Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hebrews 12:6
For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
6. for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth ] This blessedness of being “trained by God” (“Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest O Lord, and teachest him out of thy law,” Psa 94:12) is found in many parts of Scripture. “As many as I love, I test ( ) and train” ( paideuo), Rev 3:19; Psa 119:75; Jas 1:12.
and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth ] The writer follows the reading of the LXX., by a slight change in the vowel-points, for “ even as a father to a son He is good to him.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth – This is also a quotation from Proverbs 3. It means that it is a universal rule that God sends trials on those whom he truly loves. It does not, of course, mean that he sends chastisement which is not deserved; or that he sends it for the mere purpose of inflicting pain. That cannot be. But it means that by his chastisements he shows that he has a paternal care for us. He does not treat us with neglect and unconcern, as a father often does his illegitimate child. The very fact that he corrects us shows that he has toward us a fathers feelings, and exercises toward us a paternal care. If he did not, he would let us go on without any attention, and leave us to pursue a course of sin that would involve us in ruin. To restrain and govern a child; to correct him when he errs, shows that there is a parental solicitude for him, and that he is not an outcast. And as there is in the life of every child of God something that deserves correction, it happens that it is universally true that whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.
And scourgeth every son whom he receiveth – Whom he receives or acknowledges as his child. This is not quoted literally from the Hebrew, but from the Septuagint. The Hebrew is, even as a father the son in whom he delighteth. The general sense of the passage is retained, as is often the case in the quotations from the Old Testament. The meaning is the same as in the former part of the verse, that every one who becomes a child of God is treated by him with that watchful care which shows that he sustains toward him the paternal relation.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 6. For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth] Here is the reason why we should neither neglect correction, nor faint under it: it is a proof of the fatherly love of God Almighty, and shows his most gracious designs towards us; from which we may be fully convinced that the affliction will prove the means of good to our souls, if we make a proper use of it.
And scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.] , . This is a quotation, literatim from the Septuagint, of Pr 3:12, of which place our version is: Even as the father the son in whom he delighteth. But, howsoever near this may appear to be the Hebrew, it bears scarcely any affinity to the apostle’s words. The Hebrew text is as follows: uchab eth-ben yirtseh. Now, may be a noun, compounded of the conjunction vau, “and,” the comparative particle ke, “as” or “like;” and ab, “a father:” or it may be the third person preterite kal of caab, “he spoiled, wasted, marred, ulcerated,” compounded with the conjunction vau, “and.” And in this sense the Septuagint most evidently understood it; and it is so understood by the Arabic; and both readings seem to be combined by the Syriac and Chaldee versions. And as to ratsah, one of its prime meanings is to accept, to receive graciously, to take into favour; the translation, therefore, of the Septuagint and apostle is perfectly consonant to the Hebrew text, and our version of Pr 3:12 is wrong.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth: for showeth this to be a suasory reason against fainting under Gods rebukes, and enforcing the foregoing duty: sheet whomsoever, son or daughter, every child, that God the Father choicely loveth, taketh into his bosom, tendereth as a parent doth a child, Eph 5:1, he nurtureth, instructs, corrects by his word and rod in its respective measure, for their spiritual profit and advantage, 1Co 11:32.
And scourgeth every son whom he receiveth: scourgeth noteth the highest degree of chastening, even with the sharpest and most smarting punishment, wherein God proceedeth with all and every son or child, not any excepted, whom he hath adopied and received into his bosom with complacency and delight, Heb 5:8; compare Pro 3:12; Mat 17:5; Rev 3:19, where, though the words do vary, yet the sense is one and the same; God correcting, as a Father, the son in whom he delighteth.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
6. (Re3:19.)
andGreek, “yeaand,” “and moreover”; bringing out an additionalcircumstance.
scourgethwhich drawsforth “blood” (Heb 12:4).
receivethaccepts.Takes to Himself as a son “in whom He delighteth“(Pr 3:12).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth,…. All men are not the objects of God’s love, only a special people, whom he has chosen in Christ; for whom he has given his Son, when they were sinners and enemies; whom he quickens and calls by his grace, justifies, pardons, and accepts in Christ; and whom he causes to love him; these he loves with an everlasting and unchangeable love, and in a free and sovereign way, without any regard to any motive or condition in them. Now these are chastened by him, and loved while they are chastened; their chastening is in love, as appears from the nature of God’s love to them, which changes not; from the nature of chastening itself; which is that of a father; from the divine supports granted under it; from the ends of it, which are, among others, that they might be more and more partakers of holiness, and not be condemned with the world; and from the issue of it, which is a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory. So the Jews p often speak of , “chastisements of love”, in distinction from evil “chastisement”, or vindictive ones:
and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth; by whom are meant, not any of the angels, nor all the sons of men, but such whom God has predestinated to the adoption of children, and in the covenant of his grace has declared himself a father to; for whom Christ has a special regard, as children, and therefore partook of human nature, and died to gather them together, and redeemed them, that they might receive the adoption of children; and who appear to be the children of God by faith in Christ; and who have the spirit of adoption, witnessing their sonship to them; this is a valuable blessing of grace, and springs from love: and such are received by God into his heart’s love and affection, with complacency and delight; and into the covenant of his grace, to share all the blessings and promises of it; and into his family, to enjoy all the privileges of his house, and into communion with himself; and they will be hereafter received by him into glory: now these he scourges; he suffers them sometimes to be scourged by men, and to be buffeted by Satan; and sometimes he scourges them himself with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men, but always in love.
p Zohar in Gen. fol. 39. 3. & 102. 4. & in Exod. fol. 98. 2. & 102. 2. & in Lev. fol. 19. 3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Scourgeth (). Present active indicative of , old verb from (whip). This is a hard lesson for God’s children to learn and to understand. See 5:7 about Jesus.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
He chasteneth [] . See on Luk 23:16.
Scourgeth [] . Not very common, but found in all the four Gospels. Hebrews only here. Quite often in LXX
Receiveth [] . Admits to filial privileges : acknowledges as his own. Of receiving the word of God, Mr 4:20 : of receiving delegates from a body, Act 14:4 : of adopting or approving customs, Act 16:21.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth,” (hon gar agapa kurios paideuei) “For those whom the Lord loves he disciplines,” like one disciplines, spanks, chastens, or corrects a child: if he truly loves the child; The chastening is declared by the Lord to be for the purpose of bringing his erring child to repentance, which means a change of attitude and conduct, from wrong to right, Jas 1:12; Rev 3:19; Repentance is required of any who turns aside from direct worship of God, immorality and worship of other gods of gold, silver, wood, etc. Rev 9:20-21.
2) “And scourgeth every son whom he receiveth,” (mastigoi de panta huion hon paradechetai) And he lashes, stripes, or scourges every heir or son that he receives or takes to his care; Even as, just as a father chastens his son to teach him obedience, honor, and up-rightness in character, Deu 8:5-6. As the father chastens his son while there is hope, before his son becomes fixed, set, or obstinate in stubbornness, disobedience and rebellion the father chastens him in hope of helping him to grow to maturity in honor, so does God chasten his children, each of them, Pro 19:18.
True love impartially ministers both food and medicine, praise and reproof, to those who need it.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
6. For whom the Lord loveth, etc. This seems not to be a wellfounded reason; for God visits the elect as well as the reprobate indiscriminately, and his scourges manifest his wrath oftener than his love; and so the Scripture speaks, and experience confirms. But yet it is no wonder that when the godly are addressed, the effect of chastisements which they feel, is alone referred to. For however severe and angry a judge God may show himself towards the reprobate, whenever he punishes them; yet he has no other end in view as to the elect, but to promote their salvation; it is a demonstration of his paternal love. Besides, the reprobate, as they know not that they are governed by God’s hand, for the most part think that afflictions come by chance. As when a perverse youth, leaving his father’s house, wanders far away and becomes exhausted with hunger, cold, and other evils, he indeed suffers a just punishment for his folly, and learns by his sufferings the benefit of being obedient and submissive to his father, but yet he does not acknowledge this as a paternal chastisement; so is the case with the ungodly, who having in a manner removed themselves from God and his family, do not understand that God’s hand reaches to them.
Let us then remember that the taste of God’s love towards us cannot be had by us under chastisements, except we be fully persuaded that they are fatherly scourges by which he chastises us for our sins. No such thing can occur to the minds of the reprobate, for they are like fugitives. It may also be added, that judgment must begin at God’s house; though, then, he may strike aliens and domestics alike, he yet so puts forth his hand as to the latter as to show that they are the objects of his peculiar care. But the previous one is the true solution, even that every one who knows and is persuaded that he is chastised by God, must immediately be led to this thought, that he is chastised because he is loved by God. For when the faithful see that God interposes in their punishment, they perceive a sure pledge of his love, for unless he loved them he would not be solicitous about their salvation. Hence the Apostle concludes that God is offered as a Father to all who endure correction. For they who kick like restive horses, or obstinately resist, do not belong to this class of men. In a word, then, he teaches us that God’s corrections are then only paternal, when we obediently submit to him. (248)
(248) See Appendix R 2.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(6) And scourgeth.As the words stand in our Hebrew text, the meaning is even as a father the son in whom he delighteth. A very slight change in one word, however, will yield the sense in which the clause was understood by the Greek translators, and which is here retained. For the purpose of this quotation the difference between the two renderings is not material.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
6. Loveth chasteneth Even the attacks of persecutors, though neither appointed nor approved by God, yet when they come are by him used as trials by which we, if rightly using them, are bettered, and prepared to reign with the Jesus with whom we suffer.
Receiveth Accepts and treats as his son.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Heb 12:6. For whom the Lord loveth, &c. There seems to be a beautiful gradation in these words: to receive, here signifies to have a particular regard for. Comp. Isa 42:1 in the LXX. and see Pro 3:11-12.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Heb 12:6 . ] him He chasteneth . So in the LXX. Cod. A, and fifteen other MSS. The remaining manuscripts of the LXX. have, what is probably the original reading: .
] and scourges every son whom He receives (adopts as His). According to present punctuation, the words in Hebrew read: , and (He chastens) as a father the son in whom he delights. Instead of , the LXX., however, read (to cause pain).
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
Ver. 6. For whom the Lord loves ] Whom he entirely loveth and cockereth above the rest of his children. That son in whom he is well pleased, saith Mercer onPro 3:12Pro 3:12 , whom he makes his white boy, saith Theophylact here. See my Love Tokens.
And scourgeth every son ] Lays upon them hard and heavy strokes. When Ignatius came to the wild beasts, Now, saith he, I begin to be a Christian. Omnis Christianus crucianus, saith Luther. And he hath not yet learned his A B C in Christianity, saith Bradford, that hath not learned the lesson of the cross. When Munster lay sick, and his friends asked him how he did, and how he felt himself, he pointed to his sores and ulcers (whereof he was full), and said, Hae sunt gemmae et pretiosa ornamenta Dei, & c., These are God’s gems and jewels wherewith he decketh his best friends, and to me they are more precious than all the gold and silver in the world. (Joh. Manl. loc. com.)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
6 .] for whom the Lord loveth, He chasteneth ( , LXX-B; [68] [69] have as text: in ref. Rev., both are combined, , ), yea, and (the throws out the new feature into a climax) scourgeth every son whom He receiveth (“In the Heb. this clause according to the present punctuation is , ‘and (that) as a father the son in whom he delighteth.’ The LXX, instead of , have expressed , the Pihel of ‘to feel pain,’ and have taken it as = ‘to cause pain,’ as the Hiphil occurs sometimes, e. g. Job 5:18 , of God’s chastisement of men. Certainly by this rendering the parallelism with the first hemistich, and the whole expression, gain in completeness, whereas according to the Masoretic punctuation there is an appearance of lameness about it.” Bleek: who thinks, as does Del., that the LXX have expressed better the sense of the Writer than the Masoretic punctuators. “For the translation of by , to scourge, to whip , instead of generally to punish , cf. Psa 32:10 ( Psa 31:10 ), for : and for the use of the Greek verb for divine chastisement (reff.), Tob 11:14 [ [70] [71] (not [72] )], . : Heb 13:2 ( Heb 13:25; Heb 13:9 ), . : Jdt 8:27 , .”
[68] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .
[69] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
[70] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 : as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50 , to , Joh 8:52 . It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria; it does not, however, in the Gospels , represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century .
[71] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle; it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as ‘Verc’): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are (1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as ‘Blc’); (2) that of Birch (‘Bch’), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798, Apocalypse, 1800, Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (‘Btly’), by the Abbate Mico, published in Ford’s Appendix to Woide’s edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus’ Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentley’s books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (‘Rl’), and are preserved amongst Bentley’s papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20) 1 . The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgon’s “Letters from Rome,” London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[72] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
, see reff., whom He takes to him as a veritable son, receives in his heart and cherishes).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
loveth. Greek. agapao. App-135. See Rev 3:19.
chasteneth Greek. paideuo. See 1Co 11:32.
scourgeth. Greek. mastigoo. See Joh 19:1.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
6.] for whom the Lord loveth, He chasteneth (, LXX-B; [68] [69] have as text: in ref. Rev., both are combined, , ), yea, and (the throws out the new feature into a climax) scourgeth every son whom He receiveth (In the Heb. this clause according to the present punctuation is , and (that) as a father the son in whom he delighteth. The LXX, instead of , have expressed , the Pihel of to feel pain, and have taken it as = to cause pain, as the Hiphil occurs sometimes, e. g. Job 5:18, of Gods chastisement of men. Certainly by this rendering the parallelism with the first hemistich, and the whole expression, gain in completeness, whereas according to the Masoretic punctuation there is an appearance of lameness about it. Bleek: who thinks, as does Del., that the LXX have expressed better the sense of the Writer than the Masoretic punctuators. For the translation of by , to scourge, to whip, instead of generally to punish, cf. Psa 32:10 (Psa 31:10), for : and for the use of the Greek verb for divine chastisement (reff.), Tob 11:14 [[70] [71] (not [72])], . : Heb 13:2 (Heb 13:25; Heb 13:9), . : Jdt 8:27, .
[68] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.
[69] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
[70] The MS. referred to by this symbol is that commonly called the Alexandrine, or CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. It once belonged to Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople, who in the year 1628 presented it to our King Charles I. It is now in the British Museum. It is on parchment in four volumes, of which three contain the Old, and one the New Testament, with the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. This fourth volume is exhibited open in a glass case. It will be seen by the letters in the inner margin of this edition, that the first 24 chapters of Matthew are wanting in it, its first leaf commencing , ch. Mat 25:6 :-as also the leaves containing , Joh 6:50,-to , Joh 8:52. It is generally agreed that it was written at Alexandria;-it does not, however, in the Gospels, represent that commonly known as the Alexandrine text, but approaches much more nearly to the Constantinopolitan, or generally received text. The New Testament, according to its text, was edited, in uncial types cast to imitate those of the MS., by Woide, London, 1786, the Old Testament by Baber, London, 1819: and its N.T. text has now been edited in common type by Mr. B. H. Cowper, London, 1861. The date of this MS. has been variously assigned, but it is now pretty generally agreed to be the fifth century.
[71] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle;-it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon;-nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as Verc): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are-(1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as Blc); (2) that of Birch (Bch), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798,-Apocalypse, 1800,-Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (Btly), by the Abbate Mico,-published in Fords Appendix to Woides edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentleys books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (Rl), and are preserved amongst Bentleys papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20)1. The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgons Letters from Rome, London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[72] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
, see reff., whom He takes to him as a veritable son, receives in his heart and cherishes).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Heb 12:6. , and moreover scourgeth) Heb. , and (supply the Lord , will chasten) as a father his son, whom He shall hold acceptable or pleasing to Him. The LXX. read , , and He scourges. The apostle retained it, although elsewhere it does not denote paternal chastisement. Blood is drawn by the lash, Heb 12:4. And he himself insinuates the meaning of the Hebrew reading in the following verses. It is the part of a prudent teacher, not openly to blame a version before a number, and yet to give a taste of the meaning of the originals to those who are ignorant.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
, .
The apostle, proceeding with the divine testimony unto his purpose recorded by Solomon, retaining the sense of the whole exactly, changeth the words in the latter clause. For instead of , and as a father the son in whom he delighteth,with whom he is pleased; he supplies , and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. In the Proverbs the words are exegetical of those foregoing, by an allusion unto an earthly parent: For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth, even as a father the son in whom he delighteth. In the apostle they are further explanatory of what was before affirmed; but the sense is the same. And the reason of the change seems to be, because the apostle would apply the name of son, from whence he argues, unto them principally intended, namely, the children of God; and not unto them who are occasionally mentioned in the allusion, which are the children of earthly parents. Or we may say, that the apostle makes this addition, confirming what was before spoken; seeing he fully explains the similitude of the latter clause in the original, in the following verses. However, the sense in both places is absolutely the same.
The Syriac in the latter clause reads , in the plural number, the sons; and in the last words retain the Hebraism, , in whom he willeth, from , that is, is well pleased.
There may be a double distinction in reading of the last clause. Some place the incisum, or note of distinction, at ; and then the sense is, He scourgeth every one, whom he receiveth or acknowledgeth as a son: some at , as we render it, every son whom he receiveth; which is the better reading.
Heb 12:6. For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
There is a reason given us in these words why we should not faint under divine chastisements, as the redditive conjunction for, signifies. And this reason consists in a general rule, whereby what is spoken before is confirmed as highly reasonable, and way is made for what ensues. And this rule is of that nature, as is suited to answer all objections against the doctrine of afflictions, and Gods dealing with us in them; which, when we come to the trial, we shall find to be many.
And this rule is, that all these things are to be referred unto the sovereignty, wisdom, and goodness of God. This,saith he, is the way of God; thus it seems good to him to deal with his children; thus he may do because of his sovereign dominion over all. May not he do what he will with his own?
This he doth in infinite wisdom, for their good and advantage; as also to evidence his love unto them and care of them.And this is that which we are principally taught in these words, namely,
Obs. 1. That in all our afflictions, the resignation of ourselves unto the sovereign pleasure, infinite wisdom, and goodness of God, is the only means or way of preserving us from fainting, weariness, or neglect of duty. After all our arguings, desires, and pleas, this is that which we must come unto: whereof we have an illustrious instance and example in Job. See Job 33:12-13; Job 34:18-19; Job 34:23; Job 34:31-33; Job 42:-6
First, In the first part of the testimony given unto the sovereignty and wisdom of God, in the ways and methods of his dealing with his children, we are instructed,
Obs. 2. That love is antecedent unto chastening: he chastens whom he loves. So it is with any father. He hath first the love of a father, before he chastens his son. Whatever, therefore, is the same materially with the chastisement of children, if it be where the love of adoption doth not precede, is punishment. The love, therefore, here intended, is the love of adoption; that is, the love of benevolence, whereby he makes men his children, and his love of complacency in them when they are so.
Obs. 3. Chastising is an effect of his love. It is not only consequential unto it, but springs from it. Wherefore there is nothing properly penal in the chastisements of believers. Punishment proceeds from love unto justice, not from love unto the person punished. Chastisement is from love to the person chastised, though mixed with displeasure against his sin.
Obs. 4. Unto chastisement is required that the person chastised be in a state wherein there is sin, or that he be a sinner; but he is not properly chastised because he is a sinner, so as that sin should have an immediate influence unto the chastisement, as the meritorious cause of it, whence the person should receive a condignity of punishment thereunto. But the consideration of a state of sin is required unto all chastisement; for the end of it is to take away sin, to subdue it, to mortify it, to give an increase in grace and holiness, as we shall see. There is no chastisement in heaven, nor in hell. Not in heaven, because there is no sin; not in hell, because there is no amendment. Chastisement is a companion of them that are in the way, and of them only.
Obs. 5. Divine love and chastening are inseparable. Whom he loveth; that is, whomsoever he loveth. None goes free, as the apostle declares immediately. It is true, there are different degrees and measures of chastisements; which comparatively make some seem to have none, and some to have nothing else: but absolutely the divine , or instructive chastisement, is extended unto all in the family of God, as we shall see.
Obs. 6. Where chastisement evidenceth itself (as it doth many ways, with respect unto God the author of it, and those that are chastised) not to be penal, it is a broad seal set to the patent of our adoption: which the apostle proves in the following verses.
Obs. 7. This being the way and manner of Gods dealing with his children, there is all the reason in the world why we should acquiesce in his sovereign wisdom therein, and not faint under his chastisement.
Obs. 8. No particular person hath any reason to complain of his portion in chastisement, seeing this is the way of Gods dealing with all his children, 1Pe 4:12; 1Pe 5:9.
Secondly, the latter clause of this divine testimony, as expressed by the apostle, And scourgeth every son whom he receiveth, if it were, as it is generally understood, the same with the former assertion, expressed with somewhat more earnestness, would need no further exposition, the same truth being contained in the one and the other. But I confess, in my judgment, there is something peculiar in it; which I shall propose, and leave it unto that of the reader. And,
1. The particle is nowhere merely conjunctive, signifying no more but and, as we and others here render it. It may rather be etiam, even; or also, moreover.
2. The verb, scourgeth, argues at least a peculiar degree and measure in chastisement, above what is ordinary; and it is never used but to express a high degree of suffering. A scourging is the utmost which is used in , or corrective instruction. Wherefore the utmost of what God inflicts on any in this world is included in this expression.
3. By , receiveth, accepteth, owneth, avoweth, the apostle expresseth in the original; the word whereby God declares his rest, acquiescency, and well-pleasing in Christ himself, Isa 42:1. So that anespecial approbation is included herein.
4. Every son, is not to be taken universally, for so every son is not scourged; but it is restrained unto such sons as God doth so accept.
On these considerations, I am induced to judge this to be the meaning of the words, namely, Yea, even (also) he severely chastiseth, above the ordinary degree and measure, those sons whom he accepts, and delights in a peculiar manner.For,
1. This gives a distinct sense to this sentence, and doth not make it a mere repetition in other words of what went before.
2. The introductive particle and meaning of the words themselves require that there be an advancement in them, above what was before spoken.
3. The dealings of God in all ages, as unto sundry instances, with his children, have been answerable hereunto.
4. The truth contained herein is highly necessary unto the supportment and consolation of many of Gods children. For when they are signalized by affliction, when all must take notice that they are scourged in a peculiar manner, and suffer beyond the ordinary measure of the children of God, they are ready to despond, as Job was, and David, and Heman, and be utterly discouraged. But a due apprehension hereof, (which is a truth, whether intended here or no, as I judge it is,) namely, that it is the way of God to give them the severest trials and exercises, to scourge them, when others shall be more lightly chastened, whom he loves, accepts of, and delights in, in a peculiar manner, will make them lift up their heads, and rejoice in all their tribulations. See Rom 5:3-5; Rom 8:35-39; 1Co 4:9-13, 2Co 6:4-10; 2Co 11:23-28.
The reasons and ends of Gods dealing thus with those whom he owneth and receiveth in a peculiar manner, with that provision of heavenly consolation for the church, with holy weapons against the power of temptations in such cases as that complained of by Heman, Psalms 88, which are treasured up in this sacred truth, are well worthy our enlargement on them, if it were suitable unto our present design.
Fuente: An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews
Lord
Jehovah. Pro 3:12.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
whom: Deu 8:5, Psa 32:1-5, Psa 73:14, Psa 73:15, Psa 89:30-34, Psa 119:71, Psa 119:75, Pro 3:12, Pro 13:24, Isa 27:9, Jer 10:24, Jam 1:12, Jam 5:11, Rev 3:19
and scourgeth: Heb 12:7, Heb 12:8, 2Sa 7:14
Reciprocal: Exo 1:12 – But the more Deu 4:22 – General Rth 1:3 – and she was 1Sa 30:3 – burned 2Sa 12:14 – the child 2Sa 24:12 – that I may 1Ki 1:6 – had not 2Ch 20:37 – the Lord Psa 37:25 – yet Psa 39:11 – When Psa 89:32 – General Pro 3:11 – My Pro 19:29 – and Eze 14:22 – therein Mic 7:9 – bear Hab 1:12 – for Zec 1:15 – for Mar 3:10 – as many Luk 7:21 – plagues Joh 11:3 – he Joh 16:27 – the Father Rom 8:28 – we know 2Co 6:13 – I speak Eph 6:17 – which Heb 12:10 – but he Heb 12:11 – nevertheless
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
SIN AND ITS PUNISHMENT
Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth.
Heb 12:6
Scripture tells us of Gods fatherly chastisements; and speaks of them, like human chastisements, as both deterrent and remedial.
I. They are spoken of as deterrent.When Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world shall learn righteousness. We can understand that the fate of Elymas, whom St. Paul struck with blindness, and the fate of the Corinthian adulterer, whom he delivered to Satan, must have been of profound and far-stretching influence in the early Church. But how if Gods judgments are not recognised as coming from Him? If any human events may be ascribed to the avenging hand of God, should we not assign to this cause pestilence and war? But it is common experience that times of war and pestilence, so far from being times of learning righteousness, are times of exceptional forgetfulness of it. Gods judgments, like mans judgments, avail to deter us from sin only so far as they are realised as the inevitable accompaniment and shadow of sinits necessary consequence. A man who by some intimate knowledge has realised the shattered health of the debauchee and the drunkards paralysed will does gain a horror of those sins which speeds him on the path of temperance and chastity. A student of history, who has realised that the decay of nations has in past times been brought about by the decline of public spirit and the growth of private luxury, will lift a warning voice to his fellow-citizens, and for his own part will devote himself without reserve to the public good. But we must allow that the least effect of the Divine chastisements is their effect as deterrent, because it is so hard to realise.
II. The greater stress is laid in the Bible on the side most efficacious in our human punishments, their remedial power, when the sufferer recognises them as chastisements from the Father in heaven. But how can this recognition be brought about in hearts where there seems to be no love of God to appeal to? Sometimes, in Gods mercy, it is the suddenness, the unexpectedness, of the blow, or the sharpness of the punishment, that strikes home to the conscience as by the very hand of God, and creates the conviction that God is not mocked, which is the root of penitence. Many of us may know cases where the detection and prompt punishment of a first offence has stopped a career of wrong-doing. Sometimes it is sickness that, by laying a man low, gives him leisure to consider his ways and take stock of the meaning and purpose of his life. Or sometimes it is from quite other sourcesfrom books, from the wonder of the world, from the quiet influence of a Christian life, that there comes to a man the revelation that what he had previously held to be merely accidental disappointments, accidental troubles, were, in truth, Divine punishments, sent to wean him from his selfishness; and he confesses, It was good for me that I have been in trouble, that I might learn Thy law.
III. As we compare human punishment, as it is administered in the family and the state, with the chastisements of God, this point emerges. A son sometimes, despite all his father can do, goes, as we say, to the bad. The chastisements of love prove of no effect; and what punishments the state may have had occasion to inflict are equally unavailing. Punishment in such a case becomes perpetual; there is banishment from the family circle, seclusion from society. What will happen if the chastisements of the heavenly Father and heavenly Law-giver are as fruitless? Does there survive in them also, when they are proved powerless to deter or to remedy, their fundamental character of retribution? Must they maintain, as against the sinner, a continual assertion of the law of righteousness? Or, to put the question in a shape in which we are more familiar with it: When all the penitent sinners are forgiven, is it in the will of the righteous and eternal God to punish eternally the impenitent? To that question the highest human reason has always given the answer Yes. The self-pleasing Sybarite may take another view, he may fall back on irresponsibility and predestination and say
Some there are who tell
Of one who threatens he will toss to hell
The luckless pots he marrd in makingpish,
Hes a good fellow, and twill all be well.
But Plato has no doubt. The sense of justice, as it is implanted in the human mind, demands that sin and suffering should go together. But then also the human reason has never forgotten that God is love as well as righteousness, and so it has cherished the hope that there must be, within the Divine armoury, weapons of punishment capable of piercing in to the most obdurate and impenetrable hearts, and arousing in them the saving consciousness of sin.
IV. The problem whether any human will can reduce itself to eternal incompatibility with the will of God, so as to be cast as rubbish to the void, is not a problem for us. With Scripture before us, we cannot (as some have done) deny the possibility. The problem for us is so to fix our thoughts on Gods righteous law that we may never lose the sense of penitence, and so to fix our thoughts on Gods fatherly love that we may never lose the sense of sonship. Father, I have sinned; I am no more worthy to be called Thy son; but I accept my chastisement; I am Thy sonsave me.
Rev. Canon Beeching.
Illustration
What use does punishment serve in the family? Partly we mean it to be deterrent, both to the offending child and to the other members of the household; we want sin and sorrow to be associated in the childs mind as cause and effect; but still more we wish it to exercise a remedial effect upon character, and this it helps to do, in its proper character as retribution, by enforcing respect for the law which has been broken. It calls fresh attention to the law of the family, emphasises it, vindicates it. And by itself punishment cannot accomplish more than this. Punishment cannot make any one hate wrong-doing, or feel reverence for law. That effect can only be produced by the character of the father who administers the chastisement; whose own love of right and hatred of wrong, and love of the wrong-doer and zeal for his highest welfare, are clearly distinguished in and through the chastisement he feels bound to inflict.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Heb 12:6. The Lord chastises his children because of His love for them, even to the extent of scourging (suffering them to be afflicted) for their training.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Heb 12:6. Whom he receiveth, i.e. whom He takes to His heart as His son. The quotation is from the Septuagint of Pro 3:12. The Hebrew may be rendered as in the English version (even as a father), or, by an alteration of the vowel points, as here, and scourges. All suffering inflicted by God upon His children, or permitted, is a proof of love, and forms in itself or in its results part of the evidence of their sonship.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
A reason is given in these words, why we should not faint under divine chastisements, because God chasteneth every one whom he loves.
Here note, That love is antecedent unto chastening, and that chastening is consequential unto love.
Note, 2. That divine love and fatherly chastenings are inseparable; whom he loveth, that is, whomsoever he loveth, he chasteneth, none goes free.
Note, 3. That no person then has any reason to complain of his portion of fatherly chastisements, seeing it is the constant way and manner of God’s dealing with his children.
Note, 4. That in and under all our chastisements, the resignation of ourselves to the sovereign pleasure and infinite wisdom of God, is the only means to preserve us from fainting and weakness.