The apostle adds, that he is yapaunrip troordoews airod, “the ex- press figure” (or “image’’) “of his person;” that is, of the person of God the Father. I shall not enter into any dispute about the mean- ing of the word isécracic, or the difference between it and odoia. Many controversies about these words there were of old. And Jerome was very cautious about acknowledging three hypostases in the Deity, and that because he thought the word in this place to denote “substantia;” and of that mind are many still, it being so rendered by the Vulgar translation. But the consideration of these vexed questions tending not to the opening of the design of the apostle and meaning of the Holy Ghost in this place, I shall not insist upon them.
1, The hypostasis of the Father is the Father himself. Hereof, or of him, is the Son said to be the “express image.” As is the Father, so is the Son. And this agreement, likeness, and conveniency between the Father and Son, is essential; not accidental, as those things are between relations finite and corporeal. What the Father is, doth, hath, that the Son is, doth, hath; or else the Father, as the Father, could not be fully satisfied in him, nor represented by him.
2. By “character” two things seem to be intended:—(1.) That the Son in himself is 2v wopp% cod, “in the likeness of God,” Phil. ii. 6. (2.) That unto us he is e/xav @e0d, “ the image of God,” representing
him unto us, Col.i.15. For these three words are used of the
Lord Christ in respect-unto God the Father, wope7, cindy, yapaxrnp. And their use seems thus to difference them:—(l.) It is said of him, "Ey 0p07 Ocot brdépywv, Phil. ii. 6,—“ Being” (“existing, subsisting”) “in the form of God:” that is, being so, essentially so; for there is no “poy, or “form,” in the Deity but what is essential unto it. This he was absolutely, antecedently unto his incarnation, the whole nature of God being in him, and consequently he being in the form of God. (2.) In the manifestation of God unto us, he is said to be Eixay rot @s08 rod copdrov, Col. i. 15,—“ The image of the invisible God;” be- cause in him, so partaker of the nature of the Father, do the power, goodness, holiness, grace, and all other glorious properties of God, shine forth, being in him represented unto us, 2 Cor. iv. 6. And both these seem to be comprised in this word, yapaxr7p; both that the whole nature of God is in him, as also that by him God is declared and expressed unto us.
Neither were the Jews of old ignorant of this notion of the Son of God. So Philo expresseth their sense, de Confusione Linguarum: Kay wndirw weve ruyydvn zis a&sbypews dv vidg Oeod rpocuyopsdecdas,
96 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. I.
oroldale nooperodus nave roy tpwroyovov abrod Adyoy, roy dyyedov mpeocl- Truro WS apyayyEroy ToAvuvomoy Ur pyovTe., Hal Yap apXN, Kel bvowLa Ocov, nal Aoyos, nal 6 nar? eixova evdpumros, nal bpaiv "lopanrA mpoouryopsvercs— “Tf any one be not yet worthy to be called the son of God, yet endeavour thou to be conformed unto his first-begotten Word, the most ancient angel, the archangel with many names; for he is called ‘The beginning,’ ‘The name of God, ‘The man according to the image of God, ‘The seer of Israel.’” And again, Kai yap si pnwn inavol Osot waides vowiCecdas yeydvamer, GAG ror THs aiOiov eixovos airod, Adyou rou iepururou: Ozod yap cindy Adyog 6 mpeoCirurog-—* For if we are not meet to be called the sons of God, let us be so of his eternal image, the most sacred Word; for that most ancient Word is the image of God.” Thus he, expressing some of their concep- tions concerning this eternal “character” of the person of the Father.
We have seen what it is that is intended in this expression, and shall only add thereunto a consideration of that from whence the expression is taken. The ordinary engraving of rings, or seals, or stones, is generally thought to be alluded unto. It may be also that the apostle had respect unto some representation of the glory of God by engraving amongst the institutions of Moses. Now, there was scarcely any thing of old that more gloriously represented God than that of the engraving of his name on a plate of gold, to be worn on the front of the mitre of the high priest; at the sight whereof the great conqueror of the east fell down before him. Men-
tion of it we have Exod. xxviii. 36, “Thou shalt make a plate of .
pure gold, and grave upon it, like the engravings of a signet, WIP nin? 7_« Holiness of Jehovah,” or “to Jehovah.” Here was that name of God which denotes his essence and being characterized and engraven, to represent his holiness and glory to his people. And Aaron was to wear this engraven name of God on his forehead, that he might bear the iniquity of the holy things and gifts of the children of Israel; which could really be done only by him who was Jehovah himself. And thus, also, when God promiseth to bring forth the Son as the corner-stone of the church, he promiseth to engrave upon him the seven eyes of the Lord, Zech. ii. 9, or the perfection of his wisdom and power, to be expressed unto the church in him. There having been, then, this representation of the presence of God, by the character or engraving of his glorious name upon the plate of gold, which the high priest was to wear that he might bear iniquities; the apostle lets the Hebrews know, that in Christ the Son is the rea] accomplishment of what was typified there- by, the Father having actually communicated unto him his nature, denoted by that name, whereby he was able really to bear our ini- quities, and most gloriously represent the person of his Father unto us.