The Gospel According to St. John; commentaries on Hebrews and 1–3 John

The quotation (Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.) 31 ff.) offers an instructive example of variations in N. T. quotations from the lxx., from the Hebrew, and from a repetition of part of the quotation in the same book.

The following are variations from the lxx.:

v. 8. legei] lxx. phesin with v. l. leyei.

v. 9. ipoiesa] &*9$4meps.

— lechti] phesir.

v. 10. 8ia0.] some add mon.

— ligt i] phesIr.

— 8«8©vr] some add Ms*.

— Arrypty»] some read gr^i». A fViyp^fr» wkobt M rAf «. aw.

— avrovr] E A insert «ai dpsomai avrovr before ml isoma*. Oomp. c xxiil 24 LXX.

v. 11. iroX/ri^...ddf\^w...] <!8fX$oV...irXipr{oy...

— fMitpov] add avrmw.

The lxx. follows the Hebrew closely except v. 9. oik Mm%no> *p rg 8. '?n$ P|>P.

v. 10. 8icWr... Wr n)r 8. «5. DfJ? J... *fl}rrn$ *«)}.

v. 11. om. T\fc * gnothi Eeb.

— om. njn; D$.

To these certain differences most be added the rendering kago hemelesa auton for D? % 9fP9?tyl, which is generally rendered *although I was a lord (a husband) to them. In this sense StfJ is used with a simple acc. (Is. lxii. 5). In Jer. iii. 14 and xxxi. 32 it is construed with S, and Gesenius (so appy. Delitzsch), following the lxx. and Syriac versions and Arabic usage, is inclined to adopt in those places the sense 'I rejected, I was displeased with, grew weary of them.' This interpretation appears to fall in best with the context, though the common rendering can be explained.

Tho differences between the quotation here and in c. x. 16 f. are remarkable:

v. 10. to oiko Hisr. eis ten dian. ai't. epi kardias.

v. 12. kai ton ham. aut. mnestho.

v. 16. pros autous. epi kardias aut. epi ten dianoian.

v. 17. kai ton ham. aut. kai ton anomion auton. mnesthesomai.

The quotation in x. 16 f. seems to be made from memory.

IX. ¹Eiche men oun [kai] he prote dikaiomata

1 [kai] he pr.: om. kai B syr vg me: om. e D?*: + skene S me. + kai' latr. D?*.

ii. The Old Service and the New: the Atonement of the Law and the Atonement of Christ (c. ix.).

Having pointed out generally the new scene and the new conditions of Christ's High-priestly work, the writer goes on to consider it in detail in comparison with that of the Levitical system. He (1) describes with affectionate reverence the ordered arrangements of the Old Sanctuary and its furniture, and the limited privileges of the Old Priesthood (ix. 1-10); and then (2) he places in contrast with those the High-priestly Atonement of Christ resting upon a New Covenant, of which the issue will yet be revealed in glory (ix. 11—28).

(i) ix. 1—10. The Sanctuary and Priests under the Old Covenant.

This section falls into three subdivisions.

(a) The Tabernacle; its parts and furniture: (1—5).

(b) The priestly Service of the Tabernacle: (6, 7).

(c) The lesson of the restrictions of the service: (8—10).

¹Now even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service and its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world. ²For a tabernacle was prepared, the first, wherein were the candlestick and the table and the shew-bread, that which is called the Holy place. ³And after the second veil a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies,?having a golden altar of incense, and the ark of the covenant overlaid all round about with gold, wherein was a golden pot holding the manna, and the rod of Aaron that budded, and the tables of the covenant;?and above it Cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy-seat; whereof we cannot now speak severally.?But when these things have been thus prepared, the priests enter into the first tabernacle continually, accomplishing the divine services;?but into the second, once in the year, the High-priest alone, not without blood, which he offereth for himself and for the ignorances of the people,?the Holy Ghost thus signifying that the way into the Holy place hath not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle hath still an appointed place;?which is a parable for the season now present, and according to this (parable) gifts and sacrifices are offered, such as cannot make the worshipper perfect in conscience, ¹?being only ordinances of flesh, resting upon (accompanied by) meats and drinks and divers washings, imposed until a season of reformation.

(a) 1—5. The writer begins his account of the High-priestly service of Christ with a retrospective view of the Levitical Service; and in doing this he first describes the Tabernacle—the divinely appointed scene of its performance—and not the Temple, with its parts and its characteristic furniture. As he had spoken at the close of the last chapter of the imminent disappearance of the old system, he now pauses for a moment to dwell upon the glories of that Old Covenant before he contrasts them with the supreme glory of the Christian order. He seems indeed to linger over the sacred treasures of the past; and there is a singular pathos in the passage, which is unique in the N. T. There was, he says, something majestic and attractive in the Mosaic ordinances of worship. Christians do not question the fact; nay rather when they acknowledge the beauty and meaning of the Law they can understand the Gospel better.

So OEcumenius gives the connexion rightly: epei katebalen auten [ten palaian diatheken]

te pros ten nean parathesei hina me eipe hoti oukoun aei apobletos hen, prolaba'n phesin hoti eiche kakeine dikaiomata latreias, nomous, phesin, kai taxin kai akolouthian emprepousan latreia theou.

Philo discusses the meaning of the arrangements of the Tabernacle: de vit. Mos. iii. §§ 3 ff. (ii. 146 ff. M.).

(1). eiche men oun [kai] he prote...] Now even the first covenant had...Vulg. Habuit quidem et prius (O.L. Habebat autem)...The past tense (eiche) can be explained in different ways. The writer may regard the original institution of the Mosaic ritual (v. 2 kateskeuasthe); or he may regard the system as essentially abrogated by the fulfilment of Christ's work.

The latter is the view commonly taken from early times: deiknusin hede touto auten ekkechorekuian. tote gar eiche, phesin. hoste nun, ei kai esteken, ouk esti (leg. *echei) (Chrys.). to deloi hoti nun ouk echei. hoste ei kai me pante\os epausato dia to tinas aute heti stoichein, ta mentoi dikaiomata ouk echei (ŒOEcum.).

But it seems more likely that the writer is considering the Mosaic system in its divine constitution.

The particles men oun correspond with the de in v. 6. There were divine and significant elements in the service which corresponded with the first Covenant, but they were subject to particular limitations in use. The Christian Order (v. 11 Christos de) offers a contrast to both parts of this description: its institutions are spiritual, and its blessings are for all. The combination does not occur again in the Epistle; and it is found in St Paul only in 1 Cor. ix. 25 ekeinoi men oun...hemeis de...; Phil. ii. 23 touton men oun...pepoitha de...hoti kai autos... It is frequent in the Acts (viii. 4, 25; &c.).

There can be no doubt that diatheke (not skene) is to be supplied with he prote. This interpretation, which is supported by the ancient Versions (except Memph.) and Fathers, is required by the context: c. viii. 13. He prote tis; Chrysostom asks, and answers He diatheke.

If the kai is retained (kai he prote) it emphasises the parallel of the Covenants. Though the first was destined to pass away, it had, no less than the second, ordinances of divine institution.

dikaiomata latr.] ordinances of divine service...Vulg. justificationes (O. L. constitutiones) culturæ. The word dikaioma occurs again in a similar sense in v. 10. Dikaioma expresses the result, as dikaiosis expresses the process (Rom. iv. 25; v. 18), corresponding to dikaioun, to make right (righteous) in the widest sense. Two main meanings at once arise as the object of the verb is a word or a deed. The dikaioma may be 'that which is declared right,' an ordinance or a sentence pronounced by an authoritative power; or 'that which is rightly done,' righteousness realised in act. There is the same twofold meaning in the word 'judgment' (Hebrewpfflftf) in the O. T. which is constantly rendered by dikaioma in the lxx. It may be further noticed that an obligatory 'ordinance' viewed from another point of sight often becomes a 'claim.' For the use of the word dikaioma in the N. T. see (l) to dikaioma the ordinance, regarded as requirement: Rom. i. 32; viii. 4. (2) ta dikaiomata of special ordinances: Luke i. 6; Rom. ii. 26; Hebr. ix. 1, 10. (3) dikaioma a sentence or act fulfilling the claims of righteousness: Rom. v. 16, 18. (4) ta dikaiomata of special acts of righteousness: Apoc. xv. 4; xix. 8.

The gen. which is connected with dikaioma may either express the authority from which it springs (Lk. i. 6 dik. tou Kuriou: Rom. viii. 4); or the object to which it is directed, as here: comp. Ex. xxi. 9 to d. ton thugateron; 1 Sam. ii. 12 to d. tou hiereos; viii. 9; x. 25 to d. tou basileos.

XaTpeias to re ayiov kosmiko. ²skene yap katbskbn

to ti: t6M D?*.

For latrbia compare Additional Note on c. viii. a.

t6t? Sy. kosm.] and its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world... Vulg. et sanctum sæculare. Euthymius reads and interprets totc ogio kosmiko (so arm.): r6t? M at tou paKai, ot Ikratii, wv gar oukichii. The peculiar form of expression is chosen in order to recognise the familiar and characteristic place of the Mosaic worship—the Holy place—and at the same time to distinguish it from its antitype (comp. vii. 24; 1 Pet. iv. 8). The conjunction r« is rarely used by itself in the Epistles: c. i. 3 note; vi. 5; xii. 2; Rom. ii. 19; xvi. 26; 1 Cor. iv. 21; Eph. iii. 19. It marks something which is not regarded as distinct from and coordinate with that with which it is connected, but which serves to complete the fulness of one main idea.

The singular to &yto in the sense of the sanctuary is not found elsewhere in the N. T. It occurs not unfrequently in the lxx. for Hebrew&$p (Num. iii. 38; Ezek. xlv. 4, 18; xlviii. 8) and for Hebrewgth (Ex. xxvi. 33 &c.) without any obvious law. Here it appears to give naturally the general notion of the sanctuary without regard to its different parts.

It is not unlikely that the predicative force of kosmiko reaches back to due latr.—'had ordinances of divine service and its sanctuary, both of this world.'

The word kosmikos occurs elsewhere in the N. T. only in Tit. ii. 12 (comp. Didache xi. 11).

The thought which it conveys here is otherwise expressed under a different aspect by chiphopoietos (vv. 11, 24; comp. viii. 2). The opposite is given in v. 11 ov tautes tes ktisbos.

The Mosaic sanctuary was not only 'on earth' (Ar/ycw), as opposed to 'in heaven' (ipouraeos v. 23; viii. 5; xi. 16), but it partook of the nature of the world, and was therefore essentially transitory.

There does not appear to be any reference to the familiar thought that the Tabernacle was a symbol of the world, though this interpretation has patristic support: ten skene outos ikaKis tupo ipichousa ton kosmou patos (Theodt).

But in connexion with this thought it is to be remarked that both Josephus and Philo speak of the Jewish service as having a universal, a 'cosmical,' destination: Philo De Monarch. ii. 6 (ii. p. 227 M.) bouKbtai to archir4a prLton m §1koa tou satos 1chi 4mphae pr\ eauto Cha ^tes suchous Thas ozio parichb to mo bio tes ton 8Ko» phus?os, frctra Sums i rats Upovpylaut sulleitourga pas kosmos autps. Joseph. B. J. iv. 5, 2 tes kosmikes threskeias katarchontpss. And this thought was adopted by Chrysostom and many later fathers in various forms: rwtl kai Ell?s< bato e kosmiko auto koXu, ou gar bSj ol Ion&uoi o kosmos esa» (Chrys.). Sanctum sæculare i.e. quo sæculi homines, hoc est, gentiles, ad Judaismum transeuntes recipiebat; patebat enim non solum Judæis sed etiam talibus gentilibus (Primas.).

Such an interpretation however belongs to the later development of Judaism and not prominently to its first institution, though indeed it had from the first a universal element.

(2). skene gar...he prote] For a tabernacle (tent) was prepared, the first...the outermost as approached by the worshipper. The writer explains and justifies the general statement in v. 1. For this construction, asthe e prote iv y e re luchnia kai e trapeza kai e prothbsp ton arton, etis legetai G 'Agia* meta db to

2, 3 Ta agia.....mipse Ta Agia tQw i«t.

2 luch.: D?*. o&amp: + ««! t chrnnoO thumianerio B (æg) [omitting o nm.kaIiOu in v. 4]. yia: + ra'dVa B: + ay«p AD?*: om. KB vg syrr ægg.

by which a noun first regarded indefinitely ('a tabernacle') ie afterwards defined ('the first'), see c. vi. 7; 2 John 7; Acts x. 41; Phil. iii. 6, &c. and especially with a partic. 1 Pet. i. 7; Moulton-Winer, pp. 174 f.

The two parts of the Tabernacle are regarded as two Tabernacles.

kat<sk?nas0e] was prepared...factum est V. Comp. c. iii. 3 note. The tense points to the first construction of the Tabernacle. Contrast v. 6 katisienasmiror.

fr i...] The substantive verb appears to be omitted purposely. The whole description (v. 4) will not apply to the existing Temple; and yet the writer will not exclude the Temple (Xcytrai, v. 6 ffoWur). He says therefore neither 'was' nor 'is,' but uses, as in v. 4 ichonsa, a neutral form of expression.

j \v X pia]—candelabra V. (-brum O. L.); literally the lampstand (Hebrewie^r) on which the lamp (Hebrewy) was placed (Ex. xxv. 37; Zech. iv. 2; Matt. v. 15 and parallels; comp. Apoc. i. 12; ii. 5; xi. 4). See Ex. xxv. 31—40; xxxv. 16; xxxvii. 17—24 (xxxviii. 13—17); Zech. iv. 2 f.; 11 ff.; Jos. B. J. v. 5. 5; nii. 5. 5.

In the account of Solomon's Temple ten candlesticks are mentioned: 1 K. vii. 49 (35); 2 Chron. iv. 7; comp. 1 Chron. xxviii. 15; Jer. iii. 19.

So also in 2 Chron. iv. 8 Solomon is said to have made ten tables; but in 1 K. vii. 48 (34) only one table is mentioned. Comp. Jos. Antt. viii. 3, 7. Primasius, following the plural of the Vulgate, supposes that the allusion is to the Temple: non de illo tabernacule disputaturns est hic apostolus quod Moyses fecit in eremo ubi tantummodo unum candelabrum fuit, sed de templo quod postea Salomon ædificavit in Hierusalem ubi fuerunt plura candelabra.

4Tponi(a] the table...mensa V. Ex. xxv. 23-30 (Hebrewph^ D^n ip^, nyjflWJ &amp, 90 W); xxxvii. 10—16.

e prooisp rmv amtor] Vulg. propositio panum, the shewbread, literally 'the setting out of the bread (loaves)' that is 'the bread set forth in two rows.' The later Hebrew term for the 'shewbread' (Hebrew^D^Dr Ex. xxv. 30; comp. Lev. xxiv. 5 ff.) is Hebrewnj^Bpr Dh^ 'bread of the row' (e.g. 1 Chron. ix. 32 ol iprot rrjt npoBtatmt lxx.) or simply 'the row' (2 Chron. ii. 4 prothbsis*; xiii. 11 irptemt Uprmp; xxix. 18 rfjp trapza¥ rrjt irpolfVfffff) in which the N. T. phrases (Matt. xii. 4 ol Artoi rtjt irpoA. and h irpoU t. &amp.) find their origin.

ijw l/g. Agia] which is called the Holy place...Vulg. quæ dicitur Sancta. The qualitative relative (tfm) directs attention to the features of the place which determines its name as 'Holy.' The anarthrous form Agia (literally Holies) in this sense appears to be unique, as also Agia agio below, if indeed the reading is correct. Perhaps it is chosen to fix attention on the character of the sanctuary, as in other cases. The plural suggests the idea of the sanctuary with ail its parts: comp. Moulton-Winer,. p. 220.

Philo (Quis rer. div. hær. § 46; i. p. 504) interprets the three things in the Holy Place (A> voir), the Candlestick, the Table and the Golden Altar of Incense (re Ayuonfpio*), as deuteron katapetasma skene he legomene Hagia Hagion',?chrusoun echousa thumiaterion kai ten kiboton tes diathekes

3 hagia hagion S'* AD*: ta hag. ton hag. '* B me (æg). 4 chr. ech. thum. kai: echousa B [see v. 2].

symbolic of thanksgiving from all parts of creation heavenly, human, elemental. Comp, de vita Mos. iii. §§ 9 f.(ii. pp. 150 f. M.).

For a general interpretation of their meaning see Oehler, Old Test. Theology, § 117.

(3). meta de to d. k.] and after the second veil...Vulg. post velamentum autem secundum. This is the only place in which meta is used in this local sense in the N. T. For katapetasma see c. vi. 19 note. Ex. xxvi. 31 f.

skene he leg. Hagia Hagion] a tabernacle (tent) was prepared (kateskeuasthe, v. 2) which is called the Holies of Holies. The form sk. he legomene corresponds with sk. he prote of v. 2. In the lxx. two translations of HebrewD^Jft the Holy of Holies, the moat holy place, are found, to hagion ton hag. (e.g. Ex. xxvi. 33), and to hagia ton hag. (e.g. 1 K. viii. 6). This innermost sanctuary is also called simply to hagion in Lev. xvi. 2. On the name Hebrew1%5^ which was applied to it in later times (1 K. viii. 8) see Hupfeld on Ps. xxviii. 2. The Holy of Holies was a cube, like the New Jerusalem in the imagery of the Apocalypse: Apoc. xxi. 16.

For the general idea of the Tabernacle, as figuring the residence of God with His covenant people, see Oehler, l.c. § 116; and Additional Note on viii. 5. Chrysostom says of the two parts: ta men oun hagia tou proterou kairou sumbola estin. ekei gar dia thusion panta ginetai. ta de hagia ton hagion toutou tou nun enestotos. And so Theodoret: emimeito ta men hagia ten en te ge politeian, ta de agia ton hagion to ton ouranon endiaitema. auto de to katapetasma tou stereomatos eplerou ten chreian. (OEcumenius follows out the parallel at length.

(4). chr. ech. thum.] having a golden altar of incense...Vulg. aureum habens turibulum (altare O. L.). The word thumiaterion has two distinct meanings, (1) Altar of incense, (2) Censer, and from very early times each has been adopted here.

Philo (Quis rer. div. hær. § 46, i. p. 504; de vit. Moysis, iii. § 9, ii. p. 150); and Josephus (Antt. iii. 6, 8 metaxu de autes kai tes trapezes endon, hos proeipon, thumiaterion...B. J. v. (vi.) 5, 5 to thumiaterion de dia ton triskaideka thumiamaton ois ek thalasses anepimplato tes t' aoiketou kai oikoumenes esemainen hoti tou theou panta kai to theo) use thumiaterion for the altar of incense in their accounts of the furniture of the Temple. And so also Clement of Alexandria (Strom. v. 6, § 33, p. 665 P. ana meson de tou kalummatos (the outer veil) kai tou parapetasmatos (the inner veil)...thumiaterion ekeito...); and Origen, probably on the authority of this passage, places the Altar of incense in the Holy of Holies: Hom. in Ex. ix. 3 ibi collocatur...propitiatorium sed et altare aureum incensi.

But it is urged on the other hand that in the lxx. the altar of incense is never called by this name, but (to) thusiasterion (tou) thumiamatos (Ex. xxx. 1, 27; Lev. iv. 7; 1 Chron. vi. 49; comp. Luke i. 11) and to thus. ton thumiamaton (1 Chron. xxviii. 18: 2 Chron. xxvi. 16, 19), while thumiaterion is twice used in the lxx. for a censer (HebrewP'9rr): 2 Chron. xxvi 19; Ezek. viii. 11; and in Jer. iii. 19 by Aquila and Symmachus for Hebrewn$IJ© (fire-pan).

It must however be remarked that the translation of the lxx. was practically inevitable. The use of HebrewWp in the original required to be represented by thumiasterion. The only other rendering bomos was inapplicable. And further in Ex. xxx. 1 where the full phrase Hebrewtrp$ t$p Mp is found, Symmachus and Theodotion read thusiasterion thumiaterion thumiamatos, a reading which Origen introduced with an asterisk into his Greek text. Nor does the use of thumiaterion for 'censer' fix this single meaning to the word, for Josephus, who calls the altar of incense thumiaterion, uses the same word for 'censer' in his narrative of the rebellion of Korah (Antt. iv. 2, 6) where the lxx. has pureion (HebrewPxipr).

It cannot therefore be urged that the usage of the lxx. offers a valid argument against adopting here the sense which is unquestionably justified by the contemporary evidence of Philo and Josephus. External evidence then, it may be fairly said, is in favour of the rendering Altar of incense.

If now we turn to internal evidence it appears to be most unlikely that the 'golden altar* (Ex. xxx. 1 ff.; xxxvii. 25 ff.; xl. 5, 26), one of the most conspicuous and significant of the contents of the Tabernacle, on which other writers dwell with particular emphasis, should be omitted from the enumeration here; and no less unlikely that a golden censer should be mentioned in its place, while no such vessel is mentioned in the O. T. as part of the furniture of the Holy of Holies, or even in special connexion with the service of the Day of Atonement. The mention in the Mishna (Joma, iv. 4) of the use of a golden censer on the Day of Atonement, instead of the silver censer used on other days, does not furnish sufficient explanation for the place which it would hold here in the Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle. Nor indeed is there any evidence that the censer so used was in any sense part of the furniture of the Holy of Holies: on the contrary it was removed after the service (Joma, vii. 4).

At first sight however it is difficult to understand how the Altar of incense could be described as part of the furniture of the Holy of Holies; or, to speak more exactly, as properly belonging to it (echousa thumiaterion). But this phrase probably suggests the true explanation. The Altar of incense bore the same relation to the Holy of Holies as the Altar of burnt offering to the Holy place. It furnished in some sense the means of approach to it. Indeed the substitution of echousa for en e (v. 2) itself points clearly to something different from mere position. The Ark and the Altar of incense typified the two innermost conceptions of the heavenly Sanctuary, the Manifestation of God and the spiritual worship of man. And thus they are placed in significant connexion in the Pentateuch: Ex. xxx. 6; xl. 5; comp. Lev. iv. 7; xvi. 12, 18 (before the Lord).

In one passage indeed (1 K. vi. 22) the Altar of incense is described in language closely resembling that which is used here as 'belonging to the shrine' (HebrewT^^ft).

It is further to be observed that the word thumiaterion is left indefinite. While the writer says he luchnia, he trapeza (he prothesis ton arton), he kibotos tes diathekes, to hilasterion, he says simply chrusoun thumiaterion, 'a golden incense (altar).' The word is descriptive and not the technical name of a special object.

On the whole therefore it appears that both the evidence of language and the evidence of the symbolism of the passage are in favour of the sense 'Altar of incense.' This sense is given by the O.L. The Syriac is ambiguous perikekalummenen pantothen chrusio, en e stamnos chruse echousa to manna kai he rhabdos Aaron he blastesasa he blast.: om. he B.

incense-vessel (lit. house of perfume).

In Apoc. viii. 3, 5 the word for 'censer' is libanotos which is not found in lxx. (elsewhere libanotis).

It may be added that in the service of the Day of Atonement the Golden Altar was treated in the same manner as the Holy of Holies by the sprinkling of blood: Ex. xxx. 10.

In prophetic imagery also there is an altar in heaven (Is. vi. 6; Apoc. viii. 3). The type of heaven therefore could not be without its proper altar; though it was not placed locally within it.

Perhaps it is worthy of notice that in the legend mentioned in 2 Macc. ii. 5 Jeremiah hides the Ark and the Altar of incense in the cave.

ten keboton tes diath.] the ark of the covenant...Vulg. arcam testamenti. Ex. xxv. 10 ff.: xxxvii. 1 ff. (Deut x. 3). The writer of the Epistle, as has been noticed before, fixes attention on the Mosaic type, the Tabernacle. The Ark, which had belonged to the Tabernacle, was placed in Solomon's Temple (1 K. viii. 1 ff.); but in the later Temple the Holy of Holies was entirely empty (Jos. B. J. v. 6, 5 ekeito de ouden hoos en auto; Tac. Hist. v. 9). The site which the Ark should have occupied was marked by 'the stone of foundation' (Hebrewn»ttf |3^), a raised platform on which, according to a late tradition, the sacred Tetragrammaton was inscribed. Comp. Buxtorf, Len. a. v. Hebrewn»n&amp.

On the traditional later history of the Ark see Grimm on 2 Macc. ii. 1—5; and Wetstein on Apoc. ii. 17.

perikek. p. chrusio] This clause is added predicatively: 'the Ark of the covenant, an Ark overlaid all round about with gold.' Chrusion as distinguished from chrusos has the secondary idea of gold wrought for a particular use, as jewels 1 Pet. iii. 3, or coin, Acts iii. 6. For pantothen compare Ex. xxv. 10 esothen kai exothen.

stamnos] Vulg. urna. Ex. xvi. 32 ff. The epithet, 'a golden pot,' is an addition to the Hebrew text which is found in the lxx. (Ex. xvi. 33). In the Pentateuch the pot of manna and Aaron's rod are said to be laid up 'before the Testimony' (Ex. xvi. 34; Num. xvii. 10; comp. Ex. xxv. 16, 21) and not definitely in the Ark.

The significance of the Manna is indicated in Apoc. ii. 17 to m. to kekrummenon.

chrusoun.,.chrusio... chruse...] The solemn repetition of the word emphasises the splendour of this typical sanctuary (comp. Æn. iv. 138 f.). Gold was the characteristic metal of the Holy of Holies. Comp. 1 K. vii. 48 ff. It is remarkable that Ezekiel in describing the Temple of his vision makes no mention of the materials of which it was constructed.

he rhabdos] Num. xvii. 10 ff.

The pot of manna and Aaron's rod are not mentioned in Scripture except in the places of the Pentateuch referred to, and here.

When the Ark was removed to the Temple it contained only the Tables of the Law (1 K. viii. 9; comp. Jos. Ant. iii. 6, 5).

hai plakes tes diath.] Vulg. tabulæ testamenti. These are called in the lxx. hai plakes tou marturiou (HebrewHl$) Ex. xxxi. 18; xxxii. 15, and (hai) plakes (tes) diathekes (HebrewW"f9 GiEL) Deut ix. 9, 11, 15. In 1 K. viii. 9 plakes tes diathekes is added as a gloss to plakes lithinai.

Chrysostom remarks that these memorials in the Ark were monuments kai hai plakes tes diathekes, ³huperano de autes Cheroubein doxes kataskiazonta to hilasterion. peri hon

5 huperano...autes: huper...auten D?*. cheroubein (-in) 'BD?: beim (-bim) S A me. kataskiazonta: -zon A.

of the rebellious spirit of Israel: panta tauta semna hen kai lampra tes Ioudaikes agnomosunes hupomnemata. kai hai plakes tes diathekes. kateaxe gar autas kai to manna. egongusan gar...kai he rhabdos Aaron he blastesasa. epanestesan gar.

(5). huperano de autes...] and above it, i.e. the Ark (superque eam V.), Cherubim of glory (Ex. xxv. 18 ff.), not simply 'glorious Cherubim,' as if the epithet characterised their nature, but 'Cherubim of glory' ministering to the divine revelation. The divine glory, the revelation of God's majesty, was in a peculiar sense connected with them. God revealed Himself 'from between them': Ex. xxv. 22; Num. vii. 89; 1 Sam. iv. 4; 2 Sam. vi. 2; 2 K. xix. 15 || Is. xxxvii. 16; Ps. lxxx. 1; xcix. 1. Comp. Lev. xvi. 2; Ecclus. xlix. 8.

kataskiazorta] The Cherubim are treated as zoa (Apoc. iv. 6). Compare Ex. xxv. 20 suskiazontes.

to hilasterion] Vulg. propitiatorium, O. L. expiationem. Lev. xvi. 14 f. (Hebrewrvjbfy). The literal meaning of Hebbrewrnb is simply covering, but the 'covering' is distinct from the Ark which is complete without it (comp. Dillm. Ex. xxv. 17). It is possible that at a later time the idea of the 'covering,' atonement, for sin may have been added to the material sense (1 Chron. xxviii. 11 HebrewniJaM IV3). In itself the 'covering' of the Ark had a natural symbolic meaning. It was interposed between the Ark containing the Tables of the Law and the Divine glory.

On its first occurrence Hebrewrnb$ is translated in the lxx. hilasterion epithema (Ex. xxv. 15); but generally it is rendered by hilasterion only. The rendering thusiasterion in Lev. xvi. 14 seems to be an error, though there is a trace of this rendering in one of the Greek Versions in Ex. xxxvii. 6 (hallos. thusiasterion). The word hilasterion is used as technical by Philo: de vit. Mos. iii. § 8, ii. p. 150 M.; de prof. § 19, i. 561 M.

This rendering was taken from the use made of the 'covering' on the Day of Atonement when it was sprinkled with the atoning blood: Lev. xvi. 15.

In Ezekiel "ilasterion is used as the rendering of HebrewfTJjij (xliii. 14: Aqu. krepidoma; Sym. peridrome; 17, 20), the 'settle' or 'ledge' of the altar.

peri on...kata meros] Vulg. de quibus modo non est dicendum per singula. There is, it is implied, a typical significance in the details, but the writer notices only the lesson of the two great divisions of the Sanctuary, determined by the ordinances of service. For ouk estin comp. 1 Cor. xi. 20.

6—10. After speaking of the material arrangements of the Sanctuary, the writer goes on to shew the significant limitations which determined the use of it. The priests entered day by day into the Holy place: the High-priest once in the year, with special ceremonies, into the Holy of Holies (vv. 6, 7). As yet, under the Mosaic order, it was clearly taught that there was no free access to God (8—10). The people could only approach him through their representatives; and these had only a partial right of drawing near to Him.

Though there was an august array of typical instruments and means of service, the access to the Divine Presence was not yet open. Part of the Sanctuary was open to the priests: part to the High-priest only on a single day in each year. ouk estin nun legein kata meros.?Touton de houtos kateskeuasmenon, eis men ten proten skenen dia pantos eisiasin hoi hiereis tas latreias epitelountes,?eis de ten estin: enestin '*.

It must be kept in mind throughout that the Holy place was the scene of man's worship, and the way by which he approached God; while the Holy of Holies symbolised the Divine Presence itself.

Thus the Tabernacle witnessed constantly to the aim of man and to the fact that he could not as yet attain it. He could not penetrate to that innermost sanctuary to which he necessarily looked, and from which blessing flowed. The same institutions which brought forcibly to the soul of the Israelite the thought of Divine Communion made him feel that he could not yet enjoy it as it might be enjoyed.

Compare Chrysostom: toutestin, hen men tauta, ouk apelauon de touton auton ohi Ioudaioi, ou gar heoron auta. hoste ouk ekeinois mallon hen he ois proetupouto.

(b) 6, 7 The priestly service of the Sanctuary.

(6). touton de...] But when these things have been thus prepared....Vulg. His vero (O. L. autem) ita compositis (O. L. aptatis). The perf. (katesk.) expresses that the historical foundation (v. 2 kateskeuasthe) issued in an abiding system (comp. v. 8 pephanerosthai, v. 18 enkekainistai).

eis men ten pr. sk....eisiasin...epitelountes] into the first (v. 2) tabernacle, the Holy place, the scene of spiritual, symbolic worship, the priests enter continually accomplishing the services....Vulg. in priori quidem tabernaculo semper introibant sacerdotes, sacrificiorum officia consummantes.

The present (eisiasin) expresses the ideal fulfilment of the original Mosaic institution. The writer here deals only with the original conception realised in the Tabernacle, though elsewhere (c. viii. 4) he recognises the perpetuation of the Levitical ritual; and the existing Temple system was naturally present to his mind as the representation of it. The Latin rendering is an accommodation to eiche in v. 1.

dia pantos] The word is used peculiarly in the N.T. of Divine Service which knows essentially no formal limits: c. xiii. 15; Lk. xxiv. 53; Acts x. 2. Comp. Matt, xviii. 10; Acts xxiv. 16.

As distinguished from pantote (c. vii. 25 note) it seems to express the continuous, unbroken permanence of a characteristic habit, while pantote marks that which is realised on each several occasion.

tas latreias epitel.] accomplishing the divine services, such as the placing and removal of the shewbread on the Sabbath (Lev. xxiv. 5 ff.), the offering of incense every morning and evening, and the dressing of the lamps (Ex. xxx. 7 ff.). The Vulgate rendering (O.L. ministeria consummare) leads the thought away from the purely symbolic service of the Holy place to the animal sacrifices of the Temple Court.

(7). eis de ten d....archiereus] but into the second tabernacle, the tabernacle beyond 'the second veil' (v. 3), the symbol of the immediate Divine Presence, the High-priest alone, once in the year, that is, on one day in the year, though on that day he entered twice (Lev. xvi. 12 ff.), or, according to the later tradition, four times (Mishnah deuteran hapax tou heniautou monos ho archiereus, ou choris haimatos, ho prospherei huper heautou kai ton tou laou agnoematon,?touto delountos tou pneumatos tou hagiou,

Joma n. 1, 7, 4). But see Philo, Leg. ad Cai. § 39 (ii. 591 M.) kai an autos ho archiereus dusin hemerais tou etous he kai te aute tris he kai tetrakis epiphoitese thanaton aparaiteton hupomenei.

The words, hapax monos ho archiereus, emphasise the restrictions with which the approach was beset. There was only one occasion of entrance, and the entrance was allowed to one representative of the people only. And even he entered only in the power of another life (comp. c. x. 19 en to haimati).

Philo insists on the peculiar privilege in the same words: Leg. ad Cai. l. c. (eis ta aduta) hapax tou eniautou ho megas hiereus eiserchetai. See also de monarch. ii. § 2 (i. 223 M.) touto di' etous epitetrammenon hapax eisienai. de ebriet. § 34 (i. 378 M.) di' etous hapax eisionta. And he applies the limitation even to the Logos: horas hoti oude ho archiereus logos, endiatribein dei kai scholazein en tois hagiois domasi dunamenos, hadeian escheke kata panta kairon pros auta phoitan all' hapax di' eniautou molis; (de gig. § 11; i. 269 M.).

ou choris haimatos...agnoematon] The High-priest first took the blood of the bullock, which was a sin-offering for himself, within the veil, and sprinkled it seven times before the Mercy seat (Lev. xvi. 11 ff.).

After this he offered the goat which was a sin-offering for the people, and brought the blood of this within the veil, and did with it as with the blood of the bullock (Lev. xvi. 15).

This sprinkling of the blood is regarded in a wider sense as an 'offering' (Lev. i. 5) which he makes for himself and for the ignorances of the people. The most general phrase is used in regard to the High-priest (huper heautou, O.L. pro se et populi delictis). The absence of the article before heautou excludes the repetition of agnoematon (as Vulg. pro eua et populi ignorantia). Compare Lev. xvi. 11, with Lev. x 16.

For ou chorlis see c. vii. 20.

The word agnoema (sin of ignorance) occurs here only in the N.T., but the thought is included in tois agnoousin c. v. 2. Comp. 1 Macc. xiii. 39; Ecclus. xxiii. 2; Num. xv. 22 ff. 30 f. Theophylact notices that some thought that there is a reference here to the superior efficacy of the Christian covenant: hai men gar nomikai [thusiai] ta en agnoia sunechoroun plemmelemata, he de tou Christou kai ta en eidesei hamartemata aphiesi.

In connexion with the idea of agnoema Chrysostom expresses a striking thought: hora, ouk eipen hamartematon all' agnoematon hina me mega phronesosin. ei gar kai me hekon hemartes, phesin, all' akon egnoesas, kai toutou oudeis esti katharos.

(c) 8—10 The restrictions which limited the approach of priests and High-priest to God contained an obvious lesson. There was no way to God opened by the Law. The Law had a symbolical, disciplinary, value and looked forward to a more perfect system.

(8). touto del. tou pn. t. hag.] Vulg. hoc significante spiritu sancto. There is a divine meaning both in the words of Scripture and in the ordinances of worship. The Spirit which inspired the teaching and fixed the ritual Himself discloses it, and this He does continuously (delountos not delosantos) as long as the veil rests over any part of the record. For deloun see c. xii. 27; 1 Pet. i. 11; 2 Pet. i. 14.

Compare the words of Theophylact:...edelouto sumbalikos hoti eos mepo pephanerosthai ten ton hagion hodon eti tes protes hou histatai he skene aute, toutestin eos hou kratei ho nomos kai hai kat' auton latreiai telountai, ouk esti basimos he ton hagion hodos, toutestin, he eis ton ouranon eisodos.

mepo pephan....] that the way into the Holy place hath not yet been made manifest while the first tabernacle hath still an Appointed place; Vulg. nondum propalatam esse sanctorum viam adhuc priore tabernaculo habente statum (O.L. virtutem). It is evident that this phrase 'the Holy place' most include 'the Holy of holies,' the symbolic Presence of God (v. 12; 24 f.; x. 19), even if it does not mean this exclusively. Perhaps however a general phrase is chosen by the Apostle to include both the scene of worship and the scene of the Divine revelation. The people had no way into the Holy place which was open to the priests only; the priests had no way into the Holy of holies which was open to the High-priest alone.

For the construction he ton hagion hodos compare c. x. 19; Matt. x. 5; Gen. iii. 24.

The comprehensive sense which has been given to ta hagia, as including both the Holy and the Most Holy place, explains the use of he prote skene. This phrase has been used just before (v. 6; comp. v. 2) of the Holy place as the vestibule, so to speak, of the Divine presence-chamber; and it is very difficult to suppose that it should be suddenly used in another sense for 'the first (the Mosaic) tabernacle' as opposed to 'the heavenly archetypal tabernacle' (v. 11). 'The first, the outer, tabernacle,' the sanctuary of habitual worship, did in a most impressive way shew the limits which were placed upon the worshipper. While this held a recognised place among divine institutions the people were separated from the object of their devotion. All had not as yet the privilege of priests: all priests had not the right of approach to the Divine throne. Thus the outer sanctuary was the representative symbol of the whole Tabernacle as the place of service.

The phrase echouses stasin must, it is reasonable to suppose, express something more than simply standing (hestekuias, hestoses) as the Latin Versions indicate. The periphrasis with echo (comp. 1 John i. 8 note) marks the general position and not only the isolated fact: 'while the first tabernacle still has an appointed place answering to a Divine order' (c. x. 9). The phrase is used of the prevalence of periodic winds: Polyb. v. 5, 3 ton etesipon hede stasin echonton.

(9). hetis parab....enestekota] Vulg. quae parabola est temporis instantis, which is (seeing it is) a parable, a figure, and nothing more, for the season now present, 'the present age,' that period of preparation which will be followed by 'the age to come' for which we look. This sense of ho kairos ho enestos is established beyond all doubt. In technical language all time was divided into 'the past, the present (enestos), and the future' (Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. Hypot. iii. 17, 144 *ho chronos legetai trimeres ainai. kai to men parochekos, to de enestos, to de mellon); and the use of the word enesteka in the N. T. is decisive in favour of the sense the season that is present (not the season that is at hand): see 2 Thess. ii. 2; Gal. i. 4; 1 Cor. vii. 26. Things 'present' (enestota) are contrasted with things 'future' (mellonta): 1 Cor. iii. 22; Rom. viii. 38.

It may therefore be reasonably laid down that ho kairos ho enestos must be taken in connexion with that which the writer of the Epistle speaks of as 'future,' 'the future world' (ii. 5), 'the future age' (vi. 5), 'the future skenes echruses stasin?hetis parabole eis ton kairon ton enestekota, kath' hen dora te kai thusiai prospherontai me dunamenai kata suneidesin teleiosai ton

9 hetis: + prote D?*. kath' hen 'ABD?*: kath' hon S.

blessings' (x. 1). If then, as is beyond doubt, 'the future,' in the vision of the writer, is that which is characteristic of the Christian order, 'the present' must be that which is characteristic of the preparatory order, not yet outwardly abolished (comp. Gal. i. 4), that which is commonly called in other writings, 'this age,' or 'the present age'; and in the present context ho kairos ho enestos stands in opposition to kairos diorthoseos (v. 10), and parallel with 'these days' in c. i. 1 (note).

It will be noticed also that kairos is chosen (in place of aion) as suggesting the idea of a present crisis: comp. Rom. iii. 26; xi. 5 (2 Cor. viii. 13).

Thus 'the present season' must be carefully distinguished from the fulness of the Christian time, though in one sense the blessings of Christianity were already roalised essentially. So for Primasius, while he gives a wrong sense to 'present,' says truly: Quod enim agebatur in templo tunc temporis figura erat et similitudo istius veritatis quæ jam in ecclesia completur.

The Levitical system then, represented by 'the first Tabernacle,' is described here as a parable 'to serve for' or, perhaps 'to last as long as' the present season. It conveyed its lessons while the preparatory age continued up to the time of change. It did indeed foreshadow that which is offered in the Gospel, but that is not the aspect of it which is here brought forward. As a parable (c. xi. 19) it is regarded not so much in relation to a definite future which is directly prefigured ('type') as in regard to its own power of teaching. The parable suggests thoughts: the type points to a direct fulfilment.

(9), (10). kath' hen dora...monon epi...br....baptismois, dikaiomata...epikeimena] in accordance with which (and after this parable, or teaching by figure) gifts and sacrifices are offered such as cannot make the worshipper perfect as touching the conscience (in conscience), being only ordinances of flesh, resting upon meats and drinks and divers washings, imposed until a season of reformation. If the kai is retained (kai dikaiomata) then two things are stated of the Levitical sacrifices, 'that they cannot bring perfection, as resting only on meats'...and 'that they are ordinances of flesh...'.

This sense is given in a rude form by the Old Latin version: quæ [munera et bestiæ] non possunt conscientia consummare servientes, solum in cibis et potu et variis baptismis, justitia carnis usque ad tempus restitutionis imposita.

The Vulgate renders kai dikaiomasin...epikeimenois quæ non possunt...in cibis...et variis baptismatibus et justitiis carnis usque ad tempus correctionis impositis.

Three points in this complicated sentence require consideration, the weakness of the Levitical offerings (me dun. kata sun. tel. ton latr.), the ground of their weakness (monon epi bromasin...dikaiomata sarkos), the purpose of their enactment (mechri kairou diorth. epik.).

me dun....tel. ton latr.] For the idea of teleiosis 'a bringing to perfection' according to some assumed standard, see c. vii. 11 note. Here that standard is said to be 'according to' 'as touching the conscience.' The Levitical offerings were able to secure an outward perfecting, the admission of each worshipper to a full participation latreuonta, ¹?monon epi bromasin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois, dikaiomata sarkos mechri kairou

10 kai

10 baptismois '* AD?* syr vg me the: + kai '* B vg syr hl the. dikaiomata 'AB syr vg me: dikaioma D?* the: dikaiomasin S vg syr hl.

in the privileges of the ancient commonwealth of God, which depended on the satisfaction of ceremonial conditions. But they could not bring a spiritual perfecting. They could not, to notice one aspect, 'cleanse the conscience from dead works to serve a living God' (v. 14).

For suneidesis see Additional Note.

ton latreuonta expresses each worshipper who approached God through the appointed minister. Compare c. x. 2 tous latreuontas (of the whole body); xiii. 10. For the absolute use of latreuo see x. 2 note.

(10). monon epi brom....dik. s.] Those offerings were unable to satisfy man's destiny being only ordinances of flesh combined with, resting upon, meats and drinks and divers washings.

The monon and the epi brom. both serve to limit and explain the character of the Mosaic institutions. These institutions were only ordinances of flesh, ordinances which dealt with that which is external (comp. c. vii. 16 kata nomon entoles sarkines); and the accompaniments of the sacrifices, the personal requirements with which they were connected, indicated their purely outward significance.

Fur the use of the preposition epi to express the accompanying circumstances or conditions see 1 Thess. iv. 7; 1 Cor. ix. 10; 2 Cor. ix. 6; Gal. v. 13; Eph. ii. 10; 2 Tim. ii. 14. Compare also vv. 15, 17; c. viii. 6; x. 28.

The reference in brom kai pom. kai diaph. bapt. is general, and must be taken to include the various Levitical regulations positive and negative as to meats and drinks, developed by tradition. The mention of 'drinks' has caused difficulty, for the Law gave no universal directions in this respect: so Theophylact asks: pos de eipe pomasi; kaitoi peri pomaton diaphoras ou dielambanen ho nomos; He suggests that the reference may be to the conditions of the Nazarite vow (Num. vi. 3), or to the injunctions laid upon the ministering priests (Lev. x. 9). Comp. Col. ii. 16.

For the 'different washings' see Mark vii. 4. Comp. Ex. xxix. 4; Lev. xi. 25, 28 ff.; xvi. 4, 24 ff.; Num. viii. 7; xix. 17, &c.

mechri k. diorth. epikeimena] The provisional character of the Levitical institutions illustrates their enactment. They were imposed until a season of reformation. The word diorthosis is not found elsewhere in biblical Greek. It is used in late Greek writers for the reformation of laws, institutions, states. Comp. Acts xxiv. 3 diorthoma. The verb diorthoun is used in the lxx. of 'amending ways': Jer. vii. 3, 5 (HebrewT3P0); comp. Wisd. ix. 18; and also of 'setting up,' 'establishing': Is. xvi. 5; lxii. 7 (Hebrewfljto). The thought of 'making straight, erect' passes naturally into that of 'making stable.'

Under different aspects this 'reformation' is spoken of as a 'restitution' (Acts iii. 21 apokatastasis), and a 'regeneration' (Matt. xix. 28 palingenesia).

The anarthrous form of the phrase (kairos diorthoseos) marks the character of the coming change. The very nature of the Law shewed that it was transitory, if it did not shew the definite issue to which it led.

The Greek commentators call attention diorthoseos epikeimena. ¹¹Christos de paragenomenos

to the force of the word epikeimena. Thus Theodoret: kalos to epekeito, baros gar hen monon ta en to nomo (Acts xv. 10, 28).

(2) ix. 11—28. The High-priestly Atonement under the New Covenant.

The work of the Jewish High-priest has been Indicated as the climax of the old system (v. 7); and the High-priestly work of Christ is now considered in contrast with it. The comparison is instituted in respect of that which was the unique and supreme privilege of the Levitical High-priest, the access to God on the Day of Atonement. Thus two main points come into consideration: the entrance of the High-priest into the Divine Presence, and the fact that the entrance was through blood.

Under this aspect the work of Christ is first (a) described generally in vv. 11, 12; and then the truths suggested (b) by the shedding of His Blood (vv. 13—22), and (c) by His entrance into the Presence of God whence He has not yet returned (23—28), are followed out in detail.

(a) A summary description of Christ's High-priestly work (11, 12).

The work of Christ as High-priest of the new order now established stands in sovereign superiority over that of the Levitical type in regard to scene, and offering, and efficacy. The tabernacle through which He ministered was not of this creation but heavenly (11 b). The blood through which He entered before God was not that of sacrificed animals but His own (12 a). The redemption which He obtained was not for a brief season but for ever (12 b).

¹¹But Christ, having come a High-priest of the good things realised, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made by hands, that is, not of this creation, ¹²nor yet through blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, entered in once for all into the Holy place, having obtained eternal redemption.

(11), (12). In contrast (Christos de) with the repeated entrance of the Jewish High-priest into the Holy of Holies through the blood of appointed victims Christ once for all entered into the true Sanctuary, the actual Presence of God, through His own blood, and obtained not a temporary but an eternal deliverance. Thus the contrast extends to the system (ta genomena agatha), the place and mode of the Atonement (dia tes m. kai tel. sk., dia tou id. ai.), the issue (aion lutr.). In all these points the 'parable' finds fulfilment.

(11). Christos de...] But Christ having come a High-priest of good things realised...O. L. Christus autem, sacerdos quando advenit bonorum factorum. Vulg. Christus autem adsistens pontifex futurorum bonorum. For the simple Christos (contrast ho christos iii. 14 note) see v. 24; iii. 6.

paragenomenos] Christ has not only become (genomenos) High-priest as one of an appointed line, He has made His presence as High-priest felt among His people as sent from another realm to fulfil the office in part on earth.

So Chrysostom says: ouk eipe genomenos alla paragenomenos, toutestin, eis auto touto elthon, ouch heteron diadexamenos. ou proteron paregeneto kai tote egeneto all' hama helthe.

The idea of paragenesthai is that of coming to, reaching, being present at, some marked place or company. Compare Matt. iii. 1 paraginetai Iohanes. Luke xii. 51 dokeite hote eirenen paregenomen dounai en te ge; Acts v. 21 (and often in that book).

arch. ton genomenon ag.] The title of Christ at once marks His absolute supremacy. Ho is a High-priest whose work deals with blessings which have been gained and which do not archiereus ton genomenon agathon dia tes meizonos

11 mellonton

11 genomenon BD?* syrr: mellonton 'A vg syr hl mg me (æg) [comp. c. x. 1].

exist only in hope and prophecy. He is High-priest of the good things which are already realised by the fulfilment of the divine conditions, and which are not promised only and future. The same blessings can be spoken of as 'realised' in respect of Christ's work, and as 'future' in respect of the preparatory discipline of the law (c. x. 1), or the actual position of Christians (comp. c. xiii. 14). In this place it seems natural that 'the good things' should be spoken of as realised from the divine side. Even if men have not entered upon their inheritance, it is already gained. In c. x. 1 the case is different and there the reading (ton mell. ag.) is undisturbed.

For the gen. ton gen. ag. compare c. iii. 1 arch. tes homologias (dealing with and belonging to).

(11 b), (12). The Majesty of Christ's title ('High-priest of the good things realised') is justified by a description of His Work. In the circumstances and the effects of His High-priestly service He offers the heavenly counterpart of that which was exhibited under an earthly figure in the Mosaic system. This is shewn first in respect of the Tabernacle 'through which' Christ fulfils His work.

dia tes m....oude di' haim....dia de...] through the greater...nor yet through blood...but through his own...Vulg. per...tabernaculum...neque per sanguinem...sed per...sanguinem....It seems to be best to take the preposition in each case in the same general sense and to join both dia tes m. kai t. sk. and dia tou id. hai. with eiselthe. Christ employed in the fulfilment of His office 'the greater Tabernacle' and 'His own Blood' (compare the corresponding though not parallel use of dia in 1 John v. 6).

The local sense which has been given to dia in the first clause ('passing through the greater...tabernacle into the Presence of God') does not give a very clear thought. It is true indeed that the High-priest passed through 'the first tabernacle' to the Holy of Holies, but no such stress is laid on this 'passage through' as to make it the one thing noticeable in the Sanctuary. The outer Sanctuary was not merely a portal to the Holy of Holies but the appointed place of priestly service. And on the other hand the idea conveyed by this limited (local) sense of 'through' is included in the wider (instrumental) sense of 'through' which describes that which Christ used in His work.

In this work it must be observed that Christ is said to make use not of 'a greater tabernacle' but of 'the greater tabernacle,' 'the true, ideal, tabernacle' (c. viii. 2). The thought of the reader is thus carried back to the heavenly pattern which Moses followed (c. viii. 5 note; Ex. xxv. 9). The earthly Tabernacle witnessed not only to some nobler revelation of God's Presence, but definitely to the archetype after which it was fashioned.

What then is this heavenly Tabernacle? Some preparation will be made for the answer if we call to mind the two main purposes of the transitory Tabernacle. It was designed on the one hand to symbolise the Presence of God among His people; and on the other to afford under certain restrictions a means of approach to Him. The heavenly Tabernacle must then satisfy these two ends in the highest possible degree. It must represent the Presence of God, and offer a way of approach to God, being in both kai teleioteras skenes ou cheiropoietou, tout' respects eternal, spiritual, ideal (alethine c. viii. 2).

In seeking for some conception which shall satisfy these conditions it is obvious that all images of local circumscription must be laid aside, or, at least, used only by way of accommodation. The spiritual Tabernacle must not be defined by the limitations which belong to 'this creation.' We may then at once set aside all such interpretations as those which suppose that the lower heavens, through which Christ passed, or the supra-mundane realm, or the like, are 'the greater tabernacle.' We must look for some spiritual antitype to the local sanctuary.

And here we are brought to the patristic interpretation which it requires some effort to grasp. The Fathers both Greek and Latin commonly understood the greater Tabernacle to be the Lord's 'flesh,' or 'humanity.' Thus Chrysostom: ten sarka entautha legei. kalos de kai meizona kai teleioteran eipen, ei ge ho theos logos kai pasa he tou preumatos energeia enoikei en aute.

And Theodoret, followed by OEcumenius: skenen acheiropoieton ten antropeian phusin ekalesen hen anelaben ho despotes Christos...ou kata nomon phuseos tes en te ktisei politeuomenes. Compare also Euthymius: dia tou idiou phemi somatos en o okesen he toutou theotes, ho meizon hos henomenon te theoteti toutou pantote.

And Primasius: Tabernaculum per quod assistit deo patri humanitas illius est.

In this connexion Chrysostom and Theophylact notice how the Lord's 'Body' and 'heaven' are each spoken of as 'a veil' and as 'a tabernacle.' The text of Chrysostom is confused, but Theophylact has preserved his meaning: kalei to soma tou Kuriou kai skenen, hos entautha, dia to ton Monogene skenosai en aute. kai katapetasma, hos apokruptousan ten theoteta. kalei kai ton ouranon tois autois toutois onomasi, skenen, hos ekei ontos tou archiereos. katapetasma, hos apoteichizomenon ton hagion di'autou.

This interpretation was met by one interesting objection in early times: How could the Lord's Body be said to be 'not of this creation'? Was not this assertion, it was asked, a denial of His true humanity? entautha, Theophylact says, epipedosin hoi hairetikoi legontes ouranion einai to soma kai aitherion. He replies that 'heaven' and 'sky' are themselves 'of this creation.' But OEcumenius meets the difficulty more satisfactorily by saying that under different aspects the Lord's Body was and was not 'of this creation': to soma Christou kai tautes hen tes ktiseos kai ou tautes, tautes men, kata to ison einai kai dia panton homoion to hemetero somati, ou tautes de, kata to echein asunchutos kai adiairetos ten theoteta.

As far as the Lord's historical work on earth is concerned this interpretation is adequate. He was the perfect revelation of the Father and the way to Him. But in considering the ideal antitype, or rather archetype, of the Tabernacle we must take account of the Lord's ministry in heaven. In this (c. viii. 1 f.) the heavenly High-priest and the heavenly Tabernacle are in some sense distinguished; and the Lord acts as High-priest in His human Nature (c. iv. 14 ff.). Bearing this in mind we may perhaps extend the patristic conception so as to meet the difficulty, though, with our present powers of conceiving of divine things we must speak with the most reverent reserve. In this relation then it may be said that 'the greater and more perfect Tabernacle' of which Christ is minister, and (as we must add) in which the Saints worship, gathers up the various means under which God estin ou tautes tes ktiseos, ¹²oude di' haimatos tragon kai moschon dia de tou idiou haimatos, eiselthen ephapax reveals Himself in the spiritual order, and through which men approach to Him. Under one aspect these are represented by the union of the redeemed and perfected hosts made one in Christ as His Body. Through this glorified Church answering to the complete humanity which Christ assumed, God is made known, and in and through this each believer comes nigh to God. In this Body, as a spiritual Temple, Christ ministers. As members in this Body believers severally enjoy the Divine Presence. Thought fails us under the bondage of local limitations, and still we can dimly apprehend how we have opened to us in this vision the prospect of a spiritual reality corresponding to that which was material and earthly in the old ordinances of worship. It enables us to connect redeemed humanity with the glorified human Nature of the Lord, and to consider how it is that humanity, the summing-up of Creation, may become in Him the highest manifestation of God to finite being, and in its fulness that through which each part is brought near to God.

This heavenly Tabernacle is spoken of as greater and more perfect ( Vulg. amplius et perfectius), greater in comparison with the narrow limits of the earthly Tabernacle, more perfect as answering to the complete development of the Divine plan. And in its essential character it is not made by hands, that is, not of this creation (Vulg. non manu factum, id est, non hujus creationis). Human skill had nothing to do with its structure, for man's work finds its expression in the visible order of earth, to which this does not belong.

For ou cheiropoieton see v. 24; Mk. xiv. 58 (acheiropoietos); 2 Cor. v. 1 (oikian acheiropoieton aionion en tois ouranois). Compare Acts vii. 48; xvii. 24. For ou tautes tes ktiseos compare 2 Cor. iv. 18 ta gar blepomena proskaira, ta de me blepomena aionia; c. viii. 2 he skene he alethine epexen ho Kurios; and for ktisis, Rom. viii. 19 ff.

Philo, in a striking passage, speaks of the world as 'the house and city' of the first man medemias cheiropoietou kataskeues dedemiourgemenes ek lithon kai xulon hules.

(12 a). A second point which marks the heavenly character of Christ's work is seen in the nature of His offering. He made not a twofold offering but one only. He entered into the Holy place through His own Blood, and that once for all.

oude di' haim. trag. kai mosch.] nor yet through blood of goats and bulls....The oude seems to be due to the preceding ou cheir. as if the sentence had run ou dia cheirop....oude di' haimatos...The goat was the offering for the people (Lev. xvi. 15): the bullock for the High-priest himself (Lev. xvi. 11). The plural generalises the thought. The words used in the lxx. version of Leviticus are moschos and chimaros. Symmachus and Aquila seem to have used tragos for chimaros. The phrase tragoi kai tauroi (v. 13) gives the form in which the reference to animal victims would be popularly expressed. Compare Ps. xlix. 13; Is. i. 11 (elsewhere moschos seems to be always used in the lxx.).

dia de tou id. haim....ta hagia] but through His own blood (He) entered once for all into the Holy place, the immediate Presence of God in heaven (see v. 8 note).

The use of dia as marking the means but not defining the mode (meta) is significant when taken in connexion with v. 7 (ou choris). The earthly High-priest took with him eis ta hagia, aionian lutrosin heuramenos. ¹³ei gar to

the material blood: Christ 'through His own blood' entered into the Presence of God, but we are not justified in introducing any material interpretations of the manner in which He made it efficacious. Comp. c. xiii. 12 dia tou idiou haimatos: Acts xx. 28 hen periepoiesato dia tou haimatos tou idiou.

ephapax] See vii. 27 note. Christ did not need (like the Jewish High-priest) a double entrance, even as He did not need to repeat His entrance. One entrance left the way open for ever. The 'veil was rent' (Matt. xxvii. 51). There was no longer any obstacle interposed between the worshipper—for all are now priests (Apoc. i. 6)—and the Object of his worship.

(12 b). A third element in the absolute supremacy of Christ's High-priesthood lies in the abiding efficacy of His One priestly act. He obtained an eternal Redemption in contrast with the limited, recurrent, redemption of the yearly Atonement.

aion. lutr. heur.] having obtained eternal redemption, Vulg. æterna inventa redemptione, O. L. æterna expiatione reperta. In combination with eiselthen, heuramenos may express a coincident (comp. c. ii. 10 note), or a precedent fact: 'Christ entered...therein obtaining' or 'Christ entered...having already obtained.' The choice between these senses will be decided by the meaning given to 'redemption.' If 'redemption' is the initial work, the conquest of death (c ii. 14 f.), then this was completed in the Passion and Resurrection; but it seems more natural to find the fulness of the word satisfied in the Triumph of the Ascension. Compare Additional Note on lutrosis.

The form heuramenos is found here only in the N. T. The force of the middle voice (compare c. i. 3 poiesamenos) is that of 'having obtained as the issue of personal labour' directed to this end.

Chrysostom sees an emphatic sense in the word: sphodra ton aporon hen kai ton para prosdokian pos dia mias eisodou aionian lutrosin heurato.

And so Theophylact: hora de kai to heuromenos, hos para prosdokian genomenou tou pragmatos houto taute te lexei echresato. haporon gar hen to tes eleutherias hemin, all' autos heure touto.

OEcumenius also touches upon the voice: heuramenos...ouch heauto, pos gar ho anamartetos; alla to lao autou. e epeide kephale tes antropotetos exiosen einai, ta hemin katorthothenta auto katorthosthai legei ho apostolos.

(b) The truths taught by the shedding of Christ's Blood (vv. 13—22).

The thoughts springing out of the fulfilment of Christ's High-priestly work which have found a summary expression in vv. 11, 12 are developed in the remainder of the chapter. The efficacy of Christ's Blood is (a) first contrasted with that of the Jewish victims as a purifying power (13, 14); and then a new thought is introduced, which arises from the extension of the virtue of Christ's Blood to His people. The Blood is (b) the ratification of a new Covenant, as comprehensive in its application as the blood 'of the calves and the goats' by which the Old Covenant was ratified (15—22).

¹³For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctifieth unto the cleanness of the flesh, ¹?how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through His eternal spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse our conscience from dead works, to the end that we may serve a living God? ¹?And for this reason He is mediator of a new covenant, in order that a death having taken place for redemption haima tragon kai tauron kai spodos damaleos rhantizousa tous kekoinomenous hagiazei pros ten tes sarkos

13 tr. kai taur. 'ABD? vg syr vg me (æg): taur. kai tr. S syr hl. kekoin.: kekoimemenous D?*.

from the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. ¹?For where there is a covenant, the death of him that made it must needs be presented. ¹?For a covenant is sure where there hath been death; since it doth not ever have force when he that made it liveth. ¹?Whence not even hath the first covenant been inaugurated without blood. ¹?For when every commandment had been spoken according to the Law by Moses to all the people, taking the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, he sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, ²?saying This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded to youward. ²¹And the tabernacle also and all the vessels of the ministry he sprinkled in like manner with the blood ²²And I may almost say, it is in blood all things are cleansed according to the Law, and apart from outpouring of blood there cometh no remission.

(a) vv. 13, 14. A sense of difficulty might arise at the prospect of the vast claim which has been made for Christ's work. How, it might be asked, can it avail for ever? The Mosaic institutions furnish the answer.

The ritual purification of the Jewish system had a limited validity. It was directed to that which was outward. In this respect it removed outward defilement, and gave outward cleanness. If then it availed within its proper sphere, much more (we may confidently conclude) the blood of Christ will avail within its proper sphere, which is spiritual. The consequence which follows in the one case is (so to speak) due to an arbitrary enactment: the consequence in the other case lies in the very nature of things. The conclusion rests upon the comparison of a twofold relation, the relation of the blood of Christ to the blood of animals, and the relation of the inward sphere of religion to the outward.

(13). Two typical examples of the purificatory Levitical sacrifices are taken in illustration: the yearly sacrifices 'of goats and bulls' on the day of Atonement (Lev. xvi), and the occasional sacrifice of the red heifer (Num. xix.). The first regarded the impurity contracted from daily action, the second the impurity contracted from contact with death.

tragon kai tauron] Comp. v. 12 note.

spodos damaleos] In this case the blood of the sacrifice was also burnt: Num. xix. 5.

rhantizousa tous kekoin. hag...] sprinkling them that have been defiled, who by a definite act have contracted some stain, sanctifieth unto the cleanness of the flesh...Vulg. adspersus (O.L. sparsus) inquinatos sanctificat ad emundationem carnis (O.L. ad emundandam carnem). For the use of the word kekoinomenous, which is not found in the lxx., see Matt. xv. 11 ff.; Acts xxi. 28. The accus. depends on bantizsusa: Rs. l. (li.) 9 rhantieis me hussopo. The verb rhantizein occurs in the N.T. only in this Epistle: vv. 19, 21; x. 22 note. In the lxx. the form rhainein is more common. The 'water of separation (impurity)' is called in the lxx. hudor rhantismou, Num. xix. 9, 13, 20 f.

Theophylact calls attention to the distinction between hagiazei, katharoteta, ¹?poso mallon to haima tou christou, hos dia pneumatos aioniou heauton prosenenken amomon to

14 aioniou '* AB syrr: hagiou '* D?* vg me (æg).

sanctifieth,' 'halloweth,' in regard to destination, and katharizei (v. 14 kathariei), 'cleanseth' in regard to character: hora de sunesin, ouk eipen hoti ekatharise to haima ton tragon, all' hegiazen...ekei men eipe to hagiazei...entautha de kathariei eipon edeixen euthus ten huperochen.

The idea is that of the ceremonial parity which enabled the Jew to enjoy the full privileges of his covenant worship and fellowship with the external Church of God. The force of the words katharos, hagios—moral, external: ideal, personal—is determined by the context.

(14). poso mallon] The superior efficacy of Christ's Blood is based generally on the considerations that His Sacrifice was

(1). Voluntary, not by constraint as in the case of the animal sacrifices of the Law.

(2). Rational, and not animal.

(3). Spontaneous, not in obedience to a direct commandment.

(4). Moral, an offering of Himself by the action of the highest power in Himself; whereby He stood in connexion with God, and not a mere mechanical performance of a prescribed rite.

Comp. John x. 17 f.

to haima tou christou] The blood of Christ stands parallel both to the blood of goats and bulls and to the ashes of the heifer, as the means (1) of atonement for sins, and (2) of purification from contact with death: of access to God and of life in His Church.

It will be observed that it is not the death of the victim as suffering, but the use of the Blood (that is, the Life) which is presented here as the source of purification.

The efficacy of Blood—the life, Lev. xvii. 11—is regarded in different aspects in this passage. Now one aspect predominates and now another. It is a means of atonement, and it is a means of purification: it has a power retrospectively and prospectively. Death again, which makes the blood available, is the seal of the validity of a covenant. But no one view exhausts the meaning of that which is the fulness of a life made available for others. Compare Additional Note on 1 John i. 7.

hos...heaut. pros. amomon t. th.] who through His eternal spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, Vulg. qui per spiritum sanctum semetipsum obtulit immaculatum Deo. The sacrifice upon the altar of the Cross preceded the presentation of the blood. The phrase heauton prosenenken clearly fixes the reference to this initial act of Christ's High-priestly sacrifice. This act He accomplished dia pneumatos aioniou. In virtue of His inseparable and unchangeable Divine Nature Christ was Priest while He was victim also. He offered Himself, living through death and in death. Epiphanius puts together the different aspects of Christ's work in His sacrifice of Himself in a striking passage: autos hiereion, autos thuma, autos hiereus, autos thusiasterion, autos theos, autos antropos, autos basileus, autos archiereus, autos probaton, autos arnion, ta panta en pasin huper hemon genomenos, hina hemin zoe kata panta tropon genetai...(Hær. iv. § 4, 471 f.).

The absence of the article from pneuma aionion marks the spirit here as a power possessed by Christ, His 'Spirit.' It could not be said of any man absolutely that his spirit is eternal; but Christ's Spirit is in virtue of His Divine Personality eternal. By this, while truly man, He remained in unbroken connexion with God. theo, kathariei ten suneidesin hemon apo nekron epgwv

14 humon kathar.: + de' kathar. D?* [B ends with mfc]. hemon AD? (vg) syr vg me: humon ' (vg) syr hl.

Through this He had 'the power of an indissoluble life' (c. vii. 16).

The truth will become clearer if we go yet a step further. In men the 'spirit' is, as has been said, that by which they are capable of connexion with God. But in Christ, who did not cease to be the Son of God by becoming man, the 'spirit' is to be regarded as the seat of His Divine Personality in His human Nature. So far the pneuma aionion included the limited pneuma of the Lord's humanity. This pneuma, having its own proper existence, was in perfect harmony with the pneuma aionion. (Comp. ep. Barn. vii. 3 huper ton hemeteron hamartion emellen to skeuos tou preumatos prospherein thusian.)

This 'eternal spirit' obtained complete sovereignty at the Resurrection (1 Cor. xv. 45); and it is probably by reference to this fact that the difficult passage 2 Cor. iii. 17 ff. is to be explained. See also 1 Pet. iii. 18.

Another more obvious thought lies in the phrase.

Other sacrifices were wrought by the hand, being outward acts of flesh, but this was wrought by that which is highest in man's nature whereby he holds fellowship with God, being a truly spiritual act. Chrysostom indicates this thought under another aspect: to dia pneumatos hagiou (so he reads) deloi hoti ou dia puros prosenektai oude di' allon tinon, though this is but a small part of the meaning. Comp. Euthymius: dia tinos puros holokautosen heauton to theo kai patri amomon kalleirema.

For heaut. pros. to theo, compare c. vii. 27 note, vv. 25, 28 (prosenechtheis). See also c. xi. 4; John xvi. 2.

The epithet amomon describes Christ as a perfect victim. That which was required outwardly in the Levitical victims was satisfied absolutely by Christ.

The word amomos is used technically in this sense in the lxx. (e.g. Ex. xxix. 1 HebrewDnpJJ). Comp. Philo de agric. § 29 (i. 320 M.); de merc. mer. § 1 (ii. 265 M.) Dei de ton mellonta thuein skepresthai me ei to hiereion amomon, all'ei he dianoia holokleros auto kai panteles kathesteke. The connexion in which it stands shews that it refers here to the conditions and issue of the Lord's earthly life.

kathariei...theo zonti] (shall) cleanse our (your) conscience from dead works to the end that we (ye) may serve a living God. Vulg. emundabit conscientiam vestram ab operibus mortuis ad serviendum Deo viventi. The action of the blood of Christ is not to work any outward change but to communicate a vital force. It removes the defilement and the defiling power of 'dead works,' works which are done apart from Him who is 'the life' (comp. c. vi. 1 note). These stain the conscience and communicate that pollution of death which outwardly 'the water of separation' was designed to remove. The Levitical ritual contemplated a death external to the man himself: here the effects of a death within him are taken away.

Katharos as distinguished from hagios marks what the object is itself ('clean' ceremonially or morally), while hagios marks its destination.

ten suneidesin] Comp. v. 9 note.

Chrysostom says on 'dead works': kalos aipen apo nekron ergon, ei tis gar hepsato tote nekrou emiaineto. kai ntautha ei tis apsaito nekrou ergou eis to latreuein theo zo zonti. ¹?Kai dia touto diathekes kaines mesites estin, hopos thanatou genomenou eis apolutrosin ton epi te prote diatheke parabaseon ten epangelian labosin hoi keklemenoi tes aioniou th. z.: to th. to z. D?*: + kai alethino A me (1 Thess. i. 9).

molunetai dia tes suneideseos, and again ta par'hemin kai zonta kai alethina, ekeina de ta para Hioudaiois kai nekra kai pseude.

eis to latr. th. z.] Purity is not the end but the means of the new life. The end of the restored fellowship is energetic service to Him Who alone lives and gives life. The thought of performing certain actions is replaced by that of fulfilling a personal relation.

This service is specifically the service of a sacred ministry of complete surrender (latreuein). Compare Apoc. xxii. 3 hoi douloi autou latreusousin auto, and contrast 1 Thess. i. 9 douleuein th. z. kai alethino. Acts xx. 19 douleuon to Kurio. Rom. xiv. 18 douleuon to christo. xvi. 18 to Kurio hemon Christo ou douleuousin. Col. iii. 24 to Kurio Christo douleuete.

For theos zon see c. iii. 12 note.

(b) vv. 15—22. From the thought of the efficacy of Christ's Blood as the means through which He entered into the Divine Presence and cleanses the individual conscience the writer of the Epistle goes on to shew that through the shedding of His Blood came the inauguration of a new Covenant. The idea of death gives validity to the compact which it seals (15—17); and the communication of the blood of the victim to those with whom God forms a covenant unites them to Him with a power of life, a principle which was recognised in the ritual ordinances of the Mosaic system (18—22).

(15). kai dia t....mes. e.] And for this reason, even that the Blood of Christ purifies the soul with a view to a divine service, He is mediator of a new covenant...Vulg. Et ideo novi testamenti mediator (O. L. arbiter) est. The transition from the thought of the one all-efficacious atonement to that of the corresponding covenant is natural. The new internal and spiritual relation of man to God established by Christ involved of necessity a New Covenant. The Blood-the Life-of Christ, which was the source and support of the life, was the seal of the Covenant.

The words diathekes mesites go back to the prophetic promise c. viii. 8, which found its fulfilment in Christ. The emphasis lies on the phrase new covenant and specially upon the word covenant. It is of interest to notice the variation of emphasis in 2 Cor. iii. 6 diakonous kaines diathekes and here diathekes kaines mesites. For diatheke compare c. vii. 22; vii. 6 note, and xii. 24; and for mesites c. viii. 6 note; xii. 24; Gal. iii. 19 f.; 1 Tim. ii. 5.

hopos than. gen....ten epang. lab....] that a death having taken place for redemption from the transgressions that were under the first covenant they that have been called may receive...Vulg. ut morts intercedente in redemptionem earum prævaricationum quæ erant...The Old Covenant had been proved incapable of bringing men to perfection. God therefore provided them with fresh and more powerful help. At the same time He opened to them a nobler view of their end. In place of a material inheritance He shewed them an eternal inheritance. And the aim of the New Covenant was the attainment of the spiritual realities shadowed forth in the temporal blessings of Israel.

But the establishment of a New Covenant, a new and permanent relation between God and man, required as its preliminary condition the discharge of man's existing obligations. The sins which the Law had set in a clear light could not be ignored. The atonements provided for sin under the Law could not but be felt to be inadequate. They were limited in their application and so to speak arbitrary. Christ at last offered the sacrifice, perfect in efficacy and moral value, to which they pointed. This sacrifice was the characteristic basis of the New Covenant (c. viii. 12).

Thus the death of Christ appears under a twofold aspect. His Blood is the means of atonement and the ratification of the Covenant which followed upon it

The phrase eis apol. ton...parabaseon is remarkable: for redemption from the transgressions... from their consequences and their power. The genitive expresses in a wide sense the object on which the redemption is exercised ('redemption in the matter of the transgressions,' 'transgression-redemption'). So it is that elsewhere the genitive is used for that which is delivered: Rom. viii. 23 ten apolutrosin tou somatos. Eph. i. 14 eis apol. tes peripoieseos.

The transgressions are spoken of as 'the transgressions that were under the first covenant.' The phrase is general in its application. It includes all transgressions committed on the basis of Law, all transgressions against the revealed will of God made known as Law. Epi expresses the conditions, the accompanying circumstances, under which anything takes place, see v. 10.

In this connexion the covenant with Abraham (Acts iii. 25) does not come into consideration. It was of the nature of a universal promise. The 'first covenant' was that between God and the Jewish people represented by Moses: the 'new covenant' that between God and men represented by Christ.

When the necessary condition has been satisfied (thanatou genomenou eis ap. ton...parabaseon) scope is given for the positive fulfilment of the Covenant, that they that have been called may receive in fact what had been promised before. Compare vi. 12 kleronomounton tas epang. vi. 15; x. 36; xi. 13, 39; Gal. iii. 14.

The blessing is no longer limited to a particular people. It is for all to whom the invitation has been sent (Acts ii. 39; comp. iii. 1).

The phrase ohi keklemenoi, which occurs nowhere else in the epistles, is an echo of the Parables: Matt. xxii. 3, 4, 8; Luke xiv. 17, 24; comp. Apoc. xix. 9. The word kletoi, though not very common, has a wide range (Rom., 1 Cor., Jude, Apoc.).

ten epang....tes hai. kler.] The position of the gen. dependent on ten ep. is due to the fact that it is added as a further definition of the promise (comp. xii. 11 note). The sentence stands essentially complete without it: *that they that have been called may receive the promise (comp. c. vi. 15). But the explanation is naturally suggested by the thought of the contrast of the Old and the New. Moses secured to the people an 'inheritance,' which was however only a figure of that which was prepared (comp. Ex. xxxii. 13).

(16), (17). The mention of a 'new covenant' and of 'death' in close connexion suggests a fresh thought. The Death of Christ fulfilled two distinct purposes. It provided an kleronomias. ¹?hopou gar diatheke, thanaton ananke pheresthai tou diathemenou. ¹?diatheke gar epi nekrois bebaia, epei atonement for past sins; and, besides this, it provided an absolute ratification of the Covenant with which it was connected.

The Death set man free: the Covenant gave him the support which he required. The Death removed the burden of the past: the Covenant provided for the service of the future.

In any case a covenant is ratified by the death of a representative victim. But here Christ died in His own Person; and by thus dying He gave absolute validity to the covenant which He mediated: the preceding thought of the atonement shews how such a covenant was possible.

The Death of Christ was a chief difficulty of the Hebrews, and therefore the writer presents it under different aspects in order to shew its full significance in the Christian dispensation.

For a justification of the interpretation of the following verses see the Additional Note.

(16). hopou gar...diathemenou] For where there is a covenant the death of him that made it must needs be presented. Vulg. Ubi enim testamentum more necesse est intercedat testatoris. The circumstances under which the New Covenant was made, however unlooked for in man's anticipation of the Christ (touto to tarasson autous to tou thanatou tou Christou OEcum.), are to deeper thought most intelligible, for an unchangeable covenant implies death. It is not said that he who makes the covenant 'must die,' but that his death must be 'brought forward,' 'presented,' 'introduced upon the scene,' 'set in evidence,' so to speak. This sense of pheresthai appears to be perfectly natural, and to be more simple than the sense commonly attributed to the word, either 'to be alleged' as a fact, or to be pleaded in the course of an argument, or to be 'current' as a matter of common notoriety.

He who makes the covenant (ho diathemenos) is, for the purposes of the covenant, identified with the victim by whose representative death the covenant is ordinarily ratified. In the death of the victim his death is presented symbolically.

In the case of the New Covenant Christ in His Divine-human Person represented God who reveals through and in Him the unfailing greatness of the divine love, and at the same time He represented the complete self-surrender of humanity. A covenant so made could not fail. The weakness and instability of men had no longer any place. The thought expressed by the representative victim had become an eternal fact.

(17). diatheke gar...diathemenos] For a covenant is sure where there hath been death, since it doth not ever have force when he that made it liveth. Vulg. Testamentum enim in mortuis confirmatum est; alioquin nondum valet dum vivit qui testatus est. The statement which has been made is supported by an explanation which is borrowed from ancient usage and language. A solemn covenant was made upon the basis of a sacrifice. The death of the victim was supposed to give validity to it. The idea which is involved in the symbolic act is intelligible and important. The unchangeableness of a covenant is seen in the fact that he who has made it has deprived himself of all further power of movement in this respect: while the ratification by death is still incomplete, while the victim, the representative of him who makes It, still lives, that is, while he who makes it still possesses the full power of action and freedom to change, the covenant is not of force.

The sense here given to the death me pote ischuei hote ze ho diathemenos. ¹?Hothen aude he prote choris haimatos enkekainistai. ¹?laletheises gar

17 me tote id. diathemenos;

17 me pote '* A: me tote '* D?* [the verss. are free]. 18 he pr.: + diatheke D?*.

of the victim appears more natural than to suppose that it indicates the penalty for the violation of the covenant.

For the sense of epi (epi nekrois), as giving the accompanying conditions, see v. 10 note, and compare also Lev. xxi. 5 (lxx.); Eurip. Ion, 228 f.

The subjective negative may be explained on the principle that the reason alleged is regarded as a thought (John iii. 18) and not as a fact. The clause may be taken interrogatively (for is it ever of force...? John vii. 26); so OEcumenius: kat' erotesin anagnothi. Perhaps this best suits the rhetorical form of the passage.

If the reading me tote is adopted, and it has high claims on consideration, the rendering will necessarily be: since hath it then force when...?

18—22. The great, inaugurating, sacrifice of the Old Covenant embodied the same thought that death marks the immutability of the terms laid down (Ex. xxiv.); and yet more: this death also was employed to convey the thought of atonement, of life surrendered that it may be given back. The blood was sprinkled on the altar and on the people. Thus the law which was enacted for the yearly access of the High-priest to the Divine Presence (v. 7 ou choris haimatos) was observed when the people entered into the Divine Covenant.

In relation to the use which is made of this thought, it is important to observe, that it is not said of the first covenant that it was inaugurated 'not without death' but 'not without blood.' By the use of the words 'not without blood' the writer of the Epistle suggests the two ideas of atonement and quickening by the impartment of a new life which have been already connected with Christ's work (vv. 14, 15).

(18). hothen...enkekainistai] (Vulg. dedicatum est) whence, since every absolute, inviolable, covenant is based upon a death, and, further, since every covenant of God with man requires complete self-surrender on the part of man, not even hath the first covenant, though it failed in its issue, been inaugurated without blood.

The word enkainizo occurs again in the N. T. in c. x. 20, note. It is used several times in the lxx. to render Hebrewfi^O (to renew, e.g. 1 Sam. xi. 14) and HebrewVp (to dedicate, e.g. 1 K. viii. 63).

Compare 1 Macc. iv. 36, 54, 57; and ta enkainia John x. 22.

(19). laletheises gar...] Vulg. lecto enim omni mandato legis....The ceremonies connected with the establishment of the Law-Covenant emphasise the ideas already seen to be involved in 'blood'; for when every commandment had been spoken according to the Law by Moses...taking the blood... The terms of the divine covenant were declared fully to the people (Ex. xxiv. 3) and they expressed their acceptance of them (id.). Then an altar was built 'and twelve pillars.' Burnt-offerings were offered and peace-offerings were sacrificed (vv. 4, 5). Half the blood was sprinkled upon the altar: half was sprinkled over the people (vv. 6, 8).

These sacrifices were offered by young men of the children of Israel, representatives of the fulness of the people's life (Ex. xxiv. 5). The ordinances of the Levitical priesthood were not yet given (Ex. xxviii.); though some form of priesthood still pases entoles kata ton nomon hupo Mouseos panti to lao, labon to haima ton moschon kai ton tragon meta hudatos kai eriou kokkinou kai hussopou auto te to

19 p. ent.: p. tes ent. D?*. ton n. '* ACD?*: om. ton S '*. hupo M.: om. hupo D?*. ton m. kai ton tragon '* AC: ton tr. kai ton moschon D?: om. kai ton tr. '* syrr: om. ton 2° S.

remained (Ex. xix. 22). Compare Ex. xix. 6.

In this connexion Philo speaks of Moses as archiereus: Quis r. d. hær. § 38 (i. 498 M.) thaumaste mentoi kai he ton thusion haimatos hise dianome, hen ho archiereus Mouses phusei didaskalo chresomenos dieneime.

It is of interest to notice that 'sprinkling of persons with blood' is noticed in the O. T. only on one other occasion: Ex. xxix. 21 (the consecration of Aaron).

The words according to the law go with spoken. Every commandment was spoken by Moses 'according to the tenor of the Law' in which they were included. The Law represented the sum of the whole revelation made to Moses. The separate fundamental commandments which preceded the conclusion of the covenant were fashioned (so to speak) after its scope.

l. to haima ton m. kai ton t....] taking the blood of the calves and the goats...Goats are not directly spoken of in the Mosaic narrative (Ex. xxiv. 5) and Philo notices the fact: Non autem agni neque hædi (offeruntur); quia hæ bestiæ vitule debiliores sunt; sacrificium vero ex fortioribus videtur (volie) facere (Quæst. in Ex. l. c.).

The addition is the more remarkable because the offering of a goat (i.e. tragos, see Dillmann on Lev. i. 10) is never prescribed in the Law except as a sin-offering; while the sacrifices in Ex. xxiv. are described as 'burnt-offerings' and 'peace-offerings.' Yet see Num. vii. 17, 23, 29, 35, &c.

At the same time the use of the definite article (toe m. kai ton tr.) points distinctly to the sacrifices offered at the inauguration of the Law.

The explanation of the difficulty is probably to be found in the fact that these sacrifices were not made according to the Mosaic ritual. They were initiatory sacrifices offered not by priests but by the 'young men,' representing the people, and so partook of the patriarchal type. Under this aspect it is noticeable that in the record of the original covenant-sacrifice of Abraham 'a heifer of three years old and a she goat of three years old' are specially mentioned (Gen. xv. 9).

to haima] He used half the blood for the sprinkling: Ex. xxiv. 6.

meta hud....kai huss.] These details are not given in Exodus. Water is mentioned in connexion with blood Lev. xiv. 5 f. (comp. Num. xix. 9) in the purification of the leper, when also a sprinkler of 'cedar wood and scarlet and hyssop' was used (Lev. xiv. 4: comp. Num. xix. 18).

Compare Philo de vict. offer. § 3, ii. 252 f. Barn. Ep. c. 8.

For kokkinos compare Clem. 1 Cor. c. 12 (in reference to Josh. ii. 18 to spartion to kokkinon), prodelon poiountes hoti tou haimatos tou kuriou lutrosis estai....See also Barn. Ep. c. 7. The significance of blood and water is marked 1 John v. 6; John xix. 34.

auto te to bibl.] i.e. the Book of the Covenant (Ex. xxiv. 7). This detail also is an addition to the Mosaic biblion kai panta ton laon erantisen, ²°legon Touto to haima tes diathekes es eneteilato pros humas ho theos. ²¹kai ten skenen de kai panta ta skeue tes leitourgias to haimati homoios erantisen. ²²kai schedon en haimati panta

20 eneteilato: dietheto C (Ex. xxiv. 8 lxx.).

narrative. Though 'the Book' was the record of the words of God it was outwardly the work of man, and so required the application of the purifying, vivifying, blood. Thus in a figure the 'letter' received a power of life.

panta ton laon] all the people: not of course literally ('every individual of the people') but representatively. All were present, and the act of sprinkling was directed to all.

For erantisen see v. 13 note.

(20). touto to haima t. d.] The words in Ex. xxiv. 8 are Idou (so Hebr.) to haima tes diathekes hes dietheto Kurios pros humas peri panton ton lugon touton. It is possible that the corresponding phrase at the institution of the New Covenant (Matt. xxvi. 28) may have influenced the quotation.

The force of the words is: 'This Blood shed, offered, sprinkled upon you, shews the validity and the power of the purpose of God.' So Primasius: ac si diceret: Hæc est confirmatio hujus testamenti quod mandavit ad vos Deus.

enet. pros humas] commanded to youward,...Vulg. mandavit ad vos, to be brought to you; you were the people to whom the Lord looked in the commandments which He gave me. The full construction appears in Ecclus. xlv. 3 eneteilato auto [Mousei] pros laon autou. Yet comp. Acts iii. 25 diath. hes ho theos dietheto pros tous pateras....

The sprinkling of the Tabernacle and its vessels took place at a later time. They were not yet made when the Sacrifice of the Covenant was offered. Moreover it is not recorded in the Pentateuch that the Tabernacle was sprinkled with blood, though it 'and all that was therein' was anointed with oil (Ex. xl. 9; comp. Philo, Vit. Mos. iii. § 18; ii. 158 M.). But Josephus, like the writer of the Epistle, regards the Tabernacle as having been consecrated with blood: ten te skenen, kai ta peri auten skeue elaio te prothumiomeno kathos eipon kai to haimati ton tauron kai krion sphagenton kath' hekasten hemeran henos kata genos [etherapeue] (Antt. iii. 8, 6).

(21). kai...de...] And the tabernacle also.... Vulg. Etiam (tabernaculum). The combination is found here only in the Epistle. It occurs in the Epistles of St Paul, Rom. xi. 23 kakeinoi de; 1 Tim. iii. 10 kai houtoi de; 2 Tim. iii. 12 kai pantes de. Comp. 1 John i. 3 note.

to haimati] with the blood. The definite form (contrast v. 22 en haimati, xii. 24 haimati rhantismou) is used to bring out the thought that this was not the ordinary blood of purification, but the blood of the covenant, the blood of inauguration.

(22). kai sch. en haim. p.] The position of schedon, separated from panta by ev haimati, shews that it qualifies the whole of the following clause: And, I may almost say, it is in blood all things...The position of en haim. is significant. Blood was the characteristic mean for cleansing, though fire and water were also used. It is the power of a pure life which purifies. Under this aspect the Blood becomes, as it were, the enveloping medium in which (ev), and not simply the means or instrument through or by which, the complete purification is effected.

The main reference is naturally to the service of the Day of Atonement. katharizetai kata ton nomon, kai choris haimatekchusias ou

The word schedon occurs again in the N.T. in Acts xiii. 44; xix. 26. It is found in the lxx. only in 2 Macc. v. 2.

panta] all things, things and men alike. The reference is probably to the dress of the priests, the attendants of the Temple, the offerers of sacrifice.

kata ton nomon] according to the law which was itself thus inaugurated by blood.

kai choris haimat. ou g. aph.] and apart from outpouring of blood there cometh no remission. The former statement was general (schedon): this is universal (yet there is an exception Lev. v. 11).

The principle which is here affirmed belongs to the Law; and finds expression in the Pentateuch (Lev. xvii. 11). It occurs in identical terms in a later legal maxim (Hebrew0I2 vh H1D3 p«).

The 'outpouring' of blood may be understood in two ways; either of the actual slaughter of the victim, or of the pouring out of the blood upon the altar. Neither idea is in itself complete. The provision of the blood and the application of the blood are both necessary. Maimonides, in speaking of the Passover, lays down that 'the sprinkling of the blood is the main point (Hebrew-ph w) in sacrifice' (de Sacr. i. 2, § 6).

The word haimatekchusia, Vulg. sanguinis effusio (fusio), is found elsewhere only in patristic writings.

haphesis] The absolute use of aphesis is remarkable. Elsewhere in the N. T., except Luke iv. 18 (from lxx.), the word is always used with a gen. (usually hamartion). The absence of further definition here (contrast x. 18) leaves it with the broad sense of 'release,' 'deliverance,' not so much from special sins as from the bondage of which wrong-doing is a result. In this sense 'cleansing' is to a certain degree opposed to 'release.' The one marks the removal of the stain, the other the enabling for action.

At the same time the choice of ginetai, in place of estin, presents the release as the issue of the operation of a divine law. Comp. vii. 12, 18; xi. 6.

Chrysostom in comparing the use of Blood under the Old and New Covenants writes of Christ and His disciples: pou toinun to biblion ekathere; tas dianoias auton autoi gar hesan biblia tes kaines diathekes. pou de ta skeun tes leirourgias; autoi eisi. pou de he skene; autoi eisi palin. enoikeso gar en autois kai emperipateso, phesi.

23—28. The writer of the Epistle goes back now to the consideration of the fulfilment of the work of Christ. The exposition of the full meaning of 'blood' as the means of atonement and ratification came in as a necessary parenthesis. The last illustration—the use of the blood in cleansing all human means of approach to God under the Old Covenant—supplies the transition to the thought of Christ's cleansing the heavenly sanctuary 'through His own Blood' (v. 23); so He entered once for all into heaven itself to fulfil His atoning work (24—26). And that single entrance suggests the thought of a corresponding return (27 f.).

The paragraph offers an additional feature in the preeminence of the new order over the old. The sacrifice on which it rests is better (12 f.): the covenant in which it is embodied is better (15—22): the service also—one sovereign and all-sufficing act—is better (23—28).

(c) vv. 23—28. The truths taught by Christ's Entrance into the Presence of God.

The Blood of Christ by which the New Covenant was inaugurated was available also for the cleansing of the heavenly archetype of the earthly sanctuary (23). For Christ has entered once for all into the Presence ginetai aphesis. ²³Ananke oun ta men hupodeigmata

23 (ananke)...katharizesthai: (ananke)...katharizetai D?* me.

of God for us, having overcome sin for ever (24—26); and men now await the Return of the great High-priest to announce the accomplishment of His work (27, 28).

²¹It was necessary therefore that the copies of the things in the heavens should be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. ²?For Christ entered not into a Holy place made with hands, like to the pattern of the true, but into the heaven itself, now to appear openly before the face of God on our behalf; ²?nor yet did He enter in order that He may often offer Himself as the High-priest entereth into the Holy place year by year with blood not his own; ²?since in that case He must often have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now once for all, at the close of the ages, hath He been manifested to disannul sin by the sacrifice of Himself. ²?And inasmuch as it is appointed for men once to die, and after this cometh judgment; ²?even so Christ also, having been once offered to carry the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for Him, unto salvation.

(23). This verse serves for the return from the line of thought in vv. 13—22 to that indicated generally in vv. 11, 12. The consideration of the use of blood for cleansing and for remission under the Law throws light upon the significance of Christ's Blood in connexion with His heavenly ministry. That which was done in symbol on earth required to be done truly in the spiritual order. Io regard to the individual conscience, the Blood of Christ has absolute eternal validity (v. 14): in regard to the scene—if we may so speak—of the future service of the Church, the Living Christ fulfils that which was represented by the blood of victims.

ananke houn...] It was necessary therefore, since blood is the means of purification for all that is connected with man's service of God, that the typical sanctuary, the copies of the things in the heavens, should be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. The fact that such a mode of purifying by blood was enjoined for the material instruments of worship carried with it the inevitable consequence that some analogous and therefore some nobler purification should be provided for the divine archetypes.

In an external system the purification might be external, but in the spiritual order it was requisite that the purification should be of corresponding efficacy, spiritual and not material only.

The whole structure of the sentence requires that 'cleansed' should be supplied in the second clause from the first, and not any more general term as 'inaugurated.' In what sense then can it be said that 'the heavenly things' needed cleansing?

The necessity for the purification of the earthly sanctuary and its vessels came from the fact that they were to be used by man and shared in his impurity (comp. Lev. xvi. 16).

Agreeably with this view it may be said that even 'heavenly things,' so far as they embody the conditions of man's future life, contracted by the Fall something which required cleansing (comp. 1 Tim. iv. 4 f. kalon, agiazetai). Man is, according to the revelation in Scripture, so bound up with the whole finite order that the consequences of his actions extend through creation in some way which we are unable to define (compare Gen. iii. ton ev tois ouranois toutois katharizesthai, auta de ta epourania kreittosi thusias para tauta. ²?ou gar eis cheiropoieta eiselthen hagia Christos, antitupa ton alethinon, all' eis auton ton ouranon, nun