 |  |
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, practice, 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). Heb. 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". Heb. 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