Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hebrews 4:2

For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard [it.]

2. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them ] We should have expected rather “For unto them, as well as unto us,” if this had been the right translation. The better version however is “For indeed we too, just as they, have had a Gospel preached unto us.” The “Gospel” in this instance means the glad tidings of a future rest.

the word preached ] Lit. “the word of hearing.” The function of the hearer is no less necessary than that of the preacher, if the spoken word is to be profitable.

not being mixed with faith in them that heard it ] There is an extraordinary diversity in the MS. readings here. The best supported seems to be “because they were not united (lit. ‘tempered together’) by faith with them that heard (i.e. effectually listened to) it.” This would mean that the good news of rest produced no benefit to the rebellious Israelites, because they were not blended with Caleb and Joshua in their faith. They heard, but only with the ears, not with the heart. But there is probably some ancient corruption of the text. Perhaps instead of “with them that heard,” the true reading may have been “with the things heard.” The reading of our A. V. gives an excellent sense, if it were but well supported. The verb “to mingle” or “temper” occurs in 1Co 12:24.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

For unto us was the gospel preached as well as unto them – This translation by no means conveys the sense of the original. According to this it would seem that the gospel, as we understand it, or the whole plan of salvation, was communicated to them, as well as to us. But this is by no means the idea. The discussion has reference only to the promise of rest, and the assertion of the apostle is that this good news of a promise of rest is made to us as really as it was made to them. Rest was promised to them in the land of Canaan – an emblem of the eternal rest of the people of God. That was unquestioned, and Paul took it for granted. His object now is, to show that a promise of rest is as really made to us as it was to them, and that there is the same danger of failing to secure it as there was then. It was important for him to show that there was such a promise made to the people of God in his time, and as he was discoursing of those who were Hebrews, he of course made his appeal to the Old Testament. The literal translation would be, For we are evangelized – esmen euengelismenoi – as well as they. The word evangelize means to communicate good news, or glad tidings; and the idea here is, that the good news, or glad tidings of rest is announced to us as really as it was to them. This the apostle proves in the following verses.

But the word preached – Margin, Of hearing. The word preach we also use now in a technical sense as denoting a formal proclamation of the gospel by the ministers of religion. But this is not the idea here. It means, simply, the word which they heard; and refers particularly to the promise of rest which was made to them. That message was communicated to them by Moses.

Did not profit them – They derived no advantage from it. They rejected and despised it, and were, therefore, excluded from the promised land. It exerted no influence over their hearts and lives, and they lived and died as though no such promise had been made. Thus, many persons live and die now. The offer of salvation is made to them. They are invited to come and be saved. They are assured that God is willing to save them, and that the Redeemer stands with open arms to welcome them to heaven. They are trained up under the gospel; are led early in life to the sanctuary; are in the habit of attending on the preaching of the gospel all their days, but still what they hear exerts no saving influence on their hearts. At the close of life all that could be truly said of them is, that they have not been profited; it has been no real advantage to them in regard to their final destiny that they have enjoyed so many privileges.

Not being mixed with faith in them that heard it – Margin, Or, because they were not united by faith to. There are some various readings on this text, and one of these has given occasion to the version in the margin. Many mss. instead of the common reading – sugkekerasmenos – by which the word mixed would be united to ho logos – the word, have another reading – sugkekrame&noujsungkekramenous – according to which the word mixed would refer to them, and would mean that they who heard the Word and rejected it were not mixed, or united with those who believed it. The former reading makes the best sense, and is the best sustained; and the idea is, that the message which was preached was not received into the heart by faith. They were destitute of faith, and the message did not profit them. The word mixed is supposed by many of the best critics to refer to the process by which food is made nutritive, by being properly mixed with the saliva and the gastric juice, and thus converted into chyme, and chyle, and then changed into blood.

If suitably mixed in this manner, it contributes to the life and health of the physical frame; if not, it is the means of disease and death. So it is supposed the apostle meant to say of the message which God sends to man. If properly received; if mixed or united with faith, it becomes the means of spiritual support and life. If not, it furnishes no aliment to the soul, and will be of no advantage. As food when properly digested incorporates itself with the body, and gives it support, so those critics suppose it to be of the Word of God, that it incorporates itself with the internal and spiritual man, and gives it support and life. It may be doubted, however, whether the apostle had any such allusion as this, and whether it is not rather a refinement of the critics than of Paul. The word used here properly denotes a mixing or mingling together, like water and wine, 2 Macc. 15:39; a uniting together in proper proportions and order, as of the body, 1Co 12:24; and it may refer here merely to a proper union of faith with the word, in order that it might be profitable. The idea is, that merely to hear the message of life with the outward ear will be of no advantage. It must be believed, or it will be of no benefit. The message is sent to mankind at large. God declares his readiness to save all. But this message is of no advantage to multitudes – for such reasons as these.

(1) Many do not attend to it at all. They do not even listen respectfully to it. Multitudes go not near the place where the gospel is proclaimed; and many, when there, and when they seem to attend, have their minds and hearts on other things.

(2) Many do not believe it. They have doubts about the whole subject of religion, or about the particular doctrines of the gospel – and while they do not believe it, how can they be benefitted by it? How can a man be profited by the records of history if he does not believe them? How can one be benefited by the truths of science if he does not believe them? And if a man was assured that by going to a certain place he might close a bargain that would be a great advantage to him, of what use would this information be to him if he did not believe a word of it? So of the knowledge of salvation; the facts of the history recorded in the Bible; the offer of eternal life.

(3) Men do not allow the message of life to influence their conduct, and of course it is of no advantage to them. Of what use can it be if they steadily resist all the influence which it would have, and ought to have, on their lives? They live as though it were ascertained that there is no truth in the Bible; no reason for being influenced by the offered hope of eternal life, or alarmed by the threatened danger of eternal death. Resolved to pursue a course of life that is at variance with the commands of God, they cannot be profited by the message of salvation. Having no faith which influences and controls the heart, they are not in the least benefited by the offer of heaven. When they die, their condition is in no wise made better by the fact that they were trained up in a pious family; that they were instructed in the Sunday School; that they had the Bible in their dwellings, and that they sat regularly under a preached gospel. For any advantage to be derived from all this in the future world, they might as well have never heard the message of life. Nay it would have been better for them. The only effect of these privileges is to harden them in guilt, and to sink them deeper in hell; see the notes, 2Co 2:16.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 2. For unto us was the Gospel preached] . For we also have received good tidings as well as they. They had a gracious promise of entering into an earthly rest; we have a gracious promise of entering into a heavenly rest. God gave them every requisite advantage; he has done the same to us. Moses and the elders spoke the word of God plainly and forcibly to them: Christ and his apostles have done the same to us. They might have persevered; so may we: they disbelieved, disobeyed, and fell: and so may we.

But the word preached did not profit them] . But the word of hearing did not profit them. The word and promise to which the apostle most probably refers is that in De 1:20; De 1:21: Ye are come unto to the mountain of the Amorites, which the Lord our God doth give unto to us. Behold, the Lord thy God hath set the land before thee; go up and possess it, as the Lord God of thy fathers hath said unto thee: fear not. Many exhortations they had to the following effect: Arise, that we may go up against them; for we have seen the land, and, behold, it is very good: and are ye still? Be not slothful to go, and to enter to possess the land; for God hath given it into your hands; a place where there is no want of any thing that is in the earth; Jdg 18:9-10. But instead of attending to the word of the Lord by Moses, the whole congregation murmured against him and Aaron, and said one to another, Let us make a captain, and let us return into Egypt; Nu 14:2; Nu 14:4. But they were dastardly through all their generations. They spoke evil of the pleasant land, and did not give credence to his word. Their minds had been debased by their Egyptian bondage, and they scarcely ever arose to a state of mental nobility.

Not being mixed with faith in them that heard] There are several various readings in this verse, and some of them important. The principal are on the word , mixed; which in the common text refers to , the word mixed; but, in ABCD and several others, it is , referring to, and agreeing with, , and may be thus translated: The word of hearing did not profit them, they not being mixed with those who heard it by faith. That is, they were not of the same spirit with Joshua and Caleb. There are other variations, but of less importance; but the common text seems best.

The word , mixed, is peculiarly expressive; it is a metaphor taken from the nutrition of the human body by mixing the aliment taken into the stomach with the saliva and gastric juice, in consequence of which it is concocted, digested, reduced into chyle, which, absorbed by the lacteal vessels, and thrown into the blood, becomes the means of increasing and supporting the body, all the solids and fluids being thus generated; so that on this process, properly performed, depend (under God) strength, health, and life itself. Should the most nutritive aliment be received into the stomach, if not mixed with the above juices, it would be rather the means of death than of life; or, in the words of the apostle, it would not profit, because not thus mixed. Faith in the word preached, in reference to that God who sent it, is the grand means of its becoming the power of God to the salvation of the soul. It is not likely that he who does not credit a threatening, when he comes to hear it, will be deterred by it from repeating the sin against which it is levelled; nor can he derive comfort from a promise who does not believe it as a pledge of God’s veracity and goodness. Faith, therefore, must be mixed with all that we hear, in order to make the word of God effectual to our salvation.

This very use of the word, and its explanation, we may find in Maximus Tyrius, in his description of health, Dissert. x., page 101. “Health,” says he, it is a certain disposition , , , which consists in a proper mixture together of the wet and the dry, the cold and the hot, either by an artificial process, or by the skilful economy of nature.”

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: the reason enforcing the former counsel is, their having mutually the same means, the one as the other, and if they fear not, may be guilty of the same sin; for the Hebrews and the whole church were evangelized by the outward publishing to them, and their professed reception of, the glad tidings of salvation by God the Son incarnate, who was to lead them in the way to Gods eternal rest; which if they had been truly evangelized and transformed by, they could never have been shut out of Gods rest; the same gospel being preached to both their forefathers and them, though more gloriously revealed to the latter, 2Co 3:10,11. For the gospel was preached to Abraham and to his offspring, that in his eminent Seed, the Lord Jesus Christ all nations should be blessed, Gen 22:18; compare Joh 8:56. He was the Angel of the covenant that was Lord of Gods hosts, and was to lead them into the literal and heavenly Canaan, Exo 23:20; Jos 5:13-15; Isa 11:10. So that none entered into either of Gods rests but by him alone, who so testifieth by himself, Joh 5:39,46, and by his Spirit, Act 15:11.

But the word preached did not profit them: the gospel was so preached to them, that they did or might hear it, Rom 10:14,15; compare Psa 92:4; Isa 52:7; yet did it not prove effectual to many of those Hebrews, to bring them either into the literal or heavenly Canaan, but they came short of Gods rest in both; they not performing what he required, he by an irreversible sentence excluded them: see Heb 3:17,19.

Not being mixed with faith in them that heard it; a metaphor taking from mixing things in the stomach, as meat and drink, without the concoction of which there can be no nourishing the body; setting forth the sin of these Hebrews, who never received nor mixed this gospel which they heard with a sincere faith in their souls, so as, being digested thereby, it might be united with it. Thus that which was the mighty power and wisdom of God to salvation to those who believed, was a word of condemnation and eternal death to unbelievers, 1Co 1:18; 1Pe 2:2,3.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

2. gospel preached . . . untothemin type: the earthly Canaan, wherein they failed torealize perfect rest, suggesting to them that they should look beyondto the heavenly land of rest, to which faith is the avenue,and from which unbelief excludes, as it did from the earthlyCanaan.

the word preachedliterally,”the word of hearing”: the word heard by them.

not being mixed with faith inthem that heardSo the Syriac and the Old LatinVersions, older than any of our manuscripts, and LUCIFER,read, “As the world did not unite with the hearers in faith.”The word heard being the food which, as the bread of life, must passinto flesh and blood through man’s appropriating it to himself infaith. Hearing alone is of as little value as undigested food in abad stomach [THOLUCK]. Thewhole of oldest extant manuscript authority supports adifferent reading, “unmingled as they were (Greekaccusative case agreeing with ‘them’) in faith with its hearers,”that is, with its believing, obedient hearers, as Caleb andJoshua. So “hear” is used for “obey” in thecontext, Heb 4:7, “To-day,if ye will hear His voice.” The disobedient, instead of beingblended in “the same body,” separated themselves as Korah:a tacit reproof to like separatists from the Christian assemblingtogether (Heb 10:25; Jdg 1:19).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

For unto us was the Gospel preached,…. The Gospel is the good news and glad tidings of salvation by Christ; and this may be said to be preached, when men preach not themselves, nor read lectures of morality, nor mix law and Gospel together, nor make justification and salvation to be by works, nor set persons to make their peace with God, or get an interest in Christ; but when they preach Christ and salvation alone by him; and so it was preached to the Hebrews, and that more fully, and with more clearness, power, and success than formerly; and which is a privilege and blessing; and is sometimes blessed for the conviction of sinners, for regeneration, for the implanting of faith, and the comfort of believers. The words may be rendered, we were evangelized; as such may be said to be, who have a spirit of liberty, in opposition to a spirit of bondage; who live by faith on Christ alone; who derive their peace and comfort, not from their works, but from him; whose repentance and obedience are influenced by the love of God; and who desire to perform all duties aright, and depend on none: now though this was true of the apostle and others, yet is not the sense here, because of what follows,

as well as unto them, or “even as they”; for though the Gospel was preached to the Israelites in the wilderness, in the ministry of Moses, and by types and sacrifices; yet they were not evangelized by it, or cast into a Gospel mould, or brought into a Gospel spirit: however, it was preached unto them; which shows the antiquity of it; the sameness of the method of salvation in all ages; the necessity of salvation by Christ, and the unity of Christ’s church under different dispensations:

but the word preached did not profit them; that is, the Gospel, which is here called the word of hearing, as it may be rendered; because it is and may be heard; and there is a necessity of hearing, in order to faith in Christ: the word signifies a rumour, or report: the Gospel is a report of Christ, his person and offices; of his great love to sinners, and of what he has done for them; but though it is a word of hearing, a report made, and the word preached, yet to some it is unprofitable; it has no good effect upon them; yea, it is the savour of death unto death to them, and the aggravation of condemnation; and the reason of the inefficacy and unprofitableness of the word to the Israelites was, its

not being mixed with faith in them that heard it; the Gospel is as food, and faith is the hand that receives it, and takes it, and tastes of it, and eats it, and concocts and digests it; and when this is the case, it is profitable and nourishing; but when it is otherwise, it is not. The Alexandrian copy, the Complutensian edition, and five of Beza’s ancient copies, and as many of Stephens’s, with others, read, “they were not mixed” referring it not to the word, but to persons; and so read the Arabic and Ethiopic versions: and the sense is, that the generality of the Israelites did not join themselves in faith, in believing in God, to Caleb and Joshua; who hearkened to the Lord, and received and obeyed his word; and so the word became useless to them: there ought to be an union or conjunction of the saints, and the bond of this union is love; and the thing in which they unite is faith, believing in Christ, and the doctrine of faith, which is but one; and though the word may be profitable to others who are not in the communion of the saints; yet forsaking the assembly of the saints, and not constantly attending with them, or not mixing with them continually in public worship, is one reason of the unprofitable hearing of the word when it is preached to them.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

For indeed we have had good tidings preached unto us ( ). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of (from , good news, glad tidings) to bring good news, used here in its original sense as in verse 6 of the Israelites ( first aorist passive participle).

Even as also they ( ). See verse 6. We have the promise of rest as the Israelites had. The parallel holds as to the promise, the privilege, the penalty.

The word of hearing ( ). As in 1Th 2:13. Genitive describing , the word marked by hearing (the word heard).

Because they were not united by faith with them that heard ( ). , the usual negative of the participle. A very difficult phrase. The text is uncertain whether the participle (perfect passive of , old verb to mix together) ends in – agreeing with or – agreeing with (them). Taking it in – the translation is correct. is in the instrumental case and in the associative instrumental after .

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

For unto us was the gospel preached [ ] . Lit. we have had good tidings proclaimed to us. The translation of the A. V. is unfortunate, since it conveys the technical and conventional idea of preaching the gospel, which is entirely out of place here. The reference is to the special announcement of the rest of God; the glad tidings that God has provided a rest for his people. This announcement was made to the fathers, and signified to them the promise of the rest in Canaan. It has been proclaimed to us, and to us is the announcement of the heavenly rest. The emphasis is on the entire statement, “we have had the good tidings proclaimed to us,” rather than on we as contrasted with they.

The word preached [ ] . Lit. the word of the message. See on 1Th 2:13.

Not being mixed with faith in them that heard it [ ] . Rend. because not incorporated by faith in them that heard. 182 A body of obedient hearers with whom the erring Israelites were not incorporated would be an idea foreign to the discussion. Moreover, in ch. 3 16, the writer has declared that there were practically no believing hearers. He says that although the good tidings were announced to them, they did not profit them. The word did not profit them because it (the word) was not assimilated by faith in those that heard. They did not make the promise of rest their own. Their history was marked by continual renewals and rejections of the promise.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “For unto us was the gospel preached,” (kai. gar esmen euengelismenoi) “For indeed (certainly) we are having had good news preached (to us),” in our behalf, for us, or to meet our needs. We – the “us” to whom the gospel has been committed (the church) are to witness faithfully while in our world wide and age-long task till he returns, Luk 24:46-49; Act 1:8.

2) “As well as unto them,” (kathaper kakeinoi) “Even as (as well as) those also had it preached to then” Moses preached this gospel, Deu 18:15-18; Thru the story of sacrifices, types, and shadows he set it forth for men to heed, Luk 16:31.

3) “But the word preached did not profit them,” (all’ ouk ophelisen ho logos tes akoes ekeinous) “But the word of heeding did not profit those;” The earthly rest in the promised land flowing with milk and honey did not profit the doubters, those who would not go forth to meet the Philistines at God’s bidding.

4) “Not being mixed with faith in them that heard it,” (me sugkekerasmenos tes pistei tois akousasin) “Not having been mixed, mingled, or accepted by faith in those who were hearing,” Jas 1:22. To enter Canaan offered a place of blessed rest from Egyptian slavery and the rugged desert and wilderness life, but many delivered by the blood, baptized unto Moses (identified with him) in the cloud and in the sea, who drank water from the rock, and ate manna (heaven’s food), did not enter the promised land, 1Co 10:1-11. Why? Because of unbelief, doubting, disobedience and discouragement in the flesh. They were all chastened, many died because of their unfaithfulness. Among them were Moses and Aaron, but they did not go to hell. They came short of that soul-life joy and rest found in obedient service, Mar 8:14-37.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

2. For to us, etc. He reminds us that the doctrine by which God invites us to himself at this day is the same with that which he formerly delivered to the fathers; and why did he say this? That we may know that the calling of God will in no degree be more profitable to us than it was to them, except we make it sure by faith. This, then, he concedes, that the Gospel is indeed preached to us; (68) but lest we should vainly glory, he immediately adds that the unbelieving whom God had formerly favored with the participation of so great blessings, yet received from them no fruit, and that therefore we also shall be destitute of his blessing unless we receive it by faith. He repeats the word hear for this end, that we may know that hearing is useless except the word addressed to us be by faith received.

But we must here observe the connection between the word and faith. It is such that faith is not to be separated from the word, and that the word separated from faith can confer no good; not indeed that the efficacy or power of the word depends on us; for were the whole world false, he who cannot lie would still never cease to be true, but the word never puts forth its power in us except when faith gives it an entrance. It is indeed the power of God unto salvation, but only to those who believe. (Rom 1:16.) There is in it revealed the righteousness of God, but it is from faith to faith. Thus it is that the word of God is always efficacious and saving to men, when viewed in itself or in its own nature; but no fruit will be found except by those who believe.

As to a former statement, when I said that there is no faith where the word is wanting, and that those who make such a divorce wholly extinguish faith and reduce it to nothing, the subject is worthy of special notice. For it hence appears evident that faith cannot exist in any but in the children of God, to whom alone the promise of adoption is offered. For what sort of faith have devils, to whom no salvation is promised? And what sort of faith have all the ungodly who are ignorant of the word? The hearing must ever precede faith, and that indeed that we may know that God speaks and not men.

(68) See Appendix O

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(2) For unto us was.Rather, for we have had glad tidings preached unto us, even as they had. The object of these words is to support Heb. 4:1, a promise being left. How fitly the good news of the promise might, alike in their case and in ours, be designated by the same word as the gospel, will afterwards appear.

The word preached.Literally, the word of hearing, i.e., the word which was heard (1Th. 2:13). But this does not mean the word heard by them. As in Isa. 53:1 (where the same word is found in the Greek version) the meaning is our message, that which we have heard from God, so here the words signify what was heard by those who declared the promise to the people, especially the message which Moses received from God.

Not being mixed with faith.A change of reading in the Greek, which rests on the strongest authority, compels us to connect these words, not with the message, but with the people: since they had not been united (literally, mingled) by faith with them that heard. That the word of Moses and those associated with him in declaring Gods promise (perhaps Aaron, Joshua, Caleb) might benefit the people, speakers and hearers must be united by the bond of faith. Here the margin of the Authorised version preserves the true text, following the Vulgate and the earliest of the printed Greek Testaments (the Complutensian).

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

2. Gospel preached Literally, we were evangelized; greeted with the glad announcement, gospelized. This gospel of the Old Testament, identical with the promise of Heb 4:1, was the glad announcement of a Canaan rest; ours, of a heavenly rest.

Mixed with faith The word, when heard, must be mixed with faith, as food in the stomach must be mixed with gastric juice in order to nourishing and vitalizing our bodies. In the received Greek text the word mixed is nominative singular, and agrees with word, and so makes a clear, good meaning as above. But another, and perhaps true, reading, makes mixed to be accusative plural, and agree with them. The words then would imply that the hearers themselves were to be mixed with faith. That is, so fully should the soul of the hearers be filled and impregnated with faith, that the soul and the faith may be conceived as two elements or fluids mixed together. Them that heard it, is the Greek dative. So the whole may be thus read: The word did not profit them, as they were not impregnated with the faith fitting (or belonging) to the hearers of the word.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘For indeed we have had good tidings preached to us, even as also they. But the word of hearing did not profit them, because it did not meet with faith in the hearers (or, per a variant reading, ‘was not united by faith with those who heard’).’

The ancient Israelites, just like we do, received Good News of a rest that could be theirs (e.g. Exo 6:6-8 and often). But the good news did not produce faith and trust in their hearts, and thus it did not profit them. Rather they provoked God and finally perished. We also have had Good news proclaimed to us by a greater than Moses. Have we then entered into that rest of which He spoke and become partakers of Him, or has it not met with faith in us as well?

Essentially the ‘good news’ was the same, God’s offer of grace and mercy available in response to faith. Those who trusted Him would find life transformed for them in the sphere of future blessing.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Heb 4:2. Unto us was the gospel preached, &c. For we are made partakers of the good tidings, as they also were: But the word which they heard, did not profit them, &c. The children of Israel had a promise of rest made to them; and so have we, as well as they. The word gospel signifies properly, as we have often observed, good news, or good tidings; which is the meaning of the word here: but as that term is now appropriated by custom to the particular good tidings of Christ, it renders this passage very obscure, to call the good tidings of a rest, the gospel. The meaning is, “We Christians have had the joyful tidings of God’s rest, or a state of happiness, in a cessation from all our labours, preached, to us, as well as the children of Israel had to them.” The last clause might be rendered more properly, Being not through faith mixed with (that is, digested and turned into) nourishment, as it were, by those who heard it. Faith is here considered as the means by which the word of God is thus incorporated in the hearers. See ch. Heb 3:16.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Heb 4:2 corroborates in its first half the , Heb 4:1 , while the second half shows the danger of the in the example of others. The emphasis in the first half lies upon . The sense is not: for we, too, like them, have promise (to express this the addition of after would have been called for), but: for promise ( sc . of entering into the , cf. Heb 4:1 ; Heb 4:3 ) have we indeed, even as they (the fathers), sc . had it.

Most arbitrarily is the meaning of this and the following verse apprehended by Ebrard. According to Ebrard, Heb 4:2 ff. proclaims as the reason why the Jews did not attain the promised , not their “subjective unbelief,” but “the objective imperfection of the Old Testament revelation.” With the second half of Heb 4:2 , namely, a gradation (!) is supposed to begin, and the progress of thought to be as follows: “The word which we have received is even infinitely better than the word which the Israelites received through Moses. For, first, the word spoken by Moses was unable to bring the people to faith it remained external to them; it set forth a promise, it is true, and also attached a condition, but it communicated no strength to fulfil this condition (Heb 4:2-5 , comp. Heb 4:12-13 ); but, secondly, the promise there given was not even in its purport the true one; there, earthly rest was promised; here, spiritual and everlasting rest (Heb 4:6-10 ).” That the context affords no warrant for the bringing out of such a meaning is self-evident. For neither does the author here distinguish such twofold word of promise, nor a twofold , nor can signify a word which “could not prove binding.”

Erroneous, too, is the view of the connection on the part of Delitzsch, to whom Riehm ( Lehrbegr. des Hebrerbr . p. 798 ff.) accedes in all essential particulars. According to Riehm, the (as yet unproved) presupposition is first provisionally expressed in the parenthesis, Heb 4:1 , in a simply assertory manner, viz. that there is still in existence a promise of entering into the rest of God, a promise of which the fulfilment is yet outstanding, and this presupposition is then repeated, Heb 4:2 , in other expressions of a more general bearing, no doubt, but essentially in the same way of simple assertion. Upon this, however, the author now wishes to furnish proof that such presupposition is fully warranted. Accordingly, Heb 4:3 , he formulates that presupposition in the most definite manner, inasmuch as in the opening words of Heb 4:3 , , he lays down the theme which is to be proved in the sequel. This proof is afforded in the following way: the rest of God has existed long; nevertheless, in the oath of God, mentioned in the words of the psalm, a rest of God is spoken of as yet future, and of a truth it is one and the same rest of God which, according to Gen 2:2 in so far as God enjoys it alone has existed from the beginning of the world, and, according to the word of the psalm, in so far as the people of God are to participate therein, is one yet approaching. Although thus the long present rest of God was the aim and end of the creative activity of God, yet it is not the final aim which God has proposed to Himself. On the contrary, it is clearly apparent, from a comparison of the word of God pronounced upon the Israelites in the time of Moses, a word confirmed by an oath, with the account of the rest of God on the seventh day, that, according to the gracious designs of God, the rest, which He has enjoyed alone from the foundation of the world, should eventually become a rest of God which He enjoys in communion with His people. It is therefore indubitably certain, that even after the completion of the work of creation and the ensuing of the rest of God, there is still something outstanding [unfulfilled], an , and this consists in the fact that some, received by God into communion with Himself, are made partakers of that repose of God. This view is a mistaken one, because (1) As regards the assumed proof, the assertion that in the oath of God, spoken of in the words of the psalm, mention is made of a yet future rest of God, is entirely untrue. Not of a particular form of the rest of God, which is still future, is the discourse, but only the fact is represented as future that it is shared on the part of men who enter into it. For a rest of God which has already existed long is not opposed to a rest of God which is still future, nor is the rest of God, mentioned. Genesis 2., distinguished as of another kind than that mentioned in the psalm. On the contrary, the rest of God, or what is identical therewith the Sabbath-rest of God, has existed in fact and without change from the time of the completion of the works of creation, and this same rest of God it is, the participation in which was once promised to the Israelites on the condition of faith, and now upon the same condition is promised to the Christians; it is a question therefore only of the Christians taking warning from the example of the fathers, and not, like them, losing the promised blessing through unbelief. (2) That the author was desirous of still proving the , cannot at all be supposed. For this was a fact which, as self-evident from that which precedes, stood in no need of a demonstration; it is therefore expressed not only Heb 4:1 , but also Heb 4:6 , in a mere subsidiary clause, consequently in the form of logical subordination; and even Heb 4:9 , in which it is introduced in an apparently independent form, decides nothing against our explanation, because Heb 4:9 , while forming a certain conclusion to that which precedes, yet contains only the logical substructure for the exhortation attaching itself afresh at Heb 4:11 . That at which the author alone aimed, in connection with Heb 4:2 ff., was therefore the impressive confirmation of the paraenesis, Heb 4:1 ; and just this paraenetic main tendency of our section likewise fails of attaining due recognition in connection with the explanation of Delitzsch and Riehm. But when Delitzsch thinks he can support his view, that the , Heb 4:1 , is first proved in the sequel, by declaring the otherwise to be accepted “thought that the promise of entering into God’s rest has remained without its fulfilment in the generation of the wilderness, and thus is still valid,” to be “entirely false,” and exclaims: “What logic that would be! The generation of the wilderness perished indeed, but the younger generation entered into Canaan, came to Shiloh (the place in the heart of the land, which has its name from the rest , Jos 18:1 ), and had now its own fixed land of habitation, whither Jehovah had brought and planted it, and where He fenced it in (2Sa 7:10 );” such conclusion would be justified only if the author had not understood the promise given to the fathers in the time of Moses, of entering into God’s , at the same time in a higher sense, but had regarded it as fulfilled by the occupation of Canaan under Joshua; such, however, according to the distinct statement of Heb 4:8 , is not the case.

] after , the ordinary after particles of comparison. See Winer, Gramm. , 7 Aufl. p. 409.

] Periphrasis of the notion , Heb 4:1 : the word of that which is heard ( in the passive sense, as Rom 10:16 ; Gal 3:2 ; 1Th 2:13 ; Joh 12:38 ), i.e. the word of promise which was heard by them, or proclaimed to them. This periphrasis is chosen in order already at this stage to point out that it was by the fault of the fathers themselves that the word of promise became for them an unprofitable word, one which did not receive its fulfilment. It remained for them a word heard only externally, whereas, if it was to profit them, they must manifest receptiveness for the same, must believingly and confidingly appropriate the same. This culpability on the part of the fathers themselves is brought into direct relief by the participial clause , containing the indication of cause to , wherein forms an emphatic opposition to the preceding . The sense is: because it was not for the hearers mingled with faith ; the dative denoting the subject, in relation to which the . took place. See Winer, Gramm. , 7 Aufl. p. 206. Thus interpret Erasmus, translation , Calvin, Castellio, Gerhard, Owen, Calov, Limborch, Bengel, Kypke, Storr, Stuart, Reiche, Comm. Crit . p. 30; Riehm, Lehrbegr. des Hebrerbr . p. 696, note ; Maier, and others. [63] But that the fault of this not being mingled was not in the word but in the men , was naturally understood from the connection. is not to be connected with , so that would have to be taken as the dativus instrumentalis : “because it did not, by means of faith, mingle with them that heard it, become fully incorporated with them” (Schlichting, Jac. Cappellus, Dorscheus, S. Schmidt, Wolf, Rambach, Michaelis, Carpzov, Chr. Fr. Schmid, Valckenaer, Klee, Paulus, Stein, Delitzsch, Moll, Kurtz, Hofmann, Woerner). For manifestly the centres of thought for the adversative clause lie in and , while only takes up again the indication of the persons, already known to us from the , although now as characterizing these persons in attaching itself to .

, however, not the mere demonstrative pronoun, is put by the author in order thus once more to place hearing and believing in suggestive contrast. Further, the author did not write , because he would thereby have conveyed the impression that the Israelites in the wilderness possessed indeed , but the word of promise which was heard did not blend into a unity with the same; whereas by means of he denies altogether the presence of in them.

[63] Heinsius, Semler, Kuinoel, al. , take as equivalent to , which is open to no grammatical objection (cf. Winer, Gramm. , 7 Aufl. p. 206), and makes no alteration in the sense.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 2282
THE REASON WHY MEN ARE SO LITTLE PROFITED BY THE GOSPEL

Heb 4:2. Unto us was the Gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

IN these words there is a peculiarity of expression, which, till it is explained, seems almost unaccountable. Had the Apostle said that the Gospel was preached unto the Jews, as well as unto us, it would have been intelligible enough: but the text, as it stands, seems to give the preference to them, as if they had enjoyed a pre-eminent display of Gods favour, and a clearer revelation of his will than ourselves. But the true meaning of the Apostle will appear from a due attention to the context. The Apostle is shewing the superiority of Christ to Moses, Moses being a servant only in Gods house, but Christ being a Son and Lord over his own house. That house are we, says he, if we hold fast the confidence, and the rejoicing of our hope, firm unto the end [Note: Heb 3:6.]. To impress this idea the more strongly on our minds, he, in the language of David, urges us to guard against a departure from God, lest, like the Israelites of old, we provoke God to cut us off from his promised rest. But, regarding the very passage which he quotes as needing some explanation, since, though all the adults who came out of Egypt perished in the wilderness, their children did enjoy the promised rest, he intimates, that the very expression of David shewed that Canaan was only a shadow of the rest promised to Israel, and that the true rest was common to all the children of Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles. Of this rest he exhorts us not to come short: for that the promise relating to it belonged to us as much as to the Jews in the time of Moses: and, as they came short of it in consequence of their unbelief, so shall we, if we mix not faith with the truths we hear.

Now this view of the Apostles words limits the term Gospel to that which alone is mentioned in the context, the promised rest. Hence, to compare the Gospel, as revealed to the Jews by Moses and the Prophets, with that which is revealed to us by Christ and his Apostles in a general view, would be beside the proper scope of our text. It would be profitable indeed to see how the moral law shuts us up to Christ, and how the ceremonial law shadows forth his work and offices; and how the Prophets also declare the fulness and excellency of his salvation; or, in the words of the Apostle, how the righteousness which is by faith in Christ is witnessed by the Law and the Prophets [Note: Rom 3:21-22.]: but we prefer confining our views to the precise idea that was in the Apostles mind, because we then have more clearly the mind of the Holy Ghost. This then we shall do, whilst we endeavour to shew,

I.

What is that Gospel which is preached to us in common with the Jews

To the Jews were sent the glad tidings of a promised rest
[The promise given them included three things, deliverance, preservation, rest; deliverance from Egypt, preservation in the wilderness, and rest in Canaan, Their deliverance was to be by the blood of the paschal lamb, which, being sprinkled on their doorposts, was to protect them from the sword of the destroying angel, whilst all the first-born of Egypt were slain. That it was which burst their bands asunder, and caused their former masters not merely to liberate them from their bondage, but to thrust them out from amongst them: and from that time they were in all future ages to kill and eat the paschal lamb in remembrance of that great deliverance. From thenceforth, committing themselves to the Divine guidance and protection, they were to subsist entirely on the manna given them from the clouds, and on the water that issued from the rock. At the expiration of the time appointed for their sojourning in the wilderness, they were to enter into Canaan, there to serve and enjoy God as their God to the latest generations.

Now all this was to the Jews a shadow of good things to come: it marked the ways and means of our redemption; the nature of that life of faith which we are to live, and the happy termination of our labours. And, that it was so understood by the more spiritual among them, is evident, as from many other passages, so particularly from that quoted both in the foregoing and following context: for if the rest promised by Moses had had no reference to any thing beyond the land of Canaan, David could never, after that rest had been enjoyed for five hundred years, have spoken of a rest yet future. Consequently, the typical nature of that whole dispensation was made known to them; and though obscurely, yet certainly, was the Gospel of Christ preached to them.]
To us is the same rest presented as an object of faith and hope

[We are to be delivered from a worse than Egyptian bondage, even from the bonds of sin and Satan, death and hell. And in the very same manner also are we to be delivered. Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us: and by the sprinkling of his blood on our hearts and consciences are we to escape the wrath of God. We have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins [Note: Eph 1:7.]. The destroying angel has received his commission against all on whom this mark is not found: and he will execute it on all without partiality or reserve: for, as without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins, so it is by a believing application of that blood to our souls, and by that only, that we can ever obtain from Christ the benefits of his salvation.

Our preservation during the whole of our pilgrimage must also be secured in the same way. Whilst under the guidance and protection of our God, we must live altogether by faith on the Son of God, who loved us, and gave himself for us. Our blessed Lord himself has told us, that He is the bread of life: that we must live from day to day upon him, even as the Israelites did upon the manna in the wilderness; and that, whereas they derived from it only the temporary support of their mortal bodies, we shall secure from him the eternal welfare of our souls. St. Paul also tells us, that the rock which poured forth its waters in the wilderness was Christ; that is, a type and figure of Christ: we learn therefore from this, that we are to look to Christ for daily supplies of his Spirit, to renew and sanctify us, and to refresh and comfort us throughout the whole of our weary pilgrimage. This is to be the one constant tenour of our way from first to last. Never till we arrive in the promised land shall we cease to need these supplies, which are to be brought to us by the exercise of a lively faith. There is no substitute for them: the life of the Israelites in the wilderness is a perfect pattern of our life; and to theirs we are taught to conform our own.

To the rest which remaineth for us [Note: ver. 9.] we are taught to look forward with high expectations and assured confidence. There is a better country than Canaan, even heaven itself, which the patriarchs, to whom the land of Canaan was promised, themselves regarded as their destined home [Note: Heb 11:9-10; Heb 11:13-16.]. And to that must we look as our inheritance. There, we shall rest from all our labours: there, shall all tears be wiped away from our eyes. There shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying; neither shall there be any more pain: but, having his tabernacle with us, we shall dwell with him and he with us more intimately than we have now any conception of, we being his acknowledged people, and he our endeared God, for ever and ever [Note: Rev 21:3-4.].]

But as this Gospel has never yet produced what it was destined to accomplish, it will be proper to shew,

II.

To what must be ascribed its inefficacy both in them and us

The Gospel itself is not destitute of power: it is the rod of Gods strength: it is quick and powerful, and sharper than a two-edged sword: it is mighty through God to the pulling down of the strong-holds of sin and Satan: it is the power of God unto salvation to all who truly believe it. Yet its operations have been very limited and partial. And whence arises this? I answer,
The Jews mixed not faith with what they heard
[Moses from the beginning told them of all the blessings which God had in reserve for them: yet from the beginning they were an unbelieving people. Though Moses had given them abundant evidence of his divine mission, they murmured against him, when they found their burthens augmented in consequence of his interposition [Note: Exo 5:21-23.]. When they had seen all the wonders wrought in their behalf in Egypt, they again complained, as soon as ever they saw the hosts of Pharaoh pressing upon their rear, and ready, as they thought, to overwhelm them [Note: Exo 14:11-12.]. When they had passed through the sea on dry ground, and seen their enemies, who presumed to follow them, dead upon the sea shore, they were still as unbelieving as ever, and regretted that they had ever been induced to leave the land of Egypt. They even questioned whether God were amongst them or not [Note: Exo 17:3-4; Exo 17:7.]. But a few weeks afterwards they altogether renounced God, and worshipped the golden calf. Thus it was on all occasions: whenever any fresh difficulty arose, they distrusted God, and murmured against him. When the spies brought their report of the land which they had searched out, the people universally gave way to despondency, as much as if they had never seen any one display of Gods power in their behalf. On this account they were all doomed to perish in the wilderness, God swearing in his wrath that they should not enter into his rest. In a word, they could not enter in because of unbelief [Note: Heb 3:19.].]

We also are alike unbelieving in relation to the truths we hear
[The very necessity of redemption is denied by multitudes, or at least is acknowledged only in a speculative way, and without any due sense of its importance. The Jews under the pressure of their burthens cried mightily to God, so that their groans entered into the ears of the Lord of hosts. But when has he heard from us those sighs and groans by reason of the pressure of our sins? When has he heard those earnest cries for deliverance from the guilt we have contracted, and from the power of our in-dwelling corruptions? Alas! when urged on these subjects, we reply in our hearts, Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians [Note: Exo 14:12.]. If told, that the whole world lieth in wickedness, and that we must flee from it, as Lot from Sodom, if we will escape its ruin, we despise the warning, like the sons-in-law of Lot, and regard our monitor as one who only mocks us with absurd and groundless alarms.

If brought to give a general assent to the truths we hear, we still do not approve of a life of faith as the means of our final preservation. Why must we subject ourselves to so many trials and difficulties? Why may we not go in an easier way to heaven? Why must our separation from the world be so entire? Why may we not still enjoy the leeks and onions of Egypt, instead of subsisting upon the light and tasteless food provided for us? Why must we be so dependent? Why be looking every day and hour to the pillar and cloud for direction, and never to follow my own way? Why am I to have nothing in myself, but all in Christ? Why should I be necessitated to seek such a measure of sanctification, as not to entertain a thought that is not brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ? We choose to have greater liberty, and an easier path. We choose to have a less humiliating way, where we may derive some supplies from a stock of our own, and be able to ascribe some measure of credit to ourselves.

Nor are we by any means satisfied with the rest that is provided for us; we wish for some rest in earthly things; and murmur at the prohibition to seek it in them. Why must I have as the one object of my desire a portion that is invisible? Of the Israelites it is said, they despised the pleasant land; they believed not Gods word [Note: Psa 106:24.]: and the same may be said of us. We do not estimate aright the felicity of heaven: we do not despise every thing else in comparison of it: we do not follow after it with the ardour that we ought: we shew, in the whole of our life and conversation, that we do not think the prize worth the toil necessary to secure it. Were we duly impressed with the excellency of Canaan as the glory of all lands, we should grudge no labours or sufferings that we may have to encounter in our way to it, nor any exertions that may be necessary for the attainment of it.

What I have here said is applicable to the great mass even of the Christian world: and the true reason of their being so little influenced by all that they hear, is, that they do not mix faith with it: they either account it a cunningly-devised fable, or else imagine that some way shall be found for the salvation of their souls besides that which is revealed in the written word. They believe not what God has spoken either of the way, or of the end; and therefore they fall short of that end, and perish in their unbelief]

To impress this subject the more deeply on our minds, I will endeavour to improve it,
1.

In a way of solemn inquiry

[It surely is reasonable for all of us to inquire, What have we profited by the Gospel? If we have indeed been profited by it, we can tell, in some degree at least, what are the benefits which we have received from it. To imagine that we have been really benefited, and not to know wherein we have been benefited, and especially in a matter of such infinite importance, is palpable and wilful self-deception. I ask then, wherein have we been profited by the Gospel? What effect has it produced upon our minds in relation to the things before spoken of? What have we experienced of a spiritual redemption? What are we yet daily experiencing of a life of faith upon the Son of God? and how far does the prospect of eternal glory animate us to do and suffer all things for the attainment of it? I pray you, brethren, put these questions to yourselves, and satisfy not yourselves with a superficial or evasive answer. Bring forth the benefits which you have received: examine them: see how far they are of a saving nature, and bear the stamp and character of a work of grace upon the soul!If such inquiries be unnecessary, trouble not yourselves about them: but, if they will be made at the last day by the Judge of quick and dead, and will form the ground of your salvation or condemnation to all eternity, then let them be duly weighed, and impartially answered by every one of us: for, if we be not profited by the Gospel now, sure I am that we shall not be profited in the eternal world; yea, rather, that very word which ought to have been to us a savour of life unto life, will be to us a savour of death unto death [Note: 2Co 2:16.]. You all remember how greatly the guilt of Bethsaida and Chorazin was aggravated by their misimprovement of the privileges which they enjoyed under the ministry of our Lord: being exalted to heaven in their privileges, they were cast down the deeper into hell for their abuse of them [Note: Luk 10:13-15.]. The Jews in general too would not have had sin, comparatively, it they had not enjoyed the ministry of our blessed Lord: but that left them without excuse [Note: Joh 15:22.]. And even they will be innocent in comparison of you, if you, with the yet fuller light that is shining round you, neglect to improve the day of your visitation [Note: Mat 12:32.].]

2.

In a way of affectionate remonstrance

[It is clear and manifest, that the great mass of Christians do not mix faith with what they hear: for, if they did, they would obey it. Faith has the same respect to the proper objects of faith, as reason has to the proper objects of reason. From reason, we know that some things will be beneficial to the body, and other things injurious: and in accordance with its dictates we act, unless we are violently impelled in opposition to them, by some more operative principle in our minds. So will faith act. If we be blinded and overpowered by sense, we are then under the influence of unbelief. And if this be the predominant principle in our minds, O! think how awful will be our state! Verily, if this be of all sins the least criminal in appearance, it is of all sins the most fatal in its tendency: for whilst other sins render us obnoxious to Gods displeasure, this binds them all upon us, and precludes, as long as it is in exercise, all hope and possibility of obtaining mercy. See its operation as marked in our text. Methinks we have here the veil of the invisible world drawn aside. We are in the habit of sending all to heaven; but here we see how few in comparison do really attain the promised rest. Of all the six hundred thousand Israelites that were advanced to manhood, two only were suffered to enter into Canaan. All the rest (with the exception of the Levites) fell short through unbelief. And this is recorded as a warning to us, that we buoy not up ourselves with delusive expectations, in reference to our final state [Note: 1Co 10:1-6; 1Co 10:11. Jude, ver. 5.]. We can never alter that word, He that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned. I entreat you therefore to mix faith with what you hear from the infallible records of Gods word. Mix faith with it, I say, in the same intimate and influential manner as you mix reason with the deductions of reason. Your reason soon makes you flee from a house that is on fire, and to run to a place of safety from one that seeks your life: let your faith operate in like manner, without delay; stimulating you to flee to Christ for safety, and to lay hold upon the hope that is set before you in the Gospel.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it .

Ver. 2. The word preached ] Gr. , the word of hearing, i.e. the promise that fell from the preacher’s lips into their ears. Nescio quid divinum in auscultatione est, saith one; I know not what divine business there is in hearing; but sure I am that what we hear doth more deeply affect us, and more firmly abide with us, and stick by us, than what we read.

In them that heard it ] In their hearts, as in so many vessels. Faith and the promise meeting make a happy mixture, a precious confection.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

2 .] The former half of this verse substantiates the of the last verse. The stress is not, ‘ we , as well as they ,’ which would require to be expressed: but lies on , which includes both us and them.

For good tidings have been also announced ( is often used where the in fact belongs to the chief word in the sentence, but is transposed back to the , because it cannot well stand third: see Hartung, i. 138.

This passive use of is found in reff.) to us, as likewise to them (they were not the same good tidings in the two cases: but the Writer treats them as the same. To them indeed it was primarily the inheritance of the land of promise: but even then, as proved below, the had a further meaning, which meaning reaches even down to us): nevertheless the word of their hearing ( , gen. of apposition; the word and the being commensurate: ‘ the word of (consisting in) that which they heard .’ See note on ref. 1 Thess., where however is connected with . Delitzsch says here: “The classical use of (e. g. , i. e. a tradition from the ancients, Plato, Phdr. p. 274 C) does not by itself explain the apostolic; but we must refer to the Heb. , that which is received by hearing, the tidings (with the gen. of the thing declared 2Sa 4:4 , or of the declarer ref. Isa.). That is so called, which the Prophet hears from Jehovah and announces to the people, Isa 28:9 ; Jer 49 (29, LXX) 14: and thus there could not be a more appropriate word for that which is heard immediately or mediately from the mouth of the (ch. Heb 2:3 ), and thus for the N. T. preaching, so that the , considered as one idea (ref. 1 Thess.), betokens the N. T. word preached. The expression of this idea not being of itself a N. T. one, it may, without supposition of any reference to such passages as Exo 19:5 ( ), be used of God’s word spoken to Israel in the time of Moses”) did not profit them, unmingled as they were in faith with its hearers .

The passage is almost a locus desperatus. The question of reading may be solved by consulting the digest. The nominative, which apparently makes the sense so easy, “ the word, not being mingled with faith in them that heard it ,” rests on no manuscript authority, except that of the Codex Sinaiticus, but mainly on the Peschito and ancient Latin versions. It is notwithstanding retained by Mill, and Tischendorf Exo 7 [and 8], and defended, purely on subjective grounds, by Bleek, De Wette, Lnemann, Ebrard, and Delitzsch. I own that the temptation is strong to follow their example: but the evidence on the other side is very strong, and internal grounds seem to me as decisive in its favour as external. No doubt the difficulty is great: but not, I think, so great in reality, as on the other more tempting and apparently easy construction. I will first discuss this latter, and thus approach the question of the real meaning. The above rendering, “ the word, not being mingled with faith in them that heard it ,” is that of the great majority of modern expositors: who take as a dative either, . commodi, “ for ,” or “ with ” (“ chez ”) the hearers; . as = , the dative of the subject after a passive; or, . as = “ with ,” i. e. so that the hearers are they with whom the word was not mingled in, or by, faith. This latter appears to be the sense of the Syr.: “ quoniam non commixtus erat per fidem cum iis qui eum audierant :” (Etheridge’s rendering however is “because not contempered with faith in them that heard it:”) and the general understanding of this has been, that as food profits not, unless assimilated and mingled with the body of the eater, so the word did not profit, there being no assimilation of it by faith with (or, according to ( ) and ( ), it not being mingled with faith in) the hearers. Ebrard, alone of all Commentators, strikes out confidently and with some assumption a different path, and, taking this reading, understands that not the non-receptivity of the hearers, but the incapacity of the O. T. word itself to carry faith with it, is meant. I need hardly remind the reader that such a sense is directly against the argument, which knows of but one word, and against the plain assertion of Heb 4:12 , which Ebrard tries, without the least indication in the text itself, to interpret of the N. T. word only. It is indeed lamentable that an able expositor, such as Ebrard on the whole is, should suffer himself to be so often carried away by unworthy crotchets, and when so carried away, to speak so confidently of them. But let us now discuss this whole class of renderings. The first objection to it appears to me to be, that it connects with . Bleek felt this, and tried to help the sense by the conjecture , originally suggested, from Thdrt.’s explanation, by Nsselt. It would be surely unnatural that the word itself , and not the hearers, should be alleged as in any way the ground of their rejection . And if it be replied, that it is not the word itself, but the circumstance of its being not mixed with faith in them, I answer that such may have been the fact , but considering what our Writer says of the word of God in Heb 4:12 , it seems to me very unlikely that he should so have expressed it . Then again the presents a difficulty on this interpretation. The usages of with participles are very difficult to limit accurately, amidst all the varieties of subjectivity introduced by personification and hypothesis: but I think we may safely say, that the occurrence of applied to , and indicative of mere historical matter of fact, would not be so likely as that of , where persons are treated of. And yet more: it seems hardly probable from the form of the sentence, that and should refer to the same persons, as they must do, in case of the nominative reading being adopted. Why not in this case , or , or simply ? I feel however another, and a still weightier objection, to the art. , in that case. It might doubtless be there, and capable of a good meaning: but when we examine the habit of our Writer, we find that he never uses for ‘ faith ,’ abstract, but always for ‘ the faith ,’ concrete, of some person spoken of. And this usage is very marked: for in ch. Heb 11:1 , where he gives a definition of Faith in the abstract, it is , not . . . The other places where he uses it with the art. are ch. Heb 11:39 , , “by their faith:” Heb 12:2 , , “of the faith:” and Heb 13:7 , , “whose faith” So that I conceive we cannot understand here otherwise than, ‘in their faith,’ although the word ‘their’ may be too strong when expressed in English, as almost implying the existence of real faith in them, which did not exist. And I own this consideration sets so strong a barrier against the rec. reading , that, it seems to me, no difficulty consequent on adopting the other reading can bear me over it. On these grounds then, as well as external evidence, I feel that the accusative plural should be inflexibly maintained. Then, how are we to understand the sentence? The modern Commentators all declare that it cannot be understood at all. The Fathers, with the exceptions of Cyr.-alex. once, Thdrt. in one edition (both unreal ones, see Bleek, p. 505), and Lucifer of Cagliari, all read the accus.; and mostly explain the clause, that they ( ) were not mingled in (in respect of) faith with those who really listened and obeyed , viz. Joshua and Caleb. So Chrys.: but his homilies on this Epistle have been so imperfectly reported, that he seems not unfrequently very confused: here, e. g., making Caleb and Joshua those who were not mixed with the multitude; so that Thl., who himself takes the above view, navely says of Chrys., . , . And so c. and Photius (in Bleek), Hammond, Cramer, Matthi, &c. But the objection to this reference will already have been seen by the student. The exceptions to the general unbelief are not brought out by our Writer, anxious to include all under it for the greater warning to his readers. Theodoret, though quoting , seems to have read or , for he interprets , . , . (one ms. reads ) . And Theodore of Mopsuestia says, , . We have also a testimony from Irenus of a character hardly to be doubted, pointing to the same reading. It occurs iii. 19.1, p. 212, “Qui nude tantum hominem Eum dicunt ex Joseph generatum, perseverantes in servitute pristin inobedienti moriuntur, nondum commisti verbo Dei Patris.” If we could set aside the objection to , that it has next to no external authority in its favour, it would be a not improbable reading, for we have this very participle in ch. Heb 2:1 ; and in Stobus xlv. 8, we find these lines from Menander: , . But at present, it cannot come into question as a reading at all. Besides which, there would be this objection to it, that has already occurred in this passage, and as implying those who heard the word, ch. Heb 3:16 . Taking then , and rejecting the idea that it means Caleb and Joshua, or implies yielding assent and obedience, we have but this way open to us, which, though not without difficulty, is yet neither sinnlos nor contertwidrig . having been mentioned in the general sense of ‘ the word heard ,’ is also in the general sense of ‘ its hearers ,’ and the assumption is made, that the word heard has naturally recipients , of whom the normal characteristic is ‘faith.’ And so these men received no benefit from ‘the word of hearing,’ because they were not one in faith with its hearers; did not correspond, in their method of receiving it, with faithful hearers, whom it does profit. So that I would take not as historical, ‘those who heard it,’ as in Joh 5:25 , . . . I fairly own that this interpretation does not satisfy me : but it seems the only escape from violation either of the rules of criticism or of those of grammar: and therefore I am constrained to accept it until some better is suggested.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

unto us, &c. = we also were evangelized. Greek. euangelizo. App-121.

as, &c. = as they also (were).

word. Greek. logos. App-121.

preached = of hearing. Greek. akoe. App-121.

mixed. Greek. sunkerannumi. Only here and 1Co 12:24. The texts prefer the accusative case plural of this word, agreeing with “them”, rather than the nom, singular agreeing with “word”. There is the addition of one letter in the Greek Read “them, since they were not united by faith to those that heard”.

faith. Greek. pistis. App-150. Occurs thirty-two times in Hebrews. See App-10.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

2.] The former half of this verse substantiates the of the last verse. The stress is not, we, as well as they, which would require to be expressed: but lies on , which includes both us and them.

For good tidings have been also announced ( is often used where the in fact belongs to the chief word in the sentence, but is transposed back to the , because it cannot well stand third: see Hartung, i. 138.

This passive use of is found in reff.) to us, as likewise to them (they were not the same good tidings in the two cases: but the Writer treats them as the same. To them indeed it was primarily the inheritance of the land of promise: but even then, as proved below, the had a further meaning, which meaning reaches even down to us): nevertheless the word of their hearing ( , gen. of apposition; the word and the being commensurate: the word of (consisting in) that which they heard. See note on ref. 1 Thess., where however is connected with . Delitzsch says here: The classical use of (e. g. , i. e. a tradition from the ancients, Plato, Phdr. p. 274 C) does not by itself explain the apostolic; but we must refer to the Heb. , that which is received by hearing, the tidings (with the gen. of the thing declared 2Sa 4:4, or of the declarer ref. Isa.). That is so called, which the Prophet hears from Jehovah and announces to the people, Isa 28:9; Jeremiah 49 (29, LXX) 14: and thus there could not be a more appropriate word for that which is heard immediately or mediately from the mouth of the (ch. Heb 2:3), and thus for the N. T. preaching, so that the , considered as one idea (ref. 1 Thess.), betokens the N. T. word preached. The expression of this idea not being of itself a N. T. one, it may, without supposition of any reference to such passages as Exo 19:5 ( ), be used of Gods word spoken to Israel in the time of Moses) did not profit them, unmingled as they were in faith with its hearers.

The passage is almost a locus desperatus. The question of reading may be solved by consulting the digest. The nominative, which apparently makes the sense so easy, the word, not being mingled with faith in them that heard it, rests on no manuscript authority, except that of the Codex Sinaiticus, but mainly on the Peschito and ancient Latin versions. It is notwithstanding retained by Mill, and Tischendorf ed. 7 [and 8], and defended, purely on subjective grounds, by Bleek, De Wette, Lnemann, Ebrard, and Delitzsch. I own that the temptation is strong to follow their example: but the evidence on the other side is very strong, and internal grounds seem to me as decisive in its favour as external. No doubt the difficulty is great: but not, I think, so great in reality, as on the other more tempting and apparently easy construction. I will first discuss this latter, and thus approach the question of the real meaning. The above rendering, the word, not being mingled with faith in them that heard it, is that of the great majority of modern expositors: who take as a dative either, . commodi, for, or with (chez) the hearers; . as = , the dative of the subject after a passive; or, . as = with, i. e. so that the hearers are they with whom the word was not mingled in, or by, faith. This latter appears to be the sense of the Syr.: quoniam non commixtus erat per fidem cum iis qui eum audierant: (Etheridges rendering however is because not contempered with faith in them that heard it:) and the general understanding of this has been, that as food profits not, unless assimilated and mingled with the body of the eater, so the word did not profit, there being no assimilation of it by faith with (or, according to () and (), it not being mingled with faith in) the hearers. Ebrard, alone of all Commentators, strikes out confidently and with some assumption a different path, and, taking this reading, understands that not the non-receptivity of the hearers, but the incapacity of the O. T. word itself to carry faith with it, is meant. I need hardly remind the reader that such a sense is directly against the argument, which knows of but one word,-and against the plain assertion of Heb 4:12, which Ebrard tries, without the least indication in the text itself, to interpret of the N. T. word only. It is indeed lamentable that an able expositor, such as Ebrard on the whole is, should suffer himself to be so often carried away by unworthy crotchets, and when so carried away, to speak so confidently of them. But let us now discuss this whole class of renderings. The first objection to it appears to me to be, that it connects with . Bleek felt this, and tried to help the sense by the conjecture , originally suggested, from Thdrt.s explanation, by Nsselt. It would be surely unnatural that the word itself, and not the hearers, should be alleged as in any way the ground of their rejection. And if it be replied, that it is not the word itself, but the circumstance of its being not mixed with faith in them, I answer that such may have been the fact, but considering what our Writer says of the word of God in Heb 4:12, it seems to me very unlikely that he should so have expressed it. Then again the presents a difficulty on this interpretation. The usages of with participles are very difficult to limit accurately, amidst all the varieties of subjectivity introduced by personification and hypothesis: but I think we may safely say, that the occurrence of applied to , and indicative of mere historical matter of fact, would not be so likely as that of , where persons are treated of. And yet more: it seems hardly probable from the form of the sentence, that and should refer to the same persons, as they must do, in case of the nominative reading being adopted. Why not in this case , or , or simply ? I feel however another, and a still weightier objection, to the art. , in that case. It might doubtless be there, and capable of a good meaning: but when we examine the habit of our Writer, we find that he never uses for faith, abstract, but always for the faith, concrete, of some person spoken of. And this usage is very marked: for in ch. Heb 11:1, where he gives a definition of Faith in the abstract, it is , not … The other places where he uses it with the art. are ch. Heb 11:39, , by their faith:-Heb 12:2, , of the faith:-and Heb 13:7, , whose faith So that I conceive we cannot understand here otherwise than, in their faith, although the word their may be too strong when expressed in English, as almost implying the existence of real faith in them, which did not exist. And I own this consideration sets so strong a barrier against the rec. reading , that, it seems to me, no difficulty consequent on adopting the other reading can bear me over it. On these grounds then, as well as external evidence, I feel that the accusative plural should be inflexibly maintained. Then, how are we to understand the sentence? The modern Commentators all declare that it cannot be understood at all. The Fathers, with the exceptions of Cyr.-alex. once, Thdrt. in one edition (both unreal ones, see Bleek, p. 505),-and Lucifer of Cagliari, all read the accus.; and mostly explain the clause, that they () were not mingled in (in respect of) faith with those who really listened and obeyed, viz. Joshua and Caleb. So Chrys.: but his homilies on this Epistle have been so imperfectly reported, that he seems not unfrequently very confused: here, e. g., making Caleb and Joshua those who were not mixed with the multitude; so that Thl., who himself takes the above view, navely says of Chrys., . , . And so c. and Photius (in Bleek), Hammond, Cramer, Matthi, &c. But the objection to this reference will already have been seen by the student. The exceptions to the general unbelief are not brought out by our Writer, anxious to include all under it for the greater warning to his readers. Theodoret, though quoting , seems to have read or , for he interprets , . , . (one ms. reads ) . And Theodore of Mopsuestia says, , . We have also a testimony from Irenus of a character hardly to be doubted, pointing to the same reading. It occurs iii. 19.1, p. 212, Qui nude tantum hominem Eum dicunt ex Joseph generatum, perseverantes in servitute pristin inobedienti moriuntur, nondum commisti verbo Dei Patris. If we could set aside the objection to , that it has next to no external authority in its favour, it would be a not improbable reading, for we have this very participle in ch. Heb 2:1; and in Stobus xlv. 8, we find these lines from Menander: , . But at present, it cannot come into question as a reading at all. Besides which, there would be this objection to it, that has already occurred in this passage, and as implying those who heard the word, ch. Heb 3:16. Taking then , and rejecting the idea that it means Caleb and Joshua, or implies yielding assent and obedience, we have but this way open to us, which, though not without difficulty, is yet neither sinnlos nor contertwidrig. having been mentioned in the general sense of the word heard, is also in the general sense of its hearers, and the assumption is made, that the word heard has naturally recipients, of whom the normal characteristic is faith. And so these men received no benefit from the word of hearing, because they were not one in faith with its hearers; did not correspond, in their method of receiving it, with faithful hearers, whom it does profit. So that I would take not as historical, those who heard it, as in Joh 5:25, . . . I fairly own that this interpretation does not satisfy me: but it seems the only escape from violation either of the rules of criticism or of those of grammar: and therefore I am constrained to accept it until some better is suggested.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Heb 4:2. , for) This refers to , let us fear.-, to us was the Gospel preached [we have had the Gospel preached to us]) We should think that this expression is spoken especially to us, who are called Evangelical: Heb 4:6.- [as well as they], as well as to them) The promise of the land of Canaan had been proclaimed to those men of old, Heb 4:6.- , did not profit) There is less said here than is intended (Meiosis). On the contrary [so far was it from profiting them], the unbelievers incurred the greatest guilt and punishment. Supply, nor will it be profitable to us without faith.- , not being mixed with) The word is entirely mixed with and insinuated into the believing soul; and when it is thus mingled, it makes its way wonderfully, as a health-giving draught, and something more powerful even than that, Heb 4:12-13.- ) with faith, the dative.- ) So far as concerns them that heard it. Comp. Rom 4:12, note. To these are opposed , those who believed, in the following verse.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

unto us: Act 3:26, Act 13:46, Gal 3:8, Gal 4:13, 1Pe 1:12

preached: Gr. of hearing, Rom 10:16, Rom 10:17, *marg.

did: Rom 2:25, 1Co 13:3, 1Ti 4:8

not being: etc. or because they were not united by faith to, Heb 4:6, Heb 3:12, Heb 3:18, Heb 3:19, Heb 11:6, 1Th 1:5, 1Th 2:13, 2Th 2:12, 2Th 2:13, Jam 1:21

Reciprocal: Deu 9:23 – ye believed Psa 2:11 – rejoice Psa 90:7 – For we Psa 106:24 – they believed Mat 9:22 – thy Mat 13:23 – good Mar 4:8 – fell Mar 6:5 – General Luk 8:48 – thy Luk 9:41 – O faithless Joh 20:25 – Except Rom 3:3 – if some Gal 5:2 – that

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Heb 4:2. The simple meaning of gospel is “good news,” hence any announcement of good news or promises may rightly be termed gospel. The Israelites had good information that they were to be given a land of rest from their wanderings. The disciples of Christ are given the promise of a rest from their worldly cares after this life is over, provided they are faithful to the end. The promise did not profit the Israelites under consideration because they did not believe it. (See Heb 3:18-19.)

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Heb 4:2. For unto us has the Gospel been preached as well as unto them, i.e we both have our Gospel or glad tidings of a future rest, equally a Divine message, though given with different degrees of fulness.

But the word preached; rather, the word heard (literally, of hearing), was of no use to them, brought no profit, because they were not united (literally mingled) by (and in) faith with them that heard it, i.e who listened and obeyedCaleb, Joshua, and the rest. The word not united, unmingled, is found only here and in 1Co 12:24, and describes a state that follows from affinity and sympathy.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Observe here, 1. That the gospel is no new doctrine, no new law, but one and the same to all persons, and at all times, ever since the first publication of it in the original promise, Gen 3:15. It is the same for substance, though not for clearness of revelation; the same gospel was preached to Adam, to Abraham, to the Israelites in the wilderness, which was preached by Christ and his apostles, but with clearer light, evidence, and power in the administration of it; Unto us was the gospel, the same gospel, preached, as well as unto them.

Observe, 2. That the generality of persons, who have sat under the preaching of the gospel in all ages, have not savingly profited by it, The word preached did not profit: from the beginning it has been so, partly through carelessness, and want of due attention in the hearers, and partly for want of meditation upon, and particular application of, the word unto themselves after they have heard it; partly through the neglect of prayer for a blessing upon the word they hear; for those and the like causes the word preached did not nor does not profit.

Observe, 3. That unbelief in man’s heart is the great cause of that unprofitableness which is found in the word preached: unbelief hinders the efficacy of the word preached, by withholding men from yielding their assent to the truths thay hear, by hindering them from applying, from a particular and close applying, of the word they hear to their own consciences; and unbelief hinders men from calling upon God by prayer, for a blessing upon the word they hear.

Observe, 4. That the word preached then profits, and only then, when it is a mixed word: the original word is a metaphor taken either from seed, from meat, or from physic. As seed must be mixed with the soil, and with the dew and rain of heaven, or it will never spring and grow; or as meat must be mixed with the stomach, or it will not nourish; and as physic must meet and mix with the humour, gripe and put the patient to some pain, or it will never cure: so must the word be rooted in the heart, or it will never fructify in the life: it mest be mixed with faith, with love, with humility, with patience, or it will never bring forth fruit with joy.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Verse 2

The gospel; the offer of rest. The word gospel means any message or offer of kindness and favor.–The word preached; the offer made.–Mixed with faith; accompanied by faith.

Hebrews 4:3,4. This passage is somewhat obscure. The meaning may perhaps be, that the rest which God promised that his people should share with him, could not have been the rest after the creation, spoken of in the passage quoted in Hebrews 4:4, for his threatening that they should not enter into his rest was made in the time of Moses, although his rest from the work of creation had been long since past, having taken place when the works were finished at the foundation of the world.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

4:2 {1} For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being {a} mixed with faith in them that heard [it].

(1) By these words “His voice” he shows that David meant the preaching of Christ, who was then also preached, for Moses and the prophets honoured no one else.

(a) He compares the preaching of the gospel to drink, which being drunk, that is to say, heard, profits nothing, unless it is mixed with faith.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

What is the "good news" that both the Israelites and the original readers of this epistle had heard preached to them? It was probably the news about their inheritance and the possibility of entering into their rest. This seems clear from the context. This is not a reference to the gospel message. The good news the Israelites heard did not profit them because they refused to trust God but rebelled against Him. Likewise the good news of our inheritance and rest may not profit us if we fail to trust God but turn from Him in unbelief. By inheritance Moses and this writer meant all that God wanted and wants to give His people. We will all receive many blessings even if we apostatize, because we are God’s children whom He has promised to glorify (1Pe 1:3-9). Nevertheless we will not enter into full rest or experience all we could inherit if we depart from God.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)