  obscure. 

Can  execute  their  aery  purposes." 

But  that  mutable  and"  fleeting  form  of  existence  which  is  the  glory  of 
the  Angels  would  be  an  inferiority  in  the  Son.  He  could  not  be  clothed, 
as  they  are  at  God's  will,  in  the  fleeting  robes  of  varying  material  phe- 
nomena.    Calvin,  therefore,  is  much  too  rash  and  hasty  when  he  says 


64  HEBREWS,   1.  [v.  8. 

ministers  a  flame  of  fire.  But  unto  the  Son  he  saith, 
Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  for  ever  and  ever:  a  sceptre 
of  righteousness    is   the   sceptre   of  thy   kingdom. 

that  the  writer  here  draws  his  citation  into  a  sense  which  does  not 
belong  to  it,  and  that  nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  the  original 
passage  has  nothing  to  do  with  angels.  With  a  wider  knowledge  of 
the  views  of  Philo,  and  other  Rabbis,  he  would  have  paused  before 
pronouncing  a  conclusion  so  sweepingly  dogmatic.  The  "  Hebrew  " 
readers  of  the  Epistle,  like  the  writer,  were  evidently  familiar  with 
Alexandrian  conceptions.  Now  in  Philo  there  is  no  sharp  distinction 
between  the  Logos  (\\ho  is  a  sort  of  non-incarnate  Messiah)  and  the 
Lojoi  who  are  sometimes  regarded  as  Angels  just  as  the  Logos  Himself 
is  sometimes  regarded  as  an  Archangel  (see  Siegfried's  Philo,  p.  22). 
The  Rabbis  too  explained  the  "  us  "  of  Gen.  i.  26  ("Let  us  make  man"') 
as  shewing  that  the  Angels  had  a  share  in  creation,  see  Sanhedrin,  p.  38, 
2.  Such  a  passage  as  Rev.  xix.  10  may  help  to  shew  the  reader  that  the 
proof  of  Christ's  exaltation  above  the  Angels  was  necessary. 

8.  But  unto  the  Son  he  saith]  Rather  "  But  of  (lit.,  with  reference 
to)  the  Son."  The  Psalm  (xlv.)  from  which  the  quotation  is  taken,  is 
called  in  the  LXX.  "A  song  for  the  beloved,"  and  has  been  Messiani- 
cally  interpreted  by  Jewish  as  well  as  Christian  expositors.  Hence  it 
is  chosen  as  one  of  the  special  Psalms  for  Christmas  Day. 

Thy  throne,  0  God,  is  for  ever  and  euer]  The  quotation  is  f^rom 
Ps.  xlv.  6,  7  (LXX.)  which  in  its  primary  and  historic  sense  is  a 
splendid  epithalamium  to  Solomon,  or  Joram,  or  some  theocratic  king 
of  David's  house.  But  in  the  idealism  and  hyperbole  of  its  expression  it 
pointed  forward  to  "  the  King  in  His  beauty."  "Thy  throne,  O  Elohim," 
is  the  rendering  which  seems  most  natural,  and  this  at  once  evidences 
the  mystic  and  ideal  character  of  the  language ;  for  though  judges  tind 
rulers  are  sometimes  collectively  and  indirectly  called  ^/<?-^/w  (Ex.  xxi.  6, 
xxii.  8;  Ps.  Ixxiii.;  John  x.  34—36)  yet  nothing  which  approaches 
a  title  so  exalted  is  ever  given  to  a  human  person,  except  in  this  typical 
sense  (as  in  Is.  ix.  6).  The  original,  however,  has  been  understood  by 
some  to  mean ' '  Thy  divine  throne ; "  and  this  verse  maybe  rendered  ' '  God 
is  Thy  throne  for  ever  and  ever."  Philo  had  spoken  of  the  Logos  as  "the 
eldest  Angel,"  "an  Archangel  of  many  names  "(Z>t'  Con/.  Ling.  28),  and 
it  was  most  necessary  for  the  writer  to  shew  that  the  Mediator  of  the 
New  Covenant  was  not  merely  an  Angel  like  the  ministers  of  the  Old,  or 
even  an  Archangel,  but  the  Divine  Prae-existent  Son  whose  dispensation 
therefore  supersedes  that  which  had  been  administered  by  inferior 
beings.  The  Targum  on  this  Psalm  (xlv.  3)  renders  it  "  Thy  beauty,  0 
King  Messiah,  is  greater  than  the  sons  of  men,"  and  Aben  Ezra  says  it 
refers  not  so  much  to  David  as  to  his  son  Messiah. 

a  sceptre  of  righteousticss\  Rather,  "the  sceptre  of  rectitude."  The 
Greek  word  is  eitthutctos  not  dikaiosunes,  which  is  the  word  used  in 
the  next  verse.     "  Euthntes"  occurs  here  only  in  the  N.T. 

of  thy  kingdom]  The  two  oldest  MSS.  (N,  B)  read  "of  His  king- 
dom." 


vv.  9— II-]  HEBREWS,    I.  65 

Thou    hast    loved     righteousness,     and     hated    in- 9 
iquity;  therefore  God,   even  thy  God,  hath   anoint- 
ed thee  with  the  oil  of  gladness  above  thy  fellows. 
And,  Thou,   Lord,   in    the    beginning   hast   laid  the  10 
foundation  of  the  earth  ;    and  the  heavens  are  the 
works  of  thine  hands:  they  shall  perish;  but  thou  n 

9.  TJiou  hast  loved'\  Rather,  "Thou  lovedst" — ideahsing  the 
whole  reign  to  one  point.  Comp.  Is.  xxxii.  i,  "Behokl,  a  king  shall 
reign  in  righteousness;"  and  Jer.  xxiii.  5,  "I  will  raise  unto  David  a 
rigiifeous  Branch." 

i)iiq!iity'\     Lit.,  "lawlessness." 

iherefore\     Comp.  ii.  9,  16,  17,  v.  7,  8,  xii.  1. 

God,  even  thy  God]  The  first  word  might  be  a  vocative  "Oh  God," 
and  it  is  so  rendered  even  by  the  Jewisli  translator  Symmachus.  But 
this  is  contrary  to  the  usage  of  the  2nd  Book  of  Psalms.  Where  the 
word  "God"  is  taken  up  and  repeated  with  the  suffix,  there  is  no  other 
instance  in  which  the  first  is  a  vocative. 

evtvi  thy  God]  Comp.  John  xx.  17,  "I  ascend  to...7/y  God  2ca.^  your 
God." 

the  oil  of  gladness]  Rather,  "of  exultation."  The  word  means  the 
joy  of  perfect  triumph,  xii.  ■!.  For  the  "anointing"  of  Christ  by  tlie 
Spirit  see  Lk.  i.  35;  Matt.  iii.  16;  Acts  x.  38;  Is.  Ixi.  i;  but  the 
anointing  in  this  verse,  alludes  to  His  glorification  in  Heaven. 

above  thy  fellows]  In  the  original  Psalm  this  refers  to  all  contempo- 
rary princes ;  in  its  present  application  it  means  above  all  the  angel- 
dwellers  on  Mount  Sion  (xii.  22)  and  above  all  men  who  have  fellow- 
ship with  God  (iii.  14)  only  in  Christ  (ii.  11;   i  John  i.  3). 

10.  Thou,  Lord,  in  the  beginning]  The  quotation  is  from  Ps.  cii. 
25 — 27.  The  word  "Lord"  is  not  in  the  original,  but  it  is  in  the 
LXX.;  and  the  Hebrew  Christians  who  already  believed  that  it  was  by 
Christ  that  "God  made  the  world"  (see  note  on  ver.  2)  W'ould  not  dis- 
pute the  Messianic  application  of  these  words  to  Him.  They  are  a 
prayer  of  the  afilicted  written  at  some  late  period  of  the  exile.  Calvin 
(on  Eph.  iv.  8)  goes  so  far  as  to  say  of  such  passages  that  the  Apostle 
"by  a  pious  diversion  of  their  meaning  {pia  dcflectione)  accommodates 
them  to  the  Person  of  Christ."  The  remark  illustrates  the  courageous 
honesty  and  stern  good  sense  of  the  great  Reformer;  but  no  Jewish- 
Christian  exegete  would  have  thought  that  he  was  practising  a  mere 
pious  misapplication  of  the  sacred  words,  or  have  admitted  the  objec- 
tion of  Cardinal  Cajetan  that  "in  a  matter  of  such  importance  it  was 
unbecoining  to  use  such  an  argument."  The  writer's  object  is  xioi  proof 
— which  was  for  his  readers  unnecessary;  he  wished  to  illustrate  acknovi- 
ledged  truths  by  admitted  principles. 

in  the  beginning]     Heb.  D''^S^,   "face- wards,"  i.e.  of  old. 

11.  They  shall  perish]    Is.  xxxiv.  4,  &c.;  1  Pet.  iii.-  12;  Rev.  xxi.  i. 
rcniainest]     The  verb  means  "abidest  through  all  times." 

HEBREWS  C 


66  HEBREWS,  I.  [vv.  12—14. 

remainest ;  and  they  all  shall  wax  old  as  doth  a  gar- 

J2  ment ;  and  as  a  vesture  shalt  thou  fold  them  up,  and 

they  shall  be  changed:  but  thou  art  the  same,  and 

13  thy  years  shall  not  fail.  But  to  which  of  the  angels  said 
he  at  any  time,  Sit  on  my  right  hand,  until  I  make 

14  thine  enemies  thy  footstool?  Are  they  not  all  minister- 
ing spirits,  sent  forth  to  minister  for  them  who  shall  be  heirs 
of  salvation  ? 

as  doth  a  garment]     A  common  Scripture  metaphor.     Is.  1.  9,  &c. 

12.  shalt  then  fold  them  up\  Lit.,  "Thou  shalt  roll  them  up." 
This  reading  (e\('|eis)  is  found  in  most  MSS.  and  is  perhaps  an  uncon- 
scious reminiscence  of  Is.  xxxiv.  4  (comp.  Rev.  vi.  14);  but  N,  D  read 
"thou  shalt  change  them"  (aWd^ets),  as  in  the  original,  and  in  the 
LXX.  {Cod.  Alex.).  On  this  final  consummation,  and  the  destruction  of 
the  material  universe,  see  Matt.  xxiv.  35;   2  Pet.  iii.  7;  Rev.  xxi.  i. 

thou  art  the  satne]     In  the  Hebrew  (literally)  "Thou  art  He." 
thy  years  shall  not  fail]     i.e.  they  shall  never  come  to  an  end  (xiii. 
8 ;  Rev.  i.  8). 

13.  until  I  make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool]  This  same  passage 
from  Ps.  ex.  i  had  been  quoted  by  our  Lord,  in  its  Messianic  sense,  to 
the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  \vithout  aiiy  attempt  on  their  part  to  chal- 
lenge His  application  of  it  (Matt.  xxii.  41 — -44).  It  is  also  referred  to 
by  St  Peter  in  Acts  ii.  54  and  by  St  Paul  (i  Cor.  xv.  25).  The  Greek 
expression  for  "till"  implies  entire  indefiniteness  of  time.  The  refer- 
ence is  to  the  oriental  custom  of  putting  the  feet  on  the  necks  of  con- 
quered kings  (Josh.  x.  24). 

14.  tnifiistering  spirits,  sent  forth  to  minister]  Here  as  elsewhere 
the  A.V.  obliterates  distinctions,  which  it  so  often  arbitrarily  creates 
out  of  mere  love  for  variety  in  other  places.  The  word  "ministering" 
(leitotirgika)  implies  sacred  ("liturgic")  service  (viii.  6,  ix.  21);  the 
word  "  ministry"  (diakonian)  implies  service  to  God  on  behalf  of  men. 
It  should  be  rendered  "  ministrant  spirits  sent  forth  for  service." 

"How  oft  do  they  tiieir  silver  bowers  leave 
And  come  to  succour  us  who  succour  want, 
How  oft  do  they  with  golden  pinions  cleave 
The  flitting  skies  like  flying  pursuivant, 
Against  foul  fiends  to  aid  us  mditant! 
They  for  us  figlit,   they  watch  and  duly  ward 
And  their  bright  squadrons  round  about  us  plant, 
And  all  for  love  and  nothing  for  reward. 
Oh!  why  should  heavenly  God  for  men  have  such  regard." 

Spenser. 

for  them  who  shall  he  heirs  of  salvation]     Literally,  "for  the  sake  of 

those  who  are  about  to  inherit  salvation."     The  salvation  is  both  the 

state  of  salvation  here,  and  its  full  fruition  hereafter.     When  we  are 

"justified  by  God's  grace"  we  are  "made  heirs  according  to  the  hope 


vv.  I,  2.]  HEBREWS,   II.  Sj 

Therefore  we  ought  to  give  the  more  earnest  heed  to  the  2 
things  which  we  have  heard,  lest  at  any  time  we  should  let 
them  slip.     For  if  the  word  spoken  by  angels  was  stedfast,  2 

of  eternal  life"  (Tit.  iii.  7).     Spenser  widens  the  mission  of  the  Angels 
when  he  speaks  of 

"Highest  God,  who  loves  His  creatures  so 
That  blessed  Angels  He  sends  to  and  fro 
To  serve  to  wielded  men — to  serve  His  deadliest  foe." 
For  Scriptural  instances  of  the  service  of  Angels  "to  them  that  fear 
God"  see  Ps.  xxxiv.  7,  xci.  11;  Gen.  xix.  15;  Dan.  vi.  22;  Acts  xii.  7. 
seni  forth']     Lit.,  "being  sent  forth."     The  ministry  of  Angels  is 
regarded  as  still  continuing. 

heirs  of  salvation^  The  writer  recurs  to  this  great  word  "salvation" 
in  ii.  3,  10. 

CH.  II.  A  SOLEMN  WARNING  AND  EXHORTATION  (r — 4),  ChRIST'S 
TEMPORARY  HUMILIATION  FOR  THE  REDEMPTION  AND  GLORI- 
FICATION OF  Mankind  does  not  disparage  His  pre-emin- 
ence OVER  Angels  (5 — 13),  but  was  necessary  for  the 
perfectness  of  His  High-Priestly  work  (14 — 18). 

1.  Therefore]  Because  we  are  heirs  of  a  better  covenant,  adminis- 
tered not  by  Angels  but  by  a  Son,  to  whom  as  Mediator  an  absolute 
dominion  is  to  be  assigned. 

we  ought]  The  word  implies  moral  necessity  and  not  mere  obligation. 
The  author  never  loses  sight  of  the  fact  that  hi 3  purpose  was  to  warn 
as  well  as  to  teach. 

to  give  the  7nore  earnest  hcecf]  If  the  command  to  "take  heed  to 
thyself,  and  keep  thy  soul  diligently  lest  thou  forget  the  things  that 
thine  eyes  have  seen"  (Deut.  iv.  9)  came  with  awful  force  to  those  who 
had  only  received  the  Law  by  the  disposition  of  Angels,  how  much 
"more  abundantly"  should  Christians  attend  to  Him  of  Whom  Moses 
had  spoken  to  their  fathers?  (Acts  iii.  22). 

to  the  things  which  we  have  heard]  Lit.,  "to  the  things  heard,"  i.e. 
to  the  Gospel. 

lest  at  any  time]     Rather,  "lest  haply." 

we  should  let  theni  slip]  Rather,  "should  drift  away  from  them." 
Wiclif  rendered  the  word  more  correctly  than  the  A.V.  which  here 
follows  the  Genevan  Bible  of  1560 — "lest  peradventure  we  fleten 
away."  The  verb  thus  resembles  the  Latin  praetervehi.  The  metaphor 
is  taken  from  a  boat  which  having  no  "anchor  sure  and  steadfast" 
slips  its  anchor,  and  as  Luther  says  in  his  gloss,  "  before  her  landing 
shoots  away  into  destruction"  (Prov.  iii.  21  LXX.  vik  fi-ij  Trapapf>vT)s). 
It  is  obvious  that  these  Hebrew  converts  were  in  great  danger  of  "drift- 
ing away"  from  the  truth  under  the  pressure  of  trial,  and  in  conse- 
quence of  the  apathy  produced  by  isolation  and  deferred  hopes  (iii.  6, 
vi.  u,  X.  25,  36,  37,  xii.  I— 3).  _  .^    .   J    J     . 

2.  For]  An  argument  a  tninori  ad  majus,  of  which  indeed  the 
whole  Epistle  is  a  specimen.     It  was  the  commonest   form  assumed 

5—2 


63  HEBREWS,   II.  [v.  3. 

and  every  transgression  and  disobedience  received  a  just 
3  recompence  of  reward ;  how  shall  we  escape,  if  we  neglect 

by  the  Rabbinic  interpretation  of  Scripture,  and  was  the  first  of  the 
seven  exegetic  rules  of  Ililiel,  who  called  it  "light  and  heavy." 

the  word  spoken  by  a//,i^e/s]  The  "  by  "  is  not  inro  but  Blo,,  i.  e.  "by 
means  of,"  "  through  the  instrumentality  of."  The  presence  of  Angels 
at  Sinai  is  but  slightly  alluded  to  in  the  O.  T.  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  2  ; 
Ps.  Ixviii.  17;  but  these  allusions  had  been  greatly  expanded,  and 
were  prominently  dwelt  upon  in  Rabbinic  teaching — the  Talmud, 
Targums,  Midrashim,  &c. — until,  at  last,  we  find  in  the  tract  Maccoth 
that  God  was  only  supposed  to  have  uttered  the  First  Commandment, 
while  all  the  rest  of  the  Law  was  delivered  by  Angels.  This  notion 
was  at  least  as  old  as  Josephus,  who  makes  Herod  say  that  the 
Jews  "had  learned  of  God  through  Angels"  the  most  sacred  part 
of  their  laws  (Jos.  Antt.  XV.  5  §  3).  The  Alexandrian  theology  espe- 
cially, impressed  with  the  truth  that  "no  man  hath  seen  God  at 
any  time "  (comp.  Ex.  xxxiii.  30)  eagerly  seized  on  the  allusions  to 
Angels  as  proving  that  every  theophany  was  only  indirect,  and  that 
God  could  only  be  seen  through  the  medium  of  Angelic  appearances. 
Hence  the  Jews  frequently  referred  to  Ps.  civ.  4,  and  regarded  the 
fire,  and  smoke,  and  storm  of  Sinai  as  being  Angelic  vehicles  of  the 
divine  manifestation.  And  besides  this,  their  boast  of  the  Angelic 
ministry  of  the  Taw  was  founded  on  the  allusions  to  the  "Angel 
of  the  Presence"  (Ex.  xxxii.  34,  xxxiii.  14;  Josh.  v.  14;  Is.  Ixiii.  9). 
In  the  N.  T.  the  only  two  other  passages  which  allude  to  the  work 
of  Angels  in  delivering  the  Law  are  Acts  vii.  53;  Gal.  iii.  19  (see  my 
Life  of  St  Paul,  li.  149).  Clearly  the  Hebrew  Christians  had  to  be 
delivered  from  the  notion  that  Christ,  by  being  "  made  under  the 
Law,"  hid  subjected  Himself  to  the  loftier  position  of  the  Angels  who 
had  ministered  the  Law. 

was  stedfas(\  Rather,  "became"  or  "proved"  steadfast.  The 
Law  was  no  hrutum  ulmeit ;  no  inoperative  dead-letter,  but  effective 
to  vindicate  its  own  majesty,  and  punish  its  own  violation.  Philo  uses 
the  very  same  word  {^ejSaLa)  of  the  institutions  of  Moses  ;  but  the 
difference  of  standpoint  between  him  ond  the  writer  is  illustrated  by 
the  fact  that  Philo  also  calls  them  dffdXevTa,  "not  to  be  shaken" 
which  this  writer  would  not  have  done  (xii.  27). 

every  transgression  and  disobedience]  i.e.  all  sins  against  it,  whether 
of  commission  or  of  omission.  Parabasis  is  "  transgression  ;" /a/'a/TfJ 
is  "mishearing"  and  neglect  (Matt,  xviii.  17;  Rom.  v.  19). 

jjtst^  This  form  of  the  word  (endikos)  occurs  only  here  and  in  Rom. 
iii.  8, 

received  a  jttst  recompence  of  reward\  The  word  misthos,  "wage" 
or  "  pay" — which  is  used  of  punishment  as  well  as  of  reward — would 
have  expressed  the  same  thought  ;  but  the  writer  likes  ttic  more 
sonorous  misthapodosia  (x.  35,  xi.  26).  This  remorseless  self-vindication 
by  the  Law  ("without  mercy"),  the  certainty  that  it  could  not  be 
broken    with  impunity,  is  alluded  to  in  x.   28.     The   Israelites  lound 


V.  4.]  HEBREWS,  II.  69 

so  great  salvation ;  which  at  the  first  began  to  be  spoken  by 
the  Lord,  and  was  confirmed  unto  us  by  them  that  heard 
hiin ;  God  also  bearing  them  witness,  both  with  signs  and 
wonders,  and  with  divers  miracles,  and  gifts  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  according  to  his  own  will  ? 

even  in  the  wilderness  (Lev.  x.   i,  2  ;  Num.  xv.   32,  36;  Deut.  iv.  3, 

&c.),  that  such  stern  warnings  as  that  of  Num.  xv.  30 — threatening 
exxision  to  offenders — were  terribly  real,  and  applied  alike  to  indi- 
viduals and  to  the  nation. 

3.  how  shall  tve  escape]  The  "we"  (being  expressed  in  the 
original)  is  emphatic — 7C'e  who  are  sons,  not  servants.  The  verb  means 
"how  shall  we  succeed  in  escaping, "  or,  "make  good  our  escape" — 
namely,  from  similar,  but  yet  more  awful  punishment  (comp.  xii.  25). 

if  we  iieglect\  Rather,  "after  neglecting,"  or  "when  we  have 
neglected." 

so  great  salvafioit]  The  transcendence  (vii.  1^)  of  the  safety  provided 
is  a  measure  of  the  guilt  involved  in  ceasing  to  pay  any  attention  to 
it  (x.  29;  John  xii.  4S).  It  came  from  Christ  not  from  Angels,  its 
sanctions  are  more  eternal,  its  promises  more  divine,  its  whole  character 
more  spiritual. 

which  at  the  first  began  to  he  spokeiiY  Literally,  "seeing  that  it,  having 
at  the  first  been  spoken." 

by  the  Lord\  The  Gospels  shew  that  Jesus  was  the  first  preacher  of 
His  own  Gospel  (Mark  i.  14).  "The  Lord,"  standing  alone,  is  very 
rarely,  if  ever,  used  as  a  title  for  Christ  in  St  Paul,  (i  Thess.  iv.  15  ; 
2  Thess.  ii.  2 ;  2  Tim.  iv.  18,  are,  to  say  the  least,  indecisive.) 

■was  confirnted\  The  '•'■word  of  this  salvation" — the  news  of  this 
Gospel — was  ratified  to  us  (comp.  i  Cor.  i.  6),  and  so  it  becomes 
"  steadfast."  The  verb  is  derived  from  the  adjective  so  rendered 
in  ver.  2. 

by  them  that  heard]  We  did  not  indeed  receive  the  Gospel  at  first- 
hand, but  from  those  who  were  its  appointed  witnesses  (Lk.  xxiv, 
47,  48;  Acts  i.  8,  v.  32).  This  verse,  as  Luther  and  Calvin  so  clearly 
saw,  furnishes  a  decisive  proof  that  St  Paul  was  not  the  wiiter  of  this 
Epistle.  He  always  insisted  on  the  primary  and  direct  character  of 
the  revelation  which  he  had  received  as  his  independent  Gospel  (Gal. 
i.  I,  12;  Acts  xxii.  10,  xxvi.  16;  i  Cor.  xi.  23,  xv.  3,  &c.).  To 
talk  of  "accommodation  "  here  is  quite  beside  the  mark. 

4.  God  also  bearing  them  -witness']  The  original  is  stronger,  "God 
bearing  witness  with  them  ;"  the  supernatural  witness  coincided  with 
the  human. 

both  with  signs  and  ivonders,  and  with  divers  miracles]  "  Signs  " 
to  shew  that  there  was  a  power  behind  their  witness;  "portents"  to 
awaken  the  feeling  of  astonishment,  and  so  arouse  interest ;  and  various 
"powers."  These  are  alluded  to,  or  recorded,  in  Mark  xvi.  20; 
Acts  ii.  43,  xix.  II.  St  Paul  himself  appealed  to  his  own  "mighty 
signs  and  wonders"  (Rom.  xv.  18,  19;  i  Cor.  ii.  4). 


JO  HEBREWS,    II.  [vv.  5,6. 

5  For  unto  t/ie  angels  hath  he  not  put  in  subjection   the 

6  world  to  come,  whereof  we  speak :  but  one  in  a  certain  place 

and  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  arcording  to  his  own  ivilt\  The  word 
"gifts"  means  rather  ^'■distributions''''  (iv.  12,  "dividing"),  and  the 
words  "according  to  His  own  will "  apply  only  to  this  clause — the 
gifts  which  the  Holy  Spirit  distributes  as  He  wills  (i  Cor.  vii.  17, 
xii.  II ;  Rom.  xii.  3). 

6—13.    The  voluntary  humiliation  of  Jesus  was  a  necessary 

STEP    IN    THE   exaltation   OF   HUMANITY. 

5.  For'\  The  "for"  resumes  the  thread  of  the  argument  about 
the  superiority  of  Jesus  over  the  Angels.  He  was  to  be  the  supreme 
king,  but  the  necessity  of  passing  through  suffering  to  His  Messianic 
throne  lay  in  His  High- Priesthood  for  the  human  race.  To  Him,  there- 
fore, and  not  to  Angels,  the  "  future  age"  is  to  belong. 

unto  the  angels  hath  he  not  put  into  subjection  the  woj-Id  to  come] 
Lit.  "for  not  to  Angels  did  He  subject  the  inhabited  earth  to  come." 
In  this  "  inhabited  earth "  things  in  their  pre-Christian  condition 
had  been  subjected  to  Angels.  This  is  inferred  directly  from  Ps.  viii. 
where  the  "little"  of  degree  is  interpreted  as  "a  little"  of  time. 
The  authority  of  Angels  over  the  Mosaic  dispensation  had  been 
inferred  by  the  Jews  from  Ps.  Ixxxii.  1,  where  "  the  congregation  of 
Elohim "  was  interpreted  to  mean  Angels;  and  from  l3ent.  xxxii. 
8,  9,  where  instead  of  "He  set  the  bounds  of  the  people  according 
to  the  number  of  the  children  of  Israel,'''  the  LXX.  had  "accord- 
ing to  the  number  of  the  Angels  of  God."  From  this  passage,  and 
Gen.  X.,  Dan.  x.  13,  &c.  they  inferred  that  there  were  70  nations 
of  the  world,  each  under  its  presiding  Angel,  but  that  Israel  was  under 
the  special  charge  of  God,^  as  is  expressly  stated  in  Ecclus.  xvii.  17 
(comp.  Is.  xxiv.  21,  22,  LXX.).  The  notioa  is  only  modified  when 
in  Dan.  x.  13,  20,  Michael  "  the  first  Prince,"  and  in  Tobit  xii.  15,  "  the 
seven  Archangels,"  are  regarded  as  protectors  of  Israel.  But  now  the 
dispensational  functions  of  Angels  have  ceased,  because  in  "the 
kingdom  of  God  "  they  in  their  turn  were  subordinated  to  the  man 
Christ  Jesus. 

tJie  world  to  come]  The  Olam  habba  or  "future  age  "  of  the  Plebrews, 
although  the  word  here  used  is  not  aion  but  oikonmene,  properly  the 
inhabited  world.  In  Is.  ix.  6  the  Theocratic  king  who  is  a  type  of 
the  Messiah  is  called  "the  Everlasting  Father,"  which  is  rendered  by 
the  LXX.  "  father  of  the  future  age."  In  the  "new  heavens  and  new 
earth,"  as  in  the  Messianic  kingdom  which  is  "the  kingdom  of  our 
Lord  and  of  His  Christ,"  man,  whose  nature  Christ  has  taken  upon 
Him,  is  to  be  specially  exalted.  Hence,  as  Calvin  acutely  observes, 
Abraham,  Joshua,  Daniel  are  not  forbidden  to  bow  to  Angels,  but 
imder  the  New  Covenant  St  John  is  twice  forbidden  (Rev.  xix.  10, 
xxii.  q).  But,  although  the  Messianic  kingdom,  and  therefore  the 
"future  age,"  began  at  the  Resurrection,  there  is  yet  another  "future 


y.  7.]  HEBREWS,   II.  71 

testified,  saying,  What  is  man,  that  thou  art  mindful  of 
him?    or  the  son  of  man,   that  thou   visitest   him? 
Thou   madest  him  a  little  lower  than  the  angels;? 
thou  crownedst   him   with   glory  and   honour,  and 

age"  beyond  it,  which  shall   only  begin  when  this  age  is  perfected, 
and  Christ's  kingdom  \s, fully  come. 

whereof  we  speak\  i.e.  which  is  my  present  subject. 

6.  but  one  in  a  certain  place  testificd'\  The  writer  was  of  course 
perfectly  well  aware  that  the  Psalm  on  which  he  proceeds  to  comment 
is  the  8th  Psalm.  This  indefinite  mode  of  quotation  ("  some  one,  some- 
where") is  common  in  Philo  and  the  Rabbis.  Scripture  is  often  quoted 
by  the  words  "  It  saith  "  or  "  He  saith  "  or  "  God  saith.  Possibly  the 
indefinite  form  (comp.  iv.  4) — which  is,  not  found  in  St  Paul — is  only 
here  adopted  because  God  is  Himself  addressed  in  the  Psalm.  (See 
Schottgen,  Nov.  Hebr.,  p.  928.) 

What  is  vian'X  The  Hebrew  word — enosh — means  man  in  his  weak- 
ness and  humiliation.  The  "  what "  expresses  a  double  feeling — how 
mean  in  himself!  how  great  in  TY/j/ love  !  The  Psalm  is  only  Mes- 
sianic in  so  far  as  it  implies  man's  final  exaltation  through  Christ's 
incarnation.  It  applies,  in  the  first  instance,  and  directly,  to  man ; 
and  only  in  a  secondary  sense  to  Jesus  as  man.  But  St  Paul  had 
already  (i  Cor.  xv.  27;  Eph.  i.  22)  applied  it  in  a  Messianic  sense, 
and  "Son  of  man"  was  a  Messianic  title  (Dan.  vii.  13).  Thus  the 
Cabbalists  regarded  the  name  Adam  as  an  anagram  for  Adam,  David, 
Moses,  and  regarded  the  Messiah  as  combining  the  dignity  of  all  three. 
David  twice  makes  the  exclamation — "What  is  man?"; — once  when  he 
is  thinking  of  man's  frailty  in  connection  with  his  exaltation  by  God 
(Ps.  viii.);  and  once  (Ps.  cxliv.  3)  when  he  is  thinking  only  of  man's 
emptiness  and  worthlessness,  as  being  undeserving  of  God's  care, 
(comp.  Job  vii.  17). 

1.  a  little  locver]  The  "little"  in  the  original  [meat]  means  "little 
in  degree;"  but  is  here  applied  to  time — "for  a  little  while" — as  is 
clear  from  ver.  9.  The  writer  was  only  acquainted  with  the  LXX. 
and  in  Greek  the  ^paxv  rt  would  naturally  suggest  brevity  of  time 
(comp.  I  Pet.  V.  10).  Some  of  the  Old  Greek  translators  who  took  the 
other  meaning  rendered  6\iyov  Trapo  Oeov. 

than  the  angcls\  The  original  has  "  than  Elohim"  i.  e.  than  God ; 
but  the  name  Eiohim  has,  as  we  have  seen,  a  much  wider  and  lower 
range  than  "Jehovah,"  and  the  rendering  "angels"  is  here  found  both 
in  the  LXX.  and  the  Targum.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
writer  is  only  applying  the  words  of  the  Psalm,  and  putting  them  as  it 
were  to  a  fresh  use.  The  Psalm  is  "  a  lyric  echo  of  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis"  and  speaks  of  man's  exaltation.  The  author  is  applying  it  to 
man's  lowliness  ("ad  suum  institutum  deflectit,"  says  Calvin,  "/far' 
i-n-e^epyaaiav").  Yet  David's  notion,  like  that  of  Cicero,  is  that  "Man 
is  a  mortal  God,"  and  the  writer  is  only  touching  on  man's  humiliation 
to  illustrate  his  exaltation  of  the  God-Man.  See  Perowne  on  the  Psalms 
(i.  144). 


HEB'REWS,   II.  [vv.  8,9. 


8  didst  set  him  over  the  works  of  thy  hands:  thou 
hast  put  all  things  in  subjection  under  his  feet.  For 
in  that  he  put  all  in  subjection  under  him,  he  left  nothing 
that  ts  not  put  under  him.     But  now  we  see  not  yet  all 

9  things  put  under  him.  But  we  see  Jesus,  who  was  made 
a  little  lower  than  the  angels,  for  the  suffering  of  death. 


and  didst  set  him  over  the  works  of  thy  hands']  This  clause  is  pro- 
bably a  gloss  from  tl;e  LXX.,  as  it  is  absent  from  some  of  the  best 
MSS.  and  Versions  (e.g.  B  and  the  Syriac).  The  writer  omitted  it  as 
not  bearing  on  his  argument. 

8.  thou  hast  put...']  Rather,  "Thou  didst  put..."  by  one  eternal 
decree.  This  clause  should  be  added  to  the  last  verse.  The  clause 
applies  not  to  Christ  (as  in  i  Cor.  xv.  25)  but  to  man  in  his  redeemed 
glory. 

all  things]  This  is  defined  in  the  Psalm  (viii.  8,  9)  to  mean  specially 
the  animal  world,  but  is  here  applied  to  the  universe  in  accordance 
with  its  Messianic  application  (Matt-  xxviii.  18). 

For]  The  "for"  continues  the  reasoning  of  ver.  5.  The  writer 
with  cleep  insight  seizes  upon  the  juxtaposition  of  "humiliation  "  and 
"  dominion  "  as  a  paradox  which  only  found  in  Christ  its  full  solution. 

he  Irft  nothing  that  is  not  put  under  him]  The  inference  intended  to 
be  drawn  is  not  "and  therefore  even  angels  will  be  subject  to  man," 
but  "  and  therefore  the  control  of  angels  will  come  to  an  end."  When 
however  we  read  such  a  passage  as  i  Cor.  vi.  ?,  ("  Know  ye  not  that  we 
shall  judge  angels  ?  ")  it  is  uncertain  whether  the  author  would  not  have 
admitted  even  the  other  inference. 

But  now]  i.e.  but,  in  this  present  earthly  condition  of  things  man  is 
not  as  yet  supreme.  We  see  as  a  fact  {opQixfv)  man's  humiliation  :  we 
perceive  by  faith  the  glorification  of  Jesus,  and  of  all  humanity  in  Him. 

jtndcr  him]  i  e.  under  man. 

9.  But  -cve  see]  Rather,  "But  we  look  upon."  The  verb  used  is 
not  opQifj-ev  vide^nus  as  in  the  previous  verse,  but  ^Xeiro/xev  cernimus  (as 
in  iii.  19).  In  accordance  with  the  order  of  the  original  the  verse 
should  be  rendered  "But  we  look  tipon  Him  who  has  been,  for  a  little 
while,  made  loiv  in  comparison  of  angels — even  Jesus — on  account  of  the 
suffering  of  death  crowned,  &c." 

who  zvas  made  a  little  lozver  thati  the  angels]  This  alludes  to  the 
temporal  ("  for  a  little  while")  and  voluntary  humiliation  of  the  Incar- 
nate Lord.  See  Phil.  ii.  7 — 11.  For  a  short  time  Christ  was  liable  to 
agony  and  death  from  which  angels  are  exempt;  and  even  to  the  "in- 
tolerable indignity  "  of  the  grave. 

for  the  suffering  of  death]  Rather,  "  because  ofihe.  suffering  of  death. " 
The  Via  crncis  was  the  appointed  via  lucis  (comp.  v.  7 — 10,  vii.  26, 
ix.  12).  This  truth— that  the  sufferings  of  Christ  wee  the  willing  path 
of  Hisperfectionment  as  the  "  Priest  upon  his  throne  "  (Zech.  vi.  13) — is 
brought  out  more  distinctly  in  this  than  in  any  other  Epistle. 


V.  lo.]  HEBREWS,   II.  73 

crowned  with  glory  and  honour;  that  he  by  the  grace  of 
God  should  taste  death  for  every  man.     For  it  became  him,  lo 

crowned  with  glory  and  honoiii-]  Into  the  nature  of  this  glory  it  was 
needless  and  hardly  possible  to  enter.  "On  His  head  were  many 
crowns"  (Rev.  xix.  12). 

ihafi  The  words  refer  to  the  whole  of  the  last  clause.  The  universal 
efficacy  of  His  death  resulted  from  the  double  fact  of  His  humiliation 
and  glorification.  He  was  made  a  little  lower  than  the  angels,  He 
suffered  death,  He  was  crowned  with  glory  and  honour  in  order  that 
His  death  might  be  efficacious  for  the  redemption  of  the  world. 

l>y  the  grace  of  Godi  The  work  of  redemption  resulted  from  the  love 
of  the  Father  no  less  than  from  that  of  the  Son  (John  iii.  1 6  ;  Rom.  v.  8 ; 
■2  Cor.  V.  21).  It  is  therefore  a  part  of  "  the  grace  of  God  "  (I'^om.  V.  8; 
Gal.  ii.  21 ;  2  Cor.  vi.  i;  Tit.  ii.  11),  and  could  only  have  been  carried 
into  completion  by  the  aid  of  that  grace  of  which  Christ  was  full. 
The  Greek  is  x<^P""'  Qiov,  but  there  is  a  very  interesting  and  very 
ancient  various  reading  X'^P^'  6eou  '■^  apart  from  God.''  St  Jerome  says 
that  he  only  found  this  reading  "in  some  copies"  (in  quibusdam  ex- 
emplaribus)  whereas  Origen  had  already  said  that  he  only  found  the 
other  reading  "  by  the  grace  of  God  "  in  some  copies  [iv  riinv  avnypa- 
<pois).  At  present  however  the  reading  '■^  apart  from  God"  is  only  found 
in  the  cursive  manuscript  53  (a  MS.  of  the  9th  century),  and  in  the  margin 
of  67.  It  is  clear  that  the  reading  was  once  more  common  than  is  now 
the  case,  and  it  seems  to  have  been  a  Western  and  Syriac  reading  which 
has  gradually  disappeared  from  the  manuscripts.  Theodore  of  Mop- 
sueslia  calls  the  reading  "  by  the  grace  of  God  "  meaningless,  and  others 
have  stamped  it  as  Monophysite  (i.  e.  as  implying  that  in  Christ  there 
was  only  one  nature).  We  have  seen  that  this  is  by  no  means  the  case, 
though  the  other  reading  may  doubtless  have  fallen  into  disfavour  from 
the  use  made  of  it  by  the  Nestorians  to  prove  that  Christ  did  not  suffer 
in  His  divinity  but  only  "apart  from  God,"  i.  e.  in  YWs,  humanity  {%o 
too  St  Ambrose  and  Fulgentius).  But  even  if  the  reading  be  correct 
(and  it  is  certainly  more  ancient  than  the  Nestorian  controversy)  the 
words  may  belong  to  their  own  proper  clause — ■"that  he  may  taste 
death  for  every  being  except  God ;  "  the  latter  words  being  added  as  in 
I  Cor.  XV.  27.  But  the  reading  is  almost  certainly  spurious.  For  (i)  in 
the  Nestorian  sense  it  is  unlike  any  other  passage  of  Scripture;  (2)  in 
the  other  sense  it  is  unnecessary  (since  it  bears  in  no  way  on  the  imme- 
diate argument)  and  may  have  been  originally  added  as  a  superfluous 
marginal  gloss  by  some  pragmatic  reader  who  remembered  i  Cor.  xv.  27  ; 
or  (3)  it  may  have  originated  from  a  confusion  of  letters  on  the  original 
papyrus.  The  incorporation  of  marginal  glosses  into  the  text  is  a 
familiar  phenomenon  in  textual  criticism.  Such  perhaps  are  i  John  v. 
7;  Acts  viii.  37;  the  latter  part  of  Rom.  viii.  i;  "without  cause"  in 
Matt.  V.  22  ;  "unworthily"  in  i  Cor.  xi.  29,  &c. 

should  taste  death']  The  word  "taste"  is  not  to  be  pressed  as 
though  it  meant  that  Christ  "  saw  no  corruption."  "To  taste  "  does 
not  mean  merely  "  sti?nmis  lahris  delibare."     It  is  a  common  Semitic 


74  HEBREWS,   II.  [v.  lo. 

for  whom  are  all  things,  and  by  whom  are  all  things,   in 

and  metaphoric  paraphrase  for  death,  derived  from  the  notion  of  Death 
as  an  Angel  who  gives  a  cup  to  drink;  as  in  tlie  Arabic  poem  Antar 
"  Death  fed  him  with  a  cup  of  absinth  by  my  hand."  Comp.  Matt.  xvi. 
28;  Jolin  viii.  52. 

/o7-]   "on  behalf  of"  (vrrkp),  not  "  as  a  substitution  for"  {avrl). 

for  every  maii\  Origen  and  others  made  this  word  neuter  "  for  every- 
thing" or  "for  every  existence;"  but  this  seems  to  be  expressly  ex- 
cluded by  ver.  16,  and  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  analogy  of  John  i. 
29,  iii.  16;  1  Cor.  v.  21 ;  i  John  ii.  2.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  writer 
deals  freely  with  the  Psalm.  The  Psalmist  views  man  in  his  present 
condition  as  being  one  which  involves  both  glory  and  humiliation  :  it  is 
here  applied  as  expressing  man's  present  humiliation  and  his  future 
glory,  w  hich  is  compared  with  Christ's  temporal  humiliation  leading  to 
his  Eternal  giory.  It  is  the  necessity  of  this  application  which  required 
the  phrase  "a  little  "  to  be  understood  not  of  degree  but  of  time.  No 
doubt  the  writer  has  read  into  the  words  a  pregnant  significance;  but 
( i)  he  is  only  applying  them  by  way  of  illustrating  acknowledged  truths  ; 
and  (2)  he  is  doing  so  in  accordance  with  principles  of  exegesis  which 
were  universally  conceded  not  only  by  Christians  but  even  by  Jews. 

10.  For  it  became  him'\  Unlike  St  Paul  t'ne  writer  never  enters  into 
what  may  be  called  "the  philosophy  of  the  plan  of  salvation."  He 
never  attempts  to  throw  any  light  upon  the  mysterious  subject  of  the 
antecedent  necessity  for  the  death  of  Christ.  Perhaps  he  considered 
that  all  which  could  be  profitably  said  on  that  high  mystery  had  already 
been  said  by  St  Paul  (Rom.  iii.  25;  Gal.  iii.  13;  2  Cor.  v.  21).  He 
dwells  upon  Christ's  death  almost  exclusively  in  its  relation  to  jts.  The 
expression  which  he  here  uses  "it  was  morally  fitting  for  Him"  is 
almost  the  only  one  which  he  devotes  to  what  may  be  called  the 
transcendent  side  of  Christ's  sacrifice — the  death  of  Christ  as  regards  its 
relation  to  God.  He  develops  no  theory  of  vicarious  satisfaction,  &c., 
though  he  uses  the  metaphoric  words  "  redemption  "  and  "  make  re- 
conciliation for"  (ix.  15,  ii.  17).  The  "moral  fitness"  here  touched 
upon  is  the  necessity  for  absolutely  sympathetic  unity  between  the  High 
Priest  and  those  for  whom  he  offered  His  jjerfect  sacrifice.  Compare 
Lk.  xxiv.  46,  "thus  it  behoved  Christ  to  suffer."  Philo  also  uses  the 
phrase  "it  became  Him."  It  is  a  very  remarkable  expression,  for 
though  it  also  occurs  in  the  LXX.  (Jer.  x.  7),  yet  in  this  passage 
alone  does  it  contemplate  the  actions  of  God  under  the  aspect  of 
inherent  moral  fitness. 

for  whoni\  i.e.  "for  whose  sake,"  "on  whose  account."  The  reference 
here  is  to  God,  not  to  Christ. 

by  whovi\  i.  e.  by  whose  creative  agency.  Compare  Rom.  xi.  36,  "of 
Him,  and  through  Him,  and  to  Him  are  all  things."  The  same  words 
may  also  be  applied  to  Christ,  but  the  context  here  shews  that  they  refer 
to  God  the  Father. 

in  bringing]  Lit.,  "having  brought."  The  use  of  the  rt'w/j/ participle 
is  difficult,  but  the  "  glory "  seems  to  imply  the  potential  triumph  of 


V.  II.]  HEBREWS,   II.  75 

bringing  many  sons  unto  glory,  to  make  the  captain  of  their 
salvation  perfect  through  sufferings.  For  both  he  that 
sanctifieth  and  they  who  are  sanctified  a^-e  all  of  one :  for 


man  in  the  ox\c  finished  act  of  Christ  wliich  was  due  to  "tlie  grace 
of  God."  The  "Him"  and  the  "having  brought "  refer  to  God  and 
not  to  Christ.  God  led  many  sons  to  glory  through  the  Captain  of  their 
Salvation,  whom— in  that  process  of  Redemptive  Work  which  is  shared 
by  each  "Person"  of  tlie  Blessed  Trinity — He  perfected  through  suffer- 
ing. On  the  Cross  the  future  glory  of  the  many  sons  was  won  and  was 
potentially  consummated. 

many\  "A  great  multitude  which  no  man  could  number"  (Rev. 
vii.  9—14). 

soi2is\  This  word  seems  to  shew  that  the  "having  brought'  refers  to 
God,  not  to  Christ,  for  we  are  called  Christ's  "brethren,"  but  never  His 
sons. 

the  captain']  The  word  also  occurs  in  Acts  v.  31.  In  Acts  iii.  15  it 
means  "author,"  or  "originator,"  as  in  xii.  1.  The  word  primarily 
signifies  one  who  goes  at  the  head  of  a  company  as  their  leader  (attte- 
signamis)  and  guide  (see  Is.  Iv.  4),  and  then  comes  to  mean  "originator." 
Comp.  V.  9. 

to  viake...pe7-fect'\  Not  in  the  sense  of  making  morally,  or  otherwise, 
perfect,  but  in  the  sense  of  leading  to  a  predestined  goal  or  consumma- 
tion. See  the  similar  uses  of  this  word  in  v.  9,  vii.  28,  ix.  9,  x.  14,  xi.  40, 
xii.  23.  The  LXX.  uses  the  word  to  represent  the  consecration  of  the 
High  Priest  (Lev.  xxi.  10).  In  this  Epistle  the  verb  occurs  nine  times, 
in  all  St  Paul's  Epistles  probably  not  once.  (In  2  Cor.  xii.  9  the  reading 
of  A,  B,  D,  F,  G,  L  is  reXetrot.  In  Phil.  iii.  12  the  reading  of  D,  E,  F,  G 
is  BeoiKaiwfiai). 

through  sufferings']  See  note  on  ver.  9,  and  comp.  Rev.  v.  9 ;  i  Pet. 
V.  10.  Jewish  Christians  were  slow  to  realise  the  necessity  for  a  cruci- 
fied Messiah,  and  when  they  did  so  they  tried  to  distinguish  between 
Messiah  son  of  David  and  a  supposed  Messiah  son  of  Joseph.  There 
are  however  some  traces  of  such  a  belief.  See  an  Appendix  to 
Vol.  II.  of  the  last  Edition  of  Dean  Perowne  on  the  Psalms. 

11.  For]  The  next  three  verses  are  an  illustration  of  the  moral  fit- 
ness, and  therefore  of  the  Divine  necessity,  that  there  should  be  perfect 
unity  and  sympathy  between  the  Saviour  and  the  saved. 

both  he  that  sanctifieth  and  they  who  are  sanctified]  The  idea  would 
perhaps  be  better,  though  less  literally,  expressed  by  "both  the  sanctifier 
and  the  sanctified,"  for  the  idea  of  sanctification  is  here  not  so  much 
that  of  progressive  holiness  as  that  of  cleansing  (xiii.  12).  This  writer 
seems  to  make  but  little  difference  between  the  words  "to  sanctify"  and 
"to  purify,"  because  in  the  sphere  of  the  Jewish  Ceremonial  Law,  from 
which  his  analogies  are  largely  drawn,  "sanctification"  meant  the 
setting  apart  for  service  by  various  means  of  purification.  See  ix.  13, 
14,  x.  10,  14,  xiii.  12,  and  comp.  John  xvii.  17 — 19;  i  John  i.  7.  The 
progressive  sanctification  is  viewed  in  its  ideal  result,  and  in  this  result 


76  HEBREWS,    II.  [w.  12,  13. 

12  which  cause  he  is  not  ashamed  to  call  them  brethren,  saying, 

1  will  declare  thy  name  unto  my  brethren,  in  the 
midst  of  the  church  will  I  sing  praise  unto  thee. 

13  And  again,  I  will  put  my  trust  in  him.     And  again,  Be- 
hold, I,  and  the  children  which  God  hath  given  me. 

the  whole  Church  of  Christ  shares,  so  that,  like  Israel  of  old,  it  is 
ideally  "holy." 

are  all  of  one]  That  is,  they  alike  derive  their  origin  from  God ; 
in  other  words  the  relation  in  which  they  stand  to  each  other  is  due  to 
one  and  the  same  divine  purpose  (John  xvii.  17 — kj).  This  seems  a 
better  view  than  to  refer  the  "one"  to  Abraham  (Is.  li.  2;  Ezek.  xxxiii. 
24,  &c.)  or  to  Adam. 

/le  is  not  ashamed  to  call  them  brethreii\  If  the  Gospels  had  been 
commonly  known  at  the  time  when  this  Epistle  was  written,  the  author 
would  doubtless  have  referred  not  to  the  Old  Testament,  but  to  such 
direct  and  tender  illustrations  as  Matt.  xii.  49,  50,  "Behold  my  mother 
and  my  brethren  !  For  whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of  my  Father  which 
is  in  heaven,  the  same  is  my  brother,  and  sister,  and  mother:"  or  to 
John  XX.  17,  "Go  to  my  brethren,  and  say  unto  them,  I  ascend  unto  my 
Father,  and  your  Father;  and  to  my  God,  and  your  God  :"  Matt,  xxvl-ii. 
10,  "go  unto  my  brethren."  Or  are  we  to  suppose  that  this  application 
of  Messianic  Psalms  would  have  come  with  even  greater  argumentative 
force  to  his  Judaising  readers? 

to  call]  i.  e.  to    declare  them  to  be  His  brethren  by  calling  them  so. 

12.  /  -will declare  thy  name  unto  7?iy  brethren]  Ps.  xxii.  22.  This  is 
a  typico- prophetic  Psalm,  accepted  in  a  Messianic  sense,  which  was 
supposed  to  be  mystically  indicated  by  its  superscription,  "  On  the  hind 
of  the  daivn."  The  sense  of  its  prophetic  and  typical  character  had 
doubtless  been  deepened  among  Christians  by  our  Lord's  quotation  from 
it  on  the  Cross  (Matt,  xxvii.  46).  It  is  one  of  our  special  Psalms  for 
Good  Friday.  See  the  references  to  it  in  Matt,  xxvii.  35  ;  John  xix. 
24. 

in  the  nitdsi  of  the  church]     Rather,  "of  the  congregation." 

13.  And  again,  I  will  put  my  trust  in  him]  The  quotation  is  pro- 
bably from  Is.  viii.  17,  but  nearly  the  same  words  are  found  in  Ps.  xviii. 

2  and  2  Sam.  xxii.  3  (LXX.).  The  necessity  of  putting  His  trust  in  God 
is  a  proof  of  Christ's  humanity,  and  therefore  of  His  brotherhood  with 
us.  When  He  was  on  the  Cross  His  enemies  said  by  way  of  taunt, 
"He  trusted  in  God"  (Matt,  xxvii.  43). 

Behold,  I,  and  the  childreji  which  God  hath  given  me]  This  verse 
furnishes  a  marked  instance  of  the  principles  of  Biblical  interpretation,  of 
which  we  have  already  seen  many  specimens.  Isaiah  by  the  prophetess 
has  a  son  to  whom  he  is  bidden  to  give  the  name  Maher-shalal-hash- 
baz,  or  " Speed-phmder-haste-spoil ;''''  to  his  elder  son  he  has  1  een  bidden 
to  give  the  name  Shear-Jashub,  "a  rcmiiant  shall  remain  ;"  and  as  the 
names  of  both  sons  are  connected  with  prophecies  concerning  Israel  he 
says  "Lo  !  I  and  the  children  whom  the  Lord  hath  given  me  a?-efor  signs 


V.  14.]  HEBREWS,    II.  -]-! 

Forasmuch  then  as  the  children  are  partakers  of  flesh  and  14 
blood,  he  also  himself  likewise  took  part  of  the  same ;  that 
through  death  he  might  destroy  him  that  had  the  power  of 

and  for  it.'onders  in  Israel  fi-om  the  Lord  of  hosts."  The  words  are  here 
entirely  dissociated  from  their  context  and  from  their  primary  historical 
meaning  to  indicate  the  relation  between  Christ  and  His  redeemed 
children.  The  LXX.  in  Is.  viii.  17  insert  the  words  "And  He  will 
say,"  and  some  have  supposed  that  the  author  (who,  like  most  Alexan- 
drians, was  evidently  unacquainted  with  the  original  Hebrew)  understood 
these  words  to  imply  that  it  was  no  longer  the  Prophet  but  the  Messiah 
who  was  the  speaker.  It  is  however  more  probable  that  he  took  for 
granted  the  legitimacy  of  his  application.  In  this  he  merely  followed 
the  school  of  interpretation  in  which  he  had  been  trained,  in  accordance 
with  principles  which  were  at  that  period  universally  accepted  among 
Jews  and  Christians.  We  must  ourselves  regard  it  as  a  somewhat 
extreme;  instance  of  applying  the  words  of  Scripture  in  a  Messianic 
sense.  But  we  see  the  bearing  of  the  illustration  upon  the  immediate 
point  in  view,  when  we  recall  the  typical  character  and  position  of 
Isaiah,  and  therefore  the  mystic  significance  wliich  was  naturally 
attached  to  his  words.  Our  Lord  Himself  uses,  with  no  reference  to 
Isaiah,  a  similar  expression,  "those  that  thou  gavest  me,"  in  John  xvii.  12. 

14 — 18.     a  fuller  statement  of  the  moral  fitness  of 
Christ's  participation  in  human  sufferings. 

14.  are  partakers  of  flesh  and  hlood'\  Rather,  "have  shared  (and 
do  share)  in  blood  and  flesh,"  i.e.  are  human.  They  are  all  inheritors 
of  this  common  mystery.  This  is  implied  by  the  perfect  tense.  "Blood 
and  flesh,"  as  in  Eph.  vi.  12. 

likeivise'\  This  word  furnished  the  Fathers  with  a  strong  argument 
against  the  Docetae  who  regarded  the  body  of  Christ  not  as  real  but  as 
purely  phantasmal. 

took  part  of  the  same]  Because,  as  he  goes  on  to  intimate,  it  would 
otherwise  have  been  impossible  for  Christ  to  die.  Comp.  Phil.  ii.  8. 
The  aorist  implies  the  one  historic  fact  of  the  Incarnation. 

ke  might  destroy]  Rather,  "He  may  bring  to  nought,"  or  "render 
impotent."  See  2  Tim.  i.  10,  "Jesus  Christ. ..hath  abolished  death;" 
I  Cor.  XV.  51 — 57;  Rev.  i.  18.  The  word  occurs  28  times  in  St  Paul, 
but  elsewhere  only  here  and  in  Lk.  xiii.  7,  though  sometimes  found  in 
the  LXX. 

hi7n  thai  had  the  fewer  of  death]  Rather,  "him  that  hath"  i.e.  in 
the  ]5resent  condition  of  things.  But  Christ,  by  assuming  our  flesh, 
became  "the  Death  of  death,"  as  in  the  old  epitaph, 

"Mors  Mortis  Morti  mortem  nisi  morte  dedisset 
Aeternae  vitae  janua  clausa  foret;" 
which  we  may  render 
"  Had  not  the  Death  of  death  to  Death  by  death  his  death-blow  given, 

For  ever  closed  were  the  gate,  the  gate  of  life  and  heaven." 


78  HEBREWS,   II.  [vv.  15,  i6. 

15  death,  that  is,  the  devil ;  and  deliver  them  who  through  fear 

16  of  death  were  all  their  lifetime  subject  to  bondage.     For 
verily  he  took  not  on  him  the  nature  of  angels ;  but  he  took 

It  is,  however,  possil^le  that  the  phrase,  "the  power  of  death,"  does 
not  imply  that  the  devil  can,  by  God's  permission,  inflict  death,  but 
that  he  has  "a  sovereignty,  of  which  death  is  the  realm." 

that  is,  the  dcvit]  This  is  the  only  place  in  this  Epistle  in  which  the 
name  "Devil"  occurs.  It  is  nowhere  very  frequent  in  the  N.T.  The 
English  reader  is  liable  to  be  misled  by  the  rendering  "devils"  for 
"demons"  in  the  Gospels.  Satan  has  the  power  of  death,  if  that  be 
the  meaning  here,  not  as  lord,  but  as  executioner  (comp.  Rev.  ix.  11); 
his  power  is  only  a  permissive  power  (John  viii.  44  ;  Rev.  xii.  10  ; 
Wisdom  ii.  24,  "  Through  envy  of  the  devil  came  death  unto  the 
world)."  The  manner  in  which  Christ  shall  thus  bring  Satan  to  nought 
is  left  untouched,  but  tlie  best  general  comments  on  the  fact  are  in 
I  Cor.  XV.  and  the  Apocalypse.  Nor  does  this  expression  encourage 
any  Manichean  or  dualistic  views  ;  for,  however  evil  may  be  the  will  of 
Satan,  he  can  never  exercise  his  power  otherwise  than  in  accordance  witii 
the  just  will  of  God.  The  Jews  spoke  of  an  Angel  of  Death,  whom 
they  called  Sammael,  and  whom  they  identified  with  Satan  (Eisenmenger, 
Entd.  yudeuth.  II.  p.  821 

15.  tkei?i  who]     Lit.  "  those,  as  many  as,"  i.e.  "all  who." 
thivugh  fear  of  death]     This  was  felt,  as  we  see  from  the  O.T. ,  far 

more  intensely  under  the  old  than  under  the  new  dispensation.  Dr 
Robertson  Smith  quotes  from  the  Alidrash  Tanchiima,  "  In  this  life 
death  never  suffers  man  to  be  glad."  See  Num.  xvii.  13,  xviii.  5  ;  Ps. 
vi.,  XXX.,  &c.,  and  Is.  xxxviii.  10 — 20,  &c.  In  heathen  and  savage 
lands  the  whole  of  life  is  often  overshadowed  by  the  terror  of  death, 
which  thus  becomes  a  veritable  "bondage."  Philo  quotes  a  line  of 
Euripides  to  shew  that  a  man  who  has  no  fear  of  death  can  never  be  a 
slave.  But,  through  Christ's  death,  death  has  become  to  the  Christian 
the  gate  of  glory.  It  is  remarkable  that  in  this  verse  the  writer  intro- 
duces a  whole  range  of  conceptions  which  he  not  only  leaves  without 
further  development,  but  to  which  he  does  not  ever  allude  again.  They 
seem  to  lie  aside  from  the  main  current  of  his  views. 

16.  For  verily  he  took  not  on  him  the  nature  of  angels]  Rather, 
"for  assuredly  it  is  not  angels  whom  He  takes  by  the  hand.''''  The 
word  8r]irov,  "certainly,"  "I  suppose,"  occurs  here  only  in  the 
N.T.  or  LXX.,  though  common  in  Philo.  In  classic  Greek  it  often 
has  a  semi-ironic  tinge,  "you  will  doubtless  admit  that,"  like  opinor  in 
Latin.  All  are  now  agreed  that  the  verb  does  not  mean  "  to  take  the 
nature  of,"  but  "to  take  by  the  hand,"  and  so  "to  help"  or  "rescue." 
Beza  indeed  called  it  "execrable  rashness"  {exsecranda  audacia)  to 
translate  it  so,  when  this  rendering  was  first  adopted  by  Castellio  in 
1551;  but  the  usage  of  the  word  proves  that  this  is  the  only  possible 
rendering,  although  all  the  Fathers  and  Reformers  take  it  in  the  other 
way.  It  is  rightly  corrected  in  the  R.  V.  (comp.  Is.  xlix.  o,  10;  fcr. 
xx.\L  32;    Heb.  viii.  9;  Matt.  xiv.  31 ;   Wisd.  iv.  ir,    "  Wisdom. ..ia/ivJ 


w.  17,  18.]  HEBREWS,   II. 


79 


on  him  the  seed  of  Abraham.  Wherefore  in  all  thmgs  it  be- 
hoved hini  to  be  made  like  unto  his  brethren,  that  he  might 
be  a  merciful  and  faithful  high  priest  in  things  pertaining  to 
God,  to  make  reconcihation  for  the  sins  of  the  people.    For 

by  the  hand  ihose:  that  seek  her").  To  refer  "he  taketh  not  hold"  to 
Death  or  the  Devil  is  most  improbable. 

the  seed  0/ Abrahatn]  i.e.  He  was  born  a  Hebrew.  He  does  not  at 
all  mean  to  imply  that  our  Lord  came  to  the  Jews  more  than  to  the 
Gentiles,  though  he  is  only  thinking  of  the  former. 

17.  Where/ore]  The  Greek  word  Sdev,  " zv/ience,^' common  in  this 
Epistle,  does  not  occur  once  in  St  Paul,  but  is  found  in  Acts  xxvi.  19, 
in  a  report  of  his  speech,  and  in  i  John  ii.  18. 

m  all  things']  These  words  should  be  taken  with  "to  be  made 
like. " 

if  behoved  html  Stronger  than  the  "  it  became  Him"  of  ver.  10.  It 
means  that,  with  reference  to  the  object  in  view,  there  lay  upon  Him  a 
moral  obligation  to  become  a  man  with  men.      See  v.  i,  2. 

that  he  might  bc\  Rather,  "that  he  might  became,''  or,  "prove 
Himself." 

a  merciful  and  faithful  high  priest']  Merciful,  or  rather,  "compas- 
sionate" to  men  ;  "  faithful"  to  God.  In  Christ  "mercy  and  truth"  have 
met  together.  Ps.  Ixxxv.  10.  The  expression  "a  faithful  priest"  is 
found  in  i  Sam.  ii.  35.  Dr  Robertson  Smith  well  points  out  that  the 
idea  of  "a  merciful  priest,"  which  is  scarcely  to  be  found  in  the  O.T., 
would  come  home  with  peculiar  force  to  the  Jews  of  that  day,  because 
mercy  was  a  quality  in  wliich  the  Aaronic  Priests  had  signally  failed 
{^Yoma,  f.  9.  i),  and  in  tlie  Herodian  epoch  they  were  notorious  for 
cruelty,  insolence  and  greed  (see  my  Life  of  Christ,  11.  329,  330).  The 
Jews  said  that  there  had  been  no  less  than  28  High  Priests  in  107  years 
of  this  epoch  (Jos.  Antt.  XX.  ro)  their  brief  dignity  being  due  to  their 
wickedness  (Prov.  x.  27).  The  conception  of  the  Priesthood  hitherto 
had  been  ceremonial  rather  than  ethical;  yet  it  is  only  "by  mercy  and 
truth"  that  "iniquity  is  puiged."  Prov.  xvi.  6.  The  word  "High 
Priest,"  here  first  introduced,  has  evidently  been  entering  into  the 
writer's  thoughts  (i.  3,  ii.  9,  11,  16),  and  is  the  most  prominent  con- 
ception throughout  the  remainder  of  the  Epistle.  The  consummating 
steps  in  genuine  high  priesthood  are  touched  upon  in  v.  10,  vi.  20, 
ix.  24. 

high  priest]  The  Greek  word  is  comparatively  new.  In  the  Penta- 
teuch the  high  priest  is  merely  called  "the  Priest"  (except  in  Lev,  xxi. 
10).  In  later  books  of  Scripture  the  epithet  "head"  or  "great"  is 
added.  The  word  occurs  17  times  in  this  Epistle,  but  not  once  in  any 
other. 

ijt  things  pe7-taining  to  God]  Comp.  v.  i.  The  phrase  is  found  in 
the  LXX.  of  Ex.  xviii.  19. 

to  make  reconciliation  for  the  sins  of  the  people]  More  literally,  "to 
expiate  the  sins  of  the  people."  Christ  is  nowhere  said  in  the  N.  T.  to 
"expiate"  or  "propitiate"  God  or  "the  wrath  of  God"  (which  are 


8o  HEBREWS,   II.  [v.  i8. 

in  that  he  himself  hath  suffered  being  tempted,  he  is  able  to 
succour  them  that  are  tempted. 

heathen,  not  Christian,  conceptions),  nor  is  any  such  expression  found 
in  the.  LXX.  Nor  do  we  find  such  phrases  as  "God  was  proiiitiated 
by  the  death  of  His  Son,"  or  "Christ  propitiated  the  wrath  of  God  iDy 
His  blood."  God  Himself  fore-ordained  tlie  propitiation  (Rom.  iii.  ij). 
The  verb  represents  the  Hebrew  kippeer,  "  to  cover,"  whence  is  derived 
the  name  for  the  day  of  Atonement  {Kippiirim).  In  Dan.  ix.  24  Theo- 
dotion's  version  has  e^iXaffacrdai  dBtKias.  We  are  left  to  unauthorised 
theory  and  conjecture  as  to  tlie  manner  in  which  and  the  reason  for 
which  "expiation,"  in  the  form  of  "sacrifice,"  interposes  between 
"sin"  and  "  wrath."  All  we  know  is  that,  in  relation  to  us,  Christ  is 
"the  propitiation  for  our  sins"  (i  John  ii.  2,  iv.  10  ;  Rom.  iii.  25).  Ac- 
cepting the  blessed  result  as  regards  ourselves  we  shall  best  shew  our 
wisdom  by  abstaining  from  dogmatism  and  theory  respecting  the  unre- 
vealed  and  transcendent  mystery  as  it  affects  God. 

the  people^  Primarily  the  Jewish  people,  whom  alone  the  writer  has 
in  mind.  Angels,  so  far  as  we  are  told,  did  not  need  the  Redemptive 
work. 

18.  For  in  that  he  himself  hath  suffered  being  tempted'\  These  words 
have  been  taken,  and  grammatically  may  be  explained,  in  eight  or  nine 
different  ways.  One  of  the  best  ways  is  that  here  given  by  the  A.  V. 
and  endorsed  by  the  R.  V.  This  method  regards  the  Greek  ei-  y  as 
equivalent  -to  the  Hebrew  ba-asher,  w-hich  means  "  in  so  far  as."  ''  By 
His  Passion,"  says  Bp.  Wordsworth,  "He  acquired  ccw/aj-j-zc^."  Of 
other  possible  ways,  the  most  tenable  is  that  which  takes  ev  w  quite 
literally.  " /n  that  sphere  wherein  He  suffered  by  being  tempted" — 
the  sphere  being  the  whole  conditions  of  human  life  and  trial  (comp. 
vi.  17;  Rom.  viii.  3).  But  the  first  way  seems  to  be  the  better.  Tempta- 
tion of  its  own  nature  involves  suffering,  and  it  is  too  generally  over- 
looked that  though  our  Lord's  severest  temptations  came  in  two  great 
and  solemn  crises — in  the  wilderness  and  at  Gethsemane — yet  Scripture 
leads  us  to  the  view  that  He  was  always  lial>le  to  temptation — though 
without  sin,  because  the  temptation  was  always  repudiated  with  the 
whole  force  of  His  will  throughout  the  whole  course  of  His  life  of  obe- 
dience. After  the  temptation  in  the  wilderness  the  devil  only  left  Him 
"for  a  season"  (Luke  iv.  13).  We  must  remember  too  that  the  word 
"temptation"  includes  all  trials. 

he  is  able  to  succour  them  that  are  tempted\  Rather,  "  that  are  under 
temptation"  (lit.  "that  are  i^rt^^  tempted,"  i.e.  men  in  their  mortal  life 
of  trial).  This  thought  is  the  one  so  prominent  throughout  the  Epistle, 
viz.  the  closeness  of  Christ's  High-Priestly  sympathy,  iv.  15,  v.  J,  2. 

Ch.  III.    Superiority  of  Christ  to  Moses  (i — 6).    Exhortation 

AGAINST   hardening   THE   HEART    (7 — 19). 

There  is  a  remarkable  parallelism  between  the  structure  of  this  and 
the  next  chapter,  and  that  of  the  first  and  second  chapters. 


I,  2.]  HEBREWS,    III. 


Wherefore,  holy  brethren,  partakers  of  the  heavenly  call- 
ing, consider  the  Apostle  and  High  Priest  of  our  profession, 
Christ  Jesus ;  who  was  faithful  to  him  that  appointed  him, 

Christ  higher  than  angels  (i.  5 —  Christ   higher   than   Moses   (iii. 

14).  1-6). 

Exhortation  (ii.  i — 5).  Exhortation  (iii.  7 — 19). 

In  Him  man  is  exalted  above  In   Him  His  people  enter  into 

angels  (ii.  6 — 16).  rest  (iv.  i — 13). 

His  Higher  Priesthood  (ii.   17,  His  Higher  Priesthood  (iv.  14 — 

i8).  16). 

1.  JVJierefore]  The  same  word  {6d€v)  as  in  ii.  1 7,  where  see  the  note. 
It  is  an  inference  from  the  grandeur  of  Christ's  position  and  the  blessed- 
ness of  His  work  as  set  forth  in  the  previous  chapters. 

holy  brethreii]  This  form  of  address  is  never  used  by  St  Paul.  It 
assumes  that  they  answered  to  their  true  ideal,  as  does-  the  ordinary 
tenn  "saints." 

partakers  0/  the  heavenly  calling'\  Rather,  "of  a  heavenly  calling." 
It  is  a  heavenly  calling  because  it  comes  from  heaven  (xii.  25),  and  is  a 
call  "upwards"  (di-w)  to  heavenly  things  (Phil.  iii.  14)  and  toholiness 
(i  Thess.  iv.  7). 

consider']  The  word  means  "contemplate,"  consider  attentively, yfx 
yottr  thoughts  upon  (aorist). 

the  Apostle]  Christ  is  called  an  "Apostle"  as  being  "sent  forth" 
(flpostellomenon)  from  the  Father  (John  xx.  21).  The  same  title  is  used 
of  Christ  by  Justin  Martyr  {Apol.  1.  12).  It  corresponds  both  to  the 
Hebrew  maleach  ( "  angel "  or  "  messenger  ")  and  sheliach  ("  delegate  "). 
The  "Apostle"  unites  the  functions  of  both,  for,  as  Justin' says  of  our 
Lord,  He  announces  (apangellei)  and  He  is  sent  (apostellctai). 

and  High  Priest]  Christ  was  both  the  Moses  and  the  Aaron  of  the 
New  Dispensation;  an  "Apostle"  from. God  to  us;  an  High  Priest  for 
us  before  God.  As  "Apostle"  He,  like  Moses,  pleads  God's  cause  with 
us;  as  High  Priest  he,  like  Aaron,  pleads  our  cause  with  God.  Just 
as  the  High  Priest  came  with  the  name  Jehoz'ah  on  the  golden  plate  of 
his  mitre  in  the  name  of  God  before  Israel,  and  with  the  names  of  the 
Tribes  graven  on  his  jewelled  breastplate  in  the  name  of  Israel  before 
God,  so  Christ  is  "  God  with  us"  and  the  propitiatory  representative  of 
men  before  God.  He  is  above  Angels  as  a  Son,  and  a  Lord  of  the 
future  world ;  above  Aaron  as  a  Priest  after  the  order  of  Melchisedek ; 
above  Moses  as  a  Son  over  the  house  is  above  a  servant  in  it. 

of  our  profession]  Rather,  "of  our  confession''  as  Christians  (iv.  14, 
X.  23;  2  Cor.  ix.  13;  I  Tim.  vi.  12).  It  is  remarkable  that  in  Philo 
(0pp.  I.  654)  the  Logos  is  called  "the  Great  High  Priest  of  our  Con- 
fession;"— but  the  genuineness  of  the  clause  seems  doubtful. 

Christ  Jesus]  Rather,  according  to  the  best  Mss.  "Jesus"  (A,  B, 
C,  D).  Such  a  variation  of  reading  may  seem  a  matter  of  indifference, 
but  this  is  very  far  from  being  the  case.  First  of  all,  the  traceable 
differences  in  the  usage  of  this  sacred  name  mark  the  advance  of  Chris- 

HEBREWS  -  6 


82  HEBREWS,   III.  [v.  3. 

3  as  also  Moses  ivas  faithful  in  all  his  house.     For  this  jnati 
was  counted  worthy  of  more  glory  than  Moses,  inasmuch  as 

tianity.  In  the  Gospels  Christ  is  called  Jesus  and  "the  Christ;"  "the 
Christ"  being  still  the  title  of  His  ofice  as  the  Anointed  Messiah,  not 
the  name  of  His  Person.  In  the  Epistles  "Christ"  has  become  a 
proper  name,  and  He  is  frequently  spoken  of  as  "the  Lord,"  not 
merely  as  a  title  of  general  respect,  but  in  the  use  of  the  word  as  an 
equivalent  to  the  Hebrew  "Jehovah."  Secondly,  the  difference  of 
nomenclature  shews  that  St  Paul  was  not  the  author  of  this  Epistle. 
St  Paul  uses  the  title  "Christ  Jesus"  which  (if  the  reading  be  here 
untenable)  does  not  occur  in  this  Epistle.  This  author  uses  "Jesus 
Christ"  (x.  10,  xiii.  8,  21),  "the  Lord"  (ii.  3),  "our  Lord"  (vii.  14), 
"our  Lord  Jesus"  (xiii.  20),  "the  Son  of  God"  (vi.  6,  vii.  3,  x.  29), 
but  most  frequently  "Jesus"  alone,  as  here  (ii.  9,  iv.  14,  vi.  20,  vii.  22, 
X.  19,  xii.  2,  24,  xiii.  12)  or  "Christ"  alone  (iii.  6,  14,  v.  5,  vi.  i,  ix. 
ir,  &c.).     See  Prof.  Davidson,  On  the  Hebrews,  p.  73. 

2.  ivJio  was  fait kf nil  Lit.,  "Being  faithful,"  i.e.  as  Cranmer  excel- 
lently rendered  it,  "how  that  he  is  faithful."  The  word  is  suggested 
by  the  following  contrast  between  Christ  and  Moses,  of  whom  it  had 
been  said  "  My  servant  Moses  is  not  so,  who  was  faithful  in  all  mine 
house,"  Num.  xii.  7. 

to  him  that  appointed  hint]  Lit.,  "to  Him  that  made  Him."  There 
can  be  little  doubt  that  the  expression  means,  as  in  the  A.V.  "to  Him 
that  made  Him  snch,"  i.e.  made  Him  an  Apostle  and  High  Priest. 
For  the  phrase  is  doubtless  suggested  by  i  Sam.  xii.  6,  where  the  LXX. 
has  "He  i\\!xi9nade  Moses  and  Aaron"  (A.V.  "advanced");  comp.  Mk. 
iii.  14,  "And  He  7nade  (eTroijjtre)  Twelve,  that  they  should  be  with 
Him."  Acts  ii.  36,  "God  made  Him  Lord  and  Christ."  The  ren- 
dering "appointed"  is  therefore  a  perfectly  faithful  one.  Still  the 
peculiarity  of  the  phrase  was  eagerly  seized  upon  by  Arians  to  prove 
that  Christ  was  a  created  Being,  and  this  was  one  of  the  causes  which 
retarded  the  general  acceptance  of  the  Epistle.  Yet  even  if  "made" 
was  not  here  used  in  the  sense  of  "appointed"  the  Arians  would  have 
had  no  vantage  ground ;  for  the  word  might  have  been  applied  to  the 
Incarnation  (so  Athanasius,  and  Primasius),  though  not  (as  Bleek  and 
Liinemann  take  it)  to  the  Eternal  Generation  of  the  Son.  Theodoret 
and  Chrysostom  understood  it  as  our  Version  does. 

as  also  Moses. ..in  all  his  house']  Rather,  "in  all  His  (God's)  house," 
Num.  xii.  7.  The  house  is  Gods  house  or  household,  i.e.  the  theocratic 
family  of  which  the  Tabernacle  was  a  symbol— "the  house  of  God 
which  is  the  Church  of  the  living  God,"  i  Tim.  iii.  15.  The  "faith- 
fulness" of  Moses  consisted  in  teaching  the  Israelites  all  that  God  had 
commanded  him  (Deut.  iv.  5)  and  himself  "doing  according  to  all  that 
the  Lord  commanded  him"  (Ex.  xl.  16). 

3.  For  this  nia?i]  Rather,  "For  //f,"  i.e.  Christ.  The  "for" 
depends  on  the  "Consider." 

was  counted  worthy']  Rather,  "hath  been  deemed  worthy,"  namely, 
by  God. 


vv.  4,  5-]  HEBREWS,   III.  83 

he  who  hath  builded  the  house  hath  more  honour  than  the 
house.     For  every  house  is  builded  by  some  7iian  ;  but  he  .j 
that  buih  all  things  is  God.     And  Moses  verily  ^vas  faithful  5 
in  ail  his  house,  as  a  servant,  for  a  testimony  of  those  things 

more gJory^     Rather,  "a  fuller  glory"  (amplioris gloriae,  Vulg.). 

of  more  glory  than  Moses\  Eagerly  as  the  writer  is  pressing  forwards 
to  develop  his  original  and  central  conception  of  Christ  as  our  Eternal 
High  Priest,  he  yet  has  to  pause  to  prove  His  superiority  over  Moses, 
because  the  Jews  had  begun  to  elevate  Moses  into  a  position  of  almost 
supernatural  grandeur  which  would  have  its  effect  on  the  imaginations  of 
wavering  and  almost  apostatising  converts.  Thus  the  Rabbis  said  that 
"the  soul  of  Moses  was  equivalent  to  the  souls  of  all  Israel ;"  (because  by 
the  cabbalistic  process  called  Gcmatria  the  numerical  value  of  the  letters 
of  "Moses  our  Rabbi"  in  Hebrew  =  61 3,  which  is  also  the  value  of  the 
letters  of  "  Lord  God  of  Israel").  They  said  that  "the  face  of  Moses 
was  like  the  Sun;"  that  he  alone  "saw  through  a  clear  glass"  not  as 
other  prophets  "through  a  dim  glass"  (comp.  St  Paul's  "through  a 
mirror  in  a  riddle,"  i  Cor.  xiii.  1-2)  and  that  whereas  there  are  but  fifty 
gates  of  understanding  in  the  world,  "all  but  one  were  opened  to 
Moses."  See  the  Rabbinic  references  in  my  Early  days  of  Christianity, 
I.  362.  St  Paul  in  2  Cor.  iii.  7,  8  contrasts  the  evanescing  splendour 
on  the  face  of  Moses  with  the  unchanging  glory  of  Christ.  ^ 

he  who  hath  builded  the  house]  The  verb  (/caracr/ceyao-as)  implies 
rather  "equipped"  or  "established"  than  "builded"  (see  i.\.  2,  6,  xi.  7 
and  note  on  i.  2;  Wisd.  xiii.  4). 

hath  fnore  honour  than  the  house']  The  point  of  this  expression  is 
not  very  obvious.  If  taken  strictly  it  would  imply  that  Moses  was  him- 
self "the  house"  which  Christ  built.  But  okos,  "house"  or  "■household" 
means  more  than  the  mere  building  [oMa).  It  means  the  whole  theo- 
cratic family,  the  House  of  Israel  in  its  covenant  relation ;  and  though 
Moses  was  not  this  House,  he  was  more  than  a  servant  in  it  being  also  its 
direct  representative  and  human  head.  (There  is  a  somewhat  similar 
phrase  in  Philo,  Defiant.  Noe,  16.) 

4.  For  every  house  is  builded  by  some  man]  The  real  meaning  would 
perhaps  be  better  expressed  by  "Every  household  is  established  by 
some  one."  The  establisher  of  the  Old  Dispensation  as  well  as  of  the 
New  was  Christ,  but  yet,  in  some  sense  (as  an  instrument  and  minister) 
Moses  might  be  regarded  as  the  founder  of  the  Old  Covenant  (Acts 
vii.  38),  as  Jesus  of  the  New.  The  verb  {kataskeuazo)  is  rendered 
"prepare"  in  ix.  6,  xi.  7;  Lk.  i.  17. 

he  that  built  all  things  is  God]  In  His  humanity  Jesus  was  but 
"the  Apostle"  of  God  in  building  His  house,  the  Church.  "He  [the^ 
man  whose  natne  is  the  Brattch)  shall  build  the  temple  of  the  Lord," 
Zech.  vi.  12.     God  is  the  supreme,  ultimate,  and  universal  Founder. 

5.  in  all  his  house]  i.e.  in  all  God's  house.  Two  "houses"  are  con- 
templated, Mosaism  and  Christianity,  the  Law  and  the  Gospel.  Both 
were  established  by  God.  In  the  household  of  the  Law,  Moses  was 
the  faithful  minister;   in  the  household  of  the  Gospel,  Christ  took  on 

6—2 


84  HEBREWS,  III.  [v.  6. 

6  which  were  to  be  spoken  after;  but  Christ  as  a  Son  over  his 
own  house ;  whose  house  are  we,  if  we  hold  fast  the  confi- 
dence and  the  rejoicing  of  the  hope  firm  unto  the  end. 

Him,  indeed,  "the  form  of  a  slave,"  and  as  such  was  faithful  even 
unto  death,  but  yet  was^Son  over  the  House.  This  seems  a  more  natural 
explanation  than  that  the  writer  regards  both  the  covenants  as  one 
Household,  2»--which  Moses  was  a' servant,,  and  over  which  Christ  was  a 
Son. 

as  a  servant]  The  word  used  is  not  dotilos  "slave,"  nor  diakonos 
"minister,"  but  thempon  "voluntary  attendant."  It  is  also  applied  to 
Moses  in  the  Ep.  of  Barnabas  and  in  Ex.  xiv.  3x1  (LXX.). 

for  a  testhnoiiy  of  those  thhigs  which  were  to  be  spoken  after]  They 
were  to  be  spoken  afterwards-  by  Christ,  the  Prophet  to  whom  Moses 
had  pointed,  Deut.  xviii.  i'5.  The  Law*  and  the  Prophets  did  but 
xvitness  to  the  righteousness  of  God  which  was  to  be  fully  revealed  in 
Christ  (Rom.  iii.  21).  They  were  but  a  shadow  of  the  coming  reality 
(x.  i).  But  although  it  is  natural  for  us  to  understand  the  expression 
in  this  way>  the  author  possibly  meant  no  more  than  that  the  faith- 
fulness of  Moses  was  an  attestation  of  the  Law  which  was  about  to 
be  delivered. 

6.  as  a  Sen  over  his  own  house]  Rather,  "  over  His  (i.  e.  God's) 
house."  In  the  words  "Servant"  and  "Son"  we  again  (as  in  i.  5,  8) 
reach  the  central-  point  of  Christ's  superiority  to  Moses.  The  proof 
of  this  superiority  did  not  require,  more  than  abrief  treatment  because 
it  was  implicitly  involved  in  the  preceding  arguments. 

whose  house  are  7ve]  This  is  a  metaphor  which  the  writer  may  well 
have  learnt  in  his  intercourse  with  St  Paul  (2  Cor.  vi.  16;  Eph.  ii.  21, 
22.     Comp.  I  Pet.  ii.  5). 

the  confidence]  Literally,  "our  cheerfuli  confidence,"  especially  of 
utterance,  as  ini  x.  19,  35.  Thevvord  rendered  "confidence"  in  verse 
14  is  different.  This-  boldness  of  speech  and  access,  which  were  the 
special  glory  of  the  old  democracies,  are  used  by  St  John  also  to 
express  the  highest  Christian  privilege  of  filial  outspokenness  (i  John  iii. 
21).  ApoUos,  the  probable  writer  of  this  Epistle,  was  known  for  this 
bold  speech  (Acts  xviii.  26),  and  evidently  feels  the  duty  and  privilege 
of  such  a  mental  altitude  (Heb.  iv.  16,  x.  19,  35). 

the  rejoicing  of  the  hope]  Rather,  "  the  glorying  of  our  hope."  The 
Greek  word  means  "an  object  of  boasting,"  as  in  Rom.  iv.  2;  i  Cor.  v. 
6,  &c.  The  way  in  which  the  writer  dwells  on  the  need  for  "  a  full 
assurance  of  hope"  (vi.  11,  18,  19)  seems  to  shew  that  owing  to  the 
delay  in  Christ's  coming  his  readers  were  liable  to  fall  into  impatience 
(x.  36,  xii.   1)  and  apathy  (vi.  12,  x.  25). 

frni  unto  the  end]  The  same  phrase  occurs  in  ver.  14.  The  word 
"firm"  being  feminine  does  not  agree  with  the  neuter  word  "object  of 
boast,"  and  the  repetition  of  the  phrase  by  a  writer  so  faultlessly  rhetori- 
cal is  singular.  It  cannot  however  be  regarded  as  a  gloss,  for  it  is  found 
in  all  the  best  Manuscripts. 

unto  the  end]     That  is,  not  "until  death,"  but  until  hope  is  lost  in 


vv.  7,  8.]  HEBREWS,   III.  85 

Wherefore,  as  the  Holy  Ghost  saith,  To  day  if  ye  willy 
hear  his  voice,  harden  not  your  hearts,  as  in  the  8 
provocation,  in  the  day  of  temptation  in  the  wilder- 
fruition;  until  this  dispensation  has  attained  to  its  final  goal.  This 
necessity  for  perseverance  in  well-doing  is  frequently  urged  .in  the  N.T. 
because  it  was  especially  needed  in  times  of  severe  trial.  Matt.  x.  22; 
Col.  i.  23,  and  see  infra  x.  35 — 39. 

7 — 19.      A   SOLEMN   WARNING   AGAINST   HARDENING   THE   HEART. 

[This  constant  interweaving  of  warning  and  exhortation  with  argu- 
ment is  characteristic  of  this  Epistle.  These  passages  (ii.  i — 4,  iii.  7 — 
19,  iv.  I — 14,  vi.  I— '9,  X.  19 — 39)  cannot,  however,  be  called  digressions, 
because  they  belong  to  the  object  which  the  vi'riter  hadimost  distinctly 
in  view — namely,  to  check  a  tendency  to  relapse  from  the  Gospel  into 
Judaism]. 

7.  IVherefore]  The  verb  which  depends  on  this  conjunction  is  de- 
layed by  the  quotation,  but  is  practically  found  in  ver.  12,  "Take  heed." 
Christ  was  faithful :  therefore  take  heed  that  ye  be  not  unfaithful. 

as  the  Holy  Ghost  saith'\  JFor  this  form  of  quotation  see  Mk.  xii.  36 ; 
Acts  i.  i6;  2  Pet.  i.  2,1. 

To  day  if  ye  will  hear  his  voice']  Rather,  ".if  ye  hear,''  or  "shall 
have  heard."  The  quotation  is  from  Ps.  xcv.  7 — 1 1,  and  the  word  means 
"Oh  that  ye  would  hear  His  voice  !";  but  the  LXX.  often  renders  the 
Hebrew  iin  by  "if."  The  "to-day"  is. always  the  Scripture  day  of 
salvation,  which  is  tiow,  2  Cor.  vi.  2.;  Is.  Iv.  6.  "If  any  man  hear  my 
voice. ..I  will  come  in  to  him,"  Rev.  iii.  20.  The  sense  of  the  Immi- 
nent Presence  of  God  which. reigns  throughout  the  prophecies  of  the  O. 
T.  as  well  as  in  the  N.T.  (x.  37;  i.  2.  Thoss.;  i  Pet.  i.  5,  &c.)  is 
beautifully  illustrated  in  the  Talmudic  story  of  the  Rabbi  {Sanhedrin 
98.  i)  who  went  to  the  Messiah  by  direction  of  Elijah,  and  asked  him 
when  he  would  come;  and  He  answered  "to-day."  But  before  the 
Rabbi  could  return  to  Elijah  the  sun  had  set,  and  he  asked  "  Has 
Messiah  then  deceived  me?"  "No,"  answered  Elijah;  "he meant  'To- 
day if  ye  hear  His  voice.'  " 

8.  harden  not  your  hearts]  Comp.  Acts  xix.  9.  Usually  God  is 
said  to  harden  man's  heart  (Ex.  vii.  3,  &c.;  Is.  Ixiii.  17;  Rom.  ix.  18) 
an  anthropomorphic  way  of  expressing  the  inevitable  results  of  neglect 
and  of  evil  habit.  But  that  this  is  man's  own  doing  and  choice  is  always 
recognised  (Deut.  x.  16;  2  Kings  xvii.  14,  &c.). 

as  in  the  provocation]  Lit.,  "in  the  embitterment."  The  LXX. 
here  seem  to  have  read  Marah  (which  means  "bitter"  and  which  they 
render  by  -jriKpia  in  Ex.  xv.  23)  for  Meribah  which,  in  Ex.  xvii.  r — 7, 
they  render  by  Loidorcsis  "reproach."  This  is  not  however  certain,  for 
though  the  substantive  does  not  occur  again,  the  verb  "I  embitter"  is 
frequently  used  of  provoking  God  to  anger.  For  the  story  of  Meribah, 
see  Numb.  xx.  7 — 13.  ^^ 

in   the   day  of  temptation]     Rather,   "of  the   temptation,     i.e.   at 


HEBREWS,   III.  [vv.  9— II. 


9  ness  :   when  your  fathers  tempted  me,  proved  me, 

lo  and   saw   my  works  forty  years.     Wherefore  I  was 

grieved   with   that   generation,    and    said,   They   do 

alway  err  in  their  heart;  and  they  have  not  known 

•  I  my  ways.     So  I  sware  in  my  wrath,  They  shall  not 

enter  into  my  rest, 

Massah;  Ex.  xvii.  7;  Deut.  vi.  16,  though  the  allusion  might  also  be  to 
Num.  xiv. 

9.  'whcn'\  Rather,  "where,"  i.e.  at  Massah,  or  in  the  wilderness. 
The  rendering  "wherewith"  or  "with  which  temptation,"  would  have 
been  more  naturally  expressed  in  other  ways. 

proved  mc\  The  better  reading  is  "by  proving  me." 
saw  i>iy  works  fort}'  years]  The  "forty  years"  is  purposely  transferred 
from  the  next  verse  of  the  Psalm.  The  scene  at  Massah  took  place  in 
the  40th  and  that  at  Meribah  in  the  ist  year  of  the  wanderings.  Deut. 
ix.  7,  xxxiii.  8.  They  indicate  the  spirit  of  the  Jews  through  the  whole 
period.  The  number  40  is  in  the  Bible  constantly  connected  with  judg- 
ment or  trial,  and  it  would  have  sounded  more  impressive  in  this  passage 
if  the  date  of  the  Epistle  was  shortly  before  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  i.e. 
about  40  years  after  the  Ascension.  The  Rabbis  had  a  saying  "The 
days  of  the  Messiah  are  40  years." 

10.  I  was  grieved]  Rather,  "  I  was  indignant."  The  Greek  word 
is  derived  from  the  dashing  of  waves  against  a  bank.  It  only  occurs  in 
the  N.  T.  here  and  in  verse  17,  but  is  common  in  the  LXX. 

wi/h  that  generation']  The  better  reading  is  "with  this  generation," 
and  it  is  at  least  possible  that  the  writer  intentionally  altered  the  ex- 
pression to  make  it  sound  more  directly  emphatic.  The  words  "  this 
generation  "  would  fall  with  grave  force  on  ears  which  had  heard  the 
report  of  our  Lord's  great  discourse  (Matt,  xxiii.  36;  comp.  xxiv.  34). 
To  the  writer  of  this  Epistle  the  language  of  Scripture  is  not  regarded 
as  a  thing  of  the  past,  but  as  being  in  a  marked  degree,  present,  living, 
and  permanent. 

They  do  alway  err  in  their  heart]  See  Ps.  Ixxviii.  40,  41.  The  word 
"alway"  is  not  in  the  original.  The  Apostles  in  their  quotations  are 
not  careful  about  verbal  accuracy.  The  Hebrew  says  "they  are  a 
people  {am)  of  wanderers  in  heart,"  and  Bleek  thought  that  the  LXX. 
read  a(/and  understood  it  to  mean  "always." 

11.  So  I swaj-e  in  my  wrath]  The  reference  is  to  Num.  xiv.  28 — 30. 
xxxii.  13. 

They  shall  not  enter]  This  is  the  correct  rendering  of  the  idiom  (here 
used  by  a  Hebraism)  "?y"they  shall  enter." 

my  rest]  The  writer  proceeds  to  argue  that  this  expression  could  not 
refer  to  the  past  Sabbath-rest  of  God  :  or  to  the  partial  and  symbolic 
rest  of  Canaan;  and  must  therefore  refer  to  the  final  rest  of  heaven. 
But  he  does  not  of  course  mean  to  sanction  any  inference  about  the 
future  and  final  salvation  either  of  those  who  entered  Canaan  or  of 
those  who  died  in  the  wilderness. 


vv.  12—15.]  HEBREWS,    III.  87 

Take  heed,  brethren,  lest  there  be  in  any  of  you  an  evil  12 
heart  of  unbelief,  in  departing  from  the  living  God.     But  ij 
exhort  one  another  daily,  while  it  is  called  To  day ;  lest  any 
of  you  be  hardened  through  the  deceitfulness  of  sin.     For  14 
we  are  made  partakers  of  Christ,  if  we  hold  the  beginning 
oi  our  confidence  stedfast  unto  the  end  ;  whilst  it  is  said,  To  1  = 

12.  Take  heed,  brethren,  lest  there  be...\  It  is  evident  that  deep 
anxiety  mixes  with  the  warning. 

in  any  of  ymi\  The  warning  is  expressed  indefinitely ;  but  if  the 
Epistle  was  addressed  to  a  small  Hebrew  community  the  writer  may 
have  had  in  view  some  special  person  who  was  in  danger  (comp.  x.  25, 
xii.  15).  In  any  case  the  use  of  the  singular  might  lead  to  individual 
searching  of  hearts.  He  here  begins  a  homily  founded  on  the  quotation 
from  the  Psalm. 

an  evil  heart  of  unbelief '\  Unbelief  has  its  deep  source  in  the  heart 
more  often  perhaps  than  in  the  mind. 

in  departing]  Lit.,  in  the  apostatising  from.  In  that  one  word — 
Apostasy — the  moral  peril  of  his  Hebrew  readers  was  evidently  summed 
up.  To  apostatise  after  believing  is  more  dangerous  than  not  to  have 
believed  at  all. 

from  the  living  God\  The  epithet  is  not  idle.  It  conveys  directly 
the  warning  that  God  would  not  overlook  the  sin  of  apostasy,  and 
indirectly  the  thought  that  Christ  was  in  heaven  at  the  right  hand  of 
God. 

13.  exhort  one  another]  The  verb  implies  the  mutually  strengthen- 
7«^  intercourse  of  consolation  and  moral  appeal.  It  is  the  verb  from 
which  comes  the  word  Paraclete,  i.  e.  the  Comforter  or  Strengthener. 
The  literal  rendering  is  '■'■  &yiho\1  yourselves,"  but  this  is  only  an  idiom 
which  extends  reciprocity  into  identity,  and  the  meaning  is  "exhort  one 
another." 

while  it  is  called  To  day]  Another  rendering  is  "so  long  as  to-day  is 
being  proclaimed."  The  meaning  is  "  while  the  to-day  of  the  Psalm 
(t6  (7T]fispoi')  can  still  be  regarded  as  applicable,"  i.e.  while  our  "day  of 
visitation"  lasts,  and  while  we  still  "have  the  light."  Lk.  xix.  44; 
John  xii.  35,  36. 

be  hardened]  See  note  on  ver.  8.  The  following  clause  indicates 
that  God  only  "hardens  "  the  heart,  in  the  sense  that  man  is  inevitably 
suffered  to  render  his  own  heart  callous  by  indulgence  in  sin. 

14.  zve  are  made]     Rather,  "  we  are  become." 

partakers  of  Christ]  Rather,  "partakers  with  Christ,"  for  the  thought 
of  mystical  union  with  Christ  extending  into  spiritual  unity  and  identity, 
which  makes  the  words  "in  Christ"  the  "monogram"  of  St  Paul, 
is  scarcely  alluded  to  by  this  writer.  His  thoughts  are  rather  of  "  Christ 
for  us"  than  of  "Christ  in  us."  "To  him  that  overcometh  will  I 
grant  to  sit  with  me  in  my  throne,''''  Rev.  iii.  11. 

the  beginning  of  our  confidence]  The  word  hypostasis  is  here  rendered 
confidence,  as  in  Ps.  xxxix.  7  ("sure  hope").     This  meaning  of  the 


88  HEBREWS,   III.  IV.         [vv.  16—19;  i- 

day  if  ye  will  hear  his  voice,  harden  not  your  hearts, 

16  as  in  the  provocation.     For  some,  when  they  had  heard, 
did  provoke  :    howbeit  not  all  that  came  out  of  Egypt  by 

17  Moses.     But  with  whom  was  he  grieved  forty  years?  was  it 
not  with  them  that  had  sinned,  whose  carcases  fell  in  the 

18  wilderness?     And  to  whom  sware  he  that  they  should  not 

19  enter  into  his  rest,  but  to  them  that  believed  not  ?     So  we  see 
that  they  could  not  enter  in  because  of  unbelief 

4      Let  us  therefore  fear,  lest,  a  promise  being  left  tis  of  en- 

word    (elsewhere   rendered    "  substance,"   to   which   it  etymologically 
corresponds,  i.  3,  xi.  i),  is  found  only  in  later  Greek.     The  expression 
"beginning"   does   not   here   imply  anything   inchoate   or  imperfect, 
but  is  merely  in  contrast  with  "end." 
sfedfast  tinto  the  end]     See  note  on  ver.  6. 

16.  some,  when  they  had  heard,  did  provoke']  Rather,  "\Vho  (rivti) 
when  they  heard,  embittered  (Him)  "  ?  This  is  the  reading  of  the 
Peshito.  It  would  have  been  absurd  to  use  the  word  ' '  some "  of 
600,000  with  only  two  exceptions,  Num.  xiv.  38;  Josh.  xiv.  8,  9. 

howbeit  not  alF]  Rather,  "Nay!  was  it  not  all?"  (i.e.  all  except 
Caleb  and  Joshua).  It  is  true  that  the  rendering  is  not  free  from 
difficulty,  since  there  seems  to  be  no  exact  parallel  to  this  use  of 
dXX'  ov.     But  it  involves  less  harshness  than  the  other. 

17.  grieved]     Rather  "indignant."     See  ver.  10. 

whose  carcases]  To  us  the  words  read  as  though  there  were  a  deep 
and  awful  irony  in  this  term  (xwXa),  as  though,  "dying  as  it  were 
gradually  during  their  bodily  life,  they  became  walking  corpses " 
(Delitzsch).  It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  any  such  thought  was 
in  the  mind  of  the  writer.  The  word  properly  means  "limbs"  but 
is  used  by  the  LXX.  for  the  Hebrew  pegarim,  "corpses"  Num. 
xiv.  ■zg. 
fell]     Compare  the  use  of  the  word  in  r  Cor.  x.  8. 

18.  to  them  that  believed  not]     Rather,  "  that  disobeyed." 

19.  So  we  see]  Lit.  ^^ and  we  observe."  The  translators  of  the 
A.  V.  seem  by  their  version  to  regard  the  words  as  a  logical  inference 
from  the  previous  reasoning.  It  is  better,  however,  to  regard  them  as 
the  statement  of  a  fact — "we  see  by  the  argument,"  or  ex  historia  cog- 
noscimus.     Grotius.     See  Ps.  cvi.  24 — 26. 

that  they  could  not  enter  in]  They  did  make  the  attempt  to  enter, 
but  failed  because  they  lacked  the  power  which  only  God  could  give 
them  (Numb.  xiv.  40 — 45). 

Ch.  IV.  Continued  exhortation  to  embrace  the  yet  open 
OFFER  OF  God's  rest  (i — 14).  Exhortation  founded  on 
THE  High  Priesthood  of  Christ  (14 — 16). 

1.  Let  Its  therefore  fear]  The  fear  to  which  we  are  exhorted  is  not 
any  uncertainty  of  hope,  but  solicitude  against  careless  indifi'erence.  It 
is  a  wholesome  fear  taught  by  wisdom  (Phil.  ii.  12). 


vv.  2,  3.]  HEBREWS,   IV.  89 

tering  into  his  rest,  any  of  you  should  seem  to  come  short 
of  it.     For  unto  us  was  the  gospel  preached,  as  well  as  unto  2 
them:  but  the  word  preached  did  not  profit  them,  not  being 
mixed  with  faith  in  them  that  heard  it.    For  we  which  have  3 
believed  do  enter  into  rest,  as 7i(?  said,  As  I  have  sworn 

lesi\     Lit.  lest  haply. 

being  left  us\  It  is'better  to  omit  the  word  "  us.'"  It  means  "  since  a 
promise  still  remains  unrealised."  The  promise  has  not  been  exhausted 
by  any  previous  fulfilment. 

any\     Rather,  "  any  one."     See  note  on  iii.  12. 

of  yoii\  He  cannot  say  "of  us,"  because  he  proceeds  to  describe 
the  case  of  hardened  and  defiant  apostates. 

should  seem  to  come  short  of  it'\  Rather,  "  should  seem  to  have  failed 
in  attaining  it.'''  The  Greek  might  also  mean  "should  think  that  he 
has  come  too  late  for  it;"  but  the  writer's  object  is  to  stimulate  the 
negligent,  not  to  encourage  the  despondent.  The  word  "seem"  is 
an  instance  of  the  figure  called  litotes,  in  which  a  milder  term  is 
designedly  used  to  express  one  which  is  much  stronger.  The  author 
of  this  Epistle,  abounding  as  he  does  in  passages  of  uncompromising 
sternness,  would  not  be  likely  to  use  any  merely  euphuisticphrase._  The 
dignity  of  his  expressions  adds  to  their  intensity.  For  a  similar 
delicate  yet  forcible  use  of  "seem"  see  i  Cor.  xi.  16.  The  verb  "to 
isxV  or  "come  short"  occurs  in  xii.  15,  together  with  a  terrible 
example  of  the  thing  itself  in  xii.  17. 

2  For  nnto  us  was  the  gospel  preached,  as  well  as  unto  them'\  We 
should  have  expected  rather  "For  unto  them,  as  well  as  unto  us," 
if  this  had  been  the  right  translation.  The  better  version  however  is 
"  For  indeed  we  too,  just  as  they,  have  had  a  Gospel  preached  unto 
us."  The  "Gospel"  in  this  instance  means  the  glad  tidings  of  a 
future  rest. 

the  word  preached'^  Lit.  "the  word  of  hearing."  The  function  of 
the  hearer  is  no  less  necessary  than  that  of  ihc  p?-eachcr,  if  the  spoken 
word  is  to  be  profitable. 

not  being  mixed  with  faith  in  them  that  heard  ii\  There  is  an 
extraordinary  diversity  in  the  MS.  readings  here.  The  best  supported 
seems  to  be  "because  they  were  not  united  (lit.  '  tempered  together') 
by  faith  with  them  that  heard  (i.e.  effectually  listened  to)  it."  This 
would  mean  that  the  good  news  of  rest  produced  no  benefit  to  the 
rebellious  Israelites,  because  they  were  not  blended  with  Caleb  and 
Joshua  in  their  faith.  They  heard,  but  only  with  the  ears,  not  with 
the  heart.  But  there  is  probably  some  ancient  corruption  of  the  text. 
Perhaps  instead  of  "with  them  that  heard,"  the  true  reading  may 
have  been  "with  the  things  heard:'  The  reading  of  our  A.  V.  gives 
an  excellent  sense,  if  it  were  but  well_  supported.  The  verb  "  to 
mingle"  or  "temper"  occurs  in  i  Cor.  xii.  24. 

3,  For  we  ivhich  have  believed  do  enter  into  rest]  Rather,  _"  For  we 
who  believed"  (i.e.  we  who  have  accepted  the  word  of  hearing)  "are 
entering  into  that  rest." 


90  HEBREWS,  IV.  [w.  4—7. 

in  my  wrath,  if  they  shall  enter  into  my  rest:  although 
the  works  were  finished  from  the  foundation  of  the  world. 

4  For  he  spake  in  a  certain  place  of  the  seventh  day  on  this 
wise.  And  God  did  rest  the  seventh  day  from  all  his 

5  w  orks.    And  in  this//a^i?  again,  If  they  shall  enter  into 

6  my  rest.     Seeing  therefore   it  remaineth  that  some  must 
enter  therein,  and  they  to  whom  it  was  first  preached  entered 

7  not  in  because  of  unbelief,  again  he  limiteth  a  certain  day, 

if  they  shall  ente7-\  This  ought  to  have  been  rendered  as  in  iii.  11, 
^' they  shall  not  enter.'"  The  argument  of  tlie  verse  is  (i)  God  pro- 
mised a  rest  to  the  Israelites.  (2)  Many  of  them  failed  to  enter  in. 
(3)  Yet  this  rest  of  God  began  on  the  first  sabbath  of  God,  and  some 
men  were  evidently  meant  to  enter  into  it.  (4)  Since  tlien  the  original 
recipients  of  the  promise  had  failed  to  enjoy  it  through  disbelief,  the 
promise  was  renewed  ages  afterwards,  in  Ps.  xcv.  by  the  word  "To-day." 
The  immense  stress  of  meaning  laid  on  incidental  Scriptural  expressions 
was  one  of  the  features  of  Rabbinic  as  well  as  of  Alexandrian  exegesis. 

from  the  foundation  of  the  %vorld\  God's  rest  had  begun  since  the 
Creation. 

4.  he  spake  in  a  certain  place"]  Rather,  "  He  hath  said  somewhere." 
By  the  indefinite  "He"  is  meant  "God,"  a  form  of  citation  not  used 
in  the  same  way  by  St  Paul,  but  common  in  Philo  and  the  Rabbis. 
The  "somewhere"  of  the  original  is  here  expressed  in  the  A.  V.  by 
"in  a  certain  place,"  see  note  on  ii.  6.  The  reference  is  to  Gen.  ii.  1 ; 
Ex.  XX.  II,  xxxi.  17.  The  writer  always  regards  the  Old  Testament  not 
as  a  dead  letter,  but  as  a  living  voice. 

5.  If  they  shall]  i.e.  "they  shall  not." 

6.  it  remaineth]     The  promise  is  still  left  open,  is  unexhausted. 
because  of  unbelief]     Rather,  "because  oi  disobedience"  [apeitheian). 

It  was  not  the  Israelites  of  the  wilderness,  but  their  descendants,  who 
came  to  Shiloh,  and  so  enjoyed  a  sort  of  earthly  type  of  the  heavenly 
rest  (Josh,  xviii.  i). 

7.  again  he  limiteth  a  certain  day...]  There  is  no  reason  whatever 
for  the  parenthesis  in  the  A.V. ,  of  which  the  reading,  rendering,  and 
punctuation  are  here  alike  infelicitous  to  an  extent  which  destroys  for 
ordinary  readers  the  meaning  of  the  passage.  It  should  be  rendered 
(putting  only  a  comma  at  the  end  of  ver.  6),  ^'Jgaiit,  he  fixes  a  day.  To- 
day, saying  in  David,  so  long  afteitvards,  even  as  has  been  said  before, 
To-day  if  ye  will  hear,'''  &c.  In  the  stress  laid  upon  the  word  "to-day" 
we  find  a  resemblance  to  Philo,  who  defines  "to-day"  as  "th.e  infinite 
and  interminable  aeon,"  and  says  "Till  to-day,  that  is  for  ever"  (Leg. 
Allegg.  III.  8;  De  Profiig.  11).  The  argument  is  that  "David"  (a 
general  name  for  the  "Psalmist")  had,  nearly  five  centuries  after  the  time 
of  Moses,  and  three  millenniums  after  the  Creation,  still  spoken  of  God's 
rest  as  an  offer  open  to  mankind.  If  we  regard  this  as  a  mere  verbal 
argument,  turning   on   the   attribution   of  deep   mystic   senses   to  the 


V.  8.]  HEBREWS,  IV.  91 

saying  in  David,  To  day,  after  so  long  a  time;  as  it  is 
said,  To  day  if  ye  will  hear  his  voice,  harden  not 
your  hearts.     For   if  Jesus   had   given   them   rest,  timi  s 


words  "rest"  and  "to-day,"  and  on  the  trains  of  inference  which  are 
made  to  depend  on  these  words,  we  must  remember  that  such  a  method 
of  dealing  with  Scripture  phraseology  was  at  this  period  universally 
current  among  the  Jews.  But  if  we  stop  at  this  point  all  sorts  of  diffi- 
culties arise;  for  if  the  "rest"  referred  to  in  Ps.  xcv.  was  primarily  the 
land  of  Canaan  (as  in  Deut.  i.  34 — 36,  xii.  9,  &c.),  the  oath  of  God, 
"they  shall  not  enter  into  my  rest"  only  applied  to  the  genera- 
tion of  the  wandering,  and  He  had  said  "Your  little  ones... them 
will  I  bring  in,  and  they  shall  know  the  land  which  ye  have  despised," 
Num.  xiv.  31.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  "the  rest"  meant  heaven,  it 
would  be  against  all  Scripture  analogy  to  assume  that  all  the  Israelites 
who  died  in  the  wilderness  were  excluded  from  future  happiness.  And 
there  are  many  other  difficulties  which  will  at  once  suggest  themselves. 
The  better  and  simpler  way  of  looking  at  this,  and  similar  trains  of 
reasoning,  is  to  regard  them  as  particular  modes  of  expressing  blessed 
and  eternal  truths,  and  to  look  on  the  Scripture  language  applied  to 
them  in  the  light  rather  of  illustration  than  of  Scriptural  proof.-  Quite 
apart  from  this  Alexandrian  method  of  finding  recondite  and  mystic 
senses  in  the  history  and  language  of  the  Bible,  we  see  the  deep  and 
glorious  truths  that  God's  offer  of  "  Rest"  in  the  highest  sense — of  par- 
ticipation in  His  own  rest — is  left  open  to  His  people  in  the  eternal  to- 
day of  merciful  opportunity.  The  Scripture  illustiation  must  be  re- 
garded as  quite  subordinate  to  the  essential  truth,  and  not  the  essential 
truth  made  to  depend  on  the  Scripture  phraseology.  When  God  says 
"They  shall  not  enter  my  rest,"  the  writer — reading  as  it  were  between 
the  lines  with  the  eyes  of  Christian  enlightenment — reads  the  promise 
"but  others  shall  enitx  into  my  rest,"  which  was  most  true. 

saying  in  David\  A  common  abbreviated  form  of  quotation  like 
"saying  in  Elijah"  for  "in  the  part  of  Scripture  about  Elijah"  (Rom. 
xi.  2).  The  quotation  may  mean  no  more  than  "in  the  Book  of  Psalms." 
The  95th  Psalm  is  indeed  attributed  to  David  in  the  LXX;  but  the 
.superscriptions  of  the  LXX,  like  those  of  our  A.V.,  are  wholly  without 
authority,  and  are  in  some  instances  entirely  erroneous.  The  date  of 
the  Psalm  is  more  probably  the  close  of  the  Exile.  We  may  here  notice 
the  fondness  of  the  writer  for  the  Psalms,  of  which  he  quotes  no  less 
than  eleven  in  this  Epistle  (Ps.  ii.,  viii.,  xxii.,  xl.,  xlv.,  xcv.,  cii.,  civ., 
ex.,  cxviii.,  cxxxv.). 

8.  Jesus']  i.  e.  Joshua.  The  needless  adoption  of  the  Greek  form  of 
the  name  by  the  A.V.  is  here  most  unfortunately  perplexing  to  un- 
instructed  readers,  as  also  in  Acts  vii.  45. 

had  given  them  rest]  He  did,  indeed,  give  them  a  rest  and,  in  some 
sense  (Deut.  xii.  g),  the  rest  partially  and  primarily  intended  (Josh.xxiii. 
1 ) ;  but  only  a  dim  shadow  of  the  true  and  final  rest  offered  by  Christ 
(Matt.  xi.  28;  2  Thess.  iii.  i — 6;  Rev.  xiv.  13). 


92  HEBREWS,   IV.  [vv.  9-12. 

9  would  he  not  afterward  have  spoken  of  another  day.    There 

10  remaineth  therefore  a  rest  to  the  people  of  God.     For  he 
that  is  entered  into  his  rest,  he  also  hath  ceased  from  his 

11  own  works,  as  God  did  from  his.     Let  us  labour  therefore 
to  enter  into  that  rest,  lest  any  man  fall  after  the  same  ex- 

12  ample  of  unbelief.    For  the  word  of  God  />  quick,  and  pow- 

tlien  would  he  not  afterward  have  spoken^  The  "He"  is  here  Je- 
hovah. More  literally,  "He  would  not  have  been  speaking."  The 
j^hrases  applied  to  Scripture  by  the  writer  always  imply  his  sense  of  its 
living  power  and  ideal  continuity.  The  words  are  as  though  they  had 
just  been  uttered  ("He  hath  said,"  ver.  4)  or  were  still  being  uttered  (as 
here,  and  throughout).  Thereis  a  similar  mode  of  argument  in  vii.  11, 
viii.  4,  7,  xi.  15. 

9.  There  remaineth  therefore  a  rest]  Since  the  word  used  for  "rest" 
is  here  a  different  word  (saddatismos)  from  that  which  has  been  used 
through  the  earlier  part  of  the  argument  [katapausis],  it  is  a  pity  that  King 
James's  translators,  who  indulge  in  so  many  needless  variations,  did  not 
here  introduce  a  necessary  change  of  rendering.  The  word  means  "a 
Sabbath  rest"  and  supplies  an  important  link  in  the  argument  by  pointing 
to  the  fact  that  "the  rest"  which  the  Author  has  in  view  is  God's  rest, 
a  far  higher  conception  of  rest  than  any  of  which  Canaan  could  be  an 
adequate  type.  The  Sabbath,  which  in  1  Mace  xv.  i  is  called  "the 
Day  of  Rest"  [katapausis),  is  a  nearer  type  of  Heaven  than  Canaan. 
Dr  Kay  supposes  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  Joshua's  first  Sabbatic  year, 
when  "the  land  had  rest  from  war"  (Josh.  xiv.  15),  and  adds  that 
Psalms  xcii— civ.  have  a  Sabbatic  character,  and  that  Ps.  xcii.  is  headed 
"a  song  for  the  sabbath  day." 

10.  For  he  that  is  entered  into  his  resi]  This  is  not  a  special  refer- 
ence to  Christ,  but  to  any  faithful  Christian  who  rests  from  his  labours. 
The  verse  is  merely  an  explanation  of  the  newly-introduced  term  "Sab- 
bath-rest." 

11.  Let  us  labour^  Lit.,  "let  us  be  zealous,"  or  "give  diligence" 
(2  Pet.  i.  10,  11;  Phil.  iii.  14). 

lest  any  vian]     See  note  on  iv.  i. 

of  unbelief  ]     Rather,  "of  disobedience." 

12.  For  the  rvord  of  God  is  quick'\  "Quick"  is  an  old  English  ex- 
pression for  "living;"  hence  St  Stephen  speaks  of  Scripture  as  "the 
living  oracles"  (Acts  vii.  38).  The  "word  of  God"  is  not  here  the 
personal  Logos;  a  phrase  not  distinctly  and  demonstrably  adopted  by 
any  of  the  sacred  writers  except  St  John,  who  in  the  prologue  to  his 
Gospel  calls  Christ  "the  Word,"  and  in  the  Apocalypse  "the  Word  of 
God."  The  reference  is  to  the  written  and  spoken  word  of  God,  of  the 
force  and  almost  personality  of  which  the  writer  shews  so  strong  a 
sense.  To  him  it  is  no  dead  utterance  of  the  past,  but  a  living 
power  for  ever.  At  the  same  time  the  expressions  of  this  verse  could 
hardly  have  been  used  by  any  one  who  was  not  familiar  with  the  per- 
sonification of  the  Logos,  and  St  Clemens  of  Rome  applies  the  words 


V.  13-]  HEBREWS,    IV.  93 

erful,  and  sharper  than  any  twoedged  sword,  piercing  even 
to  the  dividing  asunder  of  soul  and  spirit,  and  of  the  joints 
and  marrow,  and  is  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and  intents 
of  the  heart.  Neither  is  there  any  creature  t/iat  is  not  ma- 
nifest in  his  sight:  but  all  things  are  naked  and  opened  unto 
the  eyes  of  him  with  whom,  we  have  to  do. 

"a  searcher  of  the  thoughts  and  desires"  to  God.  The  passage 
closely  resembles  several  which  are  found  in  Philo,  though  it  applies  the 
expressions  in  a  different  manner  (see  Introduction); 

powcrfitl'\  Lit.,  effective,  energetic;  The  vital  power  shews  itself  in 
acts. 

sharper  than  any  twoedged  sword\^  The  same  comparison  is  used  by 
Isaiah  (xlix.  2)  and  St  Paul  (Eph.  vi.  17)  and  St  John  (Rev.  ii.  16,  xix. 
15).  See  too  Wisdom  xviii.  15,  16,  "Thine  Almighty  Word  leaped 
down  from  heaven... and  brought  thine  unfeigned  commandment  as  a 
sharp  sword."  Philo  compares  the  Logos  to  the  flaming  sword  of  Eden 
(Gen.  iii.  24)  and  "the  fire  and  knife"  (/xdxaipa;')  of  Gen.  xxii.  6. 

piercing  even  to  the  dividing  asunder  of  soul  and  spirit,  a7id  of  the 
joints  and  marrozv]  The  meaning  is  not  that  the  word  of  God  divides 
the  soul  (the  "natural"  soul)  by  which  we  live frow  the  spirit  by  which 
we  reason  and  apprehend ;  but  that  it  pierces  not  only  the  natural 
soul,  but  even  to  the  Divine  Spirit  of  man,  and  even  to  the  joints  and 
marrow  (i.  e.  to  the  inmost  depths)  of  these.  Thus  Euripides  {Hippol. 
527)  speaks  of  the  "marrow  of  the  soul."  It  is  obvious  that  the  writer 
does  not  mean  anything  very  specific  by  each  term  of  the  enumeration, 
which  produces  its  effect  by  the  rhetorical  fulness  of  the  expressions. 
The  ^vxh  or  animal  soul  is  tlie  sphere  of  that  life  which  makes  a  man 
xl/vx^Kos,  i.e.  carnal,  unspiritual;  lie  possesses  this  element  of  life  (a«/wa) 
in  common  with  the  beasts.  It  is  only  by  virtue  of  his  spirit  {irvevfia) 
that  he  has  affinity  with  God. 

a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and  intents  of  the  hearty  These  words  are 
a  practical  explanation  of  those  which  have  preceded.  The  phraseology 
is  an  evident  reminiscence  of  Philo.  Philo  compares  the  Word  to  the 
flaming  sword  of  Paradise;-  and  calls  the  Word  "the  cutter  of  all  things," 
and  says  that  "when  whetted  to  the  utmost  sharpness  it  is  incessantly 
dividing  all  sensuous  things"  (see  Qttis  Rer.  Div.  Haeres,  §  27  ;  Opp.  ed. 
Mangey  l.  491,  503,  506).  By  enthumeseis  is  meant  (strictly)  our  moral 
imaginations  and  desires;  by  ennoiai  our  intellectual  thoughts:  but  the 
distinction  of  meaning  is  hardly  kept  (Matt.  ix.  4,  &c.). 

13.  in  his  sight']  i.e.  in  the  Sight  of  God,  not  of  "the  Word  of 
God."  "He  seeth  all  man's  goings,"  Job.  xxxiv.  21.  "Thou  hast 
set. ..our  secret  sins  in  the  light  of  Thy  countenance,"  Ps.  xc.  8 ;  comp. 
Ps.  cxxxix.  I — 12. 

opened]  The  Greek  word  rerpaxv^i-crM-^^o,  must  have  some  such 
meaning,  but  it  is  uncertain  what  is  the  exact  force  of  the  metaphor 
from  which  it  is  derived.  It  comes  from  rpaxn^os,  "the  neck,"  and 
has  been  explained  to  mean:  (i)  "seized  by  the  throat  and  thrown  on 


94 


HEBREWS,  IV.  [vv.  14,  15. 


14  Seeing  then  that  we  have  a  great  high  priest,  that  is  passed 
into  the  heavens,  Jesus  the  Son  of  God,  let  us  hold  fast  our 

1 5  profession.     For  we  have  not  a  high  priest  which  cannot 

the  back";  or  (2)  "with  the  neck  forced  back  Hke  that  of  a  malefactor 
compelled  to  shew  his  face"  (Sueton.  Vitell.  17);  or  (3)  "with  the  neck 
held  back  like  that  of  animals  in  order  that  the  Priest  may  cut  their  throats"; 
or  (4)  "  flayed";  or  (5)  "anatomised"  (comp.  Lev.  i.  6,  9).  This  anatomic 
examination  of  victims  by  the  Priests  was  called  momoskopia  since  it  was 
necessary  that  every  victim  should  be  "without  blemish"  {ainomos),2S\^ 
Maimonides  says  that  there  were  no  less  than  73  kinds  of  blemishes. 
Hence  Polycarp  {ad  Phil.  iv.)says  that  "all  things  are  rigidly  examined 
(javTo.  iiuixoaKoirdTai)  by  God."  The  usage  of  Philo,  however,  deci- 
sively shews  that  the  word  means  " laid  prostrate."  For  the  truth 
suggested  see  Prov.  xv.  11;  "  I  try  the  reins,"  Jer.  xvii.  10;  Ps.  li.  6; 
Prov.  XX.  27,  "the  candle  of  the  Lord  searching  all  the  inner  parts  of 
the  belly." 

unto  the  eyes]  "  The  Son  of  God,  who  hath  His  eyes  like  unto  a 
flame  of  fire."     Rev.  ii.  iS. 

7iiit/i  whom  we  have  to  do]  This  might  be  rendered,  "  to  whom  our 
account  must  be  given."  Thus  in  Luke  xvi.  1,  "render  thy  account" 
{rhv  \6yov).  Perhaps,  however,  our  A.V.  correctly  represents  it  "Him 
with  whom  our  concern  is."  Comp.  i  Kings  ii.  14;  2  Kings  ix.  5 
(LXX.),  where  a  similar  phrase  occurs  in  this  sense. 

14—16.     Exhortation  founded  on  Christ's  High  Priesthood. 

14.  Seeing  then  that  we  have  a  great  high  priest]  These  verses 
refer  back  to  ii.  17,  iii.  i,  and  form  the  transition  to  the  long  proof  and 
illustration  of  Christ's  superiority  to  the  Levitic  Priesthood  which 
occupies  the  Epistle  to  x.  18.  The  writer  here  reverts  to  his  central 
thought,  to  which  he  has  already  twice  alluded  (ii.  17,  iii.  i).  He  had 
proved  that  Christ  is  superior  to  Angels  the  ministers,  and  to  Moses  the 
servant  of  the  old  Dispensation,  and  (quite  incidentally)  to  Joshua.  He 
has  now  to  prove  that  He  is  like  Aaron  in  all  that  made  Aaron's  priest- 
hood precious,  but  infinitely  superior  to  him  and  his  successors,  and  a 
pledge  to  us  of  the  grace  by  which  the  true  rest  can  be  obtained. 
Christ  is  not  only  a  High  Priest,  but  "a  gj-eat  High  Priest,"  an 
expression  also  found  in  Philo  (0pp.  i.  654). 

that  is  passed  into  the  heavens]  Rather,  "who  hath  passed  through 
the  heavens" — the  heavens  being  here  the  lower  heavens,  regarded 
as  a  curtain  which  separates  us  from  the  presence  of  God.  Christ  has 
passed  not  only  into  but  above  the  heavens  (vii.  26).  Transiit,  non 
modo  intravit,  caelos. — Bengel. 

yesus  the  Son  of  God]  The  title  combines  His  earthly  and  human 
name  with  his  divine  dignity,  and  thus  describes  the  two  natures  which 
make  His  Priesthood  eternally  necessary. 

our  profession]     Rather,  "  our  confession,"  as  in  iii.  i. 

15.  For]  He  gives  the  reason  for  holding  fast  our  confession ;  [we 
may  do  so  with  confidence],  for  Christ  can  sympathise  with  us  in  our 


V.  i6;  I.]  HEBREWS,    IV.  V.  95 

be  touched  with  the  feeling  of  our  infirmities;  but  was  in  all 
points  tempted  like  as  we  are,  yet  without  sin.    Let  us  there-  ■ 
fore  come  boldly  unto  the  throne  of  grace,  that  we  may 
obtain  mercy,  and  find  grace  to  help  in  time  of  need.     For 

weaknesses,  since  He  has  suffered  with  us  (av\i.ira.<jxf-w).    Rom.  viii.  17  ; 
I  Cor.  xii.  26. 

■with  the  feeling  of  our  infirmities]  Even  the  heathen  could  feel 
the  force  and  beauty  of  this  appeal,  for  they  intensely  admired  the 
famous  line  of  Terence, 

"I  am  a  man;  I  feel  an  interest  in  everything  which  is  human;" 
at  the  utterance  of  which,  when  the  play  was  first  acted,  it  is  said  that 
the  whole  of  the  audience  rose  to  their  feet ;  and  the  exquisite  words 
which  Virgil  puts  into  the  mouth  of  Dido, 

'■'■  Hmcd  ignara  mali,  miseris  sitecerrere  disco.'''' 

tempted]  "Tempted"  {iTeTTeipa<Tp,evov)  is  the  best-supported  reading, 
not  neireipaij.ii'ov,  "having  made  trial  of,"  "  experienced  in."  It  refers 
alike  to  the  trials  of  life,  which  are  in  themselves  indirect  temptations — 
sometimes  to  sin,  always  to  murmuring  and  discontent ;  and  to  the  direct 
temptations  to  sin  which  are  life's  severest  trials.  From  both  of  these 
our  Lord  suffered  (John  xi.  33—35;  "ye  are  they  who  have  continued 
with  me  in  my  temptations''''  Luke  xxii.  28,  iv.  1,  &c.). 

like  as  we  are]  Lit.  "  after  the  likeness ;"  a  stronger  way  of  expressing 
the  resemblance  of  Christ's  "temptations"  to  ours  than  if  an  adverb 
had  been  used. 

yet  without  sin]  Lit.  "apart  from  sin."  Philo  had  already  spoken 
of  the  Logos  as  sinless  {De  Profitg.  20;  0pp.  I.  562).  His  words  are 
"the  High  Priest  is  not  Man  but  the  Divine  Word,  free  from  all  shaie, 
not  only  in  willing  but  even  in  involuntary  wrongdoing."  Christ's  sin- 
lessness  is  one  of  the  irrefragable  proofs  of  His  divinity.  It  was  both 
asserted  by  Himself  (John  xiv.  30)  and  by  the  Apostles  (2  Cor.  v.  21  ; 
I  Pet.  ii.  22  ;  i  John  iii.  5,  &c.).  Being  tempted,  Christ  could  sympa- 
thize with  us ;  being  sinless,  he  could  plead  for  us. 

16.  Let  us  therefore  come  boldly]  Rather,  "let  us  then  approach  with 
confidence."  The  notion  of  "approach"  to  God  [irpocripxecreai)  in  the 
Levitical  service  (Lev.  xxi.  17,  xxii.  3)  is  prominent  in  this  Epistle 
(vii.  25,  X.  I,  22,  xi.  6,  xii.  18—22).  In  St  Paul  it  only  occurs  once 
(i  Tim.  vi.  13),  and  then  in  a  different  sense.  His  ideal  of  the  Christian 
life  is  not  "access  to  God"  (though  he  does  also  allude  to  this  in  one 
Epistle,  Eph.  ii.  j8,  iii.  12)  but  "oneness  with  Christ."  "Boldly," 
literally,  "with  confidence"  (iii.  6).  ..    ■,   .      , 

throne  of  grace]  Comp.  viii.  i.  This  throne  was  typified  in  the 
mercy-seat  above  the  Ark  (Ex.  xxv.  21),  over  which  the  Shechinah 
shone  between  the  wings  of  the  cherubim. 

obtain  mercy,  and  find  grace]  Mercy  in  our  wretchedness,  and  tree 
favour,  though  it  is  undeserved. 

to  help  in  Hme  of  need]    Lit.  "  for  a  seasonable  succour.      Seasonable 


96  HEBREWS,  V.  [v.  2. 

every  high  priest  taken  from  among  men  is  ordained  for 
men  i'n  things  pertaining  to  God,  that  he  may  offer  both 
gifts  and  sacrifices  for  sins:  who  can  have  compassion  on 
the  ignorant,  and  on  them  that  are  out  of  the  way;  for  that 

because  "it  is  still  called  to-day''  (iii.  17),  and  because  the  help  is  so 
deeply  needed  (ii.  18). 

Ch.  V.  Two  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR  HiGH-PRIESTIIOOD  :  (l)  CAPACITY 
FOR  SYMPATHY  (l — 3);  (2)  A  SPECIAL  CALL  (4— lo).  SPIRITUAL 
DULNESS   OF   THE   HEBREWS    (m  — 14). 

1.  For  every  high  priest  taken  from  among  men]  Rather,  "being 
taken,"  or  "chosen  as  he  is-"  (comp.  Ex.  xxviii.  i).  The  writer  now 
enters  on  his  proof  that  in  order  to  fit  Him  for  the  functions  of  a  High 
Priest  for  men  it  was  necessary  that  Christ  should  become  Man.  He  has 
already  called  attention  to  the  subject  in  a  marked  manner  in  ii.  7,  iii.  i, 
iv.  14,  15. 

is  ordained  for  men]     "Is  appointed  on  men's  behalf." 

in  things  pertaining  to  God]  ii.  17.  It  is  his  part  to  act  as  man'? 
representative  in  the  performance  of  the  duties  of  worship  and  sacrifice. 

i>oth  gifts  and  sacrifices]  We  have- the  same  phrase  in  viii.  3,  ix.  9. 
In  O.T.  usage  no  distinction  is  maintained  between  "gifts"  and 
"sacrifices,"  for  in  Gen.  iv.  4,  Lev.  v.  1,  3,  "gifts"  is  used  for 
animal  sacrifices  ;  and' in  Gen.  iv.  3,  5,  "sacrifices"  is  used  (as  in  xi.  4' 
for  bloodless  gifts.  When,  however,  the  words  are  used  together  the 
distinction  between  them  is  that  which  holds  in  classical  Greek,  where 
"  sacrifices  "  is  never  used  except  to  mean  "slain  beasts."  The  word 
"offer"  is  generally  applied  to  expiatory  sacrifices,  and  though  " gifts " 
in  the  strict  sense — e.g.  "freewill  offerings"  and  "meat  offerings" — 
were  not  expiatory,  yet  the  "gift"  of  incense  offered  by  the  High 
Priest  on  the  Day  of  Atonement  had  some  expiatory  significance. 

for  sins]     To  make  atonement  for  sins  (iii  1 7). 

2.  have  compassion  on]  Rather,  '' deal  gently  ivith  ."  The  word 
inetriopathein  means  properly  "to  shew  moderate  emotions."  All  men 
are  liable  to  emotions  and  passions  (pathe).  The  Stoics  held  that 
these  should  be  absolutely  crushed  and  that  "apathy"  {awadua)  was 
the  only  fit  condition  for  a  Philosopher.  The  Peripatetics  on  the 
other  hand— the  school  of  Aristotle— held  that  the  philosopher  should 
not  aim  at  apathy,  because  no  man  can  be  absolutely  passionless  with- 
out doing  extreme  violence  to  nature ;  but  that  he  should  acquire  fne- 
triopathy,  that  is  a  spirit  of  "moderated  emotion"  and  self-control. 
The  word  is  found  both  in  Philo  and  Josephus.  In  conimon  usage  it 
meant  "moderate  compassion i"  since  the  Stoics  held  "pity"  to  be  not 
only  a  weakness  but  a  vice.  The  Stoic  apatheia  would  have  utterly 
disqualified  any  one  for  true  Priesthood.  Our  Lord  yielded  to  human 
emotions  such  as  pity,  sorrow,  and  just  anger;  and  that  He  did  so 
and  could  do  so,  "yet  without  sin,"  is  expressly  recorded  for  our 
instruction. 


97 


vv.  3—5.]  HEBREWS,  V. 

he  himself  also  is  compassed  with  infirmity.    And  by  reason  i 
hereof  he  ought,  as  for  the  people,  so  also  for  himself,  to 
offe/  for  sins.     And  no  man  taketh  this  honour  unto  him-  4 
self,  but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  as  zvas  Aaron.     So  also  5 

on  the  igno7-ant,  and  on  them  that  are  out  of  the  luay]  Highhanded 
sinners,  luilling  sinners,  those  wlio,  in  the  Hebrew  phrase,  sin  "with 
upraised  hand"  (Num.  xv.  30;  Deut.  xvii.  12),  cannot  always  be  treated 
with  compassionate  tenderness  (x.  26) ;  but  the  ignorant  and  the  erring 
(i  Tim.  i.  13) — those  who  sin  "inadvertently,"  "involuntarily"  (Lev. 
iv.  1,  13,  &c.) — and  even  those  who  under  sudden  stress  of  passion  and 
temptation  sin  wilfully^need  pity  (Lev.  v.  i,  xix.  20 — 22),  and  Christ's 
prayer  on  the  cross  was  for  those  "  who  know  not  what  they  do."  No 
untempted  Angel,  no  Being  removed  from  the  possibility  of  such  falls, 
could  have  had  the  personal  sympathy  which  is  an  indispensable  requi- 
site for  perfect  Priesthood. 

is  compassed  ivith  iiijirmity]  Moral  weakness  is  Jtart  of  the  very 
nature  ivhich  he  wears,  and  which  makes  him  bear  reasonably  with  those 
who  are  like  himself.  The  same  Greek  phrase  {perikeimai  with  an 
accusative)  occurs  in  Acts  xxviii.  20  ("I  am  bound  with  ih\?.  chain"). 
"Under  the  gorgeous  robes  of  office  there  were  still  the  galling  chains 
of  flesh."     Kay. 

3.  And  by  i-eason  hereof^  i.e.  because  of  this  moral  weakness. 

he  ought]  He  is  bound  not  merely  as  a  legal  duty,  but  as  a  moral 
necessity. 

so  also  for  himself]  The  Law  assumed  that  this  would  be  necessary 
for  every  High  Priest  (Lev.  iv.  3 — 12).  In  the  High  Priest's  prayer  of 
intercession  he  said,  "  Oh  do  thou  expiate  the  misdeeds,  the  crimes,  and 
the  sins,  wherewith  I  have  done  evil,  and  have  sinned  before  Thee  I 
and  my  house !"  Until  he  had  thus  made  atonement  for  himself,  he 
was  regarded  as  guilty,  and  so  could  not  offer  any  atonement  for  others 
who  were  guilty  (Lev.  iv.  3,  ix.  7,  xvi.  6,  and  comp.  vii.  27). 

to  offer  for  sins]  The  word  "offer"  may  be  used  absolutely  for 
"  to  offer  sacrifices"  (Lk.  v.  14);  but  the  words  "for  sins"  are  often  an 
equivalent  for  "  sin-offerings"  (see  x.  6  ;  Lev.  vi.  23  ;  Num.  viii.  8,  &c.). 

4.  this  honour]  i.e.  this  honourable  office.  We  have  here  the 
second  qualification  for  Priesthood.  A  man's  own  caprice  must  not 
be  the  Bishop  which  ordains  him.  He  must  be  conscious  of  a  divine 
call. 

but  he  that  is  called  of  God]  Rather,  "but  on  being  called  by  God," 
or  "when  he  is  called  by  God."  Great  stress  is  laid  on  this  point  in 
Scripture  (Ex.  xxviii.  i).  Any  "stranger  that  cometh  nigh" — i.e.  that 
intruded  unbidden  into  the  Priesthood — was  to  be  put  to  death  (Num. 
iii.  10).  The  fate  of  Korah  and  his  company  (Num.  xvi.  40),  and  of 
Uzziah,  king  though  he  was  (2  Chron.  xxvi.  18 — 21),  served  as  a  terrible 
warning,  and  it  was  recorded  as  a  special  aggravation  of  Jeroboam's 
impiety  that  "he  made  priests  of  the  lowest  of  the  people,  which  were 
not  of  the  sons  of  Levi"  (i  K.  xii.  31).  In  one  of  the  Jewish  Midra- 
shim,  Moses  says  to  Korah   "if  Aaron,  my  brother,  had  taken  upon 

HEBREWS  7 


HEBREWS,   V.  [v.  6. 


Christ  glorified  not  himself  to  be  made  a  high  priest;  but 

he  that  said  unto  him,  Thou  art  my  Son,  to  day  have  I 

6  begotten  thee.     As  he  saith  also  in  another //a^<?,  Thou 

art  a  priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchise^ec. 

himself  the  priesthood,  ye  would  be  excusable  for  murmuving  against 
him;  but  God  gave  it  to  him."  Some  have  supposed  that  the  writer 
here  reflects  obhquely  upon  the  High  Priests  of  that  day — alien  Saddu- 
cees,  not  descended  from  Aaron  (Jos.  Antt.  XX.  ic)  v/ho  bad  been 
introduced  into  the  Priesthood  from  Babylonian  families  by  Herod  the 
Great,  and  who  kept  the  highest  office,  with  frequent  changes,  as  a  sort  of 
apanage  of  their  own  families — the  Boethusim,  the  Kantheras,  the 
Kamhits,  the  Beni-Hanan.  For  the  characteristics  of  these  Priests, 
who  completely  degraded  the  dignity  in  the  eyes  of  the  people,  see  my 
Life  of  Christ,  II.  330,  342.  In  the  energetic  maledictions  pronounced 
upon  them  in  more  than  one  passage  of  the  Talmud,  they  are  taunted 
with  not  being  true  sons  of  Aaron.  But  it  is  unlikely  that  the  writer 
should  make  this  oblique  allusion.  He  was  an  Alexandrian ;  he  was 
not  writing  to  the  Hebrews  of  Jerusalem;  and  these  High  Priests  had 
been  in  possession  of  the  office  for  more  than  half  a  century. 

as  was  Aaro)i'\  The  original  is  more  emphatic  "exactly  as  even 
Aaron  was"  (Num.  xvi. — xviii).  The  true  Priest  must  be  a  divinely- 
appointed  Aaron,  not  a  self-constituted  Korah. 

5.  So  also  Christ\  Rather,  '■'■  So  even  the  Christ."  Jesus,  the  Mes- 
siah, the  true  Anointed  Priest,  possessed  both  these  qualifications. 

glorified  not  himsclf\  He  has  already  called  the  High  Priesthood 
"an  honour,"  but  of  Christ's  Priesthood  he  uses  a  still  stronger  word 
"glory"  (ii.  9;  John  xii.  cS,  xiii.  31). 

but  he  that  said  unto  hini\  God  glorified  Him,  and  the  writer  again 
offers  the  admitted  Messianic  Prophecies  of  Ps.  ii.  7  and  ex.  4,  as  a 
sufficient  illustration  of  this.  The  fact  of  His  Sonship  demonstrates  that 
His  call  to  the  Priesthood  was  a  call  of  God.  "Jesus  said  If  I  honour 
myself  my  honour  is  nothing ;  it  is  my  Father  that  honoureth  me,  of 
whom  ye  say  that  He  is  your  God,"  John  viii.  54. 

6.  in  another  flace\  Ps.  ex.  4.  This  Psalm  was  so  universally 
accepted  as  Messianic  that  the  Targum  of  Jonathan  jiaraphrases  the 
first  verse  of  it  "The  Lord  said  to  His  Word.'''' 

after  the  order']  al-dibhrathi,  "according  to  the  style  of."  Comp. 
vii.  15,  "after  the  likeness  of  Melchisedek." 

after  the  order  of  Melehisedcc'\  The  writer  here  with  consummate 
literary  skill  introduces  the  name  Melchisedek,  to  prepare  incidentally 
for  the  long  argument  which  is  to  follow  in  chapter  vii. ;  just  as  he 
twice  introduces  the  idea  of  High-Priesthood  (ii.  17,  iii.  1)  before 
directly  dealing  with  it.  The  reason  why  the  Psalmist  had  spoken  of 
his  ideal  Theocratic  king  as  a  Priest  after  the  order  of  Melchisedek, 
and  not  after  the  order  of  Aaron,  lies  in  the  words  "for  ever,"  as 
subsequently  explained.  In  Zech.  iv.  14,  the  Jews  explained  "the 
two  Anointed  ones  (sons  of  oil)  who  stand  by  the  Lord  of  the  whole 


99 


vv.  7,  8.]  HEBREWS,  V. 

Who  in  the  days  of  his  flesh,  when  he  had  offered  up  pray-  ^ 
ers  and  supplications  with  strong  crying  and  tears  unto  him 
that  was  able  to  save  him  from  death,  and  was  heard  in 
that  he  feared;  though  he  were  a  Son,  yd  learned  he  obe- 8 

earth  "  to  be  Aaron  and  Messiah,  and  from  Ps.  ex.  4,  they  agreed  that 
Messiah  was  the  nearer  to  God. 

7.     Whd\    i.e.  the  Cltfist. 

of  his  fesh]  The  word  "flesh"  is  here  used  for  His  Humanity 
regarded  on  the  side  of  its  weakness  and  humihation.     Comp.  ii.  14. 

w/ien  he  had  offered  ttp]     Lit.  "  having  offered  up. " 

prayers  and  snpplitations'\  The  idiosyncrasy  of  the  writer,  and 
perhaps  his  Alexandrian  training,  which  familiarised  him  with  the 
style  of  Philo,  made  him  fond  of  these  sonorous  amplifications  or  full 
expressions.  The  word  rendered  "prayers"  {dcheis)  is  rather  "suppli- 
cations," i.e.  "special  prayers"  for  the  supply  of  needs;  the  word 
rendered  _"  entreaties  "  (which  is  joined  with  it  in  Job  xli.  3,  comp. 
3  Mace.  ix.  18)  properly  meant  olive-boughs  [iKerripiai)  held  forth  to 
entreat  protection.  Thus  the  first  word  refers  to  the  suppliant,  the 
second  implies  an  approach  (iKviofxai)  to  God.  The  "supplications 
and  entreaties  "  referred  to  are  doubtless  those  in  the  Agony  at  Geth- 
semane  (Lk.  xxii.  39—46),  though  there  may  be  a  reference  to  the 
Cross,  and  some  have  even  supposed  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  Ps. 
xxii.  and  cxvi.     See  Mark  xiv.  36;  John  xii.  27  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  38—42. 

with  strotig  crying  and  tears]  Though  these  are  not  directly  men- 
tioned in  the  scene  at  Gethsemane  they  are  implied.  See  John  xi.  35, 
xii.  27  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  39,  42,  44,  53;  Mark  xiv.  36;  Lk.  xix.  41. 

and  was  heard]  Rather,  "and  being  heard"  or  "hearkened  to," 
Luke  xxii.  43;  John  xii.  28  (comp.  Ps.  xxii.  21,  24). 

in  that  he  feared]  Rather,  "from  his  godly  fear,''  or  "because  of 
his  reverential  awe."  The  phrase  has  been  explained  in  different  ways. 
The  old  Latin  {Vetus  liala)  renders  '''■  exauditus  a  vietu,"  and  some 
Latin  Fathers  and  later  interpreters  explain  it  to  mean  "  having  been 
heed,  fom  the  far  of  death."  The  Greek  might  perhaps  be  made  to 
bear  this  sense,  though  the  mild  word  used  for  "  fear  "  is  not  in  favour 
of  it;  but  the  rendering  given  above,  meaning  that  His  prayer  was 
heard  because  of  His  awful  submission  {fro  sud  reverentia,  Vulg.)  is 
the  sense  in  which  the  words  are  taken  by  all  the  Greek  Fathers.  The 
word  rendered  "from"  (apo)  may  certainly  mean  "because  of"  as  in 
Lk.  xix.  3,  "  He  could  not  because  of  (a/^?)  the  crowd;"  xxiv.  41,  "dis- 
believing because  of  (apo)  their  joy"  (comp.  John  xxi.  6;  Acts  xxii. 
II,  &c.).  The  word  rendered  "feared"  is  eulabeia,  which  means 
"reverent  fear,"  or  "reasonable  shrinking"  as  opposed  to  terror  and 
cowardice.  The  Stoics  said  that  the  wise  man  could  thus  cautiously 
shrink  {eulabeisthai)  but  never  actually  be  afraid  (phobeisthai).  Other 
attempts  to  explain  away  the  passage  arise  from  the  Apollinarian  ten- 
dency to  deny  Christ's  perfect  man/iood :  but  He  was  "perfectly  man" 
as  well  as  "truly  God."  He  was  not  indeed  "saved  y)'(?w  death," 
because  He  had  only  prayed  that  "the  cup  might  pass  from   Him" 


HEBREWS,  V.  [v.  9. 


9  dience  by  the  things  which  he  suffered;  and  being  made 
perfect,  he  became  the  author  of  eternal  salvation  unto  all 

if  such  were  His  Father's  will  (x.  7) ;  but  He  was  saved  out  of  {kii) 
death"  by  being  raised  on  the  third  day,  so  that  "He  saw  no  cor- 
ruption." For  the  word  eulabda,  "piety"  or  "reverent  awe" 
see  xii.  28. 

8.  Though  he  were  a  So7i\  Rather,  "  Sou  though  He  was,"  so 
that  it  might  have  been  thought  that  there  would  be  no  need  for  the 
great  sacrifice;  no  need  for  His  learning  obedience  from  suffering. 

yet  learned  he  obedience]  Perhaps  rather  "His  obedience."  The 
stress  is  not  on  His  ^'learning''''  (of  course  as  a  man),  but  the  whole 
expression  is  taken  together,  "  He  learnt  from  the  things  which  He 
suffered,"  in  other  words  "  He  bowed  to  the  experience  of  absolute 
submission."  "The  things  which  He  suffered"  refer  not  only  to 
the  Agony  and  the  Cross,  but  to  the  whole  of  the  Saviour's  life. 
.Some  of  the  Fathers  stumbled  at  this  expression.  Theodoret  calls  it 
liyperbolical ;  St  Chrysostom  is  surprised  at  it;  Theophylact  goes  so 
far  as  to  say  that  here  Paul  (for  he  accepts  the  traditional  authorship) 
"for  the  benefit  of  his  hearers  used  such  accommodation  as  obviously 
to  say  some  unreasonable  things."  All  such  remarks  would  have  been 
obviated  if  these  fathers  had  borne  in  mind  that,  as  St  Paul  says, 
Christ  "counted  not  equality  with  God  a  thing  at  which  to  grasp" 
(Phil.  ii.  6).  Meanwhile  passages  like  these,  of  which  there  are  several 
in  this  Epistle,  are  valuable  as  proving  how  completely  the  co-equal 
and  co-eternal  Son  "emptied  Himself  of  His  glory."  Against  the 
irreverent  reverence  of  the  Apollinarian  heresy  (which  denied  Christ's 
perfect  manhood)  and  the  Monothelite  heresy  (which  denied  His 
possession  of  a  human  will),  this  passage,  and  the  earlier  chapters  of 
St  Luke  are  the  best  bulwark.  The  human  soul  of  Christ's  perfect 
manhood  "learned"  just  as  His  human  body  grew  (Lk.  ii.  52). 
On  this  learning  of  "obedience  "  see  Is.  1.  5,  "I  was  not  rebellious." 
Phil.  ii.  8,  "Being  found  in  fashion  as  a  man  he  became  obedient  unto 
death."  The  paronomasia  "he  learnt  {cmathen)  from  what  He  S7tffered 
(epathen)  "  is  one  of  the  commonest  in  Greek  literature.  For  the  use 
oi paranomasia  in  St  Paul  see  my  Life  of  St  Paul.  I.  628. 

9.  and  being  made  perfect]  Having  been  brought  to  the  goal  and 
consummation  in  the  glory  which  followed  this  mediatorial  work.  See 
ii.  10  and  comp.  Lk.  xiii.  32,  "the  third  day  I  shall  be  perfected.^'' 

he  became  the  author]     Literally,  "the  cause." 

of  eternal  salvation]  It  is  remarkable  that  the  epithet  aionios  is  here 
alone  applied  to  the  substantive  "salvation." 

salvation  unto  all  them  that  obey  him]  In  an  author  so  polished  and 
rhetorical  there  seems  to  be  an  intentional  force  and  beauty  in  the 
repetition  in  this  verse  of  the  two  leading  words  in  the  last.  Christ 
prayed  to  God  who  was  able  to  "i-az/f"  Him  out  of  death,  and  He 
liecame  the  cause  of  "  eternal  salvation^^  from  final  death;  Christ  learnt 
'^  obedience"  hy  His  life  of  self-sacrifice,  and  He  became  a  Saviour  to 
them  that  "obey"  Him. 


vv.  lo— 12.]  HEBREWS,  V. 


them  that  obey  him;  called  of  God  a  high  priest  after  the 
order  of  Melchisedec. 

Of  whom  we  have  many  things  to  say,  and  hard  to  be 
uttered,  seeing  ye  are  dull  of  hearing.  For  when  for  the 
time  ye  ought  to  be  teachers,  ye  have  need  that  07ie  teach 

10.  called'\  Lit.,  "saluted"  or  "  addressed  by  God  as."  This  is  the 
only  place  in  the  N.T.  where  the  verb  occurs. 

a  high  priest  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec']  We  should  here  have 
expected  the  writer  to  enter  at  once  on  the  explanation  of  this  term. 
But  he  once  more  pauses  for  a  solemn  exhortation  and  warning.  These 
pauses  and  landing-places  (as  it  were)  in  his  argument,  cannot  be 
regarded  as  mere  digressions.  There  is  nothing  that  they  less  resemble 
than  St  Paul's  habit  of  "going  off  at  a  word,"  nor  is  the  writer  in  the 
least  degree  "hurried  aside  by  the  violence  of  his  thoughts."  There  is 
in  him  a  complete  absence  of  all  the  hurry  and  impetuosity  which 
characterise  the  style  of  St  Paul.  His  movements  are  not  in  the  least 
like  those  of  an  eager  athlete,  but  they  rather  resemble  the  stately  walk 
of  some  Oriental  Sheykh  with  all  his  robes  folded  around  him.  He  is 
about  to  enter  on  an  entirely  original  and  far  from  obvious  argument, 
which  he  felt  would  have  great  weight  in  checking  the  tendency  to  look 
back  to  the  rites,  the  splendours  and  the  memories  of  Judaism.  He 
therefore  stops  with  the  calmest  deliberation,  and  the  most  wonderful 
skill,  to  pave  the  way  for  his  argument  by  a  powerful  mixture  of 
reproach  and  warning — which  assisted  the  object  he  had  in  view,  and 
tended  to  stimulate  the  spiritual  dulness  of  his  readers. 

11—14.     Complaint  that  his  READEfes  were  so  slow  in  their 

SPIRITUAL    PROGRESS. 

11.  Ofwhofn]  i.e.  of  Melchisedek  in  his  typical  character.  There  is 
no  need  to  render  this  "of  which  m.atter"  or  to  refer  it  to  Christ.  The 
following  argument  really"  centres  in  the  word  Melchisedek,  and  its 
difficulty  was  the  novel  application  of  the  facts  of  his  history  to  Christ, 

hard  to  be  uttcred'\  Rather,  "  respecting  Whom  what  I  have  to  say  is 
long,  and  hard  of  interpretation."  The  word  "being  interpreted" 
(hernicmeiionicnos,  whence  comes  the  word  "hermeneutics")  occurs  in 
vii.  2. 

ye  are]  Rather,  "ye  are  become,"  as  in  v.  12,  vi.  12.  They  were 
not  so  sluggish  at  first,  but  are  become  so  from  indifference  and 
neglect. 

dull  of  hear!7tg]  Comp.  Matt.  xiii.  14,  15.  Nothros  "dull"  or 
"blunted"  is  the  antithesis  to  6|us  "sharp." 

12.  For  when  for  the  time  ye  ought  to  be  teachers]  That  is,  "though 
you  ought,  by  this  time,  to  be  teachers,  considering  how  long  a  time 
has  elapsed  since  your  conversion."  The  passage  is  important  as  bear- 
ing on  the  date  of  the  Epistle. 

ye  have  need  that  one  teach  you  again  which  be  the  first  principles] 
Rather,  "ye  again  have  need  that  some  one  teach  you  the  rudiments  of 


102  HEBREWS,  V.  [vv.  13,  14. 

you  again  which  be  the  first  principles  of  the  oracles  of  God; 

and  are  become  such  as  have  need  of  milk,  and  not  of 
J 3  strong  meat.  For  every  one  that  useth  milk  is  unskilful  in 
14  the  word  of  righteousness:  for  he  is  a  babe.     But  strong 

meat  belongeth  to  them  that  are  of  full  age,  eveti  those  who 

by  reason  of  use  have  their  senses  exercised  to  discern  both 

the  beginning  of  the  oracles  of  God."  It  is  uncertain  whether  we 
should  read  tlvo.  "that  some  one  teach  you"  or  riva.  "that  (one)  teach 
you  v'hich  are''  The  difference  in  sense  is  not  great,  but  jjerhaps  the 
indefinite  "  some  one"  enhances  the  irony  of  a  severe  remark.  For  the 
word  "rudiments"  see  Gal.  iv.  3,  9. 

the  oracles  of  God]     Here  not  the  O.T.  as  in  Rom.  iii.  2. 

szee/i  as  have  need  of  milk]  So  the  young  students  or  neophytes  in 
the  Rabbinic  schools  were  called  thinokoth  "sucklings."  Philo  {De 
Agric.  Opp.  I.  301)  has  this  comparison  of  preliminary  studies  to 
milk,  as  welt  as  St  Paui^  i  Cor.  iii.  i,  2. 

strong  77ieat\     Rather,  "solid  food." 

13.  that  useth  viiUz\     The  meaning  is  "who  feeds  on  milk." 
unskilful]     "Inexperienced." 

for  he  is  a  babe]  This  is  a  frequent  metaphor  in  St  Paul,  who  also 
contrasts  "babes"  (iirpioi)  wiih  the  mature  [teleioi),  Gal.  iv.  3;  i  Cor. 
ii.  6;  Eph.  iv.  13,  14.  We  are  only  to  be  "babes"  in  wickedness 
(i   Cor.   xiv.   20). 

the  tvord  of  righteozcsness]  i.e.  the  Scriptures,  and  especially  the 
Gospel  (see  2  Tim.  iii.  16;  Rom.  i.  17,  "therein  is  the  righteousness  of 
God  revealed"),. 

14.  belongeth  to  them  that  are  of  full  age\  The  solid  food  of  more 
advanced  instruction  pertains  to  the  mature  or  "  perfect." 

by  reason  of  use]  "Because  of  their  habit,"  i.e.  from  being  habituated 
to  it.  This  is  the  only  place  in  the  N.T.  where  this  important  word  e^is 
habitus  occurs. 

their  senses]  Their  spiritual  faculties  {ala-d-qrrjpLa.  It  does  not  occur 
elsewhere  in  the  N.T.) 

exereiseif]     Trained,  or  disciplined  by  spiritual  practice. 

to  discern  both  good  attd  evil]  Lit.,  '''the  discriitiination  of  good  and 
evil."  By  "good  and  evil"  is  not  meant  "right  and  wrong"  because 
there  is  no  question  here  of  moral  distinctions;  but  excellence  and 
inferiority  in  matters  of  instruction.  To  the  natural  man  the  things  of 
the  spirit  are  foolishness;  it  is  only  the  spiritual  man  who  can  "distin- 
guish between  things  that  differ" and  so  "discriminate  the  transcendent" 
(1  Cor.  ii.  14,  15;  Rom.  ii.  18;  Phil.  i.  9,  10).  The  phrase  "to  know 
good  and  evil"  is  borrowed  from  Hebrew  (Gen.  ii.  17,  &c.),  and  is 
used  to  describe  the  first  dawn  of  intelligence  (Is.  vii.  15,  16). 

Ch.  VI.     An  exhortation  to  advance  beyond  elementary 

CATECHETICAL     INSTRUCTIONS      (l — 3).        A     SOLEMN     WARNING 
AGAINST   THE    PERIL    OF    APOSTASY    (4—8).      A    WORD    OF    EN- 


vv.  1, 2.]  HEBREWS,  VI.  103 

good  and  evil.     Therefore  leaving  the  principles  of  the  doc-  6 
trine  of  Christ,   let  us  go  on  unto  perfection;    not  laying 
again  the  foundation  of  repentance  from  dead  works,  and 
of  faith  towards  God,  of  the  doctrine  of  baptisms,  and  of  2 

COURAGEMENT   AND    HOPE    (g — 12)    FOUNDED   ON   THE   IMMUTA- 
BILITY   OF   God's    promises    (13 — 15),    to  which  they  are 

EXHORTED   TO   HOLD    FAST    (l6 — 2o). 

1.  leaving  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Ch7-ist'\  Lit.,  "leaving 
the  discourse  of  the  beginning  of  Christ,"  i.  e.  getting  beyond  the  earliest 
principles  of  Christian  teaching.  He  does  not  of  course  mean  that  these 
first  principles  are  to  be  neglected,  still  less  forgotten,  but  merely  that 
his  readers  ought  to  be  so  familiar  with  them  as  to  be  able  to  advance  to 
less  obvious  knowledge. 

let  us  go  on'[  Lit.,  "let  us  be  borne  along,"  as  by  the  current  of  a 
stream.  The  question  has  been  discussed  whether  the  Author  in  saying 
"let  tis"  is  referring  to  himself  or  to  his  readers.  It  is  surely  clear  that 
he  means  (as  in  iv.  14)  to  imply  both,  although  in  the  words  "laying  a 
foundation  "  teachers  may  have  been  principally  in  his  mind.  He  invites 
his  readers  to  advance  with  him  to  doctrines  which  lie  beyond  the  range 
of  rudimentary  Christian  teaching.  They  must  come  with  him  out  of 
the  limits  of  this  Jewish-Christian  Catechism. 

unto  perfection^  The  "perfection"  intended  is  the  "full  growth"  of 
those  who  are  mature  in  Christian  knowledge  (see  v.  14).  They  ought 
not  to  be  lingering  among  the  elementary  subjects  of  catechetical  in- 
struction which  in  great  measure  belonged  no  less  to  Jews  than  to 
Christians. 

not  laying  again'\  There  is  no  need  for  a  foundation  to  be  laid  a 
second  time.  He  is  not  in  the  least  degree  disparaging  the  importance 
of  the  truths  and  doctrines  which  he  tells  them  to  "leave,"  but  only 
urging  them  to  build  on  those  deep  foundations  the  necessary  super- 
structure. Hence  we  need  not  understand  the  Greek  participle  in  its 
other  sense  of  "overthrov/ing." 

the  foundation]  Lit.,  "a  foundation."  The  subjects  here  alluded  to 
probably  formed  the  basis  of  instruction  for  Christian  catechumens. 
They  were  not  however  exclusively  Christian ;  they  belonged  equally  to 
Jews,  and  therefore  baptised  Christian  converts  ought  to  have  got  be- 
yond them. 

repentance  from  dead  rvorhs]  Repentance  is  the  first  lesson  of  the 
Gospel  (Mk.  i.  15).  "Dead  works"  are  such  as  cause  defilement,  and 
require  purification  (ix.  14)  because  they  are  sinful  (Gal.  v.  19—21)  and 
because  their  wages  is  death  (Rom.  vi.  23);  but  "the  works  of  the  Law,' 
as  having  no  life  in  them  (see  our  Article  xiii.),  may  be  included  under 
the  epithet.  .  . 

faith  towards  God]  This  is  also  one  of  the  ifuttal  steps  m  religious 
knowledge.  How  little  the  writer  meant  any  disparagement  of  it  may 
be  seen  from  xi.  i,  2,  6.  r    1  1     •        "  /■ 

2.  of  the  doctrine  of  baptisms]    Perhaps  rather,  "of  ablutions     (ix. 


104  HEBREWS,  VI.  [v.  3. 

laying  on  of  hands,  and  of  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  of 
3  eternal  judgment.     And  this  will  we  do,   if  God  permit. 

10;  Mk.  vii.  3,  4),  both  (i)  from  the  use  of  the  plural  (which  cannot  be 
explained  either  physically  of  "triple  immersion,"  or  spiritually  of  the 
baptisms  of  "water,  spirit,  blood") ;  and  (2)  because  baptismos  is  never 
used  of  Christian  baptism,  but  only  baptisma.  If,  as  we  believe,  the 
writer  of  this  Epistle  was  Apollos,  he,  as  an  original  adherent  "  of  John's 
baptism,"  might  feel  all  the  more  strongly  that  the  doctrine  of  "ablu- 
tions" belonged,  even  in  its  highest  forms,  to  the  elements  o{  Christianity. 
Perhaps  he,  like  Josephus  (Antt.  xviii.  5,  §  2),  would  have  used  the 
word  baptismos,  and  not  baptisma,  even  of  John's  baptism.  But  the 
word  probably  implies  the  teaching  which  enable  Christian  catechumens 
to  discriminate  beween  Jewish  washings  and  Christian  baptism. 

of  laying  on  of  hands'\  For  ordination  (Num.  viii.  10,  ii ;  Acts  vi.  6, 
xiii.  2,  3,  xix.  6,  &c.),  confirmation  (Acts  viii.  1 7),  healings  (Mk.  xvi.  18), 
&c.  Dr  Mill  observes  that  the  order  of  doctrines  here  enumerated  cor- 
responds with  the  system  of  teaching  respecting  them  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles — Repentance,  Faith,  Baptism,  Confirmation,  Resurrection, 
Judgment. 

and  of  resnn-ection  of  the  dead'\  These  topics  had  been  severally 
prominent  in  the  early  Apostolic  teaching  (Acts  ii.  38,  iii.  ig — 21,  xxvi. 
20).  Even  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  belonged  to  Judaism  (Lk.  xx. 
37,  38;  Dan.  xii.  2;  Acts  xxiii.  8). 

and  of  eternal  judgment^  The  doctrine  respecting  that  sentence 
{kritna,  "doom"),  whether  of  the  good  or  of  the  evil,  which  shall 
follow  the  judgment  {krisis)  in  the  future  life.  This  was  also  known 
under  the  Old  Covenant,  Dan.  vii.  9,  10. — The  surprise  with  which  we 
first  read  this  passage  only  arises  from  our  not  realising  the  Author's 
meaning,  which  isthis,^your  Christian  maturity  (reXetoT7;?,vi.  i)  demands 
that  you  should  rise  far  above  your  present  vacillating  condition.  You 
would  have  no  hankering  after  Judaism  if  you  understood  the  more  ad- 
vanced teaching  about  the  Melchisedek  Priesthood — that  is  the  Eternal 
Priesthood — of  Christ  which  I  am  going  to  set  before  you.  It  is  then 
needless  that  we  should  dwell  together  on  the  topics  which  form  the 
training  of  neophytes  and  catechumens,  the  elements  of  religious  leach- 
ing which  even  belonged  to  your  old  position  as  Jews;  but  let  us  enter 
upon  topics  which  belong  to  the  instruction  of  Christian  manhood.  The 
verse  has  its  value  for  those  who  think  that  "Gospel"  teaching  consists 
exclusively  in  the  iteration  of  threadbare  shibboleths.  We  may  observe 
that  of  these  six  elements  of  catechetical  instruction  two  are  spiritual 
qualities — repentance,  faith;  two  are  significant  and  symbolic  acts — 
washings  and  laying  on  of  hands  ;  two  are  eschatological  truths — 
resurrection  and  judgment. 

3.  this  will  we  do\  We  will  advance  towards  perfection.  The  Mss., 
as  in  nearly  all  similar  cases,  vary  between  "we  will  do"  (X,  B,  K,  L)and 
"let  us  do"  (A,  C,D,  E).  It  is  difficult  to  decide  between  the  two,  and  the 
variations  may  often  be  due  (i)  to  the  tendency  of  scribes,  especially  in 
Lectionaries,  to  adopt  the  hortative  lorm  as  being  more  editying ;  and 


105 


V.  4]  HEBREWS,  VI. 

For  //  is  impossible  for  those  who  were  once  enlightened,  4 
and  have  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift,  and  were  made  parta- 

(2)  to  the  fact  that  at  this  period  of  Greek  the  distinction  in  sound 
between  iroiTia-oixev  and  Tron^awfiev  was  small. 

if  God  permit^  These  sincere  and  pious  formulae  became  early  cur- 
rent among  Christians  (i  Cor.  xvi.  7;  Ja.  iv.  15). 

4—8.     The  awfulness  of  apostasy, 

4.  For'\  An  inference  from  the  previous  clauses.  We  must  advance, 
for  in  the  Christian  course  stationariness  means  retrogression — non  pro- 
gredi  est  regredi. 

For  it  is  impossible  foi'  those\  We  shall  see  further  on  the  meaning 
of  the  word  "impossible."  The  sentence  begins  with  what  is  called  the 
accusative  of  the  subject,  "For  as  to  those  who  were,  &c.,  it  is  im- 
possible, &c."  We  will  first  explain  the  particular  expressions  in  these 
verses,  and  then  point  out  the  meaning  of  the  paragraph  as  a  whole. 

once\  The  word,  a  favourite  one  with  the  writer,  means  '^  once  for 
all."  It  occurs  more  often  in  this  Epistle  than  in  all  the  rest  of  the 
N.  T.      It  is  the  direct  opposite  of  ttoXlv  in  ver.  6. 

enlightetied'\  illuminated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  John  i.  9.  Comp.  x. 
26,  32;  2  Cor.  iv.  4.  In  the  LXX.  "to  illuminate"  means  "to  teach" 
(2  Kings  xii.  2).  The  word  in  later  times  came  to  mean  "  to  baptise,"  and 
"enlightenment,"  even  as  early  as  the  time  of  Justin  Martyr  (a.D.  150), 
becomes  a  technical  term  for  "baptism,"  regarded  from  the  point  of 
view  of  its  results.  The  Syriac  Version  here  renders  it  by  "baptised." 
Hence  arose  the  notion  of  some  of  the  sterner  schismatics — such  as  the 
Montanists  and  Novatians— that  absolution  was  to  be  refused  to  all  such 
as  fell  after  baptism  into  apostasy  or  flagrant  sin  (Tertull.  De  Pudic. 
20).  This  doctrine  was  certainly  not  held  by  St  Paul  (1  Cor.  v.  5 ;  i 
Tim.  i.  20),  and  is  rejected  by  the  Church  of  England  in  her  xvith 
Article  (and  see  Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  Art.  X.).  The  Fathers  deduced 
from  this  passage  the  unlawfulness  of  administering  Baptism  a  second 
time ;  a  perfectly  right  rule,  but  one  which  rests  upon  other  grounds, 
and  not  upon  this  passage.  But  neither  in  Scripture  nor  in  the  teaching 
of  the  Church  is  the  slightest  sanction  given  to  the  views  of  the  fanatics 
who  assert  that  "after  they  have  received  the  Holy  Ghost  they  can  no 
more  sin  as  long  as  they  live  here."  It  will  be  remembered  that  Cromwell 
on  his  deathbed  asked  his  chaplain  as  to  the  doctrine  of  F  inal  Perse- 
verance, and  on  being  assured  that  it  was  a  certain  truth,  said,  "Then  I 
am  happy,  for  I  am  sure  that  I  was  once  in  a  state  of  grace." 

and  have  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift...'\  These  clauses  may  be  ren- 
dered "having  both  tasted  of.. .and  being  made. ..and  having  tasted." 
It  is  not  possible  to  determine  which  heavenly  gift  is  precisely  intended; 
perhaps  it  means  remission,  or  regeneration,  or  salvation,  which  St  Paul 
calls  "(Jod's  unspeakable  gift"  (2  Cor.  ix.  15);  or,  generally,  "the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Acts  x.  44—46).  Calvin  vainly  attempts  to  make 
the  clause  refer  only  to  "those  who  had  but  as  it  were  tasted  with 
their  outward  lips  the  grace  of  God,  and  been  irradiated  with  some 


io6  HEBREWS,  VI.  [vv.  5,  6. 

5  kers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  have  tasted  the  good  word  of 

6  God,  and  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come,  if  they  shall  fall 

sparks  of  His  Light."     It  is  clear  from  i  Pet.  ii.  3  that  such  a  view  is 
not  tenable. 

partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghosil  The  Holy  Spirit  worked  in  many 
diversities  of  operations  (i  Cor.  xii.  8 — 10). 

6.  and  have  tasted  the  good  word  of  God}  Rather,  "that  the  word 
of  God  is  good."  The  verb  "taste,"  which  in  the  previous  verse  is 
constructed  with  the  genitive  (as  in  classical  Greek),  is  here  followed  by 
an  accusative,  as  is  more  common  in  Hellenistic  Greek.  It  is  difficult 
to  establish  any  difference  in  meaning  between  the  constructions,  though 
the  latter  W(zy  imply  something  which  is.  more  habitual — "feeding  on." 
But  possibly  the  accusative  is  only  used  to,  avoid  any  entanglement  with 
the  genitive  "of  God  "  which  follows,  it.  There  is  however  no  excuse  for 
the  attempt  of  Calvin  and  others,  in  the  interests  of  their  dogmatic  bias, 
to  make  "taste  of"  mean  only  "have  an  iiiklmg  of"  without  any  deep 
or  real  participation;  and  to  make  the  preciousaess  of  the  "word  of 
God"  in  this  place  only  imply  its  contrast  to  the  rigour  of  the  Mosaic 
Law.  The  metaphor  means  "  to  partake  of,"  and  "enjoy,"  as  in  Philo, 
who  speaks  of  one  "who  lias  quaffed  much  pure  wine  of  God's  benevo- 
lent power,  and  banqueted  upon  sacred  words  and  doctrines"  [^De  proem, 
et  poen.  0pp.  I.  428).  Philo  also  speaks  of  the  utterance  [rhenia)  of  God, 
and  God,  and  of  its  nourishing  the  soul  like  manna  (0pp.  I.  120,  564). 
The  references  to  Philo  are  always  to  Mangey's  edition.  The  names  of 
the  special  tracts  and  chapters  may  be  found  in  my  Early  Days  of 
Christiiinity,  II.  541 — 543,  a.nA passi?n. 

the  powers  of  the  'world  to  come]  Here  again  it  is  not  easy  to  see 
what  is  exactly  intended  by  "the  powers  of  the  P'uture  Age."  If  the 
Future  Age  be  the  Olam  habba  of  the  Jews,  i.e.  the  Messianic  Age, 
then  its  "powers"  may  be  as  St  Chrysostom  said,  "the  earnest  of  the 
Spirit,"  or  the  powers  mentioned  in  ii.  4 ;  Gal.  iii.  5.  If  on  the  other 
hand  it  mean  "the  world  to  come"  its  "powers"  bring  the  foretaste 
of  its  glorious  fruition. 

It  will  then  be  seen  that  we  cannot  attach  a  definitely  certain  or 
exact  meaning  to  the  separate  expressions;  on  the  other  hand  nothing 
can  be  clearer  than  the  fact  that,  but  for  dogmatic  prepossessions,  no 
one  would  have  dreamed  of  explaining  them  to  mean  anything  less 
than  full  conversion. 

6.  if  they  shall  fall  away\  This  is  one  of  the  most  erroneous  trans- 
lations in  the  A.V.  The  words  can  only  mean  '''' and  have  fallen  aivay" 
(comp.  ii.  I,  iii.  12,  x.  26,  29),  and  the  position  of  the  participle  gives  it 
tremendous  force.  It  was  once  thought  that  our  translators  had  here 
been  influenced  by  theological  bias  to  give  such  a  rendering  as  should 
least  conflict  with  their  Calvinistic  belief  in  the  "indefectibility  of 
grace"  or  in  "Final  Perseverance" — i.e.  thai  no  converted  person,  no 
one  who  has  ever  become  regenerate,  and  belonged  to  the  number  of 
"the  elect" — can  ever  fall  away.  It  was  thought  that,  for  this  reason, 
they  had  put  this  clause  in  the  form  of  a  ine7-e  hypothesis.     It  is  now 


V.  6.]  HEBREWS,   VI.  107 

away,  to  renew  them  again  unto  repentance;  seeing  they 
crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh,  and  put  him 

known  however  that  the  mistake  of  our  translators  was  derived  from 
older  sources  (e.g.  Tyndale  and  the  Genevan)  and  was  not  due  to  bias. 
Calvin  was  himself  far  too  good  a  scholar  to  defend  this  view  of  the 
clause.  He  attempted  to  get  rid  of  it  by  denying  that  the  strong 
expressions  in  vers.  4,  5  describe  the  regenerate.  He  applies  them  to 
false  converts  or  half  converts  who  become  reprobate — a  view  which,  as 
we  have  seen,  is  not  tenable.  The  falling  away  means  apostasy,  the 
complete  and  wilful  renunciation  of  Christianity.  Thus  it  is  used  by 
the  LXX.  to  represent  the  Hebrew  m&al  which  in  2  Chron.  xxix.  19 
they  render  by  "  apostasy." 

to  renew  them  again  unto  repe7itance\  The  verb  here  used  [anakaini- 
zein)  came  to  mean  "  to  rebaptise."  If  the  earlier  clauses  seemed  to 
clash  with  the  Calvinistic  dogma  of  the  "  indefectibility  of  grace,"  this 
expression  seemed  too  severe  for  the  milder  theology  of  the  Arminians. 
Holding — and  rightly— that  Scripture  tuver  closes  the  door  of  forgive- 
ness to  any  repentant  sinner,  they  argued,  wrongly,  that  the  "impos- 
sible" of  ver.  4  could  only  mean  "very  difficult,"  a  translation  which  is 
actually  given  to  the  word  in  some  Latin  Versions.  The  solution  of 
the  dilticulty  is  not  to  be  arrived  at  by  tampering  with  plain  words. 
What  the  author  says  is  that  "when  those  who  have  tasted  the  hea- 
venly gift...  have  fallen  away,  it  is  impossible  to  renew  them  to  repent- 
ance." He  does  not  say  that  the  Hebrews  have  so  fallen  away;  nor 
does  he  directly  assert  that  any  true  convert  can  thus  fall  away;  but  he 
does  say  that  when  stick  apostasy  occurs  and — a  point  of  extreme  im- 
portance which  is  constantly  overlooked — so  long  as  it  lasts  (see  the 
next  clause)  a  vital  renewal  is  impossible.  There  can,  he  implies,  be 
no  second  "Second  Birth."  The  sternness  of  the  passage  is  in  exact 
accordance  with  x.  26 — 29  (comp.  2  Pet.  ii.  20,  21);  but  "the  impos- 
sibility lies  merely  within  the  limits  of  the  hypothesis  itself^''  See  cur 
Article  xvi. 

seeing  they  crncify']  Rather,  *' while  crucifying,"  "  criuifyitig  as  they 
are  doing.'"  Thus  the  words  imply  not  only  an  absolute,  but  a  con- 
tinuons  apostasy,  for  the  participle  is  changed  from  the  past  into  the 
present  tense.  While  men  continue  in  wilful  and  willing  sin  they  pre- 
clude all  possibility  of  the  action  of  grace.  So  long  as  they  cling  deli- 
berately to  their  sins,  they  shut  against  themselves  the  open  door  of 
grace.  A  drop  of  water  will,  as  the  Rabbis  said,  suffice  to  purify  a 
man  who  has  accidentally  touched  a  creeping  thing,  but  an  ocean  will 
not  suffice  for  his  cleansing  so  long  as  he  purposely  keeps  it  held  in  his 
hand.  There  is  such  a  thing  as  "doing  despite  unto  the  spirit  of 
grace"  (x.  29). 

to  themselves']  This  is  what  is  called  "the  dative  of  disadvantage" — 
"to  their  own  destruction." 

We  see  then  that  this  passage  has  been  perverted  in  a  multitude  of  ways 
from  its  plain  meaning,  which  is,  that  so  long  as  wilful  apostasy  continues 
there  is  no  visible  hope  for  it.     On  the  other  hand  the  passage  does  not 


io8  HEBREWS,  VI.  [w.  7,  8. 


7  to  an  open  shame.  For  the  earth  which  drinketh  in  the 
rain  that  cometh  oft  upon  it,  and  bringeth  forth  herbs  meet 
for  them  by  whom  it  is  dressed,  receiveth  blessing  from 

s  God  :  but  that  which  beareth  thorns  and  briers  is  rejected, 
and  is  nigh  unto  cursing ;  whose  end  is  to  be  burned. 

lend  itself  to  the  violent  oppositions  of  old  controversies.  In  the  recog- 
nition that,  to  our  human  point  of  view,  there  does  appear  to  be  such  a 
thing  as  Divine  dereliction  this  passage  and  x.  26 — 29,  xii.  15 — 17  must 
be  compared  with  the  passages  which  touch  on  the  unpardonable  sin, 
and  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  (i  John  v.  16;  Matt.  xii.  3r,  32; 
comp.  Is.  viii.'2i).  On  the  other  hand  it  is  as  little  meant  to  be  "a 
rock  of  despair"  as  "a  pillow  of  security."  He  is  pointing  out  to 
Hebrew  Christians  with  awful  faithfulness  the  fatal  end  of  deliberate 
and  insolent  apostasy.  But  we  have  no  right  to  suppose  that  he  has 
anything  in  view  beyond  the  horizon  of  revealed  possibilities.  He  is 
thinking  of  the  teaching  and  ministry  of  the  Church,  not  of  the  Omnipo- 
tence of  God.  With  men  it  is  impossible  that  a  camel  should  go 
through  the  eye  of  a  needle,  but  "  with  God  all  things  are  possible," 
(Matt.  xix.  26;  Mk.  x.  20—27;  Lk.  xviii.  27).  In  the  face  of  sin- 
above  all  of  deliberate  wretchlessness — we  must  remember  that  "God  is 
not  mocked"  (Gal.  vi.  7),  and  that  our  human  remedies  are  then  ex- 
hausted. On  the  other  hand  to  dose  the  gate  of  repentance  against  any 
contrite  sinner  is  to  contradict  all  the  Gospels  and  all  the  Epistles 
alike,  as  well  as  the  Law  and  the  Prophets. 

and  put  him  to  an  open  sha/ne]  Expose  Him  to  scorn  (comp.  Matt.  i.  19 
where  the  simple  verb  is  used). 

7.  For  the  earth  which  drinketh  in]  Rather,  "For  land  which  has 
drunk."  Land  of  this  kind,  blessed  and  fruitful,  resembles  true  and 
faithful  Christians.  The  expression  that  the  earth  "drinks  in"  the 
rain  is  common  (Deut.  xi.  11).  Comp.  Virg.  £d.  III.  iii,  ''sat  prata 
i)il)erunt."  For  the  moral  significance  of  the  comparison — namely  that 
there  is  a  point  at  which  God's  husbandry  seems  to  be  rendered  finally 
useless, — see  Is.  v.  1  —  6,  24. 

by  whom  it  is  dressed]  Rather,  "for  whose  sake  {propter  quos.  Tert.) 
it  is  also  tilled  "—namely  for  the  sake  of  the  owners  of  the  land. 

blessing]  Gen.  xxvii.  27,  "  a  field  which  the  Lord  hath  blessed." 
Ps.  Ixv.  10,  "Thou  blessest  the  increase  of  it." 

8.  that  which  beareth  thorns]  Rather,  "  if  it  bear  thorns"  (Is.  v.  6; 
Prov.  xxiv.  31).  This  neglected  land  resembles  converts  who  have 
fallen  away. 

rejected]     The  same  word,  in  another  metaphor,  occurs  in  Jer.  vi.  30. 

nigh  tinto  cursing]  Lit.,  "  near  a  curse."  Doubtless  there  is  a  refer- 
ence to  Gen.  iii.  18.  St  Chrysostom  sees  in  this  expression  a  sign  of 
mercy,  because  he  only  says  ''near  a  curse."  "He  who  has  not  yet 
fallen  into  a  curse,  but  has  got  near  it,  will  also  be  able  to  get  afar  from 
if,"  so  that  we  ought,  he  says,  to  cut  up  and  burn  the  thorns,  and  then 
we  shall  be  approved.   And  he  might  have  added  that  the  older  "curse " 


vv.  9— II-]  HEBREWS,  VI.  109 

But,  beloved,  we  are  persuaded  better  things  of  you,  and  9 
tJmigs  that  accompany  salvation,   though    we   thus    speak. 
For  God  is  not  unrighteous  to  forget  your  work  and  labour  10 
of  love,  which  ye  have  shewed  toward  his  name,  in  that  ye 
have  ministered  to  the  saints,   and  do  minister.      And  we  u 


of  the  land  to  which  he  refers,  was  by  God's  mercy  over-ruled  into  a 
blessing. 

•whose  end  is  to  be  burned'\  Lit.,  "whose  end  is  for  burning."  Comp. 
Is.  xliv.  15,  "that  it  may  be  for  burning."  It  is  probably  a  mistake  to 
imagine  that  there  is  any  reference  to  the  supposed  advantage  o{  burning 
the  surface  of  the  soil  (Virg.  Georg.  I.  84  sqq.;  Pliny,  H.  N.  XViii.  39, 
72),  for  we  find  no  traces  of  such  a  procedure  among  the  Jews.  More 
probably  the  reference  is  to  land  like  the  Vale  of  Siddim,  or  "Burnt 
Phrygia,"  or  "the  Solfatara," — like  that  described  in  Gen.  xix.  74; 
Deut.  xxix.  23.  Comp.  Heb.  x.  27.  And  such  a  land  Judea  itself 
became  within  a  very  few  years  of  this  time,  because  the  Jews  would  not 
"break  up  their  fallow  ground,"  but  still  continued  "to  sow  among 
thorns."  Obviously  the  ^^whose"  refers  to  the  "land,"  not  to  the 
"curse." 

9 — 12.    Words  of  encouragement  and  hope. 

9.  beloved^  The  warm  expression  is  introduced  to  shew  that  his 
stern  teaching  is  only  inspired  by  love. 

■we  are  persuad€d\  Lit.,  "We  have  been  (and  are)  convinced  of." 
Comp.  Rom.  xv.  14. 

better  things']  Lit.,  "the  better  things."  I  am  convinced  that  the 
better  alternative  holds  true  of  you;  that  your  condition  is,  and  your  fate 
will  be,  better  than  what  I  have  described. 

that  accompany  salvation']  Rather,  "akin  to  salvation,"  the  antithesis 
to  "near  a  curse."     What  leads  to  salvation  is  obedience  (v.  9). 

though  we  thus  speak]  in  spite  of  the  severe  words  of  warning  which  I 
have  just  used.     Comp.  x.  39. 

thus]     As  in  verses  4 — 8. 

10.  to  forget]  The  aorist  implies  "to  forget  in  a  moment."  Comp. 
xi.  6,  20.  God,  even  amid  your  errors,  will  not  overlook  the  signs  of 
grace  working  in  you.     Comp.  Jer.  xxxi.  16;  Ps.  ix.  12;  Am.  viii.  7. 

and  labour  of  love]  The  words  "labour  of"  should  be  omitted. 
They  are  probably  a  gloss  from  i  Thess.  i.  3.  The  passage  bears  a 
vague  general  resemblance  to  2  Cor.  viii.  24 ;  Col.  i.  4. 

toward  his  name]  which  name  is  borne  by  all  His  children. 

in  that  ye  have  7>!inistered  to  the  saints]  In  your  past  and  present 
ministration  to  the  saints,  i.e.  to  your  Christian  brethren.  It  used  to  be 
supposed  that  the  title  "the  saints"  applied  especially  to  the  Christians 
at  Jerusalem  (Rom.  xv.  25  ;  Gal.  ii.  10  ;  i  Cor.  xvi.  i).  This  is  a 
mistake;  and  the  saints  at  Jerusalem,  merged  in  a  common  poverty,  per- 
haps a  result  in  part  of  their  original  Communism,  were  hardly  in  a 


HEBREWS,   VI.  [vv.  12,  13. 


desire  that  every  one  of  you  do  shew  the  same  diligence  to 

12  the  full  assurance  of  hope  unto  the  end :  that  ye  be  not 
slothful,  but  followers  of  them  who  through  faith  and  pa- 

13  tience  inherit  the  promises.     For  when  God  made  promise 
to  Abraham,   because  he   could   swear   by  no   greater,  he 


condition  to  minister  to  one  another.  They  were  (as  is  the  case  with 
most  of  the  Jews  now  living  at  Jerusalem)  dependent  in  large  measure 
on  the  Chahika  or  distribution  of  alms  sent  them  from  without. 

and  do  viinister'\  The  continuance  of  their  well  doing  proved  its 
sincerity;  but  perhaps  the  writer  hints,  though  with  infinite  delicacy, 
that  their  beneficent  zeal  was  less  active  than  it  once  had  been. 

11.  And\     Rather,  "But." 

•we  desire]     A  strong  word  :   "we  long  to  see  in  you." 

that  every  one  of  yoji]  Here  again  in  the  emphasis  of  the  expression 
we  seem  to  trace,  as  in  other  parts  of  the  Epistle,  some  individual  refer- 
ence. 

the  same  diligence']  He  desires  to  see  as  much  earnestness  (2  Cor.  vii. 
11)  in  the  work  of  advancing  to  spiritual  maturity  of  knowledge  as  they 
had  shewn  in  ministering  to  the  saints. 

to  the  full  assurance]  i.e.  with  a  view  to  your  attaining  this  full 
assurance.  Comp.  x.  22,  iii.  14.  The  word  also  occurs  in  i  Thess.  i. 
5;  Col.  ii.  2. 

unto  the  end]  till  hope  becomes  fruition  (iii.  6,  14). 

12.  that  ye  be  not  slothful]  Rather,  "that  ye  become  not  slothful" 
in  the  advance  of  Christian  hope  as  you  already  are  (v.  11)  in  acquiring 
spiritual  knowledge. 

followers]  Rather,  "imitators,"  as  in  i  Cor.  iv.  16;  Eph.  v.  1  ;  i 
Thess.  I,  6,  iSic. 

through  faith  and  paiietice  inherit  the  promises]  See  ver.  15,  xii.  i; 
Rom.  ii.  7.  Tlie  word  rendered  "patience"  [inah-othumid)  is  often 
applied  to  the  "long  suffering"  of  God,  as  in  Rom.  ii.  4;  i  Pet.  iii.  20; 
but  is  used  of  men  in  Col.  i.  11  ;  2  Cor.  vi.  6,  &c.,  and  here  implies  the 
tolerance  of  hope  deferred.  It  is  a  different  word  from  the  "endurance" 
of  xii.  r,  X.  36. 

inherit]  Partially,  and  by  faith,  here;  fully  and  with  the  beatific 
vision  in  the  life  to  come. 

13.  For  when  God]  The  "for"  implies  "and  you  may  feel  absolute 
confidence  about  the  promises  ;  for,"  &c. 

made  promise  to  Abraham]  Abraham  is  here  only  selected  as  "the 
father  of  the  faithful"  (Rom.  iv.  13);  and  not  as  the  sole  example  of 
persevering  constancy,  but  as  an  example  specially  illustrious  (Calvin). 

because  he  could  swear  by  no  greater]  In  the  Jewish  treatise  Berachoth 
(f.  32.  i)  Moses  is  introduced  as  saying  to  God,  "Hadst  thou  sworn  by 
Heaven  and  Earth,  I  should  have  said  They^nW  perish,  and  therefore  so 
may  Thy  oath  ;  but  as  Thou  hast  sworn  by  Thy  great  name,  that  oath 
shall  endure  for  ever." 


vv.  14— 17-]  HEBREWS,   VI.  iii 

sware  by  himself,  saying,  Surely  blessing  I  will  bless  m 
thee,  and  multiplying  I  will  multiply  thee.  And  so,  15 
after  he  had  patiently  endured,  he  obtained  the  promise. 
For  men  verily  swear  by  the  greater :  and  an  oath  for  con- 16 
firmation  is  to  them  an  end  of  all  strife.  Wherein  God,  17 
willing  more  abundantly  to  shew  unto  the  heirs  of  promise 
the  immutability  of  his  counsel,  confirmed  it  by  an  oath  : 

he  swa7-e  by  himself  \  "By  myself  have  I  sworn"  (Gen.  xxii.  16). 
"God  sweareth  not  by  another,"  says  Philo,  in  a  passage  of  which  this 
may  be  a  reminiscence — "for  nothing  is  superior  to  Himself — but  by 
Himself,  Who  is  best  of  all"  {De  Leg.  Alleg.  ill.  72).  There  are  other 
passages  in  Philo  which  recall  the  reasoning  of  this  clause  (0pp.  I.  622, 

"•  39)- 

14.  blessing  I  will  bless  thee]  The  repetition  represents  the  emphasis 
of  the  Hebrew,  which  expresses  a  superlative  by  repeating  the  word 
twice. 

I  will  multiply  thee]  In  the  Heb.  and  LXX.  we  have  "I  will  multi- 
ply thy  seeil." 

15.  after  he  had  patiently  endured]  Tit.,  "having  patiently  en- 
dured," which  may  mean  "by  patient  endurance."  The  participles  in 
this  passage  are  really  contemporaneous  with  the  principal  verbs. 

he  obtained  the  promise]  Gen.  xv.  i,  xxi.  5,  xxii.  17,  18,  xxv.  7,  &c.  ; 
John  viii.  56.  There  is  of  course  no  contradiction  to  xi.  13,  39,  which 
refers  to  a  farther  future  and  a  wider  hope. 

16.  men  verily  swear  by  the  greater]  Gen.  xxi.  23,  xxiv.  3,  xxvi. 
30 — 31.  The  passage  is  important  as  shewing  the  lawfulness  of  Christian 
oaths  (see  our  Article  xxxix.). 

strife]  Rather,  ' ' for  an  oath  is  to  them  an  end  of  all  gainsaying  "  (or 
"controversy"  as  to  facts)  "with  a  view  to  confirmation."  It  is  meant 
that  when  men  swear  in  confirmation  of  a  disputed  point  their  word  is 
believed.  There  is  an  exactly  similar  passage  in  Plrilo,  De  sacr.  Abel, 
et  Cain  (0pp.  i.  181). 

17.  Wherein]  Rather,  "on  which  principle;"  "  in  accordance  with 
this  human  custom." 

willing]  Rather,  "wishing."  The  verb  is  not  thelon,  but  boiilome- 
nos. 

more  abundantly]  i.e.  than  if  he  had  not  sworn. 

tinto  the  heirs  of  promise]  Rather,  "  of  the  promise."  The  heirs  of 
the  promise  were  primarily  Abraham  and  his  seed,  and  then  all  Christians 
(Gal.  iii.  29). 

the  im^nidability  of  his  counsel]  "I  am  the  Lord,  I  change  not" 
(Mai.  iii.  6).  See  too  Is.  xlvi.  10,  11  ;  Ps.  xxxiii.  11  ;  Ja.  i.  17.)  His 
changeless  "decree"  was  that  in  Abraham's  seed  all  the  nations  of  the 
world  should  be  blessed.  On  the  other  hand  the  Mosaic  law  was  muta- 
ble (vii.  12,  xii.  27). 

confirmed  it  by  an  oath]  Rather,  "intervened  with  an  oath,"  i.e.  made 
His  oath  intermediate  between  Himself  and  Abraham.     Philo,  with  his 


HEBREWS,   Vr.  [vv.  i8,  19. 


is  that  by  two  immutable  things,  in  which  it  was  impossible 
for  God  to  lie,  we  might  have  a  strong  consolation,  who 
have  fled  for  refuge  to  lay  hold  upon  the  hope  set  before  us: 

'9  which  hope  we  have  as  an  anchor  of  the  soul,  both  sure 
and  stedfast,  and  which  entereth  into  that  within  the  vail ; 

usual  subtle  refinements,  observes  that  whereas  our  word  is  accredited 
because  of  an  oath,  God's  oath  derives  its  credit  because  He  is  God.  On 
the  other  hand,  Rabbi  Eleazer  (in  the  second  century)  said  "the  word 
N'ot  has  the  force  of  an  oath,"  which  he  deduced  from  a  comparison  of 
Gen.  IX.  II  with  Is.  liv.  9;  and  therefore  a  fortiori  the  word  "jw"  has 
the  force  of  an  oath  (Shevuoth.  f.  36.  1).  The  word  "intervened," 
"mediated"  {evtesiteusen)  occurs  here  only  in  the  N.  T. 

18.  by  two  immtttable  things]  Namely,  by  the  oath  and  by  the  word 
of  God.  The  Targums  for  "By  Myself"  have  "By  My  Word  have  I 
sworn." 

in  which  it  was  impossible  for  God  to  lie]  St  Clement  of  Rome  says 
" Nothing  IS  impossible  to  God,  except  to  lie"  {Ep-  ad  Cor.  2 7).  "God 
that  cannot  lie"  (Tit.  i.  2.     Comp.  Num.  xxiii.  19). 

consolntiott]     Rather,  "encouragement." 

7vho  have  fled  for  refuge]  As  into  one  of  the  refuge-cities  of  old. 
Num.  XXXV.  II. 

to  lay  hold  upon  the  hope  set  before  us]  "The  hope"  is  here 
(by  a  figure  called  inctonymy)  used  for  "  the  object  of  hope  set  before  us 
as  a  prize"  (comp.  x.  23);  "the  hope  which  is  laid  up  for  us  in 
heaven,"  Col.  i.  5. 

19.  as  an  anchor  of  the  soul]  An  anchor  seems  to  have  been  an 
emblem  of  Hope — being  something  which  enables  us  to  hope  for  safety 
in  danger — from  very  early  days  (Aesch.  Agam.  488),  and  is  even 
found  as  a  symbol  of  Hope  on  coins.  The  notion  that  this  metaphor 
adds  anything  to  the  argument  in  favour  of  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the 
Epistle,  because  St  Paul  too  sometimes  uses  maritime  metaphors,  shews 
how  little  the  most  ordinary  canons  of  literary  criticism  are  applied 
to  the  Scriptures.  St  Paul  never  happens  to  use  the  metaphor  of 
"  an  anchor,"  but  it  might  have  been  equally  well  used  by  a  person 
who  had  never  seen  the  sea  in  his  life. 

"Or  if  you  fear 
Put  all  your  trust  in  God:  that  anchor  holds." 

Tennyson,  Enoch  Arden. 
and  which  entereth  into  that  within  the  vail]  This  expression  is 
not  very  clear.  The  meaning  is  that  the  hawser  which  holds  the 
anchor  of  our  Christian  hope  passeth  into  the  space  which  lies  behind 
the  veil,  i.e.  into  the  very  sanctuary  of  Him  who  is  "the  God  of 
Hope"  (Rom.  xv.  13).  "The  veil"  is  the  great  veil  {Parocheth) 
which  separated  the  Iloly  from  the  Holy  of  Holies  (Ex.  xxvi.  31 — 35  ; 
Heb.  x.  20;  Matt,  xxvii.  51,  &c.).  The  Christian's  anchor  of  hope 
is  not  dropped  into  any  earthly  sea,  but  passes  as  it  were  through  the 
depths  of  the  aerial  ocean,  mooring  us  to  the  very  throne  of  God. 


V.  20.]  HEBREWS,  VI.  113 

whither  the  forerunner  is  for  us  entered,  even  Jesus,  made  a  20 
high  priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec. 

"Oh!  life  as  futile  then  as  frail! 
What  hope  of  answer  or  redress? — 
Behind  the  veil!    Behind  the  veil!" 

In  Memoriam. 

The  word  katapetasnia  usually  applies  to  this  veil  before  the  Holy  of 
Holies,  while  kahtmina  (as  in  Philo)  is  strictly  used  for  the  outer  veil. 

20.  zvhither  the  forerunner  is... eiitcred\  Lit.  "  where  a  forerunner 
entered...  Jesus  ;"  or  "where,  as  a  forerunner  "  (or  harbinger)  "Jesus 
entered." 

for  tis\  "  on  our  behalf."  This  explains  the  introduction  of 
the  remark.  Christ's  Ascension  is  a  pledge  that  our  Hope  will  be 
fulfilled.  He  is  gone  to  prepare  a  place  for  us  (John  xiv.  2,  3). 
His  entrance  into  the  region  behind  the  veil  proves  the  reality  of 
the  hidden  kingdom  of  glory  into  which  our  Hope  has  cast  its  anchor 
(Ahlfeld).  This  is  evidently  a  prominent  thought  with  the  writer 
(iv.  14,  ix.  24). 

niade\     Rather,  "having  become,"  as  the  result  of  His  earthly  life. 

after  the  order  of  Melchisedec\  By  repeating  this  quotation,  as  a 
sort  of  refrain,  the  writer  once  more  resumes  the  allusion  of  v.  10, 
and  brings  us  face  to  face  with  the  argument  to  which  he  evidently 
attached  extreme  importance  as  the  central  topic  of  his  epistle.  In 
the  dissertation  which  follows  there  is  nothing  which  less  resembles 
St  Paul's  manner  of  "going  off  at  a  word"  (as  in  Eph.  v.  12 — 15, 
&c.).  The  warning  and  exhortation  which  ends  at  this  verse,  so  far 
from  being  "a  sudden  transition"  (or  "a  digression")  "by  which 
he  is  carried  from  the  main  stream  of  his  argument  "  belongs  essen- 
tially to  his  whole  design.  The  disquisition  on  Melchisedek  — for 
which  he  has  prepared  the  way  by  previous  allusions  and  with  the 
utmost  deliberation — is  prefaced  by  the  same  kind  of  solemn  strain  as 
those  which  we  find  in  ii.  i — 3,  iii.  2,  12 — 14,  xii.  15 — 17.  So  far 
from  being  "hurried  aside  by  the  violence  of  his  feelings"  into  these 
appeals,  they  are  strictly  subordinated  to  his  immediate  design,  and 
enwoven  into  the  plan  of  the  Epistle  with  consummate  skill.  "  Hurry" 
and  "vehemence"  may  often  describe  the  intensity  and  impetuosity 
of  St  Paul's  fervent  style  which  was  the  natural  outcome  of  his  im- 
passioned nature;  but  faultless  rhetoric,  sustained  dignity,  perfect 
smoothness  and  elaborate  eloquence  are  the  very  different  character- 
istics of  the  manner  of  this  writer. 

for  ever]  The  words  in  the  Greek  come  emphatically  at  the  end, 
and  as  Dr  Kay  says  strike  the  keynote  of  the  next  chapter  (vii,  3,  16, 
17,  21,  24,  25,  28). 


114  HEBREWS,   VII.  [v.  i. 

7      For  this  Melchisedec,  king  of  Salem,  priest  of  the  most 

Ch.  VII.     Christ,   as  an   eternal  High    Priest    after    the 

ORDER   OF   MeLCHISEDEK,   IS    SUPERIOR   TO   THE   LeVITIC    HiGH 

Priest. 

Historic  reference  to  Melchisedek  (i — 4).  His  Priesthood  typically 
superior  to  that  of  Aaron  in  seven  particulars,  i.  Because  even 
Abraham  gave  him  tithes  (4 — 7).  ii.  Because  he  blessed  Abra- 
ham (7).  iii.  Because  he  is  the  type  of  an  tnidyiiig  Priest  (8). 
iv.  Because  even  the  yet  unborn  Levi  paid  him  tithes,  in  the 
person  of  Abraham  (9,  10).  v.  Because  the  permanence  of 
his  Priesthood,  continued  by  Christ,  implied  the  abrogation  of 
the  whole  Levitic  Law  (11 — 19).  vi.  Because  it  was  founded  on 
the  swearing  of  an  oath  (30 — 23).  vii.  Because  it  is  intrans- 
missible, never  being  vacated  by  death  (23,  24).  Summary  and 
conclusion  (25 — 28). 

1.  For  this  ]\Ielchiscdcc\  All  that  is  historically  known  of  Mel- 
chisedek is  found  in  three  verses  of  the  book  of  Genesis  (xiv.  18,  19, 
20).  In  all  the  twenty  centuries  of  sacred  histoiy  he  is  only  mentioned 
once,  in  Ps.  ex.  4.  This  chapter  is  a  mystical  explanation  of  the 
significance  of  these  two  brief  allusions.  It  was  not  wholly  new, 
since  the  Jews  attached  high  honour  to  the  name  of  Melchisedek, 
whom  they  identified  with  Shem,  and  Philo  had  already  spoken  of 
Melchisedek  as  a  type  of  the  Logos  (De  Leg.  Alleg.  in.  25,  0pp. 
I.  102). 

king  of  Salein\  Salem  is  probably  a  town  near  Shechem.  It  is  the 
same  which  is  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxxiii.  18  (though  there  the  words  ren- 
dered "  to  Shalem  "  may  mean  "  in  safety  "),  and  in  John  iii.  23;  and  it 
is  the  Salumias  of  Judith  iv.  4.  This  is  the  view  of  Jerome,  who  in  his 
Onomasticon  places  it  eight  miles  south  of  Bethshean.  The  site  is 
marked  by  a  ruined  well  still  called  Sheikh  Saliin  (Robinson,  Bibl. 
Res.  III.  333).  In  Jerome's  time  the  ruins  of  a  large  palace  were  shewn 
in  this  place  as  "the  palace  of  Melchisedek;"  and  this  agrees  v/ith 
the  Samaritan  tradition  that  Abraham  had  been  met  by  Melchisedek 
not  at  Jerusalem  but  at  Gerizim.  The  same  tradition  is  mentioned 
by  Eupolemos  (Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.  ix.  17.  See  Stanley,  Siit. 
and  Pal.  p.  237).  The  more  common  view  has  been  that  Salem  is 
a  shortened  form  of  Jerusalem,  but  this  is  very  improbable;  for  (i) 
only  a  single  instance  of  this  abbreviation  has  been  adduced,  and  that 
only  as  a  poetic  license  in  a  late  Psalm  which  the  LXX.  describe  as 
"A  Psalm  with  reference  to  the  Assyrian"  (Ps.  Ixxvi.  2).  (2)  Even 
this  instance  is  very  dubious,  for  (a)  the  Psalmist  may  be  intending 
to  contrast  the  sanctuary  of  Melchisedek  with  that  of  David;  or  (/3) 
even  here  the  true  rendering  may  be  "His  place  has  been  made  in 
peace''''  as  the  Vulgate  renders  it.  (3)  Jerusalem  in  the  days  of  Abraham, 
and  for  centuries  afterwards  was  only  known  by  the  name  Jebus. 
(4)  The  typical  character  of  Melchisedek  would  be  rather  impaired 
than  enhanced  by  his  being  a  king  at  ycnisalem,  for  that  was  the  holy 
city  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  of  which  he  was  wholly  independent, 


V.  I.]  HEBREWS,   VII.  115 

high  God,  who  met  Abraham  returning  from  the  slaughter 

being  a  type  of  One  in  whose  priesthood  men  should  worship  the  Father 
in  all  places  alike  if  they  offered  a  spiritual  worship.  We  must  then 
regard  Salem  as  being  a  different  place  from  Jerusalem,  if  any  place 
at  all  is  intended.  For  though  both  the  Targums  and  Josephus  {Atztt. 
I.  10  §  2)  here  identify  Salem  with  Jerusalem,  the  Bereshith  Rabba 
interprets  the  word  Salem  as  an  appellative,  and  says  that  it  means 
"Perfect  King,"  and  that  this  title  was  given  to  him  because  he  was 
circumcised  (see  Wiinsche,  Bibl.  Rabbinka.  Beresh.  Rabba,  p. 
198).  Philo  too  says  "king  of  peace,  for  that  is  the  meaning  of 
Salem"  {Leg.  Alleg.  in.  25,  comp.  Is.  ix.  5;  Col.  i.  20).  Nothing 
depends  on  the  solution  of  the  question,  for  in  any  case  the  fact 
that  "Salem"  means  "peace"  or  "peaceful"  is  pressed  into  the 
typology.  But  the  Salem  near  Sichem  was  itself  in  a  neighbourhood 
hallowed  by  reminiscences  scarcely  less  sacred  than  those  of  Jerusalem. 
Besides  this  connexion  with  the  name  of  Melchisedek,  it  was  the 
place  where  Jacob  built  the  altar  El- Elohe- Israel ;  the  scene  of  John's 
baptism ;  and  the  region  in  which  Christ  first  revealed  Himself  to  the 
woman  of  Samaria  as  the  Messiah. 

priest  of  the  juost  high  God'\  The  union  of  Royalty  and  Priesthood 
in  the  same  person  gave  him  peculiar  sacredness  ("  He  shall  be  a  Priest 
upon  His  throne"  (Zech.  vi.  13).  "Rex  Anius,  rex  idem  hominum, 
Phoebique  sacerdos"  (Virg.  Aen.  III.  80  and  Servius  ad  loc).  The 
expression  "God  most  high"  is  El  Elton,  and  this  was  also  a  title  of 
God  among  the  Phoenicians.  It  is  however  certain  that  Moses  meant 
that  Melchisedek  was  a  Priest  of  God,  for  though  this  is  the  earliest 
occurrence  of  the  name  El  Elion  it  is  afterwards  combined  with  "Jeho- 
vah" in  Gen.  xiv.  22,  and  in  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the 
Psalm.s.  There  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  that  the  worship  of  the 
One  True  God  was  not  absolutely  confined  to  the  family  of  Abraham. 
The  longevity  of  the  early  Patriarchs  facilitated  the  preservation  of 
Monotheism  at  least  among  some  tribes  of  mankind,  and  this  perhaps 
explains  the  existence  of  the  name  Elion  among  the  Phoenicians  (Philo 
Byblius  ap.  Euseb.  Praep.  Evang.  I.  10). 

who  7net  Abraham  returning  from  the  slaughter  of  the  ki7igs'\  Amra- 
phel  king  of  Shinar,  with  three  allies,  had  made  war  on  Bera  king  of 
Sodom  with  four  allies,  and  had  carried  away  plunder  and  captives 
from  the  Cities  of  the  Plain.  Among  the  captives  was  Lot.  Abraham 
therefore  armed  his  318  servants,  and  with  the  assistance  of  three 
Canaanite  chiefs,  Aner,  Mamre,  and  Eshcol,  pursued  Amraphel's 
army  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Damascus,  defeated  them,  rescued 
their  prisoners,  and  recovered  the  spoil.  The  woid  here  rendered 
"slaughter"  {hope  from  hopto  "cut")  may  perhaps  mean  no  more 
than  "smiting,"  i.e.  defeat.  On  his  return  the  king  of  Sodom  going 
forth  to  greet  and  thank  him  met  him  at  "the  valley  of  Shaveh, 
which  is  the  king's  dale,"  a  place  of  which  nothing  is  known,  but 
which  was  probably  somewhere  in  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  near  mount 
Gerizim.     This  seems  to  have  been  in  the  little  domain  of  Melchisedek 


ii6  HEBREWS,  VII.  [w.  2,  3. 

2  of  the  kings,  and  blessed  him ;  to  whom  also  Abraham 
gave  a  tenth  Jjafi  of  all ;  first  being  by  interpretation  King 
of  righteousness,  and  after  that  also  King  of  Salem,  which  is, 

3  King  of  peace;  without  father,  without  mother,  without  de- 
fer we  are  not  told  that  "he  went  forth  to  meet"  Abraham,  but  only 
that  (being  apparently  at  the  place  where  Bera  met  Abraham)  he 
humanely  and  hospitably  brought  out  bread  and  wine  for  the  weary 
victors,  and  blessed  Abraham,  and  blessed  God  for  granting  him  the 
victory.  In  acknowledgment  of  this  friendly  blessing,  Abraham  "gave 
him  tithes  cf  all,"  i.e.  of  all  the  spoils. 

arid  blessed  hiDiX     Evidently  as  a  priestly  act.     Gen.  xiv.  19,  20. 

2.  first  being\  This  seems  to  imply  that  of  his  two  names  or  titles 
"  Melchisedec,"  and  "King  of  Salem,"  \\\q.  first  means  "King  of 
Righteousness"  and  thesecond  "King  of  Peace."  In  a  passage  of 
mystic  interpretation  like  this,  however,  the  writer  may  intend  to  sug- 
gest that  there  is  a  direct  connexion  between  the  two  titles,  and  that 
"Righteousness"  is  the  -necessary  antecedent  to  "Peace,"  as  is  inti- 
mated in  Ps.  Ixxii.  7,  Ixxxv.  10.     Comp.  Rom.  v.  i. 

by  interpretation  King  of  righteousness^  The  name  Melchisedek  may 
mean  "King  of  Righteousness."  This  is  the  paraphrase  of  the  Tar- 
gums,  perhaps  with  tacit  reference  to  Is.  xxxii.  i,  where  it  is  said  of 
the  Messiah  '-Behold  a  king  shall  reign  in  righteousness."  (Comp. 
Zech.  ix.  9;  Jer.  xxiii.  5.)  In  the  Bereshith  Rabba  Tzedek  is  explained 
to  mean  Jerusalem  with  reference  to  Is.  i.  21,  "Righteousness  lodged 
in  it."  Josephus  {Antt.  i.  19,  §  12;  B.  J.  VI.  10)  and  Philo,  however, 
render  it  "Righteous  King."  Later  on  in  Jewish  history  (Josh. x.  3)  we 
read  of  Adonizedek  ("  Lord  of  righteousness")  who  was  a  king  of  Jerusa- 
lem. Apart  from  any  deeper  meaning  "Righteousness"  or  "Justice  "  was 
one  of  the  most  necessary  qualifications  of  Eastern  Kings  who  are  also 
Judges.  In  the  mystic  sense  the  interpretation  of  the  names  Melchizedek 
and  Salem  made  him  a  fit  type  of  "the  Lord  our  Righteousness"  (Jer. 
xxiii.  6)  and  "the  Prince  of  Peace"  (Is.  ix.  6)  :  and  he  was  also  a  fit  type 
of  Christ  because  he  was  a  Kingly  Priest ;  a  Priest  who  blessed  Abraham ; 
a  Priest  who,  so  far  as  we  are  told,  offered  no  animal-sacrifices ;  and  a 
Priest  over  whom  Scripture  casts  "the  shadow  of  Eternity."  See 
Bishop  Wordsworth's  note  on  this  passage. 

King  of  peace']  "The  work  of  Righteousness  shall  be  Peace,  and  the 
effect  of  Righteousness  quietness  and  assurance  for  ever"  (Is.  xxxii.  17  ; 
Eph.  ii.  14,  15,  17;  Rom.  v.  i.  Comp.  Philo  Leg.  Alleg.  ill.  25, 
0pp.  I.  102). 

3.  without  father,  without  mother, -djithotit  descent]  Rather,  "with- 
out lineage"  or  "pedigree"  as  in  ver.  6.  The  mistake  is  an  ancient 
one,  for  in  consequence  of  it  Irenaeus  claims  Melchisedek  as  one  who 
had  lived  a  celibate  life  (which  in  any  case  would  not  follow).  The 
simple  and  undoubted  meaning  of  these  words  is  that  the  father,  mo- 
ther, and  lineage  of  Melchisedek  are  not  reco7-ded,  so  that  he  becomes 
more  naturally  a  type  of  Christ.     In  the  Alexandrian  School,  to  which 


V.  3-]  HEBREWS,   VII.  117 

scent,  having  neither  beginning  of  days,  nor  end  of  hfe ; 

the  writer  of  this  Epistle  belonged,  the  custom  of  allegorising  Scripture 
had  received  an  immense  development,  and  the  silence  of  Scripture  was 
regarded  as  the  suggestion  of  mysterious  truths.  The  Jewish  interpreters 
naturally  looked  on  the  passage  about  Melchisedek  as  full  of  deep  sig- 
nificance because  the  Psalmist  in  the  iioth  Psalm,  which  was  univer- 
sally accepted  as  a  Psalm  directly  Messianic  (Matt.  xxii.  44)  had  found 
in  Melchisedek  a  Priest-King,  who,  centuries  before  Aaron,  had  been 
honoured  by  their  great  ancestor,  and  who  was  therefore  a  most  fitting 
type  of  Him  who  was  to  be  "a  Priest  upon  his  Throne."  The  fact 
that  he  had  no  recorded  father,  mother,  or  lineage  enhanced  his  dignity 
because  the  Aaronic  priesthood  depended  exclusively  on  the  power  to 
prove  direct  descent  from  Aaron  which  necessitated  a  most  scrupulous 
care  in  the  preservation  of  the  priestly  genealogies.  (See  Ezra  ii.  61,  62  ; 
Nehem.  vii.  63,  64,  where  families  which  could  not  actually  produce 
their  pedigree  are  excluded  from  the  priesthood.)  The  idiom  by  which 
a  person  is  said  to  have  no  father  or  ancestry  when  they  are  not 
recorded,  or  are  otherwise  quite  unimportant,  was  common  to  Greek, 
Latin,  and  Hebrew.  In  a  Greek  tragedy  "Ion"  calls  himself  "  wt'/Z/^-- 
less"  when  he  supposes  that  his  mother  is  a  slave  (Eurip.  Ion,  850). 
Scipio  taunted  the  mob  of  the  Forum  as  people  "who  had  neither  father 
nor  mother''^  (Cic.  De  Oral.  11.  64).  Horace  calls  himself  "a  man 
sprung  from  no  ancestors'"  (Hor.  Sat.  i.  6,  10).  In  the  Bereshith 
Rabba  we  find  the  rule  "a  Gentile  has  tio  father,"  i.e.  the  father  of  a 
proselyte  is  not  counted  in  Jewish  pedigrees.  Further  the  Jews  mysti- 
cally applied  the  same  sort  of  rule  which  holds  in  legal  matters  which 
says  "that  things  not  producible  are  regarded  as  non-existent."  Hence 
their  kabbalistic  interpretation  of  particulars  not  mentioned  in  Scripture. 
From  the  fact  that  Cain's  death  is  nowhere  '■ecorded  in  Genesis,  Philo 
draws  the  lesson  that  evil  never  dies  among  the  human  race;  and  he 
calls  Sarah  "motherless"  because  her  mother  is  nowhere  mentioned. 
There  is  then  no  difficulty  either  as  to  the  idiom  or  its  interpretation. 

without  mother']  The  mention  of  this  particular  may  seem  to  have 
no  bearing  on  the  type,  unless  a  contrast  be  intended  to  the  Jewish 
Priests  who  were  descended  from  Elisheba  the  wife  of  Aaron  (Ex. 
vi.  23).  But  "  Christ  as  God,  has  no  mother,  as  man  no  Father."  The 
early  Church  neither  used  nor  sanctioned  the  name  Theoiokos  "Mother 
of  God"  as  applied  to  the  Virgin  Mary. 

■witho7it  descent]  Rather,  "without  a  genealogy."  Melchisedek  has 
no  recorded  predecessor  or  successor.  Bishop  Wordsworth  quotes 
"Who  shall  declare  His  generation?" 

havitig  neither  beginning  of  days,  nor  end  of  life].  The  meaning  of 
this  clause  is  exactly  the  same  as  that  of  the  last — namely  that  neither 
the  birth  nor  death  of  Melchisedek  are  recorded,  which  makes  him  all 
the  more  fit  to  be  a  type  of  the  Son  of  God.  Dean  Alford's  remark 
that  it  is  "almost  childish"  to  suppose  that  nothing  more  than  this 
is  intended,  arises  from  imperfect  famiharity  with  the  methods  of 
Rabbinic  and  Alexandrian  exegesis.     The  notion  that  Melchisedek  was 


ii8  HEBREWS,  VII.  [v.  4. 

but  made  like  unto  the  Son  of  God ;  abideth  a  priest  con- 

the  Holy  Spirit  (which  was  held  by  an  absurd  sect  who  called  them- 
selves Melchisedekites) ;  or  "the  Angel  of  the  Presence;"  or  "God  the 
Word,  previous  to  Incarnation;"  or  "the  Shechinah;"  or  "  the  Captain 
of  the  Lord's  Host;"  or  "an  Angel;"  or  "a  reappearance  of  Enoch;"  or 
an  '■' ensarkosis  of  the  Holy  Ghost;"  are,  on  all  sound  hermeneutical 
principles,  not  only  "almost"  but  quite  "childish."  They  belong  to 
methods  of  interpretation  v/hich  turn  Scripture  into  an  enigma  and 
neglect  all  the  lessons  which  result  so  plainly  from  the  laws  which 
govern  its  expression,  and  the  history  of  its  interpretation.  No 
Hebrew,  reading  these  words,  would  have  been  led  to  these  idle  and 
fantastic  conclusions  about  the  super-human  dignity  of  the  Canaanite 
prince.  If  the  expressions  here  used  had  been  meant  literally,  Melchi- 
sedek  would  not  have  been  a  man,  but  a  Divine  Being — and  not  the 
type  of  one — and  he  could  not  therefore  have  been  "a  Priest"  at  all. 
It  would  then  have  been  not  only  inexplicable,  but  meaningless  that  in 
all  Scripture  he  should  only  have  been  incidentally  mentioned  in  three 
verses,  of  a  perfectly  simple,  and  straightforward  narrative,  and  only  once 
again  alluded  to  in  the  isolated  reference  of  a  Psalm  written  centuries 
later.  The  fact  that  some  of  these  notions  about  him  may  plead  the 
authority  of  great  names  is  no  more  than  can  be  said  of  thousands  of 
the  most  absolute  and  even  absurd  misinterpretations  in  the  melancholy 
history  of  slowly-corrected  errors  which  pass  under  the  name  of  Scrip- 
ture exegesis.  Less  utterly  groundless  is  the  belief  of  the  Jews  that 
Melchisedek  was  the  Patriarch  Shem,  who,  as  they  shewed,  might 
have  survived  to  this  time  (Avodath  Hakkodesh,  III.  20,  &c.  and  in 
two  of  the  Targums).  Yet  even  this  view  cannot  be  correct;  for  if 
Melchisedek  had  been  Shem  (i)  there  was  every  reason  why  he  should 
be  called  by  his  own  name  ;  and  (2)  Canaan  was  in  the  territory  of  Ham's 
descendants,  not  those  of  Shem;  and  (3)  Shein  was  in  no  sense,  whether 
mystical  or  literal,  "without  pedigree."  Yet  this  opinion  satisfied 
Lyra,  Cajetan,  Luther,  Melanchthon,  Lightfoot,  &c. 

Who  then  was  Melchisedek?  Josephus  and  some  of  the  most  learned 
fathers  (Hippolytus,  Eusebius,  &c.),  and  many  of  the  ablest  modern 
commentators,  rightly  hold  that  he  was  neither  more  nor  less  than  what 
Moses  tells  us  that  he  was — the  Priest-King  of  a  little  Canaanite  town, 
to  whom,  because  he  acted  as  a  Priest  of  the  True  God,  Abraham  gave 
tithes ;  and  whom,  his  neighbours  honoured  because  he  was  not  sensual 
and  turbulent  as  they  were,  but  righteous  and  peaceful,  not  joining  in 
their  wars  and  raids,  yet  mingling  with  them  in  acts  of  mercy  and 
kindness.  How  little  the  writer  of  this  Epistle  meant  to  exaggerate 
the  typolog}'  is  shewn  by  the  fact  that  he  does  not  so  much  as  allude  to 
the  "bread  and  wine"  to  which  an  unreal  significance  has  been  attached 
both  by  Jewish  and  Christian  commentators.  He  does  not  make  it  in 
any  way  a  type  of  the  shewbread  and  libations ;  or  an  offering  character- 
istic of  his  Priesthood  ;  nor  does  he  make  him  (as  Philo  does)  offer  any 
sacrifice  at  all.  How  much  force  would  he  have  added  to  the  typology 
if  he  had  ventured  to  treat  these  gifts  as  prophecies  of  the  Eucharist, 


vv.  4,  5-]  HEBREWS,  VII.  119 

tinually.      Now  consider   how   great  this  ma7i    ivas,   unto  4 
whom  even  the  patriarch  Abraham  gave  the  tenth  of  the 
spoils.     And  verily  they  that  are  of  the  sons  of  Levi  who  5 
receive  the  office  of  the  priesthood  have  a  commandment 
to  take  tithes  of  the  people  according  to  the  law,  that  is,  of 

as  some  of  the  Fathers  do  !  His  silence  on  a  point  which  would  have 
been  so  germane  to  his  purpose  is  decisive  against  sucli  a  view. 

7nade  like  unto  the  Son  of  God]  Lit.  "having  been  likened  to  the  Son 
of  God,"  i.e.  having  been  invested  with  a  tj'pical  resemblance  to 
Christ.  Tlie  expression  explains  the  writer's  meaning.  It  is  a  combi- 
nation of  the  passage  in  Genesis  with  the  allusion  in  Ps.  ex.,  shewing 
that  the  two  together  constitute  Melchisedek  a  Divinely  appointed  type 
of  a  Priesthood  received  from  no  ancestors  and  transmitted  to  no 
descendants.  The  personal  importance  of  Melchisedek  was  very 
small;  but  he  is  eminently  typical,  because  of  the  suddenness  with 
which  he  is  introduced  into  the  sacred  narrative,  and  the  subsequent 
silence  respecting  him.  He  was  born,  and  lived,  and  died,  and  had  a 
father  and  mother  no  less  than  any  one  else,  but  by  not  mentioning 
these  facts,  the  Scripture,  interpreted  on  mystic  principles,  "throws  on 
him  a  shadow  of  Eternity:  gives  him  a  typical  Eternity."  The  expres- 
sions used  of  him  are  only  literally  true  of  Him  whose  type  he  was.  In 
himself  only  the  Priest-prince  of  a  little  Canaanite  community,  his 
venerable  figure  was  seized  upon,  first  by  the  Psalmist,  then  by  the  writer 
of  this  Epistle,  as  the  type  of  an  Eternal  Priest.  As  far  as  Scripture  is 
concerned  it  may  be  said  of  him,  that  "he  lives  without  dying  fixed  for 
ever  as  one  who  lives  by  the  pen  of  the  sacred  historian,  and  thus 
stamped  as  a  type  of  the  Son,  the  ever-living  Priest." 

continually']     The  Greek  expression  is  like  the  Latin  in  perpetuutn. 

4.  Noiv  consider]     The  verb  means  "to  contemplate  spiritually." 
how  great  this  man  was]     Here  begin  the  seven  particulars  of  the 

typical  superiority  of  Melchisedek's  Priesthood  over  that  of  Aaron. 
^EiRST.     Even  Abraham  gave  him  tithes. 

the  patriarch  Abraham]  There  is  great  rhetoric  force  in  the  order  of 
the  original  "to  whom  even  Abraham  gave  a  tithe  out  of  his  best  spoils 
— he  the  patriarch."  Here  not  only  is  the  ear  of  the  writer  gratified  by 
the  sonorous  conclusion  of  the  sentence  with  an  lonictis  a  jninore 
patriarches;  but  a  whole  argument  about  the  dignity  of  Abraham  is 
condensed  into  the  position  of  one  emphatic  word.  The  word  in  the 
N.  T.  occurs  only  here  and  in  Acts  ii.  29,  vii.  8,  9. 

of  the  spoils']  The  word  rendered  "spoils"  properly  means  that 
which  is  taken  from  the  top  of  a  heap  [aKpos  6U)  ;  hence  some  translate 
it  "the  best  of  the  spoils,"  and  Philo  describes  the  tithe  given  by 
Abraham  in  similar  terms. 

5.  who  receive  the  office  of  the  pj-iesthood]  The  word  used  for 
"priesthood"  is  defined  by  Aristotle  to  mean  "care  concerning  the 
gods." 

io  take  tithes  of  the  people  according  to  the  law]   Indirectly,  through  the 


I20  HEBREWS,  VII.  [vv.  6-11. 

their  brethren,  though  they  come  out  of  the  loins  of  Abra- 

6  ham :    but   he  whose  descent  is    not  counted  from    them 
received  tithes  of  Abraham,  and  blessed  him  that  had  the 

7  promises.     And  without  all  contradiction  the  less  is  blessed 

8  of  the  better.     And  here  men  that  die  receive  tithes ;  but 
there  he  rcceiveih   i/icm,   of  whom  it  is  witnessed  that  he 

9  liveth.  And  as  /  may  so  say,  Levi  also,  who  receiveth 
^o  tithes,  payed  tithes  in  Abraham.  For  he  was  yet  in  the 
"  loins  of  his  father,  when  Melchisedec  met  him.    If  therefore 

perfection  were  by  the  Levitical  priesthood,  (for   under  it 

agency  of  the  Levites.  Delitzsch  argues  that  after  the  Exile  the  Priests 
collected  the  tithes  themselves.  It  cannot  however  be  proved  that  the 
Triests  themselves  tithed  the  people.  This  was  done  by  the  Levites, 
who  gave  the  tithe  of  ///«>  tithes  to  the  priests,  Num.  xviii.  12 — 26, 
'Nehem.  x.  38.  There  is  however  no  real  difficulty  about  the  expression, 
for  the  Priests  might  tithe  the  people,  as  Jewish  tradition  says  that  they 
did  in  the  days  of  Ezra;  and  (2)  Qiiifacitper  aliiun  facit pei-  se.  There 
is  therefore  no  need  to  alter  "the  people"  {laon)  into  h^Vi  {Lenin).  The 
Priests  stood  alone  in  receiving  tithes  and  giving  none. 

come  Old  of  the  loins'X     A  Hebrew  expression,  Gen.  xxxv.  ir. 

6.  and  blessed\  lAi.,  and  hath  blessed.  Second  point  of  superior- 
ity. The  act  is  regarded  as  permanent  and  still  continuous  in  its  effects, 
in  accordance  with  the  writer's  manner  of  regarding  Scripture  as  a 
living  and  present  entity. 

7.  of  the  better']  i.e.  the  inferior  is  blessed  by  one  who  is  (pro  hac 
vice  or  qjioad  hoc)  the  Superior.  Hence  blessing  was  one  of  the  recog- 
nised priestly  functions  (Num.  vi.  23 — 26). 

8.  And  here]  As  things  now  are;  while  the  Levitic  priesthood 
still  continues. 

men  that  dic\  "Dying  men" — men  who  are  under  liability  to  die 
(comp.  verse  23),  as  in  the  lines 

"  He  preached  as  one  who  ne'er  should  preach  again 
And  as  a  dying  man  to  dying  men." 
it  is  witnessed  that  he  liveth]     i.  e.  he  stands  as  a  living  man  on  the 
eternal  page  of  Scripture,  and  no  word  is  said  about  his  death ;  so  far 
then  as  the  letter  of  Scripture  is  concerned  he  stands  in  a  perpetuity  of 
,     mystic  hfe.     This  is  the  third  point  of  superiority. 

9.  as  I  may  so  say']  Rather,  "so  to  speak ;"  shewing  the  writer's 
consciousness  that  the  expression  is  somewhat  strained, _  especially  as 
even  Isaac  was  not  born  till  14  years  later.  The  phrase  is  classic,  and 
is  common  in  Philo,  but  occurs  here  only  in  the  N.T. 

Levi... payed  tithes]     This  is  the  FOURTH  point  of  superiority. 

11.  Lf  therefore  perfection  -Mere  by  the  Lezntical  priesthood]  At  this 
point  begins  the  argument  which  occupies  the  next  nine  verses.  "  Per- 
lection"  (compare  the  verb  in  ix.  9,  x.  i,  14,  xi.  40)  means  power  of 
perfectionment,  capacity  to  achieve  the  end  in  view;  but  this  was  not 


vv.  12—14]  HEBREWS,  VII. 


the  people  received  the  law,)  what  further  need  was  there 
that  another  priest  should  rise  after  the  order  of  Melchise- 
dec,  and  not  be  called  after  the  order  of  Aaron?  For  the  12 
priesthood  being  changed,  there  is  made  of  necessity  a 
change  also  of  the  law.  For  he  of  whom  these  things  are  '3 
spoken  pertaineth  to  another  tribe,  of  which  no  man  gave 
attendance  at  the   altar.     For  it  is  evident  that  our  Lord  h 

to  be  attained  through  the  Levitic  priesthood.  The  fifth  point  of 
superiority  is  that  the  Melchisedek  Priesthood  implies  the  abrogation  of 
the  Levitic,  and  of  the  whole  law  which  was  based  upon  it. 

for  under  it\  Rather,  "for  on  the  basis  of  it."  The  writer  regards 
the  Priesthood  rather  than  the  Law  as  constituting  the  basis  of  the 
whole  Mosaic  system  ;  so  that  into  this  slight  parenthesis  he  really  in- 
fuses the  essence  of  his  argument.  The  Priesthood  is  obviously  changed. 
For  otherwise  the  Theocratic  King  of  Ps.  ex.  would  not  have  been 
called  "a  Priest  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec"  but  "after  the  order  of 
Aaron."  Clearly  then  "the  order  of  Aaron"  admitted  of  no  attainment 
of  perfection  through  its  means.  But  if  the  Priesthood  was  thus  con- 
demned as  imperfect  and  inefficient,  the  Law'was  equally  disparaged  as 
a  transitory  institution.  Righteousness  did  not  "come  by  the  Law;" 
if  it  could  so  have  come  Christ  would  have  died  in  vain  (Gal.  ii.  21. 
Comp.  Heb.  x.  r — 14). 

ivhat  further  need  was  there'\  There  could  be  no  need,  since  none  of 
God's  actions  or  dispensations  are  superfluous. 

another  priest]     Rather,  "  a  different  priest. " 

and  not  be  called  after  the  order  of  Aaron'\  Lit.,  "and  that  he  should 
not  be  said  (viz.  in  Ps.  ex.  4)  to  be  after  the  order  of  Aaron." 

12.  being  changed]  He  here  uses  the  comparatively  mild  and  deli- 
cate term  "being  transferred.^''  When  he  has  prepared  the  mind  of  his 
readers  by  a  little  further  argument,  he  substitutes  for  "transference" 
the  much  stronger  word  ''^annulment''''  (ver.  18).  It  is  a  characteristic 
of  the  writer  to  be  thus  careful  not  to  shock  the  prejudices  of  his  readers 
more  than  was  inevitable.  His  whole  style  of  argument,  though  no 
less  effective  than  that  of  St  Paul  in  its  own  sphere,  is  more  concilia- 
tory, more  deferential,  less  vehemently  iconoclastic.  This  relation  to 
St  Paul  is  like  that  of  Melanchthon  to  Luther. 

of  necessity]  The  Law  and  the  Priesthood  were  so  inextricably 
united  that  the  Priesthood  could  not  be  altered  without  disintegrating 
the  whole  complex  structure  of  the  Law. 

13.  pertaineth]     Lit.,  "hath  had  part  in." 

of  which  no  man  gave  attendance  at  the  altar]  Sacerdotal  privileges 
were  exclusively  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Levi  (Deut.  x.  8;  Num.  iii. 
5 — 8).  The  attempt  of  King  Uzziah,  who  was  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  to 
assume   priestly  functions,   had   been  terribly  punished  (2  Chr.  xxvi. 

3.  19)- 

14.  evideitt]  "Known  to  all."  The  word  (frodelo?i)  occurs  m 
I  Tim.  V.  24,  25. 


122  HEBREWS,  VII.  [vv.  15—17. 

sprang  out  of  Juda;   of  which  tribe  Moses  spake  nothing 

15  concerning  priesthood.     And  it  is  yet  far  more  evident :  for 
that  after  the  simiUtude  of  Melchisedec  there  ariseth  another 

16  priest,  who  is  made,  not  after  the  law  of  a  carnal  command- 

17  ment,  but  after  the  power  of  an  endless  life.     For  he  testi- 

our  Lord'\  This  is  the  first  time  that  we  find  this  expression  in  the 
N.T.  standing  alone  as  a  name  for  Christ.  It  is  from  this  passage  that 
the  designation  now  so  familiar  to  Christian  lips  is  derived. 

spiattg]  Lit.,  "halh  sprung."  The  verb  is  used  generally  of  the 
sun  rising  (Udl.  iv.  2;  Lk.  xii.  54;  2  Pet.  i.  19),  but  also  of  the  sprmg- 
ing  up  of  plants  (Zech.  iii.  8,  vi.  12,  &c.).  Hence  the  LXX.  choose 
the  word  Anatole  which  usually  means  sunrise,  to  translate  the  Messi- 
anic title  of  "the  Branch."  t,,      t  •         r 

out  of  JinM  Gen.  xhx.  10;  Is.  xi.  i;  Lk.  ui.  33.  "The  Lion  of 
the  tribe  of  Judah,"  Rev.  v.  5.  ,  ,         ^^ 

concerning  pricsthood\     The  better  reading  is  "concerning  priests. 
Uzziah,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  king  though  he  was,  had  been  punished 
by  lifelong  leprosy  for  usurping  theVunctions  of  the  tribe  of  Levi. 

15.  yet  far  more  evident]  The  word  used  {katadclon)  is  stronger 
than  that  used  in  ver.  14  [prodclon)  and  does  not  occur  elsewhere  in  the 
N.T.  The  change  of  the  Law  can  be  yet  more  decisively  inferred  from 
the  fact  that  Melchisedek  is  not  only  a  Priest  of  a  different  tribe  from 
Levi,  but  a  priest  constituted  in  a  wholly  different  manner,  and  even- 
as  he  might  have  said— out  of  the  limits  of  the  Twelve  tribes  altogether; 
and  yet  a  Priest  was  to  be  raised  after  his  order,  not  after  that  of  Aaron. 

for  thai]     Rather,  "if"  (as  is  the^case),  i.e.  "seeing  that." 

16.  is  made]     Lit.,  "is  become." 

after  the  lazv  of  a  carnal  commaitdment]  Rather,  "in  accordance 
with  the  law  of  a  flcshen  (i.e.  earthly)  comviandment."  Neither  this 
writer,  nor  even  St  Paul,  ever  called  or  would  have  called  the  Law 
"carnal"  {sarkikos),  a  term  which  St  Paul  implicitly  disclaims  when  he 
says  that  the  Law  is  "spiritual"  (Rom.  vii.  14);  but  to  call  it  "fleshen" 
(sarkinos)  is  merely  to  say  that  it  is  hedged  round  with  earthly  limita- 
tions and  relationships,  and  therefore  unfit  to  be  adapted  to  eternal 
conditions.  Its  ordinances  indeed  might  be  called  "ordinances  of 
the  flesh"  (ix.  10),  because  they  had  to  do,  almost  exclusively,  with 
externals.  An  attentive  reader  will  see  that  even  in  the  closest  apparent 
resemblances  to  the  language  of  St  Paul  there  are  differences  in  this 
Epistle.  For  instance  his  relative  disparagement  of  theLaw  turns 
almost  exclusively  on  the  conditions  of  its  hierarchy;  and  his  use  of  the 
word  "flesh"  and  "fleshen,"  refers  not  to  sensual  passions  but  to  mor- 
tality and  transience.  „   ,     ,.r      r        ,. 

of  an  endless  life]  Lit.,  "  of  an  indissoluble  life,"  the  life  of  a  taber- 
nacle which  "could  not  be  dissolved."  The  word  {akataluios)  is  not 
found  elsewhere  in  the  N.T.  The  Priest  of  this  new  Law  and  Priest- 
hood is  "the  Prince  of  Life"  (Acts  iii.  15). 

17.     he  testifieth]     Rather,  "he  is  testified  of.  ' 


vv.  i8— 21.]  HEBREWS,   VII.  123 

fieth,  Thou  art  a  priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of 
Melchisedec.     For  there  is  verily  a  disannulling  of  the  18 
commandment  going  before  for  the  weakness  and  unprofit- 
ableness thereof    For  the  law  made  nothing  perfect,  but  the  19 
bringing  in  of  a  better  hope  did ;  by  the  which  we  draw 
nigh  unto  God.     And  inasmuch  as  not  without  an  oath  he  20 
was  made  priest :  (for  those  priests  were  made  without  an  21 
oath;  but  this  with  an  oath  by  him  that  said  unto  him.  The 
Lord  sware  and  will  not  repent.  Thou  art  a  priest 

18.  there  is\  Rather,  "there  occurs"  or  "results,"  in  accordance 
with  Ps.  ex.  4. 

a  disannulling^     See  note  on  ver.  12.     Comp.  Gal.  iii.  15. 

of  the  cuinmandnient\  Most  ancient  and  modern  commentators 
understand  this  of  the  Mosaic  Law  in  general. 

for  the  weakness  and  -unprofitableness  thereof^  The  writer  here  shews 
how  completely  he  is  of  the  school  of  St  Paul,  notwithstanding  the 
strength  of  his  Judaic  sympathies.  For  St  Paul  was  the  first  who 
clearly  demonstrated  that  Christianity  involved  the  abrogation  of  the 
Law,  and  thereby  proved  its  partial,  transitory,  and  inefficacious  cha- 
racter as  intended  only  to  be  a  prcpai-ation  for  the  Gospel  (Rom. 
viii.  3).  The  law  was  only  the  ''tutor"  or  attendant-slave  to  lead  men 
to  Christ,  or  train  their  boyhood  till  it  could  attain  to  full  Christian 
manhood  (Gal.  iii.  23,  24).  It  was  only  after  the  consummation  of  the 
Gospel  that  its  disciplinary  institutions  became  reduced  to  "weak  and 
beggarly  rudiments"  (Gal.  iv.  9). 

going  beforel  Comp.  i  Tim.  i.  r8,  v.  24.  The  "commandment" 
was  only  a  temporary  precursor  of  the  final  dispensation. 

19.  the  laiv  made  nothing  perfect^     This  is  illustrated  in  ix.  6 — 9. 
but  the  bringing  in  of  a  better  hope  did'\     The  better  punctuation  is 

"There  takes  place  a  disannulment  of  the  preceding  commandment  on 
account  of  its  weakness  and  unprofitableness — for  the  Law  perfected 
nothing — but  the  superinduction  of  a  better  hope."  The  latter  clause  is 
a  nominative  not  to  "perfected,"  but  to  "there  is,"  or  rather  "there 
takes  place,"  in  ver.  18.  The  "better  hope"  is  that  offered  us  by  the 
Resurrection  of  Christ ;  and  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament  Ijears 
witness  that  the  Gospel  had  the  power  of  "  perfecting,"  which  the  Law 
had  not.      Rom.  iii.  21;  Eph.  ii.  13 — 15,  &c. 

20.  inasmuch  as  not  without  an  oath\  This  is  the  Sixth  point  of 
superiority.  He  has  lingered  at  much  greater  length  over  the  Fifth 
than  over  the  others,  from  the  extreme  importance  of  the  argument 
which  it  incidentally  involved.  The  oath  on  which  the  Melchisedek 
Priesthood  was  founded  is  that  of  Ps.  ex.  4.  The  word  used  for  "oath" 
is  not  the  common  word  horkos  (as  in  vi.  17),  but  the  more  sonorous  horko- 
mosia. 

21.  those  priests  7v  ere  made  without  an  oath']  Lit.,  "these  men  have 
been  made  priests  without  an  oath." 


124  HEBREWS,   VII.  [vv.  22— 25. 

22  for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec :)  by  so  much 

23  was  Jesus  made  a  surety  of  a  better  testament.     And  they 
truly  were  many  priests,  because  they  were  not  suffered  to 

24  continue  by  reason  of  death  :  but  this  man,  because  he  con- 

25  tinueth  ever,  hath  an  unchangeable  priesthood.     Wherefore 
he  is  able  also  to  save  them  to  the  uttermost  that  come  unto 


22.  of  a  better  testainent'\  A  clearer  rendering  would  be  "By  so 
much  better  was  the  covenant  of  which  Jesus  has  been  made  surety." 
The  words — which  might  be  taken  as  the  keynote  of  the  whole  Epistle — 
should  undoubtedly  be  rendered  "of  a  better  covenajit."  The  Greek 
word  diathcke  is  the  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  Berith,  which  means  a 
covenant.  Of  "testaments"  the  Hebrews  knew  nothing  until  they 
learnt  the  custom  of  "making  a  will"  from  the  Romans.  So  completely 
was  this  the  case  that  there  is  no  word  in  Hebrew  which  means  "a 
will,"  and  when  a  writer  in  the  Talmud  wants  to  speak  of  a  "will,"  he 
has  to  put  the  Greek  word  diatheke  in  Hebrew  letters.  The  Hebrew 
berith  is  rendered  diatlieke  in  the  LXX.,  and  "covenant"  by  our  trans- 
lators at  least  200  times.  When  we  speak  of  the  "Old"  or  the  "New 
Testatiient'^  we  have  borrowed  the  word  from  the  Vulgate  or  Latin 
translation  of  St  Jerome  in  2  Cor.  iii.  6.  The  only  exception  to  this 
meaning  of  diatheke  \%  in  ix.  15 — 17.  Of  the  way  in  which  Jesus  is  "a 
pledge"  of  this  "better  covenant,"  see  ver.  25  and  viii.  r,  6,  ix.  15,  xii. 
24.  _  The  word  for  "pledge"  (e77i;os)  occurs  here  alone  in  the  N.  T., 
but  is  found  in  Ecclus.  xxix.  15. 

23.  many  p7-iests\  Tit.,  "And  they  truly  have  been  constituted 
priests  many  in  number." 

they  xvcre  jiot  suffered  to  continue  by  reason  of  death"]  The  vacancies 
caused  in  their  number  by  the  ravages  of  death  required  to  be  constantly 
replenished  (Num.  xx.  28;  Ezek.  xxii.  29,  30). 

24.  but  this  juan]     Rather,  " but  He." 

hath  an  tmchangeable  priesthood]  Rather,  "hath  his  priesthood  un- 
changeable" {scmpiternum,  Vulg.)  or  perhaps  "untransmissible;"  "a 
priesthood  that  doth  not  pass  to  another,"  as  it  is  rendered  in  the  margin 
of  our  Revised  Version.  The  rendering  "not  to  be  transgressed  against," 
or  "inviolate"  {intransgressibile,  Aug.),  is  not  tenable  here.  This  is  the 
SEVENTH  particular  of  superiority.  I  think  it  quite  needless  to  enter  into 
fedious  modern  controversies  as  to  the  particular  timeoi  Christ's  ministry 
at  which  He  assumed  His  priestly  office,  because  I  do  not  think  that 
they  so  much  as  entered  into  the  mind  of  the  author.  The  one  thought 
which  was  prominent  in  his  mind  was  that  of  Christ  passing  as  our 
Great  High  Priest  with  the  offering  of  His  finished  sacrifice  into  the 
Heaven  of  Heavens.  The  minor  details  of  Christ's  Priestly  work  are 
not  defined,  and  those  of  Melchisedek  are  passed  over  in  complete 
silence. 

25.  to  save  them  to  the  uttermost]  i.e.  "  to  the  consummate  end."  All 
the  Apostles  teach  that  Christ  is  "able  to  keep  us  from  falling  and  to 


V.  26.]  HEBREWS,  VII.  125 

God  by  him,  seeing  he  ever  liveth  to  make  intercession  for 
them. 

For  such  a  high  priest  became  us,  who  is  holy,  harmless,  25 
undefiled,  separate  front  sinners,  and  made  higher  than  the 

present  us  faultless  before  the  presence  of  his  glory"  (Jude  24;  Rom. 
viii.  34;  John  vi.  37— 39. 

to  save\  He  saves  them  in  accordance  with  His  name  of  Jesus,  "  the 
Saviour."     Bengel. 

by  hi»i\     "  No  man  cometh  unto  the  Father  but  by  me." 

to  make  intercession']  "  to  appear  in  the  presence  of  God  for  us  "  (Heb. 
ix.  24).  Philo  also  speaks  of  the  Logos  as  a  Mediator  and  Intercessor 
{Vit.  Mos.  III.  16). 

Having  thus  proved  in  seven  particulars  the  transcendence  of  the 
Melchisedek  Priesthood  of  Christ,  as  compared  with  the  Levitic  Priest- 
hood, he  ends  this  part  of  his  subject  with  a  weighty  summary,  into 
which,  with  his  usual  literary  skill,  he  introduces  by  anticipation  the 
tlioughts  which  he  proceeds  to  develop  in  the  following  chapters. 

26.  For  such  a  high  priest  became  us\  The  "for"  clinches  the 
whole  argument  with  a  moral  consideration.  There  was  a  spiritual  fit- 
ness in  this  annulment  of  the  imperfect  Law  and  Priesthood,  and  the  in- 
troduction of  a  better  hope  and  covenant.  So  great  and  so  sympathetic 
and  so  innocent  an  High  Priest  was  suited  to  our  necessities.  There  is 
much  rhetorical  beauty  in  the  order  of  the  Greek.  He  might  have  written 
it  in  the  order  of  the  English,  but  he  keeps  the  word  "  Priest"  by  way 
of  emphasis  as  the  last  word  of  the  clause,  and  then  substitutes  Pligh 
Priest  for  it. 

holy\  towards  God  (Lev.  xx.  26,  xxi.  i;  Ps.  xvi.  10;  Acts  ii.  27). 
He  bore  '"holiness  to  the  Lord"  not  on  a  golden  mitre-plate,  but  as  the 
inscription  of  all  His  life  as  "the  Holy  One  of  God"  (Mk.  i.  24). 

harmless]  as  regards  men. 

undefiled]  Not  stained,  Is.  liii.  9  (and  as  the  word  implies  unstain- 
able)  with  any  of  the  defilements  which  belonged  to  the  Levitic  priests 
from  their  confessed  sinfulness.  Christ  was  "without  sin"  (iv.  15); 
"without  spot"  (ix.  14  J  I  Pet.  i.  19).     He  "knew  no  sin"  (2  Cor.  v. 

21). 

separate  from  sinners]  Lit.,  "Having  been  separated  from  sinners. 
The  writer  is  already  beginning  to  introduce  the  subject  of  the  Day  of 
Atonement  on  which  he  proceeds  to  speak.  To  enable  the  High  Priest 
to  perform  the  functions  of  that  day  aright  the  most  scrupulous  pre- 
cautions were  taken  to  obviate  the  smallest  chance  of  ceremonial  pollu- 
tion (Lev.  xxi.  10 — 15)  ;  yet  even  these  rigid  precautions  had  at  least 
once  in  living  memory  been  frustrated — when  the  High  Priest  Ishmael 
ben  Phabi  had  been  incapacitated  from  his  duties  because  in  conversing 
with  Hareth  (Aretas)  Emir  of  Arabia,  a  speck  of  the  Emir's  saliva  had 
fallen  upon  the  High  Priest's  beard.  But  Christ  was  free  not  only  from 
ceremonial  pollution,  but  from  that  far  graver  moral  stain  of  which  the 
ceremonial  was  a  mere  external  figure;  and  had  now  been  exalted  above 
aJl  contact  with  sin  in  the  Heaven  of  Heavens  (iv.  14). 


126  HEBREWS,   VI T.  [vv.  27, 28. 

27  heavens ;  who  needeth  not  daily,  as  tliose  high  priests,  to 
offer  up  sacrifice,  first  for  his  own  sins,  and  then  for  the 
people's:  for  this  he  did  once,  when  he  offered  up  himself. 

23  For  the  law  maketh  men  high  priests  which  have  infirmity  ; 
but  the  word  of  the  oath,  which  was  since  the  law,  ?nakeih 
the  Son,  who  is  consecrated  for  evermore. 

made  higher  than  the  heavens]  Having  "ascended  up  far  above 
all  heavens"  (Epli.  iv.  10). 

27.  dailyl  A  difficulty  is  suggested  by  this  word,  because  the  High 
Priest  did  not  offer  sacrifices  daily,  but  only  once  a  year  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement.  In  any  case  the  phrase  would  be  a  mere  verbal  inaccuracy, 
since  the  High  Priest  could  be  regarded  as  potentially  ministering 
in  the  daily  sacrifices  which  were  offered  by  the  inferior  Priests ;  or 
the  one  yearly  sacrifice  may  be  regarded  as  summing  tip  all  the  daily 
sacrifices  needed  to  expiate  the  High  Priest's  daily  sins  (so  that  "daily" 
would  mean  "continually").  It  appears  however  that  the  High  Priest 
might  if  he  chose  take  actual  part  in  the  daily  offerings  (Ex.  xxix.  38,  44 ; 
Lev.  vi.  19—22;  Jos.  B.  J.  v.  5 — 7).  It  is  true  that  the  daily 
sacrifices  and  Mincha  or  "meat  offering"  had  no  recorded  connexion 
with  any  expiatoiy  sacrifices;  but  an  expiatory  significance  seems  to 
have  been  attached  to  the  daily  offering  of  incense  (Lev.  xvi.  12,  13, 
LXX.;  Yoma,  f.  44.  i).  The  notion  that  there  is  any  reference  to  the 
Jewish  Temple  built  by  Onias  at  Leontopolis  is  entirely  baseless. 
Both  Philo  {De  Spec.  Legg.  §  53)  and  the  Talmud  use  the  very  same 
expression  as  the  writer,  who  seems  to  have  been  perfectly  well 
aware  that,  normally  and  strictly,  the  High  Priest  only  offered  sacri- 
fices on  one  day  in  the  year  (ix.  25,  x.  i,  3).  The  stress  may  be  on 
the  necessity.  Those  priests  needed  the  expiation  by  sacrifice  for  daily 
sins;  Christ  did  not. 

he  did  once']  Rather,  "once  for  all"  (ix.  12,  26,  28,  x.  10;  Rom.  vi. 
10).     Christ  offered  one  sacrifice,  once  offered,  but  eternally  sufficient. 

when  he  offered  up  himself]  The  High  Priest  was  also  the  Victim, 
viii.  3,  ix.  12,  14,  25,  x.  10,  12,  14  ;  Eph.  v.  2  (Lunemann). 

28.  fnen]  i.  e.  ordinary  "  human  beings." 

the  oath,  which  zaas  since  the  la%v]     Namely,  in  Ps.  ex.  4. 

co7tsecratecr]  Rather,  "who  has  been  perfected."  The  word  "con- 
secrated" in  our  A.V.  is  a  reminiscence  of  Lev.  xxi.  10;  Ex.  xxix.  9. 
The  "perfected"  has  the  same  meaning  as  in  ii.  10,  v.  9. 

Ch.  viii.  Having  compared  the  two  Priesthoods,  and  shewn  the 
inferiority  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  to  that  of  Christ  as  "a 
High  Priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchisedek,"  the  writer 
now  proceeds  to  contrast  the  two  Covenants.  After  fixing  the 
attention  of  his  readers  on  Christ  as  the  High  Priest  of  the  True 
Sanctuary  (1—6)  he  shews  that  God,  displeased  with  the  diso- 
bedience of  those  who  were  under  the  Old  Covenant,  had  by  the 
prophet  Jeremiah  promised  a  New  Covenant  (7 — 9)  which  should 


vv.  I,  2.]  HEBREWS,   VIII.  127 

Now  of  the  things  which  we  have  spoken  this  is  the  sum  :  8 
We  have  such  a  high  priest,  who  is  set  on  the  right  hand  of 
the  throne  of  the  Majesty  in  the  heavens ;  a  minister  of  the  a 
sanctuary,   and   of  the   true   tabernacle,   which   the   Lord 

be  superior  to  the  Old  in  three  respects,  i.  Because  the  Law  of 
it  should  be  written  on  the  heart  (10).  ii.  Because  it  should  be 
universal  (11),  and  iii.  because  it  should  be  a  covenant  of  for- 
giveness (12).  The  decrepitude  of  the  Old  Covenant,  indicated  by 
its  being  called  "old"  is  a  sign  of  its  approaching  and  final 
evanescence  (13). 

1.  of  the  things  which  we  have  spoken  this  is  the  stini]  Rather, 
"the  chief  point  in  what  we  are  saying  is  this."  The  word  rendered 
"sum"  (Jicphalaion)  may  mean,  in  its  classical  sense,  "chief  point," 
and  that  must  be  the  meaning  here,  because  these  verses  are  not  a 
summary  and  they  add  fresh  particulars  to  what  he  has  been  saying. 
Dr  Field  renders  it  "now  to  crown  our  present  discourse;"  Tyndale 
and  Cranmer,  '■^  pyth." 

is  set'\     Rather,  "sat" — a  mark  of  preeminence  (x.  11,  12,  xii.  2). 

0/  the  throne\  This  conception  seems  to  be  the  origin  of  the  Jewish 
word  Metatron,  a  sort  of  Prince  of  all  the  Angels,  near  the  throne 
[nieta  thronios). 

of  the  Majesty  in  the  heavens']  A  very  Alexandrian  expression.  See 
note  on  i.  3. 

2.  a  minister']  From  this  word  leitotirgos  (derived  from  Xews, 
"people,"  and  'ipyov,  "work")  comes  our  "liturgy." 

of  the  sanctuary']  This  (and  not  "  of  holy  things,"  or  "  of  the  saints") 
is  the  only  tenable  rendering  of  the  word  in  this  Epistle. 

and]  The  "and"  does  not  introduce  something  new;  it  merely 
furnishes  a  more  definite  explanation  of  the  previous  word. 

of  the  true  tabei-naclc]     Rather,  "of  the  genuine  tabernacle"   [ale- 
thines   not  alethous).     The   word  alethinos  means  '■'■genuine,'''  and  in 
this  Epistle  '■'■ideal,''  '■'archetypal'''     It  is  the  antithesis  not  to  what 
is  spurious,  but  to  what  is  material,  secondary,  and   transient.      The 
Alexandrian  Jevi's,  as  well  as  the  Christian  scholars  of  Alexandria,  had 
adopted  from  Plato  the  doctrine  of  Ideas,  which  they  regarded  as  divine 
and  eternal  archetypes  of  which  material  and  earthly  things  were  but 
the  imperfect  copies.     They  found   their  chief  support  for  this  intro- 
duction of  Platonic  views  into  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible  in  Ex. 
xxv.  40,  xxvi.  30  (quoted  in  ver.  5).     Accordingly  they  regarded  the 
Mosaic  tabernacle  as  a  mere  sketch,  copy,  or  outline  of  the  Divine  Idea 
or  Pattern.     The  Idea  is  the  perfected  Reality  of  its  material  shadow. 
They  extended  this  conception  much  farther  : 
"What  if  earth 
Be  but  the  shadow  of  heaven,  and  things  therein 
Each  to  the  other  like,  more  than  on  earth  is  thought?" 
The  "genuine  tabernacle"  is  the  Heavenly  Ideal  (ix.   24)  shewn   to 
Moses.     To  interpret  it  of  "the  glorified  body  of  Christ"  by  a  mere 


128  HEBREWS,   VIII.  [vv.  3—5. 

3  pitched,  and  not  man.  For  every  high  priest  is  ordained 
to  offer  gifts  and  sacrifices  :  wherefore  it  is  of  necessity  that 

4  this  7nan  have  somewhat  also  to  offer.  For  if  he  were  on 
earth,  he  should  not  be  a  priest,  seeing  that  there  are  priests 

5  that  offer  gifts  according  to  the  law  :  who  serve  unto  the 
example  and  shadow  of  heavenly  things,  as  Moses  was  ad- 
verbal  comparison  of  John  ii.  19,  is  to  adopt  the  all-but-universal 
method  of  perverting  the  meaning  of  Scripture  by  the  artificial  elabo- 
rations and  inferential  afterthoughts  of  a  scholastic  theology. 

pitched^     Lit.  "fixed." 

and  not  man\  Omit  "and."  Not  a  man,  as  Moses  was.  Comp. 
ix.  ri,  -24. 

3.  is  ordained'\     Rather,  "is  appointed." 
gifts  and  saa-ifices']     See  note  on  v.  i. 

that  this  man]  It  would  be  better  as  in  the  R.  V.  to  avoid  intro- 
ducing the  word  "  man  "  which  is  not  in  the  original,  and  to  say  "  that 
this  High  Priest." 

have  some'ivhat  also  to  offer]  Namely,  the  Blood  of  His  one  sacrifice. 
The  point  is  one  of  the  extremest  importance,  and  though  the  writer 
does  not  pause  to  explain  lohat  was  the  sacrifice  which  Christ  offered  as 
High  Priest,  he  purposely  introduces  the  subject  here  to  prepare  for  his 
subsequent  development  of  it  in  ix.  12,  x.  5 — 7,  11,  11.  Similarly 
St  Paul  tells  us  "  Christ... hath  given  Himself  for  us,  an  offering  and  a 
sacrifice  to  God  for  a  sweet-smelling  savour"  (Eph.  v.  2). 

4.  Fo7-  if  he7vcre\     Rather,  "now  if  He  were  still  on  earth." 

if  he  7vere  on  earth]  His  sanctuary  must  be  a  heavenly  one,  for  in  the 
earthly  one  He  had  no  standpoint. 

he  should  not  be  a  priest]  He  would  not  even  be  so  much  as  a  Priest 
at  all;  still  less  a  High  Priest;  for  He  was  of  the  Tribe  of  Judah 
(vii.  14),  and  the  Law  had  distinctly  ordained  that  "no  stranger,  which 
is  not  of  the  seed  of  Aai-on,  come  near  to  offer  incense  before  the  Lord" 
(Num.  xvi.  40). 

seeing  that  there  are  priests  that  offer  gifts  aceordittg  to  the  law] 
Rather  (omitting  "priests"  with  the  best  Mss.),  since  "  there  are 
(already)  those  who  offer  their  gifts  according  to  the  Law."  The 
writer  could  not  possibly  have  used  these  present  tenses  if  the  Epistle 
had  been  written  after  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem.  Jewish  institutions  are, 
indeed,  spoken  of  in  the  present  tense,  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  by 
Barnabas  and  Clement  of  Rome ;  but  they  are  merely  using  an  every- 
day figure  of  speech.  In  case  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  the  argu- 
ment would  have  gained  such  indefinite  force  and  weight  in  passages 
like  this  by  appealing  to  a  fact  so  startling  as  the  annulment  of  the 
Mosaic  system  by  God  Himself,  working  by  the  unmistakeable  demon- 
strations of  history,  that  no  writer  similarly  circumstanced  could  possibly 
have  passed  over  such  a  point  in  silence. 

5.  who  serve  unto  the  example  and  shadow  of  heavenly  things] 
Namely,  the  priests — who  are  ministering  in  that  which  is  nothing  but  an 


V.  6.]  HEBREWS,  VIII.  129 

monished  of  God  when  he  was  about  to  make  the  tabernacle: 
for,  See,  saith  he,  that  thou  make  all  things  according 
to  the  pattern   shewed  to  thee  in  the  mount.     Bute 
now  hath  he  obtained  a  more  excellent  ministry,  by  how 

outline  and  shadow  (x.  i;  Col.  ii.  17)  of  the  heavenly  things.  The 
verb  "minister"  usually  takes  a  dative  of  the  person  to  whom  the 
ministry  is  paid.  Here  and  in  xiii.  10  the  dative  is  used  of  the  thing 
in  which  the  service  is  done.  It  is  conceivable  that  there  is  a  shade  of 
irony  in  this — they  sei-ve  not  a  Living  God,  but  a  dead  tabernacle. 
And  this  tabernacle  is  only  a  sketch,  an  outline,  a  ground  pattern 
(i  Chron.  xxviii.  11)  as  it  were — at  the  best  a  representative  image — of 
the  Heavenly  Archetype. 

of  heavenly  things]  Perhaps  rather  "  of  the  heavenly  sanctuary  " 
(ix.  23,  24). 

as  Jlfoses  zaas  admonished. . .]     "Even  as  Moses,  when  about  to  complete 

the  tabernacle  has  been  divinely  admonished" On  this  use  of  the 

perfect  see  note  on  iv.  9,  &c.  The  verb  is  used  of  divine  intimations  in 
Matt.  ii.  12;   Luke  ii.  26;   Acts  x.  22,  &c. 

all  things]  This  expression  is  not  found  either  in  the  Hebrew  or  the 
LXX.  of  the  passages  referred  to  (Ex.  xxv.  40,  xxvi.  30) ;  it  seems  to  be 
due  to  Philo  {^De  Leg.  Alleg.  III.  33),  who  may,  however,  have  followed 
some  older  reading. 

according  to  the  pattcrti  shewed  to  thee  in  the  iiwtint]  Here,  as  is  so 
often  the  case  in  comments  on  Scripture,  we  are  met  by  the  idlest  of 
all  speculations,  as  to  whether  Moses  saw  this  "pattern  "  in  a  dream  or 
with  his  waking  eyes;  whether  the  pattern  was  something  real  or  merely 
an  impression  produced  upon  his  senses  ;  whether  the  tabernacle  was 
thus  a  copy  or  only  "  a  copy  of  a  copy  and  a  shndow  of  a  shadow,"  &c. 
Such  questions  are  otiose,  because  even  if  they  were  worth  asking  at  all 
they  do  not  admit  of  any  answer,  and  involve  no  instruction,  and  no 
result  of  the  smallest  value.  The  Palestinian  Jews  in  their  slavish  literal 
M'ay  said  that  there  was  in  Heaven  an  exact  literal  counterpart  of  the 
^losaic  Tabernacle  with  "  a  fiery  Ark,  a  fiery  Table,  a  fiery  Candle- 
stick," &c.,  which  descended  from  heaven  for  Moses  to  see;  and  that 
Gabriel,  in  a  workman's  apron,  shewed  Moses  how  to  make  the  candle- 
stick,— an  inference  which  they  founded  on  Num.  viii.  4,  "And  this  work 
of  the  candlestick"  (Menachoth,  f.  29.  i).  "Without  any  such  fetish- 
worship  of  the  letter  it  is  quite  enough  to  accept  the  simple  statement 
that  Moses  worked  after  a  pattern  which  God  had  brought  before  his 
mind.  The  chief  historical  interest  in  the  verse  is  the  fact  that  it  was 
made  the  basis  for  the  Scriptural  Idealism  by  which  Philo  and  the 
Alexandrian  Jews  tried  to  combine  Judaism  with  the  Platonic  philo- 
sophy, and  to  treat  the  whole  material  world  as  a  shadow  of  the 
spiritual  world. 

6.     But  now]  i.  e.  but,  as  it  is. 

a  more  excellent  ministry,  by  hozv  mtuh  also]  Rather,  "  a  ministry 
more  excellent  in  proportion  as  He  is  also."     This  proportional  method 


I30  HEBREWS,  VIII.  [vv.  7,  8. 

much  also  he  is  the  mediator  of  a  better  covenant,  which 
was  estabhshed  upon  better  promises. 

7  For  if  that  first  covenant  had  been  fauhless,  then  should 

8  no  place  have  been  sought  for  the  second.     For  finding 

of  stating  results  runs  throughout  the  Epistle  (see  i.  4,  iii.  3,  vii.  -22). 
It  might  be  said  with  truth  that  the  gist  of  his  argument  turns  on  the 
word  "how  much  more."  He  constantly  adopts  the  argiinicntuni  a 
minoyi  ad  viajtis  (vii.  19,  22,  ix.  11,  14,  23,  x.  29).  For  his  object  was 
to  shew  the  Hebrews  that  the  privileges  of  Judaism  to  which  they  were 
looking  back  with  such  longing  eyes  were  but  transitory  outlines  and 
quivering  shadows  of  the  more  blessed,  and  more  eternal  privileges 
which  they  enjoyed  as  Christians.  Judaism  was  but  a  shadow  of  which 
Christianity  was  the  substance  ;  Judaism  was  but  a  copy  of  which 
Christianity  was  the  permanent  Idea,  and  heavenly  Archetype ;  it  was 
but  a  scaffolding  within  which  the  genuine  Temple  had  been  built;  it 
was  but  a  chrysalis  from  which  the  inward  winged  life  had  departed. 

the  mediatoi-]     ix.  15,  xii.  24;   i  Tim.  ii.  5. 

upon  better  promises]  Better,  because  not  physical  but  spiritual,  and 
not  temporal  but  heavenly  and  eternal.  Bengel  notices  that  the  main 
words  in  the  verse  are  all  Pauline.     Rom.  ix.  4;    i  Tim.  ii.  5. 

7—13.     Threefold    superiority    of    the    New    to    the    Old 
Covenant,   as   prophesied   by  Jeremiah  ;   being  a   proof 

THAT  THE  "PROMISES"  OF  THE  NeW  COVENANT  ARE  "BETTER." 

7.  if  that  first  covenant  had  been  faultless']  Whereas  it  was  as  he 
has  said  "weak"  and  "unprofitable"  and  "earthly"  (vii.  18).  The 
difference  between  the  writer's  treatment  of  the  relation  between 
Christianity  and  Judaism  and  St  Paul's  mode  of  dealing  with  the  same 
subject  consists  in  this  : — to  St  Paul  the  contrast  between  the  Law  and 
the  Gospel  was  that  between  the  Letter  and  the  Spirit,  between 
bondage  and  freedom,  between  Works  and  Faith,  between  Command 
and  Promise,  between  threatening  and  mercy.  All  these  polemical 
elements  disappear  almost  entirely  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
which  regards  the  two  dispensations  as  furnishing  a  contrast  between 
Type  and  Reality.  This  was  the  more  possible  to  Apollos  because  he 
regards  Judaism  not  so  much  in  the  light  of  a  Law  as  in  the  light  of  a 
Priesthood  and  a  system  of  worship.  Like  those  who  had  been 
initiated  into  the  ancient  mysteries  the  Christian  convert  from  Judaism 
could  say  ^cpvyov  kukuv,  evpov  dfieivov — "I  fled  the  bad,  I  found  the 
better  ; "  not  that  Judaism  was  in  any  sense  intrinsically  and  inherently 
"bad"  (Rom.  vii.  12),  but  that  it  became  so  when  it  was  preferred  to 
something  so  much  more  divine. 

8.  For  finding  fault  tvith  ihc7n]  The  "for"  introduces  his  proof 
that  "  place  for  a  better  covenant  was  being  sought  for."  The  persons 
blamed  are  not  expressed,  for  the  word  "them"  belongs  to  "He  says." 
Perhaps  the  meaning  is  "blaming  the  first  covenant,  He  says  to  them" 
(who  were  under  it).     The  "He  "  is  God  speaking  to  the  Prophet. 


vv.  9— II-]  HEBREWS,  VIII.  '       131 

fault  with  them,  he  saith,  Behold,  the  days  come,  saith 
the  Lord,  when  I  will  make  a  new  covenant  with 
the  house  of  Israel  and  with  the  house  of  Juda: 
not   according  to  the  covenant  that   I   made   with  9 
their  fathers  in  the  day  Avhen  I  took  them  by  the 
hand  to  lead  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt;   be- 
cause they  continued  not  in  my  covenant,  and  I  re- 
garded them  not,  saith  the  Lord.     For  this  is  the  =" 
covenant  that  I  will  make  with  the  house  of  Israel 
after  those  days,  saith  the  Lord;  I  will  put  my  laws 
into  their   mind,   and   write   them    in    their    hearts: 
and  1  will  be  to  them  a  God,  and  they  shall  be  to 
me  a  people:   and  they  shall  not  teach  every  man" 
his  neighbour,  and  every  man  his  brother,  saying. 
Know  the  Lord:   for  all  shall  know   me,  from  the 

Behold,  the  days  rome...]     The  quotation  is  from  Jer.  xxxi.  31 — 34. 

/  7vii/  wait']  The  Hebrew  word  means  literally  "I  will  cut," 
alluding  perhaps  to  the  slaying  of  victims  at  the  inauguration  of  a 
covenant.  But  the  LXX.  and  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  substitute  a  less 
literal  word. 

9.  I  took  tJiem  by  the  hand]     See  note  on  ii.  16. 

because  they  continued  not  in  my  covenant]  The  disobedience  of  the 
Israelites  was  a  cause  for  nullifying  the  covenant  wliich  they  had  trans- 
gressed (Judg.  ii.  -20,  21  ;  2  Kings  xvii.  15 — 18).  Comp.  Hos.  i.  9,  "Ye 
are  not  my  people,  and  I  will  not  be  your  God." 

and  I  regarded  them  not]  These  words  correspond  to  the  "  though  I 
was  a  husband  unto  them"  of  the  original.  The  quotation  is  from  the 
LXX.,  who  perhaps  followed  a  slightly  different  reading.  Rabbi 
Kimchi  holds  that  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  is  justifiable  even  with 
the  present  reading. 

10.  and  -write  them  in  their  hearts]  The  gift  of  an  inner  law,  not 
written  on  granite  slabs,  but  on  ihe  ileshen  tablets  of  the  heart,  is  the 
first  promise  of  the  New  Covenant.  It  involves  the  difference  between 
the  Voice  of  the  Spirit  of  the  God  in  the  Conscience  and  a  rigid  ex- 
ternal law;  the  difference,  that  is,  between  spirituality  and  legalism. 
This  is  brought  out  in  Ezek.  xxxvi.  ■26 — 7,9. 

/  ivill  he  to  them  a  God]  For  similar  prophecies  see  Zech.  viii.  8  ; 
Hos.  ii.  23  ;  and  for  their  fulfilment  i  Pet.  ii.  9,  10;  2  Cor.  vi.  16 — 18. 

11.  his  7ieighboiir]     Lit.  "his  fellow-citizen." 

for  all  shall  know  me]  The  second  promise  of  the  New  Covenant  is 
that  there  shall  be  no  appropriatiott  of  knowledge  ;  no  sacerdotal  ex- 
clusiveness  ;  no  learned  caste  that  shall  monopolise  the  keys  of  know- 
ledge, and  lock  out  those  that  desire  to  enter  in.  ''All  thy  children 
shall  be  taught  of  the  Lord"  (Is.  liv.  13),  and  all  shall  be  "a  chosen 
generation,  a  royal  priesthood,  a  holy  nation,  a  peculiar  people." 


HEBREWS,  VIII.  [vv.  12,  13. 


ir  least  to  the  greatest.  For  I  will  be  merciful  to 
their  unrighteousness,  and  their  sins  and  their  ini- 

13  quities  will  I  remember  no  more.  In  that  he  saith, 
A  new  covenant^  he  hath  made  the  first  old.  Now  that 
which  decayeth  and  waxeth  old  is  ready  to  vanish  away. 

all  shall  know  tne'\  By  virtue  of  the  anointing  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
which  "  teacheth  us  of  all  things"  (i  John  ii.  27). 

from  the  least  to  the  greatest^  That  is,  from  the  eldest  to  the  youngest 
(Gen.  xix.  11;  Acts  viii.  10,  &c.). 

12.  I  tuill  be  merciful  to  their  tinrighteousness\  Comp.  Rom.  xi.  27. 
The  tJiird  promise  of  the  New  Covenant  is  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  with  a 
fuhiess  and  reality  which  could  not  be  achieved  by  the  sacrifices  of  the 
Old  Covenant  (see  ii.  15,  ix.  9,  12,  x.  i,  2,  4,  22).  Under  the  Old 
Covenant  there  had  been  a  deep  feeling  of  the  nullity  of  sacrifices  i7i 
themselves,  which  led  to  an  almost  startling  disparagement  of  the  sacri- 
ficial system  (i  Sam.  xv.  22  ;  Ps.  xl.  6,  1.  8 — 10,  Ii.  16  ;  Mic.  vi.  6,  7; 
Is.  i.  II ;  Hos.  vi.  6 ;  Am,  v.  21,  22,  &c.). 

13.  he  hath  made  the  first  old\  The  veiy  expression,  "a  New 
Covenant,"  used  in  the  disparaging  connexion  in  which  it  stands,  super- 
annuates the  former  covenant,  and  stamps  it  as  antiquated.  The  verse 
is  a  specimen  of  the  deep  sense  which  it  was  the  constant  object  of 
Alexandrian  interpreters  to  deduce  from  Scripture.  The  argument  is 
analogous  to  that  of  vii.  11. 

Now  that  tohich  decayeth  and  waxeth  old  is  ready  to  vanish  a%vay\ 
\a\..  "  Now  that  which  is  becoming  antiquated  and  waxing  aged,  is  near 
obliteration."  The  expression  "  ;?i'i7;- evanescence  "  again  shows  that  the 
Epistle  was  written  before  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem,  when  the  decree  of 
dissolution  which  had  been  passed  upon  the  Old  Covenant  was  carried 
into  effect.  Even  the  Rabbis,  though  they  made  the  Law  an  object  of 
superstitious  and  extravagant  veneration,  yet  sometimes  admitted  that  it 
would  ultimately  cease  to  be — namely,  when  "the  Evil  Impulse"  (Deut. 
xxxi.  21)  should  be  overcome. 

7-eady  to  vanish  away]  Comp.  the  expression  "  near  a  curse  "  (vi.  8), 
and  Dr  Kay  points  out  the  curious  fact  that  "curse"  and  "obliteration" 
{apJianismos  here  alone  in  the  N.  T.)  appear  in  juxtaposition  in  2  Kings 
xxii.  19  (where  our  version  renders  it  "desolation"). 

Ch.  IX.  After  thus  tracing  the  contrast  between  the  Two  Covenants, 
the  writer  proceeds  to  shew  the  difference  between  their  ordi- 
nances of  ministration  (ix.  i — x.  18).  He  contrasts  the  sanctuary 
(i  —  k),  the  offering,  and  the  access  (6,  7)  of  the  Levitical  Priests,  in 
their  shadowy  and  inefficacious  ritual  (9,  10),  with  the  sanctuary  (11), 
the  offering,  and  the  access  of  Christ  (12),  stating  how  far  superior 
was  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  work  (13,  14).  In  the  remainder  of  the 
chapter  (15 — 28)  he  explains  the  perfection  and  indispensableness 
of  Christ's  one  sacrifice  for  sin.  His  object  in  this  great  section  of 
the  Epistle  is  to  prove  to  the  Hebrews  that  Christ  is  "  the  end  of  the 
I. aw;"  that  by  His  sacrifice  all  other  sacrifices  have  been  rendered 


vv.  I,  2.]  HEBREWS,    IX. 


Then   verily  the  first   coi'e/iarJ   had    also    ordinances  of  9 
divine  service,  and  a  worldly  sanctuary.     For  there  was  a  2 
tabernacle  made ;  the  first,  wherein  was  the  candlestick, 
and  the  table,  and   the  shewbread;   which   is    called   the 

needless ;  and  that  unlike  the  brief,  intermittent,  and  partial  access 
of  the  High  Priest  to  the  Holy  of  Holies  on  the  Day  of  Atonement, 
we  have  through  Christ  a  perfect,  universal,  and  continuous  access 
to  God. 

1.  Tkett  verily  the  first  tabernacle  had  also  ordinances'\  Rather,  "  To 
resume  then,  even  the  first  [covefiaiit)  had  its  ordinances."  No  substan- 
tive is  expressed  with  "first,"  but  the  train  of  reasoning  in  the  last 
chapter  sufficiently  shews  that  "Covenant,"  not  "Tabernacle,"  is  the 
word  to  be  su]iplied. 

had'[  Although  he  often  refers  to  the  Levitic  ordinances  as  still  con- 
tinuing, he  here  contemplates  them  as  obsolete  and  practically  an- 
nulled. 

and  a  worldly  sanctuary']  Rather,  "and  its  sanctuary — a  material 
one."  The  word  kosmikon,  rendered  "worldly,"  means  that  the  Jewish 
Sanctuary  was  visible  and  temporary — a  mundane  structure  in  con- 
trast to  the  Heavenly,  Eternal  Sanctuary.  The  adjective  "worldly" 
only  occurs  here  and  in  Tit.  ii.  12. 

2.  made\  "prepared"  or  "established."  He  treats  of  the  Sanctuary 
in  2 — 5,  and  of  the  Services  in  6—  10. 

the  first]  By  this  is  not  meant  the  Tabernacle  in  contrast  with  the 
Temple,  but  "  the  outer  chamber  (or  Holy  Place)."  It  is  however  true 
that  the  writer  is  thinking  exclusively  of  the  Taliernacle  of  the  Wilder- 
ness, which  was  the  proper  representative  of  the  worship  of  the  Old 
Covenant.  He  seems  to  have  regarded  the  later  Temples  as  deflections 
from  the  divine  pattern,  and  he  wanted  to  take  all  that  was  Judaic  at  its 
best.  His  description  applies  to  the  Tabernacle  only.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  the  seven-branched  candlestick  was  preserved  in  the  Temple 
of  Solomon;  there  was  certainly  no  ark  or  mercy-seat,  much  less  a 
Shechinah,  in  the  Herodian  Temple  of  this  period.  When  Pompey 
profanely  forced  his  way  into  the  Holy  of  Holies  he  found  to  his  great 
astonishment  nothing  wliatever  {vacua  omnia). 

was]  Rather,  "  is."  The  whole  tabernacle  is  ideally  present  to  the 
writer's  imagination. 

the  candlestick]  Ex.  xxv.  31—39,  xxxvii.  17—24-  The  word  would 
more  accurately  be  rendered  "lamp-stand."  In  Solomon's  temple 
there  seem  to  have  been  ten  (i  Kings  vii.  49).  There  was  indeed  one 
only  in  the  Herodian  temple  (i  Mace.  i.  21,  iv.  49;  Jos.  Antt.  Xii.  7. 
§  6,  and  allusions  in  the  Talmud)  It  could  not  however  have  exactly 
resembled  the  famous  figure  carved  on  the  Arch  of  Titus  (as  Josephus 
hints  in  a  mysterious  phrase,  Jos.  B.  J.  Vll.  5.  §  5),  for  that  has  marme 
monsters  carved  upon  its  pediment,  which  would  have  been  a  direct 
violation  of  the  second  commandment. 

c.ttd  the  tabic]     Ex.  xxv.  23—30,  xxxvii.  10—16.     There  were  ten 


134  HEBREWS,   IX.  [w. 


3  sanctuary.     And  after  the  second  vail,  the  tabernacle  which 

4  is  called  the  holiest  of  all ;  which  had  the  golden  censer, 

such  tables  of  acacia-wood  overlaid  v.itli  gold  in  Solomon's  temple 
(2  Chron.  iv.  8,  19). 

and  the  s/uzvbread]  Lit.  "the  setting  forth  of  the  loaves."  The 
Hebrew  name  for  it  is  "ihe  bread  of  the  face"  (i.e.  placed  before  the 
presence  of  God),  Ex.  xxv.  13 — 30;  Lev.  xxiv.  5 — 9. 

which  is  called  the  sanctuary']  In  the  O.T.  Kodesh,  "the  Holy 
Place." 

3,  after  the  second  vail]  Rather,  "behind  the  second  veil."  There 
were  two  veils  in  the  Tabernacle— one  called  Mas&k  (Ex.  xxvi.  36,  37, 
LXX.  kaluinma  or  epi spa st 7-071)  which  hung  before  the  entrance;  and 
"the  second,"  called  Pa7-ochdh  (LXX.  katapctas7na)  which  hung  between 
the  Holy  Place  and  the  Holiest  (Ex.  xxvi.  31—35).  The  Rabbis  invent 
tivo  curtains  between  the  Holy  Place  and  the  Holiest  with  a  space  of  a 
cubit  between  them,  to  which  they  give  the  name  Ta7-hesin,  which  is  of 
uncertain  origin.  They  had  many  fables  about  the  size  and  weight  of 
this  curtain— that  it  was  a  hand-breadth  thick,  and  took  ^00  priests  to 
draw  it,  &c.  &c.  ^ 

the  holiest  of  all]  Lit.  "the  Holy  of  Holies,"  a  name  which,  like 
the  Latin  Sa/icta  Sa7icto7-!nn  is  the  exact  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
Kodesh  Hakkodashiin.     In  Solomon's  Temple  it  was  called  "  the  Oracle." 

4.  the  golden  ce/iser]  The  Greek  word  is  thumiaterion,  and  it  has 
been  long  disputed  whether  it  means  Censer  or  Altar  of  Incense.  It 
does  not  occur  in  the  Greek  version  of  the  Pentateuch  (except  as  a 
various  reading)  where  the  "altar  of  incense"  is  rendered  hy  thiisia- 
ste)-io7t  thu//iia»iatos  (Ex.  xxxi.  8;  comp.  Lk.  i.  11);  but  it  is  used  by 
the  LXX.  in  2  Chron.  xxvi.  19;  Ezek.  viii.  ir,  and  there  means 
"censer;"  and  the  Rabbis  say  that  "a  golden  censer"  was  used  by 
the  High  Priest  on  the  Day  of  Atonement  only  (  Yo//ia,  iv.  4).  "  Censer" 
accordingly  is  the  rendering  of  the  word  in  this  place  in  the  Vulgate, 
Syriac,  Arabic  and  yEthiopic  versions ;  and  the  word  is  so  understood 
by  many  commentators  ancient  and  modern.  On  the  other  hand 
(which  is  very  important)  both  in  Josephus  [A7itt.  in.  6  §  8)  and  in  Philo 
(Opp.  I.  504)  the  word  thu/iiiatei-ion  means  "  the  Altar  of  License,'' 
which,  like  the  table,  might  be  called  "golden,"  because  it  was  overlaid 
with  gold ;  and  this  is  the  sense  of  the  word  in  other  Hellenistic  writers 
of  this  period  down  to  Clemens  of  Alexandria.  The  Altar  of  Incense 
was  so  important  that  it  is  most  unlikely  to  have  been  left  unmentioned. 
Further,  it  is  observable  that  we  are  not  told  of  a7iy  censer  kept  in  the 
Tabernacle,  but  only  in  the  Temple.  The  incense  in  the  days  of  the 
Tabernacle  was  burnt  in  a  77iachettah  (-Trvpelov,  "brazier,"  Lev.  xvi.  12); 
nor  could  the  censer  have  been  kept  in  the  Holiest  Place,  for  then  the 
High  Priest  must  have  gone  in  to  fetch  it  before  kindling  the  incense, 
which  would  have  been  contrary  to  all  the  symbolism  of  the  ritual. 

But  it  is  asserted  that  the  writer  is  in  any  case  mistaken,  for  that 
neither  the  censer  nor  the  "altar  of  incense"  were  in  the  Holiest. 
But  this  is  not  certain  as  regards  the  censer.     It  is  possible  that  some 


4.]  HEBREWS,   IX.  135 


and  the  ark  of  the  covenant  overlaid  round  about  with  gold, 
wherein  was  the  golden  pot  that  had  manna,  and  Aaron's 

golden  censer-stand  may  have  stood  in  the  Holiest,  on  which  the  High 
Priest  placed  the  small  golden  brazier  [viachettah,  'L'XX. />ureion),  which 
he  carried  with  him.  There  is  indeed  no  doubt  that  the  "Altar  of  In- 
cense" was  f/oi  in  the  Holiest  Place,  but  as  all  authorities  combine  in 
telling  us,  in  the  Holy  Place.  But  there  was  a  possibility  of  mistake 
about  the  point  because  in  Ex.  xxvi.  35  only  the  table  and  the  lamp- 
stand  are  mentioned;  and  Ex.  xxx.  6  is  a  Httle  vague.  Yet  the  writer 
does  not  say  that  the  altar  of  incense  was  in  the  Holiest.  It  was  im- 
possible that  any  Jew  should  have  made  such  a  mistake,  unless  he  were, 
as  Delitzsch  says,  "  a  monster  of  ignorance ;"  and  if  he  had  been  unaware 
of  the  fact  otherwise,  he  would  have  found  from  Philo  in  several  places 
{De  Victim  Offer.  §  4;  Quis  Rer.  Div.  Hacr.  §  46)  that  the  Altar  (which 
Philo  also  calls  thiimiaterion)  was  outside  the  Holiest.  Josephus  also 
mentions  this,  and  it  was  universally  notorious  {B.  J.  v.  5,  §  5).  Ac- 
cordingly, the  writer  only  says  that  the  Holiest  ''had'''  the  Altar  of 
Incense,  in  other  words  that  the  Altar  in  some  sense  belonged  to  it.  And 
this  is  rigidly  accurate  ;  for  in  i  Kings  vi.  22  the  altar  is  described  as 
"belonging  to"  the  Oracle  (lit.  "the  Altar  which  was  to  the  Oracle," 
laddebir),  and  on  the  Day  of  Atonement  the  curtain  was  drawn,  and 
the  Altar  was  intimately  associated  with  the  High  Priest's  service  in 
the  Holiest  Place.  Indeed  the  Altar  of  Incense  (since  incense  was 
supposed  to  have  an  atoning  power,  Num.  xvi.  47)  zvas  itself  called 
"  Holy  of  Holies"  (A.V.  "most  holy,"  Ex.  xxx.  10)  and  is  expressly  said 
(Ex.  xxx.  6,  xl.  5)  to  be  placed  "before  the  mercy-seat."  In  Is.  vi.  i — 8 
a  seraph  flies  from  above  the  mercy-seat  to  the  Altar.  _  The  writer  then, 
though  he  is  not  entering  into  details  with  pedantic  minuteness,  has  not 
made  any  mistake ;  nor  is  there  the  smallest  ground  for  the  idle  conjec- 
ture that  he  was  thinking  of  the  Jewish  Temple  at  Leontopolis.  The 
close  connection  of  the  Altar  of  Incense  with  the  service  of  the  Day  of 
Atonement  in  the  Holiest  Place  is  illustrated  by  2  Mace.  ii.  i— 8,  where 
the  Altar  is  mentioned  in  connexion  with  the  Ark. 

the  ark  of  the  covenant]  This,  as  we  have  seen,  applies  only  to  the 
Tabernacle  and  to  Solomon's  Temple.  "There  was  nothing  whatever," 
as  Josephus  tells  us,  in  the  Holiest  Place  of  the  Temple  after  the  Exile 
{B.  J.  V.  5.  §  5).  The  stone  on  which  the  ark  had  once  stood,  called 
by  the  Rabbis  "the  stone  of  the  Foundation,"  alone  was  visible. 

overlaid  round  about  with  gold]  The  word  "round  about"  means 
literally  "on  all  sides,"  i.e.  "within  and  without"  (Ex.  xxv.  11). 

with  gold]  The  diminutive  xpi^^'V  '^^re  used  for  gold  seems  to  imply 
nothing  distinctive.  Diminutives  always  tend  to  displace  the  simple 
forms  in  late  dialects. 

the  golden  pot  that  had  manna. . .]  The  Palestine  Targum  says  that  it 
was  an  earthen  jar,  but  Jewish  tradition  asserted  that  it  was  of  gold. 
The  LXX.  inserts  the  word  "golden"  in  Ex.  xvi.  33  and  so  does  Philo. 
It  contained  an  "omer"  of  the  manna,  which  was  the  daily  portion 
for  each  person.     The  writer  distinctly  seems  to  imply  that  the  Ark 


136  HEBREWS,    IX.  [vv.  5,  6. 

5  rod  that  budded,  and  the  tables  of  the  covenant ;  and  over 
it  the  cherubims  of  glory  shadowing  the  mercy  seat ;  of 

6  which  we  cannot  now  speak  particularly.     Now  when  these 


contained  three  things — a  golden  jar  [stamnos)  containing  a  specimen  of 
the  manna,  Aaron's  rod  that  budded,  and  the  Stone  Tables  of  the  Deca- 
logue. Here  again  it  is  asserted  that  he  made  a  mistake.  Certainly 
the  Stone  Tables  were  in  the  Ark,  and  the  whole  symbolism  of  the  Ark 
represented  the  Chenibim  bending  in  adoration  over  the  blood-sprinkled 
propitiatory  which  covered  the  tables  of  the  broken  moral  law.  But 
Moses  was  only  bidden  to  lay  up  the  jar  and  the  rod  ^'■before  the  Testi- 
mony" not  "/«  the  Arh;"  and  in  i  Kings  viii.  9;  2  Chron.  v.  10  we 
are  somewhat  emphatically  informed  that  "there  was  nothing  in  the 
Ark"  except  these  two  tables,  which  we  are  told  (Deut.  x.  2,  5)  that 
Moses  placed  there.  All  that  can  be  said  is  that  the  writer  is  not 
thinking  of  the  Temple  of  Solomon  at  all,  and  that  there  is  nothing  im- 
possible in  the  Jewish  tradition  here  followed,  which  supposes  that 
"before  the  Testimony"  was  interpreted  to  mean  "in  the  Ark."  Rabbis 
like  Levi  Ben  Gershom  and  Abarbanel  had  certainly  no  desire  to  vindicate 
the  accuracy  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  yet  they  say  that  the 
pot  and  the  rod  were  actually  at  one  time  in  the  Ark,  though  they  had 
been  removed  from  it  before  the  days  of  Solomon. 

Aaron's  rod  that  lnidded'[     Num.  xvii.  6 — 10. 

5.  the  cherubims\  Rather,  "  the  Cherubim,"  since  im  is  the  Hebrew 
plural  termination. 

of  glory]  Not  "the  glorious  Cherubim"  but  "the  Cherubim  of  the 
Shechinah"  or  cloud  of  glory.  This  was  regarded  as  the  symbol  of 
God's  presence,  and  was  believed  to  rest  between  their  outspread  wings 
(see  I  Sam.  iv.  22;  2Kingsxix.  15;  Hag.  ii.  7 — 9;  Ecclus.xlix.  8).  They 
were  emblems  of  all  that  was  highest  and  best  in  animated  nature — the 
grandest  products  of  creation  combined  in  one  living  angelic  symbol 
^Ezek.  X.  4) — upholding  the  throne  of  the  Etemal  as  on  "a  chariot  " 
and  bending  in  adoring  contemplation  of  the  moral  law  as  the  revelation 
of  God's  will. 

the  viercy-seat]  The  Greek  word  " hilasterion"  or  "propitiatory" 
is  the  translation  used  by  the  LXX.  for  the  Hebrew  Capporeth  or 
"covering."  The  word  probably  meant  no  more  than  "lid"  or 
"cover;"  but  the  LXX.  understood  it  metaphorically  of  the  covering 
of  sins  or  expiation,  because  the  blood  of  the  e.xpiatory  offering  was 
sprinkled  upon  it. 

of  which  ive  cannot  now  speak  farticiilarlyl  Rather,  "severally," 
"in  detail."  It  was  no  part  of  the  writer's  immediate  purpose  to 
enter  upon  an  explanation  of  that  symbolism  of  the  Tabernacle  which 
has  largely  occupied  the  attention  of  Jewish  historians  and  Talmudists 
as  well  as  of  modern  writers.  Had  he  done  so  he  would  doubtless 
have  thrown  light  upon  much  that  is  now  obscure.  But  he  is  pressing 
on  to  his  point,  which  is  to  shew  that  even  the  most  solemn  and  magni- 
ficent act  of  the  whole  Jewish  ritual — the  ceremony  of  the  Day  of 


vv.  7—9.]  HEBREWS,    IX.  137 

thmgs  were  thus  ordained,  the  priests  went  ahvays  into  the 
first  tabernacle,  accomplishing  the  service  of  God.  But  into  7 
the  second  tvent  the  high  priest  alone  once  every  year,  not 
without  blood,  which  he  offered  for  himself,  and  for  the 
errors  of  the  people :  the  Holy  Ghost  this  signifying,  that  3 
the  way  into  the  holiest  of  all  was  not  yet  made  manifest, 
while  as  the  first  tabernacle  was  yet  standing :  which  was  a  9 

Atonement — bears  upon  its  face  the  signs  of  complete  transitoriness  and 
inefficiency  when  compared  with  the  work  of  Christ. 

6.  Now  -when  these  things  were  thus  ordained'\  Rather,  "since  then 
these  things  have  been  thus  arranged." 

went  always  into  the  first  tabernacle,  accomplishijig  the  service  of  God] 
Rather,  "  into  the  outer  tabernacle  the  priests  enter  continually  in  per- 
formance of  their  ministrations."  Their  ordinary  ministrations  were  to 
offer  sacrifice,  burn  incense,  and  light  the  lamps,  and  in  the  perform- 
ance of  these  they  certainly  entered  the  Holy  Place  twice  daily,  and 
apparently  might  do  so  as  often  as  they  saw  fit. 

7.  I>iU  into  the  second]  i.e.  "the  inner,"  "the  Holiest."  There 
was  a  graduated  sanctity  in  the  Tabernacle  and  in  the  Temple.  In  the 
Temple  any  one  might  go  into  the  Outer  Court  or  Court  of  the  Gentiles; 
Jews  into  the  Second  Court;  men  only  into  the  Third;  priests  only  in 
their  robes  into  the  Holy  Place;  and  only  the  High  Priest  into  the 
inmost  shrine  (Jos.  c.  Apion.  11.  8). 

or^ce  every  year]  i.e.  only  on  one  day  of  the  whole  year,  viz.  on  the 
tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month  Tisri,  the  Day  of  Atonement.  In  the 
course  of  that  day  he  had  to  enter  it  at  least  three,  and  possibly  four 
times,  namely  (i)  with  the  incense,  (2)  with  the  blood  of  the  bullock 
offered  for  his  own  sins,  (3)  with  the  blood  of  the  goat  for  the  sins  of 
the  people,  and  perhaps  (4)  to  remove  the  censer  (Lev.  xvi.  12 — 16; 
Yoma,  V.  2).     But  these  entrances  were  practically  one. 

offered]     The  present  "offers"  is  here  used,  as  before. 

for  the  errors  of  the  feofle]  Lit.  "for  the  ignorances,"  but  the  word 
seems  to  be  used  in  the  LXX.  to  include  sins  as  well  as  errors  (v.  2,  3; 
Ex.  xxxiv.  7;  Lev.  xvi.  2,  11,  34;  Num.  xv.  27 — 31). 

8.  that  the  way  into  the  holiest.  ..was  not  yet  made  manifest]  Entrance 
into  the  Holiest  symbolised  direct  access  to  God,  and  the  "way" 
into  it  had  not  been  made  evident  until  Pie  came  who  is  "the  way,  the 
truth,  and  the  life"  (John  xiv.  6).  He  is  "the  new  and  living  way" 
(x.  19,  20). 

zvhile  as  the  first  tabernacle  was  yet  standing]  Rather,  "while  yet 
the  ottter  Tabernacle  is  still  standing,"  i.e.  so  long  as  there  is  (for  the 
Temple,  which  represented  the  continuity  of  the  Tabernacle  and  the 
Old  Covenant,  had  not  sunk  in  flames,  as  it  did  a  few  years  later)  an 
outer  Tabernacle,  through  which  not  even  a  Priest  was  ever  allowed  to 
enter  into  the  Holiest.  Hence  the  deep  significance  of  the  rending  of 
the  veil  of  the  Temple  from  the  top  to  the  bottom  at  the  Crucifixion. 
(Matt,  xxvii.  51). 


138  HEBREWS,   IX.  fv.  lo. 

figure  for  the  time  the7i  present,  in  which  were  offered  both 
gifts  and  sacrifices,  that  could  not  make  him  that  did  the 
service  perfect,  as  pertaining  to  the  conscience ;  w/ikh  stood 
only  in  meats  and  drinks,  and  divers  washings,  and  carnal 

9.  which  was  a  figure  for  the  time  then  fresent'\  i.e.  And  this 
outer  Tabernacle  is  a  parable  for  the  present  time.  By  "the  present 
time"  he  means  the  prae-Christian  epoch  in  which  the  unconverted 
Jews  were  still  (practically)  living.  The  full  inauguration  of  the  New 
Covenant  of  which  Christ  had  prophesied  as  his  Second  Coming, 
began  with  the  final  annulment  of  the  Old,  which  was  only  completed 
when  the  Temple  fell,  and  when  the  observance  of  the  Levitic  system 
thus  became  (by  the  manifest  interposition  of  God  in  history)  a  thing 
simply  impossible.  A  Christian  was  already  living  in  "  the  Future  Aeon" 
{Olam  habba);  a  Jew  who  had  not  embraced  the  Gospel  still  belonged 
to  "the  present  time"  {olam  hazzeh  o  Kaipbs  6  ifearrjKdis).  The  meaning 
of  the  verse  is  that  the  very  existence  of  an  outer  Tabernacle  ("the 
Holy  Place")  emphasized  the  fact  that  close  access  to  God  (of  which 
the  entrance  of  the  High  Priest  into  the  Holiest  was  a  symbol)  was  not 
permitted  under  the  Old  Covenant. 

in  which. ..'\  The  true  reading  is  not  ko.B''  qv  but  /ca0'  r^v,  so  that  the 
"which"  refers  to  the  word  "parable"  or  "symbol,"  "in  accordance 
v/ith  which  symbolism  of  the  outer  Tabernacle,  both  gifts  and  sacrifices 
are  being  offered,  such  as  (/x^)  are  not  able,  so  far  as  the  conscience  is 
concerned,  to  perfect  the  worshipper."  He  says  "are  offered"  and 
"him  that  does  the  service,"  using  the  present  (not  as  in  the  A.V.  the 
past  tense),  because  he  is  throwing  himself  into  the  position  of  the 
Jew  vvho  still  clings  to  the  Old  Covenant.  The  introduction  of  "  a 
clear  conscience  "  (or  moral  consciousness)  into  the  question  may  seem 
like  a  new  thought,  but  it  is  not.  The  implied  argument  is  this  :  only 
the  innocent  can  "ascend  the  hill  of  the  Lord,  and  stand  in  His  Holy 
Place:"  the  High  Priest  was  regarded  as  symbolically  innocent  by 
virtue  of  minute  precautions  against  any  ceremonial  defilement,  and 
because  he  carried  with  him  the  atonement  for  his  own  sins  and  those 
of  the  people :  he  therefore,  but  he  alone,  was  permitted  to  approach 
God  by  entering  the  Holiest  Place.  The  worshippers  in  general  were 
so  little  regarded  as  "perfected  in  conscience"  that  only  the  Priests 
could  enter  even  the  outer  "Holy"  (vii.  i8,  19,  x.  i — 4,  11). 

10.  which  stood  only  in  meats  and  drinks^  The  "which"  of  the 
A.V.  refers  to  the  "present  time."  The  Greek  is  here  elliptical, 
for  the  verse  begins  with  the  words  "only  upon."  The  meaning  is 
that  the  "  gifts  and  sacrifices  "  consist  only  in  meats  and  drinks  and 
divers  washings — being  ordinances  of  the  flesh,  imposed  (only)  till 
the  season  of  reformation. 

meats']     Ex.  xii.;  Lev.  xi.;  Num.  vi. 

drinks]     Lev.  x.  8,  9 ;  Num.  vi.  2,  3;  Lev.  xi.  34. 

divers  washings]  Lev.  viii.  6,  12;  Ex.  xl.  31,  32;  Num.  xix.  and 
the  Levitical  law  passim.  All  these  things  had  already  been  disparaged 
by  Christ  as  meaning  nothing  iii  themselves  (Mark  vii.    i  — 15);   and 


vv.  II,  12.]  HEBREWS,   IX.  139 

ordinances,  imposed  on  them  until  the  time  of  reformation. 
But  Christ  being  come  a  high  priest  of  good  things  to  come,  " 
by  a  greater  and  more  perfect  tabernacle,  not  made  with 
hands,  that  is  to  say,  not  of  this  building,  neither  by  the  ■■■^ 

St  Paul  had  written  "Let  no  man  judge  you  in  meat,  or  in  drink... 
which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come;  l)ut  the  body  is  of  Christ" 
(Col.  ii.  16,  17). 

and  canial  ordifiances]  This  is  a  wrong  reading.  The  "and" 
should  be  omitted,  and  for  dikaiomasi  we  should  read  dikaioviaia  in 
the  accusative  case.  It  stands  in  apposition  to  the  sentence  in  general, 
and  to  the  "gifts  and  sacrifices"  of  the  last  verse;  they  could  not 
assure  the  conscience,  because  they  had  only  to  do  with  meats,  &c. — 
being  only  ordinances  of  the  flesh,  i.e.  outward,  transitory,  superficial. 

imposed  on  thon'X  There  is  no  need  for  the  "  on  them."  The  verb 
means  "imposed  as  a  burden,"  "lying  as  a  yoke."  Comp.  Acts  xv. 
10,  28;  Gal.  V.  I. 

tmtil  the  time  of  reformatio7{\  The  season  of  reformation  is  that  of 
which  Jeremiah  prophesied :  it  is  in  fact  the  New  Covenant,  see 
viii.  7 — 12.  The  "yoke  of  bondage,"  which  consists  of  a  galling  and 
wearisome  externalism,  was  then  changed  for  "an  easy  yoke  and  a 
light  burden"  (Matt.  xi.  29). 

11 — 14.     Assurance  of  Conscience,  the  condition  of  access 
TO  God,  was  secured  through  Christ  alone. 

11.     being  come']     "  Being  come  among  us." 

a  high  priest  of  good  things  to  come}  Another  and  perhaps  better 
reading  is  "of  the  good  things  that  have  come  "  {yivofiivuiv  B,  D,  not 
/xeWovrwv).  The  writer  here  transfers  himself  from  the  Jewish  to  the 
Christian  standpoint.  The  "  good  things "  of  which  the  Law  was 
only  "the  shadow"  (x.  i)  were  still  future  to  the  Jew,  but  to  the 
Christian  they  had  already  come. 

i>y  a  greater  and  tnore  perfect  tabernacle']  The  preposition  dia 
rendered  "by"  may  mean  either  ^^ throitgh" — in  which  case  "the 
greater  and  better  tabernacle"  means  the  outer  heavens  through  which 
-Christ  (anthropomorphically  speaking)  passed  (see  ver.  24  and  iv.  14) ; 
or  ^^  by  means  of" — in  which  case  "the  better  tabernacle"  is  left 
undefined,  and  may  here  mean  either  the  human  nature  in  which  for 
the  time  "He  tabernacled"  (x.  20;  John  i.  14,  ii.  19;  Col.  ii.  9;  2  Cor. 
v.  i),  or  as  in  viii.  2,  the  Ideal  Church  of  the  firstborn  in  heaven 
(comp.  Eph.  i.  3). 

not  made  with  hands']  Because  whatever  tabernacle  is  specifically 
meant  it  is  one  which  "the  Lord  pitched,  not  man." 

not  of  this  building]  The  word  ktisis  may  mean  either  "building" 
or  "creation."  If  the  latter,  then  the  meaning  is  that  the  better 
tabernacle,  through  which  Christ  entered,  does  not  belong  to  the 
material  world.  But  since  ktizo  means  "  to  build,"  ktisis  may  mean 
"building,"    and    then    the    word    "this"   by   a  rare   idiom   means 


140  HEBREWS,   IX  [v.  13. 

blood  of  goats  and  calves,  but  by  his  own  blood  he  entered 

in  once  into  the  holy  p/ace,   having  obtained  eternal  re- 

13  demption  for  us.     For  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats, 

and  the  ashes  of  a  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean,  sanctifieth 

"vulgar,"  "ordinary'    (Field,  Otium  Norvicense,  ill.  i\i);  otherwise 
the  clause  would  be  a  mere  tautology. 

12.  neither']     "Nor  yet." 

by  the  blood  of  goats  and  calves]  ' '  by  means  of  the  blood  of  goats  and 
calves,"  (this  is  the  order  of  the  words  in  the  best  Mss.).  It  is  not 
meant  that  the  sacrifices  of  the  Old  Covenant  were  Jtseless,  but  only  that 
when  they  were  regarded  as  meritorious  in  themselves — apart  from  the 
faith,  and  the  grace  of  God,  by  which  they  could  be  blessed  to  sincere 
and  humble  worshippers — they  could  neither  purge  the  conscience,  nor 
give  access  to  God.  When  the  Prophets  speak  of  sacrifices  with  such 
stern  disparagement  they  are  only  denouncing  the  superstition  which 
regarded  the  mere  opus  operation  as  sufficient  apart  from  repentance 
and  holiness  (Hos.  vi.  6;  Is.  i.  10 — 17,  &c.). 

by  his  own  blood]  His  own  blood  was  the  offering  by  which  He 
was  admitted  as  our  High  Priest  and  Eternal  Redeemer  into  the  Holy 
of  Holies  of  God's  immediate  presence  (xiii.  20;  Rev.  v.  6). 

once]  "once  for  all." 

into  the  holy  place]  i.e.  into  the  Holiest,  as  in  Lev.  xvi.  3,  q. 

eternal  redemption]  i.e.  "the  forgiveness  of  sins"  (Eph.  i.  7),  and 
ransom  from  sinful  lives  (i  Pet.  i.  18,  19)  to  the  service  of  God  (Rev. 
v.  9).  It  should  always  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  Scriptural  metaphors 
of  Ransom  and  Propitiation  describe  the  Atonement  by  its  blessed  effects 
as  regards  man.  All  speculation  as  to  its  bearing  on  the  counsels 
of  God,  all  attempts  to  frame  a  scholastic  scheme  out  of  metaphors 
only  intended  to  indicate  a  transcendent  mystery,  by  its  results  for  us 
have  led  to  heresy  and  error.  To  whom  was  the  ransom  paid  ?  The 
question  is  idle,  because  "ransom"  is  only  a  metaphor  of  our  deliver- 
ance from  slavery.  For  nearly  a  thousand  years  the  Church  was 
content  with  the  most  erroneous,  and  almost  blasphemous  notion  that 
the  ransom  wzs  paid  by  God  to  the  devil,  which  led  to  still  more  grievous 
aberrations.  Anselm  who  exploded  this  error  substituted  for  it  another — 
the  hard  forensic  notion  of  indispensable  satisfaction.  Such  terms, 
like  those  of  "substitution,"  "vicarious  punishment,"  "reconciliation 
of  God  to  us"  (for  "of  us  to  God"),  have  no  sanction  in  Scripture, 
which  only  reveals  what  is  necessary  for  man,  and  what  man  can 
understand,  viz.  that  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  has  provided  for  him 
a  way  of  escape  from  ruin,  and  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

having  obtained.,  for  us]  The  "for  us"  is  rightly  supplied ;  but  the 
middle  voice  of  the  verb  shews  that  Christ  m  His  love  to  us  also 
regarded  the  redemption  as  dear  to  Himself. 

13.  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  and  the  ashes  of  a  heifer  sprinkling 
the  unclean]  The  writer  has  designedly  chosen  the  two  most  striking 
sacrifices  and  ceremonials  of  the  Levitical  Law,  namely  the  calf  and  the 


V.  14-]  HEBREWS,   IX.  141 

to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh :  how  much  more  shall  the 
blood  of  Christ,  who  through  the  eternal  Spirit  offered  him- 
self without  spot  to  God,  purge  your  conscience  from  dead 
works  to  serve  the  living  God  ? 

goat  offered  for  the  sins  of  people  and  priest  on  the  Day  of  Atonement 
(Lev.  xvi.)  and  "the  water  of  separation,"  or  rather  "of  impurity," 
i.e.  "to  remove  impurity"  "as  a  sin-offering"  described  in  Num.  xix. 
I — 22  (comp.  Heb.  vii.  26). 

of  a  heifer']  The  Jews  have  the  interesting  legend  that  nine  such  red 
heifers  had  been  slain  between  the  time  of  Moses  and  the  destruction  of 
the  Temple. 

the  unclean']  Those  that  have  become  ceremonially  defiled,  especially 
by  having  touched  a  corpse. 

sa7ictifidh  to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh]  i.e.  if  these  things  are 
adequate  to  restore  a  man  to  ceremonial  cleanness  which  was  a  type  of 
moral  purity.  So  much  efficacy  they  had;  they  did  make  the  worshipper 
ceremonially  pure  before  God :  their  further  and  deeper  efficacy  de- 
pended on  the  faith  and  sincerity  with  which  they  were  offered,  and 
was  derived  from  the  one  offering  of  which  they  were  a  type. 

14.  how  much  tnore]  Again  we  have  the  characteristic  word — the 
key-note  as  it  were — of  the  Epistle. 

the  blood  of  Christ]  which  is  typified  by  "the  fountain  opened  for 
sin  and  for  uncleanness"  (Zech.  xiii.  i). 

zvho  through  the  eternal  Spirit]  If  this  be  the  right  rendering  the 
reference  must  be  to  the  fact  that  Christ  was  "quickened  by  the  Spirit" 
(i  Pet.  iii.  iS);  that  "  God  gave  not  the  Spirit  by  measure  unto  Him" 
(Johniii.  34);  that  "the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  was  upon  Him"  (Lk.  iv.  18); 
that  He  "  by  the  Spirit  of  God  "  cast  out  devils  (Matt.  xii.  28).  For 
this  view  of  the  meaning  see  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  Art.  III.,  and  it  is 
represented  by  the  reading  "  Holy"  for  Eternal  in  some  cursi\e  MSS. 
and  some  versions.  It  may  however  be  rendered  "by  an  Eternal 
Spirit,"  namely  by  His  own  Spirit — by  that  burning  love  which  pro- 
ceeded from  His  own  Spirit — and  not  by  a  mere  "  ordinance  of  the 
flesh"  (vers.  10).  In  the  Levitic  sacrifices  involuntary  victims  bled; 
but  Christ's  sacrifice  was  offered  by  the  will  of  His  own  Eternal  Spirit. 

■without  spot]  Christ  had  that  sinless  perfection  which  was  dimly 
foreshadowed  by  the  unblemished  victims  which  could  alone  be  offered 
under  the  Levitic  law  (i  Pet.  i.  19). 

from  dead  -works]  See  vi.  i.  If  sinfitl  works  are  meant,  they  are 
represented  as  affixing  a  stain  to  the  conscience ;  they  pollute  as  the 
touching  of  a  dead  thing  polluted  ceremonially  under  the  Old  Law 
(Num.  xix.  II— -16).  But  all  works  are  "dead"  which  are  done 
without  love.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  writer  — true  to  the 
Alexandrian  training  which  instilled  an  awful  reverence  respecting 
Divine  things— attempts  even  less  than  St  Paul  to  explain  the  modus 
operandi.  He  tells  us  that  the  Blood  of  Christ  redeems  and  purifies  us  as 
the  old  sacrifices  could  not  do.  Sacrifices  removed  ceremonial  defilement 
—they  thus  "  purified  the  flesh  :"  but  the  Blood  of  Christ  perfects  and 


U2  HEBREWS,   IX.  [vv.  15,  16. 

13  And  for  this  cause  he  is  the  mediator  of  the  new  testa- 
ment, that  by  means  of  death,  for  the  redemption  of  the 
transgressions  that  were  under  the  first  testament,  they 
which  are  called  might  receive  the  promise  of  eternal  in- 

i5  heritance.     For  where  a  testament  is,  there  must  also  of 

purifies  the  conscience  (x.  22)  and  so  admits  us  into  the  Presence  of 
God.  The  ''how  can  this  be?"  belongs  to  the  secret  things  which  God 
has  not  revealed  ;    we  only  know  and  believe  that  so  it  is. 

to  sp-ve  the  living  God\  Not  to  serve  "dead  works"  or  a  mere 
material  tabernacle,  or  fleshly  ordinances,  but  to  serve  the  Living  God 
who  can  only  be  truly  served  by  those  who  are  "ahve  from  the  dead" 
(Rom.  vi.  13). 

15—28.  The  indispensabi^eness  and  efficacy  of  the  death 
OF  Christ. 

15.    for  this  cause]    i.  e.  on  account  of  the  grandeur  of  His  offering. 

the  mediator  of  the  fiezv  testament]  Rather,  "a  mediator  of  a  New 
Covenant."  Moses  had  been  called  by  Philo  "the  Mediator"  of  the 
Old  Covenant,  i.e.  he  who  came  between  God  and  Israel  as  the 
messenger  of  it.  But  Christ's  intervention— His  coming  as  One  who 
revealed  God  to  man— was  accompanied  with  a  sacrifice  so  infinitely 
more  efficacious  that  it  involved  a  New  Covenant  altogether. 

by  means  of  death]  This  version  renders  the  passage  entirely  un- 
intelligible. The  true  rendering  and  explanation  seem  to  be  as  follows : 
"  And  on  this  account  He  is  a  Mediator  of  a  A'eiv  Covenant,  that — since 
death"  [namely  the  death  of  sacrificial  victims]  "occurred  for  the 
redemption  of  the  transgressions  which  took  place  under  the  first 
covenant— those  who  have  been  called  [whether  Christians,  or  faithful 
believers  under  the  Old  Dispensation]  may  [by  virtue  of  Christ's  death, 
which  the  death  of  those  victims  typified]  receive  [i.e.  actually  enjoy 
the  fruition  of,  vi.  12,  17,  x.  36,  xi.  13]  the  promise  of  the  Eternal 
Inheritance."  Volumes  of  various  explanations  have  been  written  on 
this  verse,  but  the  explanation  given  above  is  very  simple.  The  verse 
is  a  sort  of  reason  why  Christ's  death  was  necessary.  The  ultimate, 
a  priori,  reason  he  does  not  attempt  to  explain,  because  it  transcends 
all  understanding;  but  he  merely  says  that  since  under  the  Old  Cove- 
nant death  was  necessary,  and  victims  had  to  be  slain  in  order  that  by 
their  blood  men  might  be  purified,  and  the  High  Priest  might  enter  the 
Holiest  Place,  so,  under  the  New  Covenant,  a  better  and  more  efficacious 
death  was  necessary,  both  to  give  to  those  old  sacrifices  the  only  real 
validity  which  they  possessed,  and  to  secure  for  all  of  God's  elect  an 
eternal  heritage. 

16.  For  where  a  tesfatnent  is]  In  these  two  verses  (16,  17),  and  these 
only,  Diatheke  is  used  in  its  Greek  and  Roman  sense  of  "  a  will,"  and  not 
in  its  Hebrew  sense  of  "a  covenant."  The  sudden  and  momentary 
change  in  the  significance  of  the  word  explains  itself,  for  he  has  just 
spoken  of  an  inheritarice,  and  of  the  necessity  for  a  death.     It  v/as  there- 


vv.  17,  18.]  HEBREWS,   IX.  143 

necessity  be  the  death  of  the  testator.     For  a  testament  is  17 
of  force  after  mefi  are  dead  :  otherwise  it  is  of  no  strength 
at  all  whilst  the  testator  liveth.     Whereupon  neither  the  i3 

fore  quite  natural  that  he  should  be  reminded  of  the  fact  that  just  as  the 
Old  Covenant  (Diatheke)  required  the  constant  infliction  of  death  upon 
the  sacrificed  victims,  and  therefore  (by  analogy)  necessitated  the  death 
of  Christ  under  the  New,  so  the  word  Diathlke  in  its  other  sense  of 
"Will  "or  "Testament"  (which  was  bythis  epoch  familiar  also  to  the  Jews) 
involved  the  necessity  of  death,  because  a  will  assigns  the  inheritance 
of  a  man  who  is  dead.  This  may  be  called  "a  mere  play  on  words ;" 
but  such  a  play  on  words  is  perfectly  admissible  in  itself;  just  as  we 
might  speak' of  the  "New  Testament"  (meaning  the  Book)  as  "a 
testament"  (meaning  "a  will")  sealed  by  a  Redeemer's  blood.  An 
illustration  of  this  kind  was  peculiarly  consonant  with  the  deep  mystic 
significance  attached  by  the  Alexandrian  thinkers  to  the  sounds  and 
the  significance  of  words.  Philo  also  avails  himself  of  both  meanings 
of  Diathekc  {De  Norn.  Mittat.  %6;  Be  Sacr.  Abel,  0pp.  I.  586.  172). 
The  passing  illustration  which  thus  occurs  to  the  writer  does  not 
indeed  explain  or  attempt  to  explain  the  eternal  necessity  why  Christ 
must  die;  he  leaves  that  in  all  its  awful  mystery,  and  merely  gives 
prominence  to  the  fact  that  the  death  wrtj- necessary,  by  saying  that 
since  under  the  Old  Covenant  death  was  required,  so  the  New  Cove- 
nant was  inaugurated  by  a  better  death  ;  and  since  a  Will  supposes 
that  some  one  has  died,  so  this  "Will,"  by  which  zue  inherit,  involves 
the  necessity  that  Christ  must  die.  The  Old  Covenant  could  not  be  called 
"  a  Will "  in  any  ordinary  sense ;  but  the  New  Covenant  was,  by  no 
remote  analogy,  the  Will  and  Bequest  of  Christ. 

there  vnist  also  of  necessity  be  the  death  of  the  tesfato)-]  Wherever  there 
is  a  will,  the  supposition  that  the  maker  of  the  will  has  died  is  implied, 
or  legally  involved  {(pepecrOai,  coistare). 

17.  after  inen  are  dcad'\  This  rendering  expresses  the  meaning 
rightly — a  will  is  only  valid  "in  cases  of  death,"  "in  the  case  of  men 
who  are  dead."  £x  vi termini,  "a  testament,"  is  the  disposition  which 
a  man  makes  of  his  affairs  with  a  view  to  his  death.  The  attempt  to 
confine  the  word  diathcke  to  the  sense  of  "covenant"  which  it  holds 
throughout  the  rest  of  the  Epistle  has  led  to  the  most  strained  and  im- 
possible distortion  of  these  words  eTrt  veKpoli  in  a  way  which  is  but  too 
familiar  in  Scripture  commentaries.  They  have  been  explained  to  mean 
"  over  dead  victims,"  &c. ;  but  all  such  explanations  fall  to  the  ground 
when  the  special  meaning  of  diathcke  m  these  two  verses  is  recognised. 
The  author  thinks  it  worth  while  to  notice,  in  passing,  that  death  is  the 
condition  of  inheritance  by  testament,  just  as  death  is  necessary  to  ratify 
a  covenant  (Gen.  xv.  7 — 10;  Jer.  xxxiv.  18). 

otherzvise  it  is  of  no  strength  at  all...]  The  words  are  better  taken  as 
a  question — "  Since  is  there  any  validity  in  it  at  all  while  the  testator  is 
alive?"     This  is  an  appeal  to  the  reader's  own  judgment. 

18.  Wherettpoji']  Rather,  "Wherefore;"  because  both  "a  covenant" 
and  "a  testament"  involve  the  idea  of  death. 


M4  HEBREWS,   IX.  [w.  19-22. 

19  first  testament  was  dedicated  without  blood.  For  when 
Moses  had  spoken  every  precept  to  all  the  people  according 
to  the  law,  he  took  the  blood  of  calves  and  of  goats, 
with  water,  and  scarlet  wool,  and  hyssop,  and  sprinkled 

=0  both  the  book,  and  all  the  people,  saying,  This  is  the 
blood  of  the  testament  which  God   hath  enjoined 

^'  unto  you.     Moreover  he  sprinkled  with  blood  both  the 

"  tabernacle,  and  all  the  vessels  of  the  ministry.     And  almost 

7ieithfr']  "  not  even." 

ivas  dedicated]  Lit.  "has  been  handselled"  or  "inaugurated." 
The  word  is  from  the  same  root  as  "Encaenia,"  the  name  given  to  the 
re-dedication  of  the  Temple  by  the  Maccabees  (John  x.  22.  Comp. 
Deut.  XX.  5  ;  I  Kings  viii.  6t,-,  LXX.).  The  perfect  is  used  by  the  author, 
as  in  so  many  other  instances. 

19.  and  of  goats]  This  is  not  specially  mentioned,  but  it  maybe 
supposed  that  "goats"  were  among  the  burnt-offerings  mentioned  in 
Ex.  xxiv.  5. 

luatcr,  and  scarlet  wool,  a7td  hyssop]  These  again  are  not  mentioned 
in  Ex.  xxiv.  6,  but  are  perhaps  added  from  tradition  on  the  analogy  of 
Ex.  xii.  22  ;  Num.  xix.  6  ;  and  Lev.  xiv.  4 — 6. 

hyssop]  the  dry  stalks  of  a  plant  resembling  marjoram. 

both  the  book]  See  Ex.  xxiv.  6 — 8,  where  however  it  is  not  specially 
mentioned  that  the  Book  was  sprinkled.  The  Jewish  tradition  was  that 
it  lay  upon  the  altar  (see  Ex.  xxiv.  7).  The  "  book  "  seems  to  have  been 
the  written  record  of  what  was  uttered  to  Moses  in  Ex.  xx.  22  to  xxiii. 
33.  Tins  is  one  of  several  instances  in  which  the  writer  shews  himself 
learned  in  the  Jewish  \&^&xiA%{Hagadoth). 

20.  This  is]  In  the  Hebrew  "Behold  ! "  Some  have  supposed  that 
the  writer  adopted  the  variation  from  a  reminiscence  of  our  Lord's 
words — "This  is  my  blood  of  the  new  covenant  which  is  shed  for  many 
for  the  remission  of  sins"  (Matt.  xxvi.  28).  But  if  such  a  reference  or 
comparison  had  been  at  all  present  to  his  mind,  he  would  hardly  have 
been  likely  to  pass  it  over  in  complete  silence. 

which  God  hath  enjoined  unto  yoii]  Rather,  ' '  which  God  commanded 
with  regard  to  you,"  i.e.  which  (covenant)  Jehovah  commanded  me  to 
deliver  to  you. 

21.  bolh  the  tabernacle]  This  again  is  not  mentioned  in  the  scene  to 
which  the  writer  seems  to  be  referring  (Ex.  xxiv.  6—8),  which  indeed 
preceded  the  building  of  the  Tabernacle.  It  is  nowhere  recorded  in 
Scripture  that  the  Tabernacle  was  sprinkled,  although  it  is  perhaps  im- 
plied that  on  a  later  occasion  this  may  have  been  done  (Ex.  xl.  9,  10); 
and  Josephus,  closely  following  the  same  Hagadah  as  the  writer,  says 
that  such  was  the  case  (Jos.  Antt.  in.  8.  §  6). 

all  the  vessels]  This  again  is  not  directly  mentioned,  though  we  are 
told  that  Aaron  and  his  sons,  and  the  altar,  were  consecrated  by  such  a 
sprinkling  (Lev.  viii.  30),  and  that  the  "propitiatory"  was  so  sprinkled 
on  the  Day  of  Atonement  (Lev,  xvi.  14).     By  these  references  to  unre- 


vv.  23—25.]  HEBREWS,    IX.  145 

all  things  are  by  the  law  purged  with  blood ;  and  without 
shedding  of  blood  is  no  remission.     //  was  therefore  neces-  23 
sary  that  the  patterns  of  things  in  the  heavens  should  be 
purified  with  these ;  but  the  heavenly  thiiigs  themselves  with 
better  sacrifices  than  these.     For  Christ  is  not  entered  into  24 
the  holy  places  made  with  hands,  which  are  the  figures  of 
the   true ;   but   into  heaven   itself,  now  to  appear  in   the 
presence  of  God  for  us :  nor  yet  that  he  should  offer  him-  25 
self  often,  as  the  high  priest  entereth  into  the  holy  place 

corded  traditions  the  writer  shews  that  he  had  been  trained  in  Rabbinic 
Schools. 

22.  almost  all  things]  There  were  a  few  exceptions  (Ex.  xix.  10; 
Lev.  V.  II — 13,  XV.  5,  xvi.  16,  Sec.)  The  word  crxfSoj',  "  almost,"  is  only 
found  in  two  other  passages  of  the  N.  T.  (Acts  xiii.  44,  xix.  26). 

without  shedding  of  blood]  This,  and  not  "  pouring  out  of  blood  "  at 
the  foot  of  the  altar  (Ex.  xxix.  16,  &c.),  is  undoubtedly  the  true  render- 
ing. Comp.  Lev.  xvii.  1 1  ;  Lk.  xxii.  20.  The  Rabbis  have  a  proverb, 
"no  expiation  except  by  blood."  The  writer  merely  mentions  this  as  a 
revealed  yizrf;  he  does  not  attempt  to  construct  any  theory  to  account  for 
the  necessity. 

23.  patterns']  Rather,  "copies,"  or  outlines — Abbilden  (not  Ur- 
bilden),  iv.  ri,  viii.  5. 

the  heavenly  things  themselves]  Not  "the  New  Covenant,"  or  "the 
Church,"  or  "ourselves  as  heirs  of  hea-«en,"  but  apparently  the  Ideal 
Tabernacle  in  the  Heavens,  which  was  itself  impure  before  Him 
to  whom  "the  very  heavens  are  not  clean.''''  If  this  conception  seem 
remote  we  must  suppose  that  by  the  figure  called  Zeugma  the  verb 
"purified"  passes  into  the  sense  of  "handselled,"  "dedicated." 

with  better  sacrifices  than  these]  The  plural  is  here  only  used  generi- 
cally  to  express  a  class.    He  is  alluding  to  the  one  transcendent  sacrifice. 

24.  For  Christ  is  not  entered]  "  For  not  into  any  Material  Sanc- 
tuary did  Christ  enter— a  (mere)  imitation  of  the  Ideal, — but  into 
Heaven  itself,  now  to  be  visibly  presented  before  the  face  of  God  for 
us,"  The  Ideal  or  genuine  Tabernacle  is  the  eternal  uncreated  Arche- 
type as  contrasted  with  its  antitype  (or  "imitation")  made  with  hands. 
The  Ideal  in  the  Alexandrian  philosophy,  so  far  from  being  an  anti- 
thesis of  the  real,  meant  that  which  alone  is  absolutely  and  eternally 
real ;  it  is  the  antithesis  of  the  material  which  is  but  a  perishing  imitation 
of  the  Archetype.  The  word  "to  be  visibly  presented"  (ifj.cpai'icrdrjvai) 
is  not  the  same  as  that  used  in  ver.  26  (Tre^ac^pwrai  "  He  hath  been 
manifested,")  nor  with  that  used  in  ver.  28  (dcpdr/ffeTaL  "He  shall  be 
seen,")  though  all  these  are  rendered  in  English  by  the  verb  "  appear." 

25.  entereth  into  the  holy  place  every  year]  In  this  entrance  of  the 
High  Priest  once  a  year,  on  the  Day  of  Atonement,  into  the  Holiest 
Place  culminated  all  that  was  gorgeous  and  awe-inspiring  in  the  Jewish 
ritual.     The  writer  therefore  purposely  chose  it  as  his  point  of  com- 


146  HEBREWS,    IX.  [v.  26. 

26  every  year  with  blood  of  others ;  for  then  must  he  often 
have  suffered  since  the  foundation  of  the  world :  but  now 
once  in  the  end  of  the  world  hath  he  appeared  to  put  away 

parison  between  the  ministrations  of  the  Two  Covenants.  For  if  he 
could  shew  that  even  the  ceremonies  of  this  day— called  by  the  Jews 
^^the  Day" — were  a  nullity  compared  \^^th  the  significance  of  the 
Gospel,  he  was  well  aware  that  no  other  rite  would  be  likely  to  make 
a  converted  Hebrew  waver  in  his  faith.  The  Day  of  Atonement  was 
called  "the  Sabbath  of  Sabbatism"  or  "perfect  Sabbath."  It  was  the 
one  fast-day  of  the  Jewish  Calendar.  The  70  bullocks  offered  during 
the  Atonement-week  were  regarded  as  a  propitiation  for  all  the  70 
nations  of  the  world.  On  that  day  the  very  Angels  were  supposed  to 
tremble.  It  was  the  only  day  on  which  perfect  pardon  could  be  assured 
to  sins  which  had  been  repented  of.  On  that  day  alone  Satan  had  no 
power  to  accuse,  which  is  inferred  by  ^'  Gematria"  from  the  fact  that 
"the  Accuser"  in  Hebrew  was  numerically  equivalent  to  364,  so  that  on 
the  365th  day  of  the  year  he  was  forced  to  be  silent.  On  the  seven 
days  before  the  day  of  Atonement  the  High  Priest  was  scrupulously 
secluded,  and  was  kept  awake  all  the  preceding  night  to  avoid  the 
chance  of  ceremonial  defilement.  Till  the  last  40  years  before  the 
Fall  of  Jerusalem  it  was  asserted  that  the  tongue  of  scarlet  cloth  tied 
round  the  neck  of  the  goat  "for  Azazel"  ("the  Scape  Goat")  used  to 
turn  white  in  token  of  the  Remission  of  Sins.  The  function  of  the 
High  Priest  was  believed  to  be  attended  with  much  peril,  and  the 
people  awaited  his  reappearance  with  deep  anxiety.  The  awful  im- 
pression made  by  the  services  of  the  day  is  shewn  by  the  legends  which 
grew  up  respecting  them,  and  by  such  passages  as  Ecclus.  1.  5 — 16,  xlv. 
6 — 22.  See  an  Excursus  on  this  subject  in  my  Early  Days  of  Chris- 
tianity, II.  549 — 552. 

with  blood  of  others']  Namely  of  the  goat  and  the  bullock.  See  ver. 
22.  A  Rabbinic  book  says  "Abraham  was  Circumcised  on  the  Day  of 
Atonement ;  and  on  that  Day  God  annually  looks  on  the  blood  of  the 
Covenant  of  the  Circumcision  as  atoning  for  all  our  iniquities." 

26.  for  then  must  he  often  have  suffered]  Since  He  could  not  have 
entered  the  Sanctuary  of  God's  Holiest  in  the  Heavens  without  some 
offering  of  atoning  blood. 

once]     "Once  for  all." 

in  the  end  of  the  world]  This  phrase  does  not  convey  the  meaning 
of  the  Greek  which  has  "at  the  consummation  of  the  ages"  (Matt, 
xiii.  39,  49,  xxiv.  3,  xxviii.  20),  in  other  words  "when  God's  full  time 
was  come  for  the  revelation  of  the  Gospel"  (comp.  i.  i ;  i  Cor.  x.  11). 

hath  he  appeared]  Lit.,  "He  has  been  manifested" — namely,  "in 
the  flesh"  at  the  Incarnation  (i  Tim.  iii.  16;  i  Pet.  i.  20,  &c.). 

to  put  away  sin]  The  word  is  stronger — "  for  the  amiulment  of  sin." 
Into  this  one  word  is  concentrated  the  infinite  superiority  of  the  work 
of  Christ.  The  High  Priest  even  on  the  Day  of  Atonement  could  offer 
no  sacrifice  which  could  put  away  sin  (x.  4),  but  Christ's  sacrifice  was 
able  to  annul  sin  altogether. 


vv.  27,  28.]  HEBREWS,    IX.  147 

sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself.  ■  And  as  it  is  appointed  unto  27 
men  once  to  die,  but  after  this  the  judgment :  so  Christ  28 
was  once  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many ;  and  unto  them 
that  look  for  him  shall  he  appear  the  second  time  without 
sin  unto  salvation. 

by  the  sacrifice  of  himself^  The  object  of  which  was,  as  St  Peter 
tells  us,  "to  bring  us  to  God"  (i  Pet.  iii.  18). 

27.  as\     "  Inasmuch  as." 

it  is  appointed'^     Rather,  "  it  is  reserved ;"  lit.,  "  it  is  laid  up  for." 
the  judgment]     Rather,  "a  judgment."     By  this  apparently  is  not 
meant  "a  day  in  the  which  He  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness" 
(Acts  xvii.  31),  but  a  judgment  which  follows  immediately  after  death. 

28.  was  once  offered]  Christ  may  also  be  said  as  in  ver.  14  "to 
offer  Himself  r  just  as  He  is  said  "to  be  dehvered  for  us"  (Rom.  iv.  25) 
and  "to  deliver  up  Himself"  (Eph.  v.  2). 

to  bear  the  sins]  The  word  rendered  "to  bear"  may  mean  "to  carry 
them  with  Him  on  to  the  Cross,"  as  in  i  Pet.  ii.  24;  or  as  probably 
in  Is.  liii.  12  "  to  take  them  away.'''' 

of  many]  "Many"  is  only  used  as  an  antithesis  to  "few."  Of 
course  the  writer  does  not  mean  to  contradict  the  lesson  which  runs 
throughout  the  N.T.  that  Christ  died  for  all.  Once  for  all  One  died 
for  all  who  were  "  many"  (see  my  Life  of  St  Paul,  11.  216). 

without  sin]  Not  merely  "without  \x^ph)"  but  "  apart  from  (arep) 
sin,"  i.e.  apart  from  all  connexion  with  it,  because  He  shall  have 
utterly  triumphed  over,  and  annulled  it  (ver.  26);  Dan.  ix.  24,  25;  Is. 
XXV.  7,  8).  The  words  do  not  go  with  "the  second  time"  for  at 
Christ's  first  coming  He  appeared  without  sin  indeed,  but  «<?/"  apart 
from  sin,"  seeing  that  "He  was  numbered  with  the  transgressors"  (Is. 
liii.  12)  and  was  "made  sin  for  us"  (2  Cor.  v.  n). 

unto  salvation]  "  It  shall  be  said  in  that  day,  Lo,  this  is  our  God  ;^ 
...we  have  waited  for  Him,  we  will  be  glad  and  rejoice  in  his  salvation" 
(Is.  XXV.  9).  It  is  remarkable  that  the  Sacred  Writers— unhke  the 
Medieval  painters  and  moralists — almost  invariably  avoid  the  more 
terrible  aspects  of  the  Second  Advent.  "How  shall  He  appear?"  asks 
St  Chrysostom  on  this  passage,  "As  a  Punisher?  He  did  not  say  this, 
but  the  bright  side."  The  parallelism  of  these  verses  is  Man  dies  once, 
and  is  judged;  Christ  died  once  and  shall  return— he  might  have  said 
"to  be  man's  judge"  (Acts  xvii.  31)— but  he  does  say  "He  shall 
return... for  salvation." 

We  may  sum  up  some  of  the  contrasts  of  this  previous  chapter  as 
follows.  The  descendants  of  Aaron  were  but  priests;  Christ,  like  Mel- 
chisedek,  was  both  Priest  and  King.  They  were  for  a  time;  He  is  a 
Priest  for  ever.  They  were  but  links  in  a  long  succession,  inheriting 
from  forefathers,  transmitting  to  dependents;  He  stands  alone,  without 
lineage,  without  successor.  They  were  established  by  a  transitory 
ordinance,  He  by  an  eternal  oath.  They  were  sinful.  He  is  sinless. 
They  weak.    He   all-powerful.     Their  sacrifices  were  ineffectual.   His 

10 — 2 


148  HEBREWS,   X.  [v.  i. 

10  For  the  law  having  a  shadow  of  good  things  to  come, 
and  not  the  very  image  of  the  things,  can  never  with  those 
sacrifices  which  they  offered  year  by  year  continually  make 

was  perfect.  Their  sacrifices  were  offered  daily,  His  once  for  all. 
Theirs  did  but  cleanse  from  ceremonial  defilement,  His  purged  the 
conscience.  Their  tabernacle  was  but  a  copy,  and  their  service  a 
shadow;  His  tabernacle  was  the  Archetype,  and  His  service  the  sub- 
stance. They  died  and  passed  away;  He  sits  to  intercede  for  us  for 
ever  at  God's  right  hand.  Their  Covenant  is  doomed  to  abrogation; 
His,  founded  on  better  promises,  is  to  endure  unto  the  End.  Their 
High  Priest  could  but  enter  once  and  that  with  awful  precautions,  with 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats,  into  a  material  shrine;  He,  entering  with 
the  blood  of  His  one  perfect  sacrifice  into  the  Heaven  of  Heavens,  has 
thrown  open  to  all  the  right  of  continual  and  fearless  access  to  God. 
What  a  sin  then  v.'as  it,  and  what  a  folly,  to  look  back  with  apostatising 
glances  at  the  shadows  of  a  petty  Levitism  while  Christ  the  Mediator  of 
a  New,  of  a  better,  of  a  final  Dispensation — Christ  whose  blood  had  a 
real  and  no  mere  symbolic  efficacy  had  died  once  for  all,  and  Alone  for 
all,  as  the  sinless  Son  of  God  to  obtain  for  us  an  eternal  redemption, 
and  to  return  for  our  salvation  as  the  Everlasting  Victor  over  sin  and 
death  ! 

Ch.  X.  The  first  eighteen  verses  of  this  chapter  are  a  summary,  rich 
with  fresh  thoughts  and  illustrations,  of  the  topics  on  which  he  has 
been  dwelling ;  namely  (i)  The  one  sacrifice  of  Christ  com- 
pared with  the  many  Levitic  sacrifices  (i — lo).  (-2)  The  perfectness 
of  His  finished  work  (11 — 18).  The  remainder  of  the  chapter  is 
occupied  with  one  of  the  earnest  exhortations  (19 — 25)  and  solemn 
warnings  (25 — 31),  followed  by  fresh  appeals  and  encouragements 
(32 — 39),  by  which  the  writer  shews  throughout  that  his  object  in 
writing  is  not  speculative  or  theological,  but  essentially  practical 
and  moral. 

1 — 14.    The  one  Sacrifice  and  the  many  Sacrifices. 

1.  of  good  things  to  come]  Of  the  good  things  which  Christ  had  now 
brought  into  the  world  (ix.  11). 

not  the  very  i??iage  of  the  things']  "The  Law,"  says  St  Ambrose, 
"  had  the  shadow ;  the  Gospel  the  image ;  the  Reality  itself  is  in 
Heaven."  By  the  word  image  is  meant  the  true  historic  form.  The 
Gospel  was  as  much  closer  a  resemblance  of  the  Reality  as  a  statue  is  a 
closer  resemblance  than  a  pencilled  outline. 

can  never]  This  may  be  the  right  reading,  though  the  plural  "  they 
are  never  able,"  is  found  in  some  Mss.  If  this  latter  be  the  true  reading 
the  sentence  begins  with  an  unfinished  construction  {anakoluthon). 

with  those  sacrifices...]  Rather,  "with  the  same  sacrifices,  year  by 
year,  which  they  offer  continuously,  make  perfect  them  that  draw  nigh," 
i.e.  the  Priests  can  never  with  their  sacrifices,  which  are  the  same  year 
by  year,  perfect  the  worshippers.     Some  have  given  a  fuller  sense  to  the 


vv.  2—5.]  HEBREWS,   X.  149 

the  comers   thereunto  perfect.     For  then  would  they  not « 
have  ceased  to  be  offered  ?  because  that  the  worshippers 
once  purged  should  have  had  no  more  conscience  of  sins. 
But  in  those  sacrifices  there  is  a  remembrance  again  madez 
of  sins  every  year.     For  it  is  not  possible  that  the  blood  4 
of  bulls  and  of  goats  should  take  away  sins.     Wherefores 


words  "the  same,"  as  though  it  meant  that  even  the  sacrifices  of  the  Day 
of  Atonement  cannot  make  any  one  perfect,  being  as  they  are,  after 
all,  the  same  sacrifices  in  their  inmost  nature  as  those  which  are  offered 
every  morning  and  evening. 

2.  once  purged\  having  been  cleansed,  by  these  sacrifices,  once  for 
all. 

conscience^     Rather,  "consciousness." 

3.  tkere  is  a  remevibrance  again  made  of  sins'\  This  view 
of  sacrifices — that  they  are  "a  calling  to  mind  of  sins  yearly" — is  very 
remarkable.  It  seems  to  be  derived  from  Num.  v.  15,  where  "the 
offering  of  jealousy"  is  called  "an  offering  of  memorial,  bringing 
iniquity  to  remef)ib7-ance."  Philo  also  speaks  of  sacrifices  as  providing 
"not  an  oblivion  of  sins,  but  a  reminding oi  them."  De plant.  IVoe,  §  25. 
De  Vit.  Mos.  in.  §  10  (0pp.  i.  345,  11.  246).  But  if  the  sacrifices 
thus  called  sins  to  remembrance,  they  also  daily  symbolised  the  means  of 
their  removal,  so  that  when  offered  obediently  with  repentance  and  faith 
they  became  valid  symbols. 

4.  it  is  not  possible... '\  This  plain  statement  of  the  nullity  of  sacri- 
fices in  themselves,  and  regarded  as  mere  outward  acts,  only  expresses  what 
had  been  deeply  felt  by  many  a  worshipper  under  the  Old  Covenant. 
It  should  be  compared  with  the  weighty  utterances  on  this  subject  in  the 
O.T.,  I  Sam.  xv.  22  ;  Is.  i.  11 — 17;  Jer.  vi.  20,  vii.  21 — 23  ;  Amos  v. 
21 — 24  ;  Mic.  vi.  6 — 8  ;  Ps.  xl.  6 — 8  (quoted  in  the  next  verses),  and 
Pss.  1.  and  li. ;  and  above  all  Hos.  vi.  6,  which,  being  a  pregnant 
summary  of  the  principle  involved,  was  a  frequent  quotation  of  our 
Lord.  Any  value  which  the  system  of  sacrifices  possessed  was  not 
theirs  intrinsically  {proprid  virtute)  but  relatively  and  typically  {per 
accidens).  "By  a  rudely  sensuous  means,"  says  Liinemann,  "we  can- 
not attain  to  a  high  spiritual  good."  Philo  in  one  of  his  finest 
passages  shews  how  deeply  he  had  realised  that  sacrifices  were  value- 
less apart  from  holiness,  and  that  no  mere  external  acts  can  cleanse 
the  soul  from  moral  guilt.  He  adds  that  God  accepts  the  innocent 
even  when  they  offer  no  sacrifices,  and  delights  in  unkindled  altars  if 
the  virtues  dance  around  them  (De plant.  Aloe).  The  heathen  had  learnt 
the  same  high  truths.     Horace  (Od.  iii.  23)  sings, 

"Immunis  aram  si  tetigit  manus 
Non  sumptuosa  blandior  hostia 
Mollivit  aversos  Penates 
Farre  pio  et  saliente  mica." 


ISO 


HEBREWS,   X.  [vv.  6.  7. 


when  he  cometh  into  the  world,  he  saith,  Sacrifice  and 
offering  thou  wouldest  not,  but  a  body  hast  thou  pre- 

6  pared  me:    in  burnt  offerings  and  sacrifices  for  sin 

7  thou  hast  had   no   pleasure.      Then   said   I,    Lo,    I 
come    (in    the    volume  of  the  book  it  is  written  of 

5.  wJufi  he  cometh  into  the  world,  he  saith']  The  quotation  is  from 
Ps.  xl.  6—8.  The  words  of  the  Psalmist  are  ideally  and  typologically 
transferred  to  the  Son,  in  accordance  with  the  universal  conception  of 
the  O.T.  Messianism  which  was  prevalent  among  the  Jews.  It  made 
no  difference  to  their  point  of  view  that  some  parts  of  the  Psalm  (e.g.  in 
ver.  12)  could  only  have  a  primary  and  contemporary  significance.  The 
"coming  into  the  world"  is  here  regarded  as  having  been  long  pre- 
determined in  the  divine  counsels;  it  is  regarded,  as  Delitzsch  says, 
"  not  as  a  point  but  as  a  line." 

Sacrifice  and  offerittg  thou  wouldest  not]  "Thou  carest  not  for  slain 
beast  or  bloodless  oblation."  This  is  in  accordance  with  the  many 
magnificent  declarations  which  in  the  midst  of  legal  externalism  de- 
clared its  nullity  except  as  a  means  to  better  things  (Is.  i.  1 1 ;  Jer.  vi. 
20 ;  Hos.  vi.  6  ;  Amos  v.  21  ;  i  Sam.  xv.  22,  &c. 

but  a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me]  This  is  the  rendering  of  the 
LXX.  In  the  Hebrew  it  is  "  But  ears  hast  thou  digged  for  me."  The 
text  of  the  Hebrew  does  not  admit  of  easy  alteration,  so  that  either  (i) 
the  reading  of  the  Greek  text  in  the  LXX.  must  be  a  clerical  error,  e.g. 
KATHPTISASftMA  for  KATHPTISASRTIA,  or  (2)  the  LXX.  render- 
ing must  be  a  sort  of  Targum  or  explanation.  They  regarded  "  a  body 
didst  Thou  prepare"  as  equivalent  to  "  Ears  didst  thou  dig."  The  ex- 
planation is  usually  found  in  the  Hebrew  custom  of  boring  a  slave's  ear 
if  he  preferred  to  remain  in  servitude  (Ex.  xxi.  6  ;  Deut.  xv.  17),  so  that 
the  "bored  ear"  was  a  symbol  of  wilUng  obedience.  But  the  Hebrew 
verb  means  "to  dig"  rather  than  "to  bore,"  and  the  true  explana- 
tion seems  to  be  "thou  hast  caused  me  to  hear  and  obey."  So  in  Is. 
xlviii.  8  we  have  "thine  ear  was  not  opened,"  and  in  1.  5,  "  God  hath 
opened  my  ear  and  I  was  not  rebellious."  Thus  in  the  two  first  clauses 
of  each  parallelism  in  the  four  lines  we  have  the  sacrifices  which  God 
does  not  desire  ;  and  in  the  second  clause  the  obedience  for  which  He 
does  care.  "The  prepared  body"  is  "the  form  of  a  servant,"  which 
Christ  took  upon  Him  in  order  to  "  open  His  ears"  to  the  voice  of  God 
(Phil.  ii.  7).  See  Rev.  xviii.  13,  where  "bodies"  means  "slaves.'  St 
Paul  says,  "  Ye  are  become  dead  to  the  law  by  the  body  of  Christ"  (Rom. 

vii.  4).  „     ^,  1  , 

6.  burnt  offerings]  Lit.,  "Holocausts."  The  word  occurs  here 
alone  in  the  N.T.  These  "whole  burnt  offerings"  typified  absolute 
self-dedication  ;  but  the  holocaust  without  the  ^<?^-sacrifice  was  valueless. 

7.  Lo,  I  come]  Rather,  "  I  am  come."  This  40th  Psalm  is  one  of 
the  special  Psalms  for  Good  Friday. 

in  the  volume  of  tlie  book]  The  word  kephalis,  here  rendered  volume, 
does  not  occur  elsewhere  in  the  N.  T.     It  means  the  knob  {umbilicus) 


vv.  8— II.]  HEBREWS,  X.  151 

me,)  to  do  thy  will,   O  God.      Above  when   he   said,  8 
Sacrifice    and    ofifering    and    burnt     offerings    and 
offering  for  sin  thou  wouldest   not,    neither   hadst 
pleasure  therein:  which  are  offered  by  the  law;   then  9 
said   he,   Lo,    I    come   to   do   thy  will,  O  God.      He 
taketh  away  the  first,   that  he  may  establish  the  second. 
By  the  which  will  we  are  sanctified  through  the  ofiFering  of  10 
the  body  of  Jesus  Christ  once  for  all.     And  every  priest  n 
standeth  daily  ministering  and  offering  oftentimes  the  same 

of  the  roller  on  which  the  vellum  v/as  rolled.  The  word  in  the  Hebrew 
is  Megillah,  "a  roll."  It  cannot  be  rendered  "in  the  chief  part"  or 
"in  the  beginning."  The  words  "it  is  written  of  me"  may  mean  in 
the  Hebrew  "  it  has  bee7i  prescribed  to  me"  and  others  take  the  clause  to 
mean  "  I  am  come  with  the  roll  of  the  book  which  is  written  for  me." 
If  we  ask  what  was  "  the  book  "  to  which  the  author  of  the  Psalm  re- 
ferred the  answer  is  not  easy ;  it  may  have  been  the  Law,  or  the  Book 
of  God's  unwritten  counsels,  as  in  Ps.  cxxxix.  16.  The  writer  of  the 
Epistle,  transferring  and  applying  David's  words  to  Christ,  thought 
doubtless  of  the  whole  O.  T.  (comp.  Lk.  xxiv.  26,  27,  "  He  expounded 
unto  them  in  all  the  Scriptures  the  things  concerning  Himself). 

to  do  thy  will]  The  writer  has  omitted  the  words  "I  delight." 
Slavish  accuracy  in  quotation  is  never  aimed  at  by  the  sacred  writers, 
because  they  had  no  letter-worshipping  theory  of  verbal  inspiration. 
They  held  that  the  inspiration  lay  in  the  sense  and  in  the  thoughts  of 
Scripture,  not  in  its  ipsissima  verba.  Hence  they  often  consider  it 
sufficient  to  give  the  general  tendency  of  a  passage,  and  frequently  vary 
from  the  exact  words. 

8.  which  are  offered  by  the  law]  Rather,  '  according  to  the  Law." 
A  whole  argument  is  condensed  into  these  words,  which  the  context 
would  enable  readers  to  develop  for  themselves. 

9.  then  said  he]     Lit.,  "  Then  he  has  said.'" 
He  taketh  away  the  first]  namely.  Sacrifices,  &c. 

that  he  may  establish  the  second]  namely,  the  Will  of  God. 

10.  By  the  which  will  we  are  sanctified]  Rather,  "we  have  been 
sanctified  "  because,  as  we  have  already  seen,  the  word  hagiasmos  is  not 
used  of  progressive  sanctification,  but  of  consecration  in  a  pure  state  to 
God's  service  (ii.  11,  xiii.  12,  &c.,  and  comp.  John  xvii.  19;  1  Thess. 
iv.  3,  "This  is  the  will  of  God,  even  your  sanctification"). 

the  offering  of  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ]  The  "body"  is  a  reference 
to  ver.  5.  And  because  Christ  thus  offered  His  body  we  are  bidden  to 
offer  our  bodies  as  "a  living  sacrifice,  holy,  well-pleasing  to  God"  (Rom. 

xii.  i).  <  TT-  1. 

11.  And  every  priest]     The  better   readmg  seems   to   be     'High 

Priest." 

standeth]  None  were  permitted  to  sit  in  the  Holy  Place.  Christ  sat 
in  the  Holiest,  far  above  all  Heavens. 


152  HEBREWS,   X.  [vv.  12—18. 

12  sacrifices,  which  can  never  take  away  sins  :  but  this  man, 
after  he  had  offered  one  sacrifice  for  sins  for  ever,  sat  down 

13  on  the  right  hand  of  God;  from  henceforth  expecting  till 

14  his  enemies  be  made  his  footstool.  For  by  one  of- 
fering he  hath  perfected  for  ever  them  that  are  sanctified. 

15  Whereof  the  Holy  Ghost  also  is  a  witness  to  us  :  for  after 

16  that  he  had  said  before,  This  is  the  covenant  that  I 
will  make  with  them  after  those  days,  saith  the 
Lord,  I  will  put  my  laws  into  their  hearts,  and  in 

i;  their  minds  will  I  write  them;    and  their  sins   and 
1^  iniquities  will  I  remember  no  more.      Now  where  re- 
mission of  these  is,  there  is  no  more  offering  for  sin. 

oftentimes\  "Day  by  day  for  a  continual  burnt-offering"  (Num. 
xxviii.  3;  comp.  vii.  27). 

takt  away  sins\  The  word  is  not  the  same  verb  (apkairein)  as  in 
ver.  4,  but  a  much  stronger  one  {perielein)  which  means  "at  once  to 
strip  away,"  as  though  sin  were  some  close-fitting  robe  (see  xii.  i). 

12.  on  the  right  hand  of  God\     viii.  i,  i.  13. 

13.  his footstoor\     Ps.  ex.  1  ;   i  Cor.  xv.  25. 

14.  he  hath  perfect ed\     vii.  11,25. 

them  that  are  sanctified'^  "those  who  are  in  the  way  of  sanctification " 
(ii.  11;  comp.  Acts  ii.  47). 

15.  Whereof^     Rather,  "But." 

the  Holy  Ghost]  For  "holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved 
by  the  Holy  Ghost"  (2  Pet.  i.  21). 

for  after  that  he  had  said]  There  is  no  direct  completion  of  this  sen- 
tence, but  the  words  "again  He  saith"  are  found  in  some  editions  before 
ver.  17.  They  have  no  manuscript  authority,  but  were  added  by  Dr 
Paris  (from  the  Philoxenian  Syriac)  in  the  margin  of  the  Cambridge 
Bible  of  1762. 

16.  This  is  the  covenant]     Jer.  xxxi.  33,  34  (comp.  viii.  10 — 12). 

17.  will  I  remember  no  more]  This  oblivion  of  sin  is  illustrated  by 
many  strong  metaphors  in  Is.  xliv.  22,  xxxviii.  17;  Jer.  1.  20;  Ps.  ciii. 
12;  Mic.  vii.  19,  &c. 

18.  there  is  710  more  offering  for  sin]  Since  the  object  of  all  sacrifices 
is  the  purging  of  the  soul  from  guilt,  sacrifices  are  no  longer  needed 
when  sins  have  been  annulled  (ix.  26).  Those  words  form  the  triumphant 
close  of  the  argument.  To  revert  to  Judaism,  to  offer  sacrifices,  meant 
henceforth  faithlessness  as  regards  Christ's  finished  work.  And  if 
sacrifices  were  henceforth  abolished  there  was  obviously  an  end  of  the 
Aaronic  Priesthood,  and  therewith  of  the  whole  Old  Covenant.  The 
shadow  had  now  been  superseded  by  the  substance,  the  sketch  by  the 
reality.  And  thus  the  writer  has  at  last  made  good  his  opening  words, 
that  "  at  this  end  of  the  days  God  had  revealed  Himself  to  us  by  His 
Son,"  and  that  the  New  Covenant  thus  revealed  was  superior  to  the 


vv.  19—23.]  HEBREWS,  X.  153 

Having  therefore,  brethren,  boldness  to  enter  into  the  tg 
hoUest  by  the  blood  of  Jesus,  by  a  new  and  Uving  way,  20 
which  he  hath  consecrated  for  us,  through  the  vail,  that  is  to 
say,  his  flesh ;  and  having  a  high  priest  over  the  house  21 
of  God ;  let  us  draw  near  with  a  true  heart  in  full  assurance  22 
of  faith,  having  our  hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience, 
and  our  bodies  washed  with  pure  water.     Let  us  hold  fast  23 

First,  alike  in  its  Agent  (vii.  1—25),  its  Priesthood  (vii.  25 — ix.  12),  its 
Tabernacle,  and  its  sacrificial  ordinances  (ix.  13— x.  18). 

19 — 25.    An  exhortation  to  Christian  confidence  and  Fel- 
lowship. 

19.  brethren^     iii.  i,  12,  xiii.  22. 

boldness  to  enter  into  the  holiest  by  the  blood  of  Jesus\  Rather,  "  con- 
fidence in  the  blood  of  Jesus,  for  our  entrance  into  the  Holiest."  This 
right  of  joyful  confidence  in  our  access  to  God  through  Christ  is  dwelt 
upon  in  Eph.  ii.  18,  iii.  12. 

20.  by  a  new  and  living  way]  The  word  rendered  "new"  is  not 
kainos  as  elsewhere  in  this  Epistle,  but  prosphatos,  which  means  origin- 
ally '■'■newly-slain.''''  It  may  be  doubted  liowever  whether  the  writer 
intended  the  oxymoron  ^^newly-slain  yet  living.'"  That  the  road  was 
"new"  has  already  been  shewn  in  ix.  8 — 12.  It  is  called  "living"  not 
as  "life-giving"  or  "enduring,"  but  because  "the  Lord  of  life"  is  Him- 
self the  way  (John  xiv.  6;  comp.  Eph.  iii.  12), 

which  he  hath  consecrated]  The  verb  is  the  same  as  in  ix.  18,  "which 
He  inaugurated  for  us." 

through  the  vail,  that  is  to  say,  his  flesh]  There  is  here  a  passing 
comparison  of  Christ's  human  body  to  the  Parocheth  or  Veil  (vi.  19,  ix.  3) 
through  which  the  High  Priest  passed  into  the  Holiest,  and  which  was 
rent  at  the  crucifixion  (Matt,  xxvii.  51).  It  was  through  His  Suffering 
Humanity  that  He  passed  to  His  glory. 

21.  a  high  priest]  Lit.  "a  great  Priest"  (as  in  Lev.  xxi.  10),  here 
meaning  a  Kingly  Priest  (Zech.  vi.  11 — 13). 

over  the  house  of  God]     See  iii.  6;  i  Tim.  iii.  15. 

22.  Let  us  draw  near]  We  have  seen  throughout  that  the  notion  of 
free  access  and  approach  to  God  is  prominent  in  the  writer's  mind. 

in  full  assurance  of  faith]     See  vi.  11. 

having  our  hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience]  That  is,  having 
our  souls — our  inmost  consciousness — sprinkled  as  it  were  with  the 
blood  of  Christ  (ix.  14,  xii.  24,  i  Pet.  i.  2)  and  so  cleansed  from  the 
consciousness  of  guilt.  So  the  Jewish  priests  were  purified  from  cere- 
monial defilement  by  being  sprinkled  with  blood  (Ex.  xxix.  21;  Lev. 
viii.  30). 

and  our  bodies  washed]  The  perfect  participles  in  these  clauses— 
"having  been  sprinkled,^''  ^^ having  been  washed''' — imply  that  it  is  to  be 
done  once  and  for  ever.  All  Christians  are  priests  to  God  (Rev.  i.  5,  6) ; 
and  therefore  Christian  Priests,  before  being  permitted  to  approach  to 


154  HEBREWS,  X.  [vv.  24,  25. 

the  profession  of  our  hope  without  wavering;    (for  he   is 

24  faithful  that   promised ;)  and  let  us  consider  one  another 

25  to  provoke  unto  love  and  to  good  works  :  not  forsaking  the 
assembling  of  ourselves  together,  as  the  manner  of  some  is  ; 
but  exhorting  one  another :  and  so  much  the  more,  as  ye  see 
the  day  approaching. 

God,  must,  like  the  Jewish  Priests  (Ex.  xxx.  20),  be  sprinkled  with  the 
blood  of  Christ,  and  bathed  in  the  water  of  baptism  (Eph.  v.  1^',  Tit. 
iii.  5;   I  Pet.  iii.  21). 

with  pure  waier]  "I  will  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye 
shall  be  clean"  (Ezek.  xxxvi.  25). 

23.  (he  profession  of  our  hope\  Rather,  "  the  confession  of  our 
Hope."  Here  we  have  the  same  trilogy  of  Christian  graces  as  in 
St  Paul — Faith  (ver.  22),  Hope  (ver.  23),  and  Love  (ver.  24). 

without  wavering']  "So  that  it  do  not  bend."  It  must  be  not  only 
"secure"  (iii.  6,  14),  but  not  even  liable  to  be  shaken. 

for  he  is  faithfiil  that  promised]  vi.  13,  xi.  11,  xii.  26.  The  writer 
felt  the  necessity  of  insisting  upon  this  point,  because  the  sufferings  of 
the  Hebrew  converts,  and  the  long  delay  (as  it  seemed  to  them)  of 
Christ's  return,  had  shaken  their  constancy. 

24.  to  provoke  unto  love]  "For  provocation  to  love."  The  word 
paroxusmos  (whence  our  "paroxysm")  is  more  generally  used  in  a  bad 
sense,  like  the  English  word  "provocation"  (see  Acts  xv.  39;  Deut. 
xxix.  28;  LXX.).  And  perhaps  the  writer  here  chose  the  word  to 
remind  them  that  the  "provocation"  at  present  prevailing  among  them 
was  to  hatred  not  to  love. 

25.  the  assembling  of  ourselves  together]  i.e.  "  our  Christian  gather- 
ings. "  Apparently  the  flagging  zeal  and  waning  faith  of  the  Hebrews 
had  led  some  of  them  to  neglect  the  Christian  assemblies  for  worship 
and  Holy  Communion  (Acts  ii.  42).  The  word  here  used  (episuna- 
goge)  only  occurs  in  2  Thess.  ii.  i,  and  is  perhaps  chosen  to  avoid  the 
Jewish  word  "synagogue;"  and  the  more  so  because  the  duty  of 
attending  "  the  synagogue"  was  insisted  on  by  Jewish  teachers.  In  the 
neglect  of  public  worship  the  writer  saw  the  dangerous  germ  of  apos- 
tasy. 

as  the  man-iier  of  some  is]  This  neglect  of  attending  the  Christian 
gatherings  may  have  been  due  in  some  cases  to  fear  of  the  Jews.  It 
shewed  a  fatal  tendency  to  waver  in  the  direction  of  apostasy. 

exho7-ting  one  another]  This  implies  the  duty  of  mutual  encourage- 
ment. 

ye  see  the  day  approaching]  The  Day  which  Christians  expected  was 
the  Last  Day  (i  Cor.  iii.  13).  They  failed  to  see  that  the  Day  which 
our  Lord  had  primarily  in  view  in  His  great  eschatological  discourse 
(Matt,  xxiv.)  was  the  Close  of  the  Old  Dispensation  in  the  Fall  of  Jeru- 
salem. The  signs  of  this  were  already  in  the  air,  and  that  approaching 
Day  of  the  Lord  was  destined  to  be  "the  bloody  and  fiery  dav/n"  of 
the  Last  Great  Day — "the  Day  of  days,  the  Ending-day  of  all  days,  the 


vv.  26—28.]  HEBREWS,   X.  155 

For  if  we  sin  wilfully  after  that  we  have  received  the  26 
knowledge  of  the  truth,  there  remaineth  no  more  sacrifice 
for  sins,  but  a  certain  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment  and  27 
fiery  indignation,  which  shall  devour  the  adversaries.     He  28 

Settling-day  of  all  days,  the  Day  of  the  promotion  of  Time  into  Eter- 
nity, the  Day  which  for  the  Church  breaks  through  and  breaks  off  the 
night  of  this  present  world"  (Delitzsch). 

26—31.  A  SOLEMN  Warning  of  the  Peril  of  Wilful  Apostasy. 
26.  For  if  we  sin  wilfully\  The  word  "wilfully"  stands  in  contrast 
with  sins  of  weakness,  ignorance  and  error  in  v.  2.  If  the  writer  meant 
to  say  that,  after  the  commission  of  wilful  and  heinous  sins,  "  there 
remaineth  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins,"  this  would  not  only  be  the  niost 
terrible  passage  in  Scripture,  but  would  do  away  with  the  very  object 
of  Redemption,  and  the  possibihty  of  any  Forgiveness  of  Sins.  It 
would,  as  Kurz  says,  "be  in  its  consequences  truly  subversive  and 
destructive  of  the  whole  Christian  soteriology."  But  the  meaning 
rather  is  "Jftae  are  willing  sinners,'"  "if  we  are  in  a  state  of  delibe- 
rate and  voluntary  defiance  to  the  will  of  God."  He  is  alluding  not 
only  to  those  sins  which  the  Jews  described  as  being  committed  pre- 
sumptuously "with  uplifted  hand"  (Num.  xv.  30;  Ps.  xix.  13;  see 
vi.  4 — 8,  xii.  16,  17),  but  to  the  deliberate  continuity  of  such  sins  as  a 
self -chosen  lata  of  life ;  as  for  instance  when  a  man  has  closed  against 
himself  the  door  of  repentance  and  said  "  Evil  be  thou  my  good. "  Such 
a  state  is  glanced  at  in  2  Pet.  ii.  20,  21 ;  Matt.  xii.  43 — 45. 

after  that  we  have  received  the  knoioledge  of  the  truth']  Rather,  "the 
fidl  knowledge  of  the  truth."  Something  more  is  meant  than  mere 
historical  knowledge.  He  is  contemplating  Christians  who  have  made 
some  real  advance,  and  then  have  relapsed  into  "desperation  or  the 
wretchlessness  of  unclean  living." 

there  remaineth  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins]  Lit.,  "no  sacrifice  for 
sins  is  any  longer  left  for  them."  They  have  rejected  the  work  of 
Christ,  and  it  cannot  be  done  for  them  over  again.  There  is  one  atoning 
sacrifice  and  that  they  have  repudiated.  He  does  not  say  that  they 
have  exhausted  the  infinite  mercy  of  God,  nor  can  we  justly  assert  that 
he  held  such  a  conclusion ;  he  only  says  that  they  have,  so  long  as  they 
continue  in  such  a  state,  put  themselves  out  of  God's  covenant,  and 
that  there  are  no  other  covenanted  means  of  grace.  For  they  have 
trampled  under  foot  the  offer  of  mercy  in  Christ  and  there  is  no  salva- 
tion in  any  other  (Acts  iv.  12). 

27.  but  a  certain  fearfid  looking  for  of  judgment...]  All  that  is  left 
for  willing  apostates  when  they  have  turned  their  backs  on  the  sole 
means  of  grace  is  "some  fearful  expectance  of  a  judgment."  They 
are    "heaping   up  to  themselves    wrath   against   the   day   of  wrath" 

(Rom.  ii.  5).  ,     TT    •     !-■  1 

and fery  indignation]  Lit.,  "and  a  jealousy  of  fire.  He  is  think- 
ing of  God  "  as  a  consuming  fire  "  (xii.  29)  and  of  the  question  "  Shall 
thy  jealousy  bum  like  fire?"  Ps.  Ixxix.  5  (comp.  Ezek.  xxxv.  5). 


156  HEBREWS,  X.  [v.  29. 

that  despised  Moses'  law  died  without  mercy  under  two  or 

29  three  witnesses :  of  how  much  sorer  punishment,  suppose 

ye,  shall  he  be  thought  worthy,  who  hath  trodden  under 

foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  hath  counted  the  blood  of  the 

which  shall  devour  the  adversaries^  "Yea  let  fire  devour  thine 
enemies"  (Is.  xxvi.  11).  It  has  so  long  been  the  custom  to  interpret 
such  passages  of  "eternal  torments"  that  we  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that 
such  a  meaning,  if  we  may  interpret  Scripture  historically,  was  in  most 
cases  not  consciously  present  to  the  mind  of  the  writers.  The  constant 
repetition  of  the  same  metaphor  by  the  Prophets  with  no  reference 
except  to  temporal  calamities  and  the  overthrow  of  cities  and  nations 
made  it  familiar  in  this  sense  to  the  N.T.  writers.  By  "the  adver- 
saries" here  are  not  meant  "sinners,"  but  impenitent  Jews  and  wilful 
apostates  who  would  perish  in  the  Day  of  the  Lord  (1  Thess.  i.  8).  It 
is  at  least  doubtful  whether  the  writer  meant  to  imply  anything  beyond 
that  prophecy  of  doom  to  the  heirs  of  the  Old  Covenant  which  was  ful- 
filled a  few  years  later  when  the  fire  of  God's  wrath  consumed  the 
whole  system  of  a  Judaism  which  had  rejected  its  own  Messiah.  The 
word  for  "adversaries"  only  occurs  in  the  N.T.  in  Col.  ii.  14. 
_  28.  He  that  despised  Hoses'  law}  Especially  by  being  guilty  of  the 
sin  of  idolatry  (Deut.  xvii.  a— 7).  Literally,  it  is  "  any  one,  on  setting 
at  nought  Moses'  law." 

died}  Lit.,  "  dies."  Here  is  another  of  the  favourite  Jewish  exegeti- 
cal  arguments  a  mitiori  ad  ??iajns. 

without  fnercy]  The  Mosaic  law  pronounced  on  offenders  an 
inexorable  doom.     "The  letter  killeth  "  (2  Cor.  iii.  6). 

7inder  two  or  three  witnesses']  i.e.  by  the  testimony  of  at  least  two 
(John  viii.  17;    1  Cor.  xiii.  1). 

29.  of  how  much  sorer  punishment}  The  word  for  "punishment" 
in  the  N.T,  is  in  every  other  passage  kolasis,  which  means,  in  accord- 
ance with  its  definition,  and  in  much  of  its  demonstrable  usage,  "reme- 
dial punishment."  Here  the  word  (though  the  difference  is  not  ob- 
served by  our  A.V.  which  has  created  so  many  needless  variations,  and 
obliterated  so  many  necessary  distinctions)  is  iimoria  which  means 
"vengeance"  or  "retribution."  It  need  hardly'be  said  i\iz.f  vitidic- 
tive  punishment"  can  only  be  attributed  to  God  by  the  figure  of  speech 
known  as  anthropopathy,  i.e.  the  representation  of  God  by  metaphors 
drawn  from  human  passions.  It  is  also  obvious  that  we  misuse  Scrip- 
ture when  we  press  casual  words  to  unlimited  inferences.  "Venge- 
ance" is  here  used  because  (i)  the  author  is  alluding  to  defiant  and 
impenitent  apostates,  in  language  derived  from  the  earthly  analogies, 
and  (2)  because  he  is  referring  to  the  temporal  ruin  and  overthrow  of 
the  Jewish  polity  at  the  fast-approaching  Day  of  Christ's  Coming. 
The  passage  which  he  proceeds  to  quote  (Deut.  xxxii.  35)  refers  directly 
to  national  and  temporal  punishments.  The  verb  "to  avenge"  is  only 
used  twice  in  the  N.T.  (Acts  xxii.  5,  xxvi.  11)— both  times  of  the  per- 
secution of  Christians  by  Saul. 

trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God}     The  writer  could  hardly  use 


w.  30,  31.]  HEBREWS,  X.  157 

covenant,  wherewith  he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and 
hath  done  despite  unto  the  Spirit  of  grace  ?     For  we  know  3° 
him  that  hath  said.  Vengeance  belo7igeth  unto  me,  I 
will  recompense,  saith  the  Lord.     And  again,  The  Lord 
shall  judge  his  people.     //  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  3' 

stronger  language  to  imply  the  extremity  of  wilful  rebellion  which  he 
has  in  view.  It  scarcely  applies  to  any  except  blaspheming  infidels 
and  to  those  Jews  who  have  turned  the  very  name  of  Jesus  in  Hebrew 
into  an  anagram  of  malediction,  and  in  the  Talmud  rarely  allude  to 
Him  except  in  words  of  scorn  and  execration. 

the  blood  of  the  covenant\     He  uses  the  same  phrase  in  xiii.  20. 

an  unholy  thing]  Lit.,  "a  common  thing,"  i.e.  either  "unclean"  or 
"valueless."  Clearly  such  conduct  as  this  must  be  the  nearest  approach 
we  can  conceive  to  "the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost,"  "the  unpardon- 
able sin,"  "the  sin  unto  death,"  for  which  no  remedy  is  provided  in 
any  earthly  means  of  grace  (Matt.  xii.  31 ;   i  John  v.  16). 

done  despite  icnto]  Lit.,  "insulted;"  e.g.  "  by  blasphemy  against 
the  Holy  Ghost"  (Matt.  xii.  31,  32).  It  is  possible  to  grieve  utterly 
that  Holy  Spirit  (Eph.  iv.  30)  and  so  to  become  "reprobate."  The 
apostates  whose  case  is  here  imagined  despise  alike  the  Father  (v.  5), 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  (vi.  4 — 6).  They  reject  the  very  promises 
of  their  baptismal  profession  and  abnegate  the  whole  economy  of  grace. 
The  verb  for  "to  do  despite"  occurs  here  only  in  the  N.T. 

30.  Vengeance  belongeth  unto  me]  The  Scripture  warrant  adduced 
in  support  of  this  stern  language  is  Deut.  xxxii.  35,  and  a  similar 
phrase  ("O  God,  to  whom  vengeance  belongeth")  is  used  in  Ps.  xciv. 
I,  2.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  citation  does  not  agree  either  with 
the  Hebrew  or  the  LXX.,  but  is  quoted  in  the  same  form  as  in 
Rom.  xii.  19,  where  however  the  application  is  quite  different,  for  it  is 
there  used  as  an  argument  against  avenging  our  own  wrongs.  The 
writer  of  this  Epistle,  as  a  friend  of  St  Paul  and  one  who  was  of  his 
school,  may  have  been  familiar  with  this  form  of  the  quotation,  or  may 
have  read  it  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  with  which  he  seems  to  have 
been  familiar  (comp.  xiii.  i — 6  with  Rom.  xii.  i — ■21);  and  indeed  there 
are  traces  that  the  quotation  in  this  form  was  known  in  the  Jewish 
schools.     Perhaps  it  had  become  proverbial. 

saith  the  Lord]  The  words  are  omitted  in  X,  D,  and  most  ancient 
versions,  and  may  have  been  added  from  Rom.  xii.  19. 

And  agaitt]     Deut.  xxxii.  36. 

The  Lord  shall  judge  his  people]  In  the  original  passage  the  "judg- 
ment "  consists  in  saving  His  people  from  their  enemies,  as  also  in  Ps. 
cxxxv.  14. 

31.  It  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  living  God] 
Fearful  for  the  dehberate  apostate  and  even  for  the  penitent  sinner 
(i  Chron.  xxi.  13;  2  Sam.  xxiv.  14;  LXX.  Ecclus.  ii.  18),  and  yet 
better  in  any  case  than  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  man. 

of  the  living  God]     iii.  12. 


158  HEBREWS,   X.  [vv.  32— 34. 

32  the  hands  of  the  living  God.  But  call  to  remembrance  the 
former  days,  in  which,  after  ye  were  illuminated,  ye  endured 

33  a  great  fight  of  afflictions ;  partly,  whilst  ye  were  made 
a  gazingstock  both  by  reproaches  and  afflictions ;  and 
partly,  whilst  ye  became  companions  of  them   that   were 

34  so  used.  For  ye  had  compassion  of  me  in  my  bonds,  and 
took  joyfully  the  spoiling  of  your  goods,  knowing  in  your- 

32 — 39.    Words  of  appeal  and  encouragement. 

32.  But  call  to  remembrance  the  former  days\  Rather,  "keep  in  re- 
membrance." Here,  as  in  vi.  9 — 12,  he  mingles  appeal  and  encourage- 
ment with  the  sternest  warnings.  The  "former  days"  are  those  in 
which  they  were  in  the  first  glow  of  their  conversion. 

after  ye  were  illuminated'\  The  w  or  A  photizein  "to  enlighten"  only 
became  a  synonym  for  'to  baptise'  at  a  later  period.  Naturally  however 
in  the  early  converts  baptism  was  synchronous  with  the  reception  of  the 
gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (see  vi.  4).  For  the  metaphor — that  "God 
hath  shined  in  our  hearts" — see  1  Cor.  iv.  6;  i  Pet.  ii.  9. 

ye  endured  a  great  fight  of  afflictions^  Rather,  "much  wrestling  of 
sufferings."  These  were  doubtless  due  to  the  uncompromising  hostility 
of  the  Jewish  community  (see  i  Thess.  ii.  14 — 16),  which  generally  led 
to  persecutions  from  the  Gentiles  also.  To  the  early  Christians  it  was 
given  "not  only  to  believe  on  Christ,  but  also  to  suffer  for  His  sake" 
(Phil.  i.  29). 

33.  yc  were  made  a  gazingstock']  Lit.  "being  set  upon  a  stage" 
(theatrizomenoi).  The  same  metaphor  is  used  in  i  Cor.  iv.  9  ("We  be- 
came a  theatre,"  comp.  i  Cor.  xv.  32). 

companions']     Rather,  "partakers." 

that  were  so  used]     "Who  lived  in  this  condition  of  things." 

34.  ye  had  compassion  of  me  in  my  bonds]  This  reading  had  more  to 
do  than  anything  else  with  the  common  assumption  that  this  Epistle 
was  written  by  St  Paul.  The  true  reading  however  undoubtedly  is  not 
Tois  Sea/Jiois  fiov,  but  rots  deff/xioLs,  "ye  sympathised  with  the  prisoners." 
The  reading  of  our  text  was  probably  introduced  from  Col.  iv.  18; 
Phil.  i.  7,  &c.  In  the  first  persecutions  many  confessors  were  thrown 
into  prison  (Acts  xxvi.  10),  and  from  the  earliest  days  Christians  were 
famed  for  their  kindness  to  their  brethren  who  were  thus  confined.  See 
too  xiii.  3.  The  verb  avixiraOilv  occurs  only  here  and  in  iv.  15.  St  Paul 
uses  (TVjj.wa.ffx^i-v  "to  suffer  with"  in  Rom.  viii.  17. 

took  joyfully  the  spoiling  of  your  goods]  Christians  were  liable  to  be 
thus  plundered  by  lawless  mobs.  Epictetus,  by  whose  time  Stoicism 
had  become  unconsciously  impregnated  with  Christian  feeling,  says, 
"I  became  poor  at  thy  will,  yea  and  gladly."  On  the  supposition  that 
the  letter  was  addressed  to  Rome,  "the  spoiling  of  goods"  has  been 
referred  to  the  edict  of  Claudius  which  expelled  the  Jews  (and  with  them 
the  Christian  Jews)  from  Rome ;  or  to  the  Neronian  persecution.  But 
the  supposition  is  improbable. 


vv^  35—38.]  HEBREWS,   X.  159 

selves  that  ye  have  in  heaven  a  better  and  an  enduring 
substance.  Cast  not  away  therefore  your  confidence,  which  35 
hath  great  recompence  of  reward.  For  ye  have  need  of  36 
patience,  that,  after  ye  have  done  the  will  of  God,  ye  might 
receive  the  promise.  For  yet  a  little  while,  and  he  that  37 
shall  come  will  come,  and  will  not  tarry.  Now  38 
the   just    shall   live   by  faith:    but  if  any  man  draw 

knowing  in  yourselves  that  ye  have  in  heaven'\  The  "  in  heaven"  is 
almost  certainly  a  spurious  gloss,  and  the  "in"  before  "yourselves" 
should  be  unquestionably  omitted.  If  the  true  reading  be  iavrois,  the 
meaning  is  "recognising  that  ye  have  /or  yourselves,"  but  if  v/q  may 
accept  eavTovs,  the  reading  of  N,  we  have  the  very  beautiful  and  striking 
thought,  "recognising  that  ye  have  yourselves  as  a  better  possession  and 
an  abiding."  He  points  them  to  the  tranquil  self-possession  of  a  holy 
heart  (Lk.  ix.  25,  xxi.  19),  the  acquisition  of  our  own  souls,  as  a  suffi- 
cient present  consolation  for  the  loss  of  earthly  goods  (Heb.  xi.  26),  in- 
dependently of  the  illimitable  future  hope  (Matt.  vi.  20;  Rom.  viii.  18; 
I  Pet.  i.  4—8). 

35.  your  confidence\     iii.  6,  iv.  16. 

which  hath']  The  Greek  relative  implies  "seeing  that  it  has"  (quippe 
quae). 

recompence  of  reward]  The  compound  inisthapodosia  as  before  for 
the  simple  misthos  (ii.  2,  xi.  26;  comp.  xi.  6). 

36.  of  patience]  Few  graces  were  more  needed  in  the  terrible  trials 
of  that  day  (vi.  12  ;  Lk.  xxi.  19  ;  Col.  i.  11 ;  Jas.  i.  3,  4). 

after  ye  have  done]  The  meaning  perhaps  rather  is  "by  doing,"  or 
"by  having  done  the  will  of  God  ye  may  win  the  fruition  of  the  promise." 
The  apparently  contradictory  expressions,  about  "receiving"  and  "not 
receiving"  the  promise  or  the  promises,  arise  in  part  from  the  fact  that 
"promise"  is  used  both  for  the  verbal  promise,  and  for  its  actual  fulfil- 
ment (ix.  15,  xi.  39). 

37.  yet  a  little  while]  The  original  has  a  very  emphatic  phrase 
{/jLiKpbv  Sffov  8(Tov)  to  imply  the  nearness  of  Christ's  return,  "yet  but  a 
very  very  little  while."  The  phrase  occurs  in  the  LXX.  in  Is.  xxvi.  20. 
The  quotations  in  this  and  the  next  verse  are  adapted  from  Hab.  ii.  3,  4. 
In  the  original  it  is  "the  vision"  which  will  not  tarry,  but  the  writer 
quotes  from  the  LXX.,  only  inserting  the  definite  article  before  ipxofievos, 
and  applying  it  to  the  Messiah.  "The  coming  one"  was  a  Messianic 
title  (Matt.  xi.  3;  Lk.  vii.  19;  comp.  Dan.  vii.  13,  &c.).  In  Matt. 
xxiv.  34  our  Lord  has  said,  "  This  generation  shall  not  pass  till  all  these 
things  be  fulfilled ; "  and  by  the  time  that  this  Epistle  was  written 
few  still  survived  of  the  generation  which  had  seen  our  Lord.  Hence, 
Christians  felt  sure  that  Christ's  coming  was  very  near,  though  it  is 
probable  that  they  did  not  realise  that  it  would  consist  in  the  close  of 
the  Old  Dispensation,  and  not  as  yet  in  the  End  of  the  World. 

38.  No%u  the  just  shall  live  by  faith]  The  true  reading  here  (though  not 
in  the  Hebrew)  perhaps  is,  "But  my  righteous  one  shall  live  by  faith" 


i6o  HEBREWS,   X.  [v.  39. 

39  back,  my  soul  shall  have  no  pleasure  in  him.  But 
we  are  not  of  them  who  draw  back  unto  perdition  ;  but 
of  them  that  believe  to  the  saving  of  the  soul. 

(as  in  N,  A,  K),  and  this  is  all  the  more  probable  because  the  "my"  is 
omitted  by  St  Paul,  and  therefore  might  be  omitted  here  by  the  copyists. 
In  D,  as  in  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX.,  "my"  is  found  after  "faith."  In 
the  original  Hebrew  the  passage  seems  to  mean  "But  the  righteous 
shall  live  by  his  fidelity."  On  the  deeper  meaning  read  into  the  verse 
by  St  Paul  see  my  Life  of  St  Paul,  i.  369.  The  Rabbis  said  that 
Habakkuk  had  compressed  into  this  one  rule  the  365  negative  and  248 
positive  precepts  of  the  Law. 

bul  if  any  man  draiv  dack]  The  introduction  of  the  words  "any 
man"  by  the  A.V.  is  wholly  unwarrantable,  and  at  first  sight  looks  as 
if  it  were  due  to  dogmatic  bias  and  a  desire  to  insinuate  the  Calvinistic 
doctrine  of  the  "  indefectibility  of  grace."  But  throughout  this  Epistle 
there  is  not  a  word  which  countenances  the  dogma  of  "final  perse- 
verance." The  true  rendering  is  "And  'if  Ae  draw  back  My  soul  ap- 
proveth  him  not;'"  i.e.  "if  my  just  man  draw  back"  (comp.  Ezek. 
xviii.  24,  "when  the  righteous  turneth  away  from  his  righteousness)." 
The  verb  implies  that  shrinking  from  a  course  once  begun  which  is  used 
of  St  Peter  in  Gal.  ii.  12.  It  means,  primarily,  "to  strike  or  shorten 
sail,"  and  then  to  withdraw  or  hold  back  (comp.  Acts  xx.  20,  27).  This 
quotation  follows  the  LXX.  in  here  diverging  very  widely  from  the 
Hebrew  of  Hab.  ii.  4,  which  has  "Behold  his  (the  Chaldean's)  soul  in 
him  is  puffed  up,  it  is  not  humble  (lit  'lever);  but  the  righteous  shall 
live  by  his  faithfulness."  All  that  we  have  seen  of  previous  quotations 
shews  us  how  free  was  the  use  made,  by  way  of  illustration,  of  Scripture 
language.  Practically  the  writer  here  applies  the  language  of  the  old 
Prophet,  not  -n  its  primary  sense,  but  to  express  his  own  conceptions 
(Calvin).  On  the  possible  defection  of  "the  righteous"  see  Article  xvi. 
of  our  Church. 

39.  But  we  are  not  of  them  who  draw  back^  More  tersely  in  the 
original,  "  But  we  are  not  of  defection  unto  perdition,  but  of  faith  unto 
gaining  of  the  soul."  "Faith,"  says  Delitzsch,  "saves  the  soul  by 
linking  it  to  God... The  unbelieving  man  loses  his  soul;  for  not  being 
God's  neither  is  he  his  own."  He  does  not  possess  himself.  The  word 
for  "gaining"  is  found  also  in  Eph.  i.  14.  In  these  words  the  writer 
shews  that  in  his  awful  warnings  against  apostasy  he  is  only  putting  a 
hypothetical  case.  "His  readers,"  he  says,  "though  some  of  them  may 
have  gone  towards  the  verge,  have  not  yet  passed  over  the  fatal  line." 
The  word  Faith  is  here  introduced  with  the  writer's  usual  skill  to  prepare 
for  the  next  great  section  of  the  Epistle. 

Ch.  XI.    The  Heroes  of  Faith. 
The  main  task  of  the  writer  has  now  been  performed,  but  the  re- 
mainder of  the  Epistle  had  also  a  very  important  purpose.     It  would 
have  been  fatal  to  the  peace  of  mind  of  a  Jewish  convert  to  feel  that 
there  was  a  chasm  between  his  Christian  faith  and  the  faith  of  his  past 


vv.  1, 2.]  HEBREWS,  XI.  i6i 

Now   faith   is  the   substance   of  things   hoped   for,    the  11 
evidence  of  things  not  seen.     For  by  it  the  elders  obtained  2 

life.  The  writer  wishes  to  shew  that  there  is  no  painful  discontinuity  in 
the  religious  convictions  of  Hebrew  converts.  They  could  still  enjoy 
the  viaticum  of  good  examples  set  forth  in  their  O.T-  Scriptures.  Their 
faith  was  identical  with,  though  transcendently  more  blessed  than,  that 
which  had  sustained  the  Patriarchs,  Prophets,  and  Martyrs  of  their  nation 
in  all  previous  ages.  The  past  history  of  the  Chosen  People  was  not 
discarded  or  discredited  by  the  Gospel ;  it  was,  on  the  contrary,  com- 
pleted and  glorified. 

1.  Now  faith']  Since  he  has  said  "  we  are  of  faith  to  gaining  of  the 
soul,"  the  question  might  naturally  arise.  What  then  is  faith?  It  is  no- 
where defined  in  Scripture,  nor  is  it  defined  here,  for  the  writer  rather 
describes  it  in  its  effects  than  in  its  essence ;  but  it  is  described  by  what 
it  does.  Tlie  chapter  which  illustrates  "faith"  is  full  of  works ;  and 
this  alone  should  shew  how  idle  is  any  contrast  or  antithesis  between 
the  two.  Here  however  the  word  "faitli"  means  only  "the  belief 
which  leads  to  faithfulness  " — the  hope  which,  apart  from  sight,  holds 
the  ideal  to  be  the  most  real,  and  acts  accordingly. 

the  substance  of  things  hoped  for]  The  word  '■^hypostasis  "  here 
rendered  "substance,"  as  in  i.  3,  may  mean  (i)  that  underlying  es- 
sence which  gives  reality  to  a  thing.  Faith  gives  a  subjective  reality  to 
the  aspirations  of  hope.  But  it  may  be  used  (2)  in  an  ordinary  and  not 
a  metaphysical  sense  for  " basis,"  foundation  ;  or  (3)  for  ''confidence  " 
as  in  iii.  14  (comp.  1  Cor.  ix.  4,  xi.  17)  :  and  this  seems  to  be  the  most 
probable  meaning  of  the  word  here.  St  Jerome  speaks  of  the  passage 
as  breathing  somewhat  of  Philo  ("  Philoneum  aliquid  spirans"),  who 
speaks  of  faith  in  a  very  similar  way. 

the  evidence  of  things  not  seen]  The  word  rendered  "evidence"  means 
"demonstration,"  or  "test." 

not  seen]  i.  e.  which  are  as  yet  invisible,  because  they  are  eternal  and 
not  temporal  (2  Cor.  iv.  18,  v.  7).  God  Himself  belongs  to  the  things  as 
yet  unseen  ;  but  Faith — in  this  sense  of  the  word,  which  is  not  the  dis- 
tinctively Pauline  sense  (Gal.  ii.  16,  iii.  26;  Rom.  iii.  25) — demonstrates 
the  existence  of  the  immaterial  as  though  it  were  actual.  The  object 
of  faith  from  the  dawn  of  man's  life  had  been  Christ,  who,  even  at  the 
Fall,  had  been  foretold  as  "the  seed  of  the  woman  who  should  break 
the  serpent's  head."  The  difference  between  the  Two  Covenants  was 
that  in  the  New  He  was  fully  set  forth  as  the  effulgence  of  the  Father's 
glory,  whereas  in  the  Old  He  had  been  but  dimly  indicated  by  shadows 
and  symbols.  Bishop  Wordsworth  quotes  the  sonnet  of  the  poet 
Wordsworth  on  these  lines  : 

"  For  what  contend  the  wise  ?  for  nothing  less 
Than  that  the  Soul,  freed  from  the  bonds  of  sense, 
And  to  her  God  restored  by  evidetice 
Of  things  not  seen,  drawn  forth  from  their  recess, 
Root  there — and  not  in  forms — her  holiness." 

HEBREWS  II 


i62  HEBREWS,  XI.  [vv.  3, 4. 

3  a  good  report.  Through  faith  we  understand  that  the 
worlds  were  framed  by  the  word  of  God,  so  that  thi?igs 
which  are  seen  were  not  made  of  things  which  do  appear. 

4  By  faith  Abel  offered  unto  God  a  more  excellent  sacrifice 

2.  For  by  it  the  elders  obtained  a  good  report'\  Lit.,  "For  therein 
the  elders  had  witness  borne  to  them."  Their  "good  report"  was  won 
in  the  sphere  of  faith.  The  elders — a  technical  Jewish  term  {Zekenim) — 
means  the  ancient  fathers  of  the  Church  of  Israel  (i.  i). 

3.  Through  faith']  In  this  chapter  we  find  fifteen  special  instances 
of  the  work  of  faith,  besides  the  summary  enumeration  in  the  32nd  and 
following  verses. 

■we  understand]     'we  apprehend  with  the  reason'.     See  Rom.  i.  20. 

that  the  worlds  were  framed]  The  word  for  "  worlds  "  means  liter- 
ally ages  (i.  2),  i.  e.  the  world  regarded  from  the  standpoint  of  human 
history.  The  "time-world  "  necessarily  presumes  the  existence  of  the 
space-world  also.     See  i.  2. 

7i'ere  fratned]  "have  been  established"  (xiii.  21;  Ps.  Ixxiv.  16; 
I.XX.). 

by  the  viord  of  God]     Rather,  "by  the  utterance  [rhematt)  of  God," 

namely  by  His  fiat,  as  in  Gen.  i.  ;  Ps.  xxxiii.  6,  9  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  5.     There 

is  no  question  here  as  to  the  creation  of  the  world  by  the  Logos,  for  he 

purposely  alters  the  word  \6yifi  used  by  the  LXX.  in  Ps.  xxxiii.  into 

/  rheniati. 

so  that  things  which  are  seen...]  The  true  reading  and  literal  trans- 
lation are  "so  that  not  from  things  which  appear  hath  that  which  is 
seen  come  into  being,"  a  somewhat  harsh  way  of  expressing  that  "the 
visible  world  did  not  derive  its  existence  from  anything  phenomenal." 
In  other  words,  the  clause  denies  the  pre-existence  of  matter.  It  says 
that  the  world  was  made  out  of  nothing,  not  out  of  the  primeval  chaos. 
So  in  2  Mace.  vii.  28  the  mother  begs  her  son  "  to  look  upon  the  heaven 
and  earth  and  all  that  is  therein,  and  consider  that  God  made  them  out 
of  things  that  are  not''  (e't  oi'/c  ovtw).  If  this  view  be  correct,  the  writer 
would  seem  purposely  to  avoid  Philo's  way  of  saying  tJiat  the  world  was 
made  out  of  to.  ix-f)  6vra,  "things  conceived  as  non-existent,"  by  which 
he  meant  the  "formless  matter"  (as  in  Wisd.  xi.  17).  He  says  that  the 
world  did  not  originate  from  anything  phenomenal.  This  verse,  so  far 
from  being  superfluous,  or  incongruous  with  what  follows,  strikes  the 
keynote  of  faith  by  shewing  that  its  first  object  must  be  a  Divine  and 
Infinite  Creator.  Thus  hke  Moses  in  Gen.  i.  the  verse  excludes  from  the 
region  of  faith  all  Atheism,  Pantheism,  Polytheism,  and  Dualism. 

4.  By  faith  Abel]  Intending,  so  to  speak,  "  to  pluck  only  the 
flowers  which  happen  to  come  within  his  reach,  while  he  leaves  the 
whole  meadow  full  to  his  readers,"  he  begins  to  cull  his  instances  from 
the  world  before  the  flood.  His  examples  of  faith  fall  into  five  groups. 
I.  Antediluvian  (4—6).  2.  From  Noah  to  Abraham  (7—19,  including 
some  general  reflexions  in  13—16).  3.  The  Patriarchs  (20—22).  4. 
From  Moses  to  Rahab  (23—31).  5.  S'ummaiy  reference  to  later  heroes 
and  martyrs  down  to  the  time  of  the  Maccabees  (32 — 40). 


vv.  5—7.]  HEBREWS,  XI.  163 

than    Cain,   by   which   he   obtained  witness   that   he   was 
righteous,  God  testifying  of  his  gifts  :   and  by  it  he  being 
dead  yet  speaketh.     By  faith  Enoch   was   translated   that  s 
he  should  not  see  death;  and  was  not  found,  because 
God  had  translated  him:  for  before  his  translation  he 
had  this  testimony,  that  he  pleased  God.     But  without  faith  6 
//  is  impossible  to  please  hhn :  for  he  that  cometh  to  God 
must  believe  that  he  is,  and  that  he  is  a  rewarder  of  them 
that  diligently  seek  him.     By  faith   Noah,   being  warned  7 
of  God  of  things  not  seen  as  yet,  moved  with  fear,  prepared 
an  ark  to  the  saving  of  his  laouse;  by  the  which  he  con- 


mot-e  excellent}     Lit.,  "more  "  or '-'greater." 

a  more  excellent  sacrifice  than  Cain}  This  we  learn  from  Gen.  iv.  5, 
but  we  are  not  told  tiie  exact  points  in  virtue  of  which  the  sacrifice  was 
superior.  We  may  naturally  infer  that  Abel's  was  a  more  carefully-chosen 
and  valuable  offering,  but  especially  that  it  was  offered  in  a  more  sincere 
and  humble  spirit  of  faith  and  love. 

he  obtained  witness']  By  God's  sign  of  approval  (Gen.  iv.  4  ;  LXX.). 
Hence  he  is  called  "righteous"  in  Matt,  xxiii.  35  ;  i  John  iii.  12.  The 
Jewish  Hagadah  was  that  God  had  shewn  His  approval  by  fire  from 
heaven  which  consumed  Abel's  sacrifice. 

testifying  of  his  gifts']     Rather,  "  bearing  witness  to  his  gifts." 

and  by  it]  i.  e.  by  his  faith. 

he  being  dead  yet  speaketh]  Another  reading  (D,  E,  I,  K)  is  "though 
dead,  he  is  still  being  spoken  of."  But  the  allusion  seems  to  be  to  "the 
voice  of  his  blood"  (Gen.  iv.  10),  as  seems  cleai  from  the  reference  in 
xii.  24.  No  doubt  it  is  also  meant  that  he  speaks  by  his  example,  but 
there  seems  to  have  been  some  Jewish  Hagadah  on  the  subject,  for 
Philo  says  "Abel — which  is  most  strange — has  both  been  slain  and 
lives  "  (0pp.  I.  200).  He  deduces  from  Gen.  iv.  10  that  Abel  is  still 
unforgotten,  and  hence  that  the  righteous  are  immortal. 

5.  Enoch  was  translated]  Lit.,  "was  transferred  (hence)"  (Gen.  v. 
24;  Ecclus.  xliv.  16,  xlix.  14;  Jos.  Afttt.  1.  3.  §4. 

was  7tot  found,  because  God  had  translated  him.  Gen.  v.  24  (LXX. 
Cod.  Alex.). 

he  had  this  testimony]  "  he  hath  had  witness  born  to  him  ;"  "  Enoch 
walked  with  God,"  Gen.  v.  24  (LXX.  "pleased  God"). 

6.  that  he  is...]  The  object  of  Faith  is  both  the  existence  and  the 
Divine  government  of  God.  "We  trust  in  the  living  God,  who  is  the 
Saviour  of  all  men,  specially  of  those  that  believe"  (i  Tim.  iv.  10). 

and  that  he  is  a  rewarder]  Rather,  "and  that  he  becomes  (i.e.  shews 
or  proves  Himself  to  be)  a  rewarder." 

7.  warned  of  God]     The  same  word  is  used  as  in  viii.  5,  xii.  25. 
moved  with  fear]     Influenced  by  godly  caution  and  reverence ;  the 

same  kind  of  fear  as  that  implied  in  v.  7. 


i64  HEBREWS,  XI.  [vv.  8—10. 

demned  the  world,  and  became  heir  of  the  righteousness 

8  which  is  by  faith.  By  faith  Abraham,  when  he  was  called 
to  go  out  into  a  place  which  he  should  after  receive  for 
an   inheritance,   obeyed ;    and  he  went   out,    not   knowing 

9  whither  he  went.  By  faith  he  sojourned  in  the  land  of 
promise,  as  in  a  strange  country,  dwelling  in  tabernacles 
with  Isaac  and  Jacob,   the   heirs   with  hitn   of  the   same 

10  promise  :  for  he  looked  for  a  city  which  hath  foundations, 

condemned  the  ivorld'\  His  example  was  in  condemning  contrast  with 
the  unbelief  of  the  world  (Matt.  xii.  41  ;  Lk.  xi.  31). 

of  the  righteousness  which  is  by  faith']  Rather,  "which  is  according 
to  faith"  (comp.  Ezek.  xiv.  14).  Noah  is  called  "  righteous "  in  Gen. 
vi.  9,  and  Philo  observes  that  he  is  the  first  to  receive  this  title,  and 
erroneously  says  that  the  name  Noah  means  "righteous"  as  well  as 
"rest."  St  Paul  does  not  use  the  phrase  "the  righteousness  according 
to  faith,"  though  he  has  "the  righteousness  of  faith"  (Rom.  iv.  13). 
"Faith  "  however  in  this  writer  never  becomes  the  same  as  mystic  oneness 
with  Christ,  but  means  general  belief  in  the  unseen ;  and  "  righteousness" 
is  not  "justification,"  but  faith  manifested  by  obedience.  Throughout 
this  chapter  righteousness  is  the  human  condition  which  faith  produces 
(xi.  33),  not  the  divine  gift  which  faith  receives.  Hence  he  says  that 
Noah  "became  an  heir  of  the  righteousness  which  is  according  to  faith," 
i.  e.  he  entered  on  the  inheritance  of  righteousness  which  faith  had 
brought  him.  In  2  Pet.  ii.  5  Noah  is  called  "a  preacher  of  righteousness;" 
and  in  Wisd.  x.  4  "the  righteous  man." 

8.  Abraham]  As  was  natural,  the  faith  of  "the  father  of  the  faith- 
ful "  was  one  of  the  commonest  topics  of  discussion  in  the  Jewish 
Schools.     Wordsworth  [Eccles.  Sonnets,  xxvi.)  speaks  of 

'■'■Faith,  which  to  the  Patriarchs  did  dispense 
Sure  guidance  ere  a  ceremonial  fence 
"Was  needful  to  men  thirsting  to  transgress." 
tvhen  he  was  called]     The  Greek  (if  d  Ka.\oviJ.ivo%  be  the  right  read- 
ing) can  only  mean  literally  either  "he  who  is  called  Abraham,"  which 
would  be  somewhat  meaningless  ;  or  "  Abraham,  who  was  called  to  go 
out." 
to  go  out]  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  (Acts  vii.  4). 
a  place  ivhich  he  should  after  receive]     Gen.  xii.  7. 

9.  as  in  a  strange  country~\  "  I  am  a  stranger  and  a  sojourner  with 
you"  (Gen.  xxiii.  3).  The  patriarchs  are  constantly  called  paroikui, 
"  dwellers  beside,"  "sojourners"  (Gen.  xvii.  8,  xx.  i,  &c.). 

dzvellingin  tabernacles]  i.e.  in  tents  (Gen.  xii.  8,  xiii.  3,  &c.). 

10.  a  city  which  hath  fonndatio7is]  Rather,  "the  city  which  hath 
the  foundations,"  namely,  "the  Jerusalem  above"  (Gal.  iv.  26;  Heb. 
xii.  12,  xiii.  14;  Rev.  xxi.  2,  14).  The  same  thought  is  frequently  found 
in  Philo.  The  tents  of  the  Patriarchs  had  no  foundations  ;  the  founda- 
tions of  the  City  of  God  are  of  pearl  and  precious  stone  (Rev.  xxi.  14, 19.) 


w.  II— 15.]  HEBREWS,  XI.  165 

whose  builder  and  maker  is  God.     Through  faith  also  Sara  n 
herself  received  strength  to  conceive  seed,  and   was   de- 
livered of  a  child  when  she  was  past  age,  because  she  judged 
him  faithful  who  had  promised.     Therefore  sprang  there  12 
even  of  one,  and  him  as  good  as  dead,  so  many  as  the  stars 
of  the  sky   in   multitude,   and   as  the  sand   which   is   by 
the  sea  shore  innumerable.     These  all  died  in  faith,  not  13 
having  received  the  promises,  but  having  seen  them  afar  off, 
and   were   persuaded   of  them,    and   embraced   them,   and 
confessed  that  they  were   strangers   and   pilgrims   on   the 
earth.     For  they  that  say  such  thi?igs  declare  plainly  that  14 
they  seek  a  country.     And  truly,  if  they  had  been  mindful  rs 
of  that  country  from  whence  they  came  out,  they  might 


Indlder  and  maJzer\  Rather,  "architect  and  builder."  This  is  the 
only  place  in  the  N.T.  where  the  word  demmirgos  occurs.  It  is  found 
also  in  2  Mace.  iv.  i,  and  plays  a  large  part  in  the  vocabulaiy  of  Gnostic 
heretics.  But  God  is  called  the  "Architect"  of  the  Universe  in  Philo 
and  in  Wisd.  xiii.  r,  "neither  by  considering  the  works  did  they 
acknowledge  the  workmaster." 

11.  also  Sara  herself^  Rather  "even."  Perhaps  the  "even"  refers 
to  her  original  weakness  of  faith  when  she  laughed  (Gen.  xviii.  \i,  xxi.  2  ; 
comp.  Rom.  iv.  19).  Dr  Field  thinks  that  these  words  may  be  a  gloss, 
and  that  the  verse  refers  to  Abraham,  since  SreKev,  "was  delivered,"  is 
not  found  in  N,  A,  D. 

to  conceive  seed'\  For  technical  reasons  the  probable  meaning  here  is 
"for  the  founding  of  a  family"  (comp.  the  use  of  the  word  katabole  in 
iv.  3,  ix.  26  and  "seed"  in  ii.  16,  xi.  18). 

who  had  promised^     Comp.  x.  23. 

12.  as  the  stars... as  the sand\     Gen.  xxii.  17;  Deut.  i.  10. 

13.  in  faith']     Lit.  "according  to  faith." 

not  having  received  the  promises]  They  received  the  promises  in  one 
sense,  as  promises  (ver.  17),  but  had  not  yet  entered  upon  their  fruition 
(comp.  ver.  39  and  ix.  15). 

and  were  persuaded  of  theni]  These  words  are  not  found  in  all  the 
best  Mss. 

and e??ibraced thcjti]  Rather,  "saluting  them"  (Gen. xlix.  18).  "Your 
father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  day;  and  he  saw  it,  and  was  glad" 
(John  viii.  56). 

confessed  that  they  were  strangers  and  pilgrims]  Gen.  xxiii.  4,  xlvii. 
9;   I  Chron.  xxix.  15;  Ps.  xxxix.  12,  &c. 

14.  that  they  seek  a  country]  Rather,  "that  they  are  seeking  further 
after  a  native  land."  Hence  comes  the  argument  of  the  next  verse  that 
it  was  not  their  old  home  in  Chaldea  for  which  they  were  yearning, 
but  a  heavenly  native-land. 


i66  HEBREWS,   XL  [w.  16—20. 

16  have  had  opportunity  to  have  returned.  But  now  they 
desire  a  better  country^  that  is,  a  heavenly  :  wherefore  God 
is  not  ashamed  to  be  called  their  God  :  for  he  hath  prepared 

17  for  them  a  city.  By  faith  Abraham,  when  he  was  tried, 
offered  up  Isaac  :  and  he  that  had  received  the  promises 

i8  offered  up  his  only  begotten  soti,  of  whom  it  was  said.  That 

19  in  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called:  accounting  that 
God  was  able  to  raise  hijn  up,  even  from  the  dead ;  from 

20  whence  also  he  received  him  in  a  figure.     By  faith  Isaac 

15.  to  have  rettirned'\  But  they  never  attempted  to  return  to 
Mesopotamia,  because  they  were  home-sick  not  for  that  land  but  for 
heaven. 

16.  But  now]     "But,  as  the  case  now  is." 

t/iej/  desire]  The  word  means,  "they  are  yearning  for,"  "they  stretch 
forth  their  liands  towards." 

is  not  ashamed  to  be  called  their  God]  Rather,  "is  not  ashamed  of 
them,  to  be  called  their  God"  (Gen.  xxviii.  13;  Ex.  iii.  6 — 15.) 

he  hath  prepared  for  them  a  city]  The  "inheritance  incorruptible  and 
undefiled,  and  that  fadeth  not  away,  reserved  in  heaven  for  us"  (i  Pet. 
i.  4).  This  digression  is  meant  to  shew  that  the  faith  and  hopes  of  the 
Patriarchs  reached  beyond  mere  temporal  blessings. 

17.  By  faith  Abraham. ..offered  tip  Isaac]  Reverting  to  Abraham, 
whose  faith  ( i )  in  leaving  his  country,  (2)  in  living  as  a  stranger  in  Canaan, 
he  has  already  mentioned,  he  now  adduces  the  third  and  greatest  instance 
of  his  faithful  obedience  in  being  ready  to  offer  up  Isaac.  Both  tenses, 
"hath  offered  up"  (perf.)  and  "was  offering  up"  (imperf.)  are  charac- 
teristic of  the  author's  views  of  Scripture  as  a  permanent  record  of  events 
which  may  be  still  regarded  as  present  to  us.  St  James  (ii.  21)  uses  the 
aorist. 

he  that  had  received  the  promises]  Four  verbs  are  used  with  reference 
to  "receiving"  the  promises,  dfaSexecr^ai  (here),  XajSe'tv  (ix.  15),  iwirvxetv 
(xi.  33),  Ko/jLl(Taa0ai  (xi.  39).  The  word  here  used  implies  a  joyous  wel- 
come of  special  promises.  The  context  generally  shews  with  sufficient 
clearness  the  sense  in  which  the  Patriarchs  may  be  said  both  to  have 
"received"  and  "not  to  have  received"  the  promises.  They  received 
and  welcomed  special  promises,  and  those  were  fulfilled;  and  in  those 
they  saw  the  germ  of  richer  blessings  which  they  enjoyed  by  faith  but 
not  in  actual  fruition. 

18.  of  whom]  Lit.  "with  reference  to  whom"  (Isaac);  or  perhaps 
"to  whom,"  i.e.  to  Abraham. 

in  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called]     Gen.  xvii.  8,  19,  xxi.  12,  &c. 

19.  fro??i  whence]  The  only  place  in  this  Epistle  where  6dei>  has  its 
local  sense. 

in  a  figure]  Lit.  "in  a  parable."  For  the  use  of  the  word  see  ix.  0. 
The  exact  meaning  is  much  disputed.  It  has  been  rendered  "  as  a  type  " 
(comp.  Vulg.  in parabolam),  or  "in  a  bold  venture."  or  "unexpectedly." 


vv.  21,  22.]  HEBREWS,   XI.  167 

blessed  Jacob  and  Esau  concerning  things  to  come.    By  s 
faith  Jacob,  when  he  was  a  dying,  blessed  both  the  sons  of 
Joseph ;  and  worshipped,  leaning  upon  the  top  of  his  staff. 
By  faith   Joseph,    when   he   died,    made   mention   of    the  = 

These  views  are  hardly  tenable.  T.ut  how  could  Abraham  have  re- 
ceived Isaac  back  "  in  ajigii7-e^'  when  he  received  him  back  "  in  reality'"/ 
The  answer  is  that  he  received  him  back,  figuratively,  front,  the  dead, 
because  Isaac  was  typically,  or  figuratively,  dead — potentially  sacrificed — 
when  he  received  him  back.  Josephus  in  narrating  the  event  uses  the 
same  word  (And.  I.  13.  §4).  But  in  this  instance  again  it  is  possible  that 
the  key  to  the  expression  might  be  found  in  some  Jewish  legend.  In 
one  Jewish  writer  it  is  said  (of  course  untruly)  that  Isaac  really  was 
killed,  and  raised  again.  The  restoration  of  Isaac  was  undoubtedly  a 
type  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  but  it  is  hardly  probable  that  the 
writer  would  have  expressed  so  deep  a  truth  in  a  passing  and  ambiguous 
expression. 

20.  By  faith  Isaac  blessed  yacob  and  Esaii\  It  is  true  that  the 
blessing  of  Esau  when  rightly  translated,  "Behold  thy  dwelling  shall  be 
away  from  the  fatness  of  the  earth  and  azikiy  from  the  dew  of  blessing" 
(Gen.  xxvii.  39)  reads  more  like  a  curse ;  but  the  next  verse  (40)  involves 
a  promise  of  ultimate  freedom,  and  Esau  obtained  the  blessings  of  that 
lower  and  less  spiritual  life  for  which  he  was  alone  fitted  by  his  character 
and  tastes. 

concerning  things  to  come]  The  true  reading  seems  to  be  "even  con- 
cerning," though  it  is  not  easy  to  grasp  the  exact  force  of  the  "even." 

21.  both  the  sons]  Rather,  "  each  of  the  sons."  He  made  a  marked 
difference  between  them  (Gen.  xlviii.  17 — 19). 

worshipped,  leaning  upon  the  top  of  his  staff]  In  this  verse  there  is 
an  allusion  to  two  separate  events.  The  first  is  the  blessing  of  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh  (Gen.  xlviii.  i- — 20);  the  other  an  earlier  occasion  (Gen. 
xlvii.  29 — 31).  In  our  version  it  is  rendered"  And  Israel  bowed  himself 
upon  the  bed's  head,"  but  in  the  LXX.  and  Peshito  as  here,  it  is  "upon 
the  top  of  his  staff."  The  reason  for  the  variation  is  that  having  no  vowel 
points  the  LXX.  understood  the  word  to  be  matteJi,  "staff,"  not  mittah, 
"bed,"  as  in  Gen.  xlviii.  2.  If  they  were  right  in  this  view,  the  passage 
means  that  Jacob,  rising  from  his  bed  to  take  the  oath  from  Joseph, 
supported  his  aged  limbs  on  the  staff,  which  was  a  type  of  his  pilgrimage 
(Gen.  xxxii.  10),  and  at  the  end  of  the  oath  bowed  his  head  over  the 
staff  in  sign  of  thanks  and  reverence  to  God.  The  Vulgate  (here  follow- 
ing the  Itala)  erroneously  renders  it  adoravit  fastigizim  virgae  ejus, 
Jacob  "adored  the  top  of  his  (Joseph's)  stafT,"  and  the  verse  has  been 
quoted  (e.  g.  by  Cornelius  a  Lapide)  in  defence  of  image-worship.  Yet 
in  Gen.  xlvii.  31  the  Vulgate  has  "adoravit  Deum,  conversus  ad  lectuli 
caput."  Probably  all  that  is  meant  is  that,  being  too  feeble  to  rise  and 
kneel  or  stand,  Jacob  "bowed  himself  upon  the  head  of  his  couch"  in 
an  attitude  of  prayer,  just  as  the  aged  David  did  on  his  deathbed 
(i  Kings  i.  47). 


i68  HEBREWS,  XI.  [vv.  23—26. 

departing  of  the  children  of  Israel ;  and  gave  commandment 

23  concerning  his  bones.  By  faith  Moses,  when  he  was  born,  was 
hid  three  months  of  his  parents,  because  they  saw  he  was  a 
proper  child ;  and  they  were  not  afraid  of  the  king's  com- 

24  mandment.     By  faith  Moses,  when  he  was  come  to  years, 

25  refused  to  be  called  the  son  of  Pharaoh's  daughter ;  choosing 
rather  to  suffer  afifliction  with  the  people  of  God,  than  to 

26  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  sin  for  a  season ;  esteeming  the 
reproach   of  Christ   greater   riches   than   the   treasures   in 


22.  ivhen  he  died'\  The  less  common  word  for  "dying"  is  here  taken 
from  the  LXX.  of  Gen.  1.  26. 

gave  commandmcttt  concerning  his  bones]  A  sign  of  his  perfect  con- 
viction that  God's  promise  would  be  fulfilled  (Gen.  1.  24,  25;  Ex.  xiii. 
19;  comp.  Acts  vii.  16). 

23.  Moses... ivas  hid]  The  "faith"  is  of  course  that  of  his  parents, 
Amram  and  Jochebed. 

of  his  parents']  This  is  implied  in  the  LXX.  of  Ex.  ii.  2,  but  the  He- 
brew only  says  that  his  mother  concealed  him. 

a  proper  child]  In  Acts  vii.  20  he  is  called  "fair  to  God."  In  his 
marvellous  beauty  (see  Philo,  Vit.  Mos.)  they  saw  a  promise  of  some 
future  blessing,  and  braved  the  peril  involved  in  breaking  the  king's 
decree. 

the  kiitg's  commattdment]  To  drown  all  male  children  (Ex.  i.  22, 
ii.  2). 

24.  rcfiised  to  be  called  the  soft  of  P]}araoKs  daughter]  He  refused 
the  rank  of  an  Egyptian  prince.  The  reference  is  to  the  Jewish  legends 
which  were  rich  in  details  about  the  infancy  and  youth  of  Moses.  See 
Jos.  Atttt.  II.  ix — xi. ;  Philo,  Opp.  II.  82  ;  Stanley,  Led.  on  Jewish 
Church.  The  only  reference  to  the  matter  in  Scripture  is  in  Ex.  ii. 
10;  Acts  vii.  22 — 25. 

25.  with  the  people  of  God]     iv.  9. 

the  pleasures  of  sin  for  a  season]  The  brevity  of  sinful  enjoyment  is 
alluded  to  in  Job  xx.  5,  "The  triumphing  of  the  wicked  is  short,  and  the 
joy  of  the  hypocrite  but  for  a  moment."  The  special  sin  would  have 
been  the  very  one  to  which  the  readers  were  tempted — apostasy. 

26.  the  reproach  of  Christ']  Rather,  "of  the  Christ"  (comp.  xiii.  13  ; 
2  Cor.  i.  5;  Rom.  xv.  3;  Phil.  iii.  7 — 11;  Col.  i.  24).  There  may  be 
in  the  words  a  reminiscence  of  Ps.  Ixxxix.  50,  51,  "Remember  Lord 
the  reproach  of  thy  servants. ..wherewith  thine  enemies  have  reproached 
the  footsteps  of  thine  attointed."  By  "the  reproach  of  the  Christ"  is 
meant  "  the  reproach  which  He  had  to  bear  in  His  own  person,  and  has 
to  bear  in  that  of  His  members"  (2  Cor.  i.  5).  It  is  true  that  in  no 
other  passage  of  the  Epistle  does  the  writer  allude  to  the  mystical  oneness 
of  Christ  and  His  Church,  but  he  must  have  been  aware  of  that  truth 
from  intercourses  with  St  Paul  and  knowledge  of  his  writings.     Other- 


vv.  27—30.]  HEBREWS,  XI.  169 

Egypt:    for  he  had  respect  unto  the  recompence  of  the 
reward.     By  faith  he  forsook  Egypt,  not  fearing  the  wrath  27 
of  the  king  :  for  he  endured,  as  seeing  him  who  is  invisible. 
Through  faith  he  kept  the  passover,  and  the  sprinkhng  of  ^s 
blood,    lest  he  that  destroyed  the  firstborn   should   touch 
them.     By  faith  they  passed  through  the  Red  sea  as  by  dry  29 
land:  which  the  Egyptians  assaying  to  do  were  drowned. 
By  faith  the  walls  of  Jericho  fell  down,  after  they  were  com-  30 

wise  we  must  suppose  him  to  imply  that  Moses  by  faith  realised,  at 
least  dimly,  that  he  was  suffering  as  Christ  would  hereafter  suffer. 

he  had  respect  unto\  Lit.  "for  he  was  looking  away  from  it  to.'''' 
What  Moses  had  in  view  was  something  wholly  different  from  sinful 
pleasure.     The  verb  is  found  here  only  in  the  N.T. 

27.  By  faith  he  forsook  Egypt']  This  must  allude  to  the  Exodus,  not 
to  the  flight  of  Moses  into  Midian.  On  the  latter  occasion,  he  distinctly 
did  "fear  the  wrath  of  the  king"  (Epc.  ii.  14,  15).  It  is  true  that  for 
the  moment  Pharaoh  and  the  Egyptians  pressed  the  Israelites  to  depart, 
but  it  was  only  in  fear  and  anger,  and  Moses  foresaw  the  immediate 
pursuit. 

he  endured,  as  seeing]  The  words  have  also  been  rendered,  but  less 
correctly,  "He  was  stedfast  towards  Him  who  is  invisible,  as  if  seeing 
Him." 

hi?n  who  is  ittvisible]  "The  blessed  and  only  Potentate... whom  no 
man  hath  seen,  nor  can  see"  (i  Tim.  vi.  15,  16).  Perhaps  we  should 
render  it  "the  Kitig  Invisible,"  understanding  the  word  ^aaiX^a,  and  so 
emphasizing  the  contrast  between  the  fear  of  God  and  the  consequent 
fearless  attitude  towards  Pharaoh. 

28.  Through  faith]     Rather,  "by  faith,"  as  before. 

he  kept  the  passover]  Lit.  "he  hath  made,"  or  "instituted."  Another 
of  the  author's  characteristic  tenses  (see  ver.  17). 

and  the  sprinkling  of  blood]  Ex.  xii.  21 — 33.  The  "faith"  con- 
sisted primarily  in  believing  the  promises  and  obeying  the  command  of 
God,  and  secondarily,  we  may  believe,  in  regarding  the  sprinkled 
blood  as  in  some  way  typical  of  a  better  propitiation  (Rom.  iii.  25). 
The  word  for  sprinkling  is  not  rantismos,  as  in  xii.  24,  but  irpbaxvci-^, 
which  is  found  here  only  ("effusion"),  but  is  derived  from  the  verb 
used  in  Lev.  i.  5  (LXX.). 

he  that  destroyed]  The  term  is  derived  from  the  LXX.  The  Hebrew 
(Ex.  xii.  23)  has  mashchith  "destruction."  Comp.  i  Chr.  xxi.  15; 
2  Chr.  xxxii.  21;  1  Cor.  x.  10;  Ecclus.  xlviii.  21. 

29.  tliey]     Moses  and  the  Israelites. 

tvere  drowned]  Lit.,  "were  swallowed  up"  (Ex.  xiv.  15 — 28;  Ps. 
cvi.  9 — 12). 

which  the  Egyptians  assaying  to  do]  The  Greek  words  must  mean 
"  of  which  sea"  (or  "  of  which  dry  land")  the  Egyptians  making  trial. 

30.  tlie  walls  of  J ericlio  fell  down]     Josh.  vi.  12 — 20. 


ijo  HEBREWS,  XI.  [vv.  31—34. 

yr  passed  about  seven  days.  By  faith  the  harlot  Rahab 
perished  not  with  them  that  believed  not,  when  she  had 
received  the  spies  with  peace, 

32  And  what  shall  I  more  say?  for  the  time  would  fail 
me  to  tell  of  Gedeon,  and  ^  Barak,  and  ^t/"  Samson,  and  0/ 
Jephthae;  of  David  also,  and  Samuel,  and  of  the.  prophets  : 

33  who  through  faith  subdued  kingdoms,  wrought  righteous- 
ness,   obtained   promises,   stopped    the    mouths   of   lions, 

34  quenched   the  violence  of  fire,    escaped   the   edge   of  the 


31.  By  faitli]    Josh.  ii.  9 — i!,  "The  Lord  your  God,  He  is  God." 
the  harlot  RahaU\     So  she  is  called  in  Josh.  ii.  i ;  Jas.  ii.  25,  and  it 

shews  the  faithfulness  of  the  sacred  narrative  that  her  name  is  even 
introduced  as  well  as  that  of  Ruth,  a  Moabitess,  in  the  genealogy  of 
our  Lord  (Matt.  i.  5).  The  Targum  softens  it  down  into  "innkeeper" 
and  others  render  it  "idolatress."  Her  name  was  highly  honoured  by 
the  Jews,  who  said  that  eight  prophets — among  them  fiaruch,  Jeremiah, 
and  Shallum — were  descended  from  her,  and  the  prophetess  Huldah. 
Megillah  f.  14.  2. 

that  believed  nof]     Rather,  "  that  were  disobedient. " 

32.  the  ti?ne  zvould  fail  7ne'\  The  phrase  is  also  found  in  Philo,  De 
Somniis.  The  names  of  "the  heroes  of  faith"  here  mentioned  are 
drawn  from  the  Books  of  Judges  and  Samuel,  with  a  reference  to  the 
Books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles,  and  what  is  known  of  the  history  of 
the  Prophets.  There  does  not  seem  to  be  any  special  design  in  the 
arrangement  of  the  paiis  of  names,  though  it  is  a  curious  circumstance 
that,  in  each  pair,  thie  hero  who  came  earlier  in  time  is  placed  after  the 
other.  In  32 — 34  we  have  instances  of  active,  and  in  35 — 38  of  pas- 
sive faith. 

33.  suhdiied  kingdo»ts]  The  allusion  is  specially  to  the  conquest  of 
Canaan  by  Joshua,  and  to  the  victories  of  David  (2  Sam.  v.  17 — 25, 
xxi.  15,  &c.). 

wrought  righfeot{sness]  The  allusion  is  somewhat  vague,  but  seems 
to  refer  to  the  justice  of  Judges  and  Kings  (i  Sam.  xii.  3,  4;  2  Sam. 
viii.  15;  I  Chron.  xviii.  14,  &c.),  and  perhaps  especially  to  the  Judg- 
ment of  Solomon.  "To  execute  judgment  and  justice"  belonged  espe- 
cially to  the  Princes  of  Israel  (Ezek.  xlv.  9). 

obtained  promises]  If  we  compare  the  expression  with  verses  13,  39, 
we  see  that  the  primary  reference  must  be  to  temporal  promises  (see 
Josh.  xxi.  43 — 45,  &c.);  but  they  also  obtained  at  least  a  partial  fruition 
of  spiritual  promises  also. 

stopped  the  moxdhs  of  lions]  Samson  (Judg.  xiv.  5,  6),  David  (i  Sam. 
xvii.  34,  35),  Daniel  (Dan.  vi.  22),  Benaiah  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  20). 

34.  quenched  the  violence  of  fire]     Dan.  iii.  25  ;  i  Mace.  ii.  59, 
escaped  the  edge  of  the  sword]     David  (i  Sam.  xviii.  11,  xix.  10,  &C.), 

Elijah  (i  K.  xix.  2),  Elisha  (2  K.  vi.  12  — 17;  Jer.  xxvi.  24,  &c.). 


vv.  35—37.]  HEBREWS,   XL  171 

sword,  out  of  weakness  were  made  strong,  waxed  valiant 
in  fight,  turned  to  flight  the  armies  of  the  aHens.     Women  35 
received  their  dead  raised  to  life  again  :  and  others  were 
tortured,  not  accepting  deliverance  ;    that  they  might  ob- 
tain  a    better  resurrection :    and  others  had  trial  of  cruel  3^ 
mockings  and   scourgings,   yea,   moreover   of   bonds    and 
imprisonment :  they  were  stoned,  they  were  sawn  asunder,  37 
were  tempted,  were  slain  with  the  sword :  they  wandered 

Old  of  %vealcncss  were  made  st7-ong'\  Hezekiah  (2  K.  xx.  5),  Samson 
Qudg.  XV.  15,  xvi.  28 — 30),  David  (i  Sam.  xvii.  42,  51,  &c.). 

turned  to  flight  the  arviies  of  the  aliens]  This  and  the  previous  clause 
may  refer  specially  to  the  Maccabees,  though  they  also  suit  Joshua,  the 
Judges,  David,  &c.  The  word  used  for  "armies"  [parembolas)  is  the 
word  used  for  "camp"  in  xiii.  11,  13;  Rev.  xx.  9.  It  has  both  senses 
in  the  LXX.  (Judg.  iv.  16).  The  classic  verb  for  "drove  back"  is 
found  here  only  in  the  N.T.  {klino). 

35.  Women  received  their  dead]  The  woman  of  Sarepta  (i  K.  xvii. 
22),  the  Shunamite  (2  K.  iv.  32 — 36). 

raised  to  life  again]     Lit.,  "  by  resurrection." 

were  tortured]  The  word  means,  technically,  "were  broken  on  the 
wheel,"  and  the  special  reference  may  be  to  2  Mace.  vi.  18 — 30,  vii. 
(the  tortures  of  Eleazer  the  Scribe,  and  of  the  Seven  Brothers). 

deliverance]  '■'■The  deliverance  offered  them"  (2  Mace.  vi.  20,  21, 
vii.  24). 

a  better  resurrection]  Not  a  mere  resurrection  to  earthly  life,  like 
the  children  of  the  women  just  mentioned,  but  "  an  everlasting  reawak- 
ening of  life"  (2  Mace.  vii.  9  z.\\^ passim). 

36.  mockings  and  scourgings]  "Seven  brethren  and  their  mother... 
being  tormented  with  scourges  and  whips... and  they  brought  the  second 
for  a  mocking-stock...And  after  him  was  the  third  made  a  mocking- 
stock... And... they  tortured  and  tormented  the  fourth  in  like  manner" 
(2  Mace.  vii.  i,  7,  10,  13,  &c.).  "And  they  sought  out. ..Judas'  friends... 
and  he  took  vengeance  on  them  and  mocked  them"  (i  Mace.  ix.  26). 

of  bonds  and  imprisonment]  Joseph  (Gen.  xxxix.  20),  Micaiah 
(i  K.  xxii.  26,  27),  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xx.  2,  xxxvii.  15),  Hanani  (2  Chron. 
xvi.  10). 

37.  they  were  stoned]  Zechariah  (2  Chron.  xxiv.  20,  21).  Jewish 
tradition  said  that  Jeremiah  was  stoned.  See  Matt,  xxiii.  35—37! 
Lk.  xi.  51. 

were  sawn  asunder]  This  was  the  traditional  mode  of  Isaiah's  mar- 
tyrdom. Hamburger  Talm.  Wijrterb.  s.v.  Jesaia.  Comp.  Matt.  xxiv. 
51.     The  punishment  was  well-known  in  ancient  days  (3  Sam.  xii.  31). 

were  te>?ipied]  This  would  not  seem  an  anticlimax  to  a  pious  reader, 
for  the  intense  violence  of  temptation,  and  the  horrible  dread  lest  the 
weakness  of  human  nature  should  succumb  to  it,  was  one  of  the_  most 
awful  forms  of  trial  which  persecutors  could  inflict  (see  Acts  xxvi.  11), 


^n         HEBREWS,  XI.  [vv.  38— 40. 

about  in  sheepskins  and  goatskins  ;  being  destitute,  afflicted, 

38  tormented ;  (of  whom  the  world  was  not  worthy :)  they 
wandered  in  deserts,  and  in  mountains,  and  in  dens  and 

39  caves  of  the  earth.     And  these  all,  having  obtained  a  good 

40  report  through  faith,  received  not  the  promise  :  God  having 
provided  some  better  tJmig  for  us,  that  they  without  us 
should  not  be  made  perfect. 

especially  if  the  tempted  person  yielded  to  the  temptation,  as  in  i  K. 
xiii.^  7,  19 — 26.  There  is  no  variation  in  the  Mss.  but  some  have 
conjectured  epresthesan  "they  were  burned"  for  epeirasthesaji.  In  a 
recent  outbreak  at  Alexandria  some  Jews  had  been  burnt  alive  (Philo 
iti  Flacc.  20)  and  burnings  are  mentioned  in  2  Mace.  vi.  11.  The  rea- 
son for  the  position  of  the  word,  as  a  sort  of  climax,  perhaps  lies  in 
the  strong  effort  to  tempt  the  last  and  youngest  of  the  seven  brother- 
martyrs  to  apostatise  in  2  Mace.  vii. 

were  slain  with  the  szvo7-d'\  "They  have  slain  thy  prophets  with  the 
sword"  (i  K.  xix.  ro).  Jehoiakim  "slew  Urijah  with  the  sword"  (Jer. 
xxvi.  23).  The  Jews  suffered  themselves  to  be  massacred  on  the 
Sabbath  in  the  war  against  Antiochus  (i  Mace.  ii.  38 ;  2  Mace.  v.  26). 

in  sheepskins  and  goatskins]  Elijah  (i  K.  xix.  13;  2  K.  i.  8).  A 
hairy  garment  seems  subsequently  to  ha.ve  been  a  common  dress  among 
prophets,  and  it  was  sometimes  adopted'for  purposes  of  deception  (Zech. 
xiii.  4).  Clement  in  his  Ep.  ad  Horn.  i.  17  says  that  Elishah  and 
Ezekiel  also  wore  hairy  garments. 

38.  was  not  worthyl  The  world  was  unworthy  of  them  though  it 
treated  them  as  worthless.  The  Greek  would  also  admit  the  meaning 
that  they  outweighed  in  value  the  whole  world  (see  Prov.  viii.  11^ 
LXX.). 

in  dens  and  caves']  The  Israelites  in  general  (Judg.  vi.  2).  The 
prophets  of  the  Lord  (i  K.  xviii.  4,  13).  Elijah  (i  K.  xix.  9).  Mat- 
tathias  and  his  sons  "fled  into  the  mountains"  (i  Mace.  ii.  28),  and 
many  others  "into  the  wilderness"  (id.  29).  Judas  the  Maccabe 
(2  Mace.  v.  27).  Refugees  in  caves  (2  Mace.  vi.  11).  "Like  beasts" 
(id.  X.  6). 

of  the  earth]  Rather,  "  of  the  land."  The  writer's  view  rarely  ex- 
tends beyond  the  horizon  of  Jewish  history. 

39.  having  obtained  a  good  report  th)-oiigh  faith]  "Having  been 
borne  witness  to  through  their  faith,"  i.e.  though  they  had  this  testi- 
mony borne  to  them,  they  did  not  see  the  fulfilment  of  the  promises. 

received  not  the  promise]  See  verses  17,  33,  vi.  15,  ix.  15.  They  did 
not  enjoy  the  fruition  of  the  one  great  promise. 

40.  God  having  provided  some  better  thing  for  us]  Lit.,  "Since 
God  provided"  (or  "foresaw")  "some  better  thing  concerning  us."  In 
one  sense  Abraham,  and  therefore  other  patriarchs  "rejoiced  to  see 
Christ's  day,"  and  yet  they  did  but  see  it  in  such  dim  shadow  that 
"many  prophets  and  kings  desired  to  see  what  ye  see,  and  saw  not, 
and  hear  the  things  which  ye  hear,  and  did  not  hear  them"   (Matt. 


I.]  HEBREWS,  XII.  173 


Wherefore  seeing  we  also  are  compassed  about  with  so  12 
great  a  cloud  of  witnesses,  let  us  lay  aside  every  weight,  and 

xiii.  17),  though  all  their  earnest  seekings  and  searchings  tended  in  this 
direction  (i  Pet.  i.  10,  11). 

that  they  without  us  should  not  be  made  perfect']  "  Not  unto  them- 
selves but  unto  us  they  did  minister"  (i  Pet.  i.  12).  Since  in  their 
days  "the  fulness  of  the  times"  had  not  yet  come  (Eph.  i.  10)  the  saints 
could  not  be  brought  to  their  completion— the  end  and  consummation 
of  their  privileges — apart  from  us.  The  "just"  had  not  been,  and 
could  not  be,  "perfected"  (xii.  23)  until  Christ  had  died  (vii.  19, 
viii.  6).  The  implied  thought  is  that  if  Christ  had  come  in  their  days — 
if  the  "close  of  the  ages"  had  fallen  in  the  times  of  the  Patriarchs  or 
Prophets — the  world  would  long  ago  have  ended,  and  we  should  never 
have  been  born.  Our  present  privileges  are,  as  he  has  been  proving  all 
through  the  Epistle,  incomparably  better  than  those  of  the  fathers.  It 
was  necessary  in  the  econom.y  of  God  that  their  "  perfectionment" 
should  be  delayed  until  ours  could  be  accomplished  ;  in  the  future 
world  we  and  they  shall  equally  enjoy  the  benefits  of  Christ's 
redemption. 

Ch.  xii.     An  exhortation  to  faithful  endurance  (i — 3)  and  a  reminder 
that  our  earthly  sufferings  are  due  to  the  fatherly  chastisement  of 
God  (4 — 13).     The  need  of  earnest  watchfulness  (14 — 17).     Mag- 
nificent concluding  appeal  founded  on  the  superiority  and  grandeur 
of  the  New  Covenant  (18 — 24),  which  enhances  the  guilt  and  peril 
of  apostasy  (25 — 29). 
1 — 3.    An  exhortation  to  patient  steadfastness. 
1.     Wherefore']     The  Greek  word  is  a  very  strong  particle  of  inference 
not  found  elsewhere  in  the  N.  T.  except  in  i  Thess.  iv.  8. 

seeing  we  also  are  compassed]  The  order  of  the  Greek  is  "Let  us  also, 
seeing  we  are  compassed  with  so  great  a  cloud  of  witnesses... run  with 
patience." 

a  cloud]  A  classical  Greek  and  Latin,  as  well  as  Hebrew,  metaphor 
for  a  great  multitude.  Thus  Homer  speaks  of  "  a  cloud  of  foot-soldiers." 
We  have  the  same  metaphor  in  Is.  Ix.  8,  "who  are  these  who  fly  as 
clouds"  (Heb.).  Here,  as  St  Clemens  of  Alexandria  says,  the  cloud  is 
imagined  to  be  "holy  and  translucent." 

of  witnesses]  The  word  has  not  yet  fully  acquired  its  sense  of  "mar- 
tyrs." It  here  probably  means  "witnesses  to  the  sincerity  and  the 
reward  of  faith."  The  notion  that  they  are  also  witnesses  of  our 
Christian  race  lies  rather  in  the  word  -n-epiKelfxevov,  "  surrounding  us  on 
all  sides,"  like  the  witnesses  in  a  circus  or  a  theatre  (i  Cor.  iv.  9). 

let  us  lay  aside  every  weight]  Lit.,  "  stripping  off  at  once  cumbrance 
of  every  kind."  The  word  "weight  "was  used,  technically,  in  the  language 
of  athletes,  to  mean  "  superfluous  flesh,"  to  be  reduced  by  training.  The 
training  requisite  to  make  the  body  supple  and  sinewy  was  severe  and 
long-continued.  Metaphorically  the  word  comes  to  mean  "pride," 
"inflation." 


174 HEBREWS,   XII.  [v. 


the_  sin  which  doth  so  easily  beset  us,  and  let  us  run  with 
2  patience  the  race  that  is  set  before  us,  looking  unto  Jesus 
the  author  and  finisher  of  our  faith;  who  for  the  joy  that 
was  set  before  him  endured  the  cross,  despising  the  shame, 
and  is  set  down  at  the  right  hand  of  the  throne  of  God. 


and  the  sin  which  doth  so  easily  beset  ?«]  The  six  words  "which  doth 
so  easily  beset  us"  represent  one  Greek  word,  euperistatoii,  of  which 
the  meaning  is  uncertain,  because  it  occurs  nowhere  else.  It  means 
literally  "well  standing  round,"  or  "well  stood  around."  (i)  If  taken 
in  the  lat^ter  sense  it  is  interpreted  to  mean  (a)  "thronged,"  "eagerly 
encircled,"  and  so  ''much  admired"  or  "much  applauded,"  and  will 
thus  put  us^on  our  guard  against  sins  which  are  popular;  or  (/3)  "easily 
avoidable,"  with  reference  to  the  yntxh peri-istaso,  "avoid"  (2  Tim.  ii. 
16;  _Tit_.  iii.  9).  ^  The  objections  to  these  renderings  are  that  the  writer 
is  thmking  of  private  sins.  More  probably  it  is  to  be  taken  in  the  active 
sense,  as  in  the  A.V.  and  the  R.  V.  of  the  sin  which  either  (a)  "presses 
closely  about  us  to  attack  us;"  or  (/3)  which  "closely  clings  (tenaciter 
tnhacrcns,  Erasmus)  to  us"  like  an  enfolding  robe  {statos  chiton).  The 
latter  _  is  almost  certainly  the  true  meaning,  and  is  suggested  by  the 
participle  apothemenoi,  "stripping  off"  (comp.  Eph.  iv.  22).  As  an 
athlete  lays  aside  every  heavy  or  dragging  article  of  dress,  so  we  must 
strip  away  from  us  and  throw  aside  the  clinging  robe  of  familiar  sin. 
The  metaphor  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  word  apelidusastliai  (Col.  iii.  9), 
vyhich  is  the  parallel  to  apotJiestJiai  in  Eph.  iv.  22.  The  gay  garment  of 
sin  may  at  first  be  lightly  put  on  and  lightly  laid  aside,  but  it  afterwards 
becomes  like  the  fabled  shirt  of  Nessus  eating  into  the  bones  as  it  were 
fire. 

with  patience']  Endurance  [Jiupomone]  characterised  the  faith  of  all 
these  heroes  and  patriarchs,  and  he  exhorts  us  to  endure  because  Christ 
also  endured  the  cross  {hupomeinas). 

the  race  that  is  set  before  us]  One  of  the  favourite  metaphors  of  St 
Paul  (Phil.  iii.  12—14;   i  Cor.  ix.  24,  25  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  7,  8). 

2.  looking  unto  yesics]  It  is  not  possible  to  express  in  English  the 
thought  suggested  by  the  Greek  verb  aphorontes,  which  implies  that  we 
must  "look  away  (from  other  things)  unto  Jesus."  It  imphes  "the 
concentration  of  the  wandering  gaze  into  a  single  direction." 

the  autJior]  The  word  is  the  same  (apxnyov)  as  that  used  in  ii.  10. 
In  Acts  iii.  15,  v.  31  it  is  rendered  "a  Prince,"  as  in  Is.  xxx.  4  (LXX.). 
By  His  faithfulness  (iii.  2)  he  became  our  captain  and  standard-bearer 
on  the  path  of  faith. 

and  finisher]   He  leads  us  to  "  the  end  of  our  faith,"  which  is  the  sal- 
vation of  our  souls  (r  Pet.  i.  9). 
of  our  faith]     Rather,  "of  faith." 

endured  the  cross,  despising  the  shame]  Lit.,  "  endured  a  cross,  de- 
spising shame." 

is  set  down]     Rather,  "hath  sat  down"  (i.  3,  viii.  i,  x.  12). 


vv.  3—5.]  HEBREWS,   XII.  175 

For  consider  him  that  endured  such  contradiction  of  sinners  3 
against  himself,  lest  ye  be  wearied  and  faint  in  your  minds. 

Ye  have  not  yet  resisted  unto  blood,  striving  against  sin.  4 
And  ye  have  forgotten  the  exhortation  which  speaketh  unto  s 

3.  co7isidc'r'\  Lit.,  "compare  yourselves  with."  Contrast  the  com- 
parative immunity  from  anguish  of  your  lot  with  the  agony  of  His  (John 
XV.  ■20). 

that  endured... '\  Who  hath  endured  at  the  hand  of  sinners  such  op- 
position. 

such  contradiction  of  sinners  against  himself]  The  Greek  word  for 
"contradiction"  has  already  occurred  in  vi.  16,  vii.  7.  Three  uncials 
(N,  D,  E)  read  "against  themselves."  Christ  was  a  mark  for  incessant 
"contradiction," — "a  sign  which  is  spoken  against"  (Lk.  ii.  34), 

lest  ye  be  tvcaned  and  faint  in  your  7ninds\  The  correction  of  the 
R.  v.,  '■'■  thatye  wax  not  weary,  fai7iting  lit  your  sotils"  will  be  reckoned 
by  careless  and  prejudiced  readers  among  the  changes  which  they 
regard  as  meaningless.  Yet,  as  in  hundreds  of  other  instances,  it 
brings  out  much  more  fully  and  forcibly  the  exact  meaning  of  the 
original.  '•'' That  ye  wax  not  weary''''  is  substituted  for  "lest  ye  be 
weary  "  because  the  Greek  verb,  being  in  the  aorist,  suggests  a  sudden 
or  momentary  break-down  in  endurance  ;  on  the  other  hand,  "fainting" 
is  in  the  present,  and  suggests  the, i;^;Wz^«/ relaxation  of  nerve  and  energy 
which  culminates  in  the  sudden  relapse.  Lastly  the  word  in  the  original 
is  "souls,"  not  "minds."  Endurance  was  one  of  the  most  needful 
Christian  virtues  in  times  of  waiting  and  of  trial  (Gal.  vi.  9). 

4 — 13.    Fatherly  chastisements  should  be  cheerfully 

ENDURED. 

4.  Ye  have  not  yet  resisted  unto  blood  ]  If  this  be  a  metaphor  drawn 
from  pugilism,  as  the  last  is  from  "running  a  race,"  it  means  that  as  yet 
they  have  not  "had  blood  drawn."  This  would  not  be  impossible,  for 
St  Paul  adopts  pugilistic  metaphors  (i  Cor.  ix.  26,  27).  More  probably 
however  the  meaning  is  that,  severe  as  had  been  the  persecutions  which 
they  had  undergone  (x.  32,  33),  they  had  not  yet — and  perhaps  a  shade 
of  reproach  is  involved  in  the  expression — resisted  up  to  the  poittt  of 
martyrdom  (Rev.  xii.  11).  The  Church  addressed  can  scarcely  therefore 
have  been  either  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  had  before  this  time  furn- 
ished "a  great  multitude"  of  martyrs  (Tac.  Ann.  XV.  44;  Rev.  vii.  9), 
or  the  Church  of  Jerusalem,  in  which,  beside  the  martyrdoms  of  St 
Stephen,  St  James  the  elder,  and  St  James  the  Lord's  brother,  some 
had  certainly  been  put  to  death  in  the  persecution  of  Saul  (Acts  viii.  i). 

striving  against  sin']  "in  your  struggles  against  sin."  Some  from 
this  expression  give  a  more  general  meaning  to  the  clause — "You  have 
not  yet  put  forth  your  utmost  efforts  in  your  moral  warfare. " 

6.  And  ye  have  forgotte7i\  "Yet  ye  have  utterly  forgotten,"  or 
possibly  the  words  may  be  intended  interrogatively  "Yet  have  ye  utterly 
forgotten?" 


176  HEBREWS,  XII.  [vv.  6—10. 

you   as   unto   children,  My  son,  despise  not  thou  the 
chastening    of  the    Lord,  nor   faint  when  thou  art 

6  rebuked  of  him :  for  whom  the  Lord  loveth  he 
chasteneth,  and  scourgeth  every  son  whom  he  re- 

7  ceiveth.  If  ye  endure  chastening,  God  dealeth  with  you 
as  with  sons ;  for  what  son  is  he  whom  the  father  chasteneth 

8  not  ?     But  if  ye  be  without  chastisement,    whereof  all  are 

9  partakers,  then  are  ye  bastards,  and  not  sons.  Furthermore 
we  have  had  fathers  of  our  flesh  which  corrected  us,  and  we 
gave  them  reverence :  shall  we  not  much  rather  be  in  sub- 

10  jection  unto  the  Father  of  spirits,  and  Hve  ?    For  they  verily 

the  exhortation']  "the  encouragement,"  or  "strengthening  consola- 
tion." 

spcakdh]  "discourseth,"  or  "reasoneth"  {dialegctai). 

My  $071...]  The  quotation  is  from  Prov.  iii.  11,  12,  and  is  taken 
mainly  from  the  LXX.  There  is  a  very  similar  passage  in  Job  v.  17, 
and  Philo,  de  Congr.  qiiaerend.  eriidit.  g>:  (0pp.  I.  544). 

despise  not]     "Regard  not  lightly." 

the  chastening]     Rather,  "the  training." 

nor  faint...]     In  the  Hebrew  it  is  "and  loathe  not  His  correction." 

rebuked]     Rather,  "tested,"  "corrected." 

6.  for  whom  the  Lord  loveth  he  chasteneth]  This  blessedness  of 
being  "trained  by  God"  ("Blessed  is  the  man  whom  thou  chastenest  O 
Lord,  and  teachest  him  out  of  thy  law,"  Ps.  xciv.  12)  is  found  in  many 
parts  of  Scripture.  "As  many  as  I  love,  I  test  (eX^^X'^)  and  train" 
{paideuo).  Rev.  iii.  19;  Ps.  cxix.  75;  Jas.  i.  12. 

and  scourgeth  every  son  whom  he  receiveth]  The  writer  follows  the 
reading  of  the  LXX.,  by  a  slight  change  in  the  vowel-points,  for  ''even 
as  a  father  to  a  son  He  is  good  to  him." 

7.  If  ye  endure  chastening]  The  true  reading  is  not  ei,  "if,"  but 
eis,  "unto."  "It  is  for  training  that  ye  endure,"  or  better,  "Endure 
ye,  for  training,"  i.e.  "regard  your  trials  as  a  part  of  the  moral  training 
designed  for  you  by  your  Father  in  Heaven." 

what  son  is  he  whom  the  father  chasteneth  not]  The  thought,  and  its 
application  to  our  relationship  towards  God  are  also  found  in  Deut. 
viii.  5;  2  Sam.  vii.  14;  Prov.  xiii.  24.  _     _ 

8.  whereof  all  are  partakers]  He  speaks  of  God's  blessed  and  disci- 
plinary chastisement  as  a  gift  in  which  all  His  sons  have  their  share. 

9.  unto  the  Father  of  spirits]  God  might  be  called  "the  Father  of 
the  spirits,"  as  having  created  Angels  and  Spirits;  but  more  probably 
the  meaning  is  "the  Father  of  our  spirits,"  as  in  Num.  xvi.  22,  "the 
God  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh."  God  made  our  bodies  and  our  souls, 
but  our  spirits  are  in  a  yet  closer  relation  to  Him  (Job  xii.  10,  xxxii.  8, 
xxxiii.  4;  Eccl.  xii.  7 ;  Zech.  xii.  i  ;  Is.  xlii.  5,  &c.).  If  it  meant  "the 
Author  of  spiritual  gifts,"  the  expression  would  be  far-fetched  and  would 
be  no  contrast  to  "the  father  of  our  flesh."     Here  and  in  vii.  10  theo- 


vv.  II— 13-]  HEBREWS,   XII.  177 

for  a  few  days  chastened  zis  after  their  own  pleasure ;  but  he 
for  our  profit,  that  7cie  might  be  partakers  of  his  holiness. 
Now  no  chastening  for  the  present  seemeth  to  be  joyous,  n 
but  grievous  :  nevertheless  afterward  it  yieldeth  the  peace- 
able fruit  of  righteousness  unto  them  which  are  exercised 
thereby.      Wherefore    lift    up    the    hands   which  hang  12 
down,    and    the    feeble    knees;   and    make  straight  13 
paths  for  your  feet,  lest  t/iat  which  is  lame  be  turned 

logians  have  introduced  the  purely  verbal,  meaningless,  and  insoluble 
dispute  about  Creationism  and  Traducianism — i.e.  as  to  whether  God 
separately  creates  the  soul  of  each  one  of  us,  or  whether  we  derive  it 
through  our  parents  by  hereditaiy  descent  from  Adam. 

10.  after  their  oivn  plcasu7-e\  Rather,  "as  seemed  good  to  them." 
He  is  contrasting  the  brief  authority  of  parents,  and  their  liability  to 
error,  and  even  to  caprice,  with  the  pure  love  and  eternal  justice  of  God. 

11.  the  peaceable  fruit  of  righteousness]  The  original  is  expressed  in 
the  emphatic  and  oratorical  style  of  the  writer,  "but  afterwards  it 
yieldeth  a  peaceful  fruit  to  those  who  have  been  exercised  by  it — (the 
fruit)  of  righteousness."  He  means  that  though  the  sterner  aspect  of 
training  is  never  pleasurable  for  the  time  it  results  in  righteousness — in 
moral  hardihood  and  serene  self-mastery- — to  all  who  have  been  trained 
in  these  gymnasia  {■yeyvfivaaiJ.ivoLs).     See  Rom.  v.  2 — 5. 

12.  IVherefoi-e]  The  poetic  style,  and  even  the  metrical  form  of 
diction  in  these  two  verses  (of  which  ver.  13  contains  a  complete  hexa- 
meter, 

Kal  rpoxi-as  6pda.$  Troi'^craTe  rols  ivodlv  i/xuv 
and  half  an  iambic, 

IVa  /jlt]  to  xwAi;/  iKTpaTrrj), 

reflect  the  earnestness  of  the  writer,  as  he  gives  more  and  more  elabora- 
tion to  his  sentences  in  approaching  the  climax  of  his  appeal.  It  is 
most  unlikely  that  they  are  quotations  from  Hellenistic  poets,  for  the  first 
agrees  closely  with  Prov.  iv.  26  (LXX.).  On  these  accidentally  metrical 
expressions  see  my  Early  Days  of  Christianity,  i.  464,  11.  14. 

lift  up  the  hands...]  Lit.  "straighten  out  the  relaxed  hands  and  the 
palsied  knees."  Make  one  effort  to  invigorate  the  flaccid  muscles  which 
should  be  so  tense  in  the  struggle  in  which  you  are  engaged.  The  writer 
is  thinking  of  Is.  xxxv.  3 ;  Ecclus.  xxv.  28,  and  perhaps  of  the  metaphors 
of  the  race  and  the  fight  which  he  has  just  used. 

13.  lest  that  which  is  lat?ie  be  turned  out  of  the  way]  Lit.  "that  the 
lame  (i.e.  lameness)  may  not  be  quite  out  of  joint,  but  may  rather  be 
cured. "_  The  verb  ifCTfja-n-rj  may  mean  "be  turned  out  of  the  way,"  as 
in  I  Tim.  i.  6,  v.  15;  2  Tim.  iv.  4;  but  as  it  is  a  technical  term  for 
"spraining," or  "dislocation,"  it  may  have  that  meaning  here,  especially 
as  he  has  used  two  medical  terms  in  the  previous  verse,  and  has  the 
metaphor  of  "healing"  in  his  thoughts.  The  writer  may  have  met  with 
these  terms  in  ordinary  life,  or  in  his  intercourse  with  St  Luke,  with 

HEBREWS  T'? 


178  HEBREWS,   XII.  [w.  14—16. 

14  out  of  the  way;  but  let  it  rather  be  healed.     Follow  peace 
with  all  men^  and  holiness,  without  which  no  vian  shall  see 

15  the  Lord  :  looking  diligently  lest  any  man  fail  of  the  grace 
of  God  ;  lest  any  root  of  bitterness  springing  up  trouble  j)'^«, 

16  and  thereby  many  be  defiled  ;  lest  there  be  any  fornicator,  or 

whose   language   he   shews    himself   familiar   throughout   the    Epistle. 
Intercourse  with  the  beloved  physician  is  perhaps  traceable  in  some  of 
the  medical  terms  of  St  Paul's  later  Epistles  (see  Dean  Plumptre's  papers 
on  this  subject  in  the  Expositor,  :v.  134  (first  series)). 
let  it  rather  be  healed]     Is.  Ivii.  17 — 19. 

14— J.7.    Need  of  earnest  watchfulness. 

14.  Follozv peace  with  all  »iefi]  The  word  "men"  is  better  omitted, 
for  doubtless  the  writer  is  thinking  mainly  of  peace  in  the  bosom  of  the 
little  Christian  community — a  peace  which,  even  in  these  early  days, 
was  often  disturbed  by  rival  egotisms  (Rom.  xiv.  19;  2  Tim.  ii.  22). 

and  holiness]  Rather,  "and  the  sanctification"  (ix.  13,  x.  10,  29, 
xiii.  12). 

without  which]    We  have  here  in  succession  two  iambics : 
Of  X'^P'5  ovSeh  oiperaL  rbv  Kvpiov 
eTnaKOTTOvvTes  fir)  tis  vcnepQv  diro. 

15.  lest  any  man  fail  of  the  grace  of  God]  Lit.  "whether  there  be 
any  man  who  is  falling  short  of,''  or  possibly  "falling  back  from  the 
grace  of  God."  We  have  already  noticed  that  not  improbably  the  writer 
has  in  view  some  one  individual  instance  of  a  tendency  towards  apostasy, 
which  might  have  a  fatal  influence  upon  other  weary  or  wavering  brethren 
(comp.  iii.  12). 

lest  any  root  of  bitterness  springing  up  trouble  you]  The  words  "  root 
of  bitterness"  are  a  reference  to  Deut.  xxix.  18,  "a  root  that  beareth 
gall  and  wormwood,"  or,  as  in  the  margin,  "a  poisonful  herb."  Here 
the  LXX.  in  the  Vatican  MS.  has  iv  x°^V'  "in  gall,"  for  ivox^y, 
"should  trouble  you."  But  the  Alexandrian  MS.,  which  the  writer 
habitually  follows  in  his  quotations,  has  hox^V-  Some  have  supposed 
that  there  is  a  curious  allusion  to  this  verse,  and  to  the  reading  "in  gall" 
in  the  apparent  reference  to  this  Epistle  by  the  Muratorian  canon  as 
"the  Epistle  to  the  Alexandrians  current  under  the  name  of  Paul,  but 
forged  in  the  interests  of  Marcion's  heresy,"  which  adds  that  "gall 
ought  not  to  be  mixed  with  honey."  The  allusion  is,  however,  very 
doubtful. 

many  be  defiled]  Rather,  "//^^  many."  Comp.  i  Cor.  v.  6  ("a  little 
leaven");  i  Cor.  xv.  33  ("evil  communications");  Gal.  v.  9. 

16.  any  fornicator]  The  word  must  be  taken  in  a  literal  sense,  since 
Esau  was  not  "an  idolator."  It  is  true  that  Esau  is  not  charged  with 
fornication  in  the  Book  of  Genesis  (which  only  speaks  of  his  heathen 
marriages,  xxvi.  34,  xxviii.  8),  but  the  writer  is  probably  alluding  to  the 
Jewish  Hagadah,  with  which  he  was  evidently  lamiliar.  There  Esau  is 
represented  in  the  blackest  colours,  as  a  man  utterly  sensual,  intern- 


V.  17.]  HEBREWS,  XII.  179 

Y>xQi3.nQ  person,  as  Esau,  who  for  one  morsel  of  meat  sold  his 
birthright.    For  ye  know  how  that  afterward,  when  he  would  17 

perate,  and  vile,  which  is  also  the  view  of  Philo  (see  Siegfried  Philo, 
p.  254). 

or  profane  person']  A  man  of  coarse  and  unspiritual  mind  (Gen. 
XXV.  33).  Philo  explained  the  word  "hairy"  to  mean  that  he  was 
sensuous  and  lustful. 

for  one  tnorsel  of  meat]  "  for  one  meal  "  (Gen.  xxv.  29 — 34). 

17.  For  ye  know  how  that  afterward]  The  verse  runs  literally  "  for 
ye  know  that  even,  afterwards,  when  he  wished  to  inherit  the  blessing, 
he  was  rejected — for  he  found  no  opportunity  for  a  change  of  mind — 
though  with  tears  he  earnestly  sought  for  it."  It  is  clear  at  once  that  if 
the  writer  means  to  say  "that  Esau  earnestly  sought  to  repent,  but 
could  not,"  then  he  is  contradicting  the  whole  tenor  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  of  the  Gospel  teaching  with  which  he  was  so  familiar.  This  would 
not  indeed  furnish  us  with  any  excuse  for  distorting  the  meaning  of  his 
language,  if  that  meaning  be  unambiguous  ;  and  in  favour  of  such  a  view 
of  his  words  is  the  fact  that  he  repeatedly  dwells  on  the  hopelessness — 
humanly  speaking — of  all  wilful  apostasy.  On  the  other  hand,  "apos- 
tasy," when  it  desires  to  repent,  ceases  to  be  apostasy,  and  the  very 
meaning  of  the  Gospel  is  that  the  door  to  repentance  is  never  closed  by 
God,  though  the  sinner  may  close  it  against  himself.  Two  modes  "of 
interpreting  the  text  would  save  it  from  clashing  with  this  precious  truth, 
(i)  One  is  to  say  (a)  that  "room  for  repentance"  means  "  opportunity 
for  changing  his  father'' s  or  his  brothe7-''s  purpose ; "  no  subsequent  re- 
morse or  regret  could  undo  the  past  or  alter  Isaac's  blessing  (Gen.  xxvii. 
33) ;  or  (/3)  no  room  for  changing  his  own  mind  in  such  a  way  as  to 
recover  the  blessing  which  he  had  lost ;  in  other  words,  he  "  found  no 
opportunity  for  such  repentance  as  would  restore  to  him  the  lost  theocratic 
blessing."  But  in  the  N.  T.  usage  the  word  "repentance"  (^eravota)  is 
always  subjective,  and  has  a  deeper  meaning  than  in  the  LXX.  The 
same  objection  applies  to  the  explanation  that  "he  found  no  room  to 
change  (Jof/V  purpose "  to  induce  God  "to  repent"  of  His  rejection  of 
him,  since  God  "is  not  a  man  that  He  should  repent"  (Num.  xxiii.  19). 
(2)  It  seems  simpler  therefore,  and  quite  admissible,  to  regard  "for  he 
found  no  place  for  repentance"  as  a  parenthesis,  and  refer  "  it  "  to  the 
lost  blessing.  "Though  he  earnestly  sought  the  lost  blessing,  even  with 
tears,  when  (perhaps  forty  years  after  his  shameful  indifference)  he 
wished  once  more  to  inherit  it,  yet  then  he  found  no  room  for  repent- 
ance;" or  in  other  words  his  repentance,  bitter  as  it  was,  could  not 
avert  the  earthly  consequence  of  his  profanity,  and  was  unavaihng  to 
regain  what  he  had  once  flung  away.  As  far  as  his  earthly  life  was  con- 
cerned, he  heard  the  awful  words  "too  late."  The  text  gives  no  ground 
for  pronouncing  on  Esau's  future  fate,  to  which  the  writer  makes  no 
allusion  whatever.  His  "repentance,"  if  it  failed,  could  only  have  been 
a  spurious  repentance — remorse  for  earthly  foolishness,  not  godly 
sorrow  for  sin,  the  dolor  amissi,  not  the  dolor  admissi.  This  is  the  sense 
of  ^Uocus poenitentiae"  the  Latin  translation  of  roTros  fierapoias.    The 


i8o  HEBREWS,  XII.  [vv.  18—20. 

have  inherited  the  blessing,  he  was  rejected :  for  he  found 

no  place  of  repentance,  though  he  sought  it  carefully  with 

tears. 
18      For   ye  are  not  come   unto  the    mount   that  might   be 

touched,  and  that  burned  with  fire,  nor  unto  blackness,  and 
ig  darkness,  and  tempest,  and  the  sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  the 

voice  of  words ;  which  voice  they  that  heard  intreated  that 
20  the  word  should  not  be  spoken  to  them  any  more  :  (for  they 

could  not  endure  that  which  was  commanded,  And  if  so 

vnich    as   a    beast   touch   the  mountain,  it  shall  be 

phrase  itself  occurs  in  Wisd.  xii.  10.  The  abuse  of  this  passage  to  sup- 
port the  merciless  severity  of  the  Novatians  was  one  of  the  reasons 
why  the  Epistle  was  somewhat  discredited  in  the  Western  Church. 

■with  tea7-s\  "  In  fonner  days  he  might  have  had  it  without  tears  ; 
afterwards  he  was  rejected,  however  sorely  he  wept.  Let  us  use  the 
time  "  (Lk.  xiii.  28).     Bengel. 

18 — 29.     The  mercy  and  sublimity  of  the  New  Covenant  as 

CONTRASTED    WITH    THE    OlD    (i8 — 24)     ENHANCE    THE    GUILT 
AND   PERIL   OF   THE   BACKSLIDER   (^S— 29). 

18.  For  ye  are  not  cornel  At  the  close  of  his  arguments  and  exhor- 
tations the  writer  condenses  the  results  of  his  Epistle  into  a  climax  of 
magnificent  eloquence  and  force,  in  which  he  shews  the  transcendent 
beauty  and  supremacy  of  the  New  Covenant  as  compared  with  the 
terrors  and  imperfections  of  the  Old. 

iinto  the  mount  that  might  be  touched,  and  that  burned  with  fi7-e\  Un- 
less we  allow  the  textual  evidence  to  be  overruled  by  the  other  con- 
siderations, which  are  technically  called  "  paradiplomatic  evidence,"  the 
verse  should  be  rendered  "  For  ye  have  not  come  near  to  a  palpable  and 
enkindled  fire."  In  any  case  the  allusion  is  to  Ex.  xix.  i6 — 19;  Deut. 
iv.  II,  and  generally  to  "the  fiery  law." 

blackness,  and  darhiess,  and  tempest^     Deut.  iv.  11,  v.  22. 

19.  the  sound  of  a  tyumpet\     Ex.  ^ix.  16,  19,  xx.  18. 
the  voice  of  words^     Deut.  iv.  12. 

intreated^     The  verb  means  literally  "  to  beg  off." 

that  the  word  should  not  be  spoken  to  them  any  more]  Lit.  "  that  no 
word  more  should  be  added  to  them  "  (Deut.  v.  22 — 27,  xviii.  16 ;  Ex. 
XX.  19). 

20.  they  could  not  endure  that  zvhich  7vas  commanded.  And  if  so  much 
as  a  beast...]  Rather,  "they  endured  not  the  injunction,  If  even  a 
beast..."  (Ex.  xix.  12,  13).  This  injunction  seemed  to  them  to  indi- 
cate an  awful  terror  and  sanctity  in  the  environment  of  the  mountain. 
It  filled  them  with  alarm.  The  Jewish  Hagadah  said  that  at  the  utter- 
ance of  each  commandment  the  Israelites  recoiled  twelve  miles,  and 
were  only  brought  forward  again  by  the  ministering  angels.  St  Paul,  in 
different  style,  contrasts  "  the  Mount  Sinai  which  gendereth  to  bond- 


vv.  21—23.]  HEBREWS,   XII. 


stoned,  or  thrust  through  with  a  dart :  and  so  terrible 
was  the  sight,  that  Moses  said,  I  exceedingly  fear  and  quake  ;) 
but  ye  are  come  unto  mount  Sion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the  ■ 
living  God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  to  an  innumerable 
company  of  angels,  to  the  general  assembly,  and  church  of  1 

age"  with  "  the  Jerusalem  which  is  free  and  tlie  mother  of  us  all"  (Gal. 
iv.  24 — 26). 

or  thrust  thi-ough  with  a  dart]  This  clause  is  a  gloss  added  from  Ex. 
xix.  13.  Any  man  who  touched  the  mountain  was  to  be  stoned,  any 
ic'ast  to  be  transfixed  (Ex.  xix.  1 3) :  but  the  quotation  is  here  abbreviated, 
and  the  allusion  is  summary  as  in  vii.  5  ;  Acts  vii.  16. 

21.  the  sight]  "the  splendour  of  the  spectacle"  {t6  ^avra^ofievov, 
here  only  in  N.T.).  The  true  punctuation  of  the  verse  is  And — so  fear- 
ful was  the  spectacle — Moses  said... 

/  exceedijigly  fear  and  quake]  No  such  speech  of  Moses  at  Sinai  is 
recorded  in  the  Pentateuch.  The  writer  is  either  drawing  from  the 
Jewish  Hagadah  or  (by  a  mode  of  citation  not  uncommon)  is  compress- 
ing two  incidents  into  one.  For  in  Deut.  ix.  19  Moses,  after  the  apos- 
tasy of  Israel  in  worshipping  the  Golden  Calf,  said;  "I  was  afraid 
(LXX.  KoX  ^K(po^6s  ei/jLi)  of  the  anger  and  hot  displeasure  of  the  Lord," 
and  in  Acts  vii.  32  we  find  the  words  "  becoming  a-tremble"  {^urpofios 
yevo/xevos)  to  express  the  fear  of  Moses  on  seeing  the  Burning  Bush 
(though  here  also  there  is  no  mention  of  any  trembling  in  Ex.  iii.  6). 
The  tradition  of  Moses'  terror  is  found  in  Jewish  writings.  In  Shabbath 
f.  88.  2  he  explains  "Lord  of  the  Universe  I  am  afraid  lest  they  (the 
Angels)  should  consume  me  with  the  breath  of  their  mouths."  Comp. 
A/idrash  Kohcldh  f.  69.  4. 

22.  unto  mount  Sion...]  The  true  Sion  is  the  anti-type  of  all  the 
promises  with  which  the  name  had  been  connected  (Ps.  ii.  6,  xlviii.  2, 
Ixxviii.  68,  69,  cxxv.  i ;  Joel  ii.  32  ;  Mic.  iv.  7).  Hence  the  names  of 
Sion  and  "  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  "  are  given  to  "  the  city  of  the  living 
God"  (Gal.  iv.  26;  Rev.  xxi.  2).  Sinai  and  Mount  Sion  are  contrasted 
with  each  other  in  six  particulars.  Bengel  and  others  make  out  an 
elaborate  sevenfold  antithesis  here. 

to  an  innujHcrahle  company  of  angels...]  This  punctuatidn  is  sug- 
gested by  the  word  "myriads,"  which  is  often  applied  to  angels  (Deut. 
xxxiii.  2  ;  Ps.  Ixviii.  17;  Dan.  vii.  10).  But  under  the  New  Covenant 
the  Angels  are  surrounded  with  attributes,  not  of  terror  but  of  beauty 
and  goodness  (i.  14  ;  Rev.  v.  11,  12). 

23.  to  the  general  assembly]  The  word  Paneguris  means  a  general 
festive  assembly,  as  in  Cant.  vi.  13  (LXX.).  It  has  been  questioned 
whether  both  clauses  refer  to  Angels — "  To  myriads  of  Angels,  a  Festal 
Assembly,  and  Church  of  Firstborn  enrolled  in  Heaven  " — or  whether 
two  classes  of  the  Blessed  are  intended,  viz.  "To  myriads  of  Angels, 
(and)  to  a  Festal  Assembly  and  Church  of  Firstborn."  The  absence  of 
"and"  before  Paneguris  makes  this  latter  construction  doubtful,  and 
the  first  construction  is  untenable  because  the  Angels  are  never  called  in 


1 82  HEBREWS,   XII.  [v.  24. 

the  firstborn,  which  are  written  in  heaven,  and  to  God  the 

=4  Judge  of  all,  and  to  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect,  and 

to  Jesus  the  mediator  of  the  new  covenant,  and  to  the  blood 

of  sprinkling,  that  speaketh  better  things  than  that  of  kh€i. 

the  N.  T.  either  "a  Church"  (liut  see  Ps.  Ixxxix.  5)  or  "Firstborn."  On 
the  whole  the  best  and  simplest  way  of  taking  the  text  seems  to  be 
"But  ye  have  come. ..to  Myriads— a  Festal  Assembly  of  Angels — and 
to  the  Church  of  the  Firstborn... and  to  spirits  of  the  Just  who  have  been 
perfected." 

and  church  of  the  firstborn,  which  arr  7vritten  in  heaven']  Rather, 
"who  have  been  enrolled  in  heaven."  This  refers  to  the  Church  of 
living  Christians,  to  whom  the  Angels  are  "ministering  spirits,"  and 
whose  names,  though  they  are  still  living  on  earth,  have  been  enrolled 
in  the  heavenly  registers  (Lk.  x.  20;  Rom.  viii.  16,  29;  Jas.  i.  18)  as 
"a  kind  of  firstfruits  of  His  creatures"  unto  God  and  to  the  Lamb 
(Rev.  xiv.  4).  These,  like  Jacob,  have  inherited  the  privileges  of  first- 
born which  the  Jews,  like  Esau,  have  rejected. 

to  God  the  fudge  of  all]  Into  whose  hands,  rather  than  into  the 
hands  of  man,  it  is  a  blessing  to  fall,  because  He  is  "the  righteous 
Judge"  (2  Tim.  iv.  8). 

and  to  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect]  That  is,  to  saints  now 
glorified  and  perfected—  i.  e.  brought  to  the  consummation  of  their 
course — in  heaven  (Rev.  vii.  14 — 17).  This  has  been  interpreted  only 
of  the  glorified  saints  of  the  Old  Covenant,  but  there  is  no  reason  to 
confine  it  to  them.  The  writer  tells  the  Hebrews  that  they  have  come 
not  to  a  flaming  hill,  and  a  thunderous  darkness,  and  a  terror-stricken 
multitude,  but  to  Mount  Sion  and  the  Heavenly  Jerusalem,  where  they 
will  be  united  with  the  Angels  of  joy  and  mercy  (Lk.  xv.  10),  with 
the  happy  Church  of  living  Saints,  and  with  the  spirits  of  the  Just 
made  perfect.  The  three  clauses  give  us  a  beautiful  conception  of  "the 
Communion  of  the  Saints  above  and  the  Church  below"  with  myriads 
of  Angels  united  in  a  Festal  throng,  in  a  Heaven  now  ideally  existent 
and  soon  to  be  actually  realised. 

24.  the  7nediator  of  the  71C1V  covenant]  Rather,  "Mediator  of  a  New 
Covenant."  The  word  for  "new"  is  here  c^as  ("new  in  time  "),  not 
Ko-ivrp  ("fresh  in  quality"),  implying  not  only  that  it  is  "fresh"  or 
"recent,"  but  also  young  and  strong  (Matt.  xxvi.  27 — 29;  Heb.  ix.  15, 
x.  22). 

that  speaketh  belter  things  than  that  of  Abel]  The  allusion  is  ex- 
plained by  ix.  13,  x.  22,  xi.  4,  xiii.  12.  "The  blood  of  Abel  cried  for 
vengeance;  that  of  Christ  for  remission"  (Erasmus).  In  the  original 
Hebrew  it  is  (Gen.  iv.  10)  "The  voice  of  thy  brother's  bloods  crieth  from 
the  ground,"  and  this  was  explained  by  the  Rabbis  of  his  blood 
"sprinkled  on  the  trees  and  stones."  It  was  a  curious  Jewish  Hagadah 
that  the  dispute  between  Cain  and  Abel  rose  from  Cain's  denial  that 
God  was  a  Judge.  The  "sprinkling"  of  the  blood  of  Jesus,  an  expres- 
sion borrowed  from  the  blood-sprinklings  of  the  Old  Covenant  (Ex. 
xxiv.  8),  is  also  alluded  to  by  St  Peter  (i  Pet.  i.  2). 


vv.  26—27.]  HEBREWS,   XT  I.  183 

See  that  ye  refuse  not  him  that  speaketh  :  for  if  they  escaped  ^s 
not  who  refused  him  that  spake  on  earth,  much  more  shall 
not  we  escape,  if  we  turn  away  from  liim  that  speaketh  from 
heaven  :  whose  voice  then  shook  the  earth  :  but  now  he  hath  '6 
promised,  saying,  Yet  once  more  I  shake  not  the  earth 
only,  but  also  heaven.     And  this  word,  Yet  once  more,  27 
signifieth  the  removing  of  those  things  that  are  shaken,  as  of 

25.  him  that  spmketh'\  Not  Moses,  as  Chrysostom  supposed, 
but  God.  The  speaker  is  the  same  under  both  dispensations,  dif- 
ferent as  they  are.  God  spoke  alike  from  Sinai  and  from  heaven. 
The  difference  of  the  places  whence  they  spoke  involves  the  whole 
difference  of  their  tone  and  revelations.  Perhaps  the  writer  regarded 
Christ  as  the  speaker  alike  from  Sinai  as  from  Heaven,  for  even  the 
Jews  represented  the  Voice  at  Sinai  as  being  the  Voice  of  Michael,  who 
was  sometimes  identified  with  "the  Shechinah,"  or  the  Angel  of  the 
Presence.     The  verb  for  "speaketh"  is  xpviJ-°-Tl^0PTa,  as  in  viii.  5,  xi.  7. 

if  they  escaped  not'X     ii.  2,  3,  iii.  17,  x.  28,  29. 

7nuch  tnore^  On  this  proportional  method  of  statement,  characteristic 
of  the  writer,  as  also  of  Philo,  see  i.  4,  iii.  3,,  vii.  20,  viii.  6. 

26.  whose  voice  then  shook  the  earth']  Ex.  xix.  18;  Judg.  v.  4;  Ps. 
cxiv.  7. 

but  now  he  hath  promised,  saying.  Yet  once  morel  Rather,  "again, 
once  for  all."  The  quotation  is  from  Hagg.  ii.  6,  7,  "yet  once,  it  is  a 
little  while"  (comp.  Hos.  i.  4). 

but  also  heaven]  "  For  the  powers  of  the  heavens  shall  be  shaken" 
(Lk.  xxi.  26). 

27.  And  this  word,  Yet  once  more]  The  argument  on  the  phrase 
*^  Again,  yet  once  for  an,''  and  the  bringing  it  into  connexion  with  the 
former  shaking  of  the  earth  at  Sinai  resembles  the  style  of  argument  on 
the  word  "to-day"  in  iii.  7 — iv.  9;  and  on  the  word  "new"  in  viii.  13. 

the  removing...]  The  rest  of  this  verse  may  be  punctuated  "Sig- 
nifies the  removal  of  the  things  that  are  being  shaken  as  of  things 
which  have  been  made,  in  order  that  things  which  cannot  be  shaken, 
may  remain."  The  "things  unshakeable"  are  God's  heavenly  city 
and  eternal  kingdom  (Dan.  ii.  44;  Rev.  xxi.  i,  &c.).  The  material 
world — its  shadows,  symbols  and  all  that  belong  to  it — are  quivering, 
unreal,  evanescent  (Ps.  cii.  25,  26;  2  Pet.  iii.  10;  Rev.  xx.  11).  It  is 
only  the  Ideal  which  is  endowed  with  eternal  reality  (Dan.  ii.  44,  vii. 
13,  14).  This  view,  which  the  Alexandrian  theology  had  learnt  from 
the  Ethnic  Inspiration  of  Plato,  is  the  reverse  of  the  view  taken  by  ma- 
terialists and  sensualists.  They  only  believe  in  what  they  can  taste,  and 
see,  and  "grasp  with  both  hands;"  but  to  the  Christian  idealist,  who 
walks  by  faith  and  not  by  sight,  the  Unseen  is  visible  (cLs  opCcv  tov 
'ASpaTov  (xi.  27),  TO,  yap  dopara  avTod...vooviJ.eva  Kadoparai.,  Rom.  i.  20), 
and  the  Material  is  only  a  perishing  copy  of  an  Eternal  Archetype. 
The  earthquake   which   dissolves  and  annihilates  things  sensible  is 


l84  HEBREWS,   XII.  XIII.     [vv.  28,  29;  1,2. 

things  that  are  made,  that  those   things  which    cannot  be 

28  shaken   may  remain.     Wherefore   we   receiving  a  kingdom 
which  cannot  be  moved,  let  us  have  grace,  whereby  we  may 

29  serve  God  acceptably  with  reverence  and  godly  fear  :  for  our 
God  is  a  consuming  fire. 

13  Let  brotherly  love  continue.  Be  not  forgetful  to  enter- 
powerless  against  the  Things  Invisible.  The  rushing  waters  of  the 
cataract  only  shake  the  shadoiv  01"  the  pine. 

28.  IVherefore]  This  splendid  strain  of  comparison  and  warning 
ends  with  a  brief  and  solemn  appeal. 

lei  us  have  grace]     Or  "  let  us  feel  thankfulness,  whereby,  &c." 
imth  reverence  and  godly  fear]     Another  well-supported  reading  is 
ii.ir''  evXafSeias  (v.    7,   xi.    7)   Kal  S^ous  "  with  godly  caution  and  fear." 
The  word  6^os  for  "fear"  does  not  occur  elsewhere  in  the  N.T.     The 
same  particles  Kal  yap  "for  indeed"  are  used  in  iv.  2. 

29.  /or  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire\  The  reference  is  to  Deut. 
iv.  24,  and  the  special  application  ^f  the  description  to  one  set  of  cir- 
cumstances shews  that  this  is  not — like  "God  is  light"  and  "God  is 
love" — a  description  of  the  whole  character  of  God,  but  an  anthropo- 
morphic way  of  expressing  His  hatred  of  apostasy  and  idolatry.  Here 
the  reference  is  made  to  shew  why  we  ought  to  serve  God  with  holy 
reverence  and  fear. 

Ch.  XHI.     Concluding  Exhortations  to   Love   (i);    Hospitality   (2); 
Kindness  to  Prisoners  and  the  Suffering  (3);  Purity  of  Life  (4); 
Contentment    (5);      Trustfulness    (6);      Submission    to    Pastoral 
Authority  (7,   8);  Steadfastness  and   Spirituality  (9);  The   Altar, 
the  Sacrifice,   and  the  Sacrifices  of  the  Christian  (10 — 16)  ;    The 
Duty   of    Obedience    to    Spiritual    Authority    (17).     Concluding 
Notices  and  Benedictions  (18 — 25). 
We  may  notice  that  the  style  of  the  writer  in  this  chapter  offers  more 
analogies  to  that  of  St  Paul  than  in  the  rest  of  the  Epistle ;  the  reason 
being  that   these   exhortations  are  mostly  of  a  general  character,  and 
probably  formed  a  characteristic  feature  in  all  the  Christian  correspond- 
ence of  this  epoch.     They  are  almost  of  the  nature  of  theological  loci 
coinminies, 

1.  Let  brotherly  love  continue]  Not  only  was  "brotherly  love" 
{Philadelphia)  a  new  and  hitherto  almost  undreamed  of  virtue  but  it  was 
peculiarly  necessary  among  the  members  of  a  bitterly-persecuted  sect. 
Hence  all  the  Apostles  lay  constant  stress  upon  it  (Rom.  xii.  10;  i  Thess. 
iv.  9;  I  Pet.  i.  22;  I  John  iii.  14  — 18,  &c.).  It  was  a  special  form  of 
the  more  universal  "Love"  ('AYaTr??),  and  our  Lord  had  said  that  by  it 
the  world  should  recognise  that  Christians  were  His  disciples  (John 
xiii.  35).  How  entirely  this  prophecy  was  fulfilled  we  see  alike  from 
the  fervid  descriptions  of  Tertullian,  from  the  mocking  admissions  of 
Lucian  in  his  curious  and  interesting  tract  "on  the  death  of  Peregri- 
nus,"  and  from  the  remark  of  the  Emperor  Julian  {Ep.  49),  that  their 


vv.  3, 4.]  HEBREWS,   XIII.  185 

tain  strangers  :   for  thereby  some  have  entertained  angels 
unawares.     Remember  them  that  are  in  bonds,   as  bound  3 
with  them;  and  them  which  suffer  adversity,  as  being  your- 
selves also  in  the  body.     Marriage  is  honourable  in  all,  and  4 

"kindness  towards  strangers"  had  been  a  chief  means  of  propagating 
their  "atheism."  But  brotherly-love  in  the  limits  of  a  narrow  com- 
munity is  often  imperilled  by  the  self-satisfaction  of  an  egotistic  and 
dogmatic  orthodoxy,  shewing  itself  in  party  rivalries.  This  may  have 
been  the  case  among  these  Hebrews  as  among  the  Corinthians;  and  the 
neglect  by  some  of  the  gatherings  for  Christian  worship  (x.  25)  may 
have  tended  to  deepen  the  sense  of  disunion.  The  disunion  however 
was  only  incipient,  for  the  writer  has  already  borne  testimony  to  the 
kindness  which  prevailed  among  them  (vi.  10,  x.  32,  33). 

2.  to  entertain  strangers\  The  hospitality  of  Christians  (what  Ju- 
lian calls  r\  irepl  ^ivovs  (piXai'dpcoiria)  was  naturally  exercised  chiefly 
towards  the  brethren.  The  absence  of  places  of  public  entertainment 
except  in  the  larger  towns,  and  the  constant  interchange  of  letters  and 
messages  between  Christian  communities — a  happy  practice  which  also 
prevailed  among  the  Jewish  Synagogues— made  "hospitality"  a  very 
necessary  and  blessed  practice.  St  Peter  tells  Christians  to  be  hospi- 
table to  one  another  ungrudgingly,  and  unmurmuringly,  though  it  must 
sometimes  have  been  burdensome  (i  Pet.  iv.  9;  comp.  Rom.  xii.  13; 
Tit.  i.  8;  I  Tim.  iii.  2).  We  find  similar  exhortations  in  the  Talmud 
(Berachoth  f.  63.  2;  Shabbath  f.  27.  i).  Lucian  (De  Mort.  Peregr.  16) 
and  the  Emperor  Julian  (Ep.  49)  notice  the  unwonted  kindness  and 
hospitality  of  Christians. 

have  entertained  angels  unawares'\  Abraham  (Gen.  xviii.  2 — 22. 
Lot  (Gen.  xix.  i,  2).  Manoah  (Judg.  xiii.  2 — 14).  Gideon  (Judg.  vi. 
II — 20).  Our  Lord  taught  that  we  may  even  entertain  Him — the 
King  of  Angels — unawares.  "I  was  a  stranger,  and  ye  took  Me  in" 
(Matt.  xxv.  35 — 40).  There  is  an  allusion  to  this  "  entertaining  of 
angels"  in  Philo,  De  Ahrahaino  (Opp.  II.  17).  The  classic  verb  rendered 
"unawares"  (elatkon)  is  not  found  elsewhere  in  the  N.T.  in  this  sense, 
and  forms  a  happy  paronomasia  with  "forget  not." 

3.  Remember  them  that  are  in  bonds']     Comp.  Col.  iv.  18. 

as  bound  with  them]  Lit.,  "as  having  been  bound  with  them."  In 
the  perfectness  of  sympathy  their  bonds  are  your  bonds  (i  Cor.  xii.  26), 
for  you  and  they  alike  are  Christ's  Slaves  (i  Cor.  vii.  22)  and  Christ's 
Captives  (2  Cor.  ii.  14  in  the  Greek).  Lucian's  tract  (referred  to  in 
the  previous  note)  dwells  on  the  effusive  kindness  of  Christians  to  their 
brethren  who  were  imprisoned  as  confessors. 

as  being  yourselves  also  in  the  body\  And  therefore  as  being  your- 
selves liable  to  similar  maltreatment.  "In  the  body"  does  not  mean 
"in  the  body  of  the  Church,"  but  "human  beings,  born  to  suffer." 
You  must  therefore  "weep  with  them  that  weep"  (Rom.  xii.  15).  The 
expressions  of  the  verse  {KaKovxav/jL^fuv,  cis  Kal  avroi  6vTes  iv  (rw/mari 
read  like  a  reminiscence  of  Philo  (De  Spec.  Legg.  §  30)  who  says  w^  ii> 
rots  eripwv  <rujxa(nv  avrol  KUKOvfiepoi  "as  being  yourselves  also  afflicted 


1 86  HEBREWS,  XIII.  [v.  5. 

the  bed  undefiled  :  but  whoremongers  and  adulterers  God 

5  will  judge.     Let  your  conversation  be  without  covetousness  ; 

and  be  content  with  such  things  as  ye  have  :  for  he  hath 

in  the  bodies  of  others ;"  but  if  so  the  reminiscence  is  only  verbal,  and 
the  application  more  simple.  Incidentally  the  verse  shews  how  much 
the  Christians  of  that  day  were  called  upon  to  endure. 

4.  Marriage  is  honourable  in  air\  More  probably  this  is  an  exhor- 
tation, "  Let  marriage  be  held  honourable  among  all,"  or  rather 
"in  all  respects,"  as  in  ver.  18.  Scripture  never  gives  even  the  most 
incidental  sanction  to  the  exaltation  of  celibacy  as  a  superior  virtue,  or 
to  the  disparagement  of  marriage  as  an  inferior  state.  Celibacy  and 
marriage  stand  on  an  exactly  equal  level  of  honour  according  as  God 
has  called  us  to  the  one  or  the  other  state.  The  mediseval  glorification 
of  Monachism  sprang  partly  from  a  religion  of  exaggerated  gloom  and 
terror,  and  partly  from  a  complete  misunderstanding  of  the  sense 
applied  by  Jewish  writers  to  the  word  "  Virgins."  Nothing  can  be 
clearer  than  the  teaching  on  this  subject  alike  of  the  Old  (Gen.  ii.  18, 
24)  and  of  the  New  Covenant  (Matt.  xix.  4 — 6;  John  ii.  i,  2;  i  Cor. 
vii.  2).  There  is  no  "  forbidding  to  marry"  (i  Tim.  iv.  i — -3)  among 
Evangelists  and  Apostles.  They  shared  the  deep  conviction  which 
their  nation  had  founded  on  Gen.  i.  27,  ii.  18 — 24  and  which  our  Lord 
had  sanctioned  (Matt.  xix.  4 — 6).  The  warning  in  this  verse  is  against 
unchastity.  If  it  be  aimed  against  a  tendency  to  disparage  the  married 
state  it  would  shew  that  the  writer  is  addressing  some  Hebrews  who 
had  adopted  in  this  matter  the  prejudices  of  the  Essenes  (i  Tim.  iv.  3). 
In  any  case  the  tnith  remains  ^^ Honourable  is  marriage  in  all;"  it  is 
only  lawless  passions  which  are  ''passions  of  dishonour"  (Rom.  i.  26). 

and  the  bed  tindefiled\  A  warning  to  Antinomians  who  made  light  of 
unchastity  (Acts  xv.  20;  i  Thess.  iv.  6). 

whoreniongers'\  Christianity  introduced  a  wholly  new  conception 
regarding  the  sin  of  fornication  (Gal.  v.  19,  21;  i  Cor.  vi.  9,  10;  Eph. 
v.  5;  Col.  iii.  5,  6;  Rev.  xxii.  15)  which,  especially  in  the  depraved 
decadence  of  Heathenism  under  the  Empire,  was  hardly  regarded  as 
any  sin  at  all.  Hence  the  necessity  for  constantly  raising  a  warning 
voice  against  it  (i  Thess.  iv.  6,  &c. ). 

God  will  jiidge\  The  more  because  they  often  escape  altogether  the 
judgment  of  man  (i  Sam.  ii.  25;  2  Sam.  iii.  39). 

5.  your  conversation^  The  word  here  used  is  not  the  one  generally 
rendered  by  "conversation"  in  the  N.T.  {anastrophe  as  in  ver.  7, 
'■general  walk"  Gal.  i.  13;  Eph.  ii.  3,  or  ("citizenship"  politeiima, 
as  in  Phil.  i.  27,  iii.  20),  but  "turn  of  mind"  {tropos). 

without  covetousness'\  Aphilarguros  not  merely  without  covetousness 
{pleonexia)  but  "without  love  of  money."  It  is  remarkable  that 
"covetousness"  and  "  uncleanness"  are  constantly  placed  in  juxta- 
position in  the  N.T.  (i  Cor.  v.  10,  vi.  9;  Eph.  v.  3,  5;  Col.  iii.  5). 

be  content]  The  form  of  the  sentence  "  Let  your  turn  of  mind  be 
without  love  of  money,  being  content"  is  the  same  as  "Let  love  be 
without  pretence,  hating"  in  Rom.  xii.  9.     Tlie  few  marked  similarities 


vv.  6— 8.]  HEBREWS,   XIII.  187 

said,  I  will  never  leave  thee,  nor  forsake  thee.     So  6 
that  we  may  boldly  say.  The  Lord  is  my  helper,  and 
1    will    not    fear  what   man   shall  do  unto  me.     Re- 7 
member  them  which  have  the  rule  over  you,   who   have 
spoken  unto  you  the  word  of  God  :  whose  faith  follow,  con- 
sidering the   end   of  their  conversation.     Jesus   Christ  the  s 

between  this  writer  and  St  Paul  only  force  the  radical  dissimilarity 
between  their  styles  into  greater  prominence;  and  as  the  writer  had 
almost  certainly  read  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  a  striking  syntactical 
peculiarity  like  this  may  well  have  lingered  in  his  memory. 

he  hath  said^  More  literally  "  Himself  hath  said."  The  "Himself" 
of  coxirse  refers  to  God,  and  the  phrase  of  citation  is  common  in  the 
Rabbis  ("IIDX  Xin).  "He"  and  "I"  are,  as  Delitzsch  says,  used  by 
the  Rabbis  as  mystical  names  of  God. 

/  zvill  never  leave  thee,  noj-  forsake  thee"]  These  words  are  found  (in 
the  third  person)  in  Deut.  xxxi.  6,  8;  i  Chron.  xxviii.  20,  and  similar 
promises,  in  the  first  person,  in  Gen.  xxviii.  15;  Josh.  i.  5;  Is.  xli.  17. 
The  very  emphatic  form  of  the  citation  (first  with  a  double  then  with  a 
triple  negation)  "  I  will  in  no  wise  fail,  neither  will  I  ever  in  any  wise 
forsake  thee"  does  not  occur  either  in  the  Hebrew  or  the  LXX.,  but  it 
is  found  in  the  very  same  words  in  Philo  [De  Confiis.  Ling.  §  32),  and 
since  we  have  had  occasion  to  notice  again  and  again  the  thorough 
familiarity  of  the  writer  with  Philo's  works,  it  is  probable  that  he 
derived  it  Irom  Philo,  unless  it  existed  in  some  proverbial  or  liturgical 
form  among  the  Jews.  The  triple  negative  ou5'  ov  [jltj  is  found  in  Matt, 
xxiv.  21. 

6.  we  may  boldly  say]     Rather,  "we  boldly  say." 
The  Lord  is  my  helper]     Ps.  cxviii.  6. 

L ivill  7iot fear  what  mati...]  Rather,  "I  will  not  fear.  What  shall 
man  do  unto  me?" 

7.  them  which  have  the  rule  over  yotc,  who  have  spoken]  Rather, 
"your  leaders,  who  spoke  to  you;"  for,  as  the  next  clause  shews,  these 
spiritual  leaders  were  dead.  At  this  time  the  ecclesiastical  organisation 
was  still  unfixed.  The  vague  term  "leaders"  (found  also  in  Acts  xv.  22), 
like  the  phrase  "those  set  over  you"  (proistamenoi,  1  Thess.  v.  12) 
means  "bishops"  and  "presbyters,"  the  two  terms  being,  in  the  Apo- 
stolic age,  practically  identical.  In  later  ecclesiastical  Greek  this  word 
{■r]yovij.€voi.)  was  used  for  "Abbots." 

whose  faith  follow,  considering  the  end  of  their  conversation]  In  the 
emphatic  order  of  the  original,  "and  earnestly  contemplating  the  issue 
of  their  conversation,  imitate  their  faith." 

the  end]  Not  the  ordinary  word  for  "end"  {telos)  but  the  vei-y 
unusual  word  ekbasin,  "outcome."  This  word  in  the  N.T.  is  found 
only  in  i  Cor.  x.  13,  where  it  is  rendered  "escape."  In  Wisd.  ii.  17 
we  find,  "Let  us  see  if  his  words  be  true,  and  let  us  see  what  shall 
happen  at  his  end"  {kv  eK^daei).  It  here  seems  to  mean  death,  but 
not  necessarily  a  death  by  martyrdom.     It   merely   means  "imitate 


i88  HEBREWS,   XIII.  [v.  9. 

9  same  yesterday,  and  to  day,  and  for  ever.  Be  not  carried 
about  with  divers  and  strange  doctrines.  For  it  is  a  good 
thing  that  the  heart  be  estabhshed  with  grace ;  not  with 
meats,  which  have  not  profited  them  that  have  been  occu- 

Ihem,  by  being  faithful  unto  death."  The  words  exodos,  "departure" 
(Lk.  ix.  31  ;  2  Pet.  i.  15)  and  aphixis  (Acts  xx.  29)  are  similar  eu- 
phemisms for  death. 

8.  Jesiis  Christ  the  sa7Jie\  R.ither,  "is  the  same"  (comp.  i.  12).  The 
collocation  "Jesus  Christ"  is  in  this  Epistle  only  found  elsewhere  in 
ver.  21  and  x.  10.  He  commonly  says  "Jesus"  in  the  true  reading 
(ii.  9,  iii.  I,  vi.  20,  &c.)  or  "Christ"  (iii.  6,  14,  v.  5,  &c.).  He  also  has 
"the  Lord"  (ii.  3),  "our  Lord"  (vii.  14),  and  "our  Lord  Jesus"  (xiii. 
20).  "Christ  Jesus,"  which  is  so  common  in  St  Paul,  only  occurs  as 
a  very  dubious  various  reading  in  iii.  i. 

yesterday,  and  to  day,  and  for  ever]  See  vii.  24.  The  order  of  the 
Greek  is  "yesterday  and  to-day  the  same,  and  to  the  ages."  See  i.  12; 
Mai.  iii.  6;  Jas.  i.  17.  The  unchangeableness  of  Christ  is  a  reason 
for  not  being  swept  about  by  winds  of  strange  teaching. 

9.  £e  7iot  carried  about...]  Lit.  "With  teachings  various  and  strange 
be  ye  not  swept  away."  From  the  allusion  to  various  kinds  of  food 
which  immediately  follows  we  infer  that  these  "teachings"  were  not 
like  the  Gnostic  speculations  against  which  St  Paul  and  St  John  had  to 
raise  a  warning  voice  (Eph.  iv.  14;  Col.  ii.  8;  i  John  iv.  i),  but  the 
minutiae  of  the  Jewish  Halachah  with  its  endless  refinements  upon,  and 
inferences  from,  the  letter  of  the  Law.  This  is  the  sort  of  teaching  of 
which  the  Talmud  is  full,  and  most  of  it  has  no  real  connection  with 
true  Mosaism. 

it  is  a  good]  "a  beautiful,  or  excellent  thing"  {kaloii). 

with  grace]  By  the  favour  or  mercy  of  God  as  a  pledge  of  our  real  se- 
curity. 

not  with  meats]  Not  by  minute  and  pedantic  distinctions  between 
various  kinds  of  clean  and  unclean  food  (ix.  10).  The  word  bromata, 
"  kinds  of  food,"  was  never  applied  to  sacrifices.  On  the  urgency  of  the 
question  of  "meats"  to  the  Early  Christians  see  my  Z?/^  of  St  Paul, 
I.  264. 

which  have  not  profited  them  that  have  been  occupied  therei7i]  These 
outward  rules  were  of  no  real  advantage  to  the  Jews  under  the  Law.  As 
Christianity  extended  the  Rabbis  gave  a  more  and  more  hostile  elabora- 
tion and  significance  to  the  Halachoth,  which  decided  about  the  degrees 
of  uncleanness  in  different  kinds  of  food,  as  though  salvation  itself  de- 
pended on  the  scrupulosities  and  micrologics  of  Rabbinism.  The  reader 
will  find  some  illustrations  of  these  remarks  in  my  Life  of  St  Paul,  I.  264. 
The  importance  of  these  or  analogous  questions  to  the  early  Jewish 
Christians  may  be  estimated  by  the  allusions  of  St  Paul  (Rom.  xiv. ; 
Col.  ii.  16 — 23;  1  Tim.  iv.  3,  &c.).  No  doubt  these  warnings  were 
necessary  because  the  Jewish  Christians  were  liable  to  the  taunt  "You 
are  breaking  the  law  of  Moses;  you  are  living  Gentile-fashion  (edviKus) 
not  Jewish- wise  (' lonSatKws) ;  you  neglect  the  Kashar  (rules  which  regu- 


V.  lo.]  HEBREWS,   XIII,  189- 

pied  therein.     We  have  an  altar,  whereof  they  have  no  right  lo 

late  the  slaughter  of  clean  and  unclean  animals,  which  the  Jews  scrupu- 
lously observe  to  this  day) ;  you  feed  with  those  who  are  polluted  by 
habitually  eating  swines'  flesh.'  These  were  appeals  to  "  the  eternal 
Pharisaism  of  the  human  heart,"  and  the  intensity  of  Jewish  feeling  re- 
specting them  would  have  been  renewed  by  the  conversions  to  Christi- 
anity. The  writer  therefore  reminds  the  Hebrews  that  these  distinc- 
tions involve  no  real  advantage  (vii.  18,  19). 

10 — 16.     The  One  Sacrifice  of  the  Christian,  and  the  sacri- 
fices WHICH  HE  MUST  OFFER. 

10.  JFe  have  an  altat-]  These  seven  verses  form  a  little  episode  of 
argument  in  the  midst  of  moral  exhortations.  They  revert  once  more 
to  the  main  subject  of  the  Epistle — the  contrast  between  the  two  dis- 
pensations. The  connecting  link  in  the  thought  of  the  writer  is  to  be 
found  in  the  Jewish  boasts  to  which  he  has  just  referred  in  the  word 
"meats."  Besides  trying  to  alarm  the  Christians  by  denunciations 
founded  on  their  indifference  to  the  Levitical  Law  and  the  oral  traditions 
based  upon  it,  the  Jews  would  doubtless  taunt  them  with  their  inability 
henceforth  to  share  in  eating  the  sacrifices  (i  Cor.  ix.  13)  since  they 
were  all  under  the  ChereDi — the  ban  of  Jewish  excommunication.  The 
writer  meets  the  taunt  by  pointing  out  (in  an  allusive  manner)  that  of 
the  most  solemn  sacrifices  in  the  whole  Jewish  year — and  of  those 
offered  on  the  Day  of  Atonement — not  even  the  Priests,  not  even  the 
High  Priest  himself,  could  partake  (Lev.  vi.  12,  23,  30,  xvi.  27).  But  of 
our  Sacrifice,  which  is  Christ,  and  from  (e^)  our  Allar,  which  is  the  Cross 
— on  which,  as  on  an  Altar,  our  Lord  was  offered — we  may  eat.  The 
"Altar"  is  here  understood  of  the  Cross,  not  only  by  Bleek  and  De 
Wette,  but  even  by  St  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Eistius;  but  the  mere  figure 
implied  by  the  "altar"  is  so  subordinate  to  that  of  our  participation  in 
spiritual  privileges  that  if  it  be  regarded  as  an  objection  that  the  Cross 
was  looked  on  by  Jews  as  "the  accursed  tree,"  we  may  adopt  the  alter- 
native view  suggested  by  Thomas  Aquinas — that  the  Altar  means  Christ 
Himself.  To  eat  from  it  will  then  be  "to  partake  of  the  fruit  of  Christ's 
Passion."  So  too  Cyril  says,  "  He  is  Himself  the  Altar. "  We  there- 
fore have  loftier  privileges  than  they  who  "serve  the  tabernacle."  The 
other  incidental  expressions  will  be  illustrated  as  we  proceed;  but,  mean- 
while, we  may  observe  that  the  word  "Altar"  is  altogether  subordinate 
and  (so  to  speak)  "out  of  the  Figure."  There  is  no  reference  whatever  to 
the  material ' '  table  of  the  Lord, "  and  only  a  very  indirect  reference  (if  any) 
to  the  Lord's  Supper.  Nothing  can  prove  more  strikingly  and  conclusively 
the  writer's  total  freedom  from  any  conceptions  resembling  those  of  the 
"sacrifice  of  the  mass"  than  the  fact  that  here  he  speaks  of  our  sacrifices 
as  being  "the  bullocks  of  our  lips."  The  Christian  Priest  is  only  a 
Presbyter,  not  a  Sacrificing  Priest.  He  is  only  a  Sacrificing  Priest  in 
exactly  the  same  sense  as  every  Christian  is  metaphorically  so  called, 
because  alike  Presbyter  and  people  offer  ^'■spiritual  sacrifices,"  which 


I90  HEBREWS,   XIII.  [w.  ii— 14. 

11  to  eat  which  serve  the  tabernacle.     For  the  bodies  of  those 
beasts,   whose  blood  is  brought  into  the  sanctuary  by  the 

12  high  priest  for  sin,  are  burnt  without  the  camp.     Wherefore 
Jesus  also,  that  he  might  sanctify  the  people  with  his  own 

,3  blood,  suffered  without  the  gate.     Let  us  go  forth  therefore 
i^  unto  him  without  the  camp,  bearing  his  reproach.    For  here 

are  alone  acceptable  to  God  through  Jesus  Christ  (r  Pet.  ii.  5).  The 
main  point  is  "we  too  have  one  great  sacrifice,"  and  we  (unlike  the 
Jews,  as  regards  their  chief  sacrifice,  Lev.  iv.  12,  vi.  30,  xvi.  27)  may 
perpetually  partake  of  it,  and  live  by  it  (John  vi.  ^i — 56).  We  live 
not  on  anything  material,  which  profiteth  nothing,  but  on  the  words 
of  Christ,  which  are  spirit  and  truth ;  and  we  feed  on  Him — a  symbol 
of  the  close  communion  whereby  we  are  one  with  Him — only  in  a 
heavenly  and  spiritual  manner. 

whereoJ'\     Lit.  "from  which." 

tJiey  have  tio  right  to  eat]  Because  they  utterly  reject  Him  whose 
flesh  is  meat  indeed  and  whose  blood  is  drink  indeed  (John  vi.  54,  55). 
Forbidden  to  eat  of  the  type  (see  ver.  1 1 )  they  could  not  of  course,  in 
any  sense,  partake  of  the  antitype  which  they  rejected. 

zvhich  serve  the  tabernacle]  See  viii.  5.  It  is  remarkable  that  not 
even  here,  though  the  participle  is  in  the  present  tense,  does  he  use  the 
word  "Temple"  or  "Shrine"  any  more  than  he  does  throughout  the 
whole  Epistle.  There  may,  as  Bengel  says,  be  a  slight  irony  in  the 
phrase  "who  sa-ve  the  Tabernacle"  rather  than  "  in  the  Tabernacle.'''' 

H.  are  burnt  without  the  camp]  Of  the  sin-offerings  the  Priests 
could  not,  as  in  the  case  of  other  offerings,  eat  the  entire  flesh,  or  the 
breast  and  shoulder,  or  all  except  the  fat  (Num.  vi.  20;  Lev.  vi.  26, 
&c.).  The  word  for  "burn"  [saraph)  means  "entirely  to  get  rid  of," 
and  is  not  the  word  used  for  burning  upon  the  altar.  The  rule  that 
these  sin-offerings  should  be  burned,  not  eaten,  was  stringent  (Lev.  vi. 
30,  xvi.  27). 

■  12.  that  he  might  sanctify  the  people  with  his  own  blood]  Lit. 
"through,"  or  "by  means  of  His  own  blood."  The  thought  is  the 
same  as  that  of  Tit.  ii.  14,  "Who  gave  Himself  for  us  that  He  might 
redeem  us  from  all  iniquity,  and  purify  unto  Himself  a  peculiar  people." 
This  sanctification  or  purifying  consecration  of  His  people  by  the  blood 
of  His  own  voluntary  sacrifice  corresponds  to  the  sprinkling  of  the 
atoning  blood  on  the  Propitiatory  by  the  High  Priest.  For  "the 
people,"  see  ii.  16. 

suffered  without  the  gate]     ix.  26;  INLatt.  xxvii.  32;  John  xix.  17,  18. 

13.  Let  us  go  forth  therefore  unto  him]  Let  us  go  forth  out  of  the 
city  and  camp  of  Judaism  (Rev.  xi.  8)  to  the  true  and  eternal  Tabernacle 
(Ex.  xxxiii.  7,  8)  where  He  now  is  (xii.  2).  Some  have  imagined  that 
the  writer  conveys  a  hint  to  the  Christians  in  Jerusalem  that  it  is  time 
for  them  to  leave  the  guilty  city  and  retire  to  Pella;  but,  as  we  have 
seen,  it  is  by  no  means  probable  that  the  letter  was  addressed  to  Jerusalem. 

bearing  his  reproach]     "If  ye  be  reproached,"  says  St  Peter,  "for  the 


vv.  IS— 17.]  HEBREWS,   XIII.  191 

have  we  no  continuing  city,  but  we  seek  one  to  come.     By  is 
him  therefore  let  us  offer  the  sacrifice  of  praise  to  God  con- 
tinually,   that  is,  the  fruit  of  our  lips  giving  thanks  to  his 
name.     But  to  do  good  and  to  communicate  forget  not :  for  16 
with  such  sacrifices  God  is  well  pleased.     Obey  them  that  17 

name  of  Christ,  happy  are  ye  "  (comp.  xi.  26).  As  He  was  excom- 
municated and  insulted  and  made  to  bear  His  Cross  of  shame,  so  will 
you  be,  and  you  must  follow  Him  out  of  the  doomed  city  (Matt.  xxiv.  2). 
It  must  be  remembered  that  the  Cross,  an  object  of  execration  and 
disgust  even  to  Gentiles,  was  viewed  by  the  Jews  with  religiozis  horror, 
since  they  regarded  every  crucified  person  as  "accursed  of  God"  (Deut. 
xxi.  22,  23;  Gal.  iii.  13  ;  see  n\y  Life  of  St  Paid,  II.  17,  148).  Christians 
shared  this  reproach  to  the  fullest  extent.  The  most  polished  heathen 
writers,  men  like  Tacitus,  Pliny,  Suetonius,  spoke  of  their  faith  as  an 
"execrable,"  "deadly,"  and  "malefic"  superstition;  Lucian  alluded  to 
Christ  as  "the  impaled  sophist;"  and  to  many  Greeks  and  Romans  no 
language  of  scorn  seemed  too  intense,  no  calumny  too  infamous,  to  de- 
scribe them  and  their  mode  of  worship.  The  Jews  spoke  of  them  as 
"Nazarenes,"  "Epicureans,"  "heretics,"  "followers  of  the  thing,"  and 
especially  "apostates,"  "traitors,"  and  "renegades."  The  notion  that 
there  is  any  allusion  to  the  ceremonial  uncleanness  of  those  who  burnt 
the  bodies  of  the  offerings  of  the  Day  of  Atonement  "  outside  the  camp  " 
is  far-fetched. 

14.  one  to  come\  Rather,  "the  city  which  is  to  be"  (xi.  10,  16). 
Our  earthly  city  here  may  be  destroyed,  and  we  may  be  driven  from  it, 
or  leave  it  of  our  own  accord;  this  is  nothing, — for  our  real  citizenship 
is  in  heaven  (Phil.  iii.  20). 

15.  the  sac7-ifice  of  praise\  A  thanksgiving  (Jer.  xvii.  26;  Lev.  vii.  12), 
not  in  the  form  of  an  offering,  but  something  which  shall  "please  the 
Lord  better  than  a  bullock  which  hath  horns  and  hoofs"  (Ps.  Ixix.  31). 

continually]  Even  the  Rabbis  held  that  the  sacrifice  of  praise  would 
outlast  animal  sacrifices  and  would  never  cease. 

the  fruit  of  our  lips  giving  thanks  to  his  name]  Rather,  "the  fruit  of 
lips  which  confess  to  His  name."  The  phrase  "the  fruit  of  the  lips"  is 
borrowed  by  the  LXX.  from  Is.  Ivii.  19.  In  Hos.  xiv.  2  we  have  "so 
will  we  render  the  calves  of  our  lips,"  literally,  "our  lips  as  bullocks," 
i.e.  "as  thank-offerings."  Dr  Kay  notices  that  (besides  the  perhaps 
accidental  resemblance  between  *~IS,  peri,  "fruit"  and  D"'"1Q,  parim, 
"calves")  karpoma  and  similar  words  were  used  of  burnt-offerings. 

16.  to  coininunicate]  To  share  your  goods  with  others  (Rom.xv.  26). 
The  substantive  from  this  verb  is  rendered  "distribution"  in  2  Cor. 
ix.  13. 

with  such  sacrifices]  The  verse  is  meant  to  remind  them  that  sacri- 
fices of  well-doing  and  the  free  sharing  ot  their  goods  are  even  more 
necessary  than  verbal  gratitude  unaccompanied  by  sincerity  of  action 
(Is.  xxix.  13;  Ezek.  xxxiii.  31). 

17.  them  that  have  the  rule  over  yoii\  See  ver.  7.  The  repetition 
01  the  injunction  perhaps  indicates  a  tendency  to  self-assertion  and 


192  HEBREWS,   XIII.  [w.  18—20. 

have  the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  yourselves  :  for  they 

watch  for  your  souls,  as  they  that  must  give  account,  that 

they  may  do  it  with  joy,  and  not  with  grief:  for  that  zs  un- 

'3  profitable  for  you.     Pray  for  us  :  for  we  trust  we  have  a  good 

19  conscience,  in  all  things  willing  to  live  honestly.  But  I  be- 
seech yoti  the  rather  to  do  this,  that  I  may  be  restored  to 
you  the  sooner. 

20  Now  the  God  of  peace,  that  brought  again  from  the  dead 
our  Lord  Jesus,  that  great  shepherd  of  the  sheep,  through 

spurious  independence  among  them.  "Bishops"  in  the  modern  sense 
did  not  as  yet  exist,  but  in  the  importance  here  attached  to  due  subor- 
dination to  ecclesiastical  authority  we  see  the  gradual  growth  of  epi- 
scopal powers.     See  i  Thess.  v.  12,  13;  i  Tim.  v.  17. 

they  watch}     Lit.  "are  sleepless." 

that  ntiist give  accounti     See  Acts  xx.  26,  28. 

with  Joy']     See  i  Thess.  ii.  19,  20. 

with  grief  1     Lit.  "groaning." 

tinprofitable\  A  litotes — i.e.  a  mild  expression  purposely  used  that  the 
reader  may  correct  it  by  a  stronger  one — for  "disadvantageous." 

18.  Pray  for  iis\  A  frequent  and  natural  request  in  Christian  corre- 
spondence (i  Thess.  V.  25;  2  Thess.  iii.  i ;  Rom.  xv.  30  ;  Eph.  vi.  18; 
Col.  iv.  3).  The  "us"  probably  means  "me  and  those  with  me," shewing 
that  the  name  of  the  writer  was  well  known  to  those  addressed. 

we  trusty     Rather,  "we  are  persuaded." 

we  have  a  good  consciettce]  The  writer,  being  one  of  the  Paulinists, 
whose  freedom  was  so  bitterly  misinterpreted,  finds  it  as  necessary  as 
St  Paul  had  done,  to  add  this  profession  of  conscientious  sincerity 
(Acts  xxiii.  I,  xxiv.  16;  i  Cor.  iv.  4  ;  2  Cor.  i.  12).  These  resemblances 
to  St  Paul's  method  of  concluding  his  letters  are  only  of  a  general  cha- 
racter, and  we  have  reason  to  suppose  that  to  a  certain  extent  the  be- 
ginnings and  endings  of  Christian  letters  had  assumed  a  recognised 
form. 

willing]    i.e.  "desiring,"  "determining." 

honestly]     Honourably. 

19.  that  I  may  be  restored  to  you  the  sooner]  So  St  Paul  in  Philem. 
22.  We  are  unable  to  conjecture  the  circumstances  which  for  the 
present  prevented  the  writer  from  visiting  them.  It  is  clear  from  the 
word  "restored"  that  he  must  once  have  lived  among  them. 

20.  the  God  of  peace.  The  phrase  is  frequent  in  St  Paul  (i  Thess. 
V.  23:  2  Thess.  iii.  16;  Rom.  xv.  33,  xvi.  20;  Phil.  iv.  9). 

that  brought  again  frofn  the  dead]  Amorig  many  allusions  to  the 
Ascension  and  Glorification  of  Christ  this  is  the  only  direct  allusion  in 
the  Epistle  to  His  Resurrection  (but  comp.  vi.  2,  xi.  35).  The  verb 
di'j77a7ei' may  be  "raised  again"rather  than  "brought  up,"  though  there 
may  be  a  reminiscence  of  "the  shepherd"  (Moses)  who  "brought  up" 
his  people  from  the  sea  in  Is.  Ixiii.  11. 


vv.  21—23.]  HEBREWS,   XIII.  193 

the  blood  of  the  everlasting  covenant,  make  you  perfect  in  ai 
every  good  work  to  do  his  will,  working  in  you  that  which  is 
well  pleasing  in  his  sight,  through  Jesus  Christ  ;  to  whom  he 
glory  for  ever  and  ever.      Amen.      And   I    beseech   you,  22 
brethren,  suffer  the  word  of  exhortation :  for  I  have  written 
a  letter  unto  you  in  few  words.     Know  ye  that  our  l)rother  23 
Timothy  is  set  at  liberty ;  with  whom,  if  he  come  shortly,  I 

through  the  blood  of  the  everlasting  covenant^  Rather,  "by  virtue  of 
(lit.  "in")  the  blood  of  an  eternal  covenant."  The  expression  finds  its 
full  explanation  in  ix.  15 — 18.  Otiiers  connect  it  with  "the  Great 
Shepherd."  He  became  the  Great  Shepherd  by  means  of  His  blood. 
So  in  Acts  XX.  28  we  have  "to  shepherd  the  Church  of  God,  which  He 
purchased  for  Himself  by  means  of  His  own  blood."  A  similar  phrase 
occurs  in  Zech.  ix.  11,  "By  (or  "  because  of")  the  blood  of  thy  covenant 
I  have  sent  forth  thy  prisoners  out  of  the  pit." 

21.  make  you  pcrfcct'\  Not  the  verb  so  often  used  to  express  "per- 
fecting" but  another  verb — "may  He  fit"  or  "stablish"  or  "equip 
you." 

to  do  his  will,  working  in  you...],  In  the  Greek  there  is  a  play  on  the 
words  "to  do  His  will,  doing  in  you."  There  is  a  similar  play  on  words 
in  Phil.  ii.  13. 

to  zvhom  be  glory  for  ever  and  ever'\  Lit.  ' '  to  whom  be  the  glory 
(which  is  His  of  right)  unto  the  ages  of  the  ages."  The  same  formula 
occurs  in  Gal.  i.  5  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  18.  The  doxology  may  be  addressed  to 
Christ  as  in  2  Pet.  iii.  18. 

22.  suffer  the  word  of  exhortation']  "  Bear  with  the  word  of  my 
exhortation."  Comp.  Acts  xiii.  15.  This  is  a  courteous  apology  for  the 
tone  of  severity  and  authority  which  he  has  assumed. 

for]  "  for  indeed,"  as  in  xii.  29. 

/  have  written  a  letter]  This  is  the  only  place  in  the  N.  T.  (except 
Acts  XV.  20,  xxi.  25)  where  epistello  has  this  sense.  Usually  it  means 
"I  enjoin." 

in  few  words]  "briefly,"  considering  the  breadth  and  dignity  of  the 
subject,  which  has  left  him  no  room  for  lengthened  apologies,  and  for 
anything  but  a  direct  and  compressed  appeal.  Or  the  force  of  the  words 
may  be  "  bear  with  my  exhortation,  for  I  have  not  troubled  you  at  any 
great  length"  (comp.  5t'  oXLyuv,  i  Pet.  v.  12).  Could  more  meaning 
have  been  compressed  into  a  letter  which  could  be  read  aloud  in  less 
than  an  hour,  but  which  was  to  have  a  very  deep  influence  on  many 
centuries  ? 

23.  Know  ye]     Or  perhaps  "  Ye  know,''  or  "know." 

is  set  at  liberty]  The  word  probably  means  (as  in  Acts  iii.  13,  iv.  21) 
"  has  been  set  free  from  prison."  It  is  intrinsically  likely  that  Timothy 
at  once  obeyed  the  earnest  and  repeated  entreaty  of  St  Paul,  shortly 
before  his  martyrdom,  to  come  to  him  at  Rome  (2  Tim.  iv.  9,  21),  and 
that,  arriving  before  the  Neronian  persecution  had  spent  its  force,  he 
had  been  thrown  into  prison.     His  comparative  youth,  and  the  unoffend- 

IIEBREWS  x^ 


194  HEBREWS,   XIII.  [vv.  24,  25. 

24  will  see  you.     Salute  all  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you, 

25  and  all  the  saints.     They  of  Italy  salute  you.     Grace  be 
with  you  all.     Amen. 

%  Written  to  the  Hebrews  from  Italy  by  Timothy. 

ing  gentleness  of  his  character,  together  with  the  absence  of  any  definite 
charge  against  him,  may  have  led  to  his  liberation.  All  this  however  is 
nothing  more  than  reasonable  conjecture.  The  word  apolehiinenos 
may  mean  no  more  than  official,  or  even  ordinary,  "  sending  forth  "  on 
some  mission  or  otherwise,  as  in  Acts  xiii.  3,  xv.  30,  xix.  41,  xxiii. 
11. 

if  he  come  shortly,  I  will  see  you\  Lit.  "if  he  come  sooner,"  i.e. 
earlier  than  I  now  expect  (comp.  koXXiov,  Acts  xxv.  10;  ^iXriov,  2  Tim. 
i.  18). 

24.  Salute  all  them  that  have  the  rule  ofer  yoii]  This  salutation  to 
all  their  spiritual  leaders  implies  the  condition  of  Churches,  which  was 
normal  at  that  period — namely,  little  communities,  sometimes  composed 
separately  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  who  in  default  of  one  large  central 
building,  met  for  worship  in  each  other's  houses. 

T/iej'  0/  Italy]  This  merely  means  "the  Italians  in  the  place  from 
which  I  write,"just  as  "they  of  Asia"  means  Asiatic  Jews  (Acts  xxi.  27. 
Comp.  xvii.  13,  vi.  9,  &c.).  The  phrase  therefore  gives  no  clue  whatever 
to  the  place  from  which,  or  the  persons  to  whom,  the  Epistle  was 
written.  It  merely  shews  that  some  Christians  from  Italy — per- 
haps Christians  who  had  fled  from  Italy  during  the  Neronian  persecu- 
tion— formed  a  part  of  the  writer's  community ;  but  it  suggests  a  not 
unnatural  inference  that  it  was  written  to  some  Italian  community  from 
some  other  town  oitt  ^  Italy.  Had  he  been  writing /ww  Italy  he  would 
perhaps  have  been  more  likely  to  write  "those  in  Italy"  (comp.  i  Pet. 
V.  13). 

25.  Grace  be  with  you  all.  Amen]  This  is  one  of  the  shorter  forms 
of  final  conclusion  found  in  Col.  iv.  18;  i  Tim.  vi.  21;  1  Tim.  iv.  22; 
Tit.  iii.  15. 

The  superscription  "Written  to  the  Hebrews  from  Italy  by  Timothy" 
is  wholly  without  authority,  though  found  in  K  and  some  versions.  It 
contradicts  the  obvious  inference  suggested  by  xiii.  23,  24.  We  have  no 
clue  to  the  bearer  of  the  Epistle,  or  the  local  community  for  which  it 
was  primarily  intended,  or  the  effect  which  it  produced.  But  it  would 
scarcely  be  possible  to  suppose  that  such  a  composition  did  not  have  a 
powe/ful  influence  in  checking  all  tendency  to  retrograde  into  Judaism 
from  the  deeper  and  far  more  inestimable  blessings  of  the  New  Covenant. 
The  Manuscripts  N  and  C  have  only  "To  the  Hebrews."  A  has  "It 
was  written  to  the  Hebrews  from  Rome." 


INDEX. 


Aaron,  20,  121 
Abel,  182 

Abraham,  12,  22,  164,  185 
Adonizedek,  116 
Alexandria.  Church  of,  28 
Alexandrian  MS.,  31,  62,  178 
altar  of  incense,  135 
Ambrose,  St,  43,  73,  148 
Amraphel,  115 
Antar,  poem  of,  74 
Antioch,  28 
Antiochus,  172 
Apollos,  48 
Aquila,  48 
Ark,  the,  95,  136 
Athanasius,  82 

Atonement,  Great  Day  of,  14,  23,  58,  80, 
96,  125,  134,  135,  137,  144,  T46,  189,  191 
Augustine,  St,  61 

Barnabas,  43,  48,  128 

Baur,  quoted,  17 

Bengel,  quoted,  94,  180,  190 

Beni-Hanan,  the,  gS 

Berith,  30,  124 

Bleek,  38,  51,  82,  86,  189 

Boethusim,  the,  98 

brotherly  love,  184 

Cain,  182 

Cajetan,  Cardinal,  46,  65 
Caleb,  88 

Calvin,  65,  105,  quoted,  30,  45 
Canon  of  Muratori,  43 
Chaluka,  no 
Ckokhvtah,  55 

Chrysostom,  St,  26,  100,  106,  147,  183 
Cicero,  quoted,  117 
Claudius,  158 

Clement,  St,  of  Alexandria,  44,  45,  173 
Clement  of  Rome,  43,  48,  56,  59,  92,  128 
confidence,  84 
conversation,  186 
Corinth,  Church  of,  27 
counted  worthy,  82 

Covenant,  the  new,   17,  21,  24,  52,  124, 
131,  132,  143;  the  old,  21,  24,  52,  83, 

124,  131,  132,  143 
Cyril,  189 

David,  90 

Day  of  Atonement,   14,  23,  58,  80,  96, 

125.  134,  135.  137.  144.  14'',  189,  191 
dead  works,  142 

Delitzsch,  50,  160 


Demiurge,  the,  52 

demons,  78 

de  Wette,  189 

Dispensation,  the  old,  17,  18,  25,  159  ;  the 

new,  20,  25 
divers  manners,  53 

Ebrard,  27 

elders,  162 

Elijah,  172 

Elisha,  172 

Elohim,  70,  71 

embitterment,  85 

entreaties,  99 

Epictetus,  158 

Erasmus,  46,  quoted,  30,  174,  182 

Esau,  178,  179 

Estius,  189 

eternal  judgment,  104 

Eupoleraos,  114 

Euripides,  93 

Eusebius,  30,  46,  118 

Ezra,  52 

faithful,  82 

fear  of  death,  99 

Field,  Dr,  quoted,  127,  165 

forerunner,  113 

foundation,  103 

Fulgentius,  73 

Gaius,  43 
Gematria,  83,  146 
Gethsemane,  99 
Gideon,  185 
Grotius,  88 

Halachoth.  the,  1S8 
Hebrews,  sense  of  word,  10,  11 
Hebrews,  Epistle   to,    divisions  of,    20 ; 

analysis   of,   22   to   25 ;    date  of,   29 ; 

character  of,    30,   31 ;   author  of,  41, 

42  ;  title  of,   51 
heresy,  the  ApoUinarian,  100 ;  the  Mono- 

thelite,  100 
High  Priest,  the,  40,  96,  125,  128,  147 
High  Priesthood,  the,  21,  96 
Hilary  of  Poictiers,  43 
Hippolytus,  St,  43,  118 
holocausts,  150 

Holy  of  Holies,  the,  137,  140,  153 
Homer,  quoted,  173 
Horace,  quoted,  117,  149 
household,  83 
hypostasis,  57,  161 


196 


INDEX. 


ideal  archetype,  the,  23,  24 
incense,  altar  of,  135 
Irenaeus,  St,  43,  116 

Jamnia.  28 

Jehoiakim,  172 

Jehovah,  81,  82,  92 

Jerome,  St,  73,  114,  quoted,  50 

Jerusalem,  Church  of,  26 

Jewish  Christians,  24,  26 

Joshua,  21,  88 

justification,  34 

Justin  Martyr,  49 

Kamhits,  the,  98 
Kantheras,  the,  98 
Korah,  97 

Leontopolis,  126 

Logos,  36,  54,  64,  8t,  92,  114.  125 

Lot,  185 

Lucian,  185 

Luke,  St,  48,  177,  178 

Liinemann,  82 

Luther,  18,  35,  46,  48 

Maimonides,  94 

Manoah,  185 

Marah,  85 

Marcion,  43,  178 

Mark,  St,  48 

M&sAk,  134 

Megillah,  151,  170 

Melanchthon,  46 

Melchizedek,  21,  22,  36,  50,  g8,  101,  11 

114,  115,  116,  117,  119,  121 
mercy  seat,  the,  136 
Middoth,  25 
Midrash  Tanchiima,  78 
Mill,  Dr,  quoted,  104 
Milton,  quoted,  63 
Monophysite,  73 
Mosaic  Law,  the,  16,  156 
Moses,  129,  181,  192 
Muratori,  Canon  of,  43 

near  a  curse,  108 
Noah,  164 
Noujneiia,  18 
Novatian,  43 

oath,  123 

Olain  habba,  70,  106,  138 

Onias,  126 

Origen,  46,  51 

Pantaenus,  44 

Paraclete,  87 

Parocheth,  134 

Paul,  St,  42  ff.,  114,  130,  154,  17s,  i£ 

181,  187,  193 
pegaritn,  88 
Pentateuch,  the,  79 


perfectionment,  34,  72 

Peripatetics,  the,  96 

Peter,  St,  183,  185,  190 

Philo,  12,   35,   37,  38,  39,  40,  41.  47.  57i 

64.  91,  96,  106,  III,  125,  134,  149,  176 
Plato,  37,  183 
Ponipey,  133 
prayers,  99 

Priesthood,  the  High,  21,  96 
Primasius,  82 
Pnscilla,  48 
prophets,  53,  54 

Rabbi  HiUel,  25 

Ravenna,  28 

Reuss,  quoted,  26 

Robertson  Smith,  quoted,  Go,  78,  79 

saints,  109 

Salem,  114,  115 

Salumias,  114 

salvation,  100 

Shechinah,  the,  56,  95,  118,  133,  183 

Shepherd,  the  Great,  193 

Siddim,  the  Vale  of,  109 

Silas,  48 

slave,  84 

Socrates,  19 

Solfatara,  the,  109 

sons  of  oil,  98 

soul,  93 

Spenser,  quoted,  66 

spoils,  120 

Stanley,  Dean,  114 

Stoics,  the,  96,  99 

sundry  times,  52 

synagogue,  154 

Tabernacle,  the,  19,  20,  23 
Targum,  the,  64,  71,  170 
tempted,  95 

Tennyson,  quoted,  112,  113 
Terence,  quoted,  95 
Tertullian,  34,  184 
Theodoret,  26,  30,  100 
Theodotion,  80 
Theophylact,  100 
Thomas  Aquinas,  St,  189 
Timothy,  26,  47,  193 
Titus,  48 

to-day,  90,  91,  183 
Traducianism,  177 

Urim,  20 
Uzziah,  97,  122 

vail,  the,  112,  134 
Vatican  MS.,  the,  31,  178 
Via  crucis,  72 
Victorinus  of  Pettau,  43 
Virgil,  quoted,  95,  115 

Wordsworth,  quoted,  161,  164 


CAMBRIDGE:     PRINTED   BY   C.    J.    CLAY,    M.A.    AND   SONS,    AT   THE   UNIVERSITY   PRESS. 


THE    CAMBRIDGE     BIBLE    FOR 
SCHOOLS    AND    COLLEGES. 

General  Editor,  The  Very  Rev.  J.  J.  S.  Perowne, 
•  Dean  of  Peterborough. 

#pinicms!  of  tJje  |)resfs;» 

"//  is  difficult  to  commend  too  highly  this  excellent  series." — Guardian. 

"  The  modesty  of  the  general  title  of  this  series  has,  we  believe,  led 
many  to  misunderstand  its  character  and  underrate  its  value.  The  books 
are  zvell  suited  for  study  in  the  tipper  forms  of  our  best  schools,  but  not 
the  less  are  they  adapted  to  the  wants  of  all  Bible  students  who  are  not 
specialists.  We  doubt,  indeed,  whether  any  of  the  numerous  popular 
comme7itaries  recetttly  issued  in  this  country  will  be  found  more  service- 
able for  general  use." — Academy. 

"  One  of  the  most  popular  and  useful  literary  enterprises  of  the 
nineteettth  cetttury." — Baptist  Magazine. 

"  Of  great  value.  The  whole  series  of  comments  for  schools  is  highly 
esteemed  by  students  capable  of  forming  a  judgment.  The  books  are 
scholarly  without  being  pretentious :  and  information  is  so  given  as  to  be 
easily  understood.'" — Sword  and  Trowel. 

"  The  value  of  the  tvork  as  an  aid  to  Biblical  study,  not  merely  itt 
schools  but  among  people  of  all  classes  who  are  desirous  to  have  intelligent 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  cannot  easily  be  over-estitnated." — The 
Scotsmaaa. 


The  Book  of  Judges.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.  A.  "  His  introduction  is  clear 
and  concise,  full  of  the  information  which  young  students  require,  and 
indicating  the  lines  on  which  the  various  problems  suggested  by  the 
Book  of  Judges  may  be  solved." — Baptist  Magazine. 

1  Samuel,  by  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick.  "Remembering  the  interest 
with  which  we  read  the  Books  of  the  Kingdoin  when  they  were  appointed 
as  a  subject  for  school  work  in  our  boyhood,  we  have  looked  with  some 
eagerness  into  Mr  Kirkpatrick's  volume,  which  contains  the  first  instal- 
ment of  them.  We  are  struck  with  the  great  improvement  in  character, 
and  variety  in  the  materials,  with  which  schools  are  now  supplied.  A 
clear  map  inserted  in  each  volume,  notes  suiting  the  convenience  of  the 
scholar  and  the  difficulty  of  the  passage,  and  not  merely  dictated  by  the 
fancy  of  the  commentator,  were  luxuries  which  a  quarter  of  a  century 
ago  the  Biblical  student  could  not  buy." — Church  Quarterly  Review. 

"To  the  valuable  series  of  Scriptural  expositions  and  elementary 
commentaries  which  is  being  issued  at  the  Cambridge  University  Press, 
under  the  title  'The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools,'  has  been  added 
The  First  Book  of  Samuel  by  the  Rev.  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick.  Like 
other  volumes  of  the  series,  it  contains  a  carefully  written  historical  and 
critical  introduction,  while  the  text  is  profusely  illustrated  and  explained 
by  notes." — The  Scotsman. 
10,000 
23/io/yj 


2      CAMBRIDGE  BIBLE  FOR  SCHOOLS   &   COLLEGES. 

II.  Samuel.  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick,  M.A.  "Small  as  this  work  is 
in  mere  dimensions,  it  is  every  way  the  best  on  its  subject  and  for  its 
purpose  that  we  know  of.  The  opening  sections  at  once  prove  the 
thorough  competence  of  the  writer  for  dealing  with  questions  of  criti- 
cism in  an  earnest,  faithful  and  devout  spirit ;  and  the  appendices  discuss 
a  few  special  difficulties  with  a  full  knowledge  of  the  data,  and  a  judicial 
reserve,  which  contrast  most  favourably  with  the  superficial  dogmatism 
which  has  too  often  made  the  exegesis  of  the  Old  Testament  a  field  for 
the  play  of  unlimited  paradox  and  the  ostentation  of  personal  infalli- 
bility. The  notes  are  always  clear  and  suggestive;  never  trifling  or 
irrelevant ;  and  they  everywhere  demonstrate  the  great  difference  in 
value  between  the  w-ork  of  a  commentator  who  is  also  a  Hebraist,  and 
that  of  one  who  has  to  depend  for  his  Hebrew  upon  secondhand 
sources. " — Academy, 

"The  Rev.  A.  F.  Kirkpatrick  has  now  completed  his  commentary 
on  the  two  books  of  Samuel.  This  second  volume,  like  the  first,  is 
furnished  with  a  scholarly  and  carefully  prepared  critical  and  historical 
introduction,  and  the  notes  supply  everything  necessary  to  enable  the 
merely  English  scholar — so  far  as  is  possible  for  one  ignorant  of  the 
original  language — to  gather  up  the  precise  meaning  of  the  text.  Even 
Hebrew  scholars  may  consult  this  small  volume  with  profit." — Scotsman. 

I.  Kings  and  Ephesians.  "  With  great  heartiness  we  commend 
these  most  valuable  little  commentaries.  We  had  rather  purchase 
these  than  nine  out  of  ten  of  the  big  blown  up  expositions.  Quality  is 
far  better  than  quantity,  and  we  have  it  here." — S'word  and  Troioel. 

I.  Kings.  "This  is  really  admirably  well  done,  and  from  first  to 
last  there  is  nothing  but  commendation  to  give  to  such  honest  work." — 
Bookseller. 

II.  Kings.  "The  Introduction  is  scholarly  and  wholly  admirable, 
while  the  notes  must  be  of  incalculable  value  to  students." — Glasgow 
Herald. 

"It  is  equipped  with  a  valuable  introduction  and  commentary,  and 
makes  an  admirable  text  book  for  Bible-classes." — Scotsjuan. 

"It  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  commentary  better  suited  for  general 
use. " — Academy. 

TIae  Book  of  Job.  "Able  and  scholarly  as  the  Introduction  is,  it  is 
far  surpassed  by  the  detailed  exegesis  of  the  book.  In  this  Dr  Davidson's 
strength  is  at  its  greatest.  His  linguistic  knowledge,  his  artistic  habit, 
his  scientific  insight,  and   his  literary  power  have  full  scope  when  he 

comes  to  exegesis The  book  is  worthy  of  the  reputation  of  Dr  Davidson  ; 

it  represents  the  results  of  many  years  of  labour,  and  it  will  greatly  help 
to  the  right  understanding  of  one  of  the  greatest  works  in  the  literature 
of  the  world." — The  Spectator. 

"  In  the  course  of  a  long  introduction,  Dr  Davidson  has  presented 
us  with  a  very  able  and  very  interesting  criticism  of  this  wonderful 
book.  Its  contents,  the  nature  of  its  composition,  its  idea  and  purpose, 
its  integrity,  and  its  age  are  all  exhaustively  treated  of.. ..We  have  not 
space  to  examine  fully  the  text  and  notes  before  us,  but  we  can,  and  do 
heartily,  recommend  the  book,  not  only  for  the  upper  forms  in  schools, 
but  to  Bible  students  and  teachers  generally.  As  we  wrote  of  a  previous 
volume  in  the  same  series,  this  one  leaves  nothing  to  be  desired.     The 


OPINIONS  OF  THE  PRESS. 


notes  are  full  and  suggestive,  without  being  too  long,  and,  in  itself,  the 
introduction  forms  a  valuable  addition  to  modern  Bible  literature." — The 
Educational  Times. 

"Already  we  have  frequently  called  attention  to  this  exceedingly 
valuable  work  as  its  volumes  have  successively  appeared.  But  we  have 
never  done  so  with  greater  pleasure,  very  seldom  with  so  great  pleasure, 
as  we  now  refer  to  the  last  published  volume,  that  on  the  Book  of  Job, 
by  Dr  Davidson,  of  Edinburgh.. ..We  cordially  commend  the  volume  to 
all  our  readers.  The  least  instructed  will  understand  and  enjoy  it ; 
and  mature  scholars  will  learn  from  it." — Methodist  Recorder. 

Job — Hosea.  "  It  is  difficult  to  commend  too  highly  this  excellent 
series,  the  volumes  of  which  are  now  becoming  numerous.  The  two 
books  before  us,  small  as  they  are  in  size,  comprise  almost  everything 
that  the  young  student  can  reasonably  expect  to  find  in  the  way  of  helps 
towards  such  general  knowledge  of  their  subjects  as  may  be  gained 
without  an  attempt  to  grapple  with  the  Hebrew ;  and  even  the  learned 
scholar  can  hardly  read  without  interest  and  benefit  the  very  able  intro- 
ductory matter  which  both  these  commentators  have  prefixed  to  their 
volumes.  It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  these  works  have  brought 
within  the  reach  of  the  ordinary  reader  resources  which  were  until 
lately  quite  unknown  for  understanding  some  of  the  most  difficult  and 
obscure  portions  of  Old  Testament  literature." — Gtiardian. 

Ecclesiastes ;  or,  the  Preacher. — "Of  the  Notes,  it  is  sufficient  to 
say  that  they  are  in  every  respect  worthy  of  Dr  Plumptre's  high  repu- 
tation as  a  scholar  and  a  critic,  being  at  once  learned,  sensible,  and 
practical.  .  .  .  An  appendix,  in  which  it  is  clearly  proved  that  the 
author  of  Ecclesiastes  anticipated  Shakspeare  and  Tennyson  in  some 
of  their  finest  thoughts  and  reflections,  will  be  read  with  interest  by 
students  both  of  Hebrew  and  of  English  literature.  Commentaries  are 
seldom  attractive  reading.  This  little  volume  is  a  notable  exception." — 
The  Scotsman. 

"In  short,  this  little  book  is  of  far  greater  value  than  most  of  the 
larger  and  more  elaborate  commentaries  on  this  Scripture.  Indispens- 
able to  the  scholar,  it  will  render  real  and  large  help  to  all  who  have  to 
expound  the  dramatic  utterances  of  The  Preacher  whether  in  the  Church 
or  in  the  School." — The  Expositor. 

"The  '■ideal  biography'  of  the  author  is  one  of  the  most  exquisite 
and  fascinating  pieces  of  writing  we  have  met  with,  and,  granting  its 
starting-point,  throws  wonderful  light  on  many  problems  connected  with 
the  book.  The  notes  illustrating  the  text  are  full  of  delicate  criticism, 
fine  glowing  insight,  and  apt  historical  allusion.  An  abler  volume 
than  Professor  Plumptre's  we  could  not  desire." — Baptist  Magazine. 

Jeremiah,  by  A.  W.  Streane.  "The  arrangement  of  the  book  is 
well  treated  on  pp.  xxx.,  396,  and  the  question  of  Baruch's  relations 
with  its  composition  on  pp.  xxvii.,  xxxiv.,  317.  The  iilustrations  from 
English  literature,  history,  monuments,  works  on  botany,  topography, 
etc.,  are  good  and  plentiful,  as  indeed  they  are  in  other  volumes  of  this 
series." — Church  Quarterly  Revie^u,  April,  1881. 

"Mr  Streane's  Jeremiah  consists  of  a  series  of  admirable  and  well- 
nigh  exhaustive  notes  on  the  text,  with  introduction  and  appendices, 
drawing  the  life,  times,  and  character  of  the  prophet,  the  style,  contents, 


4      CAMBRIDGE   BIBLE   FOR   SCHOOLS   &   COLLEGES. 

a\id  arrangement  of  his  prophecies,  the  traditions  relating  to  Jeremiah, 
meant  as  a  type  of  Christ  (a  most  remarkable  chapter),  and  other 
prophecies  relating  to  Jeremiali." — The  English  Churchman  and  Clerical 
Journal. 

Obadiah  and  Jonah.  "  This  number  of  the  admirable  series  of 
Scriptural  expositions  issued  by  the  Syndics  of  the  Cambridge  Uni- 
versity Press  is  well  up  to  the  mark.  The  numerous  notes  are 
excellent.  No  difficulty  is  shirked,  and  much  light  is  thrown  on  the 
contents  both  of  Obadiah  and  Jonah.  Scholars  and  students  of  to-day 
are  to  be  congratulated  on  having  so  large  an  amount  of  information  on 
liiblical  subjects,  so  clearly  and  ably  put  together,  placed  within  their 
reach  in  such  small  bulk.  To  all  Biblical  students  the  series  will  be 
acceptable,  and  for  the  use  of  Sabbath-school  teachers  will  prove 
invaluable." — North  British  Daily  Mail. 

"  It  is  a  very  useful  and  sensible  exposition  of  these  two  Minor 
Prophets,  and  deals  very  thoroughly  and  honestly  with  the  immense 
difficulties  of  the  later-named  of  the  two,  from  the  orthodox  point  of 
view." — Expositor. 

"  Haggai  and  Zechariah.  This  interesting  little  volume  is  of  great 
value.  It  is  one  of  the  best  books  in  that  well-known  series  of 
scholarly  and  popular  commentaries,  'the  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools 
and  Colleges '  of  which  Dean  Perowne  is  the  General  Editor.  In  the 
expositions  of  Archdeacon  Perowne  we  are  always  sure  to  notice 
learning,  ability,  judgment  and  reverence  ....  The  notes  are  terse 
and  pointed,  but  full  and  reliable." — Churchman. 

"  The  Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew,  by  the  Rev.  A.  Carr.  The 
introduction  is  able,  scholarly,  and  eminently  practical,  as  it  bears 
on  the  authorship  and  contents  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  original  form 
in  which  it  is  supposed  to  have  been  written.  It  is  well  illustrated  by 
two  excellent  maps  of  the  Holy  Land  and  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee." — 
English  Churchman. 

"St  Matthew,  edited  by  A.  Carr,  M.A.  The  Book  of  Joshua, 
edited  by  G.  F.  Maclear,  D.D,  The  General  Epistle  of  St  James, 
edited  by  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.D.  The  introductions  and  notes  are 
scholarly,  and  generally  such  as  young  readers  need  and  can  appre- 
ciate. The  maps  in  both  Joshua  and  Matthew  are  very  good,  and  all 
matters  of  editing  are  faultless.  Professor  Plumptre's  notes  on  'The 
Epistle  of  St  James'  are  models  of  terse,  exact,  and  elegant  renderings 
of  the  original,  which  is  too  often  obscured  in  the  authorised  version." — 
Nonconformist. 

"St  Mark,  with  Notes  by  the  Rev.  G.  F,  Maclear,  D.D.  Into 
this  small  volume  Dr  Maclear,  besides  a  clear  and  able  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Gospel,  and  the  text  of  St  Mark,  has  compressed  many 
hundreds  of  valuable  and  helpful  notes.  In  short,  he  has  given  us 
a  capital  manual  of  the  kind  required — containing  all  that  is  needed  to 
illustrate  the  text,  i.  e.  all  that  can  be  drawn  from  the  history,  geography, 
customs,  and  manners  of  the  time.  But  as  a  handbook,  giving  in  a 
clear  and  succinct  form  the  information  which  a  lad  requires  in  order 

to  stand  an  examination  in  the  Gospel,  it  is  admirable I  can  very 

heartily  commend  it,  not  only  to  the  senior  boys  and  girls  in  our  High 
Schools,  but  also  to  Sunday-school  teachers,  who  may  get  from  it  the 
very  kind  of  knowledge  they  often  find  it  hardest  to  get. " — Expositor. 


OPINIONS   OF  THE  PRESS. 


*'  With  the  help  of  a  book  like  this,  an  intelligent  teacher  may  make 
•Divinity'  as  interesting  a  lesson  as  any  in  the  school  course.  The 
notes  are  of  a  kind  that  will  be,  for  the  most  part,  intelligible  to  boys 
of  the  lower  forms  of  our  public  schools ;  but  they  may  be  read  with 
greater  profit  by  the  fifth  and  sixth,  in  conjunction  with  the  original 
text." — The  Academy. 

"St  Luke.  Canon  Farrar  has  supplied  students  of  the  Gospel 
with  an  admirable  manual  in  this  volume.  It  has  all  that  copious 
variety  of  illustration,  ingenuity  of  suggestion,  and  general  soundness  of 
interpretation  which  readers  are  accustomed  to  expect  from  the  learned 
and  eloquent  editor.  Any  one  who  has  been  accustomed  to  associate 
the  idea  of  'dryness'  with  a  commentary,  should  go  to  Canon  Farrar's 
St  Luke  for  a  more  correct  impression.  He  will  find  that  a  commen- 
tary may  be  made  interesting  in  the  highest  degree,  and  that  without 
losing  anything  of  its  solid  value.  .  .  .  But,  so  to  speak,  it  is  too  good 
for  some  of  the  readers  for  whom  it  is  intended." — The  Spectator, 

•'Canon  Farrar's  contribution  to  The  Cambridge  School  Bible 
is  one  of  the  most  valuable  yet  made.  His  annotations  on  The  Gospel 
according  to  St  Luke,  while  they  display  a  scholarship  at  least  as  sound, 
and  an  erudition  at  least  as  wide  and  varied  as  those  of  the  editors  of 
St  Matthew  and  St  Mark,  are  rendered  telling  and  attractive  by  a 
more  lively  imagination,  a  keener  intellectual  and  spiritual  insight,  a 
more  incisive  and  picturesque  style.  His  St  Luke  is  worthy  to  be  ranked 
with  Professor  Plumptre's  St  James,  than  which  no  higher  commend- 
ation can  well  be  given." — The  Expositor. 

•'St  Luke.  Edited  by  Canon  Farrar,  D.D.  We  have  received  with 
pleasure  this  edition  of  the  Gospel  by  St  Luke,  by  Canon  Farrar.  It  is 
another  instalment  of  the  best  school  commentary  of  the  Bible  we  pos- 
sess. Of  the  expository  part  of  the  work  we  cannot  speak  too  highly. 
It  is  admirable  in  every  way,  and  contains  just  the  sort  of  informa- 
tion needed  for  Students  of  the  English  text  unable  to  make  use  of  the 
original  Greek  for  themselves." — The  A^onconformist  and  Independent. 

"As  a  handbook  to  the  third  gospel,  this  small  work  is  invaluable. 
The  author  has  compressed  into  little  space  a  vast  mass  of  scholarly  in- 
formation. .  .  The  notes  are  pithy,  vigorous,  and  suggestive,  abounding 
in  pertinent  illustrations  from  general  literature,  and  aiding  the  youngest 
reader  to  an  intelligent  appreciation  of  the  text.  A  finer  contribution  to 
'The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools'  has  not  yet  been  made." — Baptist 
Magazine. 

"We  were  quite  prepared  to  find  in  Canon  Farrar's  St  Luke  a 
masterpiece  of  Biblical  criticism  and  comment,  and  we  are  not  dis- 
appointed by  our  examination  of  the  volume  before  us.  It  reflects  very 
faithfully  the  learning  and  critical  insight  of  the  Canon's  greatest  works, 
his  'Life  of  Christ'  and  his  'Life  of  St  Paul',  but  differs  widely  from 
both  in  the  terseness  and  condensation  of  its  style.  What  Canon  Farrar 
has  evidently  aimed  at  is  to  place  before  students  as  much  information 
as  possible  within  the  limits  of  the  smallest  possible  space,  and 
in  this  aim  he  has  hit  the  mark  to  perfection.'' — The  Examiner. 


6     CAMBRIDGE  BIBLE  FOR   SCHOOLS   &   COLLEGES. 

The  Gospel  according  to  St  John.  "Of  tlie  notes  we  can  say  with 
confidence  that  they  are  useful,  necessaiy,  learned,  and  brief.  To 
Divinity  students,  to  teachers,  and  for  private  use,  this  compact 
Commentary  will  be  found  a  valuable  aid  to  the  better  understanding 
of  the  Sacred  Text." — School  Guardian. 

"The  new  volume  of  the  'Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools' — the 
Gospel  according  to  St  John,  by  the  Rev.  A.  Plummer— shows  as 
careful  and  thorough  work  as  either  of  its  predecessors.  The  intro- 
duction concisely  yet  fully  describes  the  life  of  St  John,  the  authenticity 
of  the  Gospel,  its  characteristics,  its  relation  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels, 
and  to  the  Apostle's  Eirst  Epistle,  and  the  usual  subjects  referred  to  in 
an  'introduction'." — The  ChrisliaH  Church. 

"The  notes  are  extremely  scholarly  and  valuable,  and  in  most  cases 
exhaustive,  bringing  to  the  elucidation  of  the  text  all  that  is  best  in 
commentaries,  ancient  and  modern." — The  English  Churchman  and 
Clerical  Joitrtial. 

"(i)  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  By  J.  Rawson  Liimby,  D.D. 
(2)  The  Second  Epistle  of  the  Corinthians,  edited  by  Professor  Lias. 
The  introduction  is  pithy,  and  contains  a  mass  of  carefully-selected 
information  on  the  authorship  of  the  .-Vets,  its  designs,  and  its  sources. 

The  Second  Epistle  of  the  Corinthians  is  a  manual  beyond  all  praise, 

for  the  excellence  of  its  pithy  and  pointed  annotations,  its  analysis  of  the 
contents,  and  the  fulness  and  value  of  its  introduction." — Examiner. 

"The  concluding  portion  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  under  the  very 
competent  editorship  of  Dr  LuMBY,  is  a  valuable  addition  to  our 
school-books  on  that  subject.  Detailed  criticism  is  impossible  within 
the  space  at  our  command,  but  we  may  say  that  the  ample  notes  touch 
with  much  exactness  the  very  points  on  which  most  readers  of  the  text 
desire  information.  Due  reference  is  made,  where  necessary,  to  the 
Revised  Version  ;  the  maps  are  excellent ;  and  we  do  not  know  of  any 
other  volume  where  so  much  help  is  given  to  the  complete  understami- 
ing  of  one  of  the  most  important  and,  in  many  respects,  difficult  books 
of  the  New  Testament." — School  Guardian. 

"The  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  M.A.,  has  made  a  valuable  addition 
to  The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  in  his  brief  commentaiy  on 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  The  'Notes'  are  very  good,  and  lean, 
as  the  notes  of  a  School  Bible  should,  to  the  most  commonly  ac- 
cepted and  orthodox  view  of  the  inspired  author's  meaning  ;  while  the 
Introduction,  and  especially  the  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  St  Paul,  is  a  model 
of  condensation.  It  is  as  lively  and  pleasant  to  read  as  if  two  or  three 
facts  had  not  been  crowded  into  well-nigh  every  sentence." — Expositor. 

"The  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  It  is  seldom  we  have  met  with  a 
work  so  remarkable  for  the  compression  and  condensation  of  all  that 
is  valuable  in  the  smallest  possible  space  as  in  the  volume  before  us. 
Within  its  limited  pages  we  have  'a  sketch  of  the  Life  of  St  Paul,' 
we  have  further  a  critical  account  of  the  date  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  of  its  language,  and  of  its  genuineness.  The  notes  are 
numerous,  full  of  matter,  to  the  point,  and  leave  no  real  difficulty 
or  obscurity  unexplained," — The  Examiner. 


OPINIONS   OF  THE   PRESS. 


"The  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  Edited  by  Professor  Lias. 
Every  fresh  instalment  of  tliis  annotated  edition  of  tlie  Bible  for  Schools 
confirms  the  favourable  opinion  we  formed  of  its  value  from  the  exami- 
nation of  its  first  number.  The  origin  and  plan  of  the  Epistle  are 
discussed  with  its  character  and  genuineness." — The  Nonconfor7)iist. 

"The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  By  Professor  Lias.  The 
General  Epistles  of  St  Peter  and  St  Jude.  By  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.  D. 
We  welcome  these  additions  to  the  valuable  series  of  the  Cambridge 
Bible.  We  have  nothing  to  add  to  the  commendation  which  we 
have  from  the  first  publication  given  to  this  edition  of  the  Bible.  It  is 
enough  to  say  that  Professor  Lias  has  completed  his  work  on  the  two 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  in  the  same  admirable  manner  as  at  first. 
Dr  Plumptre  has  also  completed  the  Catholic  Epistles." — Nonconformist. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  By  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  ]\LA. 
"  It  seems  to  us  the  model  of  a  School  and  College  Commentary — 
comprehensive,  but  not  cumbersome;  scholarly,  but  not  pedantic." — 
Baptist  Alagazinc. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians.  "There  are  few  series  more  valued 
by  theological  students  than  '  The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and 
Colleges,'  and  there  will  be  no  number  of  it  more  esteemed  than  that 
by  Mr  H.  C.  G.  Moule  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians.^' — Record. 

"  Another  capital  volume  of  'The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and 
Colleges.'  The  notes  are  a  model  of  scholarly,  lucid,  and  compact 
criticism." — Baptist  Magazine. 

Hebrews,  "  Like  his  (Canon  Farrar's)  commentary  on  Luke  it 
possesses  all  the  best  characteristics  of  his  vi'riting.  It  is  a  work  not 
only  of  an  accomplished  scholar,  but  of  a  skilled  teacher." — Baptist 
Magazine. 

"  We  heartily  commend  this  volume  of  this  excellent  work," — 
Sunday  School  Chronicle. 

"The  General  Epistle  of  St  James,  by  Professor  Plumptre,  D.D. 
Nevertheless  it  is,  so  far  as  I  know,  by  far  the  best  exposition  of  the 
Epistle  of  St  James  in  the  English  language.  Not  Schoolboys  or 
Students  going  in  for  an  examination  alone,  but  Ministers  and  Preachers 
of  the  Word,  may  get  more  real  help  from  it  than  from  the  most  costly 
and  elaborate  commentaries." — Expositor. 

The  Epistles  of  St  John.  By  the  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  M.A.,  D.D. 
"This  forms  an  admirable  companion  to  the  'Commentary  on  the 
Gospel  according  to  St  John,'  which  was  reviewed  in  The  Churchman 
as  soon  as  it  appeared.  Dr  Plummer  has  som.e  of  the  highest  qualifica- 
tions for  such  a  task  ;  and  these  two  volumes,  their  size  being  considered, 
will  bear  comparison  with  the  best  Commentaries  of  the  time," — The 
Churchman. 

"  Dr  Plummer's  edition  of  the  Epistles  of  St  John  is  worthy  of  its 
companions  in  the  'Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools'  Series,  The 
subject,  though  not  apparently  extensive,  is  really  one  not  easy  to 
treat,  and  requiring  to  be  treated  at  length,  owing  to  the  constant 
reference  to  obscure  heresies  in  the  Johannine  writings.  Dr  Plummer 
has  done  his  exegetical  task  well." — The  Saturday  Review, 


THE  CAMBRIDGE  GREEK  TESTAMENT 

FOR   SCHOOLS   AND   COLLEGES 

with  a  Revised  Text,  based  on  the  most  recent  critical  authorities,  and 

English  Notes,  prepared  under  the  direction  of  the  General  Editor, 

The  Very  Reverend  J.  J.  S.  PEROWNE,  D.D. 

*•  Has  achieved  an  excelle/ice  which  puts  it  above  criticism." — Expositor. 

St  Matthew.  "  Copious  illustrations,  gathered  from  a  great  variety 
of  sources,  make  his  notes  a  very  valuable  aid  to  the  student.  They 
are  indeed  remarkably  interesting,  while  all  explanations  on  meanings, 
applications,  and  the  like  are  distinguished  by  their  lucidity  and  good 
sense. " — Pall  Mall  Gazette. 

St  Mark.  "The  Cambridge  Greek  Testament  of  which  Dr  Maclear's 
edition  of  the  Gospel  according  to  St  Mark  is  a  volume,  certainly 
supplies  a  want.  Without  pretending  to  compete  with  the  leading 
commentaries,  or  to  embody  very  much  original  research,  it  forms  a 
most  satisfactory  introduction  to  the  study  of  the  New  Testament  in 
the  original. ...Dr  Maclear's  introduction  contains  all  that  is  known  of 
St  Mark's  life;  an  account  of  the  circumstances  in  which  the  Gospel 
was  composed,  with  an  estimate  of  the  influence  of  St  Peter's  teaching 
upon  St  Mark  ;  an  excellent  sketch  of  the  special  characteristics  of  this 
Gospel ;  an  analysis,  and  a  chapter  on  the  text  of  the  New  Testament 
generally. " — Saturday  Review. 

St  Luke.  "  Of  this  second  series  we  have  a  new  volume  by 
Archdeacon  Farrar  on  St  Luke,  completing  the  four  Gospels. ...It 
gives  us  in  clear  and  beautiful  language  the  best  results  of  modern 
scholarship.  We  have  a  most  attractive  Introduction.  Then  follows 
a  sort  of  composite  Greek  text,  representing  fairly  and  in  very  beautiful 
type  the  consensus  of  modem  textual  critics.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
exposition  of  each  chapter  of  the  Gospel  are  a  few  short  critical  notes 
giving  the  manuscript  evidence  for  such  various  readings  as  seem  to 
deserve  mention.  The  expository  notes  are  short,  but  clear  and  helpful. 
For  young  students  and  those  who  are  not  disposed  to  buy  or  to  study 
the  much  more  costly  work  of  Godet,  this  seems  to  us  to  be  the  best 
book  on  the  Greek  Text  of  the  Third  GQS.T^e\."—Alet/iodist  Recorder. 

St  John.  "We  take  this  opportunity  of  recommending  to  ministers 
on  probation,  the  very  excellent  volume  of  the  same  series  on  this  part 
of  the  New  Testament.  We  hope  that  most  or  all  of  our  young  ministers 
will  prefer  to  study  the  volume  in  the  Cambridge  Greek  Testaimnt  for 
Schools. " — Methodist  Recorder, 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  "Professor  LuMBY  has  performed  his 
laborious  task  well,  and  supplied  us  with  a  commentary  the  fulness  and 
freshness  of  which  Bible  students  will  not  be  slow  to  appreciate.  The 
volume  is  enriched  with  the  usual  copious  indexes  and  four  coloured 
maps." — Glasgow  Herald. 

I.  Corinthians.  "Mr  Lias  is  no  novice  in  New  Testament  exposi- 
tion, and  the  present  series  of  essays  and  notes  is  an  able  and  helpful 
addition  to  the  existing  books." — Guai-dian. 

The  Epistles  of  St  John.  "  In  the  very  useful  and  well  annotated 
series  of  the  Cambridge  Greek  Testament  the  volume  on  the  Epistles 
of  St  John  must  hold  a  high  position... The  notes  are  brief,  well 
informed  and  intelligent." — Scotsmaft. 

CAMBRIDGE:   PRINTKD   BV   C.   J.    CLAY,    M.A.    AND    SONS,  AT   THE   UNIVERSITY    PRESS. 


CAMBRIDGE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS. 


THE    PITT   PRESS   SERIES. 


*^*  Many  of  the  books  in  this  list  catt  be  had  in  two  volumes.   Text 
and  Notes  separately.  

I.     GREEK. 

Aristophanes.    Aves— Plutus— Kanse.     By  W.   C.   Green, 

M.A.,  late  Assistant  Master  at  Rugby  School.     2^-  ^'f-  each. 

Aristotle.     Outlines   of  the   Philosophy   of.     By  Edwin 

Wallace,  M.A.,  LL.D.     Third  Edition,  Enlarged.     4^.  6ti. 

Euripides.    Heracleidae.    By  E.  A.  Beck,  M.A.    ^s.  6d. 

Hercules  Furens.    By  A.   Gray,  M.A.,  and  J.   T. 

Hutchinson,  M.A.     New  Edit.     ■zs. 

Hippolytus.     By  W.  S.  Hadley,  M.A.    2s. 

Iphigeneia  in  Aulis.  By  C.  E.  S.  Headlam,  B.A.  2s.6d. 


Herodotus,  Book  V.    By  E.  S.  Shuckburgh,  M.A.    3^, 

Book  VI.     By  the  same  Editor.     4^^. 

Book  VIII.,  Chaps.  1—90.    By  the  same  Editor.    3^-.  6d. 

Book  IX.,  Chaps.  1—89.     By  the  same  Editor,    y.  6d. 

Homer.    Odyssey,  Books  IX.,  X.    By  G.  M.  Edwards,  M.A. 

2S.  dd.  each. 

Book  XXI.     By  the  same  Editor.     2s. 


Iliad.     Books  XXII.,  XXIII.     By  the  same  Editor. 

\N early  ready. 

Lucian.   Somnium  Charon  Piscator  et  De  Luctu.    By  W.  E. 

Heitland,  M.A.,  Fellow  of  St  John's  College,  Cambridge.     3J.  (}d. 

Menippus  and  Timon.    By  E.  C.  Mackie,  M.A. 

[Nearly  ready. 

Platonis  Apologia  Socratis.    By  J.  Adam,  M.A.    3.5-.  6d. 

Crito.     By  the  same  Editor.    2s.  6d. 

Euthyphro.     By  the  same  Editor.     2s.  6d. 

Plutarch.    Lives  of  the  Gracchi.    By  Rev.  H.  A.  Holden, 

M.A.,  LL.D.     6s. 

Life  of  Nicias.     By  the  same  Editor.     5^^. 

Life  of  Sulla.     By  the  same  Editor.     6.5-. 

Life  of  Timoleon.    By  the  same  Editor.     6s. 

Sophocles.    Oedipus  Tyrannus.    School  Edition.     By  R.  C. 

Jebb,  Litt.D.,  LL.D.     4^'.  6d. 

Thucydides.    Book  VIL   By  Rev.  H.  A.  Holden,  M.A.,  LL.D. 

[Nearly  ready, 

Xenophon.    Agesilaus.    By  H.  Hailstone,  M.A.    2s.  td. 

■■ —  Anabasis.     By  A.  Pretor,  M.A.      Two  vols.     yj.  bd. 

Books  I.  III.  IV.  and  V.     By  the  same.     2s.  each. 

Books  II.  VI.  and  VII.     By  the  same.     2s.  bd.  each. 

Xenophon.    Cyropaedeia.    Books  I.  II.    By  Rev.  H.  A.  Hol- 
den, M.A.,  LL.D.    2  vols.    6s. 

Books  III.  IV.  and  V.    By  the  same  Editor.   5^. 

Books  VI.  VII.  VIIL    By  the  same  Editor. 

[Nearly  ready. 

London:    Cambridge   Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane. 

20/10/90 


PUBLICATIONS  OF 


II.     LATIN. 
Beda's  Ecclesiastical  History,  Books  III.,  IV.    By  J.  E.  B. 

Mayok,  M.A.,  and  J.  R.  Lumby,  D.D.     Revised  Edition.     7^.  6ii. 

Books  I.  II.     By  the  same  Editors.  [In  the  Press. 

Caesar.    De  Bello  Gallico,  Comment.  I.    By  A.  G.  Peskett, 

M.A.,  Fellow  of  Magdalene  College,  Cambridge,  is.  6d.  Comment.  II. 
III.  2S.  Comment.  1.  II.  III.  3^.  Comment.  IV.  and  V.,  Comment. 
VII.    2j.  each.     Comment.  VI.  and  Comment.  VIII.     is.  6d.  each. 


De  Bello  Civili,  Comment.  I.     By  the  same  Editor, 


Cicero.    De  Amicitia.— De  Senectute.    By  J.  S.  Reid,  Litt.D., 

Fellow  of  Gonville  and  Caius  College.     3.r.  6d.  each. 

In  Gaium  Verrem  Actio  Prima.     By  H.   Cowie, 

M.A.     i.f.  6d. 

In  Q.  Caecilium  Divinatio  et  in  C.  Verrem  Actio. 

By  W.  E.  Heitland,  M.A.,  and  H.  Cowie,  M.A.     3J. 

Philippica  Secunda.   By  A,  G.  Peskett,  M.A.  y.  (>d. 

Oratio  pro  Archia  Poeta.    By  J.  S.  Reid,  Litt.D.    2s. 

Pro  L.  Cornelio  Balbo  Oratio.    By  the  same.    is.  6d. 

Oratio  pro  Tito  Annio  Milone.    By  John  Smyth 


Purton,  B.D.     2s.  bd. 

Oratio  pro  L.  Murena.  ByW.  E.  Heitland,  M.A.  3^. 

Pro  Cn.  Plancio  Oratio, by  H.  A.  H olden, LL.D.  ^s.bd. 

Pro  P.  Cornelio  Sulla.    By  J.  S.  Reid,  Litt.D.    3^.  (>d. 

Somnium  Scipionis.     By  W.  D.  Pearman,  M.A.  2.s. 

Horace.    Epistles,  Book  I.    By  E.  S.  Shuckburgh,  M.A., 

late  Fellow  of  Emmanuel  College.     7.S.  6d. 

Livy.    Book  IV.    By  H.  M.  Stephenson,  M.A.    2s.  6d. 

Book  V.    By  L.  Whibley,  M.A.     2s.  6d. 

Books  XXI.,  XXII.     By  M.  S.  Dimsdale,  M.A.,  Fel- 

low  of  King's  College.     2^.  6d.  each. 

Book  XXVII.    By  Rev.  H.  M.  Stephenson,  M.A. 

[Nearly  ready. 

Lucan.    Pharsaliae  Liber  Primus.    By  W.   E.   Heitland, 

M.A.,  and  C.  E.  Haskins,  M.A.     is.  dd. 

Lucretius,  Book  V.    By  J.  D.  Duff,  M.A.    2j. 

Ovidii  Nasonis  Fastorum  Liber  VI.    By  A.  Sidgwick,  M.A., 

Tutor  of  Corpus  Christi  College,  Oxford,     ij.  td. 

Quintus  Curtius.   A  Portion  of  the  History  (Alexander  in  India). 

By  W.  E.  Heitland,  M.A.,  and  T.  E.  Raven,  B.A.    With  Two  Maps.    3^.  td. 

Vergili  Maronis  Aeneidos  Libri  I.— XII    By  A.  Sidgwick, 

M.A.    li.  td.  each. 

Bucolica.     By  the  same  Editor.     \s.  6d. 

Georgicon  Libri  I.  II.    By  the  same  Editor.  2s. 

Libri  III.  IV.     By  the  same  Editor.  2s. 

The  Complete  Works.    By  the  same  Editor.  Two  vols. 

Vol.  I.  containing  the  Introduction  and  Text.  y.  td.    Vol.  II.  The  Notes.  4s.  dd. 

London:    Cambridge   Warehouse^  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


THE   CAMBRIDGE   UNIVERSITY  PRESS.         3 

III.     FRENCH. 

Corneille.    La  Suite  du  Menteur.    A  Comedy  in  Five  Acts. 

By  the  late  G.  Masson,  B.A.    2$. 

De  Bonnechose.     Lazare  Hoclie.     By   C.   Colbeck,   M.A. 

Revised  Edition.     Four  Maps.    7.s. 

D'Harleville.  Le  Vieux  C61ibataire.  By  G.  Masson,  B.A.  7.s. 
De   Lamartine.    Jeanne    D'Arc.     By   Rev.  A.  C.  Clapin, 

M.A.,  St  John's  College,  Cambridge.     2S. 

De   Vigny.     La   Canne  de  Jonc.    By  Rev.   H.  A.  Bull, 

M.A.,  late  Master  at  Wellington  College.     2S. 

Erckmann-Chiatrian.    La  Guerre.    By  Rev.  A.  C.  Clapin, 

M.A.     3  J. 

La  Baronne  de  Stael-Holstein.  Le  Directoire.  (Considera- 
tions sur  la  Revolution  Frangaise.  Troisieme  et  quatrieme  parties.)  Revised 
and  enlarged.     By  G.  Masson,  B.A.,  and  G.  W.  Prothero,  M.A.     is. 

Dix  Annies  d'Exil.    Livre  II.   Chapitres  1—8. 

By  the  same  Editors.     New  Edition,  enlarged.     2^. 

Lemercier.    Fredegonde  et  Brunehaut.    A  Tragedy  in  Five 

Acts.    By  GusTAVE  Masson,  B.A.     2s. 

Moli^re.    Le    Bourgeois    Gentilhonune,   Comedie-Ballet    en 

Cinq  Actes.     (1670.)     By  Rev.  A.  C.  Clapin,  M.A.     Revised  Edition.     is.6d. 

L'Ecole  des  Femmes.    By  G.  Saintsbury,  M.A.   2s.  6d. 

Les  Pr^cieuses  Ridicules.   By  E.  G.  W.  Braunholtz, 


M.A.,  Ph.D. 

Abridged  Edition,    is. 


Piron.    La  M^tromanie.  A  Comedy.  By  G.  Masson,  B.A.  2s. 
Racine.    Les  Plaideurs.    By  E.  G.  W.  Braunholtz,  M.A.  2s. 

Abridged  Edition,     is. 

Sainte-Beuve.     M.  Daru   (Causeries    du    Lundi,   Vol.    IX.). 

By  G.  Masson,  B.A.     2s. 

Saintine.    Picciola.    By  Rev.  A.  C.  Clapin,  M.A.    2s. 
Scribe  and  Legouv6.    Bataille  de  Dames.    By  Rev.  H.  A. 

Bull,  M.A.    zs. 

Scribe.    Le  Verre  d'Eau.    By  C.  Colbeck,  M.A.    2s. 
S^daine.     Le  Philosophe  sans  le  savoir.     By  Rev.  H.  A. 

Bull,  M.A.     is. 

Thierry.    Lettres  sur  I'histoire  de  France  (XIII.— XXIV.). 

By  G.  Masson,  B.A.,  and  G.  W.  Prothero,  M.A.     2s.  6d. 

R^cits  des  Temps  M^rovingiens  I.— III.    By  Gustave 

Masson,  B.A.  Univ.  Gallic,  and  A.  R.  Ropes,  M.A.     With  M.-ip.     3^. 

Villemain.    Lascaris  ou  Les  Grecs  du  XVe  Si^cle,  Nouvelle 

Historique.     By  G.  Masson,  B.A.     2s. 

Voltaire.    Histoire  du  Sidcle  de  Louis  XIV.    Chaps.  I. — 

XIII.     By  G.  Ma.sson,  B. A.,  and  G.  W.  Prothero,  M.A.     2s.  6d.     Part  II, 
Chaps.  XIV.— XXIV.     2s.  (,d.     Part  III.    Chaps.  XXV.  to  end.     2s.  6d. 

Xavier  de  Maistre.    La  Jeune  Sib^rieune.    Le  L^preux  de 

la  Cite  D'Aoste.     By  G.  Massqn,  B.A.    u.  6d. 


London:    Cambridge   Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


PUBLICATIONS   OF 


IV.     GERMAN. 

Ballads  on  German  History.    ]5y  W.  Wagner,  Ph.D.    is. 
Benedix.     Doctor  Wespe.     Lustspiel  in  fiinf  Aufzugen.    By 

Kakl  Heumawn  Creul,  M.A.,  Ph.D.    31. 

Freytag.    Der  Staat  Friedrichs  des  Grossen.    By  Wilhelm 

WAfJNliR,  Ph.D.       IS. 

German  Dactylic  Poetry.  By  Wilhelm  Wagner,  Ph.D.  3^. 
Goethe's  Knabenjahre.  (1749— 1759-)  ^yW.  Wagner^PH.D.  is. 
Hermann  und   Dorothea.    By  Wilhelm  Wagner, 

Ph.D.     Revised  edition  by  J.  W.  Cartmell,  M.A.     3^.  6^. 

Gutzkow.     Zopf  und  Schwert.     Lustspiel  in  fiinf  Aufziigen. 

By  H.  J.  WoLSTENHOLME,  B.A.  (Lond.).     3.?.  (td. 

Hauff.    Das  Bild  des  Kaisers.     By  Karl  Hermann  Breul, 

M.A.,  Ph.D.,  University  Lecturer  in  German.     3.S. 

Das  Wirthshaus  im  Spessart.    By  A.  Schlottmann, 

Ph.D.     3^-  6^. 

Die  Karavane.    By  A.  Schlottmann,  Ph.D.    3^.  M. 

Immermann.    Der  Oberhof.    A  Tale  of  Westphalian  Life,  by 

Wilhelm  Wagner,  Ph.D.     -^s. 

Kohlrausch.  DasJahri8i3.  By  Wilhelm  Wagner,  Ph.D.  2.y. 
Lessing  and  Gellert,    Selected  Fables.    By  Karl  Hermann 

Bkeul,  M.A.,  Ph.D.     3^. 

Mendelssohn's  Letters.  Selections  from.  By  J.  Sime,  M.A.  3^. 
Raumer.    Der  erste  Kreuzzug  (1095 — 1099).    By  Wilhelm 

Wagner,  Ph.D.     is. 

Kiehl.    Culturgeschichtliche  Novellen.    By  H.  J.  Wolsten- 

holme,  B.A.  (Lond.).     3^.  dd. 

Schiller.    Wilhelm  Tell.    By  Karl  Hermann  Breul,  M.A., 

Ph.D.     2J.  6;/. 

Abridged  Edition.     \s.  6d. 

Uhland.    Ernst,  Herzog  von  Schwaben.    By  H.  J.  Wolsten- 

HOLME,  B.A.     3i.  6d. 


V.     ENGLISH. 


Ancient  Philosophy  from  Thales  to  Cicero,  A  Sketch  of.    By 

Joseph  B.  Mayor,  M.A.     3.?.  6d. 

An  Apologie  for  Poetrie  by  Sir  Philip  Sidney.    By  E.  S. 

Shuckburgh,  M.A.     The  Text  is  a  revision  of  that  of  the  first  edition  of  1595. 

[Nearly  ready. 

Bacon's  History  of  the  Reign  of  King  Henry  VII.     By 

the  Rev.  Professor  Lumbv,  D.D.     3J. 

Cowley's  Essays.     By  the  Rev.  Professor  Lumby,  D.D.    4J. 


Lojidon:    Cambrids:e   Warehouse.  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


THE   CAMBRIDGE    UNIVERSITY  PRESS.         5 
Milton's  Comus  and  Arcades.     By  A.  W.  Verity,  M.A., 

sometime  Scholar  of  Trinity  College.  [Nearly  ready. 

More's  History  of  King  Eichard  III.    By  J.  Rawson  Lumby, 

D.D.     y.  6d.  ' 

More's  Utopia.    By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D.    y.  bd. 

The  Two  Noble  Kinsmen.    By  the   Rev.   Professor  Skeat, 

Litt.U.     -isMi. 


VI.     EDUCATIONAL  SCIENCE. 

Comenius,  John  Amos,  Bishop  of  the  Moravians.     His  Life 

and  Educational  Works,  by  S.   S.   Laurie,  A.M.,   F.R.S.E.     3.9,  (,d. 

Education,  Three  Lectures  on  the  Practice  of.  L  On  Mark- 
ing, by  h.w.eve,  ma.  II.  On  Stimulus,  by  A.  SiDGWiCK,  M.A.  III.  On 
the  Teaching  of  Latin  Verse  Composition,  by  E.  A.  Abbott,  D.D.     is. 

Stimulus.     A   Lecture  delivered   for  the   Teachers'  Training 

Syndicate,  May,  1882,  by  A.  Sidgwick,  M.A.     ij. 

Locke  on  Education.    By  the  Rev.  R.  H.  Quick,  M.A.    y.  6d. 
Milton's  Tractate  on  Education.    A  facsimile  reprint  from 

the  Edition  of  1673.     By  O.  Browning,  M.A.     is. 

Modern  Languages,  Lectures  on  the  Teaching  of.    By  C. 

COLBECK,   M.A.       2S. 

Teacher,  General  Aims  of  the,  and  Form  Management.    Two 

Lectures  dehvered  in  the  University  of  Cambridge  in  the  Lent  Term,  1883,  by 
F.  W.  Farrar,  D.D.,  and  R.  B.  Poole,  B.D.     i.r.  6d. 

Teaching,  Theory  and  Practice  of.    By  the  Rev.  E.  Turing, 

M.A.,  late  Head  Master  of  Uppingham  School.     New  Edition.    4^.  6d. 


British  India,  a  Short  History  of.    By  E.  S.  Carlos,  M.A., 

late  Head  Master  of  E.xeter  Grammar  School,     is. 

Geography,  Elementary  Commercial.    A  Sketch  of  the  Com- 
modities and  the  Countries  of  the  World.    By  H.  R.  Mill,  D.Sc,  F.R.S.E.    is. 

Geography,  an  Atlas  of  Commercial.    (A  Companion  to  the 

above.)     By  J.  G.  Bartholomew,  F.R.G.S.     With  an  Introduction  by  Hugh 
Robert  Mill,  D.Sc.     3^:-. 


VII.     MATHEMATICS. 

Euclid's  Elements  of  Geometry.    Books  I.  and  II.    By  H.  M. 

Taylor,  M.A.,  Fellow  and  late  Tutor  of  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,     is.  6d. 

Books  III.  and  IV.     By  the  same  Editor. 

[^Nearly  ready. 

Elementary  Algebra  (with  Answers  to  the  Examples).     By 

W.  W.  Rouse  Ball,  M.A.    4s.  td. 

Other  Volumes  are  in  preparation. 


London:    Cambridge  Warehouse^  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


PUBLICATIONS  OF 


CJe   Camirilifle   33thle  for 

General  Editor  :  J.  J.  S.  PEROWNE,  D.D., 
Dean  of  Peterborough. 

"//  is  difficult  to  commend  too  highly  this  excellent  series. — Guardian. 

•'  The  modesty  of  the  general  title  of  this  series  has,  we  believe,  led 
7nany  to  misunderstand  its  character  and  underrate  its  value.  The  books 
are  well  suited  for  study  in  the  upper  forms  of  our  best  schools,  but  not 
the  less  are  they  adapted  to  the  wants  of  all  Bible  students  who  are  tiot 
specialists.  We  doubt,  indeed,  whether  any  of  the  numerous  popular 
commentaries  recently  issued  in  this  coufitry  will  be  found  ?nore  ser- 
viceable for  general  use." — Academy. 

Noia  Ready.     Cloth,  Extra  Fcap.  Zvo.     With  Maps. 
Book  of  Joshua.     By  Rev.  G.  F.  Maclear,  D.D.     7.s.  6d. 
Book  of  Judges.    By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.    3^.  6d. 
First  Book  of  Samuel.  ByRev.Prof.  Kirkpatrick,B.D.  3j.6<^. 
Second  Book  of  Samuel.    By  Rev.  Prof.  Kirkpatrick,  B.D. 

First  Book  of  Kings.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D.     3^.  6d. 
Second  Book  of  Kings.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D.     y,  6d. 
Book  of  Job.    By  Rev.  A.  B.  Davidson,  D.D.    5^. 
Book  of  Ecclesiastes.  By  Very  Rev.  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.D.  5^. 
Book  of  Jeremiah.    By  Rev.  A.  W.  Streane,  M.A.    4^.  6d. 
Book  of  Hosea.     By  Rev.  T.  K.  Cheyne,  M.A.,  D.D.     3^. 
Books  of  Obadiah  &  Jonah.   By  Archdeacon  Perowne.  2s.6d. 
Book  of  Micah.    By  Rev.  T.  K.  Cheyne,  M.A.,  D.D.     is.  dd. 
Haggai,  Zechariah  &  Malachi.   By  Arch.  Perowne.    y.  6d. 
Book  of  Malachi.    By  Archdeacon  Perowne.     is. 
Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew.  ByRev.A.CARR,M.A.  2s.6d. 
Gospel  according  to  St  Mark.    By  Rev.   G.   F.   Maclear, 

D.D.     2s.  6d. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Luke.  By  Arch.  Farrar,  D.D.  4^.  6d 
Gospel  according  to  St  John.  ByRev.A.PLUMMER,  D.D.  ^s.6d. 
Acts  of  the  Apostles.  By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D.  4^.  6d. 
Epistle  to  the  Romans.  By  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  M.A.  y.  6d. 
First  Corinthians.  By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.  With  Map.  2s. 
Second  Corinthians.    By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.    With  Map.    2s. 

Londoti:    Cambridge   IVare/touse,  Ave  Maria  Lane, 


THE  CAMBRIDGE   UNIVERSITY  PRESS. 


Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  ByRev.  E.  H.  Perowne,D.D.  is.dd. 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  By  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  M.A.  2j-.  dd. 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians.    By  Rev.  H.  C.  G.  Moule,  M.A. 

IS.  (>d. 

Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.    By  Arch.  Farrar,  D.D.    3^.  bd. 
General  Epistle  of  St  James.    By  Very  Rev.  E.  H.  Plumptre, 

D.D.     T.S.  6d. 

Epistles  of  St  Peter  and  St  Jude.    By  Very  Rev.  E.  H. 

Plumptre,  D.D.     2s.  6d. 

Epistles  of  St  John.  By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  M.A.,  D.D.  y.  6d. 
Book  of  Revelation.    By  Rev.  W.  H.  Simcox,  M.A.    y. 

Preparing. 
Book  of  Genesis.     By  Very  Rev.  the  Dean  of  Peterborough. 
Books  of  Exodus,  Numbers  and  Deuteronomy.    By  Rev 

C.  D.  GiNSBURG,  LL.D. 

Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.    By  Rev.  Prof.  Rvle,  M.A. 
Book  of  Psalms.     Part  I.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Kirkpatrick,  B.D. 
Book  of  Isaiah.    By  Prof.  W.  Robertson  Smith,  M.A. 
Book  of  Ezekiel.    By  Rev.  A.  B.  Davidson,  D.D. 
Epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  Philemon.    By  Rev.  H.  C.  G. 

Moule,  M.A. 

Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians.  By  Rev.  G.  G.  Findlay,  M.A. 
Epistles  to  Timothy  &  Titus.  By  Rev.  A.  E.  Humphreys,  M.A. 


€\)t  Sbmaller  Camljritige  33iI)Ie  for  ^d)cioIsi» 

The  Smaller  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  will  form  an  entirely 
new  series  of  commentaries  on  some  selected  books  of  the  Bible.  It  is  expected 
that  they  will  be  prepared  for  the  most  part  by  the  Editors  of  the  larger 
series  (The  Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges).  The  volumes 
will  be  issued  at  a  low  price,  and  will  be  suitable  to  the  requirements  of 
preparatory  and  elementary  schools. 

Now  ready. 

First  and  Second  Books  of  Samuel.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Kirk- 
patrick, B.D.    i^.  each. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew.  By  Rev.  A.  Carr,  M.A.   \s. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Mark.  ByRev.G.F.  Maclear,D.D.  \s. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Luke.    By  Archdeacon  Farrar.   \s. 

Acts  of  the  Apostles.     By  Rev.  Prof.  Lumby,  D.D. 

[Nearly  ready. 

London :    Catniridge   Warehouse,  Ave  Maria  Lane. 


8    PUBLICATIONS  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS. 

Cf)e  Camljrilrge  (Srtefe  Ccsitament  for 
J>rI)ooIsi  antr  Colleges, 

with  a  Revised  Text,  based  on  the  most  recent  critical  authorities,  and 
English  Notes,  prepared  under  the  direction  of  the  General  Editor, 

The  Very  Reverend  J.  J.  S.  PEROWNE,  D.D., 
Dean  of  Peterborough. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Matthew.    By  Rev,  A.  Carr,  M.A. 

With  4  Maps.     4^.  6d. 

Gospel  according  to  St  Mark.    By  Rev.  G.  F.  Maclear,  D.D. 

With  3  Maps.     4^.  bd. 

Gospel   according   to   St  Luke.    By  Archdeacon  Farrar. 

With  4  Maps.     ds. 

Gospel  according  to  St  John.    By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  D.D. 

With  4  Maps.     6j. 

Acts    of   the    Apostles.     By   Rev.    Professor   Lumby,   D.D. 

With  4  Maps.     ts. 

First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.   By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.  y. 
Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians.     By  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A. 

[/«  tfie  Press. 

Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.   By  Archdeacon  Farrar,  D.  D,   y.  6d. 
Epistle  of  St  James.    By  Very  Rev.  E.  H.  Plumptre,  D.D. 

[Preparing. 

Epistles  of  St  John.    By  Rev.  A.  Plummer,  M.A.,  D.D.    4^. 


aonlion:    C.   J.  CLAY  and  sons, 

CAMBRIDGE  WAREHOUSE,   AVE   MARIA  LANE. 

(Slassnto:    263,   ARGYLE  STREET. 

CambtiBst:    DEIGHTON,   BELL  AND  CO. 

leijjjig:    F.  A.  BROCKHAUS. 


CAitfiRtDtSS:   PRINTED  BY  C.    J.   CLAY,    M.A.   AND  SONS,   AT  THB  UNIVERSITY  PRESS. 


OU^ 


o 

o 

to 


O 


0) 

o 
•»> 

0) 
fH 
•♦> 

ca 
o 

0) 

43 


IP 

I** 


E-4    n 

•H    O    0)  &I 

«  O  w 


University  of  Toropto 
Library 


DO  NOT 

REMOVE 

THE 

CARD 

FROM 

THIS 

POCKET 


Acme  Library  Card  Pocket 
LOWE-MARTIN  CO.  limited 


MMMMHMIMM 


f 


HWIMnM4H>*K>>BM