Thomas Aquinas Commentary Hebrews 2:1-4

"Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things that were heard, lest haply we drift away [from them]. For if the word spoken through angels proved stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation? which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard; God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will." — Hebrews 2:1-4 (ASV)

After showing in a number of ways Christ’s superiority over the angels, the Apostle here concludes that Christ’s doctrine, namely, the New Testament, deserves more obedience than the Old Testament. Regarding this, he does three things: first, he states the intended conclusion; secondly, he supports this conclusion with a reason (v. 2); thirdly, he confirms the consequence (v. 3).

In regard to the first point, it should be noted that after giving the judicial and moral precepts of the Law in Exodus chapter 25, the Lord continues in Exodus 23:20: “Behold, I will send my angel, who will go before you and will bring you into the land.” He then adds a warning in Exodus 23:21, telling them to pay attention to him, listen to his voice, and not treat him with contempt. Therefore, if the commandment of an angel, through whom the Law was delivered, is obeyed, they will enter the promised land. In the same way, we must obey the commandments of Christ to enter heaven. Hence, it says in Matthew 19:17: “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” It is necessary, therefore, to keep the commandments of the Law, but it is much more necessary to obey the commandments of Him who is higher than the angels through whom the Law was delivered.

This is what the Apostle says: therefore, we must pay closer attention to what we have heard. “We have heard a rumor from the Lord” (Obadiah 1:1); “O Lord, I have heard your speech and was afraid” (Habakkuk 3:2). We must, therefore, observe these things more closely for three reasons. First, because of the authority of the one speaking, for He is the Creator and the Son of God, not a creature or a minister of God: “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

Secondly, we must pay closer attention because of the benefit of the commands, for they are the words of eternal life: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68). Other commands concern temporal goods: “If you are willing and obedient, you will eat the good of the land” (Isaiah 1:19). Thirdly, we must pay attention because of the sweetness of their observance, for they are sweet and not burdensome. As 1 John 5:3 says, His commandments are not heavy; and Christ Himself says, “My yoke is sweet and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:30). This is in contrast to the Law, which is described as “a yoke that neither our fathers nor we were able to bear” (Acts 15:10).

Secondly, he shows the same thing from the threatening danger when he says, “so that we do not drift away from it,” that is, be eternally damned. Here it should be noted that a person can drift away through bodily punishments: “For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again” (2 Samuel 14:14). One drifts away more seriously through guilt, but one drifts away most terribly through eternal damnation, from which not even a fragment remains: “And he shall break it as the breaking of the potters' vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall not spare: so that there shall not be found in the bursting of it a shard to take fire from the hearth, or to take water withal out of the pit” (Isaiah 30:14).

Then the Apostle presents his reason, which contains a conditional sentence comparing the New and Old Testaments. The antecedent mentions the condition of the Old Testament, and the consequent mentions the condition of the New Testament. Regarding the Old Testament, he mentions three things: first, the authority of the Law; secondly, the solidity of its truth (v. 2b); and thirdly, the necessity of obeying it (v. 2c).

First, he mentions its authority, because the Law was not delivered by human authority but by angels: “It was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator” (Galatians 3:19); “This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers” (Acts 7:38). Nor is this strange, because, as Dionysius proves, the revelation of divine illuminations reaches us through the medium of angels.

He shows the firmness of its truth when he says it was established, because everything predicted in the Old Law has been fulfilled: “The lip of truth shall be established for ever” (Proverbs 12:19); “Not one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled” (Matthew 5:18). As the Psalmist says, “The words that proceed from my mouth, I will not make void” (Psalms 89:34). Therefore, the Law was made valid because it was not made void.

Then he shows the necessity of obeying it, because the disobedient are punished: “and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution.” Here he mentions two types of guilt: the sin of omission and the sin of commission. The first corresponds to affirmative precepts and is identified by the name “disobedience.” The second corresponds to negative precepts and is called “transgression.”

But is disobedience a general sin? It seems so, for a sin is specific because it has a special end. Hence, when someone does not obey a precept with the intention of scorning it, it is a special sin. But when there is another reason, such as sinful desire, then disobedience is a condition following the sin, but it is not a special sin itself. The other sin is called a transgression: “You put away all the wicked of the earth like dross” (Psalms 119:119).

Then he mentions something regarding the punishment: it “received a just retribution.” Retribution depends on the amount of guilt, so that one who sins more gravely receives a greater punishment. The “wages,” however, can depend on the quality of the sin, so that one who sins from the fires of lust will be punished with fire. A person will receive a good wage for good acts and an evil wage for wicked actions. Consequently, retribution is received for both good and evil, insofar as it implies distributive justice. It is called “just” because of the equality of the punishment, so that according to the amount of sin, there is a corresponding amount of punishment.

Then (v. 3) he presents the consequent of his conditional argument, in which he describes the condition of the New Testament. Here he does three things: first, he shows the need to obey; secondly, the origin of the New Testament (v. 3b); and thirdly, the firmness of its truth (v. 4).

He says, therefore: If the word spoken by angels punishes transgressors, “how shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation?” In this, he indicates the danger that threatens those who do not obey. He calls the New Testament “salvation,” whereas the Old Testament was a “word.” The reason for this is that a word is directed primarily toward knowledge. This is what the Old Testament did, since through it came the knowledge of sin—“for by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20)—and also the knowledge of God: “He has not dealt so with any nation” (Psalms 147:20).

But the Old Testament did not bestow grace. Grace is conferred in the New Testament—“grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17)—which leads to eternal salvation: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68); “Your word is very pure” (Psalms 119:140). Then he praises this salvation, because it is “so great.”

And it is certainly very great if you consider the danger from which it frees us, because it frees us not only from the dangers of bodily death but also of spiritual death: “He will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). It is also great because it is universal, that is, not confined to one nation or to one danger, but is for all people and from all enemies: “He is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe” (1 Timothy 4:10); “That we, being delivered out of the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear” (Luke 1:74). It is also great because it is eternal: “But Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation” (Isaiah 45:17).

Therefore, it should not be neglected; we should be careful to obtain it. As it is written, “We have seen the land, and, behold, it is very good” (Judges 18:9). The passage continues: “Do not be slothful to go, and to enter to possess the land” (Judges 18:9). And of course, we should not neglect it, because if we are negligent, we will be punished not only by losing what is good but also by incurring evil, namely, eternal damnation, which we will not be able to escape. Hence, he asks, “How shall we escape?” As John the Baptist asked, “Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” (Matthew 3:7). For the wicked, “The way to escape shall perish from them” (Job 11:20); “Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence?” (Psalms 139:7).

Then (v. 3b) he shows the origin of the doctrine of the New Testament. He mentions a double origin. First, it came not through angels but through Christ: “He has spoken to us by his Son” (Hebrews 1:2); “The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him” (John 1:18). Hence, he says it was declared at first by the Lord. This doctrine has two beginnings: one is absolute and from all eternity, and this is through the Word: “He chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). The other is the beginning of its declaration, which occurs in time through the Incarnate Word. The second origin was through the apostles, who heard from Christ; hence, he says, it “was confirmed to us by those who heard him,” that is, by its preachers: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes... declare we unto you” (1 John 1:1); “who from the beginning were eyewitnesses” (Luke 1:2).

Then he mentions its solidity, which is greater than that of the Old Testament, as God testifies, who cannot lie. Hence he says, “God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders.” It should be noted that testimony is made by speech, which is a sense-perceptible sign. But God gave testimony with two kinds of sense-perceptible signs: miracles and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Regarding the first, he says God bore witness by “signs,” such as lesser miracles like healing a fever or curing a lame person (Acts 3), and by “wonders,” which are greater miracles, such as the raising of the dead: “Tabitha, arise” (Acts 9:40). But the greatest wonder was that God became man: “Behold, I and the children whom the Lord has given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel” (Isaiah 8:18). It was a marvel that the human heart should believe this.

The author said “by various miracles” to clarify that “signs” and “wonders” refer to acts that exceed the power of nature. A “sign” would be something beyond and above nature, though not contrary to it, while a “wonder” is something contrary to nature, such as the raising of the dead.

Regarding the second kind of testimony, the gifts, he says, “and with gifts of the Holy Spirit, distributed according to his own will.” This seems to contradict Wisdom 7:27, which says the spirit is one. How then is he distributed? The answer is that He is not distributed in His essence, but in His gifts: “Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:4). All gifts are attributed to the Holy Spirit because they proceed from love, which is appropriated to the Holy Spirit. As Gregory says, “Truly the Holy Spirit is love.”