Written by Dr. Robert Paul Martin
Trinity Pulpit Press, 2020.
Reviewed by Dr. Brian Borgman
If you are looking for a commentary on Hebrews which is full of background discussion on discourse analysis, or critical source theories, or endless notes on textual variants, this is not the commentary for you. If you want something that is thorough, rigorously exegetical, and robustly theological, then you will want to secure this volume.
In Hebrews: An Exegetical and Theological Commentary, Dr. Robert Paul Martin gets right to business. He briefly covers the most relevant introduction issues, such as, authorship, audience, and date in a mere 6 ¼ pages. Then he gets right to business and that business is the exegesis and theology of Hebrews.
Let me give a few words about the author, since he may not be known to a wider audience. I fully and gladly disclose right up front my incredible appreciation and admiration of Dr. Bob Martin. “Dr. Bob,” as he was affectionately called by students and congregants and friends, was truly a scholar and gentleman. Robert Paul Martin earned a Ph. D. in New Testament from Southwestern Baptist Seminary in Fort Worth, TX. He served in pastoral and professorial roles throughout his life, often teaching on the mission field. Dr. Bob was a wonderful blend of exegete, theologian, and pastor. He was at home in both the pre-critical world of exegesis and the modern scholarly world. The appendix in this commentary is a testament to his acuity in the field of textual concerns. The bibliography reflects a breadth and a depth of learning which is remarkable. The bibliography consists of Puritan divines and expositors, modern commentators and scholars, critical scholars, popular evangelical commentators of various eras, Reformers, Reformed orthodox, contemporary biblical-theological scholars, the classics, German and French scholars, linguists, and grammarians. I probably missed a few! Dr. Bob modeled piety and scholarship like few others. After a bout with cancer, he went home to be with the Lord on Feb. 3, 2016. Many of us are thankful that Dr. Bob worked hard on getting this material, and others, ready for publication before he was face to face with his Lord.
The features of this commentary make it incredibly useful for the pastor or Bible teacher. First, there is an excellent, detailed expository outline. The outline is impressive because it is clearly based on a detailed exegetical outline, but then adds nice expository features which are incredibly helpful for the preacher or teacher. But do not read “expository” as simple or basic. Martin goes into great detail and he traces the argument of Hebrews. He even demonstrates a keen awareness of rhetorical issues in the letter. For instance, he sees three movements in the section which he calls:
The main point – the superiority of Jesus’ priesthood proved from the actual ministry which he performs – a symphony in three movements (8:1-10:18)
Movement 1: Andante – superior sanctuary, sacrifice, and covenant (8:1-13)
The superior sanctuary (8:1–2)
The superior sacrifice (8:3–6)
The superior covenant (8:7–13)
Movement 2: Accelerato – superior sanctuary, sacrifice, and covenant (9:1-23)
The sanctuary—the parable of the tabernacle (9:1–10)
The sacrifice—his own blood (9:11–15)
The covenant—which also is a testament (9:16–23)
Movement 3: Crescendo – superior sanctuary, sacrifice, and covenant (9:24-10:18)
The sanctuary—heaven itself (9:24)
The sacrifice—by one offering he has perfected forever those being sanctified (9:25–10:14)
The covenant—the promise of Jeremiah 31:34 fulfilled (10:15–18) [1]
The outline shows the continuity of thought and relationships within the sections. It helps trace the argument and makes connections. As a pastor I have preached through Hebrews (190 sermons or so) and have taught it overseas. This outline is, in my estimation, one of the best available.
Another feature of this commentary is its attention to exegetical detail. A knowledge of Greek will certainly be helpful. Martin shows how the grammar of the text shapes the structure of the text. At points the reader may wish he went into more detail on his exegetical observations, but he often does not. For instance, he may point out how three successive participles, two present, and one aorist, may show the substructure of a text, but don’t expect too much explanation on the significance of the present or aorist! There are of course many exceptions to this, as he explains the significance of the grammar. But this is not simply an exegetical digest.
The lexical data is impressive, demonstrating a breadth of learning. He uses the standard critical and exegetical commentaries but is also familiar with the synchronic use of words through contemporaneous literature. The exegetical insights and detailed, robust lexical information add much depth to the commentary. There are plenty of critical commentaries that may give similar information, nevertheless, Robert Martin’s exegesis and engagement with the world of critical scholarship is done with a heart and mind completely dedicated to the inerrant and authoritative Word of God.
Martin also does not simply accept one Greek text as authoritative. Where appropriate he explores P46, the Byzantine text, Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. His knowledge of textual criticism is unquestionable, but this commentary does not get bogged down in variant readings like some others.
There is another feature, however, that sets this commentary apart. It is not uncommon to find an extensive footnote dealing with Philo, for instance, to be followed by a page later with an extensive quote from John Owen. Robert Martin did not simply traffic in the land of critical scholarship, he was immersed in the great classic works of pre-critical exegesis. Martin was committed to drawing out the theology of the text. Too many scholars today don’t want to commit to a theological position, maybe because they don’t have one. Not so with Martin, this commentary is robustly theological. An excellent example of the theological nature of this commentary is seen in his treatment of Heb. 4, and in particular v. 9, “there remains a Sabbath-rest for the people of God.” Martin engages Andrew Lincoln’s well-known essay on this text and gives a rigorous and thorough-going, exegetical and theological defense of the abiding relevance of the Sabbath for the Christian church. Whether one agrees with his conclusions or not, they simply cannot ignore.
Robert Martin’s approach to exegesis is incredibly balanced. He is committed to historic Reformed orthodoxy, expressed in his church’s confession of faith, the Second London Baptist Confession.[2] Martin says that all claims to “unbiased exegesis of this text are illusions.”[3] He readily acknowledges as the interpreter comes to Hebrews, and to the warning passage in particular, that they have a theological system. “To think otherwise would be silly. This is the only method possible.”[4] But Martin is also committed to having one’s theological system not only inform one’s exegesis, but also be modified by one’s exegesis. Martin exemplifies a blend of the historical-grammatical exegete and the theological exegete. At the end of the day he happily acknowledged the fingerprints of his own Confession of Faith are on his exegesis.
One last observation is his treatment of the warning passages. As noted above, he comes to these warning passages within the Reformed theological tradition. However, this does not mean that he simply skates down the party-line and give well-worn explanations of these texts. He works in them, he exegetes them, he interacts with other views. Clearly Martin rejects the Arminian/Wesleyan view that says these are believers who lose their salvation. But he also rejects the idea that they are merely hypothetical (advocated by Shedd) or that they are describing loss of reward (mostly recently and ably defended by Allen). Martin’s engagement with Allen’s arguments throughout are an excellent model of irenic polemics. Again, his treatment of apostasy is not simply to quote a few Reformers and Puritans, then move on. Rather there is in-depth analysis of the text.
Finally, it is interesting to note that Martin does not conclude that the warning passages are addressed to false believers. He makes a careful distinction; these admonitions are addressed to all professing believers. Martin, in his treatment of Heb. 6:4-6, presents the sense of the passage graphically.
The Writer’s Present Fallible Persuasion:
- He is alarmed by the present slothfulness of some who profess to believe in Christ.
- He therefore warns all who profess faith in faith about the danger of total, irreversible apostasy.
- He believes/hopes that all will hear him, but his judgment concerning them is fallible.
Two Possible Outcomes:
- They will receive his warning, repent of their sloth, and apply themselves to persevering in faith in Christ. Thus they will both vindicate their profession and receive the promised inheritance.
- They will reject his warning, continue in sloth until the deceitfulness of sin produces in them a hardened heart of unbelief, and they cast away Christ and the gospel, resulting in their damnation.[5]
In his treatment of the warning passages, Martin takes the traditional Reformed approach regarding the apostates, but he also sees the warning passages as means of perseverance. His lengthy quote by John L. Dagg on page 297-298 gives an excellent summary of the warning passages and their function. These warning passages are designed to encourage and exhort true believers to press on in their endurance. But in the end, those who reject Christ, and do not persevere, they show themselves to be unbelievers. Martin also has some wonderful pastoral encouragements to those who think they may have committed apostasy. Indeed, the pastor is never far from the exegete/theologian.
This commentary is extremely valuable. With so many commentaries available on Hebrews, this one most definitely belongs in the pastor’s or serious student’s library.
[1] Pages 7, 19, 38. All citations from the commentary are from a pre-published PDF.
[2] Page 285.
[3] Page 285. “This text” refers to the warning passage in Heb. 6:4-6.
[4] Page 285.
[5] Page 294.
All Rights Reserved. Used with permission.