See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and causes trouble, and by it many become defiled. (Hebrews 12:15)
The way I have typically heard this verse explained, the author is warning against the spiritual danger of harboring personal bitterness. Indeed, the Contemporary English Version interprets it this way in their “translation”: “Make sure that no one misses out on God’s wonderful kindness. Don’t let anyone become bitter and cause trouble for the rest of you.” Is that what the author meant to convey? Let’s look at the context.
See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and causes trouble, and by it many become defiled; 16 that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. 17 For you know that afterward, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent, though he sought it with tears. (Hebrews 12:15-17)
While some translations translate the Greek rhiza pikrias as “root of bitterness,” this is not the best translation. It is a genitive of apposition which is better translated as “bitter root.” This is similar to the difference between “ball of fire” and “fire ball” in English. The author, then, is not referring to a mental disposition, but the root of a tree. If the root is bitter, the fruit will be bitter as well. When the fruit is bitter, those who eat it become sick.
This analogy of a bitter root served the author’s point well. The context of the entire book is about the superiority of the New Covenant over the Mosaic Covenant. The author repeatedly warns his readers against going back to the Mosaic Law. He compares those in the Christian community who defected back to the Mosaic Covenant to a bitter root who could defile the community of believers by leading them toward his apostasy as well.
For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt. (Hebrews 6:4-6)
For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. 28 Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?… 32 But recall the former days when, after you were enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings, 33 sometimes being publicly exposed to reproach and affliction, and sometimes being partners with those so treated. 34 For you had compassion on those in prison, and you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one. 35 Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. 36 For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive what is promised. (Hebrews 10:26-29, 32-36)
The same message is found in the immediate context of Hebrews 12:15. The author reminded the readers of Esau, who gave up his birthright for something far less valuable, just like the Hebrews were giving up their inheritance in the New Covenant to revert to a covenant of types and shadows. Just like Esau could not get his birthright back, likewise the Hebrews – if they sold the New Covenant for an inferior covenant – could not return to the New Covenant of grace (which is why the author spoke of failing God’s grace).
The following translations bring out the point well:
See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God, that no one be like a bitter root springing up and causing trouble, and through him many become defiled. (NET)
See to it that no one falls short of the grace of God and that no bitter root grows up to cause trouble and defile many. (NIV)
Easy-to-Read Version as well: “Be careful that no one fails to get God’s grace. Be careful that no one loses their faith and becomes like a bitter weed growing among you. Someone like that can ruin your whole group.” (Easy to Read Version)
While there is no question that bitterness is spiritually dangerous to believers (2 Sam 2:26; Job 21:5; Eph 4:31; James 3:14), that is not what the author of Hebrews is referring to. His message is a message of warning to Christians not to apostatize by returning to the Mosaic Covenant. Those who do so, but remain in the community of Christians, become a bitter root in the community, defiling other Christians with their false doctrine.
Keep it in context….
Thinking to Believe 
January 10, 2017 at 9:25 pm
Jason, you wrote, “This analogy of a bitter root served the author’s point well. The context of the entire book is about the superiority of the New Covenant over the Mosaic Covenant. The author repeatedly warns his readers against going back to the Mosaic Law. He compares those in the Christian community who defected back to the Mosaic Covenant to a bitter root who could defile the community of believers by leading them toward his apostasy as well.”
While Scripture states, Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. (Hebrews 10:28)
You’re snared in misunderstanding the role of covenant as it relates to YHWH’s people. Your claim that, “The author repeatedly warns his readers against going back to the Mosaic Law.” contradicts Scripture’s [both Old & New Testaments] teaching. The Law of Moses stands valid for Jew & Gentile throughout the entire Bible. You’re not in apostasy when you keep Mosaic Law.
Consider: New Covenant, Superior to Old – Forerunner Commentary
http://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/CGG/ID/3437/New-Covenant-Superior-Old.htm
Galatians 4:22
Abraham actually had more sons through Keturah, but for the purposes of Paul’s allegory, he focuses on Ishmael, the son through Hagar, and Isaac, the son of promise through Sarah.
Given that the false teachers were trying to convince the Galatians to turn to a Gnostic form of Judaism, Abraham would have been a character who would have been highly respected in their eyes (the Jews in Jesus’ time trusted in descent from Abraham for salvation). Paul uses the example of Abraham throughout this epistle because he (Abraham) simultaneously served as someone that they would have looked up to, as well as a testament that they (the Galatians) were approaching this the wrong way—different from the way Abraham did.
Physical descent does not matter as far as the spiritual promises are concerned; Christ castigated the Jews for thinking that they could rely on being physical descendants of Abraham as a means of gaining favor with God. Christ showed that where it really counted was in behaving like Abraham—which the Jews did not.
Paul, in an attempt to help the Galatians to understand the covenants, is likening the Old Covenant to being born to a “bondmaid” (a female slave or servant) while the New Covenant is compared to being born of a “freewoman” (someone who is a citizen; unrestrained; not a slave; exempt from liability; at liberty). The carnal mind, as described by Romans 8:7, leaps to the conclusion that the New Covenant gives freedom from the confines of law, while the Old Covenant keeps one in bondage to a set of archaic rules. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The apostle James twice refers to the law as the “law of liberty” (James 1:25; 2:12). He could do this because when God was giving the Ten Commandments to Israel, He prefaced them with the declaration, “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Exodus 20:2). This—bringing Israel out of bondage—set the context, the foundation, for the giving of the law. Clearly, it is not God’s definition of right and wrong that keeps us in bondage; the law was given as a guide to the right way to live. The “bondage” that we are subject to derives from Satan (Ephesians 2:1-3; 6:12; II Corinthians 4:4; Revelation 12:9), this world (Exodus 6:5-8; Deuteronomy 5:6), sin (John 8:33-36), and our own human nature—our carnal mind and heart. Our bondage is to sin (John 8:33-34)—not to God’s definition of it.
The Old Covenant did not provide a way to overcome these things. Even though the Old Covenant included God’s royal law of liberty, it had no provision for ever truly escaping the clutches of sin. God’s law, which is also a part of the New Covenant (Hebrews 8:7-12; Jeremiah 31:31-34), merely defines what sin is, so that one may avoid it (Romans 3:20; 4:14-15; 5:13; 7:7, 12, 14). It neither enslaves, nor frees. The Old Covenant—the agreement, rather than the law that was its core—provided no means for overcoming the evil heart of unbelief (Hebrews 3:12, 19; 8:7-8), and so Paul compares it to a bondwoman. In verse 24 he says that it “engenders”—gives birth to—bondage. He does not mean that the agreement between God and Israel was bondage, nor that God’s definition of right and wrong keeps people in slavery, but rather that the temporary covenant made no provision for true spiritual freedom. It “gave birth to” bondage because, without addressing the incurable sickness of the heart, the only possible outcome was human degeneration back into the bondage from which they had been freed.
The New Covenant addresses these problems:
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. Because finding fault with them [the weakness was with the people, not the agreement or the law], He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” (Hebrews 8:7-12; see Jeremiah 31:31-34)
The New Covenant allows God’s way of life (law) to be internalized (put into the mind and heart). It allows for a personal relationship with God, rather than going through an intermediary. It allows for complete forgiveness of sins through repentance and accepting the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
In another place, God promises,
Then I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within them, and take the stony heart out of their flesh, and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My judgments and do them; and they shall be My people, and I will be their God. (Ezekiel 11:19-20)
Through the justification and forgiveness of sins available under the New Covenant, it is possible for the heart to be changed, and for human nature, which drives us to sin, to be overcome. Thus, true spiritual freedom is offered under the New Covenant, while absent under the Old.
– David C. Grabbe
LikeLike
January 14, 2017 at 9:13 pm
This is something I’ve been saying for years but not like you have stated. The “root of bitterness” is not a new concept to scripture. The Torah spells it out plainly in Deuteronomy 29:18. Every reader of the text from that time would have known exactly who this was referring to. It was not saying that those who return to the Mosaic covenant was a “root of bitterness” but that the referent is to turning away from God to follow after the gods of the nations or leading people away from the sworn covenant. This will cause bitter poisonous fruit.
Deut 29:18-19
18 Beware lest there be among you a man or woman or clan or tribe whose heart is turning away today from the LORD our God to go and serve the gods of those nations. Beware lest there be among you a root bearing poisonous and bitter fruit, 19 one who, when he hears the words of this sworn covenant, blesses himself in his heart, saying, ‘I shall be safe, though I walk in the stubbornness of my heart.’ This will lead to the sweeping away of moist and dry alike. ESV
Many will say that the law is dead, nailed to the cross. They are the roots of bitterness. The New Covenant is the Law written on our hearts with forgiveness of sins attached because of the blood of the spotless lamb – Jeremiah 31:31-33 as you well know.
Notice how people bless themselves in their heart saying, “I shall be safe”…
The New Covenant is better because of a better Priest with a better sacrifice.
LikeLike
January 15, 2017 at 7:12 am
Continued … I must say as well. In the context the writer likened sexual immorality to Esau – not the Mosaic Covenant. Be careful there because it has caused you to conclude that the Mosaic Covenant was evil but that is not the case.
When you delve into the contexts of your supporting scriptures you fine words like “sin” and “sacrifice”. What is sin? It is the transgression of the Law. If the Law is nailed to the cross like some have alleged then what is sin in the New Covenant? When you understand that the New Covenant is the Law – the same one God wrote at Sinai – is now Written on your heart. Ahh.. So the Law is still in effect. Even the Priesthood – Jesus. Even the Temple – in Heaven.
If the context is speaking about returning to the Mosaic Covenant being apostasy then the Apostle Paul was an Apostate for he was under a vow in Acts 18, a Jewish vow. Even when Paul refuted the Jews he did not refute the Law being right or wrong. He proved to them that Jesus was the Christ.
Acts 21 Paul took a vow to prove he was not against Moses. Paul would not be welcomed in our world if Moses was an apostasy.
I think when people speak of the Mosaic Covenant being evil – they are actually speaking of the Pharisees and their interpretation of the Law.
LikeLike
January 15, 2017 at 9:35 am
Chad:
In context, the writer did not liken sexual immorality to Esau but the fact that the phrase was in the same sentence, comma, with the term “profane” which was more appropriately linked to Esau not sexual immorality is where the confusion derives….On the other hand sexual activity was part of the fleshly desires as was hunger, as was going to the bathroom but of course the ancients were obsessed with sexual activity as Christians today still are so by using their obsession they always try to bring it to the forefront for emphasis against the evils of sexual activity not sanctioned by the church.
As to the evils of the Mosaic Law, the Mosaic Law was evil….not all of it but certainly the first four Laws were the evil precepts of man, the others were noted as observations of negative connotations when people engaged in them. Sure it is easy to say the Law was God’s Law but it wasn’t God’s Law; it was a series of Laws devised by Moses who gave it impetus by attributing it to God and more likely than not with consultation with the religious Elders(Prophets), Moses was never a one man show. And there are several instances in the New Testament which Jesus made it known that the laws were evil (not all of the Laws of Observation) much of the Laws of Observation were indeed associated with violence behavior but generally Jesus debunked the evils of the Law as well as the misinterpretation and misunderstanding of not so much the Laws of Observation but the penalties thereof , foremost the penalties allowed no room for compassion or forgiveness and followed the penalties of Mosaic revenge..”eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth”.
The first aspect of the Law was evil because it was attributed to the Laws of God and that was the beginning of the evil of the Law: claiming that the Law came to Moses from God and of course the wrath of god also came through Moses and the religious police would kill you but being attributed to God it let the religious police off the hook.
It is indeed easy enough to want to give thanks for life and the goodness we perceive in life and so early man wanted to give thanks to those entities that sustained their lives; the principal creator god in Ancient Egyptian religion is the sun-god Ra and thanks were given to the Sun as that entity to thank for the sustenance of life; the cow and her sacred gifts –milk and butter in particular which was the possible golden calf that Aaron made when Moses was gone too long and the people demanded a symbol to thank and party and feast to celebrate happiness and life. But here is an obvious evil about the Mosaic Law, the disobedience to which was capital punishment made clear in the following:
“Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said: ‘Whosoever is on the LORD’s side, let him come unto me.’ And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. And he said unto them: ‘Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel: Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.’ And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses; and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. (Exodus 32:26-28)
The same evil that the Pharisees confronted Jesus with: “Exodus 31:15
‘For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, holy to the LORD; whoever does any work on the sabbath day shall surely be put to death.” And so when Jesus was confronted: “On a certain Sabbath Jesus was walking through a field of ripe grain. His disciples were pulling off heads of grain, rubbing them in their hands to get rid of the chaff, and eating them. Some Pharisees said, “Why are you doing that, breaking a Sabbath rule?” ( Disobeying the Law demanded death)
3-4 But Jesus stood up for them. “Have you never read what David and those with him did when they were hungry? How he entered the sanctuary and ate fresh bread off the altar, bread that no one but priests were allowed to eat? He also handed it out to his companions.”
5 Then he said, “The Son of Man is no slave to the Sabbath; he’s in charge.” (Lk 6)
And again the example of the woman caught in adultery: “the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, 4 they said to him, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women.” Again Jesus debunked the evil of that Law and said to the woman: “Woman, where are they? Does no one condemn you?”
11 “No one, Master.”
“Neither do I,” said Jesus. “Go on your way. From now on, don’t sin.” (Or you may not get off so easily if you are caught next time)
It is worth noting that even today’s Laws in our so called Christian dominated, civilized western societies have no room for compassion and forgiveness and felons carry an albatross around their neck for life by a non forgiving Justice System based on the revenge-filled Mosaic Laws.
Therefore the talk about the great principles of justice: deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, retribution, and restitution is made useless in a society that denies compassion and forgiveness but passes sentence of a record denying the principles of forgiveness and compassion, obtain credit, join law enforcement and even military enlistment restricts criminal record-bearing individuals.
LikeLike
January 15, 2017 at 5:15 pm
son of man So using a phrase in the same sentence doesn’t liken the subjects? Also, are you a translator?
For all the rest of your treatise… LOL!!!
I just don’t know where to start. Paul said the law was NOT EVIL but it showed that WE ARE EVIL. (The caps are for highlighting not for attitude.)If you are trying to convert me to moralism and remove the Holy One then please waste your time doing something else. Thanks.
My comments were for the writers of the post above feel free to dismiss my comments.
LikeLike
January 15, 2017 at 6:46 pm
Chad:
I don’t dismiss your comments but I quoted Jesus as to the evils of the Law, you quoted Paul who speaks for himself.
I follow Jesus ………and you……………?
What part of “Know” don’t you understand?
LikeLike
January 15, 2017 at 6:49 pm
Chad:
And oh the same phrase was not meant to liken the subjects but to point out the difference between the context of perception and the context by language.
LikeLike
January 16, 2017 at 7:13 am
I have a different understanding of these verses with regards to the apostasy of the Hebrews.
Those that tasted the gospel never actually “ingested” the full meal of the gospel. In other words these Hebrews were on the fence trying to decide whether to trust Christ for salvation or go back to the temple.
The verse below shows that they never received the gospel and became born again.
Heb 6:7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
Heb 6:8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.
This is not talking about Christians who lost their salvation or “fell from grace”, this is talking about Hebrews who were on the fence. Our concept of a person coming to faith in Christ is based on the modern day evangelism we see in the world where people come to the front and say the “sinners prayer” but this is not the reality. While this can happen, for others coming to faith in Christ can be a long journey especially for these law-abiding Jews who in this case were hesitant about the claims of Christ.
Once a person is born again he cannot become “unborn”. Falling from grace is returning to the temple (Law) for the Jews, and for others it can mean returning to unbelief and rejection of Christ. These people were never saved to begin with.
Naz
LikeLike
January 21, 2017 at 12:56 am
God’s Law/Torah always brings righteous justice. God does not change.
Old Covenant: Numbers 15
15 As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the alien who sojourns with you, a perpetual statute throughout your generations; as you are, so shall the alien be before the LORD/YHWH.
16 There is to be one law and one ordinance for you and for the alien who sojourns with you.’”
28 The priest shall make atonement before the LORD/YHWH for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven.
29 You shall have one law for him who does anything unintentionally, for him who is native among the sons of Israel and for the alien who sojourns among them.
30 But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD/YHWH; and that person shall be cut off from among his people.
31 Because he has despised the word of the LORD/YHWH and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt will be on him.’”
New Covenant: Matthew 12
18
“BEHOLD, MY SERVANT WHOM I HAVE CHOSEN;
MY BELOVED IN WHOM MY SOUL is WELL-PLEASED;
I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT UPON HIM,
AND HE SHALL PROCLAIM JUSTICE TO THE GENTILES.
19
“HE WILL NOT QUARREL, NOR CRY OUT;
NOR WILL ANYONE HEAR HIS VOICE IN THE STREETS.
20
“A BATTERED REED HE WILL NOT BREAK OFF,
AND A SMOLDERING WICK HE WILL NOT PUT OUT,
UNTIL HE LEADS JUSTICE TO VICTORY.
21
“AND IN HIS NAME THE GENTILES WILL HOPE.”
30 He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters.
31 “Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.
32 Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
33 “Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit.
34 You brood of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak what is good? For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart.
35 The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil.
36 But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment.
37 For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
LikeLike