Hebrews Commentary

Have you ever known a person who turned his or her back on Christ and the church and simply walked away? Perhaps you have struggled to maintain your own Christian commitment in the face of disillusionment, spiritual confusion, loss of perspective, or outright persecution. The book of Hebrews points us to Christ. It provides light to help struggling Christians see Jesus clearly and stand firm.

Setting

As Christianity spread throughout the Mediterranean world, the first followers of Jesus Christ faced grave challenges. The Greco-Roman society misunderstood and mistrusted both Jews and Christians and considered them “atheists” because they did not believe in the Greek or Roman gods. Opposition to Christianity also arose from within traditional Judaism. Many Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah. Those who converted to faith in Christ—from a Jewish or Gentile background—often paid a high price in their jobs, family connections, friendships, and other social associations. Persecution of Christians was common.

The believers to whom Hebrews was addressed probably belonged to a group of house churches in Rome in the early 60s AD. The Christian community in Rome was likely founded in the AD 30s when those present at Pentecost (Acts 2:10) made their way home. Roman believers had demonstrated courage and endurance (Heb 10:32-34), but by the time Hebrews was written, the spiritual fervor of some had grown cold (5:11-14), and their theological perspective was skewed (2:1). Some had even abandoned Christ and the church (6:4-8).

Summary

Hebrews is an energetic, well-crafted pastoral response to the needs of struggling people. In the style of a first-century sermon, the author alternates between exposition on the person and work of Christ and exhortation of the hearers to obedience and endurance. Through a detailed discussion on God’s Son, along with warnings, challenges, examples, and reminders of God’s faithfulness, the author calls the readers to persevere in following Christ.

Following an introduction to the whole sermon (1:1-4), the author’s exposition of Christ’s superiority develops in two great movements. The first movement (1:5–2:18) explains the Son’s relationship to the angels. The angels are servants (1:6-7, 14), but the exalted Son (1:13), with his unique relationship with the Father (1:5), is the Lord, creator, and sustainer of the universe—indeed, he is God (1:8-12). The author exhorts the hearers to pay careful attention to the message of salvation they have been taught (2:1-4), and then resumes the exposition. The exalted Christ’s position was temporarily lower than the angels when he became human (2:5-9); Jesus took on flesh and blood in order to die to set us free (2:10-18). The first exposition is followed by exhortation (3:1–4:13) that focuses on the need for faithful obedience and a continued promise of rest for God’s people.

The second movement of the exposition (4:14–10:18) addresses the position of the Son, our High Priest, in relation to the Old Testament sacrificial system. After introducing this theme 4:14-16, the author addresses the Son’s appointment as the superior High Priest (5:1-10) and confronts the community with their spiritual immaturity (5:11–6:20). A discussion of Melchizedek’s superiority to the Levitical priests (7:1-10) lays the groundwork for presenting Jesus as the superior High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek (7:11-28). In short, Jesus was not appointed according to the conventions of the Old Testament law, which said that priests should come from the tribe of Levi. Rather, he was appointed by God with an oath, on the basis of his indestructible life. The exposition then considers the superior offering of this appointed High Priest (8:3–10:18). Like the earthly priests, this superior priest had to make an offering for sins, but his offering was a new-covenant offering (8:7-13) that was superior to the old (9:1–10:18).

The final main section (10:19–13:25) is an exhortation that challenges the hearers to respond in faithfulness to the message about Christ. The book ends with a benediction and a formal conclusion (13:20-25).

Authorship

Unlike many other letters of the New Testament, Hebrews does not begin by identifying its author and recipients; many scholars today believe that this is because the book was originally written as a sermon. Since the earliest centuries of the church, the authorship of Hebrews has been much discussed. The book circulated with Paul’s letters, and some church fathers in the eastern half of the Mediterranean world (such as Origen and Clement of Alexandria) argued that Paul was the author. Others, especially around Rome, did not think Paul had written the book.

Almost all scholars today agree that Paul was not the author of Hebrews. First, in 2:3, the author is depicted as having received the Good News from the original witnesses who followed Christ, and this does not sound at all like Paul (see Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 15:8; Gal 1:11-16). Second, the style, theological images, and vocabulary are quite different from Paul’s; for example, Hebrews uses 169 words not found elsewhere in the New Testament.

Through the centuries, many other possible authors for the book have been suggested, such as Philip, Priscilla, Luke, Barnabas, Jude, and Clement of Rome. One of the most popular ideas, since Martin Luther first made the suggestion, is that Apollos wrote it. Luke describes Apollos in Acts 18:24-26 as an eloquent man from Alexandria who was a powerful orator and preacher.

Although we cannot identify the author of Hebrews with certainty, a careful study of the book reveals much about them. First, the excellent Greek in which the book is written and its expertly crafted forms of expression point to a highly educated person. Second, the author of Hebrews must have been a dynamic preacher, one trained in interpretation and exposition, who had memorized large portions of the Old Testament. Third, and most importantly, this author was a deeply concerned Christian leader who addressed their readers urgently and with passion. Hebrews is not simply a theological treatise, but a pastoral appeal that vies for the hearts and minds of those who are struggling in their Christian commitment.

Recipients

The author writes, “Greet all your leaders and all the believers there. The believers from Italy send you their greetings” (Heb 13:24). The author seems to have been writing back to Italy, and probably to Rome, sending greetings from Italian Christians who had traveled abroad.

Those addressed in this letter seem to have had some background in Jewish worship. The author’s use of the Old Testament and the theological concepts that are presented would have been familiar to those of the synagogue in the Mediterranean world. This does not necessarily mean that all of the recipients were Jews, since many Gentiles were part of the synagogue as “God-fearers” who worshiped the God of Israel.

Occasion of Writing

Some in the Christian community were evidently struggling to maintain their commitment as they were being persecuted. Passages such as Hebrews 10:32-39 suggest that this group of believers, which had faced persecution in the past, was facing it again. In the crucible of having to stand for Christ and the church in the face of public opposition, some were faltering spiritually and others had apparently turned their backs on the faith altogether. The author thus challenges this group of professed Christ followers to endure in their public profession of Christ.

If we are correct that Rome is the destination for this book, this word of exhortation might have been precipitated by the persecution that occurred under the emperor Nero, whose intense persecution and martyrdom of Christians in the mid-60s AD is well known. It is also possible that Hebrews was written after AD 70. This seems less likely, however, because at the time Hebrews was written, apparently no one in the community had faced martyrdom (see 12:4), but the pressure of persecution was on the rise.

Meaning and Message

God has spoken about his Son and through his Son (1:1-3), and there are dire consequences for those who do not listen and respond with obedience to that word (2:1-3). In the end, Jesus, the creator and sustainer of the universe (1:2-3), will put away the created order like a person rolls up an article of old clothing (1:10-12).

Jesus is supremely worthy of our commitment, worship, and endurance in the faith. He is superior to the angels (1:5-14), to Moses (3:1-6), and to the Levitical priesthood of the old covenant (5:1-10; 7:1-28).

Jesus has made a new, heavenly covenant, offering himself once for all through his own death (8:3–10:18). In his incarnation he endured as a faithful Son (3:1-6; 5:7-8; 12:1-2), and in his exaltation he reigns as the supreme Lord of the universe (1:2-4, 8-13). Jesus thus provides us with a superior basis for persevering in the Christian life and having hope for the future.

We can also look to positive examples of others who have been faithful in their journey to God’s eternal city (see 6:13-15; 10:32-39; 11:1-40), and to negative examples of those who fell through disobedience (see 3:7-19; 6:4-8). And we can embrace God’s promises to us concerning our inheritance as his children (4:3-11; 6:13-20; 12:22-24).

Because of Jesus, we can live as faithful members of the Christian community in our relationships and in our worship (13:1-17). Our perseverance in the Christian faith will be directly proportional to the clarity with which we understand who Jesus is and what he has accomplished on our behalf.

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Epistle to the Hebrews

Concerning this epistle we must enquire, I. Into the divine authority of it; for this has been questioned by some, whose distempered eyes could not bear the light of it, or whose errors have been confuted by it; such as the Arians, who deny the Godhead and self-existence of Christ; and the Socinians, who deny his satisfaction; but, after all the attempts of such men to disparage this epistle, the divine original of it shines forth with such strong and unclouded rays that he who runs may read it is an eminent part of the canon of scripture. The divinity of the matter, the sublimity of the style, the excellency of the design, the harmony of this with other parts of scripture, and its general reception in the church of God in all ages - these are the evidences of its divine authority. II. As to the divine amanuensis or penman of this epistle, we are not so certain; it does not bear the name of any in the front of it, as the rest of the epistles do, and there has been some dispute among the learned to whom they should ascribe it. Some have assigned it to Clemens of Rome; other to Luke; and many to Barnabas, thinking that the style and manner of expression is very agreeable to the zealous, authoritative, affectionate temper that Barnabas appears to be of, in the account we have of him in the acts of the Apostles; and one ancient father quotes an expression out of this epistle as the words of Barnabas. But it is generally assigned to the apostle Paul; and some later copies and translations have put Paul's name in the title. In the primitive times it was generally ascribed to him, and the style and scope of it very well agree with his spirit, who was a person of a clear head and a warm heart, whose main end and endeavour it was to exalt Christ. Some think that the apostle Peter refers to this epistle, and proves Paul to be the penman of it, by telling the Hebrews, to whom he wrote, of Paul's having written to them, Pe2 3:15. We read of no other epistle that he ever wrote to them but this. And though it has been objected that, since Paul put his name to all his other epistles, he would not have omitted it here; yet others have well answered that he, being the apostle of the Gentiles, who were odious to the Jews, might think fit to conceal his name, lest their prejudices against him might hinder them from reading and weighing it as they ought to do. III. As to the scope and design of this epistle, it is very evident that it was clearly to inform the minds, and strongly to confirm the judgment, of the Hebrews in the transcendent excellency of the gospel above the law, and so to take them off from the ceremonies of the law, to which they were so wedded, of which they were so fond, that they even doted on them, and those of them who were Christians retained too much of the old leaven, and needed to be purged from it. The design of this epistle was to persuade and press the believing Hebrews to a constant adherence to the Christian faith, and perseverance in it, notwithstanding all the sufferings they might meet with in so doing. In order to this, the apostle speaks much of the excellency of the author of the gospel, the glorious Jesus, whose honour he advances, and whom he justly prefers before all others, showing him to be all in all, and this in lofty strains of holy rhetoric. It must be acknowledged that there are many things in this epistle hard to be understood, but the sweetness we shall find therein will make us abundant amends for all the pains we take to understand it. And indeed, if we compare all the epistles of the New Testament, we shall not find any of them more replenished with divine, heavenly matter than this to the Hebrews.

CANONICITY AND AUTHORSHIP.—CLEMENT OF ROME, at the end of the first century (A.D), copiously uses it, adopting its words just as he does those of the other books of the New Testament; not indeed giving to either the term "Scripture," which he reserves for the Old Testament (the canon of the New Testament not yet having been formally established), but certainly not ranking it below the other New Testament acknowledged Epistles. As our Epistle claims authority on the part of the writer, CLEMENT'S adoption of extracts from it is virtually sanctioning its authority, and this in the apostolic age. JUSTIN MARTYR quotes it as divinely authoritative, to establish the titles "apostle," as well as "angel," as applied to the Son of God. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA refers it expressly to Paul, on the authority of PantÃ&brvbrnus, chief of the Catechetical school in Alexandria, in the middle of the second century, saying, that as Jesus is termed in it the "apostle" sent to the Hebrews, Paul, through humility, does not in it call himself apostle of the Hebrews, being apostle to the Gentiles. CLEMENT also says that Paul, as the Hebrews were prejudiced against him, prudently omitted to put forward his name in the beginning; also, that it was originally written in Hebrew for the Hebrews, and that Luke translated it into Greek for the Greeks, whence the style is similar to that of Acts. He, however, quotes frequently the words of the existing Greek Epistle as Paul's words. ORIGEN similarly quotes it as Paul's Epistle. However, in his Homilies, he regards the style as distinct from that of Paul, and as "more Grecian," but the thoughts as the apostle's; adding that the "ancients who have handed down the tradition of its Pauline authorship, must have had good reason for doing so, though God alone knows the certainty who was the actual writer" (that is, probably "transcriber" of the apostle's thoughts). In the African Church, in the beginning of the third century, TERTULLIAN ascribes it to Barnabas. IRENÆUS, bishop of Lyons, is mentioned in EUSEBIUS, as quoting from this Epistle, though without expressly referring it to Paul. About the same period, Caius, the presbyter, in the Church of Rome, mentions only thirteen Epistles of Paul, whereas, if the Epistle to the Hebrews were included, there would be fourteen. So the canon fragment of the end of the second century, or beginning of the third, published by MURATORI, apparently omits mentioning it. And so the Latin Church did not recognize it as Paul's till a considerable time after the beginning of the third century. Thus, also, NOVATIAN OF ROME, CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE, and VICTORINUS, also of the Latin Church. But in the fourth century, HILARY OF POITIERS (A.D. 368), LUCIFER OF CAGLIARI (A.D. 371), AMBROSE OF MILAN (A.D. 397) and other Latins, quote it as Paul's; and the fifth Council of Carthage (A.D. 419) formally reckons it among his fourteen Epistles.

As to the similarity of its style to that of Luke's writings, this is due to his having been so long the companion of Paul. CHRYSOSTOM, comparing Luke and Mark, says, "Each imitated his teacher: Luke imitated Paul flowing along with more than river fulness; but Mark imitated Peter, who studied brevity of style." Besides, there is a greater predominance of Jewish feeling and familiarity with the peculiarities of the Jewish schools apparent in this Epistle than in Luke's writings. There is no clear evidence for attributing the authorship to him, or to Apollos, whom ALFORD upholds as the author. The grounds alleged for the latter view are its supposed Alexandrian phraseology and modes of thought. But these are such as any Palestinian Jew might have used; and Paul, from his HebrÃ&brvbro-Hellenistic education at Jerusalem and Tarsus, would be familiar with PHILO'S modes of thought, which are not, as some think, necessarily all derived from his Alexandrian, but also from his Jewish, education. It would be unlikely that the Alexandrian Church should have so undoubtingly asserted the Pauline authorship, if Apollos, their own countryman, had really been the author. The eloquence of its style and rhetoric, a characteristic of Apollos' at Corinth, whereas Paul there spoke in words unadorned by man's wisdom, are doubtless designedly adapted to the minds of those whom Paul in this Epistle addresses. To the Greek Corinthians, who were in danger of idolizing human eloquence and wisdom, he writes in an unadorned style, in order to fix their attention more wholly on the Gospel itself. But the Hebrews were in no such danger. And his HebrÃ&brvbro-Grecian education would enable him to write in a style attractive to the Hebrews at Alexandria, where Greek philosophy had been blended with Judaism. The Septuagint translation framed at Alexandria had formed a connecting link between the latter and the former; and it is remarkable that all the quotations from the Old Testament, excepting two (Heb 10:30; Heb 13:5), are taken from the Septuagint. The fact that the peculiarities of the Septuagint are interwoven into the argument proves that the Greek Epistle is an original, not a translation; had the original been Hebrew, the quotations would have been from the Hebrew Old Testament. The same conclusion follows from the plays on similarly sounding words in the Greek, and alliterations, and rhythmically constructed periods. CALVIN observes, If the Epistle had been written in Hebrew, Heb 9:15-17 would lose all its point, which consists in the play upon the double meaning of the Greek "diathece," a "covenant," or a "testament," whereas the Hebrew "berith" means only "covenant."

Internal evidence favors the Pauline authorship. Thus the topic so fully handled in this Epistle, that Christianity is superior to Judaism, inasmuch as the reality exceeds the type which gives place to it, is a favorite one with Paul (compare Co2 3:6-18; Gal 3:23-25; Gal 4:1-9, Gal 4:21-31, wherein the allegorical mode of interpretation appears in its divinely sanctioned application—a mode pushed to an unwarrantable excess in the Alexandrian school). So the Divine Son appears in Heb 1:3, &c., as in other Epistles of Paul (Phi 2:6; Col 1:15-20), as the Image, or manifestation of the Deity. His lowering of Himself for man's sake similarly, compare Heb 2:9, with Co2 8:9; Phi 2:7-8. Also His final exaltation, compare Heb 2:8; Heb 10:13; Heb 12:2, with Co1 15:25, Co1 15:27. The word "Mediator" is peculiar to Paul alone, compare Heb 8:6, with Gal 3:19-20. Christ's death is represented as the sacrifice for sin prefigured by the Jewish sacrifices, compare Rom 3:22-26; Co1 5:7, with Heb. 7:1-10:39. The phrase, "God of Peace," is peculiar to Paul, compare Heb 13:20; Rom 15:33; Th1 5:23. Also, compare Heb 2:4, Margin, Co1 12:4. Justification, or "righteousness by faith." appears in Heb 11:7; Heb 10:38, as in Rom 1:17; Rom 4:22; Rom 5:1; Gal 3:11; Phi 3:9. The word of God is the "sword of the Spirit," compare Heb 4:12, with Eph 6:17. Inexperienced Christians are children needing milk, that is, instruction in the elements, whereas riper Christians, as full-grown men, require strong meat, compare Heb 5:12-13; Heb 6:1, with Co1 3:1-2; Co1 14:20 Gal 4:9; Col 3:14. Salvation is represented as a boldness of access to God by Christ, compare Heb 10:19, with Rom 5:2; Eph 2:18; Eph 3:12. Afflictions are a fight, Heb 10:32; compare Phi 1:30; Col 2:1. The Christian life is a race, Heb 12:1; compare Co1 9:24; Phi 3:12-14. The Jewish ritual is a service, Rom 9:4; compare Heb 9:1, Heb 9:6. Compare "subject to bondage," Heb 2:15, with Gal 5:1. Other characteristics of Paul's style appear in this Epistle; namely, a propensity "to go off at a word" and enter on a long parenthesis suggested by that word, a fondness for play upon words of similar sound, and a disposition to repeat some favorite word. Frequent appeals to the Old Testament, and quotations linked by "and again," compare Heb 1:5; Heb 2:12-13, with Rom 15:9-12. Also quotations in a peculiar application, compare Heb 2:8, with Co1 15:27; Eph 1:22. Also the same passage quoted in a form not agreeing with the Septuagint, and with the addition "saith the Lord," not found in the Hebrew, in Heb 10:30; Rom 12:19.

The supposed Alexandrian (which are rather Philon-like) characteristics of the Epistle are probably due to the fact that the Hebrews were generally then imbued with the Alexandrian modes of thought of Philo, &c., and Paul, without coloring or altering Gospel truth "to the Jews, became (in style) as a Jew, that he might win the Jews" (Co1 9:20). This will account for its being recognized as Paul's Epistle in the Alexandrian and Jerusalem churches unanimously, to the Hebrews of whom probably it was addressed. Not one Greek father ascribes the Epistle to any but Paul, whereas in the Western and Latin churches, which it did not reach for some time, it was for long doubted, owing to its anonymous form, and generally less distinctively Pauline style. Their reason for not accepting it as Paul's, or indeed as canonical, for the first three centuries, was negative, insufficient evidence for it, not positive evidence against it. The positive evidence is generally for its Pauline origin. In the Latin churches, owing to their distance from the churches to whom belonged the Hebrews addressed, there was no generally received tradition on the subject. The Epistle was in fact but little known at all, whence we find it is not mentioned at all in the Canon of Muratori. When at last, in the fourth century, the Latins found that it was received as Pauline and canonical on good grounds in the Greek churches, they universally acknowledged it as such.

The personal notices all favor its Pauline authorship, namely, his intention to visit those addressed, shortly, along with Timothy, styled "our brother," Heb 13:23; his being then in prison, Heb 13:19; his formerly having been imprisoned in Palestine, according to English Version reading, Heb 10:34; the salutations transmitted to them from believers of Italy, Heb 13:24. A reason for not prefixing the name may be the rhetorical character of the Epistle which led the author to waive the usual form of epistolary address.

DESIGN.—His aim is to show the superiority of Christianity over Judaism, in that it was introduced by one far higher than the angels or Moses, through whom the Jews received the law, and in that its priesthood and sacrifices are far less perfecting as to salvation than those of Christ; that He is the substance of which the former are but the shadow, and that the type necessarily gives place to the antitype; and that now we no longer are kept at a comparative distance as under the law, but have freedom of access through the opened veil, that is, Christ's flesh; hence he warns them of the danger of apostasy, to which Jewish converts were tempted, when they saw Christians persecuted, while Judaism was tolerated by the Roman authorities. He infers the obligations to a life of faith, of which, even in the less perfect Old Testament dispensation, the Jewish history contained bright examples. He concludes in the usual Pauline mode, with practical exhortations and pious prayers for them.

HIS MODE OF ADDRESS is in it hortatory rather than commanding, just as we might have expected from Paul addressing the Jews. He does not write to the rulers of the Jewish Christians, for in fact there was no exclusively Jewish Church; and his Epistle, though primarily addressed to the Palestinian Jews, was intended to include the Hebrews of all adjoining churches. He inculcates obedience and respect in relation to their rulers (Heb 13:7, Heb 13:17, Heb 13:24); a tacit obviating of the objection that he was by writing this Epistle interfering with the prerogative of Peter the apostle of the circumcision, and James the bishop of Jerusalem. Hence arises his gentle and delicate mode of dealing with them (Heb 13:22). So far from being surprised at discrepancy of style between an Epistle to Hebrews and Epistles to Gentile Christians, it is just what we should expect. The Holy Spirit guided him to choose means best suited to the nature of the ends aimed at. WORDSWORTH notices a peculiar Pauline Greek construction, Rom 12:9, literally, "Let your love be without dissimulation, ye abhorring . . . evil, cleaving to . . . good," which is found nowhere else save Heb 13:5, literally, "Let your conversation be without covetousness, ye being content with," &c. (a noun singular feminine nominative absolute, suddenly passing into a participle masculine nominative plural absolute). So in quoting Old Testament Scripture, the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews quotes it as a Jew writing to Jews would, "God spoke to our fathers," not, "it is written." So Heb 13:18, "We trust we have a good conscience" is an altogether Pauline sentiment (Act 23:1; Act 24:16; Co2 1:12; Co2 4:2; Ti2 1:3). Though he has not prefixed his name, he has given at the close his universal token to identify him, namely, his apostolic salutation, "Grace be with you all"; this "salutation with his own hand" he declared (Th2 3:17-18) to be "his token in every Epistle": so Co1 16:21, Co1 16:23; Col 4:18. The same prayer of greeting closes every one of his Epistles, and is not found in any one of the Epistles of the other apostles written in Paul's lifetime; but it is found in the last book of the New Testament Revelation, and subsequently in the Epistle of CLEMENT OF ROME. This proves that, by whomsoever the body of the Epistle was committed to writing (whether a mere amanuensis writing by dictation, or a companion of Paul by the Spirit's gift of interpreting tongues, Co1 12:10, transfusing Paul's Spirit-taught sentiments into his own Spirit-guided diction), Paul at the close sets his seal to the whole as really his, and sanctioned by him as such. The churches of the East, and Jerusalem, their center, to which quarter it was first sent, received it as Paul's from the earliest times according to Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem (A.D. 349). JEROME, though bringing with him from Rome the prejudices of the Latins against the Epistle to the Hebrews, aggravated, doubtless, by its seeming sanction of the Novatian heresy (Heb 6:4-6), was constrained by the force of facts to receive it as Paul's, on the almost unanimous testimony of all Greek Christians from the earliest times; and was probably the main instrument in correcting the past error of Rome in rejecting it. The testimony of the Alexandrian Church is peculiarly valuable, for it was founded by Mark, who was with Paul at Rome in his first confinement, when this Epistle seems to have been written (Col 4:10), and who possibly was the bearer of this Epistle, at the same time visiting Colosse on the way to Jerusalem (where Mark's mother lived), and thence to Alexandria. Moreover, Pe2 3:15-16, written shortly before Peter's death, and like his first Epistle written by him, "the apostle of the circumcision," to the "Hebrew" Christians dispersed in the East, says, "As our beloved brother Paul hath written unto you" (Pe2 3:15), that is, to the Hebrews; also the words added, "As also in all his Epistles" (Pe2 3:16), distinguish the Epistle to the Hebrews from the rest; then he further speaks of it as on a level with "other Scriptures," thus asserting at once its Pauline authorship and divine inspiration. An interesting illustration of the power of Christian faith and love; Peter, who had been openly rebuked by Paul (Gal 2:7-14), fully adopted what Paul wrote; there was no difference in the Gospel of the apostle of the circumcision and that of the apostle of the uncircumcision. It strikingly shows God's sovereignty that He chose as the instrument to confirm the Hebrews, Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles (Rom 11:13); and on the other hand, Peter to open the Gospel door to the Gentiles (Act 10:1, &c.), though being the apostle of the Jews; thus perfect unity reigns amidst the diversity of agencies.

Rome, in the person of CLEMENT OF ROME, originally received this Epistle. Then followed a period in which it ceased to be received by the Roman churches. Then, in the fourth century, Rome retracted her error. A plain proof she is not unchangeable or infallible. As far as Rome is concerned, the Epistle to the Hebrews was not only lost for three centuries, but never would have been recovered at all but for the Eastern churches; it is therefore a happy thing for Christendom that Rome is not the Catholic Church.

It plainly was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, which would have been mentioned in the Epistle had that event gone before, compare Heb 13:10; and probably to churches in which the Jewish members were the more numerous, as those in Judea, and perhaps Alexandria. In the latter city were the greatest number of resident Jews next to Jerusalem. In Leontopolis, in Egypt, was another temple, with the arrangements of which, WIESELER thinks the notices in this Epistle more nearly corresponded than with those in Jerusalem. It was from Alexandria that the Epistle appears first to have come to the knowledge of Christendom. Moreover, "the Epistle to the Alexandrians," mentioned in the Canon of Muratori, may possibly be this Epistle to the Hebrews. He addresses the Jews as peculiarly "the people of God" (Heb 2:17; Heb 4:9; Heb 13:12), "the seed of Abraham," that is, as the primary stock on which Gentile believers are grafted, to which Rom 11:16-24 corresponds; but he urges them to come out of the carnal earthly Jerusalem and to realize their spiritual union to "the heavenly Jerusalem" (Heb 12:18-23; Heb 13:13).

The use of Greek rather than Hebrew is doubtless due to the Epistle being intended, not merely for the Hebrew, but for the Hellenistic Jew converts, not only in Palestine, but elsewhere; a view confirmed by the use of the Septuagint. BENGEL thinks, probably (compare Pe2 3:15-16, explained above), the Jews primarily, though not exclusively, addressed, were those who had left Jerusalem on account of the war and were settled in Asia Minor.

The notion of its having been originally in Hebrew arose probably from its Hebrew tone, method, and topics. It is reckoned among the Epistles, not at first generally acknowledged, along with James, Second Peter, Second and Third John, Jude, and Revelation. A beautiful link exists between these Epistles and the universally acknowledged Epistles. Hebrews unites the ordinances of Leviticus with their antitypical Gospel fulfilment. James is the link between the highest doctrines of Christianity and the universal law of moral duty—a commentary on the Sermon on the Mount—harmonizing the decalogue law of Moses, and the revelation to Job and Elias, with the Christian law of liberty. Second Peter links the teaching of Peter with that of Paul. Jude links the earliest unwritten to the latest written Revelation. The two shorter Epistles to John, like Philemon, apply Christianity to the minute details of the Christian life, showing that Christianity can sanctify all earthly relations.

Next: Hebrews Chapter 1