Someone asked about non-Pauline statements on the incarnation… I pointed them to one example in Hebrews 2.14ff:
“Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.” [TNIV]
I got this question back about the verse:
“Regarding the Hebrews 2:14 in
the article you sent me, once I was told that the Greek word in there rendered
"likewise" only
means "close to" and "similar". Not the "exact same". So the verse only means Jesus partook of similar to human flesh and blood.”
…………………..
My response:
I can see how someone might interpret the English that way, but the Greek is clear that this is NOT a correct reading.
Here is the literal structure of the sentence:
Epei (since) oun (therefore) ta (the) paidia (children)
kekoinönëken (‘naturally’ share, [perf
tense]) haimatos (blood) kai (and) sarkos (flesh), kai (also) autos (He) paraplësiös (likewise) meteschen
(‘deliberately’ partook
of, [Aor]) tön (the) autön (same/identical things), hina (in
order that) dia (through) tou (the) thanatou (death) katargësë
(He might destroy)… [UBS4]
The ‘likewise’ word ( paraplasious, with an omega) is an ADVERB, not an ADJECTIVE.
It modifies the verb ‘partake’ and NOT the noun translated ‘the same’…
Even if it meant ‘near to’, as an adverb, it cannot mean this:
“He partook of ‘near to’ the same things (the ‘blood and flesh’ shared by the children in the first part of the sentence)
Because that construction has ‘near to’ modifying the noun ‘same things’—ADJECTIVES modify NOUNS (even in Koine Greek…smile); Adverbs do not.
So, as an adverb, it would have to mean something like THIS:
“He –in a similar fashion—partook of the same (flesh and blood), in order that through death…”
The ‘similarity’ comparison relates NOT to the ‘blood and flesh’ (which is the constant in the comparison—the term ‘auton’ – “the same” indicates that), but to the manner in which Jesus ‘took on’ the ‘blood and flesh’.
The ‘likewise’ word CAN mean ‘nearly’, but it wouldn’t make sense in this sentence because the purpose of the en-fleshment was to be able to DIE… ‘nearly’ taking on blood/flesh doesn’t get you all the way to mortality (‘nearly dying’ wont get us there…).
And this is the way the standard translations understand it:
Because God’s children are human beings—made of flesh and blood—the Son also became flesh and blood. For only as a human being could he die, and only by dying could he break the power of the devil, who had the power of death. [NLT]
Since then the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death [NASV]
Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death” [TNIV]
Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death” [NRSV]
Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, he likewise shared in their humanity, so that through death he could destroy the one who holds the power of death [NETB]
Since the children share a mortal human nature, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of the one who holds the power of death [Lane’s translation in WBC]
Now since the children share in blood and flesh, he likewise shared in them, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death” [NAB]
You can see they all translate it adverbially—as modifying the ‘partaking’. Some of them understand the meaning to have no/negligible ‘difference’ element (i.e., translating it simply as ‘also’ or ‘too’).
Most exegetes suggest that IF there is any difference intended by Hebrews, it is either in (a) the difference between ‘us the sinful’ and ‘Jesus the sinless’; or (b) the difference between us who have blood/flesh ‘naturally’ and Jesus who took on flesh ‘deliberately’:
“Καὶ αὐτὸς
παραπλησίως is
cumulatively very emphatic. Καὶ here means “also,” possibly
“even.” Αὐτός means “Jesus himself.” Αὐτός
is always used in Hebrews as a (reverential?) periphrasis for the name of God
(1:5 = 1 Ch. 17:13; 4:10; 13:5) or of Jesus (as here; cf. 2:18, and especially
5:2, in a logical argument similar to the present verse). … Παραπλησίως,
“similarly,” reinforces καί; cf. ὁμοίως,
9:21; κατὰ πάντα ὁμοιωθῆναι,
v. 17; 4:15. The same thought is expressed in different language in Phil. 2:7,
and with an added reference to sin in Rom. 8:3. Παραπλήσιον
is used adverbially in Phil. 2:27 in a different sense. [tanknote: actually this is a different word—see the very end of this article]
The context in Hebrews shows sufficiently the basis of comparison, namely
participation in human nature. Though emphatic,
παραπλησίως does not imply identity between
Christ’s condition
and that of believers. Spicq 1978.665 tentatively suggests that the
use of παραπλησίως may
imply a reservation as to the virgin birth. This suggestion is not only
unsupported in the context, but decisively opposed by κατὰ
πάντα in v. 17. Any reservation relates rather to sin (→ 4:15). … Μετέχω
is perhaps used for variety following
κοινωνέω; its use elsewhere in Hebrews
(5:13; 7:13) is not distinctive, and it does not refer to the relationship
between Christ and believers. In the LXX (10x, e.g.,
Pr. 1:18; 5:17) and in Paul (1 Cor. 9:10, 12; 10:17, 21, 30) μετέχω implies a specific act of sharing,
not mere membership in a family, tribe, or nation (Pryer 46); so
here μέτοχοι (always plural in the NT;
outside Hebrews only Lk. 5:7). It is one of Hebrews’
favourite words, used to describe Christians’ relationship with
Christ (3:14) or their participation in the Holy Spirit
(6:4). An allusion to Ps. 45:7, quoted in → 1:9, is more
than possible. … Τῶν
αὐτῶν, “the same (blood and flesh),” adds further
emphasis. [The Epistle
to the Hebrews : A commentary on the Greek text.
“In v. 14
κεκοινώνηκεν (here
alone in the NT) takes the classical genitive, as in the LXX. An apt classical
parallel occurs in the military writer Polyaenus (Strateg. iii.11. 1), where
Chabrias tells his troops to think of their foes merely as ἀνθρώποις
αἷμα καὶ σάρκα ἔχουσι,
καὶ τῆς αὐτῆς
φύσεως ἡμῖν
κεκοινωνηκόσιν.
[tankXl8: “men having
blood and flesh, and sharing the same nature as
us”] The following phrase
παραπλησίως (= “similarly,” i.e.
almost “equally” or “also,” as, e.g., in Maxim. Tyr. vii. 2,
καὶ ἐστὶν καὶ ὁ
ἄρχων πόλεως
μέρος, καὶ οἱ ἀρχόμενοι
παραπλησίως
[TankXl8: “The ruler is a part
of a city and the ruled likewise.”])
[Moffatt, J. J. (1924). A critical and exegetical commentary on the
Epistle to the Hebrews (34).
“Having clarified the notion of the sonship shared by
Christ and God’s other children, Hebrews proceeds to explore the redemptive act
itself, and the suffering and death by which Christ was perfected. The sentence
is introduced by the particle οὖν, “therefore,” not to indicate
that an inference is being drawn, but to introduce a new phase in the argument.
Using the term “children” (παιδία) from the
Isaianic passage just cited, the author sketches their condition as one in
which they “share in”
(κεκοινώνηκεν)
“blood and flesh” (αἵματος καὶ
σαρκός), a common description of the human
condition. Although the order is unusual in the New Testament,
it is attested elsewhere. Nonetheless, the priority given to
blood may evoke the suffering associated with the human condition. Both
terms in any case can suggest the weakness and frailty of humankind. … Christ
shared in the human condition of weakness. The term used to denote that sharing
(μετέσχεν) is synonymous with that used
of the children. The tense, however, differs.
The children “share” in the
human condition; Christ “partook” of it.149 Because of Christ’s act, the
children in turn “partake in a heavenly calling.”
… Christ’s participation took place “likewise” (παραπλησίως).
The adverb certainly does not imply a
docetic christology, and can be used in circumstances where the similarity
involved is complete. As the summary of the pericope indicates, Christ’s similarity to his
brothers and sisters was “in all things” (2:17). Although Christ will later (4:15)
be distinguished from other human beings by his sinlessness, that
characteristic is not in view here. … Christ’s participation in “blood and flesh” resulted in his death,
whereby he achieved a decisive victory over and “destroyed the power”
(καταργήσῃ) of the
one who held sway over death. The imagery evokes the depiction of the Messiah’s
victory over demonic forces widespread in Jewish apocalyptic tradition
and in early Christianity. This general tradition frequently
becomes specified as a victory over death in Christian sources.
The explicit linking of the devil and death here is also based on traditional
association of Satan and death. The underlying redemption myth
is obviously one shaped within Jewish-Christian circles. There is no indication
that it has undergone the sort of complex metaphorization found in Paul, where
the power of death is sin, or among Gnostics, for whom death is
ignorance.” [Attridge, H. W., & Koester, H. (1989). The
Epistle to the Hebrews : A commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Spine
title: Hebrews. Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible
(91).
“The adverb
appears only
here in
the NT, but cf. παραπλήσιον
at Phil 2:27 in a similar context. For the meaning “likewise,”
cf. Demosthenes Olynth. 3; Arrian Exped. 7.1.6; Herodotus 3.104; Diodorus
Siculus Bib. Hist. 4.48, cited by Wettstein (p. 392); and Maximus of Tyre Diss.
7.2: καὶ ἐστὶν καὶ ὁ
ἄρχων πόλεως
μέρος, καὶ οἱ ἀρχόμενοι
παραπλησίως, “The ruler
is a part of a city and the ruled likewise.” See Moffatt, p. 34. [Attridge, H.
W., & Koester, H. (1989). The Epistle to the Hebrews : A commentary on the
Epistle to the Hebrews. Spine title: Hebrews. Hermeneia--a critical and
historical commentary on the Bible.
“14–15 The implications of the solidarity affirmed in
vv 11–13 are developed in the balanced clauses of a periodic sentence. The
exposition is related organically to its biblical support by the repetition of
the expression τὰ παιδία, “the
children,” contributed by the previous quotation (…). Since “the children” share a common human nature (αἵματος
καὶ σαρκός, Lit, “blood and
flesh”), it was necessary for the one who identified himself with them (v 13b) to assume the same full humanity
(μετέσχεν τῶν αὐτῶν). This assertion grounds
the bond of unity between Christ and his people in the reality of the
incarnation. In the
incarnation the transcendent Son accepted the mode of existence common to all
humanity. … The synonymous parallelism in the statements of v
14a indicates that any semantic difference between the verbs that refer to “the
children” and to the Son respectively ought not to be pressed here. The meaning of the two roots is virtually synonymous; both describe a
full participation in a shared reality (cf. J. Y. Campbell,
“κοιωνία and its Cognates in the New
Testament,” JBL 51 [1932] 353, 355, 363). The distinction lies in the variation of
the verbal tenses. The perfect tense of
κεκοινώνηκεν,
“share,” marks the “original and natural” state of humanity, while the aorist
tense of μετέσχεν, “shared,” emphasizes
that the Son assumed human nature “at a fixed point in time, by his own choice”
(F. F. Bruce, 41, n. 55). By means of this distinction the transcendent
character of the incarnate Son is maintained precisely in a context in which
the accent falls upon his full participation in the human condition. The addition of the adverb
παραπλησίως, “in just
the same way,” which signifies total likeness, underscores the extent of the identity of the Son’s
involvement in the conditions of human experience common to other persons
(cf. Williamson, 82). It anticipates the inferential statement of v 17, that
“obligation was upon him to be made like his brothers in every respect” (κατὰ
πάντα).” [Lane, W. L. (2002). Vol.
47A: Word Biblical Commentary : Hebrews
1-8. Word Biblical Commentary (60).
The word itself is just not specific enough to identify the ‘element of comparison’, but in many cases, it is left vague or it means simple identity:
“παραπλησίως
adv. (Hdt.+) similarly, likewise Hb 2:14. The word does not show
clearly just how far the similarity goes. But it is used in situations where no differentiation is
intended, in the sense in just the same way (Hdt. 3,
104; Diod. S. 1, 55, 5; 4, 48, 3; 5, 45, 5; Dio Chrys. 67[17], 3; Maximus Tyr.
7, 2a; Philostrat., Vi. Apoll. 4, 18 p. 138, 21; Jos., Vi. 187, 233]. Cf.
Philo, Rer. Div. Her. 151 τὸ
παραπλήσιον,
Abr. 162; Arrian, Exped. 7, 1, 6 of Alexander the Great ἄνθρωπος
ὢν
παραπλήσιος τοῖς
ἄλλοις [TankXL8: “a man being similar to others of the same kind”]).
M-M.* [Arndt, W., Gingrich, F. W.,
Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (1996, c1979). A
Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian
literature : A translation and adaption
of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer's
Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schrift en des Neuen Testaments und der
ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur (621).
“The same difficulty of evaluating the degree of similarity appears for paraplesios in Heb 2:14, where Christ shares the human conditions after the fashion of his brethren according to flesh and blood. Should we understand this to say "in exactly the same manner" or "in a manner nearly like"—in order to preserve Christ's sinlessness, his human nature not being corrupt— in which case we would say "in his own way," or perhaps in a vague sense "similarly, likewise," neither including nor excluding some particular difference. This last interpretation is the best attested in the first century: 'An equality of the same order is seen in the members of living beings" (Philo, Heir 51); "likewise in all the towns" (Josephus, Life 187); "the people of Asochis, like those of Japha, gave them a noisy reception" (ibid. 233); "to become a good distance runner, one must have robust shoulders and neck, like an athlete who competes in the pentathlon"; "Orpheus made a vow to the gods of Samothrace, just as he did the first time." It would seem that the nuance of Heb 2:14 is that cited by the Greek fathers—"with no difference"—a translation that follows the context. Christ assumed a human nature exactly like that of other mortals, even though its principle of existence was the person of the Word of God—but this is a distinction made by later theology.” [TLNT, Spicq]
BTW, there WAS a way to say ‘near to blood and flesh’, using a related word, if the
author of Hebrews wanted to say that, but our
author did not use it.
Our word in Hebrews is an adverb (ending in ‘siws’, with an omega). There is a related form that is an adjective (ending in ‘sios/a/on’, with an omicron instead of an omega) and it is used in Phil 2.27:
“…kai gar (and) ësthenësen
(he was sick) paraplësion (near to) thanatö (to
death)… “
The adjective here functions almost as a preposition (indeed, the translation of Spicq actually calls it a preposition) and it relates to death as its “object” (in the dative).
So, the author of Hebrews could easily have used this adjective (in the genitive plural neuter) and said:
“ai (also) autos (He) meteschen (‘deliberately’ partook of, [Aor]) paraplësiön (near to) tois (the) autois (same/identical things)
.. which would have yielded the ‘similar to our blood and flesh’ meaning of your questioner.
But he didn’t say that, did he?
(smile) … he used the adverb instead…
So, the Greek of the passage supports the original understanding that the nature which was ‘partken of’ by our Lord was ‘identical’ (the ‘same blood and flesh’) as the we, the children/brethren share by birth.
I hope this is clear enough,
Glenn