Hebrews 3

Hebrews 3:1-6

Hebrews 3:1-6

Near the close of the last section (Hebrews 2:17), the Apostle, while dis­cussing the question of Christ’s humanity, refers for the first time to his priesthood. And hence we might reasonably expect that this would be made the next topic of discussion. But connected with this, and naturally and historically antecedent to it, is the apostle- ship of Christ. Moses preceded Aaron in the economy of the Old Testament; and Christ appeared as the Leader of God’s people, be­fore he entered on the duties of his priesthood. And hence while our author blends together in some measure the discussion of these two functions of Christ’s mediatorial office, he devotes the next section mainly to the consideration of his apostleship and such other matters as depend essentially on it. The following are the main points which he makes in the discussion and development of this part of his subject:

 

I. He shows the great superiority of Christ over Moses, as the Apostle of God. (Hebrews 3:1-6.)

1. In making this comparison between Christ and Moses, our author shows no disposition to disparage the latter in any way. He concedes that Moses was faithful to God in all his house (Hebrews 3:2). . .

2. But then he argues that according to the Divine arrange­ment, Christ is as much superior to Moses as he who builds a house is superior to the house itself (verse 3). This argument may be briefly stated as follows: God built all things, including, of course, both the Jewish house and the Christian house. But Christ is God, one with the Father (Hebrews 1:8.) And hence it follows, that Christ is as much superior to the Jewish or Old Testament house of God, including Moses himself and every other member of the

3. Theocracy, as he who builds a house is superior to it (Hebrews 3:4-5).

4. Furthermore, Moses was but a servant in the symbolical house of God; but Christ as a Son presides over the real house of God; which is to the symbolical house of the Old Testament econ­omy, as the substance is to the shadow (Hebrews 3:6).

 

II. From this subject, the transition to the pilgrimage of the Is­raelites under Moses and ours under Christ, is easy and natural (Hebrews 3:7-19).

1. According to Moses (Numbers 2:32-33), about six hundred thousand (603,550) Israelites, besides the Levites and the women and children, left Egypt with the fairest and

most encouraging prospects of entering Canaan.

2. But, nevertheless, very few of them ever reached the Prom­ised Land. They provoked God in the wilderness, till he finally swore in his wrath that they should never enter into his rest. (Numbers 14:22-30.)

3. From this chapter of sacred history, the Apostle therefore solemnly warns his Hebrew brethren, and through them also all the followers of Christ, of their many dangers, and of the necessity of their giving all diligence in order to make their calling and elec­tion sure during their earthly pilgrimage (Hebrews 3:12-18).

4. It is true that our advantages and privileges are now, in many respects, greatly superior to those of the ancient Israelites. But human nature is still the same; our greatest enemies are still the same; the deceitfulness of sin is the same; many of our trials and temptations are the same; and hence what was “written afore­time was written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.” It becomes all Chris­tians, therefore, to exhort and admonish one another daily Hebrews 3:13).

 

I. From the pilgrimage of the Jews under Moses and ours under Christ, the Apostle is next led to consider the rest which re­mains for the people of God. (Hebrews 4:1-10.)

1. The idea of rest was a very pleasant and consoling thought to the Israelites. They had long been accustomed to reflect on the many pleasures and advantages of a sanctified rest.

(1.) From the regular observance of the weekly Sabbath.

(2.) From the habit of sanctifying many other days to the Lord; as, for example, the first day of every month; the first and last day of the feast of Unleavened Bread, etc.

(3.) From celebrating the Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee.

(4.) From the ease and repose which they enjoyed in Canaan, compared with the many toils and trials which their fathers had endured in the wilderness. From all of which it is manifest, that in an argument designed for the encouragement of the Hebrew brethren, it was particularly necessary to dwell on this element of the Christian religion, and to show that there is a rest remaining for the people of God, that far transcends in importance any earthly rest that was ever enjoyed by the seed of Abraham accord­ing to the flesh.

2. But just here the Apostle seems to have anticipated an objec­tion which might peradventure be urged by the judaizing party. That most of the Old Testament references to the heavenly rest were made through types and shadows there can be no doubt. And with some it might, therefore, be a question, whether in such portions of Scripture there is really anything more intended or implied than the mere temporal rest to which the ancient Prophets primarily referred.

3. To this question he makes the following reply:

(1.) He refers to Psalms 95:7, from which he proves that God in his wrath had sworn to the Israelites under Moses, that they should not enter into his rest. And hence he argues that this could not be the Sabbatical rest, because it was instituted in the begin­ning when God finished the work of creation (Genesis 2:2), and had been enjoyed by the Israelites throughout all their journeyings (Exodus 16:22-31). And hence it follows that there must be another rest for the people of God: a rest into which the rebellious Israel­ites under Moses never entered (verses 3-6).

(2.) But lest it might be supposed that the promise of God guaranteeing rest to his people, was fulfilled in its fullest and ulti­mate sense when the Israelites under Joshua entered Canaan, the Apostle refers again to the ninety-fifth Psalm, and proves from it that even in the time of David, after the children of Israel had pos­sessed the land of Canaan for nearly five hundred years—even then there was danger that the living generation would, like their fa­thers, be excluded from the promised rest. From all of which, it clearly follows that there is still a rest remaining for the people of God. For as our author says, if Joshua had given the people rest in the land of Canaan, then most assuredly God would not after­ward have spoken of another rest by the mouth of his servant David (verses 7-9).

 

II. The section closes with a renewed exhortation to labor ear­nestly to enter into the rest of God, especially in view of the heart-searching character of his word by which we are all to be judged at the last day (Hebrews 3:11-13)

1. Here we may often deceive one another; and sometimes we may even deceive ourselves; but nothing can escape the eye of God and the all-permeating power of his word.

2. And hence the necessity of the most careful and constant self-examination, lest, like the Israelites, we too fall short of the promised rest.

 

Under this section, we have therefore the four following para­graphs :

I. Hebrews 3:1-6. Christ superior to Moses.

II. Hebrews 3:7-19. Exhortations and warnings drawn from the exam­ple of the Israelites under Moses.

III. Hebrews 4:1-10. Concerning the rest which remains for the people of God.

IV. Hebrews 4:11-13. Renewed exhortation to strive earnestly to enter into God’s rest, in view especially of the all-penetrating and heart­searching character of God’s word.

CHRIST TO MOSES

Hebrews 3:1 —Wherefore,—We have here a very beautiful illustration of the easy and natural manner in which our author passes from one sub­ject to another. The word “wherefore” (hothen) is illative, and shows the very close and intimate connection of what follows in this verse, with what has been said of Christ in the two preceding chapters; and especially in the last paragraph of the second chap­ter. But what is here introduced as a consequence from premises considered, is made also a ground of transition to another subject.

 

Hebrews 3:1 —holy brethren,—These were the Hebrew Christians. They are addressed here by the Apostle, not as Jews, nor as brethren of Christ, but as his own brethren in Christ. And they are called holy brethren, not because they were all in possession of that holi­ness of heart which the Gospel requires, but because they had all professed to believe in Christ, to put on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and to be separated from the world as the peculiar people of God. In this sense, the Corinthian brethren are all called saints (agioi, 1 Corinthians 1:2); though we are assured by Paul in both his letters to the Corinthian Church, that some of them were very impure men. See references, and notes on Hebrews 2:11.

 

Hebrews 3:1 —partakers of the heavenly calling,—The word rendered calling (kleesis), means properly a call, a summons, an invitation; and hence by metonymy it means also the state or condition into which anyone is called. In 1 Corinthians 7:17-20, for example, Paul says to the Corinthian brethren, “As the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk; and so I ordain in all the churches. Is any man called being circumcised? let him not be uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.” In this passage, the word calling evi­dently refers to the social rank and secular condition of each indi­vidual when he was called of God to partake of the “heavenly call­ing” ; some were Jews and some were Gentiles, some were slaves and some were freemen.

The “heavenly calling,” according to Paul, is not designed to nullify and set aside arbitrarily and uncon­ditionally all such distinctions. The Jew, though converted to Christ, might nevertheless consistently remain in circumcision; and the Gentile, in uncircumcision. In this metonymical sense the word calling is used in our text to denote, not merely God’s gra­cious invitation to sinners, but also and more particularly the bene­fits of this invitation; having special reference to the present state and condition of those who, in obedience to God’s call, have put on Christ as he is offered to us in the Gospel. It is the high and holy calling of God in Christ Jesus (Philippians 3:14), to which our author here refers. And this is denominated a heavenly calling because it comes from Heaven, leads to Heaven, and fills with heavenly joys the hearts of all who are made partakers of it.

 

Hebrews 3:1 —consider the apostle and high priest—Meditate carefully and profoundly (katanoeesate) on the nature and character of Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession. Our author makes here an earnest appeal to his Hebrew brethren to consider well all that he had said, and all that he was about to say, concerning Christ; to think of his Divinity, his humanity, his sufferings, his death, his burial, his resurrection, his ascension, his glorification, his universal dominion, his love, his sympathies, and every other attribute and perfection of his character. And this he does for the purpose of confirming and strengthening their faith, increasing their love, and guarding them against the sin of apostasy.

 

The word apostle (apostelos) means one who is sent: a messen­ger of any kind. In this sense it is here applied to Christ, as the one sent by God for the redemption of mankind. “The Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.” (1 John 4:14.) Christ is then the Apostle of God under the New Economy as Moses was his Apostle under the Old Economy. True, indeed, Moses is nowhere called the Apostle of God in the Holy Scrip­tures; but words equivalent to these occur frequently in the Old Testament. In Exodus 3:10, for example, God says to Moses, “Come, now, therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou may- est bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.” And in the twelfth verse of the same chapter he says, “And this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee.” See also Exodus 3:13-15 Exodus 4:28 Exodus 5:22 Exodus 7:16, etc. It is evident, therefore, that our author here applies this term to Christ as the Apostle, or Messen­ger, of the New Covenant (Mai. 3: 1), for the purpose of compar­ing him in this capacity with Moses the renowned and honored Apostle of the Old Covenant. They were both sent by God; and were therefore the Apostles of God.

But the ministry of Christ, as Paul now proceeds to show, was far superior to that of Moses. In the fourth, sixth, and eighth sections of the Epistle, the priesthood of Christ is compared with that of Aaron, and shown to be supe­rior to it in every respect.

 

Hebrews 3:1 —of our profession,—The Greek word here rendered profession (homologia) means (1) an agreement or compact; and (2) an ad­mission, acknowledgment, or confession. It is God’s prerogative to speak (legein), and it is man’s duty and privilege to acknowl­edge (homologein) the justice and propriety of what he says. Thus God spoke the words of the Old Covenant from Mount Sinai (Exodus 20-23), and the people then acknowledged his words, and consented to observe and do all that he had commanded (Exodus 24 :3)

 

In like manner God has made known to us all the terms and stipulations of the New Covenant; and to these he requires us to give a hearty and unreserved assent and acknowledgment. But as Christ is himself the central truth, the Alpha and the Omega, of the New Covenant, it follows of course that all things pertaining to it are briefly summed up in the confession that “Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:16.) “On this rock,” says Christ, “I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:17.) This soon became publicly known as “The Confession” of the primitive Christians; and hence it is that the Greek article is always prefixed to the noun which is used to express it. In Paul’s first Epistle to Timothy, for exam­ple, he says to him, “Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eter­nal life to which thou wast called, and didst confess the good con­fession (teen kaleen homologian) before many witnesses.” (1 Timothy 6:12.) And in the next verse he says, “I charge thee in the sight of God who quickeneth all things, and before Jesus Christ who before Pontius Pilate testified the good confession, that thou keep this commandment without spot and without reproach until the appear­ing of our Lord Jesus Christ.” See also Hebrews 4:14 Hebrews 10:23; 2 Corinthians 9:13. In all these passages the Greek article is used before the noun (homologia), as in 1 Timothy 6:12, to denote that the con­fession made by Christ and Timothy was the common and well- known confession that was then required of all, as a condition of church-membership. For as Paul says to the Roman brethren, “with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Romans 10:10). And Christ says, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess before my Father who is in Heaven.” (Matthew 10:32.)

 

When the confession is made publicly in the presence of wit­nesses, it may also be called, as in our text, a profession (profes- sio); which means simply a public avowal of one’s belief and senti­ments. But the word confession or acknowledgment better ex­presses the meaning of the Apostle, and is also more in harmony with Greek usage.

 

Hebrews 3:2 —Who was faithful to him that appointed him,—More liter­ally, as being faithful to him that made him. The present participie being (onta) indicates that fidelity to God is an abiding and perpetual characteristic of Christ in his whole sphere of labor. He came to do the will of him that sent him. (John 4:34.) This he did while he tabernacled with us here on Earth; and this he is now doing in the discharge of the higher functions of his mediatorial reign. In his hands, the government of God and the interests of mankind are alike perfectly secure. Sooner will Heaven and Earth pass away, than even one jot or one tittle of the Divine law fail in his hands.

 

He that appointed or made (to poieesanti) him, is, of course, God the Father. The reference here is not, as some think, to Christ’s being eternally begotten of the Father (Bleek, Liine- mann); nor is it, as others allege, to his incarnation (Athanasius, Ambrose); but it is simply to his being officially appointed by the Father (De Wette, Delijzsch, etc.) ; to his being made the Apostle and High Priest of ou£ confession. “It is the Lord,” says Samuel, “that advanced Moses and Aaron, and brought your fathers up out of the land of Egypt.” (1 Samuel 12:6.) Here the Hebrew word rendered advanced means, literally, made, and it is so rendered in the Septuagint. (ho poieesan ton Mouseen kai ton Aaron.) It is, however, quite manifest that Samuel refers here, not to the crea­tion of Moses and Aaron as men, but to their official appointment as the Apostle and High Priest of the Old Covenant. See Mark 3:14. And so also the word (poieo) is used in our text. God has made Jesus both the Apostle and High Priest of our confes­sion ; and in the discharge of all the duties appertaining to these sacred functions, he (Jesus) has always been faithful.

 

Hebrews 3:2 —as also Moses was faithful in all his house.—That Moses was faithful in the discharge of all the duties of his office, God has him­self borne witness. “If,” says he in his admonition to Aaron and Miriam, “there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make my­self known to him in a vision, and I will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all my house. With him I will speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold.” (Numbers 12:6-8.)

 

This much, then, is evident, that Moses was faithful to him that appointed him, in the discharge of all his official duties. But what is the meaning of the word house (oikos) in this connection? and to whom does the pronoun his (autou) refer?

 

A house is a dwelling-place; and the word is manifestly used here to designate the Church of the Israelites, as God’s ancient dwelling place. This is obvious (1) from the context. We learn from the sixth verse of this chapter, that the house over which Christ now presides and in which he officiates, is the Christian Church; which, as Paul says in his Epistle to the Ephesians (Ephesians 2:20-22), is a holy temple, fitly framed together, and designed as a habitation or dwelling-place of God through the Spirit. See also 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Peter 2:5, etc.

 

The same thing is made evident also from the consideration of sundry other parallel passages, in which God is represented as ac­tually dwelling among the ancient Israelites. In Exodus 25:8, for ex­ample, God says to Moses, “Let them [the Israelites] make me a Sanctuary that I may dwell among them.” And in Exodus 29:45, he says, “I will dwell among the children of Israel, and I will be their God.” See also Leviticus 26:12; 1 Kings 6:11-13, etc. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the house in which Moses was faithful as the steward of God, was the house of Israel; the same as the Church of God in the wilderness. (Acts 7:38.)

 

Let us, then, next inquire for the proper antecedent of the pro­noun his (autou) in this connection. What is it? Some think that the word his is used here to represent Christ; and that the Apostle means to say that Moses was faithful in the house of Christ. This is Bleek’s opinion; but it is forced and unnatural, and scarcely de­serves to be mentioned. Others make the pronoun refer to Moses, regarding it, not as a genitive of possession, but of locality. According to this construction the meaning of the Apostle is sim­ply this: that Moses was faithful in the house to which he belonged and in which he served.

This opinion, supported by Ebrard and others, is thought to be plausible and in no way inconsistent with the context. But others again, as Delitzsch and Alford, maintain with more probability that this pronoun refers to God as its proper antecedent; to him who appointed both Moses and Christ to their official positions; the one as a servant in the Old Testament house, and the other as a Son over the house of the New Testament. This construction is favored by the reference which our author makes to Num. 12: 7, where God says as above, “My servant Moses … is faithful in all mine house." This view is also most in harmony with New Testament usage. See references.

 

Whatever may be thought of these minor points of grammatical construction, the general scope of this verse is very plain and obvi­ous. Our author, wishing to compare Christ with Moses, refers first with great delicacy and propriety to one point in which they may within certain limits be regarded as equal. They were both faithful to him who appointed them, in their proper spheres of labor. But having conceded so much, the Apostle now proceeds to show that the difference between them is really infinite.

 

Hebrews 3:3 —For this man, etc.—This verse in connection with the three following, has long been a stumbling-block in the way of many commentators. And it must be confessed that the passage is very elliptical, and that the construction is therefore somewhat obscure. But the argument of the Apostle manifestly implies that Christ sustains to Moses the same relation that the person who builds and furnishes a house sustains to the house itself. Consider well, he says, Jesus the Apostle and High Priest of our confession; for though he and Moses were both faithful to him who appointed them, he has nevertheless been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, in proportion as he who has builded and furnished a house has more honor than the house. Why so? Manifestly, because Christ is here regarded as the builder and furnisher of the whole house of Israel, of which Moses himself was but a member.

 

But how, it is asked, could this be, since Jesus was not born for fifteen hundred years after the birth of Moses ? And how, we may ask in reply and with equal propriety, could God by his Son make the worlds many ages before the Logos became his Son ? See note on 1:2. How could Paul say to the Colossians (Colossians 1:16-18), “By him [God’s dear Son] were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by him and for him; and he is before all things, and by him all things consist; and he is the head of the body, the Church; that in all things he might have the preeminence” ? And how could the beloved John say, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; all things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made”? How could the Word be God and be also with God ?

The truth is, we often confound ourselves and our readers by endeavoring to comprehend and explain, not indeed what is contrary to our rea­son, but what is infinitely above it. The sublime truth is, however, clearly taught in the Holy Scriptures, and in no part of them more clearly than in the first chapter of our Epistle, that the Father and the Son are both God; both included in the Eloheem Jehovah of the Old Testament, and the Lord God Omnipotent of the New; and that each of them, as well as the Holy Spirit, has an agency in all that pertains to the redemption of mankind. Jesus, as our au­thor avers in 12: 2, is both “the Author and the Finisher of the faith.” The laws and ordinances of the Patriarchal and the Jewish age, as well as those of the Christian age, are all the product of his wisdom and benevolence, as well as of the wisdom and benevolence of the Father. And hence it may be truthfully said, that he, as God, was the builder and furnisher (ho kataskeuasas) of the whole house of Israel, including Moses and everything else that per­tained to it.

 

Hebrews 3:4 —For every house is builded by some man;—This is a sort of axiomatic expression which the Apostle throws in here for the purpose of connecting more clearly and distinctly the more remote links on his chain of argument. The nation of Israel under the Theocracy was a house, a dwelling-place of the Most High. And as such it must of course have had a builder and furnisher: “for every house is builded by some one.” A design always implies a designer; and the building of every house implies a chief architect. Under him there may of course be many subordinates; but in order to secure unity of design there must of necessity be a chief designer. And just so it was with the house of Israel. It was built, and its affairs were administered through the agency of both men and angels.

But still, God himself (including the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) was the Supreme Architect in building the house of Israel, as well as in building the universe. And hence it follows, as before stated, that Jesus in his entire personality, in­cluding his Divine as well as his human nature, is as much supe­rior to Moses, as the builder of a house is to the house itself.

 

I am aware that their is in the human mind a tendency to think of Christ merely as a man; and so to bring him down in our con­ceptions to an equality with creatures of high and exalted intelli­gence. And I am also aware that with such opinions concerning him, no one can understand the reasoning of Paul in this connec­tion. No Socinian or Arian can ever give us a fair and consistent explanation of this short paragraph. But surely the Apostle never intended to call on his Hebrew brethren or any one else to consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, merely as a man. For if so, then why does he present to us so fully the evi­dence of his Divinity in the first chapter of this Epistle? To my mind it is quite evident that he purposely discusses the leading questions relating to both the Divinity and the humanity of Christ, before he attempts to compare him with Moses, the Apostle of the Old Covenant.

And then he calls on us to consider him as the Creator and Founder of all things, including the Jewish Theocracy as well as the Christian Church. In this view of the matter, all is plain and simple.

 

Hebrews 3:5 —And Moses verily was faithful in all his house as a ser­vant,—In this and the following verse, the Apostle proceeds to state two other points in which Moses was inferior to Christ: (1) Moses was but a servant (therapon) a waiting-man in the house of God; but Christ as a Son presides over the house of his Father. (2) The house in which Moses served was far inferior to that over which Christ presides. True, indeed, each of them is called the house of God; but the former was to the latter as the type is to the antitype, or as the shadow is to the subsance. (Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 10:1.) The Law was given through Moses on account of trans­gression, till the Seed should come (Galatians 3:19) ; and it was de­signed to serve (a) as a code of rules and regulations for the polit­ical government of the Israelites (1 Timothy 1:9). (b) It was given to convict men of sin; and thus to make them feel the necessity of a better covenant established on better promises. (Rom. 7:7.) (c) It was designed to restrain transgression, and so to prevent the uni­versal spread of idolatry previous to the coming of the Messiah. (Dan. 9:24.) But (d) the main design of the Sinaitic Covenant in its fullest and widest sense, embracing its subjects, ordinances, rites, and services, was to furnish to the world clear and unmistak­able evidence as to the Divine origin of the Church of Christ and all that pertains to it. The ministry of Moses was therefore intended to be “for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after,” concerning Christ and his Church. (John 5:45-47.) And hence the particularity with which Moses was instructed to make the “Tabernacle of witness” and all that belonged to it. “See,” said God to him, “that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.” (8:5.) Had Moses possessed the spirit of Cain or of some modern Rationalist, he might have so far departed from his received instructions, that there would really be now but little, if any, resemblance between the ordinances of the Old and the New Economy. But not so. He was faithful to the trust committed to him. He made “all things according to the pat­tern showed to him in the mount”; and so the intended harmony between the Old and New Institutions has been fully preserved.

Anyone may now easily perceive not only that there are many ex­isting analogies between the Church of God under the Old Cove­nant and the Church of Christ under the New, but if he carefully examine the evidence submitted he will see further that these anal­ogies were all designed and preordained by him who sees the end from the beginning, and who does all things according to the coun­sel of his own will. And hence no amount of sophistry can now fairly set aside the evidence given through the writings of Moses that the same all-wise and benevolent Being who anciently spoke unto the Fathers by the Prophets, has also in these last days spo­ken unto us by his Son and his Apostles.

 

Hebrews 3:6 —But Christ as a Son over his own house, etc.—Or rather, But Christ as a Son is faithful over his [God’s] house. Moses was faithful in the Old Testament house of God, as a servant; but Christ is faithful over the New Testament house of God, as a Son. There is no authority whatever for the use of the word “own” in this connection. The Greek pronoun rendered his (autou) is of the same form and import in the second, fifth, and sixth verses, refer­ring, no doubt, to God in every case. See note on verse 2. And ac­cordingly in Hebrews 10:21-22, our author says in the conclusion of his argument on the priesthood, “Having [then] a High Priest [Jesus Christ] over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." Th expres­sion, house of Christ, does not occur in the Bible; but the phrase, “house of God,” is of frequent occurrence. See references.

 

Hebrews 3:6 —whose house are we,—The Apostle here evidently intends to make a distinction between the Old Testament house of God in which Moses officiated as a servant, and the New Testament house of God over which Christ presides as a Son and High Priest. The former was composed of Israelites according to the flesh; but the latter is composed of Christians, or Israelites according to the Spirit. The former was an earthly, transitory, and typical house; but the latter is a heavenly, imperishable, and spiritual house. The former was the shadow, and the latter is the substance. The former was constructed and its services were performed for a testimony of the good things which were to be spoken afterward; but the latter is the sublime and glorious reality itself, concerning which Moses and all the other Prophets have borne witness.

 

Hebrews 3:6 —if we hold fast the confidence, etc.—The present tense in the first member of this clause, “whose house are (esmen) we," is used for both the present and the future. As if the Apostle had said, We are now of the spiritual house of God, and we will ever belong to it, if we hold fast the confidence and the boasting of hope firm to the end of life. This use of the present tense for both the present and future, and indeed for all time, is of frequent occurrence in the New Testament. In John 12:26, for example, Jesus says to his disciples, “If any man serve me let him follow me; and where I am (eimi) there shall also my servant be." And in John 14:3, he says, “And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself, that where I am (einii) there ye may be also.” See Winer’s Gram. Section 40, 2, a.

 

The Greek word rendered confidence (parreesia) means (1) freeness and boldness of speech, and (2) that confidence which prompts any one to the use of such freedom of speech. In the Gospels and Acts, it is generally used in the former sense; but in the Epistles, it always means an inward state of full and undis­turbed confidence. See, for example, 6: 11; 10: 19, 35. The word rendered rejoicing (kaucheema) means properly boasting, or a matter of boasting. And hope (elpis) is used here, not to de­note an affection of the mind, but rather the object of our hope, as in Romans 8:24.

 

The object of the Apostle, then, in the use of this clause, is sim­ply to encourage his Hebrew brethren to hold fast their confession, by assuring them that as they were then members of the house of God, so also they would ever continue to be members of it on con­dition that they would be faithful to the end of life. In that event, as he assures his Roman brethren, God would make all things work together for their good, so that “neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature” would be able to separate them “from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans 8:28-39.)

 

Hebrews 3:6 —firm unto the end:—That is, to the end of life; at which time ends also our state of probation. These words are supposed by some to be an interpolation from the fourteenth verse of this chap­ter, and as such are rejected by Tischendorf, Green, and Alford, on the authority of the Vatican Manuscript, the Aethiopic Version, and certain citations made by Ambrose and Lucifer. But as they are found in manuscripts A, C, D, K, L, M, and also in the Latin Vulgate, it is not surprising that they should be retained and de­fended as genuine by Tholuck, Liinemann, and others.

Hebrews 3:7-19

AND DRAWN FROM

THE EXAMPLE OF THE UNDER MOSES

Hebrews 3:7-19

 

Hebrews 3:7 —Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith,—The Apostle now pro­ceeds to make a personal application of the important truths elicited in the course of the preceding paragraph; and to warn his Hebrew brethren against the dangers of apostasy, by referring to God’s dealings with their fathers. His words may be briefly para­phrased as follows: Since it is true, he says in substance, that Jesus as the Apostle of God is so much superior to Moses; and since it is also true, that your belonging to the house of God under him, and your enjoying the blessings of the New Covenant through him, depend on your holding fast the confidence and the boasting of your hope even to the end of life, you should now take as a warning to yourselves the following solemn admonition made by God to your fathers; and beware lest there be also in any of you an evil heart of unbelief. The quotation is made from the ninety-fifth Psalm, in which David earnestly invites his brethren to worship Jehovah (verses 1, 2) ; (1) on the ground that he is above all gods, the Creator of all things, and the good Shepherd of Israel (verses 3-7) ; and (2) on the ground that the neglect of God’s word and his ordinances had cost a whole generation of their fa­thers the loss of Canaan (verses 8-11). This last portion of the Psalm, our author here quotes and applies as a part of his own ex­hortations and warnings. Observe that these words of David are ascribed to the Holy Spirit; for “holy men of God spake [in an­cient times] as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:21.) See also 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

 

Hebrews 3:7 —To-day, if ye will hear his voice,—Or rather, if ye hear his voice. Now is the acceptable time; now is the day of salvation. God never says to anyone, Hearken to my voice and obey my pre­cepts tomorrow. His command is, Do it now; at the very moment that you hear his voice and know his will. And hence the order of the primitive Church was (1) to preach the Gospel to sinners; (2) to receive the confession of such as became penitent believers; and (3)to baptize them on the same day, or even at the same hour of the night. See Acts 2:41 Acts 16:33 Acts 18:8, etc.

And after their baptism the converts continued steadfast in the Apostle’s teachings, giving all diligence to make their calling and their election sure. But now, how very different is the practice of the Church. It is amazing how both saints and sinners now procrastinate and trifle with the word and the ordinances of God.

 

Hebrews 3:8 —Harden not your hearts,—To harden the heart, is to render it insensible in any way. Here, the admonition of the Apostle to his Hebrew brethren is, not to harden their hearts by neglecting even for a day the voice of Jehovah, however expressed. His com­mands have all respect to the present; and any unnecessary delay in obeying them has always of necessity a hardening influence on the heart. Men who hear the Gospel in their youth or early man­hood, and do not then obey it, seldom do so afterward. It is to all who hear it a savor either of life unto life or of death unto death. (2 Corinthians 2:16.) Under its influence, no man can long remain sta­tionary in the Divine life. He must by the laws and impulses of his own nature become either better or worse, as the current of life flows onward.

If he does not soften and purify his heart by obey­ing the truth, he will of necessity harden it by his disobedience. And hence the great concern of the Apostle that all who hear the voice of God should obey it promptly and heartily, even while it is called To-day, lest any should be hardened through the deceitful­ness of sin.

 

Hebrews 3:8 —as in the provocation, etc.—The Hebrew rendered literally is as follows: Harden not your heart; like Meribah, like the day of Massah in the wilderness. That is, harden not your hearts, as your fathers did at Meribah; as they did on the day of Massah in the wilderness. These names were both given to a place near Mount Horeb, where the children of Israel murmured for water. (Exodus 17:1-7.) And when Moses had supplied their wants, “he called the name of the place Massah [temptation] and Meribah [strife], because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted the Lord, saying, Is the Lord among us or not?” The name Meribah was given also to Kadesh (most likely the same as Kadesh Barnea) in the wilderness of Zin (Numbers 27:3); “because [there] the children of Israel strove with the Lord and he was sanctified in them.” See Numbers 20:1-13. Whether David, in Psalms 95:8, refers to one or both of these places is a question on which expositors are not wholly agreed. It seems most likely, however, that he has in view only the place of strife and temptation near Mount Horeb; as the strife at Kadesh did not occur until about thirty-seven years after that God had sworn in his wrath that the rebellious generation which came out of Egypt under Moses should never enter into his rest. (Numbers 14:20-35.) This view is corroborated by the Greek translation of our author, which is identical with that of the Septuagint, and may be literally rendered into English as follows: Harden not your hearts as in the bitterness, on the day of temptation in the wilderness. It seems, therefore, that the excessive provocation of the people, here ele­gantly rendered bitterness by the Apostle, occurred on the day of temptation; and of course at the same place, near Mount Horeb.

 

Hebrews 3:9 —When your fathers tempted me—The Hebrew of this verse is literally rendered into English as follows: Where [expressive of either the place where or the time when] your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work. The Textus Receptus of Elzevir runs thus: Where [hou, where or when] your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. This differs from the Hebrew only in the two following unimportant particulars: (1) in the Hebrew, the noun work is singular; but in the Greek, the cor­responding word is plural; (2) in the Hebrew, the expression, forty years, is, according to the Masoretic pointing, connected with what follows, as in the seventeenth verse of this chapter; but in the Greek, it qualifies the preceding verb saw. These slight differ­ences do not, however, in any way affect the sense of the passage, the meaning being obviously the same in both the Hebrew and the Greek. Nor does the reading of Bagster as given in our best manuscripts differ in meaning from the Hebrew text. Literally ren­dered it stands thus: Where your fathers made trial by proof, and saw my works forty years. See critical notes on this verse.

 

Hebrews 3:10 —Wherefore I was grieved with that generation,—That is to say, Because your fathers so often provoked and tempted me in the wilderness, I was sorely grieved and vexed with them. The word rendered, grieved (prosochizo) is Hellenistic, and like the corresponding Hebrew word means properly to feel a loathing; to be disgusted with any person or thing. The meaning is, that the generation of the children of Israel contemporary with Moses and Aaron, had by their multiplied transgressions become loathsome to God; and, speaking after the manner of men, he was disgusted with them. Many manuscripts have this (toutee) instead of that (ekeinee) generation. In the Hebrew, the word answering to gen­eration has no qualifying epithet. It is, however, sufficiently de­fined by the context; and evidently means the generation which came out of Egypt under Moses, whose carcasses fell in the wilder­ness.

Hebrews 3:10 —and said, They do always err in their heart;—The Greek word rendered err (planao), as well as the corresponding Hebrew word means to wander, to go astray. There is perhaps in the use of this word an allusion to the wanderings of the Israelites in the desert; but it is of their heart-wanderings that Jehovah here com­plains. These, he says, were constant. They do always (aei) wander in heart. The word heart (kardia) means properly the central organ of the blood-vessels, situated in the thorax, and sup­posed to be the seat of animal life. But figuratively it means the seat of the affections, comprehending also not unfrequently the seat of the will and the understanding; as when we speak of a will­ing heart, an understanding heart, an obedient heart, etc.

But in all such cases, the reference is primarily and chiefly to man’s moral and emotional nature. As, for instance, when the fool says in his heart, “No God,” he expresses a sentiment of his depraved heart, rather than a judgment of his darkened and perverted understand­ing ; though both his heart and his intellect are involved and implicated in the enormous falsehood. Blinded and hardened by the love of sin, he first wishes there were no God; and then, per­chance, he is led to believe what he so ardently desires. See Romans 1:28, and 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12.

 

Hebrews 3:10 —and they have not known my ways.—The children of Israel were quite as ignorant of the ways of God, as they were of the me­andering paths of the desert. Like benighted wanderers, they were lost in the mazes of their own follies; and had as yet learned but little of the gracious designs of God in his dealings with them. They were still extremely sensuous; and their hearts were set on worldly pleasures and enjoyments. When they failed to reach Ca­naan as soon as they expected, they then turned back in their affec­tions, and began to long for the leeks, onions, and flesh-pots of Egypt. They seemed willing to endure Egyptian servitude, or al­most anything else, rather than submit to that Divine discipline which was necessary to qualify them for the promised rest.

 

Hebrews 3:11 —So I sware in my wrath,—This is of course a figurative ex­pression, and means simply that when the Israelites murmured and rebelled against God at Kadesh Barnea, he then resolved that they should never enter into his rest. Previous to this they had often provoked and dishonored him by their murmurings against him and his servant Moses. This they did before they crossed the Red Sea, when they were closely pursued by Pharaoh and his hosts. (Exodus 14:10-12.) Another like provocation occurred at Marah in the wilderness of Shur (Exodus 15:22-26) ; another in the wilderness of Sin (Exodus 16:1-3) ; another, at Massah and Meribah near Reph- adim (Exodus 17:1-7) ; another, at Sinai, where they made and worshiped the golden calf (Exodus 32:1-29) ; another, at Taberah in the wilderness (Numbers 11:1-3); another at Kibroth-Hattaavah (Numbers 11:4-34) ; and still another, at Kadesh Barnea, where the people believed the evil report of the ten spies, and refused to go up at the command of God and take possession of the land of Ca­naan (Numbers 14:1-4). On this last occasion, that wicked and per­verse generation filled up the cup of their iniquity; and the Lord said, “Because all these men who have seen my glory and my miracles which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness, have tempted me now these ten times and have not hearkened to my voice; surely they shall not see the land which I sware unto their fathers, neither shall any of them that provoked me see it. … I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel which they murmur against me. Say unto them, As truly as I live, saith the Lord, as ye have spoken in mine ears so will I do unto you; your carcasses shall fall in the wilderness; and all that are numbered of you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and upward, who have murmured against me, doubtless ye shall not come into the land concerning which I sware to make you all dwell therein, save Caleb, the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun." (Numbers 14:22-30.) After this they wandered through the desert in un­known paths, for about thirty-seven years; at the close of which we find them again at Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin, murmuring for water; in consequence of which the place was called Meribah Kadesh. (Numbers 20:1-13.) These places can be traced on any good map of the exodus and wanderings of the Israelites.

 

Hebrews 3:11 —They shall not enter into my rest.—This clause is best ex­plained by referring to the passage just cited from Numbers 14. Up to this time, for about eighteen months after their departure from Egypt, the Lord had borne with the people. But this last act of rebellion was intolerable; and God therefore now swore in his wrath that they should never enter into his rest. The word rest (katapausis) has in this connection a double reference, as will appear in our exegesis of the next chapter. Primarily, it means the rest of Canaan; and secondarily, it means the heavenly rest, of which the rest in Canaan was but a type. See note on 1: 5.

From this rest, in its twofold sense, it seems that most of that wicked and perverse generation were excluded. That there were some excep­tions in each case, must of course be conceded. Of this we have the most clear and reliable evidence given in the Old Testament. Joshua and Caleb entered Canaan and enjoyed God’s rest in its typical sense; and Moses and Aaron, with doubtless some others, though excluded from Canaan, entered into the heavenly rest. But it is not in harmony with the design of the Apostle to notice these exceptions. He purposely leaves all such out of view, and affirms simply what was true of the masses.

They, it would seem, were excluded from God’s rest in its twofold significance. See notes on Hebrews 4:3 Hebrews 4:6.

 

Hebrews 3:12 —Take heed, brethren, etc.—As if he had said, Beware, brethren, of an evil unbelieving heart such as the Israelites had in the wilderness, lest like them you too apostatize from the living God, and perish on your way to the Promised Land. Three things are clearly implied in the words of our text: viz. (1) that the He­brew Christians were in great danger of apostatizing from the liv­ing God, as their fathers had done. And if so, then it follows that a Christian may fall from grace; for to apostatize from God is sim­ply equivalent to falling away finally and forever from the grace of God. See notes on Hebrews 6:4-6. (2) That this danger arises wholly from “an evil heart of unbelief.” So long as we have an unwaver­ing trust in God and in his word, all is well. Nothing can, under such circumstances, separate us from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 8:39.) But let the heart at once become evil and distrustful, and then his condition becomes at once awfully alarming. (3) It is further implied in the words of our au­thor, that every Christian may, through the grace of God, avoid the dangers of apostasy, by keeping his heart with all diligence. (Proverbs 4:23.) It is true that without the grace of God we can do nothing by way of saving ourselves or anyone else (John 15:5); and it is also true, that even with this promised grace we can ac­complish comparatively but little (1 Corinthians 3:6-7). The work is of God and not of us.

Nevertheless, it has pleased God in the exer­cise of his wisdom and love to give to every man an agency in the work of redemption commensurate with his capacity and means of doing good. And, consequently, the man who “looketh into the perfect law of liberty and continueth therein, he being not a forget­ful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his doing.” (James 1:25.) And hence the following earnest exhorta­tions to constant watchfulness and perseverance in the Divine life.

 

Hebrews 3:13 —But exhort one another daily,—This admonition is not ad­dressed merely to the Elders of the Church, but to every member of it. All are required to exhort and admonish one another daily as members of the family of God, and “as joint heirs of the grace of life.” And yet, how very generally is this duty neglected. “How often,” says Mr. Barnes, “do church-members see a fellow- member go astray without any exhortation or admonition. How often do they hear reports of the inconsistent lives of other mem­bers, and perhaps contribute to the circulation of these reports themselves, without any pains taken to inquire whether they are true. How often do the poor fear the rich members of the Church, or the rich despise the poor, and see one another live in sin, with­out any attempt to entreat and save them. I would not have the courtesies of life violated.

I would not have any assume a dog­matic or dictatorial air. I would have no one step out of his proper sphere of life. But the principle which I would lay down is this: that the fact of church membership should inspire such confidence as to make it proper for one member to exhort another whom he sees going astray. Belonging to the same family; having the same interests in religion; an<J all suffering when one suffers, why should they not be allowed tenderly and kindly to exhort one an­other to a holy life ?”

 

Hebrews 3:13 —while it is called To-day;—Do not procrastinate, or put off till tomorrow what should be done today. Much may depend in such cases on prompt and proper action; and it is to be feared that thousands are eternally lost through the neglect of it. If the mem­bers of every congregation of disciples, would all watch over one another, not as censors, but as members of the body of Christ, how many errors might be corrected in their incipiency. But as it is, how very different are the results. How many delinquent Chris­tians are allowed to become hardened in sin, before even the Elders of the Church call on them and admonish them! How very unlike these Elders are to the Good Shepherd that careth for the sheep.

 

Hebrews 3:13 —through the deceitfulness of sin.—That sin (hamartia) is very deceptive is well known to everyone who has examined carefully the workings and operations of his own heart. It has by the fall of man been implanted as a principle in human nature; so that it is now natural for man to follow after its “deceitful lust.” (Ephesians 4:22.) “For to will,” says Paul, speaking as a representative of those under law without the helps and consolations of the Gospel, “is present with me; but how to perform that which is good, I find not. For the good that I would I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but Sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of Sin which is in my members.” (Romans 7:18-23.) True, indeed, in and through the process of regeneration the body of Sin is destroyed (Romans 6:6); so that we Christians are not now, as formerly, its slaves; its has no longer dominion over us (Romans 6:14 Romans 6:17-18) ; for we are not now under law but under grace.

But though the body of Sin has been destroyed, its animus still remains as a thorn in the flesh of every Christian; so that unless we are constantly on our guard, and, like Paul, keep our bodies in subjection (1 Corinthians 9:27), we are ever liable, as were the ancient Israelites, to be misled by the deceitfulness of Sin which is in our members. Its promises to us are all pleasure and happiness, but its rewards are misery and death. (Romans 6:23.) And hence the necessity of exhorting one another daily, even while it is called To-day, lest any of us “be hardened through the deceit­fulness of sin.”

 

Hebrews 3:14 —For we are made partakers of Christ, etc.—The Apostle assigns here as another reason for constant perseverance and watchfulness, that our being finally partakers of Christ and his benefits, will depend on our holding fast to the end of life the beginning of our confidence in him. We have not yet reached the end of our course. We are still in a state of trial; and we are therefore ever liable to lose through our neglect or disobedience that of which we have already to a certain extent become par­takers; but which, for the present, we hold on certain conditions. “For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance; but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that which he hath.” (Matthew 8:12.) See note on verse 6.

 

The word rendered confidence (hupostasis) is of different ety­mology from that which is so rendered (parreesia) in the sixth verse. The former looks rather to the ground of our confidence in Christ; and the latter to our free and open confession of it. They are, however, used here by our author as synonymous terms, to de­note simply that firm and well-grounded confidence in Christ, which if held fast to the end of life, will secure for us an abundant entrance into his everlasting Kingdom. Of this confidence the He­brews were then partakers; they were then in possession of that faith which purifies the heart. And hence the Apostle requires of them simply that they continue to hold fast the beginning of their confidence firm even to the end of life. “Hold fast that which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.” (Revelation 3:11.)

 

Hebrews 3:15 —While it is said, Today, etc.—The proper grammatical connection of this verse is still a matter of dispute among the crit­ics. Some of them, as Ebrard and Alford, maintain that it stands properly connected with what immediately precedes; and that the object of our author in the use of this clause is simply to give strength to the affirmation made in the fourteenth verse, that our being made partakers of Christ is conditioned on our holding fast “the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end.” As if he had said, “For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the be­ginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end; [as is clearly implied] in the saying, To-day if ye hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.” Others, as Tholuck and Delitzsch, make it the beginning of a sentence, and so connect it with the six­teenth verse as follows: “In the saying, Today if ye hear his voice harden not your hearts, as in the provocation [it is implied that the provokers to whom the Psalmist refers, were themselves re­deemed of the Lord, and yet fell under his wrath, and came short of the promised rest]. For who were they that having heard gave provocation? Was it not indeed all who under Moses’ leadership came out of Egypt?” Others, as Bengal and Michaelis, connect the fifteenth verse with the thirteenth, and include the fourteenth in parentheses. And others again, as Chrysostom and Erasmus, connect it with the beginning of the fourth chapter, making verses 16-19 parenthetical.

 

On the whole, I think it best to combine the first two., hy­potheses. It seems to me that the fifteenth verse is logically con­nected with both what precedes and what follows: though it does not, as Delitzsch supposes, form the beginning of a sentence. I would therefore render verses 14-19 as follows: For we have been made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confi­dence steadfast unto the end; [as implied] in its being said, To-day if ye hear his voice harden not your hearts as in the provo­cation. [As if the Apostle had said, It is not enough that you have been redeemed, and that you have commenced your march for the heavenly rest: you must persevere in your begun course to the end of life, or otherwise you will all fall short of the promised rest, as did your fathers in the wilderness.] For who were they that having heard did provoke ? Was it not indeed all who came out of Egypt by means of Moses? And with whom was he displeased forty years? Was it not with those that sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness?

And to whom did he sware that they should not enter into his rest, but to the disobedient? So we see that they could not enter, on account of unbelief.

 

Hebrews 3:16 —For some, when they had heard, did provoke:—The origi­nal manuscripts of the New Testament were written without any accents and also without any marks of punctuation. As early as 240 B.C. Aristophanes of Byzantium introduced into the School of Alexandria an imperfect system of both accents and punctuation; chiefly, it would seem, for the benefit of teachers and scholars of rhetoric. But accents were not generally used by Christian writers till after the middle of the fifth century; and it was not till about the beginning of the tenth century that the custom of using them became universal. And so also of the system of Greek punctua­tion. It too was gradually introduced with sundry changes and modifications.

About the middle of the fifth century, Euthalius, a Deacon of Alexandria, divided the New Testament into lines (sti- choi), each line containing as many words as were to be read with­out any pause or interruption of the voice. In the eighth century, the comma (,) was invented; and the Greek note of interrogation ( ;) in the ninth. But it was not till after the invention of the art of printing, about the middle of the fifteenth century, that the pres­ent system of Greek punctuation was universally adoped by Greek scholars.

 

It is obvious, therefore, that no authority is to be attached to these marks of accent and punctuation, except so far as they are supported by the conditions of the context and the well-known laws and principles of the Greek language. And it may therefore be still a question whether the word tines (tines) in our text should be accented on the first or on the second syllable. If on the first (tines), then it is equivalent to the interrogative pronoun who, and requires a mark of interrogation at the close of the sentence in which it stands. But if on the second (tines), it is an indefinite pronoun equivalent to some, as in our English Version, and re­quires that the sentence shall close with a period.

 

What, then, is the proper meaning of this word? Is it an inter­rogative or an indefinite pronoun? Is it equivalent to who or to some ? That it should be rendered who in the seventeenth and eighteenth verses, is conceded by all: for here, indeed, the context will admit of nothing else. But is it not almost, if not quite, as ob­vious, from the scope of the author’s argument, that it must have the same meaning in the sixteenth verse? Having, in the verses immediately preceding, solemnly warned his brethren against the dangers of apostasy from Christ, and having illustrated the whole matter by a general reference to the fortunes of their fathers in the wilderness, and also by God’s subsequent warnings and admoni­tions through David, our author now makes a more sweeping and definite application of Old Testament history.

Lest any should at­tempt to avoid the force of his general argument, on the ground of its seeming indefiniteness; and should be disposed to take refuge in the vain hope that though some of the less enlightened of their brethren might fall, they themselves yrould nevertheless escapefearing this, the Apostle makes another more definite and heart­searching appeal to the well known facts of Old Testament history. He reminds his readers by an appeal to their own knowledge of the facts, that it was not merely a few of the most ignorant and super­stitious of their fathers that fell in the wilderness on account of their disobedience; but that it was in fact the whole redeemed na­tion who came out of Egypt under Moses.

The few exceptions, consisting of Joshua, Caleb, Eliezer, and perhaps a few more of the Levites, are purposely and with strict rhetorical propriety kept in the background; and the great mass of the people who had been once enlightened and consecrated to God, are brought forward as persons doomed to destruction, in order to make a more vivid and lasting impression on the minds and hearts of the Hebrew breth­ren. For who, says the author, were they that having heard did provoke? Were they the children and servants of your fathers? Or were they a few of the most ignorant and depraved of that gen­eration? Nay indeed, were they not all of the six hundred thou­sand who came out of Egypt by Moses? The force of this appeal could not be avoided; and it must have made a very deep impres­sion on the mind and heart of every Hebrew Christian who read this Epistle.

 

Hebrews 3:17 —But with whom was he grieved forty years?—With what sort of persons was God displeased for the space of forty years? Was it with babes and slaves and such other persons as were igno­rant of God’s will? Nay indeed; was it not with them that sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness? They were persons who knew God’s will and transgressed his law. They were all sinners. And their sin so provoked God that he caused their members (chola), such as their arms, legs, etc., to be scattered as fragments through the wilderness; leaving them there as a monument of his righteous displeasure, and as a warning to all subsequent genera­tions. See Numbers 26:64-65.

 

Hebrews 3:18 –And to whom did he sware, etc?—The history of Israel’s provocations and of God’s dealings with them, was so fully re­corded in the Old Testament and so generally believed by the He­brew Christians, that any formal presentation of evidence in the case was wholly unnecessary; and our author therefore again, with great rhetorical effect, employs the interrogative style of address. By means of a series of questions addressed to their understanding, he brings home with great power to their hearts and consciences what they were all forced to concede, that the six hundred thou­sand full-grown men who came out of Egypt under Moses, per­ished in the wilderness through their unbelief. They once believed in God and confided in his servant Moses: for how indeed could they do otherwise? They had seen God’s judgments on Pharaoh and on his hosts in Egypt and in the Red Sea; they had seen the manna rained down from heaven, and they had beheld the waters flowing from the rock at the command of God; they had heard his voice from the top of Sinai, and they had witnessed many other manifestations of his power and Divinity, for the space of eighteen months, before they came to the plains of Kadesh. But after all this, through an evil heart of unbelief, they there rebelled against him, and so provoked him on the very borders of Canaan, that he was constrained to swear in his wrath, that they should not enter into his rest. See Num. 14: 20-35.

All this the Hebrews well un­derstood and readily conceded. And hence without further argu­ment, Paul simply concludes in harmony with their own convic­tions, that owing to practical infidelity a whole generation of God’s chosen people were excluded from the promised rest.

 

Hebrews 3:19 —So we see, etc.—In this verse, the Apostle states the result of the whole matter. It was not owing to any unforeseen or for­tuitous circumstances, nor to the superior strength of their ene­mies, that the Israelites were unable to enter the land of Canaan; but it was owing simply to their own infidelity and disobedience. And this is given as a warning to all Christians to beware, lest they too fall after the same example of unbelief.