« Prev I Next »

ΠΡΟΣ ΕΒΡΑΙΟΥΣ

3

I

Πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως πάλαι ό θεὸς λαλήσας τοῖς πατράσιν ἐν τοῖς προφήταις ἐπ’

προσεβραιους אAB me. ηπροσεβραιουσεπεστολη Μ₂. ηπροσεβραιουσεπιστοληπαυλου S.

Introduction (i. 1—4). The first paragraph of the Epistle gives a summary view of its main subject, the finality of the absolute Revelation in Christ as contrasted with the preparatory revelation under the Old Covenant.

The whole is bound together in one unbroken grammatical construction, but the subject is changed in its course. In the first two verses God is the subject: in the last two the Son; and the fourth verse introduces a special thought which is treated in detail in the remainder of the chapter.

Thus for purposes of interpretation the paragraph may be divided into three parts.

i. The contrast of the Old Revelation and the New: vv. 1, 2.

ii. The nature and the work of the Son: v. 3.

iii. Transition to the detailed development of the argument: v. 4.

It will be noticed that the Lord is regarded even in this brief introductory statement in His threefold office as Prophet (God spake in His Son), Priest (having made purification of sins), and King (He sat down).

i. The contrast of the Old Revelation and the New (1, 2).

The contrast between the Old Revelation and the New is marked in three particulars. There is a contrast (a) in the method, and (b) in the time, and (c) in the agents of the two revelations.

(a) The earlier teaching was conveyed in successive portions and in varying fashions according to the needs and capacities of those who received it: on the other hand the revelation in Him who was Son was necessarily complete in itself (comp. John i. 14, 18).

(b) The former revelation was given of old time, in the infancy and growth of the world: the Christian revelation at the end of these days, on the very verge of the new order which of necessity it ushered in.

(c) The messengers in whom God spoke before, were the long line of prophets raised up from age to age since the world began (Luke i. 70; Acts iii. 21): the Messenger of the new dispensation was God's own Son.

The first contrast is left formally incomplete (having...spoken in many parts and in many modes...spake). The two latter are expressed definitely (of old time to the fathers, at the end of these days to us—in the prophets, in Him Who is Son); and in the original, 4 after the first clause, word answers to word with emphatic correspondence: πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως (1) πάλαι (2) ὁ θεὸς λαλήσας (3) τοῖς πατράσιν (4) ἐν τοῖς προφήταις (5): no corresponding clause (1') ἐπ' ἐσχάτον τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων (2') ἐλάλνσεν (3') ἡμῖν (4') εν υἷῷ (5').

The consideration of these contrasts places the relation of Christianity to all that had gone before in a clear light. That which is communicated in parts, sections, fragments, must of necessity be imperfect; and so also a representation which is made in many modes cannot be other than provisional. The supreme element of unity is wanting in each case. But the Revelation in Christ, the Son, is perfect both in substance and in form. The Incarnation and the Ascension include absolutely all that is wrought out slowly and appropriated little by little in the experience of later life. The characteristics which before marked the revelation itself now mark tho human apprehension of the final revelation.

The Incarnation, in other words, is the central point of all Life; and just as all previous discipline led up to it πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως, so all later experience is the appointed method by which its teaching is progressively mastered πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως. All that we can learn of the constitution of man, of the constitution of nature, of the 'laws' of history must, from the nature of the case, illustrate its meaning for us (comp. 1 Cor. xiii. 9 £).

These thoughts find their complete justification in the two clauses which describe the relation to the order of the world of Him in Whom God spoke to us. God appointed Him heir of all things, and through Him He made the world. The Son as Heir and Creator speaks with perfect knowledge and absolute sympathy.

But while the revelations of the Old and the New Covenants are thus sharply distinguished, God is the One Author of both. He spoke in old time, and He spoke in the last time. In the former case His speaking was upon earth and in the latter case from heaven (c. xii, 25 note), but in both cases the words are alike His words. Not one word therefore can pass away, though such as were fragmentary, prospective, typical, required to be fulfilled by Christ's Presence (Matt. v. 18). In revelation and in the record of revelation all parts have a divine work but not the same work nor (as we speak) an equal work.

  1. Tho order of the first words in the original text, by which the two adverbs (πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως) come first, to which nothing afterwards directly answers (Having in many parts and in many modes of old time spoken...), serves at once to fix attention on the variety and therefore on the imperfection of the earlier revelations, and also to keep a perfect correspondence in the members which follow (πάλαι, ἐπ' ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων — λαλήσας, ἐλάλησεν — τοῖς πατράσιν, ἡμῖν — ἐν τοῖς προφήταις, ἐν υἷῶ).

At the same time the two main divisions of the revelation are connected as forming one great whole: God having spoken... spake... (ὁ θεὸς λαλήσας...ἐλάλησεν). It is not simply that the Author of the earlier revelation is affirmed to have been also the Author of the later (God who spake. . .spake...ὁ τoῖs πατράσιν λαλήσας θεὸς ἐλάλησεν or God spake. . .and spake. . .); but the earlier revelation is treated as the preparation for, the foundation of, the latter (God having spoken...spake...).

πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως] in many parts and in many manners, Vulg. 5 multifariam multisque modis. Syr. Psh. in all parts and in all manners (Syr. Hcl. in many parts...).

The variety of the former revelation extended both to its substance and to its form. Tho great drama of Israel's discipline was divided into separate acts; and in each act different modes were employed by God for bringing home to His people various aspects of truth. Thus the 'many parts' of the preparatory training for Christianity may be symbolised (though they are not absolutely coincident with them) by the periods of the patriarchs, of Moses, of the theocracy, of the kingdom, of the captivity, of the hierarchy, as Israel was enabled to assimilate the lessons provided providentially in the national life of Egypt, Canaan, Persia, Greece. And the many 'modes' of revelation are shadowed forth in the enactment of typical ordinances, in declarations of 'the word of the Lord,' in symbolic actions, in interpretations of the circumstances of national prosperity and distress. And further it must be noticed that the modes in which God spoke in the prophets to the people were largely influenced by the modes in which God spoke to the prophets themselves 'face to face,' by visions, by Urim and Thummim (comp. Num. xii. 6, 8). These corresponded in the divine order with the characters of the messengers themselves which became part of their message.

The general sense is well given by Theodoret: τὸ μέντοι πολυμερῶς τὰς παντοδαπὰς oἶκονομίας σημαίνες, τὸ δὲ πολυτρόπως τῶν θείων ὀπτασιῶν τὸ διάφορον, ἄλλως γὰρ ὥφθη τὦ 'Αβραὰμ καὶ ἄλλως τῷ Μωϋσῇ...τὸ μέντοι πολυμερῶς καὶ ἕτερον αἶνίττεται ὅτι τῶν προφητῶν ἕκαστος μερικήν τινα οἰκονομίαν ἐνεχειρίζετο, ὁ δὲ τούτων θεός, ὁ δεσπότης λέγω Χριστός, οὐ μίαν τινα ᾠκονόμησε xρείαν, ἀλλὰ τὸ πᾶν ἐνανπήσας κατώρθωσε.

The adverbs are not rare in late Greek: for πολυμερῶς see Plut. ii. 537 d; Jos. Anti. viii. 3, 9; and for πολυτρόπως Philo, ii. 512 M.; Max. Tyr. vii. 2. Πολυμερής is used of Wisdom in Wisd. vii. 22. The two corresponding adjectives occur together in Max. Tyr. xvii. 7: There are, he says, two instruments for understanding, τοῦ μὲν ἀπλοῦ ὅν καλοῦμεν νοῦν, τοῦ δὲ ποικίλου καὶ πολυμεροῦς καὶ πολυτρόπου ἄς αἶσθήσεις καλοῦμεν. For similar combinations see Philo de vit Mos. i. § 20 (ii. 99 Μ.) (πολυτρόπῳ καὶ πολυσχιδεῖ); de decal. § 17 (ii 194 M.) (πολύτροποι καὶ πολυειδεῖς); quis rer. div. haer. § 58 (i. 514 M.) (πολλοὺς καὶ πολυτρόπους).

Clement of Alexandria in a remarkable passage (Strom. vi. 7, § 58, p. 769) uses the phrase of the action of the Word, Wisdom, the firstborn Son: oὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τῶν γενητῶν ἀπόντων διδάσκαλος, ὁ σύμβουλος τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ τὰ πάντα προσγνωκότος ὁ δὲ ἄνωθεν ἐκ πρώτης καταβολῆς κόσμου πολυτρόπως καὶ πολυμερῶς πεπαίδευκέν τε καὶ τελειμῖ. Comp. Strom. i. 4, 27, p. 331 εἶκότως τοίωυω ὁ ἀπόστολος πολυποίκιλον εἴρηκεν τὴν σοφίαν τοῦ θεοῦ, πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως, διὰ τέχνης, διὰ ἐπιστή μης, διὰ πίστεως, διὰ προφητείας, τὴν ἐαυτῆς ἐνδεικνυμένην δύναμιν εἶς τὴν ἡμετέραν εὐεργεσίαν...

πάλαι] of old time (Vulg. olim) and not simply formerly (πρότερον c. iv. 6; x. 32). The word is rare in N.T. and always describes something completed in the past. Here the thought is of the ancient teachings now long since sealed.

ὁ θεὸς λαλήσας...ἐλάλησεν...] There is but one final Source of all Truth. The unity of the Revealer is the pledge and ground of the unity of the Revelation, however it may be communicated; and His revelation of Himself is spontaneous. He 'speaks' in familiar intercourse. The word λαλεῖν is frequently used in the Epistle of divine communications: ii. 2, 3; iii. 5; iv. 8; v. 5; xi. 18; xii. 25. Compare John ix. 29; xvi. 13. This usage is not found in St Paul (yet

6

έσχατου των ήμ£ρών τούτων έλάλησβν ημΐν iv υίφ,

2 έσχατου אΑΒD₂Μ₂ (vg) me: έσχατων S. syrr.

see Rom. iii. 19; 2 Cor. xiii. 3), but it is common in St Luke (Acts).

The Vulgate rendering loquens (Old Lat. locutus)...locutus est exhibits a characteristic defect of the version in the rendering of participles (compare v. 3 purgationem faciens; v. 14 missi),

τοῖς πατράσιν] This absolute title the fathers occurs again John vii. 22; Rom. ix. 5; xv. 8 (in Acts iii. 22 it is a false reading). Compare Ecclus. xliv. Πατέρων ὔμνος.

More commonly we find 'our (your) fathers': Acts iii. 13, 25; v. 30; vii. 11 &c.; 1 Cor. x. 1. The absolute term marks the relation of 'the fathers' to the whole Church.

ἑν τοῖς πρ./] in the prophets (Vulg. in prophetis), not simply through them using them as His instruments (c. ii. 2, 3), but in them (c. iv. 7) as the quickening power of their life. In whatever way God made Himself known to them, they were His messengers, inspired by His Spirit, not in their words only but as men; and however the divine will was communicated to them they interpreted it to the people: compare Matt. x. 20; 2 Cor. xiii. 3. (Ipse in cordibus corum dixit quidquid illi foras vel dictis vel fastis locuti sunt hominibus. Here.) Conversely the prophet speaks 'in Christ' as united vitally with Him: 2 Cor. ii. 17; xii. 19.

Cf. Philo de praem, et poen. 9 (ii. 417 Μ.) έρμηνεὺς γὰρ ἐστιν ὁ προφήτης ἔνδοθεν ὑπηχοῦντος τὰ λεκτέα τοῦ θεοῦ.

The title 'prophet' is used in the widest sense as it is applied to Abraham (Gen. xx. 7), to Moses (Deut. xxxiv. 10; comp. xviii. 18), to David (Acts ii. 3θ), and generally to those inspired by God: Ps. cv. 15. Compare Acts iii. 21 τῶν ἁγίων ἀπ' αἰῶνος αὐτοῦ προφητῶν. Luke i. 70. The prophets, according to a familiar Rabbinic saying, prophesied only of the days of the Messiah (Sabb. 63 a; Wünsche, Altsyn. Theol. s. 355). Comp. Philo quis rer. div. haer. § 52 (i. 510 f. M.).

(2). ἐπ' ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμ. τ.] at the end of these days: Vulg. novissime diebus istis, O.L. in novissimis diebus his.

The phrase is moulded on a lxx rendering of the Ο.T. phrase בְּאַחֲרִית הַיָּמִים 'in the latter days,' ἐπ' ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν (Gen. xlix. 1: Num. xxiv. 14; Jer. xxiii. 20 v. 1. ἐσχάτων; xlix. 39 [xxv. 18]; comp. Deut iv. 30; xxxi. 29), which is used generally of the times of Messiah (Is. ii. 2; Dan. x. 14 and notes).

Starting from this general conception Jewish teachers distinguished 'a present age,' 'this age' (עוֹלָם הַזֶּה, ὁ αἰὼν οὖτος, νῦν καιρός) from 'that age,' 'the age to come' (עוֹלָם הַבָּא, ὁ μέλλων αἰών, ὁ αἰὼν ἐκεῖνος, "αἰὼν "ἐρχόμενος).

Between 'the present age' of imperfection and conflict and trial and 'the age to come' of the perfect reign of God they placed 'the days of Messiah,' which they sometimes reckoned in the former, sometimes in the latter, and sometimes as distinct from both. They were however commonly agreed that the passage from one age to the other would be through a period of intense sorrow and anguish, 'the travail-pains' of the new birth (Hebrew, ὠδῖνες Matt. xxiv. 8).

The apostolic writers, fully conscious of the spiritual crisis through which they were passing, speak of their own time as the 'last days' (Acts ii. 17; James v. 3: comp. 2 Tim. iii. 1); the 'last hour' (1 John ii. 18); 'the end of the times' (1 Pet i. 20 ἐπ' ἐσχάτου τῶν χπόνων: in 2 Pet iii. 3 the true reading is ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμ.); 'the last time' (Jude 18 ἐπ' ἐσχάτου χρόνου).

7

ὅν ἔθηκεν κληπονόμον πάντων, δι' οὐ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς

ἐποί. τ. αἱῶνας אABD₂*M₂ (vg) syr vg: τ. αἱ. ἐποί. S syr hl.

Thus the full phrase in this place emphasises two distinct thoughts, the thought of the coming close of the existing order (ἐπ' ἐσχάτου at the end), and also the thought of the contrast between the present and the future order (tῶv ἡμερῶν τούτων of these days as contrasted with 'those days').

ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν] spake to us— the members of the Christian Church: x. 26; xiii. 1 (so Theophylact: ἐνοποιεῖ καὶ ἐξισοῖ τοῖς μαθηταῖς καὶ αὐτοὺς καὶ ἑαυτόν). The word was not directly addressed to the writer: ii. 3. The mission of Christ is here regarded as complete. It is true in one sense that He told His disciples the full message which He had received (John xv. 15), if in another sense He had, when He left them, yet many things to say (xvi. 12). This contrast between the divine, absolute, aspect of Christ's work, and its progressive appropriation by men, occurs throughout Scripture. Compare Col. iii. 1 ff., 5.

ἐν υἱῷ] The absence of the article fixes attention upon the nature and not upon the personality of the Mediator of the new revelation. God spake to us in one who has this character that He is Son. The sense might be given by the rendering in a Son, if the phrase could be limited to this meaning ('One who is Son'); but 'a Son' is ambiguous. See v. 5; iii. 6; v. 8; vii. 28. Compare John v. 27 note; x. 12; Rom. i. 4.

The absence of the article is made more conspicuous by its occurrence in the corresponding phrase. 'The prophets' are spoken of as a definite, known, body, fulfilling a particular office. The sense would lose as much by the omission of the article in this case (ἐν προφήταις 'in men who were prophets') as it would lose here by the insertion (ἐν τῷ υἱῷ in the Son c. vi. 6).

It is instructive to notice how completely the exact force of the original was missed by the later Greek Fathers. Even Chrysostom says: τὸ ἐν υἱῷ διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ φησί, and Œcumenius repeats the words.

The new revelation is a continuation of the old so far as God is the author of both. It is wholly new and separate in character so far as Christ is the Mediator of it

Herveius notices tho difference between the Presence of God in the prophets and in His Son: In prophetis fuit Deus secundum inhabitationem gratiae et revelationem voluntatis sapientiae suae, in Filie autem omnino totus manebat...utpote cui sapientia Dei personaliter erat unita.

ἔν ἔθηκεν...δι' οὖ καὶ ἐποίησεν...] The office of the Son as the final revealer of the will of God is illustrated by His relation to God in regard to the world, in and through which the revelation comes to men. He is at once Creator and Heir of all things. The end answers to the beginning. Through Him God called into being the temporal order of things, and He is heir of their last issue. All things were created 'in Him' and 'unto Him' (Col. i. 15, 16, ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη, εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται). The universal heirship of Christ is illustrated by, if not based upon, His creative activity.

ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον π.] Vulg. quem constituit (0.L. posuit) heredem universorum. Even that which under one aspect appears as a necessary consequence is referred to the immediate will of God (ἔθηκεν). For the use of τίθημι see Rom. iv. 17 (Gen. xvii. 5); 1 Tim. ii. 7; 2 Tim. i. 11. There is nothing to determine the 'time' of this divine appointment. It belongs to the eternal order. Yet see Ps. ii. 8; Matt. xxviii. 18 (ἐδόθη). We 'who see but part' may fix our attention on inceptive fulfilments.

8

κληρονόμον] The thought of sonship passes naturally into that of heirship: Gal. iv. 7; compare Rom. viii. 17.

The word heir marks the original purpose of Creation. The dominion originally promised to Adam (Gen. i. 28; compare Ps. viii.) was gained by Christ. And so, in regard to the divine economy, the promise made to Abraham (compare Rom. 13; Gal. iii. 39) and renewed to the divine King (Ps. ii. 8), which was symbolised by the 'inheritance' of Canaan (Ex. xxiii. 30), became absolutely fulfilled in Christ. The image of 'heirship' which is based apparently on the second Psalm (Ps. ii. 8) is recognised in the Gospels (Matt. xxi. 38 and parallels) where the contrast between 'the servants' (prophets) and 'the Son' is also marked.

At the same time, it must be carefully noticed that the usage cannot be pressed in all directions. The term is used in relation to the possession, as marking the fulness of right, resting upon a personal connexion, and not, as implying a passing away and a succession, in relation to a present possessor (comp. Gal. iv. 1 ὁ κληρονόμος...κύριος πάντων ὥν). The heir as such vindicates his title to what he holds. Compare Additional Note on vi. 12.

The heirship of 'the Son' was realised by the Son Incarnate (v. 4) through His humanity: κληρονόμος γὰρ πάντων ὁ δεσπότης Χριστὸς οὐχ ὡς θεὸς ἀλλ' ὡς ἄνθρωπος (Theod.); but the writer speaks of 'the Son' simply as Son as being heir. In such language we can see the indication of the truth which is expressed by the statement that the Incarnation is in essence independent of the Fall, though conditioned by it as to its circumstances.

πάπτων] The purpose of God extended far beyond the hope of Israel; oὐκέτι γὰρ μερὶς κυρίου ὁ Ἰακώβ (Deut. xxxii. 9), ἀλλὰ πάντες (Theophlct.). Νοη jam portio Domini tantum Jacob et portio ejus Israel, sed omnes omnino nationes (Atto Verc.).

δε' oὖ καὶ ἐποίησεν τ. αἱ.] This order, which is certainly correct, throws the emphasis on the fact of creation, which answers to the appointment of the Son as heir (καὶ ἐποίησεν, compare vi. 7; vii. 25). The creation does indeed involve the consummation of things. The 'Protevangelium' is Gen. i. 26 f.

τοὺς αἰῶνας] the world, Vulg. saecula. The phrase οἱ αἰῶνες has been interpreted to mean

(1) 'Periods of time,' and especially 'this age' and 'the age to come,' as though the sense were that God created through the Son—Who is supratemporal—all time and times.

(2) The successive emanations from the divine Being, as in the Gnostic theologies; or the orders of finite being. Comp. Const. Apost. viii. 12 ό δε' αὐτοῦ [τοῦ υἱοῦ] ποιήσας τὰ χερουβὶμ καὶ τὰ σεραφίμ, αἰῶνας τε καὶ στρατιός...

(3) The sum of the 'periods of time' including all that is manifested in and through them, This sense appears first in Eccles. iii. 11, answering to the corresponding use of עוֹלָם which is first found there. The plural עוֹלָמִים is found with this meaning in later Jewish writers, e.g.עוֹלָמִים בוֹרא. Comp. Wisd. xiii. 9.

There can be little doubt that this is the right sense here (comp. xi. 3 note). The universe may be regarded either in its actual constitution as a whole (ὁ κόσμος), or as an order which exists through time developed in successive stages. There are obvious reasons why the latter mode of representation should be adopted here.

The difference between ὁ αἰών — the age—one part of the whole development, and oὶ αἰῶνες — the ages—the sum of all the parts, is well illustrated by the divine title 'the King of the 9 ages' 1 Tim. i. 17 (ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν αἰώνων; Tobit xiii. 6, 10; Henoch p. 86 Dillm. ὁ β. πάντων τῶν αἰ.; Ecclus. xxxvi. 22 (19) ὁ θεὸς τῶν αἰώνων; Henoch p. 83). In this aspect 'the King of the ages' is contrasted with 'the rulers of this age' (οἱ ἄρχοντες τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου 1 Cor. ii. 6, 8). Compare παντοκράτωρ (Apoc. i. 8 &c.) with κοσμοκράτωρ (Eph. vi. 12).

The Rabbinic use of עוֹלָם is very wide. Thus they speak of the 'Macrocosm,' the universe, as עולם הגדול, and of the 'Microcosm,' man, as עוֹלָם הקטון.

There is a very fine saying in Aboth iv. 'R. Jacob said This world is like a vestibule before the world to come: prepare thyself in the vestibule that thou mayest enter into the festival-chamber'(לטרקלין).

ἐπ. τοὺς αἰῶνας) The order of finite being even when it is regarded under the form of gradual development is spoken of as 'made' by a supra-temporal act. 'All creation is one act at once.'

πάντων...τοὺς αἰῶνας]) all things.., the world...all single things regarded in their separate being: the cycles of universal life.

For the fact of creation through the Son see John i 3, 10; 1 Cor. viii. 6 (διά); Col. i. 16 (ἐν).

Philo speaks of the Logos as 'the instrument through which the world was made: εὑρήσεις αἴτιον μὲν αὐτοῦ (sc τοῦ κόσμου) τὸν θρὸν ὑφ' σὖ γέγονεν. ὕλην δὲ τὰ τέσσαρα στοιχεῖν ἐξ ὧν συνεκράθη. ὄργανον δὲ λόγον θεοῦ δι' οὖ κατεσκευάσθη. τῆς δὲ κατασκευῆς αἰτίαν τὴν ἀγαθότητα τοῦ δημιουργοῦ (de Cher. 35; ii. 162 Μ.) Comp. de monarch. ii § 5(ii. 225 M.); leg. alleg. iii. § 31 (i. 106 Μ.).

The first passage is singularly instructive as bringing out the difference between the Christian and Philonic conception of the divine action. Comp. Rom. xi. 36 (ἐκ, διά, εἰς); 1 Cor. viii. 6 (ἐξ, εἰς, διά). The preposition ὑπό is not, I believe, used in connexion with creation in the N.T.

ii. The Nature and work of the Son (3).

The Nature and work of the Son is presented in regard to (1) His divine Personality and (2) the Incarnation.

(1) In Himself the Son is presented in His essential Nature, as the manifestation of the divine attributes (ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης), and He embodies personally the divine essence (χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως). In connexion with this view of His Nature, His work is to bear all things to their true end (φέρων τὰ πάντα).

(2) This general view of His work leads to the view of His work as Incarnate in a world marred by sin. In regard to this He is the One absolute Redeemer (καθαρ. τῶν ἁμ. ποιησάμενος) and the Sovereign representative of glorified humanity (ἐκάθ. ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγ. ἐν ὑψ.).

³Who, being the effulgence of His glory and the expression of His essence, and so bearing all things by the word of His power, after He had Himself made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.

(3). The description of the Nature and Work of the Son of God in relation to the Father (spake in, appointed, made) given in the second verse is completed by a description of His Nature and Work in regard to Himself.

The description begins with that which is eternal. The participles 'being,' 'bearing' describe the absolute and not simply the present essence and action of the Son. Compare John i. 18; (iii. 13); Col i. 15, 17. The ὥv in particular guards against the idea of mere 'adoption' in the Sonship, and affirms the permanence of the divine essence of the Son during His historic work.

At the same time the divine being of the Son can be represented to men 10 αἰῶνας. ³ὅς ὥν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς

only under human figures. Since this is so, the infinite truth must be suggested by a combination of complementary images such as are given here in απαύγασμα and χαρακτὴρ. The first image (ἀπαύγασμα) brings out the conception of the source (πηγή) of the Son's Being, and of His unbroken connexion with the Father, as revealing to man the fulness of His attributes.

The second image (χαρακτήρ) emphasises the true Personality of the Son as offering in Himself the perfect representation of the divine essence of the Father (John xiv. 9).

Taken together the images suggest the thoughts presented by the theological terms 'coessential' (ὁμοούσιος) and 'only-begotten' (μονογενής).

The 'glory' of God finds expression in the Son as its 'effulgence': the 'essence' of God finds expression in Him as its 'type.'

Neither figure can be pressed to conclusions. The luminous image may be said to have no substantive existence (τλ γαρ απαύγασμα, φασίν (the followers of Sabellius, Marcellus, Photinus), ἐνυπόστατον οὐκ ἔστιν ἀλλ' ἐν ἑτέρῳ ἔχει τὸ εἶναι Chrysost. Hom. ii. 1). The express image may be offered in a different substance. So it is that the first figure leaves unnoticed the Personality of the Son, and the second figure the essential equality of the Son with the Father. But that which the one figure lacks the other supplies. We cannot conceive of the luminous body apart from the luminous image; and we cannot identify the archetype and its expression.

Under another aspect we observe that the Divine Manifestation is placed side by side with the Divine Essence. It is in Christ that the Revelation is seen (ἀπαύγασμα). It is in Christ that the Essence is made intelligibly distinct for man (χαρακτήρ).

The two truths are implied by the words of the Lord recorded in St John's Gospel v. 19, 30; xiv. 9.

For the pre-existence of the Son compare c. vii. 3; x. 5.

It must farther be noticed that in the description of the Being of the Son language is used which points to a certain congruity in the Incarnation. This is the 'propriety' of His Nature to perfectly reveal God. Through Him God reveals Himself outwardly.

Under this aspect the clause which describes the action of the Son—φέρωμ τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ—gives in its most general form the truth expressed in the divine acts ὅν ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον πάντων, δι' οὗ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αίῶνας.

ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης] the effulgence of His glory, Vulg. splendor gloriae (and so Latt. uniformly).

ἀπαύγασμα] The verb άπαυγάζω has two distinct meanings:

(1). To flash forth: radiate.

(2). To flash back: reflect.

The noun ἀπαύγασμα, which is a characteristically Alexandrine word occurring in Wisdom (vii. 25), and in Philo, may therefore mean either

(1). The effulgence; or

(2). The reflection (refulgence).

The use of the word by Philo is not decisive as to the sense to be chosen. In one passage the sense 'effulgence' appears to be most natural: De concupisc. § 11 (ii. 356 Μ.) τὸ δ' ἐυφυσώμενον (Gen. ii. 7) δῆλον ὡς αἰθέριον ἤν πνεῦμα καὶ εἰ δή τι αἰθερίου πνεύματος κρεῖττον, ἅτε τῆς μακαρίας καὶ τρισμακαρίας φύσεως ἀπαύγασμα.

In two others the sense 'reflection' is more appropriate: De opif. mundi § 51 (i. 35 Μ.) πᾶς ἀνθρωπος κατὰ μὲν ιὴν διάνοιαν οἰκείωται θείῳ λόγῳ, τῆς μακα ρίας φύσεως ἐκμαγεῖον ἧ ἀπόσπασμα ἧ ἀπαύγασμα γεγονώς, κατὰ δὲ τὴν τοῦ σώματος κατασκευὴν ἅπαντι τῷ κόσμῳ.

De plantatione Noae § 12 (i. 337 Μ.) τὸ δὲ ἁγίασμα (Ex. xv. 17) οἷον ἁγίων ἀπαύγασμα, μίμημα άρχετύπου, ἐπεὶ 11 τὰ αἰσθήσει καλὰ καὶ νοήσες καλῶν εἰκόνες.

The passage in Wisdom (vii. 25 f.) is capable of bearing either meaning. The threefold succession ἀπαύγασμα, ἔσοπτρον, εἰκών, — effulgence, mirror, image, no less than v. 25, appears to favour the sense of 'effulgence.' Otherwise ἔσοπτρον interrupts the order of thought.

In this passage the sense reflection is quite possible, but it appears to be less appropriate, as introducing a third undefined notion of 'that which reflects.' Moreover the truth suggested by reflection' is contained in χαρακτήρ, to which 'effulgence' offers a more expressive complement; and the Greek Fathers with unanimity have adopted the sense effulgence according to the idea expressed in the Nicene Creed, Light of Light. Several of their comments are of interest as bringing out different sides of the image: Orig. in Joh. xxxii. 18 ὅλης μὲν οῦν οἷμαι τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτοῦ ἀπαύγασμα εἰναι τὸν υἱόν...φθάνειν μέντοι γε ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀπαυγάσματα τος τούτοθ τῆς ὅλης δόξης μερικὰ ἀπαυγάσματα ἐπὶ τὴν λοιπὴν λογικὴν κτίσιν. Comp. c. Cels. v. 18; de princ. 1, 2, 4 (and Redepenning's note); Hom. in Jer. ix. 4 οὐχὶ ἐγέννησεν ὁ πατὴρ τὸν υἱὸν καὶ ἀπέλυσεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῆς γενέσεως αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ' δεὶ γεννᾷ αὐτὸν ὅσον ἐστὶ τὸ φῶς ποιητικὸν τοῦ ἀπαυγάσματος..

Greg. Nyss. de perfecta Christ. forma, Migne Patr. Gr. xlvi. p. 265 δόξαν καὶ ὑπόστασιν ὠνόμασε τὸ ὑπερκείμενον παντὸς ἀγαθοῦ...τὸ δὲ συναγές τε καὶ ἀδιάστατον τοῦ υἱοῦ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα διερμηνεύων...ἀπαύγασμα δόξης καὶ χαρακτῆρα ὑποστάσεως προσαγορεύει...ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ τὴν ἀπαυγάζουσαν φύσιν νοήσας καὶ τὸ ἀπαύγασμα ταύτης πάντως κατενόησε, καὶ ὁ τὸ μέγεθος τῆς ὑποστάσεως ἐν νῷ λαβὼν τῷ ἐπιφαινομέν χαρακτῆρι πάντως ἐμμετρεῖ τὴν ὑπόστασιν.

Chrysostom (Hom. ii. 2) ἀπαύγασμα εἶπεν...ἵνα δείξῃ ὅτι κάκεῖ (John viii. 12) oὕτως σἰρηται. δῆλον δὲ ὡς φῶς ἐκ φωτός.

Theodoret *ad loc. τὸ ἀπαύγασμα καὶ ἐκ τοῦ πυρός Ιστι καίσυρτψπυρίί ἐστι καὶ σὺν τῷ πυρί ἐστι...δεὶ δὲ ἡ δόξα, ἀεὶ τοίνυν καὶ τὸ ἀπαύγασμα.

Œcumenius ad loc. διὰ τοῦ ἀπαύγασμα' τὴν κατὰ φύσιν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς πρόοδον τοῦ υἱοῦ δηλοῖ. οὐδὲν γὰρ ὅλως οὐδαμοῦ κατὰ χάριν καὶ αἰσποίησιν πρόεισιν ἀπαύγασμά τινος, οὐκ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου, οὐκ ἀπὸ τοῦ πυρός, οὐκ ἀφ' ἑτέρου τινός, ἀφ' οὖ πέφυκεν ἀπαύγασμα προιέναι.

It is indeed true that the sense of 'effulgence' passes into that of 'reflection' so far as both present the truth that it is through Christ that God becomes visible to man. But in the one case the nature of Christ is emphasised and in the other His office. The 'effulgence' is the necessary manifestation of the luminous body: the 'reflection' is the manifestation through some medium as it takes place in fact.

It is however necessary to observe that 'effulgence' is not any isolated ray, but the whole bright image which brings before us the source of light. Comp. Greg. Nyss. c. Eunom. viii., Migne Patr. Gr. xlv. p. 773 ὡς ἐκ μαντὸς τοῦ ἡλιακοῦ κύκλου τῇ τοῦ φωτὸς λαμπήδονι ἀπαυγάζεται, οὐ γὰρ τὸ μέν τε λάμπει τὸ δὲ ἀλαμπές ἐστι υοῦ κύκλου. οὕτως ὅλῃ ἡ δόξα ἡτις ἐστὶν ὁ πατὴρ τῷ ἐξ ἑαυτῆς ἀπαυγάσματι, τουτέστι τῷ ἀληθινῷ φωτὶ πανταχόθεν περιαυγάζεται. And again, while the general figure guards the conception of the permanence of the relation between the source and the light, the 'effulgence' is regarded in its completeness (ἀπαύγασμα)—the light flashed forth, and not the light in the continuity of the stream.

τῆς δόξης αύτοῦ] The 'glory of God' is the full manifestation of His attributes according to man's power of apprehending them, 'all His goodness' (Ex. xxxiii. 19 ff.). This 'glory' was the subject of His crowning revelation as contemplated by the prophets 12 ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς

3 φανερῶν Β* (rell φέρων).

(Is. xl. 5 the glory of the Lord shall be revealed; xlvi. 13 in Zion salvation, unto Israel my glory; lx. 1 f.) and made known in Christ (2 Cor. iv. 4, 6: comp. Rom. ix. 23; 1 Tim. i. 11; John xi. 40; i. 14); compare Introduction to the Gospel of St John xlvii. ff. It is the final light (Apoc. xxi. 23) for which we look (Tit. ii. 13; Rom. v. 2).

Under the Old Dispensation the Shekinah was the symbol of it: Ex. xxiv. 16; Ps. lxxxv. 9, Comp. Rom. ix. 4; (2 Pet i. 17).

For illustrations see Rom. vi. 4; ix. 4; Col. i. 11; Eph. iii. 16; compare 2 Thess. i. 9; 1 Cor. xi. 7; Rom. iii. 23.

Clement (1 Cor. c. xxxvi.) writes ὅς ὤν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς μεγαλωσύνης αὐτοῦ, taking the word μεγαλωσύνη from the later clause and greatly obscuring the fulness of the thought.

χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως] the expression of His essence, Vulg. figura (O. L. imago, v. character) substantiae. Syr. image of His essence

The word χαρακτήρ is used from the time of Herodotus (i. 116) of the distinguishing features, material or spiritual, borne by any object or person; of the traits by which we recognise it as being what it is.

It is specially used for the mark upon a coin (Eurip. El. 558 f.; Arist. Pol. i. 9) which determines the nature and value of the piece. Comp. Ign. ad Magn. 5 ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐστιν νομίσματα δύο, ὁ μὲν θεοῦ ὁ δὲ κόσμου, καὶ ἔκαστον αὐτῶν ἴδιον χαρακτῆρα ἐπικείμενον ἔχει, οἱ ἄπιστοι τοῦ κόσμου τούτον, οἱ δὲ πιστοὶ ἐν ἀγάπῃ χαρακτῆρα θεοῦ πατρὸς διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ..

In this connexion χαρακτήρ is applied to the impression of the engraving on a die or seal which is conveyed to other substances. Philo, de Mund. opif. § 4 (i. 4 M.) ὥσπερ ἐν κηρῷ τινι τῇ ἑαυτοῦ ψυχῇ...τοὺς χαρακτῆρας ἐνσφραγίζεσθαι.

id. § 53 (i. 36 Μ.) τῆς ἑκατέρας φύσεως ἀπεμάττετο τῇ ψυχῇ τοὺς χαρακτῆρας; de mundo § 4 (ii. 606 Μ.).

De plant. Noae § 5 (i. 332 Μ.) ὁ Μωῦσῆς [τὴν λογικὴν ψυχὴν]ὠνόμασεν...τοῦ θείου καὶ ἀοράτου εἰκόνα, δόκιμον εἶναι νομίσας οὐσεωθεῖσαν καὶ τυπωθεῖσαν σφραγίδι θεοῦ, ἧς ὁ χαρακτήρ ἐστιν ὁ ἀίδιος λόγος.

By a natural transition from this use, χαρακτήρ is applied to that in which the distinguishing traits of the object to which it is referred are found. So Philo describes 'the spirit,' the essence of the rational part of man, as (a figure and impress of divine power': ἡ μὲν οὖν κοινὴ πρὸς τὰ ἅλογα δύναμις οὐσίαν ἔλαχεν αἷμα, ἡ δὲ ἐκ τῆς λογικῆς ἀπορρυεῖσα πηγῆς, τὸ πνεῦμα, οὐκ ἀέρα κινούμενον ἀλλὰ τύπον τινὰ καὶ χαρακτῆρα θείας δυνάμεως, ἤν ὀνόματι κυρίῳ Μωῦσῆς εἰκόνα καλεῖ, δηλῶν ὅτι ἀρχέτυπον μὲν φύσεως λογικῆς ὁ θεός ἐστι, μίμημα δὲ καὶ ἀπεικόνισμα ἄνθρωπος (quod det. pot. insid. § 23; i 207 Μ.). And Clement of Rome speaks of man as 'an impress of the image of God': ἐπὶ πᾶσιν τὸ ἐξοχώτατον...ἄνθρωπον...ἔπλασεν [ὁ δημιουργὸς καὶ δεσπότης τῶν ἁπάντων]τῆς ἑαυτοῦ εἰκόνος χαρακτῆρα (Gen. i. 26 f.) (ad Cor. i. 33).

Generally χαρακτήρ may be said to be that by which anything is directly recognised through corresponding signs under a particular aspect, though it may include only a few features of the object. It is so far a primary and not a secondary source of knowledge. Χαρακτήρ conveys representative traits only, and therefore it is distinguished from εἰκών (2 Cor. iv. 4; Col. i. 15; 1 Cor. xi. 7; Col. iii. 10) which gives a complete representation under the condition of earth of that which it 13 figures; and from μορφή (Phil. ii.. 6 f.) which marks the essential form.

There is no word in English which exactly renders it. If there were a sense of 'express' (i.e. expressed image) answering to 'impress,' this would be the best equivalent.

ὑπόστασις] The word properly means 'that which stands beneath' as a sediment (Arist. de hist. an. v. 19 and often), or foundation (Ezek. xliii. 11, lxx.), or ground of support (Ps. lxviii. (lxix.) 2; Jer. xxiii. 22, lxx.).

From this general sense come the special senses of firmness, confidence (compare c. iii. 14 note; 2 Cor. ix. 4; xi. 17); reality ([Arist.] de mundo 4 τὰ μὲν κατ' ἔμφασιν, τὰ δὲ καθ' ὑπόστασιν, κατ' ἔμφασιν μὲν ἵριδες...καθ' ὑπόστασιν δέ...κομῆτας...), that in virtue of which a thing is what it is, the essence of any being (Ps. xxxviii. (xxxix.) 6; Ps. lxxxviii. (lxxxix.) 48; Wisd. xvi. 21: compare Jerem. x. 17; Ezek. xxvi. 11).

When this meaning of 'essence' was applied to the Divine Being two distinct usages arose in the course of debate. If men looked at the Holy Trinity under the aspect of the one Godhead there was only one ὑπόστασις, one divine essence. If, on the other hand, they looked at each Person in the Holy Trinity, then that by which each Person is what He is, His ὑπόστασις, was necessarily regarded as distinct, and there were three ὑποστάσεις. In the first case ὑπόστασις as applied to the One Godhead was treated as equivalent to οὐσία: in the other case it was treated as equivalent to πρόσωπον.

As a general rule the Eastern (Alexandrine) Fathers adopted the second mode of speech affirming the existence of three ὑποστάσεις (real Persons) in the Godhead; while the Western Fathers affirmed the unity of one ὑπόστασις (essence) in the Holy Trinity (compare the letter of Dionysius of Alexandria to Dionysius of Rome, Routh, Rell. sacræ, iii. 390 ff. and notes). Hence many mediæval and modern writers have taken ὑπόστασις in the sense of 'person' here. But this use of the word is much later than the apostolic age; and it is distinctly inappropriate in this connexion. The Son is not the image, the expression of the 'Person' of God. On the other hand, He is the expression of the 'essence' of God. He brings the Divine before us at once perfectly and definitely according to the measure of our powers.

The exact form of the expression, άπαύγ. τῆς δ. καὶ χαρ. τῆς ὑποστ. and not τὸ ἀπαύγ. τ. δ. καὶ ὁ χαρ. τῆς ὑποστ. or άπαύγ. δ. καὶ χαρ. ὑποστ., will be noticed (comp. v. 2 ἐν υἱῷ).

φέρων τε] and so bearing...We now pass from the thought of the absolute Being of the Son to His action in the finite creation under the conditions of time and space. The particle τε indicates the new relation of the statement which it introduces. It is obvious that the familiar distinction holds true here: 'καί conjungit, τε adjungit.' The providential action of the Son is a special manifestation of His Nature and is not described in a coordinate statement: what He does flows from what He is.

The particle τε is rarely used as an independent conjunction in the N.T. It is so used again c. vi. 5; ix. 1; xii. 2; and in St Paul only Rom. ii. 19; xvi. 26; 1 Cor. iv. 21; Eph. iii. 19.

φέρων] bearing or guiding, Vulg. portans, O. L. ferens v. gerens. This present and continuous support and carrying forward to their end of all created things was attributed by Jewish writers to God no less than their creation. 'God, blessed be He, bears (מובל) the world' (Shem. R. § 36 referring to Is. xlvi. 4; compare Num. xi. 14; Deut. i. 9). The action of God is here referred to the Son (comp. Col. i. 17).

The word φέρειν is not to be understood simply of the passive support of a burden (yet notice c. xiii. 13; xii.

14

δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος

καθαριεμόν אΑΒ vg: + δι' αὐτοῦ' καθ. D₂*: + δι' ἑαυτοῦ' καθ. S syrr. τ. ἁμαρτιῶν אABD₂M₂ vg syr vg me: τ. ἁμ. + ἡμῶν S syr hl: + ὑμῶν א•. τ. ἁμ. ποιης. ἐκάθ. אABD₂M₂ vg: ποιης. τ. ἁμ. ἡμ. ἐκάθ. S.

2o); "for the Son is not an Atlas sustaining the dead weight of the world." It rather expresses that 'bearing' which includes movement, progress, towards an end. The Son in the words of Oecumenius περιάγαι καὶ συνέχει καὶ πηδαλιουχεῖ...τὰ ἀόρατα καὶ τὰ ὀρατὰ περιφέρων καὶ κυβερνῶν. The same general sense is given by Chrysostom: φέρων...τουτέστι, κυβερνῶν τὰ διαπίπτοντα συγκρατῶν. τοῦ γὰρ ποιῆσαι τὸν κόσμον οὐχ ἧττόν ἐστι τὸ συγκροτεῖν ἀλλ', εἰ δεπι τι καὶ θαυμαστὸν εἰπεῖν, καὶ μεῖζον (Hom. ii. 3). And so Primiasius; verbo jussionis suae omnia gubernat et regit, non enim minus est gubernare mundum quam creasse...in gubernando vero ca quae facta sunt ne ad nihilum redeant continentur.

Gregory of Nyssa goes yet further, and understands φέρων of the action by which the Son brings things into existence: τὰ σύμπαντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αύτοῦ φέρει ὁ Λόγος ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὅντος εἰς γένεσιν. πάντα γὰρ ὅα τὴν ἄῦλον εἴληχε φύσιν μίαν αἰτίαν ἔχει τῆς ὑποστάσεως τὸ ῥῆμα τῆς ἀφράστου δυνάμεως (de perf. Christ. forma, Migne Patr. Gr. xlvi. p. 265). For this sense of φέρειν compare Philo quis rer. div. haer. § 7 (i. 477 Μ.); de mut. nom. § 44 (i. 6, 7 M.).

Philo expresses a similar idea to that of the text when he speaks of ὁ πηδαλιοῦχος καὶ κυβερνήτης τοῦ παντὸς λόγος θεῖος (De Cherub. § 11; i. 145 Μ.). And Hermas gives the passive side of it Sim. ix. 14, 5 τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ μέγα ἐστὶ καὶ ἀχώρητον καὶ τὸν κόσμον ὅλον βαστάζει. εἰ οὖν πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ βαστάζεται...

τὰ πάντα] as contrasted with πάντα (John i. 2). All things in their unity: c. ii. 8, 10 (not iii. 4); Rom. viii. 32; xi. 36; 1 Cor. viii. 6; xv. 27 f.; 2 Cor. iv. 15; v. 18; Eph. i. 10 f.; iii. 9; iv. 10, 15; Phil. iii. 21; Col. i. 16 f., 20; 1 Tim. vi. 13.

See also 1 Cor. xi. 12; xii. 6; Gal iii. 22; Phil. iii. 8; Eph. i. 23; v. 13. The reading in 1 Cor. ix. 22, and perhaps in xii. 19, is wrong.

τῷ ῥ. τῆς δυν.] by the word—the expression--of His (Christ's) power, the word in which His power finds its manifestation (compare Rev. iii. 10 τὸν λόγον τῆς ὑπομονῆς μου). Αs the world was called into being by an utterance (ῥῆμα) of God (c. xi. 3), so it is sustained by a like expression of the divine will. The choice of the term as distinguished from λόγος marks, so to speak, the particular action of Providence. Gen. i. 3 εἶπεν ὁ θεός.

δυν. αὐτοῦ] The pronoun naturally refers to the Son, not to the Father, in spite of the preceding clauses, from the character of the thought.

καθ. ποιησάμενος] having made—when He had made—purification of sins. This clause introduces a new aspect of the Son. He has been regarded in His absolute Nature (ὥν), and in His general relation to finite being (φέρων): now He is seen as He entered into the conditions of life in a world disordered by sin.

The completed atonement wrought by Christ (having made) is distinguished from His eternal being and His work through all time in the support of created things (being, bearing); and it is connected with His assumption of sovereign power in His double Nature at the right hand of God (having made...He sat...). Thus the phrase prepares for the main thought of the Epistle, the High-priestly work of Christ, which is first distinctly introduced in c. ii. 17.

ποιησάμενος] The Vulgate, from the

15

ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ. τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐv ὑψηλοῖς, ⁴τοσούτῳ

defectiveness of Latin participles, fails to give the sense: purgationem peccatorum faciens (compare v. 1 loquens). In v. 14 (missi) there is the converse error. The Old Latin had avoided this error but left the thought indefinite, purificatione (purgatione) peccatorum facta.

The use of the middle (ποιησάμενος) suggests the thought which the late gloss δι' ἑαυτοῦ made more distinct. Christ Himself, in His own Person, made the purification: He did not make it as something distinct from Himself, simply provided by His power. Compare μνείαν ποιεῖσθαι Rom. i. 9; Eph. i. 16, &c.; ποιεῖσθαι δεήσεις 1 Tim. ii. 1; Luke v. 33; John xiv. 23, &c.

καθ. τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν] 2 Pet i. 9 (personally applied). Compare Exod. xxx. 10 (lxx.); Job vii. 21 (lxx.). Elsewhere the word καθαρισμός is used only of legal purification (Luke ii. 22; Mk. i. 44 || Luke v. 14; John ii. 6; iii. 25). The verb καθαρίζειν is also used but rarely of sin: c. x. 2 (ix. 14); 1 John i. 7, 9. Comp. Acts xv. 9; Eph. v. 26; Tit. ii. 14 (2 Cor. vii 1; James iv. 8).

There is perhaps a reference to the imperfection of the Aaronic purifications (compare Lev. xvi. 30) which is dwelt upon afterwards, c. x. 1 ff.

The genitive (καθ. ἁμαρτιῶν) may express either

(1) the cleansing of sins, i.e. the removal of the sins. Compare Matt. viii. 3; Job vii. 21 (Ex. xxx. 10),

or (2) the cleansing (of the person) from sins. Comp. c. ix. 15.

The former appears to be the right meaning. See Additional Note.

τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν] of sins generally. Comp. Col. i. 14; Eph. i. 7. Elsewhere ἡμῶν (or αὺτῶν) is added: Matt. i. 21; Gal. i. 4; 1 Cor. xv. 3; 1 John iv. 10; Apoc. i. 5. Contrast John i. 29 (τὴν ἁμαρτίαν). For the contrast of the sing. and pl. see c. ix. 26, 28; x. 18, 26.

The result of this 'purification' is the foundation of a 'Holy' Church (comp. John xiii. 10 n.). The hindrance to the approach to God is removed.

ἐκάθισεν] c. viii 1; x. 12; xii 2. Comp. Eph. i. 20 (καθίσας); Apoc. iii. 21. Καθίσαι (intrans.) expresses the solemn taking of the seat of authority, and not merely the act of sitting. Comp. Matt. v. 1; xix. 28; xxv. 31.

The phrase marks the fulfilment of Ps. cx. 1; Matt. xxii. 44 and parallels; Acts ii. 34; and so it applies only to the risen Christ. Angels are always represented as 'standing' (Is. vi 2; 1 K. xxii. 19) or falling on their faces: and so the priests ministered, comp. c. x. 11. Only princes of the house of David could sit in the court (Hebrew) of the Temple (Biesenthal). Hence 'the man of sin' so asserts himself: 2 Thess. ii. 4. Bernard says in commenting on the title 'thrones' (Col. i. 16): nec vacat Sessio: tranquillitatie insigne est (de consid. v. 4, 10).

ἐν δεξιᾷ] v. 13. The idea is of course of dignity and not of place ('dextra Dei ubique est'). All local association must be excluded: οὐχ ὅτι τόπῳ περικλείεται ὁ θεὸς ἀλλ' ἵνα τὸ ὁμότιμον αὐτοῦ δειχθῂ τὸ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα (Theophlct.). Non est putandum quod omnipotens Pater qui spiritus est incircumscriptus omnia replens dexteram aut sinistram habeat...Quid est ergo 'sedit ad dexteram majestatis' nisi ut dicatur, habitat in plenitudine paternae majestatis? (Primas.) Comp. Eph. iv. 10. We, as we at present are, are forced to think in terms of space, but it does not follow that this limitation belongs to the perfection of humanity.

Herveius (on v. 13) notices the double contrast between the Son and the Angels: Seraphin stant ut ministri, Filius sedet ut Dominus: Seraphin in circuitu, Filius ad dexteram.

16

τῆς μεγαλ.] c. viii. 1; Jude 25. The word is not unfrequent in the lxx.: e.g. 1 Chron. xxix. 11; Wisd. xviii. 24.

'The Majesty' expresses the idea of God in His greatness. Comp. Buxtorf Lex. s. v. נבורה 1 Clem. xvi. τὸ σκῆπτρον τῆς μεγαλ., c. xxxvi. απαύγασμα τῆς μεγαλ.

ἐν ὑψηλοῖς] Ps. xciii. (xcii.) 4 (lxx.).

Here only in N.T. Comp. ἐν ὑψίστοις Luke ii. 14; Matt. xxi. 9 and parallels; and ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις Eph. i. 3, 20; ii. 6; iii. 10; vi. 12.

The term marks the sphere of the higher life. Local imagery is necessarily used for that which is in itself unlimited by place (compare iv. 14; vii. 26). Τί ἐστιν Ἐν ὑψηλοῖς; Chrysostom asks, εἰς τόπον περικλείει τὸν θεόν; ἄπαγε (Hom. ii. 3). In excelsis dicens non eum loco concludit, sed ostendit omnibus altiorem et evidentiorem, hoc est quia usque ad ipsum pervenit solium paternae claritatis (Atto Verc.).

The clause belongs to ἐκάθισεν and not to τῆς μεγαλωσύης. The latter connexion would be grammatically irregular though not unparalleled, and τῆς μεγαλωσύνης is complete in itself.

This Session of Christ at the right hand of God,—the figure is only used of the Incarnate Son—is connected with His manifold activity as King (Acts ii. 33 ff.; Eph. i. 21 ff.; Col. iii. 1; c. x. 12) and Priest (1 Pet iii. 22; c. viii. 1; c. xii. 2) and Intercessor (Rom. viii. 34). Comp. Acts vii. 55 f. (ἑστῶτα ἐκ δ.).

iii. Transition to the detailed development of the argument (4).

The fourth verse forms a transition to the special development of the argument of the Epistle. The general contrast between 'the Son' as the mediator of the new revelation and 'the prophets' as mediators of the old, is offered in the extreme case. According to Jewish belief the Law was ministered by angels (c. ii. 2; Gal. iii. 19; comp. Acts vii. 53), but even the dignity of these, the highest representatives of the Dispensation, was as far below that of Christ as the title of minister is below that of the incommunicable title of divine Majesty. This thought is developed i. 5—ii. 18.

The abrupt introduction of the reference to the angels becomes intelligible both from the function which was popularly assigned to angels in regard to the Law, and from the description of the exaltation of the Incarnate Son. Moses alone was admitted in some sense to direct intercourse with God (Num. xii 8; Deut. xxxiv. 10): otherwise 'the Angel of the Lord' was the highest messenger of revelation under the Old Covenant. And again the thought of the Session of the Son on the Father's throne calls up at once the image of the attendant Seraphim (Is. vi. 1 ff.; John xii. 41; iv. 2 ff.).

The superiority of Messiah to the angels is recognised in Rabbinic writings.

Jalkut Sim. 2, fol. 53, 3 on Is. lii. 13, Behold my servant shall (deal wisely) prosper. This is King Messiah. He shall be exalted and extolled and be very high. He shall be exalted beyond Abraham, and extolled beyond Moses, and raised high above the ministering angels (מלאכי השרת).

Jalkut Chadash f. 144, 2. Messiah is greater than the fathers, and than Moses, and than the ministering angels (Schoettgen, i. p. 905).

having become so much better than the angels as He hath inherited a more excellent name than they.

(4). The thought of the exaltation of the Incarnate Son fixes attention on His Manhood. Under this aspect He was shewn to have become superior to angels in His historic work. And the glory of 'the name' which He has 'inherited' is the measure of His excellence. Comp. Eph. i. 20 f.

τοσούτω...ὅσῳ] c. x. 25; vii. 20 ff. Comp. viii. 6. The combination is found in Philo (de mund. opif. § 50

17

κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων ὅσῳ διαφορώτερον παρ' αὐτοὺς κεκληρονόμηκεν ὄνομα. ⁵Τίνι γὰρ εἶπέν

4 om. τῶν' (ἀγγ.) B.

(i. 33 M.); Leg. ad Cai. § 36) but not in St Paul.

κρείττων] The word is characteristic of the epistle (13 times). Elsewhere it is found only in the neuter (κρεῖττον 4 times; 1 Cor. xii. 31 is a false reading). The idea is that of superiority in dignity or worth or advantage, the fundamental idea being power and not goodness (ἀμείνων and ἄριστος are not found in the Ν. T.).

γενόμενος] The word stands in significant connexion with ὧv (v. 3). The essential Nature of the Son is contrasted with the consequences of the Incarnation in regard to His divine-human Person (comp. c. v. 9). His assumption of humanity, which for a time 'made Him lower than angels,' issued in His royal exaltation. Comp. Matt. xx. vi. 64; Luke xxii. 69 (ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου).

The Greek fathers lay stress upon κρείττων as marking a difference in kind and not in degree. Athan. c. Ar. i. § 59 τὸ ἅρα 'κρείττων' καὶ νῦν καὶ δι'ὅλων τῷ Κυρίῳ ἀνατίθησι, τῷ κρείττονι καὶ ἄλλῳ παρὰ τὰ γενητὰ τυγχάνοντι. Κρείττων γὰρ ἡ δι' αὐτοῦ θυσία, κρείττων ἡ ἐν αὐτῷ ἐλπίς, καὶ αἱ δι' αὐτοῦ ἐπαγγελίας, οὐχ ὡς πρὸς μικρὰ μεγάλαι συγκρινόμεναι ἀλλ' ὡς ἄλλαι πρὸς ἄλλα τὴν φύσιν τυγχάνουσαι ἐπεὶ καὶ ὁ πάντα οἰκονομήσας κρείττων τῶν γενητῶν ἐστί.

They also rightly point out that γενόμενος is used of the Lord's Human Nature and not of His divine Personality: τοῦτο κατὰ τὸ ἀνθρώπειον εἴρηκεν, ὡς γᾶρ θεὸς ποιητὴς ἀγγέλων καὶ δεσπότης ἀγγέλων, ὡς δὲ ανθρωπος μετα τὴν ἀνάστασιν καὶ τὴν εἰς οὐρανοὺς ἀνάβασιν κρείττων ἀγγέλων ἐγένετο.

For κρείττων, διαφορώτερος, see c. viii. 6 note.

τῶν ἀγγέλων] The class as a definite whole (vv. 5, 7, 13),and not beings of such a nature (ii. 2, 5, 7, 9, 16).

διαφ. παρ' αὐτούς....ὄνομα] The 'name' of angels is 'excellent' (&ampφορον, different, distinguished, for good from others; comp. Matt. xii. 12 διαφέρει), but that inherited by the Son is 'more excellent' (Vulg. differentius prae illis. O.L. procellentius (excellentius) his (ab his)). For the use of παρά see iii. 3, ix. 23, xi. 4, xii. 24.

By the 'name' we are to understand probably not the name of 'Son' simply, though this as applied to Christ in His humanity is part of it, but the Name which gathered up all that Christ was found to be by believers, Son, Sovereign and Creator, the Lord of the Old Covenant, as is shewn in the remainder of the chapter. Comp. Phil. ii. 9 (Eph. i. 21).

For the position of διαφορώτερον compare xi. 25 (iii. 14).

κεκληρ.] The perfect lays stress upon the present possession of the 'name' which was 'inherited' by the ascended Christ. That which had been proposed in the eternal counsel (v. 2 ἔθηκεν) was realised when the work of redemption was completed (John xix. 30 τετέλεσται). The possession of the 'name' — His own eternally — was, in our human mode of speech, consequent on the Incarnation, and the permanent issue of it.

In looking back over the view of the Lord's Person and Work given in vv. 1—4 we notice

(1). The threefold aspect in which it is regarded.

(α) The Eternal Being of the Son (ὥν, φέρων).

(β) The temporal work of the Incarnate Son (καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος, κρείττων γενόμενος).

18

(γ) The work of the Exalted Christ in its historical foundation and in its abiding issues (ἐκάθισεν, κεκληρονόμηκεν).

(2). The unity of Christ's Person.

The continuity of the Person of the Son throughout is distinctly affirmed. He is One before the work of creation and after the work of redemption. Traits which we regard as characteristic severally of His divine and of His human nature are referred to the same Person. This unity is clearly marked:

God spake in His Son,

Whom He appointed heir of all

things,

through Whom He made the world,

Who being...and bearing...

having made purification...

sat down,

having become...

Even during His dwelling on earth, under the limitations of manhood, the activity of His divine Being (φέρων τὰ πάντα) was not interrupted; and His redemptive work must be referred to the fulness of His One Person.

(3). The unity of Christ's work.

The Creation, Redemption, Consummation of all things are indissolubly connected. The heirship of Christ is placed side by side with His creative work. The exaltation of humanity in Him is in no way dependent on the Fall. The Fall made Redemption necessary, and altered the mode in which the divine counsel of love, the consummation of creation, was fulfilled, but it did not alter the counsel itself!

A mysterious question has been raised whether the terms 'Son' and 'Father' are used of the absolute relations of the divine Persons apart from all reference to the Incarnation. In regard to this it may be observed that Scripture tells us very little of God apart from His relation to man and the world. At the same time the description of God as essentially 'love' helps us to see that the terms 'Father' and 'Son' are peculiarly fitted to describe, though under a figure, an essential relation between the Persons of the Godhead. This essential relation found expression for us in the Incarnation; and we are led to see that the 'economic' Trinity is a true image, under the conditions of earth, of the 'essential' Trinity.

Comp. v. 2 ἐν υἱῷ; vii. 3. John iii. 16, 17.

It is remarkable that the title 'Father' is not applied to God in this Epistle except in the quotation i. 5; yet see xii. 9.

See Additional Note on the Divine Names in the Epistle.

I. The superiority of the Son, the Mediator of the New Revelation, to Angels (i. 5—ii. 18).

This first main thought of the Epistle, which has been announced in v. 4, is unfolded in three parts. It is established first (i) in regard to the Nature and Work of the Son, as the Mediator of the New Covenant, by detailed references to the testimony of Scripture (i. 5—14). It is then (ii) enforced practically by a consideration of the consequences of neglect (ii. 1—4). And lastly it is shewn (iii) that the glorious destiny of humanity, loftier than that of angels, in spite of the fall, has been fulfilled by the Son of Man (ii. 5—18).

i. The testimony of Scripture to the preeminence of the Son over angels (i. 5— 14).

The series of seven quotations which follows the general statement of the subject of the Epistle shews that the truths which have been affirmed are a fulfilment of the teaching of the Old Testament. The quotations illustrate in succession the superiority of the Son, the Mediator of the new Revelation and Covenant, over the angels, and therefore far more over the prophets, (1) as Son, (vv. 5, 6) and then in two main aspects, (2) as 'heir of all things' (vv. 7—9), 19 and (3) as 'creator of the world' (vv. 10—12).

The last quotation (vv. 13, 14) presents (4) the contrast between the Son and the angels in regard to the present dispensation. The issue of the Son's Incarnation is the welcome to sit at God's right hand (κρείττων γενόμενος) in certain expectation of absolute victory, while the angels are busy with their ministries.

(1) 5, 6. The essential dignity of the Son.

The dignity of the Son as Son is asserted in three connexions, in its foundation (σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε); in its continuance (ἔσομαι αὐτῷ εἰς πατέρα); and in its final manifestation (ὄταν πάλιν εἰσαγάγῃ).

⁵For to which of the angels said He at any time,

My Son art Thou:

I have today begotten Thee?

and again,

I will be to Him a Father,

And He shall be to Me a Son?

⁶And when He again bringeth (or when on the other hand He bringeth) in the Firstborn into the world He saith,

And let all the Angels of God worship Him.

The first two quotations are taken from Ps. ii. 7 and 2 Sam. vii. 14 (|| 1 Chron. xvii. 13). Both quotations verbally agree with the lxx., which agrees with the Hebr.

The words of the Psalm are quoted again c. v. 5 and by St Paul, Acts xiii. 33. And they occur in some authorities (D a b c &c.) in Luke iii. 22. See also the reading of the Ebionitic Gospel on Matt. iii. 17.

The same Psalm is quoted Acts iv. 25 ff. Comp. Apoc. ii. 27; xii. 5; xiv. 1; xix. 15.

The passage from 2 Sam. vii. 14 is quoted again in 2 Cor. vi. 18 with important variations (ἔσομαι ὑμῖν...ὑμεῖς ἔσεσθέ μοι εἰς υἱοὺς καὶ θυγατέρας), and Apoc. xxi. 7.

Both passages bring out the relation of 'the Son of David' to the fulfilment of the divine purpose. The promise in 2 Sam. vii. 14 is the historical starting point. It was spoken by Nathan to David in answer to the king's expressed purpose to build a Temple for the Lord. This work the prophet said should be not for him but for his seed. The whole passage, with its reference to 'iniquity' and chastening, can only refer to an earthly king; and still experience shewed that no earthly king could satisfy its terms. The kingdom passed away from the line of David. The Temple was destroyed. It was necessary therefore to look for another 'seed' (Is. xi. 1; Jer. xxiii. 5; Zech. vi. 12): another founder of the everlasting Kingdom and of the true Temple (compare Luke i. 32 f.; John ii. 19).

The passage from the Second Psalm represents the divine King under another aspect. He is not the builder of the Temple of the Lord but the representative of the Lord's triumph over banded enemies. The conquest of the nations was not achieved by the successors of David. It remained therefore for Another. The partial external fulfilment of the divine prophecy directed hope to the future. So it was that the idea of the theocratic kingdom was itself apprehended as essentially Messianic; and the application of these two representative passages to Christ depends upon the prophetic significance of the critical facts of Jewish history.

The third quotation is beset by difficulty. Doubt has been felt as to the source from which it is derived. Words closely resembling the quotation are found in Ps. xcvii. (xcvi.) 7 προσκυνήσατε αὐτῷ πάντες οἱ ἄγγελοι αὐτοῦ (lxx.). But the exact phrase is found in the Vatican text of an addition made to the Hebrew in Deut. xxxii. 43 by the lxx. version which reads

εὐφράνθητε οὐραμοὶ ἅμα αὐτῷ,

20

ποτε τῶν ἀγγέλων

Υἱός μου εἰ σύ, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε,

5 τῶν ἀγγ. ποτε D₂* syr vg.

καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντεσ υἱοὶ θεοῦ.

εὐφράνθητε ἔθνη μετὰ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐνισχυσάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντεσ ἄγγελοι θεοῦ.

This gloss is quoted also by Justin M. Dial. c. 130. It was probably derived from the Psalm (comp. Is. xliv. 23), and may easily have gained currency from the liturgical use of the original hymn. If (as seems certain) the gloss was found in the current text of the lxx. in the apostolic age, it is most natural to suppose that the writer of the Epistle took the words directly from the version of Deuteronomy.

The quotation of words not found in the Hebrew text is to be explained by the general character of Deut. xxxii. which gives a prophetic history of the Course of Israel, issuing in the final and decisive revelation of Jehovah in judgment. When this revelation is made all powers shall recognise His dominion, exercised, as the writer of the Epistle explains, through Christ. The coming of Christ is thus identified with the coming of Jehovah. Comp. Luke i. 76; Acts ii. 20, 21.

In the Targum on Deut. xxxii. 44 which bears the name of Jonathan ben Uzziel there is the remarkable clause: 'He by His Word (במימריה) shall atone for His people and for His land.'

It may be added that the thought both in Deuteronomy and in the Psalm is essentially the same. The Hymn and the Psalm both look forward to the time when the subordinate spiritual powers, idolised by the nations, shall recognise the absolute sovereignty of Jehovah.

Part of the same verse (Deut. xxxii. 43) is quoted by St Paul in Rom. xv. 10.

(5). τίνι φὰρ εἶπέν ποτε] For to which...said He at any time? The use of the rhetorical question is characteristic of the style of the Epistle. Compare v. 14; ii. 2 ff.; iii. 16 ff.; vii. 11; xii. 7.

The subject of the verb is taken from the context. God is the Speaker in all revelation (v. 1). It has been objected that the title 'Son' is not limited to the Messiah in the Old Testament, but the objection rests upon a misunderstanding. The title which is characteristic of Messiah is never used of Angels or men in the Old Scriptures. Angels as a body are sometimes called 'sons of God' (Ps. xxix. 1, lxxxix. 6) but to no one (τίνι) is the title 'Son of God' given individually in all the long line of revelation. The τίνι and the ποτέ are both significant.

In like manner the title 'Son' was given to Israel as the chosen nation: Hos. xi. 1; Ex. iv. 22; but to no single Jew, except in the passage quoted, which in the original refers to Solomon as the type of Him who should come after.

Nor is it without the deepest significance that in these fundamental passages, Ps. ii. 7, 2 Sam. vii. 14, the speaker is 'the Lord' and not 'God.' The unique title of Christ is thus connected with God as He is the God of the Covenant (Jehovah, the Lord), the God of Revelation, and not as He is the God of Nature (Elohim, God).

υἱός μου] The order is full of meaning. By the emphasis which is laid upon υἱός the relation is marked as peculiar and not shared by others. My Son art thou, and no less than this; and not Thou too, as well as others, art my son. Compare Ps. lxxxviii. (lxxxix.) 27 πατήρ μου εἰ σύ. At the same time the σύ is brought

21

καὶ πάλιν

Έγὼ ἔσομαι αὐτῷ εἰς πατέρα, καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι εἰς υἱόη; ⁶ὄταν δὲ πάλιν εἰσαγάγῃ τὸν πρωτότοκον εἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην, λέγει

om. αὐτῷ א*.

into significant connexion with ἐγώ in the next clause, where the emphasis is laid on ἐγώ (Ί in my sovereign majesty') and not on σήμερον.

σήμερον) The word both in its primary and in its secondary meaning naturally marks some definite crisis, as the inauguration of the theocratic king, and that which would correspond with such an event in the historic manifestation of the divine King. So the passage was applied to the Resurrection by St Paul (Acts xiii. 33; comp. Rom. i. 4); and by a very early and widespread tradition it was connected with the Baptism (Luke iii. 22 Cod. D; Just M. Dial. c. 88, and Otto's note).

Many however have supposed that 'today' in this connexion is the expression for that which is eternal, timeless.

This view is very well expressed by Primasius: Notandum quia non dixit: Ante omnia secula genui te, vel in praetorito tempore; sed, hodie, inquit, genui te, quod adverbium est praesentis temporis. In Deo enim nec praeterita transeunt nec futura succedunt; sed omnia tempora simul ei conjuncta sunt, quia omnia praesentia habet. Et est sensus: Sicut ego semper aeternus sum neque initium neque finem habeo, ita te semper habeo coaeternum mihi.

Philo recognises the same idea: σήμερον δέ ἐστιν ὁ ἀπέραντος καὶ ἀδιεξίτητος αἱών. μηνῶν γὰρ καὶ ἐνιαυτῶν καὶ σαυόλως χρόνων περίοδοι δόγματα ἀνθρώπων εἰσὶν ἀριθμὸν ἐκτετιμηκότων. τὰ δὲ ἀψευδὲς ὅνομα αἱῶνος ἡ σήμερον (de Prof. § 11; i. 554 M.); and the idea was widely current. Comp. Schöttgen, ad loc. and c. iii. 13 note.

Such an interpretation, however, though it includes an important truth, summed up by Origen in the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son, appears to be foreign to the context.

γεγέννηκα] The term marks the communication of a new and abiding life, represented in the case of the earthly king by the royal dignity, and in the case of Christ by the divine sovereignty established by the Resurrection of the Incarnate Son in which His Ascension was included (Acts xiii. 33; Rom. i. 4; vi. 4; Col. i. 8; Apoc. i. 5).

For the use of γεννπαν compare 1 Cor. iv. 15; and especially St John's use: 1 John iii. 1 Add. Note.

ἐγὼ ἔσομαι...εἰς] The relation once established is to be realised in a continuous fulfilment. The future points to the coming Messiah from the position of the Ο. T. prophet.

The title πατήρ is applied to God here only in the Epistle.

εἶναι εἰς] Comp. c. viii. 10; 2 Cor. vi. 18. And in a somewhat different sense, Matt. xix. 5; Acts xiii. 47; 1 Cor. xiv. 22; xvi. 16; Eph. i. 12; Luke iii. 5 &c.

(6). ὅταν δέ] This third quotation is not a mere continuation (καὶ πάλιν) but a contrast (δέ). It marks the relation of angels to the Son and not of the Son to God and again it points forward to an end not yet reached.

ὅταν δὲ π. εἰς.] The πάλιν has been taken (1) as a particle of connexion and also (2) as qualifying εἰσαγάγῃ.

In the first case it has received two interpretations.

(a) again, as simply giving a new quotation as in the former clause, ii. 13; iv. 5; x. 30 &c. But it is fatal 22 to this view, which is given by Old Lat. (deinde iterum cum inducit) and Syr., that such a transposition of πάλιν is without parallel (yet see Wisdom xiv. i). The ease with which we can introduce the word 'again' parenthetically hides this difficulty.

(b) on the other hand, in contrast. In this way πάλιν would serve to emphasise the contrast suggested by δέ. Comp. Luke vi. 43; Matt. iv. 7; 1 John ii. 8.

Such a use is not without parallels, Philo, Leg. Alleg. iii. § 9 (i. 93 M.) ὁ δὲ πάλιν ἀποδιδράσκων θεόν...ἡ δὲ πάλιν θεὸν ἀποδοκιμάζουσα..., and the sense is perfectly consistent with the scope of the passage. It would leave the interpretation of 'the bringing in of the Son' undefined.

(2) But it appears to be more natural to connect ὅταν with είσαγάγῃ (Vulg. et cum iterum introducit) and so to refer the words definitely to the second coming of the Lord. This interpretation is well given by Gregory of Nyssa: ἡ τοῦ 'πάλιν' προσθήκη τὸ μὴ πρώτως γίνεσθαι τοῦτο διὰ τῆς κατὰ τὴνλέξιν ταύτην σημασίας ἐνδείκνυται. ἐπὶ γὰρ τῆς ἐπαναλήψεως τῶν ἅπαξ γεγονότων τῇ λέξει ταύτῃ κεχρήμεθα. οὐκοῦν τὴν ἐπὶ τῷ τέλει τῶν αἱώνων φοβερὰν αὐτοῦ ἐπιφάνειαν σημαίνει τῷ λόγῳ ὅτε οὐκέτι ἐντῇ τοῦ δούλου καθαρᾶται μορφῇ, ἀλλ' ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου τῆς βασιλείας μεγαλοπρεπῶς προκαθήμενος καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀγγέλων πάντων περὶ αὐτὸν προσκυνούμενος. (c. Eunom. iv., Migne, Patr. Gr. xlv. p. 634; comp. c. Eunom. ii., id. p. 504.)

The advantage of taking πάλιν as 'on the other hand' is that the words then bring into one category the many preparatory introductions of the 'firstborn' into the world together with the final one. But one main object of the Epistle is to meet a feeling of present disappointment. The first introduction of the Son into the world, described in v. 2, had not issued in an open triumph and satisfied men's desires, so that there was good reason why the writer should point forward specially to the Return in which Messiah's work was to be consummated. On the whole therefore the connexion of πάλιν with εἰσαγάγῃ seems to be the more likely construction. In any case the ὅταν εἰσαγάγῃ must refer to this.

ὅταν...εἰσαγάγῃ] The Latin rendering cum introducit (inducit), which has deeply coloured the Western interpretation of the phrase, is wholly untenable. In other places the construction is rightly rendered by the fut. exact., e.g. Matt. v. 11 cum male dixerint; xix. 28 cum sederit &c., and so in 1 Cor. xv. 26 many authorities read cum dixerit.

The construction of ὅταν with aor. subj. admits of two senses. It may describe a series of events reaching into an indefinite future, each occurrence being seen in its completeness (Matt. v. 11; x. 19; Mark iv. 15; Luke vi. 22; James i. 2); or it may describe the indefiniteness of a single event in the future seen also in its completeness (John xvi. 4; Acts xxiv. 22; 1 Cor. xv. 28). (The difference between the pres. subj. and the aor. subj. with ὅταν is well seen in John vii. 27, 31; xvi. 21.)

In other words ὅταν...εἰσαγάγῃ must look forward to an event (or events) in the future regarded as fulfilled at a time (or times) as yet undetermined. It cannot describe an event or a series of events, already completed in the past. We may, that is, when we render the phrase exactly 'whenever he shall have introduced,' contemplate each partial and successive introduction of the Son into the world leading up to and crowned by the one final revelation of His glory, or this final manifestation alone (comp. Col. iii. 4; 2 Thess. i. 10).

If, as seems most likely, the πάλιν is joined with εἰσαγάγῃ, then the second interpretation must be taken.

It follows that all interpretations which refer this second introduction 23 of the Son into the world to the Incarnation are untenable, as, for example, that of Primasius: Ipsam assumptionem carnis appellat alterum introitum; dum enim qui invisibilis erat humanis aspectibus (John i. 10) assumpta carne visibilem se probavit quasi iterum introductus est.

Nor indeed was the Incarnation in this connexion the first introduction of Christ into the world. We must look for that rather in the Resurrection when for a brief space He was revealed in the fulness of His Manhood triumphant over death and free from tho limitations of earth, having victoriously fulfilled the destiny of humanity. For the present He has been withdrawn from ἡ οἰκουμένη, the limited scene of man's present labours; but at the Return He will enter it once more with sovereign triumph (Acts i. 11).

τὸν πρωτότοκον] Vulg. primogenitum. The word is used absolutely of Christ here only (comp. Ps. lxxxix. (lxxxviii.) 28, lxx.). Its usage in other passages,

Rom. vii. 29 πρ. ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς,

comp. Col. i. 15 πρ. πάσης κτίσεως,

Apoc. i. 5 ὁ πρ. τῶν νεκρῶν,

Col. i. 18 πρ. ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν.

brings out the special force of the term here, as distinguished from υἱός. It represents the Son in His relation to the whole family, the whole order, which is united with Him. His triumph, His new birth (γεγέννηκα), is theirs also (comp. 1 Pet. i. 3). The thought lies deep in the foundations of social life. The privileges and responsibilities of the firstborn son were distinctly recognised in the Old Testament (Deut. xxi. 15 ff. [inheritance]; 2 Chron. xxi. 3 [kingdom]); as they form a most important element in the primitive conception of the family, the true unit of society (Maine, Ancient Law, 233 ff.). The eldest son, according to early ideas, was the representative of his generation, by whom the property and offices of the father, after his death, were administered for the good of the family.

The title 'firstborn' (בְּכוֹר) was applied by Rabbinic writers even to God (Schöttgen ad loc.) and to Messiah on the authority of Ps. lxxxix. 27 (Shemoth R. § 19, pp. 150 f. Wünsche).

In Philo the Logos is spoken of as προτόγονος or πρεσβύτατος υἱός, De confus. ling. § 14 (i. 414 M.) τοῦτον πρεσβύτατον υἱὸν ὁ τῶν ὄντων ἀνέτειλε (Zech. vi. 12) πατήρ, ὅv ἑτέρωθι πρωτόγενον ὠνίμασε..., id. § 28 (i. 427 M.) καὶ ἅν μηδέπω μέντοι τυγχάνῃ τις ἀξιόχρεως ὥν υἱὸς θροῦ προσαγορεύεσθαι, σπουδαζέτω κοσμεῖσθαι κατὰ τὸν πρωτόγονον αὐτοῦ λόγον, τὸν ἄγγελον πρεσβύτατον ὡς ἀρχάγγελον πολυώνυμον ὑπάρχοντα. Comp. de agricult. § 12 (i. 308 Μ.).

The wider sense of the term is suggested by its application to Israel: Ex. iv. 22; comp. Jer. xxxi. 9.

The patristic commentators rightly dwell on the difference between μονογενής, which describes the absolutely unique relation of the Son to the Father in His divine Nature, and πρωτότοκος, which describes the relation of the Risen Christ In His glorified humanity to man: e.g. Theodoret: οὕτω καὶ μονογενής ἐστιν ὡς θεὸς καὶ πρωτότοκος ὡς ἀνθρωπος ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς Compare Bp Lightfoot on Coloss. i. 15.

εἰς τὴν οἰκουμ] Vulg. in orbem terrae. Comp. c. ii. 5 note; Acts xvii. 31.

λέγει] he saith, not he will say. The words already written find their accomplishment at that supreme crisis. The different tenses used of the divine voice in this chapter are singularly instructive. The aor. in v. 5 (εἶπεν) marks a word spoken at a definite moment. The perf. in v. 13 (εἴρηκεν) marks a word which having been spoken of old is now finding fulfilment Here the pres. regards the future as already realised.

The contrast of λέγω and εἴρηκα is seen clearly in John xv. 15 (comp. xii. 50).

24

Καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ.καὶ πρὸς μὲν τοὺς ἀγγέλους λέγει

καὶ προσκυν.] And let...The conjunction suggests others who join in this adoration, or in some corresponding service of honour.

πάντες ἄγγ.] Biesenthal quotes a passage from the Jerus. Talmud (Avod. Zar. § 7) in which it is said that when Messiah comes the demons who had been worshipped among the Gentiles shall do him homage, and idolatry shall cease.

(2) 7—9. The superior dignity of the Son as anointed King ('heir of all things').

In the quotations already given the author of the Epistle has shewn that the language of the Old Testament pointed to a divine Son, a King of an everlasting Kingdom, a Conqueror, a Builder of an abiding Temple, such as was only figured by the earthly kings of the chosen people. One truly man was spoken of in terms applied to no angel. In Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of God, such language was fulfilled.

He now shews the abiding royal glory of the Son in contrast with the ministerial and transitory offices of angels. Angels fulfil their work through physical forces and 'natural' laws (v. 7): the Son exercises a moral and eternal sovereignty (v. 8); and in virtue of His own Character He receives the fulness of blessing (v. 9). So He becomes 'heir of all things'.

The lesson is given in two quotations from the Psalms. The first quotation from Ps. civ. (ciii.) 4 agrees verbally with the Alexandrine text of the lxx. and with the Hebrew, save that καί is inserted, an insertion which is not uncommon. The second quotation from Ps. xlv. (xliv.) 7, 8 differs from the lxx. by the insertion of καί, by the transposition of the article (ἡ ῥ. τ. εὐθ. ῥ. for ῥ. εὐ. ἡ ῥ.), and probably by the substitution of αὐτοῦ for σου after βασιλείας, which is also against the Hebrew. For ἄνομίαν some lxx. texts give ἀδικίαν.

The use of these two Psalms is of marked significance. Ps. civ. is a Psalm of Creation: Ps. xlv. is a Psalm of the Theocratic Kingdom, the Marriage Song of the King.

Neither Psalm is quoted again in the N. T. The second passage is quoted by Justin M. Dial. 56, 63, 86.

Both quotations are introduced in the same manner by a preposition marking a general reference (πρὸς μὲν...πρὸς δὲ...: contrast τίνι εἶπεν v. 5).

⁷And of the angels He saith,

Who maketh His angels winds,

And His ministers a flame of

fire;

⁸but of the Son He saith,

God is Thy throne for ever and ever,

And the sceptre of uprightness

is the sceptre of His kingdom.

[or Thy throne, Ο God, is for ever

and ever,

And the sceptre of uprightness

is the sceptre of Thy kingdom.]

⁹Thou lovedst righteousness and

hatedst iniquity;

Therefore God, Thy God,

anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy fellows.

(7). πρὸς μὲν...] *of...in reference to...Rom. x. 21; Luke xii. 41; xx. 19 (c. xi. 18). The contrast between 'the angels' and 'the Son' is accentuated (μέν--δέ iii. 5 f.). The rendering of the original text of Ps. civ. 4 has been disputed, but the construction adopted by the lxx., the Targums (comp. Shemoth R. § 25, p. 189 Wunsche) and A. V. seems to be certainly correct. The words admit equally to be taken 'making winds his messengers (angels)' ('making his messengers out of winds'), and 'making his messengers (angels) winds'; but the order of the words and, on a closer

25

Ὀ ποιῶν τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ πνεύματα, καῖ τοῦς λειτουργοὺς αὐτοῦ πυρὸς φλόγα ⁸πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν

7 ἀγγέλους + αὐτοῦ' D₂*. πνεῦμα D₂.

view, the tenor of the Psalm are in favour of the second translation. The thought is that where men at first see only material objects and forms of nature there God is present, fulfilling His will through His servants under the forms of elemental action. So Philo views the world as full of invisible life; de gig. § 2 (i. 263 M.). In any ease the lxx. rendering is adopted by the writer of the Epistle, and this is quite unambiguous. The Greek words describe the mutability, the materiality, and transitoriness of angelic service (comp. Weber, Altsynag. Theologie, § 34), which is placed in contrast with the personal and eternal sovereignty of the Son communicated to Him by the Father.

β iroM] The Greek Fathers lay stress on the word as marking the angels as created beings in contrast with the Son: Idov ή μβγίστη διαφορά, οτι ol μρ κτιστοί ό Oc Αχτιστο (Chrys.).

πνβύματα] winds, not spirits. The context imperatively requires this rendering. And the word πκυμα is appropriate here; for as distinguished from the commoner term oWpof it expresses a special exertion of the elemental force: Gen. viii. 1; Ex. xv. 10; 1 K. xviii. 45; xix. 11; 2 K. iii. 17; Job i. 19; Ps. xi. (x.) 6, &c,

Xrcrovpyovr] The word seems always to retain something of its original force as expressing a public, social service. Comp. Rom. xiii. 6; xv. 16; ch. viii. 2; and even Phil. ii. 25 (v. 30). See also 2 Cor. ix. 12.

The reference to the 'winds' and the 'flame of fire' could not fail to suggest to the Hebrew reader the accompaniments of the giving of the Law (c. xii. 18 ff.). That awful scene was a revelation of the ministry of angels.

The variableness of the angelic nature was dwelt upon by Jewish theologians. Angels were supposed to live only as they ministered. In a remarkable passage of Shemoth R. (§ 15, p. 107 Wünsche) the angels are represented as 'new every morning.' 'The angels are renewed every morning and after they have praised God they return to the stream of fire out of which they came (Lam. iii. 23).' The same idea is repeated in many places, as, for example, at length in Bereshith R. § 78, pp. 378 f. (Wünsche).

(8). wpht bi...] in reference to...The words in the Psalm are not addressed directly to the Son, though they point to Him.

ο Bpovot σου 6 6Vof...&& το ντο... 6Vot, ο 0for σον...] It is not necessary to discuss here in detail the construction of the original words of the Psalm. The lxx. admits of two renderings: ο 6Vor can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, Ο God,...therefore, Ο God, Thy God...) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God...), and in apposition to 6 6W σον in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God. . .). The only important variation noted in the other Greek versions is that of Aquila, who gave the vocative 6W in the first clause (Hieron. Ep. lxv. ad Princ. § 13) and, as it appears, also in the second (Field, Hexapla ad loc.). It is scarcely possible that Hebrew in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that 6 toot is a vocative in the lxx. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, *Thy throne is God), that is 'Thy kingdom is founded upon

26

Ὁ θρόνος ˹σου ὁ θρὸς εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα [τοῦ αἰῶνος],

καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος τῆς εὐθύτητος ῥάβδος τῆς βασιλείας αὐτοῦ˺.

ἡγάπησας δικαιοσύνην καὶ ἐμίσησας ἀνομίαν.

8 or σου, ὁ θεός, εἰς...βασιλείας σου.

8 om. τοῦ αἰῶνος B. καὶ ἡ ῥ. אABD₂* M₂ me: om. καὶ S syrr. ἡ ῥ. τῆς εὐθ...ῥ. אᵃABM₂: ῥ. εὐθ...ἡ. ῥ. S D₂. om. τῆς εὐθ. ῥ. א*. αὐτοῦ אB: σου AD₂ vg syrr. 9 ἀνομίαν BM₂ syr hl: ἀνομίας D₂*: ἀδικίαν אA.

God, the immovable Rock'; and to take ὁ θεός as in apposition in the second clause.

The phrase 'God is Thy throne' is not indeed found elsewhere, but it is in no way more strange than Ps. lxxi. 3 [Lord] be Thou to me a rock of habitation...Thou art my rock and my fortress. Is. xxvi. 4 (R.V.) In the Lord Jehovah is an everlasting rock. Ps. xc. 1 Lord, Thou hast been our dwelling-place. Ps. xci. 1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the Most High... v. 2 I will say of the Lord. He is my refuge and my fortress, v. 9; Deut. xxxiii. 27 The eternal God is thy dwelling-place. Comp. Is. xxii. 23.

For the general thought compare Zech. xii. 8. This interpretation is required if we adopt the reading αὐτοῦ for σου.

It is commonly supposed that the force of the quotation lies in the divine title (ὁ θεός) which, as it is held, is applied to the Son. It seems however from the whole form of the argument to lie rather in the description which is given of the Son's office and endowment. The angels are subject to constant change, He has a dominion for ever and ever: they work through material powers, He—the Incarnate Son—fulfils a moral sovereignty and is crowned with unique joy. Nor could the reader forget the later teaching of the Psalm on the Royal Bride and the Royal Race. In whatever way then ὁ θεός be taken, the quotation establishes the conclusion which the writer wishes to draw as to the essential difference of the Son and the angels. Indeed it might appear to many that the direct application of the divine Name to the Son would obscure the thought.

εἰς τὸν αἰ. τοῦ αἰ.] The phrase ὁ αἰὼν τοῦ αἰῶνος is unique in the N.T. It is not unfrequent in the lxx. version of the Psalms together with ὁ αἰῶνα αἰῶνος and εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος for עולם ועד ,לעד ,לעולם ועד.

The phrase ὁ αἰὼν τῶν αἰώνων occurs in Eph. iii. 21, αἰῶνες αἰώνων in Apoc. xiv. 11, and οἱ αἰῶνες τῶν αἰώνων (εἰς τοὺς αἰ. τῶν αἰ.) not unfrequently (c. xiii. 21).

καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος εὐθύτητος] The καί, which is not found in the lxx. or the Hebr., is probably added by the apostle to mark the two thoughts of the divine eternity of Messiah's kingdom and of the essential uprightness with which it is administered.

The word εὐθύτης is found here only in the N.T. It occurs not very unfrequently in the lxx. for derivatives of ישר, and so Wisd. ix. 3 &c. It is not quoted from Classical writers in a moral sense.

For ῥάβδος compare Apoc. ii. 27, xii. 5, xix. 15. It is used in the lxx. as a rendering of שרבים ,שבם ,מטה. In classical Greek it is used rarely and only poetically (Pind. Ol. ix. 51) for the rod of authority. Virga 'justos regit, impios percutit'; sed haec virga fortitudo est invicta, aequitas rectissima, inflexibilis disciplina (Atto Verc.).

(9). ἠγάπησας...] Thou lovedst...The aorist of the lxx. gives a distinct application to the present of the Hebr. The Son in His Work on earth fulfilled the ideal of righteousness;

27

διὰ τοῦτο ἔχρισέν σε ὁ θεὸς, ὁ θεός σου, ἔλαιον ἀγαλλιάσεως παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους σου.

ἔλεον B*: ἔλεος D₂*.

and the writer of the Epistle looks back upon that completed work now seen in its glorious issue.

διὰ τοῦτο...] For this cause...Therefore...The words express the ground ('because thou lovedst') and not the end ('that thou mightest love'). Comp. ii. 1; ix. 15 (not elsewhere in ep.). For the thought see c. ii. 9; Phil. ii. 9 (διό); John x. 17.

ἔχρισεν] Comp. Luke iv. 18 (Is. lxi. 1); Acts iv. 27; x. 38. This unction has been referred (1) to the communication of royal dignity: 1 Sam. x. 1: xvi. 12 f.; and (2) to the crowning of tho sovereign with joy, as at the royal banquet: Is. lxi. 3; comp. Acts ii. 36. The second interpretation is to be preferred. The thought is of the consummation of the royal glory of the Ascended Son of man rather than of the beginning of it. Primasius gives a striking turn to the words: Oleo autem exsultationis sou laetitiae dicit illum unctum quia Christus nunquam peccavit, nunquam tristitiam habuit ex recordatione peccati. Quid est enim olco laetitiae ungi nisi maculam non habere peccati?

ὁ θεός, ὁ θεός σου] There can be no reason for taking the first ὁ θεός as a vocative, contrary to the certain meaning of the original, except that it may correspond with an interpretation of the first clause which has been set aside. The repetition of the divine Name has singular force: 'God, who has made Himself known as thy God by the fulness of blessings which He has given.'

παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους] above thy fellows, Vulg. pros participibus tuis, above all who share the privilege of ministering to the fulfilment of God's will by His appointment. There is no limitation to any sphere of being or class of ministers; but of men it is specially declared that Christ has made believers 'a kingdom and priests' (Apoc. i. 6; comp. Matt. xxv. 34). They too have received 'an unction' (1 John ii. 20). Comp. 2 Cor. i. 21; Rom. viii. 17; 2 Tim. ii. 12.

ἔλ. ἀγαλλ.] Comp. xii. 2 χαρά. The same original phrase (שמן ששון) occurs again in Is. lxi. 3 (ἄλειμμα εὐφροσύνης) in opposition to 'mourning' (אבל). It refers not to the solemn anointing to royal dignity but to the festive anointing on occasions of rejoicing.

(3) 10—12. The superior dignity of the Son as Creator in contrast with creation ('through whom He made the world').

A new quotation adds a fresh thought. The exalted king, who is truly man, is also above all finite beings.

The words are taken from Ps. cii. (ci.) 26, 27, according to the lxx. text with some variations. The σύ is brought forward for emphasis, and ὡς ἱμάτιον is repeated by the best authorities; the Kύριε is added to the original text by the lxx. from the earlier part of the Psalm; and the present text of the lxx. followed by the Epistle has ἑλίξεις αὐτούς when ἀλλάξεις αὐτούς, a variant found in some copies, would have been the natural rendering in correspondence with ἀλλαγήσονται which follows. The introduction of Kύριε is of importance for the application made of the words. It is of the greater significance be cause in v. 24 אל is introduced (though the lxx. renders differently), while in every other case the sacred Name in the Psalm is (יהוה (יה. The insertion of Kύριε therefore emphasises the thought that the majestic picture of divine unchangeableness belongs to God as He has entered into Covenant with man.

28

¹⁰καί

Σὺ καρ' ἀρχάς, κὺριε, τὴν γῆν ἐθεμελίωσας,

καὶ ἔργα τῶν χειρῶν σού εἰσιν οἱ οὐρανοί.

¹¹αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις.

καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται,

The Psalm itself is the appeal of an exile to the Lord, in which out of the depth of distress he confidently looks for the personal intervention of Jehovah for the restoration of Zion. The application to the Incarnate Son of words addressed to Jehovah (see v. 6) rests on the essential conception of the relation of Jehovah to His people. The Covenant leads up to the Incarnation. And historically it was through the identification of the coming of Christ with the coming of 'the Lord' that the Apostles were led to the perception of His true Divinity. Compare Acts ii. 16 ff., 21, 36; iv. 10, 12; ix. 20; c. iii. 7, Addit. Note.

It is not however to be supposed that Jehovah was personally identified with Christ. Rather the conception of the God of Israel was enlarged; and the revelation of God as Jehovah, the God of the Covenant, the God Who enters into fellowship with man, was found to receive its consummation in the mission of the Son.

¹⁰And [again of the Son He saith]

Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth,

And the heavens are works of Thy hands,

¹¹They shall perish, but Thou continuest;

And they all shall wax old as doth a garment;

¹²And as a mantle shall Thou roll them up,

As a garment, and they shall be changed:

But Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail.

(10). καί...] The connexion of this passage with the former is very close although it introduces a new idea. Comp. Acts i. 20. The conjunction carries with it the λέγει πρὸς τὸν υἱόν of ωω. 8, 9. God through His Spirit so speaks in the Psalmist that words not directly addressed to Christ find their fulfilment in Him.

Σὺ...Κύριε...] It has been already noticed that the Σύ is brought forward by the writer of the Epistle, and the Κύριε added to the original text in the lxx. The addition corresponds with the omission of the divine Name (אל) in v. 24 owing to a false rendering, but it is significant as definitely connecting the thought of divine immutability with the thought of the divine revelation consummated in the Incarnation.

κατ' ἀρχάς] Vulg. in principio, O. L. initiis. The phrase is a wrong rendering of לפנים (ἔνορισυεβ Jud. i. 10, 11, 23, &c.). It occurs again Ps. cxix. (cxviii.) 152 as the rendering of Hebrew; and is found in Philo and classical writers.

(11). αὐτοί] The heavens are taken as representing the whole visible universe.

ἀπολοῦνται] The idea, as it is afterwards developed (xii. 26 ff.), is of change, transfiguration, and not of annihilation: Is. li. 6, 16; lxv. 17; lxvi. 22; 2 Pet. iii. 13; Apoc. xx. 11. Thus Theophylact: μεῖζόν τι τῆς δημιουργίας ᾐνίξατο, τὴν μετασχῃμάτισιν τοῦ κόσμου, ἀλλαγήσονται γὰρ πάντα ἀπὸ τῆς φθαρὰς εἰς ἀφθαρσίαν.

διαμένεις] Latt. permanebis (διαμενεῖς). The present is more expressive. The compound marks continuance throughout some period or crisis suggested by the context: Luke i.

29

¹²καὶ ὡσεὶ περιβόλαιον ἐλίξεις αὐτοὺς,

ὡς ἱμάτιον καὶ ἀλλαγήσονται.

σὺ δὶ ὁ αὐτὸς εἶ, καὶ τὰ ἔτη σου οὐκ ἐκλείψουσιν.

¹³πρὸς τίνα δὲ τῶν ἀγγέλων εἰρηκέν ποτε

κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου

ἕως ἄν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου;

12 ὡς D₂*. ἐλίξεις ABM₂ (latt) syrr me: ἀλλάξεις א* D₂ (vg). αὐ. ὡς ἱμάτιον אABD₂: om. ὡς ἱμ. S vg syrr me.

22; xxii. 28; 2 Pet. iii. 4; Gal. ii. 5.

πάντες] The thought appears to be of sphere succeeding sphere in increasing purity and therefore in increasing permanence: but all alike are subject to time and to decay.

παλαιωθήσονται] c. viii. 135 Luke xii. 33; Is. l. 9; li. 6; Ecclus. xiv. 17

(12). περιβόλαιον] a mantle. The word suggests a costly robe: Jud. viii. 26 (A) τῶν περιβολαίων τῶν πορφθρῶν τῶν ἐπὶ τοῖς βασιλεῦσι Μαδιάμ. Ezech. xxvii. 7. Comp. 1 Cor. xi. 15.

ἐλίξεις] The substitution of this word for the natural rendering ἀλλάξεις may have been due to a reference to Is. xxxiv. 4 ἐλεγήσεται ὁ οὐρανὸς ὡς βιβλίον. In the original the verb is repeated (תחליפם ויחליפו).

ὁ αὐτός] The original is simply 'Thou art He.' Comp. Is. xli. 4; xliii. 10; xlvi. 4; xlviii. 12; Deut. xxxii. 39 (ἐγώ εἶμι).

See ch. xiii. 8 note.

(4) 13, 14. The superior dignity of the Son as seated in Royal Majesty assured of triumph ('having made purification...He sat down...').

The comparison of the Son with angels is completed by the development of the idea contained in the fact of the Session of the Son at the right hand of the Father. This idea is conveyed by the opening words of Ps. cx. and is spread throughout the New Testament: Matt. xxii. 23 ff. and parallels; Acts ii. 34 f. See also c. x. 13; 1 Cor. xv. 25; 1 Pet. iii. 22. The Psalm (cx.) is quoted again cc. v. 6; vii. 17, 21.

¹³But of which οf the angels hath

He said at any time

Sit on My right hand,

Until I make Thine enemies the footstool of Thy feet?

¹⁴Are they not all ministering

spirits sent forth unto service for

the sake of them that shall inherit

salvation?

(13). πρὸς τίνα δέ...] But of which... The writer appears to turn aside from the contemplation of the unchangeableness of God seen in the Person of Christ to the thought of the conflict between good and evil wrought out in time. Here also the supreme eminence of the Son is conspicuous. The language used of Him has been used of no angel. He serenely waits for a sure and absolute victory while they are busied with ministerial offices. For πρός see v. 7 note. The contrast between τίνι εἶπέν ποτε (v. 5) and πρὸς τίνα εἴρηκέν ποτε is full of meaning.

εἴρηκεν] See c iv. 3; x. 9 notes.

κάθου...] The verb marks the continuance of the Session as distinguished from the assumption of the place (v. 3 ἐκάθισεν). Comp. Luke xxii. 69. For the image see Zech. vi. 13; Schöttgen on Matt xxii. 44

ἐκ δεξιῶν] This phrase, which is with one exception (Mk. xvi. 5 ἐν τοῖς δεξ.) the uniform phrase in the Synoptists, is used twice only in this Epistle. Elsewhere v. 3; viii. 1 (note);

30

¹⁴οὐχἲ πάντες εἰσὶν λειτουργικὰ πνεύματα εἰς διακονίαν ἀποστελλόμενα διὰ τοὺς μέλλοντας κληρονομεῖν σωτηρίαν;

14 διακονίας Β.

x. 12; xii. 2 ἐν δεξιᾷ is written by the author himself.

ἔως ἄν θῶ] Compare 1 Cor. xv. 28. Our powers are inadequate to realise that end.

ὑποπόδιον τῶν π.] Compare Josh. x. 24 f.

(14). οὐχί] c. iii. 17. For the interrogative form see v. 5 note.

πάντες] Whatever differences of rank and dignity there may be among them, all are alike in this.

λειτουργικὰ πν.] Vulg. administratorii spiritus, מלאכי חשרת (Ber. R. 8). The word occurs here only in N.T. Comp. Philo, de carit. § 3 (ii. 387 M.) ἄγγελος λειτουργοί. de gig. § 3 (i. 264 M.).

εἰς διακ. ἀποστ.] sent forth for ministry as each occasion arises (Old Lat. qui mittuntur. Vulg. missi). Contrast 1 Pet. i. 12 (ἀποσταλέντι). The difference between the general office of the angels as spirits charged with a social ministry (v. 7 λειτουργούς), and the particular services (c. vi. 10 διακονοῦντες) in which it is fulfilled, is clearly marked.

Herveius (and so Primasius) shews how the angels, even on their missions, remain in the presence of God:

Mittuntur igitur et assistunt, quia etsi circumscriptus sit angelicus spiritus, summus tamen spiritus ipso qui Deus est circumscriptus non est. Angeli itaque et missi ante ipsum sunt quia quolibet missi veniant intra ipsum currunt.

διὰ τοὺς μ. κλ. σ.] The service is rendered to God for the sake of believers. The use of διά (accus.) instead of ὑπέρ indicates a wider relation. Compare c. vi. 7 and contrast vi. 20. The difference of idea is seen in Col. iv. 3 compared with Eph. vi. 20.

κληρον. σωτηρ.] Compare c. vi. 12 (Additional Note); xii. 17; (1 Pet. iii. 9). See also Matt. xix. 29 (eternal life); Luke x. 25; xviii. 18; Matt. xxv. 34; 1 Cor. vi. 9 f.; Gal. v. 21 (the kingdom); 1 Cor. xv. 50 (incorruption).

'Salvation,' like 'eternal life,' is at once present and future: c. v. 9; ix. 28.

σωτηρίαν] Salvation is contemplated in its essential character, and not in the concrete form of the expected and promised Salvation (ή σωτηρία Acts iv. 12; John iv. 22).

Primasius refers the words to the belief ('as the doctors say') that to each of the faithful a guardian angel is assigned 'from his birth or rather from his baptism.'

31

*Additional Note on* i. 3. *The teaching upon Sin in the Epistle*.

There is no direct statement in the Epistle as to the origin of sin or the universal sinfulness of men. It is however implied that all men are sinners. This thought lies in the description of the characteristics of the High-priest who is fitted to satisfy our needs (ἡμῖν ἔπρεπεν). He is 'separated from sinners' (vii. 26 κεχωρισμένος τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν), where the definite phrase οἱ ἁμαρτωλοί appears to describe a body commensurate with humanity. The same idea is expressed still more forcibly in iv. 15, if the interpretation given in the note upon the passage is correct. For while the fact of sin is for us a fruitful source of temptation it is laid down that, when Christ was in all other points tempted as we are, this one feature must necessarily be excepted (πεπειρασμένον κατὰ πάντα καθ' ὁμοιότητα χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας). The common interpretation also suggests, though less distinctly, the uniqueness of Christ's sinlessness.

Sin then is treated as universal, and men are held justly responsible for its consequences. They are conscious of sins (x. 2 συνείδησεν ἔχειν ἁμααρτιῶν), as hindering them from attaining their true destiny. In themselves they are, so to speak, 'clothed in weakness' (v. 2 περίκειτας ἀσθένειαν: comp. vii. 28 ἔχοντας ἀσθένειαν) which is shewn in many forms (iv. 15 ταῖς ἀσθενείαις). They 'go astray and are ignorant' (v. 2). Their works as they stand alone are 'dead works' (vi. 1; ix. 14 νεκρὰ ἔpya).

Meanwhile 'through fear of death' — which is assumed to be the end of sin — 'they are all their lifetime subject to bondage' (ii. 15). And probably the reference to 'the devil,' 'who hath the power of death' (ii. 14 τὸν τὸ κράτος ἔχοντα τοῦ θανάτου), points to the primal temptation and fall of man.

The writer of the Epistle, as the other apostolic writers, distinguishes clearly between 'sin,' the principle, and 'sins,' the specific acts in which the principle is embodied and manifested. The passages which deal with these two conceptions must be noticed separately (comp ix. 26 note).

I. Sin (ἡ ἁμαρτία, ἁμαρτία).

The ritual of the O.T. recognised 'sin' no less than 'sins.' There were sacrifices 'for (in the matter of) sin' (x. 6. 8; xiii. 11 περὶ ἁμαρτίας). The burden of 'sins and iniquities' made such a general sacrifice necessary. But 'where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin' (x. 18 οὐκἐτι προσφορὰ περὶ ἁμαρτίας). The power of sin lies in its transitory pleasures. Sin offers enjoyment though it is but 'for a season' (xi. 25 πρόσκαιρον ἔχειν ἁμαρτίας ἀπόλαυσιν). Even Christians are exposed to the peril of fatal insensibility from its insidious assaults (iii. 13 ἵνα μὴ σκληρυνθῇ τις ἐξ ὑμῶν ἀπάτῃ τῆς ἁμαρτίας). As in old time, unbelief still leads to disobedience to God, and disobedience is sin (iii. 15—19). So it is that under different figures sin is an encumbrance which tends to check the freedom of our movements, and an adversary whom we find in our path. We must 'lay it aside' that we may run our race (xii. 1 ἀποθέμενοι...τὴν εὐπερίστατον ἁμαρτίαν); and we must 'strive against it' even unto blood (xii. 4 πρὸς τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἀνταγωνιζόμενοι). Such an effort, such a conflict, is possible, for 32 Christ 'hath been manifested to disannul sin through the sacrifice of Himself' (ix. 26 εἰς ἀθέτησιν άμαρτίας). He has shewn it to us prostrate and powerless through His work, and we can use the fruits of His victory.

(2). Sins (οἱ ἁμαρτίας, ἁμαρτίας).

'Sin' issues in a variety of 'sins.' The High-priesthood was instituted to deal with these, 'to offer gifts and sacrifices for (in behalf of) sins' (v. 1 ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν: comp. vii. 27), or, as it is expressed more generally, 'to offer for (in the matter of) sins' (v. 3 περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν). But the conscience of man witnessed (x. 2) that such sacrifices as the Levitical Law prescribed were powerless to 'take away' sins, when the sinner from time to time acknowledged his guilt (x. 4 ἀφαιρεῖν ἁμαρτίας), or once for all to strip from him the bands which they had formed (x. 11 περιελεῖν ἁμαρτίας). They served indeed only to call to mind that which they could not remove (x. 3 άνάμνησις αμαρτιών). But a divine promise held out the hope of a new Covenant when sins should be no more remembered (viii. 12; x. 17 τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν οὐ μὴ μνησθῶ ἔτι); and this hope was fulfilled through the work of Christ. He 'offered one sacrifice for (in behalf of) sins for ever' (x. 12 μίαν ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν προσενέγκας θυσίαν εἰς τὸ διηωεκἐς). By this He 'Himself made purification of sins' (i. 3 καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος), and in virtue of this He is able, having entered into the heavenly sanctuary, 'to make propitiation for the sins of the people' (ii. 17 ἱλάσκεσθαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας τοῦ λαοῦ). But for those who 'sin wilfully after that they have received the knowledge (τὴν ἐπίγνωσιν) of the truth' 'there is no longer left a sacrifice for (in the matter of) sins' (x. 26 οὐκέτι περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἀπολείπεραι θυσία); and there are cases when it is impossible for the Christian teacher 'to renew to repentance' (vi. 6) such as have fallen away.

Thus Christ's work is now available for believers to overcome sin and do away sins; but one crowning scene still remains to be realised. 'Christ having been once offered (προσενεχθείς)'-- the passive form seems to express His willing submission to a divine law — 'to bear (άνενεγκεῖν) the sins of many' — to carry them up to the altar of the Cross (1 Pet ii. 24)— 'shall appear a second time without sin (χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας)'— untouched and untroubled by the sin which He has overcome — 'to them that wait for Him unto salvation' (ix. 28).

It will be observed that in all the passages quoted the prepositions περί and ὑπὲρ retain their distinctive force; περί marks the object of the action, 'in the matter of,' while ὑπὲρ adds the thought of the beneficial effect designed in the action, 'in behalf of.' Compare for the use of περί Rom. viii. 3 (περί ἁμαρτίας); 1 Pet. iii. l8 (π. ἁμαρτιῶν); 1 John ii. 2; iv. 10 (περί των άμήμων); and in a different connexion John viii. 46; xvi. 8 f.; xv. 22; and for the use of ὑπὲρ 1 Cor. xv. 3 (ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμ. ἡμῶν); Gal. i. 4 (all. περί).

The vocabulary connected with sin is not large. Παράστωμα and ἁμάρτημα are not found (yet see παραπεσεῖν vi. 6). Ἀνομία (i. 9; x. 17) and ἀδικία (viii. 12) occur only in quotations from the lxx. Παράβασις occurs ii. 2; ix. 15; and παρακοή ii. 2. The word ἀγνόημα (ix. 7; comp. v. 2) is unique in the N.T.

33

Additional Note on i. 4. The Divine Names in the Epistle.

The Names by which the Lord is spoken of in the Epistle throw light upon its characteristic teaching. Speaking generally we may say that Jesus directs our thoughts to His human Nature, Christ to His Work as the Fulfiller of the old Dispensation, Son to His divine Nature, Lord itself to His sovereignty over the Church.

(1). Of these Names that which is distinctive of the Epistle is the human Name, Jesus. This occurs nine times, and in every case it furnishes the key to the argument of the passage where it is found:

ii. 9 τὸν βραχύ τε παρ' ἀγγέλους ἠλαττωμένον βλέπομεν Ἰησοῦν... Αlthough humanity has not yet attained its end we see that the Son of Man — true man — has fulfilled through suffering the destiny of the race.

iii. 1 κατανοήσατε top απόστολον καὶ ἀρχιερέα τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν (text. rec. Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν). In His manhood, our Lawgiver and Priest is seen to rise immeasurably above Moses and Aaron, who occupied severally the same offices under the Old Covenant.

vi. 20 ὅπου πρόδρομος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν εἰσῆλθεν Ἰησοῦς ...Our High-priest, even when He enters into the immediate presence of God, to take His seat at God's right hand, preserves no less a true humanity than the Jewish High-priest who entered into the typical sanctuary.

vii. 22 κρείττονος διαθήκης γέγονεν ἕγγους Ἰησοῦς. The eternal priesthood, answering to the better Covenant, is still the priesthood of One who is true.

X. 19 ἔχοντες παρρησίαν εἰς τὴν εἶσοδον τῶν ἁγίων ἐν τῷ αἶματι Ἰησοῦ. The virtue of the offered life of Him Who shares our nature is that wherein we can draw near to God. Contrast ix. 14.

xii. 2 ἀφορῶντες εἶς τὸν τῆς πίστεως άρχηγὸν καὶ τελειωτὴν Ἰησοῦν. Our strength in Christian effort is to fix our eyes upon Him Who in His Manhood won for us the perfect victory of faith.

xii. 24 (προσεληλύθατε) διαθήκης νέας μεσίτῃ Ἰησοῦ. Comp. vii. 22.

xiii. 12 Ἰησοῦς...ἔξω τῆς πύλης ἔπαθεν.

xiiί. 20 ό ἀναγαγὼν ἐκ νεκρῶν...ἐν αἴματι διαθήκης αἶωνίοθ τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν. This single reference in the Epistle to the Resurrection, combined with the declaration of the twofold office of Christ as Shepherd and Lord, is pointed by the use of His human Name.

It will be noticed that in every case but xiii. 12, which is a simple historic statement, the name 'Jesus' occupies an emphatic position at the end of the clause.

(2). The Name of Christ (the Christ) occurs just as many times as Jesus. It is desirable to notice separately the two forms in which it is used. The definite form 'the Christ' (ὁ χριστός) appears always to retain more or less distinctly the idea of the office as the crown of the old Covenant: the anarthrous form 'Christ' (Χριστός) is rather a proper name.

34

iii. 14 μέτοχοι τοῦ χριστοῦ γεγόναμεν...we have become partakers in Him Who has fulfilled the hope of the fathers.

v. 5 ὁ χριστὸς οὐχ ἑαυτὸν ἐδόξασεν γενηθῆναι ἀρχιερέα though the High-priesthood might have seemed to be necessarily included in the office to which He was sent.

vi. 1 τὸν τῆς ἀρχἦς τοῦ χριστοῦ λόγον, the elementary exposition of the Gospel as the true accomplishment of all that was promised to Israel.

ix. 14 τὸ αἶμα τοῦ χριστοῦ, the blood of Him to Whom every sacrificial ordinance of the Levitical ritual pointed. Contrast x. 19.

ix. 28 ὁ χριστὸς ἅπαξ προσενεχθείς. . .ὀφθήσεται. That which seemed to be disappointment in the Death of Him to Whom the people had looked shall hereafter be turned to glory.

xi. 26 τὸν ὀνειδισμὸω τοῦ χριστοῦ. Each hero of faith realised a little of that which is the part of the Messenger of God.

The anarthrous form is less frequent:

iii. 6 (Μωυσῆς μέν)... Χριστὸς δὲ ὡς υἱός...

ix. 11 Χρίστὸς δὲ παραγενόμενος ἀρχιερεύς...

ix. 24 οὐ γὰρ εἶς χειροποίητα εἰσῆλθεν ἅγια Χριστός (text. rec. ὁ χριστός). The force of this Name will be felt if the student substitutes for it the human Name. Throughout c. ix. the thought is of the typical teaching of the Law.

(3). The title Son is with one exception (i. 8) always anarthrous. The writer, that is, fixes the attention of his readers upon the nature implied by it:

i. 2 ἐλάλησεν ἐv υἱῷ as contrasted with ἐν τοῖς προφήταις.

i. 5 υἱός μου εἶ σύ (lxx.). So v. 5.

iii. 6 Χριστὸς δὲ ὡς υἱός as contrasted with Μωυσῆς...ὡς θεράπων.

v. 8 καἰπερ ὧv θἱός, and therefore having personally right of access to the Father.

vii. 28 υἱόν, εἶς τὸν αἰῶνα τετελειωμένον as contrasted with ὰνθρώπους... ϊχοντας άσθίνειαν.

(4). The title Lord is comparatively rare.

ii. 3 (σωτηρία) ἀρχὴν λαβοῦσα λαλεῖσθαι διὰ τοῦ κυρίου.

νii. 14 ἐξ Ἰούδα ἀνατέταλκεν ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν. The title here is perhaps suggested by the royal tribe.

Compare also i. 10; xii. 14; xiii. 20.

(5). Of compound Names that which is elsewhere most common (more than thirty times in the Epistle to the Romans, eleven times in 1 Peter), Jesus Christ, is comparatively very rare:

x. 10 διὰ τῆς προσφορᾱς τοῦ σώματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.

xiii. 8 Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ἐχθὲς καὶ σήμερον ὁ αὐτός...

xiii. 21 διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χρίστοῦ, ὧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων.

The force of the full Name, which is an implicit Creed, will be obvious in each place.

The characteristic Pauline Name Christ Jesus does not occur in the Epistle (not iii. 1).

(6). The title the Son of God speaks for itself in the places where it is used:

vi. 6 ἀνασταυροῦντας ἑαυτοῖς τὸν υἱὸv τοῦ θεοῦ.

35

vii. 3 ἀφωμοιωμίνος τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ, not υἱῷ 0εoῦ. The Incarnate Son was the archetype of Melchizedek.

x. 29 πόσῳ xείρoνος ἀξιωθήσεται τιμωρίας ὁ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καταπατἠσας.

(7). The complete affirmation of the divine and human natures of our High-priest is found in the phrase which occurs once, Jesus, the Son of God:

iv. 14 ἐχοντες ἀρχιερία...Ἰησοῦν τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ. Compare also the descriptive titles: ii. 10; iii. 1; xii. 2; xiii. 20.

It may be noticed that the title σωτήρ does not occur in the Epistle, though σωτηρία is not uncommon. The idea which it expresses finds a special embodiment in Christ's priestly office.

Sometimes the Lord, though unnamed, is assumed as the subject of the teaching of the prophets: ii. 14; x. 5 ff.; 37.

36
« Prev I Next »





Advertisements



| Define | Popups: Login | Register | Prev Next | Help |