Hebrews 13:7-16

The Hebrews are exhorted to keep in remembrance their former leaders, to abide steadfastly by their teaching, to rid themselves of the ideas of Judaism, to bear the shame attaching to the faith of Christ, to persevere in good works. Μνημονεύετε τῶν ἡγουμένων ὑμῶν … “Have in remembrance them who had the rule over you, especially as they are those who spoke to you the word of God”. μνημον. might be used, as in Hebrews 11:22 and Galatians 2:10, τῶν πτωχῶν μνημ., of keeping living persons in mind (and so Rendall) but what follows makes it more likely that it here refers to the past. These deceased leading men were the persons alluded to in Hebrews 2:3 and Hebrews 4:2, who first “spoke” the word of the gospel to the Hebrews and who were now no longer present. The word ἡγούμενοι, occurring also in Hebrews 13:17; Hebrews 13:24 and in Acts 15:22 (and cf. Sir 30:18, οἱ ἡγούμενοι ἐκκλησίας) is a general term for leading and influential men in whom some undefined authority was vested. Official status was not yet defined and official titles were not yet universal. The chief reason why they are to be held in remembrance is given in the clause under οἵτινες, “for they are they who”. But an additional reason is suggested in the following clause, ὧν ἀναθεωροῦντες … “whose faith imitate as you closely consider the issue of their manner of life”. ὧν follows ἀναστροφῆς. ἀναθεωρέω in Theophrastus and Diodorus Siculus is explicitly contrasted with the simple verb to denote a keener and more careful observation. We cannot therefore render, as naturally we might, “look back upon”. ἔκβασιν, in 1 Corinthians 10:18 has the meaning “escape”; but in Wis 2:17, as here, it denotes the end of life with a distinct reference to the manner of it, as illustrating the man's relation to God. The leading men among the Hebrew Christians had, whether by martyrdom (as Weiss, etc.) or not, sealed their teaching and exhibited a faith worthy of imitation. Hebrews 13:8 gives force both to Hebrews 13:7 and to Hebrews 13:9. Imitate their faith, for the object of faith has not changed nor passed away. Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ἐχθὲς.… “Jesus Christ yesterday and to-day is the same, yea and for ever.” ὁ αὐτὸς exactly as in Plutarch's Pericles, xv. 2, where in describing the influence of success upon Pericles it is said οὐκέθʼ ὁ αὐτὸς ἧν, he was no longer the same. ἐχθὲς is the proper Attic form, χθές the old Ionic, see Rutherford's New Phryn., 370. “Yesterday and to-day,” in the past and in the present Jesus Christ is the same, and He will never be different. Therefore, διδαχαῖς ποικίλαις καὶ ξέναις μὴ παραφέρεσθε. “Be not carried away by teachings various and unheard of, and foreign.” παραφερ. is used in Diodorus and Plutarch of being swept away by a river in flood; cf. παραρυῶμεν of Hebrews 2:1. The teachings against which the Hebrews are here warned are such constructions of Old Testament institutions and practises as tended to loosen their attachment to Christ as the sole mediator of the New Covenant. These teachings were “various,” inasmuch as they laid stress now on one aspect, now on another of the old economy [“bald in der Schriftgelehrsamkeit, bald in peinlicher Gesetzseserfüllung, bald im Opferkult, bald in den Opfermahlzeiten” (Weiss)]. They were ξέναι both as being novel and as being irreconcileable with pure Christian truth. καλὸν γὰρ χάριτι.… “For it is good that by grace the heart be confirmed, not by meats.” The present wavering unsatisfactory condition of the Hebrews is to be exchanged for one of confidence and steadfastness not by listening to teachings about meats which after all cannot nourish the heart, but by approaching the throne where grace reigns and from which it is dispensed, Hebrews 4:16. From the following verse (Hebrews 13:10) in which sacrificial food is expressly mentioned, it would appear that the reference in οὐ βρώμασιν is not to asceticism nor to the distinction of clean and unclean meats, but to sacrificial meals. These are condemned by experiment as useless, ἐν οἷς οὐκ ὠφελήθησαν … “which were of no avail to those who had recourse to them” (Moffatt). Cf. the ἀσθενὲς καὶ ἀνωφελές of Hebrews 7:18. Sacrificial meals are also shown to be irreconcileable (ξέναι) with the Christian approach to God, for our (the Christian) altar is one from which neither worshippers nor priests have any right to eat. The point he wishes to make is, that in connection with the Christian sacrifice there is no sacrificial meal. As in the case of the great sacrifice of the Day of Atonement the High Priest carried the blood into the Holy of Holies, while the carcase was not eaten but burned outside the camp; so the Christian altar is not one from which food is dispensed to priest and worshipper. οἱ τῇ σκηνῇ λατρεύοντες refers to the Christian worshippers. The figure introduced in θυσιαστήριον is continued in these words. To refer them to the O.T. priests is to shatter the argument. Literally the words mean “they who serve the tabernacle,” that is, the priests, cf. Hebrews 8:5. The peculiarity, he says, of our Christian sacrifice is that it is not eaten. Then follows in support of this statement an analogy from the O.T. ritual, ὧν γὰρ εἰσφέρεται ζώων.… “For the bodies of those animals, whose blood is brought into the holy place by the High Priest as an offering for sin, are burned outside the camp.” Cf. Leviticus 4:12; Leviticus 4:21. In conformity with this type (διὸ καὶ Ἰησοῦς) Jesus, that He by His own blood might purify the people from their sin, suffered outside the gate. “The burning of the victim was not intended to sublimate but to get rid of it. The body plays no part in the atoning act, and has in fact no significance after the blood has been drained from it. The life, and therefore the atoning energy, resides in the blood and in the blood alone. On the writer's scheme, then, no function is left for the body of Jesus. It is ‘through his own blood,' that he must ‘sanctify the people'. It is thus inevitable that while the writer fully recognises the fact of the Resurrection of Christ (Hebrews 13:20), he can assign no place to it in his argument or attach to it any theological significance” (Peake). The suffering ἔξω τῆς πύλης is equivalent to the αἰσχύνη of Hebrews 12:2; the ignominy of the malefactor's death was an essential element in the suffering. The utmost that man inflicts upon criminals he bore. He was made to feel that he was outcast and condemned. But it is this which wins all men to Him. τοίνυν ἐξερχώμεθα πρὸς αὐτὸν … “let us therefore go out to him outside the camp bearing his reproach”. Cf. Hebrews 11:26. Do not shrink from abandoning your old associations and being branded as outcasts and traitors and robbed of your privileges as Jews. This is the reproach of Christ, in bearing which you come nearer to Him. And the surrender of your privileges need not cost you too much regret, “for we have not here (on earth) an abiding city, but seek for that which is to be,” that which has the foundations, Hebrews 11:10, the heavenly Jerusalem, Hebrews 12:22. That which is spiritual and eternal satisfies the ambition and fills the heart. Cf. Mark 3:35; Philippians 3:20. The want of recognition and settlement on earth may therefore well be borne.