Hebrews 2:11

In the eleventh verse the writer proceeds to explain wherein consisted the fittingness (τὸ πρέπον) of perfecting the ἀρχηγόν through sufferings. It lies in the fact that He and those He leads are brothers. In Hebrews 2:11-13 it is shown that this is so, and in the succeeding verses the writer points out what is involved in this brotherhood. ὁ ἁγιάζων and οἱ ἁγιαζόμενοι are to be taken as present participles, so usually are, in the timeless substantive sense. ἁγιάζειν means (1) to set apart as belonging to God, in contradistinction to κοινός, belonging to every one. So in Genesis 2:3, of the seventh day, and in Exodus of the mountain, the tent, the altar. It is especially used of persons set apart to the priesthood or to any special work (Exodus 30:30; Jeremiah 1:5; John 10:36). Through the O.T. ceremonial the whole people were thus ἡγιασμένοι, set apart to God, admitted to His worship. In this Epistle the word is used with much of the O.T. idea cleaving to it, and is often rather equivalent to what we understand by “justify” than to “sanctify”. Cf. Hebrews 10:10. It signifies that which enables men to approach God. But (2) it is in N.T. more and more felt that it is only by purification of character men can be set apart for God, so that this higher meaning also attaches to the word. In the present verse ἁγιάζων introduces the priestly idea, enlarged upon in Hebrews 2:17. ἐξ ἑνὸς πάντες “all of one”. There is much to be said for Calvin's interpretation “of one nature,” or Cappellus' “of one common mass”. Certainly Bleek's reason for rejecting such renderings that ἐξ can only signify origin, is incorrect. “Greek often uses the prepositions of origin (ἐκ, ἀπό) when we prefer those of position or direction, as in ἐξ ἀπροσδοκήτου, on a sudden, ἐξ ἀφανοῦς, in a doubt, ἐκ μιᾶς χειρός, with one hand” (Verrall on Choeph., line 70). In N.T. ἐκ frequently expresses the party or class to which one belongs (John 3:31). And cf. 1 Corinthians 10:17. It might be urged from Hebrews 11:12 that this writer had he meant parentage would have said ἀφʼ ἑνός. Nevertheless the meaning seems to be “of one father”. The πολλοὺς υἱοὺς of Hebrews 2:10, and the διʼ ἣν αἰτίαν which follows make for this sense. And the argument of Hebrews 2:14, that because Christ was brother to men He therefore took flesh, proves that ἐξ ἑνὸς cannot mean “of one nature'. The fact that He and they are ἐξ ἑνὸς is the ground of His incarnation. He was Son and Brother before appearing on earth. The words then can only mean that the “many sons” who are to be brought to glory and the “Son” who leads them are of one parentage. The sonship in both cases looks to the same Father, and depends on Him and is subject to the same laws of obedience and development. But what Father is meant? Not Adam (Beza, Hofmann, etc.); Weiss argues strongly for Abraham, appealing to Hebrews 2:16 and other considerations; but the fact that in Hebrews 2:14 the incarnation is treated as a result of the brotherhood, seems to involve that we must understand that God is meant; that before the incarnation Christ recognised His brotherhood. “On this account,” because His parentage is the same, “He is not ashamed to call them brothers”. He might have been expected to shrink from those who had so belied their high origin, or at the best to move among them with the kindly superior professionalism of a surgeon who enters the ward of an hospital solely to heal, not to live there; but He claims men as his kin and on this bases His action (cf. Hebrews 11:16).