Comp. Heb. 2:7, 9; and for dovxa , 2 Cor. 3:7 ff. kaqj o{son ...] The remark is quite general. Here the force of the argument lies in the fact that Moses is identified with the system which was entrusted to him. He was himself a part of it. He did not originate it. He received it and administered it with absolute loyalty. But its author was God. And Christ is the Son of God. Hence the relation of Moses to Christ is that of a system to its author. The argument is indicated but not worked out in the next verse. Kai; aujtov", fhsiv, th'" oijkiva" h\n. kai; oujk ei\pen ou|to" me;n ga;r dou'lo" ejkei'no" de; despovth", ajlla; tou'to lanqanovntw" ejnevfhnen (Chrys.).
Some have referred
oJ kataskeuavsa"
to Christ, as the real Founder of that Kingdom of God of which the Jewish economy was a shadow. This thought is completely in harmony with the argument of the Epistle, but it is not directly expressed elsewhere. And on this interpretation Heb. 3:4 must be taken as a parenthetical remark designed to guard the sovereign authorship of God in all things and His part in the ordering of the Law, a view which appears to be unsatisfactory. The compressed suggestiveness of the argument is not unlike John 8:31-36.
oJ kataskeuavsa"
]
he that established
, Vulg.
qui fabricavit.
The word
(
kataskeuavzein
) expresses more than the mere construction of the house. It includes the supply of all necessary furniture and equipment. Comp. Heb. 9:2, 6; 11:7; Num. 21:27.
Heb. 3:4. pa'" gavr ...] The general principle, that the framer is superior to the thing framed, admits of application in the case of the Law. Even here we must not rest on the system; for every system, and this highest of all, has its framer; and finally every system is carried up to God as its Author, and Jesus our Apostle and High-priest is the Son of God.
Nothing is said here expressly of the unique relation in which Christ, as the Son, stands to God. That is assumed, as having been already laid down in the opening of the Epistle.
pavnta
] all things taken severally, and not the sum of all things (
ta; pavnta
). Comp. 2:10.
qeov"
] For the difference of
qeov"
and
oJ qeov"
see Additional Note on 1 John 4:12. The anarthrous form (
qeov"
) wherever it is used in the Epistle suggests the thought of the character of God as God: Heb. 1:6; 2:9 (note); 3:12 (
qeo;" zw'n
note); 6:1, 5, 18; 8:10; 11:3, 16; 12:23. The force of it will be felt by comparing 6:1, 5 with 6:3; 6:17 with 6:18; 11:3 with 11:4.
(3) Moses a servant: Jesus a son (Heb. 3:5, 6)
3:5, 6. The superiority of Christ over Moses is shewn also by another argument. Moses and Christ are not only distinguished as standing to one another in the relation of an economy to its author; but also in regard to the respective economies which they administered. The position of Moses was, by a necessary consequence, that of a servant acting in a certain sphere, the position of Christ that of a Son over a certain sphere. And yet again, the Mosaic order pointed forward as preparatory to that which should come after: the Christian order includes the blessings which it proclaims.
3:5. ejn o{lw/ tw'/ oi[kw/ aujtou' ] in all God's house , as before. The phrase which marks the inferiority of Moses to Christ marks at the same time his superiority to all the other prophets.