Those who have heard the Gospel need to give it more earnest heed, because, if the message of angels (servants) was important, how much more important would be the message of the Son of God? If the hypothetical is really true that the angels are created daily, this, according to Jewish theology of the day, and they pass out of existence each day, after their service is complete, and their word was considered worthy of obedience, how much more serious would be the word of the Son, who is the Creator? He is permanent and unchangeable throughout all ages. The angels were created to serve, but the Son rules from the throne of God. How much more important, then, are his words than that of angels?
Nevertheless, if heed were not given to Jesus’ words, they would shortly slip out of the memory of mankind (Hebrews 2:1). The word Paul uses for slip (KJV) is pararrhueo (G3901), and it is used in only one other place in the New Covenant text. Paul uses it in his second epistle to the Corinthians:
For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory;(2 Corinthians 4:17; emphasis mine)
Here Paul describes his own suffering for the sake of the Gospel as something that occurs for a moment (G3901). It is quite possible that Paul is using this word in Hebrews 2:1 as a play upon the transient nature of the angels, which is how the then current Jewish angelology was believed. Paul isn’t lending credence to their doctrine, but he is taking advantage of what the they believe about angels. If angels, concerning whom the Jews believed to be of a transient nature, uttered words so permanent and true, then the Jews shouldn’t allow the words of the Son, who is, in contrast to angels, permanent and unchangeable in his nature, to become transient in character by letting them slip away from the Jews’ memory, as though such words weren’t important at all.
Therefore, if this argument is logical and true, then Paul is saying that it behooves the interest of the Jews to take a more earnest heed of Jesus’ words (cf. Hebrews 2:1), because they wouldn’t be able to escape judgment, if they would neglect so great a salvation (Hebrews 2:3; cf. Deuteronomy 18:18-19).
Paul says those who were with Jesus and heard him preach the Gospel and saw his miraculous deeds, went out and preached what Jesus said, and God confirmed their words by performing great miracles, wherever they went and preached. Paul is the only one of the seven authors of the New Covenant who did not hear Jesus’ words or see what he had done. The fact that he puts those who did in the third person (Hebrews 2:3)[1] seems to indicate the author of Hebrews must be Paul and not one of the other six witnesses who had seen and heard Jesus!
_______________________________________________
[1] Paul is the ONLY New Covenant author who did not hear Jesus preach. There is some support that Paul is the one Jesus spoke with in Mark 12:32-34, but, even if this were true, Paul didn’t hear Jesus preach regularly. The event in Mark 12 appears to be an anomaly. Peter speaks of personally hearing the word of Jesus (2Peter 1:16-19), as does John (1John 1:1-2), but the writer of Hebrews speaks in the third person of those who heard the word from Jesus. In other words, he doesn’t testify that he actually heard Jesus or witnessed his deeds, which is quite odd, if he did see and hear him.
Smoodock's Blog 