Hebrews 4:15

body { font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, serif; line-height: 1.6; max-width: 900px; margin: auto; padding: 20px; }
h1, h2, h3 { font-family: ‘Georgia’, serif; color: #333; }
h2 { border-bottom: 2px solid #eee; padding-bottom: 10px; margin-top: 40px; }
h3 { border-bottom: 1px solid #eee; padding-bottom: 5px; margin-top: 30px; }
blockquote { border-left: 4px solid #ccc; margin: 1.5em 10px; padding: 0.5em 10px; font-style: italic; background-color: #f9f9f9; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; }
li { margin-bottom: 5px; }
p { margin-bottom: 1em; }

An Exegetical Study of Hebrews 4:15

This exegetical study of An Exegetical Study of Hebrews 4:15 is based on a b-greek discussion from May 1, 2004. The discussion commenced with an inquiry into two specific lexical and grammatical nuances within Hebrews 4:15. Firstly, clarification was sought regarding the semantic range of the verb συμπαθῆσαι, particularly whether it conveys “sympathy” in the English sense or a deeper “empathy” implying shared experience. Secondly, the precise interpretation of the phrase καθ’ ὁμοιότητα was questioned, examining whether it denotes Christ’s inherent likeness to humanity as a causal factor or describes the manner in which he was tempted.

The main exegetical issue at stake in Hebrews 4:15 concerns the nature and extent of Christ’s identification with human weakness and temptation. Understanding the precise meaning of συμπαθῆσαι is crucial for appreciating the High Priest’s compassionate role, while the interpretation of καθ’ ὁμοιότητα determines how his sinlessness in temptation relates to the human experience of temptation. These points bear significant theological weight regarding Christology and soteriology, particularly in how believers find solace and intercession through his priestly ministry.

οὐ γὰρ ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα μὴ δυνάμενον συμπαθῆσαι ταῖς ἀσθενείαις ἡμῶν, πεπειρασμένον δὲ κατὰ πάντα καθ’ ὁμοιότητα χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας. (Nestle 1904)

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• There are no textual differences between the Nestle 1904 edition and the SBLGNT (2010) edition for Hebrews 4:15. Both editions present the same Greek text.

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)

Textual Criticism (NA28): The text of Hebrews 4:15 enjoys a strong manuscript consensus. The Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA28) presents the same reading as Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT, indicating no significant textual variants or uncertainties for this verse. The reading is well-attested across major manuscript traditions.

Lexical Notes:

• συμπαθῆσαι (from συμπαθέω): This aorist infinitive is central to understanding Christ’s high-priestly function.
  • BDAG defines συμπαθέω as “to have/show sympathy with, sympathize with (s. next entry) w. dat. of pers. or thing that is the obj. of the sympathy.” The related adjective συμπαθής is defined as “sympathetic, understanding.” The discussion highlights whether this denotes mere “sympathy” or a deeper “empathy.” The nuance of “sharing the experience of another” is considered reasonable, especially in context of Christ’s human experience.
  • KITTEL (TDNT), in its entry for συμπαθέω, emphasizes the idea of “suffering with” or “being affected with the suffering of another.” It suggests an identification with the other’s condition, moving beyond mere pity to a shared experience of pain or weakness. This supports the “empathy” interpretation, where Christ’s prior human experience allows him to *feel with* those he represents.
• καθ’ ὁμοιότητα: This prepositional phrase, using κατά with the accusative of ὁμοιότης, conveys a sense of likeness or conformity.
  • KITTEL (TDNT), under ὅμοιος, describes ὁμοιότης as similarity in nature or appearance. The phrase καθ’ ὁμοιότητα typically means “according to likeness” or “in likeness.” The exegetical challenge lies in whether this phrase describes the *manner* of temptation (i.e., tempted in the same way we are tempted) or the *basis* for his temptation (i.e., tempted because of his likeness to us).
  • The b-greek discussion, referencing Harold Greenlee, notes that a majority of commentators and English translations interpret it adverbially, describing the *way* Christ was tempted (e.g., “in the same way we are”). A minority views it causally or relationally, implying “because of his likeness to us.” A third option sees both meanings at play. The context, especially the preceding πεπειρασμένον (having been tempted), suggests that the likeness refers to the *conditions* of temptation which Christ experienced, similar to human conditions, yet without succumbing to sin.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The grammatical structure of Hebrews 4:15 presents a negative statement followed by a contrastive clause. The main clause states what the High Priest is *not* (`οὐ γὰρ ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα μὴ δυνάμενον συμπαθῆσαι…`), immediately followed by what he *is* (`πεπειρασμένον δὲ κατὰ πάντα…`). The rhetorical effect is to emphasize the unique qualifications of Christ as High Priest: he is not distant or unfeeling, but intimately familiar with human struggle.

• Analysis of συμπαθῆσαι: The verb is an aorist infinitive, expressing the High Priest’s capacity or ability. The negating participle μὴ δυνάμενον (“not being able”) combined with the main negative οὐ γὰρ ἔχομεν (“for we do not have”) creates a strong affirmative: “We certainly do have a High Priest who *is* able to empathize.” The lexical analysis strongly favors “empathy” over mere “sympathy” due to the emphasis on shared experience, especially when juxtaposed with “having been tempted.” The High Priest not only feels for us but understands our trials from a personal, experiential standpoint.
• Analysis of καθ’ ὁμοιότητα: This phrase modifies the preceding perfect passive participle πεπειρασμένον (“having been tempted”). Grammatically, κατά with the accusative can express manner, standard, or accordance.
  • If understood as *manner*: “tempted in every way like us.” This highlights the parallelism of Christ’s temptations to human experience.
  • If understood as *causal/relational*: “tempted in every way because of his likeness to us.” This emphasizes his human nature as the prerequisite for his temptation, differentiating him from an unembodied divine being.

  Rhetorically, the phrase underscores the authenticity and completeness of Christ’s human experience, affirming that his temptations were real and comprehensive (“in every way”), yet crucially qualified by “without sin” (χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας). The immediate context of “being tempted” (πεπειρασμένον) suggests that the likeness primarily refers to the *conditions* and *form* of the temptations, placing them in parallel with human temptations, rather than solely a statement about his inherent likeness *causing* the temptation. However, his inherent likeness is what *enables* him to be tempted in such a way. Therefore, a dual nuance is often perceived.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The exegesis of Hebrews 4:15 reveals a profound statement about Christ’s compassionate and effective high priesthood. His ability to identify with human weakness stems from his personal experience of temptation, yet his sinlessness ensures his perfect intercession.

1. We do not have a High Priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are, yet without sin.
   This translation emphasizes the experiential identification of Christ (“empathize”) and renders καθ’ ὁμοιότητα as describing the shared manner of temptation.
2. For we do not have a High Priest who cannot be touched by our infirmities, but one who has been tested in every respect on account of his likeness to us, without having committed sin.
   This option emphasizes the causal link between Christ’s humanity and his susceptibility to temptation, offering a slightly more formal rendering of συμπαθῆσαι.
3. For we have a High Priest who can truly feel with our weaknesses, having undergone testing in every way according to our common humanity, though he himself was without sin.
   This translation attempts to capture both the experiential and relational aspects, using a more dynamic equivalent for συμπαθῆσαι and a broader interpretation of καθ’ ὁμοιότητα that encompasses both the manner and the basis of his temptation in relation to humanity.