- IV. Final Warnings and Exhortations (Hebrews 12:3–13:25 ASV). 1. If these Jews remain under the chastening hand of God and do not seek to escape persecution by renouncing their professed faith in Messiah, that is an evidence that they are saved. But if they do the opposite, that shows they have never been saved Hebrews 12:3–17 ASV
- When they come to New Testament truth, they come, not to the thunders of Sinai, but to the grace of Calvary (Hebrews 12:18–24 ASV)
- They are warned not to refuse the Lord Jesus, for those who refused Moses were punished (Hebrews 12:25–29 ASV)
- General Exhortations (Hebrews 13:1–17 ASV)
- Closing words (Hebrews 13:18–25 ASV) One thing more is necessary before we look at the exegesis of the Greek text of our passage. We must indicate its analytical structure. The analytical section we are studying starts at Hebrews 5:11 ASV and goes to Hebrews 6:12 ASV. It consists of a description of the spiritual status of the Jew whom the writer wishes to reach, of a warning not to go hack to the abrogated sacrifices of the Levitical system, and of an exhortation to put a heart faith in the New Testament sacrifice, the Messiah. It is one of the passages found throughout the book containing a warning not to go back to the type but to go on to faith in the reality. This individual is described as hard to teach and dull of hearing (Hebrews 5:11 ASV), one who ought to be able to teach but cannot (Hebrews 5:12 ASV), one who is a babe (Hebrews 5:13 ASV), who was enlightened, who tasted of the heavenly gift and had been made a partaker of the Holy Ghost (Hebrews 6:4 ASV), as one who had tasted the word of God and the powers of the age to come (Hebrews 6:5 ASV), and who had been brought to repentance (Hebrews 6:6 ASV). He is exhorted to put off once for all any dependence upon the Levitical sacrifices and to go on to faith in the New Testament Sacrifice (Hebrews 6:1 ASV).The first part of this exhortation is strengthened by the warning that should he fall away, that is, renounce his professed faith in Messiah as the High Priest of the New Testament and return to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament, he would be crucifying the Son of God. This would be an act which would make it impossible to restore him again to that place of repentance to which he had been brought (Hebrews 6:6 ASV). The second part of the exhortation is repeated in the words, “that ye be not slothful but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (Hebrews 6:12 ASV), this second exhortation to faith being strengthened by the example of the saved among these Jews who showed by their lives that they really had exercised saving faith, the “beloved” of 6:9. We must be careful to note that this letter to the Hebrews is written to the professing church made up of saved and unsaved, but the concern of the writer is with reference to the unsaved. We are now ready for an exegetical study of the Greek text of the passage under discussion, based upon the analysis of the entire epistle, the only scientific way of going about our work. We have spent quite a bit of time and space upon our foundation, but as in the case of a building, the larger and deeper the foundation, the more stable and secure is the superstructure, Verse eleven. The words “of whom” of Hebrews 5:11 ASV are from a preposition and a relative pronoun, which latter is in a case form that indicates either the masculine or neuter gender. The last named individual to which a masculine pronoun could point, is Melchisedec. But the writer is not concerned with him in what he has to say in Hebrews 5:11–6:12 ASV. Therefore, the pronoun is neuter, referring to the teaching of the Melchisedecan priesthood of Jesus Christ, a thing which these Jewish readers who were still unsaved, needed to be convinced of, if they were to leave the Aaronic priesthood and its system of Levitical sacrifices. The superiority of the New Testament sacrifice over the Levitical offerings is the very thing which the writer is seeking to prove. He shows that Melchisedec is better than Aaron. Therefore, the sacrifice of Christ is better than the Levitical sacrifices. The words “hard to be uttered” are literally “hard of interpretation to be speaking.” It is difficult to make this teaching intelligible to these unsaved Hebrews. The difficulty is experienced by the writer. However, it is not found in any lack in the writer, but in the spiritual condition of the subjects of this warning and exhortation. They are dull of hearing. The word “dull” is from a Greek word meaning “slow, sluggish.” It is used of the numbed limbs of a sick lion, and the stupid hopes of the wolf that heard the nurse threaten to throw the child to the wolves. It is a combination of two Greek words, one meaning “no,” the other “to push,” hence, “no push,” thus “slow, sluggish.” These Hebrews were slow, sluggish, stupid, numbed, in their apprehension of the teaching of New Testament truth. This made it difficult to teach them. The difficulty lay therefore not in the writer but in them. But they had not always been in that condition, as is shown by the word translated “are.” The word means “to become.” It is in the perfect tense which tense speaks of a process completed in past time having present results. These Hebrews had at one time a spiritual apprehension of New Testament truth sufficiently clear that they saw that the New Testament Sacrifice displaced the First Testament offerings. The writer tells us that also in the words, “who were once enlightened” (Hebrews 6:4). The inability to apprehend was not a natural, inherent, and pardonable weakness, but a culpable incapacity which was the result of past neglect of and a gradual working away from New Testament truth (Hebrews 2:1–3). It was the hardening of the heart against the ministrations of the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 3:7, 8). It was a deterioration of spiritual apprehension on the part of these unsaved Hebrews who had been the recipients of the pre-salvation ministry of the Holy Spirit, who had been leading them on step by step toward the act of faith in the New Testament sacrifice, the Messiah. The use of the perfect tense here tells us that the process had gone on to the point of completion, with finished results. Their neglect had done its work, and they as a result were in a settled state of spiritual stupidity so far as their ability to apprehend New Testament truth was concerned. The fuller translation of Hebrews 5:11 is as follows: “Concerning which (teaching, namely, that the Lord Jesus is a high priest after the order of Melchisedec) there is much that we can say; yet when it comes to the saying of it, one finds it difficult to explain, because you are become those who are in a settled state of sluggishness, yes, of stupidity in your apprehension of the same.” Verse twelve. Hebrews 5:12 “Time” is from the Greek word speaking of time contemplated merely as the succession of moments, not from the word referring to a definite portion of time having limits. The word is in a construction which refers to extension. Thus because of the length of time in which these Hebrews had been under the instruction of teachers presenting New Testament truth, they ought to be teaching the same. The “ought” is one of moral obligation. The word is used of a necessity imposed either by law or duty, or by the matter under consideration. “Again” is in an emphatic position in the Greek and is to be construed with “need,” not “teach.” They again have need that some one be teaching them, the word “teach” showing a continuous process. These Hebrews had grown so sluggish in their apprehension of New Testament truth that it would require many lessons to do anything with them. “Principles” is from a Greek word which refers to rudimentary ideas. The word “first” in the Greek text refers to the first in a series, the very beginning of things. “Oracles” is from the Greek word used also in Romans 3:2, and Acts 7:38, and refers to divine utterances. Thus, these Hebrews again needed someone to be teaching them, and the start should be made with the very beginnings of the rudiments of the divine utterances in New Testament truth. “Meat” is from the Greek word meaning “food” in general. Today the word “meat” refers to the edible flesh of animals. When the Authorized Version was translated, it meant food in general. Our Lord said, “My food is to do the will of Him that sent Me and to finish His work” (John 4:34). “Are become” is perfect tense, speaking of a process finished in past time with present results. These Hebrews by their neglect of New Testament truth, and their gradual turning away from it because of the pressure of persecution which they were undergoing, had come to the place where they could only assimilate milk. The word “strong” is literally “solid.” Thus, only a liquid diet, milk, the very beginning of the rudimentary teachings of the New Testament could be administered, not solid food, the deeper teachings of the Word. The fuller translation follows. “In fact, when at this time you are under moral obligation to be teaching by reason of the extent of time (you have been under instruction), again you are in need of someone to be teaching you the very beginning of the rudimentary things in the oracles of God, and are become such as have need of milk, and not of solid food.” Verse thirteen. Hebrews 5:13 The writer continues his explanation in the words, “For everyone that useth milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe.” “Useth” has the idea of “has for his share in ordinary feeding.” It refers to an exclusive diet of milk. Adults drink milk, but it is not their exclusive diet. “Unskillful” is from a Greek word that means “inexperienced.” The word “babe” is not the translation of a Greek word meaning an “infant,” such as is used in Luke 2:16, nor from a word translated “child” as in Luke 1:7, which latter word is related to the verb which means “to give birth to,” and therefore speaks of a child in its birth relationship to its parents; but from a word which means “immature” as contrasted to “mature.” Paul uses this word three times in contrast to a word which means “mature.” In I Corinthians 2:6 he says that he speaks wisdom among the perfect, that is, the spiritually mature. But the Corinthian saints were babes in Christ, immature Christians. He speaks of those who are perfect, that is, spiritually mature, in contrast to children, namely, immature Christians (Eph. 4:13, 14). Here he contrasts these Hebrews who are immature so far as their spiritual apprehension is concerned, with those of full age, namely spiritually mature. We must be careful to note that the Greek word “babe” in itself carries with it no implication of salvation. The phrase, “babe in Christ,” as used today, refers to a new convert. Paul’s use of it in I Corinthians 3:1 is different. There he refers to immature Christians. One can be forty years old in the Faith and still be immature spiritually. Furthermore, the word “babe” needed the qualifying phrase “in Christ” to indicate that these Corinthian “babes” were saved. Therefore, the word “babe” in our Hebrew passage cannot be made to show that the person referred to is a saved individual. It has no birth relationship idea about it. The analysis of the book and the context in which the word is found require that we understand it to refer to these unsaved Hebrews who because of their neglect of New Testament truth and their turning away from it, have again become immature in their spiritual apprehension of the same. These who are described as perfect or mature and thus able to partake of solid food (strong meat), are said to, “by reason of use, have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” The word “use” is translated from a Greek word which refers to a habit of the body or mind. It speaks here of the habitual use of the perceptive faculties (senses) which are being vigorously exercised. This results in the ability to discriminate between good and evil, and in this context, good and evil teaching. But these Hebrews had abused their perceptive faculties in rejecting the new light given and turning again to the First Testament sacrifices. Light rejected, blinds. The translation of Hebrews 5:13,14 is as follows: (13) “For everyone whose sole diet is milk, is inexperienced in a message which is righteous in quality, for he is a (spiritually) immature person. (14) But solid food belongs to those who are (spiritually) mature, to those who on account of long usage have their powers of perception exercised to the point where they are able to discriminate between both that which is good in character and that which is evil.” Verses one and two. We now come to a careful study of the two Greek words translated “leaving” and “let us go on.” A correct understanding of these is absolutely essential to the proper exegesis of the passage we are treating. The word translated “leaving” is a verb meaning “to put or place,” with a preposition prefixed which means “off” or “away.” The preposition implies separation and is used with a case in Greek which implies separation. The case speaks not only of the literal removal of one object from the vicinity of another, but also of the departure from antecedent relations such as derivation, cause, origin, and the like. It contemplates an alteration in state from the viewpoint of the original situation. It comprehends an original situation from which the idea expressed is in some way removed. Thus, the basic idea in the verb is that of an action which causes a separation. The various meanings of the word are as follows: “to send away, to bid go away or depart, to let go, to send from one’s self, to let alone, to let be, to disregard.” It is used of teachers, writers, and speakers when presenting a topic, in the sense of “to leave, not to discuss.” In manuscripts of the Koine period, we have as reported in Moulton and Milligan’s Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, the sentence, “Let the pot drop,” and the clause, “not to leave me to be neglected in a strange land;” also an appeal from a forsaken girl to her lover, “Oh, lord, do not leave me.” In Matthew 13:36 and Mark 4:36 this word is used of the sending away of the multitudes. Expositor’s Greek Testament translates it here, “Let us abandon.” Alford explains it in the words, “Leaving as behind and done with in order to go on to another thing.” To use the word “leaving” in the sense that a superstructure of a house leaves the foundation and yet builds on it, as is done by some expositors, is a case of English eisegesis (reading into the text what is not there). But such a usage will not stand the scrutiny of the Greek exegesis of this word (taking out of the text what is there), nor is it in accord with the historical background and the analysis of the book. The word is an aorist participle. Greek grammar tells us that the action of the aorist participle precedes the action of the leading verb in the sentence, which in this case is “let us go on.” The aorist tense speaks of a once for all action. We could translate, “Therefore, having abandoned once for all the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection.” The act of abandoning is the pre-requisite to that of going on. One cannot go on without first separating one’s self from that to which one is attached. The word translated “let us go on” is first person plural subjunctive, which is used for hortatory purposes in Greek. That is, we have an exhortation here. Another way of exhorting one in Greek is to use the imperative mode. There is a classification of the participle in Greek which is designated, “the participle used as an imperative.” Our word “abandoning” is an imperative participle. It gives a command. We come now to the word translated “let us go on.” The verb means “to carry or bear.” Moulton and Milligan report its use as “bring” and “carry,” in such sentences from early Greek manuscripts as: “Her tunic, the white one which you have, bring when you come, but the turquoise one do not bring,” and “Return from where you are before someone fetches you,” the words “bring” and “fetch” being the translations of this word. The word is in the passive voice, which means that the subject is passive or inactive itself and is being acted upon by some outside agent. Thus we could translate, “abandoning once for all … let us be carried along.” Now what does the writer exhort these Hebrews to abandon, and to what does he urge them to allow themselves to be borne along? Well, what does a mariner do when he is at a loss as to exactly where he is? He checks his position by his instruments. The aviator in a similar situation checks his course by the radio beam. An exegete in a similar situation will consult the historical background and analysis of the book. And that is exactly what we will do. We found that the writer proves twice over that the New Testament in Jesus’ Blood is superior to and takes the place of the First Testament in animal blood. After proving this, he shows that faith is the only way of appropriating the salvation which the High Priest procured for sinners at the Cross. In the light of this demonstration, he warns them against falling away. He exhorts them to go on to faith in the New Testament Sacrifice. Having left the temple sacrifices, and having identified themselves with the visible Church, from what could they fall away but from their profession of Christ as High Priest, and to what could they fall back to but First Testament sacrifices? Thus the words, “the principles of the doctrine of Christ,” must refer to the First Testament sacrifices, for these Jews are exhorted to abandon them. Likewise, the word “perfection” must speak of the New Testament Sacrifice to which they are exhorted to allow themselves to be borne along. Our analysis has guided us to the correct interpretation. A study of the Greek text here will substantiate this. The words, “the principles of the doctrine of Christ” are literally, “the word of the beginning of the Christ.” The phrase “of the beginning” does not modify “Christ,” for He had no beginning. It therefore modifies “word.” The phrase, “the beginning word of the Christ” refers to that teaching concerning Him which is first presented in the Bible. And what is that but the truth concerning His Person and work found in the symbolism of the Levitical sacrifices. The tabernacle, priesthood, and offerings all speak of Him in His Person and work. And this interpretation is in exact accord with the argument of the book. All dependence upon the Levitical sacrifices is to be set aside in order that the Hebrews can go on to “perfection,” as we have it here. That the word “perfection” speaks of the New Testament Sacrifice, the Lord Jesus, and the Testament He inaugurated by His work on the Cross, is seen from the use of the Greek word here, referring to that which is complete, and in Hebrews 7:11 where the writer argues that if perfection (same Greek word) were under the Levitical priesthood, then there would be no further need of another priesthood. But since God has brought in a priestly line after the order of Melchisedec, it logically follows that completeness obtains under the New Testament which He brought in. He states in Hebrews 7:19 that the law of Moses, namely the sacrificial law, made nothing perfect. That is, the Levitical offerings were not complete in that the blood of bulls and goats could not pay for sin. Neither was their completeness in what they could do for the offerer. But “this Man (the Lord Jesus), after He had offered one sacrifice for sins, sat down in perpetuity on the right hand of God” (Hebrews 10:12). His sacrifice was complete. Thus, the writer exhorts these Hebrews to abandon the type for the reality, that which is incomplete for that which is complete. Before leaving this point, the English reader should know that the expressions, “the first principles of the oracles of God” (Hebrews 5:12), and “the principles of the doctrine of Christ” (Hebrews 6:1), are quite different in the Greek. The word “principles” in these verses comes from two different Greek words. The expression in Hebrews 5:12 refers to the elementary teachings in New Testament truth, and the one in Hebrews 6:1, to the teaching of the First Testament where Christ was first spoken of. But the question arises, if these Hebrews had left the First Testament sacrifices and had made a profession of Christ, why does the writer exhort them to abandon these? The answer is that the Holy Spirit had enlightened them (Hebrews 6:4) so that they saw that the sacrifices had been done away with at the Cross, and that the New Testament sacrifice was the only way of salvation. They had acted upon that and had abandoned their dependence upon these, and had made a profession of faith in the New Testament sacrifice. Their former dependence upon the sacrifices had not resulted in their salvation for either one of the following two reasons. In the case of those Hebrews who lived before the Cross, that dependence was a mere intellectual assent such as they were giving now to the New Testament. And in the case of those who were born since the Cross, their dependence upon the sacrifices was of no avail since these had been set aside by God at the Cross. But under stress of persecution (Hebrews 10:32–34) they were absenting themselves from the New Testament assemblies (Hebrews 10:25), and were wavering (Hebrews 10:23), literally “leaning,” that is, they were leaning toward the Levitical system again, and letting New Testament truth slip away (Hebrews 2:1). The result was that their spiritual perceptions were dulled, had become sluggish (Hebrews 5:11), and they themselves had become immature in their thinking along spiritual lines. This growing dependence upon First Testament sacrifices, they were exhorted to abandon, and abandoning these, they would be in that place where the Holy Spirit could carry them along in His pre-salvation work to the act of faith. We must be careful to note that these Hebrews had not yet finally and irrevocably discarded New Testament truth. The tendency was that way. The writer was attempting to reach them before it was too late. If they would go back to the First Testament sacrifices, they would be laying again the foundation of the First Testament, and building upon it again. This foundation is given us in 6:1, 2. “Repentance from dead works” is First Testament teaching, was preached by John the Baptist, and is in contrast to New Testament teaching of repentance toward God (Acts 20:21). “Faith toward God” is First Testament teaching, and is contrasted to the New Testament teaching of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21). “The doctrine of baptisms” (same Greek word translated “washings” in Hebrews 9:10) refers to the ceremonial ablutions or washings of Judaism, and is typical of the New Testament cleansing of the conscience from dead works to serve the living and true God by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Titus 3:5). The “laying on of hands” refers to the imposition of the offerer’s hand upon the sacrificial offering of the Levitical system (Levit. 1:4), and is typical of the act of a sinner today laying his hand of faith upon the sacred head of the Lamb of God. “The resurrection of the dead,” an Old Testament doctrine, is more fully developed in the doctrine of the out-resurrection from among the dead (Phil. 3:11 Greek) which indicates that there are two resurrections, one of the saints, the other of the lost “Eternal judgment” of the old dispensation is in contrast to the “no judgment for the believer in Christ” of the new. Thus, these Hebrews are exhorted not to return to First Testament teaching, but to go on to faith in the New Testament Sacrifice. Verse three. But coupled with this exhortation is an ominous hint, as Vincent calls it. It is in the words, “And this will we do if God permit.” Here are his words: “An ominous hint is conveyed that the spiritual dullness of the readers may prevent the writer from developing his theme, and them from receiving his higher instruction. The issue is dependent on the power which God may impart to his teaching, but His efforts may be thwarted by the impossibility of repentance on their part. No such impossibility is imposed by God, but it may reside in a moral condition which precludes the efficient action of the agencies which work for repentance, so that God cannot permit the desired consequence to follow the word of teaching.” All of which goes to say that while there is such a thing as the sovereign grace of God, yet there is also such a thing as the free will of man. God never in the case of salvation violates man’s free will. The choice must be made by these Hebrews between going back to the sacrifices or on to faith in Christ as High Priest. But their spiritual declension if persisted in, would result in their putting themselves beyond the reach of the Holy Spirit. This is implied in 3:7, 8 where they are warned that if they desire to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit, they should not harden their hearts, the implication being clear that they could harden their hearts to the extent that they would have no more desire to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit. This shows that the “impossibility” of 6:4, 6 resides in the condition of their hearts, not in the grace of God. The translation of Hebrews 6:1–3 is as follows: “Therefore, having put away once for all the beginning instruction concerning the Messiah, let us be borne along to that which is complete, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of instruction concerning washings, imposition of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this will we do, if only God permits.” Verse four. And now the writer presents a most solemn warning to those among his readers who would persist in their leanings toward the First Testament and their abandonment of the New. It would be impossible to renew them again to repentance. The Greek word translated “impossible” cannot be diluted to mean “difficult” The same word is used in Hebrews 6:18; Hebrews 10:4, and Hebrews 11:6, where it can only mean “impossible.” Likewise, the word “renew” must be taken in its full force. Expositor’s Greek Testament says that it means that those who have once experienced a renewal cannot again have a like experience. The person described cannot again be brought to a life-changing repentance. Repentance is a work of the Holy Spirit on the heart of the one who is approaching the act of faith in Christ. It is usually involved in that act, but can also exist separate and apart from it, as is seen in the present instance. These Hebrews had allowed the Holy Spirit to carry them along to the place of repentance. Now should they refuse the proffered faith by which they could lay hold of the High Priest as their Saviour, and return to the abrogated sacrifices of the First Testament it would be impossible to bring them back to the act of repentance again. And as we have seen, the impossibility would inhere in their own spiritual condition, not in the grace of God. In connection with this solemn warning, the writer reminds these Hebrews of all that a loving God had done for them. They were once enlightened. The word translated “once” is literally “once for all,” and is used of that which is so done as to be of perpetual validity, and never needs repetition. That means that as these Hebrews listened to the message of the New Testament, the Holy Spirit enlightened their minds and hearts to clearly understand it. The work of the Spirit with reference to their understanding of New Testament truth had been so thorough that it needed never to be repeated for the purpose of making the truth clear to them. These Hebrews had understood these issues perfectly. The type was set aside for the reality, the First Testament for the New. They were enlightened as every sinner is enlightened who comes under the hearing of God’s Word. But as the unsaved in an evangelistic meeting today clearly understand the message of salvation but sometimes refuse the light and turn back into the darkness of sin and continued unbelief, so these Hebrews were in danger of doing a like thing.
Kenneth S. Wuest, Wuest’s Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: For the English Reader, vol. 20 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 53–66.
also
Hebrews 6:18 ASV
The motive of this procedure on God’s part has already been indicated in βουλόμενος, but now it is more fully declared. ἵνα διὰ δύο … ἐλπίδος “that by two immutable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we may have a strong encouragement, who fled for refuge to hold fast the hope set before us”. The two immutable things are God’s promise and His oath. It is impossible for God to break His promise, impossible also for him to falsify His oath. Both of these were given that even weak men might have strong encouragement. The emphasis is on ἰσχυρὰν, no ordinary encouragement. Interpreters are divided as to the construction of κρατῆσαι, Œcumenius, Bleek, Lünemann, and others maintaining its dependence on παράκλησιν, encouragement to hold fast the hope; while others, as Beza, Tholuck, Delitzsch, Weiss, construe it with καταφυγόντες as in A.V. “who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope”. If this latter construction be not adopted, καταφυγ. is left undefined and must be taken in an absolute sense, which is unwarranted. It is the word used in the LXX (Deut. 4:42, 19:5; Josh. 20:9) for fleeing from the avenger to the asylum of the cities of refuge. So here Christians are represented as fleeing from the threatened danger and laying hold of that which promises safety. κρατῆσαι (aor. of single act) must therefore be rendered “to lay hold of” and not, as in 4:14, “hold fast”. The former meaning is much more frequent than the latter. τῆς προκειμένης ἐλπίδος, the hope, that is, the object of hope is set before us as the city of refuge was set before the refugee and it is laid hold of by the hope it excites. προκειμ. is used of any object of ambition, “de praemiis laborum ac certaminum” (Wetstein, with examples). Cf. Col. 1:5, τὴν ἐλπίδα τὴν ἀποκειμένην ὑμῖν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.
Marcus Dods, “The Epistle to the Hebrews,” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament: Commentary, vol. 4 (New York: George H. Doran Company, n.d.), 304.
For month of April 2024
Ongoing Free item strategy:
Try these Logos Bible Software Discount codes Furnished by Rick Livermore Webmaster220 San Juan Capistrano California – Publisher InformationThis blog post was furnished by Webmaster220 Bible Study Blog other blogs by the same person: |
Posts
