Ebrei 5:8 Commento

In this chapter the apostle continues his discourse upon the priesthood of Christ, a sweet subject, which he would not too soon dismiss. And here, I. He explains the nature of the priestly office in general (Heb 5:1-3). II. The proper and regular call there must be to this office (Heb 5:4-6). III. The requisite qualifications for the work (Heb 5:7-9). IV. The peculiar order of the priesthood of Christ; it was not after the order of Aaron, but of Melchisedec (Heb 5:6, Heb 5:7, Heb 5:10). V. He reproves the Hebrews, that they had not made those improvements in knowledge which might have made them capable of looking into the more abstruse and mysterious parts of scripture (Heb 5:11-14).

INTRODUCTION TO HEBREWS 5 The apostle having made mention of Christ as an high priest, in the preceding chapter, proceeds in this to give an account of an high priest, and applies the character of him to Christ; and shows that he is of another order of priesthood than that of Aaron, even of the order of Melchisedec; of whom he could say many things, but the Hebrews were dull of hearing them; which leads him to blame them for their rudeness, and non-proficience. The description of the high priest is taken from his relation to men, separation from them, and ordination for them; from his oblation of their gifts and sacrifices; from his sympathy with them, and from his call of God, Heb 5:1 all which are accommodated to Christ; as his vocation of God, Heb 5:5 confirmed by two testimonies out of Psa 2:7 his being a man, and having infirmities, though sinless ones, and his sympathy with men, and compassion on them, Heb 5:7 his obedience and sufferings, and the oblation of himself, whereby he became the author of salvation to his people, which is the main thing in his priesthood, Heb 5:8 and which was not of the order of Aaron, though in some things there was an agreement with it, but of the order of Melchizedek, Heb 5:10 of whom the apostle could say many surprising things; but these Hebrews were dull of apprehension, and incapable of receiving them, Heb 5:11. And then he proceeds to blame them for their dulness, which he aggravates by the time they had been in the school of Christ, when it might have been expected they would have been teachers of others; by their being yet scholars, and of the lowest class, who had need to be taught the first rudiments of the Christian religion; yea, by their being as babes that stood in need of milk, and could not bear meat, Heb 5:12. And then follows a description both of babes, and of adult persons; such as are unskilful in the word of righteousness are babes, and use milk; but those who exercise their spiritual senses, to discern between good and bad doctrine, are adult, and can digest strong meat, Heb 5:13.

Though he were a Son,.... The Son of God, as the Vulgate Latin version reads; not by creation, nor by adoption, nor by office, but by nature, being the only begotten of the Father, having the same nature and perfections with him: yet learned he obedience; not to his parents, or civil magistrates, though that is true; nor merely to the precepts of the law, which he did; but unto death: through sufferings he became obedient to death, even the death of the cross: and this he learnt; not that he was ignorant of the nature of it; nor was he destitute of an obedient disposition to it; but the meaning is, he had an experience of it, and effected it; and which was voluntary, and done in our room and stead; and is the rule and the measure of our righteousness before God: and this he learned, by the things which he suffered; from men, from devils, and from the justice of God. Christ's sonship did not exempt him from obedience and sufferings; this shows the dignity of Christ's person, that he is the Son of God, not as Mediator, for as such he is a servant; and it would be no wonder that he should learn obedience as a servant; and this shows also the great humility and condescension of Christ in obeying and suffering for us; though so great a person; and likewise the vile nature of sin, and the strictness of divine justice: and we may learn from hence, not to expect to be exempted from sufferings on account of sonship; nor to conclude we are not sons, because we suffer; and that afflictions are instructive, and by them experience is learned.

And this species of the divine patience indeed being, as it were, at a distance, may perhaps be esteemed as among "things too high for us; " but what is that which, in a certain way, has been grasped by hand among men openly on the earth? God suffers Himself to be conceived in a mother's womb, and awaits the time for birth; and, when born, bears the delay of growing up; and, when grown up, is not eager to be recognised, but is furthermore contumelious to Himself, and is baptized by His own servant; and repels with words alone the assaults of the tempter; while from being" Lord" He becomes" Master," teaching man to escape death, having been trained to the exercise of the absolute forbearance of offended patience. He did not strive; He did not cry aloud; nor did any hear His voice in the streets.

Jesus’ prayers were granted, but how were his prayers granted if he had demanded to be delivered from death? To be sure, he was not saved. He wanted to fulfill in himself the will of the Father. And for this reason it was evident that he was the Son of God, because in behalf of human creatures he exposed his own soul for the rest of the soul of the one who sent him, and his obedience was made evident by the hands of those who crucified him. If, therefore, the crucifiers testify that his prayers were granted, if it is so, I say, he certainly wanted to die, and he demanded that the will of his Father was fulfilled. He offered supplications with loud claims to the one who was able to save him from death; he who was about to die did not ask for delivery from death nor demand to be resurrected after his death because this had been promised to him earlier, but he prayed for his crucifiers lest they might die in him. And his prayers were granted, because the door was opened so that his crucifiers might live in him. And the one who did these things, that is, the one who abased himself to such humility and suffering for his murderers is the Son of God; and from this it was evident that he was satisfied in those sufferings which he endured. In fact, some of his murderers were converted, and through their repentance they were the heralds of his resurrection.

Connected with this general view are the facts that he "learned obedience through what he suffered," his "loud cries and tears," the fact that he "offered up prayers," that he "was heard" and he was "God-fearing." These things are marvelously constructed drama dealing with us. As Word, he was neither obedient nor disobedient—the terms apply to amenable subordinates or inferiors who deserve punishment. But as the "form of a servant" he comes down to the same level as his fellow servants; receiving an alien "form," he bears the whole of me, along with all that is mine, in himself, so that he may consume within himself the meaner element, as fire consumes wax or the sun ground mist, and so that I may share in what is his through the intermingling.

"He learned," he saith, to obey God. Here again he shows how great is the gain of sufferings. "And having been made perfect," he says, "He became the Author of salvation to them that obey Him." But if He, being the Son, gained obedience from His sufferings, much more shall we. Dost thou see how many things he discourses about obedience, that they might be persuaded to it? For it seems to me that they would not be restrained. "From the things," he says, "which He suffered He" continually "learned" to obey God. And being "made perfect" through sufferings. This then is perfection, and by this means must we arrive at perfection. For not only was He Himself saved, but became to others also an abundant supply of salvation. For "being made perfect He became the Author of salvation to them that obey Him."

It was not while bare and not participating in the limits of his emptying that God the Word became our model, but “in the days of his flesh.” Then, quite legitimately, he could employ human limits and pray insistently and shed tears and even appear somehow to need a savior and learn obedience, though a Son. The inspired author is, so to speak, stupefied by the mystery that the Son, existing by nature truly and endowed with the glories of divinity, should so abase himself that he endured the low estate of our impoverished humanity. But this was for us, as I have said, a fine and useful example.

For he gave voice to a strong cry and supplication when he became like us; and he was heard because he did not disobey, since by nature he was truly Son.

"Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered." Therefore, he says, He was so obedient (and He obeyed as is fitting for a Son to the Father) that after He was incarnate, He even endured the cross to death. "And He learned from what He suffered." He indeed says, What is death, being God? For what has God not known? But also from what he suffered, he learned. Not only, he says, as he was God, but also as he was man, having experienced death. In another way.

Two things are sought here, one, how it is said that he was heard, and yet he himself needed to pass by death, but he did not pass by. For he was indeed crucified and died. Secondly, from what kind of reverence does he say he was heard? And thirdly, although being the Son, to whom is he to be joined? To the one who was heard from reverence, or to those that follow, so that he may learn obedience from what he suffered, although being the Son. For there is not a small difference between these. As for the first, it is clear that the request was not one, but a certain double one: one rejecting death, the other requesting it. For he also says in the same prayer and supplication: "But let not my will be done, but yours." (Luke 22:42) And to clarify this more clearly, John says that the Son asks, saying, "Father, glorify Your Son, that Your Son may also glorify You," (Jn. 17:1) referring to the glory of the cross and death as he indicates. Thus, the divine Paul rightly says, "He was heard." And this, from reverence, has come close to what has been said about being made clear. For we have mentioned two requests, one for the avoidance of death, the other for the acceptance of what was truly a matter of great reverence; "But not my will, but Yours." (Luke 22:42) Therefore, Christ was heard, not from the avoidance, but from the reverence, that is, that request of His came forth, not according to the avoidance, but according to the reverence. For this reason, he says, and having been made perfect, that is, having been fully recognized through sufferings and the cross and death, he is exceedingly good and generous. This was also indicated above; speaking of prayers and supplications, he hinted at the duality of the request. Then, having spoken of prayers and supplications, he did not bring about the passing of death, but rather, towards the one who was able to save him from death, adding this well and wisely, so that when you contemplate him being crucified and buried, you should not think that he was held back by the power of the Father, but that it was a common will for Christ to suffer these things for the salvation of the world. This can also be said in relation to the resurrection. For in many places, the divine Paul, speaking, says that the Father raised Christ. Therefore, having raised him, he delivered him from death and saved him. But thus, in my opinion, these things are. As for the statement, "Although he was a Son," if anyone were to take it in an extraordinary way (for the use of this is infinite to the divine Paul), the thought would be naturally advanced as follows: that in the days of his flesh, although he was a Son, he offered prayers and supplications, and moreover, that is, though having the greatest privilege as a Son, to do all things without supplication and request by the sovereign will, as the Father does, nevertheless, since he was in the days of the flesh, he offered prayers and supplications. It can also be accordingly connected with, "and he was heard because of his reverent submission," as if he were saying, "He was heard," although he was a Son, and did not need to be heard, having a will in harmony with the Father's will, and being fulfilled without any request. If you connect it with what follows, the mind will benefit. But first, what does it mean to consider that He learned obedience from what He suffered? For He learned to obey the Father from what He suffered, and through experience, He gained knowledge of being subject to Him; or rather, He learned through experience the extent of obedience, how much He obeyed the Father, such as being crucified and dying, and rising again, and lifting up the human nature at the right hand of the Father, and saving humanity? For these things are from that obedience which was generated in saying, "Father, glorify Your Son." (Jn. 17:1) For this obedience, however great and however much, before obeying the Father, Christ knew as Son and God, just as the Father did; and having been heard, He learned it through what He suffered and experienced. Therefore, as someone might grasp, my second interpretation seems more likely. Thus, it has no uncertainty in saying, "Although He was a Son."

Now as far as the phrase "although being a Son" is concerned, if someone should understand it as a transposition—and such a trope is uncustomary for the excellent apostle—the natural reading of the passage would be something like this: "Who in the days of his flesh, although being a Son, made petitions and supplications," etc. That is, although having the very great advantage of being a Son, which enabled him to do all things by his own autocratic opinion without any petition or request, even as the Father does, nonetheless, since he was in the days of the flesh, he offered petitions and supplications. And according to this understanding it can also be understood how the phrase was soon joined to "and being heard because of his godliness," inasmuch as he says that he was heard, although being a Son, and not asking to be heard, inasmuch as he made his will concurrent to his Father's will and it was fulfilled without any petition. But if you conjoin this clause with what follows, the understanding will also be guided in the right way in the manner that I will show. But first we ought to examine the meaning of the clause "he learned obedience from the things which he suffered." It really cannot be that he himself learned from the things he suffered to obey his Father and that by testing he acquired knowledge of how to obey him, can it? Or is it not rather that by testing he learned such was the greatness of the obedience, with which the Father hearkened to him, in that he was crucified and died and rose and exalted the human race to be at the right hand of the Father and to save our race? For these sort of things pertain to that obedience which took place when he said, "Father, glorify your Son." Christ, being the Son and God just as much as the Father, already knew this obedience and how great it was, even before he rendered obedience to the Father, but "having been heard" he learned it through the things he suffered and through the testing he underwent. Then, however one wishes to understand it—although to me the second way of understanding seems particularly well suited—the phrase "although being a Son" presents no difficulty.

He became accustomed, he says, to obeying God the Father, having learned this through sufferings. What is said here seems simply incredible. For how did He learn obedience through sufferings, He Who before His sufferings was so obedient to the Father that He accepted the sufferings themselves as a result of obedience? For, he says, He "became obedient even unto death" (Phil. 2:8). So understand that, since they, being fainthearted, proved disobedient, he speaks in a lowly manner about the Son of God, so that by this condition of His he might persuade them to submit and show obedience to the will of God, and so that they would not lose heart in misfortunes, but would await help from above. For, he says, the Son too, having endured suffering out of obedience, was heard by the Father, and His soul was delivered from death. And from that time He continually learned to obey God, since obedience has great power. Therefore, if He benefited from sufferings, how much more can you benefit. Do you see how the Apostle Paul, for the benefit of his listeners, went so far as to say what might seem something unfitting? But listen further.

258. – Having listed three things which pertain to a high priest and showed that two of them were verified, namely, the office and the proper way of attaining it, the Apostle now considers the third thing which a high priest should have, namely, mercy and compassion. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows what He suffered; secondly, what benefits accrued even to others (v. 9). 259. – He says, therefore: I have stated that a high priest should be such as to be able to have compassion. But Christ is such a high priest. For since He is the Son of God from all eternity, and, therefore, could not suffer or have compassion, He assumed a nature in which He would suffer and even have compassion. And this is what He says, namely, although he was a Son from all eternity, He learned obedience from time. But only the ignorant can learn; whereas Christ, being God from all eternity, had fullness of knowledge from the very instant of His conception as man. Therefore, He was not ignorant of anything; consequently, He could not learn. I answer that knowledge is of two sorts: the first is that of simple recognition, according to which the objection is valid, because He was not ignorant of anything. But there is also the knowledge gained by experience, according to which He learned obedience; hence, he says, He learned obedience through what he suffered, i.e., experienced. And the Apostle speaks thus, because one who learns something comes voluntarily to learn it. But Christ accepted our weakness voluntarily; consequently, he says that 'he learned obedience', i.e., how difficult it is to obey, because He obeyed in the most difficult matters, even to the death of the cross (Phil. 2:8). This shows how difficult the good of obedience is, because those who have not experienced obedience and have not learned it in difficult matters, believe that obedience is very easy. But in order to know what obedience is, one must learn to obey in difficult matters, and one who has not learned to subject himself by obeying does not know how to rule others well. Therefore, although Christ knew by simple recognition what obedience is, He nevertheless learned obedience from the things He suffered, i.e., from difficult things, by suffering and dying: 'By the obedience of one many shall be made just' (Rom. 5:19).

The nature of the high priesthood of Christ; his pre-eminence, qualifications, and order, Heb 5:1-10. Imperfect state of the believing Hebrews, and the necessity of spiritual improvement, Heb 5:11-14.

Though he were a Son - See the whole of the preceding note.

CHRIST'S HIGH PRIESTHOOD; NEEDED QUALIFICATIONS; MUST BE A MAN; MUST NOT HAVE ASSUMED THE DIGNITY HIMSELF, BUT HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY GOD; THEIR LOW SPIRITUAL PERCEPTIONS A BAR TO PAUL'S SAYING ALL HE MIGHT ON CHRIST'S MELCHISEDEC-LIKE PRIESTHOOD. (Heb 5:1-14) For--substantiating Heb 4:15. every--that is, every legitimate high priest; for instance, the Levitical, as he is addressing Hebrews, among whom the Levitical priesthood was established as the legitimate one. Whatever, reasons Paul, is excellent in the Levitical priests, is also in Christ, and besides excellencies which are not in the Levitical priests. taken from among men--not from among angels, who could not have a fellow feeling with us men. This qualification Christ has, as being, like the Levitical priest, a man (Heb 2:14, Heb 2:16). Being "from men," He can be "for (that is, in behalf of, for the good of) men." ordained--Greek, "constituted," "appointed." both gifts--to be joined with "for sins," as "sacrifices" is (the "both . . . and" requires this); therefore not the Hebrew, "mincha," "unbloody offerings," but animal whole burnt offerings, spontaneously given. "Sacrifices" are the animal sacrifices due according to the legal ordinance [ESTIUS].

Though He WAS (so it ought to be translated: a positive admitted fact: not a mere supposition as were would imply) God's divine Son (whence, even in His agony, He so lovingly and often cried, Father, Mat 26:39), yet He learned His (so the Greek) obedience, not from His Sonship, but from His sufferings. As the Son, He was always obedient to the Father's will; but the special obedience needed to qualify Him as our High Priest, He learned experimentally in practical suffering. Compare Phi 2:6-8, "equal with God, but . . . took upon Him the form of a servant, and became obedient unto death," &c. He was obedient already before His passion, but He stooped to a still more humiliating and trying form of obedience then. The Greek adage is, "Pathemata mathemata," "sufferings, disciplinings." Praying and obeying, as in Christ's case, ought to go hand in hand.