Seventh-day Adventist Bible CommentaryHebrews 4

Let us therefore fear. The same warning is sounded in 1 Cor. 10:1–12. Seemingly oblivious to their own grave danger, Christians may be prone to look critically at the obtuseness of the generation of Hebrews that failed to enter Canaan and of later generations that failed to enter into the spiritual “rest” God had planned for Israel as a nation (see on Heb. 3:11). Beginning with ch. 4:1 the writer proceeds to apply the lesson from the history of Israel in the wilderness to the experience of the Christian church in apostolic times. In principle, Christians today are in the same danger and are in need of the same admonition to faithfulness. A promise being left. The promise of entering into God’s “rest” had not been withdrawn as a result of Israel’s repeated mistakes. The promise remains valid and is repeated to each successive generation. His rest. See on ch. 3:11. You. Specifically, the Christian Jews to whom the epistle was addressed. To be sure, the same is true of all Christians. Come short. That is, fail as ancient Israel had failed to enter into God’s promised “rest.”

Ellen G. White

Gospel. Literally, “good news” (see on Mark 1:1). The statement may be rendered, “we have been gospelized, just as they also.” In OT times the gospel was “preached” through type and ceremony, in sacrifice and ritual, but it was the same gospel as that more recently proclaimed by Christ (see on Heb. 1:1, 2). The word preached. Literally, “the word of hearing,” or “the heard word.” Not profit them. Unless “the word preached” meets with faith on the part of the hearer, it cannot benefit him (see on Matt. 7:24–27). The effectiveness of Christ’s personal message, when here on earth, was likewise limited by the receptiveness of His hearers. Of Nazareth it is said that “he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief” (Matt. 13:58). The outworking of this principle is clearly illustrated in the parable of the Sower (see on Matt. 13:3). Faith. See on chs. 3:12; 11:1.

We which have believed. That is, we Christians, meaning particularly converted Jews in the apostolic church. Do enter. Or, “are entering.” The invitation is still valid; furthermore, some are accepting the invitation and entering into God’s “rest,” by faith. Rest. Literally, “the rest,” meaning the very same “rest” to which reference has already been made in chs. 3:11, 18; 4:1 (see on ch. 3:11). The “rest” into which Christians, including converted Jews, enter is the very same spiritual “rest” into which God had invited ancient Israel to enter—the “rest” of soul that comes with full surrender to Christ and with the integration of the life into the eternal purpose of God (cf. Isa. 30:15; Jer. 6:16; Matt. 11:29). As he said. The writer has just affirmed that, one by one, Christian believers are entering into the very same spiritual “rest” into which God formerly purposed that ancient Israel should enter, but from which they, as a nation, were now barred. Beginning at this point and continuing on through v. 8 he sets forth the evidence on which he bases his conclusion, a conclusion shocking to unconverted Jews and perhaps an enigma to many, if not most, converted Jews. In v. 9 he concludes this line of reasoning by reaffirming the validity of his major premise, namely, that admission to God’s “rest” is now through the Christian faith as it formerly was through Judaism. The line of argument in vs. 3–8 may be summarized as follows: 1. God had sworn that literal Israel should not enter into His “rest.” 2. Nevertheless, God’s “works”—here His purpose for mankind—were “finished [“finalized”] from the foundation of the world.” In the beginning God had determined that men should enter into His “rest.” Thus, God’s oath barring ancient Israel from the promised “rest” might appear, on the surface, to be in conflict with His original purpose. Does the oath mean that God has rescinded His original design? Or does He pursue an objective until He secures it? 3. To prove that God achieves His purposes, the writer points (v. 4) to the “works” of creation. God set out to create this world; He completed His “works” of creation; His rest on the seventh day testifies to a completed creation. Note the words “finished” and “ended” in Gen. 2:1–3 and the emphasis on completion.

In Heb. 4:5 God’s oath that ancient Israel should not enter into His “rest” is repeated and placed in juxtaposition with the thought of v. 4, that God accomplishes what He sets out to do, as illustrated by the completed work of creation.

A completed creation, as testified to by God’s rest on the seventh day of creation week, is evidence of the immutability of God’s purposes. This is Paul’s major premise. His minor premise is the fact that God had purposed that His chosen people should enter into His “rest,” but that “they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief.” This brings him to the conclusion that “it remaineth that some must enter therein” (v. 6).

As further evidence for the validity of his conclusion, the writer points again, in v. 7, to the words of Ps. 95, to the effect that the failure of earlier generations had neither altered God’s original purpose nor withdrawn the original invitation. Compare the repeated invitations to the great banquet (see Luke 14:16–24).

In v. 8 he draws the further conclusion from the observation in v. 7 that God’s mention of “another day” in the time of David is evidence that although Joshua had indeed given Israel “rest” in the literal land of Canaan (see on ch. 3:11), he had definitely not led them into the spiritual “rest” God intended them to enjoy.

From the entire line of argument set forth in vs. 3–8 the writer concludes it to be certain that “there remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God” (v. 9). As I have sworn. The Greek here is identical with that of ch. 3:11, translated “so I sware.” Wrath. See on ch. 3:11. If they shall enter. The Greek is identical with that of ch. 3:11, translated more accurately “they shall not enter.” Rest. See on ch. 3:11. Although. The relationship between the two statements thus connected may be freely rendered as follows: “Despite the fact that His plans for this world were fixed at the beginning of time, God revoked His solemn promise to Israel of ‘rest’ in the Promised Land.” It is here assumed that God does not change and that He will carry His plans through to completion (see Vol. IV, p. 34; Mal. 3:6). On the surface, the changelessness of God and the reversal of His promise to Israel appear to be in conflict. The one, the author implies, seems incompatible with the other. The resolution of this seeming dilemma is set forth in Heb. 4:4–8. The answer is that the changelessness of God’s purpose has not been affected by the reversal of His promise to Israel. The conclusion is stated in v. 6, “therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein,” and v. 9, “there remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.” The resolution of the dilemma proves what has already been stated in vs. 1–3, that God has “preached” the “promise … of entering into his rest,” referred to in v. 2 as “the gospel,” to Christians as formerly He did to literal Israel, and that believing Christians are verily entering into God’s true, spiritual “rest.” Works. Here referring, not to the “works” of the natural world, but to God’s purpose and plan for the man which at creation came into being. In other words, the “works” of creation are here conceived of as including the purpose of God in the creation of this earth and His plan for achieving that purpose. In fact, the material “works” of creation were actually subsidiary to the infinite purpose to which they were designed to contribute. In v. 4 the material “works” of creation week are specifically referred to. Finished. Literally, “became,” “came into being,” meaning that they were “completed,” or “finished,” at that time and therefore not subject to future alteration. The material world as it came forth from the hands of the Creator was a perfect, completed

product (Gen. 1:31). In the same way the physical and biological laws that govern the natural world were also “finished,” that is, not subject to periodic modification or change. For instance, gravity still operates as it did at the beginning. And the law of genetics by which each plant and each animal reproduces after its kind (see on Gen. 1:12) has never been revoked or amended. The force of the argument in Heb. 4:3, 4 is that God’s original purpose for this earth to be the “rest,” or “abode” (see on ch. 3:11), of a race of righteous and happy beings, was an integral part of the work of creation week. The entrance of sin into the world did not nullify that beneficent purpose, inasmuch as the plan of salvation provided a means by which the original objective could yet be achieved, in spite of sin. This being so, the fact that the “gospel” (v. 2) did not “profit” ancient Israel (v. 2), and that God had, as a result, revoked His promise to them, could not possibly alter His fundamental purpose that “some must enter therein” (v. 6). Foundation of the world. That is, creation. 4. In a certain place. The quotation is from Gen. 2:2. Did rest. Gr. katapauō, “to stop,” “to cease,” “to rest.” Like the related noun katapausis, the verb katapauō denotes cessation from labor or other activity, together with the state or condition of inactivity that follows cessation (see on ch. 3:11). The equivalent Hebrew word, shabath, translated “rested” in Gen. 2:2 (see comment there)— the passage of Scripture here quoted—literally means “to cease” from labor or activity. Katapauō and shabath thus include both cessation from previous activity and the state of inactivity that follows cessation. Both aspects of meaning were true of God’s “rest” on that first Sabbath day; He ceased creating, and then continued in a state of inactivity so far as further creating was concerned. The “works” of creation were complete in every respect, and on that first Sabbath day, which He made a memorial of creation, God began His “rest” from creating this earth. So far as our world is concerned God has never been again taken up the work of creating then laid down, nor has He revoked or amended the laws then set up to govern the natural world. The writer of Hebrews here focuses attention on creation—including the material world, the laws that govern it, man, and God’s purpose for him and for the world—as a completed act not subject to later revision. The emphasis, then, here, is on God’s cessation from further creative activity. The Sabbath of creation week was also the first full day of life for Adam. His experiences that day were a foretaste of the eternal “rest” that was in store for him should he remain loyal to God. Our observance of the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath testifies to our faith in the true God as the Creator of all things, and is a visible expression of that faith. It testifies also to our desire to live in harmony with His great eternal purpose for this world—implicit in the creation of this world and of man to live upon it— and with His purpose for us as individuals. See on Ex. 20:8; Eze. 20:12, 20; Isa. 58:13. As God’s original purpose for this world—His “rest”—remains unchanged, the seventh- day Sabbath, the day of “rest” He established to be a memorial of creation and thus a reminder of His purpose in the creation of the world, likewise remains unchanged. The observance of the seventh-day Sabbath thus testifies not only to faith in God as the Creator of all things, but also to faith in His power to transform the life and qualify men and women for entering into that eternal “rest” He originally intended for the inhabitants of this earth. The Sabbath thus bears witness both to the creative and to the sanctifying

power of God, and its observance is an acknowledgment of faith in His power to create and to re-create, or sanctify, individual lives. The seventh day. See on Gen. 2:1–3. All his works. In Gen. 2:2 reference is to the created “works” of the natural world as described in the preceding chapter. 5. In this place. That is, in Ps. 95:11. Again. The statement is here quoted for the third time (cf. chs. 3:11; 4:3). The entire argument in chs. 3:7 to 4:10 revolves around God’s withdrawal of His invitation to enter into His “rest.” Here, the quotation from Ps. 95:11 is placed in juxtaposition with that from Gen. 2:2 (in Heb. 4:4), by way of explaining the significance of the reference in vs. 3, 4 to God’s “rest” on the seventh day of creation week. The writer has introduced this reference to God’s “works” being “finished” (see on v. 3) and to the fact that He “did rest” (v. 4), to prove that the withdrawal of His promise to ancient Israel was not absolute. In other words, the promise was not withdrawn altogether from all men, but only from those who “entered not in because of unbelief” (v. 6). Rest. See on ch. 3:11; cf. on ch. 4:4. 6. Seeing therefore. Or, “since therefore.” Verse 6 states the conclusion to be drawn from the argument of vs. 3–5. It remaineth. Or, “it is left over,” that is, the promise of entering into God’s “rest” remains valid even after it was withdrawn from ancient Israel. That some must enter. Literally, “for some to enter.” Despite the perversity of those who “could not enter in because of unbelief” (ch. 3:19), God’s original plan for this earth to be inhabited by a race of righteous, happy beings will ultimately succeed. But those who do so must first enter, by faith, into His spiritual “rest,” the rest of the soul from sin and from its own efforts at salvation. It is the “rest” of soul to which reference is here made (see on ch. 3:11). Therein. That is, into the “rest” of soul. They to whom. See on v. 2. First preached. That is, the first proclamation of the gospel invitation, mentioned in v. 2. Entered not in. The generation of Israelites that left Egypt “entered not in” to the literal Land of Promise, and those who did enter into literal Canaan never, as a nation, entered into the spiritual “rest” God purposed for them (see on ch. 3:11; see Vol. IV, pp. 30–34). Because of unbelief. See on ch. 3:19. 7. Again. In vs. 7, 8 the writer adds another point to prove his contention that a “rest” remains to the people of God. He. That is, God, speaking to Israel through His servant David. Limiteth. Literally, “appointed,” “set.” A certain day. That is, God appointed the reign of David as another fitting and appropriate time when Israel might enter into His “rest” (see Vol. IV, p. 31). In the Greek it is clear that “to day” is the “certain day” referred to. In David. That is, in one of the psalms of David—The 95th (see on Heb. 3:7, 8). Compare on Rom. 11:2.

After so long time. In the Greek it is clear that this refers to the word “saying.” It is not a part of the quotation from Ps. 95:7, 8. The era of David was “so long a time” after the era of Joshua—some three centuries. As it is said. Rather, “as has been said,” that is, in ch. 3:7, 15. To day. For comment on the quotation see on ch. 3:7. God’s promise of entering into His spiritual “rest,” originally extended to Israel when they came out of Egypt, remained valid centuries after it was first made. Although it had been neglected or rejected by successive generations ever since, it still remained valid in David’s day. Furthermore, God’s invitation to the nation of Israel in the days of David proves (ch. 4:8) that Joshua had not led Israel into the spiritual “rest” God purposed for them as a nation (see on ch. 3:7). The “day” of salvation has been a long day. It began when Adam fell, and will end with the close of human probation. Sinners have given God abundant cause for terminating the “day” of grace (cf. PP 92; DA 37). But God is “merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness” (Ex. 34:6); He is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). 8. For if. From the fact stated in v. 7, concerning the renewal of the invitation to enter into God’s “rest” in David’s time, the conclusion is drawn that Joshua had not given Israel “rest.” Otherwise, had Israel entered into the spiritual “rest” God intended for them as a nation, in the days of Joshua, He would not have repeated His invitation to that nation in the days of David, centuries later. Jesus. That is, Joshua. The English name Jesus is a transliteration of the Greek, which in turn is a transliteration of the Hebrew equivalent of Joshua (see on Matt. 1:1). Had given them rest. Joshua did, indeed, give Israel literal “rest” in Canaan, that is, he led them in a successful conquest and settlement of considerable portions of the land (see Vol. II, pp. 43, 44). But he did not lead them into the spiritual “rest” God designed for them because they were not willing (see on ch. 3:11. Afterward. That is, after the days of Joshua, in the days of David. Spoken. That is, the words of Ps. 95:7–11. Another day. That is, the “day” of David, as v. 7 makes evident (see comment there). The fact that in the days of David and Solomon, Israel was in full possession of the land of Canaan makes it clear that the “rest” here referred to was not the occupation of literal Canaan but the glorious role God intended for the nation (see Vol. IV, pp. 26–30).

There remaineth therefore. See on v. 6. Verse 9 states the conclusion, already alluded to in v. 6. drawn from the line of argument begun in v. 3 to prove the assertions of vs. 1, 3. This line of argument may be set forth briefly as follows: 1. As originally made to ancient Israel God’s promised “rest” included: (a) permanent settlement in the land of Canaan, (b) a transformation of character that would make the nation a fit representative of the principles of God’s kingdom, and (c) the role of being God’s chosen instrument for the salvation of the world (see Vol. IV, pp. 26–30; see on ch. 3:11). 2. The generation to whom the promise of “rest” was originally made failed to enter the land of Canaan because of unbelief (see on ch. 3:19). 3. Joshua did led the next generation into the land that had been promised (see on ch. 3:11), but because they were spiritually stiff-necked he could not lead them into the spiritual “rest” God intended them to find there (see on ch. 4:7, 8).

4. The same promise had been repeated in the days of David (v. 7). This was evidence that Israel had not, at that time, entered into the spiritual “rest,” and also that their failure to do so in the days of Moses and Joshua had not invalidated the original promise. 5. The ultimate accomplishment of God’s purposes is certain, despite the failure of successive generations (see on vs. 3, 4). 6. The writer’s earnest plea to God’s people of apostolic times to “enter into that rest” (vs. 11, 16) is further evidence that the invitation remained valid and that God’s people, as a group, had not truly entered into that “rest” even in apostolic times. 7. Accordingly, the promise of, and invitation to enter into, God’s spiritual “rest” remains valid (vs. 6, 9), and Christians should “labour therefore to enter into that rest” (v. 11). It should be noted that the “rest” that remained in Christian times was the spiritual “rest” originally promised to literal Israel (see on v. 3). Obviously, what remains must have been there to begin with. Rest. Gr. sabbatismos, “a resting [from previous activity],” “a cessation [from previous activity],” later “a Sabbathkeeping,” from the verb sabbatizos̄, “to rest,” “to cease,” “to keep Sabbath.” Sabbatismos appears elsewhere neither in the Bible nor in ancient literature until the 2d and 3d centuries, with the possible exception of a single occurrence in Plutarch Moralia 166A. Consequently, some have concluded that the writer of Hebrews coined the word as he wrote this passage (see Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament). Sabbatismos and sabbatizō are Greek renderings of the Hebrew noun shabbath and its related verb shabath, respectively, and the meaning of the latter may be expected to cast light on the meaning of the former. Shabbath occurs 101 times in the OT, where it generally means “Sabbath,”—the seventh day of the week—or “week,” a period of seven days marked off by successive Sabbaths. It is also used of the sabbatical year (Lev. 25:6; 26:34, 43; 2 Chron. 36:21). The verb shabath occurs 70 times, 7 times with reference to the Sabbath rest and 63 times with reference to other kinds of rest. For instances of the latter usage see Gen. 8:22; Joshua 5:12; Neh. 6:3; Lam. 5:14; Isa. 14:4; 24:8; 33:8. The root meaning of the verb shabath is “to cease,” “to rest.” The word sometimes denotes the weekly Sabbath rest. But the noun shabbath, derived from shabath, commonly denotes the weekly Sabbath rest, and also the space of time marked off by successive Sabbaths, the week (Lev. 23:15), and the sabbatical years (ch. 26:35; etc.). It may be noted also that shabbathon, which is simply shabbath with the ending –on, is used of the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:31; 23:32), of the sabbatical year (Lev. 25:4, 5), of the Feast of Trumpets (Lev. 23:24), and of the first and last days of the Feast of Tabernacles (Lev. 23:39)—as well as of the seventh-day Sabbath. Sabbatizō is used seven times in the LXX, once of the literal seventh-day Sabbath (Ex. 16:30), once of other sabbaths (Lev. 23:32), and five times of the land’s resting in the sabbatical year (Lev. 26:34, 35; 2 Chron. 36:21). In the LXX of Ex. 16:30; Lev. 23:32; 26:34, 35 sabbatizō is from the Hebrew shabath. Accordingly, the fundamental idea expressed by sabbatizo in the LXX is that of resting or ceasing from labor or other

activity. Hence usage of the related Greek and Hebrew words implies that the noun sabbatismos may denote either the literal Sabbath “rest” or simply “rest” or “cessation” in a more general sense. Thus, a linguistic study of the word sabbatismos in Heb. 4:9 leaves it uncertain whether the weekly Sabbath “rest” is here referred to, or simply “rest” or “cessation” in a general sense. Context alone can decide the matter. The writer of Hebrews appears to use katapusis and sabbatismos more or less synonymously: 1. Because Joshua could not lead Israel into spiritual “rest” (katapausis, v. 8), a sabbatismos (v. 9) remains for Christians. Consistency seems to require that what remains be the same as what was there to begin with. Because Joshua did not lead literal Israel into spiritual “rest” would be no reason for the Christian to observe the Sabbath. 2. From vs. 1, 6 it is clear that what remains for the people of God in NT times is a katapausis; in v. 9 it is said that a sabbatismos remains. To declare that what remains for “the people of God” is the weekly Sabbath, is to declare that what Joshua failed to lead Israel into was the weekly Sabbath. 3. The fact that in the LXX, the Bible of the NT church, katapauō (Gen. 2:2, 3); Ex. 20:11) and sabbatizō (Ex. 16:30; Lev. 23:32) are used interchangeably to denote the seventh-day Sabbath, would tend to preclude the suggestion that the writer of Hebrews intended to make a distinction between the noun forms of these words in Heb. 3; 4. It may be noted, further, that the Jews of Paul’s time, whether Christian or non- Christian, were punctilious in their observance of the fourth commandment. Certainly, in writing to Jews, the author of Hebrews would not consider it necessary to prove to them that Sabbathkeeping “remaineth.” If the conclusion of the extended argument beginning with ch. 3:7 is that Sabbathkeeping remains for the people of God, it would seem that the writer of Hebrews is guilty of a non sequitur, for the conclusion does not follow logically from the argument. There would have been no point in so labored an effort to persuade the Jews to do what they were already doing—observing the seventh-day Sabbath. Furthermore, in apostolic times the seventh-day Sabbath was observed by all Christians, Jew and Gentile alike, and any argument to prove the validity of the Sabbath in those early Christian times would have been pointless. Furthermore, it may be observed that the section of the book of Hebrews consisting of chs. 3 and 4 opens with an invitation to “consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus” (ch. 3:1), and closes with an earnest plea to “come boldly” before Him in order to “obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (ch. 4:16). What relationship a protracted argument designed to prove that Sabbath observance remains as an obligation to the Christian church might have to the declared theme of chs. 3 and 4—the ministry of Christ as our great High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary—is obscure indeed. “The rest here spoken of is the rest of grace” (EGW Supplementary Material on Heb. 4:9; cf. GC 253). It is “the true rest of faith” (MB 1). We enter into God’s “rest” when we “consider” Jesus (ch. 3:1) and listen to His voice (chs. 3:7, 15; 4:7), when we exercise faith in Him (ch. 4:2, 3), when we cease from our own efforts to earn salvation (v. 10), when we “hold fast our profession” (v. 14), and when we draw near to the throne of grace (v. 16). Those who would enter into this

experience must beware of “an evil heart of unbelief” (ch. 3:12), of hardening their hearts (chs. 3:8, 15; 4:7). They must strive to enter into God’s “rest” (ch. 4:11). Those who enter into God’s “rest” will “hold fast” their “profession” (v. 14). They will “come boldly unto the throne of grace” to “obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (v. 16). People of God. That is, Christians, who are now God’s chosen people as truly as the literal Israelites of old were in their day (Ex. 19:5, 6; 1 Peter 2:9, 10; see Vol. IV, pp. 35, 36).

Ellen G. White

He that is entered. Rather, “he who entered,” that is, any one of “the people of God” (v. 9). The Greek construction makes it clear that some have already entered into God’s “rest.” Rest. Gr. katapausis (see on ch. 3:11). Although the word for “rest” in ch. 4:10 is different from that of v. 9 (sabbatismos), the context makes evident that both refer to the same thing (see on v. 9). The “rest” that remains (v. 9) is obviously the “rest” into which the believing Christian of v. 10 enters. The word “for” of v. 10 makes v. 10 contingent upon, and a conclusion drawn from, v. 9. He also. That is, in addition to, or in the same manner as, God. Hath ceased. Gr. katapauō, the same word translated “did rest” in v. 4 and “given … rest” in v. 8 (see on ch. 3:11). Although the translation “hath ceased” obscures the relationship of the statement here made to other instances in which katapauō and katapausis appear in chs. 3 and 4, it is nevertheless more appropriate to the thought of v. 10 in that it stresses the idea of cessation from “works” rather than the continuing state of “rest” that follows upon cessation. His own works. Upon entering into God’s “rests,” which consists of confidence in the saving grace of Jesus Christ, the Christian has of necessity already “ceased” from attempting to become righteous by his own works. The writer may also have in mind the Christian’s “rest” from the “works” of sin, works that prevented the generation of Israelites who were delivered out of Egypt from entering the Promised Land, and later generations from entering into God’s spiritual rest (see on chs. 3:8, 9; 4:8).

Let us labour. Or, “let us be zealous,” “let us make every effort.” Diligent, determined effort is necessary in order to enter into God’s “rest.” Therefore. Verses 11–16 make a practical application of the principle established by the argument set forth in chs. 3:7 to 4:10, that a “rest” remains “to the people of God” (v. 9). This practical application to Christian experience consists of a threefold appeal: (1) to labor to enter into God’s “rest,” ch. 4:11; (2) to “hold fast our profession,” v. 14; and (3) to “come boldly unto the throne of grace,” v. 16. He who follows this admonition will enjoy the “rest” of soul God designs every sincere Christian to experience in this life. Rest. Gr. katapausis (see on ch. 3:11). Lest. He who strives wholeheartedly “to enter into that rest” thereby avoids the pitfall of unbelief into which ancient Israel fell. Fall. The opposite of entering in. The fact that ancient Israel “fell in the wilderness” (ch. 3:17) implies that they had left Egypt intending to enter the Promised Land. When a man falls short of God’s “rest” the implication is that he had, at one time, purposed to enter into it. Halfhearted Christians are the ones who, today, “fall after the same example

of unbelief.” Counsel with respect to this problem is set forth in the parable of the Sower (see on Matt. 13:5–7). The same example. That is, the example of the choice and fate of ancient Israel, first at Kadesh-barnea and later when they were settled in the Promised Land. Unbelief. Or, “disobedience” (see on ch. 3:19).

For. At first sight vs. 12 and 13 may appear to have no direct connection with the theme of chs. 3 and 4. However, as the word “for” indicates, there is a close, logical relationship. Verses 12 and 13 explain how to avoid falling in unbelief (v. 11) and how to cease from one’s “own works” (v. 10), and set forth the means God has provided to enable His children to enter into His “rest.” Word. Gr. logos (see on John 1:1). In the context the “word” here referred to is the “word” that was “preached” both to ancient Israel and to Christians (Heb. 4:2), particularly with respect to the invitation to enter into God’s “rest.” As v. 2 makes clear, this “word” is equated with the “gospel” message. In an extended sense the “word” of v. 12 may also be thought of as including all the writings of the Sacred Canon, inasmuch as the entire Bible is the “word” of God and sets forth the “gospel” of Jesus Christ. Quick. That is, “living.” It takes a living and active force to create in man a new heart and to renew a right spirit within him (cf. Ps. 51:10). The “word” of God is living, and imparts life. Thus it was in the work of creation (Ps. 33:6, 9 and thus it is in the re- creation of the image of God in the soul of man. Christ, the incarnate Word, likewise has life in Himself (John 1:4, 12; 5:26). The “word of God” is the energizing force in conversion. The Christian is “born again, … by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever” (1 Peter 1:23). Powerful. Gr. energēs, “effective,” “active,” “powerful” (cf. on 1 Cor. 12:6). Our word “energy” is derived from energēs. There is power in God’s “word” to transform sinners into saints. Sharper. The nature of this sharpness is explained in the remainder of v. 12. The “word” of God is living, powerful, and sharp—fully able to accomplish His beneficent purposes for mankind (see Isa. 46:10; 55:10, 11). Twoedged sword. See Eph. 6:17; see on Rev. 1:16. The dividing asunder. Gr. merismos, “division,” “separation.” Soul and spirit. Gr. psuchē kai pneuma, here, “life and breath.” On psuchē see on Matt. 10:28, and on pneuma see on Luke 8:55. This and the expression “joints and marrow” are used figuratively. The idea of dividing between “soul and spirit” and between “joints and marrow” describes the sharpness of God’s “word.” The value of the figure is based on the idea that “life” and “breath” are, for practical purposes at least, inseparable. Joints and marrow. Also, presumably, in the figure, practically inseparable. Discerner. Gr. kritikos, “able to discern,” “able to judge,” “able to discriminate,” that is, possessed of the quality of discernment or discrimination. The English word “critic” is derived from kritikos. By a favorable response to the impression made upon the conscience by God’s “word” the sincere Christian avoids falling into “unbelief,” ceases from “his own works,” and enters into God’s “rest” (vs. 6, 10, 11; cf. ch. 3:10, 12).

Thoughts and intents. Or, “thoughts and motives,” “thoughts and intentions” (RSV). Like a sharp blade separating “joints” from “marrow,” the clear principles of the “word of God” discern between good and evil thoughts, right and wrong motives. Heart. That is, the mind.

Ellen G. White

Neither. Literally, “and.” Creature. Gr. ktisis, any “thing created,” that is, constituted an entity in and of itself (see on Rom. 8:19), here, doubtless, the man of v. 12 whose thoughts and motives have been judged by God’s “word.” Men are able to judge only on the basis of a man’s words and acts, but God’s “word” goes back of man’s words and deeds to the place where they originate and judges a man on the basis of what goes on in the mind. “Man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” (1 Sam. 16:7). Not manifest in his sight. Or, “hidden before him.” No man can hide his thoughts and motives from God. Try as he may, no man can run away from God (cf. Ps. 139:7–10). All things. That is, the thoughts and motives of each “creature,” or man. Naked and opened. Or, “uncovered and exposed.” Nothing can be concealed from God. Him with whom we have to do. Literally, “with whom, for us, the reckoning,” that is, before whom we must give an account of ourselves. The realization that he must account for his words and deeds before so discerning a Judge may well sober the most callous of sinners; certainly it should make the professed Christian give the most diligent consideration to his thoughts and motives. Compare Rom. 14:10–12; 2 Cor. 5:10.

Ellen G. White

Then. That is, in view of the fact that “the word of God” discerns the nature of a man’s thoughts and motives, and that nothing concerning us is hidden from God (vs. 12, 13), and more particularly because we have an understanding and sympathetic “high priest” who has experienced the very same problems we have to face (chs. 2:17; 4:15). High priest. See on ch. 2:17. Christ as our great High Priest is the theme of the book of Hebrews (see p. 390). Having introduced Christ in this role (ch. 3:1), chs. 3 and 4 develop the concept of our need for His ministry in the courts of heaven and of the experience of “rest” of soul that comes when we avail ourselves of it. Chapters 5 through 10 are concerned with various aspects of His ministry on our behalf. The Christian system of salvation by faith finds its center in the person of Christ as of our great High Priest. Passed into. Literally, “passed through,” doubtless meaning through the atmospheric and the stellar heavens. See Acts 1:9; cf. on Gen. 1:8. Jesus. See on Matt. 1:1. Son of God. See on Luke 1:35; John 1:14; 3:16. Hold fast. Gr. krateō, “to seize,” “to cling to tenaciously,” as for one’s life. Christ is worthy of our full faith and confidence, and we should permit nothing to enter in between ourselves and Him (see on Rom. 8:38, 39). See on Matt. 24:13; Heb. 10:35, 36. Our profession. See on ch. 3:1.

Ellen G. White

Be touched. Gr. sumpatheō, “to symphatize,” literally, “to experience together with.” Having, through His human nature, experienced the weaknesses that are common to man—though without the least taint of sin—Christ is fully sympathetic with the problems and difficulties that the sincere Christian has to face. In fact, one purpose of the incarnation was that Deity might come so close to humanity as to experience the very

same problems and infirmities that are our common lot. By so doing, Christ qualified to become our High Priest and to represent us before the Father. Infirmities. Or, “weaknesses.” The negative form in which the statement is expressed makes it even more impressive than a positive statement would have been. All points. That is, every type of temptation. For comment on some of the respects in which Jesus was tempted see on Matt. 4:1–11; cf. DA 687–694. In some mysterious way that we cannot understand, our Lord experienced the full weight of every conceivable temptation the “prince of this world” (John 12:31) could press upon Him, but without in the least degree, even by a thought, responding to any of them (see John 14:30). Satan found nothing in Jesus that responded to his cunning devices (see DA 123). See on Heb. 2:18. As we are. In all respects, sin excepted, He became one with us (see Vol. V, p. 918; see on Phil. 2:6–8). Without sin. Herein lies the unfathomable mystery of the perfect life of our Saviour. For the first time human nature was led to victory over its natural tendency to sin, and because of Christ’s victory over sin we too may triumph over it (see on Rom. 8:1–4). In Him we can be “more than conquerors” (Rom. 8:37), for God “giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 15:57), over both sin and its wages, death (see on Gal. 2:20).

Ellen G. White

Let us therefore. Verse 16 states the practical conclusion of the entire line of thought presented in chs. chs. 3 and 4. God’s “rest” of grace remains to the people of God (v. 9); “let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace.” Boldly. Gr. parresia, translated “confidence” in ch. 3:6 (see comment there; cf. ch. 10:35). We come boldly, not because God is indebted to us, but because God freely offers His grace to all who seek it. Throne of grace. That is, a throne characterized by the quality of grace (see on Rom. 3:24; 1 Cor. 1:3). Instead of vain, laborious attempts to earn salvation by a rigorous compliance with the requirements of the legal system of Judaism, or, for that matter, any system of righteousness by works, the Christian has the privilege of free access to the grace of a loving Father. Obtain mercy. That is, secure forgiveness for sins (see on 1 John 1:9). At the throne of judgment all will find strict justice untempered by mercy. The sinner’s only hope is God’s mercy, offered while probation lingers. Grace. Gr. charis (see on John 1:14; Rom. 1:7; 3:24; 1 Cor. 1:3). To help in time of need. That is, in time of temptation. We need grace to endure hardship and suffering, and grace to overcome temptation. He who makes it a habit to come daily to the throne of grace for a fresh supply of God’s mercy and grace enters into the “rest” of soul God has provided for every sincere believer.

Ellen G. White