Moses Strut says:

`This is the very proverb to which Chrysostom and Theophylact appeal as an illustration of the word in question:

but the true sense of this word in Proverbs 3:21 they do not seem to have apprehended. Pararrheo here plainly

does not mean to perish, to fall, but is in the antithesis to tereson, keep, attend to, practise, and consequently

means, to pass by, to neglect, to transgress'.

Dr. E.W. Bullinger in his Lexicon and Concordance says:

`Pararrheo, to flow near, flow by, glide away; here the 2nd Aorist passive carried away, beside, or with,

referring, not like the active, to the act of floating away, but to being carried beside, or floating away past

anything with the stream (the marginal reading is quite wrong and follows the Vulgate pereffluamus)'.

The reader may wonder how it can be possible to arrive at a settled understanding where so many learned writers

have so differently expressed themselves; yet it is possible to perceive truth in both sets of interpretations. It is

certain that if earnest heed be not given we are apt to let the words slip; it is equally Scripturally true that, if we do

not give earnest heed, we ourselves shall slip. It appears, therefore, that the true meaning of the passage is a

combination of both thoughts; we cannot let slip the words of truth without sliding away ourselves. An extension of

the argument comes in chapters 3 and 4:

`And to whom sware He that they should not enter into His rest, but to them that believed not? ... Let us

therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into His rest, any of you should seem to come short of it'

(Heb. 3:18; 4:1).

The two sides of the question appear in chapters 5 and 6. In both the `dull' of hearing or the `slothful' are

mentioned (same word in each case). Hebrews 5:11,12:'Ye are dull of hearing ... ye ought to be teachers, ye have

need that one teach you again'; here is the parallel with the A.V. `let them slip'. Hebrews 6:12-19: `That ye be not

slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises'. These are `anchored', and this

passage parallels the R.V. rendering, `drift away from them'.

On the whole the grammatical form and the general teaching of the epistle inclines to the second meaning, that

the lack of diligence was fraught with the danger of slipping away. The argument of the verses which follow is to

the effect that, if Israel had to give earnest heed to the message sent by prophets or angels lest they should fail of

entering into the rest that remained for them, those who have had the word spoken to them, not merely by prophets

or even angels, but by the Son Himself, must even more diligently heed the words spoken. For it is impossible, we

shall learn, to renew such unto repentance if they should `fall away', or, in the words of the verse before us, `how

shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation'.

The apostle leads to this question by reverting to an argument parallel with that of the opening of the first

chapter. God spoke in the past by many agencies, now He has spoken in the Son. Here the form of the argument is

repeated, the details being altered:

`For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just

recompence of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be

spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him?' (2:2,3).

The apostle does not say `the law', but `the word', a term which is wider and embraces the whole of the old

Covenant. It will be found that the two Covenants came with new laws. There can be no difficulty in connection

with the law being given by the mediation of angels, even though the Scripture definitely declares that `God spake

all these words'. The problem would meet us in Hebrews 1:1 where God speaks, yet uses the mouth of a prophet.

Stephen, speaking of Israel, said, `ye received the law by the disposition of angels' (Acts 7:53). The apostle teaches

that the law was `ordained by angels in the hand of a Mediator' (Gal. 3:19). The awful accompaniments of the

giving of the law at Sinai are presently to be compared with the wonderful miracles that were wrought to confirm

the testimony of the Lord and the apostles. The word spoken by angels was `stedfast' (bebaios). It is the word used

for establishing a promise (Rom. 4:16); for the hope of the believer which rests upon `an oath for confirmation'

(Heb. 6:16-19); for the establishing of a covenant over the dead body of the appointed victim (Heb. 9:17); and for

the confirmation of the prophetic promise (2 Pet. 1:19).