Questions about Hebrews

Hebrews gives a wonderful vision of the Lord Jesus Christ. He is revealed as the Son of God, and Son of Man; as the heir of all things; higher than the angels. We can trace His path of humiliation to death and what has been accomplished by the death on the cross. All the blessings put on the side of the believer are made known in Hebrews. But above all the great message is the Priesthood of Christ. This is the great center of this sublime Epistle. It is an Epistle of contrasts. There is the contrast between the Lord Jesus Christ and the angels; between Him and Moses, between Him and Aaron, between the Priesthood of Melchisedec and that of Aaron; between the offerings of the old covenant and the one great offering of Christ. This was the supreme need of these Jewish-Christians, to know Christ in all His fullness and glory. This knowledge would make them perfect, steadfast and fill them with comfort. And this is still our need. May the Lord bless us in meditating on this wonderful document.

Its range of truth and its design are different from that of any other apostolic communication. It ministered Christ to those who had been Jews, with the evident purpose of so settling them in the faith, that no inducements of a peaceful life, no blandishments on the part of their friends, no threats of continued persecution or of martyrdom, should cause any to turn aside, and so land them in apostasy. Then, as we note this in perusing its pages, we may note also features of early Christian worship, which, we must all confess, the Church of God has since those days very much forgotten.

The epistle to the Hebrews presents the magnificent glories of our Lord Jesus Christ, of His person and work, eclipsing every other person and every other work. This letter shows that Christ has replaced even the great men of faith whom God had given, as well as the sacrifices He had instituted in the Old Testament. Furthermore, Jesus our Lord is now the great Leader of all believers, not only of the Hebrew Christians to whom this epistle was addressed. His leadership is explained as follows:

Hebrews 3. We need not dwell long on these intervening chapters. It is evident that he opens with our Lord as "apostle and high-priest of our confession," in contrast with the apostle and high priest of the Jews. Moses was the revealer of the mind of God of old, as Aaron had the title and privilege of access then into the sanctuary of God for the people. Jesus unites both in His own person. He came from God, and went to God. The holy brethren, then, partakers of a heavenly calling (not earthly like Israel's), are told to consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, even Jesus, who is faithful to Him that appointed Him, as also Moses in all his house. Moses, "as a servant," he takes care particularly to say, in everything shows the superiority of the Messiah. "For he was counted worthy of greater glory than Moses, by how much he that built it hath more honour than the house." He becomes bold now. He can venture, after having brought out such glory to Christ, to use plainness of speech; and they could hear it, if they believed their own scriptures. If they honoured the man who was God's servant in founding and directing the tabernacle (or house of God in its rudimentary state), how much more did the ancient oracles call attention to a greater than Moses — to Jehovah — Messiah, even Jesus. How plainly this chapter pre-supposes the proofs of the divine glory of Christ! We shall see also His Sonship presently. "And Moses was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of the things to be spoken after; but Christ, as Son over his house, whose house are we." Christ, being divine, built the house; Christ built all things. Moses ministered as servant, and was faithful in God's house; Christ as Son is over the house; "whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end."

The connection between the personal and the official glories of the Lord Jesus Christ is indeed the prominent subject of the Epistle to the Hebrews. In the first chapter the Son is presented to us as both in person and office far above angels. And it is the Son who is also the Apostle of our profession. In the second chapter He is presented to us as our High Priest; and then we are exhorted, in the third chapter, to "consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession Christ Jesus." Moses indeed was great: God had magnified him before Pharaoh, yet he was but a servant — one to whom the word of God had come, although God humbled Miriam and Aaron before him. But mark; Jesus was not only officially greater than Moses, but it was His personal greatness which gives Him the infinite superiority. He was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as He that hath builded the house hath more honour than the house; and every house is builded by some man, but He that hath built all things is God. Moses was faithful as a servant another's house, but Christ as a Son over His own house. So again as concerning the high priesthood. Aaron was the high priest, but Jesus is the Great High Priest. — higher thus indeed than Aaron, even officially. But this is not all; it is "Jesus, the Son of God," infinitely higher personally than He is officially. "Seeing then that we have a Great High Priest, that is passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God" (Heb. 4).

Now, in properly considering Him - the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, - the significance of this is more clearly seen. It will be observed that both the Deity and the Manhood of the Lord Jesus are vitally involved in what is now presented to us. Also, both Moses and Aaron are seen to be types of this blessed One: hence there are comparisons, while yet, these being noted, there is greater emphasis upon the contrasts in this great Person to the lesser glories of Moses and Aaron. Indeed angels have before been set aside in His favor, and cer­tainly men ought to be.

Among those who are upright, how much depends upon their real hold of what scripture actually teaches! The Christian Hebrews feebly understood anything distinctive. Without denying that Christ died, rose, and went to heaven, the great truths that came out consequently were not developed as they should be, so characteristically different from what the Old Testament led people to expect. With Christ confessed they looked for everything grand, honoured, prosperous, and delightful here below. But how did the cross of Christ and His going away to heaven consist with the expectation of Israel being now at the head of the nations and in the enjoyment of earthly glory? Even believers had that idea still. You will recollect that when the risen Lord was about to go to heaven from the Mount of Olives, they asked, "Wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" They had little idea of the thorough break with Israel; still less that God was bringing in a wholly distinct purpose, and associations new and heavenly. This is what we find very fully in the Epistle to the Ephesians and elsewhere: an absolutely fresh revelation. The believers in Jerusalem were slow to learn. Nor does the Epistle to the Hebrews rise to the mystery concerning Christ and concerning the church. Even the heavenly calling therein treated was imperfectly known. Yet it was written late, though somewhat before the destruction of Jerusalem. It speaks of Mosaic covenant, ritual, system, tabernacle, altar, priest and offering, superseded by what was far better, earthly shadows by the heavenly realities. This was strange not only to the unbelieving Jews but to the Christian remnant. They thought that the old forms were rather to be filled with new power, and that grace would be given to make them living. They had not realised that the old divine service must pass away, and be succeeded by entirely heavenly things in accordance with Christ seated at the right hand of God on high. He is the truth, and must be brought not only into the heart by faith as He is now exalted, but wrought into the worship of God and into the practice of men that believe as a living reality here and now.

It does not contain the name of its author. The reason of this is touching and remarkable. It is that the Lord Himself, according to this epistle, was the Apostle of Israel. The apostles whom He sent were only employed to confirm His words by transmitting them to others, God Himself confirming their testimony by miraculous gifts. This also makes us understand that, although as Priest the Lord is in heaven for the exercise of His priesthood there, and in order to establish on new ground the relationship of the people with God, yet the communications of God with His people by means of the Messiah had begun when Jesus was on earth living in their midst. Consequently the character of their relationship was not union with Him in heaven; it was relationship with God on the ground of divine communications and of the service of a Mediator with God.

Most of the modern scientists refuse to accept Paul as the author because contents, structure and language of the epistle are not typical for him. And yet the old Alexandrian tradition ascribes this epistle to the apostle Paul. The fact that the author knew Timothy well (Heb. 13:23) and that Peter who also wrote to Jewish Christians mentions an epistle of Paul to them (2 Pet. 3:15) speak for the Alexandrian tradition. However the addressees of the epistle were Jewish Christians in Palestine whereas Peter wrote to the scattered strangers (1 Pet. 1:1) who lived outside Palestine. If Paul was the author one reason for not mentioning his name might be that he was an apostle to the nations whereas Peter was an apostle to the Jews (Gal. 2:7-8).

As a matter of fact the author of the epistle remains unknown. The Holy Spirit who inspired this epistle deliberately wanted to introduce the Lord Jesus only as apostle and high priest of our profession (Heb. 3:1). The church father Origines (around 185 to 254 AC) appropriately wrote: Only God knows in truth who the author is.

"The only fact clear as to the author is that he was not the Apostle Paul. The early Fathers did not attribute the book to Paul, nor was it until the seventh century that the tendency to do this, derived from Jerome, swelled into an ecclesiastical practice. From the book itself we see that the author must have been a Jew and a Hellenist, familiar with Philo as well as with the Old Testament, a friend of Timothy and well-known to many of those whom he addressed, and not an apostle but decidedly acquainted with apostolic thoughts; and that he not only wrote before the destruction of Jerusalem but apparently himself was never in Palestine . The name of Barnabas, and also that of Priscilla, has been suggested, but in reality all these distinctive marks appear to be found only in Apollos. So that with Luther, and not a few modern scholars, we must either attribute it to him or give up in the quest" ( Weymouth ).