Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Hebrews 12:14 - 12:17
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Incipient apostasy must be counteracted by striving after union and sanctification
Heb_12:14-17
[Heb_12:14.— ìåôὰ ðÜíôùí with all, not “man;” the reference is doubtless to the brethren—any further reference would here be irrelevant.—
ïὗ
Ἐðéóêïðïῦíôåò ìÞ ôéò ὑóôåñῶí ἀðü .
Heb_12:15.—With ὑóôåñῶí either ἦ is understood or (with De W., Lün., Del., Alf., we must regard it as subject of Ýíï÷ëῇ , and in the resumption of the sentence ῥßæá ðéêñßáò , is put in its place. In favor, however, of the other construction is that of ðüñíïò , which also requires ᾗ . The passage is imitated from Deu_29:18, where the Sept. ἐí ÷ïëῇ êáὶ ðéêñé ̇ á , would almost seem, and is deemed by Del., to have originated the similarly sounding ἐíï÷ëῇ . Still this is, on the whole, improbable, “especially as the Alexandrine copy of the Sept., which our author constantly used, has ἐíï÷ëῇ ” (Alf.).— ῥßæá ðéêñßáò , is evidently to be taken of persons, and persons inclined and tempting to apostasy.— ïἱ ðïëëïß , not many; but the many, the mass.
Heb_12:16.— ἀíôὶ âñþóåùò ìéᾶò , in exchange for one meal.
Heb_12:17.— ìåôáíïßáò — åὗñå , I should put this in parenthesis in entire accordance with the usage of the author. ìåôáíïßáò also with Del., Alf., etc. (against Moll, who, however, seems undecided), I would refer to Esau, not to Isaac, and the following áὐôÞí to åὐëïãßáí , Alford’s objection to the latter, that ἐêæçôÞóáò immediately takes up åὖñå , is by no means decisive. ἘêæçôÞóïò is the natural word, without any reference to the preceding åὗñåí and the ìåôὰ äáêñýùí ἐêæçôÞóáò áὐôÞí exactly describes Esau’s endeavors after the blessing, as recorded in Gen.—K.].
Heb_12:17. For ye know, etc.—Luth. erroneously after the Vulg. takes ἴóôå imperatively, and is seriously stumbled at the general thought of the passage, inasmuch as he refers áὐôÞí to ìåôÜíïéá (with Chrys., Œc., Primas., Grot., etc.), and refers ìåôÜíïéá to the change in the mind of Esau. Hence sprang grave psychological difficulties, and a seeming antagonism, with the general teachings of Scripture. To take the clause with De W. objectively, would require that áὐôüí , sc. ôüðïí , should have been written. If we adhere to the certainly natural reference of áὐôÞí to ìåôÜíïéá , we must (with most intpp. since Zwingle, Bez., among them Thol., Ebr., Bisp., Lün.) understand the change of mind as applying to Jacob, not to Esau. We might, however, be tempted, on account of the special sense of ìåôÜíïéá in the N. Test., and inasmuch as Isaac has not been previously named, to refer (with Theophyl., Calv., Beng., Bl., Hofm., Del., Riehm) áὐôÞí to åὐëïãßáí . This yields also the unobjectionable idea that the tears shed on account of the loss of the blessing remained ineffectual, inasmuch as he found in himself no place for repentance. But in that case we must, on the one hand, take this explanatory clause, “for he found,” etc., as parenthetical, which is entirely foreign to the style of the author (for Heb_7:11 and Heb_12:20, are by no means parallel;) and on the other hand, the sentiment which thus arises is, to be sure, in accordance with Heb_6:4-6; Heb_10:29, but not with the record of the life of Esau. The opinion of Del. that Esau is here presented as a type of that unpardonable sin of apostasy, which draws after it inevitable damnation, finds no support in the text itself. But the seeking with tears for the change of mind in his father, and the father’s repelling of his entreaties, are recorded Gen_27:34-38.
[To me Moll’s objections to the view which he rejects seem by no means conclusive. That the parenthesis is not opposed to the genius of our author’s style, can be shown by several examples, as Heb_7:11; Heb_7:19; Heb_7:20-21; Heb_10:7; Heb_10:23, in all of which a parenthesis is most naturally assumed. In the second place it seems by no means necessary to assume here that the personal character of Esau is in question, at least as to his ultimate repentance and individual salvation. But he held a position and enjoyed a prerogative of inestimable importance. As Isaac’s first-born he was his natural heir, and thus naturally the inheritor of the blessings covenanted to Abraham; naturally, in the line of Theocratic descent. That prerogative he recklessly threw away. He valued so little the privilege connected with the promise and covenant of God, that he forfeited it for the single gratification of his sensual appetite. The forfeiture was fixed and fatal. When he would have recovered it he was rejected, discarded, reprobated ( ἀðåäïêéìÜóèç ), and no repentance was of any avail to secure the recovery of the once discarded and abandoned blessing. Thus his example is a most happy and forcible one for the author. He stands, as suggested by Del., as the type of him who wantonly turns away and rejects with carnal and sensual mind the blessings of God’s spiritual covenant. In his case, indeed, there is perhaps no necessity of supposing that the rejection was such as to shut him out from the kingdom of heaven. But he was inexorably excluded from the high position which he would have held as one of the line of God’s covenant people, and one of the ancestors of the Messiah, and his example is a most striking and pertinent one for the purpose of our author. I believe, therefore, that áὐôÞí refers to åὐëïãßáí , that the clause “for he found,” etc., is parenthetical, and that ìåôÜíïéá refers to the change in Esau’s own mind: repentance was impossible, i.e., any such repentance as could restore to him the once forfeited theocratic blessing, and that thus the doctrine is strikingly parallel and analogous to (though not precisely identical with) the author’s elsewhere repeatedly expressed doctrine of the hopelessness of the condition of the apostate.—K.].
2. Fellowship with the Lord, and the certainty by means of this, of yet beholding God, should not be made dependent on external things, but we should ever bear in mind that with unspiritual modes of feeling, and with a failure in sanctification, the possession of salvation is impossible, and our claim to the inheritance is lost. To our seeing of God a fulfilment of the required conditions is indispensable, Psa_17:15; Psa_42:3; Mat_5:8; 1Jn_3:2; Rev_22:3-4.
3. The Divine fulness of peace and holiness may and should serve as an example to the Church; but the appropriation of these, and reproduction in our own life, demands a zealous and continued endeavor, and a mutual brotherly, coöperation, in order that none may so withdraw himself from grace that it can no longer influence him, or be beyond his reach.
4. The roots of bitterness, those poisonous plants which, springing up, disquiet and molest a Church, as the field and vineyard of God, and bring contagion and ruin to the individuals who come in contact with them, and of whom there are but too many, are of various kinds; but preëminently dangerous is that impure and worldly feeling which, for the sake of fleeting charms of sense, and momentary enjoyments, half recklessly, half thoughtlessly, sacrifices the blessing of the promise, and a title to an inheritance in the kingdom of God.
5. As there are fruitless tears, which have no influence on the improvement and purifying of our own heart, because they stand in no connection with actual repentance, so there are also tears shed too late, and therefore in vain, which are of no avail to change the purposes of others, and have no power to modify the lot which a person has previously chosen for himself. A repentance, however, sought sincerely and earnestly, and yet in vain, is, according to the tenor of Scripture, as completely unsupposable as is a truly penitent and yet ineffectual seeking of the grace of God for the forgiveness of sin within the limits of our temporal life.
Starke:—It is lovely and beautiful to live in peace with all men, so far as it can be done with a good conscience. Yet if we cannot always be at peace, still we must never give occasion for quarrelling and strife (Psa_133:1; 1Co_11:16).—Great wisdom and careful keeping of our conscience are required, that we may neither from fear of men omit in our works or suppress in our words any thing which ought to be done and spoken, and that in neither do we say any thing which may breed dissension, and which either had better been entirely omitted, or might have been done or uttered in a better manner (Pro_13:10).—He who will not be born anew with Christ, to him His birth is of no avail. He who will not die to sin with Christ, to him His death is of no avail. He who will not rise from sin in Christ, His resurrection is of no avail (Act_3:26; Col_3:1; Joh_3:3; Joh_3:5; 1Pe_2:24).—If hatred has sprung from wrath, and the hatred continues until the sun has repeatedly set upon it, the seated hatred roots itself in the heart, and becomes a noxious plant not easily eradicated.—A Christian should be watchful over his fellow, that he may exhort him to that which is good.—There are in the Holy Scripture bad and good examples, which prove that the devil has for a long time carried on his wickedness, and that we must not indiscriminately appeal to ancient examples (1Co_11:1).—Oh, how many brethren of Esau are abroad in the world, who sell for temporal pleasures the prerogative of their birth-right, the kingdom of heaven! Woe to those who follow after them (2Ti_3:4).
Rieger:—We think that we are in the right, and that we are seeking nothing but the right; but we seek it in such a way that love, peace, compassion, are sacrificed in the pursuit, and we defile our spirits with many a stain, in which we also involve many others. He who cannot be induced to carefulness in regard to apparently small matters, will never be in genuine earnest. A mess of pottage could do Esau so much harm!—A cup of cold water may receive a reward.—To will while God wills, and awakens our own will, this effects good. To will, when grace and the season of grace have been neglected, and the door has been shut, will be in vain, and will prove no small part of one’s eternal shame and suffering (Mat_7:22-23; Luk_13:25).
Hahn:—A single act can work great ruin. Much is often lost in a brief space; for the sake of a small thing we often surrender that which is great. The false hope of its recovery we see in the example of Esau.
Heubner:—Peace would seem not to be sinful neglect, but connected with a strict adherence to the will of God.—The reward of Christian sanctification is glorious. It is the necessary condition of blessedness.—By deferring our reformation, Divine grace is often trifled away.—It is a duty to keep the Church pure, and to guard against the influence of seducers; the whole Church is defiled, dishonored and poisoned.—How miserable is the reward bestowed by sin, and how infinitely great the loss of the sinner.—Though those who come to late repentance may obtain indeed a Seir, yet it is not Canaan.
Ahlfeld:—In sanctification the Holy Spirit transforms us into the image of Christ: 1. Why should we be in earnest in regard to this sanctification? 2. Whence do we acquire the power to attain it? 3. Wherein do we perceive that we grow in it? 4. What is its goal and termination?
Menken:—The grace of God and the sanctification of our own nature, peace with God and with ourselves, and the love of peace, and a peaceful tone of feeling and of conduct in our relation with others, stand in indissoluble connection, and in the degree in which we are participant in the first, will the other also be found with us.
Footnotes:
Heb_12:16.—Instead of ἀðÝäïôï is found in A. C., the form ἀðÝäåôï , which is not an error of the copyist, but frequently occurs in the New Testament, as a specimen of forms of the later vulgar idiom. See Alex. Buttmann’s Gramm. of the New Test. Idiom, p. 41.
Heb_12:18.—Even Tisch. has (in Edd. 11, IV., VII.) replaced in the text the indispensable ὄñåé after øçëáö ., following D. K. L. and nearly all the minusc., although it is wanting in Sin. A.C., 14, 17, and many ancient translations, and hence is suspected by Mill as a gloss, and rejected by Lachm., Tisch. I., and Alford. [With Tisch., Moll, etc., I should retain it, regarding this as a case (like Ἐ÷ïìåí , Rom_5:1) in which the internal evidence overbalances stronger external testimony on the other side.—K.].