Bible Commentaries
Hebrews 3

Verses 1-6

THE GOSPEL CALL TO BECOME GOD’S HOUSE

Hebrews 3:1 to Hebrews 4:16

The Son’s Faithfulness Over God’s House (3:1-6)

Worship of God requires a house of worship. The author therefore now introduces us to the thought that God through Jesus Christ calls unto himself the people who shall constitute such a living house of worship. This call is a "heavenly" one; that is to say, it has a divine origin (vs. 1 ) , "heaven" often appearing in the contemporary Judaism as a substitute for the name of God himself. The Christian readers who have experienced this call are now called "holy," that is, consecrated or dedicated to the service of God.

The author wishes to stress the faithful character of Jesus Christ, through whom the call comes to man to become God’s house. The latter part of verse 1 might well be translated: "Will you give your attention to the one sent to be High Priest (as we confess him to be), that is, to Jesus?" This is the second time that the historical name "Jesus" has been mentioned by the author (see 2:9), and in both cases it is in connection with the incarnate life and ministry and designated service which Jesus has performed on behalf of man. Nowhere else in the New Testament is Jesus called "apostle." The English word is a slight modification of the Greek, and both together have behind them a Hebrew term employed only of a special messenger who carries with him the full authority of the one sending. Jesus, accordingly, as High Priest comes to us with all the authority of God himself, and the author’s present point is that he has proved "faithful" in his exercise of this authority (vs. 2).

Moses, too, was one sent upon a special mission by God, and he was faithful in fulfilling the service appointed to him; but by comparison with Christ’s function that of Moses was a menial one, as is shown by the word "servant" (vs. 5) employed in Numbers 12:7, which our author is quoting here. The choice of Moses in this connection for purposes of comparison is the obvious one, since it was through Moses as leader that God constituted Israel as his people at the Exodus. On the occasion of the choice of a new promised land God has chosen Moses’ opposite — Jesus Christ. But here the comparison ends, for whereas Moses was merely a "servant," Jesus Christ is "a son" (vs. 6) , through whom as God’s Mediator all things are accomplished (see 1:2). Jesus Christ is the Creator, or as is said here, "the builder of a [the] house" (vs. 3). The builder is, of course, God himself (vs. 4), but the author in his thinking has long since brought Christ into union with God as Son (vs. 6; see Hebrews 1:1-4).

The contrast between the two figures runs throughout this section. Both are pronounced faithful in their several spheres of service, but Moses is to be kept in his place. He was faithful, but as a servant only; Christ is also faithful, but "as a son." Moses was faithful "in God’s house"; Christ is faithful "over God’s house." This contrast between Moses and Jesus Christ is clearly indicative of the temptation to which the readers of this letter are exposed. It has to do without doubt with the character of the revelation represented on the one hand and the other by Moses and Jesus Christ. As clearly as in the letters of Paul, Moses here stands for Law, Christ for grace. Paul, it is true, was interested primarily in the ethical side of the Law, whereas Hebrews’ main interest lies in the ritual side. But this is probably because of the particular nature of the problem presented by the readers of Hebrews, for there can be no doubt that they were being attracted by the claims of the Qumran sect to represent the "people of the covenant" under Moses (see Introduction). For the moment, by way of reply to this the author contents himself with the remark that Moses’ highest function was "to testify to the things that were to be spoken later," that is, to those things which characterized the saving activity of Jesus Christ as great High Priest (vs. 5). Moses was, therefore, to be superseded by God’s "son."

Verses 6-15

The Thrice-Repeated Gospel Call (3:6-4:16)

Urgency of the Call and Steadfastness Required (3:6-15)

If faithfulness was required of the Son, it is also required of the "sons." This generally is the main theme of the sections which follow in chapters 3 and 4, in which the author in an almost inextricable fashion mixes instruction and exhortation.

He begins with the assurance that Christians are "God’s house" provided they fulfill certain conditions. There is a remarkable underlying sense of the unity between the Hebrew people and the Christian Church at this point which must not be overlooked. Both Moses and Christ had been said above to have been faithful with reference to "God’s house" (vss. 5-6). It is startling, immediately following that discussion, to read that Christians are this house, that is, they are the people of God (vs. 6b; see also Ephesians 2:19; Ephesians 2:22). Underlying this contention is clearly the idea that God has been for centuries calling out a people for himself. Accordingly, it should be clear that the "call" is for the people who hear it, whether Jews or Christians; that the required response to the call is one of faith or faithfulness; and that the resultant people responding to this call are one. In the sections which follow, the unity of the call and of its essential message, or gospel, is to prove one of its most notable features.

The "hope" (vs. 6b) in which Christians are to find "confidence" and "pride" is of an eschatological nature (6:18-20), which is to say that essentially it refers to the completion and acceptance of Christ’s saving work by God in the eternal order.

The author, as is his custom, bases his entire argument in this section upon a passage from the Old Testament, Psalms 95:7-11. This Psalm was one regularly employed in the synagogue in connection with worship on the Sabbath (the Hebrew word meaning "rest"). This was appropriate in view of the Psalm’s stress upon the subject of "rest" and the possibility of God’s people entering with him into "rest." It serves the author’s purpose admirably also inasmuch as "sabbath" or "rest" was one of the terms employed by the Jews for "salvation." Moreover, the Psalm with its reference to the wandering in the wilderness under the leadership of Moses lent itself to a comparison of the two faithfulnesses here involved — that of the leaders, Moses and Christ, on the one hand, and that of the people of God on the other.

The original events referred to in the Psalm are those involving the murmuring of the people of Israel when confronted with lack of food and proper drinking water in the wilderness (Exodus 15:23-24; Exodus 17:7; Numbers 20:2-5). The Psalm also illustrates the note of urgency that is struck whenever God’s voice is heard, in view of the striking manner in which the quotation begins — "Today." "But exhort one another every day," says our author, "as long as it is called ’today’ " (vs. 13). The urgency of the call arises in every case out of two factors — first, God speaks to each generation calling it to himself; second, the response is required on the day on which it is heard. Moreover, in this and the following sections the responsibility of man for response to the divine call is emphasized throughout. If men do not respond, it is because they harden their hearts against God’s call; it is because they test and : . try him; it is because they "always go astray in their hearts"; it is because they have not known God’s ways (vs. 10). God holds every generation accountable for such failure. The source of such an attitude is "an evil, unbelieving heart," and its end is to "fall away from the living God" (vs. 12).

On the other hand, the promise is held out that we shall "share in Christ," or become partakers or fellows with him, in the privileges which are his as Son over God’s house, provided "we hold our first confidence firm to the end" (vs. 14). God demands steadfastness, confidence, assurance, and faithfulness of his people at all times.

Verses 16-19

Failure of Israel at the First Call (3:16-19)

On at least three occasions the divine "call" has been given to man to become God’s people. The first of these is that referred to in the Psalm which has just been quoted. The people involved are the Israelites, and the occasion is the Exodus from Egypt (vs. 16). The author’s major concern here is to place the blame for Israel’s failure to receive the promised "rest" squarely where it belongs, namely, upon Israel and her sin. He advances from stage to stage in his argument by means of question and answer. His argument may be stated in positive fashion as follows: (1) there need be no question about God’s first call having been heard; Scripture makes it clear that those involved both heard and rebelled against the call (vs. 16a); (2) the group concerned included the entire Israelitish people who came up out of Egypt under Moses (vs. 16b); (3) for forty years God was provoked by their clear attitude of rebellion (vs. 17a) ; (4) their "bodies fell in the wilderness" on account of their sin (vs. 17b); (5) God properly punished their disobedience, swearing that that generation "should never enter his rest" (vs. 18); (6) it is clear, therefore, that the generation concerned were properly punished on account of their "unbelief (vs, 19).

Openness of the Promise Shown by the Second Call (4:1-10)

The argument now shows that the promised "rest" is still available for the people of God. This conclusion is drawn in 4:9: "So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God." The passage begins as a hortatory section — "let us fear lest any of you be judged to have failed to reach" God’s rest (vs. 1). On the whole, however, it is a doctrinal section, and this also appears in verse 1 ("while the promise of entering his rest remains"). There is obviously here the underlying assumption that, when God gives a promise, it is bound to be fulfilled at some time or other. If this does not occur in the lifetime of the immediate generation to which the promise is spoken, then it remains open to be received by some future generation. In this expectation is seen a sense of continuity between the Old and New Covenants like that to which reference has already been made in previous sections (Hebrews 1:1-4; Hebrews 3:1-6).

This assumption has ground in the Psalm (Psalms 95) which is employed here. In fact, the author sees in the repetition of the call in the Psalm a clear indication that the promise is still available to the people of God. Fundamentally, to say that the promise remains open until it is fulfilled is to say that God is the "living" God (vs. 12) and that he is "faithful," faithful to fulfill his promises (Hebrews 10:23; Hebrews 11:11).

The generation to which the author writes represents a third occasion on which the promise is opened to man. There are thus three stages in the presentation of the promise, as follows: first, to the Moses-Joshua generation (Hebrews 3:16; Hebrews 4:8), second, to the generation of those to whom the Psalm was addressed (Hebrews 3:7; Hebrews 4:7), and third, to the Christian community (Hebrews 4:2; Hebrews 4:9; Hebrews 4:11).

In view of the nature of the argument here, a more definitive phrase than "good news" for the contents of the promise is required (vs. 2). Actually, the Greek at this point reads, "for we also have been evangelized even as they." The verb ("evangelized") has a long history behind it in both Hebrew and Greek, and long before the Christian era it had acquired a technical connotation, being applied specifically to the preaching of the message of God’s redemptive activity on behalf of man. This meaning of the verb is found in its final Old Testament development in Second Isaiah in such a passage as 52:7. It is easy to see that the "good tidings" there (that "God reigns") becomes in Matthew 4:23 "the gospel of the kingdom" and in Luke 4:18 the "good news to the poor." Then, too, the very nature of the argument in Hebrews that the promise remains open requires that the "good news" announced on each occasion shall be essentially the same. Otherwise the argument has no validity.

It is invalid to object to such reasoning on the ground that the promise formerly given through Moses and Joshua had to do with the acquisition of a land, whereas the promise through Christ refers to eternal salvation. Such a compartmentalizing of human experience is foreign to the thought of Scripture, where there is rather a sense of the oneness of life and experience as a whole. God is interested in and concerned about the salvation of that whole. Accordingly, in the Scriptures, God’s promise to save man in any part of his being involves his being saved in every part. The author, therefore, sees no incongruity in conceiving of the promise through Moses and Joshua, through David, and through Jesus Christ as representing essentially the same gospel message of God’s redemptive love.

For much the same reason, perhaps we should accept the alternate reading given in the margin for the second half of verse 2, rather than that found in the text: "the message which they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united in faith with those who heard." The passage is as difficult to understand in the Greek as in the English, but the margin seems to have the best evidence in its favor. If adopted, it should be understood to refer to the fact that faith is the required normative response to the gospel promise, and that such faith unites in a great fellowship down the centuries those who receive the salvation offered in the gospel. The next verse would seem to support this view: "For we who have believed" enter into that fellowship and enjoy the common rest because we are "united in faith with those who heard" and accepted it.

Verses 3 and 4 elaborate the idea of God’s "rest" by drawing upon the Genesis account of the seven days of creation (Genesis 1). The seventh day of the creation week was the day of rest for God (Genesis 2:2) — God’s "sabbath." This period of rest may be thought of also as that salvation into which God calls men to enter with himself (vss. 4-5; see also Psalms 95:11). A word of warning should be sounded perhaps at this point, lest the idea that salvation involves enjoying the rest of God and that man "ceases from his labors as God did from his" (vs. 10) should be so interpreted as to suggest that in the future life Christians will have nothing whatever to do! Such an entire cessation of activity is nowhere taught in Scripture with regard to either God or man. In Jewish thought, "sabbath" stood for serenity, peace, and harmonious enjoyment of the works of creation on the part of both God and man. For the Jew the Sabbath has always been a day of joyful experience of all the good things that God has made. Fasting and mourning on this day are forbidden by rabbinic law. It is a day for luxurious living, for calling in one’s friends to enjoy a meal, for dressing up in one’s best, and for expressing generally the delights of godly living. There can be no doubt, therefore, that when our author speaks of ceasing from labor, it is this sort of experience that he has in mind, contrasted with the fretting and anxiety attending the usual occupations of six days of the week.