Thomas Aquinas Commentary Hebrews 1:1-2

"God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in [his] Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds;" — Hebrews 1:1-2 (ASV)

The author of Hebrews wrote this epistle against the errors of converts from Judaism who wanted to preserve legal observances alongside the Gospel, as if Christ’s grace were not sufficient for salvation. The epistle is therefore divided into two parts. In the first, the author exalts Christ’s grandeur to show the superiority of the New Testament over the Old. In the second, he discusses what unites the members to the head: namely, faith (see chapter 11).

The author intends to show the New Testament’s superiority over the Old by proving Christ’s preeminence over the key figures of the Old Testament. These include the angels, by whom the Law was handed down—The law was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator (Galatians 3:19)—and Moses, by or through whom it was given: The law was given by Moses (John 1:17); There arose no more a prophet in Israel like unto Moses, to whom the Lord spoke face to face (Deuteronomy 34:10). It also includes the priesthood by which the Law was administered: Into the first tabernacle the priests indeed entered, accomplishing the offices of sacrifices (Hebrews 9:6).

Therefore, he first shows Christ’s superiority over the angels, secondly over Moses (chapter 3), and thirdly over the priesthood of the Old Testament (chapter 5). Regarding the first point, he does two things: first, he demonstrates Christ’s greatness; secondly, by showing this to be true of Christ, he demonstrates that the angels lack this same greatness (chapter 2).

In regard to the first point, he indicates Christ’s excellence in four matters:

1. As to His unique origin, by calling Him the true, natural Son of God.
2. As to the extent of His rule (verse 2c).
3. As to the power of His activity (verse 2d).
4. As to the sublimity of His glory (verse 2e).

Because the author intends to exalt Christ in a way that contributes to the glory of the New Testament, his argument demonstrates the New’s superiority over the Old.

Concerning the Old Testament, he mentions five things:

1. How it was proclaimed.
2. The time (verse 1b).
3. The author or giver (verse 1c).
4. To whom it was given (verse 1d).
5. By which ministers (verse 1e).

He says, therefore, In many ways, referring first of all to various persons, because God spoke not to one person but to many, namely, Abraham, Noah, and others. Secondly, it refers to the various times, and always with the same certainty: He went out early in the morning… And about the third hour… And again about the sixth hour… (Matthew 20:1 and following). It was also “many” in regard to the matters treated, namely, divine things: I am who am (Exodus 3:14); future events: She knows signs and wonders before they be done ; and promises of future benefits, at least in figure: Many things are show to you above the understanding of men .

It was also “many” in the variety of figures, because at one time he uses the figure of a lion, at another the figure of a stone: A stone was cut out of a mountain without hands (Daniel 2:34); That he might show you that his law is manifold (Job 11:6). And in various ways. This refers to the three kinds of vision: first, ocular vision: In the same hour there appeared fingers, as it were the hand of a man writing over against the candlestick upon the surface of the wall (Daniel 5:5); secondly, imaginary vision: I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated (Isaiah 6:1); and thirdly, intellectual vision, as with David: I have had understanding above the ancients (Psalms 119:100). Hence, Hosea includes all of these: I have multiplied visions (Hosea 12:10).

This phrase also refers to the various ways He spoke, because sometimes He spoke plainly and sometimes obscurely. In fact, there is no manner of speaking that has not been employed in the writings of the Old Testament: Behold, I have described it to you three manner of ways, in thoughts and knowledge (Proverbs 22:20). Thirdly, it refers to how He spoke by rebuking the wicked, by encouraging the righteous, and by instructing the ignorant: All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice (2 Timothy 3:16).

Then he touches upon the time when this teaching was delivered: the past. He spoke of old, meaning not suddenly, because the things spoken about Christ were so great as to be incredible unless they had been taught bit by bit as time went on. Hence, St. Gregory says, “As time went on, the knowledge of divine things grew.” The former things of old I have declared, and they went forth out of my mouth, and I have made them to be heard (Isaiah 48:3).

Next, he mentions the author, namely, God, who speaks: I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me (Psalms 85:9). For He does not lie: God is not a man that he should lie (Numbers 23:19). These, then, are the first three things that commend the Old Testament: its authorship, because it is from God; its subtlety and sublimity, because it was given in so many and various ways; and its duration, because it was given of old.

Fourthly, he shows to whom it was delivered: to our fathers. This is why it is familiar and known to us: We declare unto you the promise which was made to our fathers (Acts 13:32); As he spoke to our fathers (Luke 1:55).

Fifthly, he indicates the ministers, because it was delivered not by deceivers but by prophets: Which he had promised before by his prophets (Romans 1:2); To whom all the prophets give testimony (Acts 10:43).

Then (verse 2) he describes the doctrine of the New Testament and mentions five properties. Four of these are differences from the Old Testament, and one is the same. For when he had said, in many and various ways, he was indicating that every ordered multitude should be referred to one thing. Therefore, although the manner is varied, all is ordained to the final goal: Be in the fear of the Lord all the day long (Proverbs 23:17); The consumption abridged shall overflow with justice. For the Lord God of hosts shall make a consumption and an abridgement in the midst of all the land (Isaiah 10:22). Likewise, of old referred to the time of waiting and of darkness, but in these last days refers to our days, that is, to the time of grace: The night is passed and the day is at hand (Romans 13:12).

It should be noted that in regard to the Old Testament he says God was “speaking,” but here he says God “has spoken,” to designate that the speech of the New Testament is more perfect than that of the Old. To understand this, we should note that three things are required for our speech: first, the conception of a thought, by which we preconceive in our mind what is to be spoken by the mouth; second, the expression of the conceived thought to indicate what has been conceived; and third, the manifestation of the thing expressed, so that it becomes evident.

God, therefore, when speaking, first conceived, so that there was but one conception, and that from all eternity: God speaks once (Job 33:14). This eternal conception is the begetting of the Son of God, concerning whom it says in Psalm 2:7: The Lord said to me: you are my Son, this day have I begotten you.

Secondly, God expressed His concept in three ways. First, in the production of creatures, for the conceived Word, existing as the likeness of the Father, is also the likeness according to which all creatures were made: God said: Be light made. And light was made (Genesis 1:3). Secondly, through certain notions, for example, in the minds of the angels, into whom the forms of all things concealed in the Word were infused, and in the minds of holy men, through sensible, intellectual, or imaginary revelations. Hence, every such manifestation proceeding from the eternal Word is called a “speaking”: The word of the Lord which came to him (Jeremiah 1:2). Thirdly, by assuming flesh, concerning which it says in John 1:14: And the Word was made flesh. Hence, Augustine says that the Incarnate Word is related to the uncreated Word as the voice’s work is related to the heart’s word.

But the first expression, in creation, is not for the purpose of manifesting. It is clear that this expression cannot be called a “speaking”; hence, it is never said that God “speaks” when making creatures, but that He is known: The invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made (Romans 1:20). The second expression, which is the infusion of forms in the minds of angels or of men, is directed only to the knowledge of divine wisdom; hence, it can be called a “speaking.” The third expression, the assuming of flesh, took place for the purpose of existing and of knowing, and for expressly manifesting. By assuming flesh, the Word was made man and brought us to a complete knowledge of God: For this was I born, that I should give testimony of the truth (John 18:37). And He clearly manifests Himself to us: Afterwards he was seen upon earth, and lived among men .

Thus, although God speaks in both the New and the Old Testaments, He speaks more perfectly in the New. In the Old, He speaks in the minds of men, but in the New, He speaks through the Son’s Incarnation. Furthermore, the Old Testament was handed down to the Fathers, who looked on from afar and saw God from a distance. The New has been handed down to us—namely, to the apostles—who have seen Him in His very person: That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, and our hands have handled the Word of life, we declare unto you (1 John 1:1); He made not the covenant with our fathers but with us who are present and living. He spoke to us face to face (Deuteronomy 5:3). Hence, it is clear that that speaking was a promise—To Abraham were the promises made (Galatians 3:16)—but the New was a manifestation: Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ (John 1:17). Also, in the Old He spoke in the prophets; in the New He spoke in His Son, who is the Lord of the prophets: The only begotten, Who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him (John 1:18).

Does this mean that all the ones through whom God spoke were prophets? I answer that five things are required of a true prophet:

1. The revealing of things that transcend human knowledge; otherwise, he would not be called a prophet but a sage, like Solomon, whose mind was enlightened regarding things within the scope of human reason. Hence, not even the Jews called him a prophet but a sage.
2. The understanding of the things revealed; otherwise, he would not be a prophet: There is need of understanding in a vision (Daniel 10:1). That is why Nebuchadnezzar, not understanding the revelation made to him, is not called a prophet, but Daniel, who did understand it, was.
3. It is required that in the things he sees, by which he is transported, he not be held by them as if they were things themselves, but as figures. Otherwise, he would not be a prophet but a lunatic, who apprehends imaginary things as if they were real: The prophet that has a dream, let him tell a dream: and he that has my word, let him speak my word with truth (Jeremiah 23:28).
4. That he perceive the things revealed with certainty, as if known through demonstration; otherwise, it would be a dream and not a prophecy: The Lord God has opened my ear and I do not resist: I have not gone back (Isaiah 50:5).
5. The fifth requirement is that he has the will to announce the thing revealed. Accordingly, some claim that Daniel is not a prophet because he did not receive the thing revealed in an expressible way. Hence, it is not said that “the word of the Lord was made to Daniel,” as it is said of the other prophets: The word of the Lord is made a reproach to me, and a derision all the day. Then I said: I will not make mention of him, nor speak any more in his name; and there came in my heart as a burning fire (Jeremiah 20:8).

But another question arises: Why does he say, in the prophets, when he might better have said, “by the prophets?” The answer is that he did this because he wished to exclude certain errors:

1. The error of Porphyry, who claimed that prophets invented their statements and were not inspired by the Holy Spirit. To counter this, the Apostle says God spoke in the prophets. As if to say: They were not speaking of themselves, but God was speaking in them. For prophecy came not by the will of men at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21).
2. To exclude the error of those who maintained that prophecy is something natural and can be possessed by one’s natural disposition, as a melancholy person might have a very strong imagination—so strong, indeed, that he considers the things he imagines to be real. Hence, it says, God spoke in the prophets. As if to say: Prophecy does not come about through a natural disposition but by an inward utterance of God. The Spirit breathes where he will (John 3:8).
3. Against the error of those who claim that prophecy can be possessed like a habit, as science is possessed, so that whenever a person decides to do so, he can prophesy. But this is not true, because the spirits of prophecy are not always present in the prophet, but only when their minds are enlightened by God. Hence, in 2 Kings 4:27, Elisha says: Her soul is in anguish, and the Lord has hid it from me. Therefore, the Apostle says, in the prophets. As if to say: Not that prophecy is possessed by all or always, as habits are, but only in those in whom it pleases God to speak.
4. To exclude the error of Priscilla and Montanus, who maintained that prophets do not understand their utterances. But this is not true; hence, it is stated in Haggai 1:3: The word of unbelievablenessthe Lord came by the hand of Haggai, the prophet; and in 1 Corinthians 14:32: The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. What he says, in the prophets, means in the understanding and power of the prophets. Thus, Christ’s unique property is clear: He is the natural Son. The Father is in me and I in the Father (John 14:10).

But is He one of those sons of whom it is said, I have said: you are gods, and all of you the sons of the Most High (Psalms 82:6)? No, because these are called sons in a general sense, but He is the Son who was appointed heir and lord of all things.

Is He one of those sons of whom it is said, He gave them the power to become the sons of God, i.e., who believe in his name (John 1:12)? No, those are said to become sons, but Christ is the Son through whom God made the world.

Is He one of those sons who glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God (Romans 5:2)? No, because they are sons through the hope they have of God’s glory, but He is the splendor of that glory.

Others are called sons because they were made in the image of this Son: Whom he foreknew to be made conformable to the image of his Son (Romans 8:29). But He is the image itself and the figure of His substance.

Others are called sons insofar as they contain within themselves the Word of God: That you may be blameless and sincere children without reproof in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation: among whom you shine as lights in the world. Holding for the word of life (Philippians 2:15). But He is the true Son who carries all things by the word of His power. Therefore, Christ’s preeminence is clear from His unique origin and from His relationship to other sons of God. It is these things that make the New Testament greater than the Old.

Yet in regard to both testaments he says God was “speaking” or “has spoken” to indicate that both have the same author. This is against the Manicheans: By him we have access both in the same Spirit to the Father (Ephesians 2:18); Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? (Romans 3:29). Again, the Old was given to our fathers, but the New to us, through His Son, who is the Lord of the prophets: The only begotten Son, Who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him (John 1:18).

Then he shows the greatness of Christ’s power when he says, whom he appointed the heir of all things. For as it says in Galatians 4:7: And if a son, an heir also through God. But in Christ are two natures, the divine and the human. Insofar as He is the natural Son, He is not an appointed heir (for He is so by nature); but insofar as He is man and has become a son of God—Concerning his Son who was made to him of the seed of David (Romans 1:3)—He has been appointed heir of all things, just as He has become a son of God. All power is given to me in heaven and in earth (Matthew 28:18), and it extends to every creature that He has taken under His rule. It extends, therefore, not only to one type of person, but to all, both Jews and Gentiles: Ask of me and I will give you the Gentiles for your inheritance (Psalms 2:8).

Having shown Christ’s excellence as to His unique origin, he now shows His excellence as to the majesty of His dominion. It is suitable that these two be joined: He has spoken to us through his Son, whom He appointed the heir of all things. For, If a son, then an heir (Romans 8:17). It should be noted that in Christ are two natures: the divine and the human. According to the divine nature, since He was not appointed Son (as He is the natural Son from all eternity), neither was He appointed heir, since He is the natural heir from all eternity. But according to His human nature, just as He was made Son of God—He was descended from David according to the flesh (Romans 1:3)—so He was made heir to all things: whom he appointed the heir of all things. This is the heir, come, let us kill him (Matthew 21:38); I will again bring an heir to you, inhabitants of Mareshah; the glory of Israel shall come to Adullam (Micah 1:15).

Indeed, according to His divine nature it belongs to Christ to be the begotten heir of the Lord. First, because He is the power and wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:24) through whom the Father makes all things. Therefore, if the Father is called the God of all by reason of creation, the Son also, through whom all things were brought into existence, is called Lord. I was with him forming all things (Proverbs 8:30). Secondly, because the Son is the Father’s wisdom, by which He governs all things. In Wisdom 8:1 it says of wisdom: She reaches mightily from one end of the earth to the other and she orders all things well. Therefore, if the Father is called Lord by reason of governing—You, the Father, govern all things ()—the Son, too, has dominion. Furthermore, the Father is Lord insofar as all things are ordered toward Him as the first principle and end of all things. So, too, the Son, who is the wisdom of God preceding all things, is Lord: Wisdom was created before all things. Who can search it out? .

But according to His human nature it also belongs to Christ to be heir and Lord of all things. First, by reason of the union, that is, from the fact that that man was assumed into the person of the Son of God: The Lord God exalted him as Savior (Acts 5:31); He set him over every principality and power and dominion (Ephesians 1:21). Secondly, by reason of power, because all things obey and serve him: All power has been given to me in heaven and in earth (Matthew 28:18). Thirdly, by reason of subjection: At the name of Jesus every knee should bow of those in heaven, on earth and, below the earth (Philippians 2:10).

He says, of all things, which refers to the totality of all nature, over which He obtains dominion, as it says in Psalm 8:6: You have subjected all things under his feet. It also refers to the whole human race, so that the sense would be: of all things, meaning not only the Jews but also other people, as it says in Psalm 2:8: Ask of me and I will give you the Gentiles as your inheritance and the ends of the earth as your possession. And of this it is said: You are Lord of all (Esther 13:11, Vulgate).

Then, when he says, by whom also he made the world (verse 2), he shows the power of Christ’s activity, explaining why He has been appointed heir of all things. It was not because He was born at a certain moment of time and merited this by leading a good life, as Photinus says, but because all things were originally made by Him, just as they were made by the Father. For it was through Him that the Father made all things.

But it should be noted that the object of the preposition “by” or “through” designates the cause of an act. In one way, it can designate the final cause motivating the maker (as an artisan works for gain), the formal cause (as fire warms by heat), or even the efficient cause (as a bailiff acts through the king). But the Son is not the cause making the Father act through Him in any of these ways, any more than He is the cause of His proceeding from the Father. Sometimes, however, the object of “by” designates the cause of the action from the viewpoint of the thing made, as an artisan acts through a hammer. The hammer is not the cause of the artisan’s action, but it is the cause of why an artifact made of iron should proceed from the artisan. This is the way the Son is the cause of things made and the way the Father works through the Son.

But is the Son inferior to the Father? It seems so, because that which is the cause of a thing’s being made seems to be an instrument. The answer is that if the power in the Father and in the Son were not numerically the same, and the activity not the same numerical activity, the objection would hold. But the fact is that the power and activity, as well as the nature and the being of the Father and of the Son, are the same. Therefore, the Father is said to make the world through Him because He begot Him who forms the world: Whatever the Father does, the Son also does (John 5:19). “World” (saeculum) here means the temporal span of a created thing. Worlds, therefore, are successions of times. He made not only everlasting things, but also temporal things, which the Apostle calls worlds (saecula): By faith we understand that the world was framed by the Word of God (Hebrews 11:3); All things were made by him (John 1:3). Thus he removes the Manichean error in two ways: first, in calling God the author of the Old Testament; secondly, in saying that He made temporal things.