Hebrews Chapter 3 verse 16 Holy Bible

ASV Hebrews 3:16

For who, when they heard, did provoke? nay, did not all they that came out of Egypt by Moses?
read chapter 3 in ASV

BBE Hebrews 3:16

Who made him angry when his voice came to them? was it not all those who came out of Egypt with Moses?
read chapter 3 in BBE

DARBY Hebrews 3:16

(for who was it, who, having heard, provoked? but [was it] not all who came out of Egypt by Moses?
read chapter 3 in DARBY

KJV Hebrews 3:16

For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.
read chapter 3 in KJV

WBT Hebrews 3:16


read chapter 3 in WBT

WEB Hebrews 3:16

For who, when they heard, rebelled? No, didn't all those who came out of Egypt by Moses?
read chapter 3 in WEB

YLT Hebrews 3:16

for certain having heard did provoke, but not all who did come out of Egypt through Moses;
read chapter 3 in YLT

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerses 16-19. - For who, when they heard, provoked? Nay, did not all those who came out of Egypt by Moses. That both these clauses are interrogative, and not as taken in the A.V., is now the prevalent view. The reasons for thus understanding them are (1) the analogy of the two following verses, both of which are interrogative, and in the first of which a question is similarly answered by putting another; and (2) the sense required. If the clauses were assertions, they could only be meant to express that the provocation was not universal, inasmuch as Joshua and Caleb (and it might be some few others) remained faithful. But to say this is unnecessary and irrelevant to the argument, the drift of which is to warn by "the example of unbelief;" and could τινὲς ("some") possibly be used to denote the whole congregation with the exception of so few? It is to be observed, too, that the ἀλλ οὐ at the beginning of the second clause is a proper Greek expression (equivalent to "nay") in the case of one question being answered by another (cf. Luke 17:7, 8). This verse, then (γὰρ retaining its usual sense of "for"), begins a proof, put in the form of a series of questions, of the preceding implied proposition, viz. that the retention of Christian privilege is dependent on perseverance, and that the privilege may be forfeited. In order to show this fully, the history of Numbers 14, referred to in the warning of the psalm, is examined in connection with the successive expressions of the warning; and it thus appears that all who came out of Egypt by Moses (the small exception of the faithful spies being disregarded) provoked God, and so forfeited their privilege, and that the cause of their failure was sin, disobedience, and, at the root of all, unbelief. The conclusion is obvious that, as their example is held out in the psalm as a warning to us, we may, all or any of us, similarly forfeit our higher calling. That the psalm is a warning to us, the rest it points to being the rest won for us by Christ, is more fully shown in the following chapter. We observe how the leading words in Psalm 95. are taken in succession in the three successive verses - παραπικρασμός in ver. 16, προσώχθισα in ver. 17, ὤμοσα in ver. 18 - and how answers to the three questions suggested by these words are found in Numbers 14. - to the first, in vers. 2, 10, etc., "all the children of Israel," "all the congregation;" to the second, in vers. 29-34, with citation of the words used; to the third, in vers. 21-24. It is to be observed, further, that it is not simply ἀπιστία, but its exhibition in actual sin and disobedience (τοῖς ἀμαρτήσασι τοῖς ἀπειθήσασι), that is spoken of as calling forth the Divine wrath and the Divine oath. The second of the above words implies more titan "believed not" (as in the A.V.); ἀπειθεῖν differs from ἀπιστεῖν in implying disobedience or contumacy. And this view of the case of the Israelites agrees entirely with the historical record, where an actual rebellion is spoken of a refusal to go on with the work they had been called to. It suits also the application to the case of the Hebrew Christians, among whom (as has been said) it was not only wavering of faith, but, as its consequence, remissness in moral duty and in the facing of trial, of which the writer of the Epistle had perceived symptoms, and on the ground of which he warns them to take heed lest growing indifference should be hardened into apostasy. But in both instances, as faith is the root of all virtue, so want of it was the cause, and again the growing result, of moral decadence. And so the argument is summed up in the concluding verse, And we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. . . .

Ellicott's Commentary

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(16) For.--The connecting link is the thought of "the provocation." A slight change in the accentuation of the first Greek word effects a complete change in the sense: For who when they had heard did provoke? Nay, was it not all that came out of Egypt through Moses? Those who were disobedient were the people whom God, through Moses, had but now delivered from bondage! The two exceptions (Numbers 14:30) are left out of account in the presence of the multitude of rebels. There can be little doubt that the above translation (now generally received) presents the true meaning of the verse. It will be remembered that the oldest MSS. give no evidence on such points as accentuation, and therefore leave our judgment free. In modern times Bengel was the first to point out the true form of the Greek word; but one of the ancient versions (the Peschito-Syriac), and at least three of the Greek Fathers, are found to give the same interpretation. It will be seen at once that, with this arrangement of the words, the present verse is similar in structure to the two following.