Having therefore a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast the confession.
The letter to the Hebrews has just described the word of God laying every heart bare. At once it turns to a Priest in heaven, and answers the question that raises: what has God given to carry weak people through to the end?
The verse belongs to a section about people still travelling, not people already home. One commentator maps the flow of these chapters and shows where verse 14 lands:
The first two chapters unfold to us the glories of the Person of Christ, and so prepare us for entering into the blessedness of His service as our great High Priest. In this fresh division of the letter we learn, first, where Christ carries out His priestly service — the House of God (Hebrews 3:1-6). Second, we learn the wilderness circumstances which call for this priestly service (Hebrews 3:7-19). Third, we are told of the rest to which the wilderness leads (Hebrews 4:1-11). Finally, we learn the gracious means God has provided to preserve us in the wilderness (Hebrews 4:12-16).
The searching word is one means. The priesthood is the other.
The first readers were Jewish believers under pressure to go back to the religion they had left, with its priests descended from Aaron. The word great answers that pressure:
A great High Priest He is called. Aaron was high priest. Jesus, the Son of God, is greater. In this the Hebrews lost nothing by becoming Christians. The Jews might boast of the line of priests descended from Aaron; these Hebrews could say, "The Son of God is our High Priest."
Older translations read "passed into the heavens." One commentator shows why the wording matters:
In verse 14 the emphasis lies upon the greatness of the Priest. As to His office, He is not only a Priest but a High Priest, and even more, a great High Priest. As to His position, He has "passed into," or as it should read, "passed through the heavens." Think of the heavens as chambers where angels or other beings live. They lead on to the highest heaven, the immediate presence of God. The great High Priest of our profession has passed through all the heavens, past every created being. He never stopped until He took His seat at the right hand of God. As to His Person, He is Divine and human — Jesus — the Son of God.
Commentators differ on the timing. Some have argued that He entered at His death. One writer ties this verse to the ascension instead:
No one denies that the Lord was in Paradise at once after His death. But no sober Christian has ever confused that with His entering on priestly work after His ascension. Indeed one of the two texts puts it beyond dispute: Christ entered the sanctuary once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. This is the only entrance the letter has in view or allows.
The verse gives two names, and each does its own work for a struggling believer:
The true believer knows only too well how hard it is to keep up the Christian profession in power. He has a deep sense of his own spiritual weakness and his tendency to yield to the enemy. So he values all the more the care and support, the sympathy and help, of our Great High Priest. He has left us in a hostile world and has passed through the heavens. Even so, He still sustains us in the path of faith, and He comforts us in all the trouble of our heavenward journey. He has all power... We may connect the mercy with the name of Jesus and the power with the Son of God.
"Confession" here is the same word elsewhere rendered "profession" — the open owning of Christ before others:
The other application of the term is confessing the Lord Jesus. The Jewish rulers agreed that if anyone "confessed" that Jesus was the Christ they would put him out of the synagogue... This is profession, as indeed the same word, homologeō, is translated. "Let us hold fast our profession" — "the profession of our faith." Hebrews 4:14; Hebrews 10:23.
The command implies a real possibility of letting go:
They were not to give up the Christian faith, and certainly not to corrupt it by mixing in the principles of the Judaism they had left. They were to hold their confession, a well-known one, firmly. And the very exhortation warns of the danger there was of surrendering it.
- Wilderness — the verse speaks to people mid-journey. God has provided the means to keep them: the searching word, then the living Priest.
- Great — He is not one more priest in Aaron's line. Those who left the old system for Him lost nothing: the Son of God is their High Priest.
- Through — He did not stop partway. He passed every created being and sat down at God's right hand. He entered at His ascension, not at His death.
- Jesus, Son of God — the human name carries mercy for our weakness, the divine title carries the power to sustain us.
- Hold fast — hold the open owning of Christ firmly. The command itself warns that the danger of letting go is real.
For we have not a high priest not able to sympathise with our infirmities, but tempted in all things in like manner, sin apart.
Hebrews has just shown the word of God laying the heart bare. Now it turns to a High Priest in heaven, and answers two questions every tested believer asks: does He really feel what we feel, and how can He, with no sin in Him at all?
The verse is put as a denial: He is not a priest who cannot be touched. One writer weighs its words closely:
In verse 15 the emphasis lies upon the grace of the Priest. He is touched with the feeling of our infirmities. Note those three words carefully. Infirmities, not sins; for His temptations here were wholly apart from sin. While infirmity deserves sympathy, sin deserves nothing but condemnation. Further, He is concerned with the feeling of our infirmities, not merely with the knowledge. When trouble comes and fellow Christians offer sympathy, we quickly know the difference between sympathy that flows from knowledge alone and sympathy that springs from having already been in the same place… He regards us not with the cold interest of the philosopher, but with the warm affection of the Lover of our souls.
The ESV says "weaknesses"; older translations say "infirmities." The word is worth a closer look:
The word translated here as "infirmities" is elsewhere translated as "sickness" and "weakness." Whatever the translation, it seems to carry the thought of someone needing help from another. It is the same word used of our Lord — "crucified in weakness." Sickness was never recorded of Him. Yet He bore the anguish of the cross in His body, so how well He would know what His saints would need when sickness was allowed to come upon them.
One writer is firm about what "tempted" means here, and about a common objection:
Temptation means trial. In Christ's case it never means what in fallen man is an inward pull toward evil. This is what the Holy Spirit expressly denies of Him… We know all too well the human and selfish argument that He could not sympathise with us properly if He was free from those inward, evil workings… But if we needed the Lord to be harassed in the same way to feel fully with us, we would on that ground want Him to have given in, as we sadly have often done, to sympathise with us in our failures… He sympathises with us in our holy, not in our unholy, temptations. For our unholiness He died; the cross alone has met it fully in God's sight.
With that one exception, the statement is total, and the record of His wilderness testing bears it out:
There is one great exception to the statement: He was altogether apart from sin. With that exception made, the statement covers everything. He was tempted in every respect. The Gospels confirm this as history. Take Luke's account of the temptation in the wilderness. There the temptations rise in order: the first aimed mainly at the body, the second at the soul, the third at the spirit… Our blessed Lord met them all, and triumphed in them all, in perfect manhood.
Darby preferred "apart from sin" to "yet without sin." He points to another verse, quoted here in an older wording, where the same phrase appears:
The "yet without sin," which I translated "apart from sin," is the same expression as in the passage, "He shall appear the second time without sin." He will then be completely free from sin. He was just as free from it in the temptations He went through… Everything which sin had caused as an effect He bore; in His nature He was sinless.
This limit is no loss to us. It matches what a believer wants:
Christ of course had no evil desires: He was tempted in every way, apart from sin. Sin had no part in it at all. But I do not wish for sympathy with the sin that is in me; I detest it, I wish it to be put to death — judged unsparingly. This the word does. For my weakness and my difficulties I seek sympathy; and I find it in the priesthood of Jesus.
He has walked our path, so His care reaches even the trials we would be ashamed to mention to anyone else:
Not one atom of our experience is beneath the notice of our blessed High Priest! No trial is so small that you cannot pour it out in His sympathetic ear, even one you would be ashamed to tell a man… He is not merely One who has divine knowledge of our path — God has that… with our blessed Lord it is more than divine knowledge of the sorrows and needs of His people; it is divine experience of those sorrows and needs.
- Weakness — "Weaknesses," or "infirmities," means sickness and weakness. It describes someone who needs help, not someone who sins.
- Tested — "Tempted" means trial, never an inward pull toward evil. In the wilderness, body, soul and spirit were each tested, and He triumphed in them all.
- Sinless — He was as free from sin under trial as He will be when He appears a second time. That is why one writer preferred to translate the phrase "apart from sin."
- Sympathy — His fellow-feeling meets us where we need it: in our weakness and difficulty. He never sympathises with the sin we ourselves want judged; for that He died.
- Boldness — He does not just know our path from above. He has walked it, so no trial is too small to bring to Him.
Let us approach therefore with boldness to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and find grace for seasonable help.
Hebrews 4:16 draws a conclusion. We have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens and knows human weakness from the inside. So God's throne is now open to us, and the verse tells us what we will find when we come.
Who sits on a throne gives that throne its character. One writer links the name to the High Priest, and adds one condition:
Oh, then, let us come boldly to the throne of grace! That throne is the third of the great helps which our chapter mentions. It is a "throne of grace" because graced by our great High Priest being seated there. From there God gives mercy and grace as help at just the right moment. But we must come to the throne to get it.
Other writers set this against Israel's past. The people knew of God's throne, and they knew of the mercy seat, the gold cover on the sacred chest in their place of worship. But they never knew it as a place they could walk up to:
The Israelite knew about the throne of God. He also knew about the mercy seat, with the glorious winged figures spreading over it. But the idea that this mercy seat was a place he could freely come to was strange to him... He thought of God as being far off. Faith's thought is that through Christ we can draw near with boldness to a throne of grace.
The confidence here is not a casual attitude toward God. It rests on Christ, not on the person coming:
This is not self-confidence. That would be "unauthorized fire" (Lev. 10:1, 2). It is the firmest confidence in the Lord Jesus. There is no dread and no cringing fear, but a calm and reverent sense of being truly welcome. For we find the majestic throne of God to be in truth a "throne of grace." He keeps His great glory there, and He gives His grace there in fullest measure. The sacrifice of the Lord Jesus is why the throne of God has this character of grace.
Notice who the verse sends us to. One writer points out that the High Priest is the reason we can come, not the one we come to:
We are exhorted therefore to draw near to the throne of grace, that is to God Himself. We are not told to draw near to the High Priest, but to God, and we can do so boldly because the High Priest represents us at the throne of grace. As we draw near we receive mercy. This is not because we have failed. It is so that we will not fail in the trial. Here the time of need is not the time of failure. It is the time when trials and temptations come, the kind that may lead to failure.
The verse names two things, and one writer keeps them apart:
The verse draws a distinction between receiving mercy and finding grace to help in time of need. Mercy is heartfelt compassion. It comes to us inside our sorrow or trial, and it sees us there. Grace is active favor. It is a power that lifts us above our circumstances... And that grace is always available in daily life here. What a real encouragement to keep praying, and to pray in a way that gets an answer!
The verse says we receive and we find. One writer draws an observation from that:
We are to draw near with boldness to receive mercy, and to find grace to help in time of need (4:16). To receive. Let us pause for a moment. We are not told even to ask. We are told to come to receive and to find. Why such language? Why this direction? Because our High Priest has asked already for us, and has obtained all the grace and the mercy that we need. It is there already for us. If we had to ask first, we could fairly expect to wait for the answer. We are to go to receive what we need, and all that we need, and as often as we need.
Commentators differ on whether this throne is for the moment after we have fallen. Some restrict it to help that prevents failure. Others read it more widely:
If I go to the throne, rather than waiting for the throne to come to me, it is all grace: I get help. I never can go to the throne of grace without finding mercy. He may send discipline, but it is a throne of grace and all mercy — "grace to help in every time of need." If you have a will, He will break it; if a need, He will help you. Do you feel that you can always go with boldness, even when you have failed? You go humbled, of course. We should be humble at all times, but we are humbled in a special way when we have failed.
- Seated — the throne gets its name from who sits there. Our great High Priest is seated at God's right hand, and He gives the throne its character.
- Welcome — boldness is not self-confidence. It is firm confidence in the Lord Jesus, and a calm sense of being truly welcome.
- Direct — we are sent to God Himself, not to the Priest; He represents us there so that we can come.
- Twofold — mercy meets us inside our trouble; grace is the active power that lifts us above it.
- Timely — the help meets the time of need. Writers differ on its reach: some stress it keeps us from falling, others say it also meets us after we fall.
For every high priest taken from amongst men is established for men in things relating to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins;
Hebrews 5 opens by defining the high priest: who he is, who appoints him, and what he does. Commentators read the words closely, because the picture is of Aaron's office, drawn to make Christ's priesthood stand out by contrast.
The first thing the verse settles is what kind of person the priest must be.
Every high priest was "taken from among men." This would be a very poor description if applied to Christ, but it is perfectly true of Aaron and his successors. They were only men, taken from among men. To speak of the Lord that way is to forget who He is. The Word became flesh. He became man, but God He was and is from everlasting to everlasting, the Eternal. But in fact a high priest had to be a man, taken from among men. He was to represent man before God, and to represent God before men.
There is a reason no angel could fill the role, and a reason the man must be set apart.
An angel is no fitting priest for men, because the driving force behind active intercession is natural sympathy. Moreover, he is taken. God's choice separates him from the people he is to act for. He is God's minister. His consecration sets him apart from them. By nature they cannot deal directly with divine holiness, and that is why the God of grace ordained the consecration of priests.
The word behind "appointed" means to install someone in authority. In Scripture, God does the installing.
The word translated "ordain" is kathistemi, meaning to establish, or set up. It is also used in Heb. 5:1 and Heb. 8:3 of the high priesthood... It is the word usually used for appointment to authority... Note that every one of these passages refers to God's act.
The small word for matters. God appoints the priest on behalf of people; the people never appoint him. One writer draws a warning from this.
It tells the professing Church, in words not to be mistaken, to beware of human intrusion upon ground that belongs only to God. "For every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men [not by men] in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. … And no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God [not by men], just as Aaron was."
The phrase "in relation to God" marks the direction of the work.
He acts on their behalf. He was appointed in things relating to God, so when he carried out that service his face was turned toward God, not toward men. Here is a difference between ministering the Word and holding the office of priest. The minister of the Word must face people. He ministers to them. The priest turned to God. He sacrificed for the people, or interceded for them, as the case required.
The verse names two things, and they are not the same.
When Aaron was set apart, anointed and consecrated in his robes, he was there representatively to offer to God the gifts and sacrifices of the people who brought them to God. The first sacrifices were offered to set the priests apart. After that they offered the sacrifices on the altar of burnt offering, and Aaron offered the bull and the goat on the great day of atonement. People also brought gifts to God, such as the firstfruits, oil for the light, and spices for incense. The last act belonged to the priest: to offer to God what was brought. They all represented the response of the people to God.
Many read this description as a picture of Christ. One writer argues that the third verse rules that out, because the same priest must offer for his own sins.
The third verse ought to put it beyond dispute for any believer. The same high priest of the first two verses is described in the third verse too. He plainly has to offer for sins for himself — not only for others, but for his own need. Is it not obvious, then, that the priest described here is one like Aaron, or Aaron's son, and not one like Christ? Christ is compared with that description only to be contrasted with it.
Another writer allows that the opening description does fit Christ, but only up to a point.
Caring for man's interests before God, and offering gifts and sacrifices, are supremely true of Christ. But the comparison ends here. Aaron's priesthood was for earth alone, and his sacrifices had only a temporary, formal value. Christ's priesthood is eternal, and the value of His work is eternal.
- Taken — the priest is a man lifted out of the people he serves, since an angel could never represent men before God.
- Appointed — God sets the office up; no one claims it. The priest stands for men, but God installs him.
- Facing God — ministry of the Word turns toward people. Priesthood turns toward God, to sacrifice and intercede for them.
- Offering — sacrifices deal with sins. Gifts are the people's response to God. The priest presents both.
- Surpassed — the description fits Aaron, who also had to offer for his own sins. Commentators differ on how far it touches Christ. They agree the aim is to show that His priesthood is far greater.
being able to exercise forbearance towards the ignorant and erring, since he himself also is clothed with infirmity;
The chapter opens with a description of priesthood in general, and the next verse settles whose priesthood it is. A man who must sacrifice for his own sins is not Christ.
The Holy Spirit is not giving this as a description of Christ's priesthood at all, but of priesthood in contrast with His. The third verse should make this plain to any believer. Verse 3 describes the same high priest as the first two verses. He is required to offer for himself — not only for others, but for his own need. Is it not obvious, then, that this is a high priest like Aaron, or Aaron's son, and not one like Christ?
The Greek word behind the phrase appears nowhere else in the New Testament. It is milder than the warm sympathy we might read into it.
Two Greek words, sympatheo and metriopatheo, are both translated 'have compassion,' but there is a marked difference between them. Metriopatheo (from metriopathes, 'moderate in passions') occurs only once in the New Testament, in Hebrews 5:2. It refers to the priest under the law, who "exercised forbearance" — the true meaning of the word is 'bear reasonably with' — towards the ignorant and the erring, since he himself was clothed with weakness.
God could have appointed a flawless being to the office. The cost of that choice explains why He did not.
Suppose God had appointed a holy angel to act as high priest for Israel. There might have been great gain toward God, since every priestly duty would have been carried out with perfect accuracy and faithfulness. But there would have been great loss toward men, in a matter like compassion on the ignorant. Anyone who acts for people must understand people from experience.
These two words mark a limit. Only one kind of sin had a sacrifice under the law.
This raises a very important principle, one that people easily overlook. Under the law the only sins the sacrifices covered were sins of ignorance. If a man sinned deliberately, he was to die without mercy. There was no sacrifice for that. So, in the nineteenth psalm, David says, "Keep back your servant from presumptuous sins" — that is, sins done knowingly. "Who can discern his errors?" There are sins of ignorance. "Declare me innocent from hidden faults" — that is, faults I know nothing of, and yet which are certainly there.
Aaron's weakness was not simply a flaw in the man. The priesthood itself turned it into fitness for the job.
Aaron was a man subject to weakness like other men. He would have failed to meet this condition of the priesthood if he had not found in the priesthood itself what fitted him for compassion and sympathy. He was to offer sacrifices not only for the people but also for himself, and these offerings produced feelings towards others. They established his position before God, and at the same time they reminded him of his own weakness.
Law by itself has no give in it. The priest was where flexibility entered the system.
The law about vows considers the case of the poor man. He could turn from Moses to the priest, who would value him according to his ability. Now the priest was one who could "deal gently with the ignorant and wayward" (Heb. 5:2). Pure law itself admits of no flexibility: what is demanded must be paid in full. The priest represented that measure of grace that was permissible under the law system.
Christ also feels for the ignorant and straying. But His compassion has a different source.
Aaron was to sympathise with the people because his nature was the same, and his offerings were as necessary for himself as for them. The sympathy of our Lord comes instead from His all-knowing wisdom and from His lowly humbling of Himself in voluntary suffering and death — entering into our circumstances in pure grace. A wonderful contrast indeed! And His sympathy is more full and pure than that of the most tender-hearted son of Aaron could be.
- Chosen — the high priest comes from among men. Anyone who acts for people must know people from the inside. An angel would have served God perfectly and failed us.
- Gentle — the word means measured forbearance, not warm fellow-feeling. He bears with those who stumble instead of crushing them.
- Reaching — his care covers the ignorant and wayward. The law provided sacrifices for their sins. For sin done knowingly there was no sacrifice at all.
- Weak — his own weakness is what softened him. The offerings he made for himself kept reminding him that he was no better than the people he served.
- Surpassed — that same weakness ends the comparison. Christ's sympathy comes from grace and voluntary suffering, not from shared sinfulness. It is fuller and purer than Aaron's could ever be.
and, on account of this [infirmity], he ought, even as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.
Hebrews 5 lists what qualified a man to serve as Israel's high priest, and this verse names the strangest qualification of all: he had to offer for his own sins first. That one detail decides whether these verses describe Christ or contrast with Him.
The chapter opens by describing every high priest taken from among men. Many readers take that description as a picture of Jesus.
People apply the opening description to the Lord Jesus. But the Holy Spirit is not giving it as a description of His priesthood at all. He is describing priesthood in contrast with Christ's. The third verse ought to make this plain beyond dispute to any believer. It describes the same high priest as the first two verses do. And he is expressly required to offer for himself — not only for others, but for his own need too — to offer for sins. So this is a high priest like Aaron, or Aaron's son, and not one like Christ. Compare Christ with that description and you find contrast.
The reason for the double offering is the priest's own weakness. The verse shows what kind of weakness that is.
Even this passage shows the limits of the Jewish high priest rather than his ability. What could he do? There is no mention of him being able to help, only of his being able to "bear with" people. And then it says that he himself is also subject to weakness. This means weakness in the sense of sin, because the verse goes on: "Because of this he is obligated to offer sacrifice for his own sins just as he does for those of the people."
The same weakness works in two directions at once.
The same personal weakness that made Aaron, and his mortal successors in the priest's office, fit to intercede for their brothers' need (verse 2) disqualified them for the ministry of holy things. So their ministry rested on the atonement they first offered for themselves (verse 3). Every step in the making of a priest declared plainly that the man himself was unfit to be a priest to God.
Christ is also a priest with something to offer, so the two priesthoods can look alike on the surface. The difference lies in one small word.
Aaron was "obligated to offer sacrifice for his own sins just as he does for those of the people." Here again we find contrast, not comparison. Christ is indeed an offering priest, for the letter says later, "it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer" (Hebrews 8:3). But read on further and you find that Christ "through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God" (Hebrews 9:14). There is all the difference in the world between Aaron offering FOR himself and Christ offering HIMSELF.
Aaron was meant to picture Christ, yet here the picture falls short. One writer explains why that gap belongs there.
Christ, on the other hand, is "holy, innocent, unstained," and He enters the heavens with His own blood as atonement for the sins of His people. The picture in Aaron has to fall short here, because it is only a picture. It must bear witness to its own shortfall, and so point forward to the One who would fulfil it. That shortfall is not simply a defect; it is a perfection: not meaningless, but full of meaning.
A priest who must keep starting with his own sins can never bring anyone to rest. The letter picks this up again later.
A priest who must sacrifice daily could never really meet the need of our souls. The daily repetition only proves that the need has not been met. So the first part of that later verse speaks only of the Aaronic priesthood, in which the priest had to offer both "for his own sins, and then for the people's." The closing phrase is the blessed contrast seen in the Lord Jesus. His sacrifice is complete: "this He did once when He offered up Himself." The eternity of His Person gives eternal value to His blessed work. In this the believer has rest.
- The cause. His own weakness is sin in him. That is why he must offer "for his own sins" first — duty, not honour.
- The cost. The same weakness cut both ways. It made him gentle with failing people, and it left him unfit for holy service until atonement first covered him.
- The contrast. Aaron offered for himself. Christ offered Himself. One word marks the whole distance between the two priesthoods.
- The design. The gap in the picture was deliberate. A picture that admits its own shortfall points away from itself to the One who fills it.
- The result. Repeated sacrifice proved the need was still unmet. One finished sacrifice, by a priest who needed nothing for Himself, is where rest begins.
And no one takes the honour to himself but [as] called by God, even as Aaron also.
This verse ends the description of the Old Testament high priest with the one thing that made him a priest. He did not choose the office. God did. So if even Aaron could not appoint himself, on what ground does anyone stand between God and man?
The verse denies man any share in choosing who may mediate. One writer contrasts this with the way people usually choose someone to settle a dispute.
"And no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God, just as Aaron was." God alone decides who is fit for this place of holy mediation between God and man. Man has no choice at all in this appointment. In human affairs, both sides in a dispute usually have to agree on a mediator. But here God alone can be trusted to make the right appointment, and He keeps it in His own hands.
God set up this office, and no man arranged it. That settles how much it matters.
We must note again that they did not take this honour upon themselves, "but only when called by God, just as Aaron was". It is a divine institution. That should settle for us how important the subject is. If people had set it up, we might have doubted its use. But God set it up, and God called One to fill that office. So we can be sure it matters.
The verse calls the priesthood an honor. Aaron had done nothing to earn it.
Aaron and his sons had not earned this privilege. God gave it to them by pure grace. Hebrews 5:4 says plainly that "no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God, just as Aaron was". So priestly standing and service come by God's appointment.
One writer applies the same rule to the priesthood of Christ, and then to a warning out of Israel's past.
As to the appointment of the priest on earth, "no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God, just as Aaron was." Here again there is a parallel, one we notice at once, with the priesthood of Christ. No one can truly take the place of priest, in any sense of the word, unless God calls him. It is a very solemn thing to ignore this great truth. We see it in the judgment that fell on Korah and those with him. They tried to set themselves up as priests, and God had not called them.
Another writer pinpoints where the sin lay.
Korah and his company may have meant to follow the directions for priestly service exactly. But that was not the question. It was a question of pushing into an office God had not called them to. They died with censers and incense in their hands. God's quarrel was with them.
Verses 1–3 describe a priest who is weak and must offer sacrifice for his own sins. That is not Christ. Verse 4 begins with a likeness, and the likeness brings out the difference.
Verse 3 describes the same high priest as the first two verses. He plainly has to offer for himself — not only for others, but for his own need too — to offer for sins. Isn't it clear, then, that this is a high priest like Aaron, or Aaron's son, and not one like Christ? Christ is compared with that description, and so He is contrasted with it as well. "And no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God, just as Aaron was. So also Christ did not glorify Himself." He begins with a likeness, but only to bring out the contrast.
People often quote this verse to defend an ordained clergy. One writer answers that the subject is priesthood, not preaching.
Where were you taught to tie yourself and your teachers to such a huge error, confusing priesthood with ministry? In this letter Christ is compared with Aaron. What has this to do with preaching? … Let me tell you that in the New Testament Christianity knows no priest on earth. Its boast is the Great Priest who intercedes for us in heaven. And it invites all Christian brothers and sisters now to come with confidence into the holy place by the blood of Jesus, through the torn curtain.
- Called — no one enters this office except by God's call. Aaron did not choose it, and neither did the people. The same rule governs the priesthood of Christ.
- Honor — the office is a privilege given by grace, never earned, never claimed.
- Intrusion — Korah shows where the sin lies. It is not doing the office badly. It is entering it uninvited.
- Contrast — the comparison with Aaron serves only to show the difference. A priest who must offer for his own sins is no picture of Christ.
- Access — one writer reads the verse as leaving no room for a priestly class on earth. Believers come to God through the blood of Jesus.
Thus the Christ also has not glorified himself to be made a high priest; but he who had said to him, *Thou* art my Son, *I* have to-day begotten thee.
Hebrews 5 has just described an ordinary high priest. He is taken from among men, he is weak, and God appoints him; he does not take the job himself. Verse 5 applies that last point to Christ. The proof of the appointment is a word God spoke about His Sonship — so why is a call to priesthood announced in the language of a Father to a Son?
The verse follows straight on from Aaron's call. The choice of a mediator belongs to God alone.
God alone decides who is fit for this place of holy mediation between God and man. Man has not the slightest choice in this appointment. In human affairs, both sides in a discussion usually have to agree on a mediator. But in this matter God alone can be trusted to make the right appointment, and He keeps this choice to Himself.
Christ kept that rule. Where the ESV says He "did not exalt himself," older translations say "glorified not Himself." One writer shows what that restraint looked like.
He truly did not glorify Himself in any way, even when the atoning work was done. He waits for His kingdom, though He is Ruler of the kings of the earth... He waited on the One who sent Him. It was for God to speak, and God did speak.
This verse quotes Psalm 2; the next quotes Psalm 110. Each declares something different.
God declares two glories: the glory of His Person, shown as man on the earth, and the glory of His office. He declares the first when He says, "You are my Son, today I have begotten you" (Psalm 2). He declares the second in these words: "You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek" (Psalm 110).
The phrase can sound puzzling. One writer takes it of Christ in His place as man on earth:
The words "today I have begotten you" come from Psalm 2, and that passage is quoted in Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5 and Hebrews 5:5. This raises no difficulty, since it plainly refers to Christ as a man, Jehovah's Anointed and Jehovah's King, in connection with this world. The phrases used — "the hill of Zion," "the ends of the earth," and "this day" — belong to the earth and to time, and so confirm this view.
That declaration in time takes nothing from what He always was: "Son of God from everlasting to everlasting, in time also as man He has God declaring 'I today have begotten you'" (William Kelly).
If the point were simply that God appointed Him, Psalm 110 alone would have settled it. The Psalm 2 quotation is there because of who He is.
There can be no real doubt that the call to the office is implied in God's acknowledgment of His Sonship. Otherwise these words would be beside the point, and the second quotation would be the only one needed. On the other hand, it is His being the Son of God in humanity that makes Him fit for the priesthood — that is, for the office of mediator.
Both were called by God. That is where the likeness ends.
This appointment too is wholly of God, but it is not merely an appointment from outside. God's own announcement at His birth declares the personal glory of His Son. It implies that in His Person He is God's High Priest by nature. There is nothing like this in Aaron. No personal quality had the slightest bearing on his priesthood, which simply passed on by natural descent.
Taking the office of priest without God's call has always been serious.
See how serious it is to ignore this great truth. Judgment fell on Korah and those with him, who tried to make themselves priests without being called by God. Jude warns us that in Christendom many will do the same and appoint themselves priests without God's call.
Some think Christ prays in heaven to hold back God's anger. One writer answers that.
Some speak of Christ's work of intercession in heaven as needed to calm God's anger... The truth is different. The same grace that moved God's heart to give His only Son, and to give Him up for our offences to the death of the cross, also appointed Him to the work of priesthood.
- Called — no one takes this honour; God alone appoints the mediator, and reserves that choice to Himself.
- Christ called — He did not exalt Himself; He waited for God to speak, even after the work of the cross was done.
- Called as Son — God announces the appointment in words about Sonship. His being the Son of God in humanity is what fits Him for the office.
- Called beyond Aaron — Aaron's priesthood simply passed down the family line. Christ's rests on who He Himself is.
- Called by grace — the God who gave His Son also appointed Him priest. His priesthood flows from God's love; it does not have to win it.
Even as also in another [place] he says, *Thou* [art] a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedec.
Hebrews 5:6 completes the proof that Christ never took the priesthood for Himself: God Himself announced it, in words drawn from Psalm 110. Three questions follow — who spoke them, what "the order of Melchizedek" means, and how long "for ever" lasts.
Christ did not promote Himself. So who gave Him this place?
Who, then, glorified Him? Hebrews 5:5, 6 quotes two passages from the Psalms, 2 and 110. Together they show that Jehovah made this appointment. It was Jehovah who said to Him, "You are My Son," and also "You are a Priest." With Aaron, Jehovah said to Moses, "Take Aaron your brother... that he may minister to Me in the priest's office" (Exodus 28:1). But in glorifying Christ there was no mediator, for Jehovah spoke directly to His Son.
Hebrews sets Psalm 2 beside Psalm 110. Each declares a different glory.
So the Christ did not glorify Himself to become a High Priest. God plainly declares both the glory of His Person, shown as man on the earth, and the glory of His office. He declared the first when He said, "You are my Son, today I have begotten you" (Psalm 2). He declared the second in these words: "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek" (Psalm 110). So this is the High Priest, the expected Messiah, Christ — glorious in both His Person and His office.
Melchizedek appears in one short passage of Genesis. Naming him here would startle any Jewish reader.
Verse 6 is the actual official announcement of His High Priesthood: "You are a Priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek." The words are quoted from Psalm 110:4, and they must have awakened the wonder of any godly Jew who read them. For Melchizedek was a priest long before Aaron. Genesis 14 mentions him only in passing, yet God's approval clearly rests on that account: he was "priest of the Most High God." Here was an order that stood apart from Aaron and came before Aaron, yet had no place in the nation of Israel on earth.
Why can this priesthood never end? The answer lies in who the Priest is.
God does mark Him out, God does appoint Him, to be sure — but He is declared the Priest of God because of what He is, the Son of God. So, as we think of our great High Priest, we think of one whom God called because of what He is... He can never cease to be a priest, because He can never cease to be the Son of God. He is priest because of what He is... The thought of the Melchizedek priesthood is its eternal and royal character.
Commentators differ here. Some take the phrase as a title that can never lapse:
If Jehovah has said "a Priest FOR EVER," how serious is the responsibility of the man who says, "He ceases to be Priest"!
Another writer measures the word by the need that priesthood exists to meet:
"For ever" is of course here qualified by the necessity and the existence of priesthood. In the eternal state, where sin and suffering are no more, it will cease in the final result of grace triumphant in glory.
Christ already belongs to this order. But His work today looks more like Aaron's.
The order of Melchizedek does apply now, in that Christ, like him, is the one sole priest without predecessor or successor. But today He exercises His priesthood after the pattern of Aaron in the sanctuary, and His intercession rests on sacrifice. The blessing and refreshment of Melchizedek belong, by contrast, to the world to come.
Aaron's priesthood passed down a family line. Melchizedek's did not.
The Aaronic principle of succession was from father to son. On that principle Christ would not be a priest at all, since He was not descended from Aaron... The striking thing about Melchizedek is that he appears in the story without descent, without beginning or end of life, and so he remains a priest continually. Not until He came who could truly remain a priest continually was there another priest after his order or succession. Only the Son of God, in resurrection, sitting at God's right hand, can be the promised priest after the order of Melchizedek.
- Called — Christ did not glorify Himself. God spoke the words to Him directly. With Aaron, God spoke through Moses.
- Declared — Psalm 2 says who He is. Psalm 110 says what He does. Both glories come from God's own mouth.
- Order — Melchizedek was a priest before Aaron and outside Israel's system. He had no ancestors in the office and no successors, and neither has Christ.
- For ever — the title cannot lapse, because it rests on His Sonship. Commentators differ over whether priesthood itself continues into the eternal state.
- Not yet in full — He holds the Melchizedek order now, but serves after Aaron's pattern. Its blessing and refreshment belong to the world to come.
Who in the days of his flesh, having offered up both supplications and entreaties to him who was able to save him out of death, with strong crying and tears; (and having been heard because of his piety;)
The chapter has been setting out what qualifies a man to be a priest. It now turns to a scene of tears and loud cries: to whom did Jesus pray, what did He ask for, and why did God hear Him?
The phrase "in the days of His flesh" marks a period when the Son lived under human conditions, a period now over. One writer notes that the Bible uses "flesh" in two different ways, and only one of them fits Christ.
"The flesh" is used in two senses. First, as describing our bodily condition, and in that sense it could refer to our blessed Lord. "In the days of His flesh" (Heb. 5:7). Second, as describing what is moral, what is bad beyond repair: "For those who are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:8). It is a condition that describes fallen sinful man. "You [believers], however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit" (Rom. 8:9).
Each word in the verse carries its own weight. Two of them mean something different from what most readers assume.
Verses 1 to 3 list what qualified Aaron; verses 7 to 9 show what qualifies Christ. There are most remarkable qualifications in verse 7. "In the days of His flesh," in order to represent this company, He offered up "prayers." That word means "asking." He also offered up "supplications," a word meaning "seeking a divine favour." It was with "strong crying and tears" — this refers to the garden of Gethsemane. He offered them "to Him who was able to save Him from death," or more correctly "out of death." And God heard Him because of His piety, which is what the word really means.
In Gethsemane the enemy attacked. Notice what the Lord used to meet him.
In Gethsemane the enemy sought to turn the Lord from the path of obedience by pressing on Him the terror of death. Facing this assault the Lord acts as the perfect Man. He did not use His divine power to drive the devil away or save Himself from death. Instead, as the perfectly dependent Man, He found His resource in prayer. So He met the trial and overcame the devil. Still, His very perfection as Man led Him to feel the terror of all that was before Him. It led Him to express His feelings in strong crying and tears.
The verse also says why God heard Him. The word behind "fear" means reverence, not fright.
He was heard because of His fear. It was right that He who took death on Himself, as answering for others, should feel its whole weight on His soul. He would neither escape the consequences of what He had undertaken, nor fail in the just sense of what it was to be under the hand of God in judgment. His fear was His piety, the right estimate of the position sinful man was in, and of what must come from God because of it.
Commentators differ here. Another writer rests the answer on His sinlessness:
He was heard, because death, the wages of sin, had no claim on Him. His claim to deliverance was allowed.
He died anyway. That does not mean the prayer failed. It means we have misread what He asked for.
He was saved, not from dying, for that would have left man in his sins and unredeemed; He was saved out of death. His prayer was answered by His resurrection. ... He did not save Himself, but drank the cup and died the sinner's death.
One writer puts the objection into words, then challenges the assumption underneath it.
How can One so exalted as the Son of God enter into all the details of His people's weakness and need down here? Hebrews 5 gives the answer. He has been here, in pressure and sorrow such as no other man ever knew. He is not in them now. It is a common mistake to think that I must be in the same circumstances as another to be able to sympathise. It is not true. If I am in them myself I am not so free to enter into those of another. But if I have been in them, and am now out of them, I can fully sympathise with those of another... Out of His own deep experience of human sorrow and trial, we know this: there is nothing we have to pass through that He cannot enter into. He enters into it to sustain us, as we seek to walk in the same path of His obedience.
- Flesh — the phrase marks His real bodily life on earth, a period now closed; it never describes a fallen nature in Him.
- Cries — facing the terror of death, He did not use divine power to escape. He prayed as the dependent Man, and so overcame.
- Fear — God heard Him for His piety: He felt the full weight of what sin deserved from God.
- Out — He did not ask to escape dying, but to be brought out of death; His resurrection was the answer.
- Ours — He has been through it, and He is now beyond it. So nothing we face lies outside the sympathy of our High Priest.
though he were Son, he learned obedience from the things which he suffered;
Hebrews 5 shows why Jesus is fit to be a High Priest. Then comes the strangest claim in that argument: the One who is Son had something to learn, and suffering is how He learned it.
The verse first grants His dignity, then sets it against the place He took. One writer explains why obedience was foreign to Him:
Yet in His eternal being, in His rightful position, in His personal dignity that can never be taken from Him, the Son was a divine person. As such, He had nothing to do with obedience. This is the very reason Hebrews 5:8 says that He learned obedience through what He suffered. He did not know what it was to obey until He came down to be man. He knew perfectly well what it was for others, for every creature; but He was no creature but Creator. Still, having become man, He loyally took up the duties of man. And the very first duty of man is to obey God.
Learning obedience is not the same as being taught to obey. That difference explains why the verse names Him as Son (older translations read "though He were Son"):
He learned, not to obey, "for the law of God was in His heart," but He learned obedience. He was obedient in the lowest and most painful circumstances a man could ever pass through, for He went down to death. When Jesus suffered, it was not a necessity He could not avoid. It was according to the will of God, who had appointed Him that portion in the world. The Holy Spirit makes us feel the right Jesus had not to pass through death, when He says, "though He were Son."
We also learn obedience through suffering, but the two lessons run in opposite directions:
We have to learn obedience because we have a wicked will. He learned it because He was God over all, who from eternity had always commanded. We often learn obedience through the suffering our own disobedience brings on us. He learned obedience through the suffering that came on Him because He obeyed the will of God. He learned by experience what it cost to obey. No suffering, however intense, could move Him from the path of perfect obedience.
How much of His life does this suffering cover — only the garden of Gethsemane, or all of it? One writer weighs it up:
The question has been raised whether our blessed Lord learned obedience only through what He endured in Gethsemane. There is no possible doubt that verse 7 refers to His experience in the garden. But the same was true of His whole life, as seen, for example, in His temptation by Satan in the wilderness. He came to do the will of God, and this brought Him suffering at every step. We conclude therefore that He learned obedience by the things which He suffered throughout His whole life on earth. Gethsemane is named as the climax of His suffering, because there the pressure of death came upon His soul.
Another writer agrees, and adds that the suffering was not only physical:
We read that He learned obedience "through what He suffered" (Heb. 5:8). This surely covers all His pathway here, and not just the closing scenes of suffering of a more physical kind.
This learning was not private. It is the ground of the sympathy He now shows to people in trouble:
It was in this school — the school of weariness and weeping, of hunger and poverty, of contact with every kind of human misery and grief. In this everyday school, and not in the untroubled dignities of heaven, He learned the art, rare and precious, of sympathy and of speaking a word to the weary. His sympathy is the result of dearly-bought experience, and is therefore always effective.
The next verse states the outcome. One writer pictures the testing behind it:
Every girder in a great bridge is tested before it goes into its destined place. In the same way, our Lord was tested under the greatest pressure, and He was never found wanting. There was no resistance to God's will in Him, no resentment, no murmuring, no fault, no flaw. The will of God did not chafe His holy soul; He delighted to do it both day and night. He passed through every test and graduated in the school of suffering, and so He is fully qualified to be the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.
- Enrolled. The Son had always commanded; He did not know what it was to obey until He came down to be man.
- The lesson. He did not learn to obey. He learned obedience itself, and found out by experience what obeying costs.
- The classroom. Suffering was the schoolroom — not only Gethsemane, but every step of His life on earth.
- The contrast. We suffer because we disobey; He suffered because He obeyed, and no pressure moved Him off that path.
- The graduation. Out of that school came sympathy bought by experience, and an Author of eternal salvation for all who obey Him.
and having been perfected, became to all them that obey him, author of eternal salvation;
The Son who prayed with loud cries, and learned obedience through suffering, is the One God calls High Priest. Verse 9 gives the result: a Saviour brought to completion, a salvation that never ends, and a surprising description of those who receive it: they obey Him.
The word cannot mean that something was missing in His character.
Not moral perfection — we all know He was morally stainless — but perfection as "the author of salvation." He would never have been perfect in this sense if He had not gone on to death. It was fitting for God to give us a perfect Saviour, and just as fitting for Christ to make Himself a perfect Saviour.
So what was completed? His office as Saviour, reached through suffering and then glory.
The Lord Jesus was always morally perfect, yet Scripture speaks of His being "made perfect" — for instance, as the captain of salvation. All had been completed in view of that office (Heb. 2:10). Though He was a Son, He learned obedience (not "to be obedient") through the things He suffered. And after He had finished the work of redemption, He was made "perfect" — that is, glorified — and became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.
With that completion comes a title. Where the ESV reads "source," older translations have "author."
Our High Priest is the Author of eternal salvation — a title found nowhere else in the New Testament. It belongs to the Lord Jesus alone. He is the Author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him, whether they were once Jews or Gentiles... Here too we first meet the word eternal in this letter. Their fathers entered Canaan, enjoyed it for a few years, and then passed away. These, their descendants, were to share in blessing that lasts for ever. It includes everlasting salvation (v. 9), everlasting redemption (9:12), everlasting inheritance (9:15), and all that flows from an everlasting covenant (13:20).
That word "eternal" also marks a contrast with Israel's rescue from Pharaoh.
That salvation lasted only for this life, and most of those rescued from Pharaoh's hand never reached the purpose of God for them... But the salvation brought to light today is said to be "in Christ" (2 Tim. 2:10), and "eternal" (Heb. 5:9). It is not an outward rescue from physical slavery. It sets the soul free from the fear of death, and from the devil, the world, the flesh, and every spiritual enemy.
The wording echoes verse 8: the Son Himself learned obedience.
Hebrews 3 and the start of Hebrews 4 press the value of faith so hard that we might have expected it to read "them that believe." Why does it say "them that obey Him"? The obedience is of course the obedience of faith. But here is the point: the One who asks obedience from us is the One who has learned obedience Himself. In obedience the Son of God worked out eternal salvation, and that salvation is ours when we come under obedience to Him.
But "obey" can sound like a fresh set of rules to keep. One writer rules that out.
The obedience is not the obedience of the law. It is not obedience done to get life. It is what Paul calls in Romans the obedience of faith. This faith has bowed in obedience to Christ. It has owned God's righteous judgment on itself, and it accepts God's perfect provision in what Christ has done.
If the salvation is eternal, the question of timing answers itself.
What is "eternal" salvation, and when do I receive it? Paul says to us that God "has saved us" (2 Tim. 1:9). Is that not "eternal salvation"? If I have obeyed Him — for the gospel calls for obedience, most surely (Rom. 10:16) — if I have obeyed His call of grace and come to Him, is He not the author of eternal salvation to me right then? Or must I wait until there is no more danger before I can speak of being saved for ever?
The certainty rests on who He is and on what He has done.
Everlasting salvation is sure for all who own Him. He is none other than the prophet like Moses whom the Lord promised long ago to raise up. But He is far more, and more blessed. Instead of only the threat of God's punishment on the one who does not listen, He has become author of salvation to those who obey Him. And, against the uncertainty of law, it is "everlasting salvation." How could it be otherwise, if we believe in the glory of His person and the power of His work?
- Perfected, not improved. He was always morally spotless. What reached completion was His course as Saviour — through suffering, death and glory.
- Author, and He alone. No one else in the New Testament carries this title.
- Eternal, not temporary. Israel's rescue from Pharaoh freed bodies for a season. This salvation frees the soul for ever, and starts a chain of "eternal" blessings running through Hebrews.
- Obedience, not law-keeping. The obedient One asks only the obedience He Himself rendered — the heart bowing to Him in faith.
- Now, not later. If God has saved us, we already have that salvation. Waiting until all danger is past misses the word "eternal."
addressed by God [as] high priest according to the order of Melchisedec.
God's own verdict closes this section: His Son is a high priest in the line of Melchizedek. Two questions sit under that line — what happened when God "designated" Him, and why the name Melchizedek and not Aaron.
This chapter uses one English word, "called," twice. Two different words stand behind it, and the difference matters.
First notice the two words in Hebrews 5 that our common version both translates "called." They are by no means the same. The second word (verse 10) reads "named" in the Revised Version, but "addressed" or "saluted" would be better. It does not carry the thought of calling to an office. And the Lord's priesthood did not begin after His work was finished. He was most certainly High Priest when He offered up Himself (Heb. 7:27), and this passage says nothing to the contrary. But it is in resurrection that His priesthood takes on the character which Melchizedek pictures — a royal priesthood, with no shadow of death upon it.
So the verse pictures a scene. The risen Christ arrives in heaven, and God greets Him there.
There you have His priestly work. Are you surprised that He is called the Author of eternal salvation? Who can touch Him now? Can death say anything to Him? He has been down into it and through it — it could not hold Him... He has suffered for sin, and put it away. The storm is gone forever, and He is the Author of eternal salvation. He has gone on high, and God now addresses Him — not "called of God," as you have it in this last verse, but "saluted of God": the risen, glorified Son of God presented there in the infinite glory of heaven. The Most High God salutes Him as "King of righteousness" and "King of peace" — a "High Priest forever."
Priesthood is given, not grabbed. What sets Christ's appointment apart is the form God used.
How did He become High Priest? The High Priest had to do with God, so no one could take this office for himself. Aaron was called to it, as the Scriptures declare. The Priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ was no less of divine appointment. No one saw Him consecrated to the office, as the people of Israel saw Aaron brought into the high priesthood. Yet we know on equally sure ground — the Word of God — that He entered His Priesthood only by divine warrant... Aaron and his sons were made priests by God's command. The Lord Jesus Christ was made Priest with an oath of God. "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, 'You are a priest forever'" (7:21). No more solemn form of appointment could be conceived.
Why name Melchizedek and not Aaron, Israel's own high priest? A brief appearance in Genesis carries the answer.
Melchizedek was a priest long before Aaron. History mentions him only briefly (Gen. 14), yet God's evident approval rested on that history: he was "priest of God Most High." Here was an order independent of Aaron, and earlier than Aaron, yet an order that had no place in the nation of Israel on earth. The reason for this is wonderful. This man was a picture of a heavenly priesthood, not an earthly one. Our Lord fully enters it only in His resurrection.
Christ holds the Melchizedek order now. But the way He serves His people today follows another pattern.
What we learn here is that the One now established after the order of Melchizedek is carrying a company through the wilderness. He acts after the pattern of Aaron toward a people in wilderness conditions. He waits to come out fully as functioning according to the order of Melchizedek in the world to come. We need Christ's support after the pattern of the Aaronic priesthood until we reach that day.
Another writer states the same distinction, and adds what the order guarantees.
Scripture plainly teaches us that Christ is "designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek" (Hebrews 5:6). More than that, we read in Hebrews 7:11 of another priest who should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron. But notice, it is a question of order here, not of exercise. There was one undying Priest, not a succession.
- Called — no one takes this office for himself. God appointed Aaron by command, and His Son by an oath — the most solemn form possible.
- Suffered — He went down into death and came through it. God's welcome comes after the storm is over.
- Saluted — the word is not "appointed" but "addressed." He was already High Priest when He offered Himself. Here God hails the finished work.
- Melchizedek — an order older than Aaron and outside Israel. It pictures a heavenly priesthood, with no shadow of death on it.
- Forever — one undying Priest, not a succession. He serves us now after the pattern of Aaron. The order of Melchizedek can never pass.