Additional Note on iv. 12. The origin and constitution of man.
The great mystery of the origin of man is touched in two passages of the Epistle which severally suggest the two complementary theories which have been fashioned in a one-sided manner as Traducianism and Creationism: c. vii. 10; xii. 9.
In c. vii. 10 (comp. v. 5) the force of the argument lies in the assumption that the descendants are included in the ancestor, in such a sense that his acts have force for them. So far as we keep within the region of physical existence the connexion is indisputable. Up to this limit 'the dead' do indeed 'rule the living.' And their sovereignty witnesses to an essential truth which lies at the foundation of society. The individual man is not a complete self-centred being. He is literally a member in a body. The connexions of the family, the nation, the race, belong to the idea of man, and to the very existence of man.
But at the same time it is obvious that if this view gives the whole account of man's being, he is a mere result. He is made as it were a mere layer—tradux—of a parent stock, and owes to that his entire vital force. He is bound in a system of material sequences, and so he is necessarily deprived of all responsibility. Thus another aspect of his being is given in c. xii. 9. Here a distinction is drawn between 'the fathers of our flesh,' of our whole physical organisation, with its 'life,' and 'the Father of spirits,' among which man's spirit is of necessity included. There is then an element in man which is not directly derived by descent, though it may follow upon birth. And in the recognition of this reality of individuality, of a personally divine kinsmanship, lies the truth of Creationism. We are not indeed to suppose that separate and successive creative acts call into existence the 'spirits' of single men. It is enough to hold that man was so made that in his children this higher element should naturally find a place on their entrance into the world. That such an issue should ensue when the child begins his separate life is neither more nor less marvellous than that the power of vision should attend the adequate preparation of an organ of vision. So also, to continue the same illustration, the power of vision and the power of self-determination are modified by the organisms through which they act, but they are not created by them. The physical life and the spiritual life spring alike from the one act of the living God when He made man in His own image; through whatever steps, in the unfolding of time, the decisive point was reached when the organism, duly prepared, was fitted to receive the divine breath.
But without attempting to develop a theory of Generationism, as it may be called, as distinguished from Traducianism and Creationism, it is enough for us to notice that the writer of the Epistle affirms the two antithetic facts which represent the social unity of the race and the personal responsibility of the individual, the influence of common thoughts and the power of great men, the foundation of hope and the condition of judgment.
The analysis of man's constitution given by implication in the Epistle corresponds with the fundamental division of St Paul (1 Thess. v. 23 body, soul, spirit).
The body is noticed both in its completeness (x. 5) and in respect of the conditions of its present manifestation (flesh, v. 7, x. 20, xii. 9; blood and flesh, ii. 14). It is unnecessary to repeat what has been said in the notes on these passages. A comparison of c. v. 7 with c. x. 5 will place in a clear light the difference between 'the body,' which represents the whole organisation through which the growth and fulness of human life is represented according to the conditions under which it is realised (notice I Cor. xv. 44 soma psuchikon, soma pnethmatikon), and the 'flesh,' which represents what is characteristic of our earthly existence under the aspect of its weakness and transitoriness and affinity with the material world. The moral sense of 'flesh,' which is prominent in St Paul, does not occur in the Epistle.
The soul, the life (psuche), is an element in man which from the complexity of his nature may be very differently conceived of. His 'life' extends to two orders, the seen and the unseen, the temporal and the eternal, the material and the spiritual. And according as one or the other is predominant in the thought of the speaker psuche may represent the energy of life as it is manifested under the present conditions of sense, or the energy of life which is potentially eternal. This manifoldness of the psuche is recognised in c. iv. 12. 'The Word of God' analyses its constituent parts and brings them before our consciousness. So it is that we have 'to gain our life,' 'our soul' in the education of experience inspired by faith (x. 39 emeis...pisteos eis peripoiesin psuches comp. Matt. x. 39; xi. 29; xvi. 25 f. || Mk. viii. 35 f. || Lk. ix. 24, xvii. 33; xxi. 19 ktesesthe). In the sadnesses and disappointments and failures of effort (c. xii. 3 tais psuchais ekluomenoi) we have 'hope as anchor of the soul, entering into that which is within the veil' (vi. 19). And it is for the preservation of this harmonious sum of man's vital powers that Christian teachers watch unweariedly (c. xiii. 17 agrupnousin huper ton psuchon).
little is said in the Epistle on the 'spirit' (pneuma) by which man holds converse with the unseen. Just as he has affinity by 'the flesh with the animal world, so he has by 'the spirit' affinity with God. God is indeed 'the Father of spirits' (c. xii. 9), and in His presence we draw near to 'spirits of just men made perfect' (xii. 23).
These three elements have in themselves no moral character. They are of the nature of powers to be used, disciplined, coordinated, harmonised. The expression of the moral character lies in 'the heart.' Men in a mere enumeration can be spoken of as 'souls,' but 'the heart' is the typical centre of personal. It is the 'heart' which receives its strong assurance by grace (c. xiii. 9). 'Unbelief' has its seat in 'the heart' (c. iii. 12 kardia ponera apistias). In Christ we can approach God 'with a true heart' (c. x. 22 meta alethines kardias), offering Him the fulness of our individual being which we have realised for His service, having severally 'had our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience' (id. rerantismenai tas kardias apo suneideseos ponerpas). See also c. iii. 8, 10, 15; iv. 7 (Ps. xcv. 8, 10); iv. 12 (note); viii. 10 (note); x. 16 (Jer. xxxi. 33).
For man has a sovereign power throned within him through which the divine law finds a voice. He has a 'conscience' (suneidesis) whose judgments he can recognise as having final authority. He has 'conscience of sins' (c. x. 2). He knows that certain acts are evil and that he is responsible for them. In such a state he has an 'evil conscience' (c. x. 22; contrast c. xiii. 18 kale suneidesis). The conscience feels the defilement of 'dead works,' which counterfeit the fruits of its righteous claims on man's activity (c. ix. 14); and it furnishes the standard of that perfection towards which man aspires (c. ix. 9 kata suneidesin teleiosai. Additional Note).
Of the words which describe man's intellectual faculties dianoia ('understanding') is found in a quotation in viii. 10; x. 16 (Jer. xxxi. 33); but nous, which occurs in each group of St Paul's Epistles, is not found in this Book.
Hebrews 5
V. ¹Pas gar archiereus ex anthropon lambanomenos
III. @The High-priesthood of Christ universal and sovereign@ (cc. v.-vii.).
In the last two chapters the writer of the Epistle has shewn the general superiority of 'Jesus,' the Founder of the New Covenant, over Moses and Joshua; and, further, that the divine promise partially fulfilled by the occupation of Canaan still awaits its complete and absolute fulfilment. He is thus brought back to the thought of Christ's High-priesthood, in virtue of which humanity finds access to the Presence of God, 'His rest,' pursuing in detail the line of argument suggested in ii. 17, 18 and resumed in iv. 14—16.
In this section the Apostle deals with the general conception of Christ's High-priesthood. He treats of the accomplishment of Christ's High-priestly work in the next section.
The section consists of three parts. The writer first briefly characterises the work and the qualifications of a High-priest; and shows that the qualifications are possessed by Christ in ideal perfection, and that He completes the (theocratic) type of the Aaronic High-priest by adding to it the features of the (natural) type of the High-priesthood of Melchizedek (v. 1—10). Then follows a hortatory passage in which the duty of continuous and patient effort is enforced as the condition of right knowledge of the Christian revelation (v. 11—vi.). Having thus prepared the way for a fuller exposition of the truth with which he is engaged, the writer unfolds through the image of Melchizedek a view of the absolute High-priesthood of Christ (vii.).
Thus we have shortly:
i. The characteristics of a High-priest fulfilled in Christ (v. 1—10).
ii. Progress through patient effort the condition of the knowledge of Christian mysteries (v. 11—vi.).
iii. The characteristics of Christ as absolute High-priest shadowed forth by Melchizedek (vii.).
i. The characteristics of a High-priest are fulfilled in Christ. (v. 1—10).
This paragraph falls naturally into two parts. (1) The characteristics of a High-priest are first laid down (v. 1—4); and then (2) it is shewn that these were perfectly satisfied by Christ (5—10).
(1) The characteristics of a High-priest are drawn from a consideration of his office (v. 1); and from the qualifications which its fulfilment requires in regard to men and to God (2-4).
¹For every High-priest, being taken from among men, is appointed for men in the things that pertain to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins; ²being able to bear gently with the ignorant and erring, since he also himself is compassed with infirmity, ³and by reason thereof is bound, as for the people so also for himself, to offer for sins.?And no one taketh the honour to himself, but being called of God, even as was Aaron.
(1). The general purpose of the institution of the High-priesthood.
pas gar...] This section follows naturally from that which precedes. The perfect sympathy of our High-priest (iv. 15) satisfies one of the conditions which are necessarily attached to the office universally. On the ground of this fundamental correspondence between Christ's Nature and the High-priesthood, the writer proceeds to develop the idea of the High-priesthood before he applies it to Christ. The gar is explanatory and not directly argumentative; and the Mosaic system is treated as embodying the general conception (pas); but even so the type of Melchizedek's priesthood is not to uper anthropon kathistatai ta pros ton theon, hina prosphere dora [te] kai thusias huper hamartion, ²metriopathein
1 dora te 'AC syr hl: om. te B vg syr vg me: te dora D?*.
be forgotten. The words recur c. viii. 3.
ex anth. lamb. huper anthr. kath....] being taken from among men... The human origin of the High-priest is marked as a ground of the fitness of his appointment. A High-priest being himself man can act for men: comp. Ex. xxviii. 1 (from among the children of Israel). He is 'of men' and 'on behalf of men' (for their service), and in the original these two phrases correspond emphatically. Khan to nomo ouk angelos huper anthropon hierateuein etachthe all' anthropos huper anthropon (Theod.). Chrysostom (followed by later Fathers) remarks: touto koinon to Xpisto. The present participle (lambanomenos, Vulg. assumptus, inadequately) suggests the continuity of the relation (v. 4 kaloumenos, Vulg. [ho kal.] qui vocatur).
It is unnatural and injurious to the argument to take ex anthr. lambanomenos as part of the subject (Syr. every high-priest that is from men).
ta pros ton theon] c. ii. 17 note; Deut. xxxi. 27 (lxx.).
prosphere] The word prospherein is commonly used in the lxx. for the 'offering' of sacrifices and gifts, and it is so used very frequently in this Epistle (19 times). It never occurs in the Epistles of St Paul, and rarely in the other books of N. T. Matt. v. 23 f. (comp. ii. 11); viii. 4 and parallels; John xvi. 2; Acts vii. 42; xxi. 26. Compare anapherein c. vii. 27 note.
This usage of prospherein appears to be Hellenistic and not Classical.
dora te kai thusias] O. L. munera et hostias, Vulg. dona et sacrificia. Doron can be used comprehensively to describe offerings of all kinds, bloody and unbloody: viii. 4 (comp. xi. 4). The same offering indeed could be called, under different aspects, a 'gift' and a 'sacrifice.' But when 'gifts' and 'sacrifices' are distinguished the former mark the 'meal-offering' (Hebrew) and the latter the bloody offerings. Comp. viii. 3; ix. 9.
In this narrower sense the 'sacrifice' naturally precedes the 'offering' (comp. Ps. xl. (6), c. x. 5). It is possible that the transposition is made in order to emphasise the thought that man needs an appointed Mediator even to bring his gifts to God. The particular reference is to the offerings of the High-priest on the Day of Atonement, 'the Day' (Joma) as it is called in the Talmud, which concentrated all the ideas of sacrifice and worship, as the High-priest concentrated all the ideas of personal service (Lev. xvi.; Num. xxix.).
The clause huper hamartion is to be joined with thusias (sacrifices for sins) and not with prosphere as referring to both nouns. The two ideas of eucharistic and expiatory offerings are distinctly marked.
For huper see c. vii. 27; x. 12; (ix. dunamenos tois agnoousi kai planomenois, epei kai autos
2 epei dai: kai gar D?*.
2—4. From the office of the High-priest the writer passes on to his qualifications in regard to man and God. He must have sympathy with man (2, 3) and receive his appointment from God (4).
(2). The capacity for calm and gentle judgment fits him for the fulfilment of his office in behalf of his fellow men. He offers sacrifices as one 'able to bear gently' with the ignorant and erring.
metriopathein] to feel gently towards, to bear gently with. Vulg. condolere. Ambr. affici pro... Syr. to make himself humble and suffer with. The proper idea of metriopathein (metriopathes, metriopatheia) is that of a temperate feeling (of sorrow and pain and anger) as contrasted with the impassibility (apathiia) of the Stoics (Diog. Laert. § 31 Aristoteles: ephe de ton sophon me einai men apathe metriopathe de). The word is frequently used by Philo: de Abrah. § 44 (ii. 37 M.) mete pleio tou metriou sphadazein...mete apatheia...chresthai, to de meson pro ton akron eomenon metriopathein peirpasthai. de Jos. § $ (ii. p. 45 M.) muria autos epathon ton a'nekeston eph' eis, paideutheis metriopathein, ouk egnamphthen. de spec. legg. § 17 (ii. 315 M., joined with epieikes). id de nobil. § 2 (ii. p. 439 M., opposed to he ''ametria ton pathon).
Comp. Jos. Antt. xii. 3, 2, Plut. de frat. am. p. 489 C he phusis edoken hemin praoteta kai metriopatheias ekgenon anexikakian. Clem. Alex. Strom. ii. 8, § 39 (p. 450 P.); iv. 17, § 100 (p. 611 P.).
In the Law no special moral qualifications are prescribed for the priests. Here the essential qualification which lies in their humanity is brought out. Their work was not and could not be purely external and mechanical even if it seemed to be so superficially. Within certain limits they had to decide upon the character of the facts in regard to which offerings were made.
tois agnoousi kai planomenois] Vulg. iis qui ignorant et errant. The compound description may either indicate the source (ignorance) and the issue (going astray) of sin; or it may describe sinners, so far as they come into consideration here, under two main aspects. Wilful, deliberate sin does not fall within the writer's scope, nor indeed within the scope of the Levitical Law. Such sin required in the first instance the manifestation of a sterner judgment. Comp. Num. xv. 22—31 (sins of ignorance and sins of presumption).
For the use of agnoein in lxx. (Hebrew, Hebrew) see 1 Sam. xxvi. 21; Ezek. xiv. 20 (Alex.); Lev. iv. 13; v. 18; Lev. iv. 2 (Hebrew, lxx. hamarte akousios, Aqu., Symm. agnoia). Ecclus. v. 15. Compare agnoia, Gen. xxvi. 10; Ecclus. xxviii. 7; xxx. 11; xxiii. 3; agnoema c. ix. 7 note. True knowledge implies corresponding action. Comp. 1 John ii. 3 note.
In iv. 15 our High-priest is described as one dunamenos sumpathesai tais astheneiais, (while here he generally is required metriopathein tois agnoousin kai planomenois. The one phrase describes his relation to the source of transgression, the other his relation to the transgressor. It is necessary that the true High-priest should be able perikeitai astheneian, ³kai di' auten opheilei, kathos peri tou laou, houtos kai peri heautou prospherein peri hamartion.?kai ouch heauto tis lambanei ten timen, alla
3 di' auten 'ABC* D?*: dia tauten S syr hl mg. heautou 'AC: autou (hautou) BD?*. peri ham. 'ABC* D?*: huper ham. S. 4 lambanei tis D?.
to sympathise with the manifold forms of weakness from which sins spring, as himself conscious of the nature of sin, but it is not necessary that he should actually share the feelings of sinners, as having himself sinned. Towards sinners he must have that calm, just feeling which neither exaggerates nor extenuates the offence. It may further be noticed that Christ, as High-priest, has no weakness, though He sympathises with weaknesses (vii. 28; iv. 15).
epei] The particle is unusually frequent (9 times) in this Epistle (10 times in St Paul), while hoti causal only occurs in quotations (c. viii. 9 ff.). See v. 11 note.
perikeitai asth.] V. L. gestat infirmitatem. Vulg. circumdatus est infirmitate. Syr. clothed with infirmity. For the use of perikeimai, compare (c. xii. 1); Acts xxviii. 20 ten halusin tautev perikeimai. Clem. 2 Cor. 1 amaurosin perikeimenoi. Ign. ad Trall. 12; and for the general thought see c. vii. 28 echontas astheneian. The image is common in Greek literature from the time of Homer: Il. xviii. 157 epieimenoi alken. Comp. Lk. xxiv. 49; Col. iii. 12. Eidos to metron tes anthropines astheneias eph' heauto epimetrei kai ten sungnomen (Theoph.).
The exact opposite to perikeisthai is perielein (c. x. 11). With the sing. (astheneia) contrast the plural c. iv. 15.
(3). kai di' auten] and by reason thereof, i.e. of the weakness. This clause may be an independent statement, or depend upon epei. On the whole the form (kai di' auten instead of di' hen) is in favour of the former view; which is further supported by the fact that weakness does not absolutely involve sin, so that the weakness and the sin even in the case of man, as he is, are two separate elements.
In the case of the human High-priest weakness actually issued in sin. In this respect the parallel with Christ fails. But it has been seen (iv. 15) that a sense of the power of the temptation and not the being overpowered by it is the true ground of sympathy. Comp. vii. 27.
opheilei] he is bound in the very nature of things, in virtue of his constitution and of his office. He must obtain purity for himself before he can intercede for others. Comp. c. ii. 17 note.
peri heautou] The ceremonies of the Day of Atonement are still foremost in the writer's thoughts (Lev. xvi.). Philo (Quis rer. div. hær. § 36, i. 497 M.) regards the daily meal offering as the offering for the priest (Lev. vi. 20), as the lamb was the offering for the people.
prosph. peri hamartion] The constant use of the singular in the sense of 'sin-offering' (x. 6, 8; xiii. 11 peri hamartias and lxx.) seems to shew that here peri ham. is to be taken generally 'for sins,' while prosph. is absolute as in Luke v. 14, though not elsewhere in this Epistle. See also Num. vii. 18.
(4). A second qualification for the High-priesthood lies in the divine call. He must be man, and he must be called by God. The fact of human sinfulness naturally leads to this complementary thought. Of himself a man could not presume to take upon him such an office. He could not draw near to God being himself sinful: still less could he draw near to God to intercede for others. At the kaloumenos hupo tou theou, kathosper kai Aaron.?Houtos kaloumenos ('ABCD? syr hl: + *o' kal. S vg syr vg. kathosper '* ABD?*: kathaper S '*. om. kai D?* vg syr vg. Aaron 'ABCD?: + 'o' A. S.
most he could only indicate in action the desire for fellowship with God.
heauto lambanei] The idea of bold presumption does not lie in the phrase itself (Luke xix. 12), but in the context The unusual form ouch heauto tis corresponds with ouch heauton which follows.
ten timen) Latt. honorem, the office. So e time is used of the High-priesthood by Josephus: e.g.. Antt. iii. 8, 1.
alla kaloum.] but being called (as called) he taketh it (lambanes is to be supplied from the preceding lambanei heauto).
The word kaleisthai (comp. c. xi. 8) is specially used for the 'call' to the Christian Faith: c. ix. 15 (especially by St Paul and St Peter).
kathosper kai Aaron] Ex. xxviii. 1; Num. xvi.—xviii. Even Aaron himself, though specially marked out before (Ex. xvi. 33), did not assume the office without a definite call.
Aaron is the divine type of the High-priest, as the Tabernacle is of ritual service. He is mentioned in the N.T. besides only cc. vii. 11; ix. 4; (Lk. i. 5; Acts vii. 40).
From the time of Herod the succession to the High-priesthood became irregular and arbitrary and not confined to the line of Aaron (Jos. Antt. xv. 2, 4; xx. 9). Therefore the writer goes back to the divine ideal. The notoriousness of the High-priestly corruption at the time could not fail to give point to the language of the Epistle.
Schoettgen quotes from Bammidbar R. c. xviii.: Moses said [to Korah and his companions]: If Aaron my brother had taken the priesthood to himself ye would have done well to rise against him; but in truth God gave it to him, whose is the greatness and the power and the glory. Whosoever therefore rises against Aaron, does he not rise against God? (Wünsche, p. 441).
(2) Having characterised the office and qualifications of a High-priest generally, the writer now goes on to shew that Christ satisfied the qualifications (5—8), and fulfils the office (9, 10).
The proof is given in an inverted form. The divine appointment of Christ is established first (5, 6); and then His power of sympathy (7, 8); and lastly His office is described (9, 10).
This inversion, in an elaborate parallelism, is perfectly natural, and removes the appearance of formality.
?So Christ also glorified not Himself to become High-priest, but He that spake unto Him,
Thou art My Son,
I have today begotten Thee: —
?Even as He saith also in another place
Thou art a priest for ever,
After the order of Melchizedek:—
?Who, in His days of flesh (or in the days of His flesh) having offered up, with strong crying and tears, prayers and supplications unto Him that was able to save Him out of death, and having been heard for His godly fear,?though He was Son yet learned obedience by the things which He suffered;?and having been made perfect He became to all that obey Him the cause of eternal salvation, ¹?being addressed by God as High-priest after the order of Melchizedek.
5—8. The qualifications of Christ for the High-priesthood are established by His divine appointment (5, 6), and by His human discipline which became the ground of perfect sympathy (7, 8). kai ho christos ouch heauton edoxasen genethenai archierea, all' ho lalesas pros auton Huios mou ei su, ego semeron gegenneka se.?kathos kai en hetero legei
5 gennethenai D?*: genesthai A. 6 hetero + palin D?*.
(5), (6). The divine appointment of Christ is exhibited in two passages of the Psalms in which the Lord who declares Him to be His Son declares Him also to be 'High-priest after the order of Melchizedek.'
These two quotations from Ps. ii. 7; Ps. cx. 4 establish the source of the Lord's sovereign dignity as 'Son,' and mark the particular form in which this dignity has been realised. They correspond in fact to the two ideas edoxasen and genethenai archierea. The first passage which has been already quoted (i. 5) refers the glory of the Risen Christ, the exalted Son of man, to the Father. This glory is not exactly defined, but the position of sonship includes every special honour, kingly or priestly. He to whom this had been given could not be said to 'glorify himself.' The second quotation (Ps. cx. 4) defines the particular application of the first. The kingly priesthood of Melchizedek was promised to Christ. Such a priesthood naturally belongs to the exalted Son.
(5). houtos kai ho sristos] So Christ (the Christ) also... The title of the office emphasises the idea of the perfect obedience of the Lord even in the fulness of His appointed work. It is not said that 'Jesus' glorified not Himself, but 'the Christ,' the appointed Redeemer, glorified not Himself.
Comp. iii. 14; vi. 1; ix. 14, 28; xi. 26 (ho christos); and iii. 6; ix. 11, 24 (christos).
ouch heath. edox. gen.] Vulg. non semetipsum clarificavit ut pontifex fieret. This fuller phrase, in place of the simple repetition of the words used before, 'took not to Himself the honour,' gives a distinct prominence to the general character of Christ's work. 'He glorified not Himself so as (in the assertion of this dignity) to become High-priest.' Christ, as sinless man, could approach God for Himself; but He waited for His Father's appointment that He might approach God as Son of man for sinful humanity. Comp. John viii. 54, 42; Acts iii. 13.
The High-priesthood, the right of mediation for humanity, was a 'glory' to 'the Son of man.' Comp. John xvii. 5.
all' ho lal. pros auton] but His Father glorified Him, that He should be made High-priest, even He that spake unto Him... (Ps. ii. 7 Kurios eipen pros me).
semeron gegenneka se] Comp. i. 5 note. Hoc est dicere Ego semper et aeternaliter manens semper te habeo filium coaeternum mihi. Hodie namque adverbium est praesentis temporis quod proprie Deo competit (Prim., Herv.).
In connexion with the quotation from Ps. ii. 7 it must be observed that the lxx. translation of Ps. cix. (cx.) 3 gives a thought closely akin to it: ek gastros pro heosphorou egennesa se, which was constantly cited by the Greek fathers as a true parallel.
(6). kathos kai...] The absolute declaration of the Sonship of Christ found a special application in these words of another Psalm. The definite office of Priesthood is a partial interpretation of the glory of the Son. 'The Father glorified the Son to become High-priest, even as in fact (kai) He expressly declares.' This glorifying was not a matter of general deduction only but definitely foreshewn. Su hiereus eis ton aiona kata ten taxin Melchisedek.
su + ei' vg syr hl me.
kathos kai] 1 Thess. v. 11; Eph. iv. 4.
en hetero] probably neuter, in another place (Ps. cx. 4). Comp. iv. 5; 1 Clem. viii. 4 en hetero topo legei.
Psalm cx. describes the Divine Saviour under three aspects as
King (1—3); Priest (4); Conqueror (5-7).
It is quoted in the N. T. to illustrate three distinct points in the Lord's Person.
(1) His Lordship and victory: Matt. xxii. 43 ff. and parallels (eipen kurios to kurio mou...Ei oun Daueid kalei auton kurion...); 1 Cor. xv. 25; c. x. 12 f.
(2) His Exaltation at the right hand of God (kathou ek dexion mou...): Acts ii. 34 f.; c. i. 13.
And this phrase underlies the many references to Christ's 'sitting' (Matt. xxvi. 64) and taking His seat (Mark xvi. 19 ekathisen) at the right hand of God.
(3) His Priesthood (hiereus eis ton aiona): v. 10 and in cc. vi. vii.
kata ten taxin M.] Vulg. secundum ordinem. Syr. after the likeness (cf. vii. 15 kata ten homoioteta) — after the order, to occupy the same position, as priest at once and king (Hebr. rr). For taxis see 2 Macc. ix. 18; the word is used very widely in classical Greek for the 'position,' 'station' of a slave, an enemy &c. Comp. Philo, de vit. Mos. iii. § 21 (ii. p. 161 M.) ou mia taxis ton hieromenon.
It is worth while to summarise the characteristic note in which Primasius enumerates three main points in which the High-priesthood of Christ was, like that of Melchizedek, contrasted with the High-priesthood of Aaron:
(1) It was not for the fulfllmont of legal sacrifices, sacrifices of bulls and goats; but for the offering of bread and wine, answering to Christ's Body and Blood. Animal offerings have ceased: these remain.
(2) Melchizedek combined the kingly with the priestly dignity: he was anointed not with oil but with the Holy Spirit.
(3) Melchizedek appeared once: so Christ offered Himself once.
Oecumenius, in almost the same form, marks the following points of resemblance in Melchizedek to Christ: hoti ou di' elaiou eis hierosunen echristhe ho Melchisedek hos Aaron, kai hoti ou tas di' aimatos prosegage thusias, kai hoti ton ethnon hen archiereus, kai hoti di' artou kai oinou eulogesen ton Abraam.
Two features in Melchizedek's priesthood appear to be specially present to the mind of the writer, (1) that it was connected with the kingly office, and (2) that it was not made dependent on any fleshly descent, or limited by conditions of time. Melchizedek had no recorded ancestry and no privileged line of descendants. He represented a non-Jewish, a universal priesthood. In relation to the Priesthood he occupies the position which Abraham occupies in relation to the Covenant. Comp. Zech. vi. 13.
No early Jewish writer applies this promise of the priesthood to Messiah. Justin (Dial. cc. 33, 83) and Tertullian (adv. Marc. v. 9) mention that the Psalm was referred by the Jews to Hezekiah. Compare Schoettgen, ii. 645. The Aboth R. Nathan from which he quotes an application of the words to Messiah is in its present form probably of post-Talmudical date (Zuns Gottesd. Vort. 108 f.; Steinschneider Jewish Literature, 40).
The Chaldee paraphrase of the verse (referring it to David) is remarkable: 'The Lord has determined that thou shalt be set Prince (Hebrew) over the world to come, for thy desert, because thou art an innocent king.' eis ton aiona] Christ is a Priest for ever, because He has no successor, nor any need of a successor. His High-priestly?hos en tais hemerais tes sarkos autou, deeseis te kai
7 de + hon D?*. om. te vg (syr vg) me.
Sacrifice, His High-priestly Entrance 'with Hie own blood' into heaven, to the presence of God, are 'eternal' acts, raised beyond all limits of time. Comp. ix. 12, 14; xiii. 20.
Here therefore there is no possibility of repetition, as in the Levitical sacrifices. All is 'one act at once,' while for men the virtue of Christ's sacrifice is applied in time.
Oecumenius understands the phrase of the perpetual memory of Christ's offering: ou gar ten pros hapax genomenen hupo theou thusian kai prosphoran eipen han eis ton aiona, all' aphoron eis tous nun hierourgous di' hon meson Christos hierourgei kai hierourgeitai, ho kai paradous autois en to mustiko deipno ton tropon tes toiautes hierourgias.
Theophylact in much more careful language says: pos eipe to eis ton aiona; hoti kai nun meta tou somatos. ho huper hempon ethusen entunchanei huper hempon to theo kai patri...he hoti he kath' hekasten ginomene kai genesomene eis ton aiona prosphora dia ton tou theou leitourgon auton echei archierea kai hierea ton kurion, kai hiereion heauton huper hemon hagiazonta kai tauta ginetai ho thanatos tou kuriou katangelletai.
7—10. The complicated sentence is divided into two main propositions by the two finite verbs (1) hos...prosenenkas kai eisakoustheis...emathen... (2) kai teleiotheis egeneto. The first sentence describes the divine discipline through which Christ was perfected in His human nature: the second, the efficacy of the work which He was fitted to accomplish in His perfected humanity.
The great statement of the first sentence (hos en tais hemerais tes sarkos autou...emathen aph' hon epathen ten hupakoen) is enlarged by two subordinate statements which illustrate the character of the divine discipline (deeseis te kai hiket....aulabeias), and Christ's unique nature (kaiper hon thhios). Of these the first is again elaborated in detail. The character (dee. kai hiket.), the object (pros ton d. s. au. ek th.), and the manner (m. kr. hi. k. d.) of Christ's prayers are vividly given; and the answer to them is referred to its moral cause (apo tes eul.).
If the words are arranged in a tabular form their symmetrical structure is at once evident:
Who,
?in His days of flesh, having offered up, with strong crying and tears, prayers and supplications unto Him that was able to save
Him out of death, and having been heard for His godly fear,
?though He was Son, yet
(1) learned obedience by the things which He suffered;
?and, having been made perfect,
(2) He became to all them that obey
Him, the cause of eternal salvation,
¹?being addressed by God, as
High-priest after the order of
Melchizedek.
(7), (8). Christ—the Son, the priest after the order of Melchizedek—has been shewn to have fulfilled one condition of true High-priesthood by His divine appointment: He is now shewn to have fulfilled the other, as having learnt through actual experience the uttermost needs of human weakness.
(7). hos] The relative goes back to the main subject of v. 5, Christ, who has been more fully described in the two intervening verses. Here there is no difficulty. Comp. 2 Thess. ii. 9; 1 Pet. iv. 11. In c. iii. 6 the ambiguity is greater, but there hou is to be hiketerias pros ton dunamenon sozein auton ek thanatou meta krauges hischuras kai dakruon prosenenkas kai referred to God and not to Christos. Comp. v. 11 note.
en tais hem. t. s. a.] Vulg. in diebus carnis suae, Syr. when He was clothed with flesh. The pronoun may be taken either with tes sarkos or with the compound phrase, in the days of His flesh. or in His days of flesh. The general meaning of the phrase is well given by Theodoret as describing 'the time when He had a mortal body' (hemeras de sarkos ton tes thnetotetos ephe kairon, toutestin hemika thneton eiche to soma. Quamdiu habitavit in corpore mortali. Prlmas.).
'Flesh' here describes not that which is essential to true humanity (Luke xxiv. 39), but the general conditions of humanity in the present life: Gal. ii. 20; Phil. i. 22, 24: 1 Pet. iv. 2. Comp. 1 Cor. xv. 50; and (perhaps) c. x. 20.
ouk eipen hemeras sarkos.....hos nun apothemenou autou ten sarka. apage. echei gar auten ei kai ophtharton. all' hemeras phesi sarkos hoion tas en te sarkike zoe autou hemeras (Oecum.). Comp. 2 Clem. v. 5 he epidemia he en to kosmo touto tes sarkos tautes mikra estin kai oligochronios.
We can indeed form no clear conception of 'immortal,' 'incorruptible' flesh; but the phrase represents to us the continuance under new conditions of all that belongs to the perfection of our nature.
The words en r. hem. t. s. stand in contrast with teleiotheis. It is not said or implied that the conflict of Christ continued in the same form throughout His earthly life. A contrast is drawn between the period of His preparation for the fulness of His Priestly work, and the period of His accomplishment of it after His 'consummation.' tais hemerais] The use of the term 'days' for 'time' or 'season' seems to suggest the thought of the changing circumstances of life (comp. Matt. xxviii. 20).
Compare also c. x. 32; i. 2.
pros. kai eisakoustheis] These participles have been interpreted as preparatory to emathen ('after He had offered...He learnt), or as explanatory and confirmatory of it ('in that He offered...He learnt'). Usage and the gradual development of the thought favour the first view. The 'obedience' of Christ was slowly fashioned through prayer, which was answered for His reverent devotion.
deeseis te kai hiket.] Vulg. preces supplicationesque. The first word deesis is the general term for a definite request (e.g. James v. 16). The second hiketeria (here only in N. T. in which no other word of its group is used) describes the supplication of one in need of protection or help in some overwhelming calamity. The one (deesis) is expressed completely in words: the other (hiketeria, properly an olive branch entwined with wool borne by suppliants) suggests the posture and external form and emblems of entreaty (comp. Mark xiv. 35).
The two words are combined Job xi. 22 (lxx.) (xli. 3); comp. Philo de Cher. § 13 (i. p. 147 M.). The difference between them is shewn strikingly in a letter of Agrippa given by Philo, Leg. ad Caium § 36 (ii. p. 586 M.) graphe de menusei mou ten deesin hen anth' hiketerias proteino. Comp. 2 Macc. ix. 18.
pros ton dun.] The clause has been taken with deeseis kai hiketerias, but the general structure of the sentence, which appears to mark each element in the supplication separately, points to the connexion with the participle (prosenenkas); and the unusual construction of prosph. pros (for dat.) may be compared with gnorizestho pros (Phil. iv. 6 with Lightfoot's note). The prayers of the Son were directed Godward, each thought was laid open in the sight of Him who was able to save out of death.
sozein ek than.] to save out of death, Vulg. salvum facere a morte. Syr. to quicken him from death. The phrase covers two distinct ideas, 'to save from physical death so that it should be escaped,' 'to bring safe out of death into a new life.' In the first sense the prayer recorded in John xii. 27 was not granted, that it might be granted in the second.
Sozein ek does not necessarily imply that that is actually realised out of which deliverance is granted (comp. 2 Cor. i. 10), though it does so commonly (John xii. 27; and cxx. in Bleck).
The force of the present sozein will be seen in contrast with sosai Luke xix. 10.
meta krauges isch.] Vulg. cum clamore valido. The passage finds a striking illustration in a Jewish saying: 'There are three kinds of prayers each loftier than the preceding: prayer, crying, and tears. Prayer is made in silence: crying with raised voice; but tears overcome all things ['there is no door through which tears do not pass']' Synopsis Sohar ap. Schoettgen ad loc.
There can be little doubt that the writer refers to the scene at Gethsemane; but the mention of these details of 'the loud cry' 'and tears' (John xi. 35 edakrusen; Luke xix. 41 eklausen), no less than the general scope of the passage, suggests the application of the words to other prayers and times of peculiar trial in the Lord's life. Compare John xi. 33 ff.; xii. 27 f.; (Matt. xxvii. 46, 50).
There is a tradition that originally the High-priest on the Day of Atonement, when he offered the prayer for forgiveness in the Holy of Holies, uttered the name of God with a loud voice so that it could be heard far off. Comp. Maimon. ap. Delitzsch, Hebr. ii. p. 471 (E. Tr.).
krauge] The loud cry of deeply-stirred feeling of joyful surprise: Lc. i. 42; Mt. xxv. 6; of partisan applause: Acts xxiii. 9; of grief: Apoc. xxi. 4 (not Apoc. xiv. 18); of anger: Eph. iv. 31. Compare Ps. xxii. 24 (lxx.); and see also krazo in Gal. iv. 6; Rom. viii 15.
meta...dakruon] c. xii. 17; Acts xx. 31: (not Mk. ix. 24). Compare Hos. xii. 4.
Epiphanius (Ancor. 31) seems to use I«lans< as a general periphrasis of the passage in St Luke (xxii. 43): ou monon gar ta hemon bare anedexato huper hemon elthon ho hagios Logos alla kai hupo aphen egeneto kai sarka elabe...alla kai eklause. kaitai en to kata Loukan euangelio en tois adiorthotois antegraphois...kai genomenos en agonia...kai ophthe angelos enischuon auton.
The question has been asked for what did Christ pray? (peri tinon edeethe; peri ton pisteusanton eis auton Chrys.). Perhaps it is best to answer generally, for the victory over death the fruit of sin. This was the end of His work, and to this end every part of it contributed. Under this aspect the conditional prayers for His own deliverance (Matt. xxvi. 39 and parallels; John xii. 27) become intelligible. And the due connexion is established between the prayer at eisakoustheis apo tes eulabeias,?kaiper hon huios, emathen akoustheis D?*.
the Agony, and the High-priestly prayer which preceded it. The general truth is admirably expressed by the Latin commentators: Omnia autem quae ipse egit in carne preces supplicationesque fuerunt pro peccatis humani generis. Sacra vero sanguinis ejus effusio clamor fuit validus in quo exanditus est a deo patre pro sua reverentia, hoc est, voluntaria obedientia et perfectissima caritate (Prim., Herv.).
prosenenkas] Comp v. 1, note. Perhaps the use of the ritual word (proseoenkas) of the Lord's prayers on earth points to the true sacrificial character of spiritual service: c. xiii. 15. The combination prospherein deesin occurs in late Greek writers. See Lexx.
eisakoustheis apo tes eulabeias] having been heard for His godly fear, O. L. exauditus a metu (all. ab illo metu v. propter timorem), Vulg. exauditus est pro sua reverentia. The Syr. transfers the words apo tes eul. from this clause to the next, learnt obedience from fear and the sufferings which He bore. True prayer—the prayer which must be answered—is the personal recognition and acceptance of the divine will (John xiv. 7: comp. Mark vi. 24 elabete). It follows that the hearing of prayer, which teaches obedience, is not so much the granting of a specific petition, which is assumed by the petitioner to be the way to the end desired, but the assurance that what is granted does most effectively lead to the end. Thus we are taught that Christ learnt that every detail of His Life and Passion contributed to the accomplishment of the work which He came to fulfil, and so He was most perfectly 'heard.' In this sense He was 'heard for His godly fear' (eulabeia).
The word eulabeia occurs again in c. xii. 28 (only in N.T.) and the verb in c. xi. 7. It is very rare in the lxx. Josh. xxii. 24 (Hebrew); Prov. xxviii. 14; Wisd. xvii. 8. The adj. eulabes is found Lev. xv. 31; Mic. vii. 2, v. l. The verb eulabeisthai is more frequent and represents no less than a dozen Hebrew words. Eulabeia marks that careful and watchful reverence which pays regard to every circumstance in that with which it has to deal. It may therefore degenerate into a timid and unworthy anxiety (Jos. Antt. vi. 2, 179); but more commonly it expresses reverent and thoughtful shrinking from over-boldness, which is compatible with true courage: Philo, Quis rer. div. haer. § 6 (i. 476 M.) skopei palin hoti eulabeia to tharrein anakekratai. id. p. 477 mete aneu eulabeias parresiazesthai mete aparresiastos eilabeisthai. Here the word in its noblest sense is singularly appropriate. Prayer is heard as it is 'according to God's will' (1 John v. 14 f.), and Christ by His eulabeia perfectly realised that submission which is obedience on one side and fellowship on the other.
Primasius has an interesting note: pro sua reverentia: hoc est propter voluntariam obedientiam et perfectissimam caritatem...Notandum autem quia reverentia, secundum sententiam Cassiodori, accipitur aliquando pro amore, aliquando pro timore: hic vero pro summa ponitur caritate qua Filius Dei nos dilexit et pro summa obedientia qua fuit obediens Patri usque ad mortem.
The Greek Fathers take a less wide view. E.g. plen me to emon thelema alla to son...hen hos alethos polles eulabeias...eisekousthe toinun ho Christos ouk apo tes paraiteseos all' apo tes eulabeias (Oecum.).
The sense 'heard and set free from His fear' or 'from the object of His fear' is wholly untenable. For the aph' hon epathen ten hupakoen,?kai teleiotheis egeneto use of apo see Luke xix. 3; xxiv. 41; Acts xii. 14; xxii. 11; John xxi 6.
(8). kaiper hon huios...] though He was Son...The clause has been taken with the words which precede ('being heard not as Son but for His godly fear'), and with those which follow ('though Son went through the discipline of suffering to obedience'). The latter connexion is most in accordance with the whole scope of the passage. Though Son and therefore endowed with right of access for Himself to the Father, being of one essence with the Father, for man's sake as man He won the right of access for humanity. In one sense it is true that the idea of Sonship suggests that of obedience; but the nature of Christ's Sonship at first sight seems to exclude the thought that He should learn obedience through suffering.
For kaiper see c. vii. 5; xii. 17; Phil. iii. 4; 2 Pet. i. 12.
In v. 5 the title 'Son' has been used of the Sonship of the exalted Christ in His twofold nature. Here it is used of the eternal, divine relation of the Son to the Father. There is a similar transition from one aspect to the other of the unchanged Personality of the Lord in i. 1—4. The Incarnation itself corresponds with and implies (if we may so speak) an immanent Sonship in the Divine Nature. Thus, though it may be true that the title Son is used of the Lord predominantly (at least) in connexion with the Incarnation, that of necessity carries our thoughts further. Comp. John v. 19 ff.
Chrysostom gives a personal application to the lesson: ei ekeinos huios hon ekerdanen apo ton pathematon ten hupakoen pollo mallon hemeis.
emathen...ten hupak.] learned obedience...The spirit of obedience is realised through trials, seen at least to minister to good. Sufferings in this sense may be said to teach obedience as they confirm it and call it out actively. The Lord 'learned obedience through the things which He suffered,' not as if the lesson were forced upon Him by the necessity of suffering, for the learning of obedience does not imply the conquest of disobedience as actual, but as making His own perfectly, through insight into the Father's will, that self-surrender which was required, even to death upon the cross (comp. Phil. ii. 8).
The Lord's manhood was (negatively) sinless and (positively) perfect, that is perfect relatively at every stage; and therefore He truly advanced by 'learning' (Luke ii. 52; 40 pleroumenou), while the powers of His human Nature grew step by step in a perfect union with the divine in His one Person.
ten hupakoen] obedience in all its completeness, the obedience which answers to the idea. It is not said that the Lord 'learned to obey.' For the difference between emathen ten hupak. and em. hupak. see 1 John iii. 10 note; and contrast 2 Cor. x. 5 eis ten hupak. t. chr. with Rom. i. 5 eis hupak. pist. The word 'obedience' contains a reference to the occasion of sin. Man's fall was due to disobedience: his restoration comes through obedience. Comp. Rom. v. 19.
The alliteration in the phrase emathen aph' hon epathen is common in Greek literature from the time of Herodotus downwards: Hdt. i. 207 ta de moi pathemata eonta acharista mathemata gegonen. Aesch. Agam. v. 177 pathei mathos (comp. v. 250); Philo, de Somn. ii. § 15 (i. 673 M.) anaphthenxetai ho (so read, not ho) pathon akribos emathen. de spec. leg. 6 (ii. 340 M.) hina ek tou pathein mathe. Wetstein has collected many examples.
(9), (10). Christ, it has been seen, satisfies the conditions of High-priesthood. He has received divine appointment: He is inspired with the pasin tois hupakouousin auto aitios soterias aioniou,
9 pasin t. hup. auto 'ABCD? vg syrr me: t. hup. au. pasin S.
completest sympathy. But His High-priesthood goes immeasurably beyond that of the Levitical system in its efficacy. As He is in His humanity superior to Moses (c. iii. 1 ff. note), so He is superior to Aaron. The one fact has been affirmed directly (iii. 5 f.): the other fact is shewn in a type (Melchizedek). And this superiority is further shown in the action of Christ as High-priest. The Levitical High-priest entered into the Holy of Holies through the blood of goats and calves, but Christ through His own blood to the presence of God Himself (comp. c. ix. 11 ff.). Yet further, the reference to Ps cx. necessarily includes the thought of the Royal priesthood which is developed afterwards.
(9). kai teleiotheis...] and having been made perfect... Vulg. et consummatus... Syr. and thus was perfected and... Comp. ii. 10 note.
This perfection was seen on the one side in the complete fulfilment of man's destiny by Christ through absolute self-sacrifice, and on the other in His exaltation to the right hand of God, which was in the divine order its due consequence. Comp. c. ii. 9 dia to pathema. Phil. ii. 9. Thus the word, which carries with it the conception of Christ's complete preparation for the execution of His priestly office, suggests the contrast between His priestly action and that of Aaron.
egeneto] became in the fulfilment of what we conceive of as a natural law. It is said 'became' and not 'becomes' or 'is,' because on the divine side and in the eternal order the issue of Christ's work is complete. For genesthai see v. 5; i. 4; ii. 17; vi. 20 vii. 22, 26.
pasin tois hupakouousin] to all that obey Him, Gentiles as well as Jews. Comp. John i. 7. In this connexion continuous active obedience is the sign of real faith (contrast iv. 3 hoi pisteusantes). The obedience of the believer to Christ answers to the obedience of the Son to the Father. By obedience fellowship is made complete. Si obedientia Filii causa est salutis humanae, quanta nobis necessitas est obedire Deo, ut dignl inveniamur ejus salutis quam nobis per Filium proprium donavit (Atto).
aitios sot. aion.] the cause of eternal salvation, Latt. causa salutis aiternae. In ii. 10 the word corresponding to aitios is archegos. There the thought was of Christ going before the 'many sons' with whom He unites Himself. Here the thought is of that which He alone does for them. In the former passage He is the great Leader who identifies Himself with His people: in this He is the High-priest who offers Himself as an effectual sacrifice on their behalf.
The word aitios does not occur elsewhere in N.T. Comp. 1 Sam. xxii. 22; 2 Macc. xiii. 4; Bel 42.
The phrase aitios soterias is used by Philo of the brazen serpent (De agric. § 22, i. 315), and of Noah in relation to his sons (De nobil. § 3, ii. 440). Comp. De vit. cont. § 11 (ii. 485 M.). It is found not unfrequently in classical writers: e.g. Demosth. De Rhod. libert. § 4 (p. 191) monoi ton panton tes soterias autois aionion.
sot. aion.] This spiritual, eternal, divine deliverance answers to the external and temporal deliverance which Moses wrought. The phrase is not found elsewhere in N. T.
Comp. Is. xlv. 17 Israel sozetai hupo kuriou soterian aionion (tsvt vlmym).
The phrase corresponds with zoe aionios (comp. 1 John v. 20, Addit. Note). Compare also c. vi. 2 krima ¹?prosagoreutheis hupo tou theou archiereus kata ten taxin Melchisedek.
10 arch. + eis ton aiona (syr hl) me.
aionion. ix. 12 aionia lutrosis. 15 he aionios kleronomia. xiii. 20 diatheke aionios.
The words with which aionios is used in other books of the N. T. throw light upon its meaning: pur Matt. xviii. 8; xxv. 41 (to p. to ai.); Jude 7 (p. ai.); kolasis Matt xxv. 46; skene Luke xvi. 9 (hai. ai. sk.); basileia 2 Pet. i. 11 (he ai. b.); holethros 2 Thess. i. 9; paraklesis 2 Thess. ii. 16; chronoi Rom. xvi. 25; 2 Tim. i. 9; Tit. i. 2; theos Rom. xvi. 20 (ho ai. th.); kratos 1 Tim. vi. 16; doxa 2 Tim. ii. 10; 1 Pet. v. 10 (he ai. d.); euangelion Apoc. xiv. 6.
The double correspondence of sozein, hupakoen (vv. 7, 8) with hupakouousin, soterias is to be noticed. Three brief notes of Greek commentators deserve to be quoted:
teleiosin ten anastasin kai ten athanasian ekalese. touto gar tes oikonomian to peras (Theod.).
ara oun teleiosis dia ton pathematon ginetai. pos oun humeis duscherainete epi tais teleiopoiois thlipsesin; (Theoph.).
horas hosa peri hupakoes dialegetai hoste peithestai autous; dokousi gar moi sunechos apheniazein kai tois legomenois me parakolouthein (Chrys.).
(10). prosagoreutheis...arch.] being addressed by God as High-priest...O. L. vocatus (pronunciatus) sacerdos (princeps sacerdotum). Vulg. vocatus pontifex. The title (High-priest) is involved in the words of Ps. cx. v. 4 and v. 1 taken together; comp. vi. 20. A royal priesthood is there combined with admission to the immediate Presence of God (sit...at my right hand), which was the peculiar privilege of the High-priest. At the same time the peculiar character of this priesthood (after the order of Melchizedek) includes the pledge of its eternal efficacy (eternal salvation). Comp. c vii. 16 f. The word prosagoreuein (here only in N.T.) expresses the formal and solemn ascription of the title to Him to whom it belongs ('addressed as,' 'styled'). Comp. 1 Macc. xiv. 40; 2 Macc. iv. 7; x. 9; xiv. 37; 1 Clem. 10, 17. Philo, de migr. Abr. § 24 (ii. 19 M.) pater men ton holon ho mesos, hos en tais hierais graphais kurio onomati kaleitai ho Hon, hai de par' ekatera presbutatai kai engutatai tou ontos dunameis, hon he men poietike he d' ad basilike prosagoreuetai. kai he men poietike theos...he de basilike kurios...
ii. Progress in patient effort (v. 11—vi. 20).
The general view which has been given of the Divine High-priest, of His office and of His qualifications, of His power of sympathy and of His direct appointment by God, leads naturally to a consideration of the obligations which this revelation imposes upon those to whom it is made. The highest truth is not to be mustered at once, nor without serious and continuous effort It can only be grasped in virtue of a corresponding growth in those to whom it is addressed. There is always, in the case of those who have learnt somewhat, the danger of resting in their attainment, which is a fatal relapse. Yet we are encouraged by past experience to hold our hope firmly; and the promise of God remains sure beyond the possibility of failure.
These general thoughts are unfolded in four sections. (1) The mention of Melchizedek calls up the difficulties connected with his priesthood which the Hebrews were not prepared to meet. They had become stationary and therefore had lost the power of receiving higher teaching (v. 11—14). (2) Such a condition illustrates the paramount duty of Christian progress, and the perils of relapse (vi. 1—8). ¹¹Peri ou polus hemin ho logos kai dusermeneutos
11 + kai' (peri) D?*. om. ho' (logos) D?*.
(3) At the same time the frank recognition of danger does not exclude the consolation of hope (vi. 9—12). And (4) though God requires patience from men, His promise can never fail (13—20).
It is of deep interest to observe that here for the second time the writer pauses when the subject of Christ's priestly work rises before him. He announced this subject in ii. 17, and directly turned aside from it to enforce the lessons of Israel's failure. He returned to the subject in iv. 14, and, after a fuller exposition of its outlines, he now again interrupts his argument to insist on the strenuous labour which believers must undertake that they may rightly enter into it.
Chrysostom says justly: hora goun auton sunechos odinonta ton peri tou archiereos eisagagein logon kai aei anaballomenon...epei oun tosautakis exekrousthe, hosanei apologoumenos phesin he aitia par' humas.
(1) Stationariness in religious life and its consequences (v. 11—14).
The life of faith is like the natural life. It has appropriate support in its different stages. Healthy growth enables us to appropriate that which we could not have received at an earlier stage. But this general law carries with it grave consequences. (a) The period of first discipleship may be misused, as by the Hebrews, so that we remain still mere 'babes' when it is past (11, 12). And so (b) when the time comes for maturer instruction we may be unprepared to apprehend it (13, 14).
¹¹Of whom (which) we hate many things to say and hard of interpretation since ye are become dull in your hearing. ¹²For when ye ought to be teachers by reason of the time, ye again have need that some one teach you the elements of the first principles of the oracles of God; and ye are become in need of milk, (and) not of solid food. ¹³For every one that partaketh of milk is without experience in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. ¹?But solid food is for full-grown men, even those who in virtue of their state have their senses exercised to discern good and evil.
(a) The Hebrews have failed to grow with years (11, 12).
(11) f. The difficulty of unfolding the truth of Christ's High-priestly office typified in Melchizedek is due to the spiritual state of the Hebrews. They are still babes when they ought to have advanced to ripe intelligence.
The character of the complaint seems to indicate clearly that the Epistle could not have been addressed to a large body as a whole, but to some section of it (comp. xiii. 17) consisting, as it appears, of men in the same general circumstances of age, position and opinion.
(11). peri ou polus hemin ho logos...] Of whom (which). Vulg. De quo grandis nobis sermo...The relative is ambiguous. It may mean concerning which, i.e. the High-priestly dignity of Christ, or concerning whom. In the latter case the antecedent may be Christ (peri ou christou Oecum.) or Melchizedek (Pesh. about this Melchizedek) or (as a complex subject) Christ a High-priest after the order of Melchizedek (vi. 20; comp. hos v. 7).
The reference to Melchizedek simply appears to be too limited. Although Melchizedek is afterwards spoken of in detail (vii. 1 ff.), the mysteries to which the apostle refers do not lie properly in his person, but in Him whom he foreshadowed; and, again, the reference to Christ generally legein, epei nothroi gegonate tais akoais. ¹²kai gar
is too vague. Hence it seems best to interpret the ou of Christ as typified by Melchizedek, or of Melchizedek as a type of Christ. Christ's Priesthood and Sacrifice is the main and most difficult subject of the Epistle; and this is foreshadowed in Melchizedek, whose significance was overlooked by the Jewish interpreters (e.g. Bereshith R.). In regard to the general sense it makes no difference whether the ou be neuter or masculine (with this reference), but the neuter is less in the style of the Epistle.
It will be observed that, while the writer of the Epistle recognises the difficulty of his theme, he declares no less plainly that he must deal with it. He speaks of the discourse, the teaching (ho logos), which (he implies) it is his duty and his purpose to deliver. There is no indication that the fulfilment of his design is contingent on those whom he addresses. His part must be done, however hard it may be to do it. In this respect he identifies himself with the society which he represents (hemin).
dusermeoeutos] hard of interpretation: Vulg. ininterpretabilis ad dicendum: hard for a writer to express, so that it will be fully understood. The difficulty of the interpreter lies in the small capacity of his audience. The addition of legein, which corresponds with the image in tais akoais, shows decisively, as is otherwise most natural, that the difficulty is considered with regard to him who has to make the exposition and not to those who have to receive it.
The sense is rightly given by the early commentators: hotan tis pros antropous eche (l. lege) me parakolouthountas mede ta legomena noountas hermeneusai kalos autois ou dunatai (Chrys.).
Difficultas interpretandi...non fuit in ejus ignorantia cui revelata sunt mysteria a seculis abscondita sed potius in illorum tarditate qui imbecilles, i.e. infirmi in fide...(Primas., Herv.).
Philo speaks of seeing the unchanging beauty of the ideal world, alekto tini kai dusermeneuto thea (De Somn. i. § 32; i. 649 M.).
epei nothroi gegonate...] since ye are become dull of hearing, Vulg. quoniam imbecilles facti estis ad audiendum...The difficulty of which the apostle has spoken came from the fault of the Hebrews. They had become with years less quick in understanding and not more quick according to a natural and healthy development. Compare Chrysostom: to eipein epei nothroi gegonate tais akoais delountos hen hoti palai hugiainon kai hesan ischuroi, te prophumia zeontes (c. x. 3), kai husteron autous touto pathein marturei.
As yet however this dulness had not extended to action though such an issue was not far off (c. vi. 12; comp. 2 Pet. ii. 20). Hora de, writes Chrysostom, pos mechris akoes ten nothroteta estese.
For nothroi see c. vi. 12. The word is found in lxx., Prov. xxii. 29; Ecclus. iv. 29; xi. 12. The plural hai akoai expresses the powers of hearing. Comp. Mk. vii. 35.
epei] since, seeing. The conjunction is of frequent use in the Epistle, in which the strengthened form epeide is not found. See ii. 14; iv. 6; v. 2; vi. 13; ix. 17, 26; x. 2; xi. 11. It expresses a fact which influences a result, yet not so that the result is the direct and necessary consequence of it (hoti).
(12). The fault of the Hebrews is clearly defined. When by reason of the time—because they had been Christians so long,—they ought to have been teachers, they were themselves in need of elementary teaching. For kai gar see iv. 2 note; for opheilontes, opheilontes einai didaskaloi dia ton chronon, palin chreian echete tou didaskein humas tina ta stoicheia tes arches ton logion tou theou, kai gegonate chreian echontes
12 logion: logon D?* (vg syrr me).
On didaskalos Bengel says 'vocabulum non muneris sed facultatis.' p. chreian echete tou did. humas tina ta st.] ye have need again that some one teach you the elements... The tina is ambiguous. It may be treated as an interrogative (tina): 'that one teach you what are the rudiments...' (so Vulg. Syr. Orig. Cyr.), or as the indefinite pronoun (tina). In spite of the ancient authority for the first rendering, the second seems to be preferable (comp. 1 Thess. iv. 9). It gives a sharper antithesis to didaskaloi einai. And it could hardly be said the Hebrews required to learn what the elements of the Faith were. They knew what they were though they did not know them.
The phrase ta stoicheia tes arches ton logion tou theou (Vulg. elementa exordii sermonum Dei) is very remarkable. Even 'the beginning,' the simplest fruitful presentation of the Gospel, is complex. The divine message includes from the first distinct elements which require to grow together. It is one, not as monotonous, but in virtue of a vital unity.
'The beginning of the oracles of God' corresponds with 'the beginning of Christ' (vi. 1). Tes arches is not in either place to be separated from the genitive which follows as if it could have one adjectival sense, 'the first elements,' 'the first teaching.' ta stoicheia] the rudiments, the first, simplest, elements of which anything consists: 'the alphabet' of a subject.
ton logion tou theou] Rom. iii. 2. Comp. 1 Pet. iv. 11; Acts vii. 38. The phrase might refer to the new revelation given by Christ to His apostles (comp. c. i. 2); but it seems more natural to refer it to the collected writings of the O.T. which the Hebrew Christians failed to understand and so, through mistaken loyalty to the past, were in danger of apostasy.
For the patristic use of logion, which is common in lxx., see Euseb., H. E. iii. 39; 1 Clem. 19, 53; Polyc. ad Phil. 8.
gegonate chreian echontes] Vulg. facti estis quibus lacte opus sit. The change of expression from sreian echete is most significant. Chreian echete describes the simple fact: this phrase points out a fact which is the result of degeneracy. The Hebrews had through their own neglect become young children again. So Chrysostom: ouk eipe chreian echete alla gegonate chreian echontes..., toutestin, humeis hethelesate, humeis heautous eis touto katestesate, eis tauten ten chreian.
gala...sterea trophe] milk...solid food...There has been much discussion as to what should be understood by these terms respectively. The early commentators generally supposed that 'milk,' the food of young converts, was the teaching on 'the Lord's galaktos, T ou stereas trophes. ¹³pas gar ho metechon galaktos apeiros logou dikaiosunes, nepios gar estin.
12 kai kai ou 'ABD? syrr: om. kai 'C vg me. 13 *dik. + estin D?*. nep. g. + akmen D?*.
humanity,' and His Resurrection and Ascension, while 'the solid food' was the more mysterious teaching on His Godhead. Thus, for example, Primasius: Lac simplicis doctrinae est incarnatio filii Dei, passio, resurrectio illius, ascensio ad caelum: solidus vero cibus perfecti sermonis est mysterium trinitatis, quomodo tres sunt in personis et unum in substantia deitatis.
The true explanation lies in vi. 1 ff.
The respective topics of the two stages of teaching are not spoken of as more or less essential or important.
That which corresponds with the 'milk' is in fact 'the foundation.' The 'milk' and 'solid food' are appropriate to different periods of growth. The older Christian ought to be able to assimilate fresh and harder truths.
galaktos...] In Rabbinic language young students were called 'sucklings' (Hebrewmpwn). See Schoettgen on 1 Pet. ii. 2. Comp. 1 Cor. iii. 2, Is. xxviii.
The image occurs in Philo: De agric. § 2 (i. 301 M.) nepiois men esti gala trophe, teleiois de ta ek purpon plemmata. De leg. Spec. § 36 (ii. 332 M.). Compare also a remarkable parallel in Arrian: ou theleis hede hos ta paidia apogalaktisthenai kai aptesthai stereas trophes (Dissert. ii. 16, 39).
(b) Each age has its appropriate support (13, 14).
(13) f. The consequences of the fault of the Hebrews are indicated by the statement of a general law. Each age has its proper food. But spiritual maturity comes through discipline and not through years only.
(13). pas gar ho met. gal.] The argument would have been clearer if the terms of the sentence had been inverted: 'For every one that is inexperienced...—as you shew yourselves to be—is fed with milk...'But the writer prefers to suggest the fact that his readers are actually living in the most rudimentary stage of faith, 'partaking of milk,' and so condemning themselves of unfitness for deeper instruction. For every one that partaketh of milk, and the Hebrews had brought themselves to this diet, is according to the figure a mere infant, and necessarily ignorant of the teachings and the problems of life. Such a one therefore could not but be without experience of the word of righteousness (Vulg. expers sermonis justitiae), unprepared by past training to enter upon the discussion of the larger problems of Christian thought.
The absence of the definite articles (logos dikaiosunes not ho l. tes dik.) shews that the main conception of the phrase lies in the character and not in the concrete realisation of the 'word.' It is not 'the word of righteousness,' the full exposition of the Christian Faith (2 Cor. iii. 9), but teaching such as belongs to it, 'teaching of righteousness,' teaching which deals at once with the one source of righteousness in Christ, and the means by which man is enabled to be made partaker of it. The doctrine of Christ's priestly work is based upon these conceptions, which belong to the 'solid food' of the mature believer.
Chrysostom offers two interpretations of the phrase: ho apeiros logou dikaiosunes, toutesti, tes ano philosophias apeiros, ou dunatai paradexasthai bion kai ekribomenon. he dikaiosunen ¹?teleion de estin he sterea trophe, ton dia ten exin ta aistheteria gegumnasmena echonton pros diakrtisin kalou te kai kakou.
entautha ton Christon phesi kai ton hupselon peri autou logon.
The word apeiros does not occur again In the N. T.
(14). Milk is the food of babes; and he who is fed on milk—whether it be in the due order of nature or by lack of reasonable growth—is a babe. But solid food is for full-grown men.
The contrast between babes and full-grown men occurs again Eph. iv. 13 f. mechri katantesomen...eis andra teleion, eis metron helikias tou pleromatos tou Christou. hina meketi homen nepioi...1 Cor. xiv. 20 te kakia nepiazete, tais de phresin teleioi ginesthe. 1 Cor. ii. 6, iii. 1. Comp. Philo, Leg. Alleg. i. § 30 (i. 62 M.) to teleio kat' eikona prostattein he apagoreuein he parainein ouchi dei...to de nepio paraineseos kai didaskalias [chreia].
A man is said to be teleios who has reached the full maturity of his powers, the full possession of his rights, his telos, his 'end.' This maturity, completeness, perfection, may be regarded generally or in some particular aspect. As compared with the child, the full-grown man is teleios physically, intellectually, socially (comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 10 f.; Gal. iv. 3); as compared with the fresh uninstructed convert, the disciplined and experienced Christian is teleios (1 Cor. xiv. 20; ii. 6; Eph. iv. 13; Phil. iii. 15; Col. i. 28; iv. 12; James i. 4). There is also an ideal completeness answering to man's constitution in his power of self-control (James iii. 2), in his love for his fellows (Matt. v. 48; comp. xix. 21).
He is absolutely teleios in whom each human faculty and gift has found a harmonious development and use, who has fulfilled the destiny of man by attaining the likeness of God (Gen. i. 26).
In the same manner any object is teleios which completely satisfies its ideal, so that all the constituent elements are found in it in perfect efficiency (1 John iv. 18 he teleia agape. James i. 4, 17; comp. Rom. xii. 2). Law is framed for the guidance of man in the attainment of his proper end: the perfect law therefore is 'the law of freedom,' which completely corresponds with the unhindered fulfilment of his duty (James 1. 25). The Levitical Tabernacle was designed to represent under the conditions of earth the dwelling of God among men, offering a revelation of God and a way of approach to God: the heavenly Tabernacle through which Christ's work is accomplished is 'the greater and more perfect Tabernacle' (ix. 11), the divine archetype of the transitory copy.
Compare ii. 10 teleiosai note.
The spiritual maturity of which the apostle speaks is the result of careful exercise. It belongs to those who have their senses—their different organs of spiritual perception—trained, in virtue of their moral state gained by long experience.
dia ten exin] by reason of, on account of, habit. Old Lat. per (propter) habitum. Vulg. pro consuetudine. The state in which they are is the ground and pledge of the discipline of their powers (dia ten exin not dia tes exeos).
Exis (here only in N.T.) expresses not the process but the result, the condition which has been produced by past exercise and not the separate acts following one on another (firma quaedam facilitas quae apud Graecos exis vocatur Quint x. 1, 1). Comp. Ecclus. Prol. ekanen exo peripoiesamenos (having acquired sufficient experience), id. xxx. 14, Jud. xiv. 9 (Alex.): 1 Sam. xvi. 7.
ta aistheteria] Vulg. sensus. Here only in N.T. Comp. Jer. iv. 19 (lxx.) ta aisth. tes kardias mou.
gegumnasmena] Comp. c. xii. 11; 1 Tim. v. 7; 2 Pet ii. 14.
For gegumn. echontes compare xii. 1, echontes peripeimenon.
pros diakrisin k. te kai k.] The phrase recalls the language of the O. T. e.g. Gen. iii. 5; Deut. i. 39; Is. vii. 16.
The discernment of 'good and evil' is here regarded in relation to the proper food of the soul, the discrimination of that which contributes to its due strengthening. The mature Christian has already gained the power which he can at once apply, as the occasion arises. This power comes through the discipline of use which shapes a stable character.
Philo De migr. Abr. § 9 (i. 443 M.) heteros nepion kai heteros teleion choros estin, ho men onomazomenos askesis, ho de kaloumenos sophia.
*Additional Note on* v. 1. *The præ-Christian Priesthood*It had been my hope to write an Essay on the præ-Christian priesthood. This has been impossible; and I venture to give a few notes which indicate some of the main points in the inquiry..