A Study Of The Apostle Pauls Letter To The Hebrews

1
AStudyOf TheApostlePauls LetterTo The
Hebrews
How can we neglect so greata salvation?
Hebrews 23
2
Hebrews Christ Is Superior! Superior Person
(11413) Superior to Prophets
(11-3) Superior to Angels (14218) Superior
to Moses (31-19) Superior to Joshua
(41-13) Superior Priest (414728) Superior to
Aaron (414612) but Well only study 51163
today. Superior to Melchizedek
(61375) Superior to Levi (76-28)
3
Hebrews Christ Is Superior! Superior Pact to
Moses (811018) Superior Promises
(81-13) Superior Sanctuary (91-15) Superior
Sacrifice (916-28) Superior Results
(101-18) Superior Principle (Faith) to Moses
(10191325) Superior Things (1019-39) Superio
r Actions (111-40) Superior Relationship
(121-29) Superior Way of Life (131-25)
4
At this point, Paul, frustrated with them, broke
off from his discussion concern-ing Jesus and His
Melchizedekian priesthood to warn them a fourth
time. As mentioned before, there are seven
warnings in Hebrews the first three were about
their lack of faith, and this one was about their
lack of growth.
5
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
Hebrews 511 ?
6
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
Since the term for whom can be mas-culine or
neuter, it falls to the interpre-ter to translate
it as either whom or which in this case the term
which is better, because the subject isnt Jesus
or Melchizedekits actually
the relation of Je-sus to the priestly order of
Melchizedek.
7
This word could re-fer to Paul and his personal
scribe (cf. Rom. 1622, Gal. 611, et al.), or it
couldve simply been a tact-ful way of saying, We
have much to discuss.
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
8
Interestingly, this phrase is from one Greek
term, the pre-fix of which means difficult, while
the root means inter-pretation, resulting in
explanation. In fact, its from this term that we
get our word hermeneu-tics the rules of
in-terpretation.
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
9
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
By saying since you, Paul was blaming them for
this being a difficult subject to explain
incident-ally, this helps us to see that the
audi-ence is what deter-mines which parts of
Gods Word are milk and which parts are meat.
10
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
This phrase tells us that at one time they
werent like this, but because they were pulling
away from the truths they had once confessed,
they had become (not were becoming) dull of
hearing. Cf. notes on 21-3 414.
11
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
The term for dull means slow and is only found
one other time in the NT (612) where its
translated sluggish.
12
Of whom we have much to say and hard to explain,
since you have become dull of hearing.
The term for hearing means understand-ing i.e.,
they had be-come slow in learn-ing and therefore
in growing.
13
They were drifting backward insteadof pushing
forward (512b 61a) so due to their apparent
desire to go backward into Judaism instead of
forward into Christianity, Paul had a hard time
figuring out how to get this important subject
across to them.
14
Notice Their Journey to Immaturity 1. They
Drifted from the Word (21-4). Then 2. They
Doubted the Word (37413). And now 3.
They Were Dull in Hearing the Word. So something
we can learn from this is that a symptom of
spiritual problems is the attitude which says
that Bible study, worship, and preaching are dull.
15
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
Hebrews 512 ?
16
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
If this letter was written to Jewish Christians
in Jerusa-lem, as certainly seems to be the case,
then that makes this first clause a very strong
one. Why? Because ? ? ?
17
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
In saying, by this time you ought to be teachers,
Paul was referring to the idea that the church
had been established there for more than 30 years!
18
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
Since the first prin-ciples here are of the
oracles of God, lets talk about those first ?
? ?
19
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
The word for oracles (logion) is related to
logias translated collection (1 Cor. 16 1-2),
but its derived from the very fami-liar logos
which is variously translated as sayings, words,
and even teachings. But ? ? ?
20
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
While logos could be used for something anyone
thought or said, logion was only associated with
divine thoughts teachings. So put- ting this
together we discover that ?
21
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
The oracles of God refer to a collection of
sayings or teach-ings of God. So what was the
collection of Gods sayings they had at that
time? The Old Testament .
22
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
What else would people like Paul use to convince
Jews that Jesus was the promised Messiah? By
the way ? ?
23
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
The term logion was used of the Law of Moses by
Stephen (Acts 738) by Paul (Rom. 32). And ?
24
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
Since Hebrews deals so much with priest-hood,
its also inter-esting to note that divine
oracles were engraved on the high priests
breast-plate in fact, the Greek OT employs the
term logion to describe that breast-plate in Exo.
2815. Now ? ? ?
25
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
Lets briefly define the first principles. Some
synonyms for principles are truths, thoughts,
ingredi-ents, and elements. Applying it to this
context ? ? ?
26
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
This phrase simply refers to the first truths or
elements about Christ (61) found in the Old
Testament.
27
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
Speaking more about the term for princi-ples
here, this term is (coincidentally) translated
elements in Galatians 43 9 where the idea of
that which is ele-mentary or found-ational is
meant to describe the Old Testament.
28
Notice first Gal. 324-25 The law was our tutor
to bring us to Christ. Now we are no longer
under a tutor. Then notice 41-3 9 A child
is under guardians and stewards until the time
appointed by the father. Even so we, when we were
children, were in bond-age under the elements of
the world the Jewish system. But now how is
it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly
elements of the world the Jew-ish system, the
law of sin/death to which you desire again to be
in bondage? So ?
29
If the oracles of God here are a reference to the
Law of Moses, then what was Paul saying? If the
OT prophesied of Jesus of Nazareth, and if they
were headed back to that world (remember, this
was before it was destroyed), then they obviously
need-ed to be taught again concerning the very
fundamentals of the OT. So For them to head back
to the world that foreshadowed Christ would have
been to totally miss the very basics of the OT
(cf. Col. 216-17 Heb. 101) Jesus being their
High Priest was something that should have been
fundamental to Jews who had become Christians!
30
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
The milk of Gods Word is obviously equal to the
first principles of the oracles of God (or the
elementary prin-ciples of Christ, 61), including
that which he had already dis-cussedJesus
ful-fillment of the type and shadow of the
Aaronic priesthood. So ? ? ?
31
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
Meat or solid food likely refers to the next step
in the dis-cussion of Jesus priesthood that Paul
was trying to take. Why? Because ?
32
For though by this time you ought to be teachers,
you need someone to teach you again the first
principles of the oracles of God and you have
come to need milk and not solid food.
It was at the point of bringing up the priesthood
of Jesus in the order of Mel-chizedek that he
paused to scold them for making this more
difficult on him than it shouldve been.
33
Notice these three points 1. This verse implies
that it isnt neces- sary to know everything
(or even a great deal) about the Bible to be
saved. 2. This verse implies that every Christi-
an is expected to be a teacher of Gods
Word in one form or another. And 3. Isnt it
sad that many of those who complain about
hearing the basics too often from the pulpit
dont even know where to go in the Bible to
share the Gospel plan of salvation with
others?
34
Because everyone who partakes only of milk is
unskilled in the Word of righteousness,for he is
a babe.
Hebrews 513 ?
Why did Paul think they needed to be taught the
first principles again?
35
The term for unskill-ed means inexperi-enced
i.e., they needed to be taught so they could
teach . And what were they expected to share with
the world? ?
Because everyone who partakes only of milk is
unskilled in the Word of righteousness,for he is
a babe.
36
This phrase brings Romans 117 to mind where Paul
taught that through the Gospelthe New Testament
we learn how to gain Gods righteousness by
faith. I.e. ? ?
Because everyone who partakes only of milk is
unskilled in the Word of righteousness,for he is
a babe.
37
Since they were so caught up in and headed back
to the Old Covenant , they were unskilled or
inexperienced in teaching people the New Covenant.
Because everyone who partakes only of milk is
unskilled in the Word of righteousness,for he is
a babe.
38
Being called a babe in Pauls day wasnt a good
thing this term referred to someone who was
ignorant, either due to a lack of being taught or
to a lack of personal study and experience in
teaching others.
Because everyone who partakes only of milk is
unskilled in the Word of righteousness,for he is
a babe.
39
Notice an implied irony here these brethren
werent inexperienced be-cause they were babes
(which would be normal) they were babes because
they were inexperienced and that by that own
choice. See, unlike normal child-ren, they
werent trying to learn and grow, so they were
actually regressing instead of progressing.
40
But solid food belongs to those who are of full
age, that is, those who by reason of use have
their senses exercised to discern both good and
evil.
Hebrews 514 ?
41
But solid food belongs to those who are of full
age, that is, those who by reason of use have
their senses exercised to discern both good and
evil.
The term for use re-fers to that which has become
second nature. The old say-ing that if you dont
use it , you lose it implies that you can-not
lose what you dont have, yet Paul was telling
them that they didnt even have it because they
didnt use it. (Paul mustve really enjoyed
ironies!)
42
But solid food belongs to those who are of full
age, that is, those who by reason of use have
their senses exercised to discern both good and
evil.
The phrase full age refers to adults, of course
and, unlike infants wholl swal-low anything,
adults are much more cau-tious about what they
swallow, liter-ally and figuratively.
43
But solid food belongs to those who are of full
age, that is, those who by reason of use have
their senses exercised to discern both good and
evil.
The word senses here refers to men-tal abilities,
not to the five senses we normally think of and
these exercised senses result in the ability to
determine whats good and whats bad to swallow.
44
But solid food belongs to those who are of full
age, that is, those who by reason of use have
their sense exercised to discern both good and
evil.
This phrase doesnt refer to good bad morals,
but to right wrong doctrines, for thats what
cor-responds to this text concerning what makes
one righteous. Remember ? ?
45
These brethren were being severely pressured to
return to Judaism, and this pressure (false
teaching as well as persecution from Judaizers)
was causing them to neglect, even renounce, what
they had been taught and what they had previously
accepted as true. This is why Paul indicated that
such negli-gence leads to apostasy (64-9).
46
Theres something comforting in this verse that
we should take to heart the implied lesson here
is that, gener-ally speaking, the more one
exercises himself in reading, studying,
meditat-ing upon, and teaching Gods Word, the
more chance there is that hes cor-rect in his
interpretation this is obvi-ously why God
expects respect in har-mony with ones amount of
spiritual exercise (cf. 1 The. 512-13).
47
Therefore, leaving the discussion of the
elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
per-fection, not laying again the founda-tion of
Hebrews 61a ?
48
At this verse Paul began to ease back into the
subject of Jesus being of the priesthood order of
Melchizedek but it would take him the rest of
chapter 6 to do this. Firstly ?
Therefore, leaving the discussion of the
elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
per-fection, not laying again the founda-tion of
49
I think its important to point out here that
when Paul used the phrase let us, he didnt
usually mean to include himselfit was (and is)
merely a tactful way to mo-tivate people.
Therefore, leaving the discussion of the
elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
per-fection, not laying again the founda-tion of
50
I mention this here because this phrase applies
to both the leaving and the go-ing on clauses.
So
Therefore, leaving the discussion of the
elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
per-fection, not laying again the founda-tion of
51
Paul was saying, Let us leave the discus-sion of
the element-ary (lit. first) princi-ples of
Christ. And
Therefore, leaving the discussion of the
elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
per-fection, not laying again the founda-tion of
52
Where were (and are) these teachings found again?
Rightin the Old Testa-ment, beginning as far
back as Genesis 315, in fact. However, in this
context Paul may have been more specifically
referring to the very things he had been talking
about up to this pointthe Old Testament types
and shadows found in the Aaronic priesthood with
its sacrifices and offerings. Then he went
on to say ? ? ?
53
The word perfection here comes from a term
referring to an end, thus pointing to the end ,
the pur-pose, the consum-mation, or the
ful-fillment of the OT types, shadows, and
prophecies.
Therefore, leaving the discussion of the
elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
per-fection, not laying again the founda-tion of
54
Going on to perfection meant leaving the Aaronic
priesthood behind (not just in conversation here,
but totally) and ac-cepting the Melchizedekian
(eternal) priesthood of Jesus which required the
absolution of the old law (cf. 712). See, since
Melchizedek lived before Moses, Christs
priesthood wasnt meant to carry on the old law,
but to supersede it.
55
This clause is pas-sive, meaning let us be
carried on to this perfectionthis end i.e., it
was coming whether they were ready or not.
Therefore, leaving the discussion of the
elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to
per-fection, not laying again the founda-tion of
56
Their wilderness wandering, their tran-sition
phase, their forty-year grace period was very
near its end! When speaking of Jerusalems
destruction in AD 70, Jesus said, These are the
days of vengeance that all things which are
written may be fulfilled (Luke 2122). The thing
is, these brethren, instead of going backwards,
needed all-the-more to start seriously pressing
toward and thinking about their future in
relation to their present state. Now ? ? ?
57
Lets briefly consider the six subjects Paul
listed in verses 1b-2, keeping two things in
mind 1. They were being pressured to return
to Judaism (the Scriptures of which they
had). And 2. They didnt have much of the New
Testament for their Christianity.
The result was that ? ? ?
58
They were dwelling on what little they knew,
apparently not trying to grow by utilizing
whatever resources and sources of new information
they had such as asking questions of the
apos-tles or others, even after 30 years!
59
repentance from dead works and faith toward God,
of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of
hands, and of resurrec-tion from the dead and
of eternal judgment.
Hebrews 61b-2 ?
60
repentance from dead works and faith toward God,
of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of
hands, and of resurrec-tion from the dead and
of eternal judgment.
Firstly its probab-ly worth mention- ing that
Paul wrote these 6 topics in 3 sets of 2 as can
be seen in his use of the coordinating
conjunction and.
61
So for brevitys sake, Im going to just con-
cisely paraphrase what I believe Paul was saying
here ?
repentance from dead works and faith toward God,
of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of
hands, and of resurrec-tion from the dead and
of eternal judgment.
62
Yes, studying, believing, and discuss-ing the
fact that men must turn from evil deeds that lead
to death toward faith in God that leads to life
is indeed good old first testament teaching
that's brought to its fullness in the second
testament, but let's move on. And ?
63
Yes, studying, believing, and discuss- ing how
the various ceremonial cleans- ings and laying
hands on the sin-sacri-fices beautifully picture
our forgive-ness and cleansing is indeed good old
first testament teaching that's brought to its
fullness in the second testament, but again let's
move on. And ? ?
64
Yes, studying, believing, and discuss-ing the
wonders of resurrection and the terrors of
eternal judgment is in-deed good old first
testament teaching that's brought to its fullness
in the second testament, but let's move on!
Yes, lets move on. ? ? ?
65
And this we will do if God permits.
Hebrews 63 ?
66
And this we will do if God permits.
Since (as will become more clear in our study of
64-12), the hearts of these brethren could be
too far gone already, Paul, by this statement,
hinted at the possi-bility that Gods na-ture may
not permit the desired conse-quence of this
teach-ing. See ? ? ?
67
Because God created man with free-will, He will
not, yea cannot, violate it i.e., the choice had
to be made by these brethren between going back
to the first testament or on deeper into the
second testamentthe purpose of the first
testament. If these brethren persisted in their
course (a course that was implied in 37-8 when
Paul warned against the harden-ed heart) this
letter would do them no good what the result of
this letter was, we cant know, but we should be
ex-tremely thankful for the good it does for us
today.