Theodore of Mopsuestia — Commentary on Scripture

Hebrews 4:1-11

It was fitting for them to be afraid, he says so that they might not be found lacking because of the depravity of their opinion, when they themselves had received the promise of access into the rest. For let no one suppose that the promise of the things to come are sufficient for him, just as it was not sufficient for them. For they were not joined to the things promised in accordance with faith. Therefore, one ought to read as follows, “They did not attach themselves in faith to the things that they heard,” namely, the promises that were made to them from God through Moses.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 4.1-2

Hebrews 4:1-11

We ought to be afraid … lest we, too, who have received the promise of the entrance into the rest, may be found lacking through a wickedness of purpose. For let no one think that the promise of things to come suffices him any more than it did them. Indeed, they did not understand in faith what had been promised.

COMMENTARY ON HEBREWS 4.1-2

Hebrews 4:1-11

This is the work of true “rest,” namely, not having to run again to the old things, while enduring transition and change. For just as God is said to rest from his creation of the world, having completed its foundation, so it is fitting that also the one who has entered “into rest” not run back again to the old things, viewing with contempt the labors required by the law’s virtuous ordinances to restrain transgression. For out of necessity change and a removal from the old institution follows these things.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 4.4-7

Hebrews 4:1-11

“Today” is neither an indefinite period of time, nor can it be predicated of an interval outside of “days” as if “today” were joined with each day. This should be stated not only for the sake of apostolic perspicuity but also for the sake of those who wish to understand, in the matter of the origin of the Only Begotten, the “I have begotten you today” by flatly asserting that the “today” is an indefinite period of time. They cannot perceive that if this were the case one would not be able to speak of a “today” since there was then not yet a day. The apostle has made clear that he would not say that “today” is an indefinite period of time when he said, “Again speaking in David he marks off a day.” Also in another passage, “Comfort them every day until it will be called ‘the Day.’ ” First he showed that the “today” is not being spoken of outside of “days,” by his saying “every day,” and so appending “until it will be called ‘the Day.’ ” Then in the matter of the “day” it does not appear as if he were talking about an indefinite period of time which might be applied both to the time tha…

“Today” is neither an indefinite period of time, nor can it be predicated of an interval outside of “days” as if “today” were joined with each day. This should be stated not only for the sake of apostolic perspicuity but also for the sake of those who wish to understand, in the matter of the origin of the Only Begotten, the “I have begotten you today” by flatly asserting that the “today” is an indefinite period of time. They cannot perceive that if this were the case one would not be able to speak of a “today” since there was then not yet a day. The apostle has made clear that he would not say that “today” is an indefinite period of time when he said, “Again speaking in David he marks off a day.” Also in another passage, “Comfort them every day until it will be called ‘the Day.’ ” First he showed that the “today” is not being spoken of outside of “days,” by his saying “every day,” and so appending “until it will be called ‘the Day.’ ” Then in the matter of the “day” it does not appear as if he were talking about an indefinite period of time which might be applied both to the time that has already passed and the time that is about to come. For what does he say? Deeming “each day” to be “the Day” which is spoken to we should give heed to remaining in the faith. For as “the Day” indicates the present day, he advises them to make full use of the day for that which is useful for exhortation.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 4.4-7

Hebrews 5:7-10

Even if he [the Word] gave a certain exceptional cooperation to the one who was assumed, this does not mean that the divinity took the place of the mind. If the divinity did take the place of his mind in the assumed man, as you say, how is it that he felt fear in his passion? Why did he need strong prayers in the face of necessity, the strong prayers that he offered to God with a loud voice and many tears, according to blessed Paul? TREATISES AGAINST APOLLINARIS 3.4.HE WAS OFTEN SAD. CHRYSOSTOM. Our affairs, both our business and our politeness, are turned into laughing; there is nothing steady, nothing grave. I do not say these things only to people of the world, but I know those whom I am hinting at. For the church has been filled with laughter. Whatever clever thing one may say, immediately there is laughter among those present, and the marvelous thing is that many do not leave off laughing even during the very time of the prayer. Everywhere the devil leads the dance; he has entered into all and is master of all. Christ is dishonored, is thrust aside; the church is made no account…

Even if he [the Word] gave a certain exceptional cooperation to the one who was assumed, this does not mean that the divinity took the place of the mind. If the divinity did take the place of his mind in the assumed man, as you say, how is it that he felt fear in his passion? Why did he need strong prayers in the face of necessity, the strong prayers that he offered to God with a loud voice and many tears, according to blessed Paul? TREATISES AGAINST APOLLINARIS 3.4.HE WAS OFTEN SAD. CHRYSOSTOM. Our affairs, both our business and our politeness, are turned into laughing; there is nothing steady, nothing grave. I do not say these things only to people of the world, but I know those whom I am hinting at. For the church has been filled with laughter. Whatever clever thing one may say, immediately there is laughter among those present, and the marvelous thing is that many do not leave off laughing even during the very time of the prayer.
Everywhere the devil leads the dance; he has entered into all and is master of all. Christ is dishonored, is thrust aside; the church is made no account of. Do you not hear Paul saying, “Let there be no filthiness, nor silly talk, nor levity”? He places “levity” along with “filthiness,” and do you laugh? What is “silly talk”? That which has nothing profitable. And do you, solitary one, laugh at all and relax your countenance? You that are crucified, you that are a mourner, tell me, do you laugh? Where do you hear of Christ doing this? Nowhere, but that he was sad, indeed oftentimes. For even when he looked on Jerusalem, he wept; and when he thought on the traitor, he was troubled; and when he was about to raise Lazarus, he wept; and do you laugh? If he who grieves not over the sins of others deserves to be accused, of what consideration will he be worthy who is without sorrow for his own sins and even laughs at them? This is the season of grief and tribulation, of bruising and of conflicts, and do you laugh? Do you not see how Sarah was rebuked? Do you not hear Christ saying, “Woe to you that laugh now, for you shall weep”? You chant these things every day, for, tell me, what do you say? “I have laughed”? By no means; but what? “I am weary with my moaning.”
But perhaps there are some persons so dissolute and silly as even during this very rebuke to laugh, because we discourse thus about laughter. For, indeed, such is their derangement, such their madness, that it does not feel the rebuke.

ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 15.8

Hebrews 6:13-20

Paul added that “Christ” has become “an eternal high priest” for us, in that Christ leads all those believing through him in each generation to God based on the hope of the resurrection.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 6.20

Hebrews 6:13-20

“Through two unchangeable things,” namely, that God would never be able to lie about what had been promised and that he made the promise with an oath.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 6.18

Hebrews 7:3

God the Word was not generated from a woman; the one generated from a woman was the one fashioned in her by the power of the Holy Spirit. The one who is of one essence with the Father was not born from her womb, for he is “without mother,” as blessed Paul’s phrase has it. It was rather the one fashioned in his mother’s womb by the power of the Holy Spirit who came in the last times. For this reason he is also called “without father.”

TREATISES AGAINST APOLLINARIS 3.1

Hebrews 7:3

When Paul wished to show that Christ was a high priest after the order of Melchizedek, he speaks those things that pertain to him, not explaining his nature but putting forth the explanation about him found in the divine Scripture and demonstrating the similarity between Melchizedek and Christ from the Scripture.Thus, he calls him “fatherless” and “motherless,” on the grounds that the divine Scripture does not narrate his genealogy. Then he adds, “being without genealogy,” showing that he is not talking about the nature of the man but rather the account of the divine Scripture. Then he further connects in the thought “neither having a beginning of days nor an end of life”—not in his nature but in the divine Scripture. And since it was possible to also say these about another person—for the divine Scripture does not remember to note the parents of many people or to set forth their genealogy, especially as many as we have learned were born outside the Israelite race—he does well to add, “being likened to the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.” For no longer does this apply to the…

When Paul wished to show that Christ was a high priest after the order of Melchizedek, he speaks those things that pertain to him, not explaining his nature but putting forth the explanation about him found in the divine Scripture and demonstrating the similarity between Melchizedek and Christ from the Scripture.Thus, he calls him “fatherless” and “motherless,” on the grounds that the divine Scripture does not narrate his genealogy. Then he adds, “being without genealogy,” showing that he is not talking about the nature of the man but rather the account of the divine Scripture. Then he further connects in the thought “neither having a beginning of days nor an end of life”—not in his nature but in the divine Scripture. And since it was possible to also say these about another person—for the divine Scripture does not remember to note the parents of many people or to set forth their genealogy, especially as many as we have learned were born outside the Israelite race—he does well to add, “being likened to the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.” For no longer does this apply to the rest as it does to him. And he makes clear from this explanation of the Scripture how Christ has this property as well as the rest. For Christ was “without father” in the begetting of his humanity, and “without mother” in the origin of his divine essence, and really “without genealogy.” For what genealogy would there be of him who exists from his Father alone? And it is also clear that “he has neither beginning of days nor an end of life.” In the case of Christ it is actually the case, whereas in the case of Melchizedek it is what we find (or do not find) in the Scripture’s account of him. Christ received his “priesthood forever” from the divine Scripture where it said, “You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek,” even as Melchizedek acts as priest eternally. And he calls him an “eternal” priest on the grounds that he has not passed on the priesthood to successors, which happened to be the case under Mosaic law. Therefore he also said, “Having been likened to the Son of God,” and yet it was appropriate to say that the Son had been made like Melchizedek—for the first is not made like the second. Yet the truth took place in connection with Christ, but no such thing took place beforehand with Melchizedek. So he says that Melchizedek was made like Christ by the way that he appears in the narrative, since the divine Scripture wished to show to us in its narration of the life of Melchizedek the similarity with the one who was to be.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 7.3

Hebrews 7:20-22

He says that it shows the difference between Christ and Aaron in that Christ received the priesthood with an oath. For those who became priests without oaths became so because of their need to cease being priests at some time, but Christ entered the priesthood with oaths, since he intended to remain based on his rank. He shows his rank is far greater than those under the law, since he intended also to furnish a greater high priest to those coming to him. For in this way he says he becomes “a surety” … for being the first to rise, just as he also calls him a “high priest,” so he pledges to us a similar resurrection.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 7.20-22

Hebrews 9:1-5

He begins to say how there were symbols in the law and the types of things in the era of grace and how it was possible to see clearly the things of the new covenant glimpsed beforehand in the things of the old covenant, even as he shows in comparison what sort of preeminence the new covenant things have over those of the old covenant. He makes this the beginning of the exposition of his teaching. Then he says that also the first testament had bounds and commandments of ritual that were obligated to be offered to God. The phrase “regulations for worship” refers to the commandments concerning these things.“And an earthly sanctuary.” Most likely he calls the temple “the sanctuary” because the liturgy is rendered in it to God, or also he calls the tabernacle “the sanctuary,” since they had this in service before the temple. For in a similar manner he called the tabernacle “the temple,” inasmuch as God happened to be present in it, while the later temple was built by Solomon. “And Samuel sat in the temple of the Lord where the ark of God was,” although the temple had not yet been built by…

He begins to say how there were symbols in the law and the types of things in the era of grace and how it was possible to see clearly the things of the new covenant glimpsed beforehand in the things of the old covenant, even as he shows in comparison what sort of preeminence the new covenant things have over those of the old covenant. He makes this the beginning of the exposition of his teaching. Then he says that also the first testament had bounds and commandments of ritual that were obligated to be offered to God. The phrase “regulations for worship” refers to the commandments concerning these things.“And an earthly sanctuary.” Most likely he calls the temple “the sanctuary” because the liturgy is rendered in it to God, or also he calls the tabernacle “the sanctuary,” since they had this in service before the temple. For in a similar manner he called the tabernacle “the temple,” inasmuch as God happened to be present in it, while the later temple was built by Solomon. “And Samuel sat in the temple of the Lord where the ark of God was,” although the temple had not yet been built by Solomon. And just as when God commanded Moses to erect the tabernacle as a symbol of the world according to a certain plan, God ordered him to make an enclosure out of curtains that would divide the middle from the rest, so also the temple was made according to the same plan.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 9.1-2

Hebrews 9:27-28

Christ having now been seen when he gained mastery over sin, took on death that had power because of sin. When sin had been atoned for, as was reasonable, he also will appear apart from suffering. For “without sin” means that when sin no longer has power, so also he himself will be seen apart from all human suffering.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 9.28

Hebrews 10:3-11

These things have been spoken to those in Babylon who wanted to say to God, “You did not demand sacrifices from me but only to obey you and to do your will.” And right away the things pertaining to the quotation have become unambiguous as far as I am concerned. Changing it he speaks in this way about the person of Christ, saying, “I will establish a body” instead of “I will establish ears.”

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 10.5

Hebrews 10:26-27

Those who have changed from the better to the worse must in the end be handed over to punishment, when they rise from the dead, since they did not allow any repentance in this life. For not merely in the present life does such an individual abolish repentance, but by his inability to assent to repentance he remains content with his fall and takes no notice of his stumbling, accomplishing every sort of sin with much pleasure by a certain lack of reason.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 10.26-27

Hebrews 11:1-3

He has made use of many proofs, since he knew the Jews especially questioned faith by means of a certain line of argument. For the Jews were setting forth the law and righteousness by their works, but Christians set forth faith, saying that even if someone should be guilty of ten thousand evils, by only believing in Christ he receives immediately deliverance from all of them, being deemed worthy of justification from him. Therefore, having determined this, then partly to appropriate the things that had been said before and partly to be able to show that faith appeared among all the virtuous men of old, he adds, “by faith the men of old received divine approval.”

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 11.1-2

Hebrews 11:17-19

He obtained it in accordance with his faith. For believing in the resurrection, he received him who had died symbolically. For the fact that he suffered nothing, although he fully expected to die, was a symbol of the one who would truly rise, inasmuch as, “having tasted death for a short time,” he rose, having suffered nothing under death’s power. For this was done “in a parable” instead of in symbols.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 11.19

Hebrews 11:32-40

It is also clear from the passage that when he says, “the dead in Christ will rise first,” he does not mean to neglect the just who died before Christ’s coming. Otherwise, how could he explicitly say in the epistle to the Hebrews, “And all these, though well attested by their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had foreseen something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.”

COMMENTARY ON 1 THESSALONIANS 4:16-17

Hebrews 12:1

He did not simply say that there is one time of repayment for all—for this was not his intention—but he said this to show that also those who had done such things and suffered such things through faith might still await the payment of the things promised. Not bearing it with ill grace, they are brought with us of the later generation. Thus he showed their even greater endurance, if indeed they still await after death those who ought to contend likewise with them so that with them we may obtain the enjoyment of all the good. And therefore he speaks of “witnesses,” not of the things suffered but of the things testified for our faith.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 12.1

Hebrews 12:12-13

Where are those who say that the apostle in this epistle precludes repentance by saying, “It is impossible to renew again thereafter to repentance those once enlightened”? How then do they understand these words: “Therefore lift your drooping hands and strengthen your weak knees”? What sort of healing of the lame does this apostle, who allegedly does not believe in a repentance for those who have sinned, wish to take place? It is clear he writes these things to believers in that he says to them: “Recall the former days when, after you were enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings.”

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 12.12-13

Hebrews 12:16-17

Through these words he does not wish to preclude the chance of repentance, but to teach that it is not possible for those who do not receive correction at the present time to receive it later.… For he has not been eager to say contradictory things, especially in so close proximity. And anyone could figure this out from the example that he uses. For first he made mention of Esau, who partly was disheartened when he did not obtain the blessing, but partly abided the decision even after this event owing to the malice of his character. Then when he repented of his assent to sin, he did not obtain the blessing. For he was not asking for repentance, but for the blessing that had been given to his brother in accordance with the worthiness of his character. It was impossible that the blessing would again be taken away and given to him again. Also, however, it is possible to discover that his tears were not altogether unprofitable. His father seems to have grieved thereafter for his careless son and seems to have given him some blessings. So he does not wish to preclude repentance through the…

Through these words he does not wish to preclude the chance of repentance, but to teach that it is not possible for those who do not receive correction at the present time to receive it later.… For he has not been eager to say contradictory things, especially in so close proximity. And anyone could figure this out from the example that he uses. For first he made mention of Esau, who partly was disheartened when he did not obtain the blessing, but partly abided the decision even after this event owing to the malice of his character. Then when he repented of his assent to sin, he did not obtain the blessing. For he was not asking for repentance, but for the blessing that had been given to his brother in accordance with the worthiness of his character. It was impossible that the blessing would again be taken away and given to him again. Also, however, it is possible to discover that his tears were not altogether unprofitable. His father seems to have grieved thereafter for his careless son and seems to have given him some blessings. So he does not wish to preclude repentance through these words.

FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS 12.17