« Prev IV. Next »


¹Φοβηθῶμεν οὖν μή ποτε καταλειπομένης ἐπαγγελίας

1 καταλειπ. ABCΜ₂: καταλιπ. אD₂* + τῆς' ἐπαγγ. D₂.

(2) iv. 1—13. The promise remaining.

It follows from the consideration of the history of Israel that the promise of God to His people was not fulfilled by the entrance into Canaan.

There is, therefore, (a) a rest, a divine rest, a rest from earthly labour, promised still and not enjoyed (1—10). And (b) towards this rest Christians must strive, filled with the feeling of their responsibility (11—13).

(a) The rest of God is prepared for believers in Christ (1—10).

The development of this main thought is somewhat perplexed and formally incomplete. The promise of the entrance into the divine rest is first assumed to apply to Christians (1,2); the present reality of the rest is then established by the record of creation (3—5); and by the repetition of the promise to those who had entered into Canaan (6, 7); for that first rest could not satisfy the divine purpose (8—10). The writer takes for granted throughout that whatever God in His love has ever designed for man is brought within man's reach by Christ, 'the heir of all things,' the fulfiller of human destiny.

(1), (2). The fate of those who were rescued from Egypt had a direct meaning for those to whom the Epistle was addressed. The people that were delivered did not 'enter into the rest of God,' but perished in the wilderness. And the next generation who occupied Canaan still found the promise unaccomplished, and so it remained till the time when Christ again proclaimed it for the vital appropriation of believers by faith. Thus, in other words, under one aspect the Israelites in the wilderness and the first Christians were in the same position. Both had a message of glad tidings to make their own; and the end of the message in both cases was the same. But in the order of the Divine Providence Christians were placed in a more advantageous position (viii. 6 ff.) than Israel. Belief and obedience were more easily within their reach when the former discipline had done its work,

¹Let us fear, therefore, lest haply a promise being left of entering into His rest, any one of you should seem to have come short of it. ²For indeed we have had good tidings preached to us, even as also they; but the word of the message did not profit them, because it was not incorporated by faith in them that heard.

(1). φοβηθῶμεν οὖν...] Let us fear therefore, since Israel, redeemed from bondage, never entered into the rest which was prepared for them, for we have had good tidings preached to us even as they. Our position, like theirs, is one of trial. The position of privilege is the discipline of faith. To have been brought to Christ is a beginning and not an end. In such a case 'fear' is a motive for strenuous exertion.

The writer uses the first person (contrast ἐξ ὑμῶν) in sympathy with the whole Christian society.

καταλειπομένης...] as there is still now left (v. 6) a promise (Vulg. pollicitatione) to enter (that one should enter)...The promise was left because no purpose of God can fall to the ground; and this was unfulfilled in the case of those to whom it was first given. Outwardly the promise was fulfilled afterwards, for the next generation did enter Canaan; but that fulfilment did not exhaust the meaning of the promise (v. 8); and so in fact the promise was repeated.

The tense of the participle (καταλειπομένης) marks the present fact. There is a slight difference between


γελίας αἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσιν αὐτοῦ δοκῇ τισ ἐξ ὑμῶν ὑστερηκέναι. ²καὶ γάρ ἐσμεν εὐηγγελισμένοι καθάπερ κάκεῖνοι, ἀλλ' οὐκ ὠφέλησεν ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς ἐκείνους,

δοκεῖ M₂. 2 καὶ πάρεσμεν C*.

καταλείπεσθαι and ἀπολείπεσθαι (vv. 6, 9). Ἀπολείπεσθαι is used from the point of sight of those who have gone away; καταλείπεσθαι of that which retains its original position.

μή...δοκῇ τις...] lest any one should seem...Vulg. ne existimetur aeliquis... The phrase is less stern in expression than the simple ὑστεπῇ (Oecom. ἀνεπαχθῆ τὸν λόγον ποιῶν οὐκ εἶπεν ὑστερήσει (-ῃ) ἀλλὰ δοκῂ ὑστερίζειν), and yet it is more comprehensive in warning. It suggests that the mere appearance or suspicion of failure, even though it may not be fully justified, for man's judgment is necessarily fallible, is a thing to be earnestly dreaded. Other renderings, 'lest any should be shown to...' or 'be judged to...,' or 'think that he has...,' are less natural and less forcible.

ὑστερηκέναι] to have come short, Vulg. doesse, to have failed to attain the promised rest in spiritual possession. The tense marks not only a present (Rom. iii. 23 ὑστεροῦνται) or past defeat (2 Cor. xii. ὐστέρησα) but an abiding failure.

(2). καὶ γάρ...] For indeed...Comp. v. 12; x. 34; xii. 29; xiii. 22. The omission of the pronoun (ἡμεῖς throws the emphasis upon ἐσμὲν εὐηγ. (comp. xiii. 10). 'For indeed we have received a message of good tidings—a promise of rest—even as also they (v. 6). For ἐσμ. εὐηγγ. see vii. 20; x. 20 notes.

For the construction see Matt. xi. 5 || Lk. vii. 22; 2 Sam. xviii. 31; Joel ii. 32; and compare viii. 5 κεχπημάτισται Μωυσῆς: the perfect (ἐσμ. εὐηγγ.) marks the present continuation of the message, which was not simply one past announcement (v. 6 oἱ πρ. εὐαγγελισθέντες).

The Vulg. renders the phrase very inadequately: etenim et nobis nuntiatum est. It may be added that the noun εὐαγγέλιον, which is found in all St Paul's Epistles except that to Titus, does not occur in the Epistle.

καθάπερ] Elsewhere in the N.T. (not v. 4) only in St Paul's Epistles (about 15 times).

ἀλλά...τοῖς ἀκούσασιν] It is possible that there is here some primitive corruption of the text (see Additional Note). At the same time the general drift of the passage is clear, and both the readings which have found acceptance on adequate authority, (1) συνκεκερασμένους [-κεκραμένους], and (2) συνκεκεπασμένος [-κεκραμένος] can be brought into agreement with it.

(1) If the former (συνκεκερασμένους) be adopted, the sense must be: 'But the mere hearing did not profit them because they were not united by faith with them that' truly heard, 'with the body of the faithful,' or, perhaps, 'with them that first heard, 'with those to whom the message was given' (comp. ii. 3), that is, Moses and Joshua and Caleb. The verb συνκεράννυσθαι is used of the intimate association of familiar friendship in classical and late Greek; but this pregnant sense of oἱ ἀκούσαντες after ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς and ἐὰν ἀκούσητε of the Psalm appears to be unnatural.

(2) If on the other hand we read συνκεκερασμένος there is a choice of two constructions. We may either (α) take τῇ πίστει as the dative of the instrument joining τοῖς ἀκούσασιν closely with συνκεκερασμένος: 'the word did not profit them because it was not incorporated by faith in them that heard,' 'because they were not vitally inspired with the divine message though they outwardly received it.' Or again (b) we may connect τῇ πίστει with συνκεκερασμένος, and regard τοῖς


μὴ ˹συνκεκερασμένος˺ τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν. ³Εἰσερχόμεθα

2 συνκεκερασμένους

συνκεκερασμένος [-κεκραμένος]: συνκεκερασμένους [-κεκραμένους]: τῶν ἀκουσάντων D₂* syr hl mg: see Additional Note.

ἀκούσασιν as a dative of reference: 'the word did not profit them because it was not united with faith for them that heard, 'because the word itself was not quickened by the power of faith so as to effect its vital work.' Of these two interpretations the former seems to be the simpler and more expressive; but both are open to the serious objection that it is strange that ἐκείνους and τοῖς ἀκούσασιν should be applied to the same persons.

On the whole however, if it be supposed that the true reading has been preserved by our existing authorities, the former of those two renderings of the reading συνκεκερασμένος appears to offer the least difficulty; and it may be urged that the addition of τοῖς ἀκούσασιν is required to bring out the reference to the Psalm, while ἐκείνους points the contrast with Christians.

οὐκ ὠφέλησεν] The familiar facts carry the thought of the reader beyond this negative result. The word heard and not welcomed involved those to whom it was addressed in a tragic fate.

ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς] Vulg. sermo auditus. Syr. the word which they heard. The phrase admits of two renderings. It may mean (1) 'the word of the message heard,' the simple proclamation of the divine tidings; or (2) 'the word of hearing,' that is, the word as heard only, according as ἀκοή is taken passively or actively. The second sense which falls in perfectly with the context is justified by Ecclus. xli. 23 (xlii. 17) λόγος ἀκοῆς 'a simple rumour'; but the former sense is more in accordance with the general (passive) usage of ἀκοή itself for a message spoken and heard: Is. liii. 1 (Rom. x. 16; John xii. 38); Jer. x. 22 φωνὴ ἀκοῆς (and in 1 Thess. ii. 13 λογός ἀκοῆς) seems to mean 'a message of hearing,' that is, a message not commended by any more authoritative form of delivery.

The argument remains the same in both cases whether the apostle speaks of 'the simple delivery of the message' or of 'the message which was simply heard.'

μὴ συνκεκ.] The subjective negative is naturally used with the participle which gives the suggested reason ('since they were not...'); comp. v. 15 note.

συνκεκερασμένος] The compounds of κεράννυσθαι are constantly used from early times of the moral (and spiritual) union of persons. So (συγκεκρ.) Xou. Cyr. i. 4, 1 τοῖς ἡλικιώταις συνεκέκρατο ὥστε οἰκείως διακεῖσθαι, (ἐγκεκρ.) Ign. Eph. 5 τοὺς ἐγκεκραμένους αὐτῷ (τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ), (ἀνακεκρ.) Plut. Rom. p. 36 D καιναῖς ἀνακραθέντων ἐπεγαμίαις τῶν γενῶν. They are used also of the union of things or qualities: l Cor. xii. 24 ὁ θεὸς συνεκέρασεν τὸ σῶμα. Plat. Legg. xii. c. 10, p. 961 M τὰς αἰσθήσεις τῷ κυβερνητικῷ νῷ συγκερασάμενοι... Menander, ap. Stob. Anthol. 45, 8, speaks of λόγου δύναμις ἥτει χρηστῷ συγκεκραμένη. Plut. Non posse suav. vivi sec. Epic. ii. p. 1101, B βέλτιον ἐνυπάρχειν τι καὶ συγκεκρᾶστθαι τῇ περὶ θεῶν δόξῃ κοινὸν αἰδοῦς καὶ φόβου πάθος... Comp. Ign. ad Smyrn. 3 κραθέντες τῇ σαρκὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ αἵματι (al. πνεύματι), and Lightfoot ad loc.

3—7. The present experience of Christians confirms the privilege of faith (3); The fact that the rest itself is already realised is witnessed by the record of creation (4); The fact that the promise of the rest still remains is implied by the exclusion of the


˹γὰρ˺ εἰς [τὴν] κατάπαυσιν οἱ πιστεύσαντες, καθὼς εἴρηκεν

Ὡς ὥμοσα ἐν τῇ ὀργῇ μου

Εἰ εἰσελεύσονται εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσίν μου,

καίτοι τῶν ἔργων ἀπὸ καταβολῆςής κόσμου γενηθέντων,


3 εἰςερχόμεθα אΒD₂Μ₂: εἰςερχώμεθα Α (ἰσερχ.) C (comp. vi. 3; Rom. v. 1; 1 Cor. xv. 49). γάρ BD₂ vg syr hl: oῦν אACM₂ me. τήν (1°) אACM: om. BD₂*. εἰ om. A: C*. κατ. μου: om. μου C*.

unfaithful from it (5); And a fresh word of God points to the end not yet reached (6, 7).

³For we that believe enter into the rent of God; even as He hath said,

As I sware in my wrath,

They shall not enter into my rest; although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

For He hath said as we know (somewhere) of the seventh day on this wise:

And God rested on the seventh day from all His works;

And in this place again:

They shall not enter into my rest,

Seeing therefore it remaineth that some should enter into it, and they to whom the good tidings were before preached entered not in because of disobedience, ⁷He again defineth a certain day, Today, saying in David, after so long a time as hath been said before,

Today, if ye shall hear His voice, Harden not your hearts.

(3). εἰσερχόμεθα γάρ...] The apostle assumes that actual experience establishes the reality of the promise and the condition of its fulfilment. 'I speak without hesitation' he seems to say 'of a promise left to us, for we enter, we are entering now, into the rest of God, we that believed...' The verb εἰσερχόμεθα is not to be taken as a future (Vulg. ingrediemur), but as the expression of a present fact: John xiv. 3, 18; Matt. xvii. 11; 1 Cor. iii. 13; Col. iii. 6. Moreover the efficacy of faith is regarded in its critical action (πιστεύσαντες) and not, as might have been expected, in its continuous exercise (ἰστεύοντες). Comp. Acts iv. 32; 2 Thess. i. 10; 1 Cor. xv. 2. At the same time he does not say simply 'we enter in having believed' (πιστεύσαντες); but he regards 'believers' as a definite class who embraced the divine revelation when it was offered (oἱ πιστεύσαντες). Comp. c. vi. 18 οἱ καταφυγόντες.

εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσιν] not simply 'into rest but into the rest of which the Psalmist spoke, 'into the rest of God.'

καθὼς εἴρηκεν, Ὡς ὥμοσα...] The words of the realm, as used here, prove that there is a rest and that it has not been attained. It follows therefore, this the writer assumes, that Christ has brought the rest within the reach of His people, as indeed Christians know. This interpretation of the quotation seems to be more natural than to suppose that the reference is designed to contrast the faith of Christians with the want of faith which caused the rejection of the Jews of the Exodus.

εἴρηκεν] Comp. v. 4; i. 13; x. 9 note; xiii. 5; Acts xiii. 34. The subject is simply, 'God,' or 'the Spirit,' and not 'the Scripture.'

καίτοι τῶν ἔργων...] although the works (of God) were finished (done) from the foundation of the world. Vulg. et quidem operibus ab institutione mundi perfectis; Syr. although


εἴρηκεν γάρ που περὶ τῆς ἑβδομης οὕτως Καὶ κατέπαυσεν ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἔργων αὐτοῦ, ⁵καὶ ἐν τούτῳ πάλιν Εἰ εἰσελεύσονταὶ εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσίν μου. ⁶ἐπεὶ οὖν ἀπολείπεται τινὰς εἰσελθεῖν εἰς αὐτήν, καὶ οἱ πρότερον

4 ἐν τῇ...ἐβδ. om. Α. 5 εἰ om. D₂*.

the works οf God...There was therefore no failure on the part of God. The divine rest was prepared. God Himself had entered into it, though it still remained that His people should share it according to His purpose. Thus the rest was at once in the past and in the future.

καίτοι] In the N.T. Acts xiv. 17 only; καίτοιγε John iv. 2. The word is used with a participle in all periods of Greek literature: Simon. ap. Plat. Protag. 26 p. 339 C καίτοι εἴρημένον. Epict. Diss. i. 8, 5.

ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κ.] c. ix. 26. See Matt. xiii. 35 [Ps. lxxvii. (lxxviii.) ἀπ' ἀρχῆς lxx.]; xxv. 34; Lk. xi. 50; Αροc. xiii. 8; xvii. 8. The phrase is not found in the lxx. Compare πρὸ καταβολῆς κ. John xvii. 24; Eph. i. 4.

The writer of the Epistle by this reference completes the conception of the promised rest. 'The rest of God,' the rest which He had provided for His people, is no other in its last form than the rest which He Himself enjoyed. Of this the earthly inheritance was only a symbol.

(4), (5). The quotations in these verses establish in detail the two conclusions found in the words quoted in v. 3, that there is a rest already prepared (v. 4); and that Israel did not enter into it (v. 5).

(4). εἴρηκεν] Comp. v. 3 note.

που] Comp. ii. 6 note. This indefinite form of quotation is found nowhere else in the N.T. It occurs in other writers: Philo, Quod Deus immut. § 16, i. p. 284 M.; De prof. § 36, i. 575; De congr. er. gr. § 31, i. 544; Clem. R. ad Cor. i. 15. The sense of the particle is probably not local (somewhere) but general ('as we know,' 'to quote familiar words').

περὶ τῆς ἑβδ.] It has been remarked that 'the six days' are defined in the record of creation by 'the evening and the morning,' but to the seventh no such limits are given. See v. 9 note.

κατέπαυσεν] The verb is used in an intransitive sense (though rarely) in classical Greek; and in the lxx.: Ecclus. v. 6; 1 Macc. ix. 73 &c. It is used in the commoner transitive sense below v. 8.

(5). ἐν τούτῳ πάλιν] sc. εἴρηκεν "λ θεός. The τούτῳ is neuter: in this place, or phrase.

πάλιν] again, on the other side. The failure of those to whom the promise was originally made to attain it, is a second element in the argument There is a rest; and yet further it has not been realised by men.

(6). But when we recognise failure it is not that we acquiesce in it. The promise once made will have a fulfilment. Some must enter into the rest: those who were formerly called did not enter through disobedience; therefore another time was afterwards fixed when believers might gain by ready self-surrender that which God still offered. The conditional terms are thus two and not one; for the second clause (καὶ οἱ πρότ. εὐαγγελ.) cannot be considered to be only explanatory of the first.

ἐπεὶ οὖν] See c. v. 11 note.

ἀπολείπεται] v. 9; x. 26. This certainty is left as a consequence of the unrepealed (though unfulfilled) promise.

oἱπρότερον εὐαyy.] they to whom the good tidings were before preached...Vulg. quibus prioribus annunciatum est.


εὐαγγελισθέντες οὐκ εἰσῆλθον δι' ἀπείθϊίαν, 'πάλιν τινὰ ὁρίζει ἡμέραν, Σήμερον, ἐν Δαυεὶδ λέγων μετά τοσοῦτον χρόνον, καθὼς προείρηται,

Σήμερον ἐὰν τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ ἀκούσητε,

μὴ σκληρύνητε τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν.

εἰ φὰρ αὐτοὺς Ίησοῦς κατέπαυσεν, οὐκ ἂν ἄλλης


6 ἀπείθειαν: ἀπεστίαν א* vg. 7 τινὰ ὁρίζω א*. προείρηται אΑCD₂* vg syr hl me: προείρηκεν Β: ἀρηται S. 8 ἅν: ἄρα B.

Only two generations are contemplated, that of Moses and that of Christ. The second generation of Israel who entered into Canaan are not considered to have received or enjoyed the fulness of the original promise.

δι' ἀπείθειαν] O. L. propter contumaciam. The Vulgate rendering propter incredulitatem (and so v. 11; Rom. xi. 30, 32; Col. iii. 6 [O. L. dissidentia]; Eph. ii. 2; v. 6: in iii. 12, 19 ἀπιστία is so rendered) obscures the important difference between the state of mind and the active expression of it. Unbelief is manifested in disobedience (contrast iii. 19). The two are placed in close connexion Rom. xi. 20 ff., 30 ff.; comp. John iii. 36.

(7). ὁρίζει] O. L. prafinivit... Vulg. terminat... The Holy Spirit through the writer of the Psalm (c. iii. 7) defineth a certain day, 'Today,' saying... It seems more natural to take 'Today' as the explanation of 'a certain day,' than to connect it with 'saying' as part of the quotation.

ἐν Δ. λέγων ] saying in the person of David, who was regarded as the author of the whole Psalter; and not 'in the book of David' (the phrases ἐν Ἠλίᾳ Rom. xi. 2, ἐν τῷ Ὡσνέ Rom. ix. 25, are not exactly parallel). The expression, which follows the common mode of speaking, is not to be regarded by itself as decisive of the authorship of the Psalm.

προείρηται] c. iii. 7, 15.

8—10. The words of the Psalmist convey also another lesson. In one sense it might be said that in the second generation those who were rescued from Egypt did enter into the rest which was refused to their fathers. But Canaan was not the rest of God. The rest of God is a Sabbath rest which man also is destined to share, a rest after finished labour. Therefore the Psalmist, in the troubled rest of Canaan, still points his hearers to an end unattained.

For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken after this of another day. ⁹There remaineth then a sabbath rest for the people of God, ¹⁰For he that is entered into His rest hath himself also rested from his works as God did from His own.

(8). εἰ γὰρ...Ἰησοῦς] For if Joshua...The Peshito defines the ambiguous name (Jesus): Jesus the son of Nun... (but not in Acts vii. 45).

αὐτούς] The antecedent is mentally supplied: 'those in whom Christians find their counterpart' Comp. viii. 8, xi. 28. See Winer p. 183.

κατέπαυσεν] transitive (otherwise vv. 4 note, 10) as in Ex. xxxiii. 14; Deut. iii. 20 &c.

οὐκ ἄν περὶ ἄλλης ἐλάλει...]He would not have continued to speak after this, after so long a time (v. 7), of another day. O. L. non de alio (?)


ἐλάλει μετὰ ταῦτα ἡμέρας. ⁹ἄρα ἀπολείπεται σαββατισμός

μετὰ ταῦτα: μετ αὐτά C. 9 om. vers. א* (suppl. Α). ἀπολείπεται: ἀπολειται Β.

(Lef. de aliis) dixisset postera die. Vulg. nunquam de alia loqueretur posthac die. For the unusual and expressive combination εἰ κατέπαυσεν οὐκ ἄν...ἐλάλει, see Additional Note.

It is assumed that if Joshua did not gain an entrance into the rest of God, no later leader did up to the time of Christ. No earthly rest indeed can be the rest of God (xi. 9 f.).

(9). ἄρα ἀπολ....] c. xii. 8. This unclassical use of ἄρα in the first place of a sentence as defining a conclusion from the previous words is found in the Synoptists (Matt. xii. 28; Luke xi. 48) and in St Paul (Rom. x. 17; 1 Cor. xv. 18 &c.), especially in the form ἄρα οὖν (Rom. v. 18 &c.), but it is not found in St John or in the Catholic Epistles.

σαββατισμός] a sabbath rest (Ο. L. requies, Vulg. sabbatismus, Syr. to keep a Sabbath-rest)— a rest which closes the manifold forms of earthly preparation and work (the Hexaemeron of human toil): not an isolated sabbath but a sabbath-life. The change of term from κατάπαυσις is significant.

The word is not quoted as used by any earlier writer. Σαββατίζω occurs not unfrequently in the lxx., and σαββατίσμός itself is used in an enumeration of superstitious observances by Plutarch: De superst. 3; ii. p. 166 A.

The Sabbath rest answers to the Creation as its proper consummation. Such is the thought of Augustine at the end of his Confessions (xiii. 35 f.): Domine Deus, pacem da nobis, omnia enim praestitisti, pacem quietis, pacem sabbati, sabbati sine vespera. Omnis quippe iste ordo pulcherrimus rerum valde bonarum modis suis peractis transitorius est; et mane quippe eis factum est et vespera. Dies autem septimus sine vespera est nec habet occasum, quia sanctificasti cum ad permansionem sempiternam; ut id quod tu post opera tua bona valde, quamvis ea quiete feceris, requievisti septimo die, hoc praeloquatur nobis vox libri tui, quod et nos post opera nostra, idee bona valde quia tu nobis ea donasti, sabbato vitae aeternae requiescamus in te.

And again after giving a brief parallel of the six days of Creation with the ages of the world, be closes his De civitate (xxii. 30, 5) with the striking conception of the 'seventh day,' the 'Sabbath,' passing into an eternal 'Lord's day': De istis porro aetatibus singulis nunc diligenter longum est disputare. Haec tamen septima erit sabbatum nostrum, cujus finis non erit vespera sed dominicus dies, volut octavus aeternus, qui Cristi resurrectione sacratus est, aeternam non solum spiritus verum etiam corporis requiem praefigurans. Ibi vacabimus et vidobimus; vidobimus et amabimus; amabimus et laudabimus. Ecce quod erit in fine sine fine. Nam quis alius noster est finis nisi pervenire ad regnum cujus nullus est finis?

The remarks of the Greek fathers are less suggestive: σαββατισμὸν ὠνόμασε τὴν τῶν σωματικῶν ἔργων ἀπαλλαγήν (Theodoret). And Chrysostom: ὤσπερ γὰρ ἐν τῷ σαββάτῳ πάντων μὲν τῶν πονηρῶν ἀπέχεσθαι κελεύει, ἐκεῖνα δὲ μόνα γίνεσθαι τὰ πρὸς λατρείαv τοῦ θεοῦ, ἄπερ οἱ ἱερεῖς ἐπετέλουν, καὶ ὅσα ψυχὴν ὡφελεῖ καὶ μηδὲν ἕτερον, οὕτω καὶ τότε.

The Jewish teachers dwelt much upon the symbolical meaning of the Sabbath as prefiguring 'the world to come.' One passage quoted by Schoettgen and others may be given: 'The people of Israel said: Lord of the whole world, shew us the world to come. God, blessed be He, answered: Such a pattern is the Sabbath' (Jalk. Rub. p. 95, 4). In this connexion the double ground


τῷ λαῷ τοῦ θεοῦ. 10 ὁ γὰρ εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσιν αὐτοῦ καὶ αὐτὸς κατέπαυσεν ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων αὐτοῦ ὥσπερ ἀπὸ τῶν ἰδίων ὁ θεός. 11 Σπουδάσωμεν οὖν εἰσελθεῖν εἰς ἐκείνην

11 εἰσελθεῖν: + ἀδελφοί D₂*.

which is given for the observance of the Sabbath, the rest of God (Ex. xx. 11) and the deliverance from Egypt (Deut. v. 15), finds its spiritual confirmation. The final rest of man answers to the idea of Creation realised after the Fall by Redemption. Comp. Schoettgen ad loc. and on v. 3.

τῷ λαῷ τοῦ θεοῦ] c. xi. 25. Comp. 1 Pet. ii. 10 (λαὸς θεοῦ). The phrase often occurs by implication (Rom. ix. 25 f.; xi. 1 f. &c.). Comp. Gal. vi. 16 (ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ); and contrast c. ii. 17 (τοῦ λαοῦ); xiii. 12 (note); Apoc. xviii. 4. Israel was the type of the divine commonwealth. Sabbatismus non pancis reservatur sed populo, id est magnae multitudini; nec tamen cuilibet populo, sed populo Dei (Herv.).

(10). ὁ γὰρ εἰς.] for he that is entered (enters), whoever has once entered, into His rest, the rest of God (iii. 18; iv. 1)... The general statement gives the reason for the remarkable title which has been now given to the rest (σαββατισμός) by reference to v. 4.

The words may also be understood (though this seems to be less likely) as unfolding the nature of the promised rest.

The form of construction (εἰσελθών, κατέπαυσεν) marks the perfectness of the issue. The entrance and the rest are coincident and complete. Comp. Matt. xxv. 21, 23.

κατ. ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων] Comp. Apoc. xiv. 13.

ὥσπερ ἀπὸ τῶν ἰδίων ὁ θ.] as God did from His own works, from the works which, as far as man can conceive, correspond with His Nature, and which are spoken of as works, though wrought without toil. Comp. 1 Cor. iii. 8 κατὰ τὸν ἴδιον κόπον.

(b) The responsibility of such as have received the promise of the rest of God (11—13).

11—13. Since the promise remains for Christians they must also heed the warning (v. 11). The Gospel must be received with a devotion which answers to the character of the Power by which it is offered (vv. 12, 13).

¹¹Let us therefore give diligence to enter into that rest, that no one fall after the same example of disobedience. ¹²For the word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and quick to judge the feelings and thoughts of the heart. ¹³And there is no creature that is not manifest in His sight, but all things are naked and laid open to the eyes of Him to whom we have to give account.

(11). σπουδάσωμεν οὖν...] Let us give diligence (Latt. Festinemus), strive earnestly...because 'the prize is noble and the peril is great.' There is need of active exertion that we may secure what God has promised. So Chrysostom: μέγα μὲν ἡ πίστις καὶ σωτήριον καὶ ταύτης ἄνευ οὐκ ἔνι σωθῆναί τινα. ἀλλ' οὐκ ἀρκεῖ καθ' ἑαυτὴν τοῦτο ἐργάσασθαι ἀλλὰ δεῖ καὶ πολιτείας ὁρθῆς. And Primasius, following him: Festinomus inquit quoniam non sufficit sola fides sed debet addi et vita fidei condigna... Herveius marks the situation of the Hebrews more exactly: Festinemus ingredi nec in his terrenis quae nos impediunt immoremur. Festinemus fide et bonis operibus, quod illi non faciunt qui carnaliter adhuc legem observant et erga fidem et spiritualem conversationem negligentes existunt. 100 τὴν κατάπαυσιν ἵνα μὴ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ τις ὑποδείγματι πέσῃ τῆς ἀπειθείας. ¹²Ζῶν γὰρ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐνεργὴς

om. τις א*. ἀπειθείας: ἀληθείας D₂*. 12 ἐνεργής: ἐναργής B.

For σπουδάζειν see Eph. iv. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 15; 2 Pet. i. 10; iii. 14.

εἰς ἐκείνην τὴν κατ.] into that rest, that rest of God which is characterised by such absolute blessedness (comp. Matt. vii. 22 ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ; John xi. 49 note).

ἵνα μὴ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ...πέσῃ...] O. L. ne aliquis eodem exemplo cadat a veritate. Lcf. ne aliqui in idem ex. contumaciae cadant. Vulg. ne in id ipsum quis incidat incredulitatis exemplum. Syr. that we may not fall in the manner of those who did not believe. These two forms of rendering (Lcf., Vulg.; O. L., Syr.;) represent two possible interpretations of the words represented roughly by 'falling into' and 'falling after' the same example. According to the first interpretation πίστειν ἐν ὑποδ. is a compressed expression for 'falling into the same type of disobedience and thus exhibiting it.' But πίστειν εἰς ὑπὀδειγμα, which is involved in this explanation, is, under any circumstances, an extremely strange expression.

Hence it is better to follow the second view, in which πίστειν is taken absolutely in the sense of 'falling' 'perishing' as opposed to 'standing' (comp. 1 Cor. x. 12; Rom. xi. 11), and ἐν ὑποδ. describes the lesson presented by the fall.

Those who so fall become, in their punishment, an example like that offered by the Jews in the Wilderness, an example, that is, of the fatal consequences of disobedience fitted to alarm others. Unbelief (iii. 12) is here seen in its practical issue (v. 6 note). The word ὑπόδειγμα occurs 2 Pet. ii. 6 with gen. pers. ('an example to deter them'). See also John xiii. 15; and for a different use of the word c. viii. 5 note.

The words τῆς ἀπειθείας are placed at the end and isolated, so that attention is fixed and rests upon them (comp. ix. 15; xii. 11).

The parallel suggested by the words was the more impressive when the Apostle wrote, because the generation of the Exodus had borne much, like the Hebrew Christians, before they fell at last. And the spiritual trial of Jews and Christians was essentially the same: illi non crediderunt Deum sufficero ad dandam requiem terrae promissionis, et isti similiter Christum ad dandam requiem perpetuam sufficere non credebant sine carnalibus observantiis (Herv.).

(12). The necessity of earnest effort lies in the character of the divine revelation. It is not 'a vain thing for us: it is our life.'

The main thought in the description of 'the word of God' is not that of punishment, as it is taken by Chrysostom, but of its essential nature as it enters into, permeates, transforms, every element in man. There is no question of an external rest apart from the harmony of the believer with God or, in the figure of v. 2, apart from the vital union of the hearer with the word. The rest is the consummation of that divine fellowship of which the life in Canaan was a type.

Thus Philo also saw in the 'perfect light' of the seventh day a symbol of 'the light of virtue' in which the soul finds true rest: ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ φύσει παύεται ἡ τῶν θνητῶν σύστασις. καὶ γὰρ οὕτως ἔχει. ὅταν ἀνατείλῃ φέγγος τῆς ἀρετῆς, τὸ λαμπρὸν καὶ θεῖον ὄντως, ἐπέχεται (is checked) τῆς ἐvαντίας φύσεως ἡ γένεσις (Leg. Alleg. i. § 8; i. 46).

The five successive epithets (ζῶν...ἐνεργής...τομώτερος...διικνούμενος...κριτικός...) applied to 'the word' mark 101 with increasing clearness its power to deal with the individual soul. There is a passage step by step from that which is most general to that which is most personal. Life is characterised by activity: the activity takes the special form of an internal examination, which reaches to the very foundations of our organisation; and this is not physical only but inspired by a moral force, All-pervading, all-discerning, for it is indeed the force of God.

By 'the word of God' (ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ) we must understand the word which He speaks through His messengers or immediately in the heart of each man. Here the thought is in the first instance necessarily of the word spoken by the Son Who has again offered to man the rest of God. Comp. John xii. 48 (Deut. xviii. 18 f.). This sense is required by the whole course of the argument (iii. 7 λέγει, v. 15 ἐν τῷ λέγεσθαι,* iv. 2 ἐσμὲν εὐηγγελισμένοι...ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς, v. 4 εἴρηκεν, v. 7 ἐν Δαυεὶδ λέγων, v. 8 ἐλάλει).

The language is not directly applicable to the Personal Word Himself, He cannot properly be likened to the sword. The sword 'issues from his mouth' (Apoc. i. 16); and it may be concluded yet further that the author of the Epistle did not directly identify the divine λόγος with the Son (i. 2). At the same time, the truth that Christ is the Gospel which He brings is present to the writer's mind and influences his form of expression. Thus the passage shows how naturally the transition was made from the revelation of God to Him Who was at once the Revelation and the Revealer. Comp. 1 John i. 1 f. note.

It is not however surprising that the passage was commonly understood of the Personal Word by the Fathers: e.g. Eusebius Theoph. Cram. Cat. p. 460; Athanasius c. Ar. ii §§ 35, 72; Isidore, Cat. p. 459; Œcumenius; Theophylact; Primasius; Herveius. The transition to this sense is given in Apoc. xix. 13.

The passage offers an instructive parallel with Philo. Philo speaks at length (Quis rerum div. hær. §§ 26 ff.; i. 491 ff M.) of the Logos as 'the divider' (τομεύε) of things, basing his teaching on an interpretation of Gen. xv. 10. So the Logos divides material things into their indivisible atoms, the soul into rational and irrational, speech into true and false, formless matter into the elements, and so on. Two things only are left undivided: 'the nature of reason (τοῡ λογισμοῦ) in man and that of the Divine Logos above us, and these being indivisible (ἄτμητοι) divide other things innumerable. For the Divine Logos divides and distributes all things in nature, and our intellect (νοῦς) divides into infinitely infinite parts whatsoever matters and bodies it receives intellectually, and never ceases cutting them...' (i. p. 506 M.).

So elsewhere the virtuous man is said to remove the sores of vice by λόγος τομεύς, the knife of reason (Quod det. pot. insid. § 29, i. 212 M.). Compare De Cher. § 9 (i. p. 144 Μ.), where the flaming sword of the Cherubim is explained of the Logos used by the individual.

Thus as far as the 'cutting,' 'dividing' power of the Divine Logos is concerned, it is, according to Philo, exercised simply in the realm of being. It has no moral qualities. The moral divider is the human reason. Under other aspects however the Philonic Logos has a moral power (Quod Deus sit immut. § 28; i. p. 292 M.).

There is a yet more fundamental difference between the writer of the Epistle and Philo in the conception of the Divine Logos. With Philo it is characteristically the divine thought (the λόγος ἐνδιάθετος): with the writer of the Epistle the divine word (the λόγος προφορικός), as it is with St John.

The action of the word is regarded in relation to (1) man (v. 12), and (2) to all created things. It deals with man in respect (a) to his constitution, 102 καὶ τομώτερος ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν μάχαιραν δίστομον καὶ διικνούμενος

διικνούμενος: δεικνόμενος D₂*.

both immaterial and material, and (b) to his activity, in feeling and reason.

(12). ζων...καὶ ἐνεργὴς καὶ τομώτερος...] The Word—the revelation—of God is living (ζῶν), not simply as 'enduring for ever,' but as having in itself energies of action. It partakes in some measure of the character of God Himself (iii. 12 θεὸς ζῶν note; x. 31). Comp. Acts vii. 38 λόγια ζῶντα. John vi. 63 τὰ ῥήματα ἁ ἐγὼ λελάληκα ὑμῖν πνεύμά ἐστιν καὶ ζωή ἐστιν taken up by St Peter v. 68 ῥήματα ζωῆς αἰωνίου ἔχεις.

With this 'living word' believers are incorporated.

Compare Orig. de Princ. i. 2, 3 Unde et recto mihi dictus vidotur sermo ille qui in Actibus Pauli scriptus est quia Hic (?) est verbum animal vivens (cf. Lipsius, Apokr. Apostelgesch. ii. 1, 70 f.).

Comp. Philo, Leg. Alleg. iii. §§ 59, 61 (i. 120, 122 Μ.) ὁρᾷς τῆς ψυχῆς τροφὴν οἵα ἐστί. λόγος θεοῦ (Ex. xvi. 15)...τὸ δὲ ῥῆμα μέρος αὐτοῦ. τρέφεται δὲ τῶν μὲν τελειοτέρων ἡ ψυχὴ ὅλῳ τῷ λόγῳ, ἀγαπήσαιμεν δ' ἄν ἡμεῖς εἰ καὶ μέρει τραφείημεν αὐτοῦ.

The life of the Word is not only present, but it is also vigorously manifested. The Word is active (ἐνεργής, O.L. validum, Vulg. efficax). For ἐνεργής see 1 Cor. xvi. 9 θύρα...ἐνεργής. Philem. 6 ὅπως ἡ κοινωνία...ἐνεργὴς γένηται. The variant ἐναργής (Β, Hier. in Isai. lxvi. evidens) represents a very common confusion of forms.

The activity of the Word is not intellectual only but moral: it deals with conduct as well as with knowledge. It is shewn in the power of the Word to lay open the innermost depths of human nature. The Word has unrivalled keenness: it pierces in fact to the most secret parts of man; and that not as an instrument merely but as a judge of moral issues. It is sharper than the most formidable weapon of earthly warfare: it finds its way through every element of our earthly frame: it scrutinises the affections and thoughts of which our bodily members are the present organs.

The image of the sharp cutting power (τομώτερος, Vulg. penetrabilior) of the Word finds a striking parallel in a line of Phocylides (v. 118), ὅπλον τοι λόγος ἀνδρὶ τομώτερόν ἐστι σιδήρου.

In this respect the word is compared with the sharpest of material arms, 'the two-edged sword.' Comp. Apoc. i. 16 ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ ῥομφαία δίστομος ὀξεῖα ἐκπορευομένη, ii. 12. Is. xlix, 2; (xi. 4; ii. 16; Hos. vi. 5). Schoettgen quotes a Jewish saying to the effect that 'he who utters the Shema is as if he held a two-edged sword.'

The phrase is common in classical writers, e.g. Eurip. Hel. 989.

Other examples are given by Wetstein.

For μάχαιρα see Eph. vi 17 δέξασθε...τὴν μάχαιραν τοῦ πνεύματος ὅ ἐστιν ῥῆμα θεοῦ (ξίφος is not found in N.T.); and for τομώτερος ὑπέρ Luke xvi. 8; Jud. xi. 25; c. iii. 3; ix. 23 (παρά).

καὶ διικνούμενος ἄχρι μερισμοῦ...] The 'dividing' operation of 'the Word of God' has been understood as reaching to the separation of soul from spirit, and of joints from marrow, or to the separation, in themselves, of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow. The latter interpretation seems to be unquestionably right. The Word of God analyses, lays bare, reveals in their true nature, reduces to their final elements, all the powers of man. Chrysostom mentions both views: τί ἐστι τοῦτο; φοβερόν τι ῇνίξατο. ἥ γὰρ ὅτι τὸ πηεῦμα διαιρεῖ ἀπὸ τῆς ψυχῆς, λέγει. ἥ ὅτι καὶ αὐτῶν (leg. δι' 103 ἄχρι μερισμοῦ ψυχῆς καὶ πνεύματος, ἁρμῶν τε καὶ μυελώῶν, καὶ κριτικός ἐνθυμήσεων καὶ ἐννοιῶν καρδίας

ψυχῆς καὶ אABCH vg syrr me: ψ. + τε' καὶ S D₂. ἐνθυμήσεως: -σεως C* D₂*. καὶ ἐνν.: ἐνν. τε D₂*.

αὐτῶν) τῶν ἀσωμάτων διικνεῖται, οὐ καθὼς ἡ μάχαιρα μόνον τῶν σωμάτπων. δείκνυσιν...ὅτι...ὅλον δι' ὅλου διικνεῖτας ἄνθρωπον (leg. τοῦ ἀνθρώπου) (ad l.).

The omission of the τε in the first of the two double clauses (ψ. καὶ πν. ἁρ. τε καὶ μ.) causes some difficulty as to the construction. It has been supposed that the first clause (ψ. καὶ πν.) depends on the second 'unto the division both of the joints and marrow of soul and spirit'; and again that the second clause, understood metaphorically, explains the extent of the penetrative power of the Word 'unto the division of soul and spirit, yea, of both spiritual joints and marrow in that internal frame.'

The first of these interpretations presupposes a most unnatural construction; and the second is harsh and forced, though Euripides (Hipp. 255) speaks of the ἄρκος μυελὸς ψυχῆς.

It is more simple, and free from objection, to regard the two compound clauses as coupled by the τε, so that the first two terms taken together represent the immaterial elements in man; while the two which follow represent the material elements. Thus the four in combination offer a general view of the sum of man's powers in his present organisation. The divine revelation penetrates through all. No part of human nature is untouched by it.

For this use of τε compare Acts xxvi. 30; Luke xxiv. 20.

ψυχῆς καὶ πνεύματος] Vulg. animae ac spiritus. Compare 1 Cor. xv. 45; 1 Thess. v. 23. The broad distinction between the two is given forcibly by Primasius: Anima vivimus, spiritu rationabiliter intelligimus: vita nobis carnalis cum bestiis communis est, ratio spiritalis cum angelis...Comp. Additional Note.

όρμων τε καὶ μυελῶν] Vulg. compagum quoque ac medullarum. Syr. Of joints and of marrow and bones, the most critical parts of the physical framework of man, and the inmost media of his physical force. The words are not found elsewhere in the N.T. Oecumenius notices their relation to what goes before: εἰπὼν τὰ ἀσώματα εἶπε καὶ τὰ σωματικά. The plural μυελῶν expresses the idea of the separate members in which the 'marrow' is found. The rendering of the Peshito is a remarkable example of an interpretative gloss.

κριτικὸς ἐνθυμήσεων καὶ ἐννοιῶν κ.] Vulg. discretor (Ο. L. scrutator) cogitationum et intentionum cordis. The enumeration of the constituent elements of man is followed by a notice of his rational activity as a moral being. Over this, over the feelings and thoughts of his hearty the Word of God is fitted to exercise judgment. The first word (ἐνθυμήσεων) refers to the action of the affections, the second (ἐννοιῶν) to the action of the reason. Clement has a remarkable parallel: ἐρευνήσεων γάρ ἐστιν (ὁ θεὸς) ἐννοιῶν καὶ ἐνθυμήσεων (1 Cor. xxi. 9).

For ἐνθύμησις see Matt. ix. 4; xii. 25; Acts xvii. 29; and for ἔννοια, 1 Pet. iv. 1.

Both 'feelings' and 'thoughts' are referred to 'the heart,' which represents the seat of personal, moral life. It is of interest to trace the use of the word through the Epistle: iii. 8 (iii. 15, iv. 7); iii. 10, 12; viii. 10 (x. 16); x. 22; xiii. 9.

(13). The thought of the pervading energy of the revelation of God in regard to man is now extended to 104 ¹³καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν κτίσις ἀφανὴς ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ, πάντα δὲ γυμνὰ καὶ τετραχηλισμένα τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς αὐτοῦ, πρὸς

13 κτίσις: κρίσις D₂*.

that of the universal Providence of God with regard to all created beings. Τί λέγω περὶ ἀνθρώπων, φησίν, κἆν γὰρ ἀγγέλους κἆν ἀρχαγγέλους κἆν τὰ Xερουβὶμ καὶ τὰ Σεραφὶμ κἆνν οἐανδήποτε κτίσιν, πάντα ἐκκεκάλυεται τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ ἐκείνῳ; (Chrys.). Comp. Philo Leg. Alleg. iii. 60 (i. 121 M.). Timeamus ejus praesentiam cujus scientiam nullatenus effugere valeamus (Primas. Atto).

There is some difficulty as to the antecedent of the two pronouns (ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ, τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς αὐτοπυ). They must evidently refer to the same subject; and since the subject in the second case is unequivocally personal ('Him to Whom we must render account'), there can be little doubt that we must understand 'God' in both places, suggested by the compound subject of the former sentence, 'the Word of God.' Nor is there anything unnatural in the transition from the manifestation of God through His Word to His Person.

For κτίσις (creature) see Rom. i. 25; viii. 39; 2 Cor. v. 17. Ἀφανής does not occur again in Ν. T.

The negative statement that nothing is hidden from the sight of God is supplemented by a positive statement that all things are stripped of every disguise which might conceal their true nature (γυμνά) and brought by an overmastering power into full view before His eyes (τετραχηλισμένα).

The general sense of τετραχηλισμένα (Latt. aperta, Syrr. revealed, made manifest) is clear, as it is given in the old versions (Hesych. τετραχηλισμένα. πεφανερωμένα), but it is by no means certain from what image the meaning is derived. The word τραχηλίζειν is not found in the lxx. It is frequently used by Philo in the sense of prostrating, overthrowing; e.g. Quis rer. div. haer. § 55 (i. p. 512 Μ.) ἀνὴρ ὄντως τραχηλίζων ἥ (lege ) τραχηλίζεσθαί δύναται: de vit. Mos., § 54 (ii. p. 127 Μ.) τραχηλιζόμενοι ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις πάνθ' ὑπομεροῦσι δρᾶν τε καὶ πάσχειν ('obtorto collo pertracti'); and, with a more general application, de exsecr. § 7 (ii. 433 Μ.) ἄρξεταί ποτε διαπνεῖν καὶ ἀνακύπτειν ἡ πολλὰ γυμνασθεῖσα καὶ τραχηλισθεῖσα γῆ. So Jos. Β. Jud. iv. 6, 2. Comp. Plut. de Curios. ii. p. 521 B ὁρᾶτε τὸν ἀθλητὴν ὑπὸ παιδισκαρίου τραχηλιζόμενον (where the idea is of the head turned round to gaze, παρεπιστρεφόμενον, and so, in the next sentence, τραχηλιζομένους καὶ περιαγομένους).

The Greek Fathers were evidently perplexed by the word. Chrysostom appears to understand it of victims hung up (by the neck) and flayed: τὸ τετραχηλισμένα εἴρηται ἀπὸ μεταφορᾶς τῶν δερμάτων τῆω ἀπὸ τῶν ἱερείων ἐξελκομένων. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐκαῖνα, ἐπειδάν τις σφάξας ἀπὸ τῆς σαρκὸς παρελκύσῃ τὸ δέρμα, πάντα τὰ ἔνδον ἀποκαλύεται καὶ δῆλα γίνεται τοῖς ἡμετέροις ὀφθαλμοῖς, οὕτω καὶ τῷ θεῷ δῆλα πρόκειται πάντα.

Theodoret interprets the word of victims prostrate and lifeless: τὸ δὲ τετραχηλισμένα τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς αὐτοῦ ἐκ μεταφορᾶς τἐθεικε τῶν θυομένων ζώων, ἅ παντελῶς ἄφωνα κεῖται, τῆς σφαγῆς τὴν φωνὴν ἀφελομένης.

Oecumonius gives Chrysostom's meaning and anothor without deciding between them: τετραχηλισμένα δὲ φησι τὰ γυμνὰ ἀπὸ μεταφορᾶς τῶν προβάτων τῶν ἐκ τραχήλου ἠρτημένων καὶ γεγυμνωμένων τῆς δορᾶς. ἥ τὸ τετραχηλισμένα ἀντὶ τοῦ κάτω κύπτοντα, καὶ τὸν τράχηλον ἐπικλίνοντα διὰ τὸ μὴ ἰσχύειν ἀτενίσαι τῇ δόξῃ ἐκείνῃ τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ


ὅν ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος. ¹⁴Ἔχοντες οὖν ἀρχιερέα μέγαν διεληλυθότα τοὺς οὐρανούς, Ίησοῦν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ

ὑμῶν (leg. ἡμῶν) Ἰησοῦ. Theophylact prefers the interpretation of Chrysostom.

The word has been popularly explained as used of a wrestler who seizes the neck and thrusts back the head of his adversary (resupinare) so as to expose it fully to sight; but there is no direct evidence of the use of τραχηλίζω in this sense; and the words of Oecumenius point to the sense of pressing down the head, which agrees with the general idea of prostration.

πρὸς ὅν ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος] to whom we have to give account. (So Syr.) O. L. ante quem nobis oratio est. Vulg. ad quem (Hier. de quo) nobis sermo. Comp. Ign. ad Magn. 3. Compare Chrysostom Orat. ad illumin. 1 (ii. 274 ed. Gaume) οὐ γὰρ πρὸς τοὺς συνδούλους ἡμῖν ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸν Δεσπότην ὁ λόγος ἐστί, καὶ τούτῳ τὰς εὐθύνας δώσομεν τῶν βεβιωμένων ἁπάντων So he rightly gives the sense here: ὧ μέλλομεν δοῦναι εὐθύνας τῶν πεπραγμένων. Primasius lays open the ground of the truth in impressive words: noc mirum si totus ubique totam suam agnoscat creaturam.

iii. Transition to the doctrine of the High-priesthood of Christ, resuming ii. 17 f. (14—16).

Having dealt with the relation of the Son of Man (iii. 1 Jesus) to Moses and Joshua; and with the relation of the promise which declares man's destiny to the people of God under the Old and New Dispensations, the writer now returns to the central thought of the High-priesthood, from which he has turned aside, and prepares for the full discussion of it in the following chapters (v.— x. 18). Briefly, he shews, we have a Highpriest who has Himself entered the rest of God (v. 14); who can perfectly sympathise with us (v. 15); so that we can ourselves draw near to God, with whom He is (v. 16).

¹⁴Having therefore a great High-priest, Who hath passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us cling to our confession; ¹⁶for we have not a High-priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but one that hath been tempted in all points like as we are, apart from sin. ¹⁶Let us therefore come with boldness unto the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in time of need.

(14). ἔχοντες οὖν ἀρχ....] Comp. x. 19; xii. 1. The words point back to ii. 17; iii. 1. The fear of final failure, the consciousness of weakness and partial failure, turn the thoughts again to the Mediator.

Our High-priest, our Apostle, has done more than Aaron or Moses prefigured. He has entered into the rest which He foreshewed, so that He can also bring His people into it. He is seated at the right hand of God. But meanwhile man has his part to do; and as we strive to secure the promised rest we must cling firmly to the confession in which lies the assurance of success.

The simple fact that we have a High-priest is stated first (Having therefore a High-priest), and then His character and position are described: Having therefore a High-priest, great in His essential Nature (i. 1 ff.), and One Who hath passed through the heavens, and so come before the very Presence of God. The epithet piyat does not go to complete the notion of High-priest, but characterises his dignity. Comp. x. 21; (xiii. 20). Philo de somn. i. § 38 (i. p. 654 Μ.) ὁ μέγας ἀρχιερεὺς [τῆς ὁμολογίας]; de Abr. § 40 (ii. 34 Μ.) ὁ μέγας ἀρχιερεὺς τοῦ μαγίστου θεοῦ.

διελ. τ. οὐρ.] who hath passed 106 θεοῦ, κρατῶμεν τῆς ὁμολογίας. ¹⁵οὐ γὰρ ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα

through the heavens. Ο. L. egressum caelos. Vulg. qui penetravit caelos. Comp. Eph. iv. 10 (c. vii. 26 note). Christ not merely ascended up to heaven in the language of space, but transcended the limitations of space. Thus we say that He 'entered into heaven' and yet is 'above the heavens.'

The phrase points out the superiority of Christ over the Jewish high-priest and over the Jewish mediator. He has passed not through the veil only but through the heavens up to the very throne of God (comp. ix. 24; i. 3), and entered into the royal rest of God.

Theophylact well compares Christ and Moses; οὐ τοιοῦτος οἷος Μωυσῆσ, ἐκεῖνos μὲν γὰρ οὕτε αὐτὸς εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσιν οὕτε τὸν λαὸν εἰσήγαγεν. οὗτος δὲ διεληλυθὼσ τοὺς οὐρανοὺς συνεδριάζει τῷ Πατρὶ καὶ δύναται ἡμῖν τὴν εἰς οὐρανοὺς εἴσοδον δοῦναι καὶ τῆς ἐν ἐπαγγελίαις καταπαύσεως κληρονόμους ποι. And Primasius brings out aspects of μέγας: Magnum pontificem eum appellat qui habet aeternum sacerdotium, semper vivens, ad interpellandum pro nobis (c. vii. 25). Sic enim dixit de illo angelus ad Mariam: Hic erit magnus et Filius altissimi vocabitur (Lk. i. 32).

Ἱησοῦν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ] The two titles are placed side by side in order to suggest the two natures of the Lord which include the assurance of sympathy and power. For the use of Jesus see ii. 9 note; and for the Son of God see vi. 6; vii. 3; x. 29; and Additional Note on i. 4. And for the combination of the two see Acts ix. 20; 1 Thess. i. 10; 1 John i. 7; iv. 15; v. 5.

κρατῶμεν τῆς ὁμολ.] Let us cling to our faith in Him, Whom we openly confess, as truly human, truly divine (Latt. teneamus confessionem). Οὐ τὸ πᾶν τῷ ἱερεῖ δίδωσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ παρ' ἡμῶν ζητεῖ, λέγε δὴ τὴν ὁμολογίαν (Theophlct).

The phrase κρατεῖν τῆς ὁμολογίας, as contrasted with κατέχωμεν τὴν ὁμολογίαν (c. x. 23), seems to mark the act of grasping and clinging to that to which we attach ourselves, as distinguished from the act of holding firmly that which is already completely in our possession. Comp. vi. 18. Thus the words imply danger and incite to effort.

For ὁμολογία compare c iii. 1; x. 23 note; 1 Tim. vi. 12 f.

The writer everywhere insists on the duty of the public confession of the faith. The crisis claimed not simply private conviction but a clear declaration of belief openly in the face of men. Comp. 1 John iv. 2 note.

(15). oὐ γὰρ] The apostle calls for effort, and he encourages it. By the negative form of the sentence he recognises the presence of an objection which he meets by anticipation. The divine glory of Christ might have seemed to interpose a barrier between Him and His people. But on the contrary, the perfectness of His sympathy is the ground for clinging to the faith which answers to our needs. He is as near to us as the human high-priests (nay, nearer than they) whose humanity inspired the Jewish worshippers with confidence. For we have not a High-priest such as can not be touched...but one that hath been tempted...

μὴ δυνάμενον...πεπειρασμένον\ The power of Christ's sympathy is expressed negatively and positively. He is not such as to be unable to sympathise: nay rather He has been tried in all respects after our likeness, and therefore He must sympathise from His own experience.

μὴ δυνάμενον] such that he cannot...For μὴ with participles in this Epistle see iv. 2; vii. 3, 6; ix. 9; xi. 8, 13, 27; xii. 27; (vi. 1; x. 25; xiii. 17 are 107 μὴ δυνάμενον συνπαθῆσαι ταῖς ἀσθενείαις ἡμῶν, πεπειρασμένον

different); for οὐ xi. 1 (contrast 2 Cor. iv. 18), 35. For other examples of participles with οὐ see 2 Cor. iv. 8 f.; Gal. iv. 8, 27; Col. ii. 19; 1 Pet. i. 8; ii. 10 (not Eph. v. 4; Phil. iii. 3); Winer, pp. 606 ff.

συνπαθῆσαι] to be touched with the feeling of. Vulg. compati... c. x. 34 (συμπαθής 1 Pet. iii. 8. Vulg. compatiens). The verb occurs in Symmachus Job ii. 11, and in classical writers from Isocrates downwards. It expresses not simply the compassion of one who regards suffering from without, but the feeling of one who enters into the suffering and makes it his own. So Christ is touched with the feeling of our weaknesses, which are for us the occasions of sins, as knowing them, though not with the feeling of the sins themselves. Such weaknesses can be characterised by the circumstances of the Lord's life, natural weariness, disappointment, the feeling of desertion, shrinking from pain (contrast the sing. ἀσθένεια c. vii. 28 note). From temptations through such weaknesses the Hebrew Christians were suffering. Comp. v. 2; vii. 28; xi. 34. Clement also combines the thought of Christ's High-priesthood with that of His help to man's weakness: ad Cor. i. c. 36 αὔτη ἡ ὁδός, ἀγαπητοί, ἐν ἧ εὐρομεν τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν, Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν ἀρχιερέα τῶν προσφορῶν ἡμῶν, τὸν προστάτην καὶ βοηθὸν τῆς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν. Compare Orig. in Matt. xiii. 2 Ἰησοῦς γοῦν φησίν Διὰ τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας ἡσθένουν καὶ διὰ τοὺς πεινῶντας ἀπείνων καὶ διὰ τοὺς διψῶντας ἐδίψων, and Resch Agrapha p. 244.

πεπειρασμένον δέ...χ. ἁμαρτίας] Ο. L. expertum in omnibus (omnia) secundum similitudinem sine peccato. Vulg. tentatum autem per omnia pro similitudine absque peccato. Syr. Pesh. tempted in everything as we (are), sin excepted.

The words are capable of two distinct interpretations. They may (1) simply describe the issue of the Lord's temptation, so far as He endured all without the least stain of sin (c. vii. 26). Or they may (2) describe a limitation of His temptation. Man's temptations come in many cases from previous sin. Such temptations had necessarily no place in Christ. He was tempted as we are, sharing our nature, yet with this exception, that there was no sin in Him to become the spring of trial. The first of these thoughts is not excluded from the expression, which is most comprehensive in form, but the latter appears to be the dominant idea. In this sense there is a reference to the phrase in the Chalcedonic definition: Ίησοῦν Χριστόν...ἐκδιδάσκομεν...κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας. Comp. c. ix. 28.

We may represent the truth to ourselves best by saying that Christ assumed humanity under the conditions of life belonging to man fallen, though not with sinful promptings from within. Comp. c. ii. 18 note.

Comp. Greg. Nyss. c. Eunom. ii. p. 545 Migne: οὐδὲν ἀφῆκε τῆς φύσεως ἡμῶν ὅ οὐκ ἀνέλαβεν ὁ κατὰ πάντα πεπειραμίνος καθ' ὁμοιότητα χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας. ἡ δὲ ψυχὴ ἁμαρτία οὐκ ἐστὶν ἀλλὰ δεκτικὴ ἁμαρτίας ἐξ ἀβουλίας ἐγένετο...c. Apoll. xi. id. p. 1144 ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ τοῦ χοῖκοῦ ἰδιώματα τοῖς ἐξ ἐκείνου ἐνθεωρεῖται, οὕτως ἐπάναγκες, κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἀπόφασιν, τὸν κατὰ πάντα πεπειραμένον τοῦ ἡμετέρου βίου καθ' ὁμοιότητα χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας. ὁ δὲ νοῦς ἁμαρτία οὐκ ἐστί, πρὸς πᾶσαν ἡμῶν οἰκείως ἔχειν τὴν φύσιν. c. Eunom. vi. id. ρ. 721.

Atto, pursuing the thought of Primasius, says well: Venit per viam humanae conditionis per omnia sine peccato, nihil secum afferens unde morti debitor esset, sicut ipse in Evangelio testatur (St John xiv. 30). 108 δὲ κατὰ πάντα καθ' ὁμοεότητα χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας. ¹⁶προσερχώμεθα ροσ€ρχωμβθα οὖν μετὰ παρρησίας τῷ θρόνῳ τῆς

The Greek Fathers generally interpret the words χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας in relation to the facts of Christ's life: ἐνταῦθα καὶ ἄλλο τι αἰνίττεται, ὅτι δυνατὸν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας καὶ ἐν θλίψεσιν ὄντα διενεγκεῖν. ὥστε καὶ ὅταν λέγῃ 'τν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς οὐ τοῦτό φησιν ὅτι ὁμοίωμα σαρκὸς ἀλλ' ὅτι σάρκα ἀνέλαβε. διὰ τί αὖν εἶπεν ἐν ὁμοιώματι; περὶ ἁμαρτωλοῦ σαρκὸς ἔλεγεν. ὁμοία γὰρ ἧν τῇ σαρκὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ. τῇ μὲν γὰρ φύσει ἡ αὐτὴ ἧν ἡμῖν, τῇ δὲ ἁμαρτίᾳ οὐκέτι ἡ αὐτή (Chrys.).

ὡς ἄνθρωπος πεῖραν τῶν ἡμετέρων ἔλαβε παθημάτων μόνης τῆς ἁμαρτίας διαμείνας ἀμύητος (Theod.).

οὔτε γὰρ ἁπλῶς ἁμαρτίαν εἰργάσατο, οὔτε ὅτε ταῦτα ἔπασχεν ἁμαρτητικόν τι ἧ εἶρεν ἧ ἔδρασςεν. ὥστε δύνασθε καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας διαγενέσθαι (Theophlct).

πεπειρασμένον] For the perfect, see ii. 18; xii. 3 notes.

κατὰ πάντα] in all things, as in nature so in life. Comp. ii. 17.

καθ' ὁμοι.] c. vii. 15. Comp. Gen. i. 11 f. The words may mean 'according to the likeness of our temptations,' i.e. like as we are tempted (secundum similitudinem 0. L.); or 'in virtue of His likeness to us,' i.e. ὁμοιωθεὶς ἡμῖν (ii. 17; pro similitudine Vulg.).

Primasius (compare Chrysostom quoted above) interprets the words as if they were καθ' ὁμοιότητα σαρκὸς [ἁμαρτίας] (Rom. viii. 3): Pro similitudine carnis peccati absque peccato... In hoc enim quia homo factus est, veram carnom habuit: in hoc vero quia carnem peccati non habuit sed absque peccato, similitudinem nostrae carnis habuit, quae est caro peccati, nam peccatum non habuit...Illius caro non fuit peccati sed munditiae et castitatis atque innocentiae; quapropter non est tentatus in carne peccati ut peccatum faceret sed in similitudine carnis peccati ut absque peccato maneret; and again on c. v. 2; tentari potuit per omnia similitudine carnis peccati absque peccato.

(16). προσερχώμεθα οὖν...] The vision of the High-priest Who is not Priest only but King, Who is not only Son of God but Son of man, suggests the conclusion that believers, clinging to their confession, can and must use the infinite privileges which their Lord has gained for them. The minds of writer and readers are full of the imagery of the Levitical system, and of the ceremonial of the High-priestly atonement; and the form of the exhortation suggests the grandeur of the position in which the Christian is placed as compared with that of the Jew: 'Let us therefore, trusting the divine power and the human sympathy of 'Jesus the Son of God,' draw near, as priests ourselves in fellowship with our High-priest,—and not remain standing afar off as the congregation of Israel,—to the throne of grace, no symbolic mercy-seat, but the very centre of divine sovereignty and love...'

προσερχώμεθα] The word occurs here for the first time in the Epistle (comp. vii. 25 note; x. 1, 22; xi. 6). It is used in the lxx. for the priestly approach to God in service: e.g. Lev. xxi. 17, 21; xxii. 3, though it has also a wider application. That right of priestly approach is now extended to all Christians. Comp. Apoc. i. 6; v. 10; (xx. 6); 1 Pet. ii. 5, 9, See also ἐγγίζομεν, vii. 19, note.

The power of sympathy in our High Priest is made effective by the power of help: per hoc enim quod similia passus est potest compati; et per hoc quod Deus est in utraque substantia potest misereri (Primas. ad c. v.).

μετὰ παρρησίας] Latt. cum fiducia. (The Syr. Pesh. gives, as elsewhere, 109 χάριτος, ἵνα λάβωμεν ἔλεος καὶ χάριν εὕρωμεν εἰs εὔκαιρον βοήθειαν.

16 εὕρωμεν: om. Β. om. εἰς D₂*.

'with eye (face) open.') So Acts ii. 29; iv. 29, 31; xxviii. 31. St Paul uses ἐν παρρησίᾳ Eph. vi 19; Phil. i. 20; Col. ii. 15; St John παρρησίᾳ vii. 13 &c.; ἥ μηδὲν πρὸς τὴν πίστιν διστάζοντες, ἥ ὅτι νενίκηκε τὸν κόσμον (John xvi. 33), δῆλον οὖν ὅτι νικήσες καὶ τοὺς νῦν ἡμᾶς θλίβοντας (Oecum.). The phrase is perhaps used here in the primary sense, 'giving utterance to every thought and feeling and wish,' though the word παρρησία is used more generally elsewhere in the epistle: iii. 6; x. 19, 35.

τῷ θρόνῳ τῆς χάριτος] The phrase is to be compared with θρόνος δόξης (Matt. xix. 28; xxv. 31; 1 Sam. ii. 8; Jer. xiv. 21; xvii. 12; Ecclus. xlvii. 11); ὁ θρόνος τῆς μεγαλωσύνης (c. viii. 1), θρόνος ἀνομίς (Ps. xciii. (xciv.) 20), θρόνος αἰσθήσεως (Prov. xii. 23). The gen. in each case seems to express that which is shewn in a position of sovereign power. Thus the 'throne of grace' is that revelation of God's Presence in which His grace is shewn in royal majesty. Of this revelation the glory over the mercy-seat was a faint symbol.

Philo speaks also of ὁ ἐλέου βωμός de exsecr. § 7 (ii. 434 M.); and Clement describes Christians as having come ὑπο τὸν ζυγὸν τῆς χάριτος [τοῦ κυρίου] (1 Cor. 16).

θρόνος χάριτός ἐστιν (Ps. CX. l) οὐ θρόνος κρίσεως νῦν...θρόνος χάριτός ἐστιν ἔως κάθηται χαριζόμενος ὁ βασιλεύς, ὅταν δὲ ἡ συντέλεια γένηται, τότε ἐγείρεται εἰς κρίσιν (Chrys.).

On this 'throne of grace' Christ Himself is seated: ἵνα μὴ ἀκούσας αὐτὸν ἀρχιερέα νομίσῃς ἐστάναι εὐθέως αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον ἅγει, ὁ δὲ ἱερεὺς οὐ κάθηται ἀλλ' ἔστηκεν (Chrys.).

ἵνα λάβωμεν ἕ. καὶ χ. εὐρωμεν] that we may receive mercy and find grace.

The twofold aim corresponds with the twofold necessity of life. Man needs mercy for past failure, and grace for present and future work. There is also a difference as to the mode of attainment in each case. Mercy is to be 'taken' as it is extended to man in his weakness; grace is to be 'sought' by man according to his necessity. Ut misericordiam consequamur, id est, remissionem peccatorum, et gratiam donorum Spiritus Sancti (Primas.).

For χάρις compare ii. 9; x. 29; xii. 15, 28; xiii. 9, 25.

For λαβεῖν compare John i. 16; xx. 22; Rom. viii. 15; 1 Pet. iv. 10; and for εἱρεῖν Luke i. 30; Acts vii. 46; 2 Tim. i. 18.

εἰς εὕκαιρον βοήθειαν] Vulg. gratiam inveniamus in auxilio opportuno. The help comes when it is needed and not till then (ii. 18 τοῖς πειραζομένοις βοηυῆσαι). Comp. Philo de migr. Abr. § 10 (i. p. 445 Μ.) οὐκοῦν ὅτι καὶ πρὸς βοήθειαν δύναμις ἀρωγὸς εὐτρεπὴς ἐφεδρεύει παρὰ θεῷ καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ ἡγεμὼν ἐγγυτέρω πρὸσεισιν ἐπ' ὠφελείᾳ τῶν ἀξίων ὠφελεῖσθαι δεδήλωται. The clause goes with all that precedes: 'mercy' and 'grace' are always ready at the present moment. Αν νῦν προσέλθῃς, φησί, φησί, λήψῃ καὶ χάριν καὶ ἔλεον. εὐκαίρως γὰρ προσέρχῃ. ἄν δὲ τότε προσέλθῃς, οὐκέτι. ἄκαιρος γὰρ τότε ἡ πρόσοδος (Chrys. followed by the later commentators).

Comp. Gen. xxxv. 3. One of the names of Ahura Mazda is 'the One of whom questions are asked' (Zendavesta S. B. E. ii. p. 24 and note). Philo's description of 'the Divine Word' as High-priest in the soul of man is worthy of study: de prof. §§ 20, 21 (i. pp. 562 f. M.).


*Additional Note on the reading of* iv. 2.

There is evidence of a twofold difference in the earliest authorities as to the reading of this verse. The difference in the forms σνκιαρασμ-, σννκραμ- may be neglected. The substantial differences which affect the interpretation of the passage lie in (1) -μένος, -μένους, and (2) τοῖς ἀκούσασιω, τῶν ἀκοθσάντων, (τοῖς ἀκουσθεῖσι).

(1) (a) The nom. sing. (συνκεκερασμένος) is read by Κ (vg non admistus) d (non temperatus) syr vg (because it was not mixed) Cyr. Alex., Lcfr. (non temperatus), (Prima.).

(b) The accus. plur. (συνκεκερασμένους) is read by ABCD2M„ the great mass of later mss., some Lat. mss. (am. non admixtis), syr hl (text for they were not mixed), me (quia non confusi sunt, Wilkins), Theod. Mops., Aug., Chrys., Theodt., Theophet.

(2) (a) τοῖς ἀκούσασιν is the reading of all the Greek mss. with the exception of D2 and 71.

(b) τῶν ἀκουσάντων is read by D, (and this may be the original of auditorum in d Lcfr.), and by syr hl mg.

(c) τοῖς ἀκουσθεῖσι which appears to have been a conjecture of Theodore of Mopsuestia is read by 71, but the sense is given by the vg en his quæ audierunt.

Thus four combinations which have early authority require to be considered.

(α) μὴ συνκεκερασμένος τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν

(β) μὴ συνκεκερασμένος τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκουσάντων.

(γ) μὴ συνκεκερασμένους τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν.

(δ) μὴ συνκεκερασμένοθς τῇ πίστει τοῖς [ἀκουσθεῖσιν v. ἀκούσμασιν].

Of these (β) may be set aside without hesitation. The variant τῶν ἀκουσάντων is not unlike one of the mechanical changes of D2 (see vv. 1, 12, 16), and it gives no tolerable sense.

The other readings ((α), (γ), (δ)) give severally a good sense, though there are difficulties in each case (see Notes).

The external authority for (δ) is relatively so slight11   Comp. Iren. iii. 19, 1 nondum commixti verbo Dei Patris. that this reading can hardly be accepted unless the better attested readings are inadmissible. Moreover it simply gives in another form the thought which is conveyed by συνκεκερασμένος τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν.

Our choice then lies between (α) and (γ). The authorities for (α) though few in number cover a very wide field, and reach in each case to the earliest accessible date. And further, while the change from -μένος to -μένους is natural both as a mechanical alteration and as the intentional correction of a scribe, the change from -μένους to -μένος is more difficult to account for. It would scarcely be made mechanically; and it is not obvious as a correction.

On the whole therefore it seems best to accept the reading συνκεκερασμένος τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν as attested by varied ancient authority, adequately explaining the other readings, and giving a satisfactory sense.


Some of the patristic explanations are worth quoting:

@Theodorus Mops@. (Cram. Cat. p. 177): οὐ γὰρ ἧσαv κατὰ τὴν πίστιν τοῖς ἐπαγγελθεῖσι συνημμένοι, ὅθεν οὔτως άναγνωστέον, 'μὴ συγκεκερασμένους τῇ πίστες τοῖς ἀκουσθεῖσιν,' ἵνα εἴπῃ ταῖς πpὂς αὐτοὒς γεγενημέναις ἐᾶγγελίαις τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ Μωυσέως.

Theodoret: τί γὰρ ὥνησεν ἡ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπαγγελία τοὺς ταύτην δεξαμένους, μὴ πιστῶς δεξαμίνους καὶ τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ δυνάμει τεθαρρηκότας καὶ οἷον τοῖς θεοῦ λόγοις ἀνακραθέντας;

@Chrysostom@: εἶτα ἐπάγει Ἀλλ' οὐκ ὠφελησεν ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀκοῆς ἐκείνους μὴ συγκεκπαμίνους (so mss.; edd. -μένης) τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν,΄ δεικνὸς πῶς ὁ λόγος οὐκ ὠφείλησεν, ἐκ γὰρ τοῦ μὴ σθγκραθῆναι οῦκ ὠφελήσαν. Then afterwards he goes on to say, oἱ οὖν περὶ Χάλεβ καὶ Ἰησοῦν, ἐπειδὴ μὴ συνεκράθησαν τοῖς ἀπιστήσασι, τουτέστιν οὐ σθνεφώνησαν, διέφυγον τὴν κατ' ἐκείνων ἐξενεχθεῖσαν τιμωπίαν. καὶ ὅρα γέ τι θαυμαστόν, οὐκ εἶπεν, οὐ συνεφώνησαν ἀλλ' οὐ σθνεκράθησαν, τουτέστιν, ἀστασιάστως διέστησαν, ἐκείνωνμίαν πάντων μίαν καὶ τῆν αὐτὴν γνώμηω ἐσχηκότων.

This latter is the opinion which Theophylact quotes and criticises as Chrysostom's.

@Augustine@, in commenting upon Ps. lxxvii. (lxxviii.) 8 non est creditus cum Deo spiritus ejus, writes: ut autom cor cum illo sit et per hoc rectum esse possit, acceditur ad eum non pede sed fide. Ideo dicitur etiam in epistola ad Hebræos de illa ipsa generatione prava et amaricante, Non profuit sermo auditus illis non contemperatis (so mss.) fidei eorum qui obaudierunt (In Ps. lxxvii. § 10); and again: crant illic etiam electi quorum fidei non contemperabatur generatio prava et amaricans (id. § 18)11   This reference I owe to my very old friend the late Rev. A. A. Ellis, sometime Fellow of Trinity College..

The note of Primasius is: non profuit illis, quia non fuit admistus et conjunctus fidei, et contemperatus fidei ex his promissionibus quas audiorunt. Tunc enim prodesset lis sermo auditus si credidissent quoniam tunc oesct contemperatus fide (i fidei). Quoniam vero non credidorunt, non fuit conjunctus fidei, ideoque nihil ois profuit quod audierunt...

*Additional Note on* iv. 8. *On some hypothetical sentences*.

It is worth while for the sake of some young students to illustrate a little in detail from the writings of the N.T. the various forms of the sentence which expresses the hypothetical consequence of an unfulfilled condition.

Two main cases arise. In one (I) the protasis expressed by εἶ with the indicative is followed by the imperfect indicative with ἄv. The thought here is of a present or continuous result which would have been seen now if the unfulfilled supposition had been realised. In the other (II), the protasis expressed by εἶ with the indicative is followed by the aorist indicative with ἄv. The thought here is of a past and completed result which would have ensued if the unfulfilled condition had been realised.


No uniform rendering in English is able to give the exact force of these two different forms of expression. It has become common to translate (I) by if (he) had...(he) would...; and (II) by if (he) had... (he) would have.... But if this rendering is adopted, the definite negation of the fact in the apodosis of (I) is commonly lost or obscured, and the statement appears to be simply hypothetical and to suggest a possible fulfilment in the future. On the other hand if (I) and (II) are translated in the same manner, the suggestion of the present or continuous fact in (I) is obliterated.

Each case therefore must be considered by itself in order that the translator may convey the truest impression of the original with regard to the context

If we look at the two main cases more closely we shall see that each has two divisions according as εἰ is joined with the imperfect or with the aorist in the protasis. Thus four types of expression must be distinguished.

I. (1) Εἰ imp. indic....imp. with ἅν.

(2) Eἰ aor. indic.....imp. with ἅν.

II. (1) Eἰ imp. indic.....aor. with ἅν.

(2) Eἰ aor. indic......aor. with ἅν.

I. (1) Eἰ with imp. ind. in protasis followed by imp. in apodosis.

In this case the hypothetic unfulfilled condition and the consequence of its non-fulfilment are both regarded (a) generally as present, or (b), if not as present, as continuous and not definitely complete in a specific incident.

(a) Hebr. viii. 4 εἰ ἧν...οὐδ' ἅν ἥν... (if he had been now invested with such an office...he would not be as he now is...).

Hebr. viii. 7 εἰ ἧν...οὐκ ἅν ἐζητεῖτο...

John v. 46 εἰ ἐπιστεύετε...ἐπιστεύετε ἅν.

— viii. 42 εἰ ἧν...οὐδ' ἅν ἥν...

— ix. 41 εἰ ἧν...οὐκ ἅν εἴχετε.

— xiv. 7 εἰ ἐγνώκειτε...ἅν ἥδειτε.

— xv. 19 εἰ ἧτε...ἅν ἐφίλει.

— xviii. 36 εἰ ἧν...ἠγωνίζοντο ἅν...

Luke vii. 39 εἰ ἧν...ἐγίνωσκεν ἅν...

1 Cor. xi. 31 εἰ διεκρίνομεν...οὐκ ἅν ἐκρινόμεθα.

Gal i. 10 εἰ ἥρεσκον...οὐκ ἅν ἥμην.

With these examples must be ranged also John viii. 19 εἰ ᾕδειτε...αν ᾕδειτε...

(b) Hebr. xi. 15 εἰ ἐμνημόνευον...εἶκον ἅν...; (if they had continued to remember...they would all that time have had...).

Matt. xxiii. 30 εἰ ἥμεθα...οὐκ ἅν ἥμεθα...

In this connexion may be noticed

1 John ii. 19 εἰ ἥσαν...μεμενήκεισαν ἅν... where the pluperfect suggests a continuous state limited at a point in the past.

Sometimes an interrogation takes the place of the apodosis.

Heb. vii. 11 εἰ...τελείωσις...ἧν...τίς ἔτι χρεία...;

1 Cor. xii. 19 εἰ δὲ ἧν...ποῦ τὸ σῶμα;


Sometimes the ἅν of the apodosis is omitted (as indic. in Latin: Hor. Od. ii. 17, 27.

John ix. 33 εἰ μὴ ἧν...οὐκ ἠδύνατο...

— xιx. 11 οὐκ εἶχες...εἰ μὴ ἧν...

The unconditioned apodosis seems to emphasise what is implied in the protasis.

(2) Eἰ with the aor. indic. in protasis followed by imp. in apodosis.

The hypothetic unfulfilled condition Is placed as a definite incident in the past, while the result of the non-fulfilment is regarded as continuous in the present.

Hebr. iv. 8 εἰ κατέπαυσεν...οὐκ ἅν ἐλάλει... (if rest had been given at the entrance into Canaan, God would not have continued to speak as He does now...).

Gal. iii. 21 εἰ ἐδόθη...ἐν νόμῳ ἅν ἧν...

So lxx. Jer. xxiii. 22 εἰ ἐστησαν...καὶ εἰ ἥκουσαν...ἅν ἀπέσρεφον.

In this case also the ἅν of the apodosis is omitted: John xv. 22 εἰ μὴ ἧλθον...οὐκ εἴχοσαν...

Matt. xxvi. 24 καλὸν ἧν...εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη...

II. (1) Eἰ with the imp. indic. in protasis followed by aor. in apodosis.

The hypothetic unfulfilled condition is regarded as continuous and not definitely complete in the past, while the consequence of its non-fulfilment is specific and past:

John xiv. 28 εἰ ἠγαπᾶτε...ἐχάρητε...ἅν (if ye had now been loving me...ye would at the moment of my saying...).

John iv. 10 εἰ ᾕδεις...σὺ ἅν ᾕτησας.

— xi. 21, 32 εἰ ἧς...οὐκ ἅν ἀπέθανεν.

— xviii. 30 εἰ μὴ ἧν...οὐκ ἅν παρεδώκαμεν.

Acts xviii. 14 εἰ ἧν...ἅν ἀνεσχόμην.

And here also we must place:

Matt. xii. 7 εἰ ἀγνώκειτε (real imp.)... οὐκ ἅν κατεδικάσατε.

— xxiv. 43 || Lk. xii. 39 εἰ ᾕδει (real imp.)...ἐγρηγόρησεν ἅν...

Sometimes the ἅν of the apodosis is omitted: Gal. iv. 15 εἰ δυνατόν...

(2) Eἰ with the aor. indic. in protasis followed by aor. in apodosis.

The hypothetic unfulfilled condition and the result of its non-fulfilment are regarded as definite incidents wholly in the past.

1 Cor. ii. 8 εἰ ἔγνωσαν...οὐκ ἅν ἐσταύρωσαν (if at the crisis of their trial they had known... they would not have crucified).

Matt. xi. 21 εἰ ἀγένοντο...πάλαι ἅν μετενόησαν || Lk. x. 13.

— xxiv. 22 || Mk. xiii. 20 εἰ μὴ ἐκολόβωσεν...οὐκ ἅν ἐσώθη...

So in lxx. Is. i. 9 εἰ μὴ...ἐγκατέλιπεν...ἅν ἐγενήθημεν. Rom. ix. 29.

Compare also:

Matt. xxv. 27 || Lk. xix. 23 διὰ τί οὐκ ἔδωκας...κἀγὼ ἐλθὼν...ἅν...ἔπραξα...

John xiv. 2 εἰ δὲ μή, εἶπον ἅν ἡμῖν...

Hebr. x. 2 ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἅν ἐπαύσαντο...


In some passages there appears to be a combination of two forms of expression:

Luke xvii. 6 εἰ ἔχετε...ἐλέγετε ἄν..., as if the sentence would naturally have continued λέγετε, but then the ἔχετε was mentally corrected to εἴχετε to meet the actual case. Comp. Winer p. 383 with Dr Moulton's note.

John viii. 39 εἰ...ἔστε...ἐποιεῖτε (if this reading be adopted).

It may be added that the construction is relatively more frequent in St John's Gospel than in any other Book of the N.T.

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 115 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 σώμα ψυχικόν, σώμα πνεθματικόν), 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 (ψυχή), 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 ψυχή 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 ψυχή 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 ήμεῖς...πίστεως εἶς περιποίησιν ψυχῆς comp. Matt. x. 39; xi. 29; xvi. 25 f. || Mk. viii. 35 f. || Lk. ix. 24, xvii. 33; xxi. 19 κτήσεσθε). In the sadnesses and disappointments and failures of effort (c. xii. 3 ταῖς ψυχαῖς ἐκλυόμενοι) 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 άγρυπνοῦσιν ὑπὲρ τών ψυχῶν).

little is said in the Epistle on the 'spirit' (πνεῦμα) 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 116 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 καρδία πονηρὰ ἀπιστίας). In Christ we can approach God 'with a true heart' (c. x. 22 μετὰ ἀληθινῆς καρδίας), 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. ῤεραντισμέναι τάς καρδίας ἀπὸ συνειδήσεως πονηρπας). 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' (συνείδησις) 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 καλὴ συνείδησις). 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 κατὰ συνείδησιν τελειῶσαι. Additional Note).

Of the words which describe man's intellectual faculties διάνοια ('understanding') is found in a quotation in viii. 10; x. 16 (Jer. xxxi. 33); but νοῦς, which occurs in each group of St Paul's Epistles, is not found in this Book.

« Prev IV. Next »

| Define | Popups: Login | Register | Prev Next | Help |