<- Previous   First   Next ->

neque initium neque finem habeo, ita te semper habeo coaeternum mihi.

Philo recognises the same idea: shvmeron dev ejstin oJ ajpevranto" kai; ajdiexivthto" aijwvn. mhnw'n ga;r kai; ejniautw'n kai; sunovlw" crovnwn perivodoi dovgmata ajnqrwvpwn eijsi;n ajriqmo;n ejktetimhkovtwn : to; de; ajyeude;" o[noma aijw'no" hJ shvmeron ( de Prof. § 11; 1.554 M.); and the idea was widely current. Comp. Scho1ttgen , ad loc. and Heb. 3:13 note.

Such an interpretation, however, though it includes an important truth, summed up by Origen in the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son, appears to be foreign to the context.
gegevnnhka ] The term marks the communication of a new and abiding life, represented in the case of the earthly king by the royal dignity, and in the case of Christ by the divine sovereignty established by the Resurrection of the Incarnate Son in which His Ascension was included (Acts 13:33; Rom. 1:4; 6:4; Col. 1:8; Apoc. 1:5).

For the use of genna'n compare 1 Cor. 4:15; and especially St John's use: 1 John 3:1 Add. Note.
ejgw; e[somai ... eij" ] The relation once established is to be realised in a continuous fulfilment. The future points to the coming Messiah from the position of the O. T. prophet.

The title pathvr is applied to GOD here only in the Epistle. ei\nai eij" ] Comp. Heb. 8:10; 2 Cor. 6:18. And in a somewhat different sense, Matt. 19:5; Acts 13:47; 1 Cor. 6:16; 14:22; Eph. 1:12; Luke 3:5 & c.

Heb. 1:6. o{tan dev ] This third quotation is not a mere continuation ( kai; pavlin ) but a contrast ( dev ). It marks the relation of angels to the Son and not of the Son to God; and again it points forward to an end not yet reached. o{tan de; p. eij" .] The pavlin has been taken (1) as a particle of connexion and also (2) as qualifying eijsagavgh/ .

In the first case it has received two interpretations. ( a ) again , as simply giving a new quotation as in the former clause, 2:13; 4:5; 10:30 & c. But it is fatal to this view, which is given by Old Lat.

( deinde iterum cum inducit ) and Syr. , that such a transposition of pavlin is without parallel (yet see Wisdom 14:1). The ease with which we can introduce the word ‘again’ parenthetically hides this difficulty.

( b ) on the other hand, in contrast. In this way pavlin would serve to emphasise the contrast suggested by dev . Comp. Luke 6:43; Matt. 4:7; 1 John 2:8.

Such a use is not without parallels, Philo, Leg. Alleg. iii. § 9 (1:93 M.) oJ de; pavlin ajpodidravskwn qeovn ... hJ de; pavlin qeo;n ajpodokimavzousa ..., and the sense is perfectly consistent with the scope of the passage. It would leave the interpretation of ‘the bringing in of the Son’ undefined.

(2) But it appears to be more natural to connect pavlin with eijsagavgh/ (Vulg. et cum iterum introducit ) and so to refer the words definitely to the second coming of the Lord. This interpretation is well given by Gregory of Nyssa: hJ tou' pavlin prosqhvkh to; mh; prwvtw" givnesqai tou'to dia; th'" kata; th;n levxin tauvthn shmasiva" ejndeivknutai . ejpi; ga;r th'" ejpanalhvyew" tw'n a{pax gegonovtwn th'/ levxei tauvth/ kecrhvmeqa . oujkou'n th;n ejpi; tw'/ tevlei tw'n aijwvnwn fobera;n aujtou' ejpifavneian shmaivnei tw'/ lovgw/ o{teoujkevti ejnth'/ tou' douvlou kaqora'tai morfh'/, ajllj ejpi; tou' qrovnou th'" basileiva" megaloprepw'" prokaqhvmeno" kai; uJpo; tw'n ajggevlwn pavntwn peri; aujto;n proskunouvmeno" . ( c.


<- Previous   First   Next ->