God having spoken in many parts and in many ways formerly to the fathers in the prophets,
The letter to the Hebrews opens with no greeting and no author's name — the first word is God, and the first fact is that He has spoken. This verse tells us how God spoke before, and to whom.
Paul's other letters all begin with his name. This one does not, and commentators see purpose in it.
Readers have often noticed that this letter opens differently from all of Paul's other letters. I have no doubt that Paul wrote it, though I do not argue that here. His usual greeting is missing. Two things pressed hard on the apostle: the theme that filled his mind and heart, and the needs of his readers. With so much to say, it would have been out of place for him to put himself forward. So instead of the familiar name "Paul" at the opening, we have the blessed God brought before us at once.
Another writer finds the reason in what this letter does with the word "apostle."
This letter opens with no introduction or prelude. The usual style of Paul's letters (and I do not doubt he wrote this book) is absent, and for a beautiful reason. "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ" would have been out of place in a letter where Jesus Christ Himself is presented as the Apostle. The author of the book is out of sight; its subject stands out at once in glory.
The first words of the verse describe the shape of that older revelation. Where modern versions read "at many times and in many ways," commentators press the sense "in many parts and in many ways."
The words that make up this grand opening are full of meaning, and they are true. In few words they show the character of what God said in the Old Testament. It could not be complete or final. It came piece by piece... He spoke "in many parts." His word came only in fragments. Each was perfect for its purpose, but it was not the fullness He meant to give when the right moment came. God used many different persons in that work, and He used "many ways" of revealing too: open speech to Moses, and usually visions and dreams to others.
The fragmentary character was not a failure of method. It reflected what was still missing.
God has spoken in the past in many parts; that is, we have to gather the sum of His truth from many portions of His Word. He had to give partial revelations. A full and complete revelation was not possible yet. It had to wait for One who could hold in Himself all that God was.
God did not use one kind of messenger only. He sent a line of them, each suited to a moment.
In times past God spoke to the fathers of Israel at various times and in various ways. God had spoken by Moses, asserting in the law His claims on man. At other times God had spoken by angels in His providential ways with His people. Later, God had spoken by the prophets to call a rebellious people back to Himself. Scripture mentions the prophets in particular, because they came just before the Son.
Calling the earlier word partial takes nothing from it. But treating it as final was the mistake Israel made.
This was real revelation, but God kept adding to it. So it stayed partial, and it was in no sense a complete revelation of God. Note too that God was free to choose any way He wished to speak. Israel knew this well. When their Messiah came, they should have expected a revelation just as distinct, and worthy of so great a God. Instead they were set on limiting God by their own ideas and tying Him to human tradition.
The verse does not set the old against the new. The same God stands behind both, and the change is in how He speaks, not in who He is.
God had spoken to the fathers by the prophets at different times and in different ways. Now those days had come to an end. They were the days of God's dealings with Israel, the age in which the law should have held force... God had spoken in the Person of the Son. There is no break to begin a wholly new system. The God who had spoken before by the prophets now went on to speak in Christ.
A messenger can carry a message. Only one Person could be the message.
The time came for God to set aside partial revelations of Himself. To show all that He is, He spoke in the One who is Son. No one else could do it. No prophet on earth and no angel in heaven could bring to light all that is in the heart of God, or express all His character... The Son was the language in which God spoke.
- God spoke. The letter begins with God, not a writer's name. Attention falls on the message and its Subject, not the messenger.
- He spoke in pieces. God's older word came in many parts and many ways. It was real revelation, but it came in pieces, because no full disclosure was possible yet.
- He spoke through servants. Moses, angels, prophets — each one suited to a moment. The prophets come last, because they lead up to the Son.
- He spoke without a break. The same God who used the prophets went on to speak in Christ; this is continuation, not a rival system.
- He spoke fully at last. What prophets could only carry, the Son could be — He is the language in which God finally said everything.
at the end of these days has spoken to us in [the person of the] Son, whom he has established heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
God's last word does not come through a messenger. It comes in the Son Himself, and this verse sets three things side by side: God speaks in the Son, the Son is heir of everything, and the Son made everything.
The old order came in pieces, through many speakers across long centuries. The phrase "in these last days" closes that sequence for good.
There was a constant, increasing unfolding of truth. But now the Son of God has come. The Sun in all its glory and splendour has burst upon the vision of faith. What further revelation can there possibly be? This is not "the last days" in the sense Scripture sometimes gives that phrase. It does not mean days when Christianity declines. It does not mean the time when Israel will be restored and God will begin to deal with His ancient people — though then Messiah will have brought in blessing. Those are smaller uses of the phrase "the last days." Here it simply marks the revelation of Christ.
Prophets passed on a message from someone else. Here God does not use a go-between.
In the past God spoke by the prophets. But now He has spoken to us, not by or through anyone else, but "in His Son." He Himself spoke to us directly, in that character, for the Son was and is God just as much as the Father. So there is nothing more to be said.
The ESV reads "by his Son." Other translations have "in Son," because the Greek has no article before "Son." Commentators say this marks the character in which God spoke, not just the messenger He used.
Many learned men say the missing article is caused by the preposition in front of it, or by the emphatic position of the word. It is neither. The wording is deliberate… Yet the phrase has no article, so it does not set the person before the mind as an object. It brings His character to the front. The prophets were, like Moses, only servants. He in whom God spoke at the end of these days was Son… Now God spoke no longer in the prophets, nor in the form of an angel as He often had, but as Son.
English does not carry that as well, so J. N. Darby paraphrased the phrase in his translation and explained why in a note:
On the whole I have paraphrased it: in [the person of the] Son. It is God Himself who speaks. Not by another. Not as the Father. Not merely by the Holy Spirit using a person who is not divine, but as Himself a Divine Person — and that Person the Son.
The heirship is not a reward handed to an outsider. The One who will receive the universe is the One who called it into being.
The universe exists by the creative power of the Son; it is through Him that it has its being. In becoming "Heir of all things" He will take possession of that which owes its very existence to Himself. It will all be put under His hand, and He will acquire the glory of it all in a public way. And this, let us remember, will be in Manhood. As Man He will be "Heir of all things."
Human ambition reaches for the very same things.
Men are trying to own the earth, to rule the sea, and conquer the air. They strive to inherit power, riches, wisdom, strength, honour, glory and blessing. Christ, as Son, will inherit all, for He is the appointed Heir of all, and He alone is worthy of all… Man had completely rejected the One who is the appointed Heir of all things, and nailed Him to a cross.
The ESV says He created "the world"; other translations read "the worlds." The Greek word usually means "ages," and here it carries a wider sense.
tous aiōnas generally means "the ages." But Greek-speaking Jews also used it, beyond any fair dispute, for the universe — perhaps as the stage on which God's dealings through the ages take place — as here and in Hebrews 11:3.
That claim lands hardest when you put it next to the cross.
Yes — the very Man they crucified by the hand of lawless men, the Man crucified in weakness! At the moment He bowed His head and died, He was holding all creation up. If He had been only a man, it would be absurd to think or say such a thing. But He was God.
The Heir has not yet taken possession, and the delay has a reason.
He is waiting for all the joint-heirs to be called out. He will give them the inheritance at the same moment that He takes it Himself. For if we are children, then we are heirs — heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ.
- Spoken — God has moved from speaking through many prophets to speaking in one Son. Nothing is left to add.
- Son — God speaks as a divine Person, with no go-between. "In Son" marks the character of the speaking.
- Made — the Son made "the worlds," a word meaning the ages and, by use, the whole universe.
- Heir — He will publicly take possession, as Man, of what already owes its existence to Him.
- Shared — He waits until God has called out every joint-heir. Then He and they enter the inheritance together.