Annotations for Hebrews

Annotations for Hebrews

Annotations for Hebrews

These two verses represent perhaps the most articulate Greek prose in the NT, modeled after old Attic Greek (as the most elite works were). One literary device here is alliteration (five Greek words beginning with a p sound in v. ). The author apparently also models some of his language on the opening of the prologue to the popular Jewish Apocryphal book of Sirach. The author here depicts Christ as God’s ultimate Word; his Jewish contemporaries identified God’s Word with his Wisdom (cf. Sirach 24:1, 23; Baruch 3:28–4:1). Jewish tradition developed further the Biblical image of God creating everything through Wisdom or his Word (cf. ; ; see note on ). As the fullness of the Word, Christ was superior to the authentic but partial revelation of God in the law.

these last days. The promised end time (; ; ; ), initiated by the Lord’s first coming. heir. An heir held title to the property of the one who appointed him heir.

radiance. The Greek term used here evokes the Jewish Apocryphal work Wisdom of Solomon 7:26, in which Wisdom reflects God’s light and is a mirror revealing his image. (Philo applies the language to the Logos, the Word.) exact representation of his being. Jewish authors writing in Greek sometimes said that divine Wisdom was the exact “image” (cf. KJV) of God, the prototypical stamp by which he “imprinted” the seal of his image on the rest of creation (the way an image was stamped on coins). he had provided purification for sins. “Purification” of sins was the work of priests; mention of it here anticipates a theme that appears later in the book. sat down at the right hand of the Majesty. Sitting down at the right hand of the supreme king was an image of ultimate honor and alludes to (see explicitly ).

superior to the angels. Because Christ is greater than the angels who mediated the law (), the punishment for neglecting his salvation is also greater than the punishment for rejecting the law (). Some may have also been tempted to reduce Jesus’ divine status to the status of a mere angel to better accommodate their synagogue critics; some Diaspora Jews even allowed angels a role in creation. Jesus, however, is greater than angels ().

to which of the angels did God ever say . . . ? The author brackets vv.  by repeating in v.  this question from v.  (quoting in v. ). You are my Son . . . will be my Son. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that other Jews also linked with (both cited in this verse) in expectations of the Messiah. Son . . . Son. Jewish interpreters often linked texts on the basis of a common key word. Like several other Messianic texts, (cited first in this verse) originally celebrated the promise to the Davidic line in (cited second in this verse). become. This “begetting” (cf. KJV) referred to the royal coronation—in Jesus’ case, his exaltation (cf. similarly ).

firstborn. Specified the inheritance rights of the oldest son (); it is a title of the Davidic king of . Let all God’s angels worship him. To Jesus’ coronation as king and consequent superiority to the angels, the author applies a text from the Greek translation of , from a context that Diaspora Jews used for worship alongside the Psalms. (The words also appear in some of the early Hebrew manuscripts as well.)

spirits . . . fire. (cited in this verse) may mean that God uses winds and fire as his messengers; early Jewish thinkers, however, understood it as saying that angels were made of fire. (Many Greeks thought that stars and souls consisted of fire or breath.) Hebrews shows that angels, unlike the Son, are of a lesser nature than God (v. ).

may have been composed for a royal wedding celebration, but part of it speaks of God’s blessing on the king and probably (certainly in the Greek version cited here) addresses God directly. Jewish interpreters read as much literal significance into a passage as they could. Because God is addressed in (cited in ), it is natural to assume that he continues to be addressed in (cited in v. ). This allows the author to distinguish the Father (“God” in , who exalts the one addressed as “God” in ) and the Son (addressed in ).

your years will never end. Interpreters frequently connected texts on the basis of a common key word or concept; because God’s “throne . . . will last for ever and ever” (v. ), the writer cites here , where it says that God’s faithfulness and “years will never end.”

Sit at my right hand. Given links among texts (see note on v. ), the Son’s “throne” (v. ) shows the Son at the Father’s “right hand,” as in . (Jewish people already also spoke of Wisdom being beside God’s throne.) In context, the Lord addressed in is also the priest-king of , a text that the author develops starting in . This is the third citation from the section of since , and the sixth citation from Psalms since .

Are not all angels ministering spirits . . . ? The author has just suggested from Scripture that “angels” are “spirits” who serve (v. ). Guardian angels of individuals were already familiar in Jewish tradition.

the message spoken through angels. Jewish tradition held that God had given his law through angels (also ; ; cf. , especially in the Septuagint, the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT).

ignore so great a salvation. The law, and therefore Jewish tradition, punished deliberate acts much more harshly than unintentional ones (). Some Jewish teachers even viewed deliberate rejection of God’s law as unforgivable. Jewish teachers sometimes argued from lesser to greater; here, if neglecting the law mediated through angels (v. ) merited judgment, how much more does neglecting Christ, who is greater than such angels (vv. )?

It is not to angels. It may be that because some Jewish people criticized Christians’ worship of Jesus as the worship of a second god, in the second century some Jewish believers in Jesus argued that he was merely a great angel. If some of Hebrews’ audience already found such an approach attractive, however, Hebrews clearly closes off that possibility here.

there is a place where someone has testified. Jewish interpreters sometimes used ambiguous phrases to emphasize that the divine authorship matters more than the human authorship. son of man. Although Jesus is the Son of Man in the Gospels, the writer of Hebrews simply follows the standard Greek translation here, referring to human beings.

made them a little lower than the angels. The Greek translation of the passage cited here, interprets the Hebrew “a little lower than God” (the simplest Hebrew sense) as “a little lower than the angels” (certainly a possible translation); the writer of Hebrews uses this translation, which his audience knows.

put everything under their feet. Jewish interpreters often connected texts based on similar language; because God would make Jesus’ enemies a “footstool for [his] feet” (), the author can now cite another text about things being put under feet. In Hebrew, (cited in vv. ) announces that God generously set people over his creation, a little lower than himself (alluding to ). we do not see everything subject to them. Interpreters often established first what a text could not mean; it was obvious that people were not ruling creation the way God intended in the beginning. Jewish tradition recognized both that angels ruled nature and the nations in the present and that the righteous would reign in the age to come (cf. ). Interpreting in , the writer of Hebrews recognizes that the world is not presently subject to humanity, the way God designed it to be. Yet Jesus is now exalted (v. ), a forerunner for the future exaltation of all God’s children (v. ). (Cf. the idea of a New Adam in and the article “

lower than the angels. Fitting the language of the psalm that the author of Hebrews quoted in v. , Jesus embraced humanity to restore humanity (cf. v. ). crowned with glory. Now Jesus is exalted, experiencing God’s unrealized purpose for humanity, as noted in v. .

for whom and through whom everything exists. A phrase used by some philosophers and Diaspora Jews to describe the supreme God (cf. ). pioneer. The Greek term applied to heroes, founders and champions, sometimes to a forerunner who paved the way for others, as here.

brothers and sisters. The author of Hebrews here anticipates his quotation from in v. ; Jesus is there identified as one of “the children.”

I will declare your name to my brothers and sisters. Some psalms, including (cited here), depict a righteous sufferer; Jesus fills this role most fully (see quotations and echoes of in, e.g., ; , ; ). Yet the author of Hebrews, like Jesus, knew that the psalm went on to declare God’s deliverance, including in . There the triumphant psalmist declares God’s “name to [his] brothers and sisters” (although the NIV translates differently there in order to capture the meaning).

The writer may cite here for several reasons. On the most basic level, Jewish interpreters sometimes simply echoed a text that made the point; this one reinforces the point in vv. . More fundamentally for , the context in Isaiah depicts God as a stone that causes the wicked to stumble (); using the Jewish technique of linking texts with similar key terms, early Christians sometimes linked this text with other “stones” and with Jesus (; ; see ; ). and the children God has given me. in context indicates that Isaiah’s children have names that communicate God’s message to Israel. One of Isaiah’s children pointed toward Immanuel, God with us (; ; see note on ), and this text declared the other children brothers.

the children. These children are Jesus’ brothers and sisters, as suggested in vv. , ; see note on v. . flesh and blood. A common way of describing humans. him who holds the power of death . . . the devil. Many Jewish sources recognized the devil as the originator of death (cf. note on ).

fear of death. Philosophers tried to overcome this fear, which they viewed as a fundamental problem; most explained that the fear did not accomplish anything positive, some (such as Epicureans) arguing that death was annihilation and others (such as Stoics) arguing that cooperating with Fate was the most reasonable course. Jesus overcame our enslavement to the fear of death not by assuaging anxiety but by truly overcoming death. Death was not part of God’s original design for humanity (vv. ), though creation was perishable (cf. divine eternality, , ).

he had to be made like them. In antiquity, the powerful might show compassion for the weak, but they never made themselves weak to be like them. By contrast, as God chose human high priests as mediators (cf., e.g., ), Jesus shared our humanity (vv. , ).

One of the author’s main points in Hebrews is that Jesus is greater than all those things associated with the Jewish religion and way of life. Sometimes he actually uses the words “greater than”; sometimes he does not. But in all cases the theme is clear.

Theme

Passage in Hebrews

Jesus is greater than the prophets.

Jesus is greater than the angels.

;

Jesus is greater than Moses.

Jesus is greater than Joshua.

Jesus is greater than the Aaronic high priests.

;

Jesus is greater than the Levitical priests.

Jesus as the high priest in the order of Melchizedek is greater than Abraham.

Jesus’ ministry is greater than the tabernacle ministry.

;

Jesus’ new covenant is greater than the old covenant.

Jesus’ sacrifice is greater than the OT sacrifices.

Experiencing Jesus is greater than the experience on Mount Sinai.

Adapted from The Expositor’s Bible Commentary - Abridged Edition: The New Testament, by Kenneth L. Barker; John R. Kohlenberger III. Copyright © 1994 by the Zondervan Corporation. Used by permission of Zondervan.

Go to

the heavenly calling. Many ancient thinkers would have appreciated anything “heavenly” (cf. also ; ; ; see notes on ; ). our apostle and high priest. Although a few writers viewed Moses as a high priest and some viewed Moses as God’s commissioned agent (like an apostle), most recognized that only Aaron and his descendants were high priests; Jesus is thus greater than Moses here.

He was faithful . . . just as Moses was faithful in all God’s house. In , God exalts Moses above other prophets and affirms that “he is faithful in all my house.” Jesus is a unique prophet like Moses (), but see .

worthy of greater honor than Moses. Ancient speakers often compared two honorable figures to show that the greater of these two was great indeed. Many Jewish traditions exalted Moses as the greatest person in history (or second only to Abraham). the builder . . . has greater honor than the house. Jewish and Christian writers used the argument that the builder was greater than what was made to note that the Creator was greater than his creation (v. ). This writer identifies Jesus as the Creator. Ancient writers often developed arguments based on wordplays; this writer plays on two senses of house: God’s “house” (see vv. , ) and a “builder” (see vv. ). (Playing on these senses of “house” occurs already in , , , .)

bearing witness to what would be spoken by God in the future. The author quotes . Moses prefigured the promised prophet (), and Jewish tradition suggested that he foresaw the Messianic era. Other elements of Moses’ covenant prefigured heavenly realities (see note on ).

faithful as the Son over God’s house. A servant (v. ) could manage a household, but ancient sources often contrasted a mere servant with a son. An heir owns the household, which in antiquity could include servants.

Many Jewish people recited psalms in worship; at some point became a significant element in synagogue prayers. The writer comments on (cited in ) in the way that other Jewish Midrashic writers explained texts. (After this explanation the writer of Hebrews will in turn to expounding .) shows that Israel’s wilderness generation rejected God’s offer of rest in the promised land (cf. the promise of rest in ; ; ; ; , ). Moreover, since God was still offering it after Joshua’s day, the promise had never yet been completely fulfilled (); the full promise remained available for a new generation—the time of the promised future restoration of God’s people.

the Holy Spirit says. Jewish people recognized that God’s Holy Spirit inspired and thus spoke through Scripture.

They shall never enter my rest. Some Jewish thinkers debated whether the wilderness generation was excluded from rest only in this age, or also barred from the world to come. Highlighting their rebellion, the writer of Hebrews may see them as barred from both.

as long as it is called “Today.” As Jewish interpreters often highlighted a term’s applicability for their generation, the writer emphasizes the psalm’s continued offer of rest today (v. , citing ).

if indeed we hold our original conviction. God’s own people, whom he had already redeemed, rebelled rather than persevered (vv. , citing ) and thus were barred from God’s promise (); perseverance was thus essential.

Writers sometimes reinforced a point rhetorically with a series of questions, the answers to which were clear.

because of their unbelief. Scripture was clear that failure to trust God’s promise lay behind their failure to obey him (cf. ; ; ; ; ).

let us be careful. The psalmist warned new generations () not to reject the gift of God’s rest ().

they did not share the faith of those who obeyed. Israel in the wilderness lacked faith () to embrace God’s promise of rest (); the good news about Christ offers a new opportunity for those who will exercise faith (v. ).

believed. Cf. and note. rest. See .

somewhere he has spoken about. For the ambiguity of “somewhere,” see note on . On the seventh day God rested. Because in v.  the author speaks of people entering God’s “rest” (citing ), the author elaborates on the meaning of God’s rest. The author notes here in v.  that God rested from his work of creating (citing ). (Jewish interpreters often used one text to interpret another on the same subject or with the same wording.) Some Jewish thinkers viewed the coming world as the ultimate Sabbath (cf. v. ).

since it still remains for some to enter that rest. See notes on v. ; . shows that the promised rest remained to be fulfilled.

if Joshua had given them rest. Not only did Moses’ generation never enter God’s rest (vv. , ), but neither was the promise completed in Joshua’s day. God gave Israel rest then (; ), but if it were completed, the author argues, God would not afterward offer it “today.” Although Israel had defeated many cities, the local peoples remained and Israel had not yet settled all the land (; ; , , ). Only the generations of David (cf. , ; ), Solomon () and to a lesser extent Josiah () came close to reaching the boundaries promised to Abraham, and testing and enemies never disappeared for very long. In the author’s day, the Jewish people, existing under foreign domination, prayed for God to fulfill his promises and restore the kingdom to Israel.

There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest. The author has already connected God’s rest in with God’s rest from his works in .

the word of God is alive and active. Moses announced the word of God to Israel, and the recipients of this letter encountered it in the good news of Christ (see v. ). dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow. Jewish tradition, following Scripture, recognized that God could discern even the hidden details of people’s hearts (e.g., ). The Alexandrian Jewish philosopher Philo spoke of the power of the universal, divine Logos, divine reason, God’s word, to divide rational and irrational components of the soul; yet he also sometimes identified spirit and soul, as the NT writers usually do. The point here is not an analysis of human nature, but that God’s word searches the heart so deeply that it resembles a sharp sword that divides even what seems almost indivisible, whether soul and spirit or joints and marrow.

The author’s argument for Jesus’ high priesthood comes especially from (cited explicitly in ). At least some Diaspora Jews depicted God’s word (v. ) as high priest but tried to play down the high priest’s full humanity when he interceded for Israel. Hebrews’ author, by contrast, emphasizes Jesus the high priest identifying with humanity (v. ; ).

ascended into heaven. For the heavenly sanctuary, see note on .

we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses. Although the recipients of Hebrews probably did not know this, many of Jerusalem’s priestly elite were corrupt and abusive. The benevolent high priest here offers a stark contrast. he did not sin. See note on .

Let us then approach God’s throne of grace. In the temple, the ark of the covenant of the Lord represented God’s throne (e.g., ; ; ; ). But the ark was unapproachable, secluded in the Most Holy Place, which even the high priest could approach only once a year. Christ has opened full access to God to all his followers ().

he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins. Like other high priests, Christ can sympathize with human weakness; but he is greater than they, since they must first atone for their own sin (; ), whereas Christ did not sin ().

when called by God, just as Aaron was. The writer of Hebrews and his Diaspora audience would think of the Biblical high priest, not the political situation in Judea. There Rome or, more recently, Agrippa II, installed and deposed high priests as they deemed fit (cf. note on ).

Christ did not take on himself the glory. The writer of Hebrews shows from (cited here and already applied to Jesus in ) that Jesus’ royal exaltation was the Father’s initiative.

a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek. If, as in , (the royal verse the author has just cited in ) applied to Jesus, the author can move naturally to another psalm about Jesus’ royal exaltation cited in —namely, . The context in that psalm showed clearly that this exalted king was also a special, “priest forever in the order of Melchizedek” (, cited here in ). (Like , addresses the exalted one; God’s “rest” in might also recall the “sitting” of , but that potential connection is less clear here.) Because speaks of a priest-king, it naturally cites the figure of Melchizedek, also a priest-king (). This image may have evoked nostalgia for some Jews: before full Roman control and Herod’s dynasty, Israel had a celebrated dynasty of heroic priest-kings, the Maccabees. Some Jews disliked this combination of kings descended from Levi; the Dead Sea Scrolls, e.g., longed for a future appointed ruler from Judah and a future anointed priest from Levi. But because Melchizedek’s priesthood was not Levitical, the promised Davidic king, the Messiah (cf. ), could be a priest-king. Some Jewish circles, including those that produced the Dead Sea Scrolls, exalted Melchizedek as a heavenly figure, perhaps an angel (a view the writer of Hebrews rejects in ). The author of Hebrews, however, needs only to cite in order for his audience to recognize that this priest is exalted to heaven (as the Lord beside God’s throne in ). The writer’s argument was strong enough that later rabbis tried to get around it, claiming (without textual support) that God took the priesthood from Melchizedek and gave it to Abraham (cf. )!

he offered up prayers . . . with fervent cries and tears. At Gethsemane Jesus cried (; cf. , ). he was heard. The Father answered not by preventing the cross, but by raising Jesus from the dead.

he learned obedience from what he suffered. In Greek, the writer plays on words: “learned” is emathen, and “suffered” is epathen. Ancient writers sometimes used wordplays to make a point, and this one was common in antiquity. Even aside from wordplays, however, ancient education included children learning through suffering, including physical discipline (cf. also ).

made perfect. The Greek term here (also in ; ) is also the standard Greek way to translate an OT term for ordaining priests (e.g., , , , ; ; ).

The author warns that his audience’s Biblical knowledge is too basic to understand his entire argument in this section (). Nevertheless he plunges into it, warning that they must press beyond these basics () so they can be sure to persevere ().

We have much to say about this. Speakers and writers often warned that they were simply offering a portion of the vast evidence that could be offered (cf. ).

by this time you ought to be teachers. Many ancient teachers recognized the value of beginning with the basics. Nevertheless, sages often complained that their students were slow to understand or that by now they should be teachers. elementary truths. The Greek term could apply to something as simple as the alphabet; the writer lists such basic teachings in . You need milk, not solid food! Teachers spoke of giving milk to elementary students, as if to infants, but solid food to more advanced disciples, whom they considered mature. (Although people used milk from goats, sheep and even cows, the image here is of an infant nursing at their mother’s or nurse’s breast; cf. note on .)

trained themselves. This phrase includes a Greek term meaning “senses” or “sensory faculties.” Although the term can apply figuratively to rational sense, many philosophers also discussed the proper use of physical senses (which they often numbered as five). distinguish good from evil. Despite limitations of the senses, many thinkers believed that the senses were useful and could be disciplined for moral benefit. Far more widely, the ability to critically “distinguish good from evil,” i.e., between truth and falsehood, was valued, including in Scripture (; ).

elementary teachings . . . maturity. See note on . The teachings listed in vv.  were matters that the Jewish recipients of Hebrews would have understood even before becoming Jesus’ followers. acts that lead to death. May mean (also in ) simply useless works (cf. similar wording in , ).

instruction about cleansing rites. Jewish people had many cleansing rites, including washing of hands and immersing new converts. the laying on of hands. Probably refers to ordaining teachers (see note on ), though hands were laid also on sacrifices and for blessings. the resurrection . . . and eternal judgment. See, e.g., .

once been enlightened. Jewish people sometimes prayed to be enlightened in understanding Scripture (see note on ), but the experience here refers to conversion (see ). (The Qumran sect also believed that God had enlightened them, making them children of light.) shared in the Holy Spirit. Early Christians and (typically in a less dramatic way) Qumranites believed that members of their own groups experienced the Holy Spirit, but most Jewish people believed that only a few worthy people experienced that gift in this age. The Spirit was more widely expected in the coming age (v. ).

tasted the goodness. Perhaps could evoke the language of , even though the Greek translation of that passage replaces “good” with “kind.” tasted . . . the powers of the coming age. Jewish people expected a coming age of righteousness, justice and peace for their people. Many expected the coming of the Messiah to inaugurate that era of God’s reign. Because Jesus the Messiah has already come, his followers experience a foretaste of what will be consummated at his return.

to be brought back to repentance. God held to a higher standard those who should have known better (). Many Jewish circles believed that apostates, or at least the most heinous of them, could never be forgiven. The present text warns of a level of provoking God that makes repentance impossible (cf. ; ; contrast ). It addresses believers deliberately turning from truth (cf. ; ), though salvation can be found through no one else but Christ (). they are crucifying the Son of God all over again. By willfully embracing the kind of belief that nailed Jesus to the cross, they accept responsibility again for killing him. subjecting him to public disgrace. Crucifixion made a public example of its victims, openly killing them by slow and painful torture and disgracing them as they hung naked, their most private parts and bodily functions exposed to passersby.

thorns and thistles. Some other ancient writers used “thorns and thistles” figuratively for moral desolation.

we are convinced of better things in your case. Often a writer would soften warnings by assuring a more trustworthy audience that he was confident that the audience would not fail. For the reason for the writer’s assurance here, see v. .

imitate. Sages frequently cited models for hearers to imitate (some are listed in ch. ). inherit. Jewish tradition spoke of the righteous inheriting the world to come.

he swore by himself. Interpreters often connected texts based on a common key word or phrase—sometimes even without quoting the phrase. God swore by himself () the promise to Abraham (, cited in )—just as God swore that the exalted king would be a priest like Melchizedek (), although the writer has not yet quoted the line about the oath (see ). God had also sworn that the wilderness generation would never enter his rest (see in ; ).

what was promised. The writer probably refers to Isaac’s birth in , from whom came countless descendants (), though some of God’s promise remains future (, ).

People swear by someone greater than themselves. Jewish people counted oaths that directly called God to attest their veracity as particularly inviolable; God swore such oaths by himself or his holiness in ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; .

unchanging nature of his purpose. Sometimes God swore oaths that included the assurance that God would not change his mind (; ; ).

impossible for God to lie. Jewish people recognized that God never lies (; ), but the writer here may focus on the two divine oaths in the passages that he has been mentioning: the oath to Abraham () in v.  and the oath to the (greater) priest-king like Melchizedek (; see note on ).

anchor for the soul. This work’s original audience would not find this image strange; people in the Diaspora often used the anchor image figuratively. the inner sanctuary behind the curtain. Because the writer is still thinking of the exalted priest-king like Melchizedek (cf. note on v. ; see v. ), he thinks of the heavenly sanctuary (see ). behind the curtain. Implies inside the temple’s Most Holy Place (; ; ). The earthly high priest could enter this place once a year (), but the writer refers here to the heavenly temple (v. ; see note on ).

forerunner. Presupposes those who follow (cf. the related idea in the different term “pioneer” in ; ; see note on ). a high priest forever . . . Melchizedek. Quotes again from .

, just cited in , declares that the exalted king is “in the order of Melchizedek”; the author of Hebrews must now examine the psalm’s source (Genesis) to elaborate what that comparison entails. The writer uses interpretive techniques common among early Jewish interpreters, and even some conclusions common among them, to show how Jesus the exalted king is a greater priest than those of the Levitical priesthood.

The author here summarizes information from .

Salem. Jerusalem (see ; cf. also extra-Biblical sources).

Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. Tithing (giving a tenth, ) was practiced both in some ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman settings. Melchizedek means “king of righteousness” . . . “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” The author of Hebrews may appeal here to ideas already possibly known to his audience. Greek-speaking Jews often allegorized names, including this one.

Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life. When useful, Jewish interpreters would argue from silence that what was not stated did not occur; the author of Hebrews can use this tactic for the sake of elaborating the psalm’s comparison. Because the psalmist invites a comparison with the Melchizedek explained in Genesis, Hebrews probes details. Since no parents are mentioned, and since Genesis usually lists parents, the priest like Melchizedek lacks beginning. Since he is a “priest forever” (), he also lacks ending. Greeks viewed as divine whatever lacked beginning and ending. Some other Jewish interpreters viewed Melchizedek as an exalted, perhaps angelic, figure.

Abraham gave him a tenth. The law assigned tithes to descendants of Levi, who descended from Abraham (e.g., ; ; ; , ); but Abraham himself tithed to a different, greater priest.

The priesthood like Melchizedek’s is “greater” (v. ) than the Levitical priesthood, for at least two reasons (vv. ). First, whereas the Levites die, the one with the priesthood like Melchizedek would hold this office forever (v. ; ; cf. ; ). (Some Diaspora Jews also thought of the perfect priest being eternal.) Second, Melchizedek is greater than Abraham and thus greater than Levi, since Abraham is greater than Levi, who depended on him for existence (vv. ). Seeking to get around this argument, later rabbis said that God withdrew the priesthood from Melchizedek (for blessing Abram before blessing God []) and gave it to Abraham in ; but clearly refers to the ultimate priest-king who would rule over the nations, not to Abraham.

As the writer’s critics would undoubtedly point out, Scripture made the Levitical priesthood permanent (; ; ; ; ). The writer counters by noting that promises a different and better kind of priesthood (on its superiority, see and note). Since it was better, it superseded the need for the lesser priesthood. (Normally, no one complained when God sometimes did more than what he promised rather than less.) The promised priest-king coincided with some other Messianic expectations (see note on ). Soon after Hebrews circulated, the temple was destroyed and the conventional Levitical task became impossible.

Some Diaspora Jews idealized Levi as a model of the perfect priesthood; but most Diaspora thinkers viewed what was perfect as unchanging, since what was perfect did not need to change. What was changeless was also eternal, as was clearly the promised king’s priesthood (“a priest forever,” v. , citing ). Since their Lord, Jesus, was from the tribe of Judah (v. ), as would be expected for the promised Davidic Messiah (e.g., ; , ; ), the greater priesthood differed from one depending on tribal descent (or genealogy, as in ).

This priesthood is also greater than the Levitical priesthood because, unlike the latter, it is guaranteed with a divine oath (see notes on ). God changed some points in the law when such changes were necessary to accomplish his original, eternal purpose in the law (e.g., ; cf. ), but in this case he had sworn and promised not to change his mind.

guarantor. Appears often in business documents and entailed a firm obligation.

death prevented them from continuing in office. Even apart from Rome recently deposing high priests at will, priests died; by contrast, Jesus was “a priest forever” (v. , citing ).

always lives to intercede. Unlike other priests, Jesus is permanent (v. ), so he can always intercede.

holy, blameless, pure, set apart. Earthly priests were to be consecrated, separated from ritual impurity during their ministry (later rabbis even thought the high priest should be isolated for a week before the Day of Atonement ritual). above the heavens. Separation in heaven from impurity was far greater than separation from it on earth (cf. note on ), and “above the heavens” was where the priest-king was (at God’s right hand, ). Many people in antiquity believed that what was in the highest heavens was completely pure and set apart from the corruption of earth.

day after day, first for his own sins. High priests had to atone for themselves before atoning for others (), relevant primarily to the Day of Atonement (, , , ). Because Jesus’ sacrifice is perfect its efficacy is eternal (since what was perfect was changeless and eternal; cf. note on ). Although the larger argument is clear, the writer of Hebrews may use imprecise wording to make the point; high priests did not directly offer up the daily offerings during the morning and evening sacrifices. Nevertheless, high priests were responsible for the priestly service that did offer them. Also, Jewish tradition (perhaps reflecting recent reality) did speak of Aaron making such daily sacrifices, and others from this period spoke in similar, general terms.

perfect forever. Many believed that what was perfect was eternal; being raised, Jesus certainly qualified as a “priest forever” ().

sat down at the right hand of the throne. The priest-king of was enthroned beside God in (see ; ; ). As a priest, then (), he would have to serve in the sanctuary in heaven, where God was enthroned.

the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord. Although earthly temples invited deities’ presence on earth, most people in antiquity believed that many of these deities also resided in heaven. Jewish people affirmed this also for the one true God (cf. ; ).

copy. Or pattern; recalls the promised future temple in the Greek translation of . Many people envisioned a heavenly temple in terms of an earthly one. Both apocalyptic thinkers and Diaspora Jewish ones thought of God’s earthly temple as merely a model of the heavenly and/or eternal one. Some, such as Philo of Alexandria, additionally found abundant allegorical significance even in the details. (The earlier Greek philosopher Plato treated the earthly world as shadows of the true realm of ideas above, imagery that was later adapted by Philo.) Some scholars suggest that even God’s original instruction to follow the precise model given on the mountain (here, following , ) indicated a heavenly temple. Babylonians, Canaanites and others had modeled earthly temples after heavenly ones.

Hebrews finds patterns in the earthly tabernacle that point to the greater, heavenly one. The author’s modest suggestions, however, contrast starkly with the wholesale allegorizing of Philo, who explains each detail as a symbol of something that none of Moses’ original readers would have guessed (linen as earth, dark red as air, the seven-branched candelabrum as the seven planets, etc.).

superior to the old one. As noted in , the old priesthood was tied to the old law and its covenant; if the former was superseded or transformed by a greater priesthood guaranteed by God’s oath, the latter would also be changed. What was superseded might point to eternal principles, yet it was itself imperfect.

In one of the author’s most extended quotations (cf. also ), he cites to show Biblically God’s plan to improve on or transform the earlier covenant. The Dead Sea Scrolls also emphasize this passage, but their authors tried to follow the law more strictly. Most understood the new covenant as a renewed covenant with Israel. It differed, however, from the earlier covenant: instead of breaking the covenant (), all of God’s people would now know him, his law written in their hearts (). Some had earlier experienced a foretaste of the law being in their hearts (), which was always God’s desire for them (; ), but this would now be the experience of all God’s people, something performed by God himself (; ).

will soon disappear. In AD 66 Jewish patriots slaughtered many priests in the temple; in AD 70 the temple was destroyed and Levitical priests could no longer make atonement there. The author probably writes before 70, but had reason to expect judgment on the temple to be completed (cf. ).

The tabernacle was a portable temple. It was enough like other temples to be intelligible to Israelites as a temple, yet it was different enough at key points to teach a distinctive theology. Temples in Egypt, where the Israelites had lived and labored, had an outer court, an inner sanctuary, and, in the back, a most holy place. The building techniques and materials used for the ark of the covenant of the Lord were all found in Egypt. Those who lived in Egypt and served Pharaoh’s building projects would have known what such temples looked like. Egyptians also had many portable tent-shrines, and some have cited evidence to support the argument that Midianites, Canaanites and others may have had some as well.

It also appears that the most expensive dyes (blue) and metals (pure gold) were used nearest the ark of the covenant, whereas the least expensive dyes (red) and metals (copper) were used farthest from it. This fits ancient Near Eastern practice; in the ancient Near East, the gradation of materials in relation to the Most Holy Place was meant to emphasize the holiness of the deity. It thus communicated the reverence with which he or she must be approached.

Most ancient temples had a table for offerings, lampstands (because holy places were shrouded from the light of the world), an altar of sacrifice, and (to address the stench of burning sacrifices in closed spaces) an altar of incense. Canaanites had many of the same sorts of offerings the Israelites did. Acacia wood, used to construct the tabernacle, was simply practical: it was the most available wood in the Sinai Desert. (Solomon later used more prestigious cedar wood from Lebanon for his temple.)

Such similarities with surrounding cultures, however, underlined the contrasts all the more graphically. In most ancient temples, the innermost shrine included a platform on which was enthroned the image of the deity. That there is no image in God’s tabernacle reinforces the commandment “You shall not make for yourself an image” (). Many massive Egyptian shrines were flanked with shrines for deities that assisted the major deity. This does not appear in God’s tabernacle, for he demanded, “You shall have no other gods” in my sight (). Moreover, although some items of furniture (such as altars and a table) parallel other temples, God’s tabernacle lacks a bed. Egyptians, Hittites and others would put their deity-images to bed at night, wake them in the morning, provide royal entertainment, and so forth. But the God of Israel “will neither slumber nor sleep” ().

The forms communicate eternal principles to a particular cultural setting. For the correspondence between heavenly and earthly temples in ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman thought, see note on . ◆

Model of the Tabernacle.

Photo by Heather Biscoe Tarman

Go to

lampstand. Ancient Near Eastern temples were to be shrouded from the profane light of the world; lampstands were necessary so that priests could see.

the golden altar of incense. Against some tradition, the altar of incense was not inside the Most Holy Place (; ), even though (as here) it could be said to belong to it (cf. ; , ; ). gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff. The writer follows the Biblical description of the tabernacle rather than updating it for Herod’s temple or even mentioning the loss of the manna and staff (; ).

cherubim of the Glory. God was enthroned above the cherubim (; ); ancient Near Eastern kings sometimes had carved winged creatures on pedestals for thrones. The innermost, most holy place in an ancient Near Eastern temple included a platform or sacred object on top of which sat the image of the deity. God’s temple had no image (), but his glory could appear there.

only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year. The one entrance of the high priest to the Most Holy Place each year was for the Day of Atonement (, ).

The Holy Spirit was showing. The single annual entrance to the Most Holy Place illustrated clearly Israel’s limited access to God’s full presence under the old covenant. This would contrast with the new covenant, in which God would put his laws in his people and they would all know him because he would forgive all their sins (see , citing ). For the understanding that the earthly tabernacle pointed to something greater, see note on .

greater and more perfect tabernacle. The first covenant () stipulated rules for “an earthly sanctuary” (); since God would not give a new covenant () unless it improved over the previous one (), the new covenant not surprisingly has a better tabernacle. not made with human hands. Cf. note on . A temple built by human beings would be inferior to the heavenly temple; what was heavenly was considered pure and perfect.

blood of goats and calves. The high priest on the annual Day of Atonement brought the blood of a bull for himself and that of a goat for the people (, , ). once for all. Because what was heavenly was understood to be perfect and thus changeless (see notes on , , , ), this ultimate sacrifice would not need to be repeated. eternal redemption. Some ancient Jewish circles expected perfect and complete redemption, or deliverance, at the time of the end (Dead Sea Scrolls; cf. ); the Greek term for redemption sometimes connotes paying a ransom or price (e.g., ), as here.

ashes of a heifer. Alludes to (and apparently also ).

How much more. Jewish interpreters often reasoned in this way; in this case, if the blood of sacrifices on the Day of Atonement can remove sin (hypothetically; cf. ), how much more effective would be the blood of Christ! The sacrifice of Christ was worth more than any other (cf. ; , ). eternal Spirit. Jewish tradition did not understand God’s Spirit as distinct from God, but it did understand the Spirit as divine and eternal. offered himself unblemished. Acceptable sacrifices were to be unblemished, i.e., without defect (; ; ).

Christ is the mediator of a new covenant. The new covenant provides a better redemption from sin than the old covenant (, citing ). Moses was considered mediator of the first covenant; Jesus was greater than Moses ().

, will. The writer here plays on the different senses of the same Greek term; the Greek term he has been using for “covenant” (vv. , ; ; ) is also used for “will.”

necessary to prove the death. In the case of a will, it was sealed with the seals of witnesses attesting the authenticity of the will; wills were not to be opened until the testator died. In the case of a covenant (v. ), it was initiated by blood (from a sacrificed animal, ; ), as in v. .

blood. For blood and the first covenant, see .

water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop. A significant adaptation, since there is no mention of these elements in (they appear instead in ; ). Perhaps the writer assumes that sprinkled blood was often mixed with this concoction. Jewish interpreters often linked texts; the writer apparently connects (referenced in ) with or , to emphasize purification—in the latter case, from sin ().

He said. Cf. . The author of Hebrews varies the wording slightly, blending in another familiar element from the Pentateuch (; ; ; ). Ancient interpreters sometimes adapted the wording of the text in ways that clarified the point the writer sought to make. Another ancient source also made one of this writer’s minor changes to Moses’ words.

sprinkled with the blood. See, e.g., ; ; ; .

nearly everything be cleansed with blood. Blood did not cleanse physically, but it purified ritually (see, e.g., ; ). Blood was necessary for sin offerings and atonement (e.g., ; ; , ; ).

heavenly things . . . with better sacrifices. The writer returns to the parallel between earthly and heavenly tabernacles (see notes on v. ; ): if the earthly sanctuary could be dedicated only by blood (vv. ), so also the heavenly sanctuary. But a perfect sacrifice was necessary for the perfect sanctuary. Not only Gentile philosophers but even Diaspora Jewish thinkers (such as Philo) sometimes treated earthly things as a shadow of heavenly realities.

A heavenly sanctuary (v. ) made without hands (v. ) would be perfect and thus changeless (see notes on vv. , ; ).

once for all. The eternal priesthood of one like Melchizedek (; “forever” in ) could not depend on annual sacrifices; had the eternal priesthood involved perpetual sacrifices, they would have had no beginning (“since the creation of the world”) as well as no ending. Instead it depends on a once-for-all sacrifice of the perfect, unblemished victim. culmination of the ages. Jewish people frequently divided history up into many ages (they proposed a number of different schemes), but the most basic was the division between the present age and the age to come. The culmination of all prior ages climaxes in God’s reign; in the decisive act of Christ, the writer recognizes that the future age has in some sense invaded history (cf. ).

destined to die once, and after that to face judgment. All people who have sinned need to die once and then face judgment for sin; the sinless Christ died once as a sacrifice for their sins (v. ).

take away the sins of many. Closely echoes the Greek translation of (“bore the sins of many”; cf. ). he will appear a second time. Some scholars compare Jesus’ reappearance to bring salvation with the reemergence of the high priest from the inner sanctuary that assured the people that God had accepted the sacrifice and forgiven them. Many Jewish people believed that judgment immediately followed death, death being one’s final opportunity for repentance (as in Scripture, ). Some Jewish people did allow for a posthumous purgatory for some Israelites once their judgment was decided.

The writer here builds on the argument he began making in : only Christ could be a sufficient sacrifice for the heavenly sanctuary.

The law is only a shadow. Some philosophers viewed earthly experience as merely shadows of the real world of ideas, apprehended by reason alone. More relevant, by this period many Diaspora Jewish thinkers viewed the heavens above as pure and perfect. Arguing from even older assumptions (see note on ), the writer views the earthly tabernacle as a shadow of the heavenly one, while also reflecting the perspective of Jewish apocalyptic writers: heaven reveals what the world to come will be like. For this writer, however, the first stage (, ) of that future time had already invaded history ().

Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? The author again plays on the idea that what is perfect need not be changed or supplemented. Rhetorical questions were commonly used in ancient reasoning.

annual reminder of sins. Each year the Day of Atonement sacrifices reminded people of their sins that needed to be forgiven (), perhaps the way Passover reminded them of God’s redemptive acts (). By contrast, the new covenant would deal with sin so that God would “remember their sins no more” (, citing ).

Animal sacrifices were a standard part of most ancient temples and belong to many religious traditions. Some philosophers rejected the value of blood sacrifice, which they felt was unreasonable in a perfect temple focused on the mind; most people, however, disagreed.

Scripture already relativized the value of animal sacrifices (e.g., ; ; ; ; ; ; ), including in the present citation (), cited here in the Greek version. Before AD 70, many Diaspora Jews and some Jews in the Holy Land emphasized the spiritual, figurative use of sacrificial imagery, but only a few denied the necessity of sacrifices altogether. Later rabbis argued that the Day of Atonement, conjoined with repentance, was necessary for the forgiveness of most violations of the law.

The writer of Hebrews recognizes that blood sacrifice is necessary; yet he deems animal sacrifices inadequate for human redemption in the heavenly sanctuary. He views their past value as symbolic, pointing to the perfect and ultimate sacrifice of Christ ().

First he said . . . though. Jewish teachers often explained a text after citing it. From , the writer points out that God’s real interest was not in animal sacrifices.

sets aside the first to establish the second. The writer notes that the psalm distinguishes between sacrifices and God’s will, and that the speaker in the psalm came to perform the latter.

made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Most Jewish people in the Mediterranean Diaspora heard Scripture in its Greek translation, which is what this writer therefore expounds. Where the surviving Hebrew text reads “my ears you have opened,” most Greek versions read “a body you prepared for me” (to do God’s will). Jewish interpreters generally chose whichever reading they needed to make their point (some interpreters even changed readings slightly to make their point). Jesus thus offers here not burnt offerings, but his own body.

this priest . . . sat down at the right hand of God. The writer returns to what he already established from , (see ; ; , and notes on ; ). sat down. The eternal priest like Melchizedek () will remain seated until his enemies are put down. Priests stood to offer sacrifices, so the priest-king must have already offered his once-for-all sacrifice.

The Holy Spirit also testifies. Jewish people believed that God’s Spirit inspired Scripture as God’s word.

Interpreters often returned to earlier texts they had cited (here ), comparing passages. See note on .

sacrifice for sin is no longer necessary. If God no longer remembers his people’s sins (v. ), no need remains to atone for them. A Biblical image of the future temple does include sin or guilt offerings (; ; ; ), but no one objected to God doing something even greater than the images with which he conveyed future hopes (here, the removal of sin). Christ’s once-for-all offering was greater.

confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus. Under the old covenant, access to the Most Holy Place was extremely limited (). By contrast, Jesus offered full access to his followers in the heavenly Most Holy Place (; ).

through the curtain. The curtain (see note on ; cf. and note) no longer obstructed the Most Holy Place (). This new situation fulfilled God’s ultimate purpose all along: his people having a personal relationship with the God who dwelled among them (cf. ; ; ).

over the house of God. The writer alludes to his earlier citation (in ) of .

let us draw near to God. Israel could not draw near the Lord fully (). Priests sprinkled people for ritual purity, for most rituals using blood (e.g., , quoted in ; cf. ) and for some rituals using water (; , ); the impure were also supposed to bathe (e.g., ; ). having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us. The writer envisions the promised spiritual cleansing of hearts in . having our bodies washed with pure water. The perfect participle translated “washed” suggests that the washing of “our bodies” refers to the act of baptism, which Judeans already understood as an act of conversion. (Baptism was customary when Gentiles converted to Judaism, and practiced when one joined particular sects, including when one became a follower of Jesus.)

Let us hold unswervingly. The recipients of the letter to the Hebrews face social pressure from the rest of the local Jewish community to return to their previous practices.

meeting together. On average, various groups (such as trade guilds) met together about once a month. Diaspora Jews could use their synagogues at any time, but especially gathered on weekly Sabbaths (e.g., , ; ). Christians seem to have gathered at least weekly, but persecution (cf. ; ) may have dissuaded some people from attending even relatively private house churches. Roman authorities were suspicious of private meetings, although no one would likely investigate them outside Rome unless someone brought an accusation.

deliberately keep on sinning. God judged deliberate sin far more harshly than unintentional sin (). no sacrifice for sins is left. Jewish tradition taught that no sacrifice availed for the person who knowingly rejected the authority of God’s law. (At Qumran such rebels were expelled; later rabbis thought they could be forgiven only through death.) One who knowingly turned away from life in Christ (v. ) would not find it anywhere else.

fire that will consume the enemies. Alludes to the future judgment in .

Anyone who rejected the law of Moses. Jewish teachers recognized that everyone sinned in some ways; but a sin by which a person declared, “I reject the authority of any of God’s Word” was considered equivalent to rejecting the whole law and was reckoned as apostasy. two or three witnesses. See ; ; for apostasy from obedience to God, see ; .

How much more . . . ? Jewish thinkers often used “How much more?” arguments; if rejecting the old covenant merited judgment, how much more for rejecting the new one? trampled the Son of God underfoot. Treating as profane what was holy merited judgment (e.g., ; ; ). Rebelling against the Spirit (who revealed the truth [; ] and facilitated Jesus’ sacrifice []) merited judgment (). Spirit of grace. May echo the promise of .

The writer uses to show that God can judge even his own people, reinforcing the warning of . (The NIV translates “judge” as “vindicate” in , but the author of Hebrews links the phrase with what precedes; although he follows the Hebrew text more closely than the Greek version, the Greek term is the same in both cases.)

fall into the hands of the living God. Scripture often used expressions such as “fall into [someone’s] hands” (the Lord’s in ; the enemy’s in, e.g., ).

suffered along with those in prison. Imprisonment (also ; cf. ) brought shame and exposed one to hunger and disease; prison was normally a holding area until trial or execution, but trials did not always happen quickly. joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property. Punishments, including banishment, sometimes included confiscation of property. The emperors Tiberius and Claudius expelled many Jewish residents of Rome in the first century (including Jewish Christian leaders under Claudius, ); in the early second century, Gentiles slaughtered much of Alexandria’s Jewish population and seized their goods. The location of the recipients of the letter to the Hebrews is uncertain (see

In just a little while. The writer here quotes a line from the Greek translation of , adding “a little while” from the Greek translation of . The blending is not likely a coincidence; he cited the context of the latter verse in v.  (see note there).

my righteous one will live by faith. The writer continues his quotation (v. ), mostly quoting the Greek version of (see note on ). Nevertheless, like Paul elsewhere, this writer omits the Greek version’s “my” in front of “faith,” in this case joining it instead to “righteous one.” Although the common Greek version read “my faith,” i.e., God’s faithfulness, the Hebrew read “his faith,” presumably that of the righteous, as meant here. The writer then elaborates on this persevering faith in .

destroyed . . . saved. In the context of (see note on v. ), the wicked face destruction but the righteous trust God for deliverance.

After encouraging his audience regarding persevering faith (), the author defines this kind of faith (v. ) and offers a thesis statement (v. ), an appropriate way to begin a discourse on a subject. Writers sometimes praised a virtue, as here (see note on ); orators would often drive home a point by repeating the same opening word or words, as here (“by faith”); and Jewish writers sometimes summarized Jewish history in a way that emphasized a particular element of it (; also in works as diverse as 1 Maccabees 2:49–69; Sirach 44–50). The author climaxes with the ultimate hero of the faith in .

the universe was formed at God’s command. God spoke existence into being (; ; ). Many cultures believed that the current ordered world was simply the result of arranging already preexistent matter. Jewish people commonly spoke of God creating the universe without prior substance (2 Maccabees 7:28). Some Diaspora Jews believed that God first formed his wisdom, or Logos, by which he then designed and created the world (for this belief they combined texts such as with elements of Platonic philosophy).

Abel brought God a better offering than Cain. God preferred Abel’s offering (). Abel still speaks. His blood cried from the ground (), indicating that the legacy of the righteous person remains before God and that vindication will be accomplished. Jewish tradition highlighted Abel as the first martyr and further embellished Cain’s wickedness and punishments.

Enoch . . . did not experience death. Following the most natural reading of , most early Judean sources viewed Enoch as particularly righteous and exempted from death. Some Diaspora Jews identified him with Greek figures such as Atlas. Later rabbis, reacting against the glorifying of Enoch at the expense of more Jewish figures such as Moses, condemned Enoch as shifting between righteousness and wickedness. The writer of Hebrews follows the Biblical account rather than the later traditions some had added to it.

Writers often cited the example of a person to draw moral lessons from their character; that Enoch pleased God enough to be taken away alive (v. ) indicates that he had faith. Some other terms in this verse (such as “rewards”; cf. v. ; ) also fit the author’s emphasis.

By faith Noah . . . condemned the world. Many early Jewish stories honored Noah. (Later rabbis, emphasizing that most of Noah’s descendants were Gentiles, preferred to transfer such stories to Moses.) Jewish teachers sometimes noted that the righteous choices of the righteous would discredit the excuses of the wicked on the day of judgment.

By faith Abraham . . . obeyed and went. Jewish tradition highlighted Abraham’s faith (already explicit in Scripture, e.g., ) and often used him as a role model. Abraham’s obedience to God’s call, leaving his home and relatives behind, was an act of faith (, ).

the city . . . whose architect and builder is God. Many Diaspora Jews viewed God as the world’s “architect and builder” (cf. ); some spoke of heaven as the “mother city,” designed and constructed by God; one could not look for the heavenly Jerusalem on earth. More often, Judeans and some Diaspora Jews instead saw the new Jerusalem as the city of God for the future age (see note on ). foundations. See note on ; cf. also .

Sarah . . . was enabled to bear children. Jewish tradition highlighted and amplified Sarah’s faith. Like Abraham, Sarah laughed (; ); human faith is limited, but God affirmed it and blessed them.

See .

they were foreigners and strangers on earth. Jewish residents of Diaspora cities were often counted as resident aliens; Diaspora Jews understood what it meant to be strangers. Abraham was a foreigner and stranger in Canaan () and on one level the same was true for Israel, since the land was God’s ().

a better country—a heavenly one. Some Diaspora Jewish thinkers (such as Philo) spoke of heaven rather than earth as the home of the righteous. The author of Hebrews, however, looks for the future experience of the city, i.e., the new Jerusalem (cf. ; ).

By faith Abraham . . . offered Isaac as a sacrifice. God accepted Abraham’s faith in , but it was still limited (; ); it grew over the years of walking with God. The offering of Isaac, after years of waiting for the promise of this son, was Abraham’s ultimate test of faith (). Jewish readers rightly recognized this, and presented Abraham’s action as a model of faith. Although Jewish tradition also noted Isaac’s willingness to be sacrificed, the writer of Hebrews does not add such details to the Biblical narrative. his one and only son. Jewish people sometimes used “one and only son” (cf. ) to mean “specially loved,” including in the case of Isaac.

Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead. Abraham said that he would return with his son () and told Isaac that God would provide the offering (); by now his faith was so strong that he understood that even if he carried out God’s instructions, God would restore his son and fulfill the promise. God had, after all, promised that his descendants would be reckoned through Isaac ().

By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau. Jewish people recognized that Isaac’s blessings were inspired and that they included predictions of the future (as divinely led prayers [, ]).

By faith Jacob . . . blessed each of Joseph’s sons. Jewish people also regarded the blessings of as prophetic. (Jewish storytellers also later expanded on these blessings.)

By faith Joseph . . . spoke about the exodus. Joseph knew that the promise of land to Abraham’s descendants would be fulfilled, even if not in his own lifetime (see ).

By faith Moses’ parents hid him for three months. The writer follows . (Some other Jewish writers expanded the story of Moses’ birth, especially his beauty, into reports that glory illumined the room when he was born.)

By faith Moses . . . refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. Writers often drew lessons from their accounts. This writer does so, but he does not add extra-Biblical tradition. Many Jewish storytellers depicted Moses’ Egyptian education (which may be assumed for members of the royal family; cf. ) and Moses himself as an Egyptian military hero. Given common understanding of adoption in the first century, many understood Moses as Pharaoh’s heir; whether or not this is in view here (Pharaohs usually had many sons; Moses rejected status to identify with his oppressed people [v. ]).

the treasures of Egypt. Although Egypt was repressed under Roman rule, everyone knew of its past grandeur and wealth; it was this region’s most powerful empire in Moses’ day.

not fearing the king’s anger. Many Jewish writers played down Moses’ fear. Moses actually did fear the king (), but the writer of Hebrews might mean that Moses was not afraid enough to deny his people; or perhaps that Moses’ faith in God surmounted fear; or, perhaps likeliest of all, the writer refers to the exodus, when Moses led his people out of Egypt (cf. their Passover in v. ). him who is invisible. Diaspora Jews emphasized Gods invisibility.

By faith he kept the Passover. The writer alludes to . All Israel kept the Passover, though the writer is still emphasizing Moses.

By faith the people passed through the Red Sea as on dry land. Cf. ; . Exodus reports the completion of Israel’s faith after the miracle (), but Moses exercised faith (), and his people had to act in some faith to enter the basin (cf. ). Some Jewish teachers affirmed Israel’s faith but many others attributed the miracle to the faith or merit of their ancestors.

By faith the walls of Jericho fell. See .

By faith . . . Rahab . . . was not killed. Hebrews follows ; . (By contrast, later rabbis elaborated more extensive stories about Rahab.)

I do not have time to tell. Speakers and writers often noted that they could comment more fully but for the audience’s sake would not do so. Sometimes they would introduce the topics that they said they would not cover (cf. ); in this case, the central audience of Hebrews knew these stories well. Barak. Most first-century hearers would consider Barak the official leader in even though Deborah gave the divine instructions.

through faith conquered kingdoms. Alludes to David and many judges (including Gideon, Barak, and Jephthah [v. ]). administered justice. May refer to Samson, among others (see , where the NIV text note says Samson “judged” Israel, though this also means, as with the NIV text there, that he led them). shut the mouths of lions. Undoubtedly, the writer of Hebrews refers to the faith of Daniel (), presumably one of the “prophets” of .

quenched the fury of the flames. Likely, Daniel’s friends are in view here (; some Jewish tradition also claimed this for Abraham). whose weakness was turned to strength. Could evoke the return of power to Samson () but might be more general (). routed foreign armies. Could refer to many leaders, including all those named in v.  and the later, renowned Maccabees.

Women received back their dead. See ; . tortured, refusing to be released. Nearly all Jews knew the stories of Maccabean martyrs, who were tortured by being scalded to death, having their skin flayed off, and so forth. Common Greek torture practices included fire, thumbscrews and (the activity from which the word translated “tortured” here originally derived) stretching on a wheel to break the person’s joints, then beating the victim to death. Jewish people expected martyrs to be rewarded at the resurrection, a hope highlighted, e.g., in 2 Maccabees.

flogging. Scourging, which required first stripping, was a common punishment both by itself and when preceding execution. chains and imprisonment. Matters of great shame and deprivation; chains could be heavy and prisoners usually depended on outside help for food to supplement their basic rations.

stoning. Hostile people stoned or considered stoning prophets and other servants of God (; ; ; ); some Jewish tradition amplified this, claiming that Jeremiah, e.g., died by stoning. sawed in two. Jewish tradition claimed that Isaiah, hiding inside a tree, was sawed in two. went about in sheepskins and goatskins. John wore animal skins (; cf. ); he and Elijah sojourned in the wilderness, as did others, including David when fleeing Saul and the Maccabees when fighting guerilla warfare, especially in the hill country.

Here the author offers a concluding summary for vv. , part of it rehearsing the author’s thesis in v.  (though one further example climaxes the list of heroes of the faith in ). Concluding summaries of one’s thesis were very common.

perfect. May refer to the promised future resurrection of the righteous (v. ); all the righteous would be raised together at the very end of the age (, ).

witnesses. May reflect the image of people watching a race (writers sometimes used “cloud” figuratively for a crowd), but the specific witnesses here may be those who also received God’s commendation (lit. “testimony” or “witness”) that they were righteous (, , , ). (Some Jewish sources thought of a heavenly court; perhaps one could envision faith heroes of the past who would judge those now vying for the same honors.) throw off everything that hinders. Could refer to removing artificial weights used in training but not in races, but more likely it simply refers to the Greek custom of stripping off clothes to run unencumbered. (Ancient writers sometimes used “weights” figuratively for vices.). This encouragement is significant, for like Israel in the wilderness, this audience may be tempted to turn back. let us run with perseverance the race. The writer here uses the image of runners disciplining themselves for competition (some suggest also in vv. ). Greek thinkers often used athletic contests to depict the moral battle waged by the wise person; the Diaspora Jewish writer of 4 Maccabees sometimes applied the image to martyrs.

fixing our eyes on Jesus. One running a race needed to keep one’s eyes fixed on the goal (cf. ). pioneer. See note on . pioneer and perfecter of faith. Jesus climaxes the list of heroes of the faith (). endured the cross, scorning its shame. Jesus suffered in the hope of future reward, as these readers are to do (). Both Jews (cf. ; ) and Romans viewed death by crucifixion as shameful. sat down at the right hand. Reflects , cited in .

to the point of shedding your blood. Although they had suffered (), they had not yet had to give their lives like some of their esteemed predecessors (v. ; ).

Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as his children. Some other Jewish thinkers applied (cited in vv. ) in similar ways, and the idea that is taught there is even more widespread (cf., e.g., ; ). disciplined by their father. Jewish wisdom literature understood appropriate discipline as a sign of a father’s concern for his children. Suffering can lead to greater maturity (, , ).

not legitimate, not true sons and daughters. In ancient society, not being legitimate was considered shameful and normally meant that one would not inherit; fathers invested more effort in “legitimate” children. (The writer simply draws on a familiar image; he does not genuinely view those born outside marriage as spiritually inferior—compare with ).

Father of spirits. God was often called “Lord of spirits” (1 Enoch 37–71 passim; cf. ; ); here he is called “Father of spirits” in contrast to human fathers. Jewish tradition developed the Biblical concept of God as their father (e.g., ), and, as here, understood and often used “How much more?” arguments.

God disciplines us for our good. The audience would easily follow the author’s argument. Jewish tradition recognized that God disciplined the righteous for their good and only for a time, and that he would afterward reward them. Jewish people also expected the Lord to punish the wicked more severely, especially in the future.

feeble arms and weak knees. Language such as this sometimes described people’s terror in the face of God’s judgment, but the language here more closely echoes the encouragement to God’s oppressed people to persevere because they are on the verge of vindication and restoration (). (Hebrews’ major change, a different verb for “strengthen,” is related to the verb in the next quotation in v. .) Possibly vv.  might revisit the race image of vv. .

lame may not be disabled. The writer echoes , where this image is a moral one; the healing of the lame may echo the context of the preceding quotation (), where in the time of restoration God heals the disabled ().

Turning away from Jesus was worse than Esau’s shortsighted apostasy (vv. ) and more serious than rejecting the revelation of God at Sinai (vv. ), for Jesus is greater than Moses and greater than Abel (v. ). Most of the Jewish people felt embarrassed by the rebellion of many of their ancestors in the wilderness; the writer warns that if his hearers turn their backs on Christ, they are even worse than their ancestors.

Make every effort to live in peace. Echoes the Greek translation of .

no bitter root grows up. In , the bitter root of apostasy can spread to infect many.

sexually immoral, or . . . godless like Esau. In , Esau did not act as if he viewed life from a long-range perspective, much less an eternal one (the rabbis inferred from this text that he denied the future resurrection of the dead). Noting Esau’s actions, the Diaspora Jewish writer Philo regarded Esau as enslaved by sensual and temporal desires. Jewish tradition deemed Esau sexually immoral, probably originally based on his initial preference for Gentile wives (), which dismayed his parents (; ).

sought the blessing with tears. Despite his tears (), it was too late for Esau to regain the blessing, because the first blessing could not be annulled. He was effectively disinherited from the promise (cf. ).

God warned of his power in these ways when he gave the law on the mountain (; , ; ). burning with fire. Translates similar wording in ; ; . darkness. The Greek term used here appears in the Greek translation of ; ; . gloom. The Greek term for “gloom” rhymes with the Greek term for “darkness.” storm. The same Greek term appears in the Greek text of ; .

trumpet blast. See ; . begged that no further word be spoken to them. The people wanted Moses to hear God for them, fearing that if God spoke to them directly, they would die (; ), for he came as a consuming fire (). But God’s purpose was to inspire the fear of God in them to warn them against sin ().

could not bear. For God’s unapproachable holiness here, see ; cf. .

Moses feared for Israel’s survival because of their sin ().

Mount Zion. A reference to the temple or more broadly, as here, Jerusalem. Jerusalem, as opposed to Mount Sinai, was to be the place of the giving of the new law in the end time (). heavenly Jerusalem. See note on . Everyone in antiquity would regard a heavenly place of revelation as superior to an earthly one, regardless of the earthly one’s impressiveness (vv. ). thousands upon thousands of angels. Jewish tradition claimed that vast numbers of angels were present when God gave the law, often citing ; the main source here (probably also for the psalm) is .

the church of the firstborn. The popular Greek version of the OT already sometimes used the Greek term translated “church” to designate the assembly of God’s people; thus the writer of Hebrews here contrasts the congregation led by Jesus with the one led by Moses (v. ). firstborn. See note on ; because the reference to the “firstborn” here is plural in Greek, it may refer to God’s people as a whole here—e.g., . names are written in heaven. People’s names were often written in ancient citizen registers; the writer probably alludes especially to the widespread Jewish concept of the book of life (see note on ). spirits of the righteous made perfect. In some Jewish apocalyptic texts, “spirits” could refer to the righteous dead in heaven. Many Diaspora Jews believed that the righteous finally attained perfection in death (or in resurrection, cf. ; some suggest that “the righteous” of include the heroes of ch. ).

Jesus the mediator of a new covenant. Jewish people regarded Moses as the mediator of the first covenant (cf. ; ), who inaugurated it with sprinkled blood (). sprinkled blood . . . blood of Abel. In contrast to Jesus’ blood, Abel’s blood cried for vengeance (; cf. ). (Illustrating how seriously Jewish interpreters took that passage in Genesis, later rabbis charged that the blood of all the descendants who would have been born from Abel cried out to God against Cain, and Cain thus had no share in the world to come.) Cf. note on .

The heavenly Zion is greater than the earthly Sinai (v. ), and judgment for rejecting the voice from heaven (; cf. v. ) is correspondingly greater. how much less will we . . . ? Reflects a familiar type of “How much more?” argument (cf. v. ; ; ).

shake not only the earth but also the heavens. Many Jewish people expected a great end-time earthquake, following some OT texts (; [in mind here]; cf. ). The land quaked when God came to give the law on Mount Sinai (; ); later Jewish tradition amplified this point to say that God shook the whole world.

once more. Might also imply reference to the previous shaking, perhaps referring to Sinai (see v.  and note); the future shaking, however, would impact all creation (cf. ). the removing of what can be shaken. The author argues that the reason there will be one final shaking is because nothing shakable will remain after it. what cannot be shaken may remain. On the permanence of perfect and heavenly things, see note on .

kingdom that cannot be shaken. For God’s unshakable reign, cf. the popular Greek translation of ; ; cf. ; for Mount Zion as unshakable, see ; .

God is a consuming fire. The author quotes (cf. ; ; ; ). The context is God’s anger against those who broke his covenant by worshiping other deities ().

Ancient moral teachers often provided exhortations loosely fitted together, often after more sustained argumentation (cf., e.g., ; ; ).

hospitality to angels. The highly regarded ancient virtue of hospitality included lodging and feeding trustworthy travelers in one’s home. Jewish sources praised as the greatest model of this hospitality Abraham, who welcomed the three visitors ()—at least two of whom turned out to be angels. (Some hearers may have also thought of other stories, like an angel in the Jewish story of Tobit or Greek stories about gods visiting people in disguise.)

remember those in prison. Prisoners had to depend on those outside for food beyond basic prison rations, for clothing and other items; guards sometimes required bribes even to grant this much access. Prisons detained people until trial or execution, but prisoners could remain in custody for long periods of time until trial. By the second century, Christians were known for their care for the imprisoned. those in prison. Probably refers to some Christians imprisoned for their faith or for practices related to it (as in v. ; cf. ; ).

the marriage bed kept pure. Many ancient writers spoke of honoring the “(marriage) bed” (the “bed” was a euphemism for intercourse). Most people regarded adultery as wrong, although it is commonly reported. Greek men often married around age 30, before that time fulfilling sexual urges with prostitutes, slaves, or other males. Greek men often had affairs with boys around the age of puberty and young men in their teens. Following Scripture, Jewish circles regarded such behaviors as immoral.

Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you. In , Moses offers this promise to Israel, describing God in the third person, but the writer of Hebrews, who regards all Scripture as God’s inspired Word, uses (a prophecy of assurance to Joshua as God’s servant) to adapt it to God speaking in the first person.

The author of Hebrews cites the Greek version of (cf. ; ). He may add this to the previous quotation of , because , says that the hearers should not be afraid (although the writer of Hebrews does not quote that line). Writers often linked texts based on similar words. (The Judean practice of linking texts in this manner was called gezerah shevah.)

Remember your leaders. When teaching on moral subjects, teachers often offered examples as role models.

In part because Greeks often emphasized the value of what was changeless and eternal, many Diaspora Jews emphasized the Biblical picture of God’s changelessness (; ).

not by eating ceremonial foods. ; listed “unclean” foods that Jewish people were to avoid. Some Diaspora Jews found allegorical significance in these laws, but it appears that the majority still practiced them literally (even those who allegorized them).

no right to eat. Now the author addresses a special kind of pure food (cf. v. ): the priests’ portion of the sacrifice in the tabernacle/temple (see note on ). Believers, he says, serve as priests (v. ) at a different kind of altar (cf. ).

bodies are burned outside the camp. Burning sacrifices outside the camp was part of several different rituals (cf. ; ), but the present text refers to the Day of Atonement, when the priest went into the Most Holy Place with the blood of the sacrifice (). This is the sacrifice Jesus fulfilled for the heavenly altar ().

outside the city . . . outside the camp. That Jesus was crucified and buried outside Jerusalem’s walls fits both the Gospel accounts and the ancient requirement that the dead be buried outside the city (so as to avoid contracting ritual impurity caused by contact with graves; cf., e.g., ; ; ; ). Roman law also required that crucifixions occur outside the city gate. (Although sin offerings on the Day of Atonement were burned outside the camp [], they were sacrificed in the temple or tabernacle [].) For Hebrews’ Jewish Christian audience, leaving “the camp” may imply enduring expulsion from their Jewish community, if need be, to follow the God of Abraham wholeheartedly (cf. ).

make the people holy through his own blood. Blood was sprinkled to purify things or make them holy ().

city that is to come. See note on .

let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise. This passage may reflect (cf. also ). Ancient writers often depicted praise as an offering to God; for spiritual sacrifices, cf. ; ; ; ; .

do not forget to do good. Pharisees’ belief in piety as a spiritual offering may have helped Pharisaism survive the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Passages such as this one illustrate that, theologically, Christians were even better prepared for that crisis.

submit to their authority. When writing on moral topics, writers often exhorted people how to submit to rulers. The exhortation here might function like a sort of “letter of recommendation” (on these, see note on ). submit. Submission here is general, as often in ancient sources, not the extreme sort found, e.g., in the Dead Sea Scrolls: there leaders of the community would determine members’ progress or lack of it, affecting members’ standing in the community and before God.

that I may be restored to you soon. Some suspect that the author is imprisoned (cf. v. ; ). Some prisoners had access to writing materials, especially in cases of lighter custody or favorable guards.

blood of the eternal covenant. The first covenant was inaugurated by the blood of the covenant (), which Jewish tradition sometimes called the eternal covenant (a designation Scripture applied more clearly to earlier covenants such as ; , ; ; though cf. ; ). But the promised future covenant would also be eternal or everlasting (; ; ; ; ; ); it is the blood of this new covenant to which the author of Hebrews refers (). great Shepherd of the sheep. See note on . The Greek translation of says that God brought up the “shepherd of the sheep” (Moses) from the sea. The prophets had also prophesied a new exodus (cf. note on ).

I have written to you quite briefly. Skilled speakers sometimes claimed that they had spoken only briefly, despite it being obviously untrue, to imply that they could have said much more (cf. ).

Timothy has been released. Timothy probably traveled to Rome to receive Paul’s final instructions (, ). It was especially Nero who in this period persecuted Christians in Rome. If, as is likely, Timothy was arrested under Nero in Rome, he may well have been released on Nero’s death in AD 68; the Praetorian Guard and the Roman aristocracy had already lost faith in Nero’s policies.

Those from Italy. It seems likely that the author writes from Italy. send you their greetings. It was common for those in a letter writer’s location to convey greetings when they knew the addressees.

↑ Back to top