Թուղթ Եբրայեցիներին / Hebrews - 1 |

Text:
< PreviousԹուղթ Եբրայեցիներին - 1 Hebrews - 1Next >


jg▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ mh▾ tb▾ armz▾ all ▾
Zohrap 1805
ՆԱԽԱԴՐՈՒԹԻՒՆ Առ Եբրայեցիս Թղթոյն

Զայս առաքեաց յԻտալիոյ. եւ է պատճառ թղթոյս՝ ա՛յս։ Զի որք Հրեայք էին՝ կանգնէին զօրէնս եւ զստուերս. վասն այսորիկ առաքեալն Պաւղոս որ վարդապետ հեթանոսաց եղեւ, եւ առ հեթանոսս առաքեցաւ քարոզել զաւետարանն, գրեալ յամենայն հեթանոսս, գրեաց եւս եւ որք ՚ի թլփատութեանն էին հաւատացելոց Եբրայեցւոցն խրատտութեան թուղթ՝ վասն գալստեանն Քրիստոսի եւ վասն դադարելոյ ստուերական օրինացն։ Եւ նախ ցուցանէ զմարգարէս վասն այսորիկ առաքեալս, զի վասն Փրկչին աւետարանէին. եւ յետ նոցա ինքն եկն։ Ծառայս ասէ զմարգարէսն, եւ պատգամաւորս նորա գալստեանն, զսոյն Քրիստոս՝ Որդի Աստուծոյ ասէ. որով ամենայն եղեւ. եւ զի այս Որդիս մարդ եղեւ. որ իւրով մարմնովն պատարագեալ մերժեաց զմահն. եւ ո՛չ արեամբ ցլուց եւ նոխազացն. այլ արեամբն Քրիստոսի եղեւ փրկութիւն մարդկան։ Ցուցանէ եւ զայս եթէ օրէնքն ոչ զոք կատարեաց, այլ զստուերս ունէր հանդերձեալ բարութեանս, եւ ո՛չ հանգեաւ ժողովուրդն. այլ հաղորդս առնու զմեզ զամենեսեան աւուրն հանգստեան։ Դարձեալ ցուցանէ՝ զի քահանայապետութեան պատարագն եդաւ ՚ի յԱհարովնէ մինչեւ ՚ի Քրիստոս՝ որոյ է տիպ Մելքիսեդեկ. եւ ո՛չ ՚ի Ղեւեայ։ Հաւատովք արդարութիւն հարցն մեր նշանակէ, եւ ո՛չ ՚ի գործոց օրինաց. եւ դարձեալ ՚ի սովորականն դարձուցանէ եւ զսոսա, եւ ընդունի զսոցա վասն Քրիստոսի զհամբերութիւնն. եւ ՚ի պատուել զերիցունսն կատարէ զթուղթն։

Գլուխք առ Եբրայեցիս Թղթոյն։
Եբրայեցւոց թուղթս՝ թուի թէ չիցէ Պաւղոսի վասն նկարագրին եւ վասն ո՛չ ՚ի գլուխն կարգելոյ զիւր անունն՝ որպէս եւ յայլ թուղթսն, եւ վասն ասելոյն, թէ մեք զիա՞րդ կարասցուք ապրել հեղգացեալք յայնպիսի փրկութենէ, որ սկիզբն առ խօսելոյ ՚ի Տեառնէ, եւ ՚ի ձեռն այնոցիկ որ լուանն ՚ի մեզ հաստատեցաւ վկայութեամբն Աստուծոյ՝ նշանօք եւ արուեստիւք։ Փոխելոյ նկարագրի թղթոյս յայտնի են պատճառք, զի առ Եբրայեցիսն նոցին բարբառովն գրեալ, յետոյ ասեն թարգմանեցաւ, ոմանք թէ ՚ի Ղուկայ, եւ այլք թէ ՚ի Կղեմայ. զորոյ եւ զնկարագիրն իսկ ողջ ածէ։ Բայց չգրելոյ զանունն ՚ի թղթի աստ, պատճառքն ՚ի դէպ են, զի հեթանոսաց առաքեալ էր Պաւղոս եւ ո՛չ Հրէից. քանզի ձեռն տուեալ էր Պետրոսի եւ այլոց առաքելոցն հաւանութեան, զի ինքն Բառնաբաւ հանդերձ ՚ի հեթանոսս, եւ պետրոսեանք ՚ի թլփատութիւնն։ Եւ արդ՝ քանզի հաւանութեան էր քարոզութիւնն, եւ թեքեալ էին որ ՚ի Հրէից անտի էին, որպէս թէ ապստամբութիւն ինչ ուսուցանիցէ Պաւղոս, յիրաւի՛ ճանաչելոյ վասն զմիաբանութիւնն՝ տայ թուղթս եւ առ Եբրայեցիսն, եւ ՚ի գրելն առ նոսա, զանուն իւր կարգել ՚ի գլուխ թղթոյն չէր օրէն։ Բայց վկայէ եւս յառաջ յաջորդօքն թուղթս թէ Պաւղոսի է, գրելովն թէ. Եւ կապանաց իմոց վշտակիցք եղերուք։ Եւ ասելովն թէ. Առաւել եւս աղօթս արարէք զի վաղվաղակի պատսպարեցայց ձեզ։ Եւ բազում եւս այլ են որ ցուցանեն մեզ թէ նորա է թուղթս. որպէս եւ ինքն իսկ ընթերցուածն յառաջ մատուցեալ ուսուցանէ։

А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
Послание св. Апостола Павла к Евреям отличается от других посланий сего апостола особенно тем, что не именует нигде своего автора, каковым - ввиду других отличий по изложению - не всегда единодушно даже и считался Апостол Павел.

Один из самых ранних упоминателей послания - св. Климент Римский (в конце I в.) - не дает составить из его цитат никакого определенного суждения о том, кого именно считали Римляне автором послания. Из дальнейших западных церковных писателей - Тертуллиан, ссылаясь на послание, приписывает его Варнаве. Восточные писатели единодушнее и определеннее западных. Пантен, Климент Александрийский, Ориген не только приводят послание под именем "послания к Евреям", но и признают его именно как произведение Апостола Павла. Ориген подтверждает это даже ссылкою на свидетельство предания. Впрочем, надо оговориться, очевидные особенности языка послания вызвали и у Оригена догадку, что хотя мысли этогослания всецело Павловы, однако изложение их могло принадлежать одному из его учеников - или Луке или Клименту.

Как бы то ни было, уже во II в. восток был единодушен в признании послания Павловым. Запад утвердился в сем мнении позднее (в половине IV в., с распространением сочинений Оригена). И наконец, на Карфагенском соборе (397: г.) послание решительно признано было посланием Апостола Павла, по числу XIV-м.

Какие же признаки заставляли сомневаться в принадлежности послания Апостолу Павлу, чем можно ослабить их силу и какие данные говорят за принадлежность послания именно названному апостолу?

Один из наиболее очевидных признаков, дающих, по-видимому, сильное основание для сомнения в принадлежности послания Апостолу Павлу, это II гл. 3: ст., где как будто речь идет от какого-то другого лица. Указывали также на не совсем обычный для Павла способ цитирования Ветхого Завета в этом послании. Обыкновенно он везде приводит места из Ветхого Завета по переводу LXX, но пользуется и еврейским текстом, если этот более точен; между тем как в послании к Евреям автор исключительно пользуется лишь LXX, хотя бы этот текст допускал значительные неточности. Самая форма цитирования значительно отступает от обычной для Павла. Если в других посланиях он обыкновенно выражается: "глаголет Писание" или "такой-то писатель", то здесь представляются говорящими или Бог, или Дух Святой. Наконец, последнее послание отличается от других и большею чистотою языка, напоминающего более Евангелие и Деяния Луки.

В противовес всему этому достаточно указать на несколько мест послания, где личность писателя, если не упоминается, то ясно открывается (ср. XIII:23, 24, 18: и д.), и где отдельные выражения и воззрения оказываются совершенно родственными Павловым (ср. напр. Евр 10:30: и Рим XII:19). Не оставляет сомнения относительно автора послания и все вообще содержание, и самый дух послания. Что же касается того обстоятельства, что апостол, вопреки обычаю своему, не именует себя нигде в послании, то и это самое, находя справедливое себе объяснение, служит лишь к большему подтверждению его авторства. Дело в том, что апостол должен был считаться с весьма враждебными к нему чувствами своих соплеменников, к которым направлялось его послание, почему и счел нужным не упоминать своего имени.

Повод, а отчасти и время написания послания устанавливаются из VI, и дал. ; X:26: и дал. и др. мест. Эти места говорят о большой опасности для веры в смешении христианских требований с иудейскими и о необходимости установить совершенно самостоятельное и довлеющее значение христианства независимо от иудейства. Такая опасность угрожала особенно Палестинским христианам из иудеев, которые никак не могли свыкнуться со своим новым положением в христианстве и продолжали не только в силу привычки, но и в силу убеждений совершать все храмовые обряды и законы иудейские, считая их существенно важными для спасения. В последующее время, когда церковь Палестинская лишилась такого влиятельного предстоятеля, как Апостол Иаков († 62: г. по Р Х.), и когда стало закрадываться в души многих разочарование относительно Царства Мессии, в котором приходилось переносить столько страданий, и участие в котором соединялось с потерею национальности и характернейших особенностей Израиля, - тогда многие оставили христианские собрания и возвратились снова к иудейскому служению. Другие, не устояв в истинной вере, впали в особого рода ожесточенное состояние, потом выродившееся в ересь эвифнеев и назореев. Более всего, все (прибл. около 66: года ср. XIII:23) это должно было ложиться на душу такого ревнителя, как Павел, почему он и пишет Палестинцам свое послание, цель которого ясно указывается в XIII:22: ст. Это - увещание не оставлять веры в Иисуса Христа и надежды на Него. Он есть исполнение всего, что в Ветхом Завете составляло только предмет преобразований и обетований. И если слава Нового Завета, сменившего старый, сокрывается доселе в сумраке страданий, то это вполне согласно с чаяниями и духом христианства (XIII:13-14) и не исключает надежды в будущем достигнуть соответствующего величия и славы путем страданий.

Главные мысли послания: превосходство Основателя христианской веры, как Богочеловека, пред Моисеем (I-IV гл.); превосходства осветительных и спасительных средств, данных людям через Иисуса Христа, как Божественного Первосвященника, седящего одесную Бога Отца (V-X гл.), и, наконец, превосходство самих верующих во Христа при столь благодатных средствах для спасения от греха и смерти и теснейшего общения с Богом, под руководством пастырей и учителей Церкви.

Такое обоснование и уяснение духа и силы христианства делает послание в высшей степени важным и ценным не для одних евреев, но и для всех верующих всех времен и народов, давая необходимейшее завершение всем другим посланиям апостольским, в которых заключена вся система христианского богословия.

Первоначальный язык послания, по мнению некоторых, еврейский; на греческий же язык оно переведено, вероятно, Климентом, папою Римским.
Matthew Henry: Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible - 1706
CONCERNING this epistle we must enquire, I. Into the divine authority of it; for this has been questioned by some, whose distempered eyes could not bear the light of it, or whose errors have been confuted by it; such as the Arians, who deny the Godhead and self-existence of Christ; and the Socinians, who deny his satisfaction; but, after all the attempts of such men to disparage this epistle, the divine original of it shines forth with such strong and unclouded rays that he who runs may read it is an eminent part of the canon of scripture. The divinity of the matter, the sublimity of the style, the excellency of the design, the harmony of this with other parts of scripture, and its general reception in the church of God in all ages--these are the evidences of its divine authority. II. As to the divine amanuensis or penman of this epistle, we are not so certain; it does not bear the name of any in the front of it, as the rest of the epistles do, and there has been some dispute among the learned to whom they should ascribe it. Some have assigned it to Clemens of Rome; other to Luke; and many to Barnabas, thinking that the style and manner of expression is very agreeable to the zealous, authoritative, affectionate temper that Barnabas appears to be of, in the account we have of him in the acts of the Apostles; and one ancient father quotes an expression out of this epistle as the words of Barnabas. But it is generally assigned to the apostle Paul; and some later copies and translations have put Paul's name in the title. In the primitive times it was generally ascribed to him, and the style and scope of it very well agree with his spirit, who was a person of a clear head and a warm heart, whose main end and endeavour it was to exalt Christ. Some think that the apostle Peter refers to this epistle, and proves Paul to be the penman of it, by telling the Hebrews, to whom he wrote, of Paul's having written to them, 2 Pet. iii. 15. We read of no other epistle that he ever wrote to them but this. And though it has been objected that, since Paul put his name to all his other epistles, he would not have omitted it here; yet others have well answered that he, being the apostle of the Gentiles, who were odious to the Jews, might think fit to conceal his name, lest their prejudices against him might hinder them from reading and weighing it as they ought to do. III. As to the scope and design of this epistle, it is very evident that it was clearly to inform the minds, and strongly to confirm the judgment, of the Hebrews in the transcendent excellency of the gospel above the law, and so to take them off from the ceremonies of the law, to which they were so wedded, of which they were so fond, that they even doted on them, and those of them who were Christians retained too much of the old leaven, and needed to be purged from it. The design of this epistle was to persuade and press the believing Hebrews to a constant adherence to the Christian faith, and perseverance in it, notwithstanding all the sufferings they might meet with in so doing. In order to this, the apostle speaks much of the excellency of the author of the gospel, the glorious Jesus, whose honour he advances, and whom he justly prefers before all others, showing him to be all in all, and this in lofty strains of holy rhetoric. It must be acknowledged that there are many things in this epistle hard to be understood, but the sweetness we shall find therein will make us abundant amends for all the pains we take to understand it. And indeed, if we compare all the epistles of the New Testament, we shall not find any of them more replenished with divine, heavenly matter than this to the Hebrews.

In this chapter we have a twofold comparison stated: I. Between the evangelical and legal dispensation; and the excellency of the gospel above that of the law is asserted and proved, ver. 1-3. II. Between the glory of Christ and that of the highest creatures, the angels; where the pre-eminence is justly given to the Lord Jesus Christ, and clearly demonstrated to belong to him, ver. 4, to the end.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
Preface to the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews
The Epistle to the Hebrews, on which the reader is about to enter, is by far the most important and useful of all the apostolic writings; all the doctrines of the Gospel are in it embodied, illustrated, and enforced in a manner the most lucid, by references and examples the most striking and illustrious, and by arguments the most cogent and convincing. It is an epitome of the dispensations of God to man, from the foundation of the world to the advent of Christ. It is not only the sum of the Gospel, but the sum and completion of the Law, on which it is also a most beautiful and luminous comment. Without this, the law of Moses had never been fully understood, nor God's design in giving it. With this, all is clear and plain, and the ways of God with man rendered consistent and harmonious. The apostle appears to have taken a portion of one of his own epistles for his text - Christ is the End of the Law for Righteousness to them that Believe, and has most amply and impressively demonstrated his proposition. All the rites, ceremonies, and sacrifices of the Mosaic institution are shown to have had Christ for their object and end, and to have had neither intention nor meaning but in reference to him; yea, as a system to be without substance, as a law to be without reason, and its enactments to be both impossible and absurd, if taken out of this reference and connection. Never were premises more clearly stated; never was an argument handled in a more masterly manner; and never was a conclusion more legitimately and satisfactorily brought forth. The matter is everywhere the most interesting; the manner is throughout the most engaging; and the language is most beautifully adapted to the whole, everywhere appropriate, always nervous and energetic, dignified as is the subject, pure and elegant as that of the most accomplished Grecian orators, and harmonious and diversified as the music of the spheres.
So many are the beauties, so great the excellency, so instructive the matter, so pleasing the manner, and so exceedingly interesting the whole, that the work may be read a hundred times over without perceiving any thing of sameness, and with new and increased information at each reading. This latter is an excellency which belongs to the whole revelation of God; but to no part of it in such a peculiar and supereminent manner as to the Epistle to the Hebrews.
To explain and illustrate this epistle multitudes have toiled hard; and exhibited much industry, much learning, and much piety. I also will show my opinion; and ten thousand may succeed me, and still bring out something that is new. That it was written to Jews, naturally such, the whole structure of the epistle proves. Had it been written to the Gentiles, not one in ten thousand of them could have comprehended the argument, because unacquainted with the Jewish system; the knowledge of which the writer of this epistle everywhere supposes. He who is well acquainted with the Mosaic law sits down to the study of this epistle with double advantages; and he who knows the traditions of the elders, and the Mishnaic illustrations of the written, and pretended oral law of the Jews, is still more likely to enter into and comprehend the apostle's meaning. No man has adopted a more likely way of explaining its phraseology than Schoettgen, who has traced its peculiar diction to Jewish sources; and, according to him, the proposition of the whole epistle is this: -
Jesus of Nazareth Is the True God
And in order to convince the Jews of the truth of this proposition, the apostle uses but three arguments:
1. Christ is superior to the angels.
2. He is superior to Moses.
3. He is superior to Aaron.
These arguments would appear more distinctly were it not for the improper division of the chapters; as he who divided them in the middle ages (a division to which we are still unreasonably attached) had but a superficial knowledge of the word of God. In consequence of this it is that one peculiar excellency of the apostle is not noticed, viz. his application of every argument, and the strong exhortation founded on it. Schoettgen has very properly remarked, that commentators in general have greatly misunderstood the apostle's meaning through their unacquaintance with the Jewish writings and their peculiar phraseology, to which the apostle is continually referring, and of which he makes incessant use. He also supposes, allowing for the immediate and direct inspiration of the apostle, that he had in view this remarkable saying of the rabbins, on Isa 52:13 : "Behold, my servant will deal prudently." Rab. Tanchum, quoting Yalcut Simeoni, part ii., fol. 53, says: זה מלך המשיה, "This is the King Messiah, who shall be greatly extolled, and elevated: he shall be elevated beyond Abraham; shall be more eminent than Moses; and more exalted than ממלאכי השרה the ministering angels." Or, as it is expressed in Yalcut Kadosh, fol. 144: משיה גדול מן האבות ומן משה ומן מלאכי השרה Mashiach gadol min ha-aboth; umin Mosheh; umin Malakey hashshareth. "The Messiah is greater than the patriarchs; than Moses; and than the ministering angels." These sayings he shows to have been fulfilled in our Messiah; and as he dwells on the superiority of our Lord to all these illustrious persons because they were at the very top of all comparisons among the Jews; he, according to their opinion, who was greater than all these, must be greater than all created beings.
This is the point which the apostle undertakes to prove, in order that he may show the Godhead of Christ; therefore, if we find him proving that Jesus was greater than the patriarchs, greater than Aaron, greater than Moses, and greater than the angels, he must be understood to mean, according to the Jewish phraseology, that Jesus is an uncreated Being, infinitely greater than all others, whether earthly or heavenly. For, as they allowed the greatest eminence (next to God) to angelic beings, the apostle concludes "that he who is greater than the angels is truly God: but Christ is greater than the angels; therefore Christ is truly God." Nothing can be clearer than that this is the apostle's grand argument; and the proofs and illustrations of it meet the reader in almost every verse.
That the apostle had a plan on which he drew up this epistle is very clear, from the close connection of every part. The grand divisions seem to be three: -
I. The proposition, which is very short, and is contained in chap. Heb 1:1-3. The majesty and pre-eminence of Christ.
II. The proof or arguments which support the proposition, viz.: -
Christ Is Greater than the Angels
1. Because he has a more excellent name than they, chap. Heb 1:4, Heb 1:5.
2. Because the angels of God adore him, Heb 1:6.
3. Because the angels were created by him, Heb 1:7.
4. Because, in his human nature, he was endowed with greater gifts than they, Heb 1:8, Heb 1:9.
5. Because he is eternal, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:11, Heb 1:12.
6. Because he is more highly exalted, Heb 1:13.
7. Because the angels are only the servants of God; he, the Son, Heb 1:14.
In the application of this argument he exhorts the Hebrews not to neglect Christ, chap. Heb 2:1, by arguments drawn,: -
1. From the minor to the major, Heb 2:2, Heb 2:3.
2. Because the preaching of Christ was confirmed by miracles, Heb 2:4.
3. Because, in the economy of the New Testament, angels are not the administrators; but the Messiah himself, to whom all things are subject, Heb 2:5.
Here the apostle inserts a twofold objection, professedly drawn from Divine revelation: -
1. Christ is man, and is less than the angels. What is man - thou madest him a little lower than the angels, Heb 2:6, Heb 2:7. Therefore he cannot be superior to them.
To this it is answered:
1. Christ as a mortal man, by his death and resurrection, overcame all enemies, and subdued all things to himself; therefore he must be greater than the angels, Heb 2:9.
2. Though Christ died, and was in this respect inferior to the angels, yet it was necessary that he should take on him this mortal state, that he might be of the same nature with those whom he was to redeem; and this he did without any prejudice to his Divinity, Heb 2:10-18.
Christ Is Greater than Moses
1. Because Moses was only a servant; Christ, the Lord, Heb 3:2-6.
The application of this argument he makes from Psa 95:7-11, which he draws out at length, Heb 3:7-18; Heb 4:1-13.
Christ Is Greater than Aaron, and All the Other High Priests
1. Because he has not gone through the veil of the tabernacle to make an atonement for sin, but has entered for this purpose into heaven itself, Heb 4:14.
2. Because he is the Son of God, Heb 4:14.
3. Because it is from him we are to implore grace and mercy, Heb 4:15, Heb 4:16, and Heb 4:1, Heb 4:2, Heb 4:3.
4. Because he was consecrated High Priest by God himself, Heb 5:4-10.
5. Because he is not a priest according to the order of Aaron, but according to the order of Melchisedec, which was much more ancient, and much more noble, chap. 7. For the excellence and prerogatives of this order, see the notes on Heb 7:26.
6. Because he is not a typical priest, prefiguring good things to come, but the real Priest, of whom the others were but types and shadows, 8:1-9:11. For the various reasons by which this argument is supported, see also the notes on Heb 8:1-13 (note) and Hebrews 9 (note).
In this part of the epistle the apostle inserts a digression, in which he reproves the ignorance and negligence of the Hebrews in their mode of treating the sacred Scriptures. See Heb 5:11, and chap. 6.
The application of this part contains the following exhortations: -
1. That they should carefully retain their faith in Christ as the true Messiah, Heb 10:19-23.
2. That they should be careful to live a godly life, Heb 10:24, Heb 10:25.
3. That they should take care not to incur the punishment of disobedience, Heb 10:32-37, and Heb 12:3-12.
4. That they should place their whole confidence in God, live by faith, and not turn back to perdition Heb 10:38; Heb 12:2.
5. That they should consider and imitate the faith and obedience of their eminent ancestors, chap. 11.
6. That they should take courage, and not be remiss in the practice of the true religion, Heb 12:12-24.
7. That they should take heed not to despise the Messiah, now speaking to them from heaven, Heb 12:25-29.
III. Practical and miscellaneous exhortations relative to sundry duties, chap. 13.
All these subjects, (whether immediately designed by the apostle himself, in this particular order, or not), are pointedly considered in this most excellent epistle; in the whole of which the superiority of Christ, his Gospel, his priesthood, and his sacrifice, over Moses, the law, the Aaronic priesthood, and the various sacrifices prescribed by the law, is most clearly and convincingly shown.
Different writers have taken different views of the order in which these subjects arc proposed, but most commentators have produced the same results.
For other matters relative to the author of the epistle, the persons to whom it was sent, the language in which it was composed, and the time and place in which it was written, the reader is referred to the introduction, where these matters are treated in sufficient detail.

Different discoveries made of the Divine will to the ancient Israelites by the prophets, Heb 1:1. The discovery now perfected by the revelation of Jesus Christ, of whose excellences and glories a large description is given, Heb 1:2-13. Angels are ministering spirits to the heirs of salvation, Heb 1:14.

Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
Introduction to Hebrews
Section 1. Preliminary Remarks
It need not be said that this Epistle has given rise to much discussion among writers on the New Testament. Indeed there is probably no part of the Bible in regard to which so many conflicting views have been entertained. The name of the author; the time and place where the Epistle was written; the character of the book; its canonical authority; the language in which it was composed; and the persons to whom it was addressed - all have given rise to great difference of opinion. Among the causes of this are the following: - The name of the author is not mentioned. The church to which it was sent, if sent to any particular church, is not designated. There are no certain marks of time in the Epistle, as there often are in the writings of Paul, by which we can determine the time when it was written.
It is not the design of these notes to go into an extended examination of these questions. Those who are disposed to pursue these inquiries, and to examine the questions which have been started in regard to the Epistle, can find ample means in the larger works that have treated of it; and especially in Lardner; in Michaelis' Introduction; in the Prolegomena of Kuinoel; in Hug's Introduction; and particularly in Professor Stuart's invaluable Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. No other work on this portion of the New Testament is so complete as his, and in the Introduction he has left nothing to be desired in regard to the literature of the Epistle.
Early on controversies arose in the church in regard to a great variety of questions pertaining to this Epistle, which are not yet fully settled. Most of those questions, however, pertain to the literature of the Epistle, and however they may be decided, are not such as to affect the respect which a Christian ought to have for it as a part of the word of God. They pertain to the inquiries, to whom it was written; in what language, and at what time it was composed; questions which in whatever way they may be settled, do not affect its canonical authority, and should not shake the confidence of Christians in it as a part of divine Revelation. The only inquiry on these points which it is proper to institute in these notes is, whether the claims of the Epistle to a place in the canon of Scripture are of such a kind as to allow Christians to read it as a part of the oracles of God? May we sit down to it feeling that we are perusing that which has been given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit as a part of Rev_ealed truth? Other questions are interesting in their places, and the solution of them is worth all which it has cost; but they need not embarrass us here, nor claim our attention as preliminary to the exposition of the Epistle. All that will be attempted, therefore, in this Introduction, will be such a "condensation" of the evidence collected by others, as shall show that this Epistle has of right a place in the volume of Rev_ealed truth, and is of authority to regulate the faith and practice of mankind.
Section 2. To Whom Was the Epistle Written?
It purports to have been written to the "Hebrews." This is not found, indeed, in the body of the Epistle, though it occurs in the subscription at the end. It differs from all the other epistles of Paul in this respect, and from most of the others in the New Testament. In all of the other epistles of Paul, the church or person to whom the letter was sent is specified in the commencement. This, however, commences in the form of an essay or homily; nor is there anywhere in the Epistle any direct intimation as to what church it was sent. The subscription at the end is of no authority, since it cannot be supposed that the author himself would affix it to the Epistle, and since it is known that many of those subscriptions are false. See the remarks at the close of the notes on Romans, and the notes 1 Corinthians. Several questions present themselves here which we may briefly investigate:
(I) "What is the evidence that it was written to the Hebrews?" In reply to this we may observe:
(1) That the inscription at the commencement, "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews," though not affixed by the author, may be allowed to express the current sense of the church in ancient times in reference to a question on which they had the best means of judging. These inscriptions at the commencement of the epistles have hitherto in general escaped the suspicion of spuriousness, to which the subscriptions at the close are justly exposed. "Michaelis." They should not in any case be called in question, unless there is good reason from the Epistle itself, or from some other source. This inscription is found in all our present Greek manuscripts, and in nearly all the ancient versions. It is found in the Peshito, the Old Syriac version, which was made in the first or in the early part of the second century. It is the title given to the Epistle by the fathers of the second century, and onward - Stuart.
(2) the testimony of the fathers. Their testimony is unbroken and uniform. With one accord they declare this, and this should be regarded as testimony of great value. Unless there is some good reason to depart from such evidence, it should be regarded as decisive. In this case, there is no good reason for calling it in question, but every reason to suppose it to be correct; nor so far as I have found is there any one who has doubted it.
(3) the internal evidence is of the highest character that it was written to Hebrew converts. It treats subjects of Hebrew institutions. It explains their nature. It makes no allusion to Gentile customs or laws. It all along supposes that those to whom it was sent were familiar with the Jewish history; with the nature of the temple service; with the functions of the priestly office; and with the whole structure of their religion. No other person than those who had been Jews are addressed throughout the Epistle. There is no attempt to explain the nature or design of any customs except those with which they were familiar. At the same time, it is equally clear that they were Jewish converts - converts from Judaism to Christianity - who are addressed. The writer addresses them as Christians, not as those who were to be converted to Christianity; he explains to them the Jewish customs as one would do to those who had been converted from Judaism; he endeavors to guard them from apostasy, as if there were danger that they would relapse again into the system from which they were converted. These considerations seem to be decisive; and in the view of all who have written on the Epistle, as well as of the Christian world at large, they settle the question. It has never been held that the Epistle was directed to Gentiles; and in all the opinions and questions which have been started on the subject, it has been admitted that, wheRev_er they resided, the persons to whom the Epistle was addressed were originally Hebrews who had never been converted to the Christian religion.
(II) "To what particular church of the Hebrews was it written?" Very different opinions have been held on this question. The celebrated Storr held that it was written to the Hebrew part of the churches in Galatia; and that the Epistle to the Galatians was addressed to the Gentile part of those churches. Semler and Noessett maintained that it was written to the churches in Macedonia, and particularly to the church of Thessalonica. Bolten maintains that it was addressed to the Jewish Christians who fled from Palestine in a time of persecution about the year 60 a. d., and who were scattered through Asia Minor. Michael Weber supposed that it was addressed to the church at Corinth. Ludwig conjectured that it was addressed to a church in Spain. Wetstein supposes that it was written to the church at Rome. Most of these opinions are mere conjectures, and all of them depend upon circumstances which furnish only slight evidence of probability. Those who are disposed to examine these, and to see them confuted, may consult Stuart's Commentary on the Hebrews, Introduction Sections 5-9.
The common, and the almost universally received opinion is that the Epistle was addressed to the Hebrew Christians in Palestine. The reasons for this opinion, briefly, are the following:
(1) The testimony of the ancient church was uniform on this point - that the Epistle was not only written to the Hebrew Christians, but to those who were in Palestine. Lardner affirms this to be the testimony of Clement of Alexandria, Jerome, Euthalius, Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Theophylact; and adds that this was the general opinion of the ancients. Works, vol. iv. pp 80, 81. ed. London, 1829.
(2) The inscription at the commencement of the Epistle leads to this supposition. That inscription, though not appended by the hand of the author, was early affixed to it. It is found not only in the Greek manuscripts, but in all the early versions, as the Syriac and the Itala; and was doubtless affixed at a very early period, and by whomsoever affixed, expressed the current sense at the time. It is hardly possible that a mistake would be made on this point; and unless there is good evidence to the contrary, this ought to be allowed to determine the question. That inscription is, "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews." But who are the Hebrews - the Ἑβρᾶιοι Hebraioi? Professor Stuart has endeavored to show that this was a term that was employed exclusively to denote the "Jews in Palestine," in contradistinction from foreign Jews, who were called "Hellenists." Compare my notes on Act 6:1. Bertholdt declares that there is not a single example which can be found in early times of Jewish Christians out of Palestine being called "Hebrews." See a Dissertation on the Greek Language in Palestine. and of the meaning of the word "Hellenists," by Hug, in the Bib. Repository, Vol. I, 547, 548. Compare also Robinson's Lexicon on the word Ἑβρᾶιος Hebraios. If this is so, and if the inscription is of any authority, then it goes far to settle the question. The word "Hebrews" occurs only three times in the New Testament Act 6:1; Co2 11:22; Phi 3:5 in the first of which it is certain that it is used in this sense, and in both the others of which it is probable. There can be no doubt, it seems to me, that an ancient writer acquainted with the usual sense of the word "Hebrew," would understand an inscription of this kind - "written to the Hebrews" - as designed for the inhabitants of Palestine, and not for the Jews of other countries.
(3) there are some passages in the Epistle itself which Lardner supposes indicate that this Epistle was written to the Hebrews in Palestine, or to those there who had been converted from Judaism to Christianity. As those passages are not conclusive, and as their force has been called in question, and with much propriety, by Professor Stuart (pp. 32-34). I shall merely refer to them. They can be examined at leisure by those who are disposed, and though they do not prove that the Epistle was addressed to the Hebrew Christians in Palestine, yet they can be best interpreted on that supposition, and a special significancy would be attached to them on this supposition. They are the following: Heb 1:2; Heb 4:2; Heb 2:1-4; Heb 5:12; Heb 4:4-6; Heb 10:26-29, Heb 10:32-34; Heb 13:13-14. The argument of Lardner is that these would be more applicable to their condition than to others; a position which I think cannot be doubted. Some of them are of so general character, indeed, as to be applicable to Christians elsewhere; and in regard to some of them it cannot be certainly demonstrated that the state of things referred to existed in Judea, but taken together they would be more applicable by far to them than to the circumstances of any others of which we have knowledge; and this may be allowed to have some weight at least in determining to whom the Epistle was sent.
(4) the internal evidence of the Epistle corresponds with the supposition that it was written to the Hebrew Christians in Palestine. The passages referred to in the pRev_ious remarks (3) might be adduced here as proof. But there is other proof. It might have been otherwise. There might be such strong internal proof that an epistle was not addressed to a supposed people, as completely to neutralize all the evidence derived from an inscription like that prefixed to this Epistle, and all the evidence derived from tradition. But it is not so here. All the circumstances referred to in the Epistle; the general strain of remark; the argument: the allusions, are just such as would be likely to be found in an epistle addressed to the Hebrew Christians in Palestine, and such as would not be likely to occur in an epistle addressed to any other place or people. They are such as the following:
(a) The familiar acquaintance with the Jewish institutions supposed by the writer to exist among those to whom it was sent - a familiarity hardly to be expected even of Jews who lived in other countries.
(b) The danger so frequently adverted to of their relapsing into their former state; of apostatizing from Christianity, and of embracing again the Jewish rites and ceremonies - a danger that would exist nowhere else in so great a degree as in Judea. Compare Heb 2:1-3; Heb 3:7-11, Heb 3:15; Heb 4:1; Heb 6:1-8; Heb 10:26-35.
(c) The nature of the discussion in the Epistle - not turning upon the obligation of circumcision, and the distinction of meats and drinks, which occupied so much of the attention of the apostles and early Christians in other places - but a discussion relating to the whole structure of the Mosaic economy, the pre-eminence of Moses or Christ, the meaning of the rites of the temple, etc. These great questions would be more likely to arise in Judea than elsewhere, and it was important to discuss them fully, as it is done in this Epistle. In other places they would be of less interest, and would excite less difficulty.
(d) The allusion to local places and events; to facts in their history; and to the circumstances of public worship, which would be better understood there than elsewhere. There are no allusions - or if there are they are very brief and infrequent - to pagan customs games, races, and philosophical opinions, as there are often in the other epistles of the New Testament. Those to whom the Epistle was sent, are presumed to have an intimate and minute knowledge of the Hebrew history, and such a knowledge as could be hardly supposed elsewhere. Compare Heb. 11, particularly Heb 11:32-39. Thus, it is implied that they so well understood the subjects referred to relating to the Jewish rites, that it was not necessary that the writer should specify them particularly. See Heb 9:5. Of what other persons could this be so appropriately said as of the dwellers in Palestine?
(e) The circumstances of trial and persecution so often referred to in the Epistle, agree well with the known condition of the church in Palestine. That it was subjected to great trials we know; and though this was extensively true of other churches, yet it is probable that there were more vexatious and grievous exactions; that there was more spite and malice; that there were more of the trials arising from the separation of families and the losses of property attending a profession of Christianity in Palestine than elsewhere in the early Christian church. These considerations - though not so conclusive as to furnish absolute demonstration - go far to settle the question. They seem to me so strong as to preclude any reasonable doubt, and are such as the mind can repose on with a great degree of confidence in regard to the original destination of the Epistle.
(3) "was it addressed to a particular church in Palestine, or to the Hebrew Christians there in general?" Whether it was addressed to the churches in general in Palestine, or to some particular church there, it is now impossible to determine. Prof. Stuart inclines to the opinion that it was addressed to the church in Caesarea. The ancients in general supposed it was addressed to the church in Jerusalem. There are some local references in the Epistle which look as though it was directed to some particular church. But the means of determining this question are put beyond our reach, and it is of little importance to settle the question. From the allusions to the temple, the priesthood, the sacrifices, and the whole train of special institutions there, it would seem probable that it was directed to the church in Jerusalem. As that was the capital of the nation, and the center of religious influence; and as there was a large and flourishing church there, this opinion would seem to have great probability; but it is impossible now to determine it. If we suppose that the author sent the Epistle, in the first instance, to some local church, near the central seat of the great influence which he intended to reach by it - addressing to that church the particular communications in the last verses - we shall make a supposition which, so far as can now be ascertained, will accord with the truth in the case.
Section 3. The Author of the Epistle
To those who are familiar with the investigations which have taken place in regard to this Epistle, it need not be said that the question of its authorship has given rise to much discussion. The design of these notes does not permit me to go at length into this inquiry. Those who are disposed to see the investigation pursued at length, and to see the objections to the Pauline origin examined in a most satisfactory manner, can find it done in the Introduction to the Epistle to the Hebrews, by Prof. Stuart, pp. 77-260. All that my purpose requires is to state, in a very brief manner, the evidence on which it is ascribed to the apostle Paul. That evidence is, briefly, the following:
(1) That derived from the church at Alexandria. Clement of Alexandria says, that Paul wrote to the Hebrews, and that this was the opinion of Pantaenus, who was at the head of the celebrated Christian school at Alexandria, and who flourished about 180 a. d. Pantaenus lived near Palestine. He must have been acquainted with the pRev_ailing opinions on the subject, and his testimony must be regarded as proof that the Epistle was regarded as Paul's by the churches in that region. Origen, also of Alexandria, ascribes the Epistle to Paul; though he says that the "sentiments" are those of Paul, but that the words and phrases belong to some one relating the apostle's sentiments, and as it were commenting on the words of his master. The testimony of the church at Alexandria was uniform after the time of Origen, that it was the production of Paul. Indeed there seems never to have been any doubt in regard to it there, and from the commencement it was admitted as his production. The testimony of that church and school is particularly valuable, because:
(a) it was near to Palestine, where the Epistle was probably sent;
(b) Clement particularly had traveled much, and would be likely to understand the pRev_ailing sentiments of the East;
(c) Alexandria was the seat of the most celebrated theological school of the early Christian ages, and those who were at the head of this school would be likely to have correct information on a point like this; and,
(d) Origen is admitted to have been the most learned of the Greek fathers, and his testimony that the "sentiments" were those of Paul may be regarded as of unique value.
(2) it was inserted in the translation into the Syriac, made very early in the second century, and in the Old Italic version, and was hence believed to be of apostolic origin, and is by the inscription ascribed to Paul. This may be allowed to express the general sense of the churches at that time, as this would not have been done unless there had been a general impression that the Epistle was written by him. The fact that it was regarded early as an inspired book is also conclusively shown by the fact that the Second Epistle of Peter, and the Second Epistle and Third Epistle of John, are not found in that version. They came later into circulation than the other epistles, and were not possessed, or regarded as genuine, by the author of that version. The Epistle to the Hebrews is found in these versions, and was, therefore, regarded as one of the inspired books. In those versions it bears the inscription, "To the Hebrews."
(3) this Epistle was received as the production of Paul by the Eastern churches. Justin Martyr, who was born at Samaria, quotes it, about the year 140 a. d. It was found, as has been already remarked, in the Peshito - the Old Syriac Version, made in the early part of the second century Jacob, bishop of Nisibis, also (about 325 a. d.) repeatedly quotes it as the production of an apostle. Ephrem Syrus, or the Syrian, abundantly ascribes this Epistle to Paul. He was the disciple of Jacob of Nisibis, and no man was better qualified to inform himself on this point than Ephrem. No man stands deservedly higher in the memory of the Eastern churches. After him, all the Syrian churches acknowledged the canonical authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews. But the most important testimony of the Eastern church is that of Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, in Palestine. He is the well-known historian of the church, and he took pains from all quarters to collect testimony in regard to the Books of Scripture. He says, "There are fourteen epistles of Paul, manifest and well known: but yet there are some who reject that to the Hebrews, alleging in behalf of their opinion, that it was not received by the church of Rome as a writing of Paul." The testimony of Eusebius is particularly important.
He had heard of the objection to its canonical authority. He had weighed that objection. Yet in view of the testimony in the case, he regarded it as the undoubted production of Paul. As such it was received in the churches in the East; and the fact which he mentions, that its genuineness had been disputed by the church of Rome, and that he specifies no other church, proves that it had not been called in question in the East. This seems to me to be sufficient testimony to settle this inquiry. The writers here referred to lived in the very country to which the Epistle was evidently written, and their testimony is uniform. Justin Martyr was born in Samaria; Ephrem passed his life in Syria; Eusebius lived in Cesarea, and Origen passed the last twenty years of his life in Palestine. The churches there were unanimous in the opinion that this Epistle was written by Paul, and their united testimony should settle the question.
Indeed when their testimony is considered, it seems remarkable that the subject should have been regarded as doubtful by critics, or that it should have given rise to so much protracted investigation. I might add to the testimonies above referred to, the fact that the Epistle was declared to be Paul's by the following persons: Archelaus, Bishop of Mesopotamia, about 300 a. d.; Adamantius, about 330 a. d.; Cyril, of Jerusalem, about 348 a. d.; the Council of Laodicea, about 363 a. d.; Epiphanius, about 368 a. d.; Basil, 370 a. d.; Gregory Nazianzen, 370 a. d.; Chrysostom, 398 a. d., etc. etc. Why should not the testimony of such men and churches be admitted? What more clear or decided evidence could we wish in regard to any fact of ancient history? Would not such testimony be ample in regard to an anonymous oration of Cicero, or poem of Virgil or Horace? Are we not constantly acting on far feebler evidence in regard to the authorship of many productions of celebrated English writers?
(4) in regard to the Western churches, it is to be admitted that, like the Second Epistle of Peter, and the Second Epistle and Third Epistle of John, the canonical authority was for some time doubted, or was even called in question. But this may be accounted for. The Epistle had not the name of the author. All the other epistles of Paul had. As the Epistle was addressed to the Hebrews in Palestine, it may not have been soon known to the Western churches. As there were spurious epistles and gospels at an early age, much caution would be used in admitting any anonymous production to a place in the sacred canon. Yet it was not long before all these doubts were removed, and the Epistle to the Hebrews was allowed to take its place among the other acknowledged writings of Paul. It was received as the Epistle of Paul by Hilary, Bishop of Poictiers, about 354 a. d.; by Lucifer, Bishop of Cagliari, 354 a. d.; by Victorinus, 360 a. d.; by Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, 360 a. d.; by Rufinus, 397 a. d., etc. etc.
Jerome, the well-known Latin Father, uses in regard to it the following language: "This is to be maintained, that this Epistle, which is inscribed to the Hebrews, is not only received by the churches at the East as the apostle Paul's, but has been in past times by all ecclesiastical writers in the Greek language; although most Latins think that Barnabas or Clement was the author." Still, it was not rejected by "all" the Latins. Some received it in the time of Jerome as the production of Paul. See Stuart, pp. 114, 115, for the full testimony of Jerome. Augustine admitted that the Epistle was written by Paul. He mentions that Paul wrote fourteen epistles, and specifies particularly the Epistle to the Hebrews. He often cites it as a part of Scripture, and quotes it as the production of an apostle - Stuart, p. 115. From the time of Augustine it was undisputed. By the Council of Hippo, 393 a. d., the Third Council of Carthage, 397 a. d., and the Fifth Council of Carthage, 419 a. d., it was declared to be the Epistle of Paul, and was commended to the churches as such.
(5) as another proof that it is the writing of Paul, we may appeal to the internal evidence:
(a) The author of the Epistle was the companion and friend of Timothy. "Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty - or is sent away - ἀπολελυμένον apolelumenon - with whom if he come speedily, I will make you a visit." Heb 13:23. Sent away, perhaps, on a journey, to visit some of the churches, and expected soon to return. In Phi 2:19, Paul speaks of sending Timothy to them "so soon as he should see how it would go with him," at the same time expressing a hope that he should himself see them shortly. What is more natural than to suppose that he had now sent Timothy to Philippi; that during his absence he wrote this Epistle; that he was waiting for his return; and that he proposed, if Timothy should return soon, to visit Palestine with him? And who would more naturally say this than the apostle Paul - the companion and friend of Timothy; by whom he had been accompanied in his travels; and by whom he was regarded with special interest as a minister of the gospel?
(b) In Heb 13:18-19, he asks their prayers that he might be restored to them; and in Heb 13:23, he expresses a confident expectation of being able soon to come and see them. From this it is evident that he was then imprisoned, but had hope of speedy release - a state of things in exact accordance with what existed at Rome. Phi 2:17-24.
(c) He was in bonds when he wrote this Epistle. Heb 10:34, "ye had compassion of me in my bonds;" an expression that will exactly apply to the case of Paul. He was in "bonds" in Palestine; he was two whole years in Caesarea a prisoner Act 24:27; and what was more natural than that the Christians in Palestine should have had compassion on him, and ministered to his needs? To what other person would these circumstances so certainly be applicable?
(d) The salutation Heb 13:24, "they of Italy salute you," agrees with the supposition that it was written by Paul when a prisoner at Rome. Paul writing from Rome, and acquainted with Christians from other parts of Italy, would be likely to send such a salutation. In regard to the "objections" which may be made to this use of the passage, the reader may consult Stuart's Introduction to the Hebrews, p. 127, following.
(e) The "doctrines" of the Epistle are the same as those which are taught by Paul in his undisputed writings. It is true that this consideration is not conclusive, but the want of it would be conclusive evidence against the position that Paul wrote it. But the resemblance is not general. It is not such as any man would exhibit who held to the same general system of truth. It relates to "peculiarities" of doctrine, and is such as would be manifested by a man who bad been reared and trained as Paul had:
(1) No one can doubt that the author was formerly a Jew - and a Jew who had been familiar to an uncommon degree with the institutions of the Jewish religion. Every rite and ceremony; every form of opinion; every fact in their history, is perfectly familiar to him. And though the other apostles were Jews, yet we can hardly suppose that they had the familiarity with the minute rites and ceremonies so accurately referred to in this Epistle, and so fully illustrated. With Paul all this was perfectly natural. He had been brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, and had spent the early part of his life at Jerusalem in the careful study of the Old Testament, in the examination of the pRev_alent opinions, and in the attentive observance of the rites of religion. The other apostles had been born and trained, apparently, on the banks of Gennesareth, and certainly with few of the opportunities which Paul had had for becoming acquainted with the institutions of the temple service. This consideration is fatal, in my view, to the claim which has been set up for Clement as the author of the Epistle. It is wholly incredible that a foreigner should be so familiar with the Jewish opinions, laws, institutions, and history, as the author of this Epistle manifestly was.
(2) there is the same preference for Christianity over Judaism in this Epistle which is shown by Paul in his other epistles, and exhibited in the same form. Among these points are the following - "The gospel imparts superior light." Compare Gal 4:3, Gal 4:9; Co1 14:20; Eph 4:11-13; Co2 3:18; with Heb 1:1-2; Heb 2:2-4; Heb 8:9-11; Heb 10:1; Heb 11:39-40. "The gospel holds out superior motives and encouragements to piety." Compare Gal 3:23; Gal 4:2-3; Rom 8:15-17; Gal 4:1; Gal 5:13; Co1 7:19; Gal 6:15; with Heb 9:9, Heb 9:14; Heb 12:18-24, Heb 12:28; Heb 8:6-13. "The gospel is superior in promoting the real and permanent happiness of mankind." Compare Gal 3:13; Co2 3:7, Co2 3:9; Rom 3:20; Rom 4:24-25; Eph 1:7; Rom 5:1-2; Gal 2:16; and the same views in Heb 12:18-21; Heb 9:9; Heb 10:4, Heb 10:11; Heb 6:18-20; Heb 7:25; Heb 9:24. "The Jewish dispensation was a type and shadow of the Christian." See Col 2:16-17; Co1 10:1-6; Rom 5:14; Co1 15:45-47; Co2 3:13-18; Gal 4:22-31; Gal 4:1-5; and for the same or similar views, see Heb 9:9-14; Heb 10:1; Heb 8:1-9; Heb 9:22-24. "The Christian religion was designed to be perpetual, while the Jewish was intended to be abolished."
See Co2 3:10-11, Co2 3:13, Co2 3:18; Co2 4:14-16; Rom 7:4-6; Gal 3:21-25; Gal 4:1-7; Gal 5:1; and for similar views compare Heb 8:6-8, Heb 8:13; Heb 7:17-19; Heb 10:1-14. "The person of the Mediator is presented in the same light by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews and by Paul." See Phi 2:6-11; Col 1:15-20; Co2 8:9; Eph 3:9; Co1 8:6; Co1 15:25-27; and for the same and similar views, see Heb 1:2-3; Heb 2:9, Heb 2:14; Heb 12:2; Heb 2:8; Heb 10:13. "The death of Christ is the propitiatory sacrifice for sin." See Ti1 1:15; Co1 15:3; Rom 8:32; Rom 3:24; Gal 1:4; Gal 2:20; Co1 5:7; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; Ti1 2:6; Co1 6:20; Co1 7:23; Rom 5:12-21; Rom 3:20, Rom 3:28; Rom 8:3; Ti1 2:5-6. For similar views see Heb 1:3; Heb 2:9; Heb 5:8-9; Heb. 7; Heb 8:1-13; Heb. 9; Heb. 10: "The general method and arrangement of this Epistle and the acknowledged epistles of Paul are the same." It particularly resembles the Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians, where we have first a doctrinal and then a practical part.
The same is true also to some extent of the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philippians. The Epistle to the Hebrews is on the same plan. As far as Heb 10:19, it is principally doctrinal; the remainder is mainly practical. "The manner of appealing to, and applying the Jewish Scriptures, is the same in this Epistle as in those of Paul." The general structure of the Epistle, and the slightest comparison between them, will show this with sufficient clearness. The general remark to be made in view of this comparison is, that the Epistle to the Hebrews is just such an one as Paul might be expected to write; that it agrees with what we know to have been his early training, his views, his manner of life, his opinions, and his habit in writing; that it accords better with his views than with those of any other known writer of antiquity; and that it falls in with the circumstances in which he was known to be placed, and the general object which he had in view. So satisfactory are these views to my mind, that they seem to have all the force of demonstration which can be had in regard to any anonymous publication, and it is a matter of wonder that so much doubt has been experienced in reference to the question who was the author.
It is difficult to account for the fact that the name of the author was omitted. It is found in every other Epistle of Paul, and in general it is appended to the epistles in the New Testament. It is omitted, however, in the three Epistles of John, for reasons which are now unknown. And there may have been similar reasons also unknown for omitting it in this case. The simple fact is, that it is anonymous; and whoever was the author, the same difficulty will exist in accounting for it. If this fact will prove that Paul was not the author, it would prove the same thing in regard to any other person, and would thus be ultimately conclusive evidence that it had no author. What were the reasons for omitting the name can be only matter of conjecture. The most probable opinion, as it seems to me, is this. The name of Paul was odious to the Jews. He was regarded by the nation as an apostate from their religion, and everywhere they showed special malignity against him.
See the Acts of the Apostles. The fact that he was so regarded by them might indirectly influence even those who had been converted from Judaism to Christianity. They lived in Palestine. They were near the temple, and were engaged in its ceremonies and sacrifices - for there is no evidence that they broke off from those observances on their conversion to Christianity. Paul was abroad. It might have been reported that he was preaching against the temple and its sacrifices, and even the Jewish Christians in Palestine might have supposed that he was carrying matters too far. In these circumstances it might have been imprudent for him to have announced his name at the outset, for it might have aroused prejudices which a wise man would wish to allay. But if he could present an argument, somewhat in the form of an essay, showing that he believed that the Jewish institutions were appointed by God, and that he was not an apostate and an infidel; if he could conduct a demonstration that would accord in the main with the pRev_ailing views of the Christians in Palestine, and that was adapted to, strengthen them in the faith of the gospel, and explain to them the true nature of the Jewish rites, then the object could be gained without difficulty, and then they would be prepared to learn that Pant was the author, without prejudice or alarm. Accordingly he thus conducts the argument; and at the close gives them such intimations that they would understand who wrote it without much difficulty. If this was the motive, it was an instance of tact such as was certainly characteristic of Paul, and such as was not unworthy any man. I have no doubt that this was the true motive. It would be soon known who wrote it; and accordingly we have seen it was never disputed in the Eastern churches.
Section 4. The Time When Written
In regard to the time when this Epistle was written, and the place where, critics have been better agreed than on most of the questions which have been started in regard to it. Mill was of opinion that it was written by Paul in the year 63 a. d., in some part of Italy, soon after he bad been released from imprisonment at Rome. Wetstein was of the same opinion. Tillemont also places this Epistle in the year 63 a. d., and supposes that it was written while Paul was at Rome, or at least in Italy, and soon after he was released from imprisonment. Basnage supposes it was written about the year 61, and during the imprisonment of the apostle. Lardner supposes also that it was written in the beginning of the year 63 a. d., and soon after the apostle was released from his confinement. This also is the opinion of Calmet. The circumstances in the Epistle which will enable us to form an opinion on the question about the time and the place are the following:
(1) It was written while the temple was still standing, and before Jerusalem was destroyed. This is evident from the whole structure of the Epistle. There is no allusion to the destruction of the temple or the city, which there certainly would have been if they had been destroyed. Such an event would have contributed much to the object in view, and would have furnished an unbreakable argument that the institutions of the Jews were intended to be superseded by another and a more perfect system. Moreover, there are allusions in the Epistle which suppose that the temple service was then performed. See Heb 9:9; Heb 8:4-5. But the city and temple were destroyed in the year 70 a. d., and, of course, the Epistle was written before that year.
(2) it was evidently written before the civil wars and commotions in Judea, which terminated in the destruction of the city and nation. This is clear, because there are no allusions to any such disorders or troubles in Palestine, and there is no intimation that they were suffering the evils incident to a state of war. Compare Heb 12:4. But those wars commenced 66 a. d., and evidently the Epistle was written before that time.
(3) they were not suffering the evils of violent persecution. They had indeed formerly suffered (compare Heb 10:32, Heb 10:34); James and Stephen had been put to death Acts 7; Acts 12; but there was no violent and bloody persecution then raging in which they were called to defend their religion at the expense of blood and life. Heb 10:32-33. But the persecution under Nero began in the year 64 a. d., and though it began at Rome, and was confined to a considerable degree to Italy, yet it is not improbable that it extended to other places, and it is to be presumed that if such a persecution were raging at the time when the Epistle was written there would be some allusion to this fact. It may be set down, therefore, that it was written before the year 64 ad.
(4) It is equally true that the Epistle was written during the latter part of the apostolic age. The author speaks of the former days in which after they were illuminated they had endured a great fight of afflictions, and when they were made a gazing-stock, and were plundered by their oppressors Heb 10:32-34; and he speaks of them as having been so long-converted that they ought to have been qualified to teach others Heb 5:12; and, hence, it is fairly to be inferred that they were not recent converts, but that the church there had been established for a considerable period. It may be added, that it was after the writer had been imprisoned - as I suppose in Caesarea (see Section 3) - when they had ministered to him; Heb 10:34. But this was as late as the year 60 ad.
(5) At the time when Paul wrote the Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, he had hopes of deliverance. Timothy was evidently with him. But now he was absent; Heb 13:23. In the Epistle to the Philippians Phi 2:19-23 he says, "But I trust in the Lord Jesus to send Timotheus shortly unto you, that I may be also of good comfort, when I know your state." He expected, therefore, that Timothy would come back to him at Rome. It is probable that Timothy was sent soon after this. The apostle had a fair prospect of being set at liberty, and sent him to them. "During his absence" at this time, it would seem probable, this Epistle was written. Thus, the writer says Heb 13:23, "Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty" - or rather, "sent away," or "sent abroad" (see the note in that place); "with whom if be come shortly, I will see you." That is, if he returns soon, as I expect him, I will pay you a visit. It is probable that the Epistle was written while Timothy was thus absent at Philippi, and when he returned, Paul and he went to Palestine, and thence to Ephesus. If so it was written somewhere about the year 63 a. d. as this was the time when Paul was set at liberty.
(6) the Epistle was written evidently in Italy. Thus, in Heb 13:24, the writer says, "They of Italy salute you." This would be the natural form of salutation on the supposition that it was written there. He mentions none by name, as he does in his other epistles, for it is probable that none of those who were at Rome would be known by name in Palestine. But there was a general salutation, showing the interest which they had in the Christians in Judea, and expressive of regard for their welfare. This expression is, to my mind, conclusive evidence that the Epistle was written in Italy; and in Italy there was no place where this would be so likely to occur as at Rome.
Section 5. The Language in which It Was Written
This is a vexed and still unsettled question, and it does not seem to be possible to determine it with any considerable degree of certainty. Critics of the ablest name have been divided on it, and what is remarkable, have appealed to the same arguments to prove exactly opposite opinions - one class arguing that the style of the Epistle is such as to prove that it was written in Hebrew, and the other appealing to the same proofs to demonstrate that it was written in Greek. Among those who have supposed that it was written in Hebrew are the following, namely: - Some of the fathers - as Clement of Alexandria, Theodoret, John Damascenus, Theophylact; and among the moderns, Michaelis has been the most strenuous defender of this opinion. This opinion was also held by the late Dr. James P. Wilson, who says, "It was probably written in the common language of the Jews;" that is, in that mixture of Hebrew, Syriac, and Chaldee, which was usually spoken in the time of the Saviour, and which was known as the Syro-Chaldaic.
On the other hand, the great body of critics have supposed it was written in the Greek language. This was the opinion of Fabricius, Lightfoot, Whitby, Beausobre, Capellus, Basnage, Mill, and others, and is also the opinion of Lardnet, Hug, Stuart, and perhaps of most modern critics. These opinions may be seen examined at length in Michaelis' Introduction, Hag, Stuart, and Lardner.
The arguments in support of the opinion that it was written in Hebrew are, briefly, the following:
(1) The testimony of the fathers. Thus, Clement of Alexandria says, "Paul wrote to the Hebrews in the Hebrew language, and Luke carefully translated it into Greek." Jerome says, "Paul as a Hebrew wrote to the Hebrews in Hebrew - Scripserat ut Hebraeus Hebraeis Hebraice;" and then he adds, "this Epistle was translated into Greek, so that the coloring of the style was made diverse in this way from that of Paul's."
(2) the fact that it was written for the use of the Hebrews, who spoke the Hebrew, or the "Talmudic" language, is alleged as a reason for supposing that it must have been written in that language.
(3) it is alleged by Michaelis, that the style of the Greek, as we now have it, is far more pure and Classical than Paul elsewhere employs, and that hence it is to be inferred that it was translated by some one who was master of the Greek language. On this, however, the most eminent critics disagree.
(4) it is alleged by Michaelis, that the quotations in the Epistle, as we have it, are made from the Septuagint, and that they are foreign to the purpose which the writer had in view as they are now quoted, whereas they are exactly in point as they stand in the Hebrew. Hence he infers that the original Hebrew was quoted by the author, and that the translator used the common version at hand instead of making an exact translation for himself. Of the fact alleged here, however, there may be good ground to raise a question; and if it were so, it would not prove that the writer might not have used the common and accredited translation, though less to his purpose than the original. Of the fact, moreover, to which Michaelis here refers, Prof. Stuart says, "He has not adduced a single instance of what he calls a "wrong translation" which wears the appearance of any considerable probability." The only instance urged by Michaelis which seems to me to be plausible is Heb 1:7. These are the principal arguments which have been urged in favor of the opinion that this Epistle was written in the Hebrew language. They are evidently not conclusive. The only argument of any considerable weight is the testimony of some of the fathers, and it may be doubted whether they gave this as a matter of historic fact or only as a matter of opinion. See Hug's Introduction, 144. It is morally certain that in one respect their statement cannot be true. They state that it was translated by Luke; but it is capable of the clearest proof that it was not translated by Luke, the author of the Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles, since there is the most remarkable dissimilarity in the style.
On the other hand there are alleged in favor of the opinion that it was written in Greek the following considerations, namely:
(1) The fact that we have no Hebrew original. If it was written in Hebrew, the original was early lost. None of the fathers say that they had seen it; none quote it. All the copies that we have are in Greek. If it was written in Hebrew, and the original was destroyed, it must have been at a very early period, and it is remarkable that no one should have mentioned the fact or alluded to it. Besides, it is scarcely conceivable that the original should have so soon perished, and that the translation should have altogether taken its place. If it was addressed to the Hebrews in Palestine, the same reason which made it proper that it should have been written in Hebrew would have led them to retain it in that language, and we might have supposed that Origen, or Eusebius, or Jerome, who lived there, or Ephrem the Syrian, would have adverted to the fact that there was there a Hebrew original. The Jews were remarkable for retaining their sacred books in the language in which they were written, and if this were written in Hebrew it is difficult to account for the fact that it was so soon suffered to perish.
(2) the presumption - a presumption amounting to almost a moral certainty - is, that an apostle writing to the Christians in Palestine would write in Greek. This presumption is based on the following circumstances:
(a) The fact that all the other books of the New Testament were written in Greek, unless the Gospel by Matthew is an exception.
(b) This occurred in cases where it would seem to have been as improbable as it was that one writing to the Hebrews should use that language. For instance, Paul wrote to the church in Rome in the Greek language, though the "Latin" language was what was in universal use there.
(c) The Greek was a common language in the East. It seems to have been familiarly spoken, and to have been commonly understood.
(d) Like the other books of the New Testament, this Epistle does not appear to have been intended to be confined to the Hebrews only. The writings of the apostles were regarded as the property of the church at large. Those writings would be copied and spread abroad. The Greek language was a far better language for such a purpose than the Hebrew language. It was polished and elegant; was adapted to the purpose of discoursing on moral subjects; was fitted to express delicate shades of thought, and was the language which was best understood by the world at large.
(e) It was the language which Paul would naturally use unless there was a strong reason for his employing the Hebrew. Though he was able to speak in Hebrew Act 21:40, yet he had spent his early days in Tarsus, where the Greek was the vernacular tongue, and it was probably that which he had first learned. Besides this, when this Epistle was written he had been absent from Palestine about 25 years, and in all that time he had been there but a few days. He had been where the Greek language was universally spoken. He had been among Jews who spoke that language. It was the language used in their synagogues, and Paul had addressed them in it. After thus preaching, conversing, and writing in that language for 25 years, is it any wonder that he should prefer writing in it; that he should naturally do it; and is it not to be presumed that he would do it in this case? These presumptions are so strong that they ought to be allowed to settle a question of this kind unless there is positive proof to the contrary.
(3) there is internal proof that it was written in the Greek language. The evidence of this kind consists in the fact that the writer bases an argument on the meaning and force of Greek words, which could not have occurred had he written in Hebrew. Instances of this kind are such as these:
(a) In Heb. 2: he applies a passage from Psa 8:1-9 to prove that the Son of God must have had a human nature, which was to be exalted above the angels, and placed at the head of the creation. The passage is, "Thou hast made him a little while inferior to the angels. Heb 2:7, margin. In the Hebrew, in Psa 8:5, the word rendered "angels," is אלהים 'Elohiym - God; and the sense of "angels" attached to that word, though it may sometimes occur, is so unusual, that an argument would not have been built on the Hebrew language.
(b) In Heb 7:1, the writer has explained the name "Melchizedek," and translated it "king of Salem" - telling what it is in "Greek" - a thing which would not have been done had he written in Hebrew, where the word was well understood. It is possible, indeed, that a translator might have done this, but the explanation seems to be interwoven with the discourse itself, and to constitute a part of the argument.
(c) In Heb 9:16-17, there is an argument on the meaning of the word "covenant" - διαθήκη diathē kē - which could not have occurred had the Epistle been in Hebrew. It is founded on the double meaning of that word - denoting both a "covenant" and a "testament," or "will." The Hebrew word - בּרית beriyt - has no such double signification. It means only "covenant," and is never used in the sense of the word "will," or testament. The proper translation of that word would be συνθήκη sunthē kē - but the translators of the Septuagint uniformly used the former - διαθήκη diathē kē and on this word the argument of the apostle is based. This could not have been done by a translator; it must have been by the original author, for it is incorporated into the argument.
(d) In Heb 10:3-9, the author shows that Christ came to make an atonement for sin, and that in order to this it was necessary that he should have a human body. This he shows was not only necessary, but was predicted. In doing this, he appeals to Psa 40:6 - "A body hast thou prepared for me." But the Hebrew here is, "Mine ears hast thou opened." This passage would have been much less pertinent than the other form - "a body hast thou prepared me; " - and indeed it is not easy to see how it would bear at all on the object in view. See Heb 10:10. But in the Septuagint, the phrase stands as he quotes it - "a body hast thou prepared for me;" a fact which demonstrates, whatever difficulties there may be about the "principle" on which he makes the quotation, that the Epistle was written in Greek. It may be added, that it has nothing of the appearance of a translation. It is not stiff, forced, or constrained in style, as translations usually are. It is impassioned, free, flowing, full of animation, life, and coloring, and has all the appearance of being an original composition. So clear have these considerations appeared, that the great body of critics now concur in the opinion that the Epistle was originally written in Greek
Section 6. The Design and General Argument of the Epistle
The general purpose of this Epistle is, to preserve those to whom it was sent from the danger of apostasy. Their danger on this subject did not arise so much from persecution, as from the circumstances that were fitted to attract them again to the Jewish religion. The temple, it is supposed, and indeed it is evident, was still standing. The morning and evening sacrifice was still offered. The splendid rites of that imposing religion were still observed. The authority of the law was undisputed. Moses was a lawgiver, sent from God, and no one doubted that the Jewish form of religion had been instituted by their fathers in conformity with the direction of God. Their religion had been founded amidst remarkable manifestations of the Deity - in flames, and smoke, and thunder; it had been communicated by the ministration of angels; it had on its side and in its favor all the venerableness and sanction of a remote antiquity; and it commended itself by the pomp of its ritual, and by the splendor of its ceremonies. On the other hand, the new form of religion had little or nothing of this to commend it. It was of recent origin. It was founded by the Man of Nazareth, who had been trained up in their own land, and who had been a carpenter, and who had had no extraordinary advantages of education. Its rites were few and simple. It had no splendid temple service; none of the pomp and pageantry, the music and the magnificence of the ancient religion. It had no splendid array of priests in magnificent vestments, and it had not been imparted by the ministry of angels. Fishermen were its ministers; and by the body of the nation it was regarded as a schism, or heresy, that enlisted in its favor only the most humble and lowly of the people.
In these circumstances, how natural was it for the enemies of the gospel in Judea to contrast the two forms of religion, and how keenly would Christians there feel it! All that was said of the antiquity and the divine origin of the Jewish religion they knew and admitted; all that was said of its splendor and magnificence they saw; and all that was said of the humble origin of their own religion they were constrained to admit also. their danger was not that arising from persecution. It was that of being affected by considerations like these, and of relapsing again into the religion of their fathers, and of apostatizing from the gospel; and it was a danger which beset no other part of the Christian world.
To meet and counteract this danger was the design of this Epistle. Accordingly, the writer contrasts the two religions in all the great points on which the minds of Christians in Judea would be likely to be affected, and shows the superiority of the Christian religion over the Jewish in every respect, and especially in the points that had so much attracted their attention, and affected their hearts. He begins by showing that the author of the Christian religion was superior in rank to any and all who had ever delivered the word of God to man. He was superior to the prophets, and even to the angels. He was over all things, and all things were subject to him. There was, therefore, a special reason why they should listen to him, and obey his commands; Heb 1:1-14 and Heb. 2: He was superior to Moses, the great Jewish lawgiver, whom they venerated so much, and on whom they so much prided themselves; Heb. 3: Having shown that the Great Founder of the Christian religion was superior to the prophets, to Moses, and to the angels, the writer proceeds to show that the Christian religion was characterized by having a High Priest superior to that of the Jews, and of whom the Jewish high priest was but a type and emblem.
He shows that all the rites of the ancient religion, splendid as they were, were also but types, and were to vanish away - for they had had their fulfillment in the realities of the Christian faith He allows that the Christians High Priest derived his origin and his rank from a more venerable antiquity than the Jewish high priest did - because he went back to Melchizedek, who lived long before Aaron, and that he had far superior dignity from the fact that he had entered into the Holy of Holies in heaven. The Jewish high priest entered once a year into the most holy place in the temple; the Great High Priest of the Christian faith had entered into the Most Holy place - of which that was but the type and emblem - into heaven. In short, whatever there was of dignity and honor in the Jewish faith had more than its counterpart in the Christian religion; and while the Christian religion was permanent, that was fading.
The rites of the Jewish system, magnificent as they were, were designed to be temporary. They were mere types and shadows of things to come. They had their fulfillment in Christianity That had an Author more exalted in rank by far than the author of the Jewish system; it had a High Priest more elevated and enduring; it had rites which brought men nearer to God; it was the substance of what in the temple service was type and shadow. By considerations such as these the author of this Epistle endeavors to preserve them from apostasy. Why should they go back? Why should they return to a less perfect system? Why go back from the substance to the shadow? Why turn away from the true sacrifice to the type and emblem? Why linger around the earthly tabernacle, and contemplate the high priest there, while they had a more perfect and glorious High Priest, who had entered into the heavens? And why should they turn away from the only perfect sacrifice - the great offering made for transgression - and go back to the bloody rites which were to be renewed every day?
And why forsake the perfect system - the system that was to endure for ever - for that which was soon to vanish away? The author of this Epistle is very careful to assure them that if they thus apostatized, there could be no hope for them. If they now rejected the sacrifice of the Son of God, then was no other sacrifice for sin. That was the last great sacrifice for the sins of men. It was designed to close all bloody offerings. It was not to be repeated. If that was rejected, there was no other. The Jewish rites were soon to pass away; and even if they were not, they could not cleanse the conscience from sin. Persecuted then though they might be; Rev_iled, ridiculed, opposed, yet they should not abandon their Christian hope, for it was their all; they should not neglect him who spake to them from heaven, for in dignity, rank, and authority, he far surpassed all who in former times had made known the will of God to men.
This Epistle, therefore, occupies a most important place in the book of Revelation, and without it that book would be incomplete. It is the most full explanation which we have of the meaning of the Jewish institutions. In the Epistle to the Romans we have a system of religious doctrine, and particularly a defense of the great doctrine of justification by faith. Important doctrines are discussed in the other epistles; but there was something wanted that would show the meaning of the Jewish rites and ceremonies, and their connection with the Christian scheme; something which would show us how the one was preparatory to the other; and I may add, something that would restrain the imagination in endeavoring to show how the one was designed to introduce the other. The one was a system of "types" and "shadows." But on nothing is the human mind more prone to wander than on the subject of emblems and analogies.
This has been shown abundantly in the experience of the Christian church, from the time of Origen to the present. Systems of divinity, commentaries, and sermons, have shown everywhere how prone men of ardent imaginations have been to find types in everything pertaining to the ancient economy; to discover hidden meanings in every ceremony; and to regard every pin and hook and instrument of the tabernacle as designed to inculcate some truth, and to shadow forth some fact or doctrine of the Christian Revelation. It was desirable to have one book that should tell how that is; to fetter down the imagination and bind it by severe rules, and to restrain the vagaries of honest but credulous devotion. Such a book we have in the Epistle to the Hebrews. The ancient system is there explained by one who had been brought up in the midst of it, and who understood it thoroughly; by one who had a clear insight into the relation which it bore to the Christian economy; by one who was under the influence of divine inspiration, and who could not err.
The Bible would have been incomplete without this book: and when I think of the relation between the Jewish and the Christian systems; when I look on the splendid rites of the ancient economy, and ask their meaning; when I wish a full guide to heaven, and ask for that which gives completeness to the whole, I turn instinctively to the Epistle to the Hebrews. When I wish also that which shall give me the most elevated view of the Great Author of Christianity and of his work, and the most clear conceptions of the sacrifice which he made for sin: and when I look for considerations that shall be most effectual in restraining the soul from apostasy, and for considerations to enable it to bear trials with patience and with hope, my mind recurs to this book, and I feel that the book of Revelation, and the hopes of man, would be incomplete without it.

The main object of the Epistle is to commend the Christian religion to those who were addressed in it in such a way as to pRev_ent defection from it. This is done, principally, by showing its superiority to the Mosaic system. The great danger of Christians in Palestine was of relapsing into the Jewish system. The imposing nature or its rites; the public sentiment in its favor; the fact of its antiquity, and its undisputed divine origin, would all tend to that. To counteract this, the writer of this Epistle shows that the gospel bad higher claims on their attention, and that if that was rejected ruin was inevitable. In doing this, he begins, in this chapter, by showing the superiority of the Author of Christianity to prophets and to the angels; that is, that he had a rank that entitled him to the profoundest regard. The drift of this chapter, therefore, is to show the dignity and exalted nature of the Author of the Christian system - the Son of God. The chapter comprises the following points:
I. The announcement of the fact that God, who had formerly spoken by the prophets, had in this last dispensation spoken by his Son; Heb 1:1-2.
II. The statement respecting his rank and dignity. He was:
(1) the Heir of all things;
(2) the Creator of the worlds;
(3) the Brightness of the divine glory and the proper expression of his nature;
(4) he upheld all things; Heb 1:2-3.
III. The work and exaltation of the Author of the Christian system:
(1) He, by his own unassisted agency, purified us from our sins.
(2) he is seated at the right hand of God.
(3) he has a more exalted and valuable inheritance than the angels, in proportion as his name is more exalted than theirs; Heb 1:3-4.
IV. Proofs that what is here ascribed to him belongs to him, particularly that he is declared to be superior to the angels; Heb 1:5-14.
(1) the angels have never been addressed with the title of Son: Heb 1:5.
(2) he is declared to be the object of worship by the angels, while they are employed merely as the messengers of God; Heb 1:6-7.
(3) he is addressed as God, and his throne is said to be foRev_er and ever; Heb 1:8-9.
(4) he is addressed as immutable. He is declared to have laid the foundations of heaven and earth; and though they would perish, yet he would remain the same; Heb 1:10-12.
(5) none of the angels had been addressed in this manner, but they were employed in the subordinate work of ministering to the heirs of salvation; Heb 1:13-14.
From this train of reasoning, the inference is drawn in Heb 2:1-4, that we ought to give diligent heed to what had been spoken. The Great Author of the Christian scheme had special claims to be heard, and there was special danger in disregarding his message. The object of this chapter is to impress those to whom the Epistle was addressed with the high claims of the Founder of Christianity, and to show that it was superior in this respect to any other system.

R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
Heb 1:1, Christ in these last times coming to us from the Father, Heb 1:4, is preferred above the angels, both in person and office.
John Gill
INTRODUCTION TO HEBREWS 1
The intention of this epistle being to demonstrate the superior excellency of the Gospel revelation to the legal one, the apostle begins with the divine author of it, in which they both agree, and observes that in other things they differ. The revelation under the law was made in times past, the Gospel revelation in these last days; the former was made to the Jewish fathers that were of old, the latter to the then present apostles; the one was made at sundry times, and in divers manners, the other was made at once, and in one way; the one was made by the prophets of the Lord, the other by his own son, Heb 1:1 and therefore the latter must be the more excellent; in proof of which the author enlarges on the character of the Son of God, with respect to his person, office, and glory; showing that he is heir of all things, the Maker of the worlds, of the same nature and glory with his Father; is omnipotent, and upholds all things by the word of his power; is the High Priest of his people, who has made satisfaction for their sins, and purged them from them, and is now at the right hand of God, Heb 1:2 He goes on to prove that he is more excellent than the angels, by a variety of arguments, and these supported by testimonies from the Scriptures; as that he has a more excellent name than any of them, being called the Son of God, Heb 1:4 which is proved from Ps 2:7 that he is the object of the worship of angels, Heb 1:6 which is required of them, Ps 97:7 that he is their Maker and Creator, Heb 1:7 which appears from Ps 104:4 that he has an everlasting kingdom, is a righteous King, and is richly anointed above his fellows, Heb 1:8 which is the sense of some passages in Ps 45:6 and that he is the founder and former of the heavens, and of the earth, and will endure when they shall not, Heb 1:10 which is confirmed by testimonies out of Ps 102:25 that he sits at the right hand of God, where none of the angels were ever admitted, Heb 1:13 as is clear from Ps 110:1 and besides, the angels, as they are ministers made by him, they are sent out from him to wait on his people, the heirs of salvation, and minister to them, and therefore he must be greater than they, Heb 1:14.
1:11:1: [4656] Բազո՛ւմ մասամբք, եւ բազում օրինակօք կանխաւ խօսեցաւ Աստուած ընդ հարսն մեր մարգարէիւք[4657]. [4656] ՚Ի վերնագրիս՝ ոմանք. Թուղթ առ Եբրայեցիսն։[4657] Ոմանք. Ընդ հարս մեր։
1 Աստուած բազմապիսի ձեւերով եւ այլազան օրինակներով նախապէս խօսեց մեր հայրերի հետ մարգարէների միջոցով.
1 Շատ ձեւերով ու շատ կերպերով կանխաւ խօսած է Աստուած հայրերուն հետ՝ մարգարէներով։
Բազում մասամբք եւ բազում օրինակօք կանխաւ խօսեցաւ Աստուած ընդ հարսն [1]մեր մարգարէիւք:

1:1: [4656] Բազո՛ւմ մասամբք, եւ բազում օրինակօք կանխաւ խօսեցաւ Աստուած ընդ հարսն մեր մարգարէիւք[4657].
[4656] ՚Ի վերնագրիս՝ ոմանք. Թուղթ առ Եբրայեցիսն։
[4657] Ոմանք. Ընդ հարս մեր։
1 Աստուած բազմապիսի ձեւերով եւ այլազան օրինակներով նախապէս խօսեց մեր հայրերի հետ մարգարէների միջոցով.
1 Շատ ձեւերով ու շատ կերպերով կանխաւ խօսած է Աստուած հայրերուն հետ՝ մարգարէներով։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:11: Бог, многократно и многообразно говоривший издревле отцам в пророках,
1:1  πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως πάλαι ὁ θεὸς λαλήσας τοῖς πατράσιν ἐν τοῖς προφήταις
1:1. ΠΟΛΥΜΕΡΩΣ (Unto-much-portioned) ΚΑΙ (and) ΠΟΛΥΤΡΟΠΩΣ (unto-much-turned) πάλαι (unto-past) ὁ (the-one) θεὸς (a-Deity) λαλήσας (having-spoken-unto) τοῖς (unto-the-ones) πατράσιν (unto-fathers) ἐν (in) τοῖς (unto-the-ones) προφήταις (unto-declarers-before,"ἐπ' (upon) ἐσχάτου (of-most-bordered) τῶν (of-the-ones) ἡμερῶν (of-days) τούτων (of-the-ones-these) ἐλάλησεν (it-spoke-unto) ἡμῖν (unto-us) ἐν (in) υἱῷ, (unto-a-Son,"
1:1. multifariam et multis modis olim Deus loquens patribus in prophetisGod, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all,
1. God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners,
1:1. In many places and in many ways, in past times, God spoke to the fathers through the Prophets;
1:1. God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets:

1: Бог, многократно и многообразно говоривший издревле отцам в пророках,
1:1  πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως πάλαι ὁ θεὸς λαλήσας τοῖς πατράσιν ἐν τοῖς προφήταις
1:1. multifariam et multis modis olim Deus loquens patribus in prophetis
God, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all,
1:1. In many places and in many ways, in past times, God spoke to the fathers through the Prophets;
1:1. God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ mh▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
1: "Многократно (polumerwV) и многообразно (polutropwV)" - через многих пророков и разнообразными способами. Последнее относится и к способам сообщения воли Божией пророкам, и к способам сообщения этой воли пророками людям, для чего - кроме обычной речи - употреблялись и необычные средства - видения, знамения, чудеса, символы, пророчества и прообразы. Славянское - "многочастне" лучше и правильнее отражает мысль подлинника, желающего указать на простую многократность и как бы повторяемость откровения, а именно - его многочастность и как бы раздельность, при разнообразии и характерной особенности открываемой в каждом отдельном случае и при теснейшем отношении каждой отдельной открываемой истины к общему - единому и целому содержанию откровения. Таким образом, через пророка Исаию, например, было открыто рождение Мессии от девы и Его страдания, через Даниила - время Его пришествия, через Иону - Его тридневное погребение, через Малахию - пришествие Его Предтечи и т д. В противоположность этой раздельности и многочастности в Новом Завете Бог открыл через одного Своего Сына всю полноту истины - существенно, видимо, осязательно - в воплощенном Сыне, Который есть Сама Истина. - "Издревле" - (неопределенное наречие) опять менее характерно, чем славянское "древле" для точнейшего оттенения мысли подлинника. Это древле (palai) противополагается дальнейшему - в последок дней сих (ep escatou tain hmerwn toutwn) и означает здесь все время Ветхого Завета, всю древность в ее совокупности, а не отдельных моментах. - "В пророках". - Это выражение надо понимать здесь в самом широком смысле, разумея под пророками всех святых мужей Ветхого Завета, получавших откровение от Бога.
Matthew Henry: Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible - 1706
Law and Gospel Compared; Dignity and Glory of Christ.A. D. 62.
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Here the apostle begins with a general declaration of the excellency of the gospel dispensation above that of the law, which he demonstrates from the different way and manner of God's communicating himself and his mind and will to men in the one and in the other: both these dispensations were of God, and both of them very good, but there is a great difference in the way of their coming from God. Observe,

I. The way wherein God communicated himself and his will to men under the Old Testament. We have here an account, 1. Of the persons by whom God delivered his mind under the Old Testament; they were the prophets, that is, persons chosen of God, and qualified by him, for that office of revealing the will of God to men. No man takes this honour to himself, unless called; and whoever are called of God are qualified by him. 2. The persons to whom God spoke by the prophets: To the fathers, to all the Old-Testament saints who were under that dispensation. God favoured and honoured them with much clearer light than that of nature, under which the rest of the world were left. 3. The order in which God spoke to men in those times that went before the gospel, those past times: he spoke to his ancient people at sundry times and in divers manners. (1.) At sundry times, or by several parts, as the word signifies, which may refer either to the several ages of the Old-Testament dispensation--the patriarchal, the Mosaic, and the prophetic; or to the several gradual openings of his mind concerning the Redeemer: to Adam, that the Messiah should come of the seed of the woman,--to Abraham, that he should spring from his loins,--to Jacob, that he should be of the tribe of Judah,--to David, that he should be of his house,--to Micah, that he should be born at Bethlehem,--to Isaiah, that he should be born of a virgin. (2.) In divers manners, according to the different ways in which God though fit to communicate his mind to his prophets; sometimes by the illapses of his Spirit, sometimes by dreams, sometimes by visions, sometimes by an audible voice, sometimes by legible characters under his own hand, as when he wrote the ten commandments on tables of stone. Of some of these different ways God himself gave an account in Num. xii. 6-8, If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known to him in a vision, and will speak to him in a dream. Not so with my servant Moses: with him I will speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches.

II. God's method of communicating his mind and will under the New-Testament dispensation, these last days as they are called, that is, either towards the end of the world, or the end of the Jewish state. The times of the gospel are the last times, the gospel revelation is the last we are to expect from God. There was first the natural revelation; then the patriarchal, by dreams, visions, and voices; then the Mosaic, in the law given forth and written down; then the prophetic, in explaining the law, and giving clearer discoveries of Christ: but now we must expect no new revelation, but only more of the Spirit of Christ to help us better to understand what is already revealed. Now the excellency of the gospel revelation above the former consists in two things:--

1. It is the final, the finishing revelation, given forth in the last days of divine revelation, to which nothing is to be added, but the canon of scripture is to be settled and sealed: so that now the minds of men are no longer kept in suspense by the expectation of new discoveries, but they rejoice in a complete revelation of the will of God, both preceptive and providential, so far as is necessary for them to know in order to their direction and comfort. For the gospel includes a discovery of the great events that shall befal the church of God to the end of the world.

2. It is a revelation which God has made by his Son, the most excellent messenger that was ever sent into the world, far superior to all the ancient patriarchs and prophets, by whom God communicated his will to his people in former times. And here we have an excellent account of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

(1.) The glory of his office, and that in three respects:-- [1.] God hath appointed him to be heir of all things. As God, he was equal to the Father; but, as God-man and Mediator, he was appointed by the Father to be the heir of all things, the sovereign Lord of all, the absolute disposer, director, and governor of all persons and of all things, Ps. ii. 6, 7. All power in heaven and earth is given to him; all judgment is committed to him, Matt. xxviii. 18; John v. 22. [2.] By him God made the worlds, both visible and invisible, the heavens and the earth; not as an instrumental cause, but as his essential word and wisdom. By him he made the old creation, by him he makes the new creature, and by him he rules and governs both. [3.] He upholds all things by the word of his power: he keeps the world from dissolving. By him all things consist. The weight of the whole creation is laid upon Christ: he supports the whole and all the parts. When, upon the apostasy, the world was breaking to pieces under the wrath and curse of God, the Son of God, undertaking the work of redemption, bound it up again, and established it by his almighty power and goodness. None of the ancient prophets sustained such an office as this, none was sufficient for it.

(2.) Hence the apostle passes to the glory of the person of Christ, who was able to execute such an office: He was the brightness of his Father's glory, and the express image of his person, v. 3. This is a high and lofty description of the glorious Redeemer, this is an account of his personal excellency. [1.] He is, in person, the Son of God, the only-begotten Son of God, and as such he must have the same nature. This personal distinction always supposes one and the same nature. Every son of man is man; were not the nature the same, the generation would be monstrous. [2.] The person of the Son is the glory of the Father, shining forth with a truly divine splendour. As the beams are effulgent emanations of the sun, the father and fountain of light, Jesus Christ in his person is God manifest in the flesh, he is light of light, the true Shechinah. [3.] The person of the Son is the true image and character of the person of the Father; being of the same nature, he must bear the same image and likeness. In beholding the power, wisdom, and goodness, of the Lord Jesus Christ, we behold the power, wisdom, and goodness, of the Father; for he hath the nature and perfections of God in him. He that hath seen the Son hath seen the Father; that is, he hath seen the same Being. He that hath known the Son hath known the Father, John xiv. 7-9. For the Son is in the Father, and the Father in the Son; the personal distinction is no other than will consist with essential union. This is the glory of the person of Christ; the fulness of the Godhead dwells, not typically, but really, in him.

(3.) From the glory of the person of Christ he proceeds to mention the glory of his grace; his condescension itself was truly glorious. The sufferings of Christ had this great honour in them, to be a full satisfaction for the sins of his people: By himself he purged away our sins, that is, by the proper innate merit of his death and bloodshed, by their infinite intrinsic value; as they were the sufferings of himself, he has made atonement for sin. Himself, the glory of his person and nature, gave to his sufferings such merit as was a sufficient reparation of honour to God, who had suffered an infinite injury and affront by the sins of men.

(4.) From the glory of his sufferings we are at length led to consider the glory of his exaltation: When by himself he had purged away our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, at his Father's right hand. As Mediator and Redeemer, he is invested with the highest honour, authority, and activity, for the good of his people; the Father now does all things by him, and receives all the services of his people from him. Having assumed our nature, and suffered in it on earth, he has taken it up with him to heaven, and there it has the high honour to be next to God, and this was the reward of his humiliation.

Now it was by no less a person than this that God in these last days spoke to men; and, since the dignity of the messenger gives authority and excellency to the message, the dispensations of the gospel must therefore exceed, very far exceed, the dispensation of the law.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:1: God, who at sundry times and in divers manners - We can scarcely conceive any thing more dignified than the opening of this epistle; the sentiments are exceedingly elevated, and the language, harmony itself! The infinite God is at once produced to view, not in any of those attributes which are essential to the Divine nature, but in the manifestations of his love to the world, by giving a revelation of his will relative to the salvation of mankind, and thus preparing the way, through a long train of years, for the introduction of that most glorious Being, his own Son. This Son, in the fullness of time, was manifested in the flesh that he might complete all vision and prophecy, supply all that was wanting to perfect the great scheme of revelation for the instruction of the world, and then die to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. The description which he gives of this glorious personage is elevated beyond all comparison. Even in his humiliation, his suffering of death excepted, he is infinitely exalted above all the angelic host, is the object of their unceasing adoration, is permanent on his eternal throne at the right hand of the Father, and from him they all receive their commands to minister to those whom he has redeemed by his blood. in short, this first chapter, which may be considered the introduction to the whole epistle is, for importance of subject, dignity of expression, harmony and energy of language, compression and yet distinctness of ideas, equal, if not superior, to any other part of the New Testament.
Sundry times - Πολυμερως, from πολυς, many, and μερος, a part; giving portions of revelation at different times.
Divers manners - Πολυτροπως, from πολυς, many, and τροπος, a manner, turn, or form of speech; hence trope, a figure in rhetoric. Lambert Bos supposes these words to refer to that part of music which is denominated harmony, viz. that general consent or union of musical sounds which is made up of different parts; and, understood in this way, it may signify the agreement or harmony of all the Old Testament writers, who with one consent gave testimony to Jesus Christ, and the work of redemption by him. To him gave all the prophets witness, that, through his name, whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins; Act 10:43.
But it is better to consider, with Kypke, that the words are rather intended to point out the imperfect state of Divine revelation under the Old Testament; it was not complete, nor can it without the New be considered a sufficiently ample discovery of the Divine will. Under the Old Testament, revelations were made πολυμερως και πολυτροπως, at various times, by various persons, in various laws and forms of teaching, with various degrees of clearness, under various shadows, types, and figures, and with various modes of revelation, such as by angels, visions, dreams, mental impressions, etc. See Num 12:6, Num 12:8. But under the New Testament all is done ἁπλως, simply, by one person, i.e. Jesus, who has fulfilled the prophets, and completed prophecy; who is the way, the truth, and the life; and the founder, mediator, and governor of his own kingdom.
One great object of the apostle is, to put the simplicity of the Christian system in opposition to the complex nature of the Mosaic economy; and also to show that what the law could not do because it was weak through the flesh, Jesus has accomplished by the merit of his death, and the energy of his Spirit.
Maximus Tyrius, Diss. 1, page 7, has a passage where the very words employed by the apostle are found, and evidently used nearly in the same sense: Τῃ του ανθρωπου ψυχῃ δυο οργανων οντων προς συνεσιν, του μεν ἁπλου, ὁν καλουμεν νουν, του δε ποικιλου και πολυμερους και πολυτροπου, ἁς αισθησεις καλουμεν. "The soul of man has two organs of intelligence: one simple, which we call mind; the other diversified, and acting in various modes and various ways, which we term sense."
A similar form of expression the same writer employs in Diss. 15, page 171: "The city which is governed by the mob, πολυφωνον τε ειναι και πολυμερη και πολυπαθη, is full of noise, and is divided by various factions and various passions." The excellence of the Gospel above the law is here set down in three points:
1. God spake unto the faithful under the Old Testament by Moses and the prophets, worthy servants, yet servants; now the Son is much better than a servant, Heb 1:4.
2. Whereas the body of the Old Testament was long in compiling, being about a thousand years from Moses to Malachi; and God spake unto the fathers by piecemeal, one while raising up one prophet, another while another, now sending them one parcel of prophecy or history, then another; but when Christ came, all was brought to perfection in one age; the apostles and evangelists were alive, some of them, when every part of the New Testament was completely finished.
3. The Old Testament was delivered by God in divers manners, both in utterance and manifestation; but the delivery of the Gospel was in a more simple manner; for, although there are various penmen, yet the subject is the same, and treated with nearly the same phraseology throughout; James, Jude, and the Apocalypse excepted. See Leigh.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:1: God who at sundry times - The commencement of this Epistle varies from all the others which Paul wrote. In every other instance he at first announces his name, and the name of the church or of the individual to whom he wrote. In regard to the reason why he here varies from that custom, see the introduction, section 3. This commences with the full acknowledgment of his belief that God had made important Revelations in past times, but that now he had communicated his will in a manner that more especially claimed their attention. This announcement was of particular importance here. He was writing to those who had been trained up in the full belief of the truths taught by the prophets. As the object of the apostle was to show the superior claims of the gospel, and to lead them from putting confidence in the rites instituted in accordance with the directions of the Old Testament, it was of essential importance that he should admit that their belief of the inspiration of the prophets was well founded.
He was not an infidel. He was not disposed to call in question the divine origin of the books which were regarded as given by inspiration. He fully admitted all that had been held by the Hebrews on that heart, and yet showed that the new Revelation had more important claims to their attention. The word rendered "at sundry times" - πολυμερῶς polumerō s - means "in many parts." It refers here to the fact that the former Revelation had been given in various parts. It had not all been given at once. It had been communicated from time to time as the exigencies of the people required, and as God chose to communicate it. At one time it was by history, then by prophecy, by poetry, by proverbs, by some solemn and special message, etc. The ancient Revelation was a collection of various writings, on different subjects, and given at different times; but now God had addressed us by His Son - the one great Messenger who had come to finish the divine communications, and to give a uniform and connected Revelation to mankind. The contrast here is between the numerous separate parts of the Revelation given by the prophets, and the oneness of that given by his Son. The word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.
And in divers manners - - πολυτρόπως polutropō s. In many ways. It was not all in one mode. He had employed various methods in communicating his will. At one time it was by direct communication, at another by dreams, at another by visions, etc. In regard to the various methods which God employed to communicate his will, see Introduction to Isaiah, section 7. In contradistinction from these, God had now spoken by his Son. He had addressed us in one uniform manner. It was not by dreams, or visions; it was a direct communication from him. The word used here, also, occurs nowhere else in the New Testament.
In times past - Formerly; in ancient times. The series of Revelations began, as recorded by Moses, with Adam Gen. 3, and terminated with Malachi - a period of more than three thousand five hundred years. From Malachi to the time of the Saviour there were no recorded divine communications, and the whole period of written Revelation, or when the divine communications were recorded from Moses to Malachi, was about a thousand years.
Unto the fathers - To our ancestors; to the people of ancient times.
By the prophets - The word "prophet" in the Scriptures is used in a wide signification. It means not only those who predict future events, but these who communicate the divine will on any subject. See Rom 12:6 note; Co1 14:1 note. It is used here in that large sense - as denoting all those by whom God had made communications to the Jews in former times.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:1: at: Gen 3:15, Gen 6:3, Gen 6:13-22, Gen 8:15-19, Gen 9:1-17, Gen 12:1-3, Gen 26:2-5, Gen 28:12-15; Gen 32:24-30, Gen 46:2-4; exo 3:1-22; Luk 24:27, Luk 24:44; Act 28:23; Pe1 1:10-12; Pe2 1:20, Pe2 1:21
in: Num 12:6-8; Joe 2:28
the fathers: Luk 1:55, Luk 1:72; Joh 7:22; Act 13:32
Geneva 1599
1:1 God, who at (1) sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
The purpose of this epistle, is to show that Jesus Christ the Son of God both God and man is that true eternal and only Prophet, King and High Priest, that was shadowed by the figures of the old law, and is now indeed exhibited of whom the whole Church ought to be taught, governed and sanctified.
(1) The first part of the general proposition of this epistle the son of God is indeed that prophet or teacher, who has actually now performed that which God after a sort and in shadows signified by his prophets, and has fully revealed his Father's will to the world.
John Gill
1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners,.... The apostle begins the epistle with an account of the revelation God has made of his mind and will in former times: the author of this revelation is God, not essentially, but personally considered, even God the Father, as distinguished from his Son in the next verse; for the revelation under the Old Testament is divine, as well as that under the New; in this they both agree, in whatsoever else they differ: and this revelation was made at several times, at different seasons, and to different persons; and consisted of a variety of things relating to doctrine and worship, and concerning the Messiah, his person and office; of whom, at different times, there were gradual discoveries made, both before and after the giving of the law, from the beginning of the world, or the giving forth of the first promise, and in the times of the patriarchs, of: Moses, David, Isaiah, and other prophets: and this was delivered in various manners; sometimes by angels; sometimes in a dream; at other times by a vision; and sometimes by Urim and Thummim: and this he
spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets; by Moses, and other succeeding prophets, as David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, Zechariah, Malachi, and others; who were sent to the Jewish fathers, the ancestors of the people of the Jews, to whom they prophesied and declared the will of God, as they were moved and inspired by the Holy Ghost: and the apostle suggests, by this way of speaking, that it was a long time since God spake to this people; for prophecy had ceased ever since the times of Malachi, for the space of three hundred years; and this time past includes the whole Old Testament dispensation, from the beginning to the end of it, or of prophecy in it.
John Wesley
1:1 God, who at sundry times - The creation was revealed in the time of Adam; the last judgment, in the time of Enoch: and so at various times, and in various degrees, more explicit knowledge was given. In divers manners - In visions, in dreams, and by revelations of various kinds. Both these are opposed to the one entire and perfect revelation which he has made to us by Jesus Christ. The very number of the prophets showed that they prophesied only "in part." Of old - There were no prophets for a large tract of time before Christ came, that the great Prophet might be the more earnestly expected. Spake - A part is put for the whole; implying every kind of divine communication. By the prophets - The mention of whom is a virtual declaration that the apostle received the whole Old Testament, and was not about to advance any doctrine in contradiction to it. Hath in these last times - Intimating that no other revelation is to be expected. Spoken - All things, and in the most perfect manner. By his Son - Alone. The Son spake by the apostles. The majesty of the Son of God is proposed, Absolutely, by the very name of Son, Heb 1:1, and by three glorious predicates, - "whom he hath appointed," "by whom he made," who "sat down;" whereby he is described from the beginning to the consummation of all things, Heb 1:2-3 Comparatively to angels, Heb 1:4. The proof of this proposition immediately follows: the name of Son being proved, Heb 1:5; his being "heir of all things," Heb 1:6-9; his making the worlds, Heb 1:10-12 his sitting at God's right hand, Heb 1:13, &c.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:1 THE HIGHEST OF ALL REVELATIONS IS GIVEN US NOW IN THE SON OF GOD, WHO IS GREATER THAN THE ANGELS, AND WHO, HAVING COMPLETED REDEMPTION, SITS ENTHRONED AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND. (Heb 1:1-14)
at sundry times--Greek, "in many portions." All was not revealed to each one prophet; but one received one portion of revelation, and another another. To Noah the quarter of the world to which Messiah should belong was revealed; to Abraham, the nation; to Jacob, the tribe; to David and Isaiah, the family; to Micah, the town of nativity; to Daniel, the exact time; to Malachi, the coming of His forerunner, and His second advent; through Jonah, His burial and resurrection; through Isaiah and Hosea, His resurrection. Each only knew in part; but when that which was perfect came in Messiah, that which was in part was done away (1Cor 13:12).
in divers manners--for example, internal suggestions, audible voices, the Urim and Thummim, dreams, and visions. "In one way He was seen by Abraham, in another by Moses, in another by Elias, and in another by Micah; Isaiah, Daniel, and Ezekiel, beheld different forms" [THEODORET]. (Compare Num 12:6-8). The Old Testament revelations were fragmentary in substance, and manifold in form; the very multitude of prophets shows that they prophesied only in part. In Christ, the revelation of God is full, not in shifting hues of separated color, but Himself the pure light, uniting in His one person the whole spectrum (Heb 1:3).
spake--the expression usual for a Jew to employ in addressing Jews. So Matthew, a Jew writing especially for Jews, quotes Scripture, not by the formula, "It is written," but "said," &c.
in time past--From Malachi, the last of the Old Testament prophets, for four hundred years, there had arisen no prophet, in order that the Son might be the more an object of expectation [BENGEL]. As God (the Father) is introduced as having spoken here; so God the Son, Heb 2:3; God the Holy Ghost, Heb 3:7.
the fathers--the Jewish fathers. The Jews of former days (1Cor 10:1).
by--Greek, "in." A mortal king speaks by his ambassador, not (as the King of kings) in his ambassador. The Son is the last and highest manifestation of God (Mt 21:34, Mt 21:37); not merely a measure, as in the prophets, but the fulness of the Spirit of God dwelling in Him bodily (Jn 1:16; Jn 3:34; Col 2:9). Thus he answers the Jewish objection drawn from their prophets. Jesus is the end of all prophecy (Rev_ 19:10), and of the law of Moses (Jn 1:17; Jn 5:46).
1:21:2: ՚ի վախճան աւուրցս այսոցիկ՝ խօսեցաւ ընդ մեզ Որդւո՛վն, զոր եդ ժառա՛նգ ամենայնի. որով եւ զյաւիտեանսն արար[4658]։ [4658] Ոմանք. Զյաւիտեանս արար։
2 այս վերջին օրերին մեզ հետ խօսեց իր Որդու միջոցով, որին ժառանգ նշանակեց ամէն ինչի, եւ որի միջոցով ստեղծեց տիեզերքը:
2 Այս վերջին օրերս իր Որդիովը խօսեցաւ մեզի հետ, որը ամէն բանի ժառանգորդ ըրաւ, որով աշխարհն ալ ստեղծեց։
ի վախճան աւուրցս այսոցիկ խօսեցաւ ընդ մեզ Որդւովն զոր եդ ժառանգ ամենայնի, որով եւ զյաւիտեանսն արար:

1:2: ՚ի վախճան աւուրցս այսոցիկ՝ խօսեցաւ ընդ մեզ Որդւո՛վն, զոր եդ ժառա՛նգ ամենայնի. որով եւ զյաւիտեանսն արար[4658]։
[4658] Ոմանք. Զյաւիտեանս արար։
2 այս վերջին օրերին մեզ հետ խօսեց իր Որդու միջոցով, որին ժառանգ նշանակեց ամէն ինչի, եւ որի միջոցով ստեղծեց տիեզերքը:
2 Այս վերջին օրերս իր Որդիովը խօսեցաւ մեզի հետ, որը ամէն բանի ժառանգորդ ըրաւ, որով աշխարհն ալ ստեղծեց։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:22: в последние дни сии говорил нам в Сыне, Которого поставил наследником всего, чрез Которого и веки сотворил.
1:2  ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν υἱῶ, ὃν ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον πάντων, δι᾽ οὖ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας·
1:2. ὃν (to-which) ἔθηκεν (it-placed) κληρονόμον (to-lot-parceleed) πάντων , ( of-all ,"δι' (through) οὗ (of-which) καὶ (and) ἐποίησεν (it-did-unto) τοὺς (to-the-ones) αἰῶνας: (to-ages)
1:2. novissime diebus istis locutus est nobis in Filio quem constituit heredem universorum per quem fecit et saeculaIn these days, hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world.
2. hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds;
1:2. lastly, in these days, he has spoken to us through the Son, whom he appointed as the heir of all things, and through whom he made the world.
1:2. Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds:

2: в последние дни сии говорил нам в Сыне, Которого поставил наследником всего, чрез Которого и веки сотворил.
1:2  ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν υἱῶ, ὃν ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον πάντων, δι᾽ οὖ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας·
1:2. novissime diebus istis locutus est nobis in Filio quem constituit heredem universorum per quem fecit et saecula
In these days, hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world.
1:2. lastly, in these days, he has spoken to us through the Son, whom he appointed as the heir of all things, and through whom he made the world.
1:2. Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
2: "В последние дни сии" - евр. ??? - в последние времена обозначает вообще время царствования Мессии. С наступлением этого времени ("когда пришла полнота времени", Гал 4:4) дни подзаконного служения - по определению Божию - не вечного, а временного, обреченного на замену новым, вечным, благодатным - являлись последними не в хронологическом только смысле, но, так сказать, и по существу, как дни, исчерпавшие временную необходимость Ветхого Завета и вызвавшие зарождение Нового. - "Говорил..." - в сопоставлении с выше употребленным - "говоривший" от одного и того же глагола lalein (евр. rbd - употреблявшегося для обозначения Божественного откровения) - указывает на внутреннюю связь обоих откровений - Ветхозаветного и Новозаветного, причем первое являлось лишь предопределенною Богом предварительною ступенью ко второму. - "Нам" в противоположность "отцам" указывает и на преимущество наше, вытекающее из дальнейшего противопоставления "в Сыне" вместо прежнего - "в пророках". - "В Сыне" - как "в пророках", - en греческое в смысле dia - через Сына, через пророков, но с особым оттенком мысли, что и Сын, и пророки Божии не были лишь внешними орудиями откровения, но живыми посредниками и выразителями его. Греческий текст при этом выражается - en uiw (без члена), желая этим сказать, что противополагаемый пророкам Некто стоял к Богу не в отношении простого пророка, но в гораздо более близком отношении Сына. Другие толкователи объясняют опущение члена в данном месте тем, что здесь - uioV (как и в 7:28) имеет значение собственного имени Мессии, и как такое, будучи в себе самом определенным, не нуждается в ближайшем определении посредством члена Как истинный Сын Божий, равный Отцу (3: ст.), этот последний Посредник между Богом и людьми дал в Себе людям полнейшее и совершеннейшее Откровение Божества, покрывшее и завершившее все прежде бывшие откровения через пророков. Упомянув о Сыне, писатель старается уяснить Его Божественную и человеческую природу и сущность, делая это в трёх соотносительных предложениях. Сын есть вместе и наследник; отсюда Сын Божий есть наследник всего, т.е. Господь всей вселенной, так как наследство и наследник по еврейскому словоупотреблению означают господство и господин (ср. Пс 2:8, а также Ин 16:15; Мф ХXVIII:18). - "Всего" - pantwn - как и Кол 1:16, означает совокупность всех вещей. Но почему сказано: "Которого поставил" (eqhke), а не "Который есть?" - Св. Златоуст и Феодорит объясняют это тем, что тут речь касается человеческой природы Мессии. Как Бог, Он всегда, от начала был Господь всего, потому что через Него все сотворено. Но как человек, Он стал во времени Наследником и Господом всего, совершив, как Богочеловек, второе творение, т.е. искупление всей твари. - Это искупление еще не закончилось в своих действиях и будет продолжаться, доколе продолжается мир. Христос основал Себе особое Богочеловеческое царство, в конце которого покорятся под ноги Его все враги Его и наступит полное господство Сына над всем (ср. 1: Kop 15:25: и д.). Выражение "положил наследника всем" (поставил наследником всего) должно быть, таким образом, понимаемо в смысле предвечного предназначения Сына Божия к будущему обладанию, которое, так сказать, юридически началось с момента произнесения Спасителем слов: "сoвepшишася", а фактически исполнится и завершится, когда Бог "покорит Сыну всяческая и когда и Сам Сын покорится покорившему Ему всяческая и будет Бог всяческая во всех!" - "Через Которого и веки сотворил..." Это предложение, как показывает частица и, составляет основание к прежде сказанному: "Его же положи..." Христос поставлен наследником всего потому, что через Него и веки сотворил Бог. - "Веки сотворил", т.е. не только самое время, исчисляемое веками, но и все, что существует во времени или вместе с временем. Знаменательно то, как апостол постепенно, как бы по лестнице, идет все выше и выше в Богословествовании: сначала он называет Основателя христианства Сыном, что иной, пожалуй, сочтет за общее название чад Божиих; потом назвал Его наследником всего: это уже высшая степень Богословествования; далее именует Его Творцом веков; это еще выше по сравнению с предыдущими наименованиями; наконец, апостол представляет еще более возвышенное - то, выше чего уже нет.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:2: Last days - The Gospel dispensation, called the last days and the last time, because not to be followed by any other dispensation; or the conclusion of the Jewish Church and state now at their termination.
By his Son - It is very remarkable that the pronoun αὑτου, his, is not found in the text; nor is it found in any MS. or version. We should not therefore supply the pronoun as our translators have done; but simply read εν Υἱῳ, By a Son, or In a Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things. God has many sons and daughters, for he is the Father of the spirits of all flesh; and he has many heirs, for if sons, then heirs, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ; but he has no Son who is heir of all things, none by whom he made the worlds, none in whom he speaks, and by whom he has delivered a complete revelation to mankind, but Jesus the Christ.
The apostle begins with the lowest state in which Christ has appeared:
1. His being a Son, born of a woman, and made under the law. He then ascends,
2. So his being an Heir, and an Heir of all things.
3. He then describes him as the Creator of all worlds.
4. As the Brightness of the Divine glory.
5. As the express Image of his person, or character of the Divine substance.
6. As sustaining the immense fabric of the universe; and this by the word of his power.
7. As having made an atonement for the sin of the world, which was the most stupendous of all his works.
"'Twas great to speak a world from nought;
'Twas greater to redeem."
8. As being on the right hand of God, infinitely exalted above all created beings; and the object of adoration to all the angelic host.
9. As having an eternal throne, neither his person nor his dignity ever changing or decaying.
10. As continuing to exercise dominion, when the earth and the heavens are no more! It is only in God manifested in the flesh that all these excellences can possibly appear, therefore the apostle begins this astonishing climax with the simple Sonship of Christ, or his incarnation; for, on this, all that he is to man, and all that he has done for man, is built.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:2: Hath in these last days - In this the final dispensation; or in this dispensation under which the affairs of the world will be wound up. Phrases similar to this occur frequently in the Scriptures. They do not imply that the world was soon coming to an end, but that that was the "last" dispensation, the "last" period of the world. There had been the patriarchal period, the period under the Law, the prophets, etc., and This was the period during which God's "last" method of communication would be enjoyed, and under which the world would close. It might be a very long period, but it would be the "last" one; and so far as the meaning of the phrase is concerned, it might be the longest period, or longer than all the others put together, but still it would be the "last" one. See Act 2:17 note; Isa 2:2 note.
Spoken unto us - The word "us" here does not of necessity imply that the writer of the Epistle had actually heard him, or that they had heard him to whom the Epistle was written. It means that God had now communicated his will to man by his Son. It may be said with entire propriety that God has spoken to us by his Son, though we have not personally heard or seen him. We have what he spoke and caused to be recorded for our direction.
By his Son - The title commonly given to the Lord Jesus, as denoting his unique relation to God. It was understood by the Jews to denote equality with God (notes, Joh 5:18; compare Joh 10:33, Joh 10:36), and is used with such a reference here. See notes on Rom 1:4, where the meaning of the phrase "Son of God" is fully considered. It is implied here that the fact that the Son of God has spoken to us imposes the highest obligations to attend to what he has said; that he has an authority superior to all those who have spoken in past times; and that there will be special guilt in refusing to attend to what he has spoken. See Heb 2:1-4; compare Heb 12:25. The reasons for the superior respect which should be shown to the Revelations of the Son of God may be such as these:
(1) His rank and dignity. He is the equal with God Joh 1:1, and is himself called God in this chapter; Heb 1:8. He has a right, therefore, to command, and when he speaks, people should obey.
(2) The clearness of the truths which he communicated to man on a great variety of subjects that are of the highest moment to the world. Revelation has been gradual - like the breaking of the day in the east. At first there is a little light; it increases and expands until objects become more and more visible, and then the sun rises in full-orbed glory. At first we discern only the existence of some object - obscure and undefined; then we can trace its outline; then its color, its size, its proportions, its drapery - until it stands before us fully Rev_ealed. So it has been with Revelation. There is a great variety of subjects which we now see clearly, which were very imperfectly understood by the teaching of the prophets, and would be now if we had only the Old Testament. Among them are the following:
(a) The character of God. Christ came to make him known as a merciful being, and to show how he could be merciful as well as just. The views given of God by the Lord Jesus are far more clear than any given by the ancient prophets; compared with those entertained by the ancient philosophers, they are like the sun compared with the darkest midnight,
(b) The way in which man may be reconcile to God. The New Testament - which may be considered as what God "has spoken to us by his Son" - has told us how the great work of being reconciled to God can be effected. The Lord Jesus told us that he came to "give his life a ransom for many;" that he laid down his life for his friends; that he was about to die for man; that he would draw all people to him. The prophets indeed - particularly Isaiah - threw much light on these points. But the mass of the people did not understand their Revelations. They pertained to future events always difficult to be understood. But Christ has told us the way of salvation, and he has made it so plain that he who runs may read.
(c) The moral precepts of the Redeemer are superior to those of any and all that had gone before him. They are elevated, pure, expansive, benevolent - such as became the Son of God to proclaim. Indeed this is admitted on all hands. Infidels are constrained to acknowledge that all the moral precepts of the Saviour are eminently pure and benignant. If they were obeyed, the world would be filled with justice, truth, purity, and benevolence. Error, fraud, hypocrisy, ambition, wars, licentiousness, and intemperance, would cease; and the opposite virtues would diffuse happiness over the face of the world. Prophets had indeed delivered many moral precepts of great importance, but the purest and most extensive body of just principles of good morals on earth are to be found in the teachings of the Saviour.
(d) He has given to us the clearest view which man has had of the future state; and he has disclosed in regard to that future state a class of truths of the deepest interest to mankind, which were before wholly unknown or only partially Rev_ealed.
1. He has Rev_ealed the certainty of a state of future existence - in opposition to the Sadducees of all ages. This was denied before he came by multitudes, and where it was not, the arguments by which it was supported were often of the feeblest kind. The "truth" was held by some - like Plato and his followers - but the "arguments" on which they relied were feeble, and such as were untitled to give rest to the soul. The "truth" they had obtained by tradition; the "arguments" were their own.
2. He Rev_ealed the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. This before was doubted or denied by nearly all the world. It was held to be absurd and impossible. The Saviour taught its certainty; he raised up more than one to show that it was possible; he was himself raised, to put the whole matter beyond debate.
3. He Rev_ealed the certainty of future judgment - the judgment of all mankind.
4. It disclosed great and momentous truths respecting the future state. Before he came, all was dark. The Greeks spoke of Elysian fields, but they were dreams of the imagination; the Hebrews had some faint notion of a future state where all was dark and gloomy, with perhaps an occasional glimpse of the truth that there is a holy and blessed heaven; but to the mass of mind all was obscure. Christ Rev_ealed a heaven, and told us of a hell. He showed us that the one might be gained and the other avoided. He presented important motives for doing it; and had he done nothing more, his communications were worthy the profound attention of mankind. I may add:
(3) That the Son of God has claims on our attention from the manner in which he spoke. He spoke as one having "authority;" Mat 7:29. He spoke as a "witness" of what he saw and knew; Joh 3:11. He spoke without doubt or ambiguity of God, and heaven, and hell. His is the language of one who is familiar with all that he describes; who saw all, who knew all. There is no hesitancy or doubt in his mind of the truth of what he speaks; and he speaks as if his whole soul were impressed with its unspeakable importance. Never were so momentous communications made to people of hell as fell from the lips of the Lord Jesus (see notes on Mat 23:33); never were announcements made so suited to awe and appall a sinful world.
Whom he hath appointed heir of all things - see Psa 2:8; compare notes, Rom 8:17. This is language taken from the fact that he is "the Son of God." If a son, then he is an heir - for so it is usually among people. This is not to be taken literally, as if he inherits anything as a man does. An heir is one who inherits anything after the death of its possessor - usually his father. But this cannot be applied in this sense to the Lord Jesus. The language is used to denote his rank and dignity as the Son of God. As such all things are his, as the property of a father descends to his son at his death. The word rendered "heir" - κληρονόμος klē ronomos - means properly:
(1) one who acquires anything by lot; and,
(2) an "heir" in the sense in which we usually understand the word. It may also denote a "possessor" of anything received as a portion, or of property of any kind; see Rom 4:13-14. It is in every instance rendered "heir" in the New Testament. Applied to Christ, it means that as the Son of God he is possessor or lord of all things, or that all things are his; compare Act 2:36; Act 10:36; Joh 17:10; Joh 16:15. "All things that the Father hath are mine." The sense is, that all things belong to the Son of God. Who is so "rich" then as Christ? Who so able to endow his friends with enduring and abundant wealth?
By whom - By whose agency; or who was the actual agent in the creation. Grotins supposes that this means, "on account of whom;" and that the meaning is, that the universe was formed with reference to the Messiah, in accordance with an ancient Jewish maxim. But the more common and Classical usage of the word rendered "by" (διὰ dia), when it governs a genitive, as here, is to denote the instrumental cause; the agent by which anything is done; see Mat 1:22; Mat 2:5, Mat 2:15, Mat 2:23; Luk 18:31; Joh 2:17; Acts , Act 2:22, Act 2:43; Act 4:16; Act 12:9; Rom 2:16; Rom 5:5. It may be true that the universe was formed with reference to the glory of the Son of God, and that this world was brought into being in order to show his glory; but it would not do to establish that doctrine on a passage like this. Its obvious and proper meaning is, that he was the agent of the creation - a truth that is abundantly taught elsewhere; see Joh 1:3, Joh 1:10; Col 1:16; Eph 3:9; Co1 8:6. This sense, also, better agrees with the design of the apostle in this place. His object is to set forth the dignity of the Son of God. This is better shown by the consideration that he was the creator of all things, than that all things were made for him.
The worlds - The universe, or creation. So the word here - αἰών aiō n - is undoubtedly used in Heb 11:3. The word properly means "age" - an indefinitely long period of time; then perpetuity, ever, eternity - "always" being. For an extended investigation of the meaning of the word, the reader may consult an essay by Prof. Stuart, in the Spirit of the Pilgrims, for 1829, pp. 406-452. From the sense of "age," or "duration," the word comes to denote the present and future age; the present world and the world to come; the present world, with all its cares, anxieties, and evils; the people of this world - a wicked generation, etc. Then it means the world - the material universe creation as it is. The only perfectly clear use of the word in this sense in the New Testament is in Heb 11:3, and there there can be no doubt. "Through faith we understand that the worlds were made by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." The passage before us will bear the same interpretation, and this is the most obvious and intelligible. What would be the meaning of saying that the "ages" or "dispensations" were made by the Son of God? The Hebrews used the word - צולם ‛ owlaam - in the same sense. It properly means "age, duration;" and thence it came to be used by them to denote the world - made up of "ages" or generations; and then the world itself. This is the fair, and, as it seems to me, the only intelligible interpretation of this passage - an interpretation amply sustained by texts referred to above as demonstrating that the universe was made by the agency of the Son of God. Compare Heb 1:10 note, and Joh 1:3 note.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:2: these: Gen 49:1; Num 24:14; Deu 4:30, Deu 18:15, Deu 31:29; Isa 2:2; Jer 30:24, Jer 48:47; Eze 38:16; Dan 2:28, Dan 10:14; Hos 3:5; Mic 4:1; Act 2:17; Gal 4:4; Eph 1:10; Pe2 3:3; Jde 1:18
spoken: Heb 1:5, Heb 1:8, Heb 2:3, Heb 5:8, Heb 7:3; Mat 3:17, Mat 17:5, Mat 26:63; Mar 1:1, Mar 12:6; Joh 1:14, Joh 1:17, Joh 1:18; Joh 3:16, Joh 15:15; Rom 1:4
appointed: Heb 2:8, Heb 2:9; Psa 2:6-9; Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7, Isa 53:10-12; Mat 21:38, Mat 28:18; Joh 3:25, Joh 13:3; Joh 16:15, Joh 17:2; Act 10:36; Rom 8:17; Co1 8:6, Co1 15:25-27; Eph 1:20-23; Phi 2:9-11; Col 1:17, Col 1:18
by whom: Pro 8:22-31; Isa 44:24, Isa 45:12, Isa 45:18; Joh 1:3; Co1 8:6; Eph 3:9; Col 1:16, Col 1:17
Geneva 1599
1:2 Hath in these (a) last days spoken unto us by [his] (b) Son, (2) whom he hath appointed (c) heir of all things, by whom also he made the (d) worlds;
(a) So that the former declaration made by the prophets was not complete, and nothing must be added to this latter.
(b) That one Son is God and man. (2) The second part of the same statement: The same Son is appointed by the Father to be our king and Lord, by whom also he made all things: and in whom only he sets forth his glory, yea and himself also to be under obligation to us, who upholds and supports all things by his will and pleasure.
(c) Possessor and equal partner of all things with the Father.
(d) That is, whatever has been at any time, is, or shall be.
John Gill
1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son,.... This is the Gospel revelation, or the revelation in the Gospel dispensation; which though it comes from the same author the other does, yet in many things differs from it, and is preferable to it; and indeed the general design of this epistle is to show the superior excellency of the one to the other; the former was delivered out in time past, but this "in these last days"; the Alexandrian copy, the Complutensian edition, and several other copies, read, "in the last of these days": perfectly agreeable to the phrase , used in Gen 49:1 to which the apostle refers, and in which places the days of the Messiah are intended; and it is a rule with the Jews (m), that wherever the phrase, "the last days", is mentioned, the days of the Messiah are designed: and they are to be understood not of the last days of the natural world, but of, the Jewish world and state; indeed the times of the Messiah, or Gospel dispensation, may be called the last days of the natural world, according to the tradition of the house of Elias; which teaches, that the duration of the world will be six thousand years, and divides it into three parts, the last of which is assigned to the Messiah, thus; two thousand years void, (or without the law,) two thousand years the law, and two thousand years the days of the Messiah (n): but it is best to understand this of the last days of the Mosaic economy, or Jewish dispensation; for the Messiah was to come before the Jewish civil and church states were dissolved; before the sceptre departed from Judah, and before the second temple was destroyed; and he was to come at the end, or toward the close of both these states; and which is called the end, or ends of the world, Hab 2:3 and quickly after Jesus, the true Messiah was come, an end was put to both these: from whence it may be observed, that the Messiah must be come; that the Mosaic economy, and Jewish worship, will never be restored again; that the Gospel revelation being made in the last days, ought to be regarded the more, it being the last revelation God will ever make. Moreover, this differs from the former in this respect, that was made to the fathers, this "to us"; meaning either the apostles in particular, or the Jews in general, to whom the apostle is writing: this shows that the Gospel revelation was first made to the Jews; and it being made to them personally, they were under great obligation to regard it; and that God had not cast off his people; and that though he had greatly indulged their fathers, he had showed greater favour to them, having provided some better thing for them: and there is a difference between these two revelations in the manner in which they were made; the former was at sundry times, and in divers manners, the latter was made at once, and in one way; that was delivered out in parts, and by piece meal, this the whole together; the whole mind and will of God, all his counsel, all that Christ heard of the Father; it is the faith that was once, and at once, delivered to the saints; and it has been given out in one way, by the preaching of the word: to which may be added, that formerly God spoke by many persons, by the prophets, but now by one only, "by his Son"; who is so not by creation, nor by adoption, nor by office, but by nature; being his own Son, his proper Son, begotten of him, of the same nature with him, and equal to him; and so infinitely preferable to the prophets: he is a Son, and not a servant, in whom the Father is, and he in the Father, and in whom the Spirit is without measure; and God is said to speak by him, or in him, because he was now incarnate; and what he says from God should be attended to, both on account of the dignity of his person, as the Son of God, and because of the authority he came with as Mediator: whom he hath appointed heir of all things; which must be understood of him not as God, and Creator; for as such he has a right to all things; all that the Father has are his; the kingdom of nature and providence belongs to him, he being the Former and Maker of all things; but as Mediator, who has all things committed to him, to subserve the ends of his office; and has a kingdom appointed him, and which he will deliver up again the word all may refer either to persons or things; to persons, not angels, good or bad, though both are subject to him, yet neither are called his inheritance; but elect men, who are his portion, and the lot of his inheritance; and to things relating to these persons, and for their use and service, in time, and to all eternity; as all temporal things, and all spiritual ones, the blessings and promises of the covenant of grace, the gifts and graces of the Spirit, and eternal glory and happiness, the saints' inheritance, who are joint heirs with Christ.
By whom also he made the worlds; this is said in agreement with the notions of the Jews, and their way of speaking, who make mention of three worlds, which they call, the upper world (the habitation of God), the middle world (the air), and the lower world (o) (the earth); and sometimes they call them the world of angels (where they dwell), the world of orbs (where the sun, moon, and stars are), and the world below (p) (on which we live); and it is frequent in their writings, and prayer books (q), to call God , "Lord of all worlds"; See Gill on Heb 11:3, these God made by his Son, not as an instrument, but as an efficient cause with him; for by him were all things made, whether visible or invisible; and the preposition "by" does not always denote instrumentality, but sometimes efficiency; and is used of God the Father himself, and in this epistle, Heb 2:10.
(m) Kimchi & Aben Ezra in Isa. ii. 2. (n) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 97. 1. (o) Tzeror Hammor, fol. 1. 4. & 3. 2, 3. Caphtor, fol. 79. 1. (p) Tzeror Hammor, fol. 83. 2. Caphtor, fol. 90. 1. (q) Seder Tephillot, fol. 5. 2. & 40. 2. Ed. Amstelod.
John Wesley
1:2 Whom he hath appointed heir of all things - After the name of Son, his inheritance is mentioned. God appointed him the heir long before he made the worlds, Eph 3:11; Prov 8:22, &c. The Son is the firstborn, born before all things: the heir is a term relating to the creation which followed, Heb 1:6. By whom he also made the worlds - Therefore the Son was before all worlds. His glory reaches from everlasting to everlasting, though God spake by him to us only "in these last days."
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:2 in these last days--In the oldest manuscripts the Greek is. "At the last part of these days." The Rabbins divided the whole of time into "this age," or "world," and "the age to come" (Heb 2:5; Heb 6:5). The days of Messiah were the transition period or "last part of these days" (in contrast to "in times past"), the close of the existing dispensation, and beginning of the final dispensation of which Christ's second coming shall be the crowning consummation.
by his Son--Greek, "IN (His) Son" (Jn 14:10). The true "Prophet" of God. "His majesty is set forth: (1) Absolutely by the very name "Son," and by three glorious predicates, "whom He hath appointed," "by whom He made the worlds," "who sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;" thus His course is described from the beginning of all things till he reached the goal (Heb 1:2-3). (2) Relatively, in comparison with the angels, Heb 1:4; the confirmation of this follows, and the very name "Son" is proved at Heb 1:5; the "heirship," Heb 1:6-9; the "making the worlds," Heb 1:10-12; the "sitting at the right hand" of God, Heb 1:13-14." His being made heir follows His sonship, and preceded His making the worlds (Prov 8:22-23; Eph 3:11). As the first begotten, He is heir of the universe (Heb 1:6), which He made instrumentally, Heb 11:3, where "by the Word of God" answers to "by whom"' (the Son of God) here (Jn 1:3). Christ was "appointed" (in God's eternal counsel) to creation as an office; and the universe so created was assigned to Him as a kingdom. He is "heir of all things" by right of creation, and especially by right of redemption. The promise to Abraham that he should be heir of the world had its fulfilment, and will have it still more fully, in Christ (Rom 4:13; Gal 3:16; Gal 4:7).
worlds--the inferior and the superior worlds (Col 1:16). Literally, "ages" with all things and persons belonging to them; the universe, including all space and ages of time, and all material and spiritual existences. The Greek implies, He not only appointed His Son heir of all things before creation, but He also (better than "also He") made by Him the worlds.
1:31:3: Որ է լոյս փառաց՝ եւ նկարագի՛ր էութեան նորա. որ կրէ՛ զամենայն բանիւ զօրութեան իւրոյ. սրբութիւն մեղաց մերոց արարեալ, նստա՛ւ ընդ աջմէ Մեծութեանն ՚ի բարձունս[4659]։ [4659] Ամենայն գրչագիրք համաձայն մերումս ՚ի լուս՛՛. ՚ի վերայ՝ Որ կրէ. նշանակեն. դարմանէ. խնամէ. տածէ. առաջնորդէ։ Ոմանք. Զօրութեամբ իւրով... մեծութեան ՚ի։
3 Նա, որ լոյսն է նրա փառքի եւ բուն պատկերը նրա էութեան, որ իր խօսքի զօրութեամբ հաստատ է պահում տիեզերքը: Նա մեր մեղքերի մաքրումը կատարելուց յետոյ, նստեց Աստծու մեծութեան աջ կողմում՝ բարձունքներում:
3 Ան իր փառքին լոյսն է եւ իր էութեան՝ բուն պատկերը։ Ան իր զօրութեան խօսքովը ամէն բան կը բռնէ։ Իր անձով մեր մեղքերը սրբեց եւ նստաւ բարձրերը, Աստուծոյ մեծութեան աջ կողմը։
որ է լոյս փառաց եւ նկարագիր էութեան նորա, որ կրէ զամենայն բանիւ զօրութեան իւրոյ, [2]սրբութիւն մեղաց մերոց արարեալ` նստաւ ընդ աջմէ Մեծութեանն ի բարձունս:

1:3: Որ է լոյս փառաց՝ եւ նկարագի՛ր էութեան նորա. որ կրէ՛ զամենայն բանիւ զօրութեան իւրոյ. սրբութիւն մեղաց մերոց արարեալ, նստա՛ւ ընդ աջմէ Մեծութեանն ՚ի բարձունս[4659]։
[4659] Ամենայն գրչագիրք համաձայն մերումս ՚ի լուս՛՛. ՚ի վերայ՝ Որ կրէ. նշանակեն. դարմանէ. խնամէ. տածէ. առաջնորդէ։ Ոմանք. Զօրութեամբ իւրով... մեծութեան ՚ի։
3 Նա, որ լոյսն է նրա փառքի եւ բուն պատկերը նրա էութեան, որ իր խօսքի զօրութեամբ հաստատ է պահում տիեզերքը: Նա մեր մեղքերի մաքրումը կատարելուց յետոյ, նստեց Աստծու մեծութեան աջ կողմում՝ բարձունքներում:
3 Ան իր փառքին լոյսն է եւ իր էութեան՝ բուն պատկերը։ Ան իր զօրութեան խօսքովը ամէն բան կը բռնէ։ Իր անձով մեր մեղքերը սրբեց եւ նստաւ բարձրերը, Աստուծոյ մեծութեան աջ կողմը։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:33: Сей, будучи сияние славы и образ ипостаси Его и держа все словом силы Своей, совершив Собою очищение грехов наших, воссел одесную (престола) величия на высоте,
1:3  ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῶ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς,
1:3. ὃς (which) ὢν (being) ἀπαύγασμα (a-raying-off-to) τῆς (of-the-one) δόξης (of-a-recognition) καὶ (and) χαρακτὴρ (a-graver) τῆς (of-the-one) ὑποστάσεως (of-a-standing-under) αὐτοῦ, (of-it,"φέρων (bearing) τε (also) τὰ (to-the-ones) πάντα ( to-all ) τῷ (unto-the-one) ῥήματι (unto-an-uttering-to) τῆς (of-the-one) δυνάμεως (of-an-ability) αὐτοῦ, (of-it,"καθαρισμὸν (to-a-cleansing-of) τῶν (of-the-ones) ἁμαρτιῶν (of-un-adjustings-along-unto) ποιησάμενος ( having-done-unto ) ἐκάθισεν ( it-sat-down-to ) ἐν ( in ) δεξιᾷ ( unto-right-belonged ) τῆς (of-the-one) μεγαλωσύνης (of-a-Greatness) ἐν (in) ὑψηλοῖς , ( unto-overed-of ,"
1:3. qui cum sit splendor gloriae et figura substantiae eius portansque omnia verbo virtutis suae purgationem peccatorum faciens sedit ad dexteram Maiestatis in excelsisWho being the brightness of his glory and the figure of his substance and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high:
3. who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
1:3. And since the Son is the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and is carrying all things by the Word of his virtue, thereby accomplishing a purging of sins, he sits at the right hand of Majesty on high.
1:3. Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

3: Сей, будучи сияние славы и образ ипостаси Его и держа все словом силы Своей, совершив Собою очищение грехов наших, воссел одесную (престола) величия на высоте,
1:3  ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῶ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς,
1:3. qui cum sit splendor gloriae et figura substantiae eius portansque omnia verbo virtutis suae purgationem peccatorum faciens sedit ad dexteram Maiestatis in excelsis
Who being the brightness of his glory and the figure of his substance and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high:
1:3. And since the Son is the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and is carrying all things by the Word of his virtue, thereby accomplishing a purging of sins, he sits at the right hand of Majesty on high.
1:3. Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
3: Сияние славы и образ ипостаси Его. Сим обозначается прямо вечность Сына и единосущие Богу Отцу. "Сияние от солнца, и не после его; ибо вместе солнце и вместе сияние (Феофил.)". Как солнце, в отношении к сиянию своему, есть само из себя, и сияние из солнца, так Отец из Себя Самого, Сын же рождается от Отца. Как сияние происходит от солнца, не отнимая ничего от его сущности и не отделяясь, так Сын произошел от Отца. Солнце существует прежде сияния, но однако и вместе с ним, так и Сын с Отцом, Сияние не может быть без солнца, и солнце без сияний: так Сын не может быть без Отца, и Отец без Сына, и однако они оба отличны. Нельзя видеть солнца без исходящего из него света: так никто не может видеть Отца без Сына (ср. Ин 1:18; 5:19: и дал. ; 6:46; 14:9; 16:15). Если сияющее - Бог, то Божественно и Его сияние. Если сияющее - вечность, не имеющая ни начала, ни конца, то таково и сияние. Полное во всем единосущие и равенство. - "Образ ипостаси" - carakthr thV apostasewV, - оттиск, отпечаток, начертание (от carassein - надрезывать, начертывать). Как печать, оттиснутая штемпелем, вполне соответствует сделанному на нем изображению, так Сын - точнейшее и совершеннейшее отображение сущности Отца (ср. Ин 14:9: "видевший Меня видел Отца"). Совершенно в другом смысле именуется человек "образом Божиим и подобием". Как созданный во времени, со способностью бесконечного развития, человек постепенно Богоуподобляется и обожествляется. Божественная сущность отображается в его душе как слабое подобие, как малая искра Божественного сияния, а не весь свет, сполна и совершенно изливаемый Сыном. Человек только подобосущен Богу, а Сын единосущен Отцу. Или Сын единосущен Отцу в полной и всесовершенной степени, как личность нераздельна с Ним, а человек единосущен Богу в том смысле, что Бог уделил Ему малое подобие Своей сущности для вечного совершенствования по образу Создавшего его. - "Держа все словом силы Своей..." Сотворив все Словом Своим, Бог и держит все, т.е. хранит бытие и порядок вещей также словом силы Своей. Это хранение мира есть как бы постоянно продолжающееся творение; и то и другое совершается одним словом Божественной силы, которая и завершит все тем же словом, когда силою уст Сына Божия будет убиен единственный противник нравственного порядка бытия мира - антихрист (2: Сол 2:8). - "Совершив Собою очищение грехов наших..." Очищение грехов наших, освящение и оправдание человека часто упоминаются в сем послании, как плоды первосвященнического служения Мессии, Его жертвоприношения, совершенного Им не через кровь козлов или тельцов; но Самим Собою, жертвою Своего послушания, Своего самопожертвования, Своей крови и жизни. Принеся такую жертву за людей, Христос и для Самого Себя, т.е. для Своей человеческой природы приобрел возвышение над всеми тварями - воссел одесную (престола) величия на высоте, (en uyhloiV, собственно на высоких, т.е. на небесах, ср. далее 8:1). Что это выражение относится к человеческой природе во Христе, видно из того, что нигде в Новом Завете не приписывается Иисусу Христу седение одесную Отца прежде вознесения Его на небо (ср. Ин 17:5; 6:62). До этого вознесения о Сыне говорится более возвышенно: "Сый в лоне Отчи" (Ин 1:18). Образ выражения (о седении одесную), означающего участие в Божественной власти и мироправлении, заимствован апостолом из 1: ст. 109: Пс., который всегда считался Мессианским, хотя и в различных смыслах. - Одесную престола величия на высоте - в этом образном выражении каждое слово - полно глубокого смысла: одесную - указывает сродство и равночестность Сына Божия с Отцом; - Престол - означает достоинство и власть Божества; - седение - покой и довольство; - величие - то же, что выше - слава, т.е. слава и величие Божества; - на высоте - знаменательное выражение, имеющее в виду не ограничить Бога одним определенным местом, хотя бы небом, а только указать высшее над всем положение Его, - т.е. что Бог выше всего.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:3: The brightness of his glory - Απαυγασμα της δοξης The resplendent outbeaming of the essential glory of God. Hesychius interprets απαυγασμα by ᾑλιου φεγγος, the splendor of the sun. The same form of expression is used by an apocryphal writer, Wis. 7:26, where, speaking of the uncreated wisdom of God, he says: "For she is the splendor of eternal light, απαυγασμα γαρ εστι φωτος αΐδιου, and the unsullied mirror of the energy of God, and the image of his goodness." The word αυγασμα is that which has splendor in itself απαυγασμα is the splendor emitted from it; but the inherent splendor and the exhibited splendor are radically and essentially the same.
The express image of his person - Χαρακτηρ της ὑποστασεως αυτου· The character or impression of his hypostasis or substance. It is supposed that these words expound the former; image expounding brightness, and person or substance, glory. The hypostasis of God is that which is essential to him as God; and the character or image is that by which all the likeness of the original becomes manifest, and is a perfect fac-simile of the whole. It is a metaphor taken from sealing; the die or seal leaving the full impression of its every part on the wax to which it is applied.
From these words it is evident,
1. That the apostle states Jesus Christ to be of the same essence with the Father, as the απαυγασμα, or proceeding splendor, must be the same with the αυγασμα, or inherent splendor.
2. That Christ, though proceeding from the Father, is of the same essence; for if one αυγη, or splendor, produce another αυγη, or splendor, the produced splendor must be of the same essence with that which produces it.
3. That although Christ is thus of the same essence with the Father, yet he is a distinct person from the Father; as the splendor of the sun, though of the same essence, is distinct from the sun itself, though each is essential to the other; as the αυγασμα, or inherent splendor, cannot subsist without its απαυγασμα, or proceeding splendor, nor the proceeding splendor subsist without the inherent splendor from which it proceeds.
4. That Christ is eternal with the Father, as the proceeding splendor must necessarily be coexistent with the inherent splendor. If the one, therefore, be uncreated, the other is uncreated; if the one be eternal, the other is eternal.
Upholding all things by the word of his power - This is an astonishing description of the infinitely energetic and all pervading power of God. He spake, and all things were created; he speaks, and all things are sustained. The Jewish writers frequently express the perfection of the Divine nature by the phrases, He bears all things, both above and below; He carries all his creatures; He bears his world; He bears all worlds by his power. The Hebrews, to whom this epistle was written, would, from this and other circumstances, fully understand that the apostle believed Jesus Christ to be truly and properly God.
Purged our sins - There may be here some reference to the great transactions in the wilderness.
1. Moses, while in communion with God on the mount, was so impressed with the Divine glories that his face shone, so that the Israelites could not behold it. But Jesus is infinitely greater than Moses, for he is the splendor of God's glory; and,
2. Moses found the government of the Israelites such a burden that he altogether sank under it. His words, Num 11:12, are very remarkable: Have I conceived all this people? Have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy Bosom - unto the land which thou swearest unto their fathers? But Christ not only carried all the Israelites, and all mankind; but he upholds All Things by the word of his power.
3. The Israelites murmured against Moses and against God, and provoked the heavy displeasure of the Most High; and would have been consumed had not Aaron made an atonement for them, by offering victims and incense. But Jesus not only makes an atonement for Israel, but for the whole world; not with the blood of bulls and goats, but with his own blood: hence it is said that he purged our sins δι' αὑτου, by himself his own body and life being the victim. It is very likely that the apostle had all these things in his eye when he wrote this verse; and takes occasion from them to show the infinite excellence of Jesus Christ when compared with Moses; and of his Gospel when compared with the law. And it is very likely that the Spirit of God, by whom he spoke, kept in view those maxims of the ancient Jews, concerning the Messiah, whom they represent as being infinitely greater than Abraham, the patriarchs, Moses, and the ministering angels. So Rabbi Tanchum, on Isa 52:13, Behold my servant shall deal prudently, says, זה מלך המשיח Zeh melek hammashiach, this is the King Messiah; and shall be exalted, and be extolled, and be very high. "He shall be exalted above Abraham, and shall be extolled beyond Moses, and shall be more sublime than the ministering angels." See the preface.
The right hand of the Majesty on high - As it were associated with the supreme Majesty, in glory everlasting, and in the government of all things in time and in eternity; for the right hand is the place of the greatest eminence, Kg1 2:19. The king himself, in eastern countries, sits on the throne; the next to him in the kingdom, and the highest favourite, sits on his right hand; and the third greatest personage, on his left.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:3: Who being the brightness of his glory - This verse is designed to state the dignity and exalted rank of the Son of God, and is exceedingly important with reference to a correct view of the Redeemer. Every word which is employed is of great importance, and should be clearly understood in order to a correct apprehension of the passage. First, in what manner does it refer to the Redeemer? To his divine nature? To the mode of his existence before he was incarnate? Or to him as he appeared on earth? Most of the ancient commentators supposed that it referred to his divine dignity before he became incarnate, and proceed to argue on that supposition on the mode of the divine existence. The true solution seems to me to be, that it refers to him as incarnate, but still has reference to him as the incarnate "Son of God." It refers to him as Mediator, but not simply or mainly as a man. It is rather to him as divine - thus, in his incarnation, being the brightness of the divine glory, and the express image of God. That this is the correct view is apparent, I think, from the whole scope of the passage. The drift of the argument is, to show his dignity as "he has spoken to us" Heb 1:1, and not in the period antecedent to his incarnation. It is to show his claims to our Rev_erence as sent from God - the last and greatest of the messengers which God bas sent to man. But, then it is a description of him "as he actually is" - the incarnate Son of God; the equal of the Father in human flesh; and this leads the writer to dwell on his divine, character, and to argue from that; Heb 1:8, Heb 1:10-12. I have no doubt, therefore, that this description refers to his divine nature, but it is the divine nature as it appears in human flesh. An examination of the words used will prepare us for a more clear comprehension of the sense. The word "glory" - δόξα doxa - means properly "a seeming, an appearance;" and then:
(1) praise, applause, honor:
(2) dignity, splendor, glory;
(3) brightness, dazzling light; and,
(4) excellence, perfection, such as belongs to God and such as there is in heaven.
It is probably used here, as the word - כבוד kaabowd - is often among the Hebrews, to denote splendor, brightness, and refers to the divine perfections as resembling a bright light, or the sun. The word is applied to the sun and stars, Co1 15:40-41; to the light which Paul saw on the way to Damascus, Act 22:11; to the shining of Moses' face, Co2 3:7; to the celestial light which surrounds the angels, Rev 18:1; and glorified saints, Luk 9:31-32; and to the dazzling splendor or majesty in which God is enthroned; Th2 1:9; Pe2 1:17; Rev 15:8; Rev 21:11, Rev 21:23. Here there is a comparison of God with the sun; he is encompassed with splendor and majesty; he is a being of light and of infinite perfection. It refers to "all in God" that is bright, splendid, glorious; and the idea is, that the Son of God is the "brightness" of it all.
The word rendered "brightness" - ἀπαύγασμα apaugasma - occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It means properly "reflected splendor," or the light which emanates from a luminous body. The rays or beams of the sun are its "brightness," or that by which the sun is seen and known. The sun itself we do not see; the beams which flow from it we do see. The meaning here is, that if God be represented under the image of a luminous body, as he is in the Scriptures (see Psa 84:11; Mal 4:2), then Christ is the radiance of that light, the brightness of that luminary - Stuart. He is that by which we perceive God, or by which God is made known to us in his real perfections; compare Joh 1:18; Joh 14:9. - It is by him only that the true character and glory of God is known to people. This is true in regard to the great system of Revelation but it is especially true in regard to the views which people have of God. Mat 11:27 - "no man knoweth the Son but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will Rev_eal him."
The human soul is dark respecting the divine character until it is enlightened by Christ. It sees no beauty, no glory in his nature - nothing that excites wonder, or that wins the affections, until it is disclosed by the Redeemer. somehow it happens, account for it as people may, that there are no elevating practical views of God in the world; no views that engage and hold the affections of the soul; no views that are transforming and purifying, but those which are derived from the Lord Jesus. A man becomes a Christian, and at once he has elevated, practical views of God. He is to him the most glorious of all beings. He finds supreme delight in contemplating his perfections. But he may be a philosopher or an infidel, and though he may profess to believe in the existence of God, yet the belief excites no practical influence on him; he sees nothing to admire; nothing which leads him to worship him; compare Rom 1:21.
And the express image - The word used here - χαρακτὴρ charaktē r - likewise occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It is that from which our word "character" is derived. It properly means a "engraving-tool;" and then something "engraved" or "stamped" - "a character" - as a letter, mark, sign. The image stamped on coins, seals, wax, expresses the idea: and the sense here is, that if God be represented under the idea of a substance, or being, then Christ is the exact resemblance of that - as an image is of the stamp or die. The resemblance between a stamp and the figure which is impressed is exact; and so is the resemblance between the Redeemer and God; see Col 1:15. "Who is the image of the invisible God."
Of his person - The word "person" with us denotes an individual being, and is applied to human beings, consisting of body and soul. We do not apply it to anything dead - not using it with reference to the body when the spirit is gone. It is applied to man - with individual and separate consciousness and will; with body and soul; with an existence separate from others. It is evident that it cannot be used in this sense when applied to God, and that this word does not express the true idea of the passage here. Tyndale renders it, more accurately, "substance." The word in the original - ὑπόστασις hupostasis - whence our word "hypostasis," means, literally, a "foundation," or "substructure." Then it means a well-founded trust, firm expectation, confidence, firmness, boldness; and then "reality, substance, essential nature." In the New Testament, it is rendered "confident," or "confidence" Co2 9:4; Co2 11:17; Heb 3:14; "substance" Heb 11:1; and "person" in the passage before us. It is not used elsewhere. Here it properly refers to the essential nature of God - what distinguishes him from all other beings, and which, if I may so say, "constitutes him God;" and the idea is, that the Redeemer is the exact resemblance of "that." This resemblance consists, probably, in the following things - though perhaps the enumeration does not include all - but in these he certainly resembles God, or is his exact image:
(1) In his original mode of being, or before the incarnation. Of this we know little. But he had a "glory with the Father before the world was;" Joh 17:5. He was "in the beginning with God, and was God;" Joh 1:1. He was in intimate union with the Father, and was one with Him, in certain respects; though in certain other respects, there was a distinction. I do not see any evidence in the Scriptures of the doctrine of "eternal generation," and it is certain that that doctrine militates against the "proper eternity" of the Son of God. The natural and fair meaning of that doctrine would be, that there was a time when he had not an existence, and when he began to be, or was begotten. But the Scripture doctrine is, that he had a strict and proper eternity. I see no evidence that he was in any sense a "derived being" - deriving his existence and his divinity from the Father. The Fathers of the Christian church, it is believed, held that the Son of God as to his divine, as well as his human nature, was "derived" from the Father. Hence, the Nicene creed speaks of him as "begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten not made" - language implying derivation in his divine nature. They held, with one voice, that he was God (divine); but it was in this manner; see Stuart, Excursus III. on the Epistle to the Hebrews. But this is incredible and impossible. A derived being cannot in any proper sense be "God"; and if there is any attribute which the Scriptures have ascribed to the Saviour with special clearness, it is that of proper eternity; Rev 1:11, Rev 1:17; Joh 1:1.
(Perhaps the doctrine of Christ's natural or eternal Sonship had been as well understood without the help of the term "generation," which adds nothing to our stock of ideas on the subject, and gives rise, as the above remarks prove, to objections which attach altogether to the "word," and from which the "doctrine" itself is free. In fairness however, it should be remembered that, like many other theological terms, the term in question, when applied to Christ's Sonship, is not to be understood in the ordinary acceptation, as implying derivation or extraction. It is used as making some approach to a proper term only, and in this case, as in others of like nature, it is but just to respect the acknowledged rule that when human phraseology is employed concerning the divine nature, all that is imperfect, all that belongs to the creature, is to be rejected, and that only retained which comports with the majesty of the Creator. It is on this very principle that Prof. Stuart, in his first excursus, and Trinitarians generally, have so successfully defended the use of the word "person" to designate a distinction in the Godhead. Overlooking this principle, our author deduces consequences from the doctrine of eternal generation, which do not properly belong to it, and which its advocates distinctly repudiate.
That doctrine cannot militate against the proper eternity of the Son, since, while it uses the term "generation," not "more human," but with every thing of human informity separated from it, it supplies also the adjunct "eternal." Whatever some indiscreet advocates of the eternal Sonship may have affirmed, it should never be forgotten, that the ablest friends equally with the author, contend that there is no "Derivation or communication of essence from the Father to the Son." "Although the terms "Father" and "Son" indicate a relation analogous to that among people, yet, as in the latter case, it is a relation between two material and separate beings, and in the former, is a relation in the same Spiritual essence, the one can throw no light upon the other; and to attempt to illustrate the one by the other is equally illogical and presumptuous. We can conceive the communication of a material essence by one material being to another, because it takes place in the generation of animals; but the communication of a spiritual, indivisible, immutable essence is altogether inconceivable, especially when we add, that the supposed communication does not constitute a different being, but takes place in the essences communicating."
Dick's Theology, vol. 2, page 71. It is readily allowed that the Fathers, and many since their times, have written unguardedly on this mysterious subject: but their errors, instead of leading us to reject the doctrine entirely, should lead us only to examine the Scriptures more fully, and form our opinions on them alone. The excellent author already quoted has well remarked: "I cannot conceive what object they have in view who admit the Divinity, but deny the natural Sonship of our Saviour, unless it be to get rid of the strange notions about communication of essence and subordination which have pRev_ailed so much; and in this case, like too many disputants, in avoiding one extreme, they run into the other.")
It may have been that it was by him that the perfections of God were made known before the incarnation to the angelic world, but on that point the Scriptures are silent.
(2) on earth he was the brightness of the divine glory, and the express image of his person:
(a) It was by him, eminently, that God was made known to human beings - as it is by the beams of the sun that that is made known.
(b) He bore an exact resemblance to God. He was just such a being as we should suppose God to be were he to become incarnate, and to act as a man.
He was the embodied representation of the Deity. He was pure - like God. He was benevolent - like God. He spake to the winds and storms - like God. He healed diseases - like God. He raised the dead - like God. He wielded the power which God only can wield, and he manifested a character in all respects like what we should suppose God would evince if he appeared in human flesh, and dwelt among people and this is saying much. It is in fact saying that the account in the Gospels is real, and that the Christian religion is true. Uninspired men could never have drawn such a character as that of Jesus Christ, unless that character had actually existed. The attempt has often been made to describe God, or to show how be would speak and act if he came down to earth.
Thus, the Hindus speak of the incarnations of Vishnu; and thus Homer, and Virgil, and most of the ancient poets, speak of the appearance of the gods, and describe them as they were supposed to appear. But how different from the character of the Lord Jesus! they are full of passion, and lust, and anger, and contention, and strife; they come to mingle in battles, and to take part with contending armies, and they evince the same spirit as men, and are merely "men of great power, and more gigantic passions; "but Christ is God in human nature. The form is that of man; the spirit is that of God. He walks, and eats, and sleeps as a man; he thinks, and speaks, and acts like God. He was born as a man - but the angels adored him as God. As a man he ate; yet by a word he created food for thousands, as if he were God. Like a man he slept on a pillow while the vessel was tossed by the waves; like God be rose, and rebuked the winds and they were still. As a man he went, with affectionate interest, to the house of Martha and Mary. As a man he sympathized with them in their affliction, and wept at the grave of their brother; like God he spoke, and the dead came forth to the land of the living. As a man he traveled through the land of Judea. He was without a home. Yet everywhere the sick were laid at his feet, and health came from his touch, and strength from the words of his lips as if he were God. As a man he prayed in the garden of Gethsemane; he bore his cross to Calvary; he was nailed to the tree: yet then the heavens grew dark, and the earth shook and the dead arose as if he were God. As a man he slept in the cold tomb - like God he rose, and brought life and immortality to light.
He lived on earth as a man - he ascended to heaven like God. And in all the life of the Redeemer, in all the variety of trying situations in which he was placed, there was not a word or action which was inconsistent with the supposition that he was the incarnate God. There was no failure of any effort to heal the sick or to raise the dead; no look, no word, no deed that is not perfectly consistent with this supposition; but on the contrary, his life is full of events which can be explained on no other supposition than that he was the appropriate shining forth of the divine glory, and the exact resemblance of the essence of God. There are not two Gods - as there are not two suns when the sun shines. It is the one God, in a mysterious and incomprehensible manner shining into the world in the face of Jesus Christ. See note on Co2 4:6. As the wax bears the perfect image of the seal - perfect not only in the outline, but in the filling up - in all the lines, and features, and letters, so is it with the Redeemer. There is not one of the divine perfections which has not the counterpart in him, and if the glory of the divine character is seen at all by people, it will be seen in and through him.
And upholding all things by the word of his power - That is, by his powerful word, or command. The phrase "word of his power" is a Hebraism, and means his efficient command. There could not be a more distinct ascription of divinity to the Son of God than this. He upholds or sustains all things - that is, the universe. It is not merely the earth; not only its rocks, mountains, seas, animals and human beings, but it is the universe - all distant worlds. How can he do this who is not God? He does it by his word - his command. What a conception! That one simple command should do all this! So the world was made when God "spake and it was done; he commanded and it stood fast;" Psa 33:9. So the Lord Jesus commanded the waves and the winds, and they were still Mat 8:26-27; so he spoke to diseases and they departed, and to the dead land they arose; compare Gen 1:3. I do know how people can "explain away" this ascription of infinite power to the Redeemer. There can be no higher idea of omnipotence than to say that he upholds all things by his word; and assuredly he who can "hold up" this vast universe so that it does not sink into anarchy or into nothing, must be God. The same power Jesus claimed for himself; see Mat 28:18.
When he had by himself purged our sins - "By himself" - not by the blood of bulls and lambs, but by his own blood. This is designed to bring in the grand feature of the Christian scheme, that the purification made for sin was by his blood, instead of the blood which was shed in the temple-service. The word rendered here "purged" means "purified" or "expiated;" see notes on Joh 15:2. The literal rendering is, "having made purification for our sins." The purification or cleansing which he effected was by his blood; see Jo1 1:7 "The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin." This the apostle here states to have been the great object for which he came, and having done this, he sat down on the right hand of God; see Heb 7:27; Heb 9:12-14. It was not merely to teach that he came; it was to purify the hearts of people, to remove their sins, and to put an end to sacrifice by the sacrifice of himself.
Sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high - Of God; see the notes on Mar 16:19; Eph 1:20-23.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:3: the brightness: Joh 1:14, Joh 14:9, Joh 14:10; Co2 4:6
image: Co2 4:4; Col 1:15, Col 1:16
upholding: Psa 75:3; Joh 1:4; Col 1:17; Rev 4:11
the word: Ecc 8:4; Rom 1:16; Co2 4:7
by himself: Heb 7:27, Heb 9:12-14, Heb 9:16, Heb 9:26; Joh 1:29; Jo1 1:7, Jo1 3:5
sat: Heb 4:14, Heb 8:1, Heb 10:12, Heb 12:2; Psa 110:1; Mat 22:24; Mar 16:19; Luk 20:42, Luk 20:43; Act 2:33, Act 7:56; Rom 8:34; Eph 1:20-22; Col 3:1; Pe1 1:21, Pe1 3:22; Rev 3:21
Majesty: Ch1 29:11; Job 37:22; Mic 5:4; Pe2 1:16; Jde 1:25
Geneva 1599
1:3 Who being the (e) brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his (f) person, and (g) upholding all things by the word of his power, (3) when he had by himself purged our sins, (h) sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
(e) He in whom the glory and majesty of the Father shines, who is otherwise infinite, and cannot be under obligation.
(f) His Father's person.
(g) Sustains, defends and cherishes. (3) The third part of the same proposition: The same Son executed the office of the High Priest in offering up himself, and is our only and most mighty Mediator in heaven.
(h) This shows that the savour of that his sacrifice is not only most acceptable to the Father, but also is everlasting, and furthermore how far this High Priest surpasses all the other high priests.
John Gill
1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory,.... Or "of glory"; of God the Father, the God of glory, and who is glory itself; so called on account of his glorious nature and perfections and because of the glorious manifestations of them in his works of creation and providence, and in the various dispensations of his grace, and especially in his Son; and because he is the author of all glory, in the creatures, in the whole world, in Christ as man and Mediator, and in his own people. Now Christ is the "brightness" of this, as he is God; he has the same glorious nature and perfections, and the same glorious names, as Jehovah, the Lord of glory, &c. and the same glory, homage, and worship given him: the allusion is to the sun, and its beam or ray: so some render it "the ray of his glory"; and may lead us to observe, that the Father and the Son are of the same nature, as the sun and its ray; and that the one is not before the other, and yet distinct from each other, and cannot be divided or separated one from another: so the phrase , "the brightness of his glory", is used of the divine Being, in the Chaldee paraphrases (r); see the Apocrypha.
"For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness.'' (Wisdom 7:26)
And the express image of his person; this intends much the same as the other phrase; namely, equality and sameness of nature, and distinction of persons; for if the Father is God, Christ must be so too; and if he is a person, his Son must be so likewise, or he cannot be the express image and character of him; See Gill on Col 1:15.
And upholding all things by the word of his power; the Syriac version renders it, "by the power of his word", to the same sense, only inverting the words. The Targumist on 2Chron 2:6 uses a phrase very much like this, of God, whom the heaven of heavens cannot contain; because, adds he, , "he bears", or "sustains all things by the arm of his power"; and the words are to be understood not of the Father, upholding all things by his essential and powerful Word, his Son; but of the Son himself, who upholds all creatures he has made; bears up the pillars of the universe; preserves every creature in its being, and supports it, and supplies it with the necessaries of life; rules and governs all, and providentially orders and disposes of all things in the world, and that by his all powerful will; which makes it manifest, that he is truly and properly God, and a very fit person to be a priest, as follows:
when he had by himself purged our sins; the Arabic and Ethiopic versions seem to refer this to God the Father, as if he, by Christ, made the expiation of sin, and then caused him to sit down at his right hand; but it belongs to the Son himself, who of himself, and by himself alone, and by the sacrifice of himself, made atonement for the sins of his people; which is meant by the purgation of them: he took their sins upon himself, and bore them, and removed them far away, and utterly abolished them, which the priests under the law could not do: and when he had so done,
he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; by "Majesty" is meant God the Father, to whom majesty belongs; who is clothed with it, and which is before him: and his "right hand" designs his power, greatness, and glory, and is expressive of the high honour Christ, as man, is possessed of; for his sitting here denotes the glorious exaltation of him in human nature, after his sufferings, and death, and resurrection from the dead; and shows that he had done his work, and was accepted, and was now enjoying rest and ease, honour and glory, in which he will continue; and the place of his session, as well as of the habitation of God, at whose right hand he sits, is on high, in the highest heavens.
(r) Targum in 2 Sam xxii. 13. & in Cant. v. 10.
John Wesley
1:3 Who sat down - The third of these glorious predicates, with which three other particulars are interwoven, which are mentioned likewise, and in the same order, Col 1:15, Col 1:17, Col 1:20. Who, being - The glory which he received in his exaltation at the right hand of the Father no angel was capable of; but the Son alone, who likewise enjoyed it long before. The brightness of his glory - Glory is the nature of God revealed in its brightness. The express image - Or stamp. Whatever the Father is, is exhibited in the Son, as a seal in the stamp on wax. Of his person - Or substance. The word denotes the unchangeable perpetuity of divine life and power. And sustaining all things - Visible and invisible, in being. By the word of his power - That is, by his powerful word. When he had by himself - Without any Mosaic rites or ceremonies. Purged our sins - In order to which it was necessary he should for a time divest himself of his glory. In this chapter St. Paul describes his glory chiefly as he is the Son of God; afterwards, Heb 2:6, &c., the glory of the man Christ Jesus. He speaks, indeed, briefly of the former before his humiliation, but copiously after his exaltation; as from hence the glory he had from eternity began to be evidently seen. Both his purging our sins, and sitting on the right hand of God, are largely treated of in the seven following chapters. Sat down - The priests stood while they ministered: sitting, therefore, denotes the consummation of his sacrifice. This word, sat down, contains the scope, the theme, and the sum, of the epistle.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:3 Who being--by pre-existent and essential being.
brightness of his glory--Greek, the effulgence of His glory. "Light of (from) light" [Nicene Creed]. "Who is so senseless as to doubt concerning the eternal being of the Son? For when has one seen light without effulgence?" [ATHANASIUS, Against Arius, Orations, 2]. "The sun is never seen without effulgence, nor the Father without the Son" [THEOPHYLACT]. It is because He is the brightness, &c., and because He upholds, &c., that He sat down on the right hand, &c. It was a return to His divine glory (Jn 6:62; Jn 17:5; compare Wisdom 7:25-26, where similar things are said of wisdom).
express image--"impress." But veiled in the flesh.
The Sun of God in glory beams
Too bright for us to scan;
But we can face the light that streams
For the mild Son of man. (2Cor 3:18)
of his person--Greek, "of His substantial essence"; "hypostasis."
upholding all things--Greek, "the universe." Compare Col 1:15, Col 1:17, Col 1:20, which enumerates the three facts in the same order as here.
by the word--Therefore the Son of God is a Person; for He has the word [BENGEL]. His word is God's word (Heb 11:3).
of his power--"The word" is the utterance which comes from His (the Son's) power, and gives expression to it.
by himself--omitted in the oldest manuscripts.
purged--Greek, "made purification of . . . sins," namely, in His atonement, which graciously covers the guilt of sin. "Our" is omitted in the oldest manuscripts. Sin was the great uncleanness in God's sight, of which He has effected the purgation by His sacrifice [ALFORD]. Our nature, as guilt-laden, could not, without our great High Priest's blood of atonement sprinkling the heavenly mercy seat, come into immediate contact with God. EBRARD says, "The mediation between man and God, who was present in the Most Holy Place, was revealed in three forms: (1) In sacrifices (typical propitiations for guilt); (2) In the priesthood (the agents of those sacrifices); (3) In the Levitical laws of purity (Levitical purity being attained by sacrifice positively, by avoidance of Levitical pollution negatively, the people being thus enabled to come into the presence of God without dying, Deut 5:26)" (Lev. 16:1-34).
sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high--fulfilling Ps 110:1. This sitting of the Son at God's fight hand was by the act of the Father (Heb 8:1; Eph 1:20); it is never used of His pre-existing state co-equal with the Father, but always of His exalted state as Son of man after His sufferings, and as Mediator for man in the presence of God (Rom 8:34): a relation towards God and us about to come to an end when its object has been accomplished (1Cor 15:28).
1:41:4: Այնչափ առաւել եղեալ քան զհրեշտակս, որչափ լա՛ւ եւս քան զնոսա անուն ժառանգեաց։
4 Նա այնչափ գերազանց եղաւ հրեշտակներից, որ նրանցից շատ աւելի անուն ժառանգեց:
4 Այնչափ բարձր եղաւ հրեշտակներէն, որչափ իր ժառանգած անունը բարձր է անոնց անուններէն։
Այնչափ առաւել եղեալ քան զհրեշտակս, որչափ լաւ եւս քան զնոսա անուն ժառանգեաց:

1:4: Այնչափ առաւել եղեալ քան զհրեշտակս, որչափ լա՛ւ եւս քան զնոսա անուն ժառանգեաց։
4 Նա այնչափ գերազանց եղաւ հրեշտակներից, որ նրանցից շատ աւելի անուն ժառանգեց:
4 Այնչափ բարձր եղաւ հրեշտակներէն, որչափ իր ժառանգած անունը բարձր է անոնց անուններէն։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:44: будучи столько превосходнее Ангелов, сколько славнейшее пред ними наследовал имя.
1:4  τοσούτῳ κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων ὅσῳ διαφορώτερον παρ᾽ αὐτοὺς κεκληρονόμηκεν ὄνομα.
1:4. τοσούτῳ (unto-the-one-which-the-one-this) κρείττων (more-superior) γενόμενος ( having-had-became ) τῶν (of-the-ones) ἀγγέλων (of-messengers) ὅσῳ (unto-which-a-which) διαφορώτερον (to-more-beareed-through) παρ' (beside) αὐτοὺς (to-them) κεκληρονόμηκεν (it-had-come-to-lot-parcelee-unto) ὄνομα. (to-a-name)
1:4. tanto melior angelis effectus quanto differentius prae illis nomen hereditavitBeing made so much better than the angels as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they.
4. having become by so much better than the angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they.
1:4. And having been made so much better than the Angels, he has inherited a name so much greater than theirs.
1:4. Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they:

4: будучи столько превосходнее Ангелов, сколько славнейшее пред ними наследовал имя.
1:4  τοσούτῳ κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων ὅσῳ διαφορώτερον παρ᾽ αὐτοὺς κεκληρονόμηκεν ὄνομα.
1:4. tanto melior angelis effectus quanto differentius prae illis nomen hereditavit
Being made so much better than the angels as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they.
1:4. And having been made so much better than the Angels, he has inherited a name so much greater than theirs.
1:4. Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ mh▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
4: Мысль о превосходстве Сына Божия апостол начинает развивать далее сопоставлением Его с Ангелами, имея в виду указать, что и сообщенное Им откровение выше и совершеннее того, которое было дано при посредстве Ангелов, рукою ветхозаветного посредника - Моисея. Имя, в котором одном уже выражается преимущество Христа пред Ангелами, есть имя Сына, которое Он носил прежде век, а унаследовал - по выражению апостола - в том смысле, что на Нем именно, а не другом ком пополнились и к Нему относились приводимые далее пророчества. - Можно также понимать это наследовал подобно тому, как выше - поставил, воссел относя к человеческой природе Сына Божия. Христос от вечности был Сыном Божиим и прежде Ангелов. Став человеком, Он по-видимому умалился пред Ангелами, но это умаление ограничивалось коротким временем. Оказав послушание Отцу Своему даже до крестной смерти, Он заслужил и для Своей человеческой природы возвышение над всею тварью, наследовав и по человечеству имя Сына Божия, обладая этим Именем по праву наследства, а не как мы - по усыновлению.
Matthew Henry: Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible - 1706
The Dignity of Christ.A. D. 62.
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. 5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? 6 And again, when he bringeth in the first-begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. 7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. 8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: 11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; 12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. 13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? 14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

The apostle, having proved the pre-eminence of the gospel above the law from the pre-eminence of the Lord Jesus Christ above the prophets, now proceeds to show that he is much superior not only to the prophets, but to the angels themselves. In this he obviates an objection that the Jewish zealots would be ready to make, that the law was not only delivered by men, but ordained by angels (Gal. iii. 19), who attended at the giving forth of the law, the hosts of heaven being drawn forth to attend the Lord Jehovah on that awful occasion. Now the angels are very glorious beings, far more glorious and excellent than men; the scripture always represents them as the most excellent of all creatures, and we know of no being but God himself that is higher than the angels; and therefore that law that was ordained by angels ought to be held in great esteem. To take off the force of this argument, the penman of this epistle proceeds to state the comparison between Jesus Christ and the holy angels, both in nature and office, and to prove that Christ is vastly superior to the angels themselves: Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. Here observe,

I. The superior nature of Christ is proved from his superior name. The scripture does not give high and glorious titles without a real foundation and reason in nature; nor would such great things have been said of our Lord Jesus Christ if he had not been as great and excellent as those words import. When it is said that Christ was made so much better than the angels, we are not to imagine that he was a mere creature, as the angels are; the word genomenos, when joined with an adjective, is nowhere to be rendered created, and here may very well be read, being more excellent, as the Syriac version hath it. We read ginesthe ho Theos alethes--let God be true, not made so, but acknowledged to be so.

II. The superiority of the name and nature of Christ above the angels is declared in the holy scriptures, and to be deduced thence. We should have known little or nothing either of Christ or of the angels, without the scriptures; and we must therefore be determined by them in our conceptions of the one and the other. Now here are several passages of scripture cited, in which those things are said of Christ that were never said of the angels.

1. It was said of Christ, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee (Ps. ii. 7), which may refer to his eternal generation, or to his resurrection, or to his solemn inauguration into his glorious kingdom at his ascension and session at the right hand of the Father. Now this was never said concerning the angels, and therefore by inheritance he has a more excellent nature and name than they.

2. It was said concerning Christ, but never concerning the angels, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son; taken from 2 Sam. vii. 14. Not only, "I am his Father, and he is my Son, by nature and eternal promanation;" but, "I will be his Father, and he shall be my Son, by wonderful conception, and this his son-ship shall be the fountain and foundation of every gracious relation between me and fallen man."

3. It is said of Christ, When God bringeth his First-begotten into the world, let all the angels of God worship him; that is, when he is brought into this lower world, at his nativity, let the angels attend and honour him; or when he is brought into the world above, at his ascension, to enter upon his mediatorial kingdom, or when he shall bring him again into the world, to judge the world, then let the highest creatures worship him. God will not suffer an angel to continue in heaven who will not be in subjection to Christ, and pay adoration to him; and he will at last make the fallen angels and wicked men to confess his divine power and authority and to fall before him. Those who would not have him to reign must then be brought forth and slain before him. The proof of this is taken out of Ps. xcvii. 7, Worship him, all you gods, that is, "All you that are superior to men, own yourselves to be inferior to Christ in nature and power."

4. God has said concerning Christ, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, &c., v. 8-12. But of the angels he has only said that he hath made them spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire, v. 7. Now, upon comparing what he here says of the angels with what he says to Christ, the vast inferiority of the angels to Christ will plainly appear.

(1.) What does God say here of the angels? He maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. This we have in Ps. civ. 4, where it seems to be more immediately spoken of the winds and lightning, but is here applied to the angels, whose agency the divine Providences makes use of in the winds, and in thunder and lightnings. Observe, [1.] The office of the angels: they are God's ministers, or servants, to do his pleasure. It is the glory of God that he has such servants; it is yet more so that he does not need them. [2.] How the angels are qualified for this service; he makes them spirits and a flame of fire, that is, he endows them with light and zeal, with activity and ability, readiness and resolution to do his pleasure: they are no more than what God has made them to be, and they are servants to the Son as well as to the Father. But observe,

(2.) How much greater things are said of Christ by the Father. Here two passages of scripture are quoted.

[1.] One of these is out of Ps. xlv. 6, 7, where God declares of Christ, First, His true and real divinity, and that with much pleasure and affection, not grudging him that glory: Thy throne, O God. Here one person calls another person God, O God. And, if God the Father declares him to be so, he must be really and truly so; for God calls persons and things as they are. And now let who will deny him to be essentially God at their peril, but let us own and honour him as God; for, if he had not been God, he had never been fit to have done the Mediator's work nor to have worn the Mediator's crown. Secondly, God declares his dignity and dominion, as having a throne, a kingdom, and a sceptre of that kingdom. He has all right, rule, authority, and power, both as the God of nature, grace, and glory, and as Mediator; and so he is fully adequate to all the intents and purposes of his mediatorial kingdom. Thirdly, God declares the eternal duration of the dominion and dignity of Christ, founded upon the divinity of his person: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, from everlasting to everlasting, through all the ages of time, maugre all the attempts of earth and hell to undermine and overthrow it, and through all the endless ages of eternity, when time shall be no more. This distinguishes Christ's throne from all earthly thrones, which are tottering, and will at length tumble down; but the throne of Christ shall be as the days of heaven. Fourthly, God declares of Christ the perfect equity of his administration, and of the execution of his power, through all the parts of his government: A sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom, v. 8. He came righteously to the sceptre, and he uses it in perfect righteousness; the righteousness of his government proceeds from the righteousness of his person, from an essential eternal love of righteousness and hatred of iniquity, not merely from considerations of prudence or interest, but from an inward and immovable principle: Thou lovest righteousness and hatest iniquity, v. 9. Christ came to fulfil all righteousness, to bring in an everlasting righteousness; and he was righteous in all his ways and holy in all his works. He has recommended righteousness to men, and restored it among them, as a most excellent and amiable thing. He came to finish transgression, and to make an end of sin as a hateful as well as hurtful thing. Fifthly, God declares of Christ how he was qualified for the office of Mediator, and how he was installed and confirmed in it (v. 9): Therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 1. Christ has the name Messiah from his being anointed. God's anointing of Christ signifies both his qualifying him for the office of the Mediator with the Holy Spirit and all his graces, and likewise his inauguration of him into the office, as prophets, priests, and kings, were by anointing. God, even thy God, imports the confirmation of Christ in the office of Mediator by the covenant of redemption and peace, that was between the Father and the Son. God is the God of Christ, as Christ is man and Mediator. 2. This anointing of Christ was with the oil of gladness, which signifies both the gladness and cheerfulness with which Christ undertook and went through the office of Mediator (finding himself so absolutely sufficient for it), and also that joy which was set before him as the reward of his service and sufferings, that crown of glory and gladness which he should wear for ever after the suffering of death. 3. This anointing of Christ was above the anointing of his fellows: God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Who are Christ's fellows? Has he any equals? Not as God, except the Father and Spirit, but these are not here meant. As man, however, he has his fellows, and as an anointed person; but his unction is beyond all theirs. (1.) Above the angels, who may be said to be his fellows, as they are the sons of God by creation, and God's messengers, whom he employs in his service. (2.) Above all prophets, priests, and kings, that ever were anointed with oil, to be employed in the service of God on earth. (3.) Above all the saints, who are his brethren, children of the same father, as he was a partaker with them of flesh and blood. (4.) Above all those who were related to him as man, above all the house of David, all the tribe of Judah, all his brethren and kinsmen in the flesh. All God's other anointed ones had only the Spirit in a certain measure; Christ had the Spirit above measure, without any limitation. None therefore goes through his work as Christ did, none takes so much pleasure in it as Christ does; for he was anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows.

[2.] The other passage of scripture in which is the superior excellence of Christ to the angels is taken out of Ps. cii. 25-27, and is recited in v. 10-12, where the omnipotence of the Lord Jesus Christ is declared as it appears both in creating the world and in changing it.

First, In creating the world (v. 10): And thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands. The Lord Christ had the original right to govern the world, because he made the world in the beginning. His right, as Mediator, was by commission from the Father. His right, as God with the Father, was absolute, resulting from his creating power. This power he had before the beginning of the world, and he exerted it in giving a beginning and being to the world. He must therefore be no part of the world himself, for then he must give himself a beginning. He was pro panton--before all things, and by him all things consist, Col. i. 17. He was not only above all things in condition, but before all things in existence; and therefore must be God, and self-existent. He laid the foundations of the earth, did not only introduce new forms into pre-existent matter, but made out of nothing the foundations of the earth, the primordia rerum--the first principles of things; he not only founded the earth, but the heavens too are the work of his hands, both the habitation and the inhabitants, the hosts of heaven, the angels themselves; and therefore he must needs be infinitely superior to them.

Secondly, In changing the world that he has made; and here the mutability of this world is brought in to illustrate the immutability of Christ. Observe, 1. This world is mutable, all created nature is so; this world has passed through many changes, and shall pass through more; all these changes are by the permission and under the direction of Christ, who made the world (v. 11, 12): They shall perish, they shall all wax old as doth a garment; as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed. This our visible world (both the earth and visible heavens) is growing old. Not only men and beasts and trees grow old, but this world itself grows old, and is hastening to its dissolution; it changes like a garment, has lost much of its beauty and strength; it grew old betimes on the first apostasy, and it has been waxing older and growing weaker ever since; it bears the symptoms of a dying world. But then its dissolution will not be its utter destruction, but its change. Christ will fold up this world as a garment not to be abused any longer, not to be any longer so used as it has been. Let us not then set our hearts upon that which is not what we take it to be, and will not be what it now is. Sin has made a great change in the world for the worse, and Christ will make a great change in it for the better. We look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Let the consideration of this wean us from the present world, and make us watchful, diligent, and desirous of that better world, and let us wait on Christ to change us into a meetness for that new world that is approaching; we cannot enter into it till we be new creatures. 2. Christ is immutable. Thus the Father testifies of him, Thou remainest, thy years shall not fail. Christ is the same in himself, the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever, and the same to his people in all the changes of time. This may well support all who have an interest in Christ under all the changes they meet with in the world, and under all they feel in themselves. Christ is immutable and immortal: his years shall not fail. This may comfort us under all decays of nature that we may observe in ourselves or in our friends, though our flesh and heart fail and our days are hastening to an end. Christ lives to take care of us while we live, and of ours when we are gone, and this should quicken us all to make our interest in him clear and sure, that our spiritual and eternal life may be hid with Christ in God.

III. The superiority of Christ to the angels appears in this that God never said to the angels what he has said to Christ, v. 13, 14.

1. What has God said to Christ? He has said, "Sit thou at my right hand, till I make thy enemies thy footstool, Ps. cx. 1. Receive thou glory, dominion, and rest; and remain in the administration of thy mediatorial kingdom until all thy enemies shall either be made thy friends by conversion or thy footstool." Note, (1.) Christ Jesus has his enemies (would one think it?), enemies even among men--enemies to his sovereignty, to his cause, to his people; such as will not have him to reign over them. Let us not think it strange then if we have our enemies. Christ never did any thing to make men his enemies; he has done a great deal to make them all his friends and his Father's friends, and yet he has his enemies. (2.) All the enemies of Christ shall be made his footstool, either by humble submission and entire subjection to his will casting themselves down at his feet, or by utter destruction; he shall trample upon those who continue obstinate, and shall trample over them. (3.) God the Father has undertaken for this, and he will see it done, yea, he will himself do it; and, though it be not done presently, it shall certainly be done, and Christ waits for it,; and so must Christians wait till God has wrought all their works in them, for them, and by them. (4.) Christ shall go on to rule and reign till this be done; he shall not leave any of his great designs unfinished, he shall go on conquering and to conquer. And it becomes his people to go on in their duty, being what he would have them to be, doing what he would have them to do, avoiding what he would have them to avoid, bearing what he would have them to bear, till he make them conquerors and more than conquerors over all their spiritual enemies.

2. What has God said to the angels? He never said to them, as he said to Christ, Sit you at my right hand; but he has said of them here that they are ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation. Note, (1.) What the angels are as to their nature: they are spirits, without bodies or inclination to bodies, and yet they can assume bodies, and appear in them, when God pleases. They are spirits, incorporeal, intelligent, active, substances; they excel in wisdom and strength. (2.) What the angels are as to their office: they are ministering spirits. Christ, as Mediator, is the great minister of God in the great work of redemption. The Holy Spirit is the great minister of God and Christ in the application of this redemption. Angels are ministering spirits under the blessed Trinity, to execute the divine will and pleasure; they are the ministers of divine Providence. (3.) The angels are sent forth for this end--to minister to those who shall be the heirs of salvation. Here observe, [1.] The description given of the saints--they are heirs of salvation; at present they are under age, heirs, not inheritors. They are heirs because they are children of God; if children, then heirs. Let us make sure that we are children by adoption and regeneration, having made a covenant-resignation of ourselves to God, and walking before him in a gospel-conversation, and then we are heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ. [2.] The dignity and privilege of the saints--the angels are sent forth to minister for them. Thus they have done in attending and acting at the giving forth of the law, in fighting the battles of the saints, in destroying their enemies. They still minister for them in opposing the malice and power of evil spirits, in protecting and keeping their bodies, pitching their tents about theirs, instructing, quickening, and comforting their souls under Christ and the Holy Ghost; and thus they shall do in gathering all the saints together at the last day. Bless God for the ministration of angels, keep in God's way, and take the comfort of this promise, that he will give his angels charge over you, to keep you in all your ways. They shall bear you up in their hands, lest you dash your feet against a stone, Ps. xci. 11, 12.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:4: So much better than the angels - Another argument in favor of the Divinity of our Lord. The Jews had the highest opinion of the transcendent excellence of angels, they even associate them with God in the creation of the world, and suppose them to be of the privy council of the Most High; and thus they understand Gen 1:26 : Let us make man in our own image, in our own likeness; "And the Lord said to the ministering angels that stood before him, and who were created the second day, Let us make man," etc. See the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel. And they even allow them to be worshipped for the sake of their Creator, and as his representatives; though they will not allow them to be worshipped for their own sake. As, therefore, the Jews considered them next to God, and none entitled to their adoration but God; on their own ground the apostle proves Jesus Christ to be God, because God commanded all the angels of heaven to worship him. He, therefore, who is greater than the angels, and is the object of their adoration, is God. But Jesus Christ is greater than the angels, and the object of their adoration; therefore Jesus Christ must be God.
By inheritance obtained - Κεκληρονομηκεν ονομα. The verb κληρονομειν signifies generally to participate, possess, obtain, or acquire; and is so used by the purest Greek writers: Kypke has produced several examples of it from Demosthenes. It is not by inheritance that Christ possesses a more excellent name than angels, but as God: he has it naturally and essentially; and, as God manifested in the flesh, he has it in consequence of his humiliation, sufferings, and meritorious death. See Phi 2:9.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:4: Being made so much better - Being exalted so much above the angels. The word "better" here does not refer to moral character, but to exaltation of rank. As Mediator; as the Son of God in our nature, he is exalted far above the angels.
Than the angels - Than all angels of every rank; see notes on Eph 1:21; compare Pe1 3:22. "Angels, and authorities, and powers being made subject unto him." He is exalted to his mediatorial throne, and all things are placed beneath his feet.
As he hath by inheritance - Or in virtue of his name - the Son of God; an exaltation such as is implied in that name. As a son has a rank in a family above servants; as he has a control over the property above that which servants have, so it is with the Mediator. He is the Son of God: angels are the servants of God, and the servants of the church. They occupy a place in the universe compared with what he occupies, similar to the place which servants in a family occupy compared with that which a son has. To illustrate and prove this is the design of the remainder of this chapter. The argument which the apostle insists on is, that the title "the Son of God is to be given to him alone. It has been conferred on no others. Though the angels, and though saints are called in general "sons of God," yet the title" the Son of God" has been given to him only. As the apostle was writing to Hebrews, he makes his appeal to the Hebrew Scriptures alone for the confirmation of this opinion.
A more excellent name - To wit, the name Son. It is a more honorable and exalted name than has ever been bestowed on them. It involves more exalted privileges, and entitles him on whom it is bestowed to higher respect and honor than any name ever bestowed on them.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:4: so: Heb 1:9, Heb 2:9; Eph 1:21; Col 1:18, Col 2:10; Th2 1:7; Pe1 3:22; Rev 5:11, Rev 5:12
by: Psa 2:7, Psa 2:8; Phi 2:9-11
Geneva 1599
1:4 (4) Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent (i) name than they.
(4) Before he comes to declare the office of Christ, he sets forth the excellency of his person. First of all he shows him to be man, and that in addition he is God also.
(i) Dignity and honour.
John Gill
1:4 Being made so much better than the angels,.... Christ is so much better than the angels, as the Creator, than the creature; as an independent being, than a dependent one; as he that blesses, than he that is blessed; as he that is worshipped, than he that worships: as a king, than his subjects; as a master, than his servants; and as he that sends, than he that is sent: and Christ may be said to be "made so", when he was manifested and declared to be so; and he was actually preferred to them, and exalted above them in human nature, after he had expiated the sins of his people, and when he was set down at the right hand of God, as in the latter part of the preceding verse, with which these words stand connected; for in his state of humiliation, and through his sufferings and death, he was made lower than they; but when he was risen from the dead, and ascended to heaven, he was placed at the right hand of God, where none of them ever was, or ever will be: besides, the phrase, "being made", signifies no more than that "he was"; and so the Syriac version renders it, "and he was so much better than the angels"; and so the Ethiopic version, "he is so much better": and this is observed, to prove him to be more excellent than any creature, since he is preferred to the most excellent of creatures; and to show, that the Gospel dispensation is superior to the legal dispensation, which was introduced by the ministration of angels; and to take off the Jews from the worship of angels, to which they were prone: and this doctrine of his could not be well denied by them, since it was the faith of the Jewish church, that the Messiah should be preferred to the angels: for in their ancient writings they say of him, he shall be exalted above Abraham, he shall be lifted up above Moses, and be higher than the ministering angels (s); and that he is above them, appears from what follows,
as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they; which is that of the Son of God, a name peculiar to him; and which belongs to him in such a sense as it does not to angels, as is evident from the following verse: and though this name is not founded on his office, as Mediator, but arises from his nature and relation to God; yet he was declared to be the Son of God, and it was made manifest, that this name of right belonged to him, upon the discharge of his office, at his resurrection and ascension to heaven; and therefore he is said to obtain it by inheritance; or he appeared to inherit it of right, and that it was his possession for evermore.
(s) Tanchuma spud Huls. p. 321.
John Wesley
1:4 This verse has two clauses, the latter of which is treated of, Heb 1:5; the former, Heb 1:13. Such transpositions are also found in the other epistles of St. Paul, but in none so frequently as in this. The Jewish doctors were peculiarly fond of this figure, and used it much in all their writings. The apostle therefore, becoming all things to all men, here follows the same method. All the inspired writers were readier in all the figures of speech than the most experienced orators. Being - By his exaltation, after he had been lower than them, Heb 2:9. So much higher than the angels - It was extremely proper to observe this, because the Jews gloried in their law, as it was delivered by the ministration of angels. How much more may we glory in the gospel, which was given, not by the ministry of angels, but of the very Son of God! As he hath by inheritance a more excellent name - Because he is the Son of God, he inherits that name, in right whereof he inherits all things His inheriting that name is more ancient than all worlds; his inheriting all things, as ancient as all things. Than they - This denotes an immense pre - eminence. The angels do not inherit all things, but are themselves a portion of the Son's inheritance, whom they worship as their Lord.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:4 Being made . . . better--by His exaltation by the Father (Heb 1:3, Heb 1:13): in contrast to His being "made lower than the angels" (Heb 2:9). "Better," that is, superior to. As "being" (Heb 1:3) expresses His essential being so "being made" (Heb 7:26) marks what He became in His assumed manhood (Phil 2:6-9). Paul shows that His humbled form (at which the Jews might stumble) is no objection to His divine Messiahship. As the law was given by the ministration of angels and Moses, it was inferior to the Gospel given by the divine Son, who both is (Heb 1:4-14) as God, and has been made, as the exalted Son of man (Heb 2:5-18), much better than the angels. The manifestations of God by angels (and even by the angel of the covenant) at different times in the Old Testament, did not bring man and God into personal union, as the manifestation of God in human flesh does.
by inheritance obtained--He always had the thing itself, namely, Sonship; but He "obtained by inheritance," according to the promise of the Father, the name "Son," whereby He is made known to men and angels. He is "the Son of God" is a sense far exalted above that in which angels are called "sons of God" (Job 1:6; Job 38:7). "The fulness of the glory of the peculiar name "the Son of God," is unattainable by human speech or thought. All appellations are but fragments of its glory beams united in it as in a central sun, Rev_ 19:12. A name that no than knew but He Himself."
1:51:5: Քանզի ցո՞ երբէք ասաց ՚ի հրեշտակաց. Որդի իմ ես դու, ես այսօր ծնայ զքեզ։ Եւ դարձեալ թէ. Ես եղէց նմա ՚ի Հայր, եւ նա եղիցի ինձ յՈրդի[4660]։[4660] Ոմանք. Եւ ես այսօր... նմա Հայր։
5 Արդարեւ, հրեշտակներից որի՞ն երբեւէ ասաց. «Դու ես իմ որդին, ես այսօր ծնեցի քեզ»: Եւ դարձեալ. «Ես նրան հայր կը լինեմ, իսկ նա ինձ որդի կը լինի»:
5 Վասն զի հրեշտակներէն որո՞ւն ըսաւ. «Դուն իմ Որդիս ես, ես այսօր քեզ ծնայ» եւ դարձեալ՝ «Ես անոր Հայր պիտի ըլլամ ու անիկա ինծի Որդի պիտի ըլլայ»։
Քանզի ցո՞ երբեք ասաց ի հրեշտակաց. Որդի իմ ես դու, ես այսօր ծնայ զքեզ: Եւ դարձեալ թէ. Ես եղէց նմա ի Հայր, եւ նա եղիցի ինձ յՈրդի:

1:5: Քանզի ցո՞ երբէք ասաց ՚ի հրեշտակաց. Որդի իմ ես դու, ես այսօր ծնայ զքեզ։ Եւ դարձեալ թէ. Ես եղէց նմա ՚ի Հայր, եւ նա եղիցի ինձ յՈրդի[4660]։
[4660] Ոմանք. Եւ ես այսօր... նմա Հայր։
5 Արդարեւ, հրեշտակներից որի՞ն երբեւէ ասաց. «Դու ես իմ որդին, ես այսօր ծնեցի քեզ»: Եւ դարձեալ. «Ես նրան հայր կը լինեմ, իսկ նա ինձ որդի կը լինի»:
5 Վասն զի հրեշտակներէն որո՞ւն ըսաւ. «Դուն իմ Որդիս ես, ես այսօր քեզ ծնայ» եւ դարձեալ՝ «Ես անոր Հայր պիտի ըլլամ ու անիկա ինծի Որդի պիտի ըլլայ»։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:55: Ибо кому когда из Ангелов сказал [Бог]: Ты Сын Мой, Я ныне родил Тебя? И еще: Я буду Ему Отцем, и Он будет Мне Сыном?
1:5  τίνι γὰρ εἶπέν ποτε τῶν ἀγγέλων, υἱός μου εἶ σύ, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε; καὶ πάλιν, ἐγὼ ἔσομαι αὐτῶ εἰς πατέρα, καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι εἰς υἱόν;
1:5. Τίνι (Unto-what-one) γὰρ (therefore) εἶπέν (it-had-said) ποτε (whither-also) τῶν (of-the-ones) ἀγγέλων (of-messengers," Υἱός ( A-Son ) μου ( of-me ) εἶ ( thou-be ) σύ , ( thou ," ἐγὼ ( I ) σήμερον ( this-day ) γεγέννηκά ( I-had-come-to-generate-unto ) σε , ( to-thee ,"καὶ (and) πάλιν (unto-furthered," Ἐγὼ ( I ) ἔσομαι ( I-shall-be ) αὐτῷ ( unto-it ) εἰς ( into ) πατέρα , ( to-a-Father ) καὶ ( and ) αὐτὸς ( it ) ἔσται ( it-shall-be ) μοι ( unto-me ) εἰς ( into ) υἱόν ; ( to-a-Son ?"
1:5. cui enim dixit aliquando angelorum Filius meus es tu ego hodie genui te et rursum ego ero illi in Patrem et ipse erit mihi in FiliumFor to which of the angels hath he said at any time: Thou art my Son, to-day have I begotten thee? And again: I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
5. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee? and again, I will be to him a Father, And he shall be to me a Son?
1:5. For to which of the Angels has he ever said: “You are my Son; today have I begotten you?” Or again: “I will be a Father to him, and he shall be a Son to me?”
1:5. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son:

5: Ибо кому когда из Ангелов сказал [Бог]: Ты Сын Мой, Я ныне родил Тебя? И еще: Я буду Ему Отцем, и Он будет Мне Сыном?
1:5  τίνι γὰρ εἶπέν ποτε τῶν ἀγγέλων, υἱός μου εἶ σύ, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε; καὶ πάλιν, ἐγὼ ἔσομαι αὐτῶ εἰς πατέρα, καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι εἰς υἱόν;
1:5. cui enim dixit aliquando angelorum Filius meus es tu ego hodie genui te et rursum ego ero illi in Patrem et ipse erit mihi in Filium
For to which of the angels hath he said at any time: Thou art my Son, to-day have I begotten thee? And again: I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
1:5. For to which of the Angels has he ever said: “You are my Son; today have I begotten you?” Or again: “I will be a Father to him, and he shall be a Son to me?”
1:5. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
5: Свою мысль апостол подтверждает и поясняет рядом ветхозаветных изречений, показывая, что его мысль не новая, а вечная, как сама истина. "Сказал... вводит... говорит..." - сказуемые к подразумеваемому подлежащему Бог. В некоторых местах Ветхого Завета Ангелы называются также "сынами Божиими", но в данном случае апостол имеет в виду указать на совершенно особое личное единственное в своем роде сыновство, оттеняемое и у Псалмопевца более точным определением: "Сын Мой, Которого Я родил", т.е. Сын единородный по существу, равный по природе и Божественным свойствам. - "Ныне (днесь)" - по мнению одних толковников - указывает на вечное рождение Сына от Отца, так как в вечности нет прошедшего и будущего, а одно вечное настоящее, вечное есть. Прошедшее же время глагола родил (gegennhka) означает с одной стороны совершение, а с другой постоянное продолжение этого рождения. По мнению других (особенно греческих) толковников, выражение днесь относится к временному рождению в воплощении, когда Христос и как человек стал Сыном Божиим. По смыслу этого толкования, ныне (днесь) должно относить ко времени земной жизни воплотившегося Сына Божия, и в таком случае прошедшее время глагола родил указывает на время его воплощения по наитию Св. Духа от Девы Марии. По мнению третьих, выражение псалма относится апостолом к воскресению и вознесению Христа, т.е. ко времени Его прославления, имеющего продолжаться вечно (ср. Деян 13:33; 4:25: и дал.). - "И еще..." т.е. кому когда сказал Бог? (подразумевается: никому никогда). - "Я буду Ему Отцем, и Он будет Мне Сыном..." Слова эти, ближайшим образом сказанные о Соломоне, заключают также в себе обетование о восстановлении семени Давида и о вечном пребывании царства и престола его, что во всей полноте осуществилось лишь в лице Иисуса Христа - Мессии, к Которому относили это обетование и сам Давид, и Соломон, и пророки, и Архангел Гавриил в благовестии Деве Марии (Лк 1:32; ср. 2Цар. 7:19; Ис XXII:37; 3Цар. 5:5; 8:17-20, 24; Ис 9:6-7; Иер ХXIII:5; XXXIII:15; Зах 6:12-13; Деян 2:30).
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:5: Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee - These words are quoted from Psa 2:7, a psalm that seems to refer only to the Messiah; and they are quoted by St. Paul, Act 13:33, as referring to the resurrection of Christ. And this application of them is confirmed by the same apostle, Rom 1:4, as by his resurrection from the dead he was declared - manifestly proved, to be the Son of God with power; God having put forth his miraculous energy in raising that body from the grave which had truly died, and died a violent death, for Christ was put to death as a malefactor, but by his resurrection his innocence was demonstrated, as God could not work a miracle to raise a wicked man from the dead. As Adam was created by God, and because no natural generation could have any operation in this case, therefore he was called the son of God, Luk 3:38, and could never have seen corruption if he had not sinned, so the human nature of Jesus Christ, formed by the energy of the eternal Spirit in the womb of the virgin, without any human intervention, was for this very reason called the Son of God, Luk 1:35; and because it had not sinned, therefore it could not see corruption, nor was it even mortal, but through a miraculous display of God's infinite love, for the purpose of making a sacrificial atonement for the sin of the world and God, having raised this sacrificed human nature from the dead, declared that same Jesus (who was, as above stated, the Son of God) to be his Son, the promised Messiah; and as coming by the Virgin Mary, the right heir to the throne of David, according to the uniform declaration of all the prophets.
The words, This day have I begotten thee, must refer either to his incarnation, when he was miraculously conceived in the womb of the virgin by the power of the Holy Spirit; or to his resurrection from the dead, when God, by this sovereign display of his almighty energy, declared him to be his Son, vindicated his innocence, and also the purity and innocence of the blessed virgin, who was the mother of this son, and who declared him to be produced in her womb by the power of God. The resurrection of Christ, therefore, to which the words most properly refer, not only gave the fullest proof that he was an innocent and righteous man, but also that he had accomplished the purpose for which he died, and that his conception was miraculous, and his mother a pure and unspotted virgin.
This is a subject of infinite importance to the Christian system, and of the last consequence in reference to the conviction and conversion of the Jews, for whose use this epistle was sent by God. Here is the rock on which they split; they deny this Divine Sonship of Jesus Christ, and their blasphemies against him and his virgin mother are too shocking to be transcribed. The certainty of the resurrection of Jesus refutes their every calumny; proves his miraculous conception; vindicates the blessed virgin; and, in a word, declares him to be the Son of God with power.
This most important use of this saying has passed unnoticed by almost every Christian writer which I have seen; and yet it lies here at the foundation of all the apostle's proofs. If Jesus was not thus the Son of God, the whole Christian system is vain and baseless: but his resurrection demonstrates him to have been the Son of God; therefore every thing built on this foundation is more durable than the foundations of heaven, and as inexpugnable as the throne of the eternal King.
He shall be to me a Son? - As the Jews have ever blasphemed against the Sonship of Christ, it was necessary that the apostle should adduce and make strong all his proofs, and show that this was not a new revelation; that it was that which was chiefly intended in several scriptures of the Old Testament, which, without farther mentioning the places where found, he immediately produces. This place, which is quoted from Sa2 7:14, shows us that the seed which God promised to David, and who was to sit upon his throne, and whose throne should be established for ever, was not Solomon, but Jesus Christ; and indeed he quotes the words so as to intimate that they were so understood by the Jews. See among the observations at the end of the chapter.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:5: For unto which of the angels ... - The object of this is, to prove that the Son of God, who has spoken to people in these last days, is superior to the angels. As the apostle was writing to those who had been trained in the Jewish religion, and who admitted the authority of the Old Testament, of course he made his appeal to that, and undoubtedly referred for proof to those places which were generally admitted to relate to the Messiah. Abarbanel says, that it was the common opinion of the Jewish doctors that the Messiah would be exalted above Abraham, Moses, and the angels - Stuart. There is a difficulty, as we shall see, in applying the passages which follow to the Messiah - a difficulty which we may find it not easy to explain. Some remarks will be made on the particular passages as we go along. In general it may be observed here:
(1) That it is to be presumed that those passages were in the time of Paul applied to the Messiah. He seems to argue from them as though this was commonly understood, and is at no pains to prove it.
(2) it is to be presumed that those to whom he wrote would at once admit this to be so. If this were not so, we cannot suppose that he would regard this mode of reasoning as at all efficacious, or adapted to convince those to whom he wrote.
(3) he did not apprehend that the application which he made of these texts would be called in question by the countrymen of those to whom he wrote. It is to be presumed, therefore, that the application was made in accordance with the received opinions, and the common interpretation.
(4) Paul had been instructed in early life in the doctrines of the Jewish religion, and made fully acquainted with all their principles of interpretation. It is to be presumed, therefore, that he made these quotations in accordance with the pRev_alent belief, and with principles which were well understood and admitted.
(5) every age and people have their own modes of reasoning. They may differ from others, and others may regard them as unsound, and yet to that age and people they are satisfactory and conclusive. The ancient philosophers employed modes of reasoning which would not strike us as the most forcible, and which perhaps we should not regard as tenable. So it is with the Chinese, the Hindus, the Muslims now. So it was with the writers of the dark ages who lived under the influence of the scholastic philosophy. They argue from admitted principles in their country and time - just as we do in ours. Their reasoning was as satisfactory to them as ours is to us.
(6) in a writer of any particular age we are to expect to find the pRev_ailing mode of reasoning, and appeals to the usual arguments on any subject. We are not to look for methods of argument founded on the inductive philosophy in the writings of the schoolmen, or in the writings of the Chinese or the Hindus. It would be unreasonable to expect it. We are to expect that they will be found to reason in accordance with the customs of their time; to appeal to such arguments as were commonly alleged; and if they are reasoning with an adversary, "to make use of the points which he concedes," and to urge them as suited to convince "him." And this is not wrong. It may strike him with more force than it does us; it may be that we can see that is not the most solid mode of reasoning, but still it may not be in itself an improper method. That the writers of the New Testament should have used that mode of reasoning sometimes, is no more surprising than that we find writers in China reasoning from acknowledged principles, and in the usual manner there, or than that people in our own land reason on the principles of the inductive philosophy. These remarks may not explain all the difficulties in regard to the proof-texts adduced by Paul in this chapter, but they may remove some of them, and may so prepare the way that we may be able to dispose of them all as we advance. In the passage which is quoted in this verse, there is not much difficulty in regard to the propriety of its being thus used. The difficulty lies in the subsequent quotations in the chapter.
Said he at any time - He never used language respecting the angels like what he employs respecting his Son. He never applied to any one of them the name Son. "Thou art my Son." The name "sons of God," is applied in the Scriptures to saints, and may have been given to the angels. But the argument here is, that the name, my "Son" has never been given to any one of them particularly and by eminence. In a large general sense, they are the sons of God, or the children of God, but the name is given to the Lord Jesus, the Messiah, in a special sense, implying a unique relation to him, and a special dominion over all things. This passage is quoted from Psa 2:1-12; - a Psalm that is usually believed to pertain particularly to the Messiah, and one of the few Psalms that have undisputed reference to him; see notes on Act 4:25; Act 13:33.
This day - see notes on Act 13:33, where this passage is applied to the resurrection of Christ from the dead: proving that the phrase "this day" does not refer to the doctrine of eternal generation, but to the resurrection of the Redeemer - "the first-begotten of the dead:" Rev 1:5. Thus, Theodoret says of the phrase "this day," "it does not express his eternal generation, but what is connected with time." The argument of the apostle here does not turn on the time when this was said, but on the fact that this was said to him and not to any one of the angels, and this argument will have equal force whether the phrase be understood as referring to the fact of his resurrection, or to his pRev_ious existence. The structure and scope of the second Psalm refers to his exaltation after the kings of the earth set themselves against him, and endeavored to cast off His government from them. In spite of that, and subsequent to that, he would set his king, which they had rejected, on his holy hill of Zion; see Psa 2:2-6.
Have I begotten thee - See this place explained in the notes on Act 13:33. It must, from the necessity of the case, be understood figuratively; and must mean, substantially, "I have constituted, or appointed thee." If it refers to his resurrection, it means that that resurrection was a kind of "begetting" to life, or, a beginning of life; see Rev 1:5.
And yet though Paul Act 13:33 has applied it to the resurrection of the Redeemer, and though the name "Son of God" is applied to him on account of his resurrection (see notes on Rom 1:4), yet I confess this does not seem to me to come up to "all" that the writer here intended. The phrase," The Son of God," I suppose, properly denotes that the Lord Jesus sustained a relation to God, designated by that name, corresponding to the relations which he sustained to man, designated by the name "the Son of man." The one implied that he had a special relation to God, as the other implied that he had a special relation to man. This is indisputable. But on what particular account the name was given him, or how he was manifested to be the Son of God, has been the great question. Whether the name refers to the mode of his existence before the incarnation, and to his "being begotten from eternity," or to the incarnation and the resurrection, has long been a point on which people have been divided in opinion.
The natural idea conveyed by the title "the Son of God" is, that he sustained a relation to God which implied more than was human or angelic; and this is certainly the drift of the argument of the apostle here. I do not see, however, that he refers to the doctrine of "eternal generation," or that he means to teach that. His point is, that God had declared and treated him as "a Son" - as superior to the angels and to human beings, and that this was shown in what had been said of him in the Old Testament. This would be equally clear, whether there is reference to the doctrine of eternal generation or not. The sense is, "he is more than human." He is more than angelic. He has been addressed and treated as a Son - which none of the angels have. They are regarded simply as ministering spirits. They sustain subordinate stations, and are treated accordingly. He, on the contrary, is the brightness of the divine glory.
He is treated and addressed as a Son. In his original existence this was so. In his incarnation this was so. When on earth this was so; and in his resurrection, ascension, and session at the right hand of God, he was treated in all respects "as a Son" - as superior to all servants, and to all ministering spirits." The exact reference, then, of the phrase "this day have I begotten thee," in the Psalm, is to the act of "constituting" him in a public manner the Son of God - and refers to God's setting him as king on the "holy hill of Zion" - or making him king over the church and the world as Messiah; and this was done, eminently, as Paul shows Acts 13, by the resurrection. It was based, however, on what was fit and proper. It was not arbitrary. There was a reason why he should thus be exalted rather than a man or an angel; and this was, that he was the God incarnate, and had a nature that qualified him for universal empire, and he was thus "appropriately" called "the Son of God."
(No doctrine is advanced, by pressing into its service, such texts as sound criticism declares not strictly to belong to it. Yet, without doubt, many advocates of the eternal Sonship have done violence to this passage, with the design of upholding their views. That doctrine, however, happily is not dependent on a single text; and ample ground will remain for its friends, even if we admit, as in candor we must, that our author has fully made out his case against this text as a proof one. It seems clear, that neither σήμερον sē meron nor its corresponding היום haayowm can denote eternity; of such signification there is no example. The sense is uniformly confined to limited duration, Psa 95:7; Heb 4:7. The order of the second Psalm, too, certainly does prove that the "begetting" took place after the opposition which the kings and rulers made to Christ, and not prior to it. Accordingly, the text is quoted elsewhere in reference to the resurrection of Christ, Rom 1:4; Act 13:33. Besides, the chief design of the apostle in the place is not so much to show why Christ is called the Son of God, as simply to direct attention to the fact that he has this name, on the possession of which the whole argument is founded. He inherits a name which is never given to angels, and that of itself is proof of his superiority to them, whether we suppose the ground of the title to lie in his pRev_ious existence, or, with our author, in his incarnate Deity. But on this question, it must be admitted, that the passage determines nothing.
All this is substantially allowed by Owen, than whom a more stanch supporter of the doctrine of eternal Sonship cannot be named. "The apostle, in this place," says he, "does not treat of the eternal generation of the Son, but of His exaltation and pre-eminence above angels. The word also, היום haayowm, constantly in the Scripture, denotes some signal time, one day, or more. And that expression, 'this day have I begotten thee,' following immediately upon that other typical one, 'I have set my King upon my holy hill of Zion,' seems to be of the same import, and in like manner to be interpreted." On the general doctrine of the Sonship, the author has stated his views both here and elsewhere. That it is eternal or has its origin in the pRev_ious existence of Christ, he will not allow. It is given to the second person of the Trinity because he became God incarnate, so that but for the incarnation and the economy of redemption, he would not have had this name. But the eternal Sonship of Christ rests on a body of evidence, that will not soon or easily be set aside. See that evidence adduced in a supplementary Note under Rom 1:4. Meanwhile we would simply ask the reader, if it do not raise our idea of the love of God, in the mission of Christ, to suppose that he held the dear relation of Son pRev_ious to His coming - that being the Son, he was sent to prove what a sacrifice the Father could make, in yielding up one so near, and so dear. But this astonishing evidence of love, if not destroyed, is greatly weakened, by the supposition that there was no Sonship until the sending of Christ. See also supplementary note under Heb 1:3.)
"And again, I will be to him a Father." This passage is evidently quoted from Sa2 7:14. A sentiment similar to this is found in Psa 89:20-27. As these words were originally spoken, they referred to Solomon. They occur in a promise to David that he should not fail to have an heir to sit on his throne, or that his throne should be perpetual. The promise was particularly designed to comfort him in view of the fact that God would not suffer him to build the temple because his hands had been defiled with blood. To console him in reference to that, God promises him far greater honor than that would be. He promises that the house should be built by one of his own family, and that his family and kingdom should be established foRev_er. That in this series of promises the "Messiah" was included as a descendant of David, was the common opinion of the Jews, of the early Christians, and has been of the great body of interpreters.
It was certainly from such passages as this, that the Jews derived the notion which pRev_ailed so universally in the time of the Saviour that the Messiah was to be the son or the descendant of David; see Mat 22:42-45; Mat 9:27; Mat 15:22; Mat 20:30-31; Mar 10:47-48; Luk 18:38-39; Mat 12:23; Mat 21:9; Joh 7:42; Rom 1:3; Rev 5:5; Rev 22:16. That opinion was universal. No one doubted it; and it must have been common for the Jews to apply such texts as this to the Messiah. Paul would not have done it in this instance unless it had been usual. Nor was it improper. If the Messiah was to be a descendant of David, then it was natural to apply these promises in regard to his posterity in an eminent and special sense to the Messiah. They were a part of the promises which included him, and which terminated in him. The promise, therefore, which is here made is, that God would be to him, in a special sense, a Father, and he should be a Son. It does not, as I suppose, pertain originally exclusively to the Messiah, but included him as a descendant of David. To him it would be applicable in an eminent sense; and if applicable to him at all, it proved all that the passage here is adduced to prove - that the name "Son" is given to the Messiah - a "name" not given to angels.
That is just the point on which the argument turns. What is implied in the bestowment of that name is another point on which the apostle discourses in the other parts of the argument. I have no doubt, therefore, that while these words originally might have been applicable to Solomon, or to any of the other descendants of David who succeeded him on the throne, yet they at last terminated, and were designed to terminate in the Messiah - to whom pre-eminently God would be a Father; compare the introduction to Isaiah, section 7, iii. (3), and the notes on Isa 7:16.
(The promise, doubtless, had a special reference to the Messiah. Nay, we may safely assert, that the chief reference was to him, for in the case of typical persons and things what they adumbrate is principally to be regarded. So here, though the original application of the passage be to Solomon, the type of Christ, yet it finds its great and ultimate application in the person of the glorious antitype. However strange this double application may seem to us, it is quite in accordance with the whole system of things under the Jewish dispensation. Almost everything connected with it was constructed on this typical principle. This the apostles understood so well, that they were never stumbled by it, and what is remarkable, and of the last importance on this subject, "never for a moment drawn from the ultimate and chief design of a promise or prophecy" by its primary reference to the type. They saw Christ in it, and made the application solely to him, passing over entirely the literal sense, and seizing at once the ultimate and superior import. The very passage in question Sa2 7:11-17, is thus directly applied not only here, but throughout the New Testament; Luk 1:32-33; Act 2:30, Act 2:37; Act 13:22-23. Now certainly the apostles are the best judges in matters of this kind. Their authority, in regard to the sense of passages quoted by them from the Old Testament, is just as great as in the case of the original matter of the New Testament. That Christ was indeed principally intended is further evident from the fact, that "when the kingdom had passed from the house of David," succeeding prophets repeat the promise in 2 Sam. 7: as yet to be fulfilled. See Jer 33:14, Jer 33:26. Now connecting this fact with the direct assertion of the writer of the New Testament above referred to, every doubt must be removed.
It will be alleged, however, that while the direct application to the Messiah, of this and other prophecies, is obvious and authoritative, it is yet desirable, and they who deny inspiration will insist on it as essential, to prove that there is at least nothing in the original places, whence the citations are made, inconsistent with such application. Such proof seems to be especially requisite here; for immediately after the words, "I will be his Father and he shall be my Son," there follows: "if he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men," Sa2 7:14; which last sentence, it is affirmed, cannot, in any sense, be applicable to the Messiah. It has been said in reply, that though such language cannot be applied to Christ "personally," it may yet refer to him as the "covenant head" of his people. Though there be no iniquity in him, "such fallings and transgressions as disannul not the covenant, often fall out on their part for whom he undertaketh therein." In accordance with this view, it has been observed by Mr. Pierce, and others after him, that the Hebrew relative pronoun אשׁר 'asher should be translated "whosoever;" in which case, the sense is, whosoever of his "children," that is, the Messiah's, shall commit iniquity, etc. And to this effect indeed is the alteration of the words in Psa. 89, where the original covenant is repeated, "if his children forsake my law - then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes."
Perhaps, however, the better solution of the difficulty is what at once admits, that the words in question cannot apply to the antitype but to the type only. It is a mistake to suppose, that in a typical passage every thing must necessarily have its antitypical reference. The reader will find some excellent and apposite remarks on this subject in Dr. Owen's commentary on the place. "No type," says that judicious writer, "was in all things a type of Christ, but only in that particular wherein he was designed of God so to be. David was a type of Christ, but not in all things that he was and did. In his conquests of the enemies of the church, in his throne and kingdom, he was so; but in his private actions, whether as a man, or as a king, or captain, he was not so. Nay, not all things spoken of him that was a type, even in those respects wherein he was a type, are spoken of him as a type, or have any respect unto the thing signified, but some of them may belong to him in his personal capacity only. And the reason is, that he who was a type by God's institution, might morally fail in the performance of his duty, even then and in those things wherein he was a type. And this wholly removes the difficulty connected with the words 'if he sin against me;' for those words relating to the moral duty of Solomon, in that wherein he was a type of Christ, namely, the rule and administration of his kingdom, may not at all belong to Christ, who was prefigured by God's institution of things, and not in any moral deportment in the observance of them."
These observations seem to contain the true principles of explication in this and similar cases. The solution of Prof. Stuart is not materially different. "Did not God," says he, "engage, that David should have successors on his 'earthly' throne, and also that he 'should' have a son who would sit on a 'spiritual' throne, and have a kingdom of which David's own was but a mere type? Admitting this, our difficulty is diminished if not removed. "The iniquity committed is predicated of that part of David's seed, who might commit it," that is, his successors on the 'national' throne, while the more exalted condition predicated of his successor, belongs to Him to whom was given a kingdom over all.")
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:5: Thou: Heb 5:5; Psa 2:7; Act 13:33
I will: Sa2 7:14; Ch1 17:13, Ch1 22:10, Ch1 28:6; Psa 89:26, Psa 89:27
Geneva 1599
1:5 (5) For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, (k) this day have I begotten thee? (6) And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
(5) He proves and confirms the dignity of Christ revealed in the flesh, by these six evident testimonies by which it appears that he far surpasses all angels, so much so that he is called both Son, and God in (Heb 1:5-8, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:13).
(k) The Father begat the Son from everlasting, but that everlasting generation was revealed and represented to the world in his time, and therefore he added this word "Today" (6) He proves and confirms the dignity of Christ revealed in the flesh, by these six evident testimonies by which it appears that he far surpasses all angels, so much so that he is called both Son, and God in (Heb 1:5-8, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:13).
John Gill
1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time,.... That is, he never said to any of the angels what he has said to Christ; namely, what follows,
thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee for though angels are called the sons of God, Job 1:6 yet are never said to be begotten by him; or, with this clause annexed to it, "this day have I begotten thee"; nor are they ever so called in a proper sense, or in such sense as Christ is: this is said to Christ, and of him, in Ps 2:7 and that agreeably to the sense of the Jewish church at this time, or the apostle would never have produced it to the Hebrews in such a manner; and not only the whole psalm in general, but this verse in particular, is owned by Jewish writers (t), both ancient and modern, to belong to the Messiah. Christ is the Son of God, not by Creation, nor by adoption, nor by office, but by nature; he is the true, proper, natural, and eternal Son of God; and as such is owned and declared by Jehovah the Father, in these words; the foundation of which relation lies in the begetting of him; which refers not to his nature, either divine or human: not to his divine nature, which is common with the Father and Spirit; wherefore if his was begotten, theirs must be also, being the same undivided nature, common to all three; much less to his human nature, in which he is never said to be begotten, but always to be made, and with respect to which he is without Father; nor to his office, as Mediator, in which he is not a Son, but a servant; besides, he was a Son, previous to his being a prophet, priest, and King; and his office is not the foundation of his sonship, but his sonship is the foundation of his office; or by which that is supported, and which fits him for the performance of it: but it has respect to his divine person; for as, in human generation, person begets person, and like begets like, so it is in divine generation; though care must be taken to remove all imperfection from it, as divisibility and multiplication of essence, priority and posteriority, dependence, and the like; nor can the modus, or manner of it, be conceived, or explained by us: the date of it, today, designs eternity, as in Is 43:13, which is one continued day, an everlasting now; and this may be applied to any time and case, in which Christ is declared to be the Son of God; as at his incarnation, his baptism, his transfiguration on the Mount, and his resurrection from the dead, as in Acts 13:33 and at his ascension to heaven, when he was made Lord and Christ, and his divine sonship more manifestly appeared; which seems to be the time, and case, more especially referred to here. And again, I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a Son: which words are taken from 2Kings 7:14 and the sense is, not that he should be his son by adoption; or that he would be instead of a father to him; or that he should be as dear to him as a son is to a father; but that he was really and properly so; and he would make it manifest, and own him as such, as he did at Jordan's river, upon the Mount, and at his resurrection and ascension; though the words are spoken of Solomon, as a type of Christ, they properly belong to the antitype, who is greater than Solomon.
(t) Zohar in Numb. fol. 82. 2. Maimon. in Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 11. 1. & Abarbinel, Mashmia Jeshua, fol. 37. 4. & 38. 1.
John Wesley
1:5 Thou art my Son - God of God, Light of Light. This day have I begotten thee - I have begotten thee from eternity, which, by its unalter able permanency of duration, is one continued, unsuccessive day. I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son - I will own myself to be his Father, and him to be my Son, by eminent tokens of my peculiar love The former clause relates to his natural Sonship, by an eternal, inconceivable generation; the other, to his Father's acknowledgment and treatment of him as his incarnate Son. Indeed this promise related immediately to Solomon, but in a far higher sense to the Messiah. Ps 2:7; 2Kings 7:14
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:5 For--substantiating His having "obtained a more excellent name than the angels."
unto which--A frequent argument in this Epistle is derived from the silence of Scripture (Heb 1:13; Heb 2:16; Heb 7:3, Heb 7:14) [BENGEL].
this day have I begotten thee-- (Ps 2:7). Fulfilled at the resurrection of Jesus, whereby the Father "declared," that is, made manifest His divine Sonship, heretofore veiled by His humiliation (Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4). Christ has a fourfold right to the title "Son of God"; (1) By generation, as begotten of God; (2) By commission, as sent by God; (3) By resurrection, as "the first-begotten of the dead" (compare Lk 20:36; Rom 1:4; Rev_ 1:5); (4) By actual possession, as heir of all [BISHOP PEARSON]. The Psalm here quoted applied primarily in a less full sense to Solomon, of whom God promised by Nathan to David. "I will be his father and he shall be my son." But as the whole theocracy was of Messianic import, the triumph of David over Hadadezer and neighboring kings (2Sa. 8:1-18; Ps 2:2-3, Ps 2:9-12) is a type of God's ultimately subduing all enemies under His Son, whom He sets (Hebrew, "anointed," Ps 2:6) on His "holy hill of Zion," as King of the Jews and of the whole earth. the antitype to Solomon, son of David. The "I" in Greek is emphatic; I the Everlasting Father have begotten Thee this day, that is, on this day, the day of Thy being manifested as My Son, "the first-begotten of the dead" (Col 1:18; Rev_ 1:5). when Thou hast ransomed and opened heaven to Thy people. He had been always Son, but now first was manifested as such in His once humbled, now exalted manhood united to His Godhead. ALFORD refers "this day" to the eternal generation of the Son: the day in which the Son was begotten by the Father is an everlasting to-day: there never was a yesterday or past time to Him, nor a to-morrow or future time: "Nothing there is to come, and nothing past, but an eternal NOW doth ever last" (Prov 30:4; Jn 10:30, Jn 10:38; Jn 16:28; Jn 17:8). The communication of the divine essence in its fulness, involves eternal generation; for the divine essence has no beginning. But the context refers to a definite point of time, namely, that of His having entered on the inheritance (Heb 1:4). The "bringing the first-begotten into the world" (Heb 1:6), is not subsequent, as ALFORD thinks, to Heb 1:5, but anterior to it (compare Acts 2:30-35).
1:61:6: Այլ յորժամ միւսանգամ մուծցէ զանդրանիկն յաշխարհ, ասէ. Երկի՛ր պագցեն նմա ամենայն հրեշտակք Աստուծոյ։
6 Եւ դարձեալ, երբ անդրանկին աշխարհ է մտցնում, ասում է. «Թող երկրպագեն նրան Աստծու բոլոր հրեշտակները»:
6 Եւ դարձեալ՝ երբ անդրանիկը աշխարհ կը մտցնէ՝ կ’ըսէ. «Աստուծոյ բոլոր հրեշտակներն ալ անոր երկրպագութիւն թող ընեն»։
Այլ յորժամ միւսանգամ մուծցէ զանդրանիկն յաշխարհ, ասէ. Երկիր պագցեն նմա ամենայն հրեշտակք Աստուծոյ:

1:6: Այլ յորժամ միւսանգամ մուծցէ զանդրանիկն յաշխարհ, ասէ. Երկի՛ր պագցեն նմա ամենայն հրեշտակք Աստուծոյ։
6 Եւ դարձեալ, երբ անդրանկին աշխարհ է մտցնում, ասում է. «Թող երկրպագեն նրան Աստծու բոլոր հրեշտակները»:
6 Եւ դարձեալ՝ երբ անդրանիկը աշխարհ կը մտցնէ՝ կ’ըսէ. «Աստուծոյ բոլոր հրեշտակներն ալ անոր երկրպագութիւն թող ընեն»։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:66: Также, когда вводит Первородного во вселенную, говорит: и да поклонятся Ему все Ангелы Божии.
1:6  ὅταν δὲ πάλιν εἰσαγάγῃ τὸν πρωτότοκον εἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην, λέγει, καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῶ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ.
1:6. ὅταν (which-also-ever) δὲ (moreover) πάλιν (unto-furthered) εἰσαγάγῃ (it-might-have-had-led-into) τὸν (to-the-one) πρωτότοκον (to-most-before-produced) εἰς (into) τὴν (to-the-one) οἰκουμένην, (to-being-housed-unto) λέγει (it-fortheth," Καὶ ( And ) προσκυνησάτωσαν ( they-should-have-kissed-toward-unto ) αὐτῷ ( unto-it ," πάντες ( all ) ἄγγελοι ( messengers ) θεοῦ . ( of-a-Deity )
1:6. et cum iterum introducit primogenitum in orbem terrae dicit et adorent eum omnes angeli DeiAnd again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him.
6. And when he again bringeth in the firstborn into the world he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
1:6. And again, when he brings the only-begotten Son into the world, he says: “And let all the Angels of God adore him.”
1:6. And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him:

6: Также, когда вводит Первородного во вселенную, говорит: и да поклонятся Ему все Ангелы Божии.
1:6  ὅταν δὲ πάλιν εἰσαγάγῃ τὸν πρωτότοκον εἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην, λέγει, καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῶ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ.
1:6. et cum iterum introducit primogenitum in orbem terrae dicit et adorent eum omnes angeli Dei
And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him.
1:6. And again, when he brings the only-begotten Son into the world, he says: “And let all the Angels of God adore him.”
1:6. And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
6: "Также, когда вводит..." - неточный перевод греческого otan de palin eisagagh... славянский правильнее: "егда же паки вводит...", то есть: когда опять вводит... - "Вводит Первородного во вселенную..." - греческое eisagein значит вводит в обладание известным предметом (судебный термин); вводит во вселенную - вводит в обладание вселенной; вводит Первородного - вводит имеющего по закону полные права наследства. Опять - этим выражением имеется в виду указать не вторичное введение Первородного во вселенную, а вторичное приведение соответствующего выше только что приведенному текста: "когда опять вводит Первородного во вселенную, говорит..." или яснее: "опять, когда вводит Первородного, говорит", то есть не: опять вводит, а опять говорит. Выражение - Первородный - (prwtotokoV) излюбленное у евреев для обозначения Мессии. У Апостола Павла оно повторяется несколько разе различными оттенками. Так, в Рим 8:29: Христос называется первородным во многих братьях, в отношении к искупленным людям, которые в Нем снова усыновлены Богом, как дети, и, таким образом, сделались Его братьями (II:11). - В Кол 1:18: Христос называется перворожденным из мертвых, как первый, преодолевший происходящую от Адама смерть. В Кол 1:15: апостол называет Христа перворожденным всей твари, как Первообраз всего Им и через Него сотворенного. Во всех этих случаях означенное выражение должно быть понимаемо в приложении к человеческой природе во Христе. Как Христос, будучи вечным Словом есть, Единороден (monogenhV) у Отца, так, будучи человеком, Он есть перворожденный Божий (prwtotokoV tou qeou). Он перворожден в отношении к христианам, которые суть Его братия, и поэтому также сыны Божии (II:10). Как перворожденный, Он поэтому и будет введен некогда в свое полное наследие, и тогда Ангелы поклонятся Ему, как царю всей твари (ср. Флп 2:9: и д.). - "Да поклонятся Ему все Ангелы Божии..." - выражение заимствовано из Пс 96-го (7: ст.) и ближайшим образом относится Псалмопевцем к Иегове, Который прославляется в этом псалме как Царь и Судья всей вселенной. Относя приписываемое Иегове к Сыну Божию, апостол поступает согласно с указанием этого Сына Божия, открывшего нам, что "Отец не судит никого, но весь суд отдал Сыну" (Ин 5:22).
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:6: And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten - This is not a correct translation of the Greek, Ὁταν δε παλιν εισαγαγῃ τον πρωτοτοκον εις την οικουμενην· But when he bringeth again, or the second time, the first-born into the habitable world. This most manifestly refers to his resurrection, which might be properly considered a second incarnation; for as the human soul, as well as the fullness of the Godhead bodily, dwelt in the man, Christ Jesus on and during his incarnation, so when he expired upon the cross, both the Godhead and the human spirit left his dead body; and as on his resurrection these were reunited to his revivified manhood, therefore, with the strictest propriety, does the apostle say that the resurrection was a second bringing of him into the world.
I have translated οικουμενη the habitable world, and this is its proper meaning; and thus it is distinguished from κοσμος, which signifies the terraqueous globe, independently of its inhabitants; though it often expresses both the inhabited and uninhabited parts. Our Lord's first coming into the world is expressed by this latter word, Heb 10:5 : Wherefore when he cometh into the world, διο εισερχομενος εις τον κοσμον, and this simply refers to his being incarnated, that he might be capable of suffering and dying for man. But the word is changed on this second coming, I mean his resurrection, and then οικουμενη is used; and why? (fancy apart) because he was now to dwell with man; to send his gospel everywhere to all the inhabitants of the earth, and to accompany that Gospel wherever he sent it, and to be wherever two or three should be gathered together in his name. Wherever the messengers of Jesus Christ go, preaching the kingdom of God, even to the farthest and most desolate parts of the earth where human beings exist, there they ever find Christ; he is not only in them, and with them, but he is in and among all who believe on him through their word.
Let all the angels of God worship him - The apostle recurs here to his former assertion, that Jesus is higher than the angels, Heb 1:4, that he is none of those who can be called ordinary angels or messengers, but one of the most extraordinary kind, and the object of worship to all the angels of God. To worship any creature is idolatry, and God resents idolatry more than any other evil. Jesus Christ can be no creature, else the angels who worship him must be guilty of idolatry, and God the author of that idolatry, who commanded those angels to worship Christ.
There has been some difficulty in ascertaining the place from which the apostle quotes these words; some suppose Psa 97:7 : Worship him, all ye gods; which the Septuagint translate thus: Προσκυνησατε αυτῳ, παντες αγγελοι αυτου· Worship him, all ye his angels; but it is not clear that the Messiah is intended in this psalm, nor are the words precisely those used here by the apostle. Our marginal references send us with great propriety to the Septuagint version of Deu 32:43, where the passage is found verbatim et literatim; but there is nothing answering to the words in the present Hebrew text. The apostle undoubtedly quoted the Septuagint, which had then been for more than 300 years a version of the highest repute among the Jews; and it is very probable that the copy from which the Seventy translated had the corresponding words. However this may be, they are now sanctioned by Divine authority; and as the verse contains some singular additions, I will set it down in a parallel column with that of our own version, which was taken immediately from the Hebrew text, premising simply this, that it is the last verse of the famous prophetic song of Moses, which seems to point out the advent of the Messiah to discomfit his enemies, purify the land, and redeem Israel from all his iniquities.
Deu 32:43, from the Hebrew Deuteronomy 32:43, from the Septuagint - Rejoice, ye heaven, together with him; and let all the ... Rejoice, O ye nations, with angels of God worship him. Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people ... his people; and let the children of God be strengthened ... for he will avenge in him; for he will avenge the blood of his children; the blood of his servants; - and will render he will avenge, and will repay judgment to his adver- vengeance to his adversaries: - and ... saries; and those who hate him will he recompense: ... will be merciful to his land and to his people and the Lord will purge the land of his people
This is a very important verse; and to it, as it stands in the Septuagint, St. Paul has referred once before; see Rom 15:10. This very verse, as it stands now in the Septuagint, thus referred to by an inspired writer, shows the great importance of this ancient version; and proves the necessity of its being studied and well understood by every minister of Christ. In Romans 3 there is a large quotation - from Psa 14:1-7 :, where there are six whole verses in the apostle's quotation which are not found in the present Hebrew text, but are preserved in the Septuagint! How strange it is that this venerable and important version, so often quoted by our Lord and all his apostles, should be so generally neglected, and so little known! That the common people should be ignorant of it, is not to be wondered at, as it has never been put in an English dress; but that the ministers of the Gospel should be unacquainted with it may be spoken to their shame.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:6: And again - Margin, "When he bringeth in again." The proper construction of this sentence probably is, "But when, moreover, he brings in," etc. The word "again" refers not to the fact that the Son of God is brought "again" into the world, implying that he had been introduced before; but it refers to the course of the apostle's argument, or to the declaration which is made about the Messiah in another place. "The name Son is not only given to him as above, but also in another place, or on another occasion when he brings in the first-begotten into the world." "When he bringeth in." When he introduces. So far as the "language" here is concerned this might refer to the birth of the Messiah, but it is evident from the whole connection that the writer means to refer to something that is said in the Old Testament. This is plain because the passage occurs among quotations designed to prove a specific point - that the Son of God, the Author of the Christian system, was superior to the angels.
A declaration of the writer here, however true and solemn, would not have answered the purpose. A "proof-text" was missing; a text which would be admitted by those to whom he wrote to bear on the point under consideration. The meaning then is, "that on another occasion different from those to which he had referred, God, when speaking of the Messiah, or when introducing him to mankind, had used language showing that he was superior to the angels." The meaning of the phrase, "when he bringeth in," therefore, I take to be, when he introduces him to people; when he makes him known to the world - to wit, by the declaration which he proceeds immediately to quote. "The first-begotten." Christ is called the "first-begotten," with reference to his resurrection from the dead, in Rev 1:5, and Col 1:18. It is probable here, however, that the word is used, like the word "first-born," or "first-begotten" among the Hebrews, by way of eminence.
As the first-born was the principal heir, and had special privileges, so the Lord Jesus Christ sustains a similar rank in the universe of which God is the Head and Father; see notes on Joh 1:14, where the word "only-begotten" is used to denote the dignity and honor of the Lord Jesus. "Into the world." When he introduces him to mankind, or declares what he is to be. "He saith, And let all the angels of God worship him." Much difficulty has been experienced in regard to this quotation, for it cannot be denied that it is intended to be a quotation. In the Septuagint these very words occur in Deu 32:43, where they are inserted in the Song of Moses. But they are not in the Hebrew, nor are they in all the copies of the Septuagint. The Hebrew is, "Rejoice, O ye nations with his people; for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries." The Septuagint is, "Rejoice ye heavens with him; and let all the angels of God worship him. Let the nations rejoice with his people, and let all the sons of God be strong in him, for he has avenged the blood of his sons." But there are objections to our supposing that the apostle had this place in his view, which seem to me to settle the matter.
(1) one is, that the passage is not in the Hebrew; and it seems hardly credible that in writing to Hebrews, and to those residing in the very country where the Hebrew Scriptures were constantly used, he should adduce as a proof-text on an important doctrine what was not in their Scriptures.
(2) a second is, that it is omitted in all the ancient versions except the Septuagint.
(3) a third is, that it is impossible to believe that the passage in question in Deuteronomy had any reference to the Messiah. It does not relate to his "introduction" to the world. It would not occur to any reader that it had any such reference. The context celebrates the victory over the enemies of Israel which God will achieve. After saying that "his arrows would be drunk with blood, and that his sword would devour flesh with the blood of the slain and of captives, from the time when he began to take vengeance on an enemy," the Septuagint (not the Hebrew) immediately asserts, "let the heavens rejoice at the same time with him, and let all the angels of God worship him." That is, "Let the inhabitants of the heavenly world rejoice in the victory of God over the enemies of his people, and let them pay their adoration to him." But the Messiah does not appear to be alluded to anywhere in the context; much less described as "introduced into the world."
There is, moreover, not the slightest evidence that it was ever supposed by the Jews to have any such reference; and though it might be said that the apostle merely quoted "language" that expressed his meaning - as we often do when we are familiar with any well-known phrase that will exactly suit our purpose and convey an idea - yet it should be remarked that this is not the way in which this passage is quoted. It is a "proof-text," and Paul evidently meant to be understood as saying that that passage had a "fair" reference to the Messiah. It is evident, moreover, that it would be admitted to have such a reference by those to whom he wrote. It is morally certain, therefore, that this was not the passage which the writer intended to quote. The probability is, that the writer here referred to Psa 97:7, (in the Septuagint Psa 96:7). In that place, the Hebrew is, "worship him, all ye gods" כל אלהים kaal 'elohiym - "all ye 'elohiym."
In the Septuagint it is, "Let all his angels worship him;" where the translation is literal, except that the word "God" - "angels of God" - is used by the apostle instead of "his" - "all his angels" - as it is in the Septuagint. The word "gods" - אלהים 'elohiym - is rendered by the word "angels" - but the word may have that sense. Thus, it is rendered by the Septuagint; in Job 20:15; and in Psa 8:6; Psa 137:1. It is well known that the word אלהים 'elohiym may denote "kings" and "magistrates," because of their rank and dignity; and is there anything improbable in the supposition that, for a similar reason, the word may be given also to "angels"? The fair interpretation of the passage then would be, to refer it to "angelic beings" - and the command in Psa 97:1-12 is for them to do homage to the Being there referred to. The only question then is, whether the Psalm can be regarded properly as having any reference to the Messiah? Did the apostle fairly and properly use this language as referring to him? On this we may remark:
(1) That the fact that he uses it thus may be regarded as proof that it would be admitted to be proper by the Jews in his time, and renders it probable that it was in fact so used.
(2) two Jewish Rabbis of distinction - Rashi and Kimchi - affirm that all the Psalms Psa. 93-101 are to be regarded as referring to the Messiah. Such was, and is, the opinion of the Jews.
(3) there is nothing in the Psalm which forbids such a reference, or which can be shown to be inconsistent with it. Indeed the whole Psalm might be taken as beautifully descriptive of the "introduction" of the Son of God into the world, or as a sublime and glorious description of his advent. Thus, in Heb 1:1, the earth is called on to rejoice that the Lord reigns. In Heb 1:2-5, he is introduced or described as coming in the most magnificent manner - clouds and darkness attend him; a fire goes before him; the lightnings play; and the hills melt like wax - a sublime description of his coming, with appropriate symbols, to reign, or to judge the world. In Heb 1:6, it is said that all people shall see his glory; in Heb 1:7, that all who worship graven images shall be confounded, and "all the angels are required to do him homage;" and in Heb 1:8-12, the effect of his advent is described as filling Zion with rejoicing, and the hearts of the people of God with gladness. It cannot be proveD, therefore, that this Psalm had no reference to the Messiah; but the presumption is that it had, and that the apostle has quoted it not only as it was usually regarded in his time, but as it was designed by the Holy Ghost. If so, then it proves, what the writer intended, that the Son of God should be adored by the angels; and of course that he was superior to them. It proves also more. Whom would God require the angels to adore? A creature? A man? A fellow-angel? To ask these questions is to answer them. He could require them to worship none but God, and the passage proves that the Son of God is divine.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:6: And again: etc. or, When he bringeth again, the first- begotten, Heb 1:5; Pro 8:24, Pro 8:25; Joh 1:14, Joh 1:18, Joh 3:16; Rom 8:29; Col 1:15, Col 1:18; Jo1 4:9; Rev 1:5
And let: Deu 32:43 *Sept: Psa 97:7; Luk 2:9-14; Pe1 3:22; Rev 5:9-12
Geneva 1599
1:6 (7) And (l) again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
(7) He proves and confirms the dignity of Christ revealed in the flesh, by these six evident testimonies by which it appears that he far surpasses all angels, so much so that he is called both Son, and God in (Heb 1:5-8, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:13).
(l) The Lord was not content to have spoken it once, but he repeats it in another place.
John Gill
1:6 And again, when he bringeth the first begotten into the world;.... By "the first begotten" is meant Christ. This is a name given him in the Old Testament, and is what the Hebrews were acquainted with, and therefore the apostle uses it; it is in Ps 89:27 from whence it seems to be taken here, and which the ancient Jews (u) acknowledge is to be understood of the Messiah; who, as the Son of God, is the only begotten of the Father, and was begotten from eternity, as before declared, and before any creature had a being, and therefore called the firstborn of every creature, Col 1:15 and is sometimes styled the first begotten from the dead; he rose the first in time, and is the first in causality and dignity: and he may be called the firstborn, with respect to the saints, who are of the same nature with him, and are partakers of the divine nature, and are adopted into the family of God, though they are not in the same class of sonship with him; and the bringing of him into the world may refer to his second coming, for this seems agreeable from the natural order of the words, which may be rendered, "when he shall bring again", &c. that is, a second time, and from Ps 97:1 from whence the following words are cited; and from the glory he shall then have from the angels, who will come with him, and minister to him; and not to his resurrection from the dead, when he was exalted above angels, principalities, and powers; though, as we read the words, they seem to regard his first coming in to this habitable world, at his incarnation and birth, when he was attended with angels, and worshipped by them, according to the order of God the Father, as follows:
he saith, and let all the angels of God worship him; these words are cited from Ps 97:7 where the angels are called Elohim, gods. So Aben Ezra on the place observes, that there are some (meaning their doctors) who say, that "all the gods are the angels"; and Kimchi says, that the words are not imperative, but are in the past tense, instead of the future,
all the angels have worshipped him; that is, they shall worship him; as they have done, so they will do. According to our version, they are called upon to worship God's firstborn, his only begotten Son, with a religious worship and adoration, even all of them, not one excepted; which shows, that Christ, as the first begotten, is the Lord God, for he only is to be served and worshipped; and that if angels are to worship him, men ought; and that angels are not to be worshipped, and that Christ is preferable to them; and the whole sets forth the excellency and dignity of his person. Philo the Jew (w) often calls the Logos, or Word of God, his first begotten.
(u) Shemot Rabba, sect. 19. fol. 104. 4. (w) De Agricultura, p. 195. De Confus. Ling. p. 329, 341. Somniis, p. 597.
John Wesley
1:6 And again - That is, in another scripture. He - God. Saith, when he bringeth in his first - begotten - This appellation includes that of Son, together with the rights of primogeniture, which the first - begotten Son of God enjoys, in a manner not communicable to any creature. Into the world - Namely, at his incarnation. He saith, Let all the angels of God worship him - So much higher was he, when in his lowest estate, than the highest angel. Ps 97:7.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:6 And--Greek, "But." Not only this proves His superiority, BUT a more decisive proof is Ps 97:7, which shows that not only at His resurrection, but also in prospect of His being brought into the world (compare Heb 9:11; Heb 10:5) as man, in His incarnation, nativity (Lk 2:9-14), temptation (Mt 4:10-11), resurrection (Mt 28:2), and future second advent in glory, angels were designed by God to be subject to Him. Compare Ti1 3:16, "seen of angels"; God manifesting Messiah as one to be gazed at with adoring love by heavenly intelligences (Eph 3:10; Th2 1:9-10; 1Pet 3:22). The fullest realization of His Lordship shall be at His second coming (Ps 97:7; 1Cor 15:24-25; Phil 2:9). "Worship Him all ye gods" ("gods," that is, exalted beings, as angels), refers to God; but it was universally admitted among the Hebrews that God would dwell, in a peculiar sense, in Messiah (so as to be in the Talmud phrase, "capable of being pointed to with the finger"); and so what was said of God was true of, and to be fulfilled in, Messiah. KIMCHI says that the ninety-third through the hundred first Psalms contain in them the mystery of Messiah. God ruled the theocracy in and through Him.
the world--subject to Christ (Heb 2:5). As "the first-begotten" He has the rights of primogeniture (Rom 8:29); Col 1:15-16, Col 1:18). In Deut 32:43, the Septuagint has, "Let all the angels of God worship Him," words not now found in the Hebrew. This passage of the Septuagint may have been in Paul's mind as to the form, but the substance is taken from Ps 97:7. The type David, in the Ps 89:27 (quoted in Heb 1:5), is called "God's first-born, higher than the kings of the earth"; so the antitypical first-begotten, the son of David, is to be worshipped by all inferior lords, such as angels ("gods," Ps 97:7); for He is "King of kings and Lord of lords" (Rev_ 19:16). In the Greek, "again" is transposed; but this does not oblige us, as ALFORD thinks, to translate, "when He again shall have introduced," &c., namely, at Christ's second coming; for there is no previous mention of a first bringing in; and "again" is often used in quotations, not to be joined with the verb, but parenthetically ("that I may again quote Scripture"). English Version is correct (compare Mt 5:33; Greek, Jn 12:39).
1:71:7: Այլ առ հրեշտակսն ասէ. Ո՛ արար զհրեշտակս իւր հոգիս, եւ զպաշտօնեայս իւր բոց հրոյ[4661]։ [4661] Ոմանք. Իւր ՚ի հոգիս... իւր ՚ի բոց հրոյ։
7 Իսկ հրեշտակների մասին էլ ասում է. «Նա իր հրեշտակներին հոգիներ դարձրեց եւ իր ծառաներին՝ կրակի բոց»:
7 Եւ հրեշտակներուն համար կ’ըսէ. «Որ իր հրեշտակները հոգիներ կ’ընէ ու իր պաշտօնեաները՝ կրակի բոց»։
Այլ [3]առ հրեշտակսն`` ասէ. Ո արար զհրեշտակս իւր հոգիս, եւ զպաշտօնեայս իւր` բոց հրոյ:

1:7: Այլ առ հրեշտակսն ասէ. Ո՛ արար զհրեշտակս իւր հոգիս, եւ զպաշտօնեայս իւր բոց հրոյ[4661]։
[4661] Ոմանք. Իւր ՚ի հոգիս... իւր ՚ի բոց հրոյ։
7 Իսկ հրեշտակների մասին էլ ասում է. «Նա իր հրեշտակներին հոգիներ դարձրեց եւ իր ծառաներին՝ կրակի բոց»:
7 Եւ հրեշտակներուն համար կ’ըսէ. «Որ իր հրեշտակները հոգիներ կ’ընէ ու իր պաշտօնեաները՝ կրակի բոց»։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:77: Об Ангелах сказано: Ты творишь Ангелами Своими духов и служителями Своими пламенеющий огонь.
1:7  καὶ πρὸς μὲν τοὺς ἀγγέλους λέγει, ὁ ποιῶν τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ πνεύματα, καὶ τοὺς λειτουργοὺς αὐτοῦ πυρὸς φλόγα·
1:7. καὶ (And) πρὸς (toward) μὲν (indeed) τοὺς (to-the-ones) ἀγγέλους (to-messengers) λέγει (it-fortheth," Ὁ ( The-one ) ποιῶν ( doing-unto ) τοὺς ( to-the-ones ) ἀγγέλους ( to-messengers ) αὐτοῦ ( of-it ) πνεύματα , ( to-currentings-to ," καὶ ( and ) τοὺς ( to-the-ones ) λειτουργοὺς ( to-public-workers ) αὐτοῦ ( of-it ) πυρὸς ( of-a-fire ) φλόγα : ( to-a-blaze )
1:7. et ad angelos quidem dicit qui facit angelos suos spiritus et ministros suos flammam ignisAnd to the angels indeed he saith: He that maketh his angels spirits and his ministers a flame of fire.
7. And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels winds, And his ministers a flame of fire:
1:7. And about the Angels, certainly, he says: “He makes his Angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.”
1:7. And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire:

7: Об Ангелах сказано: Ты творишь Ангелами Своими духов и служителями Своими пламенеющий огонь.
1:7  καὶ πρὸς μὲν τοὺς ἀγγέλους λέγει, ὁ ποιῶν τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ πνεύματα, καὶ τοὺς λειτουργοὺς αὐτοῦ πυρὸς φλόγα·
1:7. et ad angelos quidem dicit qui facit angelos suos spiritus et ministros suos flammam ignis
And to the angels indeed he saith: He that maketh his angels spirits and his ministers a flame of fire.
1:7. And about the Angels, certainly, he says: “He makes his Angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.”
1:7. And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
7: Изречению Св. Писания об Ангелах апостол противопоставляет несколько текстов, в которых говорится о Сыне, превосходящим Ангелов. - "Об Ангелах сказано...", греч. kai proV men tou aggellouV legei..., точнее слав.: "ко Ангелом убо глаголет..." - ко Ангелом - (proV - в отношении, об) что касается Ангелов, или относительно Ангелов - говорит, т.е. Писание, или автор Писания... Сказанное об Ангелах заимствовано из 103: Пс. 4: ст., причем еврейский текст здесь выражается собственно так: "ветры Он делает Своими вестниками (Ангелами) и пламень огненный Своими служителями". Перевод LXX дает некоторое видоизменение этому выражению, изменяя подлежащие в сказуемые и наоборот o poiwn touV aggellouV autou pneumata kai touV leitourgouV autou puroV floga... - "творящий Ангелов своих духами (ветрами) и слуг своих огнем парящим..." Смысл получается такой, что Ангелы настолько подчиненные Богу и служебные существа, что, исполняя волю Божию, нисходят даже в материю и служат как элементы природы - ветер и огонь (ср. Ин 5:4). Это дает возможность лучше оттенить превосходство над Ангелами Сына, относительно Которого (proV de ton Uion) то же Писание говорит (Пс XLIV:7-8): "престол Твой, Боже, в век века..." и т д. 8-9: ст.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:7: Who maketh his angels spirits - They are so far from being superior to Christ, that they are not called God's sons in any peculiar sense, but his servants, as tempests and lightnings are. In many respects they may have been made inferior even to man as he came out of the hands of his Maker, for he was made in the image and likeness of God; but of the angels, even the highest order of them, this is never spoken. It is very likely that the apostle refers here to the opinions of the Jews relative to the angels. In Pirkey R. Elieser, c. 4, it is said: "The angels which were created the second day, when they minister before God, נעשין של אש become fire." In Shemoth Rabba, s. 25, fol. 123, it is said: "God is named the Lord of hosts, because with his angels he doth whatsoever he wills: when he pleases, he makes them sit down; Jdg 6:11 : And the angel of the Lord came, and sat under a tree. When he pleases, he causes them to stand; Isa 6:2 : The seraphim stood. Sometimes he makes them like women; Zac 5:9 : Behold there came two women, and the wind was in their wings. Sometimes he makes them like men; Gen 18:2 : And, lo, three men stood by him. Sometimes he makes them spirits; Psa 104:4 : Who maketh his angels spirits. Sometimes he makes them fire; ibid. His ministers a flame of fire."
In Yalcut Simeoni, par. 2, fol. 11, it is said: "The angel answered Manoah, I know not in whose image I am made, for God changeth us every hour: sometimes he makes us fire, sometimes spirit, sometimes men, and at other times angels." It is very probable that those who are termed angels are not confined to any specific form or shape, but assume various forms and appearances according to the nature of the work on which they are employed and the will of their sovereign employer. This seems to have been the ancient Jewish doctrine on this subject.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:7: And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits - He gives to them an inferior name, and assigns to them a more humble office. They are mere ministers, and have not ascribed to them the name of "Son." They have a name which implies a more humble rank and office - the name "spirit," and the appellation of a "flame of fire." They obey his will as the winds and the lightnings do. The "object" of the apostle in this passage is to show that the angels serve God in a ministerial capacity - as the winds do; while the Son is Lord of all. The one serves him passively, as being wholly under his control; the other acts as a Sovereign, as Lord over all, and is addressed and regarded as the equal with God. This quotation is made from Psa 104:4. The passage "might" be translated, "Who maketh his angels winds, and his ministers a flame of fire;" that is, "who makes his angels like the winds, or as swift as the winds, and his ministers as rapid, as terrible, and as resistless as the lightning."
So Doddridge renders it; and so did the late Dr. John P. Wilson (manuscript notes). The passage in the Psalm is susceptible, I think, of another interpretation, and might be regarded as meaning, "who makes the winds his messengers, and the flaming fire his ministers;" and perhaps this is the sense which would most naturally occur to a reader of the Hebrew. The Hebrew, however, will admit of the construction here put upon it, and it cannot be proved that it was the original intention of the passage to show that the angels were the mere servants of God, rapid, quick, and prompt to do his will - like the winds. The Chaldee Paraphrase renders this passage in the Psalm, "Who makes his messengers swift as the wind; his ministers strong like a flame of fire." Prof. Stuart maintains that the passage in the Psalms cannot mean "who makes the winds his messengers," but that the intention of the Psalmist is to describe the "invisible" as well as the "visible" majesty of God, and that he refers to the angels as a part of the retinue which goes to make up His glory.
This does not seem to me to be perfectly certain; but still it cannot be demonstrated that Paul has made an improper use of the passage. It is to be presumed that he, who had been trained in the knowledge of the Hebrew language, would have had a better opportunity of knowing its fair construction than we can; and it is morally certain that he would employ the passage "in an argument" as it was commonly understood by those to whom he wrote - that is, to those who were familiar with the Hebrew language and literature. If he has so used the passage; if he has - as no one can disprove - put the fair construction on it, then it is just in point. It proves that the angels are the "attendant servants" of God; employed to grace his train, to do his will, to accompany him as the clouds and winds and lightnings do, and to occupy a subordinate rank in his creation. "Flame of fire." This probably refers to lightning - which is often the meaning of the phrase. The word "ministers" here, means the same as angels, and the sense of the whole is, that the attending retinue of God, when he manifests himself with great power and glory, is like the winds and the lightning. His angels are like them. They are prompt to do his will - rapid, quick, obedient in his service; they are in all respects subordinate to him, and occupy, as the winds and the lightnings do, the place of servants. They are not addressed in language like what is applied to the Son of God, and they must all be far inferior to him.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:7: of: Gr. unto
Who: Heb 1:14; Kg2 2:11, Kg2 6:17; Psa 104:4; Isa 6:2 *Heb: Eze 1:13, Eze 1:14; Dan 7:10; Zac 6:5
Geneva 1599
1:7 (8) And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels (m) spirits, and his ministers a (n) flame of fire.
(8) He proves and confirms the dignity of Christ revealed in the flesh, by these six evident testimonies by which it appears that he far surpasses all angels, so much so that he is called both Son, and God in (Heb 1:5-8, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:13).
(m) Cherub, (Ps 18:11).
(n) Seraph, (Is 6:2).
John Gill
1:7 Or "to the angels", as in the following verse, "to the Son", which stands opposed to this; and the words said to them, or of them, are found in Ps 104:4
who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire: this cannot be understood of the wind and lightning, and of God's making these his messengers and ministers to do his will; for such a sense is not suitable to the scope of the psalm, from whence they are taken, nor to the order of the words in which they stand; for it is not said he makes spirits, or winds, his angels, and flaming fire his ministers, but the reverse; and is contrary to the design of the apostle in citing them, which is to show the superiority of Christ to angels, of whom it is said, that they are made spirits: they are "spirits", created ones, and so differ from God the Creator: they are incorporeal ones, and so differ from men; they are immaterial, and so die not; they are spiritual substances subsisting in themselves: and they are "made" such by God the Father, and by the Son the Lord Jesus Christ, within the six days of the creation, and all at once; for it is not to be supposed that the Lord is daily making them; and this proves the Son to be God, as well as more excellent than the angels; unless this is to be understood of the daily disposal of them in providence, in causing winds, thunder, lightning, and the like. Some choose to supply the word with "as", and read, who maketh his angels as winds; for invisibility, velocity, power, and penetration: "and his ministers as a flame of fire"; and these are the same with the angels, for they are ministers to God; they attend his presence; are ready to perform any service for him; they sing his praise, and are his chariots in which he rides: and they are ministers to Christ; they attended at his incarnation: were solicitous for his preservation, ministered to him in distress, assisted at his resurrection, and accompanied him in his ascension, and will be with him at his second coming: and they are as a flame of fire, so called from their great power, force, and swiftness; and from their burning love, and flaming zeal, hence named seraphim; and because they are sometimes the executioners of God's wrath, and will descend in flaming fire, when Christ shall be revealed from heaven: angels sometimes appear in fiery forms; the chariots and horses of fire, by which Elijah was carried up to heaven, were no other than angels, in such forms: so the Jews (x) say of the angels,
"all the angels, their horses are horses of fire, and their chariots fire, and their bows fire, and their spears fire, and all their instruments of war fire.''
And they have a notion, that an angel is half water, and half fire (y).
(x) Sepher Jetzirah, p. 16. Ed. Rittangel. (y) T. Hieros. Roshhashana, fol. 58. 1.
John Wesley
1:7 Who maketh his angels - This implies, they are only creatures, whereas the Son is eternal, Heb 1:8; and the Creator himself, Heb 1:10. Spirits and a flame of fire - Which intimates not only their office, but also their nature; which is excellent indeed, the metaphor being taken from the most swift, subtle, and efficacious things on earth; but nevertheless infinitely below the majesty of the Son. Ps 104:4.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:7 of--The Greek is rather, "In reference TO the angels."
spirits--or "winds": Who employeth His angels as the winds, His ministers as the lightnings; or, He maketh His angelic ministers the directing powers of winds and flames, when these latter are required to perform His will. "Commissions them to assume the agency or form of flames for His purposes" [ALFORD]. English Version, "maketh His angels spirits," means, He maketh them of a subtle, incorporeal nature, swift as the wind. So Ps 18:10, "a cherub . . . the wings of the wind." Heb 1:14, "ministering spirits," favors English Version here. As "spirits" implies the wind-like velocity and subtle nature of the cherubim, so "flame of fire" expresses the burning devotion and intense all-consuming zeal of the adoring seraphim (meaning "burning), Is 6:1. The translation, "maketh winds His messengers, and a flame of fire His ministers (!)," is plainly wrong. In the Ps 104:3-4, the subject in each clause comes first, and the attribute predicated of it second; so the Greek article here marks "angels" and "ministers" as the subjects, and "winds" and "flame of fire," predicates, Schemoth Rabba says, "God is called God of Zebaoth (the heavenly hosts), because He does what He pleases with His angels. When He pleases, He makes them to sit (Judg 6:11); at other times to stand (Is 6:2); at times to resemble women (Zech 5:9); at other times to resemble men (Gen 18:2); at times He makes them 'spirits'; at times, fire." "Maketh" implies that, however exalted, they are but creatures, whereas the Son is the Creator (Heb 1:10): not begotten from everlasting, nor to be worshipped, as the Son (Rev_ 14:7; Rev_ 22:8-9).
1:81:8: Իսկ ցՈրդին ասէ. Աթո՛ռ քո Աստուած յաւիտեա՛նս յաւիտենից. գաւազան ուղղութեան գաւազան արքայութեան քոյ[4662]։ [4662] Ոմանք. Գաւազան զօրութեան, գաւազան արքայ՛՛։
8 Իսկ Որդու մասին ասում է. «Աստուա՛ծ, քո աթոռը յաւիտեանս յաւիտենից է. քո արքայութեան գաւազանը՝ ուղղութեան գաւազան:
8 Սակայն Որդիին համար կ’ըսէ. «Քու աթոռդ, ո՛վ Աստուած, յաւիտեանս յաւիտենից է. քու թագաւորութեանդ գաւազանը ուղղութեան գաւազան է.
Իսկ ցՈրդին [4]ասէ. Աթոռ քո, Աստուած, յաւիտեանս յաւիտենից. գաւազան ուղղութեան` գաւազան արքայութեան քո:

1:8: Իսկ ցՈրդին ասէ. Աթո՛ռ քո Աստուած յաւիտեա՛նս յաւիտենից. գաւազան ուղղութեան գաւազան արքայութեան քոյ[4662]։
[4662] Ոմանք. Գաւազան զօրութեան, գաւազան արքայ՛՛։
8 Իսկ Որդու մասին ասում է. «Աստուա՛ծ, քո աթոռը յաւիտեանս յաւիտենից է. քո արքայութեան գաւազանը՝ ուղղութեան գաւազան:
8 Սակայն Որդիին համար կ’ըսէ. «Քու աթոռդ, ո՛վ Աստուած, յաւիտեանս յաւիտենից է. քու թագաւորութեանդ գաւազանը ուղղութեան գաւազան է.
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:88: А о Сыне: престол Твой, Боже, в век века; жезл царствия Твоего--жезл правоты.
1:8  πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν, ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος, καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος τῆς εὐθύτητος ῥάβδος τῆς βασιλείας σου.
1:8. πρὸς (toward) δὲ (moreover) τὸν (to-the-one) υἱόν (to-a-Son," Ὁ ( The-one ) θρόνος ( a-throne ) σου ( of-thee ) ὁ ( the-one ) θεὸς ( a-Deity ) εἰς ( into ) τὸν ( to-the-one ) αἰῶνα ( to-an-age ) [ τοῦ "[ of-the-one ) αἰῶνος ], ( of-an-age ]," καὶ ( and ) ἡ ( the-one ) ῥάβδος ( a-rod ) τῆς ( of-the-one ) εὐθύτητος ( of-a-straightness ) ῥάβδος ( a-rod ) τῆς ( of-the-one ) βασιλείας ( of-a-ruling-of ) αὐτοῦ. (of-it,"
1:8. ad Filium autem thronus tuus Deus in saeculum saeculi et virga aequitatis virga regni tuiBut to the Son: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of justice is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
8. but of the Son , Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
1:8. But about the Son: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of equity.
1:8. But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.
But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom:

8: А о Сыне: престол Твой, Боже, в век века; жезл царствия Твоего--жезл правоты.
1:8  πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν, ὁ θρόνος σου, ὁ θεός, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος, καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος τῆς εὐθύτητος ῥάβδος τῆς βασιλείας σου.
1:8. ad Filium autem thronus tuus Deus in saeculum saeculi et virga aequitatis virga regni tui
But to the Son: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of justice is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
1:8. But about the Son: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of equity.
1:8. But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
8-9: Сила доказательства превосходности Сына над Ангелами состоит в том, что в то время как Ангелы в Св. Писании называются служебными, элементами природы, Сын называется (два раза) Богом и вечным Царем. Сила Царства Сына Божия в том, что оно есть царство правды, которая одна пребывает во век века. Любовь к этой правде и ненависть к неправде - по ветхозаветному пониманию - наиболее существенные свойства и условия достоинства истинного царя. В Сыне Божием эти свойства и условия возвысились до такого исключительного совершенства, что послужили причиною помазания Его елеем радости более всех соучастников Его, иначе говоря - Он стал Помазанником Божиим в гораздо более совершенном смысле слова, чем обычные помазанники - цари, принимающие свое помазание на царство от Того же Царя Царей ("Мною царие царствуют..."), и чем все остальные соучастники Его Царственней славы и победы - верующие в Него "чада царствия". - "Помазание елеем радости" - в применении к Сыну Божию есть соединение человеческой природы Его с божеством, как говорил о сем Св. Иоанн Дамаскин: "Сам Христос помазал Себя Самого, помазуя как Бог, помазуясь как человек; помазание же человечества есть Божество". - "Более соучастников Твоих...", т.е. более, преимущественно, чем все прочие люди, хотя и Его братья (II:11). И эти последние благодатно воспринимают в себя Божество, но не как Христос, в Котором Божество и человечество соединены ипостасно.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:8: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever - If this be said of the Son of God, i.e. Jesus Christ, then Jesus Christ must be God; and indeed the design of the apostle is to prove this. The words here quoted are taken from Psa 45:6, Psa 45:7, which the ancient Chaldee paraphrast, and the most intelligent rabbins, refer to the Messiah. On the third verse of this Psalm, Thou art fairer than the children of men, the Targum says: "Thy beauty, מלכא משיחא malca Meshicha, O King Messiah, is greater than the children of men." Aben Ezra says: "This Psalm speaks of David, or rather of his son, the Messiah, for this is his name," Eze 34:24 : And David my servant shall be a Prince over them for ever. Other rabbins confirm this opinion.
This verse is very properly considered a proof, and indeed a strong one, of the Divinity of Christ; but some late versions of the New Testament have endeavored to avoid the evidence of this proof by translating the words thus: God is thy throne for ever and ever; and if this version be correct, it is certain the text can be no proof of the doctrine. Mr. Wakefield vindicates this translation at large in his History of Opinions; and ὁ Θεος, being the nominative case, is supposed to be a sufficient justification of this version. In answer to this it may be stated that the nominative case is often used for the vocative, particularly by the Attics; and the whole scope of the place requires it should be so used here; and, with due deference to all of a contrary opinion, the original Hebrew cannot be consistently translated any other way, כסאך אלהים עולם ועד kisaca Elohim olam vaed, Thy throne, O God, is for ever, and to eternity. It is in both worlds; and extends over all time; and will exist through all endless duration. To this our Lord seems to refer, Mat 28:18 : All power is given unto me, both in Heaven and Earth. My throne, i.e. my dominion, extends from the creation to the consummation of all things. These I have made, and these I uphold; and from the end of the world, throughout eternity, I shall have the same glory - sovereign, unlimited power and authority, which I had with the Father before the world began; Joh 17:5. I may add that none of the ancient versions has understood it in the way contended for by those who deny the Godhead of Christ, either in the Psalm from which it is taken, or in this place where it is quoted. Aquila translates אלהים Elohim, by Θεε, O God, in the vocative case; and the Arabic adds the sign of the vocative ya, reading the place thus: korsee yallaho ila abadilabada, the same as in our version. And even allowing that ὁ Θεος here is to be used as the nominative case, it will not make the sense contended for, without adding εστι to it, a reading which is not countenanced by any version, nor by any MS. yet discovered. Wiclif, Coverdale, and others, understood it as the nominative, and translated it so; and yet it is evident that this nominative has the power of the vocative: forsothe to the sone God thi troone into the world of world: a gerde of equite the gerde of thi reume. I give this, pointing and all, as it stands in my old MS. Bible. Wiclif is nearly the same, but is evidently of a more modern cast: but to the sone he seith, God thy trone is into the world of world, a gherd of equyte is the gherd of thi rewme. Coverdale translates it thus: But unto the sonne he sayeth, God, thi seate endureth for ever and ever: the cepter of thi kyngdome is a right cepter. Tindal and others follow in the same way, all reading it in the nominative case, with the force of the vocative; for none of them has inserted the word εστι, is, because not authorized by the original: a word which the opposers of the Divinity of our Lord are obliged to beg, in order to support their interpretation. See some farther criticisms on this at the end of this chapter.
A scepter of righteousness - The scepter, which was a sort of staff or instrument of various forms, was the ensign of government, and is here used for government itself. This the ancient Jewish writers understand also of the Messiah.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:8: But unto the Son he saith - In Psa 45:6-7. The fact that the writer of this Epistle makes this application of the Psalm to the Messiah, proves that it was so applied in his time, or that it would be readily admitted to be applicable to him. It has been generally admitted, by both Jewish and Christian interpreters, to have such a reference. Even those who have doubted its primary applicability to the Messiah, have regarded it as referring to him in a secondary sense. Many have supposed that it referred to Solomon in the primary sense, and that it has a secondary reference to the Messiah. To me it seems most probable that it had an original and exclusive reference to the Messiah. It is to be remembered that the hope of the Messiah was the special hope of the Jewish people. The coming of the future king, so early promised, was the great event to which they all looked forward with the deepest interest.
That hope inspired their prophets and their bards, and cheered the hearts of the nation in the time of despondency. The Messiah, if I may so express it, was the "hero" of the Old Testament - more so than Achilles is of the Iliad, and Aeneas of the Aenead. The sacred poets were accustomed to employ all their most magnificent imagery in describing him, and to present him in every form that was beautiful in their conception, and that would be gratifying to the pride and hopes of the nation. Everything that is gorgeous and splendid in description is lavished on him, and they were never under any apprehension of attributing to him too great magnificence in his personal reign; too great beauty of moral character; or too great an extent of dominion. That which would be regarded by them as a magnificent description of a monarch, they freely applied to him; and this is evidently the case in this Psalm. That the description may have been in part derived from the view of Solomon in the magnificence of his court, is possible, but no more probable than that it was derived from the general view of the splendor of any Oriental monarch, or than that it might have been the description of a monarch which was the pure creation of inspired poetry.
Indeed, I do see not why this Psalm should ever have been supposed to be applicable to Solomon. His "name" is not mentioned. It has no special applicability to him. There is nothing that would apply to him which would not also apply to many an Oriental prince. There are some things in it which are much less applicable to him than to many others. The king here described is a conqueror. He girds his sword on his thigh, and his arrows are sharp in the hearts of his foes, and the people are subdued under him. This was not true of Solomon. His was a reign of peace and tranquillity, nor was he ever distinguished for war. On the whole, it seems clear to me, that this Psalm is designed to be a beautiful poetic description of the Messiah as king. The images are drawn from the usual characteristics of an Oriental prince, and there are many things in the poem - as there are in parables - for the sake of keeping, or verisimilitude, and which are not, in the interpretation, to be cut to the quick.
The writer imagined to himself a magnificent and beautiful prince; a prince riding prosperously in his conquests; swaying a permanent and wide dominion; clothed in rich and splendid vestments; eminently upright and pure; and scattering blessings everywhere - and that prince was the Messiah. The Psalm, therefore, I regard as relating originally and exclusively to Christ; and though in the interpretation, the circumstances should not be unduly pressed, nor an attempt be made to spiritualize them, yet the whole is a glowing and most beautiful description of Christ as a King. The same principles of interpretation should be applied to it which are applied to parables, and the same allowance be made for the introduction of circumstances for the sake of keeping, or for finishing the story. If this be the correct view, then Paul has quoted the Psalm in conformity exactly with its original intention, as he undoubtedly quoted it as it was understood in his time.
"Thy throne." A throne is the seat on which a monarch sits, and is here the symbol of dominion, because kings when acting as rulers sit on thrones. Thus, a throne becomes the emblem of authority or empire. Here it means, that his "rule" or "dominion" would be perpetual - "foRev_er and ever" - which assuredly could not be applied to Solomon. "O God." This certainly could not be applied to Solomon; but applied to the Messiah it proves what the apostle is aiming to prove - that he is above the angels. The argument is, that a name is given to "him" which is never given to "them." They are not called "God" in any strict and proper sense. The "argument" here requires us to understand this word, as used in a sense more exalted than any name which is ever given to angels, and though it may be maintained that the name אלהים 'elohiym, is given to magistrates or to angels, yet here the argument requires us to understand it as used in a sense superior to what it ever is when applied to an angel - or of course to any creature, since it was the express design of the argument to prove that the Messiah was superior to the angels.
The word "God" should be taken in its natural and obvious sense, unless there is some necessary reason for limiting it. If applied to magistrates Psa 82:6, it must be so limited. If applied to the Messiah, there is no such necessity, Joh 1:1; Isa 9:6; Jo1 5:20; Phi 2:6, and it should be taken in its natural and proper sense. The "form" here - ὁ Θεὸς ho Theos - is in the vocative case and not the nominative. It is the usual form of the vocative in the Septuagint, and nearly the only form of it - Stuart. This then is a direct address to the Messiah, calling him God; and I see not why it is not to be used in the usual and proper sense of the word. Unitarians proposed to translate this, "God is thy throne;" but how can God be "a throne" of a creature? What is the meaning of such an expression? Where is there one parallel? And what must be the nature of that cause which renders such an argument necessary? - This refers, as it seems to me, to the Messiah "as king."
It does not relate to his mode of existence before the incarnation, but to him as the magnificent monarch of his people. Still, the ground or reason why this name is given to him is that he is "divine." It is language which properly expresses his nature. He must have a divine nature, or such language would be improper. I regard this passage, therefore, as full proof that the Lord Jesus is divine; nor is it possible to evade this conclusion by any fair interpretation of it. It cannot be wrong to address him as God; nor addressing him as such, not to regard him as divine. "Is foRev_er and ever." This could not in any proper sense apply to Solomon. As applied to the Messiah, it means that his essential kingdom will be perpetual, Luk 1:33. As Mediator his kingdom will be given up to the Father, or to God without reference to a mediatorial work, (Co1 15:24, Co1 15:28 - see notes on these verses), but his reign over his people will be perpetual.
There never will come a time when they shall not obey and serve him, though the special form of his kingdom, as connected with the work of mediation, will be changed. The form of the organized church, for example, will be changed, for there shall be no necessity for it in heaven, but the essential dominion and power of the Son of God will not cease. He shall have the same dominion which he had before he entered on the work of mediation; and that will be eternal. It is also true that, compared with earthly monarchs, his kingdom shall be perpetual. They soon die. Dynasties pass away. But his empire extends from age to age, and is properly a perpetual dominion. The fair and obvious interpretation of this passage would satisfy me, were there nothing else, that this Psalm had no reference to Solomon, but was designed originally as a description of the Messiah as the expected King and Prince of his people. "A scepter of righteousness."
That is, a right or just scepter. The phrase is a Hebraism. The former expression described the perpetuity of his kingdom; this describes its "equable nature." It would be just and equal; see notes on Isa 11:5. A "scepter" is a staff or wand usually made of wood, five or six feet long, and commonly overlaid with gold, or ornamented with golden rings. Sometimes, however, the scepter was made of ivory, or wholly of gold. It was borne in the hands of kings as an emblem of authority and power. Probably it had its origin in the staff or crook of the shepherd - as kings were at first regarded as the "shepherds" of their people. Thus, Agamemnon is commonly called by Homer the "shepherd" of the people. The "scepter" thus becomes the emblem of kingly office and power - as when we speak of "swaying a scepter;" - and the idea here is, that the Messiah would be a "king," and that the authority which he would wield would be equitable and just. He would not be governed, as monarchs often are, by mere caprice, or by the wishes of courtiers and flatterers; he would not be controlled by mere "will" and the love of arbitrary lower; but the execution of his laws would be in accordance with the principles of equity and justice. - How well this accords with the character of the Lord Jesus we need not pause to show; compare notes on Isa 11:2-5.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:8: Thy throne: Psa 45:6, Psa 45:7
O God: Heb 3:3, Heb 3:4; Isa 7:14, Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7, Isa 45:21, Isa 45:22, Isa 45:25; Jer 23:6; Hos 1:7; Zac 13:9; Mal 3:1; Mat 1:23; Luk 1:16, Luk 1:17; Joh 10:30, Joh 10:33, Joh 20:28; Rom 9:5; Ti1 3:16; Tit 2:13, Tit 2:14; Jo1 5:20
for: Psa 145:13; Isa 9:7; Deu 2:37, Deu 7:14; Co1 15:25; Pe2 1:11
a sceptre: Sa2 23:3; Psa 72:1-4, Psa 72:7, Psa 72:11-14, Psa 99:4; Isa 9:7, Isa 32:1, Isa 32:2; Jer 23:5, Jer 38:15; Zac 9:9
righteousness: Gr. rightness, or, straightness
Geneva 1599
1:8 But unto the Son [he saith], Thy (o) throne, O God, [is] for ever (p) and ever: a (q) sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.
(o) The throne is proper for princes and not for servants.
(p) For everlasting, for this repeating of the word increases the significance of it beyond all measure.
(q) The government of your kingdom is righteous.
John Gill
1:8 But unto the Son, he saith,.... What he does not to angels, and which sets him infinitely above them; which shows him to be a Prince and King, and not a servant, or minister; and which even ascribes deity to him:
thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: this, with what follows in this verse, and the next, is taken out of Ps 45:6 which psalm is not spoken of Solomon, to whom many things in it will not agree; he was not fairer than other men; nor was he a warrior; nor was his throne for ever and ever; and much less a divine person, and the object of worship; but the Messiah, and so the ancient Jews understand it: the Targum applies it to him, and mentions him by name in Heb 1:2 and some of their modern writers (z) affirm it is said of the Messiah; though Aben Ezra seems doubtful about it, saying, it is spoken concerning David, or Messiah his Son, whose name is so, Ezek 37:25. Deity is here ascribed to the Son of God; he is expressly called God; for the words will not bear to be rendered, "thy throne is the throne of God, or thy throne is God"; or be supplied thus, "God shall establish thy throne": nor are the words an apostrophe to the father, but are spoken to the king, the subject of the psalm, who is distinguished from God the Father, being blessed and anointed by him; and this is put out of all doubt by the apostle, who says they are addressed "to the Son", who is not a created God, nor God by office, but by nature; for though the word "Elohim" is sometimes used of those who are not gods by nature; yet being here used absolutely, and the attributes of eternity, and most perfect righteousness, being ascribed to the person so called, prove him to be the true God; and this is the reason why his throne is everlasting, and his sceptre righteous, and why he should be worshipped, served, and obeyed. Dominion and duration of it are given to him; his throne denotes his kingly power, and government; which is general, over angels, good and bad; over men, righteous and wicked, even the greatest among them, the kings and princes of the earth: and special, over his church and people; and which is administered by his Spirit and grace in the hearts of his saints; and by his word and ordinances in his churches; and by his powerful protection of them from their enemies; and will be in a glorious manner in the latter day, and in heaven to all eternity; for his throne is for ever, and on it he will sit for ever: his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom; he will have no successor in it, nor can his government be subverted; and though he will deliver up the kingdom to the Father, it will not cease.
A sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom; the sceptre is an ensign of royalty; and a sceptre of righteousness, or rightness, is expressive of the justice of government; the Syriac version renders it, "a sceptre stretched out"; which is a sceptre of mercy, as the instance of Ahasuerus stretching out his sceptre to Esther shows; and such is the Gospel of Christ, which holds forth and declares the mercy, grace, and love of God to men through Christ; and which may be called a sceptre of righteousness, since it reveals and directs to the righteousness of Christ, and encourages to works of righteousness; but here it designs the righteous administration of Christ's kingly office; for just and true are, have been, and ever will be his ways, as King of saints.
(z) Kimchi & R. Sol. ben Melech in loc. & R. Abraham Seba, Tzeror Hammor, fol. 49. 2.
John Wesley
1:8 O God - God, in the singular number, is never in scripture used absolutely of any but the supreme God. Thy reign, of which the sceptre is the ensign, is full of justice and equity. Ps 45:6-7.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:8 O God--the Greek has the article to mark emphasis (Ps 45:6-7).
for ever . . . righteousness--Everlasting duration and righteousness go together (Ps 45:2; Ps 89:14).
a sceptre of righteousness--literally, "a rod of rectitude," or "straightforwardness." The oldest manuscripts prefix "and" (compare Esther 4:11).
1:91:9: Սիրեցեր զարդարութիւն, եւ ատեցեր զանօրէնութիւն. վասն ա՛յսորիկ օծ զքեզ Աստուած Աստուած քո իւղով ուրախութեան՝ առաւե՛լ քան զընկերս քո։
9 Դու սիրեցիր արդարութիւնը եւ ատեցիր անօրէնութիւնը. դրա համար, Աստուա՛ծ, քո Աստուածը քեզ օծեց ուրախութեան իւղով՝ աւելի քան քո ընկերներին»:
9 Արդարութիւնը սիրեցիր ու անօրէնութիւնը ատեցիր. անոր համար, ո՛վ Աստուած, քու Աստուածդ ուրախութեան իւղով օծեց քեզ քու ընկերներէդ աւելի»։
Սիրեցեր զարդարութիւն եւ ատեցեր զանօրէնութիւն. վասն այսորիկ օծ զքեզ, Աստուած, Աստուած քո իւղով ուրախութեան առաւել քան զընկերս քո:

1:9: Սիրեցեր զարդարութիւն, եւ ատեցեր զանօրէնութիւն. վասն ա՛յսորիկ օծ զքեզ Աստուած Աստուած քո իւղով ուրախութեան՝ առաւե՛լ քան զընկերս քո։
9 Դու սիրեցիր արդարութիւնը եւ ատեցիր անօրէնութիւնը. դրա համար, Աստուա՛ծ, քո Աստուածը քեզ օծեց ուրախութեան իւղով՝ աւելի քան քո ընկերներին»:
9 Արդարութիւնը սիրեցիր ու անօրէնութիւնը ատեցիր. անոր համար, ո՛վ Աստուած, քու Աստուածդ ուրախութեան իւղով օծեց քեզ քու ընկերներէդ աւելի»։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:99: Ты возлюбил правду и возненавидел беззаконие, посему помазал Тебя, Боже, Бог Твой елеем радости более соучастников Твоих.
1:9  ἠγάπησας δικαιοσύνην καὶ ἐμίσησας ἀνομίαν· διὰ τοῦτο ἔχρισέν σε ὁ θεός, ὁ θεός σου, ἔλαιον ἀγαλλιάσεως παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους σου·
1:9. ἠγάπησας ( Thou-excessed-off-unto ) δικαιοσύνην ( to-a-course-belongedness ) καὶ ( and ) ἐμίσησας ( thou-hated-unto ) ἀνομίαν : ( to-an-un-parceleeing-unto ) διὰ ( Through ) τοῦτο ( to-the-one-this ) ἔχρισέν ( it-anointed ) σε ( to-thee ," ὁ ( the-one ) θεός , ( a-Deity ," ὁ ( the-one ) θεός ( a-Deity ) σου , ( of-thee ," ἔλαιον ( to-an-oillet ) ἀγαλλιάσεως ( of-a-jumping-to-excess ) παρα : ( beside ) τοὺς ( to-the-ones ) μετόχους ( to-held-with ) σου : ( of-thee )
1:9. dilexisti iustitiam et odisti iniquitatem propterea unxit te Deus Deus tuus oleo exultationis prae participibus tuisThou hast loved justice and hated iniquity: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
9. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee With the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
1:9. You have loved justice, and you have hated iniquity. Because of this, God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of exultation, above your companions.”
1:9. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows:

9: Ты возлюбил правду и возненавидел беззаконие, посему помазал Тебя, Боже, Бог Твой елеем радости более соучастников Твоих.
1:9  ἠγάπησας δικαιοσύνην καὶ ἐμίσησας ἀνομίαν· διὰ τοῦτο ἔχρισέν σε ὁ θεός, ὁ θεός σου, ἔλαιον ἀγαλλιάσεως παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους σου·
1:9. dilexisti iustitiam et odisti iniquitatem propterea unxit te Deus Deus tuus oleo exultationis prae participibus tuis
Thou hast loved justice and hated iniquity: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
1:9. You have loved justice, and you have hated iniquity. Because of this, God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of exultation, above your companions.”
1:9. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ all ▾
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:9: Thou hast loved righteousness - This is the characteristic of a just governor: he abhors and suppresses iniquity; he countenances and supports righteousness and truth.
Therefore God, even thy God - The original, δια τουτο εχρισε σε ὁ Θεος, ὁ Θεος σου, may be thus translated: Therefore, O God, thy God hath anointed thee. The form of speech is nearly the same with that in the preceding verse; but the sense is sufficiently clear if we read, Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee, etc.
With the oil of gladness - We have often had occasion to remark that, anciently, kings, priests, and prophets were consecrated to their several offices by anointing; and that this signified the gifts and influences of the Divine Spirit. Christ, ὁ Χριστος, signifies The Anointed One, the same as the Hebrew Messias; and he is here said to be anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows. None was ever constituted prophet, priest, and king, but himself; some were kings only, prophets only, and priests only; others were kings and priests, or priests and prophets, or kings and prophets; but none had ever the three offices in his own person but Jesus Christ, and none but himself can be a King over the universe, a Prophet to all intelligent beings, and a Priest to the whole human race. Thus he is infinitely exalted beyond his fellows - all that had ever borne the regal, prophetic, or sacerdotal offices.
Some think that the word μετοχους, fellows, refers to believers who are made partakers of the same Spirit, but cannot have its infinite plenitude. The first sense seems the best. Gladness is used to express the festivities which took place on the inauguration of kings, etc.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:9: Thou hast loved righteousness - Thou hast been obedient to the Law of God, or holy and upright. Nothing can be more truly adapted to express the character of anyone than this is to describe the Lord Jesus, who was "holy, harmless, undefiled," who "did no sin, and in whose mouth no guile was found;" but it is with difficulty that this can be applied to Solomon. Assuredly, for a considerable part of his life, this declaration could not well be appropriate to him; and it seems to me that it is not to be regarded as descriptive of him at all. It is language prompted by the warm and pious imagination of the Psalmist describing the future Messiah - and, as applied to him, is true to the letter. "Therefore God, even thy God." The word "even" inserted here by the translators, weakens the force of the expression. This might be translated, "O God, thy God hath anointed thee." So it is rendered by Doddridge, Clarke, Stuart, and others.
The Greek will bear this construction, as well the Hebrew in Psa 45:7. In the margin in the Psalm it is rendered "O God." This is the most natural construction, as it accords with what is just said before. "Thy throne, O God, is foRev_er. Thou art just and holy, therefore, O God, thy God hath anointed thee," etc. It is not material, however, which construction is adopted. "Hath anointed thee." Anciently kings and priests were consecrated to their office by pouring oil on their heads; see Lev 8:12; Num 3:3; Sa1 10:1; Sa2 2:7; Psa 2:2; Isa 61:1; Act 4:27; Act 10:38; Note, Mat 1:1. The expression "to anoint," therefore, comes to mean to consecrate to office, or to set apart to some public work. This is evidently the meaning in the Psalm, where the whole language refers to the appointment of the personage there referred to to the kingly office. "The oil of gladness." This probably means the perfumed oil that was poured on the head, attended with many expressions of joy and rejoicing. The inauguration of the Messiah as king would be an occasion of rejoicing and triumph. Thousands would exult at it as in the coronation of a king; and thousands would be made glad by such a consecration to the office of Messiah. "Above thy fellows." Above thine associates; that is, above all who sustain the kingly office. He would be more exalted than all other kings. Doddridge supposes that it refers to angels, who might have been associated with the Messiah in the government of the world. But the more natural construction is to suppose that it refers to kings, and to mean that he was the most exalted of all.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:9: loved: Heb 7:26; Psa 11:5, Psa 33:5, Psa 37:28, Psa 40:8, Psa 45:7; Isa 61:8
hated: Psa 119:104, Psa 119:128; Pro 8:13; Amo 5:15; Zac 8:17; Rom 12:9; Rev 2:6, Rev 2:7, Rev 2:15
thy God: Psa 89:26; Joh 20:17; Co2 11:31; Eph 1:3; Pe1 1:3
anointed: Psa 2:2, Psa 2:6 *marg. Psa 89:20; Isa 61:1; Luk 4:18; Joh 1:41, Joh 3:34; Act 4:27, Act 10:38
oil: Psa 23:5; Isa 61:3; Rom 15:13; Gal 5:22
thy fellows: Heb 2:11; Co1 1:9; Jo1 1:3
Geneva 1599
1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated (r) iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath (s) anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy (t) fellows.
(r) This type of speech in which the Jews use contrasting phrases, has great force in it.
(s) In that, that the word became flesh, by sending the Holy Spirit on him without measure.
(t) For he is the head and we are his members.
John Gill
1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity,.... Christ loves righteous persons and righteous works, faithfulness and integrity, and a just administration of government, everything that is holy, just, and good; which has appeared in the whole course of his life on earth, in working out a righteousness for his people, and in encouraging righteousness in them, which he leads them in the way of; and his love of justice will still more appear at the last day, when he will judge the world in righteousness, and give the crown of righteousness to proper persons: and he hates iniquity; or "unrighteousness", as the Alexandrian copy and another read; as being contrary to his nature, both as God and man, and to the righteous law of God; which has appeared by his inveighing against it, and dehorting from it; by his severity exercised towards delinquents; by his suffering for it, and abolishing of it; and by chastising his own people on account of it; and his abhorrence of it will still more appear at the day of judgment, when all workers of iniquity, professors and profane, will be bid to depart from him:
therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows: the anointer is the God of Christ; that is, God the Father, who is the God of Christ, as man; and is so called, because he prepared and formed the human nature of Christ, and supported it under all its sufferings, and has glorified it; and as such Christ prayed unto him, believed in him, loved him, and obeyed him: the anointed is the Son of God, the Son spoken to, and is called God in the preceding verse; though he is not anointed as God, but as Mediator, to be prophet, and priest, and King: what he is anointed with is not material oil, but spiritual, the Holy Ghost, as it is explained in Acts 10:38 called the oil of gladness, in allusion to the use of oil at feasts and weddings, for the delight and refreshment of the guests; and because of the spiritual effects of joy and gladness, both on Christ, as man, and on his people. Now Christ was anointed as Mediator from all eternity; that is, he was invested with his office as such; and at his conception and birth he was filled with the Holy Ghost; who also descended on him at his baptism, after which he went about doing good, and healing diseases; but here it seems to refer to the time of his ascension, when he was declared to be Lord and Christ, the anointed one; and received gifts for men, the fulness of the Spirit without measure, and with which he was anointed above his "fellows"; by whom are meant, not the angels, nor the kings and princes of the earth; but the saints, who are so called, because they are of the same nature, and are of the same family, and are partakers of the same spirit, and grace; and having received the unction from him, are also kings, priests, and prophets, and will be companions with him to all eternity. Now the reason of his being anointed, or exalted, and made Lord and Christ, is, because he loves righteousness; see Phil 2:7 or rather, because he is anointed with the Holy Spirit without measure, therefore he loves righteousness; for the words may be rendered, "thou lovest righteousness--because God, thy God, hath anointed thee".
John Wesley
1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity - Thou art infinitely pure and holy. Therefore God - Who, as thou art Mediator, is thy God. Hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness - With the Holy Ghost, the fountain of joy. Above thy fellows - Above all the children of men.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:9 iniquity--"unnrighteousness." Some oldest manuscripts read, "lawlessness."
therefore--because God loves righteousness and hates iniquity.
God . . . thy God--JEROME, AUGUSTINE, and others translate Ps 45:7, "O God, Thy God, hath anointed thee," whereby Christ is addressed as God. This is probably the true translation of the Hebrew there, and also of the Greek of Hebrews here; for it is likely the Son is addressed, "O God," as in Heb 1:8. The anointing here meant is not that at His baptism, when He solemnly entered on His ministry for us; but that with the "oil of gladness," or "exulting joy" (which denotes a triumph, and follows as the consequence of His manifested love of righteousness and hatred of iniquity), wherewith, after His triumphant completion of His work, He has been anointed by the Father above His fellows (not only above us, His fellow men, the adopted members of God's family, whom "He is not ashamed to call His brethren," but above the angels, fellow partakers in part with Him, though infinitely His inferiors, in the glories, holiness, and joys of heaven; "sons of God," and angel "messengers," though subordinate to the divine Angel--"Messenger of the covenant"). Thus He is antitype to Solomon, "chosen of all David's many sons to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the Lord over Israel," even as His father David was chosen before all the house of his father's sons. The image is drawn from the custom of anointing guests at feasts (Ps 23:5); or rather of anointing kings: not until His ascension did He assume the kingdom as Son of man. A fuller accomplishment is yet to be, when He shall be VISIBLY the anointed King over the whole earth (set by the Father) on His holy hill of Zion, Ps 2:6, Ps 2:8. So David, His type, was first anointed at Bethlehem (1Kings 16:13; Ps 89:20); and yet again at Hebron, first over Judah (2Kings 2:4), then over all Israel (2Kings 5:3); not till the death of Saul did he enter on his actual kingdom; as it was not till after Christ's death that the Father set Him at His right hand far above all principalities (Eph 1:20-21). The forty-fifth Psalm in its first meaning was addressed to Solomon; but the Holy Spirit inspired the writer to use language which in its fulness can only apply to the antitypical Solomon, the true Royal Head of the theocracy.
1:101:10: Եւ դու Տէր իսկզբանէ զերկի՛ր հաստատեցեր. եւ գործք ձեռաց քոց երկի՛նք են։
10 Նաեւ՝ «Դո՛ւ, Տէ՛ր, սկզբից երկիրը հիմնեցիր, եւ քո ձեռքերի գործն են երկինքները:
10 Եւ՝ «Դո՛ւն, ո՛վ Տէր, սկիզբէն երկրի հիմերը դրիր ու երկինք քու ձեռքերուդ գործն է.
Եւ, Դու, Տէր, ի սկզբանէ զերկիր հաստատեցեր, եւ գործք ձեռաց քոց երկինք են:

1:10: Եւ դու Տէր իսկզբանէ զերկի՛ր հաստատեցեր. եւ գործք ձեռաց քոց երկի՛նք են։
10 Նաեւ՝ «Դո՛ւ, Տէ՛ր, սկզբից երկիրը հիմնեցիր, եւ քո ձեռքերի գործն են երկինքները:
10 Եւ՝ «Դո՛ւն, ո՛վ Տէր, սկիզբէն երկրի հիմերը դրիր ու երկինք քու ձեռքերուդ գործն է.
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:1010: И: в начале Ты, Господи, основал землю, и небеса--дело рук Твоих;
1:10  καί, σὺ κατ᾽ ἀρχάς, κύριε, τὴν γῆν ἐθεμελίωσας, καὶ ἔργα τῶν χειρῶν σού εἰσιν οἱ οὐρανοί·
1:10. καί (and," Σὺ ( Thou ) κατ' ( down ) ἀρχάς , ( to-firstings ," κύριε , ( Authority-belonged ," τὴν ( to-the-one ) γῆν ( to-a-soil ) ἐθεμελίωσας , ( thou-en-foundation-belonged ," καὶ ( and ) ἔργα ( works ) τῶν ( of-the-ones ) χειρῶν ( of-hands ) σού ( of-THEE ) εἰσιν ( they-be ) οἱ ( the-ones ) οὐρανοί : ( skies )
1:10. et tu in principio Domine terram fundasti et opera manuum tuarum sunt caeliAnd: Thou in the beginning, O Lord, didst found the earth: and the works of thy hands are the heavens.
10. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of thy hands:
1:10. And: “In the beginning, O Lord, you founded the earth. And the heavens are the work of your hands.
1:10. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:

10: И: в начале Ты, Господи, основал землю, и небеса--дело рук Твоих;
1:10  καί, σὺ κατ᾽ ἀρχάς, κύριε, τὴν γῆν ἐθεμελίωσας, καὶ ἔργα τῶν χειρῶν σού εἰσιν οἱ οὐρανοί·
1:10. et tu in principio Domine terram fundasti et opera manuum tuarum sunt caeli
And: Thou in the beginning, O Lord, didst found the earth: and the works of thy hands are the heavens.
1:10. And: “In the beginning, O Lord, you founded the earth. And the heavens are the work of your hands.
1:10. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
10: Следующий приводимый из Писания текст в доказательство превосходства Сына Божия пред Ангелами, заимствован из 101: Пс. 26-28; ближайшим образом сказанное здесь относится к Иегове, но апостолом вполне справедливо прилагается и ко Христу, Который есть Сила и Слово Божие, Которым все сотворено и Который, следовательно, совечен, единосущен и единоравен Отцу, и превосходство Которого пред всем сотворенным - безмерно и неоспоримо.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:10: And, Thou, Lord - This is an address to the Son as the Creator, see Heb 1:2; for this is implied in laying the foundation of the earth. The heavens, which are the work of his hands, point out his infinite wisdom and skill.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:10: And - That is, "To add another instance;" or, "to the Son he saith in another place, or in the following language." This is connected with Heb 1:8. "Unto the Son he saith Heb 1:8, Thy throne," etc. - and Heb 1:10 he "also" saith, "Thou Lord," etc. That this is the meaning is apparent, because:
(1) the "object" of the whole quotation is to show the exalted character of the Son of God, and,
(2) an address here to Yahweh would be wholly irrelevant. Why, in an argument designed to prove that the Son of God was superior to the angels, should the writer break out in an address to Yahweh in view of the fact that he had laid the foundations of the world, and that he himself would continue to live when the heavens should be rolled up and pass away? Such is not the manner of Paul or of any other good writer, and it is clear that the writer here designed to adduce this as applicable to the Messiah. Whatever difficulties there may be about the principles on which it is done, and the reason why This passage was selected for the purpose, there can be no doubt about the design of the writer. He meant to be understood as applying it to the Messiah beyond all question, or the quotation is wholly irrelevant, and it is inconceivable why it should have been made. "Thou Lord." This is taken from Psa 102:25-27. The quotation is made from the Septuagint with only a slight variation, and is an accurate translation of the Hebrew. In the Psalm, there can be no doubt that Yahweh is intended. This is apparent on the face of the Psalm, and particularly because the "name" Yahweh is introduced in Heb 1:10, and because He is addressed as the Creator of all things, and as immutable. No one, on reading the Psalm, ever would doubt that it referred to God, and if the apostle meant to apply it to the Lord Jesus it proves most conclusively that he is divine. In regard to the difficult inquiry why he applied this to the Messiah, or on what principle such an application can be vindicated, we may perhaps throw some light by the following remarks. It must be admitted that probably few persons, if any, on reading the "Psalm," would suppose that it referred to the Messiah; but:
(1) the fact that the apostle thus employs it, proves that it was understood in his time to have such a reference, or at least that those to whom he wrote would admit that it had such a reference. On no other principle would he have used it in an argument. This is at least of some consequence in showing what the pRev_ailing interpretation was.
(2) it cannot be demonstrated that it had no such reference, for such was the habit of the sacred writers in making the future Messiah the theme of their poetry, that no one can prove that the writer of this Psalm did not design that the Messiah should be the sub ject of his praise here.
(3) there is nothing in the Psalm which may not be applied to the Messiah; but there is much in it that is especially applicable to him. Suppose, for example, that the Psalmist Psa 102:1-11, in his complaints, represents the people of God before the Redeemer appeared - as lowly, sad, dejected, and afflicted - speaking of himself as one of them, and as a fair representative of that people, the remainder of the Psalm will well agree with the promised redemption. Thus, having described the sadness and sorrow of the people of God, he speaks of the act that God would arise and have mercy upon Zion Psa 102:13-14, that the pagan would fear the name of the Lord, and all the kings of the earth would see his glory Psa 102:15, and that when the Lord should build up Zion, he would appear in his glory; Psa 102:16. To whom else could this be so well applied as to the Messiah? To what time so well as to his time? Thus, too in Psa 102:20, it is said that the Lord would look down from heaven "to hear the groaning of the prisoner, and to loose them that are appointed to death" - language remarkably resembling that used by Isaiah, Isa 61:1, which the Saviour applies to himself, in Luk 4:17-21. The passage then quoted by the apostle Psa 102:25-27 is designed to denote the "immutability" of the Messiah, and the fact that in him all the interests of the church were safe. He would not change. He had formed all things, and he would remain the same. His kingdom would be permanent amidst all the changes occurring on earth, and his people had no cause of apprehension or alarm; Psa 102:28.
(4) Paul applies this language to the Messiah in accordance with the doctrine which he had stated Heb 1:2, that it was by him that God "made the worlds." Having stated that, he seems to have felt that it was not improper to apply to him the passages occurring in the Old Testament that speak of the work of creation. The argument is this, "He was in fact the creator of all things." But to the Creator there is applied language in the Scriptures which shows that he was far exalted above the angels. He would remain the same, while the heavens and the earth should fade away. His years are enduring and eternal. "Such" a being must be superior to the angels; such a being must be divine. The words "Thou Lord" - σὺ Κύριε su Kurie - are not in the Hebrew of the Psalm, though they are in the Septuagint. In the Hebrew, in the Psalm (Psa 102:24,), it is an address to God - "I said, O my God" - אלי 'Eeliy - but there can be no doubt that the Psalmist meant to address Yahweh, and that the word "God" is used in its proper sense, denoting divinity; see Heb 1:1, Heb 1:12, of the Psalm. "In the beginning;" see Gen 1:1.
When the world was made; compare notes on Joh 1:1, where the same phrase is applied to the Messiah - "In the beginning was the word, where the same phrase is applied to the Messiah - "In the beginning was the word." "Hast laid the foundation of the earth." Hast made the earth. This language is such as is common in the Scriptures, where the earth is represented as laid on a foundation, or as supported. It is figurative language, derived from the act of rearing an edifice. The meaning here is, that the Son of God was the original creator or founder of the universe. He did not merely arrange it out of pre-existing materials, but he was properly its creator or founder. "And the heavens are the works of thine hands." This must demonstrate the Lord Jesus to be divine. He that made the vast heavens must be God. No creature could perform a work like that; nor can we conceive that power to create the vast array of distant worlds could possibly be delegated. If that power could be delegated, there is not an attribute of Deity which may not be, and thus all our notions of what constitutes divinity would be utterly confounded. The word "heavens" here, must mean all parts of the universe except the earth; see Gen 1:1. The word "hands" is used, because it is by the hands that we usually perform any work.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:10: Thou: Psa 102:25-27
in: Gen 1:1; Joh 1:1-3; Rev 3:14
hast: Pro 8:29; Isa 42:5, Isa 48:13, Isa 51:13; Jer 32:17; Zac 12:1
the works: Deu 4:19; Psa 8:3, Psa 8:4, Psa 19:1; Isa 64:8
Geneva 1599
1:10 (9) And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast (u) laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
(9) He proves and confirms the dignity of Christ revealed in the flesh, by these six evident testimonies by which it appears that he far surpasses all angels, so much so that he is called both Son, and God in (Heb 1:5-8, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:13).
(u) Made the earth firm and sure.
John Gill
1:10 And thou Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth,.... The person here addressed, as the Lord or Jehovah, and as the Maker of the heavens and the earth, is the same with the Son spoken to, and of, before; for the words are a continuation of the speech to him, though they are taken from another psalm, from Ps 102:25. The phrase, "thou, Lord" is taken from Ps 102:12 and is the same with, "O my God", Ps 102:24 and whereas it is there said, "of old", and here, in the beginning, the sense is the same; and agreeably to the Septuagint, and the apostle, Jarchi interprets it by "at", or "from the beginning"; and so the Targum paraphrases it, , "from the beginning", that the creatures were created, &c. that in the beginning of the creation, which is the apostle's meaning; and shows the eternity of Christ, the Lord, the Creator of the earth, who must exist before the foundation of the world; and confutes the notion of the eternity of the world: and the rounding of it shows that the earth is the lower part of the creation; and denotes the stability of it; and points out the wisdom of the Creator in laying such a foundation; and proves the deity of Christ, by whom that, and all things in it, were made:
the heavens are the works of thine hands: there are more heavens than one; there are the airy heaven, and the starry heaven, and the heaven of heavens, the third heaven; and they were created the beginning, as the earth was, Gen 1:1 and are the immediate work of Christ; they were made by himself, not by the means of angels, who were not in being till these were made; nor by any intermediate help, which he could not have, and which he did not need: the phrase is expressive of the power of Christ in making the upper parts of the creation, and of his wisdom in garnishing them, in which there is a wonderful display of his glory; and the whole serves to set forth the dignity and excellency of his person.
John Wesley
1:10 Thou - The same to whom the discourse is addressed in the preceding verse. Ps 102:25-26
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:10 And--In another passage (Ps 102:25-27) He says.
in the beginning--English Version, Ps 102:25, "of old": Hebrew, "before," "aforetime." The Septuagint, "in the beginning" (as in Gen 1:1) answers by contrast to the end implied in "They shall perish," &c. The Greek order here (not in the Septuagint) is, "Thou in the beginning, O Lord," which throws the "Lord" into emphasis. "Christ is preached even in passages where many might contend that the Father was principally intended" [BENGEL].
laid the foundation of--"firmly founded" is included in the idea of the Greek.
heavens--plural: not merely one, but manifold, and including various orders of heavenly intelligences (Eph 4:10).
works of thine hands--the heavens, as a woven veil or curtain spread out.
1:111:11: Նոքա կորնչին՝ եւ դու կաս եւ մնա՛ս. ամենեքեան իբրեւ զձորձս մաշեսցին[4663], [4663] Ոմանք. Ամենեքին իբրեւ։
11 Նրանք կորստեան պիտի մատնուեն, բայց դու կաս եւ մնում ես: Բոլորը պիտի մաշուեն որպէս ձորձեր եւ որպէս վերարկու.
11 Անոնք պիտի կորսուին, բայց դուն պիտի կենաս ու մնաս ու բոլորը լաթի պէս պիտի մաշին
Նոքա կորնչին, եւ դու կաս եւ մնաս. ամենեքեան իբրեւ զձորձս մաշեսցին:

1:11: Նոքա կորնչին՝ եւ դու կաս եւ մնա՛ս. ամենեքեան իբրեւ զձորձս մաշեսցին[4663],
[4663] Ոմանք. Ամենեքին իբրեւ։
11 Նրանք կորստեան պիտի մատնուեն, բայց դու կաս եւ մնում ես: Բոլորը պիտի մաշուեն որպէս ձորձեր եւ որպէս վերարկու.
11 Անոնք պիտի կորսուին, բայց դուն պիտի կենաս ու մնաս ու բոլորը լաթի պէս պիտի մաշին
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:1111: они погибнут, а Ты пребываешь; и все обветшают, как риза,
1:11  αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις· καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται,
1:11. αὐτοὶ ( them ) ἀπολοῦνται , ( they-shall-destruct-off ," σὺ ( thou ) δὲ ( moreover ) διαμένεις : ( thou-stay-through ) καὶ ( and ) πάντες ( all ) ὡς ( as ) ἱμάτιον ( an-apparelet ) παλαιωθήσονται , ( they-shall-be-en-past-belonged ,"
1:11. ipsi peribunt tu autem permanebis et omnes ut vestimentum veterescentThey shall perish: but thou shalt continue: and they shall all grow old as a garment.
11. They shall perish; but thou continuest: And they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
1:11. These shall pass away, but you will remain. And all will grow old like a garment.
1:11. They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment:

11: они погибнут, а Ты пребываешь; и все обветшают, как риза,
1:11  αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις· καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται,
1:11. ipsi peribunt tu autem permanebis et omnes ut vestimentum veterescent
They shall perish: but thou shalt continue: and they shall all grow old as a garment.
1:11. These shall pass away, but you will remain. And all will grow old like a garment.
1:11. They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jg▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ all ▾
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:11: They shall perish - Permanently fixed as they seem to be, a time shall come when they shall be dissolved, and afterward new heavens and a new earth be formed, in which righteousness alone shall dwell. See Pe2 3:10-13.
Shall wax old as doth a garment - As a garment by long using becomes unfit to be longer used, so shall all visible things; they shall wear old, and wear out; and hence the necessity of their being renewed. It is remarkable that our word world is a contraction of wear old; a term by which our ancestors expressed the sentiment contained in this verse. That the word was thus compounded, and that it had this sense in our language, may be proved from the most competent and indisputable witnesses. It was formerly written weorold, and wereld. This etymology is finely alluded to by our excellent poet, Spencer, when describing the primitive age of innocence, succeeded by the age of depravity: -
"The lion there did with the lambe consort,
And eke the dove sat by the faulcon's side;
Ne each of other feared fraude or tort,
But did in safe security abide,
Withouten perill of the stronger pride:
But when the World woxe old, it woxe warre old,
Whereof it hight, and having shortly tride
The trains of wit, in wickednesse woxe bold,
And dared of all sinnes, the secrets to unfold."
Even the heathen poets are full of such allusions. See Horace, Carm. lib. iii., od. 6; Virgil, Aen. viii., ver. 324.
Thou remainest - Instead of διαμένεις, some good MSS. read διαμενεῖς, the first, without the circumflex, being the present tense of the indicative mood; the latter, with the circumflex, being the future - thou shalt remain. The difference between these two readings is of little importance.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:11: They shall perish - That is, the heavens and the earth. They shall pass away; or they shall be destroyed. Probably no more is meant by the phrase here, than that important changes will take place in them, or than that they will change their form. Still it is not possible to foresee what changes may yet take place in the heavenly bodies, or to say that the present universe may not at some period be destroyed, and be succeeded by another creation still more magnificent. He that created the universe by a word, can destroy it by a word and he that formed the present frame of nature can cause it to be succeeded by another not less wonderful and glorious. The Scriptures seem to hold out the idea that the present frame of the universe shall be destroyed; see Pe2 3:10-13; Mat 24:35. "But thou remainest." Thou shalt not die or be destroyed. What a sublime thought! The idea is, that though the heavens and earth should suddenly disappear, or though they should gradually wear out and become extinct, yet there is one infinite being who remains unaffected and unchanged.
Nothing can reach or disturb him. All these changes shall take place under his direction, and by his command; see Rev 20:11. Let us not be alarmed then at any Rev_olution. Let us not fear though we should see the heavens rolled up as a scroll, and the stars falling from their places. God, the Creator and the Redeemer, presides over all. He is unchanged. He ever lives; and though the universe should pass away, it will be only at his bidding, and under his direction. "And they all shall wax old." Shall "grow" or become old. The word "wax" is an Old Saxon word, meaning to grow, or increase, or become. The heavens here are compared to a garment, meaning that as that grows old and decays, so it will be with the heavens and the earth. The language is evidently figurative; and yet who can tell how much literal truth there may be couched under it? Is it absurd to suppose that that sun which daily sends forth so many countless millions of beams of light over the universe, may in a course of ages become diminished in its splendor, and shine with feeble lustre? Can there be constant exhaustion, a constant burning like that, and yet no tendency to decay at some far distant period? Not unless the material for its splendor shall be supplied from the boundless resources of the Great Source of Light - God; and when he shall choose to withhold it, even that glorious sun must be dimmed of its splendor, and shine with enfeebled beams.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:11: shall perish: Heb 12:27; Isa 34:4, Isa 65:17; Mat 24:35; Mar 13:31; Luk 21:33; Pe2 3:7-10; Rev 20:11, Rev 21:1
thou: Psa 10:16, Psa 29:10, Psa 90:2; Isa 41:4, Isa 44:6; Rev 1:11, Rev 1:17, Rev 1:18, Rev 2:8
shall wax: Isa 50:9, Isa 51:6, Isa 51:8
John Gill
1:11 They shall perish,.... That is, the heavens and the earth; not as to the substance of them, but as to the quality of them; the present form and fashion of them shall pass away; the curse will be removed from them, and they will be renewed and purified, but the substance of them will continue; otherwise there would be no place, either for the righteous or the wicked,
But thou remainest; without any change or alteration, neither in his natures, divine or human, as God or man, nor in his office as Mediator; as a priest, he has an unchangeable priesthood, and ever lives to make intercession; as a King, his kingdom is an everlasting one, and of it there will be no end; and as a prophet, he will be the everlasting light, of his people.
They all shall wax old as doth a garment; garments in time wax old, and lose their beauty and usefulness, unless when a miracle is wrought, as in the case of the children of Israel in the wilderness. Now the heavens, and the light thereof, are as a garment and a curtain, Ps 104:2 and these, together with the earth, will in time come to their end of usefulness, in the present form of them; see Is 51:6.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:11 They--The earth and the heavens in their present state and form "shall perish" (Heb 12:26-27; 2Pet 3:13). "Perish" does not mean annihilation; just as it did not mean so in the case of "the world that being overflowed with water, perished" under Noah (2Pet 3:6). The covenant of the possession of the earth was renewed with Noah and his seed on the renovated earth. So it shall be after the perishing by fire (2Pet 3:12-13).
remainest--through (so the Greek) all changes.
as . . . a garment-- (Is 51:6).
1:121:12: իբրեւ զվերարկու. գալարե՛սցես զնոսա իբրեւ զհանդերձ եւ գալարեսցի՛ն. բայց դու նո՛յն իսկ ես՝ եւ ամք քո ո՛չ պակասեսցեն[4664]։ [4664] Ոմանք. Եւ իբրեւ զվերարկուս... իբրեւ զհանդերձս... եւ ամք քո ոչ պակասեն։ Ուր ոմանք. Քո ոչ անցանեն։
12 պիտի ոլորես դրանք հագուստի պէս. եւ նրանք պիտի ոլորուեն[26]: Բայց դու միշտ նոյնն ես, եւ քո տարիները չեն պակասելու»:[26] 26. Յունարէնն ունի... պիտի փոխուեն:
12 Ու վերարկուի պէս պիտի գալարես զանոնք եւ պիտի փոխուին, բայց դուն նոյն ինքն ես ու քու տարիներդ պիտի չպակսին»։
եւ իբրեւ զվերարկու [5]գալարեսցես զնոսա` [6]իբրեւ զհանդերձ``, եւ [7]գալարեսցին. բայց դու նոյն իսկ ես, եւ ամք քո ոչ պակասեսցեն:

1:12: իբրեւ զվերարկու. գալարե՛սցես զնոսա իբրեւ զհանդերձ եւ գալարեսցի՛ն. բայց դու նո՛յն իսկ ես՝ եւ ամք քո ո՛չ պակասեսցեն[4664]։
[4664] Ոմանք. Եւ իբրեւ զվերարկուս... իբրեւ զհանդերձս... եւ ամք քո ոչ պակասեն։ Ուր ոմանք. Քո ոչ անցանեն։
12 պիտի ոլորես դրանք հագուստի պէս. եւ նրանք պիտի ոլորուեն[26]: Բայց դու միշտ նոյնն ես, եւ քո տարիները չեն պակասելու»:
[26] 26. Յունարէնն ունի... պիտի փոխուեն:
12 Ու վերարկուի պէս պիտի գալարես զանոնք եւ պիտի փոխուին, բայց դուն նոյն ինքն ես ու քու տարիներդ պիտի չպակսին»։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:1212: и как одежду свернешь их, и изменятся; но Ты тот же, и лета Твои не кончатся.
1:12  καὶ ὡσεὶ περιβόλαιον ἑλίξεις αὐτούς, ὡς ἱμάτιον καὶ ἀλλαγήσονται· σὺ δὲ ὁ αὐτὸς εἶ καὶ τὰ ἔτη σου οὐκ ἐκλείψουσιν.
1:12. καὶ ( and ) ὡσεὶ ( as-if ) περιβόλαιον ( to-a-casteelet-about ) ἑλίξεις ( thou-shall-curl ) αὐτούς , ( to-them ) ὡς (as) ἱμάτιον (to-an-apparelet) καὶ ( and ) ἀλλαγήσονται : ( they-shall-have-been-othered ) σὺ ( thou ) δὲ ( moreover ) ὁ ( the-one ) αὐτὸς ( it ) εἶ , ( thou-be ," καὶ ( and ) τὰ ( the-ones ) ἔτη ( years ) σου ( of-thee ) οὐκ ( not ) ἐκλείψουσιν . ( they-shall-remainder-out )
1:12. et velut amictum involves eos et mutabuntur tu autem idem es et anni tui non deficientAnd as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shalt be changed. But thou art the selfsame: and thy years shall not fail.
12. And as a mantle shalt thou roll them up, As a garment, and they shall be changed: But thou art the same, And thy years shall not fail.
1:12. And you will change them like a cloak, and they shall be changed. Yet you are ever the same, and your years will not diminish.”
1:12. And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail:

12: и как одежду свернешь их, и изменятся; но Ты тот же, и лета Твои не кончатся.
1:12  καὶ ὡσεὶ περιβόλαιον ἑλίξεις αὐτούς, ὡς ἱμάτιον καὶ ἀλλαγήσονται· σὺ δὲ ὁ αὐτὸς εἶ καὶ τὰ ἔτη σου οὐκ ἐκλείψουσιν.
1:12. et velut amictum involves eos et mutabuntur tu autem idem es et anni tui non deficient
And as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shalt be changed. But thou art the selfsame: and thy years shall not fail.
1:12. And you will change them like a cloak, and they shall be changed. Yet you are ever the same, and your years will not diminish.”
1:12. And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ all ▾
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:12: And they shall be changed - Not destroyed ultimately, or annihilated. They shall be changed and renewed.
But thou art the same - These words can be said of no being but God; all others are changeable or perishable, because temporal; only that which is eternal can continue essentially, and, speaking after the manner of men, formally the same.
Thy years shall not fail - There is in the Divine duration no circle to be run, no space to be measured, no time to be reckoned.
All is eternity - infinite and onward.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:12: And as a vesture - A garment; literally something thrown around - περιβόλαιον peribolaion - and denoting properly the outer garment, the cloak or mantle; see notes, Mat 5:40. "Shalt thou fold them up." That is, the heavens. They are represented in the Scriptures as an "expanse." or something spread out (the Hebrew text of Gen 1:7): as a "curtain," or "tent" Isa 40:22, and as a "scroll" that might be spread out or rolled up like a book or volume, Isa 34:4; Rev 6:14. Here they are represented as a garment or mantle that might be folded up - language borrowed from folding up and laying aside garments that are no longer fit for use. "And they shall be changed." That is, they shall be exchanged for others, or they shall give place to the new heavens and the new earth; Pe2 3:13. The meaning is, that the present form of the heavens and the earth is not to be permanent, but is to be succeeded by others, or to pass away, but that the Creator is to remain the same. "Thou art the same." Thou wilt not change. "And thy years shall not fail." Thou wilt exist foRev_er unchanged. What could more clearly prove that he of whom this is spoken is immutable? Yet it is indubitably spoken of the Messiah, and must demonstrate that he is divine. These attributes cannot be conferred on a creature; and nothing can be clearer than that he who penned the Epistle believed that the Son of God was divine.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:12: but: Heb 13:8; Exo 3:14; Joh 8:58; Jam 1:17
and thy: Psa 90:4
John Gill
1:12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up,.... In order to lay them aside, and make no use of them in the manner they now are; just as clothes, when they are grown old, or out of fashion, are folded up, and laid aside from use at present, or are put into another form. In the Hebrew text it is, "as a vesture shalt thou change them"; but the sense is the same, for a garment is changed by folding it, or turning it; agreeably to which Jarchi interprets the Hebrew phrase thus,
"as a man turns his garment to put it off;''
the Vulgate Latin version reads as the Hebrew does, and one of the manuscripts of New College, Oxford.
And they shall be changed; as to their form and use, not as to their being; for a change, and an annihilation, are two things:
but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail; which is expressive of the immutability of Christ, in his nature and perfections, in his person, and offices, in the virtue of his blood, righteousness, and sacrifice; and of his duration or continuance, in opposition to the fading and transitory nature of the heavens and earth, and of all outward enjoyments: and this may serve to take off the heart from the one, and set it upon the other; and to strengthen our faith in Christ, and encourage us to expect a continuance of blessings from him; all supplies of grace now, and eternal glory hereafter.
John Wesley
1:12 As a mantle - With all ease. They shall be changed - Into new heavens and a new earth. But thou art eternally the same.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:12 vesture--Greek, "an enwrapping cloak."
fold them up--So the Septuagint, Ps 102:26; but the Hebrew, "change them." The Spirit, by Paul, treats the Hebrew of the Old Testament, with independence of handling, presenting the divine truth in various aspects; sometimes as here sanctioning the Septuagint (compare Is 34:4; Rev_ 6:14); sometimes the Hebrew; sometimes varying from both.
changed--as one lays aside a garment to put on another.
thou art the same-- (Is 46:4; Mal 3:6). The same in nature, therefore in covenant faithfulness to Thy people.
shall not fail--Hebrew, "shall not end." Israel, in the Babylonian captivity, in the hundred second Psalm, casts her hopes of deliverance on Messiah, the unchanging covenant God of Israel.
1:131:13: Ցո՞ երբէք ասաց ՚ի հրեշտակաց. Նի՛ստ ընդ աջմէ իմմէ, մինչեւ եդից զթշնամիս քո պատուանդան ոտից քոց[4665]։ [4665] Ոմանք. Ցո՞ ոք երբէք։
13 Հրեշտակներից որի՞ն երբեւէ ասաց. «Նստի՛ր իմ աջ կողմում, մինչեւ որ քո թշնամիներին քո ոտքերին պատուանդան դարձնեմ»:
13 Եւ հրեշտակներէն որո՞ւն ըսաւ. «Իմ աջ կողմս նստէ՛, մինչեւ քու թշնամիներդ ոտքերուդ պատուանդան դնեմ»։
Ցո՞ երբեք ասաց ի հրեշտակաց. Նիստ ընդ աջմէ իմմէ, մինչեւ եդից զթշնամիս քո պատուանդան ոտից քոց:

1:13: Ցո՞ երբէք ասաց ՚ի հրեշտակաց. Նի՛ստ ընդ աջմէ իմմէ, մինչեւ եդից զթշնամիս քո պատուանդան ոտից քոց[4665]։
[4665] Ոմանք. Ցո՞ ոք երբէք։
13 Հրեշտակներից որի՞ն երբեւէ ասաց. «Նստի՛ր իմ աջ կողմում, մինչեւ որ քո թշնամիներին քո ոտքերին պատուանդան դարձնեմ»:
13 Եւ հրեշտակներէն որո՞ւն ըսաւ. «Իմ աջ կողմս նստէ՛, մինչեւ քու թշնամիներդ ոտքերուդ պատուանդան դնեմ»։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:1313: Кому когда из Ангелов сказал [Бог]: седи одесную Меня, доколе положу врагов Твоих в подножие ног Твоих?
1:13  πρὸς τίνα δὲ τῶν ἀγγέλων εἴρηκέν ποτε, κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου;
1:13. πρὸς (Toward) τίνα (to-what-one) δὲ (moreover) τῶν (of-the-ones) ἀγγέλων (of-messengers) εἴρηκέν (it-had-come-to-utter-unto) ποτε (whither-also," Κάθου ( Thou-should-sit-down ) ἐκ ( out ) δεξιῶν ( of-right-belonged ) μου ( of-me ) ἕως ( unto-if-which ) ἂν ( ever ) θῶ ( I-might-have-had-placed ) τοὺς ( to-the-ones ) ἐχθρούς ( to-en-emnitied ) σου ( of-thee ) ὑποπόδιον ( to-an-under-footlet ) τῶν ( of-the-ones ) ποδῶν ( of-feet ) σου ; ( of-thee ?"
1:13. ad quem autem angelorum dixit aliquando sede a dextris meis quoadusque ponam inimicos tuos scabillum pedum tuorumBut to which of the angels said he at any time: Sit on my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool?
13. But of which of the angels hath he said at any time, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet?
1:13. But to which of the Angels has he ever said: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool?”
1:13. But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool:

13: Кому когда из Ангелов сказал [Бог]: седи одесную Меня, доколе положу врагов Твоих в подножие ног Твоих?
1:13  πρὸς τίνα δὲ τῶν ἀγγέλων εἴρηκέν ποτε, κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου;
1:13. ad quem autem angelorum dixit aliquando sede a dextris meis quoadusque ponam inimicos tuos scabillum pedum tuorum
But to which of the angels said he at any time: Sit on my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool?
1:13. But to which of the Angels has he ever said: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool?”
1:13. But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ all ▾
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:13: But to which of the angels - We have already seen, from the opinions and concessions of the Jews, that, if Jesus Christ could be proved to be greater than the angels, it would necessarily follow that he was God: and this the apostle does most amply prove by these various quotations from their own Scriptures; for he shows that while he is the supreme and absolute Sovereign, they are no more than his messengers and servants, and servants even to his servants, i.e. to mankind.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:13: But to which of the angels - The apostle adduces one other proof of the exaltation of the Son of God above the angels. He asks where there is an instance in which God had addressed any one of the angels, and asked him to sit at his right hand until he should subdue his enemies under him? Yet that high honor had been conferred on the Son of God; and he was therefore far exalted above them. "Sit on my right hand;" see notes on Heb 1:3. This passage is taken from Psa 110:1, a Psalm that is repeatedly quoted in this Epistle as referring to the Messiah, and the very passage before is applied by the Saviour to himself, in Mat 22:43-44, and by Peter it is applied to him in Act 2:34-35. There can be no doubt, therefore, of its applicability to the Messiah. "Until I make thine enemies thy footstool." Until I reduce them to entire subjection. A footstool is what is placed under the feet when we sit on a chair, and the phrase here means that an enemy is entirely subdued; compare notes on Co1 15:25. The phrase "to make an enemy a footstool," is borrowed from the custom of ancient warriors who stood on the necks of vanquished kings on the occasion of celebrating a triumph over them as a token of their complete prostration and subjection; see notes on Isa 10:6. The enemies here referred to are the foes of God and of his religion, and the meaning is, that the Messiah is to be exalted until all those foes are subdued. Then he will give up the kingdom to the Father; see notes on Co1 15:24-28. The exaltation of the Redeemer, to which the apostle refers here, is to the mediatorial throne. In this he is exalted far above the angels. His foes are to be subdued to him, but angels are to be employed as mere instruments in that great work.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:13: to: Heb 1:5
Sit: Heb 1:3, Heb 10:12; Psa 110:1; Mat 22:44; Mar 12:36; Luk 20:42; Act 2:34-36, Act 7:55
until: Psa 21:8, Psa 21:9, Psa 132:18; Isa 63:3-6; Luk 19:27; Co1 15:25, Co1 15:26; Rev 19:11-21; Rev 20:15
Geneva 1599
1:13 (10) But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
(10) He proves and confirms the dignity of Christ revealed in the flesh, by these six evident testimonies by which it appears that he far surpasses all angels, so much so that he is called both Son, and God in (Heb 1:5-8, Heb 1:10, Heb 1:13).
John Gill
1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time,.... That is, he never said to any of them in his council, or covenant; he never designed to give them any such honour, as hereafter expressed; he never promised it to them, or bestowed it on them; he never called up any of them to so high a place, or to such a dignity:
sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool; yet this he said to his Son, Ps 110:1 for to him, the Messiah, are they spoken, and have had their fulfilment in him: See Gill on Mt 22:44; and therefore he must be greater than the angels.
John Wesley
1:13 Ps 110:1.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:13 Quotation from Ps 110:1. The image is taken from the custom of conquerors putting the feet on the necks of the conquered (Josh 10:24-25).
1:141:14: Ոչ ապաքէն ամենեքեան հոգիք են հարկաւո՛րք՝ որ առաքին ՚ի սպասաւորութիւն վասն այնոցիկ՝ որ ժառանգելոցն են զփրկութիւն[4666]։[4666] Ոմանք. Ոչ ամենեքին հո՛՛... ժառանգելոց են։
14 Չէ՞ որ բոլորն էլ սպասարկող հոգիներ են, որոնք ուղարկւում են ի սպասաւորութիւն նրանց, որ ժառանգելու են փրկութիւնը:
14 Չէ՞ որ հրեշտակները սպասաւորող հոգիներ են, որոնք սպասաւորութեան կը ղրկուին անոնց համար՝ որ փրկութիւն պիտի ժառանգեն։
Ո՞չ ապաքէն ամենեքեան հոգիք են հարկաւորք որ առաքին ի սպասաւորութիւն վասն այնոցիկ որ ժառանգելոցն են զփրկութիւն:

1:14: Ոչ ապաքէն ամենեքեան հոգիք են հարկաւո՛րք՝ որ առաքին ՚ի սպասաւորութիւն վասն այնոցիկ՝ որ ժառանգելոցն են զփրկութիւն[4666]։
[4666] Ոմանք. Ոչ ամենեքին հո՛՛... ժառանգելոց են։
14 Չէ՞ որ բոլորն էլ սպասարկող հոգիներ են, որոնք ուղարկւում են ի սպասաւորութիւն նրանց, որ ժառանգելու են փրկութիւնը:
14 Չէ՞ որ հրեշտակները սպասաւորող հոգիներ են, որոնք սպասաւորութեան կը ղրկուին անոնց համար՝ որ փրկութիւն պիտի ժառանգեն։
zohrab-1805▾ eastern-1994▾ western am▾
1:1414: Не все ли они суть служебные духи, посылаемые на служение для тех, которые имеют наследовать спасение?
1:14  οὐχὶ πάντες εἰσὶν λειτουργικὰ πνεύματα εἰς διακονίαν ἀποστελλόμενα διὰ τοὺς μέλλοντας κληρονομεῖν σωτηρίαν;
1:14. οὐχὶ (Unto-not) πάντες ( all ) εἰσὶν (they-be) λειτουργικὰ ( public-work-belonged-of ) πνεύματα (currentings-to) εἰς (into) διακονίαν (to-a-raising-through-unto) ἀποστελλόμενα ( being-set-off ) διὰ (through) τοὺς (to-the-ones) μέλλοντας ( to-impending ) κληρονομεῖν (to-lot-parcelee-unto) σωτηρίαν; (to-a-savioring-unto?"
1:14. nonne omnes sunt administratorii spiritus in ministerium missi propter eos qui hereditatem capient salutisAre they not all ministering spirits, sent to minister for them who shall receive the inheritance of salvation?
14. Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?
1:14. Are they not all spirits of ministration, sent to minister for the sake of those who shall receive the inheritance of salvation?
1:14. Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation:

14: Не все ли они суть служебные духи, посылаемые на служение для тех, которые имеют наследовать спасение?
1:14  οὐχὶ πάντες εἰσὶν λειτουργικὰ πνεύματα εἰς διακονίαν ἀποστελλόμενα διὰ τοὺς μέλλοντας κληρονομεῖν σωτηρίαν;
1:14. nonne omnes sunt administratorii spiritus in ministerium missi propter eos qui hereditatem capient salutis
Are they not all ministering spirits, sent to minister for them who shall receive the inheritance of salvation?
1:14. Are they not all spirits of ministration, sent to minister for the sake of those who shall receive the inheritance of salvation?
1:14. Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
ru▾ el▾ el-en-gloss▾ vulgate▾ erva_1895▾ catholic_pdv▾ kjv_1900▾
jfb▾ jw▾ jg▾ gnv▾ tr▾ ab▾ ac▾ tb▾ all ▾
А. П. Лопухин: Tолковая Библия или комментарий на все книги Св.Писания Ветхого и Нового Заветов - 1903-1914
14: Ст. 14: заключает сказанное об Ангелах положением, что все они, в противоположность Сыну - Господу, являются Его слугами и исполнителями Его воли относительно спасения всех людей. - "Не все ли" - не исключая, следовательно, и высших из них. - "Служебные духи, посылаемые на служение для тех, которые..." Духи служат Богу и тогда, когда посылаются Им на служение спасению людей. Поэтому на служение нельзя относить непосредственно к хотящим наследовать спасение: здесь разумеется служение, которое Ангелы оказывают Богу, но ради тех, которые должны наследовать спасение. - Спасение - вся полнота явившейся во Христе благодати и истины, которая достигнет полного своего завершения лишь на небе.
Adam Clarke: Commentary on the Bible - 1831
1:14: Are they not all ministering spirits - That is, They are all ministering spirits; for the Hebrews often express the strongest affirmative by an interrogation.
All the angels, even those of the highest order, are employed by their Creator to serve those who believe in Christ Jesus. What these services are, and how performed, it would be impossible to state. Much has been written on the subject, partly founded on Scripture, and partly on conjecture. They are, no doubt, constantly employed in averting evil and procuring good. If God help man by man, we need not wonder that he helps man by angels. We know that he needs none of those helps, for he can do all things himself; yet it seems agreeable to his infinite wisdom and goodness to use them. This is part of the economy of God in the government of the world and of the Church; and a part, no doubt, essential to the harmony and perfection of the whole. The reader may see a very sensible discourse on this text in vol. ii., page 133, of the Rev. John Wesley's works, American edition. Dr. Owen treats the subject at large in his comment on this verse, vol. iii., page 141, edit. 8vo., which is just now brought to my hand, and which appears to be a very learned, judicious, and important work, but by far too diffuse. In it the words of God are drowned in the sayings of man.
The Godhead of Christ is a subject of such great importance, both to the faith and hope of a Christian, that I feel it necessary to bring it full into view, wherever it is referred to in the sacred writings. It is a prominent article in the apostle's creed, and should be so in ours. That this doctrine cannot be established on Heb 1:8 has been the assertion of many. To what I have already said on this verse, I beg leave to subjoin the following criticisms of a learned friend, who has made this subject his particular study.
Albert Barnes: Notes on the Bible - 1834
1:14: Are they not all - There is not one of them that is elevated to the high rank of the Redeemer. Even the most exalted angel is employed in the comparatively humble office of a ministering spirit appointed to aid the heirs of salvation. "Ministering spirits." A "ministering" spirit is one that is employed to execute the will of God. The proper meaning of the word here - λειτουργικὰ leitourgika - (whence our word "liturgy") is, "pertaining to public service," or "the service of the people" (λαός laos}}; and is applied particularly to those who were engaged in the public service of the temple. They were those who rendered aid to others; who were helpers, or servants. Such is the meaning as used here. They are employed to render "aid" or "assistance" to others - to wit, to Christians. "Sent forth." Appointed by God for this. They are "sent;" are under his control; are in a subordinate capacity.
Thus, Gabriel was sent forth to convey an important message to Daniel; Dan 9:21-23. "To minister." For the help or succour of such. They come to render them assistance - and, if employed in this humble office, how much inferior to the dignity of the Son of God - the Creator and Ruler of the worlds! "Who shall be heirs of salvation." To the saints; to Christians. They are called "heirs of salvation" because they are adopted into the family of God, and are treated as his sons; see notes on Rom 8:14-17. The main point here is, that the angels are employed in a much more humble capacity than the Son of God; and, therefore, that he sustains a far more elevated rank. But while the apostle has proved that, he has incidentally stated an exceedingly interesting and important doctrine, that the angels are employed to further the salvation of the people of God, and to aid them in their journey to heaven.
In this doctrine there is nothing absurd. It is no more improbable that angels should be employed to aid man, than that one man should aid another; certainly not as improbable as that the Son of God should come down "not to be ministered unto but to minister," Mat 20:28, and that he performed on earth the office of a servant; Joh 13:1-15. Indeed it is a great principle of the divine administration that one class of God's creatures are to minister to others; that one is to aid another to assist him in trouble, to provide for him when poor, and to counsel him in perplexity. We are constantly deriving benefit from others, and are dependent on their counsel and help. Thus, God has appointed parents to aid their children; neighbors to aid their neighbors: the rich to aid the poor; and all over the world the principle is seen, that one is to derive benefit from the aid of others. Why may not the angels be employed in this service?
They are pure, benevolent, powerful; and as man was ruined in the fall by the temptation offered by one of an angelic, though fallen nature, why should not others of angelic, unfallen holiness come to assist in repairing the evils which their fallen, guilty brethren have inflicted on the race? To me there seems to be a beautiful propriety in bringing "aid" from another race, as "ruin" came from another race; and that as those endowed with angelic might, though with fiendish malignity, ruined man, those with angelic might, but heavenly benevolence, should aid in his recovery and salvation. Further, it is, from the necessity of the case, a great principle, that the weak shall be aided by the strong; the ignorant by the enlightened; the impure by the pure; the tempted by those who have not fallen by temptation. All over the world we see this in operation; and it constitutes the beauty of the moral arrangements on the earth; and why shall not this be extended to the inhabitants of other abodes? Why shall not angels, with their superior intelligence, benevolence, and power, come in to perfect this system, and show how much adapted it is to glorify God? In regard to the ways in which angels become ministering spirits to the heirs of salvation, the Scriptures have not fully informed us, but facts are mentioned which will furnish some light on this inquiry. What they do now may be learned from the Scripture account of what they have done - as it seems to be a fair principle of interpretation that they are engaged in substantially the same employment in which they have ever been. The following methods of angelic interposition in behalf of man are noted in the Scriptures:
(1) They feel a deep interest in man. Thus, the Saviour says, "there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth;" Luk 15:10. Thus also he says, when speaking of the "little ones" that compose his church, "in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father who is in heaven;" Mat 18:10.
(2) they feel a special interest in all that relates to the redemption of man. Thus, Peter says of the things pertaining to redemption, "which things the angels desire to look into;" Pe1 1:12. In accordance with this they are represented as praising God over the fields of Bethlehem, where the shepherds were to whom it was announced that a Saviour was born Luk 2:13; an angel announced to Mary that she would be the mother of the Messiah Luk 1:26; an angel declared to the shepherds that He was born Luk 2:10; the angels came and ministered to Him in His temptation Mat 4:11; an angel strengthened Him in the garden of Gethsemane Luk 22:43; angels were present in the sepulchre where the Lord Jesus had been laid, to announce His resurrection to His disciples Joh 20:12; and they reappeared to his disciples on Mount Olivet to assure them that he would return and receive his people to him self, Act 1:10.
(3) they appear for the defense and protection of the people of God. Thus it is said Psa 34:7, "The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them." Thus, two angels came to hasten Lot from the cities of the plain, and to rescue him from the impending destruction; Gen 19:1, Gen 19:15. Thus, an angel opened the prison doors of the apostles, and delivered them when they had been confined by the Jews; Act 5:19. Thus, the angel of the Lord delivered Peter from prison when he had been confined by Herod; Act 12:7-8.
(4) angels are sent to give us strength to resist temptation. Aid was thus furnished to the Redeemer in the garden of Gethsemane, when there "appeared an angel from heaven strengthening him;" Luk 22:43. The great trial there seems to have been somehow connected with temptation; some influence of the power of darkness, or of the Prince of evil; Luk 22:53; compare Joh 14:30. In this aid which they rendered to the tempted Redeemer, and in the assistance which they render to us when tempted, there is a special fitness and propriety. Man was at first tempted by a fallen angel. No small part - if not all the temptations in the world - are under the direction now of fallen angels. They roam at large "seeking whom they may devour;" Pe1 5:8. The temptations which occur in life, the numerous allurements which beset our path, all have the marks of being under the control of dark and malignant spirits. What, therefore, can be more appropriate than for the pure angels of God to interpose and aid man against the skill and wiles of their fallen and malignant fellow-spirits? Fallen angelic power and skill - power and skill far above the capability and the strength of man - are employed to ruin us, and how desirable is it for like power and skill, under the guidance of benevolence, to come in to aid us!
(5) they support us in affliction. Thus, an angel brought a cheering message to Daniel; the angels were present to give comfort to the disciples of the Saviour when he had been taken from them by death, and when he ascended to heaven. Why may it not be so now, that important consolations, in some way, are imparted to us by angelic influence? And,
(6) they attend dying saints, and conduct them to glory. Thus, the Saviour says of Lazarus that when he died he was "carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom;" Luk 16:22. Is there any impropriety in supposing that the same thing may be done still? Assuredly, if anywhere heavenly aid is needed, it is when the spirit leaves the body. If anywhere a guide is needed, it is when the ransomed soul goes up the unknown path to God. And if angels are employed on any messages of mercy to mankind, it is proper that it should be when life is closing, and the spirit is about to ascend to heaven. Should it be said that they are invisible, and that it is difficult to conceive how we can be aided by beings whom we never see, I answer, I know that they are unseen. They no longer appear as they once did to be the visible protectors and defenders of the people of God. But no small part of the aid which we receive from others comes from sources unseen by us. We owe more to unseen benefactors than to those whom we see, and the most grateful of all aid, perhaps, is what is furnished by a hand which we do not see, and from quarters which we cannot trace. How many an orphan is benefited by some unseen and unknown benefactor! So it may be a part of the great arrangements of Divine Providence that many of the most needed and acceptable interpositions for our welfare should come to us from invisible sources, and be conveyed to us from God by unseen hands.
Remarks
1. The Christian religion has a claim on the attention of man. God has spoken to us in the Gospel by his Son; Heb 1:1-2. This fact constitutes a claim on us to attend to what is spoken in the New Testament. When God sent prophets to address people, endowing them with more than human wisdom and eloquence, and commanding them to deliver solemn messages to mankind, that was a reason why people should hear. But how much more important is the message which is brought by his own Son! How much more exalted the Messenger! How much higher his claim to our attention and regard! compare Mat 21:37. Yet it is lamentable to reflect how few attended to him when he lived on the earth, and how few comparatively regard him now. The great mass of people feel no interest in the fact that the Son of God has come and spoken to the human race. Few take the pains to read what he said, though all the records of the discourses of the Saviour could be read in a few hours.
A newspaper is read; a poem; a novel; a play; a history of battles and sieges; but the New Testament is neglected, and there are thousands even in Christian lands who have not even read through the Sermon on the Mount! Few also listen to the truths which the Redeemer taught when they are proclaimed in the sanctuary. Multitudes never go to the place where the gospel is preached; multitudes when there are engaged in thinking of other things, or are wholly inattentive to the truths which are proclaimed. Such a reception has the Son of God met with in our world! The most wonderful of all events is, that he should have come from heaven to be the teacher of mankind; next to that, the most wonderful event is that, when he has come, people feel no interest in the fact, and refuse to listen to what he says of the unseen and eternal world. What a man will say about the possibility of making a fortune by some wild speculation will be listened to with the deepest interest; but what the Redeemer says about the "certainty" of heaven and eternal riches there, excites no emotion: what one from the dead might say about the unseen world would excite the profoundest attention; what he has said who has always dwelt in the unseen world, and who knows all that has occurred there, and all that is yet to occur, awakens no interest, and excites no inquiry. Such is man. The visit, too, of an illustrious stranger - like Lafayette to America - will rouse a nation, and spread enthusiasm everywhere; the visit of the Son of God to the earth on a great errand of mercy is regarded as an event of no importance, and excites no interest in the great mass of human hearts.
2. Christ is divine. In the view of the writer of this Epistle he was undoubtedly regarded as equal with God. This is so clear that it seems wonderful that it should ever have been called in question. He who made the worlds; who is to be worshipped by the angels; who is addressed as God; who is said to have laid the foundation of the earth, and to have made the heavens, and to be unchanged when all these things shall pass away, must be divine. These are the attributes of God, and belong to him alone. These things could not be spoken of a man, an angel, an archangel. It is impossible to conceive that attributes like these could belong to a creature. If they could, then all our notions of what constitutes the distinction between God and his creatures are confounded, and we can have no intelligible idea of God.
3. It is not improbable that Christ is the medium of communicating the knowledge of the divine essence and perfections to all worlds. He is the brightness of the divine glory - the showing forth - the manifestation of God; Heb 1:3. The body of the sun is not seen - certainly not by the naked eye. We cannot look upon it. But there is a shining, a brightness, a glory, a manifestation which is seen! It is in the sun-beams, the manifestation of the glory and the existence of the sun. By his shining the sun is known. So the Son of God - incarnate or not - may be the manifestation of the divine essence. And from this illustration, may we not without irRev_erence derive an illustration of the doctrine of the glorious Trinity? There is the body of the sun - to us invisible - yet great and glorious, and the source of all light, and heat, and life. The vast body of the sun is the source of all this radiance, the fountain of all that warms and enlivens.
All light and heat and life depend on him, and should he be extinct all would die. Thus, may it not be with God the Father; God the eternal and unchanging essence - the fountain of all light, and life in the universe. In the sun there is also the "manifestation" - the shining - the glorious light. The brightness which we see emanates from that - emanates at once, continually, always. While the sun exists, that exists, and cannot be separated from it. By that brightness the sun is seen; by that the world is enlightened. Without these beams there would be no light, but all would be involved in darkness. What a beautiful representation of the Son of God - the brightness of the divine glory; the medium by which God is made known; the source of light to man, and for anything we know, to the universe! When he shines upon people, there is light when he does not shine, there is as certain moral darkness as there is night when the sun sinks in the west.
And for aught we can see, the manifestation which the Son of God makes may be as necessary in all worlds to a proper contemplation of the divine essence, as the beams of the sun are to understand its nature. Then there are the warmth and heat and vivifying influences of the sun - an influence which is the source of life and beauty to the material world. It is not the mere shining - it is the attendant warmth and vivifying power. All nature is dependent on it. Each seed, and bud, and leaf, and flower; each spire of grass, and each animal on earth, and each bird on the wing, is dependent on it. Without that, vegetation would decay at once, and animal life would be extinct, and universal death would reign. What a beautiful illustration of the Holy Spirit, and of his influences on the moral world! "The Lord God is a Sun" Psa 84:11; and I do not see that it is improper thus to derive from the sun an illustration of the doctrine of the Trinity. I am certain we should know nothing of the sun but for the beams that Rev_eal him, and that enlighten the world; and I am certain that all animal and vegetable life would die if it were not for his vivifying and quickening rays. I do not see that it may not be equally probable that the nature - the essence of God would be unknown were it not manifested by the Son of God; and I am certain that all moral and spiritual life would die were it not for the quickening and vivifying influences of the Holy Spirit on the human soul.
4. Christ has made an atonement for sin; Heb 1:3. He has done it by "himself." It was not by the blood of bulls and of goats; it was by his own blood. Let us rejoice that we have not now to come before God with a bloody offering; that we need not come leading up a lamb to be slain, but that we may come confiding in that blood which has been shed for the sins of mankind. The great sacrifice has been made. The victim is slain. The blood has been offered which expiates the sin of the world. We may now come at once to the throne of grace, and plead the merits of that blood. How different is our condition from that of the ancient Jewish worshippers! They were required to come leading the victim that was to be slain for sin, and to do this every year and every day. We may come with the feeling that the one great sacrifice has been made for us; that it is never to be repeated, and that in that sacrifice there is merit sufficient to cancel all our sins. How different our condition from that of the pagan! They too lead up sacrifices to be slain on bloody altars. They offer lambs, and goats, and bullocks, and captives taken in war, and slaves, and even their own children! But amidst these horrid offerings, while they show their deep conviction that some sacrifice is necessary, they have no promise - no evidence whatever, that the sacrifice will be accepted. They go away unpardoned. They repeat the offering with no evidence that their sins are forgiven, and at last they die in despair! We come assured that the "blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin," and the soul rejoices in the evidence that all past sins are forgiven, and is at peace with God.
5. Let us rejoice that the Lord Jesus is thus exalted to the right hand of God; Heb 1:3-4. He has gone into heaven. He is seated on the throne of glory. He has suffered the last pang, and shed the last drop of blood that will ever be necessary to be shed for the sins of the world. No cold tomb is again to hold him; and no spear of a soldier is again to enter his side. He is now happy and glorious in heaven. The angels there render him homage Heb 1:6, and the universe is placed under his control.
6. It is right to worship the Lord Jesus. When he came into the world the angels were required to do it Heb 1:6, and it cannot be wrong for us to do it now. If the angels in heaven might properly worship him, we may. If they worshipped him, he is divine. Assuredly, God would not require them to worship a fellow-angel or a man! I feel safe in adoring where angels adore; I do not feel that I have a right to withhold my homage where they have been required to render theirs.
7. It is right to address the Lord Jesus as God; Heb 1:8. If he is so addressed in the language of inspiration, it is not improper for us so to address him. We do not err when we adhere closely to the language of the Bible; nor can we have a stronger evidence that we are right than that we express our sentiments and our devotions in the very language of the sacred Scriptures.
8. The kingdom of the Redeemer is a righteous kingdom. It is founded in equity; Heb 1:8-9. Other kingdoms have been kingdoms of cruelty, oppression, and blood. Tyrants have swayed an iron scepter over people. But not thus with the Redeemer in his kingdom. There is not a law there which is not equal and mild; not a statute which it would not promote the temporal and eternal welfare of man to obey. Happy is the man that is wholly under his scepter; happy the kingdom that yields entire obedience to his laws!
9. The heavens shall perish; the earth shall decay; Heb 1:10-11. Great changes have already taken place in the earth - as the researches of geologists show; and we have no reason to doubt that similar changes may have occurred in distant worlds. Still greater changes may be expected to occur in future times, and some of them we may be called to witness. Our souls are to exist foRev_er; and far on in future ages - far beyond the utmost period which we can now compute - we may witness most important changes in these heavens and this earth. God may display his power in a manner which has never been seen yet; and safe near his throne his people may be permitted to behold the exhibition of power of which the mind has never yet had the remotest conception.
10. Yet amidst these changes, the Saviour will be the same; Heb 1:12. He changes not. In all past Rev_olutions, he has been the same. In all the changes which have occurred in the physical world, he has been unchanged; in all the Rev_olutions which have occurred among kingdoms, he has been unmoved. One change succeeds another; kingdoms rise and fall and empires waste away; one generation goes off to be succeeded by another, but he remains the same. No matter what tempests howl, or how wars rage, or how the pestilence spreads abroad, or how the earth is shaken by earthquakes, still the Redeemer is the same. And no matter what are our external changes, he is the same. We pass from childhood to youth, to manhood, to old age, but he changes not. We are in prosperity or adversity; we may pass from affluence to poverty, from honor to dishonor, from health to sickness, but he is the same.
We may go and lie down in the cold tomb, and our mortal frames may decay, but he is the same during our long sleep, and he will remain the same till he shall return and summon us to renovated life. I rejoice that in all the circumstances of life I have the same Saviour. I know what he is. I know, if the expression may be allowed, "where he may be found." Man may change by caprice, or whim, or by some new suggestion of interest, of passion, or ambition. I go to my friend today, and find him kind and true - but I have no absolute certainty that I shall find him such tomorrow. His feelings, from some unknown cause, may have become cold toward me. Some enemy may have breathed suspicion into his ear about me, or he may have formed some stronger attachment, or he may be sick, or dead. But nothing like this can happen in regard to the Redeemer. He changes not. I am sure that he is always the same. No one can influence him by slander; no new friendship can weaken the old; no sickness or death can occur to him to change him; and though the heavens be on fire, and the earth be convulsed, he is the same. In such a Saviour I may confide; in such a friend why should not all confide? Of earthly attachments it has been too truly said:
"And what is friendship but a name,
A charm that lulls to sleep;
A shade that follows wealth or fame,
But leaves the wretch to weep?"
But this can never be said of the attachment formed between the Christian and their gracious Redeemer. That is unaffected by all external changes; that shall live in all the Rev_olutions of material things, and when all earthly ties shall be severed; that shall survive the dissolution of all things.
11. We see the dignity of man; Heb 1:13-14. Angels are sent to be his attendants. They come to minister to him here, and to conduct him home "to glory." Kings and princes are surrounded by armed men, or by sages called to be their counselors; but the most humble saint may be encompassed by a retinue of beings of far greater power and more elevated rank. The angels of light and glory feel a deep interest in the salvation of people. They come to attend the redeemed; they wait on their steps; they sustain them in trial; they accompany them when departing to heaven. It is a higher honor to be attended by one of those pure intelligences than by the most elevated monarch that ever swayed a scepter or wore a crown; and the humblest and obscurest Christian shall soon be himself conducted to a throne in heaven, compared with which the most splendid seat of royalty on earth loses its luster and fades away:
"And is there care in heaven? and is there love.
In heavenly spirits to these creatures base,
That may compassion of their evils move?
There is: else much more wretched were the case.
Of men than beasts; But O! th' exceeding grace.
Of Highest God that loves his creatures so,
And all his works of mercy doth embrace,
That blessed angels he sends to and fro,
To serve to wicked man, to serve his wicked foe!
"How oft do they their silver bowers leave,
To come to succour us that succour want!
How do they with golden pinions cleave.
The yielding skies, like flying pursuivant.
Against foul fiends to aid us militant!
They for us fight, they watch and duly ward,
And their bright squadrons round about us plant;
And all for love and nothing for reward;
O why should Heavenly God to men have such regard!"
"Spenser's Faery Queen," B. II. Canto Heb 8:1, Heb 8:2.
12. What has God done for the salvation of man! He formed an eternal plan. He sent his prophets to communicate his will. He sent his Son to bear a message of mercy, and to die the just for the unjust. He exalted him to heaven, and placed the universe under his control that man may be saved. He sent his Holy Spirit; his ministers and messengers for this. And last, to complete the work, he sends his angels to be ministering spirits; to sustain his people; to comfort them in dying; to attend them to the realms of glory. What an interest is felt in the salvation of a single Christian! What a value he has in the universe! And how important it is that he should be holy! A man who has been redeemed by the blood of the Son of God should be pure. He who is an heir of life should be holy. He who is attended by celestial beings, and who is soon - he knows not "how" soon - to be transported to heaven, should be holy. Are angels my attendants? Then I should walk worthy of my companionship. Am I soon to go and dwell with angels? Then I should be pure. Are these feet soon to tread the courts of heaven? Is this tongue soon to unite with heavenly beings in praising God? Are these eyes soon to look on the throne of eternal glory, and on the ascended Redeemer? Then these feet, and eyes, and lips should be pure and holy, and I should be dead to the world, and should live only for heaven.
R. A. Torrey - Treasury: Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge - 1880
1:14: ministering: Heb 8:6, Heb 10:11; Psa 103:20, Psa 103:21; Dan 3:28, Dan 7:10; Mat 18:10; Luk 1:19, Luk 1:23, Luk 2:9, Luk 2:13; Act 13:2; Rom 13:6, Rom 15:16, Rom 15:27; Co2 9:12; Phi 2:17, Phi 2:25 *Gr: Kg1 22:19; Job 1:6; Psa 103:20, Psa 103:21, Psa 104:4; Isa 6:2, Isa 6:3; Dan 7:10; Mat 13:41, Mat 13:49, Mat 13:50; Luk 1:19; Th2 1:7; Jde 1:14
sent: Gen 19:15, Gen 19:16, Gen 32:1, Gen 32:2, Gen 32:24; Act 11:22; Pe1 1:12; Rev 5:6
minister: Psa 34:7, Psa 91:11, Psa 91:12; Dan 6:22, Dan 9:21-23, Dan 10:11, Dan 10:12; Mat 1:20, Mat 2:13, Mat 24:31; Luk 16:22; Act 5:19, Act 10:3, Act 10:4, Act 12:7, Act 12:23, Act 16:26, Act 27:23
heirs: Heb 6:12, Heb 6:17; Mat 25:34; Rom 8:17; Gal 3:7, Gal 3:9, Gal 3:29; Eph 3:6; Tit 3:7; Jam 2:5; Pe1 1:4, Pe1 3:7
Geneva 1599
1:14 Are they not all (x) ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
(x) By that name by which we commonly call princes messengers, he here calls the spirits.
John Gill
1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits,.... Servants to God, to Christ, and to his people, and therefore must be inferior to the Son of God. The phrase is Rabbinical; frequent mention is made in Jewish writings (a) of , "the angels of ministry", or "the ministering angels"; this is their common appellation with the Jews; and the apostle writing to such, uses a like phrase, well known to them, and appeals to them, if the angels were not such spirits.
Sent forth to minister for them who shall be the heirs of salvation? the persons they minister to, and for, are those, who shall be the heirs of salvation; that is, of eternal glory, which will be possessed by the saints, as an inheritance: hence it belongs to children, being bequeathed to them by their Father, and comes to them through the death of Christ, of which the Spirit is the earnest; and this shows that it is not of works, and that it is of an eternal duration, and takes in all kind of happiness: and of this the saints are heirs now; and so the Ethiopic version renders it, "who are heirs of salvation"; nor should it be rendered, "who shall be heirs", but rather, "who shall inherit salvation"; for this character respects not their heirship, but their actual inheriting of salvation: and the ministry of angels to, and for them, lies in things temporal and spiritual, or what concern both their bodies and their souls; in things temporal, in which they have often been assisting, as in providing food for their bodies, in curing their diseases, in directing and preserving them in journeys, in saving and delivering them from outward calamities, in restraining things hurtful from hurting them, and in destroying their enemies; in things spiritual, as in making known the mind and will of God to them, in comforting them, and suggesting good things to them, and in helping and assisting them against Satan's temptations; and they are present with their departing souls at death, and carry them to heaven, and will gather the elect together at the last day. And they are "sent forth" to minister to them in such a way; they are sent forth by Christ, the Lord and Creator of them, who therefore must be superior to them; they do not take this office upon themselves, though, being put into they faithfully and diligently execute it, according to the will of Christ: and this shows the care of Christ over his people, and his kindness to them, and the great honour he puts upon them, to appoint such to minister to them; and since they are of so much use and service, they ought to be respected and esteemed, though not worshipped.
(a) T. Bab. Chagiga, fol. 12. 2. & 14. 1, 2. & 16. 1. Taanith, fol. 11. 1. & Megilia, fol. 15. 2. & in Zohar passim.
John Wesley
1:14 Are they not all - Though of various orders. Ministering spirits, sent forth - Ministering before God, sent forth to men. To attend on them - In numerous offices of protection, care, and kindness. Who - Having patiently continued in welldoing, shall inherit everlasting salvation.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
1:14 ministering spirits--referring to Heb 1:7, "spirits . . . ministers." They are incorporeal spirits, as God is, but ministering to Him as inferiors.
sent forth--present participle: "being sent forth" continually, as their regular service in all ages.
to minister--Greek, "unto (that is, 'for') ministry."
for them--Greek, "on account of the." Angels are sent forth on ministrations to God and Christ, not primarily to men, though for the good of "those who are about to inherit salvation" (so the Greek): the elect, who believe, or shall believe, for whom all things, angels included, work together for good (Rom 8:28). Angels' ministrations are not properly rendered to men, since the latter have no power of commanding them, though their ministrations to God are often directed to the good of men. So the superiority of the Son of God to angels is shown. They "all," how ever various their ranks, "minister"; He is ministered to. They "stand" (Lk 1:19) before God, or are "sent forth" to execute the divine commands on behalf of them whom He pleases to save; He "sits on the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Heb 1:3, Heb 1:13). He rules; they serve.