Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Hebrews 1:5 - 1:14
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Scripture proof of the elevation of Jesus Christ as Son of God, and being above the Angels
Heb_1:5-14.
[Heb_1:6.—And when he shall have again introduced, etc. Both the position of ðÜëéí , and the connection of the thought, point decidedly to this construction. The reference is (de W., Lün., Ebr., Del., Alf., Moll.) to the re-introduction of Christ into the inhabited world ( ἡ ïἰêïõìÝíç ) at His second coming. It may be rendered again, a second time, or back; both ideas being in fact included.
Heb_1:7.—In respect indeed to=while in respect to. The force of the part, ìÝí , making Heb_1:7 preparatory to Heb_1:8 is lost in Eng. ver., as in many other passages in the Epistle. In Heb_1:8 ðñüò with ôὸí õἱüí should be rendered as in Heb_1:7. In respect to the Son. So also I think it should be (with Moll) at Heb_1:13, and so I think (as against Moll, and nearly all the Intpp.) at Heb_11:13, ðñὸò ὃí ἐëáëÞèç — ôíåýìáôá clearly here winds, not spirits, as demanded by the connection.
Heb_1:9.—[“O God, thy God,” ὁ èåüò , ὁ èåüò óïí . Even Del. is doubtful whether in Heb_1:9 the first ὁ èåüò should be rendered, as in Heb_1:8, as Voc. ‘O God’, or, as in apposition with the following: ‘God, thy God.’ With Lün., Moll, etc., I think we are clearly to prefer the former construction.
Heb_1:14.— Åἱò äéáêïíßáí for service or ministration, not to men, but to God. Their ministration or service is to God; but in His service they are sent forth on account of, for the sake of ( äéÜ ) men.—K.]
My Son—shall be to me a Son.—Through the two passages Psalms 2. and 2 Samuel 7. cited by him with like application, the author goes back to the germ of the Messianic prophecy in the narrower and stricter sense. When David designed the building of a temple on Mount Zion in fulfilment of Exo_15:17; Deu_12:5, he received, through the prophet Nathan, the divine declaration that not he, but his son, after him, was to build a temple to Jehovah; nay, that for this seed God would, on His part, build a house, and establish His throne forever; that Jehovah would be to him a father, and he should be to Him a son, 2Sa_7:14. In a prayer of David accompanying this prophetic assurance, David expresses the conviction that the complete fulfilment of this prophecy is reserved to the remote future. The following words, however (2Sa_7:19), mean not: “and this in a man who shall be the Lord Jehovah Himself” (Ebr. and the older interpreters), but: “And this (hast Thou, spoken) after the manner of man (or as man speaks with man), Thou who art God the Lord.” In this condescension of God so fully does David recognize a prerogative bestowed upon him that in the parallel passage (1Ch_17:17) he says: “Thou hast regarded me as a man of very high degree.” Thus a filial relation is described as that which the posterity of David will sustain to God, and this posterity conceived not merely in its aggregate or collective character, but individually. We hence refer the language immediately to Solomon who, with express reference to this prophecy, undertakes the building of the temple (1Ki_8:17 ff.), and regards himself as this promised Son (1Ki_5:5; 2Ch_6:9), as does also David, 1Ch_22:9 ff; 1Ch_29:19. But through this seed the royal dominion is to be established forever to the house of David, 2Sa_7:16. And Solomon immediately declares (1Ki_8:26-27) that this temple reared by him is not a house in which God may properly dwell, Men must of necessity, therefore, while David slept with his fathers, direct their eye farther into the future; as in of fact David himself, 1Ch_17:17, beholds the promised seed in a long and blessed succession, and there is here no mention, as 2Sa_7:14 of transgressions, which God will visit with a paternal chastisement. For the question is not of the form, as such, of the kingdom, however glorious it might be, in fulfilment of the prediction Num_24:17 : “A star shall arise out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall arise out of Israel, and will dash in pieces the corners of Moab, and will destroy all the children of pride;” nor is mere descent from David sufficient to ensure the receiving of the everlasting kingdom, Psa_61:7 ff., which God has confirmed to David with an oath, Ps. 18:51; Psa_89:50 ff.; Psa_132:11 ff. We have here rather to do with a theocratic kingdom under a theocratic ruler, who goes forth to battle amidst the offerings and prayers of his people (Psalms 20.), and who, with God as auxiliary, will annihilate all his enemies, but will righteously administer the princely gifts and prerogatives with which he has been entrusted, Psalms 21. Of this ruler David stands as a type, and he himself, at the close of his life, makes the declaration, 2Sa_23:4; “A righteous ruler in the fear of God is as the light of the sun which arises in a morning without clouds, like the tender grass which after the rain springs forth from the earth.” For this reason God builds again the fallen tabernacle of David as in the ancient times, Amo_9:1, after Israel has been sifted out as one sifts out grain, Heb_1:9. And the ruler through whom the dominion returns back to the “tower of the flock” of David, and to the “strong hold” of Zion, Mic_4:8, will not merely have his historical descent from the house of David, Mic_5:1, but as “the branch,” the “shoot,” “the stem from the root of Jesse,” Isa_11:1; Isa_11:10, the righteous branch (Isa_4:2; Jer_23:5; Jer_33:15; Zec_3:8; Zec_6:12), whom God will raise up to David (Jer_30:9; Eze_34:23; Eze_37:24), is called even by the name of David, Jer_30:9; Eze_37:24-25; comp. Hos_3:5; and “the sure mercies of David,” Isa_55:3, are a designation of the Messianic salvation. As now this Majestic one, who issues from the nation itself, as a ruler from its midst, is to draw near unto Jehovah Himself, Jer_30:21, nay, is to bear the name “Jehovah our Righteousness” (Jer_23:6; Jer_33:16), it is clear that in the view of prophecy the Messianic salvation is linked to a son of David who is an “Anointed One” not merely in the sense in which even foreign kings as Cyrus, Isa_45:1, and Hazael, 1Ki_19:15, receive this name as being instruments of Jehovah, and in which the theocratic kings in general bear it, 1Sa_2:10; Psa_20:7; Psa_132:10, etc., but in a special sense which includes, besides the kingly, also the prophetic, Isa_61:1, and the priestly anointing, so that Zechariah (Heb_6:12-13) may say: “Behold a man, Branch is his name, who will spring up in his place and build the temple of Jehovah,—he will bear kingly adornment, and will sit and rule upon his throne, and will be priest upon his throne, and there will be harmony between the two.” When, now, this Messiah is regarded as standing to God in the relation of Son to the Father, we can see in this only the full perfection of the Theocratic relation. The designating of the stock of Ephraim, Jer_31:9, as the dear son and confidential child of God, shows that this language points to an intimate relation of communion and love. But that the term referred primarily not to subjective excellence, but to an objective relation, appears from Zec_13:7, where the wicked Pekah is styled by God “the man that is my fellow;” and while Exo_4:22 shows that at the same time the origin of the nation in this, its peculiar relation to God, is, in the expression, “First-born Son,” referred back to God Himself, so Psa_89:27-28 brings out with special clearness at once the dignity of the relation, involving the manifold prerogatives of the first-born, and also the traits of trustful devotion and hope, in the language: “He (David) will cry unto me, Thou art my Father, my strength, and the rock of my salvation. And I will make him my First-Born, supreme above the kings of the earth.” In the application of these expressions to the Messiah, their form, indeed allows the possibility of a deeper conception of His origin and of His issuing forth from God. But this deeper conception, which finds expression in the New Testament, we are not directly to transfer to the words of the Old. We find nowhere in the Old Testament a clearly developed and conscious apprehension of the eternal and immanent relation of the Son to the Father. Even Mic_5:1 scarcely declares definitely the preëxistence of the Messiah, or His eternal destination in the purpose of God; but from the completely humbled condition of the house of David, it simply assures us that beyond any known and historical record of the life and lineage of the Deliverer, who is to be born in the humble Bethlehem, we must go indefinitely back for His issuing forth, or origin, which is from ancient times, from “the days of old.” In a manner equally indefinite as to chronology, but significant and fraught with ominous import as to the facts, is in that passage indicated the time of His coming. For it is immediately added that Jehovah will give over the Israelites until the time when she who is with child shall bear her offspring. Among the attributes of the Messiah, too, is found, Isa_9:5, the title, ‘Father of eternity,’ but not the ‘Son of eternity.’ The ‘Son,’ Isa_9:8, stands parallel to the ‘child’ whose birth is to be looked for. Yet, on the other hand, the profounder New Testament conception has not merely the formal right of an external connection with the Old Testament form of expression, but the higher and essential right of an unfolding of those germs which the veil of the Old Testament only so conceals, that in their intrinsic nature they at the same time point beyond themselves and those present circumstances in which they had their origin. This is shown particularly in Psalms 2, here cited, which presupposes as an historical fact the prediction of Nathan, and displays its early acknowledged Messianic character in the fact that it speaks of a world-subduing power of the King whom Jehovah Himself has established upon Zion (erroneously translated by earlier scholars: ‘anointed at Zion’) and placed in the relation of Son to Jehovah—the King whom the author of the Psalms, Heb_1:12, styles “the Son”—and that this Son appeals for this relation, on which the futile endeavors of Princes and nations that rise up against Jehovah and His Anointed (Heb_1:2) will dash themselves to ruin, to an inviolable decree ( çֹ÷ ), Heb_1:7 : “Thou art my Son: I have to-day begotten Thee.” Whether David (Act_4:25), or some other prophetic bard, be the author of this anonymous Psalm, at all events the author distinguishes himself from the Anointed One of Jehovah, and makes the latter come forward personally and speak in the full consciousness of his relation (Heb_1:7-9), just as previously do the raging insurgents (Heb_1:3), and the Lord enthroned in heaven, who, kindling in wrath, will thunder down upon them the voice of His indignation (Heb_1:6). We may not, therefore (with Hupfeld), regard the Psalm, “whether originating in some definite historical event (as perhaps a triumphant military expedition), or, (as an independent product of the general spirit of the Theocracy), as a poetical glorification of the Israelitish kingdom in its peculiar Theocratic character, and with all the proud hopes which the national feeling associated with it,”—and appeal in support of our view to the Lyrico-dramatic character of the Psalm. In the view of the Psalmist the several speakers have the significance of real personalities. They express ideas, but are not personifications of ideas.
Inasmuch, now, as the prophecy of Nathan, which was given to David before Solomon was begotten (2Sa_12:24), is no fabricated declaration of God, but an actual fact of His historical revelation, and as the Anointed One in Psalms 2 appeals to an inviolable ordinance or decree of Jehovah, we are naturally led to look back to that prophecy, and to refer the ‘to-day’ in its historical import to that day in which that ‘seed’ was promised to David, who was to stand to God in the relation of Son, and who then on that day received his procreation, or, still better, his birth ( éָìַã , rarely meaning ‘beget,’ but generally, ‘to be born’) as the Son of Jehovah. This destined seed of David is the “Anointed One” of the Psalmist, and expresses the consciousness of having been in the actual course of events introduced by Jehovah into this relation. It would not be a whit more unnatural to suppose that we have here a mere personified Messianic ideal employed in celebrating its own Divine origin, than to regard the “to-day” as a mere poetic element of figurative speech, or an expression indicating the certainty and reality of the Messianic idea. But neither does the “to-day” point to the day of the coronation of an Israelitish Prince, either Solomon (Bl.) or the Maccabean Alexander Jannæus (Hitzig), appealing in these words to the Divine right of the Theocratic dominion claimed by him. It points originally to the day of the introduction of the Messiah as the Theocratic ruler from the seed of David into the knowledge and recognition of God’s people through His word of revelation. From this historical connection we may understand how Paul, Act_13:33, could apply this passage to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, especially if we compare Rom_1:4, ôïῦ ὁñéóèÝíôïò õἱïῦ èåïῦ ἐí äõíÜìåé êáôὰ ðíåῦìá ἁãéùóýíçò ἐî ἀíáóôÜóåùò ôῶí íåêñῶí (“who was constituted Son of God in power,” etc.); and with this remember, on the one hand, that the anointing as Theocratic king presupposes the bestowment of the Holy Spirit (1Sa_10:6; 1Sa_10:10; 1Sa_16:13), and that on the influence of the Spirit of God rests the Sonship, and, on the other, that Rev_1:12 conceives the issuing forth of Christ for the conquest of the kingdoms of the world, as a birth from the church in which he has his abode. From this, now, it is clear that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews is justified in citing this passage to prove a special Sonship of the Messiah such as has been attributed to no angel. This is here the specially important point with the author. To refer the “to-day” to an eternal and “metaphysical” generation of the Son on the part of God (Orig., Athan., Basil, Theoph., August., Primas., the older Lutheran Intpp. generally, Stein, Lün.), or to the day of the conception of Jesus with a reference to Luk_1:31 ff. (Chrys., Theod., Œc., Kuin., Böhm., Hofm.), or to the entrance of Jesus Christ into His kingly life of super-terrestrial glory, whether by His resurrection or by His ascension (Hil., Ambr., Calv., Grot., Schlicht., Calm., von Gerl., Del.), is partly an interpretative application, partly a deduction which the author himself, however, has not here made. [And yet, when we consider that in the application of the Psalm in question to our Lord, it applies to no event in His career so naturally as to His glorification after His resurrection, in fact applies, properly speaking, to no other period; and that Paul so applies it, Act_13:33, as above noticed; and that the author, in the verse immediately preceding refers definitely to Christ’s taking His seat at the right hand of God after His resurrection, as in that immediately following he refers definitely to His second coming, it seems by no means improbable that he had in his mind that definite period in which the exalted and glorified Christ was proclaimed, and, as it were, constituted Son of God in power.—K.].
Heb_1:6. And when he shall again have introduced the first-born into the world, he saith.—The usage of our Epistle does not allow us to transpose ðÜëéí and make it the introduction of a citation, as even Bleek (recently followed by Reuss, L’épître aux Hebr., p. 199 ff.) maintained after Carpz., overlooking at the same time the correspondence of the Aor. Subj. with ὅôáí to the Lat. perf. Fut. (Winer Gr., 6 Ed., p. 275 ff. [Hadley Gr. Gr., 747 a]). The language refers to the second introduction—yet in the future—of the First-born into the world (Lün.). The ïἰêïõìÝíç (world) is the inhabited earth on which the Son has already previously lived and labored. As the author has already spoken of this sojourn, and, at the same time, expressly testified of the preëxistence of the Son, the mode of expression is perfectly clear and unobjectionable. Even Greg. Nyss. (Contr. Eunom. Orat. III., p. 541) recognized the reference of the passage to the Second Coming, while Grot., Schlicht, Wetst., &c., refer it to a public and formal presentation of Christ after the Ascension; Bleek [Stuart] and Reuss to some otherwise unrecorded and like presentation previously to the incarnation; Chrys., Primas., Calv., Calov, Beng., to one accompanying the incarnation. The term ðñùôüôïêïò is not identical in meaning with ìïíïãïíÞò (Primas., Œcum.). The latter epithet represents this as an exclusive relation which no being sustains to God, except the Messiah. The former specially signalizes His preëminence in the relations belonging essentially to the Messiah, whether to the creation (Col_1:15) or to the Theocratic children of God (Rom_8:29; Col_1:18; Rev_1:5; Heb_2:10), partly in respect to the mode and time of His entrance on the stage of being, partly in respect to position, dignity and power. As the word stands here with no limiting epithet, it is to be taken without any special reference as a terminus technicus, founded on Psa_89:28. To this Messianic King and Son of God, the angels, by Divine command, are to render adoring homage. Presupposing the certainty of the Second Coming, and referring exclusively to this, the author announces what God then ordains ( ëÝãåé , he saith). The Pres. tense brings before the eye as present that which is actually future, and springs from the conviction of its certainty. In the Parousia the author sees the final fulfilment of the prophecy, Deu_32:43, in which Jehovah, after a long withdrawal and concealment, when at length the power of the ungrateful people has utterly disappeared, revealing Himself in His compassion for their deliverance, is, at the same time, depicted as the God who brings fearful judgment on the heathen. To the words of the Heb. text, “Praise, ye heathen, His people; for He avenges the blood of His servants, and repays vengeance to His enemies, and brings expiation to His land, His people,” there is subjoined in all the MSS. of the LXX. a clause made up from Isa_44:23; Psa_97:7, and Psa_29:1 (springing probably from the liturgical use of the Song of Moses, Del.) in which the words here cited are found strictly after the Cod. Vat. and the Collection of the Old Testament Cantica appended to the Psalter in the Cod. Alex. (which in the text of Deut. has õἱïß instead of ἄãã .)—for that the words are here given as a citation appears undeniably from the retention of the particle êáß (‘And, Let all the angels, &c.’). The reference of the áὐôῷ to the Messiah, springs not from the fact that Jehovah Himself appears previously as the Speaker (Lün.); nor is it to be explained from the fact that Israel, who has previously been mentioned as the object of the praise of the heathen, bears elsewhere the designation of First-born, and thus what applies to Israel might, with abundant ease, be transferred to its Messianic King. It has its ground rather in the view, common to all the New Testament writers, that we are to apply to Christ as Sovereign of the Kingdom of God, all that in the Old Testament is in this relation declared of Jehovah. Ðñïóêõíåῖí , with Dat. only in the later classical writers: earlier with Acc. (Bernh. Synt., p. 113, 266).
Heb_1:7. And in respect to the angels, indeed, he saith.—In contrast with the Messiah ( ìÝí — äÝ ) the subordinate position of the angels is brought out by a declaration of God in the Scripture, in a twofold relation: 1, in that they are servants; 2, in that they are changeable and perishable (Lün.). Ðñüò , in reference, in relation to; so frequently (Win. Gram., § 49 h. [It is one of the most familiar usages of ðñüò with the Acc.; see Dem. 1 Ol. 4.—K.]. The connection in Psa_104:4 seems to warrant our understanding it as affirming that winds and lightnings, like nature in general, are merely servants of God. As, however, òָùָׂä with double Acc. usually signifies not making into something ( òָùָׂä ìְ ), but, making out of something, it were properly translated, “making His messengers out of winds, and His servants out of flaming fire.” Still we can hardly suppose that the Psalmist meant in this to express the idea that “God, in accomplishing the work which is wrought in the world through angelic agencies, gives to the angels the elemental wind and fire as the material in which they are, as it were, to embody themselves and assume a visible form,” Del.). It can, however, also be translated: “making winds out of His messengers, and flaming fire out of His ministers.” This reading is adopted in the Sept., which, by placing the Art. before ÜããÝë . and ëåéô ., shows that it thus regards the angels; and our author, who, perhaps, with reference to Exo_3:2, writes ðõñὸò öëüãá , instead of the ðῦñ öëÝãïí of the Sept. (the ðõñὸò öëüãá of the Cod. Alex. is probably a later correction from our Epistle), evidently regards the passage as teaching that the angels have so little of substantive existence that they are obliged sometimes to clothe themselves in the changing garment of natural phenomena for the execution of the Divine commands, and, under the form of elemental agencies, to act with dynamical efficiency. Substantially parallel are Psa_34:8; Joh_5:4. Also the Rabbins call the angels ëּåֹçåֹú = äõíÜìåéò , and the Targum at Psa_104:4 paraphrases “who maketh His messengers swift as winds, His ministers strong as flaming fire.”
Heb_1:8. But in respect to the Son, etc.—The Son is not directly addressed (Bengel), but the ðñüò is to be taken as in the verse preceding. And as matter of fact the words, Psa_45:7, are not spoken to the Messiah, but were simply at an early period, as shown by the admission of the Psalm into the temple liturgy ( ìַîְðַöֵּçַ ), referred to Him. The Psalm designated in the inscription as a song of love, and celebrating the marriage of Solomon or Joram with a foreign princess, is presented by an Israelite to the king (Psa_45:2), who is addressed in Psa_45:3-10, while in Psa_45:11 ff. the discourse changes to the bride. The minstrel conceives the king, in his Theocratic position and function, as commissioner and vicegerent of Jehovah, who, by righteous and wise government, is to effect the destined coming of the Kingdom of God. Inasmuch as by the king in question this was but partially or not at all effected, the Psalm early past over as a mystical bridal song, to the marriage of the Messiah with His Church. The Messianic references also appear in the Psalm itself, in that it is said (Psa_45:7) that His throne is Elohim=Divine forever and ever, or better, that His Divine throne is forever and ever: [or, better still, I think, even in the original Heb.: “Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.” This is certainly the most natural construction of the sentence, and need not be shrunk from, as it is in perfect keeping with the context; and as, at all events, the idea is substantially contained in the context—K.]; in that it is said further that God (Psa_45:17) will render His posterity princes over the whole earth, so that they should eclipse the splendor of their ancestors, and all nations should praise the King on account of His glory; and finally, in that some characteristic expressions of this Psalm are used in Isa_9:5; Isa_61:3, directly of the Messiah as the Servant of Jehovah—a fact the more important, as àֵì âִּáּåֹø , mighty God, is elsewhere a customary designation of God Himself, e.g., Deu_10:17; Jer_32:18; Neh_9:32; Psa_24:8. Since, therefore, the Theocratic King “sat on the throne of Jehovah” (1Ch_29:23)—and the throne of God is eternal, Lam_5:19,—and Zech. prophesies (Heb_12:8) that the house of David shall yet be at the head of the nation, as Elohim, as a messenger of Jehovah ( éְäåָֹä ëֵּîַìְàַêְ , ëֵּàìäִéí ), the author of our Epistle is entirely justified in interpreting the Psalm not as typically or indirectly, but as prophetically and directly Messianic, and in finding a proof of the Godhead of the Messiah in the fact that He who as King was, for His love of righteousness, exalted above all His fellows, received the appellation of Elohim. For while, indeed, the Kingly government, as representative of God ruling in majesty, is sometimes named Elohim (Exo_21:6; Exo_22:7; Psalms 82.) the individual person never elsewhere receives this name. And he would all the more naturally infer the Godhead of the Messiah, inasmuch as love of righteousness and hatred of iniquity are special characteristics of the holiness of God, Psa_5:5; Isa_61:8. Äéὰ ôïῦôï many erroneously explain (with August. and Thom. Aquin.) of the purpose and result of the anointing, referring it to the anointing of the Holy Spirit made in order that the anointed one might love righteousness. In the Heb. text it is a quality of the King that He loves righteousness; and this forms the ground for that fulness of joy which, as an anointing, has been poured over Him in richer measure than over His companions or fellows, i.e., the other kings of the earth. As this love of righteousness is to be conceived not as a state of passive repose, but as an active attribute, the Sept. employs the Aor. ἠãÜðçóáò , ἐìßóçóáò (didst love, etc.), and from this it is still more clear that äéὰ ôïῦôï points back to this as the ground of the anointing, which also our author understands not of the crowning of Jesus, after His accomplished earthly career, as Heavenly King, and His exaltation thus above the angelic dwellers in heaven (Peirce, Olsh., Bl., Ebr., Alf., Lün.), but, in accordance with the original text, of the fulness of bliss which He, long since anointed as King of the Kingdom of God, has above His fellows. ‘Fellows’ Klee erroneously refers to “all creatures;” Chrys., Theoph., Œc., Beng., to “all men.” The ‘fellows’ ( ìÝôï÷ïé ) of the Messiah must certainly be anointed ones. Thus they are either Christians (Theodor., Calv., Camero, Schlicht.), or the prophets, high-priests and kings, anointed as types of Christ (Wittich, Braun, Cranm.), or, which seems best suited to the connection, Princes in general (Kuin., Ebr., Del.). The author does not develop the individual features of the passage in their possible application, but lays the whole emphasis on the repeatedly recurring term, “God,” which, in an equally exclusive manner with the term “Son,” is given in the Divine word of Scripture to the Messiah.
Heb_1:10. And: Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay, etc.—The êáß introduces in the closest connection of thought with the preceding, a citation from Psa_102:26-28 illustrating the point that all aid to the people of God must come, not through any creature instrumentality, but through God the Creator. The Psalm is a lamentation, written at a late period of the exile, in which the poet, profoundly penetrated by the wretchedness of his people, expects and entreats deliverance and preservation from God, who, as the eternal one, even amidst that change and revolution of things over which He presides, still approves Himself as unchangeably the same, as äåּà , áýôüò . The Psalmist is hence so sure of deliverance that he declares that it “will be told to coming generations,” how God looked down from heaven, and heard the groaning of the captives (Psa_102:19 ff.). In the fact that help comes only from the eternal and unchangeable God, while even the heavens, as they were originally formed by Him, are also transformed by Him, lies our author’s warrant for referring the cited words to the Son by whom God hath made the worlds. The author is not merely expressing in scriptural phraseology what, in his own belief, and, in the presumed belief of his readers, may be justly said of Jesus (Hofm., Schriftb., I. 150). There would then be wanting the connecting link which, according to the tenor of Scripture, warrants his statement. We are not at liberty to transfer to the Son all the attributes ascribed to the Father. Hence we do not say with Theod. of Mops. (ed. Fritzsche, p. 162) that the Old Test. Scripture when it speaks of God, always speaks of the Father without exclusion of the Son. Equally unsatisfactory is the explanation that the interpolated êýñéå of the Sept. (wanting in the Heb.) has, as being the customary designation of Jesus in apostolic times, seduced the author into his interpretation (Böhm., Lün.); for Heb_8:8 ff; Heb_12:6 ff. forbid our charging the author with any such ignorance. The link of connection is found rather (as in all the other citations), in the fact that the original Psalm itself expressed a positive hope in that earnestly longed for revelation of the salvation of Jehovah which was to be accomplished only in the Messiah. (Similarly Hofm., “Prophecy and Fulfilment,” II. p. 33, Del.). Êáô ̓ ἀñ÷Üò , Ps. 119, 152 is not= ἐí ἀñ÷ῇ , but corresponds to ἀð ̓ ἀñ÷ῆò , and expresses also in the classics extension downwards in time (Kühn., § 605, 1. Jelf, II. § 629, 2). In Heb. we have the more general ìְôָðִéí =formerly. ÄéáìÝíåéí indicates the abiding in one condition through all the vicissitudes of time, Psa_119:90; 2Pe_3:4. ðåñéâüëáéïí denotes anything thrown around (1Co_12:15, probably a veil), commonly the garment thrown around like a mantle. Storr finds in ἀëëáãÞóïíôáé the idea that the heavens, which are works of God’s hands or fingers (Psa_8:4), will be exchanged like a garment, in that God will make a new heaven and a new earth. This form of conception is certainly made prominent Isa_65:17; Isa_66:22; 2Pe_3:13; Rev_21:1; for the Scripture, while indeed it teaches a ôÝëïò of the world, Mat_24:14, a change of its present ó÷ῆìá , 1Co_7:31, a passing away of heaven and earth, Mat_5:18; Luk_21:33; 1Jn_2:17; Rev_20:11, a dissolving of the elements, 2Pe_3:12, yet by no means teaches an annihilation of its existence, but rather a regeneration, a new birth of the world, with the transformation naturally attending it. Yet here the other form of conception seems the preponderating one, which makes heaven an apparent tent-cloth spread out over the earth, Isa_40:22; Psa_104:2, without, however, requiring us with Heinrichs to resolve the ἔñãá into the products of the loom. Here their transformation consists in their becoming antiquated, Psa_102:27. The reading ἑëßîåéò , then, involves the thought that they are rolled up, and laid aside. This rolling up, Isa_34:4; Rev_6:14, is compared with that of a book; and Isa_34:4 it is said of the heavenly hosts that they fall off as the leaves of the vine, and as the withering of the fig-tree; while in like manner in Isa_51:6 they are said to pass away like smoke. But the Lord is unchangeable in His being, and absolutely imperishable. In the Hebrew we have: “And Thy years have no completion,” i.e., their end never comes. In the Greek: “Thy years shall never fail,” i.e., they shall never cease or discontinue. Ἐêëåßðåéí is used as intransitive also in the classics.
Heb_1:13. Sit on may right hand, etc.— Åἶðå (Heb_1:5) used of the declaration made absolutely, and once for all, (he said), and ëÝãåé (Heb_1:6) of the declaration which is now or continuously being made (he saith, he is saying), are here exchanged for åἴñçêå of the declaration which stands before us as fixed in Scripture (he hath said). Del.
The metabatic äÝ which stands in the third place after a preposition with its case (Hartung, Partikellehre I. p. 190) introduces as the last proof—challenging in its interrogative form the assured assent of the reader—the elevation of the Messiah to a joint sovereignty with God in absolute triumph over His foes, in contrast with angels who, though spiritual beings, have but the place and destination of servants. True, the angels, as inhabitants of heaven, also enjoy the immediate presence of God, and the proverbial expressions, “he is good as an angel of God,” 1Sa_29:9; “he judges righteously as an angel of God,” 2Sa_14:17; “he is wise as an angel of God,” 2Sa_14:20; 2Sa_19:27, point to their extraordinary intellectual and moral endowments. But organized as an heavenly host, 1Ki_22:19; 2Ch_18:18,—whence we are told of an encampment of angels (Gen_32:1-2), and find chariots and horses assigned to them (2Ki_6:17),—they encompass the throne of Jehovah—partly in the form of an advisory assemblage (Job_1:6; Job_2:1; Psa_89:8); partly praising God and His works in holy joy, Psa_29:1; Psa_103:20; partly as servants standing ready to execute His commands, Job_4:18; Job_15:15, as heroes of strength, Psa_103:20; Psa_148:2, and as Jehovah’s (Jos_5:14) “host of the high ones,” Isa_24:21. But to the Messiah is ascribed not merely sitting beside or in presence of the all-ruling God, but sitting at His right hand. The former expression would have designated Him only as theocratic ruler; as David, after the removal of the ark of the covenant to Mount Zion, had his throne in immediate proximity to the throne of Jehovah. But the latter elevates Him above every species of principality and dominion to participation in the divine majesty itself. The historical incidents in which this typical Psalm had birth, stand connected apparently (Heb_1:5 ff.) with the victory of David over the Syrians and Ammonites. But the promise of the elevation spoken of (Heb_1:1) appears as an oracular or prophetic utterance ( ðְàֻí ) of Jehovah, whose fulfilment is still in the future (Heb_1:4), and is directed to the Lord of the minstrel ( àֲãֹðִé , my Lord); we are, therefore, entirely justified in assuming a widening of the prophetic view beyond the historical and typical incidents, and in finding in the “Lord” not the David sung by the people (Ewald), but the Messiah whom David recognized as at once his Lord and his Son (Mat_22:41 ff.); especially as this king, whom the people, born like dew from the womb of the morning, clad in sacred garments, are to follow into the conflict (Heb_1:3), is not merely to conquer His enemies upon the whole earth (Heb_1:6), but as priestly king (Heb_1:4), is to stand in a relation (to be hereafter more fully considered), such as could be predicated of no historical ruler of Israel. The custom of setting the foot on the neck of a conquered enemy, belongs to earlier Israel, Jos_10:24; 1Ki_5:17. To later Greek belongs ὑðïðüäéïí , and the frequent Hellenistic formula ἐê äåîéῶí which implies the rising conspicuously above that which is on the right hand.
Heb_1:14. Are they not all ministering spirits, etc.—In this summing up of the series of thoughts developed from Heb_1:4, the emphasis lies partly on ðÜíôåò , all, which includes even the angelic leaders, partly on ëåéôïõñãéêÜ , which designates these spirits as standing in sacred service. For the term points, not in a general way, to service obligatory by virtue of public office, but specially to that connected with the public Levitical worship, Exo_31:10; Num_4:12; Num_7:5; 2Ch_24:14. Hence also the Rabbins frequently designate certain angels as íַìְàֲëֵé äַùָּׁøֵú . No allusion to the heavenly sanctuary can be inferred from the choice of the expression: it simply refers back to Heb_1:7. The Pros. Part. ἀðïóôåëëüìåíïé habitually sent forth, commissioned, brings out the proper characteristic of the angels, or that habitus, that habitual form of action, which springs from their nature, and corresponds to their destination. The term äéáêïíßá refers not directly to their rendering service to men; (for, apart from the fact that the angels are not placed in subordination to men, the construction would require the Dat. ôïῖò ìÝëëïõóé (Act_11:29; 1Co_16:15), but to the ministerial relation in which they stand to God, and in which God employs them for the good of those who are to inherit the salvation procured by His Son. This special signification of óùôçñßá (though without the article) is implied alike in the context, and in the verb êëçñïíïìåῖí , inherit. It implies neither deliverance from danger in general (Michael., Schleusn., Böhm., Kuin.); nor again the actual conferring of eternal salvation upon its inheritors through the ministrations assigned by God to the angels (Lün.); but simply the proper office of the angels, as those whom God sends forth for the benefit of godly men. The term óùôçñßá , employed in designating this salvation, presupposes a deliverance from ruin wrought by “the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” Tit_2:13.
2. The old canon of Scripture interpretation: Novum Testamentum in vetere latet; Vetus Testamentum in novo patet, springs from a correct apprehension of the true essential relation of the two parts of the economy of salvation. The sacred writers constantly emphasize the divine purpose, as that which determines the events of history; yet this not formally as mere purpose, which might seek its end irrespective of the course of things; but as that divine determination, which of itself, in a concrete manner, brings about its result. When this determination is prophetically uttered, this prophetic word is an expression of the divine counsel, thought and will, which is already stamped with the impress of human history, but primarily as but a form, which awaits in the future its ultimate fulfilment, and reaches this by an actual carrying out in history of the divine purpose. The historical facts which gradually lead to this final and proper fulfilment of prophecy, bear, for this reason, a typico-prophetic character. They represent typically, and for precisely this reason, but partially and defectively, the idea that is to be realized; yet they must be regarded as evidences of its truth, and of its infallible and already incipient realization. They are interwoven with historical conditions which as yet contain no adequate realization of the divine thought. It might hence be half suspected that nothing but the caprice or the unwarranted fancies of a later time had discovered this relation of purely historical facts, or of earlier oracular utterances, to those later events which they typify and predict. Unquestionably, too, we are warranted in insisting on the historical foundations of prophecy, and on its direct reference to immediate events, as against an unhistorical and, as it were, soothsaying prophecy. But the exaggeration of this feature leads to a mode of dealing with events which knows no prophecy, to a history with no positive divine guidance and control, with no real ideas, with no true future of redemption. The New Testament writers, on the other hand, see bursting through these enveloping folds of history the germs and tendencies of divine ideas, and, in their illustrative citations, mainly exhibit the symbolical facts, in a direct and immediate application to the fulfilment already effected through Christ. Hence they, on the one hand, neither take the facts and statements of the Old Testament, in their original import as referring to immediate events, nor on the other, put upon them an allegorical and mystical interpretation, which rests upon no sure basis; but so interpret them that they appear as members of that system of divine ideas and acts, by which, in the progress of revelation, the original Gospel which announced “the seed of the woman,” is gradually, step by step, announcing and accomplishing itself until its final and complete fulfilment in the coming of the Son of God in the flesh. The occasional use of Rabbinical forms of citation and modes of interpretation in no way destroys this essential relation, but stands connected with the national position and special culture of the respective writers: compare (from earlier times) Andr. Kesler de dictorum V. T. in N. allegatione 1627; also in Hackspan dispp. theol. et phil. syllogæ, p. 563 sq.: Oporinus, demonstratio N. T. ex. V. T. p. 60 sq., and Surenhusius, Âßâëïò êáôáëëáãῆò , in quo, secundum veterum theol. Hebr. formulas allegandi et modos interpretandi, conciliantur loca V. in N. T. allegata, Amst. 1713.
3. The true and perfect deity of Jesus Christ is to be proved a. from the name “Son of God,” bestowed on Him in an exclusive sense, and as designating a specific relation, which, along with essential unity, points to a hypostatical distinction of persons, for which reason He is also directly called “God:” b. from His works of creating, upholding, redeeming, governing, and renovating the world: c. from the perfection of the metaphysical, intellectual and moral attributes involved in that specific relation to God, and attesting themselves in all these several spheres of action: d. from the adoring worship which belongs to Him, and is rendered Him even by the Princes among the heavenly angels, a fact which, within the sphere of the monotheistic faith, is of the utmost significance.
4. The doctrine of the eternity of the world is equally to be repudiated with that of its future annihilation. Its transformation into a new and nobler form of existence is effected by means of the same Lord through whom it was created, and that according to divine purpose and will, so that its destruction also is to be referred to no exhaustion of originally supplied powers, wrought by age and the natural decay of years, nor to any regularly recurring cycles of revolution, by which, at definite intervals and according to unchangeable laws, creation is resolved into its elements, and again remoulded into new forms and combinations for other destinies.
5. The anticipated reintroduction of the First-born into the inhabited world forms the goal of the ways of God in history, and promises a revelation of glory to which, in hope and faith, we are to look; which, in the patience of the saints, we are humbly to await, and for which, in the sanctification of our persons, as children of God born anew to be brethren in Jesus Christ, and called to be fellow-heirs with Him, we are earnestly to prepare, that we may join the adoring worship of the angels.
6. The invocation of angels, as ministers to our need and mediators of salvation, is no less irrational and absurd, than the denial of their existence and of their employment in the service of God for the benefit of the heirs of salvation, is unscriptural. The position here assigned to them excludes any rendering to them of worship, and, on the other hand, their spiritual nature remits to the province of imagination and art all sensible representations of their form; while yet their employment in the service of God renders possible their transient appearance and agency on earth in the most various forms.
7. The means which God employs for the protection and support of the pious in this wicked world, are numerous in proportion as He is unfathomable in wisdom, unlimited in power, and inexhaustible in love. Besides the forces, creatures, and instrumentalities, which belong to the sphere of earth and human action, He has equally at command, for the exigencies of even our temporal life, heavenly and angelic agencies, and that in unmeasured abundance and untold variety.
8. The establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth in the form of a kingdom of grace under the regal dominion of the Messiah, who, after accomplishing the mission assigned to Him below, is now forever exalted above all powers to the throne of God, is, on the one hand, a fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies; on the other, a preparation for the consummated