John Brown, Hebrews Quote 16

Hebrews by John Brown  p. 241
    Now, as it was with these persons that the high priest had to do—as it was their interests he had to manage with God, it was necessary that he should be a person who “could have—who was capable of having—compassion on them.”  The word translated “have compassion,” is rendered in the margin, reasonably bear with.  A person could not be expected to do the duties of a high priest aright if he could not enter into the feelings of those whom he represented.  If their faults excited no sentiment in his mind but disapprobation—if they moved him to no feeling but anger, he would not be fit to interpose in their behalf with God—he would not be inclined to do for them what was necessary for the expiation of their guilt, and the acceptance of their services.  But the Jewish high priest was one who was capable of pitying and bearing with the ignorant and the erring; “for he himself also was compassed with infirmity.”
    “Infirmity,” here, plainly is significant of sinful weakness, and probably also of the disagreeable effects resulting from it.  The Jewish high priest was himself a sinner.  He had personal experience of temptation, and the tendency of man to yield to temptation—of sin, and of the consequences of sin; so that he had the natural capacity, and ought to have had the moral capacity, of pitying his fellow sinners.  Of this truth, of which the Apostle makes use afterwards in illustrating the superiority of Jesus Christ to the Levitical high priests, we have a striking proof in the undeniable fact, that they were appointed to offer sacrifices for “their own sins, as well as for the sins of the people,”—a plain proof that they needed pardon as well as those in whose room they stood.  And it deserves particular notice, that the high priest was required first to offer sacrifices for himself that he might be purified and accepted in offering for the people,--an intimation that, in order to available interposition with God, the person who interposes must be considered as himself an object of His favorable regards.  Lev. Iv. 3, ix. 7, xvi. 6, 24.  Such is the Apostle’s description of the Levitical high priest.  From what has been said it is plain that there is no human ministry under the New Economy which corresponds to the priesthood or high-priesthood under the law.  There is an essential difference between the Christian ministry and the Levitical priesthood.  Christians do not need a human priesthood.  We have a great High Priest, who requires no coadjutors.  His character and work are perfect.

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 15

Hebrews by John Brown  p.235

‘Since we have a High Priest—one to interpose with God on our behalf—one to expiate our sins and to make intercession for us; since our High Priest is an illustrious personage, who has entered into the immediate presence of God, thus proving the acceptance of His sacrifice and the prevalence of His intercession; since He is indeed the only begotten of God, the divinity of whose nature gives infinite virtue to His sacrifice, and secures uniform success to His interpositions; and since, though so inconceivably great and glorious, He is not withstanding, from His having assumed our nature and submitted to our condition, at once capable of and disposed to sympathize with us in all our trials, having Himself, so far as the absolute purity of His nature admitted, been exposed to the same trials,--let us persevere in the acknowledgement we have made, and instead of falling before the temptations to abandon Christ and His cause, let us, in the exercise of an enlightened and affectionate devotion, seek from God, the propitiated Divinity, in the exercise of His pity for our weakness and misery, and of His grace towards us who are utterly undeserving, those aids of His good Spirit which are at once absolutely necessary and abundantly sufficient to enable us to “hold fast the beginning of our confidence stedfast to the end,” amid all the trials to which we are exposed.’  The exhortation was peculiarly appropriate to the Hebrew Christians in their circumstances.  It is suited, however, to Christians of all countries and ages.  The grand leading outlines of state, character and education of true Christians are independent of the circumstances of time and place.  The two great duties of the Christian are, the believing study of the truth respecting Jesus Christ, and the cultivation of a habitual affectionate intercourse with God as the God of peace, under the influence of the faith of “the truth as it is in Jesus.”

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 14

Hebrews  by John Brown   p. 218

    It can never be too strongly stated—it can scarcely be too frequently repeated—that the religion of Christ is pre-eminently a spiritual religion; that to have the mind and heart, the thoughts and the affections, subjected to the divine authority, conformed to the divine will, forms its essence; and when these are wanting, it does not exist, however ingeniously the man may speculate, however fluently he may talk, however plausible may be his profession, and however regular his performance of the external offices of Christian devotion.  “Keep thy heart with all diligence,” is an injunction which ought to be constantly before the mind of all who are called by the name of Christ.  “As a man thinketh in his heart, so he is.”  The word of God, whether of promise or of threatening, refers to principles as well as to actions, and to actions only so far as they are the result and expression of principles.  If our minds and hearts are not in accordance with God’s word, we sin; and we may rest assured that “our sin,” though not manifesting itself strongly in outward acts, “will,” as Moses says, “find us out.”  However orthodox, then, may be our professed creed, however regular our external conduct, if our views of truth are not conformed to the mind of Christ, if our tempers and dispositions are not regulated by the statements of His word and subjected to the influence of His Spirit, though we may be called by His name, though we may be students and preachers of His word, we “are none of His.”  We are in reality unbelievers; and the threatening of God, that the unbeliever shall not enter into His rest, is as really pointed against us as against the professed infidel or the open apostate, and will as certainly be executed in reference to us as in reference to them.

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 13

Hebrews by John Brown p. 208

Now, this prophetic Psalm makes it quite plain that there is a divine rest into which men are invited to enter different from, and long subsequent to, the rest of Canaan. Ver. 8. “For if Jesus had given them rest, then would He not afterwards have spoken of another day.” Jesus here, as in Acts vii. 45, is the Greek form of the name of Joshua, the conqueror of Canaan; and in both cases the Hebrew word should have been retained. If there had been no other rest of God but the rest of Canaan into which Joshua conducted the Israelites, then there would not have been any mention made of a period called a day, long posterior to the era of entering Canaan, during which men are invited to enter into the rest of God. But since mention is made of such a period, and as nothing that can be called a divine rest has been entered into by men since Israel entered into Canaan, it is plain that we must come to the Apostle’s conclusion, ver. 9 “There remaineth therefore a rest for the people of God.”

These words, interpreted, as so many other passages of Scripture are, without reference to their connection, are usually explained of the celestial blessedness, and considered as intimating, that whatever may be the afflictions, and troubles, and labours of the saint here below, there remains for him rest above. This is truth, but it is not the truth here taught. The rest here is that state of holy happiness which Christians enjoy on earth as well as in heaven, and into which they enter by the “belief of the truth.” There is a rest far better than the rest of Israel in Canaan, which remains—after the rest of Canaan has passed away—for the peculiar people of God, the spiritual Israel under the new economy; and into this we are invited in the Gospel to enter by believing.

The word rest in this passage is not the same as that employed in the preceding context: it is a word equivalent to the rest of God,a sabbatism –a sacred rest; and the Apostle states the reason why he gives it this appellation in the 10^th verse. “For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from His.” These words have by some interpreters of great name (Dr Owen and Dr Wardlaw) been referred to Christ. But, though it is true that Christ has entered into rest, and has ceased from the work of expiation as God as ceased from the work of creation, yet, as Christ is not mentioned in the immediate context, as He is never anywhere by way of eminence called, ‘He who hath entered into rest,’ and as this statement, however important in itself, has no bearing on the Apostle’s object, this mode of interpretation cannot be acquiesced in. “He that is entered into his rest” is a description of the same persons as “the people of God.” Those who consider the rest of God as exclusively descriptive of heaven, consider the words as expressing this idea: ‘They who have entered on the enjoyment of the celestial inheritance are completely at rest, as God was after the creation; they rest from their labours; and their rest resembles God’s.’ The words, viewed in this light, no doubt express a truth; but it is difficult to see how that truth is connected with the Apostle’s design, which seems to be, to show how the rest which, as appears from the 95^th Psalm, yet “remains for the people of God,” and into which they enter by believing, deserves to be called a sacred rest—a sabbatism—the rest of God. By “him that is entered into rest,” I understand the man who by believing is introduced into that state of holy happiness which is begun on earth and is perfected in heaven. This state of rest is called a sabbatism, or sacred rest—the rest of God; and it deserves the name, for he who has entered into it has fellowship with God—rests along with God.

Some have supposed that in the words, “hath ceased,” or rested, “from his works, even as God did from His,” there is a reference to the believer ceasing for ever from the vain attempts in which he previously engaged to make himself happy, and resting in the enjoyment of that happiness which through believing he possesses as the gift of God through Jesus Christ his Lord. He does not go about to establish his own method of justification, but he submits to God’s method of justification. He does not say, “Who will show me any good?” but, “This is the rest, and this is the refreshing.”

We are disposed to think the primary idea is that already hinted at: ‘He who has entered into his rest has fellowship with God—rests along with God; and therefore the rest well deserves to be called a sabbatism—a sacred rest. He who believes the truth enters on the enjoyment of a happiness which is of the same nature, and springs from the same sources, as the happiness of God. Jehovah rests and rejoices in the manifestation made of His all-perfect character in the person and work of Jesus Christ; and he who believes enters into this rest, and participates of this joy. Such, we apprehend, is the Apostle’s illustration of the principle—a promise of entering into God’s rest has been left us, or a divine rest remains for us.

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 12

Hebrews  by John Brown  p. 180

    To be hardened is to become insensible to the claims of Jesus Christ, so that they do not make their appropriate impression on the mind, in producing attention, faith, and obedience.  He is hardened who is careless, unbelieving, impenitent, and disobedient.

     Into this state the professors of Christianity among the Jews were in danger of falling “through the deceitfulness of sin”—that is, through sin’s deceiving them.  By “sin” I apprehend we are to understand anything inconsistent with the law of Christ, whom professing believers acknowledge as their Lord and Master; for example, the neglecting to assemble themselves together for the observance of the ordinances of Christianity, to which the Apostle particularly refers in a subsequent part of the Epistle.

    But how is such a sin as this calculated to deceive them, and by deceiving to “harden” them—to make them careless, unbelieving and disobedient, so as that they depart from Christ, and, in departing from Him, depart also from “the living God?”  It is natural for man to wish to stand well with himself.  Self-condemnation is one of the most intolerable of all feelings.  When a man has, from whatever motive, done something that is inconsistent with the law of Christ, he naturally sets himself to extenuate, to excuse, and, if possible, to defend his conduct.  There is perhaps an attempt made to convince the mind that there is really no violation of the law of Christ; that the ordinary way of interpreting that law is unduly strict; or that, if there was a violation, it was in his circumstances scarcely avoidable, and, if not justifiable altogether, yet deserving of but very slight blame.  In this state of mind, doubts of the reasonableness of the law he has transgressed, and of the authority to which it lays claim, present themselves to the mind, and, instead of being immediately dismissed, meet with a welcome reception.  These naturally lead to a repetition of the act of violation of the law of Christ, or to other violations to the law of Christ; and just as the backslider proceeds in his downward course, the process of thought above described is apt to become more and more habitual to him, till at last he becomes completely hardened against the claims which the word of Christ has on his attention, faith, and obedience, and finally “makes shipwreck of faith and a good conscience.”

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 11

Hebrews by John Brown  p.189

This statement—‘Almost all who came out of Egypt with Moses, after having heard the promise and command of God, provoked Him, by refusing to believe the promise and obey the command’—was well fitted to excite a salutary fear in the minds of the Hebrew Christians.  It cautioned them against resting in privileges, and thinking themselves safe merely because they had by profession forsaken Judaism, and had heard the promises and commands of God made known by Jesus Christ and His Apostles.  All who left Egypt did not enter Canaan.  All who by profession leave the world lying in wickedness do not, of course, enter into the heavenly rest.  Men may hear the Gospel, and yet not believe it.  The grace of God may come to them and yet come to them in vain.  But this is not all.  The great majority—almost all who came out of Egypt with Moses, almost all who heard the promise and command of God—were unbelieving and disobedient.  Was not this a most striking demonstration of the strength of the natural tendency to unbelief and disobedience in the human heart? and was it not reasonable and right that the Hebrews should take heed lest there was in any of them “and evil heart of unbelief,” when it was so plain that there was such a heart in the great majority of their ancestors?  Every new proof of the tendency of human nature to unbelief and disobedience should make us the more “jealous over ourselves with a godly jealousy.”

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 10

Hebrews by John Brown  p. 181

“Exhort one another,” says he, “daily, while it is still called To-day.”  The food of faith is truth and its evidence.  All that man can do to produce faith, and maintain faith, is just to place these before the mind.  It is the duty of every Christian, knowing that there is in him “an evil heart of unbelief,” often to turn his own mind to a serious consideration of the truth and its evidence, as contained in the Volume of Inspiration; and it is his duty, too, knowing that in every fellow-Christian there is also “an evil heart of unbelief,” and especially if he perceives this evil heart manifesting itself in anything like a tendency to apostasy, to bring before his mind the truth and its evidence, that he may continue “stedfast and unmovable,” rooted, and grounded, and stablished in the faith wherein he has been taught.  This is, I apprehend, the mutual exhortation to which the Apostle refers.

    It deserves notice that the word rendered exhort is the same word which is often translated ‘comfort;’ and it is very probably used to suggest the idea, that nothing is better fitted to prevent apostasy than bringing before the mind the truth as to the “exceeding great and precious promises,” made to those who “hold fast the confidence and rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.”  It is the good news –the consolatory message of a free and full salvation through Christ Jesus—it is this, believed, which binds the heart to the Saviour and to His law.  It is quite right to imitate the Apostle in placing before the mind of the backslider the awful results of apostasy; but such statements alone will produce but little effect.  The voice of a reconciled God behind him, proclaiming, “Return to Me, thou backsliding child, for I have redeemed thee,” when heard, will do more to prevent apostasy, and induce him to turn his feet to God’s testimonies, than all the terrors of the tenfold damnation which awaits the apostate, though presented to the mind in the most striking and alarming form.

    The duty of public exhortation forms an important part of the duty of Christian pastors; but it is plain from the passage before us that it is the duty of all Christians, as they have opportunity, privately to exhort and admonish one another, lest they be “hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.”  It is too much the practice of professors of Christianity in our times, when they perceive in one of their brethren a tendency, as they think, to “depart from the living God,” to speak of it to every person rather than to the one to whom alone in the first instance it ought to be spoken of—to lament over it in the presence of others, instead of endeavoring to remove the evil by friendly exhortation to the individual himself, and earnest prayer to God to render the use of the means prescribed by Himself effectual for the purpose for which He has appointed it.

    This mutual exhortation the Apostle enjoins to be engaged in “daily, while it is still called To-day.”  They were to exhort one another daily, i.e., frequently, and without delay.  Whenever we observe in brethren what appears to us an indication of departure from the path of Christian truth and duty, we are to use the means prescribed by the inspired writer for bringing them back.  Every step they take in the downward path makes their recovery more difficult; and yet a little while, and they will be removed beyond the reach of our exertions.  If any of us have a friend whom we think in danger of that greatest of all evils, the loss of the soul, let us be speedy, diligent, earnest, whether by instruction, admonition or prayer.

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 9

From Hebrews by John Brown  p. 178

    To “depart from the living God” is just an expression for apostasy from Christianity,--in the case   of those whom the Apostle was addressing, the renouncing the profession of the faith of Christ and returning to Judaism.  Those who did so, no doubt, flattered themselves that they were not departing from, but returning to God; but the Apostle presses on them this truth, that they could not abandon Christ without abandoning God.  There is but one God, --He is “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,”—He is “God in Christ reconciling the world to Himself;” and, of course, he who renounces Christ abandons God.

    The appellation living God is emphatic.  Some have supposed it just equivalent to the true God; as if the Apostle had said, ‘In apostatizing from Christianity to Judaism, you as really depart from the living God as if you were becoming the worshippers of idols.’  I am rather disposed to think that the expression “living” is intended to convey the idea of power.  ‘Dead’ is often equivalent to powerless; ‘living,’ to powerful.  This is remarkably the case in two passages in this Epistle:  “The word of God is quick (living) and powerful, sharper than a two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing of the soul and spirit.”  “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”  It is quite safe to depart from dead gods.  No spiritual advantage can be obtained by adhering to them; no danger is incurred in abandoning them; they cannot punish the apostate.  But it is otherwise with him who apostatizes from the living God.  He departs from Him “with whom is the fountain of life,” and who alone can make him happy; He departs from Him who can execute all the threatenings which He has denounced against those who forsake Him.

    There is need of constant watchfulness on the part of the professors of Christianity, lest under the influence of unbelief they “depart from the living God.”  “Take heed,” says the Apostle.  There is nothing, I am persuaded, in regard to which professors of Christianity fall into more dangerous practical mistakes than this.  They suspect everything sooner than the soundness and firmness of their belief.  There are many who are supposing themselves believers who have no true faith at all,--and so it would be proved were the hour of trial, which is perhaps nearer than they are aware, to arrive; and almost all who have faith suppose they have it in greater measure than they really have it.  There is no prayer that a Christian needs more frequently to present than, “Lord, increase my faith;” “deliver me from an evil heart of unbelief.”  All apostasy from God, whether partial or total, originates in unbelief.  To have his faith increased—to have more extended, and accurate, and impressive views of “the truth as it is in Jesus”—ought to be the object of the Christian’s most earnest desire and unremitting exertion.  Just in the degree in which we obtain deliverance from the “evil heart of unbelief” are we enabled to cleave to the Lord with full purpose of heart, to follow Him fully, and, in opposition to all the temptations to abandon His cause, to “walk in all His commandments and ordinances blameless.”

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 8

Hebrews by John Brown  p. 168

This figurative view of the state of believers in Christ Jesus as the family of God, under the management of His Son, suggests many very important truths in reference to the relation in which they stand—to God, to Jesus Christ, and to one another—to the privileges which they enjoy, and to the duties which are incumbent on them.  The idea which the words of the Apostle seem intended to bring before the mind, is the honour and happiness of the situation of the believing Hebrews as members of this family of God.  God is their Father; the incarnate Son is their Elder Brother; angels are their ministers; the heavenly Canaan is their inheritance.  They are “heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ Jesus.”  This is the truth in reference to all genuine believers, of every country, in every age; but it is the truth only in reference to genuine believers; and the only permanently satisfactory evidence of the genuineness of their faith, is their continuing to manifest by their conduct that they are under the influence of this faith.  Accordingly, the Apostle adds, We are the family of God, “if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.”

These words are not intended to suggest the sentiment, that persons may belong to the family of God under the government of His Son—in other words, may be the children of God through faith in Christ Jesus—and yet not “hold fast the confidence and rejoicing of the hope stedfast unto the end;” for this is plainly inconsistent with many plain declarations of Scripture.  While their inheritance is “reserved for them in heaven,” they are “kept to it by the mighty power of God through faith.”  But it is intended to teach us this important truth, that none but those who “hold firm to the end the confidence and rejoicing of their hope,” really belong to the family of God which is entrusted to the care of His Son Jesus Christ.

The hope here spoken of is what by way of eminence may be called the Christian hope—the expectation of everlasting happiness through Christ Jesus.  This is the hope which has been brought to us in “the word of the truth of the Gospel,” and which is awakened in every heart into which the faith of the Gospel enters.

But what are we to understand by the “confidence of this hope,” and “the rejoicing of this hope?”  The primary and ordinary meaning of the word rendered “confidence,” is freedom and boldness of speech, as expressive of full conviction and the absence of fear—opposed to silence and hesitation, as expressive of doubt and timidity.  The force of the word is illustrated by the following passages in which it occurs:--John vii. 26, xviii.20; Acts iv.13; 2 Cor. iii.12. vii.4; Phil. i.20; 1 Tim. iii.13.  Open , unhesitating, fearless profession of the Christian hope, seems to be the Apostle’s idea.  The Apostle Peter exhorts Christians to be “always ready to give an answer to every one who asketh them a reason of the hope that is in them.”

This constant readiness to state and defend those truths and their evidences on which rests our hope, is what is here termed “the confidence of the hope,” the free and fearless profession of the hope.  This was indeed dangerous in the primitive times, and the Hebrew Christians were exposed to very strong temptations to desist from it; but it is absolutely necessary to the continuance and progress of the Gospel in the world, and it is very plainly enjoyed by our Lord, Matt. x. 32, 33.
   

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 7

Hebrews by John Brown  p. 156

    It now only remains that we inquire into the import of the exhortation, “Consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus.”  The phraseology is peculiar.  The usual order of the names, Jesus Christ, is reversed.  Michaelis is probably right in thinking this was intended to bring out this thought:  ‘Consider the Apostle and High Priest whom we acknowledge—the Messiah, Jesus.’  Some have supposed that the exhortation here is just equivalent to that in the beginning of the second chapter.  To “consider the Apostle of our profession,” and to “give heed to the things spoken by Him,” if not the same, are very closely allied; but to “consider the High Priest of our profession,” is obviously a very different thing from “taking heed to the things spoken by Him,” though it is only by taking heed to the things spoken by Him that we can consider Him as our High Priest, as He alone, by His Spirit, has revealed the truth respecting His priestly office and functions.  To “consider” our Lord as “the Apostle and High Priest of our profession,” is just to make the truth revealed to us in His word respecting Him, as the Great Prophet and the only High Priest whom we acknowledge, the subject of deep habitual thought, that we may understand it and believe it, and be led into a corresponding course of affection and conduct in reference to Him.

    This is a duty of radical importance to Christians.  It is because we think so little, and to so little purpose, on Christ, that we know so little about Him, that we love Him so little, trust in Him so little, so often neglect our duty, are so much influenced by “things seen and temporal,” and so little by “things unseen and eternal.”  If the Apostle could but get the Hebrew Christians to “consider the Apostle and High Priest of their profession,” his object of keeping them steady in their attachment to Him was gained.  It is because men do not know Christ that they do not love Him; it is because they know Him so imperfectly that they love Him so imperfectly.  The truth about Him as the Great Prophet and the Great High Priest well deserves consideration—it is “the manifold wisdom of God.”  It requires it; it cannot be understood by a careless, occasional glance.  Angels feel that even their faculties are overmatched with this subject.  They are but “desiring to look into” it, as they do not yet fully understand it. It is only by “considering” the truth about Jesus Christ as “the Apostle and High Priest of our profession” that we can personally enjoy the benefits of His teaching as a Prophet, and of His expiation and intercession as a High Priest.  We cannot be too deeply impressed with a conviction of this, that all spiritual blessings come to us through the faith of the truth respecting the Apostle and High Priest of our profession.  Truth must be understood in order to its being believed, and it must be considered in order to its being understood.  The consideration of Jesus Christ is not only necessary to the production of faith, but to its continued existence, and to its gradual improvement.  An inconsiderate man is never likely to succeed in life.  An inconsiderate Christian is necessarily a very unsteady and a very uncomfortable one.  The grand radical duty of the Christian is “looking to Jesus;” and the sum and substance of the message which the ministers of Christ have to deliver is, ‘Behold Him, behold Him.’

    We all acknowledge Jesus Christ as “the Apostle and High Priest.”  Let us treat Him accordingly.  Believe nothing but on His authority.  On His authority believe everything that He reveals.  In religion acknowledge no other ultimate authority but His.  Expect pardon and salvation in no other way but through His atonement and intercession; and confidently expect them through this medium.  You equally do Him dishonor when you trust to anything but His sacrifice, and when you refuse to trust implicitly and unsuspectingly to that sacrifice.  In the New Economy, Jesus Christ is “all in all”—Prophet, Priest, King,Saviour, Lord.  Let us then seek all from Him; let us receive all that He is appointed to bestow—knowledge, pardon, sanctification, eternal life; and let us cheerfully ascribe to Him all the glory.

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 6

Hebrews by John Brown   p. 134

    The Apostle’s assertion is, that it “behoved” the Divine Saviour “to be made like unto His brethren in all things.”  The expression, “in all things,” though in itself universal, is plainly to be limited.  It is to be limited, plainly, to the whole of those things necessary to the end in view.  And even with regard to these the conformity is not necessarily a complete and perfect conformity.  It plainly was not necessary that He should be conformed to His brethren in personal guilt or depravity.  This, so far from conducing to the gaining of the object in view, would have completely obstructed it.  The conformity referred to includes a conformity of nature.  They were men; and it was necessary that He should be a man, possessed of a body capable of suffering death, and a soul endowed with all the faculties and affections of human nature.  But the conformity was not complete.  His human nature was formed in a miraculous manner, and did not subsist by itself, but in union with the divine.  These particular differences were as necessary as the general conformity in nature was to the great end of His being a successful Saviour.  He was conformed to His people not only in nature, but in condition.  They are in a suffering condition; and He, when on earth, was in a suffering condition—exposed to the same kind of sufferings as those to which they were exposed; though these sufferings produced very different effects on His innocent and all-perfect mind from what they do on the minds of guilty, depraved men.

        This conformity both of nature and condition was becoming and necessary.  “It behoved Him.”  On the supposition of His being divinely appointed to save men as a high priest, this conformity was absolutely necessary.  He could not have made “reconciliation for the sins of His people”—He could not in the same degree have executed the duties of a Saviour—had He not been “in all things made like unto His brethren.”
The language here, as well as in the preceding context, seems intentionally so fashioned as to convey the idea that our Saviour was not originally conformed to His brethren:  “It behoved  Him to be made like” to them.

    The great object to the gaining of which this conformity of Christ to His brethren is necessary, is His being “a faithful and merciful high priest,” “to make reconciliation for the sins of His people.”  The object is twofold:  that as a high priest He might “make reconciliation for the sins of the people;” and that, in the discharge of His duties as high priest, He might show Himself at once “faithful and merciful.”  We have already seen that His conformity to His brethren implied two things—participation of their nature, and fellowship with them in their state of suffering.  The first of these was necessary to His being a high priest, and “making reconciliation for the sins of the people;” the second was necessary to His being “a merciful and faithful high priest,” in the way and degree in which His people stood in need of mercy and faithfulness.

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 5

From Hebrews by John Brown  p. 136

Every high priest for men must be “taken from among men.”  Expiation is not a work for angels, nor even for God, merely as God.  The duty which He had to perform as the Great High Priest, who was to “give Himself a sacrifice, the Just One in the room of the unjust,” made it necessary that He should be conformed to His brethren by assuming their nature.

    And as He could not have been a high priest at all, as He could not have made reconciliation, without being conformed to His brethren as to nature, so He could not, in the degree and manner in which they required mercy and fidelity, have been “a merciful and faithful high priest,” if He had not been conformed to His brethren in His condition.  It is finely observed by Dr. Owen, “that in a perfectly holy human nature He should exactly discharge the will of God, was all that was required in order to His being a high priest.  But this was not all that the estate and condition of the brethren required.  Their sorrows, tenderness, weakness, miseries, disconsolations were such, that if there be not a cotempering of His sublime holiness and absolute perfection in fulfilling all righteousness, with some qualifications inclining Him to condescension, pity, and compassion, and tender sense of their condition, whatever might be the issue of their safety in the life to come, their comforts in this life would be in continual hazard.”

    To be a “merciful high priest,” is to be a tender-hearted, compassionate manager of all our religious interests—to be ever ready, under the influence  of a tender sympathy, to support, and comfort, and deliver.  To be a “faithful high priest,” does not, I apprehend, mean, as some interpret it, a true, a legitimate high priest; nor, as others, a high priest who is generally faithful to God and man both in the discharge of his duties; but a high priest who is trustworthy, exact, constant, and careful in attending to his people amid all their varied temptations and sufferings.

    To be such “a merciful and faithful high priest,” it behoved the Divine Saviour not only to be conformed in nature, but in condition, to the brethren.  There is a kind and degree of compassion and fidelity in giving comfort and relief which nothing but fellowship in suffering can teach.  Suppose two friends, equally benevolent in their temper, equally attached to you; the one, a person who had never suffered under the afflictions to which you are exposed; the other, one who had experienced the same, or at least a very similar course of trials; would there not be a tenderness, a suitableness, and a minuteness of appropriate attentions and consolations experienced from the latter, which, in the very nature of things, it is impossible that the former, however kindly disposed , should yield?  Who is not struck with astonishment and delight at observing in the plan of salvation such an intimate knowledge of all the peculiarities of our nature, and such a benevolent use made of this intimate knowledge, in securing for man not only the great substantial blessings of salvation, but their being conferred on him in the way best fitted to soothe and comfort him amid the remaining evils of the present state?

    This idea of the capacity of the Saviour to sympathize with and relieve His people under their trials, in consequence of His having Himself been tried, is very beautifully amplified in the verse with which this division of the Epistle closes.  18.  “For in that He Himself hath suffered, being tempted, He is able to succour them that are tempted.”

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 4

John Brown quote from Hebrews  p. 107-109

To secure that the “many sons” shall be brought “to glory” under this “Captain of their salvation,” God saw meet to “make Him perfect through suffering.”  Interpreters are by no means agreed as to the significance of the word rendered by our translators, make perfect.  It is plain that, in the sense which the English term most naturally suggests, it is not applicable to Jesus Christ.  The character of Jesus Christ was perfect; He did not stand in need, as good men do, of a course of discipline to cure them of their faults, and to improve their virtues.  It is indeed said, that “He learned obedience by the things which He suffered;” but the meaning of that expression is not that He learned to obey, but that He learned by experience what obedience is.  To avoid this difficulty, some have represented the word as signifying ‘to consecrate, to set apart to.’  There can be little doubt that the word is employed in this way, as the consecration of a priest was an intimation that he was fully possessed of the qualifications the law required in those who filled that office, and in that sense perfected, accomplished for the discharge of its functions.  Others consider it as signifying ‘to glorify, to bring glory, to crown with glory and honour, to render perfectly happy and glorious.’  I am rather disposed to understand the word as equivalent to ‘to accomplish—completely to fit or qualify for the discharge of His office as the Captain of salvation.’  This is a common use of the term: Heb. vii. 19, ix. 9, x. 1, 14.

To perform the office of a Saviour of lost men, three things were necessary—merit, power, and sympathy.  It pleased the Father that the incarnate Son should, as the Saviour of men, obtain all these by suffering.  The Saviour of men must deserve so well of the Moral Governor of the world, as that He, in consistency with the perfections of His character and the principles of His government, may on the Saviour’s account reverse the sentence of condemnation passed on those in whose behalf He has interposed, and bestow on them blessings to which on their own account they have no claim.  The Saviour of men must be possessed of “all power in heaven and earth”—He must have the command of those divine influences which are necessary to make ignorant, foolish, depraved, miserable men, wise, good and happy; He must, too, have the control of all events which, directly or indirectly, bear upon their interest.  And, still further, the Saviour of men must, to fit Him for the discharge of His office, be able to enter into the feelings of those whom He is to deliver.

All these accomplishments are necessary to His being a perfect Saviour; and all these accomplishments were obtained by our Lord Jesus “through suffering.”  It was the patient, cheerful endurance of those penal evils which the law of God had denounced against sinners by the incarnate only begotten of God, that “magnified the divine law and made it honourable,” and made it not merely consistent with, but gloriously illustrative of, the righteousness as well as the mercy of God, to pardon and save the guiltiest of the guilty believing in Jesus.  The power and authority bestowed on Jesus Christ as Mediator are uniformly represented as the meritorious reward of His voluntary obedience unto the death.  “Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He hath put Him to grief; when Thou shalt make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.  He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied:  by His knowledge shall My righteous servant justify many; for He shall bear their iniquities.  Therefore will I divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong; because He hath poured out His soul unto death:  and He was numbered with the transgressors; and He bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”—“And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.  Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name.”  The power and disposition to sympathize with His people were obtained, and indeed could be obtained, in no other way but suffering.  If our High Priest can be “touched with the feeling of our infirmities,” it is because “He was in all things tempted like as we are, yet without sin.”  Without suffering, sin could not have been expiated; without the expiation of sin, the Saviour could not have obtained all power to give eternal life to men; and, from the very nature of the case, without suffering He would have been very imperfectly capable of sympathizing with the sufferers.  But by suffering He expiated sin; by suffering He obtained for Himself the control both of that inward influence and that physical power which are necessary to the salvation of His people, and He also acquired that experimental acquaintance with trial which peculiarly fits Him to succour them who are tried.

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 3

Hebrews  by John Brown  p. 105

    Let us examine this interesting passage somewhat more particularly.   Ver. 10.  “For it became Him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect though sufferings.”
    The first thing to which our attention is naturally called, on looking at this verse, is the appellation here given to the Supreme Being.  He is styled, He, “for whom are all things, and by whom are all things.”  The expression, all things, is one as comprehensive as language can furnish.  It includes all beings and all events.  All beings and all events are for God; i.e., the ultimate reason why the one exist and the other occur, is the manifestation of the glories of His character.  All beings and all events are by God; i.e. the one exist, and the other occur, in consequence of His will—they all originate in His appointment and in His agency.  His glory is the end, His will is the law, of the universe.

There is a beautiful appropriateness in the descriptive appellations given to God in the inspired writings.  They have almost uniformly a peculiar reference to the statement in the course of which they occur.  When the Apostle prays that the Roman Christians may be “likeminded one towards another,” he addresses the prayer to “the God of all patience and consolation;”  when he speaks of spiritual illumination, he describes God as “Him who commanded the light to shine out of darkness.”  We see the same appropriateness in the appellation here given to the Divinity, as will appear more distinctly when we come to show how the dispensation here referred to had a congruity with the character of God as “Him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things.”

    This glorious Being, in the exercise of His high sovereignty, had formed a purpose of mercy with respect to a large portion of the human race, all of whom had by sin forfeited every claim on His kind regard, and rendered themselves the fit objects of His judicial displeasure and moral disapprobation.  It was His determination to “bring many sons to glory.”    He “predestined them to the adoption of children,” having “chosen them before the foundation of the world.”  Though in any past age of the church they have formed a very small minority of mankind, yet, considered collectively, they are “a multitude which no man can number, out of every kindred, and people, and tongue and nation.”
    

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 2

Ver. 16  “For verily He took not on Him the nature of angels;  but He took on Him the seed of Abraham.”
The meaning of these words, as they stand in our English version, is sufficiently obvious:  ‘The Son of God assumed into connection with His divine nature, not the nature of angels, but the nature of man;  and He did so by becoming a descendant of Abraham.’  This is an important truth, but it does not appear to me to be the truth intended by the inspired writer.  A careful reader will notice that our translators have inserted a very important word—the nature—in the first clause of the verse, to bring out the sense;  which, indeed, would have been required to be repeated in the second clause--‘but He took on Him the nature  of the seed of Abraham,’ as the expression ‘seed of Abraham’ never in Scripture means anything but the descendants, either natural or spiritual, of that patriarch;  and, in strict accuracy, perhaps the words on HIm should have been marked as a supplement also.

The words as they stand in the original are:  “For verily He took not angels, but He took the seed of Abraham.”  The word rendered “took” never, in either sacred or profane writers, is used to signify, ‘to assume, or to put on;’  the ordinary and primary signification is, ‘to lay hold of.’  The sense given in our version, though conveying an important truth, does not well suit the context.  The words seem a reason assigned for the statement made in the 14th and 15th verses.  The leading statement there is, “Inasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also took part of the same.”  Now, surely the Apostle would never assign as the reason of this,  “For verily He took not on Him the nature of angels, but that of man;”—that were just to say ‘He became incarnate, for He became incarnate.’  It is not in this way that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews reasons, though his translators and interpreters have sometimes made him appear to reason so inconclusively.  (see note at bottom)
The real connection is:  ‘He assumed human nature, not angelic  nature;  for He is the Saviour not of angels, but of men.’  The word properly signifies ‘to lay hold of, to lay the hand on a person or thing.’  I may lay hold of a person for different and even opposite purposes.  I may lay hold of him to punish him.  I may lay hold of him to help him or deliver him.  The word in itself merely denotes ‘to lay hold of;’—the purpose must be gathered from the context.  There is no difficulty in the passage before us.  Salvation, deliverance, is the subject spoken of, and the word is to be understood in reference to that subject.  “He laid not hold on angels”—i.e., to save them—“but He laid hold on the seed of Abraham,” to save them.  Understood in this way, there is a close and important connection between these words and the preceding statement.  He became a partaker of “flesh and blood,” for His object was to save not angels but men.  It deserves notice, also, that the word is not in the past, but in the present time:  ‘He lays not hold on angels, but He lays hold.’  The assumption of human nature is a past event, but the salvation of His people is the constant employment of the Saviour.

Note:  Frommann (Opusc. P. 274) very justly remarks,  “If this interpretation stands, Paul must be said to have repeated one and the selfsame thought three times;  for this would be the thread of his utterance:  ‘For as much as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same:  for He took not the nature of angels but of the seed of Abraham.  Wherefore it behoved Him in all things to be made like His brethren.’  What would this mean but—‘Christ became a partaker of true human nature:  for He became a partaker, not of the nature of angels, but of human nature.  Wherefore it behoved Him to become a partaker of human nature.’  Who, now, would think such stuff tolerable in the utterance, I will not say of a divine writer, but of a mere human writer?  ‘Christ is the deliver not of angels, but of men.’

John Brown, Hebrews Quote 1

From  Hebrews  by John Brown

    The revelation made by Jesus Christ consists of doctrines and precepts.  In order to take heed to one of the doctrines of Christ,--for example, the doctrine of the atonement,--the first thing is to endeavor to obtain distinct ideas of this doctrine, as stated by Christ—to apprehend clearly the meaning of the declarations in the Christian revelation on this subject.  We cannot properly give heed to anything, till we have distinctly ascertained what it is.  This is the radical part of the duty of consideration; and if we go wrong here, we are giving heed, not to the things we have heard of Christ, but, it may be, to the things we have heard of men only, or to the unauthorized suggestions of our own mind.  Distinct apprehensions of the meaning of Christian truth, are plainly, then, of primary importance.

    Having ascertained the meaning of a doctrine, we should “take heed” to its evidence, satisfying ourselves as to the divine origin of the statement which contains it.  This is obviously necessary, as its claims on our faith depend on this, and as it is only as believed that the doctrine will be effectual for the purposes it is intended to serve.
    Having ascertained the meaning and evidence of a doctrine, we ought to “give heed” to its importance—view it in its various relations to the perfections of the divine character, the principles of the divine government, the constitution and circumstances, the duties and interests, of mankind.

    And then as to the duties enjoined in the Christian revelation—to “give heed” to them, is first to attend to the terms in which the injunction is given, that we may clearly understand what is required of us, and then to attend to the motives which urge us to comply with the requisition, especially those which rise out of the character of God, and our relation to Him, as in Christ reconciling the world to Himself.  Such is the duty recommended by the Apostle, and such the manner in which we ought to discharge it.

    But we ought not only to give heed to the things which we have heard of the Lord, but we ought to “give the more earnest heed.”  The qualifying words “more earnest,” convey one of two ideas closely connected,--that Jesus Christ has a stronger claim on our attention than any angel or divine messenger; or, that the consideration of the essential and official glories of Jesus Christ, which are altogether unrivalled, should lead us to give a greater degree of attention to the statements He makes, than we would have been disposed to yield in other circumstances.  The general idea is, that the personal and mediatorial  excellences of Christ suggest strong additional motives to a diligent study of the revelation He has made.  ‘We ought; it is reasonable and right, seeing He is so much better than the angels, that we give the closest attention our minds are capable of to a revelation coming from so high a source, and through so dignified a medium.’