to greater claims (v. 9), and is directed by higher wisdom to a nobler end (v.
10), than belong to natural parents. And while all discipline alike is painful to bear we are taught by experience to look to its issue (v. 11).
9 Furthermore we had the fathers of our flesh to chasten us, and we gave them regard: shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? 10 For while they chastened us as it pleased them for a few days, He chastens us for our profit that we may receive of His holiness. 11 All chastening for the present seemeth to be not joyous but grievous; but afterward it yieldeth peaceable fruit to them that have been exercised thereby , even the fruit of righteousness.
12:9. ei\ta ... ejnetrepovmeqa ] Furthermore we had the fathers of our flesh to chasten us, and we gave them regard ...This particle ei\ta has been taken as an interrogative: Is it so then that we had..., according to common classical use, but in this case the following sentence would naturally begin with kaiv ( kai; ouj polu; ma'llon ). It is better therefore to regard it as introducing a second argument: further, yet again. In 5:8 the Apostle has shewn the universality of filial discipline: he now shews in what spirit it should be borne, drawing his conclusion from natural experience. There is no exact parallel in the N. T. to this use of ei\ta , which is used in enumerations (e.g., 1 Cor. 12:28; 15:5, 7) as well as in sequences (e.g., Mark 4:28).
The word paideuthv" (Vulg. eruditores ) is found again in Rom. 2:20; Hos. 5:2; Ecclus. 37:19. It expresses not only the fact of the discipline, but the parental office to exercise it.
jEntrevpomai
(Vulg.
reverebamur
) is found in Luke 18:2, 4; 20:13 (and parallels).
tou;" t. s. hJ. pat.
...
tw'/ pat. t. pn
.] The fathers of our earthly, corporeal,
being are contrasted with the Father of spirits, the Author not only of our spiritual being but of all spiritual beings (
tw'n pneum
. not
tou' pn. hJmw'n
). Their limited relation to us (
th'" s. hJmw'n
) is contrasted with His universal power. By our spirit (Heb. 12:23) we have connexion with Him and with a higher order. We owe to Him therefore a more absolute subjection than to those from whom we derive the transitory limitations of our nature.
The language is perhaps based upon Num. 16:22, 27:16 (LXX.) (
oJ
)
qeo;" tw'n pneumavtwn kai; pavsh" sarkov"
(
tw'n ajnqrwvpwn
). Comp. Clem. R. 1:58
oJ panepovpth" qeo;" kai; despovth" tw'n pneumavtwn kai; Kuvrio" pavsh" sarkov"
.
id.
59
to;n panto;" pneuvmato" ktivsthn kai; ejpivskopon
(and Lightfoot's note); and Apoc. 22:6
oJ Kuvrio", oJ qeo;" tw'n pneumavtwn tw'n profhtw'n
.
ouj polu; m.
...
kai; zhvsomen
;] The form of this clause is different from that
of the clause to which it corresponds. Instead of saying
tw'/ de; p. t. pn. oujc uJpotag.
; the writer brings forward the overwhelming superiority of the obligation (
ouj polu; ma'llon
). So also the careful regard (
ejnetrepovmeqa
) due to an earthly parent is contrasted with the complete submission due to God
(
uJpotaghsovmeqa
).
For the use of mevn without dev following compare Luke 22:22; Col. 2:23. Such absolute subjection is crowned by the highest blessing ( kai; zhvsomen ). True life comes from complete self-surrender. As the One Son fulfilled His Father's will and lives through Him, so the many sons live through His life in obedience to Him: John 6:57 ( diav ), 14:15, 19. This life is given on the part of God, but it has to be realised by the individual: 1 John 5:16.