Глава седьмая

Hebrews 7:1. For Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, he who met Abraham and blessed him as he returned from the defeat of the kings, Hebrews 7:2. to whom Abraham also divided the tithe from everything - (cf. Gen. 14:18) The apostle's purpose is to show the difference between the Old and New Testaments. And he pointed out this at the very beginning, saying that God spoke to the ancients through His servants - the prophets, and to us, the people of the New Testament, “in the Son” (Heb. 1: 1-2). But since the listeners were weak, for they discovered cowardice under temptation, then in the middle of the epistle he strengthened the weak, and finally, after he had sufficiently encouraged them, he again begins to speak about the superiority of the New Testament over the Old. And delve into his wisdom. It shows that Melchizedek, who was a type of Christ, was superior to Abraham. For if he had not excelled, he would not have blessed him and would not have received tithes from him. And since the priests of the law came from Abraham, it is clear that Melchizedek surpasses them, as if blessing them and receiving tithes from them, at the same time when he blessed their forefather and received tithes from him. If the type of Christ, Melchizedek, is so different from the priests of the law, how much more so is the true Melchizedek, the Christ? This is the general meaning of this place. But, having briefly outlined the story of Melchizedek (Gen. 14:18-20), he then moves on to examine it, explaining the story of Melchizedek from the spiritual and mysterious side. first, by the sign of the name king of righteousness, Here he shows in what sense Melchizedek is a type of Christ. And above all, he says, learn the true meaning from the name itself. Namely: “Melchi” means king; “Sedek” is true. Who else is the king of righteousness if not our Lord Jesus Christ? and then the king of Salim, that is, the king of the world, And from the name of the city, he says, this is clear. For Salim, according to interpretation, means “peace.” But who else is the king of the world if not Christ, who reconciled heavenly and earthly things? The title “king of truth and peace” does not belong to any person except Christ alone. Hebrews 7:3. without father, without mother, without pedigree, There are other similarities. Precisely, like Melchizedek without a father and without a mother - not, however, because he did not have a father or mother - like a man he did - but because the Scriptures do not indicate his genealogy and his parents are not mentioned. So Christ is without a father by earthly birth; for according to the flesh He was born of one Virgin Mary. Without a mother by birth from above; for inexpressibly and incomprehensibly he was born of one Father before all ages. But beyond that, “without genealogy.” For “Who will explain His generation?” (Isaiah 53:8; cf. Acts 8:33). Since the Father who gave birth is in heaven and incomprehensible, the very image of birth is also incomprehensible. It is also impossible to comprehend with reason the Mother who gave birth on earth, the actual image of birth, that is, how the Virgin gave birth without pain, and the like. So, Christ is actually without a father and without a mother: Melchizedek is not really without a father and without a mother, for this is impossible; but in the sense that his parents are not mentioned in Scripture. Therefore, the expression “without pedigree” serves as an explanation of another expression: “without father and without mother.” The Apostle seems to say this: I said about Melchizedek that he is without father and mother, because the Scriptures do not contain his genealogy and do not mention his family. having neither the beginning of days nor the end of life, being like the Son of God, remains a priest forever. And understand this in the same sense as what was said before. As a man, Melchizedek, of course, had both a beginning of days and an end of life, but since we do not know either when he was born or when he died, then, in our understanding, he seems to have neither a beginning nor an end. However, Christ, in fact, as God, has no beginning, for he is beginningless in relation to the beginning of time, although he has the Father as the beginning as the cause; no end, for he is immortal; in a word, eternal. Therefore, where are the Arians? Let them hear that the “Son” has no beginning. In this sense, Paul resolves this question for us. And if anything complicates us, it is this: how is Christ “a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek,” when Melchizedek died and was not a priest “forever.” Let us also solve this difficulty by saying that Christ, as eternal and immortal, is, indeed, a “Priest forever.” For even now - we believe - He always offers Himself for us through His priests, and especially as an Advocate for us before the Father: at this time He performs the highest and most mysterious sacred act for us, offering Himself to us in bread and drink in a wonderful and surpassing all understanding way. Melchizedek is said to have an eternal priesthood, not because he is eternal, for he died; but because the Scripture does not indicate his end, how could we know when his priesthood ceased. And just as in relation to the names of the first there are only names: Melchizedek, that is, the king of righteousness, and the king of Salem (king of peace), and with Christ the very thing: so the expression: “having neither the beginning of days nor the end of life,” refers to the first Melchizedek only because it is not written down, for he was a type; but actually refers to Christ. If there were similarity in everything, then there would be no prototype and truth, but either in both cases there would be a prototype, or in both cases there would be truth. Don't we also see this in paintings? And there a simple outline already has a similarity in comparison with the finished picture, since the characteristic features are unclearly displayed by the lines; There is also a dissimilarity, since the picture through paint has acquired a more distinct and clearer appearance. Hebrews 7:4. You see how great is he to whom Abraham the patriarch gave tithes of his best spoils. After adapting the type to the truth, or what belongs to Melchizedek, to Christ, he finally shows with confidence that the type, that is, Melchizedek, is more glorious than the actual Jewish priests themselves, and not only them, but also the forefather himself. If the type surpasses them, then the true High Priest Christ will surpass them much more. So, “you see,” he says, “how great,” that is, how much superior he is to whom gifts were given not by an ordinary person, but by Abraham, such a great patriarch; not without intention he added the word “patriarch”, but to elevate the personality. And “from the best spoils,” that is, from the most excellent and valuable spoils. And it cannot be said that he separated some reward for his labor as someone who fought and helped together, but sat at home. That’s why he said above: “I met Abraham returning after the defeat of the kings.” If he is higher than the patriarch himself, as shown by the giving of tithes, then he is much higher than the priests of the law. Heb.7:5. Those who receive the priesthood from the sons of Levi have a commandment to take tithes according to the law from the people, that is, from their brothers, although these also came from the loins of Abraham. Hebrews 7:6. But this one, who was not descended from their lineage, received tithes from Abraham Now he shows how Melchizedek is superior to Abraham, saying that the priests of the tribe of Levi received tithes from the people (Lev. 27:30-32), obviously as the best and most honorable people for the sake of the dignity of the priesthood. For why else would the people themselves, being subjected to toil and distress, bring tithes of all kinds to the priests, who are not subjected to such labors and do not cultivate the land, if not because they are more sacred and serve a higher cause? Such is the dignity of the priesthood and so much are those who have it superior to their own brothers, although they came from the same loins. Hence Melchizedek, who received tithes from Abraham, and, moreover, not being from his family, for he was a foreigner, superior and superior to him. For why would Abraham give a tithe to a foreigner if great honor did not belong to him? If Melchizedek, the type, surpasses even Abraham himself, then the much more true High Priest surpasses the priests of the law. and blessed him who had the promises. Since Abraham was greatly exalted by the fact that he received promises from God, he now adds that such and such a great one, who was honored with a conversation with God and who had God as a debtor, was blessed by the prototype of Christ. Hebrews 7:7. Without any contradiction, the smaller is blessed by the larger. He said that Melchizedek blessed so great Abraham. Yet we agree and unquestioningly acknowledge that the one who blesses is higher than the one being blessed. Consequently, Melchizedek, the prototype of Christ, is higher than the patriarch. Heb.7:8. And here the tithes are taken by mortal men, and there by the one who has a testimony about himself that he lives. And another reasoning proving that Melchizedek is superior to the priests of the law. For “here,” that is, in the law, those who receive tithes die; and “there,” that is, in the case of Melchizedek, he received tithes, to whom Scripture testifies that he “lives.” For “You,” he says, “are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek” (Ps. 109:4). As for the fact that Melchizedek lives forever, understand this in the same way as was said above, that is, that Scripture does not mention his death. That the Levites die, but Melchizedek lives, some understand that the image of the Levitical priesthood has become dead, for it has become invalid, but the image of the priesthood of Melchizedek, or life according to Christ, lives and abides, and will exist forever. Hebrews 7:9. And, so to speak, Levi himself, who receives tithes, in the person of Abraham gave tithes: So that the priests of the law cannot say: what does it have to do with us if Abraham gave tithes? - says that through the mediation of Abraham and Levi, the ancestor of our priesthood, “who took tithes, ... gave tithes.” Thus, is Melchizedek not higher than Levi, when, obviously, he received tithes from him through the mediation of Abraham? The expression: “so to speak” either means: to say briefly, or instead of: so I will say. Since it seemed too bold to say that Levi, not yet born, gave tithes to Melchizedek, he softened it (the statement, using the turn of phrase “so to speak” - Ed.). Hebrews 7:10. for he was still in his father's loins when Melchizedek met him. He shows how Levi gave tithes, saying that since the forefather gave tithes, he also gave due to the fact that, being already in the loins of Abraham, he had to be born of his seed, although he was not yet born. And he did not say: “Levites,” but Levi, to show superiority. What courage! He completely refuted everything Jewish. That is why he said before: “they became unable to hear” (Heb. 5:11), that he intended to offer these truths and so that they would not turn away the ears. So, having configured and prepared them in advance, as he wanted, he already says what he wants. For the soul both contains and returns the word differently than the earth, having received the seed, will return it. There is nature, which is distinguished by constancy; here is free will, something that is easily changed and extremely diverse. Therefore, the teacher needs to prepare a lot in advance. Hebrews 7:11. So, if perfection were achieved through the Levitical priesthood - for the law of the people is associated with it - then what further need would there be for another priest to rise up in the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron? He showed that Melchizedek was much higher in the priestly rank than both Abraham and Levi. Now he again gives another proof, showing that the priesthood in Christ is much superior to the Levitical priesthood, and that the priesthood of Christ is a perfect priesthood, and that is an imperfect one. For if the priesthood were perfect according to the law, then the priest would have to rise up according to the order of Aaron: for Aaron was from the tribe of Levi. But it is said that the priest rises not according to the order of Aaron, but according to the order of Melchizedek. Then, since that priesthood was imperfect, another one is introduced in its place. And the expression “yet” has great meaning; it seems to say that if Christ was first according to the order of Melchizedek, and then the law was given, then with all justice it could be said that the priesthood according to the law, that is, the Aaronic priesthood, was given due to the fact that the Melchizedek priesthood was, as it were, imperfect. In fact, Christ later received a different image of the priesthood. From this it is obvious that since the Aaronic priesthood was imperfect, something else is introduced in its place. What does the expression mean: “for the law of the people is connected with it”? Based on this, it cannot be said that the Aaronic priesthood is perfect, that it was given for others, and not for the Jews; on the contrary, it was entirely given to one people, and the law of the people was associated with it, that is, it was determined that they should use it, be guided by it, and do everything through it. So why was it abolished? - because, obviously, it is powerless. Hebrews 7:12. Because with the change of the priesthood there must be a change of the law. Now shows how the law is gradually abolished, and another covenant is introduced in its place. For if the priesthood is changed, then it is necessary that the law be different, for there is no priest without a covenant and without laws and decrees. The priesthood was changed not only according to the image, that is, so that it was not according to the order of Aaron, but according to the order of Melchizedek, but also according to the tribe. For it passed from the priestly tribe of Aaron to the royal tribe of Judah. Pay attention to the sacrament. First there was the royal tribe, and then the priestly tribe: so Christ was always the King, and finally became the High Priest when he took on flesh and when he made a sacrifice. Hebrews 7:13. For the One about whom (ἐφ᾿ ὃν) this is said belonged to another tribe, He shows how the priesthood changed according to the tribe, and says that Christ (“about Whom” (ἐφ᾿ ὃν) instead of τον, περί ου - that is, “to whom” the priesthood passed) is from another tribe, namely from Judah. from which no one approached the altar. “From which,” namely from the tribe of Judah, “no one approached,” that is, did not stand before the altar and did not perform priestly duties. Hebrews 7:14. For it is known that our Lord rose from the tribe of Judah, The expression “shone” is significant, taken from the prophecy of Balaam, who says: “a star rises from Jacob” (Num. 24:17), as well as from the prophecy of Malachi, calling Him “the Sun of righteousness” (Mal. 4:2). This shows that the Lord appeared to enlighten the world. of which Moses said nothing concerning the priesthood. For Moses assigned everything that concerns the priesthood to the tribe of Levi, and to the tribe of Judah everything that concerns leadership in wars. Hebrews 7:15. And this is even more clearly seen from the fact that in the likeness of Melchizedek another Priest arises, What is “clearer to see”? The middle ground between one and the other priesthood. Or that the change of priesthood and covenant is revealed not only from the fact that the priest rises from another tribe, and by no means from Levi, but also, let’s say about this, it is more fully revealed from this: that “in the likeness of Melchizedek” and so on. This means that a priest rises up according to the order of Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:16. Who is such not according to the law of the carnal commandment, but according to the power of unceasing life. He, Melchizedek, was not like the priests under the law; those received the priesthood from the law containing carnal commandments: circumcise the flesh and wash the flesh, rest in the flesh and you will be rewarded with carnal blessings; Melchizedek is not so, but by the power of God, which is why his priesthood is eternally alive and indestructible. Understand “life” in the same way as above, namely, that his death is unknown. Or understand the word “who” about a priest, as if he were saying: what other priest, that is, Christ, received the priesthood “not according to the law of the carnal commandment,” but according to the power of the Father, or according to His own, and His priesthood is indestructible. It would be appropriate to add the word “spiritual” to the word “carnal.” Why did he add: “according to the power of unceasing life”? Because through the carnal he designated the temporary. And according to the temporary, he added the expression: “unceasing life.” This means: Christ lives by his own power. Hebrews 7:17. For it is testified: You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek. (Ps.109:4) He confirms why he said: “unceasing life,” and says that Scripture testifies that He is “a priest forever.” Some, however, think that he does not confirm this, but that He is a priest not according to the law of the carnal commandment. For if, he says, He were a priest according to the law, then it would be necessary to assert that He was according to the order of Aaron. Now, since it is written: “according to the order of Melchizedek,” it is obvious that not according to the law, but according to some other divine way. Hebrews 7:18. The cancellation of a former commandment occurs because of its weakness and uselessness, Hebrews 7:19. for the law brought nothing to perfection; He said that the law can be obeyed, and he showed it. Next, he looks for the reason. For we humans then calm down when we find out the reason. And he says: this is why the abrogation and rejection of the former commandment, that is, the former covenant, took place, because it was found to be useless and weak. So what? Has the law benefited anyone? Of course, it brought benefits, but it turned out to be useless in making people perfect. For he adds: “for the law brought nothing to perfection.” Why was the law weak? Because it proclaimed only the letters: do this and do not do that; but he did not impart any power to fulfill the commandments, which is now given to us by the Spirit. However, heretics attack the law, saying: even Paul degrades the law. But he, the madmen, did not call him bad, but useless and weak precisely in order to make him perfect. For just as milk is useful for babies, according to their age, but for perfect ones it is useless, so the law is useful for imperfect Jews, distracting them from idols and leading them to God, informing them of the corresponding commandments, but for those who need more perfect commandments, it was not like that. For he commanded carnal sacrifices and purifications, which spiritual ones do not need. Therefore, it has now been cancelled. Cancellation is the cancellation of what was in force. Thus, the law had power when it had its time. but a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God. The commandment of the law was abolished, he says, but a hope was given that the Jews did not have: for they also had hope, pleasing God, to take possession of the earth, to overcome their enemies, and in general they trusted in bodily blessings. But our hope is not like that, it is more excellent: for we trust in heavenly things, that we will be close to God, that we will appear and serve Him with the angels. Above, he said: “enters into the interior behind the veil” (Heb. 6:19), but now: “through which we draw closer,” he says, “to God.” For hope brings us to the very throne of God and places us with the cherubim. Hebrews 7:20. And how this was not without an oath, - This is another difference between the new Priest and the ancients and one covenant from another. For the priesthood of Christ was not promised simply, but with an oath, so that the word of God would be fully believed, as above, for greater persuasiveness, he said that God swore to Abraham (Heb. 6:13). Hebrews 7:21. for they were priests without an oath, but this one was with an oath, because it was said about Him: The Lord has sworn, and will not repent: You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek, - (Ps. 109:4) For, he says, the priests of the law are appointed without an oath, and God did not swear about any of them, saying: you will be a priest according to the law. Christ with an oath given through God, speaking to Him: You are a priest according to some new image: not according to Aaron, but according to Melchizedek. Hebrews 7:22. then Jesus became the surety of the better covenant. That is, because he swore that He would always be a priest. For I would not have sworn if I had not been higher. Hence the New Testament is superior to the Old. Hebrews 7:23. Moreover, there were many of those priests, because death did not allow one to be alone; Hebrews 7:24. and this One, since He abides forever, has an imperishable priesthood, And here he shows the advantage that Christ has in comparison with the high priests according to the law, and says that there are many priests there, because they are mortal; here alone, because He is immortal. So, “has an enduring priesthood,” that is, not shared with anyone and not transferable. Do you see how much higher it is? How much higher is the immortal than the mortal? Hebrews 7:25. therefore He can always save those who come to God through Him, Since, he says, He is immortal, He can stand for everyone and save to the end, that is, He can grant salvation not temporary, but complete, and, of course, both here and in the future life. For the high priest in the Old Testament, even if he was glorious, offered sacrifices to God while he lived, such as Samuel and others like him, but after that he no longer did, for he died. Here is the High Priest, eternal and ever living. Therefore, He can always save those who come through Him, that is, through faith in Him. For whoever believes in the Son, without a doubt, approaches the Father: for He is the way to the Father, and whoever adheres to this path here receives peace there. being always alive to intercede for them. This is how it is said humiliatingly about Christ according to the flesh. For, indeed, He is the High Priest according to the flesh: since He is the High Priest, to that extent, it is said, He intercedes. How does He who raises the dead and gives life, like the Father, intercede when He must save? How does He intercede, in whose power is all judgment, Who sends angels to cast some into the furnace and save others? Of course, according to humanity, he said: “intercede.” Condescending to his listeners, Paul says: do not be afraid and do not say: Yes, He loves us and has boldness before the Father, but He is not always able to do the high priestly work for us. When I speak about His humanity, I do not separate Him from Divinity, for both have one hypostasis, but I give the listeners to understand what is due about both natures. Moreover, the very fact that the Son sits with the Father in the flesh is intercession for us: as if the flesh were beseeching the Father for us; Of course, it was accepted for this purpose, precisely for the sake of our salvation. Hebrews 7:26. This is how our High Priest should be: holy, not involved in evil, From these words it is clear that both above and now he speaks of the flesh. For who can say such things about God, and will not he be ashamed, applying this to the incomprehensible nature of God? So, He is “holy”. One who leaves nothing behind that is due to Him to do; and “not involved in evil,” that is, alien to deceit and evil. “And there was no deceit in His mouth” (Is. 53:9; cf. 1 Peter 2:22). And who can call this also a praise for God: for He is of such a nature that He is not defiled. It is clear that this speaks of the humanity of Christ alone. separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens, The high priests according to the law, he says, even though they were saints in everything else, however, as people, they are not alien to vices and are not completely “separated from sinners.” For how could it be otherwise, if they themselves are involved in sins? And besides, none of them was in heaven: our High Priest, along with the fact that He is filled with all virtue and “separated from sinners,” is also “exalted above the heavens,” seated on the very throne of the Father. The expression “exalted,” as is obvious, was used of Him according to the flesh. For, as God the Word, He was always “above the heavens.” Hebrews 7:27. Who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices first for his own sins, then for the sins of the people, Having said that our High Priest is “separated from sinners,” he now expands on this and says that He is so free from sins that, having sacrificed His own body, He did not offer it for Himself, for how is this possible when He committed no sin, but for us. There is, however, another advantage. The high priests according to the law offered sacrifices daily, since they could not cleanse immediately; He made a sacrifice of such great power that he cleansed the world through it in one go. So, Christ is superior to the priests in this respect too. for He did it once, by sacrificing Himself. What does it mean? The fact that He made a sacrifice for human sins, and not for Himself. “Once,” he says, he performed a sacred act, and after that he sat down at the right hand of the Father, as the Lord. So that you, hearing that He is a priest, do not think that He constantly stands and performs sacred acts, shows that He became a priest according to the economy. When the economy was completed, He again assumed His own greatness. Hebrews 7:28. For the law appoints as high priests those who have infirmities; So that you do not think that although you once brought it, it was for Yourself, but now you prove that you did not bring it for Your own sins. For “the law appoints as high priests” ordinary people “who have weaknesses,” that is, those who cannot resist sin, but who themselves, being weak, are subject to falls. He, like the Son, being so strong, how can he have sin? And not having sin, why would He make a sacrifice for Himself? But also for others, not many times, but “once”. As Almighty, He was able to accomplish everything through a single sacrifice. By “weakness” we mean, as Paul himself says in many places, sin and even death. For, since the high priests were mortal and weak according to the law, they themselves were not sinless, and could not cleanse others. He is immortal and strong. Listen to what follows. and the word of oath, after the law, established the Son, perfect forever. Observe the opposites. There is the law, here is the word of oath, that is, the most faithful, the truest; there people, of course, are slaves, here the Son, of course, is Lord; there the weak, that is, those who stumble, having sins guilty of death, - here he is perfect forever, that is, eternal, omnipotent, not only now, but always sinless. Therefore, if He is perfect, if He never sins, if He is always alive, then why would He sacrifice for Himself, or in general many times for others? You might be interested in: