Seventh-day Adventist Bible CommentaryHebrews 1

The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the HEBREWS INTRODUCTION 1. Title. The title given this book in the oldest Greek manuscripts is simply Pros Hebraious (“To the Hebrews”). Inasmuch as the book deals to a large extent with the significance, for the Christian, of the sanctuary and its early Hebrew, or Jewish, Christians (see below under “Historical Setting”), the title is particularly appropriate. 2. Authorship. The authorship of Hebrews has been in dispute since early times. While many attributed the book to Paul, others dissented vigorously. Origen, one of the early Fathers, concluded his examination of the book with the declaration, “Who wrote the epistle, in truth God knows” (quoted by Eusebius Ecclesiastical History vi. 25. 14; Loeb ed., vol. 2, p. 79). Other Fathers thought Barnabas, Apollos, Clement, or Luke to be the author. This uncertainty in regard to the authorship of Hebrews was a major factor in the reluctance of many early Christians in the western part of the Roman Empire to accept the epistle as canonical. It was, in fact, not until the latter part of the 4th century that Hebrews came to be accepted generally in the West see Vol. V, p. 131). During the following centuries the discussion regarding the authorship of Hebrews ceased, and most Christians accepted it as the work of Paul. This view was generally held until comparatively modern times, when the question again came under scholarly discussion. As late as 1885 the RV ascribes Hebrews to Paul, but at the present time few critics hold this view. The evidences against the view that Paul wrote Hebrews have been drawn largely from considerations of the literary style and content of the book. Although it is possible for a writer’s vocabulary and style to vary with subject matter, these variances are largely in the technical terms characteristic of the different subjects about which he writes. His more general vocabulary and particularly the words that he chooses almost unconsciously in expressing himself, such as prepositions, adverbs, and especially connectives, are considered by most scholars to be much better indications of his style than is his technical terminology. When compared with the generally accepted epistles of Paul, Hebrews differs markedly, especially in the small, common connective words with which its author binds together his clauses. Another distinctive difference is found in the handling of quotations from the OT. The accepted epistles employ one group of more or less standard phrases to introduce OT quotations, whereas Hebrews uses another group. Also, the epistles show that the apostle was relatively free in his use of OT materials. Often his quotations follow the LXX, but at times he gives what apparently is his own translation of the Hebrew; at still other times he is content to give only a loose quotation. By contrast OT quotations in Hebrews are virtually always word for word from the LXX. From a broader standpoint, the general literary style of Hebrews is notably different from that of any of the epistles that bear the name of Paul. The style of the latter is marked indelibly by effervescent yet fervent passages that reveal the surging torrent of the author’s thoughts at the expense of polished literary style. Hebrews, on the other hand, presents a thoroughly organized argument, and maintains the highest rhetorical level of any NT book. This marked difference in style was noted by writers of the early church, for whom Koine Greek was the native language. Clement of Alexandria (died c.

A.D. 215; cited by Eusebius Ecclesiastical History vi. 14.2–3) suggests that Paul wrote Hebrews in Hebrew, and that Luke translated it into Greek. Although such an explanation is ruled out by the fact that Hebrews contains a number of plays on Greek words that could not have been translated from another language, yet Clement’s statement is significant in that it implies the recognition that the Greek of Hebrews does not appear to be the Greek of Paul. Origen (died c. A.D. 254), one of the prominent scholars of the early church, likewise recognized the difficulty of harmonizing the style of Hebrews with that of Paul. His solution was “that the thoughts are the apostle’s, but that the style and composition belong to one who called to mind the apostle’s teachings and, as it were, made short notes of what his master said” (quoted by Eusebius Ecclesiastical History vi. 25. 13; Loeb ed. vol. 2, pp. 77, 79). Certain presumptive evidence in favor of the Pauline authorship of Hebrews rather recently came to light in connection with the discovery of the 3d century Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri (see Vol. V, pp. 116, 117. In the codex that consists of the Pauline Epistles, Hebrews is found between Romans and 1 Corinthians. Though this fact does not prove the Pauline authorship of Hebrews, it strongly suggests that very early in the history of the church there were those who believed that Hebrews should be included as a part of Paul’s writings. This commentary holds that though weighty arguments have been presented against the Pauline authorship of Hebrews, those arguments are not sufficient to offset the traditional belief that Paul is the author. Much of the difference in tone and style of Hebrews compared with the known Pauline epistles may be reasonably explained by the fact that these other epistles are addressed to particular church groups, or to individuals, to meet particular problems. Granted there are certain differences in literary style that cannot be explained on this basis, these differences may be reasonably explained on the assumption that Paul preached certain sermons on the theme of Christ’s priestly ministry and that these were taken down stenographically. As is sometimes the case with matter thus recorded, the final literary form of the transcribed copy may be strongly colored by the transcriber. It is easy to see how Paul might never have had opportunity to edit these sermons—he traveled incessantly, with the traveling terminated, erelong, by martyrdom. It is generally agreed that Hebrews was written before the fall of Jerusalem. Now, the number of church leaders was very small in the years before A.D. 70. Which of those leaders might have set forth an argument as profound as that presented in the book of Hebrews? By all odds the most likely person is Paul. To say that the author was an unknown Christian of that early period simply poses a new problem. How was it that a Christian possessing the theological insights and the logical powers necessary to produce a work like Hebrews should have been anonymous at a time when Christian leaders were so few and the record of Christian workers so full? 3. Historical Setting. The issue that produced probably a deeper cleavage in the apostolic church than any other was the question of the ceremonial law and its observance by Christians. The council at Jerusalem had freed Gentile Christians from its obligations, but psychologically the large Jewish-Christian community in Palestine was unprepared to enter into the same freedom. They doubtless felt that they themselves, because they were Jews, should keep it. Thus they failed to realize that for all men the ceremonial observances had met their fulfillment in Jesus Christ. This situation set up an

unhealthy tension in the church, inasmuch as one large segment followed an elaborate system of religious life disregarded by the other. Paul and those close to him had the needed insight into the Mosaic ordinances and ceremonies to evaluate them rightly and give them their proper setting in the plan of salvation. Paul knew their transitory nature and that the time was past due for their abrogation (see Col. 2:16, 17). The Jewish Christian church, centered at Jerusalem, seemed unaware of the calamities soon to befall it. Jewish Christians still kept the feasts; they still sacrificed as in former years; they were still zealous for the ceremonial law see (Acts 15). They had but a faint conception of Christ’s work in the heavenly sanctuary; they knew little of His ministry; they did not realize that their sacrifices were useless in view of the great sacrifice on Calvary. These thousands of Jewish Christians, “all zealous of the law” (Acts 21:20), would be confronted by a crisis when the city and the Temple should be destroyed. This occurred apparently only a short time after Hebrews was written see Vol. VI, pp. 86, 106. It was high time that the eyes of the Jewish Christians should be opened to heavenly realities. When their Temple should be destroyed, it would be needful for them to have their faith anchored to something sure and steadfast that would not fail. If their minds could be turned to the heavenly High Priest and sanctuary and to a better sacrifice than that of bulls and goats, they would not be dismayed when a mere earthly structure should pass away. But if they had no such hope, if they had no vision of the sanctuary in heaven, they would be bewildered and perplexed as they should see the destruction of that in which they had trusted. It was important that the Jewish Christians should understand these things, not only for themselves, but also for the sake of the Gentile churches throughout the provinces among whom the Jerusalem believers would be scattered during the coming war with Rome. It seems to have been in this crisis hour that the book of Hebrews appeared. It contained just the help needed: light on the sanctuary question; on Christ as high priest; on the blood “that speaketh better things than that of Abel” (ch. 12:24); on the rest that remains for the children of God (ch. 4:9; on the blessed hope that is “as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil” ch. 6:19). 4. Theme. The book of Hebrews consists essentially of a comparison with, and contrast between, the symbols by which God presented the plan of salvation to His chosen people in OT times and the reality of Christ’s ministry on behalf of sinners since the cross. The experiences of ancient Israel under the typical system are set forth as a lesson and warning to Christians. Through the typical system and Israel’s experiences under it, Paul seeks to develop a more complete understanding and appreciation of the ministry of Christ in heaven above. The following analysis of the comparisons and contrasts he draws between various aspects of the earthly and heavenly sanctuaries and priesthoods outlines the way in which the apostle develops this theme. The Earthly and Heavenly Sanctuaries and Priesthoods Compared The Earthly The Heavenly

1. Moses and Christ Compared as Leaders of God’s Chosen People 1. “God, who . . . spake in Hath in these last days spoken unto us by time past unto his Son” (1:1, 2). the fathers by the prophets,

2. “Moses was faithful in “Consider the Apostle and High Priest of all his house” our profession, Christ Jesus; who was faithful (3:2). to him that appointed him” (3:1, 2).

3. “ . . . than Moses” “This man was counted worthy of more glory . . . ” (3:3). 4. “ . . . than the house” “He who hath builded the house hath more honour . . . ” (3:3).

5. “Moses verily was But Christ as a son over his own house” faithful in all his (3:5, 6). house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;

II. The Old and New Covenants 6. “That first covenant,” “A new covenant . . . : not according to “the covenant that the covenant that I made with their fathers,” I made with their fathers,” “a better covenant,” “the everlasting covenant” “my covenant” (8:8, 9, 6; 13:20). (8:7, 9)

7. “Because they continued “Behold, the days come saith the Lord, not in my when I will make a new covenant with the covenant, and I regarded house of Israel,” “the covenant that I will them not,” “find make with the house of Israel after those days” -ing fault with them,” “he (8:8, 10). hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (8:9, 8, 13).

8. “If that first covenant then should no place have been sought for had been faultless, the second” (8:7).

III. The Earthly and Heavenly Sanctuaries 9. “The first covenant had . “The sanctuary, . . . the true tabernacle, . . a worldly which the Lord pitched, and not man” (8:2). sanctuary. For there was a tabernacle made.” “Make all things according to the pattern

shewed to thee in the mount” (9:1, 2; 8:5).

10. “Christ is not entered but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God into the holy for us” (9:24). places made with hands, which are the figures of the true;

“Having therefore, brethren, boldness to en- ter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath conse- crated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having an high priest over the house of God; let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith” (10:19, 22).

IV. The Earthy and Heavenly Priesthoods 11. “If he were on earth, he “The priesthood being changed,” “Jesus, should not be made an high priest for ever after the order a priest, seeing that there of Melchisedec.” “Now hath he obtained a more are priests that offer excellent ministry, by how much also he is the gifts according to the law: mediator of a better covenant, which was es- who serve unto the tablished upon better promises” (7:12; 6:20;8:6). example and shadow of heavenly things,” “many priests” (8:4, 5; 7:23).

12. “Every high priest “So also Christ glorified not himself to be taken from among made an high priest; but he that said unto men is ordained for men in him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten things pertaining thee” (5:5). to God” (5:1).

13. “Those priests were but this with an oath . . . : by so much made without an was Jesus made a surety of a better testament” oath [they were born to the (7:21, 22). office];

14. “The law maketh men but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh high priests which have the Son, who is consecrated for evermore” (7:28). infirmity;”

15. “They truly were many But this man, because he continueth ever,

priests, because hath an unchangeable priesthood” (7:23, 24). they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: 16. “Here men that die but there he receiveth them” (7:8). receive tithes; 17. “If therefore perfection what further need was there that another were by the priest should rise after the order of Melchis- Levitical priesthood, . . . edec, and not . . . Aaron?” (7:11).

18. “The law maketh men “The priesthood being changed, there is high priests,” made of necessity a change also of the law. “priests that offer gifts . . . There is verily a disannulling of the com-mandment according to the law,” going before for the weakness and “the law having a shadow unprofitableness thereof” (7:12-18). of good things to come” (7:28; 8:4; 10:1).

19. “The law made nothing but the bringing in of a better hope did” perfect, (7:19).

V. The Earthly and Heavenly Ministrations 20. “Every high priest is wherefore it is of necessity that this man ordained to offer have somewhat also to offer” (8:3). gifts and sacrifices:

21. “Almost all things are but the heavenly things themselves with by the law better sacrifices than these” (9:22, 23). purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. It was therefore neces- sary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these;

22. “If the blood of bulls How much more shall the blood of Christ, and of goats, . . . . . . purge your conscience from dead works sanctifieth to the purifying to serve the living God?” (9:13, 14). of the flesh:

23. “The priests went “But Christ being come an high priest of always into the first good things to come, by a greater and more tabernacle, accomplishing perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that

the service of God. is to say, not of this building; neither by the But into the second went blood of goats and calves, but by his own the high priest alone blood he entered in once into the holy place, once every year . . . : the having obtained eternal redemption for us” Holy Ghost this (9:11, 12). signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: which was a figure for the time then present, . . . im- posed on them until the time of reformation” (9:6-10).

24. “ . . . daily, as those “Who needeth not daily, as those high high priests, to priests, to offer up sacrifice . . . : for this he offer up sacrifice,” “often, did once, when he offered up himself.” “But as the high priest now once in the end of the world hath he entereth into the holy place appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of every year with himself.” “But this man, after he had of- blood of others.” “Every fered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down priest standeth daily on the right hand of God” (7:27; 9:26; 10:12). ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices” (7:27; 9:25;10:11).

25. “The bodies of those Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify beasts, whose blood the people with his own blood, suffered with- is brought into the out the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto sanctuary by the high him without the camp, bearing his reproach” priest for sin, are burned (13:11-13). without the camp.

26. “For the law having a “By one offering he hath perfected for ever shadow of good them that are sanctified” (10:14). things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. . . . For it is not pos- sible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins,” “sacrifices, which can never take away sins,” sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience” (10:1-4, 11; 9:9).

27. “In burnt offerings and “Wherefore when he cometh into the world, sacrifices for sin he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest thou hast had no pleasure” not, but a body hast thou prepared me. . . (10:6). Then said I, Lo, I come . . . to do thy will, O God” (10:5-7).

28. “He taketh away the that he may establish the second. By the first, which will we are sanctified through the of- fering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (10:9, 10).

VI. Our Privileges and Responsibilities 29. “Ye are not come unto but ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the mount that the city of the living God, the heavenlyJeru- might be touched, and that salem, . . . and to Jesus the mediator of the burned with fire, new covenant. . . . See that ye refuse not ... him that speaketh” (12:18-25).

30. “Whose voice then but not he hath promised, saying, Yet once shook the earth: more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven,” “that those things which cannot be shaken may remain” (12:26, 27).

31. “God, who . . . spake in Hath in these last days spoken unto us by time past unto his Son” (1:1, 2). the fathers by the prophets,

32. “. . . as well as unto “Unto us was the gospel preached” (4:2). them.”

33. “Your fathers tempted “Harden not your hearts. . . . Take heed, me. . . . I was brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil grieved with that heart of unbelief” (3:8-12). generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart” (3:9, 10).

34. “I sware in my wrath, “There remaineth therefore a rest to the They shall not people of God.” “It remaineth that some must enter into my rest. . . . enter therein.” “Let us therefore fear, lest . . . any of you They could not enter should seem to come short of it.” in because of unbelief.” “Let us labour therefore to enter into that “They to whom it was rest, lest any man fall after the same example first preached entered not of unbelief” (4:9, 6, 1, 11). in. . . . If Jesus [Joshua] had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day” (3:11-19; 4:6-8).

35. “If the word spoken by How shall we escape, if we neglect so great angels was sted- salvation; which at the first began to be fast, and every spoken by the Lord?” (2:2, 3). transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward;

36. “For if they escaped much more shall not we escape, if we turn not who refused away from him that speaketh from heaven” him that spake on earth, (12:25).

37. “He that despised Of how much sorer punishment, suppose Moses’ law died with- ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath out mercy under two or trodden under foot the Son of God, . . . and three witnesses: hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?” (10:28, 29).

38. “By it [faith] the elders God having provided some better thing for obtained a us, that they without us should not be made

good report.” “And these perfect” (11:2, 39, 40). all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

39. “Wherefore seeing we let us lay aside every weight, and the sin also are compassed which doth so easily beset us, and let us run about with so great a cloud with patience the race that is set before us, of witnesses, looking unto Jesus.” “Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. . . . Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (12:1, 2; 4:14, 16). 5. Outline. I. The Supreme Position and Authority of Jesus Christ, 1:1 to 2:18. A. His equality with the Father, 1:1–3. B. His superiority over angels, 1:4–14. C. The importance of accepting salvation provided in Christ, 2:1–4. D. The purpose of the incarnation of Christ, 2:5–18. 1. The exalted destiny of the human race, 2:5–8. 2. Salvation possible as a result of the incarnation, 2:9–18. II. The “Rest” That Remains to the People of God, 3:1 to 4:16. A. The faithfulness of Christ, our Apostle and High Priest, 3:1–6. B. The failure of ancient Israel to enter into God’s “rest,” 3:7–19. 1. An appeal to faithfulness on our part, 3:7–15. 2. Unbelief the cause of Israel’s failure, 3:16–19. C. An appeal to enter into God’s “rest” through faith in Christ, 4:1–16. 1. Evidence that the promise of “rest” remains valid, 4:1–11. 2. An admonition to find this “rest” by coming to Christ, 4:12–16. III. The Exalted Status of Christ as High Priest, 5:1 to 8:13. A. Christ appointed high priest by the Father, 5:1–10. 1. The function of a high priest, 5:1–3. 2. The appointment of Christ, 5:4–6. 3. Christ’s preparation to serve as high priest, 5:7–10. B. An admonition to acceptance of Christ as high priest, 5:11 to 6:20. 1. The slowness of many to understand Christ’s role as high priest, 5:11–14. 2. The writer’s confidence that his readers will grow in understanding, 6:1–12. 3. The certainty of the Christian hope, 6:13–20. C. Christ as high priest after the order of Melchisedec, 7:1–28. 1. The exalted position of Melchisedec, 7:1–4. 2. The Melchisedec priesthood prior and superior to the Aaronic priesthood, 7:5–11. 3. The Aaronic priesthood replaced by the priesthood of Christ, 7:12–24. 4. The efficacy and permanence of Christ’s priesthood, 7:25–28.

D. Christ as high priest of the heavenly sanctuary, 8:1–5. E. The new covenant, under which Christ serves as high priest, 8:6–13. IV. The High-priestly Ministry of Christ, 9:1 to 10:22. A. A description of the earthly sanctuary and its services, 9:1–7. B. The typical significance of the earthly sanctuary, 9:8–14. C. Christ as mediator of the new covenant, 9:15–28. 1. Ratification of the old covenant and dedication of its sanctuary by blood, 9:15–22. 2. The blood of Christ makes the new covenant effective, 9:23–28. D. Christ’s sacrifice superior to animal sacrifices, 10:1–22. 1. The ineffectiveness of animal sacrifices, 10:1–4. 2. The efficacy and permanence of Christ’s sacrifice, 10:5–18. 3. An appeal to accept Christ’s priestly ministry, 10:19–22. V. An Appeal to Faithfulness and Godly Living, 10:23 to 13:17. A. In view of the day of judgment and the coming of Christ, 10:23–39. B. In view of the faithful example of the ancient worthies, 11:1 to 12:2. C. In spite of trials and persecutions, 12:3–13. D. In spite of temptation, 12:14–29. E. With respect to specific situations in daily life, 13:1–17. VI. Apostolic Benediction and Personal Salutation, 13:18–25.

God. The epistle launches directly into a doctrinal discussion without the customary opening salutations (see the opening verses to the other NT epistles; see p. 387). In Greek the word for God does not occur first, but the word for “sundry times.” See below under “spake.” At sundry times. Gr. polumerōs, “in many portions,” “in many ways.” The full light from the throne of God did not burst upon men in one great flash of glory. Rather, it came slowly, little by little, as men could comprehend it. In divers manners. Gr. polutropōs, “in various ways.” God spoke through the prophets by spoken and written message, by parable, and by means of visual aids. Whatever means were employed, it was God who spoke (see below under “spake”). Spake. The writer emphasizes the fact that it was God who spoke through the prophets. A book may bear the name of Isaiah or Amos or Daniel, but God is the real author (cf. John 5:46, 47). The fact that God gave revelations through the prophets in OT times did not preclude His giving later and even greater revelations as they were needed. It was fitting in OT times to show faith in the coming Redeemer by offering a lamb on the altar. But after Christ had come it would be inappropriate to continue such sacrifices: to do so would no longer show faith but unbelief. It was necessary to discard rites and ceremonies that pointed to Christ to come, and substitute others that would betoken faith in a Christ who had come. To enable the believer in God to do this would require fresh revelations from Heaven. To discontinue age-hallowed ceremonies and customs—as Christianity demanded of Israel—and to adopt new ones that in outward display did not compare with the old; to sever connection with the stately Temple service—all this doubtless seemed to many not

only a repudiation of all past experiences and revelations but an end of all religion. The 1st-century Jews and their fathers had always offered sacrifices, and God had accepted their worship. Could there be any harm in continuing that which Heaven had so signally blessed? They remembered how God had instructed Moses to build the sanctuary, and how God Himself honored its dedication by sending fire from heaven to light the wood on the altar. The religion that was good enough for Abraham, Moses, and Elijah, they deemed to be good enough for them. It is always a difficult task to change the customs of centuries, and to transform the habits of a nation in a few years is well-nigh impossible. In the case of the transition from Judaism to Christianity it was particularly difficult, in that the change had to be accomplished through the leadership of men who, in the estimation of most of the people, did not rank with those who had instituted the customs. The transition period was therefore a most trying one. Much wisdom and wise counsel were needed. The question would doubtless constantly recur that if God did not require sacrifices now, if in fact they were displeasing to Him, what about the great and good men of old who had taught them to Israel, and had themselves offered gifts to Him? Had these men not followed the specific directions of God? And who were Paul and the other apostles that they should presume to change ancient practices and institutions? The Jews might pointedly ask the apostles whether they considered themselves greater than the prophets and patriarchs of old (cf. John 4:12). These questions are answered in the first words of the epistle. The great leaders of the past had not been mistaken. They had been led by God. They were God’s men. When they spoke, God spoke. They had not followed cunningly devised fables. In taking this position the author of the book would naturally gain the confidence of the people, who believed that the great men and prophets of old had been led by God. In time past. Gr. palai, “long ago,” “formerly.” The reference is doubtless to all OT revelation. Fathers. Here meaning “forefathers,” or “ancestors.” Prophets. Gr. prophētai (see on Matt. 11:9).

Ellen G. White

These last days. This is equivalent to the expression “in our time.” Bible writers sometimes speak of events associated with the first advent of Christ as occurring in the “last days” (see Acts 2:17; Heb. 9:26; 1 Peter 1:5). By his Son. The word “his” is supplied. The RSV translates the phrase “by a Son.” This translation, though grammatically allowable, is misleading, for it could be taken as suggesting that God had more than one son. It is better to regard the absence of an article here as laying emphasis on the quality of the noun as in Dan. 7:13; Rev. 1:13 (see on comment there; cf. on John 1:1). The meaning of the phrase would then be “one who is a son.” The contrast is between revelation by a prophet and revelation by a “son.” Hath appointed. It is difficult to assign this event to any precise moment in history inasmuch as the purposes of God are eternal. However, the appointment here referred to probably took effect at the time of the ascension, when Christ sat “down on the right hand of the Majesty on high” (v. 3). The first verse presents the Father, the second the Son. In presenting the Son, the author of Hebrews comes to the heart of his subject. If Christ is to supersede the Aaronic priesthood instituted by Moses, He must be shown to be superior to Moses, or He would

not have the power to abrogate that which Moses had instituted. Therefore Christ is set forth as God (see on 1:3; cf. on John 1:1). Heir of all things. When Jesus came to earth He laid “aside His royal robe and kingly crown” (9T 68). He “chose to give back the scepter into the Father’s hands, and to step down from the throne of the universe” (DA 22, 23). At His ascension He resumed the position that He had had with the Father prior to the incarnation (see AA 38, 39; cf. 8T 268, 269). It was important that the Hebrews understand the true position of the Son. Old Testament writers did not clearly distinguish between the persons in the Godhead. Israel had been taught, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deut. 6:4). It was necessary that they understand that the Messiah shared the throne of the universe with the Father. See Additional Note on John 1; cf. on 1 Cor. 15:24–27. By whom also he made. The Son stands revealed as associated with the Father, the active agent in creation (see on John 1:3; Col. 1:16, 17). Worlds. Gr. aiōnes (see on 13:39). The plural probably looks to the whole system of things brought into existence by Christ in time, the “all things” of Heb. 1:3, the things “visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers” (1:16, 17).Through Christ, God made the worlds. God used Him, not as a tool, but as a fellow worker. There is an indication here of division of activity in the Godhead. He who was to be man’s Redeemer was his Creator. And, indeed, because He is the Creator, He is able to create a man “a new creature” (2 Cor. 5:17). When we consider the magnitude of God’s creation, the unnumbered millions of worlds circling the throne of Deity, not only do we gain an enlarged concept of God; we are led to say with the psalmist, “What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?” (Ps. 8:4). Wonderful in wisdom, knowledge, and power must our God be; and with this, wonderful must be the love of Him who created and upholds all things and invites man to become a partaker with Him in glory.

Being. Gr. ōn, an expression denoting eternal, timeless existence (see on Rev. 1:4). The related verb form ēn occurs with this same idea in the expression in John 1:1; “in the beginning was [ēn] the Word” (see comment there). Christ did not come into existence “in the beginning”—in the beginning He already was. When He came to this world, He that already was, became flesh. He had not previously been flesh (see on John 1:14). Brightness. Gr. apaugasma, “outshining,” “outraying,” “reflection,” “radiance.” The Father and the Son are inseparable. The Son reveals the Father, is the outshining of the Father. As when we look at the sun, we see not the sun itself but its rays, so we see not the Father but the Son, the Father Himself being invisible, “dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see” (1 Tim. 6:16). Glory. Gr. doxa (see on Rom. 3:23; 1 Cor. 11:7). The glory of God is the sum total of all His attributes. On a certain occasion Moses asked God, “I beseech thee, shew me thy glory” (Ex. 33:18). In response to the appeal God said, “I will make all my goodness pass before thee” (Ex. 33:19; cf. ch. 34:5–7).God’s glory is His character (see DA 20; PK 312, 313; GW 417). Christ did not become the brightness of God’s glory. He already was, and always had been (see on John 1:1; see Vol. V, p. 917). This constitutes the essential and eternal ground of His personality.

Express image. Gr. charaktēr, originally, a tool used for engraving or marking. Later it came to mean the marking itself. The same duality of meaning may be noted in certain English words. Thus “seal” may mean the impression made upon the receiving medium, as well as the instrument used, and “stamp” denotes both the instrument used and the imprint made. As a seal or stamp impresses an exact image of itself upon the wax, so Christ is the exact counterpart of God. Person. Gr. hupostasis, literally, “that which stands under,” hence, “subsistence,” “essence,” “actual being,” “reality.” It signifies reality as contrasted with imagination and fancy, and is used for the essence of things, the inmost nature of anything, the real self. It is also used to denote firmness, steadfastness, assurance, confidence. When Christ is said to be the “express image” of the Father’s hupostasis it means more than outward likeness. He is the exact and true expression of the very inmost nature of God. As is the Father, so is the Son: one in essence, one in character, one in mind and purpose. So alike are they that Christ could say, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9), “I and my Father are one” (ch. 10:30). Indeed, one of the great purposes of Christ’s coming to this earth was to give men a true picture of the Father. Upholding. Gr. pherō, “to bear,” “to carry,” “to bear along,” “to bear up.” Here there may be the added meaning of movement, purpose, guidance; proceeding with definite intent. Christ is the one who is upholding all things in the entire universe and who keeps the heavenly bodies in their appointed paths. Compare the phrase, “by him all things consist,” that is, hold together (Col. 1:17). Pherō is more comprehensive than our English word “consist,” since it embraces the concept of purposeful working, of planning. This definition changes the concept from that of a mere power sustaining the physical universe to that of an intelligent Being who has a plan and is in the process of carrying it out. Word. Gr. rhēma, “utterance,” “word,” “command.” In ch. 11:3 the worlds are said to have been framed by the rhēma of God. Compare the use of rhēma in Rom. 10:8, 17, 18; Eph. 6:17; 1 Peter 1:25. His. That is, Christ’s. Power. Gr. dunamis, “might,” “strength,” “the ability to perform.” By himself. Important textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of this phrase. The idea is contained, however, in the form of the Greek expression translated “had … purged.” Christ trod the wine press alone (Isa. 63:3). Purged. By His atonement Christ accomplished both the cleansing of sin in general— which work was made possible by the sacrifice on the cross and will at last issue in the purification of the universe from sin—and the cleansing of the individual from sin. This latter work, also made possible by the cross, is still in progress and will not be finished till the last soul is saved. On the cross Christ finished His work as victim and sacrifice. He shed His blood, and thus was a “fountain opened … for sin and for uncleanness” (Zech. 13:1). But His work as intercessor continues on. He is our advocate with the Father (see Heb. 7:25). Christ overcame every temptation. Though the sins of the world were laid upon Him, His own soul was unsullied. He repelled every suggestion to evil. Satan never secured a foothold anywhere. He made a thousand attacks upon Christ, but not one succeeded.

Our. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 10) the omission of this word. The reading therefore is that Christ “by himself purged sins,” or rather, “made purification of sins.” It is true that Christ purged “our” sins, but the author here takes a more inclusive view. Sat down. Christ’s sitting down was a formal seating, an installation into office, an inauguration, a coronation. It was an investiture with authority, an acknowledgment of His right to exercise jurisdiction. It was the beginning, not the end, of His activity as special mediator. It was the placing of God’s seal upon His mediatorial work. By thus seating Christ at His own right hand, God placed His approval upon the work Christ had done in the earth and accepted it, addressed Him as high priest, and authorized Him henceforth to function as mediator after the order of Melchisedec (ch. 7:17). The seat on the right hand of the Majesty on high was given Christ in view of His purgation of sin. He had succeeded where Adam had failed. He had won for Himself the right to speak and act for mankind. Therefore, far from sitting down to rest, He was now beginning His new activity. As a judge on earth takes his seat on the bench, as the chairman of an assembly “takes the chair” and proceedings begin, so Christ took His seat at the right hand of God, and thus received official recognition before the assembled multitudes that He served by the appointment and will of God. The priests in the service on earth offered the blood of the victims the people brought to the sanctuary, the blood of slain animals. It was necessary that Christ as high priest should have “somewhat also to offer” (ch. 8:3). This “somewhat” was not “the blood of goats and calves, but … his own blood” (ch. 9:12). This blood He could not offer until it had been shed on Calvary. But as soon as it was shed, He could begin His ministry. This He did immediately after He was installed in office. He was now a priest forever, and was ready to intercede for man in the holy places in heaven. Right hand. The place of honor and authority. There is doubtless an allusion to Ps. 110:1. Majesty. Gr. megalōsunē, literally, “greatness.” The word occurs in the NT only here and in Heb. 8:1; Jude 25. An attribute of divinity is here used in place of the divine name, doubtless for literary purposes. On high. Literally, “in [the] heights,” that is, heaven (cf. Ps. 93:3).

Ellen G. White

Being made. Rather, “having become.” At His incarnation Jesus was made “a little lower than the angels” (see on ch. 2:9); now He is highly exalted (ch. 1:3). So much better. The remainder of the chapter is devoted to a discussion of the contrast between Christ and the angels. The author sets out to show that Christ is, in the highest sense, God. If Christ is to purge men from sin, He must be God; for only God can forgive sins. Great as are the angels, and highly as the Jews regarded them, no angel can ever be a savior. The author therefore proceeds to show that Christ is “much better” than the angels. The deity of Christ was a great stumbling block in the way of the Jews’ acceptance of Christianity. Israel had for centuries prided itself on the worship of only one God, whereas the heathen had many gods. “The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deut. 6:4) had been the challenge to their heathen neighbors. The Jews needed to understand the nature of the Godhead, that the phrase “one Lord” involved Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. By inheritance. Christ has been “appointed heir of all things” (see on v. 2). With this inheritance He was also given “a name which is above every name” (see on Phil. 2:9).

A more excellent name. Some believe that the name is “Jesus.” This was the name given to Him at birth, and it was given in recognition of the fact that He would “save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21); and since the angel who announced the name was only executing God’s command, it was in reality God the Father who gave Him that name. Others think that the title “Son” is here referred to. They believe this name is highlighted by the OT quotations cited (Heb. 1:5–8). It was with respect to the incarnation that the title “Son” came especially to be applied (see on Luke 1:35). The angels were merely “ministering spirits” (Heb. 1:13, 14); Jesus was uniquely “Son.”

Ellen G. White

Which of the angels. Now begins a series of OT quotations to prove the superiority of Christ over the angels. The anticipated answer to the question is, “He never said this to an angel at any time.” Thou art my Son. A citation from Ps. 2:7 (see comment there). For a discussion of the title “Son” applied to Christ see on Luke 1:35; cf. on Rom. 1:4. The author here disposes of the claim made by some that Christ is an angel raised to a higher position. If Christ really were an angel elevated to His present status, then God did say to an angel, “Thou art my Son.” But God did not say this to any angel “at any time.”Some refer to Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 as evidence that the Scriptures do call angels sons of God (see comments on these verses). It should be noted that these expressions are all in the plural. Nowhere is any angel called a son of God; and, of course, angels are created beings (Col. 1:16). This day have I begotten thee. For a discussion of the various interpretations given to this passage see on Acts 13:33; cf. on Rom. 1:4. I will be to him a Father. A citation from 2 Sam. 7:14 (see comment there). The original prophecy had primary application to Solomon, but it is here given Messianic import. The purpose of the citation is to highlight the sonship of Christ and thus further establish His superiority over the angels.

When he bringeth. Apparently a reference to the incarnation, although no such command seems elsewhere to be recorded. Some urge that the time element should not be pressed. Christ was God before the incarnation; He was God during the incarnation; and He is God after the incarnation. At any stage worship was appropriate. The command to worship sets forth the supremacy of the Son. Firstbegotten. Gr. prōtotokos (see on Rom. 8:29). Let all the angels. A free citation from the LXX of Deut. 32:43, with elements of Ps. 97:7. The quotation is not found in the Hebrew Bible. Citations from the LXX are characteristic of this epistle (see p. 388). The command to worship Christ is confirmatory of the deity of Christ. High as is the position of the angels, Christ is so much higher that they are commanded to worship Him. God only may be worshiped (Rev. 22:8, 9). Christ is therefore God.

Ellen G. White

Spirits. Gr. pneumata, “winds,” citation is from Ps. 104:4 (see comment there). The author’s purpose in quoting this text is to show that angels are servants, and that God uses them as His ministers, in contrast with the Son, who is God. Ministers. Gr. leitourgoi (see on Rom. 13:6). Whereas the Son is God and is to be worshiped, the angels are ministers, servants who delight to do God’s will. From the very beginning they have had a definite part in the plan of God and have served in many capacities. After man had sinned they guarded the way to the tree of life (Gen. 3:24). When the final events take place and Christ returns, they will come with Him (Matt.

25:31), and Christ will send them to “gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other” (Matt. 24:31). All through history angels have been men’s guardians and protectors, “sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation” (Heb. 1:14). The angels appeared often in the ministry of Christ on earth, from the first announcement of His birth to the time of His ascension. Although we may not be conscious of the constant presence of angels in our lives, we may know of a surety that we are always under their loving watchcare. Flame of fire. Compare on Gen. 3:24.

Unto the Son. In contrast with “of the angels” (v. 7). Thy throne, O God. A citation from Ps. 45:6, 7 (see comment there). Here the Father addresses the Son reverently, calling Him God. This may be considered the climax in the argument on the position and dignity of Christ. There can be no higher testimony to the deity of Christ than this apostrophe of the Father to the Son. In the most solemn manner Christ’s Godhood is affirmed, and this by the Father Himself. Man’s salvation and the whole plan of redemption are based on the deity of Christ. If Christ is not God in the highest sense and in His own right, our faith is in vain and salvation becomes impossible. Many of the Jews had seen Jesus in the flesh. It was probably harder for them than for later generations to believe in Christ as divine. Did they not know His supposed father and His mother, and were not some of the family still living? How could this man be God? This stumbling block the author sought to remove. Hence he summons the testimony of Scripture to confirm his position. It would be of little use to present the vital subjects with which Hebrews deals, until this one point was settled and fully accepted. As we consider the history of the church since the days of the apostles, we see the need of emphasis on the deity of Christ. Many there are today who revere Christ and in their own way esteem Him highly, who nevertheless refuse to give Him the place that is rightly His. They fail to understand that the deity of Christ is the central fact in the plan of redemption, and that there is “none other name under heaven given among men,” whereby we may be saved (Acts 4:12). For ever and ever. Compare on Rev. 11:15; 14:11. Righteousness. Gr. euthutēs, “rectitude,” “uprightness.” The reference to the throne and the scepter is worthy of note. It indicates actual, not merely potential, possession of power. It presents the kingdom not as future, but as present and in active operation. The throne and the kingdom are everlasting; and the scepter—symbol of actual exercise of authority—is characterized by uprightness.

Ellen G. White

Righteousness. Gr. dikaiosunē (see on Matt. 5:6). This has particular reference to Christ’s earthly life. This is the basis upon which He was anointed, as mentioned in the latter part of the verse. To love righteousness is a higher virtue than merely to do righteousness. Many sincere Christians take an active part in various good enterprises more from a sense of duty than from any inherent love for the work. A missionary may go to a needy field with a high sense of duty and of the responsibility resting upon him, and accomplish a great work. It is not, however, until he enters into the love of the work, not until he truly begins to love the people among whom he labors, that he has reached the standard set by God. Work, with duty as a motive, is commendable. Work, with love as a motive, is a still higher experience.

Some accept the doctrines of the church and step out in obedience to God’s command because of the overpowering logic of the truth and its masterful presentation. However, unless they also receive “the love of the truth, that they might be saved” (2 Thess. 2:10), they may at last be found wanting. Love is what prompted God to action. “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son” (John 3:16). “Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it” (Eph. 5:25). Paul, who confesses, “I laboured more abundantly than they all” (1 Cor. 15:10), testifies, “the love of Christ constraineth us” (2 Cor. 5:14). Iniquity. Gr. anomia, “lawlessness,” “violation of law.” Love is an essential Christian virtue. However, it is necessary to stress the quality of hate also. God commends Christ for His love of righteousness, and also for His hatred of sin. It is possible to resist sin without actually hating it. Indulgence in a particular sin may not appeal to a man, and hence may be no temptation to him. Other sins may be pleasing to him, but knowing that they are sin and also that he may possibly be detected, he refrains from doing what he would really like to do. We do not know what credit will be given on the books of heaven to such a man. But we know that simply fear of having one’s reputation ruined if one is found out, is not a satisfactory motive for abstinence from sin. Only the man who has actually learned to hate sin is really secure. The man who abstains from sin, yet hankers after it and finds it alluring and interesting, is not on safe ground. He needs to learn to hate sin. The Ephesus church was commended for hating the deeds of the Nicolaitanes (Rev. 2:6). In God’s book are recorded not only our loves but our hates. Anointed. The anointing here is with the oil of gladness, that is, with oil which is gladness. The anointing is symbolical of blessing and joy (see Deut. 28:40; Ps. 23:5 92:10). Fellows. In the original prophecy these were doubtless other celestial personages. When the passage is applied to Christ these “fellows” are understood by some to represent all other beings; by others, to represent Christ’s associates in the plan of salvation, that is, the saved, who are associate heirs with Him.

Thou, Lord. Verses 10–12 are a citation from Ps. 102:25–27. Citation after citation from the LXX is marshaled to establish the deity of Christ beyond question. In v. 8 Christ is called God. Here He is named Lord. Jesus is both Lord and God (cf. on Acts 2:36). The foundation of the earth. The fact that Christ was the active agent in creation has already been mentioned (see on v. 2). Here an OT quotation that the Jews viewed as referring to God is shown to have specific reference to Christ.

They shall perish. That is, the atmospheric heavens and the earth will undergo fundamental changes (see on Matt. 24:35; Rev. 21:1). Thou remainest. Here eternity is attributed to Christ. As Creator, Christ existed before all things (Col. 1:17), and when perishable things vanish, He remains.

As a vesture. A striking picture of the decay and temporary nature of the heavens and the earth (see on v. 11). Thou art the same. This statement attests Christ’s immutability. All of God’s attributes are vital. We stress His love, His kindness, His justice. But His immutability is just as important, though we do not always appreciate this. It is a most blessed thing that

we can depend upon Christ’s always being the “same yesterday, and to day, and for ever” (ch. 13:8). Eternity and immutability give the idea of solidarity, stability, permanence. They are an “anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast” (ch. 6:19). In these times of uncertainty it is well to have something sure to build on; it is well to have an anchor that will not drift.

The angels. The anticipated answer to the question (cf. on v. 5) is, “God never called an angel ‘my Son,’ neither did He ever invite one to sit at His right hand—to share His position and prerogatives.” Sit on my right hand. A citation from Ps. 110:1. See on Heb. 1:3. Thine enemies thy footstool. A reference to an Oriental custom according to which the victor placed his foot on the neck of his enemies as a sign of their submission. Compare Jesus’ reference to this statement from the psalms (Luke 20:42, 43).

Ministering. Gr. leitourgikos, “rendering [public] service.” Leitourgikos is related to leitourgos, the plural of which is translated “ministers” in v. 7. For the verb leitourgeō see on Acts 13:2. To minister. Gr. eis diakonian, “for service.” For diakonia see on Rom. 12:7. While discussing the supremacy of Christ over the angels, it is not the intention of the author to speak slightingly of these messengers of God. They hold high office (see on v. 7). The Jews highly regarded the angels; hence the argument in this chapter is an impressive one.

Ellen G. White