Hebrews 2:16

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels,.... Good angels; for they are all along spoken of in this book; and it would have been impertinent to have said this of evil angels: and this is to

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels: the Spirit having asserted the deliverance of the children from their slavery to the devil, shows here the means by which it was effected, even by the gospel Prophet, being a man, and not an angel; he took their nature to himself, that by death he might deliver them: ou dhpou may signify no where, or in no wise; epilambanetai is read by some, to take hold of, and so make this work denied of God the Son, that he did not take hold of the falling angels, to save or recover them: but the Spirit speaks not one word of lapsed angels in either this or the foregoing chapter, and so it cannot refer to them; and for good angels, they never departed or fell, that he should stretch out his hand to save them. And it cannot be understood otherwise than affirmatively here, which must needs have another sense, because the same act is denied and affirmed. The word therefore signifieth to assume, or to take to one, to assume or take into union. He united not to his person the angelical nature, the individual substance of an angel, so as to redeem those sinning lapsed spirits. But he took on him the seed of Abraham; but he assumed into union with his person the seed of Abraham; which seed is not to be understood here collectively, for either his carnal or believing seed; but it is the one singular, eminent Seed of Abraham, in and by whom, himself, his seed, and all nations were to be blessed, , compare , the man Christ Jesus. This man, God the Son took of the virgin Mary, the offspring of Abraham, and united him to his person, and of God and this Seed united into one person, became our Lord Jesus Christ, so as he might bring the blessing of salvation to the chosen of God in all nations. The assumption of this eminent Seed into the unity of his own person, is here asserted by the Spirit, and denied concerning any angel, there being no promise ever made to them for it, ,35 Galatians 4:4 . If the verb signify no such assumption in human authors, as some cavil, it is because the matter to which it is here applied was never treated on among them; and it is common with the Spirit to make words which are ordinary with men, transcendent, when he applieth them to the great mysteries of God, as Trinity, Son, adoption, &c.

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Ver. 16. For verily he took not] επιλαμβανεται. Or, for nowhere took he, q. d. We find not anywhere, either in the Scriptures or in any Church record. But he took] He assumed, apprehended, caught, laid hold on, as the angel did on Lot, Genesis 19:16, as Christ did on Peter, Matthew 14:31, as men use to do upon a thing they are glad they have got and are loth to let go again. It is a main pillar of our comfort, that Christ took our flesh, for if he took not our flesh, we are not saved by him. But he not only took it, but overtook it by running after it, as the shepherd doth the sheep that is run away. A shepherd witha sheep upon his shoulder, engraved upon the communion cup, in the primitive times of the gospel, imported the same notion that here seems implied.

(16) He took not on him the nature of angels.—The rendering of the margin approaches very nearly the true meaning of the verse; whereas the text (in which the Authorised version differs from all our earlier translations) introduces confusion into the argument. Having spoken in Hebrews 2:14 of our Lord’s assumption of human nature, the writer in these words assigns the reason: “For surely it is not of angels that He taketh hold, but He taketh hold of the seed of Abraham.” Though the words “take hold,” which occur twice in the verse, probably cannot directly signify “help” (as is often maintained), they distinctly suggest laying hold for the sake of giving help; and a beautiful illustration may be found in some of the Gospel narratives of our Lord’s works of healing (Mark 8:23; Luke 14:4). It is probable that the language used here is derived from the Old Testament. In Hebrews 8:9, a quotation from Jeremiah 31, we read, “In the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt.” Isaiah 41:8-9, however, is perhaps a still closer parallel (for the word used in the Greek version is very similar, and no doubt expresses the same meaning): “Thou Israel, my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend; thou of whom I have taken hold from the ends of the earth.” If the writer had these verses in his thought, it is hardly necessary to inquire why he chooses the expression “seed of Abraham,” instead of one of (apparently) wider meaning, such as Hebrews 2:7-8, might seem to require. But even apart from this passage of Isaiah, and the natural fitness of such a phrase in words addressed to Jews, we may doubt if any other language would have been equally expressive. For as to the means, it was by becoming a child of Abraham that the Saviour “took hold of” our race to raise it up; and as to the purpose, St. Paul teaches us that “the seed of Abraham” includes all who inherit Abraham’s faith.

Verse 16. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels] Ουγαρδηπουαγγελωνεπιλαμβανεται, αλλασπερματοςΑβρααμεπιλαμβανεται. Moreover, he doth not at all take hold of angels; but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold. This is the marginal reading, and is greatly to be preferred to that in the text Jesus Christ, intending not to redeem angels, but to redeem man, did not assume the angelic nature, but was made man, coming directly by the seed or posterity of Abraham, with whom the original covenant was made, that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed; and it is on this account that the apostle mentioned the seed of Abraham, and not the seed of Adam; and it is strange that to many commentators should have missed so obvious a sense. The word itself signifies not only to take hold of, but to help, succour, save from sinking, c. The rebel angels, who sinned and fell from God, were permitted to fall downe, alle downe, as one of our old writers expresses it, till they fell into perdition: man sinned and fell, and was falling downe, alle downe, but Jesus laid hold on him and prevented him from falling into endless perdition. Thus he seized on the falling human creature, and prevented him from falling into the bottomless pit but he did not seize on the falling angels, and they fell down into outer darkness. By assuming the nature of man, he prevented this final and irrecoverable fall of man; and by making an atonement in human nature, he made a provision for its restoration to its forfeited blessedness. This is a fine thought of the apostle, and is beautifully expressed. Man was falling from heaven, and Jesus caught hold of the falling creature, and prevented its endless ruin. In this respect he prefers men to angels, and probably for this simple reason, that the human nature was more excellent than the angelic; and it is suitable to the wisdom of the Divine Being to regard all the works of his hands in proportion to the dignity or excellence with which he has endowed them.

16. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels] Rather, “for assuredly it is not angels whom He takes by the hand.” The word äÞðïõ, “certainly,” “I suppose,” occurs here only in the N. T. or LXX., though common in Philo. In classic Greek it often has a semi-ironic tinge, “you will doubtless admit that,” like opinor in Latin. All are now agreed that the verb does not mean “to take the nature of,” but “to take by the hand,” and so “to help” or “rescue.” Beza indeed called it “execrable rashness” (exsecranda audacia) to translate it so, when this rendering was first adopted by Castellio in 1551; but the usage of the word proves that this is the only possible rendering, although all the Fathers and Reformers take it in the other way. It is rightly corrected in the R. V. (comp. Isaiah 49:9-10; Jeremiah 31:32; Hebrews 8:9; Matthew 14:31; Wis 4:11, “Wisdom … takes by the hand those that seek her”). To refer “he taketh not hold” to Death or the Devil is most improbable.the seed of Abraham] i.e. He was born a Hebrew. He does not at all mean to imply that our Lord came to the Jews more than to the Gentiles, though he is only thinking of the former.

For verily - Truly. He took not on him the nature of angels - Margin, “He taketh not hold of angels, but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold.” The word used here - ἐπιλαμβάνεται epilambanetai -

16. Took not on him—This verb signifies primitively to grasp, to take hold of; generally with some degree of force or earnestness. This taking is for the purpose of aid, or to possess and appropriate.