7Remember your leaders who taught you the word of God. Think of all the good that has come from their lives, and follow the example of their faith. 8Jesus Christ [is] the same yesterday, today, and forever. 9So do not be attracted by strange, new ideas. Your strength comes from God’s grace, not from rules about food, which don’t help those who follow them. 10We have an altar from which the priests in the Tabernacle have no right to eat. 11Under the old system, the high priest brought the blood of animals into the Holy Place as a sacrifice for sin, and the bodies of the animals were burned outside the camp. 12So also Jesus suffered and died outside the city gates to make his people holy by means of his own blood. 13So let us go out to him, outside the camp, and bear the disgrace he bore. 14For this world is not our permanent home; we are looking forward to a home yet to come. 15Therefore, let us offer through Jesus a continual sacrifice of praise to God, proclaiming our allegiance to his name. 16And don’t forget to do good and to share with those in need. These are the sacrifices that please God. 17Obey your spiritual leaders, and do what they say. Their work is to watch over your souls, and they are accountable to God. Give them reason to do this with joy and not with sorrow. That would certainly not be for your benefit.
Hebrews 13:7-17
Now we come to the second of our difficult verses in this passage:-
9So do not be attracted by strange, new ideas. Your strength comes from God’s grace, not from rules about food, which don’t help those who follow them.
The difficulty in this verse lies in the fact that the words are being used in a unique way, outside of their normal usage. Normally we can determine the word use by the general meaning of the word as it is used in other contexts, preferably by the same writer. The way a writer uses a word shows us how we ought to interpret that word in the context in which the writer is using it. However, in this case the words are clearly being used in a different way. All three commentators I have referred to: William Lane, Neva Miller and Arnold Fruchtenbaum refer to the unique way in which the writer is using these words, especially the use of [brōmata] “foods”. I am not so sure [brōmata] is being used in a unique way. I think rather the plural is being contrasted with the singular to say something deep and meaningful in using the typical rabbinical term for “foods”. There is more to come on this matter in a following Gem. Other commentators have taken issue with the use of new ideas. Isn’t this rather a case of the old ideas of Judaism?
Allow me to remind you that we have to keep in mind the connectedness this verse has with what went before it. Why is that? The verse begins with “So” – ‘So do not be attracted by strange new, ideas . . .’ The test in all of this is not just to interpret the author’s intention in each verse but then to determine what the overall intent of all verses are when combined.
Let’s begin our analysis of the words the author has used. The initial verb in this statement is [περιφέρω – periphero] which means ‘to be carried away’, ‘borne here and there’, ‘taken away in different directions’, ‘tossed about doctrinally’, “to be driven to this opinion, not to that, to the point of confusion’. The verb comes from the same root as Paul’s comment in Ephesians 4:14, only here in Hebrews it is in the present passive tense, suggesting this was an ever present reality for them, hence the warning. What were they to avoid?
διδαχαῖς ποικίλαις καὶ ξέναις
teachings diverse and strange
The teachings that were encountered by these Hebrew Christians were described as both [poikilos] ‘diverse’, ‘various’, ‘manifold’ and ‘chequered’ as well as [ξένος – xenais] ‘strange’, ‘foreign’, ‘alien’ or even ‘novelties’. Do you recognise the root word? It is the same one we have encountered before in [xenophobia / philoxenia] – the fear of strangers and the love of strangers. The end result of encounters with the foreign world are foreign ideas. All kinds of teachings and ideas come with the association with other cultures. I suspect in part that was why the LORD gave the warning to Israel about marrying into the cultures of the Ancient Near East. There is much I could extrapolate from this connection, but I don’t know how far to press the analogy.
Now let’s turn to the other key term involved in this verse. That term is found in the phrase rules about food. The meaning is clear in this usage; the use of the word [βρώματα / βρώμασιν] (plural) is referring to foods. The first form of the word is the nominative or accusative plural, the second example is the dative plural for those of you who want to know and are confused by the difference in the words. These are terms related to the ‘case’ of the word, or how the word is used semantically. The word is “foods”, the case determines whether the word is the subject, the object or instrument and more in the sentence. Having written that for those who will be inquisitive, those of you who find it confusing don’t need to worry. Just think “foods”. As mentioned above, the commentators think the writer of Hebrews is doing something unique with the word [βρώμα], “food” singular. I believe I know what it is, but again I am unsure how far to press the analogy. For that I will have to ask the writer when I see him, exactly what he was meaning by what he wrote.
There is a wonderful play on words in John 4 with the words “food” in John 4:8 and 4:34. The use of food (4:8) is the Greek word [τροφη / τροφὰς]. The disciples had gone into town to buy ‘food’. The food referred to here is everyday food, staple food: bread, potatoes, rice, kumara, taro or chapati. On their return (4:34) Jesus says, “My food [βρώμα] is to do the will of Him who sent me and to finish His work.” The difference between being focused on everyday food or even working for a living (earning a crust) and doing the will of God. The sense in this second use is “essence of life” or “deep spiritual food”. Now let’s switch to the use of the word here in Hebrews 13:9.
In this verse the word is clearly βρώματα, the plural of [βρώμα] – “foods”. The standard way of using this word in the plural is rabbinical – referring to the issues of food in the context of sacrifice, food offered to idols, food permitted to eat and not permitted to eat. With the use of this plural form came all the minutiae of laws which governed the use and the consumption of such food. (See Mark 7:19, Roman 14:15, 1 Corinthians 6:13, 1 Timothy 4:3. Hebrews 9:10, 13:9). In the next verse, Hebrews 13:10, the writer has this enigmatic comment about the altar in the tabernacle from which the priests had no right to eat.
I think it is clear that the use of [brōmata] in Hebrews 13:9 is the rabbinical use of the word in terms of foods permitted and prohibited. I suspect the author of Hebrews is using the word in the usual way in which this plural form of [brōma] was used, but he is playing on the difference between the use of the singular and the plural form of the word. Paul uses [brōma] as a term to mean solid food (solids) or the meat of the word as opposed to baby food.
I had to feed you with milk, not with solid food, because you weren’t ready for anything stronger. And you still aren’t ready . . .
1 Corinthians 3:2
I will leave the analogy at this point so as not to press it beyond the point the author meant it. We also have yet to pick up on what is being meant by the third of our difficult verses.
10We have an altar from which the priests in the Tabernacle have no right to eat.
Following that we have to look carefully at the three verses which utilise the threefold repetition outside the camp or outside the gates. So you can see we still have some work to do. When we have finished analysing these four verses we have to put the pieces back together again – i.e. reconstruct the passage in the way the author meant it. The next verse, Hebrews 13:10, is considered one of the hardest verses to interpret. Get a good number of night’s sleep before we tackle that one. I hope the ‘grammatical speak’ about case structure and the Greek terms in this Gem didn’t put you off too much. But sometimes it is necessary to go into detail for those of you who want to know the detail.
I learned from my Greek professor to stay with a passage until I had discovered the depth of it. I am only just beginning that process with this difficult passage in Hebrews.
Ian
Dr Basil Brown spent 3 years studying the nuances in Greek of John’s Gospel. He then spent another three years on John 1 following which he spent 2 and half years on the Prologue, John 1:1-18. Thanks for the inspiration Prof.
Ian
It is not that I’m so smart. But I stay with the questions much longer.
Albert Einstein
If you study the Bible and it doesn’t lead you to wonder and awe then you haven’t studied the Bible.
Rob Bell
I am beginning to see the awe and wonder in this closing passage in Hebrews.
Ian