Hebrews 2:5-13

IV

The exaltation of Jesus’ above the Angels, is not disparaged by His earthly life, which rather effects the elevation of humanity

Hebrews 2:5-13.

5For unto the angels hath he not [For not unto the angels did he] put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak [are speaking]. 6But one in a certain place testified, saying, What Isaiah 2:0 [a] man, that thou art mindful of him? or the [a] son of man, that thou visitest him? 7Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honor, and didst set him over the works of thy hands 8 [om. and didst set him over the works of thy hands]Hebrews 3:0 : Thou hast [didst] put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put [in subjection] under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. 9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels [but him who has for some little been made lower than the angels, Jesus, we see] for the [on account of his] suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God4 should [might] taste death for every man. 10For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing [as one who brought] many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of [from] one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, 12Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church [congregation] will I sing praise unto thee. 13And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me [that God gave to me].

[Hebrews 2:5.—οὐ γὰρ , for not unto angels=it is not to angels that he subjected, etc. Ἀγγέλοις without the Art., as marking not the individuals, but the class, and emphatic in its position.—ὑπέταξεν, he subjected, Aor.; not, hath subjected.—τήν οἰκουμένην. There are three words commonly rendered, world: 1. Κόσμος properly the world as a harmoniously adjusted and orderly system of things; this is never used in the phrase, the “world to come;” 2. αἰών, age, duration of time, and hence the world as constituting a particular period of time, or age; so commonly ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος, this age, this world, and αἰὼν ὁ μέλλων, the coming or future age or world; 3. ἡ οἰκουμένη (γῆ), the world as a locality and as inhabited; the world in a more concrete character than is expressed by αἰών.

Hebrews 2:6.—τί ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος. De Wette, Del., Alf. render as=ὁ ἄνθρωπος, man, collectively, as Eng. Ver.: Moll and Lün. a man, individually, which accords better with the absence of the article.

Hebrews 2:7.—βραχύ τι, some little, in the Hebr. text, and in the citation, Hebrews 2:7, in relation to man, is “a paululum of degree;” in its application by the author to Jesus, Hebrews 2:9, it becomes a “paululum of time,” Del., contrasting his temporary humiliation with his permanent exaltation.

Hebrews 2:9.—διὰ τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου, on account of his suffering of death, referring forward to ἐστεφ, crowned. The Eng. ver. “for the suffering,” etc., suggests an erroneous reference, or is at least ambiguous.—For the general construction of Hebrews 2:9 see exegetical notes.—K.].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Hebrews 2:5. For not unto angels did He put in subjection the coming world of which we are speaking.—The γάρ refers not back to Hebrews 1:13 (de W.), nor in form to the preceding exhortation, while, in fact, introducing an entirely new thought, parallel to the preceding, viz., that in the Son humanity is exalted above the angels (Ebr.). Nor does it introduce the ground on which the author has assigned to the revelation made through the Son a so much loftier position (Thol.), but rather the ground for the earnest exhortation to personal devotion to the system of salvation revealed through the Son. Jewish conceptions assigned to the angels a share, not merely in the giving of the Law, but also in the government of the world, and especially in influencing the events of history. It is uncertain whether Psalms 82:0 has such a reference; but the LXX., in rendering the obscure words, Deuteronomy 32:8 (that God, when He fixed the heritage of the nations and separated the children of men from one another, fixed the limits of the nations according to the number of the sons of Israel), makes the division to take place according to the number of the angels of God. In the following verse it is then said that the people of Israel are the portion of Jehovah Himself. The same idea is found, Sir 17:17, and with many Rabbins, who, on the ground of the list of nations, Genesis 10:0., assume for the seventy nations seventy angelic heads and rulers, while Israel, excepted from the number, is the special and privileged people of the Supreme God. At Daniel 10:13; Daniel 10:20; Dan. 21:12, however, we find the representation that the Jews also have such an angelic prince, who takes in charge this people as against the guardian angels at other nations; and at Tob 12:15, the seven archangels are regarded as the angelic protectors of the covenant people; and at Daniel 4:14, the fate announced to Nebuchadnezzar is indicated as the decision of the “Watchers,” and the decree of the “Holy Ones.” From these passages is explained the mode of expression here employed, in regard to which we may also recollect that the LXX. render the designation of the Messiah, Isaiah 9:6, (אֲבִי־עַד), according to the Cod. Alex, by πατὴρ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, Father of the coming age. For it is not a mere absolute futurity which is meant (Theodoret, Œc, Grot., Schulz), but the Messianic world (Calv.). And the order of the words, too, shows that the contrast is not between the future and the preceding world (Camero, Bl.), but, as indicated also by the absence of the Art. with ἀγγ., between angelic existences and man, to which latter class the Messianic King sustains a relation entirely unlike that which he bears to the former.

Hebrews 2:6. But some one testified in a certain place.—Here is not the commencement of a new section (Heinr.), but the adversative δέ subjoins a contrast to the idea referred to and denied in the preceding clause, and over against that idea presents in a contrast indicated by its Scriptural citation, the real nature of the case. The indefiniteness of the form of citation (πού, somewhere), occurring also with Philo, (Carpz.), and with many Rabbins (Schöttg.), implies not that, as against the inscription which refers the Psalm to David, the author would ascribe it to some unknown person (Grot.), which would imply a critical habit not at this time existing; nor that, quoting from memory, he did not know the precise locality of the passage (Koppe, Schulz),—a supposition negatived partly by the verbal exactness of the citation, partly by the like mode of citing a passage entirely familiar, Hebrews 4:4 (Lün.); nor that, regarding God or the Holy Spirit as the proper Author of the passage, he was indifferent to its human writer (Bl.), in which case τὶς would hardly have been employed; but is probably a usage purely rhetorical (so the majority after Chrys.). For that God Himself is addressed in this well known passage (Ebr.) is a matter on which no stress need be laid, since the author either might have made the Scripture the subject, or employed a passive construction.

What is a man—all things under his feet.—The connection of the words in Psalms 8:5-7 shows that man, as אֱנוֹשׁ, in contrast with heaven and the shining stars which God has ordained, is conceived immediately in his frailty and earthly lowliness, and it is purely arbitrary to introduce here,—whether into the original text, or the conception of our author (Kuin., Heinr., Böhm., Bl., Stein, Lün.),—the idea of the glory and dignity of man. We find rather the preceding words of the Psalm expressing the idea that God is not stumbled, so to speak, by this natural inferiority of man, but displays His own glory in selecting from such an humble sphere His instruments of victory for the confusion of His enemies. After reminding us, Hebrews 2:2, that God, whose majesty is extolled above the heavens, has also a mighty name upon the earth, the Psalmist declares in Hebrews 2:3 that out of the mouth of children and sucklings He has prepared to Himself a power against His adversaries, to subdue the enemy, the seeker of vengeance. On this follows (Hebrews 2:4) the wondering gaze at the heavens, the work of the fingers of God, and then, Hebrews 2:5, the contrasted reference to the twofold nature of man, appearing, on the one hand, frail and impotent, as a mortal dweller on the earth, as a creature of dust, and, on the other, not merely an object of loving care, but an instrument, preferred before all creatures, for the execution of the will of God. The subsequent delineations of the Psalm show that the reference is to that position of sovereignty which, according to the account of creation, man has received by virtue of his possession of the Divine image. Precisely for this reason it is added: “Thou hast made him to fall short but little of Deity.” Elohim without the Art. expresses abstractly the Divine in its super-terrestrial character,—nay, 1 Samuel 28:13; Zech. 12:19, the super-terrestrial in general, such as appertains to spirits. The Psalmist thus says, not that man is made almost equal to Jehovah, but that he has received almost a supra-terrestrial nature and position. Hence the LXX. in place of Elohim put παῤ . But the words of the text do not justify Calov, Vitr., Stier, Ebr., in taking not merely the βραχύ τι of the Sept., but even the Heb. מְעַט, not, of degree, but, of time, in the sense, “Thou hast for a season let him fall short of Elohim, i.e, of the intercourse and presence of the world-ruling Deity in His glory, which the angels, as inhabitants of heaven, always enjoy.” Equally unwarranted is the assumption that this glory of man is a glory as yet merely promised by God, and that the hope of the Psalmist looks to its speedy realization. For the “falling short” or “lacking” is not transferred back to the past, nor the ‘crowning’ carried forward to the future; but the two are represented as contemporaneous, and the description refers to man, not after the Fall, but in his primitive and normal condition. Precisely for these reasons can the words be applied to the Messiah, and the application made by our author, Hebrews 2:9, is facilitated by the expression, “Son of Man.” But it finds in this expression, neither its occasion nor its substantial reason, and the nature of the argument rather requires us here to regard the author as applying the parallel terms, ‘man’ and “Son of man,” to mankind in general (Bez., Storr, Ebr., Del.), than to assume in the original a direct reference of these words to Christ (Bl., Lün.), and thus interpolate here the quite differently applied train of thought which is found at 1Co 15:25 ff.5

Hebrews 2:8. For in subjecting to him all things he has left nothing.—The author proceeds to draw from the words of the Psalmist a conclusion which introduces the proof of the position laid down in Hebrews 2:5. The subject of the verb is not the Psalmist, but God (Hebrews 3:15; Hebrews 8:13), and αὐτῷ refers not to the Son of man, either as appealing in Christ as a historical person (Calv., Gerh., Calov, Seb. Schmidt, Lün., etc.), or simply as ideally conceived, but to man as such, as immediate object of Psalms 8:0 (Bez., Grot., Schlicht, Ebr., Del.). But neither is it his purpose to make good and justify the declaration of the Psalmist (Hofm.). This rests on the statement of Genesis 1:28. It is rather to justify the declaration of the author that God has not subjected to angels the future world of which we speak. This is done by an appeal to the infallible word of Scripture that God has subjected every thing to man: this declaration admits no exception. It cannot be objected to the legitimacy of this conclusion, that the Psalmist is speaking of the present, and our author of the future world, and that he is thus unwarranted in including the οἰκουμ. μέλλ. in the category of the “all things.” With partial correctness, Del. remarks, after Hofm.: The world, as collective aggregate of what is created, coincides with the generic term, “all things,” and the present and future world are not two different things, comprehended under the τὰ πάντα, but they are the τὰ πάντα—the all things themselves, only in two distinct and successive forms. Still I would rather lay the emphasis on the fact that in οἰκ. μέλλ. denotes the Messianic world as that in which alone the Divine destination of man to dominion over all things can have its accomplishment. By this, attention is at once directed partly to the present position of the human race, not yet corresponding with its destiny, and partly to that fulfilment of the Divine declaration which, through Jesus the Messianic King, has been already commenced, and is pledged to an absolute completion.

But now we see not as yet all things subjected to him.—The νῦν δέ is not logical,=but as the case stands, in fact, but directs our eyes to the earthly present, which shows the universe as yet not in a condition answering to its destination. By this the certain fulfilment of the divine declaration, is indeed held out in prospect for a more perfect future. But this aspect of the subject the author is not now unfolding. To assume (with Lün), a contrast between that which we now see and that which we shall yet see, disturbs the connection, and is inconsistent with the following verse. The purpose of the author is to prove that the future or Messianic world—the world of redemption—that world which forms the proper subject of communication between him and his readers—is as far as the original world, which began with creation, from being subjected to angelic beings. Hence he institutes a double contrast of that which we now do not see: primarily a contrast with the declaration immediately preceding [viz. the inferential statement that God subjecting to man all things, has left nothing unsubjected to him]; and, secondly, a contrast with that which we now already see [viz., Jesus glorified in advance, and for the sake of, humanity.] Even the δέ in our passage should have awakened a suspicion against the common assumption that we have here an objection to the declaration of the Psalm, or a limitation of our author’s previous position inferentially derived from it. [Νῦν has here, with nearly all interpreters, the temporal signification. While entirely coinciding with the author’s general exposition, which cites the passage from the Psalm in its primary literal acceptation, and then draws out from it, by legitimate reasoning, its proper Messianic application, I yet incline strongly to the logical explanation of νῦν. The closing clause of Hebrews 2:8 : “For in subjecting to Him all things, etc.,” is purely logical. It seems more natural that the next should commence with a logical particle, and it is precisely because the author (as Moll maintains above) is not yet contrasting the present with the future; but an actual condition with an ideal condition, that I prefer to take νῦν in the purely logical sense, which is not inconsistent with the not yet, (or possibly not at all) of the οὔπω. I would thus render, “But as it is, in no way,” or, “But as it is, not yet do we see,” etc. Still, if we forbear to press the νῦν, its temporal acceptation harmonizes nearly as well with the reasoning as the logical. I wish to add that the passage, rightly expounded, is a beautiful specimen of the author’s skilful and profound manner of dealing with Scripture; or, perhaps we should rather say, it is a striking example of a commentary by the Spirit of inspiration on a passage which the Spirit had indited.—K.].

Hebrews 2:9. But him who has been for a little humbled below the angels, Jesus, we behold—honor. The position and import of the word ‘Jesus,’ standing in close connection with the finite verb βλέπομεν, and between the two Perf. Part. ἠλαττ. and ἐστεφ., of which the former has the Art. the latter not, present to us the historical Saviour as the person in whom the language of the Psalm has its fulfilment. The object is not a direct contrast between as yet unexalted humanity, and the already exalted Jesus, nor between the humiliation and exaltation of the Messiah; but simply this, to declare that that Jesus who was once, for a little, humbled below the angels, is well known as a person crowned on account of His suffering of death with glory and honor, and that to Him must be referred the words of the Psalm, because also now, i.e, in the period of redemption and the time of the Messiah, these infallible words of the Psalm can apply to no other “man” and “Son of man” than Jesus. While Hofmann formerly (Weiss. II. 28) regarded τὸν ἠλαττ. as predicate, I̓ησοῦν as obj. and ἐστεφ. as its apposition, he now more correctly regards (Schriftb. I. 187) τὸν ἠλαττ. as object., Ἰησ. as in apposition with it, and ἐστεφ. as predicate. This construction is, on grammatical grounds, preferable to that adopted by Ebr. and Del., which makes Ἰησ. the proper object of βγέπ., and ἠλαττ. its apposition, placed before it on purely rhetorical grounds.6 True, Lün. goes too far in maintaining that Ἰησ. is wholly unemphatic, and could even be dispensed with. But the emphasis lies certainly on the predicates formed from the words of the Psalm, which describe the two contrasted conditions of the Lord, and hence inclose as it were between them the historical name of His person. The subjection of the world under man we as yet see not; but we see the man really characterized by the Psalm, viz: Jesus, in whose history we at the same time recognize the deeper significance of its words, and learn to give to the words, “lowered a little below the angels” a new and profounder import. The Messianic application of Psalms 8:0 is made in a different way by Jesus Himself at Matthew 21:16, and again in still another way by Paul 1 Corinthians 15:27. In both cases, however, Jesus is regarded as the ‘Lord,’ equal to God; and as such is also the doctrine of our author, we need not, by our anxiety to retain the historical sense of the βραχύ τι, be misled into the rendering of Hofm., “Him who was well-nigh equal to the angels.” The transition of the βραχύ τι of degree into the βραχύ τι of time is all the more easy, from the fact that on the one hand the meaning of the phrase is in clasical Greek more commonly temporal, and that, on the other, the actual state of the case, man’s inferiority to angels, having its ground in his corporeal and mortal nature, is but transient, and limited to his earthly life; while for Jesus, this period of His life, being already completely finished, belongs now to the past. We are, in like manner, to reject Hofmann’s reference of the words: “crowned with glory and honor,” to the furnishing out and endowing of Jesus at His entrance into the world, or to His designation and appointment as Saviour; also his idea that the “suffering of death” refers to that suffering of death to which man, instead of enjoying his destined sovereignty, is subjected, and which, consequently, becomes thus the occasioning cause of the appointment of Jesus as Saviour. For Christ’s appointment as Saviour is indicated in the words, “lowered for some little below the angels,” while His “crowning” is constantly referred in the New Testament to His heavenly reward, obtained after His successful and victorious life-conflict of suffering and of faith; while again, His suffering of death appears as the ground and procuring cause of His glorification, (Hebrews 5:10; Philippians 2:9). Precisely for this reason also we are to refer the διὰ τὸ πάθ τοῦ θαν., not (with Orig., Chrys., Theod., Aug., Bez., Calov, etc.,) to ἡλαττ. but to ἐστεφ. as is also indicated by its position in the sentence.

That by the grace of God, on behalf of every man, he might taste of death.—The clause commencing with ὅπως [in order that=ἴνα] and thence introducing not a mere result (Eras., Kuin., etc.) but purpose, cannot, from the nature of the thought, be connected directly with ἐστεφ. [“crowned in order that”], nor from the structure of the sentence with ἠλαττ., but must be regarded either as a pregnant exponent of πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου, (Thol., Lün.), or as belonging to the entire participial predicative clause—[i.e., “crowned on account,” etc.]—(Del.) and thus assigning the reason why Jesus was exalted, not without the suffering of death, and even on account of it; or, according to my view, as final object of the two-fold declaration respecting Christ’s transfer into His two successive states of humiliation and glorification. With this explanation accords best the reasoning of the following verse; and in the present final clause itself, the author’s main point is not to explain why Jesus has gone through suffering to glory (with which understanding Grot., Carpz., Storr, Bleek, etc., supply, from the preceding πάθημα, an explanatory ὃ ἔπαθεν) but to declare the object to be subserved alike by the incarnation of the First Born, and the exaltation of the Crucified One in the inseparable unity of the theanthropic person Jesus, viz.: the fulfilment of the divine purpose, that Jesus should, by the grace of God, for the benefit of every one, taste of death. There is no reason for laying the entire stress on ὑπὲρ παντός, although the masc. sing is employed with a designed emphasis. The weight of the thought is rather distributed nearly equally between the impressive closing words γεύσηται θανάτου, taste of death, the ὑπὲρ παντός, which declares the universality of the purpose and merit of His death, accomplished by His entrance into glory, and the χάριτι θεοῦ which refers back the whole, for its efficient and originating cause, to the grace of God. (We add, in passing, that the γεύσηται θανάτου taste of death refers neither to brevity of duration—simply “tasting,” (as Chrys., Primas., Braun, etc.,) nor to the bitterness of the death (Calov), nor to its reality (Beza, Bengel), but presupposes Jesus’ personal experience of the suffering of death and his incarnation). Even the reading χωρὶς θεοῦ would not necessarily require more than a secondary stress to be laid upon ὑπὲρ παντός. This would be the most natural, as also would the neuter rendering of παντός (every thing), only in case we take the thought to be that Jesus suffered death for all existences, with the single exception of God (Orig., Theodor., Ebr.), contrary to Hebrews 2:16; or, in order, with the exception of God, to gain and subjugate every thing to Himself (Beng., Chrys., Fr. Schmidt); the thought in this case being parallel to that Ephesians 1:10, and the form of expression to 1 Corinthians 15:27. Other interpreters take the words χωρὶς θεοῦ as an independent characterization, either of the subject of the clause [Christ separately from God], or of the verb [taste of death apart from God]. The former is advocated by Theod. Mops. and his pupil Nestorius, by Ambros., Fulgent., and Colomesius, (Obb. sacr. 603), who thus made Christ to have died in His humanity, without participation of His divinity: the latter, with a reference to Matthew 27:46, by Paul., and Baumgart., (Sach. I. 359, and in the Sermon: “How the sight of Jesus, amidst the woes of life, suffices for our blessedness, Brunsw. 1856). Hofm., who formerly explained thus (Weiss. I. 92): “Jesus has tasted death, χωρὶς θεοῦ, by surrendering to death a life (commencing in time), separated from God,” has abandoned both the interpretation and the reading on which it was based. The dispute regarding its genuineness is ancient. For while Orig. (at John 1:1) declares that he had found the reading χάριτι only ἔν τισι , Jerome (ad Galatians 1:2) has, in like manner, found absque Deo only in quibusdam exemplaribus.

Hebrews 2:10. For it became him—perfect through sufferings,—it seems, at first view, more natural to find the stress of the thought in διὰ παθημάτων (Lün., Del.) than in τελειῶσαι (Thol.), by which διὰ παθημάτων is reduced to a mere secondary and incidental place. In the former case, the way so offensive to the Jews, which leads the Messiah to glory through suffering and death, is here justified as entirely worthy of God. In the other case, we should have the thought expressed that it was indispensable that He should be glorified Himself, who became to others the author of salvation. But the connection demands an equal emphasis upon both points, to which also corresponds the two-fold description of God as the Being by whom and for whom are all things. God—not Christ, as (Prim., Hunn., Dorsch., Cram., etc.)—is designated as the final cause (for whom), and the instrumental cause (by or through whom) of all, in order, at the same time, to remind the reader that alike the τελίωσις, perfecting, which is the end, and the παθήματα, sufferings, which are the means, stand respectively in corresponding relation to those respective aspects of God’s being and agency. The perfecting (τελειοῦν) embraces at once the outward and the inward, the formal and the spiritual elements of perfecting, Hebrews 9:9, the bringing the person to the goal by the complete realization and fulfilment of his entire destiny (Thol.), so that the reaching of the highest outward goal is the consequence of internal moral perfection (Camero, de W.). For the perfect (τέλειον) stands in contrast alike with the incipient, the imperfect, and the unrealized (Köstl.). Lün. takes the idea too restrictedly as identical with δόξ. καὶ τιμ. ἐστεφ.

As leading many sons—perfect through sufferings.—We might be inclined to refer the participial clause, “leading many sons,” etc., to Jesus, as in apposition with “Leader of their salvation,” (ἀρχηγὸν τῆς σωτηρίας), but placed emphatically before it as in Hebrews 2:9 (so Primas., Erasm., Este, Ebr., Win.). And to this neither the absence of the Art. before ἀγαγόντα (Böhm., Bl.), nor the expression υἱούς, sons (Lün.), constitutes any objection. For as to the former, the participial clause is only made by the failure of the Art., subordinate to its noun [the Leader, as one who led] instead of being coördinated with it as in case of the employment of the Art. [the Leader who led]; and as to the latter we might say that while those brought to glory are indeed brethren of Christ, yet here they are mentioned not, in their relation to Him, as brethren, but in their relation to God as sons, especially as God is the subject of the entire sentence. But the word ἀρχηγός. (Hebrews 12:2; Acts 3:15; Acts 5:31) needs no explanatory apposition (Lün.). It is an abridged form of ἁρχεγέτης, with which, Philo designates the first Adam, and it denotes him who, at the head of a company, goes in advance of them, and leads them to a like goal; it thus passes over into the sense of author, originator, and becomes=αἴτιος (Bl. II. 1, p. 302). The goal is here ‘salvation’ (σωτηρία), to which ‘glory’ (δόξα) in the participial clause is entirely equivalent. We refer, therefore (with Chrys., Luth., Calov, and most intpp.), this participial clause more fittingly to God, of whom then the same is said, as the expression, “Leader of their salvation,” declares in reference to Christ. He is author of salvation for a great number of children, who are styled ‘many,’ not in the sense of ‘all,’ (Seb. Schmidt), and not in antithesis to all, but in contrast to ‘few,’ and in relation to ‘the One’ (Del.). The irregular Acc. ἀγαγόντα (for Dat. ἀγαγόντι) cannot be urged (as by Carpz., Mich., etc.) against this construction; for the Accus. is the natural case for the subject of the Inf., whence also transitions into it are frequent in spite of a preceding Dat. (Kühn., Gr. II., 346; Bernh. Synt., 367; Buttm. Gr. N. Test., 1859, p. 262).

The Aor. Part. (ἀγαγόντα) was formerly commonly taken in the sense of the Pluperf., and was applied, if it was referred to God as subject, to the saints of the Old Test., as Hofm. even still says (II., 1, 39): “The God who has led many sons to glory, a Moses to the prophetic, an Aaron to the high-priestly, a David to the royal dignity, must render this Son, to whom He had given as His distinguishing vocation, the realization of that destiny of humanity which is set forth in Psalms 8:0, perfect through suffering.” If, on the contrary, the Part. were referred to Christ, then they were applied (as still by Win. Gr. Exodus 6:0Exodus 6:0) to the men already saved through the personal instructions of Jesus. But it is alike inadmissible to weaken the idea of δόξα, glory, hitherto used of Christ’s heavenly glorification, into the lower conception of an earthly, prophetic, priestly, or kingly dignity, and to make the teachings of Jesus, exclusively of His glorious exaltation acquired by sufferings, the cause of salvation. All more recent investigations, however, show that the restricting of the Aor. Part, to the past—a restriction already previously abandoned in reference to the Infin.—is inadmissible. The future signification which many expositors, as even Grotius and Bleek, following Erasmus, give to the participle, is certainly unwarrantable. And to refer it again (with Grot., Limb., Schlicht.), to the eternal purpose and decree of God, though justified by Kuinoel on the ground of an utterly erroneous canon of the earlier Rhetoricians, that the Aor. can be used de conatu, is, of course, to be rejected. “Customary” action may, indeed, be denoted by the Aor., but we are forbidden to assume such a use here, by the fact that we are required by the term ἀρχηγός to restrict the “Sons” spoken of to the New Testament times, excluding those of the Old. [I would add, that there is no such use of the Aor. Participle to denote customary action, as would, in any case, justify the construction here supposed.—K.]. This difficulty is evaded by Tholuck’s assumption, that, here, without respect to relations of time, the Part. expresses the simple way and manner of the perfection, claiming that the Aor. connected with the finite verb, may express that which is contemporaneous with the finite verb, whether mention of this be present or future. To this Lün. objects, that while the Aor. Infin. may be thus used irrespectively of time, this usage does not extend to the Part., and that ἀγαγόντα cannot express the way and manner of the τελειῶσαι—the perfecting—inasmuch as the personal objects of the two verbs are different, ἀγαγόντα having for its object υἱούς, sons, and τελειῶσαι, the Captain, τὸν . The former remark, however, does not touch the examples adduced by Tholuck; and the latter appears to rest on a misapprehension. For the “perfecting” of Jesus, as ‘Leader of salvation,’ has been historically accomplished in His person in no other way and manner than by having had personally His career and course of life in a communion and fellowship of men believing on Him, and transformed by Him into children of God, who, after His manner and type, were led to glory—(a manner and type which Jac., Cappell. and Grot. restrict too exclusively to sufferings). To this also comes substantially the explanation of Lün. himself, viz., that from the stand-point of the writer, the participial clause stands in causal relation to the main proposition, and that the Aor. Part. is justified by the fact that in reality God, from the moment Christ came upon earth as Redeemer, and found faith existing, led to glory, that is, put upon the way to glory, those who had become believers in Him.

[The knot of the difficulty of the Aor. Part. ἀγαγόντι is scarcely yet untied. That it may grammatically be equally well referred either to God, or to the ‘Leader of salvation,’ Christ, seems unquestionable; and in either construction it makes nearly equally good sense, and is liable substantially to the same difficulties. Granting it, however (as with most, I, on the whole, prefer), to be connected with God (to which, as Moll justly remarks, and for the reason which he assigns, the Acc. case of the Part. constitutes no objection), it still remains a question why, and in precisely what sense, the Aor. Part. is used. That, like the Inf., it can be used without specific reference to past time, and that, in a certain sense, it takes its time from its accompanying finite verb, is unquestionable. It usually thus either denotes an act actually, or ideally and logically separable from that expressed by the finite verb, and conceived as logically prior to it, or, as remarked by Thol., expresses its way and manner. Thus to give examples of its several uses:

1. Of its frequent use as applied to past time: “God, after speaking (λαλήσας) to the Fathers, spoke to us,” etc. “Opening (ἀνοίξαντες) their treasures, they presented.” They opened their treasures and presented.

2. Of contemporaneous action actually distinct: “On seeing (ἰδόντες) the star, they rejoiced.” They saw the star before they could rejoice, and yet they rejoiced as soon as they saw the star. Logically, the seeing preceded the rejoicing: chronologically they were simultaneous.

3. A still stronger case of the merely logical separation: “Answering (ἀποκριθείς) he said=he answered and said. The ‘answering’ and ‘saying’ are absolutely and completely one and the same act, but the mind views it under two distinct aspects, and of these the ‘answering’ is logically anterior to the ‘saying.’ So “Jesus crying with a loud voice, said, Father,” etc., here, as in the preceding, the distinction of time is purely logical, the ‘crying’ and ‘saying’ being two aspects of the same act.

4. These latter examples often run into way and manner: “Answering, he said”=“he answered and said,” or nearly=he said in the way of answering. Πιὼν φάρμακον , ‘he drank poison and died,’ or here more exactly, “he died of drinking poison.” Plato does not mean to say (Phæd. I.) “after drinking poison he died,” but “he drank poison and died,” or better, “he died by drinking poison.” Hence the Aor. Part. sometimes denotes almost or quite purely, ‘way and manner.’

5. We may remark, that the Aor. Part. may be employed to denote an idea that is strictly subordinate to that of the accompanying verb, or really coördinate with it, and of equal, or even superior importance. Thus, ‘He directed me coming (ἐλθόντα) to inform him,’ might be either, ‘he directed me after coming, to inform him,’ or ‘to come and inform him;’ and only the connection can show whether the act expressed by the Part. is included in the command, or only presupposed by it. Thus “He commanded him, arising, (ἐγερθέντα) to take the child and flee,” might be either “on or after arising, to take the child and flee,” or to arise and take, etc. The connection only can positively determine.

In view of the above, the natural renderings of the Aor. Part. here would be: 1. (with Hofm.). It became him, etc., “after leading many sons to glory,” which, however, is nearly impossible as to the thought, even after rejecting Hofmann’s absurd reference of it to Christ’s Old Testament predecessors, and referring it, as we might possibly do, to all the righteous whom God had formerly led to glory. One grand objection to this is, that the Old Testament saints had not as yet been led to glory (Hebrews 11:39-40). Or 2. It became him “by leading many sons to glory,” with Thol. making the Part. express the way and manner. To this, however, Lönemann’s objection is valid, that then the Part. and the verb ought to have the same personal object, as it seems difficult to see how God could perfect Jesus, one being, by leading many sons, other beings, to glory, unless we reply with Moll that the career of our Lord was so intimately blended with the life of His people, that His perfection was really accomplished in the process—not exclusively of suffering—by which they were brought to glory. This answer is ingenious, but hardly satisfactory. Or 3. Taking the Part. not as expressing a subordinate, but a coördinate or principal idea: It became him to lead many sons, etc., and to make: which, however, it must be confessed, hardly seems to be the writer’s idea. To render the Part. as future, being about to lead, or for the purpose of leading (ἄξοντα or ὡς ἄξοντα), or as present while leading (ἄγοντα), is out of the question. It is, indeed, possible to render it ‘as leading’ absolutely,=‘as one who led;’ and this perhaps, all things considered, is the best mode of constructing it. But this is harsh, and I know of no strictly parallel examples in Greek prose. Exceptional constructions in the poets are hardly worth the citing, even if they can be found. Were there even any slight external authority for ἄγοντα or ἄξοντα, on internal grounds I should hardly hesitate to adopt it. The rendering of the Eng. vers., ‘in bringing many sons,’ etc., would naturally require ἐν τῶ ἅγειν, or at the least, the Pres. Part., ἄγοντα.—K.].

Hebrews 2:11. For both he that sanctifieth and they—are all from one.—Having designated Jesus as the ‘Son of God,’ the author now justifies his application of the same term to those who believe in Him. Not barely the One, but also the others (τε—καί); not merely the Sanctified (Peirce, Beng.), but they together with the Sanctifier, i.e., with Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:13; Hebrews 13:12), are from One. “From one” (ἐξ ἑνός) expresses not likeness of nature and character (ejusdem naturæ et conditionis spiritualis, Calv., Camero), but simply community of origin; and this not ex communi massa (J. Cappell, Akersloot); not “from one seed, or blood, or stock,” (ἐξ ἑνός scil. σπέρματος, or αἵματος, or γένους, as Carpz., Abresch, etc.); nor from Adam (Erasm., Bez., Este, etc.), but from God. For the language relates not to that relationship subsequently adverted to Hebrews 2:14, by joint participation in humanity, but to spiritual brotherhood with Christ, a brotherhood founded in that translation from the darkness of a life estranged from God into a union with Him as the perfectly pure and absolute and essential light, which Christ, as the Sanctifier, has wrought for us as the sanctified. This is effected, as is subsequently shown, by the high-priestly work, which Jesus Christ, as eternal Priestly King, accomplishes in heaven. For by ἁγιάζειν our Epistle denotes the accomplishment of the actual commencement of the true fellowship of individuals with God, in the Covenant relation which God Himself has instituted, on the basis of the expiation wrought by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, and in virtue of the purification obtained through the blood of Jesus Christ, under the point of view of dedication to a Divine relationship, Hebrews 9:13 f.; Hebrews 10:10; Hebrews 10:14; Hebrews 10:29; Hebrews 13:12. This expression also has its origin in the terminology of the Old Testament, but has within the sphere of New Testament fulfilment and realization, a more than merely nominal and ritual significance. The Pres. Part. may stand without reference to distinction of time, in the sense of substantives (Winer), [that is, any Participle may, with the Article, be employed in the sense of a concrete substantive, as the Infinitive with the Art. is employed in the sense of the abstract (τὸ ἁγιάζεσθαι, the being sanctified: ὁ ἡγιασμένος, he who has been sanctified), while the Pres. tense denotes, according to the nature of the case, that which is going on at the time specified by the principal verb, or that which from time to time or habitually takes place. Thus οἱ ἁγιαζόμενοι may denote “those who are being sanctified, or are in process of sanctification,” or, “those who, from time to time, are sanctified,” i.e., the successive classes of the sanctified.—K.]. It is a characteristic of Christ to exercise this ministry: of us to receive its influence and efficient power. Thus we are ‘from God’ (John 8:47; 1 John 4:6), and the language can be applied to Jesus, as here the subject is the Saviour’s earthly and historical relation to God. Hence we need not find the ‘Father’ in Abraham (Drus., Peirce, Beng.), nor again refer to God as creative (Chrys. and the Fathers), but as spiritual Father (Grot., Limb., etc.). And thus, under this connection, we need not take the words as denoting a properly universal relation (Hofm.) restricted in its application to Christ and Christians by a reference to the O. T. priesthood (Schlicht., Gerh., etc.). They refer directly to Christ and Christians.

For which reason he is not ashamed to call them brethren.—In accordance with the character of the Epistle, the author appeals not to the words of Jesus Himself regarding this his fraternal relation, but regards it as belonging essentially to the fulfilment of the Messiah’s vocation; and hence, as so typified in the O. Test., that alike David the Theocratic Ruler, and Isaiah the prophetic Servant of Jehovah, recognize, feel, and express this their relation in the Church, and embrace in a unity with themselves those who otherwise are subordinated to them, and dependent upon them. In subjoining, therefore, his proof passages, the writer adds: “for which cause he is not ashamed,” an expression which points on the one hand to the distinction between Christ’s Sonship and that of believers (Chrys., Theod.); and on the other, to his sincere and hearty condescension to this fellowship, in proof of which are now given three citations from the Scripture.

Hebrews 2:12. Saying, I will declare, etc.—The first passage is from Psalms 22:23, according to the LXX, except that ἀπαγγελῶ is substituted for διηγήσομαι. David, amidst the sore distress of his flight from before Saul, reposes in faith, as one whom Samuel had anointed, upon the promise made to him of the throne, and declares, in the midst of affliction, not merely this assurance of deliverance and exaltation, but also his determination to declare on this account to his brethren in the congregation, to the seed of Jacob, to them that fear Jehovah, the name, the grace, the help of the Lord, and summon them to join him in praising God. We need assume neither that Christ speaks in David, nor that the Psalmist has transferred himself into the person of Christ. Nor need we interpose the ideal or abstract righteous person (Heng.) in order to justify the Messianic application of this Psalm. We can conceive it as purely typical (Hofm.), or, regarding the prophecy of history as here united with verbal prophecy, we may regard it as typico-prophetical (Del.).

The second passage is found three times in the form πεποιθὼς ἔσομαι ἐπ’ αὐτῶ—I will put my trust in him,—so that the author has merely reversed the order of the first two words, and prefixed an emphatic ἐγώ. The passage Isaiah 12:2, cannot possibly be referred to; while that 2 Samuel 22:3 is intrinsically suitable. Still we are not necessarily forced to this from the fact that a καί πάλιν separates it from the third (Isaiah 8:17) as well as from the first (Ebr.). Rather we may more naturally refer it to Isaiah 8:17, because the immediately following verse in Isaiah is employed as the third citation, and the separation of the two verses springs not from the author’s wish to accumulate proofs (Lün.), but from the two passages presenting the relation in question under two different aspects (Del.); first, that the speaker associates himself with his brethren in a common attitude of spirit toward God, viz., that of confidential trust, which belongs properly to all the children of God; secondly, that he embraces in one himself and the children that God has given him. Of course these two passages refer but typically to Jesus; but this typical view is entirely legitimate. For Isaiah, whose very name points to the Saviour, not merely prophesies with prophetic words, but has also begotten children who are partly pledges for the salvation of Jehovah, which is to come after affliction and through judgment, and partly, like him, point by their names symbolically to this relation, and by their position prefigure it. It is hence needless to assume (as Bl., Lün.) that the author has been led by the καὶ ἐρεῖ, introduced by the LXX. before Isaiah 8:17, to suppose that the Messiah is the speaker, in that these words appeared to point to another subject than the prophet, who, in the whole section, has spoken in the first person, and also to another subject than God, since the latter is in the ἐπ’ αὐτῶ named as He in whom the speaker puts his trust.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Angels may, indeed, sometimes be conceived as guardian spirits of individual men, and as heads of entire nations, and are also designated in Scripture as dominions, principalities, and powers, which in themselves, again, have distinctions of position, of power, and of rank. But a dominion over the world is never ascribed to them, neither over the world of creation, nor over that of redemption. It is, for this reason, folly to invoke them as helpers of our need, or to expect from them any saving intercession.

2. The destination of man to the dominion of the world, has the possibility of its realization in his possession of the divine image. Hence, under the dominion of sin, the actual condition of man cannot correspond to his Divine destination. But on account of man’s susceptibility of redemption, and in reference to his future redemption, the attainment of this destination becomes the goal of history, and is an essential part of the Divine promises.

3. The attainment of this destination of our race, can be reached by individuals only on the ground of redemption, and that, too, in that new world, which, in its hidden ground and germ, is already present; but in its glorified form of manifestation, is still in the future. It is linked completely, and in all respects, with the mediation of Christ as the Redeemer. But those who, through Him, have become children of God, will, by virtue of their birthright, enter into the possession of the promised land (Matthew 5:6), and of the world (Romans 4:13), and sitting with Him upon the throne of His glory (Matthew 19:28), and on the seat of His Father (Revelation 3:21; Revelation 5:10) will reign with Him as priestly kings (Romans 5:17; 2 Timothy 2:12), and as His saints will judge the world (1 Corinthians 6:2), and the angels (Hebrews 2:3).

4. That which for humanity is still in the future, we see in the person of Jesus Christ already realized. In Him the destiny of man is attained, so that in Him, idea and realization are united. An ancient voice from the synagogue (with Del., p. 59, from Biesenthal’s Rabb. Comm., 1857, p. 1) says: “The mystery of Adam is the mystery of the Messiah; Adam is the anagram of א֯דם ד֯ור מ֯שׁיח. And the midrash at Psalms 104:1 : “God lent to Moses הוד, and to Joshua הדר in that he purposed yet, in accordance with Psalms 21:6, to lend both to King Messiah.”

5. But precisely for this reason has also the history of Jesus an inestimable value. We have in it no mythological presentation of religious ideas, no symbolical expression of general relations, no moral portraiture of the ideal man, as a postulate of reason and of conscience; but, however wide-reaching may be this history, and flexible and various in its applications, it is yet in its being matter of fact that it has its true significance and importance. For the peculiarity of the Christian faith is not the idea of communion with God, and the idea of a salvation furnished by the theanthropic personalities and arrangements. This is rather a characteristic of all religious faith. The distinguishing feature of the Christian faith is the certainty of the realization of salvation, for eternal ages and for all believers, a realization accomplished in a single historical subject, in Jesus of Nazareth, and by the acts of His life.

6. Although men, by the fact that they live in a body of flesh and blood, hold for the time being a position subordinated to angels, as heavenly spirits, yet it is precisely in this relationship with earthly creatures, above whom men are again, by their spiritual natures, specifically exalted, that there exists the possibility of man’s central position and of his history in his fall and redemption within the sphere of the universe. He is the creaturely, as Christ is the uncreated, head of the creation.

7. The glorification of the body in the future world, whose type and pledge we behold, in the Son of man, crowned with glory and honor at the right hand of the Father, and the participation of the whole thus glorified man, in the glory of the Lord, elevates him completely and forever above the angels. His subordination to these, is but “for a little,” in respect alike of degree and time.

8. Patient endurance in our present position, in which we as yet see not the fulfilment of our destiny, and of the promises relating to it, is rendered difficult to us by our sufferings, but is rendered easy by the participation and example of Christ. Sufferings have been for Him no hinderance, but rather the ground and means of His glorification; hence we are not to be displeased at the sufferings which we ourselves experience, and are to take no offence at the sufferings of Jesus Christ, but in order rightly to understand and profit by them, are to have regard to their cause and their purpose.

9. A remembrance of that crowning of Christ which has been achieved by sufferings, and the declaration of the gracious purpose of God, in the death of Christ, viz., that Christ tasted death for us, should, on the one hand, awaken our consciousness of guilt, on the other, strengthen our faith in the redemption already secured, and our hope of the glorification yet to be attained: for alike Christ’s suffering and His coronation have sprung neither from accident, nor from any natural necessity, nor from caprice, nor from outward compulsion; but have taken place in free love, in willing obedience, according to God’s gracious purpose for the accomplishment of the true end and destination of the world.

10. The final object of the world, is to reflect back the glory of God. It can fulfil this object only under the dominion of man who corresponds with his destination, i.e., who mirrors in himself the glory of God. In the attainment of this, his destination, man has been hindered by sin, but sin does not merely hinder his reaching the goal; it brings him into positive destruction. Thus for the accomplishment of the world’s destiny, a deliverer of the race becomes indispensable, who has been Himself incorporated into it, as a member, yet whose life is of such a nature, that He can work vicariously, and by His own progress through suffering to glory, can become the author, pioneer, and captain of salvation, for the children whom God leads to glory.

11. The birth and introduction of this indispensable Deliverer, is no result of mere natural development or product of the natural course of human affairs, but a work of Divine freedom and love, corresponding to the holy nature of the Eternal and Omnipotent One, who from everlasting to everlasting has, as to Himself and as to all things, absolute knowledge and control, and has Himself placed Himself, not merely in His glory, as the end, for the sake of which, but in His goodness and might as the cause by means of which, all beings are and exist. The means by which we, as redeemed ones are led to glory, correspond, therefore, alike to the ultimate end and the nature of Him who has both ordained the end, and arranged the means.

12. The fellowship which Christ has with those who are led to glory, rests, in its ultimate ground, on their common origin from one and the same Father. They are all children of God, by virtue of their birth from God. But this fellowship includes an essential diversity. Christ is the eternal Son of God, of like nature with the Father, and hence even in His state of humiliation, needs no regeneration of His nature from the corruption of sin, but only, by virtue of His true humanity, was susceptible and participant of perfection in the pathway of suffering. As the proper and peculiar (ἴδιος, Romans 8:32) Son of the Father He is in Himself ἅγιος (holy). But by virtue of the perfection of His life in the flesh, He, as ἁγιάζων, sanctifier, imparts, by taking away sin and communicating His holy obedience (Hebrews 9:13-14; Hebrews 10:10; Hebrews 10:14; Hebrews 10:29; Hebrews 13:12) this quality to those who by adoption and regeneration receive the Divine Sonship, and acknowledges expressly the common brotherhood which He has with them preëminently on the spiritual side.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

To what shall we adhere, amidst the contradictions of our earthly life, and amidst the strifes and turmoil of the world? 1. To the word of God, which announces to us the truth; 2. to the grace of God, which works our salvation; 3. to the Son of God, who has become our brother.—Wherewith shall we comfort and sustain ourselves amidst the sufferings of time? 1. With hope of the glory of the future world. 2. With faith in the certainty of our redemption in Christ Jesus. 3. With the love of the children of God.—We shall triumph victoriously over all dangers which threaten us, if we—1, keep in our eye our destination to that dominion over the world which God has given us; 2, tread the path to perfection which God has ordained and pointed out to us; 3, allow ourselves to be led with all the children of God in following Jesus as the Captain of our salvation.—The greatness and power of the wondrous grace of God is most clearly discoverable by us: 1, in the preëminence to which in the creation He destined us above all creatures; 2, in the accomplishment of our redemption by the giving of His Son for us; 3, in leading the redeemed to sanctification, and to a perfected life in glory.—The Sonship which we possess with God is: 1, a work of grace which binds us to grateful acknowledgment of our unworthiness, and the Divine compassion; 2, a state of salvation which summons us to abiding trust in the Lord; 3, a common brotherhood which stimulates to mutual love in our following after Christ.—Why it is needful and good in all cases to put confidence in God the Lord: 1, because He is the God through whom, as the Almighty, all things are: 2, in like manner, the God for whose sake all things are, for the manifestation of His glory; 3, and further, the God who, as the absolutely truthful One, certainly executes the utterances of His lips; 4, who, as the compassionate One, stoops to His creatures in their necessities; 5, and as the Holy, Ever-living, Unchangeable God, in the only fitting way brings His purposes to accomplishment.—The way through suffering to glory is ordained for us of God: 1, on account of our sins, which hinder us in the promised attainment of our destiny: 2, by the grace of God, which will lead many children to glory; 3, after the pattern of Jesus Christ, who, as Captain of our salvation, was made perfect through sufferings.—From temporal sufferings spring eternal joys if they bring us: 1, under the guidance of God; 2, into the following of Christ; 3, into eternal glory.

Starke:—Everything is subject to Christ, not only in this world, but also in the future. O that in true obedience of faith we may henceforth subject ourselves to Him, that we may not be obliged to bow to His chastisement as Judge!—Of the majesty and glory of Christ we must judge not according to our reason or sense, but solely according to the word of God; otherwise we shall go widely astray, 1 Corinthians 2:9.—The character of Christ’s Kingdom is not worldly, but invisible and spiritual. What wonder, then, that we cannot comprehend with our senses the character of His majestic Presence and Dominion? John 18:36; Luke 17:20-21.—As one portion of the prophecy regarding Christ is already fulfilled, viz., that He should be crowned with glory and honor, we need not doubt that the rest will also be fulfilled, and that all things will be brought perfectly beneath His feet.—The grace, love and compassion of God are the source of our entire salvation; but the love of the Father was also the love of the Son, Galatians 2:20. Observe that the expiatory death of Christ is to be for the benefit of all men, without exception, and is to be applied to them under the condition of faith, 1 Timothy 2:6.—Precious word! The Lord Christ has tasted death for us, that we might live before Him, Romans 5:10; Colossians 1:22.—If God has taken this method with His Son, that He should be exalted by suffering, then must we also, through many tribulations, enter into eternal life, Acts 14:22; Christ is our “breaker,” Micah 2:13.—Christ, the Captain of thy salvation, has been made perfect by sufferings; why, then, thou cross-shunner, wilt thou not go a like way? 1 Peter 4:13.—Believers are indeed brethren of Christ, on account of His human nature, but actually to bear the title and that from love is a work of the grace which they do not deserve. For He, the Brother and Head, is of far greater glory than His members.—The haughtiness of man must be put to shame before the condescension of Christ, who acknowledges us as His brethren. How unreasonable in us not to bear the shame of the poverty, or sinfulness, or impurity of our nearest friends, when Christ bears the shame of our sins!—Behold how men are honored even yet above the angels! Holy and glorious as are these latter, they are not brethren of the Son of God. Should it not arouse us to an humble, indeed, but still joyful praise of God, that we not only have Christ our Brother on the throne of the Divine Majesty, but are also ourselves with Him to be raised to the like royal dignity?—Believers are brethren of Jesus and Sons of God. What a consolation! How is it possible that they should ever be sorrowful? Romans 8:17.—All men are delivered over to Christ for the attainment of salvation; but happy are they who also deliver up themselves in the appropriation of it by the influence of the Holy Spirit, John 6:44.—If Christ the Lord of Heaven and Earth is not ashamed to acknowledge us as His brethren, we also should be mindful with all diligence to maintain brotherly love among ourselves, and to evince it by words and deeds.—The exclamation, “Behold, I,” expresses: 1, that the Messiah exhibits Himself as present, and, as with the finger, points to Himself: Behold, here am I! Isaiah 40:5; Isaiah 40:9; Isaiah 52:6-7; Isaiah 2:0, that His appearance in the flesh would be wondrous and remarkable, Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 9:5; 1 Timothy 3:16; 1 Timothy 3:0, His readiness and perfect willingness to speak, to do, and to suffer, that which had been laid upon Him, Is. L. 4, 5; Psalms 41:7-9; Psalms 4:0, that it was He to whom the eyes of all Israel were to look, nay, also the heathen, Isaiah 45:22.—If it is said of Christ that He reposes His confidence in God, He is not regarded in His character as God, but as having become man, and as executing His assumed work of redemption. And this confidence involves in itself: 1, that the Messiah would exhibit Himself in a lowly, poor and unprotected condition; 2, that He would be in much suffering and danger from enemies; 3, that He would not at all times make use of His Divine power, but would surrender His life to the power of His Father; 4, that He would have abiding assurance of the Divine willingness to aid him.—It was in accordance with Divine: 1, love, that it should discover so effectual a means for the restoration of our lost bliss; 2, righteousness, that it should be such a means as should render satisfaction to righteousness itself; 3, wisdom, that the love and righteousness of God should, through this means, unitedly and in equal measure, distinguish themselves; 4, truth, in order that that which God in the Old Testament had promised at so great cost, and had prefigured in so many types, should be fulfilled, and the Head should stand, in respect to suffering, in close communion with the members; 5, honor, that this might thereby be most gloriously promoted.—God has done every thing which He has done for the manifestation and glorifying of His name, and this with the most entire propriety; otherwise He who possesses perfectly in Himself all glory, would have, as it were, denied Himself. Thus must the honor of God be placed as the object in all things, Psalms 115:1; Ephesians 1:5-6.—Believers under the Old Testament were equally with those in the New Testament, brethren of the Lord Jesus, Matthew 12:50.

Berlenburger Bible:—Future things we must hold fast by means of the past and present. But men spring away from them and submit to no struggle. While they grasp after that which glitters, and despise the unostentatious, they wage absolutely no conflict. Many would have only glory, and would only become Lords with their Messiah; therefore they have utterly lost Christ. They would have a king in Christ, but not a bleeding priest.—What to our corrupt eyes appears abominable, is “becoming” in the eyes of God. This becomingness we should always study; all other decorum, all that otherwise belongs to well being, or is reckoned as such, our art may well let pass.—Since we have lost our case by evil doing, it must be recovered by suffering. For this leads through ways of righteousness, and yet from the impulse of love. Hence comes it that such an arrangement “became him.”—We cannot come directly to holiness without expiation, but we all have equal right to both.—It is true that our humanity and Divinity constitute a pair totally unlike, yet this miserable unlikeness has awakened the compassion of God to undertake such a work on our behalf.—Had it depended on our judgment, nothing would have been accomplished in the work of redemption.—It is perhaps easily told how many elements faith has; but the thing itself costs a struggle; man, however, would gladly triumph before the victory.

Laurentius:—Divine truths in the Holy Scripture must also be experienced.—Christ’s state of humiliation lasted only for a little time.—To Christ in His human nature, all things are subjected.—Whom God makes righteous, He also makes glorious. Believers have one and the same Father with Christ.

Rambach:—Believers need no visible Head, but stand immediately under Christ, Hebrews 12:9.—Christ was humbled a short time below the angels: 1, in that sometimes the service of the angels was withdrawn from Him, as otherwise they are required to worship and serve Him; 2, in that He was exposed to the assaults of wicked angels; 3, in that He subjected Himself to the law which was given by angels.—In the sufferings of Christ were disclosed the grace and righteousness of God. His grace toward us, in laying our sin and punishment upon His Son; His righteousness in Christ as the surety, Romans 3:25.—Had Christ been a mere man, he had had absolutely no cause to be ashamed of His fellow-creatures, even though He had been elevated to the highest honor, as also Joseph was not ashamed to acknowledge his brethren, Genesis 45:4; in like manner, Moses, Acts 7:22.

Steinhofer:—It is the mystery of the Divine good pleasure, that a man from our midst should be Lord on the throne of majesty, and have dominion over all things. Here none can ask, “Why doest thou so?” Here none can inquire, Why is it so determined? Why has it been so arranged, and accomplished, in Christ Jesus? But, instead, we readily bow ourselves to the earth and adore. I mean that we honor the counsel of eternity; we are astonished at the riches of grace; it is our profoundest pleasure that such is the good pleasure of God; we kiss the Son; we rejoice in this our Lord.—The lowliness and condescension of our Redeemer, the great Son of God, puts us to shame, as often as we behold Him in this form; it inspires in us pangs of love, it melts our hearts like wax before Him.—The simple look of faith toward Jesus, best learns the great mystery of the eternal purpose of God for our salvation. With this we look upon His cross, we look upon His crown. Faith grasps both together.—The grounds and causes of this entire procedure, viz., that the Captain of salvation should be made perfect by death, are God’s perceptions of Divine fitness and propriety.—God takes His children out of the number of the most miserable sinners.—Blessedness and glory are the two things we are to receive from our Saviour and Lord.—Jesus legitimates among His people even the name of brother, so that all worldly titles of honor readily yield to it.—It belongs to the office and work of Jesus, which is His highest joy and the delight of His heart, 1. that He gathers into a community the children of God, who have been ordained and presented to him by His Father; 2. that in His Church He announces and reveals the name of His Father; 3. that He conducts and brings His people to glory.—The way of faith has been tried by the Son of God Himself, inasmuch as Jesus is a noble and thoroughly experienced Prince and Leader on the way of faith; but the power of God is required that one maintain faith to the end.

Hahn:—If we can say with joy, Jesus is my Lord! then we have a pass which we can and may exhibit in the whole realm of creation.—The path of suffering trod by Jesus, makes our own pleasant to us, and should repress our excessive murmuring against suffering.—From Jesus we are to learn the true spirit of suffering, and in like manner the value of suffering in the eyes of God, and with this, bethink ourselves of the brevity of suffering. We should have perpetually before our eyes, 1. the Divine sense of propriety and fitness; 2. the career Christ entered upon wholly for us; 3. the way of faith which Christ makes so honorable to us.

Hiller:—The Church is a community that treads a difficult way, but on this way is led by God; yet can enter upon it no otherwise than by blood, and by faith in one that was crucified.—The Church is a people that is forever preserved and saved by God.

Rieger:—From the love of the Father all further revelation of the kingdom of Christ, and hope therein, is to be derived.—Of all which the result has confirmed, we can say, We see! though we may not have it directly before our eyes.—As the Saviour, under suffering, solaced Himself by this, “It takes place according as it has been decreed and written;” as He, under the heaviest assaults of terror, subjected His most pressing demand, “Is it possible?” to the, “As thou wilt!” so still more, we, in reflection on His suffering, are to rest ourselves, in this good pleasure of God, in these Divine proprieties which are founded in the prerogatives of God’s majesty, and have an influence upon His entire kingdom.—The chief power by which the Lord Jesus endured under suffering, and looked forward to His perfection, was trust. His official burden, the weight of sin that was laid upon Him, the judgment of God, might press Him as they would; His confidence He never cast away.

Heubner:—The dignity of man was first brought to light by Revelation: it flows from Religion. Insignificant man becomes great by the grace of God. Toward no being has God so proved His grace as toward man, since for him He has given His Son.—Christianity knows no perfection except in union with God, and participation in His blessedness.—Christ has secured for God eternal praise, since the highest praise comes from ransomed souls.—The redemption which was completely brought about and inaugurated by the death of Christ, could become universally known and rendered efficacious, only by His exaltation. In this was demonstrated and confirmed the complete validity of His redemption.

Stier:—It was not the wrath of God, it was not condemnation that Jesus tasted, but death; and death, too, not on account of the wrath of God, but from the grace of God. Of short duration was the mockery and the shame that attended Jesus’ suffering of death on our behalf; but eternal are the praise and the honor with which He is crowned.—Although Christ died for all, yet are not all saved by Him, but only the many sons who let Him draw and lead them.

Steinmeyer:—The fraternal relation sustained by the Lord to His believing ones: 1. how we have to unite this with His supreme and all-transcending dignity; 2. what an expression it should find in Christian life.

Hedinger:—Believers are indeed brethren of Christ, on account of His human nature; but actually to bear the title is a work of that grace of which they are undeserving.

Baumgarten (1856):—How looking to Jesus suffices for our happiness amidst the unhappiness of life.

Fricke:—Suffering and victory are so little antagonistic to each other that the same being who has suffered is styled the “Captain of salvation.”

[Owen:—The Lord Christ: 1. our head; 2. our only head, a. of vital influence, b. of rule and government; 3. our immediate head.—If men forget the true God, and then lift up their eyes unto, or fall into the contemplation of the heavenly bodies, such is their glory, majesty, and excellency, that they will be driven and hurried unto the adoration and worship of them.—The assumption of our nature into personal union with the Son of God, was an act of mere free, sovereign, unconceivable grace.—God is more glorified in the humiliation and exaltation of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the salvation of mankind thereby, than in any of, or all the works of the first creation.—No love or grace will suit our condition but that which is incomprehensible. We find ourselves by experience to stand in need of more grace, goodness, love, and mercy, than we can look into, search to the bottom of, or fully understand.—Jesus Christ as Mediator of the New Covenant hath absolute and supreme authority given unto Him over all the works of God in heaven and on earth.—There is a double act of God’s predestination; the first is His designation of some unto grace, to be sons, Ephesians 1:5; the other His appointment of those sons unto glory; both to be wrought and accomplished by Christ, the Captain of their salvation.—In bringing the elect unto glory, all the sovereign acts of power, wisdom, love and grace exerted therein, are peculiarly assigned unto the Father, as all ministerial acts are unto the Son as Mediator; so that there is no reason why He may not be said, by the way of eminency, to be the ἀγωγεύς, the leader or bringer of His sons unto glory.—As the obedience of Christ, which is our pattern, did incomparably exceed whatever we can attain unto; so the sufferings of Christ, which are our example, did incomparably exceed all that we shall be called unto.—Christ is gone before us through death, and is become the “first fruits of them that sleep.” And had Christ passed into heaven before He died, as did Enoch and Elijah, we had wanted the greatest evidence of our future immortality.—The Lord Jesus, being consecrated and perfected through sufferings, hath consecrated the way of suffering, for all that followed Him to pass through unto glory.—No end of the mediation of Christ is accomplished in them who are not sanctified and made holy.—A living head and dead members, a beautiful head and rotten members—how uncomely would it be! Such a monstrous body Christ will never own.—There is no one thing required of the sons of God that an unsanctified person can do: no one thing promised them that he can enjoy].

Footnotes:

Hebrews 2:6; Hebrews 2:6.—The reading τίς ἐστιν (Lach. Ed. Stereot. and Bl.) is not sufficiently supported.

Hebrews 2:7; Hebrews 2:7.—The lect. rec. Καὶ κατέστησας αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὰ ἔργα τῶν χειρῶν σου, deemed spurious by Mill, bracketed by Lachman, cancelled since Griesbach, is a gloss from the LXX. The author has omitted it in citation as unnecessary to his purpose. It is found, however, in the original text of Cod. Sin.

Hebrews 2:9; Hebrews 2:9.—The reading χωρὶς θεοῦ, without, or apart from God (instead of χάριτι θεοῦ), preferred by Orig. and Theod. Mops., known by Jerome, made use of by Ambr., Fulgent. and Vigil. Thaps., strongly insisted on by the Nestorians, defended by Beng., Ebr., etc., is found only in Cod. 53 (Griesb.) of the 9 or 10 Cent., and Cod. 67 of the 11 or 12 Cent., and in the latter only on the margin. [For χωρὶς θεοῦ, which Theod. Mops. and Ebr., find eminently in place, no natural and appropriate meaning can here be found; while χάριτι θεοῦ, which Ebr. denounces as flat and uncalled for, is eminently to the writer’s purpose, as commending the arrangement which involved the crucifixion of the Messiah, as one called for and originated by the grace of God. It would seem probable that χωρὶς θεοῦ may have originally been placed on the margin opposite Hebrews 2:8, limiting the expression, “he left nothing unsubjected to him”—‘except God,’ after 1 Corinthians 15:27, and that a subsequent copyist, misled by the resemblance of χωρὶς θεοῦ to χάριτι θεοῦ, substituted it in the text. At all events its history is curious, but the internal evidence is decisively against it.—K.].

[5][By a failure to recognize this, the course of thought must be inextricably entangled. By referring the ‘him’ already in Hebrews 2:8 to Jesus, we are obliged, in order to extract any sense out of the passage, to make a false distinction between Jesus’ being already “crowned with glory and honor,” as but a first step in his elevation, and an ultimate and more complete glorification. Such a distinction, we scarcely need say, is not in the author’s mind at all. “Crowned with glory and honor” is repeated in Hebrews 2:9 as the exponent and representative of all the dignity and dominion expressed in the preceding verses; and the contrast is not between Jesus now partially exalted in token of His future complete exaltation, and that future complete exaltation, but between man, as such, not yet in himself exalted to his true original destination, and Jesus, the representative Man, thus exalted in Himself, and as the Leader of the destinies of humanity. Thus by taking ‘man’ and ‘him,’ through Hebrews 2:7-8, in their natural sense, and then, when it appears that in this sense the language of the Psalm is not fully borne out, applying them to the God-Man, we make the connection and the reasoning perfect.—K.].

[6][Hofmann’s first construction would be: But Jesus, having been, on account of His suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor, we behold as one who has been for a little humbled below the angels, i. e.=we behold this being to have been for a little, etc. The latter, and unquestionably more correct construction is: ‘But Him who has been for a little humbled below the angels, viz., Jesus, we behold on account of His suffering of death [to have been and to be now] crowned with glory and honor,’ and thus fulfilling in His own person that language of the Psalm, which in humanity proper is not fulfilled. This construction is equally natural, elegant and suited to the context.—K.].