Hebreus 1:4

These seven facts also reveal clearly the Son’s superiority to any other of God’s messengers, even the angels. This superiority is clear too in the fact that His name is Son (singular) rather than sons (collectively). The Old Testament writers called angels "sons of God" (e.g., Job 2:1; Job 38:7). Jesus Christ "inherited" the name "Son" before creation (Hebrews 1:2; cf. Hebrews 5:8). Within the Trinity, God the Son carried out the will of God the Father in a way that corresponds to the way in which sons in biblical culture carried out the wills of their fathers. In another sense, Jesus became God’s Son at His ascension by taking His seat at the Father’s right hand with a view to returning to the earth and ruling over it (cf. 2 Samuel 7:12-16; Psalms 2:7).

This is the first of the writer’s 13 uses of the word "better" (Gr. kreitton) all of which contrast Jesus Christ and His order with what preceded Him in Judaism (Hebrews 6:9; Hebrews 7:7; Hebrews 7:19; Hebrews 7:22; Hebrews 8:6 [twice]; Hebrews 9:23; Hebrews 10:34; Hebrews 11:16; Hebrews 11:35; Hebrews 11:40; Hebrews 12:24). This word appears only six times elsewhere in the New Testament. The writer used many comparatives (e.g., "more excellent," "lesser," "better," "more," "greater," et al.) to support his argument that the new Christian order is superior to the old Jewish order. This is also a "signpost passage" in which a brief statement (in this case "much better than the angels") identifies a main subject the writer proceeded to develop later (cf. Hebrews 2:17; Hebrews 5:9-10; Hebrews 10:36-39; Hebrews 12:11?). [Note: See David J. MacLeod, "The Literary Structure of the Book of Hebrews," Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):187.] "Angel" (Gr. angelos) is another of this writer’s favorite words. It appears 13 times in Hebrews.

"Opinions differ as to what is meant here by ’the name.’ Some take this to mean that in his whole character and personality Christ was superior to any angel. Others think the reference is simply to the name ’Son,’ which is a better name than ’angel’ because it denotes superiority in character and personality. Either interpretation is possible." [Note: Morris, p. 16.]

The writer introduced several concepts in the prologue that he developed more fully later. These include the distinctive quality of the Son’s revelation, the superiority of His sacrifice, His sovereignty, and His greatness compared with the angels. [Note: For another exposition of Hebrews 1:1-4, see David J. MacLeod, "The Finality of Christ: An Exposition of Hebrews 1:1-4," Bibliotheca Sacra 162:646 (April-June 2005):210-30.]

The differences in the beginning of this epistle compared with the beginnings of other New Testament epistles are striking. There is no introduction of the writer, no mention of the original readers, and no benediction, all of which were common features of letters in the first century. The writer obviously wanted his readers to give their full attention to the greatness of Jesus Christ. Some students of Hebrews have concluded that the writer did not identify himself or his readers because he wanted to make Jesus Christ primary in the readers’ thinking throughout this epistle. I think this is very likely.

"In Hebrews 1:1-4 the writer gave christological precision to a cluster of ideas derived from hellenistic Judaism. He boldly applied the categories of Wisdom to a historical figure, Jesus. The writer to the Hebrews was a creative theologian who brought together wisdom motifs and priestly motifs in a tightly formulated statement concerning the dignity and achievement of the Son of God. The opening paragraph establishes a firm christological foundation for all that the writer has to say concerning the character and demands of the revelation mediated by the Son. The joining together of wisdom and priestly notes in the carefully orchestrated presentation of the Son provides the readers with the assurance of Jesus’ sustained concern for them and his ability to strengthen and vindicate the people of God when they become objects of contempt in a hostile world." [Note: Lane, p. 19.]