Hebrews 12:16-17

Hebrews 12:16-17

[16] Lest  there be any  fornicator,  or  profane person,  as  Esau,  who  for  morsel of meat  sold  birthright.  [17] For  how  that afterward,  when he would  have inherited  the blessing,  he was rejected:  for  he found  no  place  of repentance,  though  it  carefully  with  tears. 

What does Hebrews 12:16-17 Mean?

Contextual Meaning

Esau is a clear example of someone who apostatized; he despised his inheritance and forfeited it to satisfy his immediate desires. That is precisely what the writer warned his readers not to do in this letter. Esau could not regain his inheritance later when he repented. His decision had permanent consequences; he could not repent (cf. Hebrews 4:1; Hebrews 6:4-6). [1] His inability to repent was not a matter of forgiveness but of consequences. David is another example of a person who had to bear the consequences of his sins even though God forgave him for those sins.
"To take a very simple example-if a young man loses his purity or a girl her virginity, nothing can ever bring it back. The choice was made and the choice stands. God can and will forgive, but God Himself cannot turn back the clock and unmake the choice or undo the consequences." [2]
The writer warned against two things in Hebrews 12:16 : immorality (Gr. pornos) and being godless (bebelos) like Esau. The Old Testament makes no mention of Esau"s immorality, so probably the writer understood this term metaphorically in the sense of "apostate." [3] Esau was "godless" in that he relinquished his covenant rights for the sake of immediate gratification. Some translators rendered the Greek word bebelos "profane," which means "before (outside) the temple." This paints Esau correctly as a man who lived his life by avoiding God. Today we might know him as a man who did not attend church. He is "the prototype of all who throw away the heavenly reality for the sake of the earthly one." [4]
"Whether or not Esau was saved is not relevant to this discussion. The writer uses him as an illustration of the fact that the saved can lose their firstborn inheritance rights. His example is applied to those who have come to the church of the firstborn ones ( Hebrews 12:23).
"True Christians fully parallel the description of Esau. We are children of God and we are firstborn sons. Because of that we possess the rights of the firstborn. We do not have to earn these rights. They are given to us through the grace of God. However, we must value and keep these rights and are warned by Esau"s example regarding the possibility of not doing so. But even though we cannot forfeit eternal life, we can forfeit our firstborn rights." [5]
"Esau"s willingness to give up all that was his as the firstborn son reflected a contempt for the covenant by which his rights were warranted. By descriptive analogy, he is representative of apostate persons who are ready to turn their backs on God and the divine promises, in reckless disregard of the covenant blessings secured by the sacrificial death of Jesus. The immediate reference is to the objective blessings of "peace" and "holiness," specified in Hebrews 12:14. With the example of Esau, apostasy is further defined as a decisive rejection of God"s gifts." [6]
"In Jewish history, the birthright belonged to the firstborn son in a family simply by right of birth and consisted of three things: 1) ruler of the household under and for the father, 2) priest of the family, and3) the reception of a double portion of all the father"s goods. Although a firstborn son did nothing whatsoever to come into possession of the birthright, he could conduct his life in such a manner so as to forfeit the birthright. He could not forfeit his position as firstborn in the family, but he could forfeit the rights of the firstborn." [7]