| RPM, Volume 18, Number 52, December 18 to December 24, 2016 |
THE Jews valued their religion on many accounts. One was that it had been given by the instrumentality of distinguished prophets sent from God, and by the medium of angels. The apostle, in the previous chapters, had shown that, in these respects, the Christian religion had the advantage over theirs, for it had been communicated by one who was superior to any of the prophets, and who had a rank above the angels. Next to this, they valued their religion because it had been imparted by a law-giver so eminent as Moses—a man more distinguished than any other one on earth as a legislator. To him they looked with pride as the founder of their economy, and the medium through whom God had given them their peculiar laws. Next to him, their high priest was the most important functionary in the nation. He was at the head of their religion, and served to distinguish it from all others; for they high priest was recognised. The apostle, therefore, proceeds to show, that in these respects the Christian religion had lost nothing, but had the advantage altogether—that it was founded by one superior to Moses, and that Christ, as high priest, was superior by far, to the high priest of the Jews.
This chapter, and to verse 13 of chapter 4, relates to the first of these points, and is occupied with showing the superiority of the Redeemer to Moses, and the consequences which result from the admission of that fact. It consists, therefore, of two parts.
I. The first is employed in showing, that if the Author of the Christian religion is compared with Moses, he has the preference, Heb 3:1-6. Moses was indeed faithful, but it was as a servant. Christ was faithful as a Son. He had a rank as much above that of Moses as one who builds a house has over the house itself.
II. The consequences that resulted from that, Heb 3:7-19, and Heb 4:1-13. The general doctrine here is, that there would be special danger in apostatizing from the Christian religion —danger far superior to that which was threatened to the Israelites if they were disobedient to Moses. In illustrating this, the apostle is naturally led to a statement of the warnings against defection under Moses, and of the consequences of unbelief and rebellion there, he entreats them, therefore,
(1,) not to harden their hearts against God, as the Israelites did, who were excluded from Canaan, Heb 3:7-11.
(2.) To be on their guard against unbelief, Heb 3:12.
(3.) To exhort one another constantly, and to stimulate one another, that they might not fall away, Heb 3:13.
(4.) To hold the beginning of their confidence steadfast unto the end, and not to provoke God, as they did who came out of Egypt, Heb 3:14-19. In the following chapter (Heb 4:1-13) he completes the exhortation, by showing them that many, who came out of Egypt, were excluded from the promised land, and that there was equal danger now; and then proceeds with the comparison of Christ with the Jewish high priest, and extends that comparison through the remainder of the doctrinal part of the epistle.
Verse 1. Wherefore. That is, since Christ sustains such a character as has been stated in the previous chapter; since he is so able to succour those who need assistance; since he assumed our nature that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest, his character ought to be attentively considered, and we ought to endeavour fully to understand it.
Holy brethren The name brethren is often given to Christians to denote that they are of one family. It is possible, also, that the apostle may have used the word here in a double sense—denoting that they were his brethren as Christians, and as Jews. The word holy is applied to them to denote that they were set apart to God, or that they were sanctified. The Jews were often called a "holy people," as being consecrated to God; and Christians are holy, not only as consecrated to God, but as sanctified.
Partakers of the heavenly calling. On the meaning of the word calling, See Barnes "Eph 4:1".
The "heavenly calling" denotes the calling which was given to them from heaven, or which was of a heavenly nature. It pertained to heaven, not to earth; it came from heaven, not from earth; it was a calling to the reward and happiness of heaven, and not to the pleasures and honours of the world.
Consider. Attentively ponder all that is said of the Messiah. Think of his rank; his dignity; his holiness; his sufferings; his death; his resurrection, ascension, intercession. Think of him, that you may see the claims to a holy life; that you may learn to bear trials; that you may be kept from apostasy. The character and work of the Son of God are worthy of the profound and prayerful consideration of every man; and especially every Christian should reflect much on him. Of the friend that we love we think much; but what friend have we like the Lord Jesus?
The Apostle. The word apostle is nowhere else applied to the Lord Jesus. The word means one who is sent—and in this sense it might be applied to the Redeemer as one sent by God, or as by way of eminence THE one sent by him. But the connexion seems to demand that there should be some allusion here to one who sustained a similar rank among the Jews; and it is probable that the allusion is to Moses, as having been the great apostle of God to the Jewish people, and that Paul here means to say, that the Lord Jesus, under the new dispensation, filled the place of Moses and of the high priest under the old, and that the office of "apostle" and "high priest," instead of being now separated, as it was between Moses and Aaron under the old dispensation, was now blended in the Messiah. The name apostle is not indeed given to Moses directly in the Old Testament, but the verb from which the Hebrew word for apostle is derived is frequently given him. Thus, in Ex 3:10, it is said, "Come now, therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh." And in Heb 3:13, "The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you." So also in Heb 3:14,15, of the same chapter. From the word there used—to send, the word denoting apostle—is derived; and it is not improbable that Moses would be regarded as being, by way of eminence, THE one sent by God. Further, the Jews applied the word apostle, to the minister of the synagogue; to him who presided over its affairs, and who had the general charge of the services there; and in this sense it might be applied by way of eminence to Moses, as being the general director and controller of the religious affairs of the nation, and as sent for that purpose. The object of Paul is to show that the Lord Jesus, in the Christian system—as the great apostle sent from God—sustained a rank and office similar to this, but superior in dignity and authority.
And High Priest. One great object of this epistle is, to compare the Lord Jesus with the high priest of the Jews, and to show that he was in all respects superior. This was important, because the office of high priest was that which eminently distinguished the Jewish religion, and because the Christian religion proposed to abolish that. It became necessary, therefore, to show that all that was dignified and valuable in that office was to be found in the Christian system. This was done by showing that in the Lord Jesus was found all the characteristics of a high priest, and that all the functions which had been performed in the Jewish ritual were performed by him, and that all which had been prefigured by the Jewish high priest was fulfilled in him. The apostle here merely alludes to him, or names him as the high priest, and then postpones the consideration of his character, in that respect, till after he had compared him with Moses.
Of our profession. Of our religion; of that religion which we profess. The apostle and high priest whom we confessed as ours when we embraced the Christian religion.
{a} "High Priest" Heb 4:14
Verse 2. Who was faithful. See Barnes "Heb 2:17".
He performed with fidelity all the functions entrusted to him.
To him that appointed him. Marg. Made. The word made, however, is used in the sense of constituted or appointed. The meaning is, that he was faithful to God. Perhaps Paul urges on them the necessity of considering his fidelity in order to keep them from the danger of apostasy. A leading object of this epistle was to preserve those whom he addressed from apostatizing from God, amidst the temptations and trials to which they were exposed. In doing this, what could be a more powerful argument than to direct their attention to the unwavering constancy and fidelity of the Lord Jesus? The importance of such a virtue in the Saviour is manifest. It is seen everywhere; and all the great interests of the world depend on it. A husband should maintain inviolate fidelity towards a wife, and a wife towards her husband; a child should be faithful to a parent, a clerk and apprentice to his employer, a lawyer to his client, a physician to his patient, an ambassador to the government that commissions him. No matter what may be the temptations in the way; in all these, and in all other relations, there should be inviolate fidelity. The welfare of the world depended on the faithfulness of the Lord Jesus. Had he failed in that, all would have been lost. His fidelity was worthy of the more attentive consideration, from the numerous temptations which beset his path, and the attempts which were made to turn him aside from his devotedness to God. Amidst all the temptations of the adversary, and all the trials through which he passed, he never for a moment swerved from fidelity to the great trust which had been committed to his hands. What better example to preserve them, from the temptations to apostasy, could the apostle propose to the Christians whom he addressed? What, in these temptations and trials, could be more appropriate than for them to "consider" the example of the great Apostle and High Priest of their profession? What more proper for us now, in the trials and temptations of our lives, than to keep that great and glorious example continually before our eyes?
As also Moses was faithful, Fidelity to God was remarkable in Moses. In all the provocations and rebellions of the Jews, he was firm and unwavering. This is affirmed of him in Nu 12:7, to which place the apostle here alludes:—"My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all his house." The word house, as applied to Moses, is used probably in the sense of family, as it often is, and refers to the family over which he presided—that is, the Jewish nation. The whole Jewish people were a household, or the family of God, and Moses was appointed to preside over it, and was faithful in the functions of his office there.
{b} "Moses" Nu 12:7
Verse 3. For this man. The Lord Jesus. The word "man" is understood, but there can be no doubt that he is referred to.
Was counted worthy. Was more worthy; or is more worthy. The word here used does not refer to anything that had been said of him, or to any estimate which had been made of him. It means simply that he was worthy of more honour than Moses. How he was so Paul proceeds to show.
Of more glory doxhv. Honour, dignity, regard. He really had a higher rank, and was worthy of more respect. This was saying much for the Messiah; and that it was proper to say this Paul proceeds to show. He did not attempt in any way to undervalue Moses and his institutions. He gave him all the honour which the Jews were themselves disposed to render him. He admitted that he had been eminently faithful in the station where God had placed him; and he then proceeds to show that the Lord Jesus was entitled to honour superior to that, and that hence the Christian religion had more to attach its friends to it than the Jewish had.
Inasmuch as he who hath builded the house. The idea here is, either that he who is the maker of a house—the architect— is worthy of more respect than the house itself; or that he who is the founder of a family is worthy of more honour than the family of which he is the founder. It seems to me that the former is the meaning—for the latter is not always true. The founder of a family may be really deserving of much less respect than some of his descendants. But it is always true that the architect is worthy of more respect than the house which he makes. He exhibits intellect and skill. The house, however splendid, has neither. The plan of the house was drawn by him; its beauty, its proportions, its ornaments, are what he made them, and but for him they would not have existed, Michael Angelo was worthy of more honour than "St. Peter's" at Rome; and Sir Christopher Wren worthy of more than St. Paul's at London. Galileo is more worthy of praise than the telescope, and Fulton more than a steam-engine. All the evidence of skill and adaptedness that there is in the invention had its origin in the inventor; all the beauty of the statue or the temple had its origin in the mind of him that designed it, an author is worthy of more honour than a book; and he that forms a work of art is worthy of more respect than the work itself. This is the idea here. Paul assumes that all things owed their origin to the Son of God, Heb 1:2,8,10.
He was the Author of the universe; the Source of all wise and well-founded systems; the Originator of the Jewish dispensation, over which Moses presided. Whatever beauty or excellence there might have been, therefore, in that system, was to be traced to him; and whatever ability even Moses displayed was imparted by him. Christ is really the head of the family over which Moses presided, and has claims, therefore, to higher honour as such.
{c} "builded" Zec 6:12,13
Verse 4. For every house is builded by some man. The words in this verse are plain, and the sentiment in it clear. The only difficulty is in seeing the connexion, and in understanding how it is intended to bear on what precedes, or on what follows. It is clear that every house must have a builder, and equally clear that God is the Creator of all things. But what is the meaning of this passage in this connexion? What is its bearing on the argument? If the verse was entirely omitted, and the fifth verse read in connexion with the third, there would be apparently nothing wanting to complete the sense of the writer, or to finish the comparison which he had commenced. Various ways have been adopted to explain the difficulty. Perhaps the following observations may remove it, and express the true sense.
(1.) Every family must have a founder; every dispensation an author; every house a builder. There must be some one, therefore, over all dispensations —the old and the new—the Jewish and the Christian.
(2.) Paul assumes that the Lord Jesus was Divine. He had demonstrated this in Heb 1; and he argues as if this were so, without now stopping to prove it, or even to affirm it expressly.
(3.) God must be over all things. He is Creator of all; and he must therefore be over all. As the Lord Jesus, therefore, is Divine, he must be over the Jewish dispensation as well as the Christian—or he must, as God, have been at the head of that—or over his own family or household.
(4.) As such, he must have a glory and honour which could not belong to Moses. He, in his Divine character, was the Author of both the Jewish and the Christian dispensations; and he must, therefore, have a rank far superior to that of Moses—which was the point which the apostle designed to illustrate. The meaning of the whole may be thus expressed:— "The Lord Jesus is worthy of more honour than Moses, He is so, as the maker of a house deserves more honour than the house. He is Divine. In the beginning he laid the foundation of the earth, and was the agent in the creation of all things, Heb 1:2,10. He presides, therefore, over everything; and was over the Jewish and Christian dispensations—for there must have been some one over them, or the author of them, as really as it must be true that every house is built by some person. Being, therefore, over all things, and at the head of all dispensations, he MUST be more exalted than Moses." This seems to me to be the argument—- an argument which is based on the supposition that he is at the head of all things, and that he was the agent in the creation of all worlds. This view will make all consistent. The Lord Jesus will be seen to have a claim to a far higher honour than Moses, and Moses will be seen to have derived his honour, as a servant of the Mediator, in the economy which he had appointed.
Verse 5. Moses was faithful—as a servant. Not as the head of the dispensation; not as having originated it; but as in the employ and under the direction of its great Founder and Author—the Messiah. As such a servant he deserves all the honour for fidelity which has ever been claimed for him, but it cannot be the honour which is due to him who is at the head of the family or house. Paul assumed that Moses was a servant, and argued on that supposition, without attempting to prove it, because it was so often affirmed in the Old Testament, and must have been conceded by all the Jews. In numerous instances he is spoken of as "THE servant of the Lord." See Jos 1:1,2; 9:24 1 Ch 6:49; 2 Ch 24:9; Ne 10:29; Da 9:11; Ex 14:31; 1 Ki 8:56; Ps 105:26.
As this point was undisputed, it was only necessary to show that the Messiah was superior to a servant, in order to make the argument clear.
For a testimony. To bear witness to those truths which were to be revealed; that is, he was the instrument of the Divine communications to the people, or the medium by which God made his will known. He did not originate the truths himself; but he was the mere medium by which God made known his truth to his people—a servant whom he employed to make his will known. The word "after" here is not necessary in order to a just translation of this passage, and obscures the sense. It does not mean that he was a witness of those truths which were to be spoken subsequently to his time, under another dispensation; nor those truths which the apostle proposed to consider in another part of the epistle, as Doddridge supposes; but it means merely that Moses stood forth as a public witness of the truths which God designed to reveal, or which were to be spoken. God did not speak to his people directly, and face to face, but he spoke through Moses, as an organ or medium. The sense is, Moses was a mere servant of God to communicate his will to man.
{a} "Moses, verily" Nu 12:7
{b} "servant" Jos 1:2
{c} "of those things" De 18:15-19
Verse 6. But Christ as a son over his own house. He is not a servant. To the whole household or family of God he sustains the same relation which a son and heir in a family does to the household. That relation is far different from that of a servant. Moses was the latter; Christ was the former. To God he sustained the relation of a Son, and recognised him as his Father, and sought in all things to do his will; but over the whole family of God—the entire Church of all dispensations—he was like a son over the affairs of a family. Compared with the condition of a servant, Christ is as much superior to Moses as a son and heir is to the condition of a servant. A servant owns nothing; is heir to nothing; has no authority, and no right to control anything, and is himself wholly at the will of another. A son is the heir of all; has a prospective right to all; and is looked up to by all with respect. But the idea here is not merely that Christ is a son; it is that as a son he is placed over the whole arrangements of the household, and is one to whom all is entrusted as if it were his own.
Whose house we are. Of whose family we are a part, or to which we belong. That is, we belong to the family over which Christ is placed, and not to that which was subject to Moses.
If we hold fast. A leading object of this epistle is to guard those to whom it was addressed against the danger of apostasy. Hence this is introduced on all suitable occasions; and the apostle here says, that the only evidence which they could have that they belonged to the family of Christ, would be that they held fast the confidence which they had unto the end. If they did not do that, it would demonstrate that they never belonged to his family, for evidence of having belonged to his household was to be furnished only by perseverance to the end.
The confidence. The word here used originally means, the liberty of speaking boldly and without restraint; then it means boldness, or confidence in general.
And the rejoicing. The word here used means, properly, glorying, boasting, and then rejoicing. These words are used here in an adverbial signification, and the meaning is, that the Christian has a confident and a rejoicing hope. It is
(1.) confident—bold—firm. It is not like the timid hope of the pagan, and the dreams and conjectures of the philosopher; it is not that which gives way at every breath of opposition; it is bold, firm, and manly. It is
(2.) rejoicing—triumphant, exulting. Why should not the hope of heaven fill with joy? Why should not he exult who has the prospect of everlasting happiness?
Unto the end. To the end of life. Our religion, our hope, our confidence in God, must be persevered in to the end of life, if we would have evidence that we are his children. If hope is cherished for a while, and then abandoned; if men profess religion, and then fall away—no matter what were their raptures and triumphs—it proves that they never had any real piety. No evidence can be strong enough to prove that a man is a Christian, unless it leads him to persevere to the end of life.
{d} "son" Ps 2:7,12
{e} "house" 1 Pe 2:15
{f} "if we hold fast" Mt 10:22; Heb 10:38,39
Verse 7. Wherefore. In view of the fact that the Author of the Christian dispensation has a rank far superior to that of Moses. Because Christ has claims on us far greater than those which Moses had, let us hearken to his voice, and dread his displeasure.
As the Holy Ghost saith. In Ps 95:7-11. This is full proof that, in the estimation of the author of this epistle, the writer of this Psalm was inspired. The Holy Ghost speaks through the word which he has revealed. The apostle quotes this passage, and applies it to those whom he addressed, because the admonition was as pertinent and important under the Christian dispensation as it was under the Jewish. The danger of hardening the heart by neglecting to hear his voice was as great, and the consequences would be as fearful and alarming.—We should regard the solemn warnings in the Old Testament against sin, and against the danger of apostasy, as addressed by the Holy Ghost to us. They are as applicable to us as they were to those to whom they were at first addressed; and we need all the influence of such appeals, to keep us from apostasy, as much as they did.
Today. Now; at present. At the very time when the command is addressed to you. It is not to be put off till tomorrow. All God's commands relate to the present—to this day—to the passing moment. He gives us no commands about the future, he does not require us to repent; and to turn to him to-morrow, or ten years hence. The reasons are obvious.
(1.) Duty pertains to the present. It is our duty to turn from sin, and to love him now.
(2.) We know not that we shall live to another day. A command, therefore, could not extend to that time, unless it were accompanied with a revelation that we should live till then—and such a revelation God does not choose to give. Every one, therefore, should feel that whatever commands God addresses to him are addressed to him now. Whatever guilt he incurs by neglecting those commands is incurred now. For the present neglect and disobedience each one is to answer—and each one must give account to God for what he does TODAY.
If ye will hear. In case you are willing to hearken to God, listen now, and do not defer it to a future period.—There is much in a willingness to hear the voice of God. A willingness to learn is usually the precursor of great attainments in knowledge. A willingness to reform is usually the precursor of reformation. Get a man willing to break off his habits of profaneness or intemperance, and usually all the rest is easy. The great difficulty in the mind of a sinner is in his will. He is unwilling to hear the voice of God; unwilling that he should reign over him; unwilling now to attend to religion. While this unwillingness lasts he will make no efforts, and he sees, or creates, a thousand difficulties in the way of his becoming a Christian. But when that unwillingness is overcome, and he is disposed to engage in the work of religion, difficulties vanish, and the work of salvation becomes easy.
His voice. The voice of God speaking to us
(1.) in his written word;
(2.) in the preached gospel;
(3.) in our own consciences;
(4.) in the events of his Providence;
(5.) in the admonitions of our relatives and friends. Whatever conveys to us the truth of God, or is adapted to impress that on us, may be regarded as his voice speaking to us. He thus speaks to us every day in some of these ways; and every day, therefore, he may entreat us not to harden our hearts.
{g} "Today" Ps 95:7
Verse 8. Harden not your hearts. Do not render the heart insensible to the Divine voice and admonition. A hard heart is that where the conscience is seared and insensible; where truth makes no impression; where no religious effect is produced by afflictions; where preaching is listened to without interest; and where the mind is unaffected by the appeals of friends. The idea here is, that a refusal to listen to the voice of God is connected with a hardening of the heart. It is in two ways.
(1.) The very refusal to do this tends to harden it. And
(2.) in order to resist the appeals of God, men must resort to the means of voluntarily hardening the heart. This they do by setting themselves against the truth; by the excuses which they offer for not becoming Christians; by plunging into sin in order to avoid serious impressions; and by direct resistance of the Holy Ghost. No inconsiderable part of the efforts of sinners consists in endeavouring to produce insensibility in their minds to the truth and the appeals of God.
As in the provocation. Literally, in the embittering— Then it means that which embitters or provokes the mind—as disobedience. Here it refers to what they did to embitter the mind of God against them; that is, to the course of conduct which was adopted to provoke him to wrath.
In the day of temptation. In the time of temptation—the word day being used here, as it is often, to denote an indefinite period, or time in general. The word temptation here refers to the various provocations by which they tried the patience of God. They rebelled against him; they did that which put the Divine patience and forbearance to a trial. It does not mean that they tempted God to do evil, but that his long-suffering was tried by their sins.
In the wilderness. The desert through which they passed. The word wilderness, in the Scriptures, commonly means a desert. See Barnes "Mt 3:1".
"One provocation was in demanding bread at Sin; a second for want of water at Massah or Meribah; a third time at Sinai with the golden calf; a fourth time at Taberah for want of flesh; a fifth time at Kadesh, when they refused to go up into Canaan, and the oath came that they should die in the wilderness. A like refusal may prevent us from entering into rest."—Dr. J. P. Wilson, MS. Notes.
Verse 9. Proved me. "As if they would have made an experiment how much it was possible for me to bear." Doddridge. The meaning is, they put my patience to a thorough trial.
And saw my works. That is, my miracles, or my interpositions in their behalf. They saw the wonders at the Red Sea, the descent on Mount Sinai, the supply of manna, etc.; and yet, while seeing those works, they rebelled. Even while sinners look on the doings of God, and are surrounded by the proofs of his power and goodness, they rebel, and provoke him to anger. Men sin when God is filling their houses with plenty; when he opens his hand daily to supply their wants; when they behold the manifestations of his goodness on the sea and on the land; and even in the midst of all the blessings of redemption they provoke him to wrath.
Forty years. The whole time during which they were passing from Egypt to the promised land. This may mean, either that they saw his works forty years, or that they tempted him forty years. The sense is not materially affected, whichever interpretation is preferred.
Verse 10. Wherefore I was grieved. On the word grieved, See Barnes "Eph 4:30".
The word here means that he was offended with, or that he was indignant at them.
They do alway err in their heart. Their long trial of forty years had been sufficient to show that it was a characteristic of the people that they were disposed to wander from God. Forty years are enough to show what the character is. They had seen his works; they had been called to obey him; they had received his law; and yet their conduct, during that time, had shown that they were not disposed to obey him. So of an individual. A man who has lived in sin forty years; who during all that time has rebelled against God, and disregarded all his appeals; who has lived for himself, and not for his Maker, has shown what his character is. Longer time is unnecessary; and if God should then cut him down, and consign him to hell, he could not be blamed for doing it. A man who during forty years will live in sin, and resist all the appeals of God, shows what is in his heart; and no injustice is done if then he is summoned before God, and he swears that he shall not enter into his rest.
And they have not known my ways. They have been rebellious. They have not been acquainted with the true God; or they have not approved my doings. The word know is often used, in the Scriptures, in the sense of approving, or loving. See Barnes "Mt 7:23".
Verse 11. So I sware in my wrath. God is often represented in the Scriptures as swearing—and usually as swearing by himself, or by his own existence. Of course this is figurative, and denotes a strong affirmation, or a settled and determined purpose. An oath with us implies the strongest affirmation, or the expression of the most settled and determined purpose of mind. The meaning here is, that so refractory and perverse had they showed themselves, that he solemnly resolved that they should never enter into the land of Canaan.
They shall not enter into my rest. Marg. As in the original, if they shall enter. That is, they shall not enter. The word if has this negative meaning in Hebrew, and this meaning is transferred to the Greek word if. Comp. 1 Sa 3:17; 2 Sa 3:35; 2 Ki 6:31.
It is called "my rest" here; meaning that it was such rest as God had provided, or such as he enjoyed. The particular rest referred to here was that of the land of Canaan, but which was undoubtedly regarded as emblematic of the "rest" in heaven. Into that rest God solemnly said they should never enter. They had been rebellious. All the means of reclaiming them had failed. God had warned and entreated them; he had caused his mercies to pass before them, and had visited them with judgments in vain; and he now declares, that for all their rebellion they should be excluded from the promised land. God speaks here in the manner of men. Men are affected with feelings of indignation in such circumstances, and God makes use of such language as expresses such feelings. But we are to understand it in a manner consistent with his character, and we are not to suppose that he is affected with the same emotions which agitate the bosoms of men. The meaning is, that he formed and expressed a deliberate and solemn purpose, that they should never enter into the promised land. Whether this rest refers here to heaven, and whether the meaning is that God would exclude them from that blessed world, will be more appropriately considered in the next chapter. The particular idea is, that they were to be excluded from the promised land, and that they should fall in the wilderness. No one can doubt, also, that their conduct had been such as to show that the great body of them were unfit to enter into heaven.
{1} "They shall not enter" "if they shall enter"
Verse 12. Take heed, brethren. In view of the conduct of the rebellious Jews, and of their fearful doom, be on your guard lest you also be found to have had the same feelings of rebellion and unbelief. See to it, that under the new dispensation, and in the enjoyment of the privileges of the gospel, you be not found to manifest such feelings as shall exclude you from the heavenly world. The principle has been settled by their unbelief, that they who oppose God will be excluded from his rest. That may be shown under all dispensations, and in all circumstances; and there is not less danger of it under the gospel, than there was when the fathers were conducted to the promised land. You are travelling through a wilderness—the barren wilderness of this world. You are exposed to trials and temptations. You meet with many a deadly and mighty foe. You have hearts prone to apostasy and sin. You are seeking a land of promise—a land of rest. You are surrounded by the wonders of almighty power, and by the proofs of infinite beneficence. Disobedience and rebellion in you will as certainly exclude you from heaven, as their rebellion did them from the promised land; and as their great sin was unbelief, be on your guard lest you manifest the same.
An evil heart of unbelief. An evil, unbelieving heart. The word unbelief is used to qualify the word heart by a Hebraism—a mode of speech that is common in the New Testament. An unbelieving heart was the cause of their apostasy, and what worked their ruin will produce ours. The root of their evil was a want of confidence in God—and this is what is meant here by a heart of unbelief. The great difficulty on earth everywhere is a want of confidence in God and this has produced all the ills that man has ever suffered. It led to the first apostasy; and it has led to every other apostasy, and will continue to produce the same effects to the end of the world. The apostle says that this heart of unbelief is "evil." Men often feel that it is a matter of little consequence whether they have faith or not, provided their conduct is right; and hence they do not see or admit the propriety of what is said about the consequences of unbelief in the Scriptures. But what do they say about a want of confidence between a husband and wife? Are there no evils in that? What husband can sleep with quietness on his pillow, if he has no confidence in the virtue of his wife? What child can have peace who has no confidence in a parent? How can there be prosperity in a community, where there is no confidence in a bank or an insurance office, or where one merchant has no confidence in another; where a neighbour has no confidence in his neighbour; where the sick have no confidence in a physician; and where, in general, all confidence is broken up between man and man? If I wished to produce the deepest distress in any community, and had the power, I would produce the same want of confidence between man and man which there is now between man and his Maker. I would thus take away sleep from the pillow of every husband and wife, every parent and child; and make every man wretched, with the feeling that all the property which he had was insecure. Among men, nothing is seen to be productive of greater evil than a want of confidence or faith; and why should not the same evil exist in the Divine administration? And if want of confidence produces such results between man and man, why should it not produce similar, or greater miseries, where it occurs in relation to God? There is not an evil that man endures which might not be alleviated or removed by confidence in God; and hence one great object of the Christian religion is, to restore to man his lost confidence in the God that made him.
In departing from the living God. Manifested in departing from him; or leading to a departure from him. The idea is, that such a heart of unbelief would be connected with apostasy from God. All apostasy first exists in the heart, and then is manifested in the life. They who indulge in unbelief in any form, or in regard to any subject, should remember that this is the great source of all alienation from God, and that if indulged it will lead to complete apostasy. They who wish to live a life of piety should keep the heart right, he that lives "by the faith of the Son of God" is safe; and none is safe but he.
{a} "evil heart" Mr 7:21,23
{b} "departing" Jer 2:13
Verse 13. But exhort one another daily. This is addressed to the members of the churches; and it follows, therefore,
(1.) that it is their duty to exhort their brethren; and
(2.) that it is their duty to do it daily; that is, constantly. See Heb 10:24; 1 Th 4:18; 5:11; See Barnes "Ro 12:8".
While this is the special duty of the ministers of the gospel, 1 Ti 6:2; 2 Ti 4:2; Tit 2:6,15, it is also the duty of all the members of the churches —and a most important, but much neglected duty. This does not refer to public exhortation, which more appropriately pertains to the ministers of the gospel, but to that private watch and care which the individual members of the church should have over one another. But in what cases is such exhortation proper? What rules should regulate it ? I answer, It may be regarded as a duty, or is to be performed in such cases as the following:—
(1.) Intimate friends in the church should exhort and counsel one another; should admonish each other of their faults; and should aid one another in the divine life.
(2.) Parents should do the same thing to their children. They are placed particularly under their watch and care. A pastor cannot often see the members of his flock in private; and a parent may greatly aid him in his work by watching over the members of their families who are connected with the church.
(3.) Sabbath school teachers may aid much in this duty. They are to be assistants to parents and to pastors. They often have under their care youthful members of the churches. They have an opportunity of knowing their state of mind, their temptations, and their dangers, better than the pastor can have. It should be theirs, therefore, to exhort them to a holy life.
(4.) The aged should exhort the young. Every aged Christian may thus do much for the promotion of religion. His experience is the property of the church; and he is bound so to employ it, as to be useful in aiding the feeble, reclaiming the wandering, recovering the backslider, and directing the inquiring. There is a vast amount of spiritual capital of this kind in the church that is unemployed, and that might be made eminently useful in helping others to heaven.
(5.) Church members should exhort one another. There may not be the intimacy of personal friendship among all the members of a large church, but still the connexion between them should be regarded as sufficiently tender and confidential to make it proper for any one to admonish a brother who goes astray. They belong to the same communion. They sit down at the same Supper of the Lord. They express their assent to the same articles of faith. They are regarded by the community as united. Each member sustains a portion of the honour and the responsibility of the whole; and each member should feel that he has a right, and that it is his duty, to admonish a brother if he goes astray. Yet this duty is greatly neglected. In what church is it performed! How often do church-members see a fellow-member go astray, without any exhortation or admonition! How often do they hear reports of the inconsistent lives of other members, and perhaps contribute to the circulation of these reports themselves, without any pains taken to inquire whether they are true! How often do the poor fear the rich members of the church, or the rich despise the poor, and see each other live in sin, without any attempt to entreat or save them! I would not have the courtesies of life violated. I would not have any assume a dogmatical or dictatorial air. I would have no one step out of his proper sphere of life. But the principle which I would lay down is, that the fact of church-membership should inspire such confidence, as to make it proper for one member to exhort another whom he sees going astray. Belonging to the same family; having the same interest in religion; and all suffering when one suffers, why should they not be allowed tenderly and kindly to exhort one another to a holy life?
While it is called To-day. While life lasts; or while you may be permitted to use the language, "To-day hear the voice of God." The idea is, that the exhortation is not to be intermitted. It is to be our daily business to admonish and exhort one another. Christians are liable every day to go astray; every day they need aid in the divine life; and they who are fellow;heirs with them of salvation should be ever ready to counsel and advise them.
Lest any of you be hardened. See Barnes "Heb 3:8".
It is possible for Christians to become, in a sense, hardened. Their minds become less sensitive than they were to the claims of duty, and their consciences become less tender. Hence the propriety of mutual exhortation, that they may always have the right feeling, and may always listen to the commands of God.
The deceitfulness of sin. See Barnes "Eph 4:22".
Sin is always deceitful. It promises more than it performs. It assures us of pleasure which it never imparts. It leads us on beyond what was supposed when we began to indulge in it. The man who commits sin is always under a delusion; and sin, if he indulges it, will lead him on from one step to another, until the heart becomes entirely hardened. Sin puts on plausible appearances and pretences; it assumes the name of virtue; it offers excuses and palliations, until the victim is snared; and then, spell-bound, he is hurried on to every excess. If sin was always seen in its true aspect when man is tempted to commit it, it would be so hateful that he would flee from it with the utmost abhorrence. What young man would become a drunkard, if he saw, when he began, exactly the career which he would run? What young man, now vigorous and healthful, and with fair prospects of usefulness and happiness, would ever touch the intoxicating bowl, if he saw what he would be when he became a sot? What man would ever enter the room of the gambler, if he saw just where indulgence would soon lead him, and if, at the commencement he saw exactly the woe and despair which would inevitably ensue? Who would become a voluptuary and a sensualist, if he saw exactly the close of such a career? Sin deceives, deludes, blinds. Men do not, or will not, see the fearful results of indulgence. They are deluded by the hope of happiness or of gain; they are drawn along by the fascinations and allurements of pleasure, until the heart becomes hard and the conscience seared—and then they give way without remorse. From such a course the apostle would have Christians guarded by kind and affectionate exhortation. Each one should feel that he has an interest in keeping his brother from such a doom; and each Christian, thus in danger should be willing to listen to the kind exhortation of a Christian brother.
{c} "exhort" Heb 10:24
Verse 14. For we are made partakers of Christ. We are spiritually united to the Saviour. We become one with him. We partake of his Spirit and allotments. The sacred writers are accustomed to describe the Christian as being closely united to the Saviour, and as being one with him. See Barnes "Joh 15:1, seq., See Barnes "Joh 17:21" See Barnes "Joh 17:23" See Barnes "Eph 5:30" See Barnes "1 Co 12:27".
The idea is, that we participate in all that pertains to him. It is a union of feeling and affection; a union of principle and of congeniality; a union of dependence as well as love; a union where nothing is to be imparted by us, but everything gained; and a union, therefore, on the part of the Redeemer of great condescension. It is the union of the branch to the vine, where the branch is supported and nourished by the vine, and not the union of the ivy and the oak, where the ivy has its own roots, and merely clings around the oak and climbs up upon it. What else can be said so honourable of man as that he is "a partaker of Christ;" that he shares his feelings here, and that he is to share his honours in a brighter world? Compared with this, what is it to participate with the rich and the gay in their pleasures; what would it be to share in the honours of conquerors and kings?
If we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast. See Barnes "Heb 3:6".
If we continue to maintain the same confidence which we had in the beginning, or which we showed at the commencement of our Christian life. At first, they had been firm in the Christian hope. They evinced true and strong attachment to the Redeemer. They were ardent and devoted to his cause. If they continued to maintain that to the end, that is, the end of life; if, in the midst of all temptations and trials they adhered inflexibly to the cause of the Savior, they would show that they were true Christians, and would partake of the blessedness of the heavenly world with the Redeemer. The idea is, that it is only perseverance in the ways of religion that constitutes certain evidence of piety. Where piety is manifested through life, or where there is an untiring devotion to the cause of God, there the evidence is clear and undoubted. But where there is at first great ardour, zeal, and confidence, which soon dies away, then it is clear that they never had any real attachment to him and his cause. It may be remarked here, that the "beginning of the confidence" of those who are deceived, and who know nothing about religion at heart, is often as bold as where there is true piety. The hypocrite makes up in ardour what he lacks in sincerity; and he who is really deceived, is usually deceived under the influence of some strong and vivid emotion, which he mistakes for true religion. Often the sincere convert is calm, though decided, and sometimes is even timorous and doubting; while the self-deceiver is noisy in profession, and clamorous in his zeal, and much disposed to blame the lukewarmness of others. Evidence of piety, therefore, should not be built on that early zeal; nor should it be concluded, that because there is ardour, there is of necessity genuine religion. Ardour is valuable, and true religion is ardent; but there is other ardour than that which the gospel inspires. The evidence of genuine piety is to be found in that which will bear us up under trials, and endure amidst persecution and opposition. The doctrine here is, that it is necessary to persevere if we would have the evidence of true piety. This doctrine is taught everywhere in the Scriptures. Persevere in what? I answer, not
(1.) merely in a profession of religion. A man may do that, and have no piety.
(2.) Not in zeal for party or sect. The Pharisees had that to the end of their lives.
(3.) Not in mere honesty, and correctness of external deportment. A man may do that in the church, as well as out of it, and yet have no religion. But we should persevere
(1) in the love of God and of Christ—in conscious, ardent, steady attachment to Him to whom our lives are professedly devoted.
(2) In the secret duties of religion: in that watchfulness over the heart; that communion with God; that careful study of the Bible; that guardianship over the temper; and in that habitual intercourse with God in secret prayer which is appropriate to a Christian, and which marks the Christian character.
(3) In the performance of the public duties of religion: in leading a Christian life, as distinguished from a life of worldliness and vanity—a life of mere morality and honesty—a life such as thousands lead who are out of the church. There is something which distinguishes a Christian from one who is not a Christian; a religious from an irreligious man. There is something in religion; something which serves to characterize a Christian; and unless that something is manifested, there can be no evidence of true piety. The Christian is to be distinguished in temper, feeling, deportment, aims, plans, from the men of this World; and unless those characteristics are shown in the life and deportment, there can be no well-founded evidence of religion. Learn,
(1.) that it is not mere feeling that furnishes evidence of religion.
(2.) That it is not mere excitement that constitutes religion.
(3.) That it is not mere ardour.
(4.) That it is not mere zeal. All these may be temporary. Religion is something that lasts through life. It goes with a man everywhere. It is with him in trial. It forms his plans; regulates his temper; suggests his words; prompts to his actions. It lives with him in all his external changes, and goes with him through the dark valley of death, and accompanies him up to the bar of God, and is with him for ever.
{a} "if we hold" Heb 3:6
Verse 15. While it is said, To-day, etc. That is, persevere as long as life lasts, or as long as it can be said "To-day;" and by persevering in this manner you will have evidence that you are the friends of the Redeemer. This is a quotation from Ps 95:7. Paul means, undoubtedly, to make use of this language himself as a direct exhortation to the Christians to whom he was writing. He entreats them, therefore, as long as it could be said "To-day," or as long as life lasted, to take care lest they should harden their hearts, as had been done in the temptation in the wilderness.
{b} "Today" Heb 3:7
Verse 16. For some. Some of the Hebrews who came out of Egypt. The truth was, that a large proportion of them rebelled against God, and provoked him to indignation. It is somewhat remarkable, that though all the Hebrews seem to have joined in the provocation— except a very small number—Paul should have used language which would seem to imply that the number which rebelled was comparatively small. Another version, therefore, has been given to this passage by some of the most eminent critics, consisting merely in a change in the punctuation, by which a different view is given of the whole sentence. According to this it would be a question, and would mean, "But who were they who when they had heard did provoke? Were they not all, indeed, who came out of Egypt under Moses? And with whom was he angry forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness?" This version was adopted by Chrysostom, Theodoret, and others of the Fathers; and is adopted by Rosenmuller, Clarke, Stuart, Pyle, and some others. In favour of it, it may be alleged
(1.) that the Greek win bear it—all the change required being in the punctuation;
(2.) that it avoids the difficulty which exists in one other interpretation, of supposing the apostle to imply that but few of them rebelled, when the truth was that it was nearly all;
(3.) it thus accords with the remainder of the exhortation which consists in a series of questions; and
(4.) it agrees with the scope and design of the whole. The object was not to state that it was not all who came out of Egypt that rebelled, or that the number was small; but that the great body of them rebelled, and fell in the wilderness, and that Christians should be admonished by their example. These reasons seem to be so strong as to make it probable that this is the true construction; and the sense then will be, "For who were they that having heard did provoke? Were they not all who came out of Egypt under Moses?"
When they had heard. Had heard God speaking to them, and giving them his commands.
Did provoke.Provoked him to anger; or their conduct was such as was fitted to produce indignation. See Barnes "Heb 3:8".
Howbeit. alla. But. This particle "in a series of questions, and standing at the head of a question, means, but, further. It serves to connect, and give intensity to the interrogation." Stuart. Paul means to ask, with emphasis, whether the great mass of those who came out of Egypt did not apostatize at the same time he means to intimate that there is no security that they who have witnessed remarkable manifestations of the greatness of God, and who have partaken of extraordinary mercies, will not apostatize and perish. As the Hebrews, who heard God speak from Mount Sinai, revolted and perished, so it is possible that they who witness the mercies of God in redemption may be in danger of abusing all those mercies, and of perishing. By the example, therefore, of the disobedient Israelites, he would admonish professed Christians of their danger.
Not all, etc. According to the interpretation proposed above, "Were they not all who came out of Egypt?" Or, "Did not all who came out of Egypt?" The word all here is not to be taken in the strict sense. It is often used to denote the great body; a large proportion; or vast multitudes. Thus it is used in Mt 3:5: "Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan." So in Joh 3:26: "The same baptizeth, and all men come to him," So Php 2:21: "For all seek their own." 2 Co 3:2: "Ye are our epistle, known and read of all men." In fact, there were two exceptions—and but two—of the adults who came out of Egypt— Caleb and Joshua, Nu 14:30. All the others murmured against the Lord, and were prohibited from entering the promised land. Of the great multitudes who came out of Egypt, and who murmured, the exception was so small that the apostle had no scruple in saying in general that they were all rebellious.
{a} "For some" Nu 14:2, etc.
Verse 17. But with whom was he grieved forty years? With whom was he angry? See Barnes "Heb 3:10".
Was it not with them that had sinned? That had sinned in various ways —by rebellion, murmuring, in belief. As God was angry with them for their sins, we have the same reason to apprehend that he will be angry with us if we sin; and we should, therefore, be on our guard against that unbelief which would lead us to depart from him, Heb 3:12.
Whose carcases fell, Nu 14:29. That is, they all died, and were left on the sands of the desert. The whole generation was strewed along in the way to Canaan. All of those who had seen the wonders that God had done in the land of Ham—-who had been rescued in so remarkable a manner from oppression—were thus cut down, and died in the deserts through which they were passing, Nu 26:64,65. Such an example of the effects of revolt against God, and of unbelief, was well fitted to admonish Christians in the time of the apostle, and is fitted to admonish us now, of the danger of the sin of unbelief. We are not to suppose that all of those who thus died were excluded from heaven. Moses and Aaron were among the number of those who were not permitted to enter the promised land, but of their piety there can be no doubt. Beyond all question, also, there were many others of that generation who were truly pious. But, at different times, they seem all to have partaken of the prevalent feelings of discontent, and were all involved in the sweeping condemnation that they should die in the wilderness.
{b} "carcases" Nu 26:64,65; Jude 1:5
Verse 18. And to whom sware he. See Barnes "Heb 3:11".
But to them that believed not. That did not confide in God. De 1:32: "Yet in this thing ye did not believe the Lord your God." In consequence of this want of faith, God solemnly sware unto them that they should not enter into the promised land. De 1:34,35: "And the Lord heard the voice of your words, and was wroth, and sware saying, Surely there shall not one of these men of this evil generation see that good land, which I sware to give unto your fathers, save Caleb," etc. The distinct reason, therefore, assigned by —Moses, why they did not enter the promised land, was a want of faith; and this accords directly with the design of the apostle here. He is exhorting those whom he addresses to beware of an evil heart of unbelief, Heb 3:12. He says that it was such a heart that excluded the Hebrews from the promised land. The same thing, says he, must exclude you from heaven—the promised home of the believer; and if that firm confidence in God and his promises which he requires is wanting, you will be excluded from the world of eternal rest.
{c} "sware" De 1:34,35
Verse 19. So we see, etc. We see, from the direct testimony of the Old Testament, that unbelief was the reason why they were excluded from the promised land. Let us learn, in view of the reasoning and exhortations here—
(1.) The evil of unbelief. It excluded that whole generation, consisting of many hundred thousand souls, from the land of promise—the land to which they had looked with ardent hopes, and with warm desires. It will exclude countless millions from heaven. A want of confidence in God is the great source of evil in this world, and will be the cause of wretchedness to all eternity of unnumbered hosts. But surely that was not a small or unimportant thing which strewed the desert with the bones of that whole generation whom God had, in so remarkable a manner, rescued from Egyptian servitude. And that cannot be a small matter which wile cause multitudes to sink down to infinite wretchedness and despair.
(2.) Let us, who are professed Christians, be cautious against indulging unbelief in our hearts. Our difficulties all begin there. We lose confidence in God. We doubt his promises, his oaths, his threatenings. In dark and trying times we begin to have doubts about the wisdom of his dealings, and about his goodness. Unbelief once admitted into the heart is the beginning of many woes. When a man loses confidence in God, he is on a shoreless ocean that is full of whirlpools, and rocks, and quicksands, and where it is impossible to find a secure anchorage. There is nothing to which he may moor his driven bark; and he will never find safety or peace till he comes back to God.
(3.) Let us live a life of faith. Let us so live that we may say with Paul, "The life that I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." So living, we shall have peace. The mind will be at rest. Storms and tempests may blow, but we shall be secure. Others may be troubled in the vicissitudes of life, but our minds will be at peace.
(4.) Let us live expecting the future "rest" that remains for us. Let us keep our eye fixed upon it. To us there is a rest promised, as there was to the Hebrews whom God had delivered from the land of oppression; and we may by faith attain to that, "rest," as they might have reached the land of Canaan.
(5.) Let us persevere to the end. He that draws back must be lost. He that does not endure to the end of life, in the ways of religion, can never have been a Christian. There is nothing which will furnish certain evidence of religion, unless our piety is such as to lead us to persevere till death. The man who enters on the professed Christian life expecting to fall away, or who can look upon the possibility of falling away without concern, has never known anything of the nature of true religion, he cannot be a Christian. He may have had raptures and visions; he may be a loud professor, and a noisy and zealous partisan, but he has no evidence that he has ever known anything about religion. That religion which is not connected with a firm and determined purpose, by the grace of God, to persevere to the end of life, is no true religion; and a man who expects to fall away and go back again to the world, or who can look at such an idea without alarm, should regard it as a settled matter that he has no true knowledge of God.
(6.) No man should delay the work of salvation to a future time. To-day is the accepted time; to-day the only time of which we have any security. God speaks to-day, and to-day his voice should be heard. No man on any subject should defer till to-morrow what ought to be done to-clay. He who defers religion till a future time neglects his own best interest; violates most solemn obligations; and endangers his immortal soul. What security can any one have that he will live to see another day? What evidence has he that he will be any more disposed to attend to his salvation then than he is now? What evidence can he have that he will not provoke God by this course, and bring condemnation on his soul? Of all delusions, that is the most wonderful by which dying men are led to defer attention to the concerns of the soul to a future period of life. Nowhere has Satan such advantage as in keeping this delusion before the mind; and if in respect to anything the voice of warning and alarm should be lifted loud and long, it is in reference to this. Oh, why will not men be wise to-day? Why will they not embrace the offer of salvation now? Why will they not at once make sure of eternal happiness? And why, amidst the changes and trials of this life, will they not so secure the everlasting inheritance as to feel that that is safe—that there is one thing at least that cannot be shaken and disturbed by commercial embarrassment and distress; one thing secure, though friends and kindred are torn away from them; one thing safe when their own health fads, and they lie down on the bed where they will bid adieu to all earthly comforts, and from which they will never rise.
{d} "so we see" Heb 4:6
THIS chapter comprises two parts. In the first, Heb 4:1-13, the apostle pursues and completes the exhortation which he had commenced in the previous chapter, drawn from the comparison of the Saviour with Moses, (see the analysis of chapter 3;) and in the second part, (Heb 4:14-16,) he enters on the consideration of the character of Christ as a high priest, which is pursued to the end of the doctrinal part of the epistle.
In the first part, (Heb 4:1-13,) he describes more at length the character of the "rest" to which he had referred in the previous chapter. He shows (Heb 4:1) that the promise of a "rest" yet remains, and that there is still danger, as there was formerly, of coming short of it, or of losing it. He affirms that such was the nature of that promise, that it is applicable to us as well as to those to whom it was first made, and that the promise of rest as really pertains to Christians now as it did to the Hebrews of old, Heb 4:2. The reason, he adds, (Heb 4:2) why they did not enter into that rest was, that they had not faith. This he had established in the previous chapter, Heb 3:18. In Heb 4:3-6, he proceeds to demonstrate more at length that there is a "rest" remaining for those who believe. The great object, in this part of the chapter, is to prove that a "rest" remains for believers now; a rest of a spiritual character, and much more desirable than that of the land of Canaan; a rest to which Christians may look forward, and which there may be danger of losing. Addressing Hebrew Christians, he, of course, appeals to the Old Testament, and refers to several places where the word "rest" occurs, and argues that those expressions are of such a character as to allow that there remains a "rest" for Christians yet. It would have been easy to have affirmed this as a part of the Christian revelation; but, throughout the epistle, he is bringing his illustrations from the Old Testament, and showing to the Hebrew Christians to whom he wrote that there were abundant considerations in the Old Testament itself, to constitute an argument why they should adhere inviolably to the Christian religion. He says, therefore, (Heb 4:4,) that God himself had spoken of his own rest from his works; that when he had finished the work of creation he had instituted a rest which was characterized by the peace, and beauty, and order of the first Sabbath after the work of creation, when all was new, and lovely, and pure. That might be called the rest of God—a beautiful emblem of that which dwells around his throne in heaven. The meaning of this verse (Heb 4:4) is, that the Bible spoke early of a rest which appertained to God himself. In Heb 4:5, he goes on to say, that the prospect of entering into His rest was spoken of as a possible thing; that some were excluded, but that there was a place deserved to be called "the rest of God"—" My rest"—to which all may come. Of course, that rest must be of a spiritual nature, and must be different from that of the promised land. That "rest," the apostle implies, it was possible to attain. He does not argue this point at length, but he assumes that God would not create a place of rest in vain; that it was made to be enjoyed; and that since those to whom it was at first offered were excluded, it must follow that it remained still; and as they were excluded by the want of faith, it would follow also that it was reserved for those who had faith. Of course, therefore, it is offered to Christians now, Heb 4:6.
This view he proceeds to confirm by another consideration, Heb 4:7,8. It is that David, who lived nearly five hundred years after the land of promise had been occupied by the Israelites, spoke then of the possibility of entering into such a "rest." He says (Ps 95:7,) that, in his time, the people were called to hear the voice of God; that he warned them against the guilt and danger of hardening their hearts; that he reminded them that it was by that that the Israelites were excluded from the promised land; and that he said that the same thing would occur if those in his own time should harden their hearts. It followed, therefore, that even in the time of David there was a hope and promise of "rest;" and that there was something more intended for the true people of God than merely entering into the promised land. There must be something in advance of that; something that existed to the time of David—and it must be, therefore, a spiritual rest. This, the apostle adds, (Heb 4:8,) is conclusive; for if Joshua had given them all the "rest" that was contemplated, then David would not have spoken as he did of the danger of being excluded from it in his time. He, therefore, (Heb 4:9,) comes to the conclusion, that there must still remain a "rest" for the people of God—a "rest" to which they were invited, and which they were in danger of losing by unbelief. He adds, (Heb 4:10,) that he who enters into that "rest" ceases from toil, as God did from his when he had finished the work of creation. Since, therefore, there is such a "rest," and since there is danger of coming short of it, the apostle urges them (Heb 4:11) to make every effort to enter into it. He adds, Heb 4:12,13,) as a consideration to quicken them to earnest effort and to anxious care, lest they should be deceived, and should fail of it the fact that God cannot be deceived; that his word penetrated the heart, and that everything is naked and open before him. There should, therefore, be the most faithful investigation of the heart, lest they should fail of the grace of God, and lose the hoped-for rest.
In the second portion of the chapter, (Heb 4:14-16,) he enters on the consideration of the character of Christ as High Priest; and says, that since we have such an High Priest as he is, we should be encouraged to come boldly to the throne of grace. We have encouragement to persevere from the fact that we have such a High Priest, and in all our conscious weakness and helplessness we may look to him for aid.
1. Let us therefore fear. Let us be apprehensive that we may possibly fail of that rest. The kind of fear which is recommended here is that which leads to caution and care. A man who is in danger of losing his life or health should be watchful; a seaman that is in danger of running on a lee-shore should be on his guard. So we who have the offer of heaven, and who yet are in danger of losing it, should take all possible precautions lest we fail of it,
Lest a promise being left us. Paul assumes here that there is such a promise. In the subsequent part of the chapter, he goes more into the subject, and proves from the Old Testament that there is such a promise made to us. It is to be remembered, that Paul had not the New Testament then to appeal to, as we have, which is perfectly clear on the subject, but that he was obliged to appeal to the Old Testament. This he did, not only because the New Testament was not then written, but because he was reasoning with those who had been Hebrews, and who regarded the authority of the Old Testament as decisive. If his reasoning to us appears somewhat obscure, we should put ourselves in his place, and should remember that the converts then had not the full light which we have now in the New Testament.
Of entering into his rest. The rest of God—the rest of the world where he dwells. It is called his rest, because it is that which he enjoys, and which he alone can confer. There can be no doubt that Paul refers here to heaven, and means to say that there is a promise left to Christians of being admitted to the enjoyment of that blessed world where God dwells.
Any of you should seem to come short of it. The word "seem" here is used as a form of gentle and mild address, implying the possibility of thus coming short. The word here— dokew -is often used so as to appear to give no essential addition to the sense of a passage, though it is probable that it always gave a shading to the meaning. Thus the phrase esa videatur is often used by Cicero at the end of a period, to denote merely that a thing was—though he expressed it as though it merely seemed to be. Such language is often used in argument or in conversation as a modest expression, as when we say a thing seems to be so and so, instead of saying "it is." In some such sense Paul probably used the phrase here—perhaps as expressing what we would by this language—" lest it should appear at last that any of you had come short of it." The phrase "come short of it" is probably used with reference to the journey to the promised land, where they who came out of Egypt came short of that land, and fell in the wilderness. They did not reach it. —This verse teaches the important truth, that though heaven is offered to us, and that a "rest" is promised to us if we seek it, yet that there is reason to think that many may fail of reaching it who had expected to obtain it. Among those will be the following classes:—
(1.) Those who are professors of religion, but who have never known anything of true piety.
(2.) Those who are expecting to be saved by their own works, and are looking forward to a world of rest on the ground of what their own hands can do.
(3.) Those who defer attention to the subject, from time to time, until it becomes too late. They expect to reach heaven, but they are not ready to give their hearts to God now, and the subject is deferred from one period to another, until death arrests them unprepared.
(4.) Those who have been awakened to see their guilt and danger, and who have been almost, but not quite, ready to give up their hearts to God. Such were Agrippa, Felix, the young ruler, (Mr 10:21;) and such are all those who are almost but not quite prepared to give up the world, and to devote themselves to the Redeemer. To all these the promise of "rest" is made, if they will accept of salvation as it is offered in the gospel; all of them cherish a hope that they will be saved; and all of them are destined alike to be disappointed. With what earnestness, therefore, should we strive that we may not fail of the grace of God!
{a} "Let us therefore fear" Heb 12:15
Verse 2. For unto us was the gospel preached as well as unto them. This translation by no means conveys the sense of the original. According to this, it would seem that the Gospel, as we understand it, or the whole plan of salvation, was communicated to them, as well as to us. But this is by no means the idea. The discussion has reference only tothe promise of rest; and the assertion of the apostle is, that this good news of a promise of rest is made to us, as really as it was made to them. "Rest" was promised to them in the land of Canaan—an emblem of the eternal rest of the people of God. That was unquestioned, and Paul took it for granted. His object now is, to show that a promise of "rest" is as really made to us as it was to them, and that there is the same danger of failing to secure it as there was then. It was important for him to show that there was such a promise made to the people of God in his time; and as he was discoursing of those who were Hebrews, he of course made his appeal to the Old Testament. The literal translation would be, "For we are evangelized—esmen euhggelismenoi— as well as they." The word evangelize means, to communicate good news, or glad tidings; and the idea here is, that the good news or glad tidings of "rest" is announced to us as really as it was to them. This the apostle proves in the following verses.
But the word preached. Marg. Of hearing. The word preach we also use now, in a technical sense, as denoting a formal proclamation of the gospel by the ministers of religion. But this is not the idea here. It means, simply, the word which they heard; and refers particularly to the promise of "rest" which was made to them. That message was communicated to them by Moses.
Did not profit them. They derived no advantage from it. They rejected and despised it, and were, therefore, excluded from the promised land. It exerted no influence over their hearts and lives, and they lived and died as though no such promise had been made. Thus many persons live and die now. The offer of salvation is made to them. They are invited to come, and be saved. They are assured that God is willing to save them, and that the Redeemer stands with open arms to welcome them to heaven. They are trained up under the gospel; are led early in life to the sanctuary; are in the habit of attending on the preaching of the gospel all their days; but still what they hear exerts no saving influence on their hearts. At the close of life, all that could be truly said of them is, that they have not been profited; it has been no real advantage to them, in regard to their final destiny, that they have enjoyed so many privileges.
Not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. Marg. "Or, because they were not united by faith to" There are some various readings on this text, and one of these has given occasion to the version in the margin. Many Mss., instead of the common reading—sugkekramenov which the word mixed would be united to o logov "the word," have another reading— sugkekramenouv according to which the word mixed would refer to "them," and would mean that they who heard the word and rejected it were not mixed, or united, with those who believed it. The former reading makes the best sense, and is the best sustained; and the idea is, that the message which was preached was not received into the heart by faith. They were destitute of faith, and the message did not profit them. The word mixed is supposed by many of the best critics to refer to the process of which food is made nutritive, by being properly mixed with the saliva and the gastric juice, and thus converted into chyme and chyle, and then changed into blood. If suitably mired in this manner, it contributes to the life and health of the bodily frame; if not, it is the means of disease and death. So it is supposed the apostle meant to say of the message which God sends to man. If properly received—if mixed or united with faith—it becomes the means of spiritual support and life; if not, it furnishes no alhnent to the soul, and will be of no advantage. As food, when properly digested, incorporates itself with the body, and gives it support, so those critics suppose it to be of the word of God, that it incorporates itself with the internal and spiritual man, and gives it support and life: It may be doubted, however, whether the apostle had any such allusion as this, and whether it is not rather a refinement of the critics than of Paul. The word used here properly denotes a mixing or mingling together, like water and wine, 2 Mac. 15:39; a uniting together in proper proportions and order, as of the body, 1 Co 12:24; and it may refer here merely to a proper union of faith with the word, in order that it might be profitable. The idea is, that merely to hear the message of life with the outward ear will be of no advantage. It must be believed, or it will be of no benefit. The message is sent to mankind at large. God declares his readiness to save all. But this message is of no advantage to multitudes—for such reasons as these:—
(1.) Many do not attend to it at all. They do not even listen respectfully to it. Multitudes go not near the place where the gospel is proclaimed; and many, when there, and when they seem to attend, have their minds and hearts on other things.
(2.) Many do not believe it. They have doubts about the whole subject of religion, or about the particular doctrines of the gospel; and while they do not believe it, how can they be benefited by it? How can a man be profited by the records of history if he does not believe them? How can one be benefited by the truths of science if he does not believe them? And if a man was assured that by going to a certain place he might close a bargain that would be a great advantage to him, of what use would this information be to him if he did not believe a word of it? So of the knowledge of salvation; the facts of the history recorded in the Bible; the offset of eternal life.
(3.) Men do not allow the message of life to influence their conduct, and of course it is of no advantage to them. Of what use can it be, if they steadily resist all the influence which it would have, and ought to have, on their lives? They live as though it were ascertained that there is no truth in the Bible; no reason for being influenced by the offered hope of eternal life, or alarmed by the threatened danger of eternal death. Resolved to pursue a course of life that is at variance with the commands of God, they cannot be profited by the message of salvation. Having no faith which influences and controls the heart, they are not in the least benefited by the offer of heaven. When they die, their condition is in no wise made better by the fact, that they were trained up in a pious family; that they were instructed in the Sabbath-school; that they had the Bible in their dwellings, and that they sat regularly under a preached gospel. For any advantage to be derived from all this in the future world, they might as well have never heard the message of life. Nay it would have been better for them. The only effect of these privileges is to harden them in guilt, and to sink them deeper in hell. See Barnes "2 Co 2:16".
{1} "did" "of hearing"
{2} "not being mixed" "or, because they were not united by faith to"
Verse 3. For we which have believed do enter into rest. That is, it is a certain fact that believers will enter into rest. That promise is made to "believers;" and as we have evidence that we come under the denomination of believers, it will follow that we have the offer of rest as well as they. That this is so the apostle proceeds to prove; that is, he proceeds to show, from the Old Testament, that there was a promise to "believers" that they would enter into rest. Since there was such a promise, and since there was danger that by unbelief that "rest" might be lost, he proceeds to show them the danger, and to warn them of it.
As he said, etc. See Heb 3:11. The meaning of this passage is this:— "God made a promise of rest to those who believe. They to whom the offer was first made failed, and did not enter in. It must follow, therefore, that the offer extended to others, since God designed that some should enter in, or that it should not be provided in vain. To them it was a solemn declaration, that unbelievers should not enter in—and this implied that believers would. As we now, "says he, "sustain the character of believers, it follows that to us the promise of rest is now made, and we may partake of it."
If they shall enter, etc. That is, they shall not enter in. See Heb 3:11. The "rest" here spoken of, as reserved for Christians, must be different from that of the promised land. It is something that pertains to Christians now, and it must, therefore, refer to the "rest" that remains in heaven.
Although the works were finished, etc. This is a difficult expression. What works are referred to? it may be asked. How does this bear on the subject under discussion? How can it be a proof that there remains a "rest" to those who believe now? This was the point to be demonstrated; and this passage was designed clearly to bear on that point. As it is in our translation, the passage seems to make no sense whatever. Tindal renders it, "And that spake he verily long after that the works were made from the foundation of the world laid," which makes much better sense than our translation. Doddridge explains it as meaning, "And this may lead us further to reflect on what is elsewhere said concerning his works as they were finished from the foundation of the world." But it is difficult to see why they should reflect on his works just then, and how this would bear on the case in hand. Prof. Stuart supposes that the word "rest" must be understood here before "works," and translates it, "Shall not enter into my rest—to wit, rest from the works which were performed when the world was founded." Prof. Robinson (Lex.) explains it as meaning, "The rest here spoken of, 'MY rest,' could not have been God's resting from his works, (Ge 2:2,) for this rest, the Sabbath, had already existed from the creation of the world." Dr. J.P. Wilson (MSS. Notes) renders it, "For we who have believed do enter into rest (or a cessation) indeed (kaitoi) of the works done (among men) from the beginning of the world." Amidst this variety of interpretation it is difficult to determine the true sense. But perhaps the main thought may be collected from the following remarks.
(1.) The Jews, as the people of God, had a rest promised them in the land of Canaan. Of that they failed by their unbelief.
(2.) The purpose of the apostle was to prove that there was a similar promise made to the people of God long subsequent to that, and to which all his people were invited.
(3.) That rest was not that of the promised land, it was such as God had himself when he had finished the work of creation. That was peculiarly his rest—the rest of God, without toil or weariness, and after his whole work was finished.
(4.) His people were invited to the same rest—the rest of God—to partake of his felicity; to enter into that bliss which he enjoyed when he had finished the work of creation. The happiness of the saints was to be like that. It was to be, in their case, also a rest from toil—to be enjoyed at the end of all that they had to do. To prove that Christians were to attain to such a rest was the purpose which the apostle had in view—showing that it was a general doctrine pertaining to believers in every age, that there was a promise of rest for them. I would, then, regard the middle clause of this verse as a parenthesis, and render the whole," For we who are believers shall enter into rest—[the rest] indeed which occurred when the works were finished at the foundation of the world—as he said [in one place] as I have sworn in my wrath they shall not enter into my rest." That was the true rest—such rest or repose as God had when he finished the work of creation—such as he has now in heaven. This gives the highest possible idea of the dignity and desirableness of that "rest" to which we look forward—for it is to be such as God enjoys, and is to elevate us more and more to him. What more exalted idea can there be of happiness than to participate in the calmness, the peace, the repose, the freedom from raging passions, from wearisome toil, and from agitating cares, which God enjoys? Who, torn with conflicting passions here, wearied with toil, and distracted with care, ought not to feel it a privilege to look forward to that rest? Of this rest the Sabbath and the promised land were emblems. They to whom the promise was made did not enter in; but some shall enter in, and the promise therefore pertains to us.
{a} "he said" Ps 95:11
Verse 4. For he spake. Ge 2:2.
And God did rest. "At the close of the work of creation he rested. The work was done. That was the rest of God. He was happy in the contemplation of his own works; and he instituted that day to be observed as a memorial of his resting from his works, and as a type of the eternal rest which remained for man." The idea is this— that the notion of rest of some kind runs through all dispensations. It was seen in the finishing of the work of creation; seen in the appointment of the Sabbath; seen in the offer of the promised land, and is seen now in the promise of heaven. All dispensations contemplate rest, and there must be such a prospect before men now. When it is said that "God did rest," of course it does not mean that he was wearied with his toil, but merely that he ceased from the stupendous work of creation. He no more put forth creative energy, but calmly contemplated his own works in their beauty and grandeur, Ge 1:31. In carrying forward the great affairs of the universe, he always has been actively employed, Joh 5:17, but he is not employed in the work of creation, properly so called. That is done; and the sublime cessation from that constitutes the "rest of God."
{b} "wise" Ge 2:2.
Verse 5. And in this place again. Ps 95:11.
If they shall enter. That is, they shall not enter. See See Barnes "Heb 3:11".
The object of quoting this here seems to be two-fold.
(1.) To show that even in this Psalm God spoke of his rest, and said that they should not enter into it; and
(2) it is connected with Heb 4:6, and is designed to show that it was implied, that a rest yet remained. "That which deserves to be called the divine rest is spoken of in the Scriptures; and as they did not enter into it, it follows that it must be in reserve for some others, and that the promise must still remain."
Verse 6. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein. That is, "Since there is a rest spoken of in the Scriptures, implying that it is to be enjoyed by some, and since they to whom it was first promised did not inherit it, it follows that it must still be in reserve." This is the conclusion which the apostle draws from the argument in the previous verses, and is connected with Heb 4:9, where he says that "there remaineth a rest to the people of God"—the point to which the whole argument tended. The statement in Heb 4:7,8, is to be regarded as an interruption in stating the conclusion, or as the suggestion of a new thought or a new argument bearing on the subject, which he sets down even while stating the conclusion from his argument. It has the appearance of being suggested to him as a new thought of importance, and which he preferred to place even in the midst of the summing up of the argument rather than omit it altogether. It denotes a state of mind full of the subject, and where one idea came hastening after another, and which it was deemed important to notice, even though it should seem to be out of place. The position in this verse (Heb 4:6) is, that it was a settled or indisputable matter that some would enter into rest. The implied argument to prove this is,
(1.) that there was a "rest" spoken of which deserved to be called a divine rest, or the "rest of God;"
(2) it could not be supposed that God would prepare such a rest in vain; for it would follow, that if he had fitted up a world of rest he designed that it should be occupied. As he knew, therefore, that they to whom it was first offered would not enter in, it must be that he designed it for some others, and that it remained to be occupied by us now.
And they to whom it was first preached, Marg. The Gospel. Gr. Evangelized; that is, to whom the good news of the rest was first announced—the Israelites.
Entered not in because of unbelief. See Barnes "Heb 3:19".
{a} "they" Heb 3:19
{*} "preached" "To whom glad tidings were first preached"
Verse 7. Again, he limiteth. He designates, or definitely mentions. The word rendered limiteth orizei means to bound, to set a boundary—as of a field, or farm; and then, to determine or fix definitely, to designate, appoint. Here it means, that he specifies particularly, or mentions expressly.
A certain day. A particular time; he mentions TO-DAY particularly. That is, in the time of David, he uses the word "to-day," as if there was then an offer of rest, and as if it were then possible to enter into it. The object of the additional thought was to show that the offer of rest was not confined to the Israelites, to whom it was first made; that David regarded it as existing in his day; and that man might even then be invited to come and partake of the rest that was promised. "Nearly five hundred years after the time when the Israelites were going to the promised land, and when the offer of rest was made to them, we hear David speaking of rest still; rest which was offered in his time, and which might then be lost by hardening the heart. It could not be, therefore, that the offer of rest pertained merely to the promised land. It must be something in advance of that. It must be something existing in the time of David. It must be an offer of heaven." "A Jew might feel the force of this argument more than we do; still it is conclusive to prove the point under consideration, that there was a rest spoken of long after the offer of the promised land, and that all the promises could not have pertained to that".
Saying in David. In a Psalm composed by David, or rather, perhaps, saying by David; that is, God spake by him.
To-day. Now; that is, even in the time of David.
After so long a time. That is, so long after the first promise was made; to wit, about five hundred years. These are the words of Paul, calling attention to the fact, that so long a time after the entrance into the promised land there was still a speaking of "to-day," as if even then they were called to partake of the rest.
As it is said. To quote it exactly; or to bring the express authority of the Scriptures. It is expressly said even after that long time, "To-day—or Now—if you will hear his voice." All this is to prove that even in that time, there was an offer of rest.
{b} "to-day" Ps 95:7
Verse 8. For if Jesus Marg. "That is, Joshua." The Syriac renders it, "Joshua the Son of Nun." Jesus is the Greek mode of writing Joshua, and there can be no doubt that Joshua is here intended. The object is to prove that Joshua did not give the people of God such a rest as to make it improper to speak of a "rest" after that time. "If Joshua had given them a complete and final rest; if, by his conducting them to the promised land, all had been done which had been contemplated by the promise, then it would not have been alluded to again, as it was in the time of David." Joshua did give them a rest in the promised land; but it was not all which was intended, and it did not exclude the promise of another and more important rest.
Then would he not. Then God would not have spoken of another time when that rest could be obtained. The "other day" here referred to is that which is mentioned before by the phrase "to-day," and refers to the time in which it is spoken of long after Joshua, to wit, in the time of David.
{2} "Jesus" "that is, Joshua"
Verse 8. For if Jesus Marg. "That is, Joshua." The Syriac renders it, "Joshua the Son of Nun." Jesus is the Greek mode of writing Joshua, and there can be no doubt that Joshua is here intended. The object is to prove that Joshua did not give the people of God such a rest as to make it improper to speak of a "rest" after that time. "If Joshua had given them a complete and final rest; if, by his conducting them to the promised land, all had been done which had been contemplated by the promise, then it would not have been alluded to again, as it was in the time of David." Joshua did give them a rest in the promised land; but it was not all which was intended, and it did not exclude the promise of another and more important rest.
Then would he not. Then God would not have spoken of another time when that rest could be obtained. The "other day" here referred to is that which is mentioned before by the phrase "to-day," and refers to the time in which it is spoken of long after Joshua, to wit, in the time of David.
{2} "Jesus" "that is, Joshua"
Verse 9. There remaineth, therefore, a rest. This is the conclusion to which the apostle comes. The meaning is this, that according to the Scriptures there is now a promise of rest made to the people of God. It did not pertain merely to those who were called to go to the promised land, nor to those who lived in the time of David, but it is still true that the promise of rest pertains to all the people of God of every generation. The reasoning by which the apostle comes to this conclusion is briefly this.
(1.) That there was a rest called "the rest of God"—spoken of in the earliest period of the world—implying that God meant that it should be enjoyed.
(2.) That the Israelites, to whom the promise was made, failed of obtaining that which was promised by their unbelief.
(3.) That God intended that some should enter into his rest—since it would not be provided in vain.
(4.) That long after the Israelites had fallen in the wilderness, we find the same reference to a rest which David in his time exhorts those whom he addressed to endeavour to obtain.
(5.) That if all that had been meant by the word rest, and by the promise, had been accomplished when Joshua conducted the Israelites to the land of Canaan, we should not have heard another day spoken of when it was possible to forfeit that rest by unbelief. It followed, therefore, that there was something besides that; something that pertained to all the people of God, to which the name rest might still be given, and which they were exhorted still to obtain. The word rest in this verse sabbatismov Sabbatism, in the margin is rendered keeping of a Sabbath. It is a different word from sabbaton —the Sabbath; and it occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and is not found in the Septuagint. It properly means, a keeping Sabbath— from sabbatizw to keep Sabbath. This word, not used in the New Testament, occurs frequently in the Septuagint, Ex 16:30; Le 23:32; 26:35
2 Ch 36:21 and in 3 Esd. 1:58; 2 Mac. 6:6. It differs from the word Sabbath. That denotes the time—the day, this, the keeping, or observance of it; the festival. It means here, a resting, or an observance of sacred repose—and refers undoubtedly to heaven, as a place of eternal rest with God. It cannot mean the rest in the land of Canaan—for the drift of the writer is to prove that that is not intended. It cannot mean the Sabbath, properly so called—for then the writer would have employed the usual word sabbaton—Sabbath. It cannot mean the Christian Sabbath—for the object is not to prove that there is such a day to be observed; and his reasoning about being excluded from it by unbelief and by hardening the heart would be irrelevant. It must mean, therefore, heaven—the world of spiritual and eternal rest; and the assertion is, that there is such a resting, or keeping of a Sabbath in heaven for the people of God. Learn hence,
(1.) that heaven is a place of cessation from wearisome toil. It is to be like the "rest" which God had after the work of creation, (Heb 4:4) See Barnes "Heb 4:4, and of which that was the type and emblem. There will be employment there, but it will be without fatigue; there will be the occupation of the mind, and of whatever powers we may possess, but without weariness. Here we are often worn down and exhausted. The body sinks under continued toil, and falls into the grave. There the slave will rest from his toil; the man here oppressed and broken down by anxious care will cease from his labours. We know but little of heaven; but we know that a large part of what now oppresses and crushes the frame will not exist there. Slavery will be unknown; the anxious care for support will be unknown, and all the exhaustion which proceeds from the love of gain, and from ambition, will be unknown. In the wearisome toils of life, then, let us look forward to the rest that remains in heaven; and as the labourer looks to the shades of the evening, or to the Sabbath, as a period of rest, so let us look to heaven as the place of eternal repose.
(2.) Heaven will be like a Sabbath. The best description of it is to say it is an eternal Sabbath. Take the Sabbath on earth, when best observed, and extend the idea to eternity, and let there be separated all idea of imperfection from its observance, and that would be heaven. The Sabbath is holy; so is heaven. It is a period of worship; so is heaven. It is for praise, and for the contemplation of heavenly truth; so is heaven. The Sabbath is appointed that we may lay aside worldly cares and anxieties for a little season here; heaven, that we may lay, them aside for ever.
(3.) The Sabbath here should be like heaven. It is designed to be its type and emblem. So far as the circumstances of the case will allow, it should be just like heaven. There should be the same employments; the same joys; the same communion with God. One of the best rules for employing the Sabbath aright is, to think what heaven will be, and then to endeavour to spend it in the same way. One day in seven at least should remind us of what heaven is to be; and that day may be, and should be, the most happy of the seven.
(4.) They who do not love the Sabbath on earth are not prepared for heaven. If it is to them a day of tediousness; if its hours move heavily; if they have no delight in its sacred employments, what would an eternity of such days be? How would they be passed? Nothing can be clearer than that if we have no such happiness in a season of holy rest, and in holy employments here, we are wholly unprepared for heaven. To the Christian it is the subject of the highest joy in anticipation, that heaven is to be one long, unbroken SABBATH—an eternity of successive Sabbath hours. But what, to a sinner, could be a more repulsive and gloomy prospect than such an eternal Sabbath?
(5.) If this be so, then what a melancholy view is furnished as to the actual preparation of the great mass of men for heaven! How is the Sabbath now spent? In idleness; in business; in travelling; in hunting and fishing; in light reading and conversation; in sleep; in visiting; in riding, walking, lounging, ennui; in revelry and dissipation; in any and every way except the right way; in every way except in holy communion with God. What would the race be if once translated to heaven as they are! What a prospect would it be to this multitude to have to spend an eternity, which would be but a prolongation of the Sabbath of holiness!
(6.) Let those who love the Sabbath rejoice in the prospect of eternal rest in heaven. In our labour let us look to that world where wearisome toil is unknown; in our afflictions, let us look to that world where tears never fall; and when our hearts are pained by the violation of the Sabbath all around us, let us look to that blessed world where such violation will cease for ever. It is not far distant. A few steps will bring us there. Of any Christian it may be said that perhaps his next Sabbath will be spent in heaven—near the throne of God.
{3} "a rest" or "keeping of a Sabbath"
Verse 10. For he that is entered into rest. That is, the man who is so happy as to reach heaven, will enjoy a rest similar to that which God had when he finished the work of creation. It will be
(1) a cessation from toil; and
(2) it will be a rest similar to that of God—the same kind of enjoyment, the same freedom from care, anxiety, and labour, How happy, then, are they who have entered into heaven! Their toils are over. Their labours are done. Never again will they know fatigue. Never more will they feel anxious care. Let us learn then,
(1.) not to mourn improperly for those who have left us, and gone to heaven. Happy in the rest of God, why should not we rejoice? Why wish them back again in a world of toil?
(2.) Let us in our toils look forward to the world of rest. Our labours will all be over. The weary man will lay down his burden; the exhausted frame will know fatigue no more. Rest is sweet at night after the toils of day; how much more sweet will it be in heaven after the toils of life! Let us
(3) labour while it is called to-day. Soon we shall cease from our work. All that we have to do is to be done soon. We shall soon cease from our work, as God did from his. What we have to do for the salvation of children, brothers, sisters, friends, and for the world, is to be done soon. From the abodes of bliss we shall not be sent forth to speak to our kindred of the blessedness of that world, or to admonish our friends to escape from the place of despair. The pastor will not come again to warn and invite his people; the parent will not come again to tell his children of the Saviour and of heaven; the neighbour will not come to admonish his neighbour. Comp. Lu 16:24-29. We shall ALL have ceased from our work, as God did from his; and never again shall we speak to a living friend to invite him to heaven.
Verse 11. Let us labour therefore. Let us earnestly strive. Since there is a rest whose attainment is worth all our efforts; since so many have failed of reaching it by their unbelief; and since there is so much danger that we may fail of it also, let us give all diligence that we may enter into it. Heaven is never obtained but by diligence, and no one enters there who does not earnestly desire it, and who does not make a sincere effort to reach it.
Of unbelief. Marg. disobedience. The word unbelief best expresses the sense, as the apostle was showing that this was the principal thing that prevented men from entering into heaven. See Barnes "Heb 3:12".
{a} "Let us" 2 Pe 1:10
{1} "unbelief" "disobedience"
Verse 12. For the word of God. The design of this and the following verse is obvious. It is to show that we cannot escape the notice of God; that all insincerity, unbelief, hypocrisy, will be detected by him; and that since our hearts are perfectly open before him, we should be sincere, and should not attempt to deceive him. The sense is, that the truth of God is all-penetrating and searching, and that the real thoughts and intents of the heart will be brought to light; and that if there is insincerity and self-deception, there can be no hope of escape. There has been a great variety of opinion here about the meaning of the phrase "the word of God." Some have supposed that it means the Lord Jesus; others the whole of the divine revelation; others the gospel; others the particular threatening referred to here. The "word of God" is that which God speaks—whether it be a promise or a threatening; whether it be law or gospel; whether it be a simple declaration or a statement of a doctrine. The idea here is, that what God had said is fitted to detect hypocrisy, and to lay open the true nature of the feelings of the soul, so that there can be no escape for the guilty. His truth is adapted to bring out the real feelings, and to show man exactly what he is. Truth always has this power —whether preached, or read, or communicated by conversation, or impressed upon the memory and conscience by the Holy Spirit. There can be no escape from the penetrating, searching application of the word of God. That truth has power to show what man is, and is like a penetrating sword that lays open the whole man. Comp. Isa 49:2. The phrase "the word of God" here may be applied, therefore, to the truth of God, however made known to the mind. In some way it will bring out the real feelings, and show what man is.
Is quick. Gr. zwn—living. It is not dead, inert, and powerless. It has a living power, and is energetic and active. It is adapted to produce this effect.
And powerful. Mighty. Its power is seen in awakening the conscience; alarming the fears; laying bare the secret feelings of the heart; and causing the sinner to tremble with the apprehension of the coming judgment. All the great changes in the moral world for the better, have been caused by the power of truth. They are such as the truth in its own nature is fitted to effect; and, if we may judge of its power by the greatness of the revolutions produced, no words can over-estimate the might of the truth which God has revealed.
Sharper than any two-edged sword. Literally, two-mouthed sword distomon. The word mouth was given to the sword because it seemed to devour all before it. It consumed or destroyed, as a wild beast does. The comparison of the word of God to a sword, or to an arrow, is designed to show its power of penetrating the heart, Ec 12:11. "The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies." Comp. Isa 49:2; "And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword." Re 1:16: "And out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword;" Re 2:12,16; 19:15.
The comparison is common in the classics, and in Arabic poetry. See Gesenius, on Isa 49:2. The idea is that of piercing, or penetrating; and the meaning here is, that the word of God reaches the heart—the very centre of action and lays open the motives and feelings of the man. It was common among the ancients to have a sword with two-edges. The Roman sword was commonly made in this manner. The fact that it had two edges made it more easy to penetrate, as well as to cut with every way.
Piercing even to the dividing asunder. Penetrating so as to divide.
Soul and spirit. The animal life from the immortal soul. The former word here—quch— soul—is evidently used to denote the animal life, as distinguished from the mind or soul. The latter word— pneuma—spirit—means the soul; the immaterial and immortal part; that which lives when the animal life is extinct, This distinction occurs in 1 Th 5:23" your whole spirit. and soul, and body;" and it is a distinction which we are constantly in the habit of making. There is the body in man—the animal life—and the immortal part that leaves the body when life is extinct. Mysteriously united, they constitute one man. When the animal life is separated from the soul, or when the soul leaves the animated body, the body dies, and life is extinct. To separate the one from the other is, therefore, the same as to take life—and this is the idea here, that the word of God is like a sharp sword that inflicts deadly wounds. The sinner "dies;" that is, he becomes dead to his former hopes, or is "slain" by the law. Ro 7:9, "I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." This is the power referred to here—the power of destroying the hopes of the sinner; cutting him down under conviction; and prostrating him, as if a sword had pierced his heart.
And of the joints and marrow. The figure is still continued of the sword that takes life. Such a sword would seem to penetrate even the joints and marrow of the body. It would separate the joints, and pierce through the very bones to the marrow. A similar effect, Paul says, is produced by truth. It seems to penetrate the very essence of the soul, and lay it all open to the view.
And is a discerner of the thoughts. It shows what the thoughts and intentions are. Prof. Stuart, Bloomfield, and some others, suppose that the reference here is to God speaking by his word. But the more natural construction certainly is, to refer it to the word or truth of God. It is true that God searches the heart, and knows the thoughts; but that is not the truth which is prominent here. It is, that the thoughts and intents of the heart are brought out to view by the word of God. And can any one doubt this? See Ro 7:7. Is it not true that men are made to see their real character under the exhibition of the truth of God? That in the light of the law they see their past lives to be sinful? That the exhibition of truth calls to their recollection many long forgotten sins? And that their feelings are brought out when the truth of God is proclaimed? Men then are made to look upon their motives as they had never done before, and to see in their hearts feelings whose existence they would not have suspected, if it had not been for the exhibition of the truth. The exhibition of the truth is like pouring down the beams of the sun at midnight on a dark world; and the truth lays open the real feelings of the sinner, as that sun would disclose the clouds of wickedness that are now performed under cover of the night. Many a man has a deep and fixed hostility to God, and to his gospel, who might never be sensible of it, if the truth was not faithfully proclaimed. The particular idea here is, that the truth of God will detect the feelings of the hypocrite and self-deceiver. They cannot always conceal their emotions, and the time will come when truth, like light poured into the soul, will reveal their unbelief and their secret sins. They who are cherishing a hope of salvation, therefore, should be on their guard lest they mistake the name for the reality. Let us learn from this verse,
(1,) the power of truth. It is fitted to lay open the secret feelings of the soul. There is not an effect produced in awakening a sinner, or in his conviction, conversion, and Sanctification, which the truth is not adapted to produce. The truth of God is not dead; nor fitted to make man worse; nor designed merely to show its own weakness, and to be a mere occasion on which the Holy Spirit acts on the mind; —it is, in its own nature, FITTED to produce just the effects which are produced when it awakens, convicts, converts, and sanctifies the soul.
(2.) The truth should be preached with the feeling that it is adapted to this end. Men who preach should endeavour to understand the nature of the mind and of the moral feelings, as really as he who would inflict a deadly wound should endeavour to understand enough about anatomy to know where the heart is, or he who administers medicine should endeavour to know what is adapted to remove certain diseases. And he who has no belief in the efficacy of truth to produce any effect, resembles one who should suppose that all knowledge of the human system was needless to him who wished and who should cut at random— to perform a surgical operations piously leaving it with God to direct the knife; or he who should go into a hospital of patients, and administer medicines indiscriminately-devoutly saying, that all healing must come from God, and that the use of medicine was only to show its own weakness! Thus many men seem to preach. Yet, for aught that appears, truth is just as wisely adapted to save the soul, as medicine is to heal the sick; and why, then, should not a preacher be as careful to study the nature of truths and its adaptedness to a particular end, as a student of the healing art is to understand the adaptedness of medicine to cure disease? The true way of preaching is, to feel that truth is adapted to the end in view; to select that which is best fitted for that end; to preach as if the whole result depended on getting that truth before the mind and into the heart, and then to leave the whole result with God—as a physicians with right feelings, will exert all his skill to save his patient, and then commit the whole question of life and health to God. He will be more likely to praise God intelligently who believes that he has wisely adapted a plan to the end in view, than he who believes that God works only at random.
{b} "word" Isa 49:2
{c} "piercing" Re 1:16
{a} "discerner" Ps 139:2; Jer 17:10; Re 2:23
Verse 13. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight. There is no being who is not wholly known to God. All his thoughts, feelings, plans, are distinctly understood. Of the truth of this there can be no doubt. The design of the remark here is, to guard those to whom the apostle was writing from self-deception —since they could conceal nothing from God.
All things are naked. Exposed; uncovered. There is nothing that can be concealed from God, Ps 139:11,12.
"The veil of night is no disguise,
No screen from thy all-searching eyes;
Thy hands can seize thy foes as soon
Through midnight shades as blazing noon."
And opened tetrachlismena. The word here used — trachlizw — properly means,
(1.) to lay bare the neck, or to bend it back so as to expose the throat to being cut.
(2.) To expose; to lay open in any way. Why the word is used here has been a matter of inquiry. Some have supposed that the phrase is derived from offering sacrifice, and from the fact that the priest carefully examined the victim, to see whether it was sound, before it was offered. But this is manifestly a forced exposition. Others have supposed that it is derived from the custom of bending back the head of a criminal, so as to look full in his face, and recognise him, so as not to be mistaken; but this is equally forced and unnatural. This opinion was first proposed by Erasmus, and has been adopted by Clarke and others, Bloomfield, following, as he says, the interpretation of Chrysostom, Grotius, (though this is not the sentiment of Grotius,) Beza, Alting, Hammond, and others, supposes the allusion to be to the custom of cutting the animal down the back-bone through the spinal marrow, and thus of laying it open entirely. This sense would well suit the connexion. Grotius supposes that it means to strip off the skin by dividing it at the neck, and then removing it. This view is also adopted substantially by Doddridge. These explanations are forced, and imply a departure, more or less, from the proper meaning of the Greek word. The most simple and obvious meaning is usually the best in explaining the Bible. The word which the apostle employs relates to the neck; trachlov —-and not to the spinal marrow, or the skin. The proper meaning of the verb is, to bend the neck back, so as to expose it in front when an animal is slain. Passow. Then it means, to make bare; to remove everything like covering; to expose a thing entirely—as the naked neck is for the knife. The allusion here is undoubtedly to the sword which Paul had referred to in the previous verse, as dividing the soul and spirit, and the joints and marrow; and the meaning is, that in the hand of God, who held that sword, everything was exposed. We are, in relation to that, like an animal whose neck is bent back, and laid bare, and ready for the slaughter. Nothing hinders God from striking; there is nothing that can prevent that sword from penetrating the heart any more than, when the neck of the animal is bent back and laid bare, there is anything that can hinder the sacrificing priest from thrusting the knife into the throat of the victim. If this be the true interpretation, then what an affecting view does it give of the power of God, and of the exposedness of man to destruction! All is bare, naked, open. There is no concealment; no hinderance; no power of resistance. In a moment God can strike, and his dreadful sentence shall fall on the sinner like the knife on the exposed throat of the victim. What emotions should the sinner have who feels that he is exposed each moment to the sentence of eternal justice —to the sword of God—as the animal with bent-back neck is exposed to the knife! And what solemn feeling should all have who remember that all is naked and open before God! Were we transparent, so that the World could see all we are, who would dare go abroad? Who would wish the world to read all his thoughts and feelings for a single day? Who would wish his best friends to look in upon his naked soul, as we can look into a room through a window? Oh, what blushes and confusion; what a hanging down of the head, and what an effort to escape from the gaze of men would there be, if every one knew that all his secret feelings were seen by every person whom he met! Social enjoyment would end; and the now gay and blithe multitudes in the streets would become processions of downcast and blushing convicts. And yet all these are known to God. He reads every thought; sees every feeling; looks through the whole soul. How careful should we be to keep our heart pure; how anxious that there should be nothing in the soul that we are not willing to have known!
With whom we have to do. Literally, with whom is our account. Our account; our reckoning is to be with him before whom all is naked and open. We cannot, therefore, impose on him. We cannot pass off hypocrisy for sincerity. He will judge us according to truth, not according to appearances; and his sentence, therefore, will be just. A man who is to be tried by one who knows all about him, should be a pure and holy man.
{b} "naked" Pr 15:11
Verse 14. Seeing then that we have a great High Priest. The apostle here resumes the subject which had been slightly hinted at in Heb 2:17; 3:1, and pursues it to the end of chapter 10. The object is to show that Christians have a great High Priest as really as the Jews had; to show wherein he surpassed the Levitical priesthood; to show how all that was said of the Aaronic priesthood, and all the types pertaining to that priesthood, were fulfilled in the Lord Jesus; and to state and illustrate the nature of the consolations which Christians might derive from the fact that they had such an High Priest. One of the things on which the Jews most valued their religion, was the fact that it had such a minister of religion as their high priest—the most elevated functionary of that dispensation. It came, therefore, to be of the utmost importance to show that Christianity was not inferior to the Jewish religion in this respect, and that the High Priest of the Christian profession would not suffer in point of dignity, and in the value of the blood with which he would approach God, and in the efficacy of his intercession, when compared with the Jewish high priest. Moreover, it was a doctrine of Christianity that the Jewish ritual was to pass away; and its temple services cease to be observed. It was, therefore, of vast importance to show why hey passed away, and how they were superseded. To do this, the apostle is led into this long discussion respecting their nature. He shows that they were designed to be typical. He proves that they could not purify the heart, and give peace to the conscience. He proves that they were all intended to point to something future, and to introduce the Messiah to the world; and that when this object was accomplished, their great end was secured, and they were thus all fulfilled. In no part of the Bible can there be found so full an account of the design of the Mosaic institutions as in chapter 5 through 10 of this epistle; and were it not for this, the volume of inspiration would be incomplete. We should be left in the dark on some of the most important subjects in revelation; we should ask questions for which we could find no certain answer. The phrase "great High Priest" here is used with reference to a known usage among the Jews. In the time of the apostle the name high priest pertained not only to him who actually held the office, and who had the right to enter into the holy of holies, but to his deputy, and to those who had held the office, but who had retired from it; and perhaps also the name was given to the head of each one of the twenty-four courses or classes into which the priests were divided. Comp. See Barnes "Lu 1:5" See Barnes "Mt 26:3".
The name "great high priest" would designate him who actually held the office, and was at the head of all the other priests; and the idea here is, not merely that the Lord Jesus was a Priest, but that he was at the head of all; in the Christian economy he sustained a rank that corresponded with that of the great high priest in the Jewish.
That is passed into the heavens. Heb 9:12,24. The Jewish high priest went once a year into the most holy place in the temple, to offer the blood of the atonement. See Barnes "Heb 9:7".
Paul says that the Christian High Priest has gone into heaven. He has gone there also to make intercession, and to sprinkle the blood of the atonement on the mercy-seat. See Barnes "Heb 9:24" See Barnes "Heb 9:25".
Jesus the Son of God. Not a descendant of Aaron, but one greater— the Son of God. See Barnes "Heb 1:2".
Let us hold fast our profession. See Barnes "Heb 9:23" See Barnes "Heb 3:14".
This is the drift and scope of the epistle— to show that Christians should hold fast their profession, and not apostatize. The object of the apostle now is to show why the fact, that we have such a High Priest, is a reason why we should hold fast our professed attachment to him. These reasons—which are drawn out in the succeeding chapters—are such as the following.
(1.) We may look to him for assistance—since he can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, Heb 4:15,16.
(2.) The impossibility of being renewed again if we should fall away from him, since there is but one such High Priest, and since the sacrifice for sin can never be repeated, Heb 6.
(3.) The fact that all the ancient types were fulfilled in him, and that everything which there was in the Jewish dispensation, to keep men from apostasy, exists much more powerfully in the Christian scheme.
(4.) The fact that they who rejected the laws of Moses died without mercy, and much more any one who should reject the Son of God must expect more certain and fearful severity, Heb 10:27-30. By considerations such as these, the apostle aims to show them the danger of apostasy, and to urge them to a faithful adherence to their Christian profession.
{a} "passed" Heb 9:12,24
{b} "hold fast" Heb 10:23
Verse 15. For we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched. Our High Priest is not cold and unfeeling. That is, we have one who is abundantly qualified to sympathize with us in our afflictions, and to whom, therefore, we may look for aid and support in trials. Had we a high priest who was cold and heartless; who simply performed the external duties of his office, without entering into the sympathies of those who came to seek for pardon; who had never experienced any trials, and who felt himself above those who sought his aid, we should necessarily feel disheartened in attempting to overcome our sins, and to live to God. His coldness would repel us; his stateliness would awe us; his distance and reserve would keep us away, and perhaps render us indifferent to all desire to be saved. But tenderness and sympathy attract those who are feeble, and kindness does more than anything else to encourage those who have to encounter difficulties and dangers. See Barnes "Heb 2:16, also Heb 2:17-18. Such tenderness and sympathy has our great High Priest.
But was in all points tempted like as we are. Tried as we are. See Barnes "Heb 2:18".
He was subjected to all the kinds of trial to which we can be, and he is, therefore, able to sympathize with us, and to aid us. He was tempted—in the literal sense; he was persecuted; he was poor; he was despised; he suffered bodily pain; he endured the sorrows of a lingering and most cruel death.
Yet without sin. 1 Pe 2:22: "Who did no sin." Isa 53:9: "He had done no violence, neither was there any deceit in his mouth." Heb 7:26: "Who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners." The importance of this fact, that the great High Priest of the Christian profession was "without sin," the apostle illustrates at length in chapters 7 through 9. He here merely alludes to it, and says that one who was "without sin" was able to assist those who were sinners, and who put their trust in him.
{c} "touched" Hos 11:8
{d} "without sin" 1 Pe 2:22
Verse 16. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace. "The throne of grace!" What a beautiful expression! A throne is the seat of a sovereign; a throne of grace is designed to represent a sovereign seated to dispense mercy and pardon. The illustration or comparison here may have been derived from the temple service. In that service God is represented as seated in the most holy place on the mercy-seat. The high priest approaches that seat or throne of the Divine Majesty with the blood of the atonement, to make intercession for the people, and to plead for pardon. See Barnes "Heb 9:7, See Barnes "9:8".
That scene was emblematic of heaven. God is seated on a throne of mercy. The great High Priest of the Christian calling, having shed his own blood to make expiation, is represented as approaching God, and pleading for the pardon of men. To a God willing to show mercy he comes with the merits of a sacrifice sufficient for all, and pleads for their salvation. We may, therefore, come with boldness, and look for pardon. We come not depending on our own merits, but we come where a sufficient sacrifice has been offered for human guilt, and where we are assured that God is merciful. We may, therefore, come without hesitancy, or trembling, and ask for all the mercy that we need.
That we may obtain mercy. This is what we want first. We need pardon—as the first thing when we come to God. We are guilty and self-condemned—and our first cry should be for mercy— mercy. A man who comes to God, not feeling his need of mercy, must fail of obtaining the Divine favour; and he will be best prepared to obtain that favour who has the deepest sense of his need of forgiveness.
And find grace. Favour—strength, help, counsel, direction, support, for the various duties and trials of life. This is what we next need—we all need—we always need. Even when pardoned, we need grace to keep us from sin, to aid us in duty, to preserve us in the day of temptation. And feeling our need of this, we may come and ask of God all that we want for this purpose. Such is the assurance given us; and to this bold approach to the throne of grace all are freely invited. In view of it, let us:
(1) rejoice that there is a throne of grace. What a World would this be if God sat on a throne of justice only, and if no mercy were ever to be shown to men! Who is there who would not be overwhelmed with despair? But it is not so. He is on A THRONE OF GRACE. By day and by night; from year to year; from generation to generation, he is on such a throne. In every land he may be approached, and in as many different languages as men speak may they plead for mercy. In all times of our trial and temptation we may be assured that he is seated on that throne, and, wherever we are, we may approach him with acceptance.
(2) We need the privilege of coming before such a throne. We are sinful, and need mercy; we are feeble, and need grace to help us. There is not a day of Our lives in which we do not need pardon; not an hour in which we do not need grace.
(3) How obvious are the propriety and necessity of prayer! Every man is a sinner, and should pray for pardon; every man is weak, feeble, dependent, and should pray for grace. Not till a man can prove that he has never done any sin should he maintain that he has no need of pardon; not till he can show that he is able alone to meet the storms and temptations of life should he feel that he has no need to ask for grace. Yet who can feel this? And how strange it is that all men do not pray!
(4) It is easy to be forgiven. All that needs to be done is to plead the merits of our great High Priest, and God is ready to pardon. Who would not be glad to be able to pay a debt in a manner so easy? Yet how few there are who are willing to pay the debt to justice thus!
(5.) It is easy to obtain all the grace that we need. We have only to ask for it—and it is done. How easy then to meet temptation, if we would! How strange that any should rely on their own strength, when they may lean on the arm of God!
(6.) If men are not pardoned, and if they fall into sin and ruin, they alone are to blame. There Is A THRONE OF GRACE. It is always accessible. There is A GOD. He is always ready to pardon. There Is A REDEEMER. He is the great High Priest of men. He is always interceding, His merits may always be pleaded as the ground of our salvation. Why then, oh why, should any remain unforgiven, and perish? On them alone the blame must lie. In their own bosoms is the reason why they are not saved.
{e} "boldly" Eph 3:12; Heb 10:19-22
IN this chapter the subject of the priestly office of Christ is continued, and further illustrated. It had been introduced, Heb 2:17,18; 3:1; 4:14-16.
The Jews regarded the office of high priest as an essential feature in the true religion; and it became, therefore, of the highest importance to show that in the Christian system there was a High Priest every way equal to that of the Jews. In his rank; in his character; and in the sacrifice which he offered, he was more than equal to the Jewish high priest; and they who had forsaken Judaism, and embraced Christianity, had lost nothing in this respect by the change, and had gained much. It became necessary, therefore, in making out this point, to institute a comparison between the Jewish high priest, and the great Author of the Christian religion: and this comparison is pursued in this and the following chapters. The comparison in this chapter turns mainly on the qualifications for the office, and the question whether the Lord Jesus had those qualifications. The chapter embraces the following points.
I. The qualifications of a Jewish high priest, Heb 5:1-4. They are these.
(1.) He must have been ordained or appointed by God, for the purpose of offering gifts and sacrifices for sins, Heb 5:1.
(2.) He must be tender and compassionate in his feelings, so that he can sympathize with those for whom he ministers, Heb 5:2.
(3.) He must have an offering to bring to God, and be able to present a sacrifice alike for himself and for the people, Heb 5:3.
(4.) He could not take this honour on himself, but must have evidence that he was called of God, as was Aaron, Heb 5:4.
II. An inquiry whether these qualifications were found in the Lord Jesus, the great High Priest of the Christian dispensation, Heb 5:5-10. In considering this, the apostle specifies the following qualifications in him, corresponding to those which he had said were required by the Jewish high priest.
(1.) He did not take this honour on himself, but was called directly by God, and after an order superior to the Aaronic priesthood —the order of Melchisedek, Heb 5:5,6,9,10.
(2.) He was kind, tender, and compassionate, and showed that he was able to sympathize with those for whom he had undertaken the office. When on the earth, he had evinced all the tenderness which could be desired in one who had come to pity and save mankind, he had a tender, sensitive, human nature. He felt deeply as a man, under the pressure of the great sufferings which he endured, and thus showed that he was abundantly qualified to sympathize with his people, Heb 5:7,8.
III. In verse 10 the apostle had introduced, incidentally, a topic of great difficulty; and he adds, Heb 5:11-14, that he had much to say on that subject, but that those whom he addressed were not qualified then to understand it. They ought to have been so far advanced in knowledge as to have been able to embrace the more abstruse and difficult points connected with the doctrines of Christianity. But they needed, he says, instruction even yet in the more simple elements of religion, and he feared that what he had to say of Melchisedek would be far above their comprehension. This point, therefore, he drops for the present, and in Heb 6 states again, and at greater length, the danger of apostasy, and the importance of perseverance in endeavouring to comprehend the sublime mysteries of the Christian religion; and then Heb 7 he resumes the subject of the comparison between Christ and Melchisedek.
Verse 1. For every high priest. That is, among the Jews, for the remarks relate to the Jewish system. The Jews had one high priest who was regarded as the successor of Aaron. The word "high priest" means chief priest; that is, a priest of higher rank and office than others. By the original regulation the Jewish high priest was to be of the family of Aaron, (Ex 29:9,) though in later times the office was frequently conferred on others. In the time of the Romans it had become venal, and the Mosaic regulation was disregarded, 2 Mac. 4:7; Jos. Ant. xv. 3, 1. It was no longer held for life, so that there were several persons at one time to whom was given the title of high priest. The high priest was at the head of religious affairs, and was the ordinary judge of all that pertained to religion, and even of the general justice of the Hebrew commonwealth, De 17:8-12; 19:17; De 21:5; 23:9,10.
He only had the privilege of entering the most holy place once a year, on the great day of atonement, to make expiation for the sins of the people, Le 16. He was to be the son of one who had married a virgin, and was to be free from any corporeal defect, Le 21:13. The dress of the high priest was much more costly and magnificent than that of the inferior order of priests, Ex 39:1-9. He wore a mantle or robe—meil—of blue, with the borders embroidered with pomegranates in purple and scarlet; an ephod made of cotton, with crimson, purple, and blue, and ornamented with gold, worn over the robe or mantle, without sleeves, and divided below the arm-pits into two parts or halves, of which one was in front, covering the breast, and the other behind, covering the back. In the ephod was a breastplate of curious workmanship, and on the head a mitre. The breastplate was a piece of broidered work about ten inches square, and was made double, so as to answer the purpose of a pouch or bag. It was adorned with twelve precious stones, each one having the name of one of the tribes of Israel. The two upper corners of the breastplate were fastened to the ephod, and the two lower to the girdle. The cut is supposed to give an illustration of this part of the dress of the high priest. It is copied from Taylor's Fragments, appended to Calmet. As there is frequent reference to the high priest of the Jews in this epistle, and as he performed so important an office among the Hebrews, it may be useful to have a view of the appearance of this officer in fall dress. The following cuts will illustrate this.
The first represents him with the robe and the ephod. On each shoulder is seen an onyx stone, Upon each of which were engraved the names of six of the tribes of the children of Israel. The breastplate is also seen with a wrought chain of gold fastened to each corner, and passing under the arms and over each shoulder. The dress is described at length in Ex 28. The second cut, exhibits the dress of the high priest on the day of expiation, and is very plain and simple, consisting only of plain linen, with a sash and girdle, Le 16:4,23.
Taken from among men. There may be an allusion here to the fact, that the great High Priest of the Christian dispensation had a higher than human origin, and was selected from a rank far above men. Or it may be that the meaning is, that every high priest on earth—including, all under the old dispensation and the great High Priest of the new—is ordained with reference to the welfare of men, and to bring some valuable offering for man to God.
Is ordained for men. Is set apart or consecrated for the welfare of men. The Jewish high priest was set apart to his office with great solemnity. See Ex 29.
In things pertaining to God. In religious matters, or with reference to the worship and service of God. He was not to be a civil ruler, nor a teacher of science, nor a military leader, but his business was to superintend the affairs of religion.
That he may offer both gifts. That is, thank-offerings, or oblations, which would be the expressions of gratitude. Many such offerings were made by the Jews under the laws of Moses, and the high priest was the medium by whom they were to be presented to God.
And sacrifices for sins. Bloody offerings; offerings made of slain beasts. The blood of expiation was sprinkled by him on the mercy-seat, and he was the appointed medium by which such sacrifices were to be presented to God. See Barnes "Heb 4:6, seq. We may remark here,
(1.) that the proper office of a priest is to present a sacrifice for sin.
(2.) It is improper to give the name priest to a minister of the gospel. The reason is, that he offers no sacrifice; he sprinkles no blood. He is appointed to "preach the word," and to lead the devotions of the church, but not to offer sacrifice. Accordingly, the New Testament preserves entire consistency on this point, for the name priest is never once given to the apostles, or to any other minister of the gospel. Among the Papists there is consistency—though gross and dangerous error—in the use of the word priest. They believe that the minister of religion offers up "the real body and blood of our Lord;" that the bread and wine are changed by the words of consecration into the "body and blood, the soul and divinity, of the Lord Jesus," (Decrees of the Council of Trent;) and that this is really offered by him as a sacrifice. Accordingly, they "elevate the host;" that is, lift up or offer the sacrifice, and require all to bow before it and worship; and with this view they are consistent in retaining the word priest. But why should this name be applied to a Protestant minister, who believes that all this is blasphemy, and who claims to have no sacrifice to offer when he comes to minister before God? The great sacrifice —the one sufficient atonement—has been offered; and the ministers of the gospel are appointed to proclaim that truth to men, not to offer sacrifices for sin.
{a} "among men" Heb 8:3
{*} "ordained" "appointed"
{+} "pertaining" "related"
Verse 2. Who can have compassion. Marg. Reasonably bear with. The idea is that of sympathizing with. The high priest is taken from among men, in order that he may have a fellow-feeling for those on whose behalf he officiates. Sensible of his own ignorance, he is able to sympathize with those who are ignorant; and compassed about with infirmity, he is able to succour those who have like infirmities.
And on them that are out of the way. The erring and the guilty. If he were taken from an order of beings superior to men, he would be less qualified to sympathize with those who felt that they were sinners, and who needed pardon.
For that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. Heb 7:28. He is liable to err; he is subject to temptation; he must die, and appear before God: and encompassed with these infirmities, he is better qualified to minister in behalf of guilty and dying men. For the same reason it is that the ministers of the gospel are chosen from among men. They are of like passions with others. They are sinners; they are dying men. They can enter into the feelings of those who are conscious of guilt; they can sympathize with those who tremble in dread of death; they can partake of the emotions of those who expect soon to appear before God.
{1} "have compassion" "reasonably bear with"
{a} "he himself" Heb 7:28
Verse 3. And by reason hereof. Because he is a sinner—an imperfect man.
As for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. To make an expiation for sins. He needs the same atonement; he offers the sacrifice for himself which he does for others, Le 9:7 The same thing is true of the ministers of religion now. They come before God feeling that they have need of the benefit of the came atonement which they preach to others; they plead the merits of the same blood for their own salvation which they show to be indispensable for the salvation of others.
{*} "hereof" "On this account"
{a} "so also" Le 9:7
Verse 4. And no man taketh this honour to himself. No one has a right to enter on this office unless he has the qualifications which God has prescribed. There were fixed and definite laws in regard to the succession in the office of the high priest, and to the qualifications of him who should hold the office.
But he that is called of God, as was Aaron. Aaron was designated by name. It was necessary that his successors should have as clear evidence that they were called of God to the office, as though they had been mentioned by name. The manner in which the high priest was to succeed to the office was designated in the law of Moses, but in the time of Paul these rules were little regarded. The office had become venal, and was conferred at pleasure by the Roman rulers. Still it was true that, according to the law, to which alone Paul here refers, no one might hold this office but he who had the qualifications which Moses prescribed, and which showed that he was called of God. We may remark here,
(1.) that this does not refer so much to an internal as to an external call. He was to have the qualifications prescribed in the law; but it is not specified that he should be conscious of an internal call to the office, or be influenced by the Holy Spirit to it. Such a call was, doubtless, in the highest degree desirable, but it was not prescribed as an essential qualification.
(2.) This has no reference to the call to the work of the Christian ministry, and should not be applied to it. It should not be urged as a proof-text to show that a minister of the gospel should have a "call" directly from God, or that he should be called according to a certain order of succession. The object of Paul is not to state this, whatever may be the truth on this point. His object is to show that the Jewish high priest was called of God to his office in a certain way, showing that he held the appointment from God, and that therefore it was necessary that the great High Priest of the Christian profession should be called in a similar manner. To this alone the comparison should be understood as applicable.
{b} "no man" 2 Ch 26:18
{c} "Aaron" Ex 28:1; Nu 16:40
Verse 5. So also Christ glorified not himself. See Barnes "Joh 8:54".
The meaning is, that Jesus was not ambitious; that he did not intrude himself into the great office of high priest; he did not enter upon its duties without being regularly called to it. Paul claimed that Christ held that office; but, as he was not descended from Aaron, and as no one might perform its duties without being regularly called to it, it was incumbent on him to show that Jesus was not an intruder, but had a regular vocation to that work. This he shows by a reference to two passages of the Old Testament.
But he that said unto him. That is, he who said to him, "Thou art my son," exalted him to that office He received his appointment from him. This was decisive in the case; and this was sufficient, if it could be made out; for the only claim which Aaron and his successors could have to the office, was the fact that they had received their appointment from God.
Thou art my Son. Ps 2:7. See this passage explained See Barnes "Ac 13:33".
It is here used with reference to the designation to the priestly office, though in the Psalm more particularly to the anointing to the office of king. The propriety of this application is founded on the fact, that the language in the Psalm is of so general a character, that it may be applied to any exaltation of the Redeemer, or to any honour conferred on him. It is here used with strict propriety, for Paul is saying that Jesus did not exalt himself, and in proof of that he refers to the fact that God had exalted him by calling him his "Son."
{d} "Christ glorified" Joh 8:54
{e} "Thou art my Son" Ps 2:7
Verse 6. As he said also in another place. Ps 110:4.
Thou art a Priest for ever. It is evident here that the apostle means to be understood as saying that the Psalm referred to Christ-and this is one of the instances of quotation from the Old. Testament respecting which there can be no doubt. Paul makes winch of this argument in a subsequent part of this epistle, Heb 7, and reasons as if no one would deny that the Psalm had a reference to the Messiah. It is clear, from this, that the Psalm was understood by the Jews at that time to have such a reference, and that it was so universally admitted that no one would call it in question. That the Psalm refers to the Messiah has been the opinion of nearly all Christian commentators, and has been admitted by the Jewish Rabbins in general also. The evidence that it refers to the Messiah is such as the following.
(1.) It is a Psalm of David, and yet is spoken of One who was superior to him, and whom he called his "Lord," Ps 110:1.
(2.) It cannot be referred to JEHOVAH himself, for he is expressly Ps 110:1 distinguished from him who is here addressed.
(3.) It cannot be referred to any one in the time of David, for there was no one to whom he would attribute this character of superiority but God.
(4.) For the same reason there was no one among his posterity, except the Messiah, to whom he would apply this language.
(5.) It is expressly ascribed by the Lord Jesus to himself, Mt 22:43,44.
(6.) The scope of the Psalm is such as to be applicable to the Messiah, and there is no part of it which would be inconsistent with such a reference. Indeed, there is no passage of the Old Testament of which it would be more universally conceded that there was a reference to the Messiah than this Psalm.
Thou art a Priest. He is not here called a high priest, for Melchisedek did not bear that title, nor was the Lord Jesus to be a high priest exactly in the sense in which the name was given to Aaron and his successors. A word is used, therefore, in a general sense, to denote that he would be a print simply, or would sustain the priestly office. This was all that was needful to the present argument, which was, that he was designated by God to the priestly office, and that he had not intruded himself into it.
For ever. This was an important circumstance, of which the apostle makes much use in another part of the epistle. See Barnes "Heb 7:8, See Barnes "Heb 7:23"
See Barnes "Heb 7:24".
The priesthood of the Messiah was not to change from hand to hand; it was not to be laid down at death; it was to remain unchangeably the same.
After the order. The word rendered order— taxiv ~means, "a setting in order—hence arrangement or disposition. It may be applied to ranks of soldiers; to the gradations of office; or to any rank which men sustain in society. To say that he was of the same order with Melchisedek, was to say that he was of the same rank or station. He was like him in his designation to the office. In what respects he was like him the apostle shows more fully in Heb 7. One particular in which there was a striking resemblance, which did not exist between Christ and any other high-priest, was that Melchisedek was both a priest and a king. None of the kings of the Jews were priests; nor were any of the priests ever elevated to the office of king. But in Melchisedek these offices were united; and this fact constituted a striking resemblance between him and the Lord Jesus. It was on this principle that there was such pertinency in quoting here the passage from Ps 2. See Heb 5:5. The meaning is, that Melchisedek was of a peculiar rank or order; that he was not numbered with the Levitical priests, and that there were important features in his office which differed from theirs. In those features it was distinctly predicted that the Messiah would resemble him.
Melchisedek. See Barnes "Heb 7:1, seq.
{f} "Thou art" Ps 110:4
Verse 7. Who. That is, the Lord Jesus—for so the connexion demands. The object of this verse and the two following is, to show that the Lord Jesus had that qualification for the office of priest to which he had referred Heb 5:2. It was one important qualification for that office, that he who sustained it should be able to show compassion, to aid those that were out of the way, and to sympathize with sufferers; in other words, they were themselves encompassed with infirmity, and thus were able to succour those who were subjected to trials. The apostle shows now that the Lord Jesus had those qualifications, as far as it was possible for one to have them who had no sin. In the days of his flesh he suffered intensely; he prayed with fervour; he placed himself in a situation where he learned subjection and obedience by his trials; and in all things he went far beyond what had been evinced by the priests under the ancient dispensation.
In the days of his flesh. When he appeared on earth as a man. Flesh is used to denote human nature, and especially human nature as susceptible of suffering. The Son of God still is united to human nature, but it is human nature glorified; for in his case, as in all others, "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," 1 Co 15:50. He has now a glorified body, Php 3:21, such as the redeemed will have in the future world. Comp, Re 1:13-17. The phrase "days of his flesh," means the time when he was incarnate, or when he lived on earth in human form. The particular time here referred to, evidently, was the agony in the garden of Gethsemane.
Prayers and supplications. These words are often used to denote the same thing. If there is a difference, the former—dehseiv—means, petitions which arise from a sense of need,—from deomai— want, to need; the latter refers usually to supplication for protection, and is applicable to one who, under a sense of guilt, flees to an altar with the symbols of supplication in his hand. Suppliants in such cases often carried an olive-branch as an emblem of the peace which they sought.
A fact is mentioned by Livy respecting the Locrians that may illustrate this passage. "Ten delegates from the Locrians, squalid and covered with rags, came into the hall where the consuls were sitting, extending the badges of suppliants—olive branches—according to the custom of the Greeks; and prostrated themselves on the ground before the tribunal, with a lamentable cry," Lib xxix. c. 16. The particular idea in the word here used ikethria is, petition for protection, help, or shelter, (Passow;) and this idea accords well with the design of the passage. The Lord Jesus prayed as one who had need, and as one who desired protection, shelter, or help. The words here, therefore, do not mean the same thing, and are not merely intensive, but they refer to distinct purposes which the Redeemer had in his prayers. He was about to die, and, as a man, he needed the Divine help; he was, probably, tempted in that dark hour, See Barnes "Joh 12:30, and he fled to God for protection.
With strong crying. This word does not mean weeping, as the word "crying" does familiarly with us. It rather means an outcry, the voice of wailing and lamentation. It is the cry for help of one who is deeply distressed, or in danger; and refers here to the earnest petition of the Saviour when in the agony of Gethsemane, or when on the cross. It is the intensity of the voice which is referred to, when it is raised by an agony of suffering. Comp. Lu 22:44: "He prayed more earnestly." Mt 27:46: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice—My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" See also Mt 26:38,39; 27:60.
And tears. Jesus wept at the grave of Lazarus, Joh 11:35, and over Jerusalem, Lu 19:41. It is not expressly stated by the Evangelists that he wept in the garden of Gethsemane, but there is no reason to doubt that he did. In such an intense agony as to cause a bloody sweat, there is every probability that it would be accompanied with tears. We may remark then,
(1.) that there is nothing dishonourable in tears, and that man should not be ashamed, on proper occasions, to weep. The fact that the Son of God wept is a full demonstration that it is not disgraceful to weep. God has so made us as to express sympathy for others by tears. Religion does not make the heart insensible and hard, as stoical philosophy does; it makes it tender and susceptible to impression.
(2.) It is not improper to weep. The Son of God wept—and if he poured forth tears it cannot be wrong for us. Besides, it is a great law of our nature, that in suffering we should find relief by tears. God would not have so made us if it had been wrong.
(3.) The fact that the Son of God thus wept should be allowed deeply to affect our hearts.
"He wept that we might weep;"
Each sin demands a tear."
He wept that he might redeem us; we should weep that our sins were so great as to demand such bitter woes for our salvation. That we had sinned; that our sins caused him such anguish; that he endured for us this bitter conflict, should make us weep. Tear should answer to tear, and sigh respond to sigh, and groan to groan, when we contemplate the sorrows of the Son of God in accomplishing our redemption. That man must have a hard heart who has never had an emotion when he has reflected that the Son of God wept, and bled, and died for him.
Unto him that was able. To God. He alone was able then to save. In such a conflict man could not aid; and the help of angels, ready as they were to assist him, could not sustain him. We may derive aid from man in trial; we may be comforted by sympathy and counsel; but there are sorrows where God only can uphold the sufferer. That God was able to uphold him, in his severe conflict, the Redeemer could not doubt; nor need we doubt it, in reference to ourselves, when deep sorrows come over our souls.
To save him from death. It would seem from this, that what constituted the agony of the Redeemer was the dread of death, and that he prayed that he might be saved from that. This might be, so far as the language is concerned, either the dread of death on the spot by the intensity of his sufferings and by the power of the tempter, or it might be the dread of the approaching death on the cross. As the Redeemer, however, knew that he was to die on the cross, it can hardly be supposed that he apprehended death in the garden of Gethsemane. What he prayed for was, that, if it were possible, he might be spared from a death so painful as he apprehended, Mt 26:39. Feeling that God had power to save him from that mode of dying, the burden of his petition was, that, if human redemption could be accomplished without such sufferings, it might please his Father to remove that cup from him.
And was heard. In Joh 11:42, the Saviour says, "I know that thou hearest me always." In the garden of Gethsemane he was heard. His prayer was not disregarded, though it was not literally answered. The cup of death was not taken away; but his prayer was not disregarded. What answer was given—what assurance or support was imparted to his soul—we are not informed. The case, however, shows us,
(1.) that prayer may be heard even when the sufferings which are dreaded, and from which we prayed to be delivered, may come upon us. They may come with such assurances of Divine favour, and such supports, as will be full proof that the prayer was not disregarded.
(2.) That prayer offered in faith may not be always literally answered. No one can doubt that Jesus offered the prayer of faith; and it is as little to be doubted, if he referred in the prayer to the death on the cross, that it was not literally answered. Comp, Mt 26:39. In like manner it may occur now, that prayer shall be offered with every right feeling, and with an earnest desire for the object, which may not be literally answered. Christians, even in the highest exercise of faith, are not inspired to know what is best for them; and, as long as this is the case, it is possible that they may ask for things which it would not be best to have granted. They who maintain that the prayer of faith is always literally answered, must hold that the Christian is under such a guidance of the Spirit of God that he cannot ask anything amiss. See Barnes "2 Co 12:9".
In that he feared. Marg. For his piety. Coverdale, "Because he had God in honour." Tindal, "Because he had God in reverence." Prof. Stuart renders it, "And was delivered from that which he feared." So also Doddridge. Whitby, "Was delivered from his fear." Luther renders it, "And was heard for that he had God in reverence"—dass er Gott in Ehren hatte. Beza renders it, "His prayers being heard, he was delivered from fear." From this variety in translating the passage, it will be seen at once that it is attended with difficulty. The Greek is, literally, "from fear or reverence" —apo thv eulabeiav. The word occurs in the New Testament only in one other place, Heb 12:28, where it is rendered "fear." "Let us serve him with reverence and godly fear." The word properly means, caution, circumspection; then timidity, fear; then the fear of God, reverence, piety. Where the most distinguished scholars have differed as to the meaning of a Greek phrase, it would be presumption in me to attempt to determine its sense. The most natural and obvious interpretation, however, as it seems to me, is, that it means that he was heard on account of his reverence for God; his profound veneration; his submission. Such was his piety that the prayer was heard, though it was not literally answered. A prayer may be heard, and yet not literally answered; it may be acceptable to God, though it may not consist with his arrangements to bestow the very blessing that is sought. The posture of the mind of the Redeemer, perhaps, was something like this. He knew that he was about to be put to death in a most cruel manner. His tender and sensitive nature, as a man, shrank from such a death. As a man he went, under the pressure of his great sorrows, and pleaded that the cup might be removed, and that man might be redeemed by a less fearful scene of suffering. That arrangement, however, could not be made. Yet the spirit which he evinced; the desire to do the will of God; the resignation, and the confidence in his Father which he evinced, were such as were acceptable in his sight. They showed that he had unconquerable virtue; that no power of temptation, and no prospect of the intensest woes which human nature could endure, could alienate him from piety, To show this was an object of inestimable value, and, much as it cost the Saviour, was worth it all. So now it is worth much to see what Christian piety can endure; What strong temptations it can resist; and what strength it has to bear up under accumulated woes: and even though the prayer of the pious sufferer is not directly answered, yet that prayer is acceptable to God, and the result of such a trial is worth all that it costs.
{a} "prayers" Mt 26:39-44
{b} "able" Mt 26:53
{1} "in that he feared" "for his piety"
Verse 8. Though he were a Son. Though the Son of God. Though he sustained this exalted rank, and was conscious of it, yet he was willing to learn experimentally what is meant by obedience in the midst of sufferings.
Yet learned he obedience. That is, he learned experimentally and practically. It cannot be supposed that he did not know what obedience was; or that he was indisposed to obey God before he suffered; or that he had, as we have, perversities of nature, leading to rebellion, which required to be subdued by suffering;—but that he was willing to test the power of obedience in sufferings; to become personally and practically acquainted with the nature of such obedience in the midst of protracted woes. Comp. See Barnes "Php 2:8".
The object here is, to show how well fitted the Lord Jesus was to be a Saviour for man-kind; and the argument is, that he has set us an example, and has shown that the most perfect obedience may be manifested in the deepest sorrows of the body and the soul. Learn hence, that one of the objects of affliction is to lead us to obey God. In prosperity we forget it. We become self-confident and rebellious. Then God lays his hand upon us; breaks up our plans; crushes our hopes; takes away our health; and teaches us that we must be submissive to his will. Some of the most valuable lessons of obedience are learned in the furnace of affliction; and many of the most submissive children of the Almighty have been made so, as the result of protracted woes.
{a} "obedience" Php 2:3
Verse 9. And being made perfect. That is, being made a complete Saviour—a Saviour fitted in all respects to redeem men. Sufferings were necessary to the completeness or the finish of his character as a Saviour—not to his moral perfection, for he was always without sin. See this explained See Barnes "Heb 2:10".
He became the Author,That is, he was the procuring cause (aitiov) of salvation. It is to be traced wholly to his sufferings and death. See Barnes "Heb 2:10".
Unto all them that obey him. It is not to save those who live in sin. Only those who obey him have any evidence that they will be saved. See Barnes "Joh 14:15".
{b} "being made perfect" Heb 2:10
Verse 10. Called of God. Addressed by him, or greeted by him. The Word. here used does not mean that he was appointed by God, or "called" to the office, in the sense in which we often use the word but simply that he was addressed as such, to wit, in Ps 110.
An High Priest. In the Septuagint, (Ps 110:4, ) and in Heb 4:6 above, it is rendered priest — iereuv —-but the Hebrew word cohen—is used to denote the high priest, and may mean either. See Sept. in Le 4:3. Whether the word priest, or high priest, be used here, does not affect the argument of the apostle.
After the order of Melchisedek. See Barnes "Heb 5:6".
{c} "High Priest" Heb 5:6
Verse 11. Of whom we have many things to say. There are many things which seem strange in regard to him; many things which are hard to be understood. Paul knew that what he had to say of this man, as a type of the Redeemer, would excite wonder, and that many might be disposed to call it in question. He knew that, in order to be understood, what he was about to say required a familiar acquaintance with the Scriptures, and a strong and elevated faith. A young convert—one who had just commenced the Christian life—could hardly expect to be able to understand it. The same thing is true now. One of the first questions which a young convert often asks is, Who was Melchisedek? And one of the things which most uniformly perplex those who begin to study the Bible, is the statement which is made about this remarkable man.
Hard to be uttered. Rather, hard to be interpreted, or explained. So the Greek word means.
Seeing ye are dull of hearing. That is, when they ought to have been acquainted with the higher truths of religion, they had shown that they received them slowly, and were dull of apprehension. On what particular fact Paul grounded this charge respecting them is unknown; nor could we know, unless we were better acquainted with the persons to whom he wrote, and their circumstances, than we now are. But he had doubtless in his eye some fact which showed that they were slow to understand the great principles of the gospel.
{*} "uttered" "explained"
{+} "hearing" "apprehension"
Verse 12. For when for the time. Considering the time which has elapsed since you were converted. You have been Christians long enough to be expected to understand such doctrines. This verse proves that those to whom he wrote were not recent converts.
Ye ought to be teachers. You ought to be able to instruct others. He does not mean to say, evidently, that they ought all to become public teachers, or preachers of the gospel, but that they ought to be able to explain to others the truths of the Christian religion. As parents, they ought to be able to explain them to their children; as neighbours, to their neighbours; or as friends, to those who were inquiring the way to life.
Ye have need. That is, probably the mass of them had need. As a people, or a church, they had shown that they were ignorant of some of the very elements of the gospel.
Again. This shows that they had been taught, on some former occasions, what were the first principles of religion, but they had not followed up the teaching as they ought to have done.
The first principles. The very elements; the rudiments; the first lessons—such as children learn before they advance to higher studies. See the word here used explained See Barnes "Ro 4:3, under the word "elements." The Greek word is the same.
Of the oracles of God. Of the Scriptures, or what God has spoken. See Barnes "Ro 3:2".
The phrase here may refer to the writings of the Old Testament, and particularly to those parts which relate to the Messiah; or it may include all that God had at that time revealed, in whatever way it was preserved. In 1 Pe 4:11, it is used with reference to the Christian religion, and to the doctrines which God had revealed in the gospel. In the passage before us it may mean, the Divine oracles or communications, in whatever way they had been made known. They had shown that they were ignorant of the very rudiments of the Divine teaching.
And are become such. There is more meant in this phrase than that they simply were such persons. The word rendered "are become" ginomai—sometimes implies a change of state, or a passing from one state to another—well expressed by the phrase "are become." See Mt 5:45; 4:3; 13:32; 6:16; 10:25; Mr 1:17; Ro 7:3,4.
The idea here is, that they had passed from the hopeful condition in which they were when they showed that they had an acquaintance with the great principles of the gospel, and that they had become such as to need again the most simple form of instruction. This agrees well with the general strain of the epistle, which is to preserve them from the danger of apostasy. They were verging towards it, and had come to that state where, if they were recovered, it must be by being again taught the elements of religion.
Have need of milk. Like little children. You can bear only the most simple nourishment. The meaning is, that they were incapable of receiving the higher doctrines of the gospel, as much as little children are incapable of digesting solid food. They were, in fact, in a state of spiritual infancy.
And not of strong meat. Greek. "Strong food." The word meat, with us, is used now to denote only animal food. Formerly, it meant food in general. The Greek word here means nourishment.
{++} "time" "For whereas by this time"
{d} "milk" 1 Co 3:1-3
Verse 13. For every one that useth milk. Referring to the food of children. The apostle has in view here those Christians who resemble children in this respect, that they are not capable of receiving the stronger food adapted to those of mature age.
Is unskilful. Inexperienced; who has not skill to perform anything. The word Is properly applied to one who has not experience or skill, or who is ignorant. Here it does not mean that they were not true Christians, but that they had not the experience or skill requisite to enable them to understand the higher mysteries of the Christian religion.
In the word of righteousness. The doctrine respecting the way in which men become righteous, or the way of salvation by the Redeemer. See Barnes "Ro 1:17".
For he is a babe. That is, in religious matters. He understands the great system only as a child may. It is common to speak of "babes in knowledge," as denoting a state of ignorance.
{1} "is unskilful" "hath no experience"
Verse 14. Strong meat. Solid food pertains to those of maturer years. So it is with the higher doctrines of Christianity. They can be understood and appreciated only by those who are advanced in Christian experience.
Of full age. Marg Perfect. The expression refers to those who are grown up.
Who by reason of use. Marg. Or, an habit; or perfection. Coverdale and Tindal render it, "through custom." The Greek word means, habit, practice. The meaning is, that by long use and habit they had arrived to that state in which they could appreciate the more elevated doctrines of Christianity. The reference, in the use of this word is not to those who eat food—meaning that by long use they are able to distinguish good from bad; but it is to experienced Christians, who, by long experience, are able to distinguish that which is useful, in pretended religious instruction, from that which is injurious. It refers to the delicate taste which an experienced Christian has in regard to those doctrines which impart most light and consolation. Experience will thus enable one to discern what is fitted to the soul of man, what elevates and purifies the affections, and what tends to draw the heart near to God.
Have their senses. The word here used means, properly, the senses— as we use the term; the seat of sensation, the smell, taste, &c. Then it means, the internal sense, the faculty of perceiving truth: and this is the idea here. The meaning is, that by long experience Christians come to be able to understand the more elevated doctrines or Christianity; they see their beauty and value, and they are able carefully and accurately to distinguish them from error. See Barnes "Joh 7:17".
To discern both good and evil. That is, in doctrine. They will appreciate and understand that which is true; they will reject that which is false.
{2} "full of age" "perfect"
{3} "of use" "or an habit; or perfection"
1. Let us rejoice that we have a High Priest who is duly called to take upon himself the functions of that great office, and who lives for ever, Heb 5:1-6. True, he was not of the tribe of Levi; he was not a descendant of Aaron; but he had a more noble elevation, and a more exalted rank. He was the Son of God, and was called to his office by special Divine designation, He did not obtrude himself into the work; he did not unduly exalt himself, but he was directly called to it by the appointment of God, When, moreover, the Jewish high priests could look back on the long line of their ancestors, and trace the succession up to Aaron, it was in the power of the great High Priest of the Christian faith to look farther back still, and to be associated in the office with one of higher antiquity than Aaron, and of higher rank—one of the most remarkable men of all ancient times— he whom Abraham acknowledged as his superior, and from whom Abraham received the benediction.
2. It is not unmanly to weep, Heb 5:7. The Son of God poured out prayers and supplications, with strong crying and tears, He wept at the grave of Lazarus, and he wept over Jerusalem. If the Redeemer wept, it is not unmanly to weep; and we should not be ashamed to have tears seen streaming down our cheeks. Tears are appointed by God to be the natural expression of sorrow, and, often to furnish a relief to a burdened soul. We instinctively honour the man whom we see weeping when there is occasion for grief. We sympathize with him ia his sorrow, and we love him the more. When we see a father who could face the cannon's mouth without shrinking, yet weeping over the open grave of a daughter, we honour him more than we could otherwise do. He shows that he has a heart that can love and feel, as well as courage that can meet danger without alarm. Washington wept when he signed the death-warrant of Major Andre; and who ever read the affecting account without feeling that his character was the more worthy of our love? There is enough in the world to make us weep. Sickness, calamity, death, are around us. They come into our dwellings, and our dearest objects of affection are taken away, and God intends that we shall deeply feel. Tears here will make heaven more sweet; and our sorrows on earth are intended to prepare us for the joy of that day when it shall be announced to us, that "all tears shall be wiped away from every face."
3. We see the propriety of prayer in view of approaching death, Heb 5:7. The Redeemer prayed when he felt that he must die. We know, also, that we must die. True, we shall not suffer as he did. He had pangs on the cross which no other dying man ever bore. But death to us is am object of dread. The hour of death is a fearful hour. The scene when a man dies is a gloomy scene. The sunken eye, the pallid cheek, the clammy sweat, the stiffened corpse, the coffin, the shroud, the grave, are all sad and gloomy things. We know not, too, what severe pangs we may have when we die. Death may come to us in some peculiarly fearful form; and in view of his approach, in any way, we should pray. Pray, dying man, that you may be prepared for that sad hour; pray, that you may not be left to complain, and rebel, and murmur then; pray, that you may lie down in calmness and peace; pray, that you may be enabled to honour God even in death.
4. It is not sinful to dread death, Heb 5:7. The Redeemer dreaded it. His human nature, though perfectly holy, shrank back from the fearful agonies of dying. The fear of death, therefore, in itself, is not sinful. Christians are often troubled because they have not that calmness in the prospect of death which they suppose they ought to have, and because their nature shrinks back from the dying pang. They suppose that such feelings are inconsistent with religion, and that they who have them cannot be true Christians. But they forget their Redeemer, and his sorrows; they forget the earnestness with which he pleaded that the cup might be removed. Death is in itself fearful, and it is a part of our nature to dread it; and even in the best of minds sometimes the fear of it is not wholly taken away until the hour comes, and God gives them "dying grace." There are probably two reasons why God made death so fearful to man.
(1.) One is, to impress him with the importance of being prepared for it. Death is, to him, the entrance on an endless being, and it is an object of God to keep the attention fixed on that as a most momentous and solemn event. The ox, the lamb, the robin, the dove, have no immortal nature, no conscience, no responsibility, and no need of making preparation for death; and hence—except in a very slight degree—they seem to have no dread of dying. But not so with man. He has an undying soul. His main business here is to prepare for death, and for the world beyond; and hence, by all the fear of the dying pang, and by all the horror of the grave, God would fix the attention of man on his own death as a most momentous event, and lead him to seek that hope of immortality which alone can lay the foundation for any proper removal of the fear of dying.
(2.) The other reason is, to deter man from taking his own life. To keep him from this, he is made so as to start back from death. He fears it; it is to him an object of deepest dread; and even when pressed down by calamity and sadness, as a general law, he "had rather bear the ills he has, than fly to others that he knows not of." Man is the only creature in reference to whom this danger exists. There is no one of the brute creation, unless it be the scorpion, that will take its own life; and hence they have not such a dread of dying. But we know how it is with man. Weary of life; goaded by a guilty conscience; disappointed and heart-broken, he is under strong temptation to commit the enormous crime of self-murder, and to rush uncalled to the bar of God. As one of the means of deterring from this, God has so made us that we fear to die; and thousands are kept from this enormous crime by this fear, when nothing else would save them. It is benevolence, therefore, to the world, that man is afraid to die; and in every pang of the dying struggle, and everything about death that makes us turn pale, and tremble at its approach, there is in some way the manifestation of goodness to mankind.
5. We may be comforted in the prospect of death by looking to the example of the Redeemer, Heb 5:7. Much as we may fear to die, and much as we may be left to suffer then, of one thing we may be sure. It is, that he has gone beyond us in suffering. The sorrows of our dying will never equal his. We shall never go through such scenes as occurred in the garden of Gethsemane and on the cross. It may be some consolation that human nature has endured greater pangs than we shall, and that there is one who has surpassed us even in our keenest sufferings. It should be to us a source of consolation, also, of the highest kind, that he did it that he might alleviate our sorrows, and that he might drive away the horrors of death from us by "bringing life and immortality to light," and that, as the result of his sufferings, our dying moments may be calm and peaceful.
6. It often occurs that men are true Christians, and yet are ignorant of the elementary principles of religion, Heb 5:12. This is owing to such things as the following:—A want of early religious instruction; the faults of preachers who fail to teach their people; a want of inquiry on the part of Christians, and the interest which they feel in other things above that which they feel in religion. It is often surprising what vague and unsettled opinions many professed Christians have on some of the most important points of Christianity, and how little qualified they are to defend their opinions when they are attacked. Of multitudes in the Church even now it might be said, that they "need some one to teach them what are the very first principles of true religion." To some of the elementary doctrines of Christianity, about deadness to the world, about self-denial, about prayer, about doing good, and about spirituality, they are utter strangers. So of forgiveness of injuries, and charity, and love for a dying world. These are the elements of Christianity—rudiments which children in righteousness should learn; and yet they are not learned by multitudes who bear the Christian name.
7. All Christians ought to be teachers, Heb 5:12. I do not mean that they should all be preachers; but they should all so live as to teach others the true nature of religion. This they should do by their example, and by their daily conversation. Any Christian is qualified to impart useful instruction to others. The servant of lowest rank may teach his master how a Christian should live. A child may thus teach a parent how he should live, and his daily walk may furnish to the parent lessons of inestimable value. Neighbours may thus teach neighbours; and strangers may learn of strangers. Every Christian has a knowledge of the way to be saved, which it would be of the highest value to others to know, and is qualified to tell the rich, and proud, and learned sinner, that about himself, and of the final destiny of man, of which he is now wholly ignorant. Let it be remembered, also, that the world derives its views of the nature of religion from the lives and conduct of its professed friends. It is not from the Bible, or from the pulpit, or from books, that men learn what Christianity is; it is from the daily walk of those who profess to be its friends; and every day we live, a wife, a child, a neighbour, or a stranger, is forming some view of the nature of religion from what they see in us. How important, therefore, it is that we so live as to communicate to them just views of what constitutes religion!
| This article is provided as a ministry of Third Millennium Ministries (Thirdmill). If you have a question about this article, please email our Theological Editor. If you would like to discuss this article in our online community, please visit the RPM Forum. |
Subscribe to RPM
RPM subscribers receive an email notification each time a new issue is published.
Notifications include the title, author, and description
of each article in the issue, as well as links directly to the articles.
Like RPM itself, subscriptions are free.
Click here to subscribe.
|