Was or Were

We may have discussed this in the past; but I can’t find it, and I did get a question about it; so, one more time with gusto!

“…Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered…” - Hebrews 5:8

Why is the past tense of to be recorded as were, and not was?  “Though he were a Son…”

Typically we’d use was for a single person; we use were for plurals.

Example: (single) I was sleeping, he was talking; — (plural) they were sleeping, the people were talking.

So, we wonder why, in Hebrews 5:8, referring to a single person (Jesus), why was the plural used?  Or, in other words, why isn’t it written 'though he was a son…'?

The answer is simple and easily dovetails with the theme of the epistle.   

We typically have been trained to use was / were in the indicative mood: a statement, a fact.

However, in the past, ‘were’ could be used to show the subjunctive mood: hypothetical or conditional statements.  Often these subjunctive statements include an if, or a though.

Example: If I were a millionaire…

Such is the case of were in Hebrews 5:8.  It is a conditional statement.  Though (in spite of) and were are used to form a subjunctive mood, a condition.  The condition is the chastening of sons, for perfection.  Hebrews 12: 6 restates it: “For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.”  And again: “But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.” - Hebrews 12:8

Jesus led the way — suffered, but was also obedient, even unto death. The condition  was met, the suffering son endured, and was made perfect: “…and being made perfect, he became…”(5:9).

This matches and reinforces the message to these suffering Hebrew believers: your suffering shows God’s working, and his relationship — so don’t quit.  The condition for reaching maturity, of perfection, is the endurance of suffering, as described by the grammar in Hebrews 5:8.  It all fits nicely.