Hebrews 1:1-2:4: Such a Great Salvation

By many portions (polumeros) and in many ways (polutropos) long ago God having spoken [Nom MS 1 Aor Act Part laleo] to the fathers by the prophets (en tois prophetais), 2on the end of these days he has spoken [3S 1 Aor Act Indic laleo] to us by his Son (en huio), whom he appointed [3MS 1 Aor Act Indic tithemi] heir of all things, through whom also he made [3S 1 Aor Act Indic poieo] the universe; 3he being [Nom MS Pres Act Part eimi] the radiance of the glory and the imprint (charakter) of his nature (hupostaseos), upholding [Nom MS Pres Act Part phero] also/even (te) all things by the word of his power, having made [Nom MS 1 Aor Mid Part poieo] purification, he sat down [3S 1 Aor Act Indic kathizo] on the right hand of the majesty on high, 4so much more excellent having become [Nom MS 2 Aor Pass Part ginomai] than the angels, as great as | a more excellent | than them | he has inherited [3S Perf Act Indic kleronomeo] | name. For to which did he say [3S 2 Aor Act Indic lego] at any time of the angels, My Son you are [2S Pres Act Indic eimi], I this day have begotten [1S Perf Act Indic ginomai] you? And again, I will be [1S Fut Mid Indic eimi] to him as a father, and he will be [2S Fut Mid Indic eimi] to me as a Son? 6 And again, when he brings in [3S Pres Act Subj eisago] the firstborn into the world, he says [3S Pres Act Indic lego], And let them worship [3P 1 Aor Act Impv proskuneo] him, all Gods angels. 7 And to, on the one hand, the angels he says [3S Pres Act Indic lego], He makes [Nom MS Pres Act Part poieo] his angels a wind, and his ministers a flame of fire. 8 But only other hand, to his Son, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and a scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. 9 You have loved [2S 1 Aor Act Indic agapao] righteousness and hated [2S 1 Aor Act Indic miseo] lawlessness. Because of this God, your God, anointed [3S 1 Aor Act Indic chriso] you with the oil of gladness above your partakers. 10 And, You in the beginning, Lord, laid the foundation [2S 1 Aor Act Indic themelioo] of the earth, and the works of your hands are [3P Pres Act Indic eimi] the heavens. 11 They will perish [3P Fut Mid Indic apollumi], but you remain [2S Pres Act Indic diameno], and all as a garment will wear out [3P Fut Pass Indic palaioo], 12 And as a robe you will roll them up [2S Fut Act Indic elisso], like a garment also they will be changed [3P Fut Pass Indic allasso]. But you are [2S Pres Act Indic eimi] the same, and your years will not end [3P Fut Act Indic ekleipo]. 13 And to which of the angels did he say [3S Perf Act Indic eipon] ever, Sit [?] from my right hand, until when I place [1S 2 Aor Act Subj tithemi] your enemies the footstool of your feet? 14 Are [3P Pres Act Indic eimi] they not all ministering spirits sent out [Nom NP Pres Pass Part apostello] for serving the intended ones [Acc MP Pres Act Part mello] to inherit [Pres Act Inf kleronomeo] salvation? For this it is necessary more earnestly to take heed [Pres Act Inf prosecho] us to those things heard [Dat NP 1 Aor Pass Part akouo], lest we ever (mepote) drift away [1P 2 Aor Act Subj pararreo]. 2For if the-throughangels-spoken [Nom MS 1 Aor Pass Part laleo] word became [3S 2 Aor Mid Indic ginomai] reliable, and every transgression and disobedience received [3S 2 Aor Act Indic lambano] a just recompense of wages (misthapodosian), 3how shall we escape [1P Fut Mid Indic ekpheugo] if neglecting [Nom MP 1 Aor Act Part] so great a salvation, which at first began [Nom FS 2 Aor Act Part lambano] to be spoken [Pres Pass Inf] by the Lord to those who heard [Gen MP 1 Aor Pass Part akouo] for the purpose of (eis) being attested [3S 1 Aor Pass Subj bebaioo] to us, 4God [Genitive Absolute] bearing witness [Gen MS Pres Act Part sunepimartureo] by signs and also wonders and various miracles and distributions [merismois, cf. 1:1] of the Holy Spirit, according to his will.
2:1 5 1

Commentary V. 1: The opening words of the book of Hebrews come with Effortless alliteration [that] meets us again and again1 through the book: polumeros kai polutropos palai. The KJV, NIV, and ESV incorrectly translate the first word as sundry/many times, because polumeros means many portions (NASB gets this correct), whether as a portion of the whole, or as a portion due someone (i.e., your lot). (Calvin, for what its worth, acknowledges that polumeros means in many parts, but writes that he understands it as referring to a diversity as to timesbut polutropos points out a diversity, as I think, in the very manner itself.2) Lenski explains the two words this way: The two adverbs in many portions and in many ways have been understood to mean in many parts but only in fragments and not in completeness; in many ways but all of them inferior. But these adverbs convey the opposite sense: the first refers to quantityso rich the varied contents; the second to qualityso rich the variety of form.3 The major point to understand here is that the author of Hebrews is not denigrating the witness given in the Old Testamentquite the opposite, he is absolutely affirming it. His affirmation, though, is made in order to show Jesus as that much better. Calvin makes this point: That we may understand this more clearly, we must observe the contrast between each of the clauses. First, the Son of God is set in opposition to the prophets; then we to the fathers; and, thirdly, the various and manifold modes of speaking which God had adopted as to the fathers, to the last revelation brought to us by Christ. But in this diversity he still sets before us but one God, that no one might think that the Law militates against the Gospel, or that the author of one is not the author of the other.4 Calvin, Lenski, and Wiersbe all note the breadth of the revelation of God through history, law, prophecy, worship, covenant, circumcision, etc. All of this was good revelation that pointed truly toward God, and God gave all the revelation that was needed at the time it was needed. Lenski writes this, however: The one point to be noted is the fact that this clause is participial: lalesas (God having spoken), pointing forward to the main verb with its aorist of finality: elalesen, God spoke. The Old Testament itself speaks in the same way. God spoke in Moses who wrote the first part of the Old Testament, yet God promised to send another Prophet like unto Moses but one who was to be vastly greater than even Moses, the greatest of all the prophetsDeut 18:18, 19; compare John 8:28; 12:49, 50; 17:8. There is no danger of placing the Old Testament on too high a level or of

R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 29. 2 John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.i.html> 3 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 30. 4 John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.i.html>

making it seem too grand; for the more it is exalted, the more it itself is made to exalt the Son and all that God spoke in the person of the Son, the whole New Testament.5 The portioned out in many ways revelation was goodvery good. But Jesus is better. Calvin, therefore, gives this wise characterization of the sinfulness of the human heart in its response to Gods revelation: If God then has spoken now for the last time, it is right to advance thus far; so also when you come to Christ, you ought not to go farther: and these two things it is very needful for us to know. For it was a great hindrance to the Jews that they did not consider that God had deferred a fuller revelation to another time; hence, being satisfied with their own Law, they did not hasten forward to the goal. But since Christ has appeared, an opposite evil began to prevail in the world; for men wished to advance beyond Christ. What else indeed is the whole system of Popery but the overleaping of the boundary which the Apostle has fixed? As, then, the Spirit of God in this passage invites all to come as far as Christ, so he forbids them to go beyond the last time which he mentions. In short, the limit of our wisdom is made here to be the Gospel. 6 This characterization reminds me of Psalm 32:8-9: I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will counsel you with my eye upon you. Be not like a horse or a mule, without understanding, which must be curbed with bit and bridle, or it will not stay near you. Do not stubbornly (like the mule) remain behind when Gods instruction and teaching points us forward beyond the shadows of the Old Covenant to Christ; but neither should you over-ambitiously run on ahead (like the horse) when God has spoken ultimately in Christ. Jesus has come; neither remain behind nor run aheadstay near to Jesus. V. 2: Lenski interestingly takes in these last days to refer not to the end of time, but the recent past from the perspective of the writer: We have a double designation of time, the second being an apposition of time within: at the endduring (within) these days, i.e., at the end of the Old Testament period, during the recent past.7 Regardless of whether the writer refers to the 1st Century AD or the end of human history, the fact remains that in these last days God has spoken to us by a more authoritative source even than the prophets (v. 1), because he has spoken to us en huioby [his] Son. This Son, the author continues, God appointed as the heir of all [things]. Both Calvin and Lenski insist that Christs inheritance refers specifically to his human nature. So Calvin: But the word heir is ascribed to Christ as manifested in the flesh; for being made man, he put on our nature, and as such received this heirship, and that for this purpose, that he might restore to us what we had lost in Adam. For God had at the beginning constituted man, as his Son, the heir of all good things; but through sin the first man became alienated from God, and deprived himself
R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 31. 6 John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.i.html> 7 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 31.
5

and his posterity of all good things, as well as of the favor of God. We hence only then begin to enjoy by right the good things of God, when Christ, the universal heir, admits to a union with himself; for he is an heir that he may endow us with his riches. But the Apostle now adorns him with this title, that we may know that without him we are destitute of all good things.8 And so Lenski: It is essential to understand that the incarnate Son is referred to; we shall otherwise not grasp how he could be set or placed as heir of all things.From all eternity and thus at the very creation when the eons of time began God made his Son the heir of all things, not according to his deity which could inherit nothing, but according to his humanity which could and did inherit all things. When the Son in his human nature came to earth incarnate and as a man completed his great saving work, then this mighty inheritance was paid out to him, the inheritance now being in the hands of the heir.9 I think that the reason that the Son of God could inherit nothing is only that, as Creator, he already owns and possesses all thingswhat else could he inherit at any particular point in time? This inheritance, however, happened in order to restore to Gods creation to its rightful owner who had lost it at the fall: humankind. Indeed, it is no accident that the author of Hebrews speaks here of the Sons being appointed the heir (kleronomon) of all things, and then later speaks of our inheriting (kleronomein) salvation (v. 14). Our inheritance comes through our personal union with the heir of all things. ILLUSTRATION: Every year, I used to give my brother the newest NCAA Football video game selfishly, because I wanted to enjoy it with him. In the case of Christ, he won the inheritance of all things for himself, but he graciously shares that inheritance with all those united to him by faith. The final thought in verse 2 is that this Sonwho was appointed to be the heir of all things (according to his humanity)is also the one through whom also he created the world (according to his divinity). Only God creates, and so in this sentence The eternal deity of the Son is fully revealed.10 Aside from the simple through whom (di hou), the text gives us no indicators of how the Son would have partnered with the Father to create the world. That, however, is not the point, as Lenski notes: The point is not our comprehension of the divine act of creation but an apprehension of the true nature of the Son, who is one in essence, omnipotence, and glory with the Father, and thus his Sonship, partnership, and heirship that were involved at creation.11 Jesus is the man who inherits all things as well as the God who created all things. Who could challenge such perfect authority? V. 3: Lenskis introduction to v. 3 is better than anything I could write:

John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.i.html> R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 34. 10 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 35. 11 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 35.
9

A third relative clause, which is built more grandly because it contains three participial elaborations, reveals still more: not only the infinite exaltation and the incomparable glory of the Son but, woven into this, the blessedness of the redemptive work which makes him more than the supreme Prophet (Deut. 18:18), namely our eternal High Priest and King. 12 The first phrase, he being the radiance of the glory refers to Christs participation in the radiance of Gods glory. Lenski notes that The word [apaugasma] occurs only here in the New Testament. Chrysostom defines it as phos ek photos, light out of light, a sun shining out from the original light but participating in its essence and viewed by itself.13 The second phrase, and the imprint of his being, refers to an image being stamped indelibly onto something. Thayer defines this as a mark or figure burned in (Lev. xii. 28) or stamped on, an impression; the exact expression (the image) of any person or thing, marked likeness, precise reproduction in every respect (cf. facsimile).14 Lenski writes: We note that effulgence and impress correspond save that the former blazes forth from God, and the latter terminates in the Son himself. His glory and his being also correspond, but again Gods glory is the shining forth of the effulgence of his attributes while his being is God himself, of whom the Son is the very counterpart.15 The third phase states, and upholding all [things] by the word of his power. Lenski notes the breathtaking power suggested in such a statement: Not, however, as an Atlas with the world or the universe as a dead weight upon his shoulders, who merely keeps all things from sinking into nothingness; he bears all things so that his will and his purpose are fulfilled.16 We should note that the word here is not logos but hrema, not his gospel word but the utterance of his omnipotence. He commands, and it stands fast.17 Calvin utterly dismisses any idea that Christ is able to uphold the universe merely by being the word of God (c.f., John 1:1)this is Christs word that upholds the universe. 18 Finally, we come to the glory of the salvation that Christ wrought. Purification of sins having made Purification (or, cleansing) can refer to physically cleaning something, but most of the uses for katharizo, katharismos, or katharos have to do with ritual/cultic/ceremonial cleansing.19 Cleansing and purification of this kind was something that only a priest could do, and, knowing the rest of the contents of the book of Hebrews, the author here drops a hint toward not only the priesthood of Christ, but the

R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 36. 13 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 36. 14 Thayers Lexicon, Charakter <http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5481&t=KJV> 15 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 37. 16 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 38. 17 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 39. 18 John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.ii.html> 19 BDAG 3rd ed., 488-489.

12

perfect sacrifice that he offered of himself. Jesus Christ is not only the final Prophet (v. 2), but he is also the ultimate Priest, making purification for sins once for all. But v. 3 name one more office held by Jesus Christ: High King. We read that, purification of sin having made, he sat down at the right hand of the majesty in the heights. Calvin paints this whole picture well: having in the world procured salvation for men, he was received into celestial glory, in order that he might govern all things. And he added this in order to show that it was not a temporary salvation he has obtained for us; for we should otherwise be too apt to measure his power by what now appears to us. He then reminds us that Christ is not to be less esteemed because he is not seen by our eyes; but, on the contrary, that this was the height of his glory, that he has been taken and conveyed to the highest seat of his empire. The right hand is by a similitude applied to God, though he is not confined to any place, and has not a right side nor left. The session then of Christ means nothing else but the kingdom given to him by the Father, and that authority which Paul mentions, when he says that in his name every knee should bow. (Philippians 2:10) Hence to sit at the right hand of the Father is no other thing than to govern in the place of the Father, as deputies of princes are wont to do to whom a full power over all things is granted. And the word majesty is added, and also on high, and for this purpose, to intimate that Christ is seated on the supreme throne whence the majesty of God shines forth. As, then, he ought to be loved on account of his redemption, so he ought to be adored on account of his royal magnificence.20 Our Lord Jesus is declared to be Prophet, Priest, and King. V. 4: In this verse, the author continues the glorious run-on sentence; however, he also transitions into the subject of v. 5-14 (that Jesus is better than the angels), and reveals the purpose for this sermon. At first, it seems odd that the author of Hebrews would devote such an extended section to demonstrating Christs superiority over the angels. After all, as Lenski notes, No polemical intent is evident as though the readers held false views about the angels, as though they were to be worshipped. The Jews never worshipped angels.21 Probably two issues are at play here. First, the Jews revered angels because of the belief (affirmed in Heb. 2:2) that the angels assisted Gods giving Moses the Law. Second, because of this, there may have been an unhealthy preoccupation with angels among the Jewish people. Calvin puts it this way: It was a common notion among the Jews, that the Law was given by angels; they attentively considered the honorable things spoken of them everywhere in Scripture; and as the world is strangely inclined to superstition, they obscured the glory of God by extolling angels too much.22 Wiersbe seems emphasize the first issue alone, rather than ascribing superstitious tendencies to the Jews: Angels were most important in the Jewish religion, primarily because thousands of angels assisted in the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai. This fact is stated in Deuteronomy 33:2 (where saints in KJV means holy ones or angels); Psalm 68:17; Acts 7:53; and Galatians 3:19. Since the theme of Hebrews is the superiority of Christ and His salvation to the [page] Law of Moses, the writer would have to deal with the important subject of angels. 23
John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.ii.html> R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 43. 22 John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.ii.html> 23 Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, New Testament, Vol. 2 (Colorado Springs: Victor, 2001), 280-81.
21 20

Thus, the incarnate Son of God has become as much superior to the angels as the name that has inherited (kekleronomeken, the verbal form of kleronomon, v. 2; cf. inf. kleronomein v. 14) is more excellent than theirs. The man Jesus is enthroned above even the angels, and has been given the name of Son. On the name, I think Lenski is correct: The supreme name referred to is not the one mentioned in Rev. 19:12, which no mans tongue can utter but, as the following shows, the name Son which was mentioned already in v. 2. But the aorist participle states that he who is named here got or got to be as much better than the angels as he has inherited a name that is more superior than theirs, namely the name Son. There is no reference in these tenses to the Sons deity, which is eternal. The perfect tense has inherited explains the aorist got to be. In the incarnation the human nature of Jesus inherited the name Son, (Luke 1:32) which belonged to his person from all eternity, which, in reference to his human nature, was given to him already in the Old Testament; the perfect tense implies that what he inherited remains his ever since. The incarnation ushered him into this world for his great work. This work Jesus wrought through his human nature and in accomplishing his work proved himself vastly superior to the angels. 24 Im wondering if the slant on preaching this should have to do heavily with the inheritance of salvation that we humans receive (1:14) on the basis of what Jesus, the incarnate Son of God, inherited by his great work of salvation in this world (1:2, 4). 1:5-9 and 1:13 quote verses that have to do with what Jesus accomplished, received, and inherited within space and time according to his humanity. Only the single quotation over 1:10-12 deal with the eternal work and nature of the divine Jesus. It seems certain that the theology articulated here by author of Hebrews is written with a soteriological motivation in mind, based on the conclusion of this section in 1:14-2:4. This would make sense if Jewish Christians were drifting (2:1) from the message of Jesus in order to return to the Law delivered by angels. Jesus is bettera better Savior, offering a better salvation. Whoever thinks that the angels who delivered the Law were something special would be blown away by this Jesus who has inherited the name Son (along with all that such a name entails) from the Father. V. 5: From this point, the author of Hebrews cites several Old Testament quotations to prove that the Scriptures have always anticipated one to come who would be superior to the angels. Lenski argues that the inheritance is still very much in view: For substantiates the fact that this inheritance of the name Son has taken place.25 In v. 5, the author cites Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14, both speaking to the enthronement and inauguration of Gods chosen King to reign over Gods own Kingdom. Lenski writes, The inauguration of such a King is for Yahweh the begetting of a Son who rules like Yahweh himself. This inauguration is attested throughout the Old Testament and culminates, as Paul says in Acts 13:33, in the resurrection of Jesus.26 The resurrections role in the Sonship of the incarnate Jesus is noted in Romans 1:4: [Christ Jesus] was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead. Christ was always the Son of God; his resurrection declared him as such in his humanity.
R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 44. 25 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 45. 26 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 46.
24

Again, the author of Hebrews speaks to what Christ accomplishes according to his humanity. Lenski writes: The passage quoted from the psalm does not speak of the generatio aeterna; not of the inner Trinitarian relation of the two persons although this is involved; not of semeron, today, as eternity but as time, and involves the incarnation, the human nature, and the redemptive work of Jesus, who purged away the sins of the world (v. 3). The idea is not that we may restrict have begotten thee to the incarnation, or to the baptism, or to the transfiguration. Even the resurrection must include all that preceded as well as the exaltation at the right hand of the majesty.27 Lenski summarizes the opening of Hebrews thus far magnificently: In brief, (1) the Son in his deity, one in essence with the Father, (2) is the Son through whom and for whom in the eternal counsel of the Trinity as the heir of all things the eons were to be and then actually were created, (3) he to be the incarnate Savior to cleanse, the incarnate King to rule at his Fathers side. All this is present to the writers mind; his careful Jewish Christian readers felt and perceived it all. 28 V. 6: Lenski notes that the KJV, NIV, and ESV mistranslate the question posed by the author (NASB and HCSB get it right): Palin is not carelessly placed. We translated when he shall again bring in and not and againhe says (A. V. and R. V. margin), which would require the reading palin de hotan ktl. The aorist subjunctive = shall again bring in, the aorist is used because a single act is referred to; not: shall again have brought in as some translate.29 Lenski argues that this translation issue is a big deal, since it refers not to Christs first coming, but his second coming as the Son who has inherited all things: The point of this [v. 6 as a whole] would amount to very little if it meant no more than that the angels are called upon to bow in worship before the deity of the Son. The fact that all creatures must bow before the persons of the Godhead was a truism to all Jews.In order to bring out the real point of this third quotation the writer of Hebrews prefaces Yahwehs word with the clause: when he shall again bring in the First-begotten into the inhabited earth he says, etc. Then, when Yahweh brings him in again, he demands that all the angels cast themselves down in worship before the Son as the First-begotten. Once before Yahweh has brought the First-begotten into the oikoumene (sc. Ge), into the earth that is inhabited by men. That was at the time of the incarnation and in the redemptive mission of the incarnate Son, when he wrought the cleansing of the world from its sins (v. 3). Then, too, Gods angels worshipped him (over Bethlehems fields, at the end of the forty days of the temptation, etc.) although this worship is not mentioned here. He who was brought in once shall be brought in again, which must occur at the end of the world, when he will execute the final judgment. Then all the angels of God shall accompany him, and
R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 46. 28 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 47. 29 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 50.
27

then they shall worship him, and not only in his deity, but equally as the Son of man in his humanity, in which the heavenly host worshipped him already at his incarnation.30 Christ will be worshipped as the Son, the incarnate Son of God who has inherited all things according to his humanity. But here he is described as firstborn (prototokon). Lenski helpfully defines this term: First-born does not refer to time but to dignity, to pre-eminence in all respects (Col. 1:18: get to be first en pasin, in all respects, adverbial).First-born covers all the eons (v. 2), all creation from its beginning to its end in time, from eternity to eternityand this for the Incarnate One, the Son of man, through whom the eons were wrought, who bears all that exists, who wrought the redemptive cleansing, who shall judge all things at his Parousia. Him all Gods angels must worship.31 Upon his being brought into the world a second time, all Gods angelsalong with every creature in heaven, and on earth, and under the earthwill bow the knee and confess his Lordship. V. 7-9: These three verses are grammatically bound (see translation above): And on the one hand (men) to the angels he says.But on the other hand (de) to the Son [he says] Within Psalm 104, these angels and ministers play only a small role in the rich tapestry of Gods good created order. They are significant, to be sure, but they are mentioned and passed over without more fanfare than being described as winds and flames of fire. On the other hand, to the Son God speaks a word to exalt him beyond your companions. The Son is placed upon a throne, addressed as God, and anointed with the oil of gladness beyond his companions. There is no question that Jesus is thus proclaimed to be God in his being, Yet the point to be emphasized here is not essence and being in contrast to the angels who are creatures [page] but position, office, function, and what a height angels have in this respect as compared with the supreme height of the Son in the corresponding respect. The Son occupies his throne for the eon of the eon, the Greek expression meaning for all eternity (the plural is sometimes used: for the eon of the eons). Thy throne implies that the Son is King. In v. 3 he sat down at the right of the majesty on high as a king also in his human nature. Luke 1:32, 33. See also v. 13 below. The angels are messengers, officers who have wondrous power, but never is one of them God who has a throne eternal. Jesus is this.32 The reign of this King Jesus is marked by uprightness and righteousness, corresponding to a hatred of wickedness. Because the Kingdom of Jesus is such an upright and righteous kingdom, hating all wickedness, God has anointed him with the oil of gladness beyond his companions.

R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 48. 31 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 49. 32 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 54-55.

30

V. 10-12: Next, the author of Hebrews ascribes the work of creation (v. 10) as well as the destruction and recreation of the universe to the Son (v. 11-12). Lenski fascinatingly takes this as a reference to the Incarnate Son of God: The Incarnate Son is the Creator. All that we said about the relative clauses used in v. 2 belongs also here. Certainly, the incarnation occurred historically in time, long after the creation; but God is beyond and above time and dates; Rev. 13:8 affords us a glimpse of this. Only mechanical thinking will cling to dates and seek to subject the Eternal One to this limitation. Realizing that we are on the brink of the humanly conceivable every time we touch eternity, omnipotence, etc., we shall go as far as Scripture actually goes but shall never venture a step farther. In heaven we may be granted the privilege of seeing more of this connection between the creation and the incarnation of the heir of all things, the Changeless One.33 This connects with the thrust of the passage so farthat we are reading not a treatise respecting only the deity of Jesus Christ, but respecting the way in which the Son of God made human has now become the heir of all things, should be worshiped as God (even by the angels!), and reigns over YHWHs kingdom. The Incarnate Son of God is he who laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of his hands. Moreover, they will perish, but he will remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe he will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But he is the same, and his years will have no end. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Heb. 13:8) V. 13: This verse is the final rhetorical challenge to the position of angels compared to the preeminence of the Incarnate Son. Calvin has a marvelous reminder from this statement about the certainty of victory for Christs Kingdom, in spite of the many threats it may receive: Doubtless, were we to regard things as they appear, the kingdom of Christ would seem often to be on the verge of ruin. But the promise, that Christ shall never be thrust from his seat, takes away from us every fear; for he will lay prostrate all his enemies. These two things, then, ought to be borne in mind, that the kingdom of Christ shall never in this world be at rest, but that there will be many enemies by whom it will be disturbed; and secondly, that whatever its enemies may do, they shall never prevail, for the session of Christ at Gods right hand will not be for a time, but to the end of the world, and that on this account all who will not submit to his authority shall be laid prostrate and trodden under his feet. 34 Lenski answers the rhetorical question in this way: The question asked in v. 13 is like that asked in v. 5. The answer is, To no angel has God ever said such a thing.35 V. 14: This verse, the final verse comparing with the Incarnate Son to the angels, establishes the proper spheres of both. The angels are Assistants to the Incarnate Son of God, and nothing anywhere near to anything like an Assistant Incarnate Son of God, to borrow a reference from The Office. Lenski writes:
R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 58. 34 John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.vii.v.html> 35 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 61.
33

It is the angels delight to do this service for Christs saints. To act as Christs officiating ministrants in saving us poor mortals is the height of their joy. It is also the limit of their activity. They cannot make us heirs of salvation, only the heir (v. 2) can do this, who alone has the inheritance to share with us as joint heirs (Rom. 8:17). 36 This issue of Christs making us heirs of salvation by virtue of his being appointed the heir of all [things] is vital to understanding the soteriological point that the author of Hebrews has been making through this extended reflection on the nature and work of the Incarnate Son. We humans inherit salvation because the human Jesus offers it freely to us, after himself having inherited all things in heaven and earth through his incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension into glory. Because he has been given the name Son, he is able, in turn, to make us sons of God, and if children, then heirsheirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him (Rom. 8:17). Jesus Christ the Saviorand the salvation that Jesus Christ offers us as an inheritance from his own inheritance of all thingsis better than anything the old covenant offered, no matter how glorious it may have been. 2:1: Now that we see the full picture of the glory of the Incarnate Son of God who is to be worshiped, adored, and magnified, the author of Hebrews draws practical conclusions from this picture. We are not merely to look at it, admire it, and move onin fact, such a response is precisely the opposite of what our response should be. Because we are given the fullest possible revelation of God in his Incarnate Son Jesus Christ, who has been appointed the heir of all things and who has inherited the name Son according to his humanity, we must pay the closest possible attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. To those who are considering a return to the Law and its glory, the author of Hebrews warns us to stop. Calvin raises two important questions on this contrast between the glory of the Law and the glory of Christ, though: But should it seem strange to any one, that as the doctrine both of the Law and of the Gospel is from God, one should be preferred to the other; inasmuch as by having the Law lowered the majesty of God would be degraded; the evident answer would be this, that he ought indeed always to be heard with equal attention whenever he may speak, and yet that the fuller he reveals himself to us, it is but right that our reverence and attention to obedience should increase in proportion to the extent of his revelations; not that God is in himself less at one time than at another; but his greatness is not at all times equally made known to us. Here also another question arises. Was not the Law also given by Christ? If so, the argument of the Apostle seems not to be well grounded. To this I reply, that in this comparison regard is had to a veiled revelation on one side, and to that which is manifest on the other. Now, as Christ in bringing the Law showed himself but obscurely or darkly, and as it were under coverings, it is nothing strange that the Law should be said to have been brought by angels without any mention being made of his name; for in that transaction he never appeared openly; but in the promulgation of the Gospel his glory was so conspicuous, that he may justly be deemed its author.37
R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 62. 37 John Calvin, Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, <http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.viii.i.html>
36

The author brings us around, full circle, to the opening words of this book: that although in many portions and in many ways God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, in these last days he has actually spoken to us by his Son! The fuller (indeed, fullest) revelation demands the fuller (and absolutely, fullest) attention, lest we should ever drift from the precious gospel of Christ. Lenski gives the perfect illustration for the word drift: The verb pararreo = to flow or drift aside; the second aorist passive subjunctive means get to be drifted past like a ship that a contrary wind causes to drift past its harbor so that it is prevented from [page] reaching its destinationa calamity indeed. While the aorist is effective: actually caused to drift past, the indefinite me pote, lest ever or at any time, warns against its becoming actuality at any time; for this danger is not one of the present moment only. The way to overcome it is ever to keep the mind on the things heard, to tie fast to them ever more abundantly, with ever stronger cords.38 The ESV, NIV, and NASB drop out the full force of mepote with only a lest. Only the KJV includes lest at any time. This thrust, however, is important in bringing this warning today. It is doubtful whether I shall ever meet in a Christian church someone tempted to return to the Jewish religion; however, I will constantly meet people tempted to drift from the gospel into some other harbor, whether of sin, false religion, apathy, or innumerable other deceptions. Those of us living in the 21st century must remain just as vigilant to pay the closest possible attention to what we have heard as those living in the 1st. 2:2-3: The logic of these verses depends on the case established beyond doubt in the first chapter: 1. 2. 3. 4. If the word spoken by means of angels became reliable, And if every transgression or disobedience [to that word] received a just retribution, [And if the angels are inferior in every respect to the Incarnate Soncf. chapter 1], Then how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation [which was revealed by the Incarnate Son]?

The Lord is the one declaring this salvation, although this salvation also is attested to (ebebaiothe same word as in v. 2, became reliable, bebaios) by those who heard him. 2:4: To the attestation of those who heard, the author of Hebrews adds that the final authority stamped upon this salvation came from God himself. Lenski parses out the three means by which God bore witness to the veracity of Christs salvation: God gave his testimony in three ways: 1) by means of both signs and wonders; 2) by means of manifold powers; 3) by means of apportionings of the Holy Spirit, all three in accord with his (Gods) volition, thelesis, the act of willing (thelema = what is willed).39 Lenski also distinguishes between the first two helpfully:

R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 63-64. 39 R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 69.

38

Signs and wonders refer to the apostolic miracles which were great and glorious indeed. Others, too, like Stephen, were given this grace. Signs is the greater word because it is ethical and designates the miracles as signifying something; wonders or portments indicates only their astonishing character so that the New Testament never uses this word alone as it does signs. The latter is broader; a sign does not always need to be a wonder. Moreover, pagan religion had wonders and portents which, however, were never true signs. The term dunameis sometimes means power works, which is another term for miracles that is derived from the omnipotence involved. Here, because [page] of the adjective manifold powers, the word seems to refer only to the many powers which God bestowed upon the apostles as Stephen was full of faith and power (Acts 6:8). The next term is allied: apportionings of the Holy Spirit, among them being powers but also other charismatic gifts.40 We should not miss that these apportionings of the Holy Spirit comes from the same word as the first word of this book, polumeros, where there were many portions by which God spoke to our fathers. Now, through apportionings of the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christs salvation is attested to by God himself.

40

R. C. H. Lenski, The interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966), 69-70.