<- Previous   First   Next ->

words. Eujlavbeia marks that careful and watchful reverence which pays regard to every circumstance in that with which it has to deal. It may therefore degenerate into a timid and unworthy anxiety (Jos. Antt. 6.2, 179); but more commonly it expresses reverent and thoughtful shrinking from over-boldness, which is compatible with true courage: Philo, Quis rer. div. haer. § 6 (1.476
M.)
skovpei pavlin o{ti eujlabeiva/ to; qarrei'n ajnakevkratai . id. p. 477 mhvte a[neu eujlabeiva" parrhsiavzesqai mhvte ajparrhsiavstw" eujlabei'sqai . Here the word in its noblest sense is singularly appropriate. Prayer is heard as it is ‘according to God's will’ (1 John 5:14 f.), and Christ by His eujlavbeia perfectly realised that submission which is obedience on one side and fellowship on the other.

Primasius has an interesting note: pro sua reverentia: hoc est propter voluntariam obedientiam et perfectissimam caritatem...Notandum autem quia reverentia, secundum sententiam Cassiodori, accipitur aliquando pro amore, aliquando pro timore: hic vero pro summa ponitur caritate qua Filius Dei nos dilexit et pro summa obedientia qua fuit obediens Patri usque ad mortem.

The Greek Fathers take a less wide view. E.g. plh;n mh; to; ejmo;n qevlhma ajlla; to; sovn...h\n wJ" ajlhqw'" pollh'" eujlabeiva" ... eijshkouvsqh toivnun oJ Cristo;" oujk ajpo; th'" paraithvsew" ajllj ajpo; th'" eujlabeiva" (OEcum.).

The sense ‘heard and set free from His fear’ or ‘from the object of His fear’ is wholly untenable. For the use of ajpov see Luke 19:3; 24:41; Acts 12:14; 22:11; John 21:6.

Heb. 5:8. kaivper w]n uiJov" ...] though He was Son ...The clause has been taken with the words which precede (‘being heard not as Son but for His godly fear’), and with those which follow (‘though Son went through the discipline of suffering to obedience’). The latter connexion is most in accordance with the whole scope of the passage. Though Son and therefore endowed with right of access for Himself to the Father, being of one essence with the Father, for man's sake as man He won the right of access for humanity. In one sense it is true that the idea of Sonship suggests that of obedience; but the nature of Christ's Sonship at first sight seems to exclude the thought that He should learn obedience through suffering.

For kaivper see Heb. 7:5; 12:17; Phil. 3:4; 2 Pet. 1:12. In Heb. 5:5 the title ‘Son’ has been used of the Sonship of the exalted Christ in His twofold nature. Here it is used of the eternal, divine relation of the Son to the Father. There is a similar transition from one aspect to the other of the unchanged Personality of the Lord in Heb. 1:1-4. The Incarnation itself corresponds with and implies (if we may so speak) an immanent Sonship in the Divine Nature. Thus, though it may be true that the title Son is used of the Lord predominantly (at least) in connexion with the Incarnation, that of necessity carries our thoughts further. Comp. John 5:19 ff.

Chrysostom gives a personal application to the lesson: eij ejkei'no" uiJo;"
w]n ejkevrdanen ajpo; tw'n paqhmavtwn th;n uJpakoh;n pollw'/ ma'llon hJmei'"
. e[maqen ... th;n uJpak. ] learned obedience ... The spirit of obedience is realised through trials, seen at least to minister to good. Sufferings in this sense may be said to teach obedience as they confirm it and call it out actively. The Lord ‘learned obedience through the things which He suffered,’ not as if the lesson were forced upon Him by the necessity of suffering, for the learning of obedience does not imply the conquest of disobedience as actual, but as making His own perfectly, through insight into the Father's will,


<- Previous   First   Next ->