“ Dicam equidem, licet ille mihi mortemque minetur ;” “ He would speak truth, though it cost him his life.”
And so weep inoley d:dévee is to give liberty of speech. Boldness and confidence absolutely is oa pfos. Ours leave Beza (which they do seldom), and render this word “ confidence.” It is used frequently in the New Testament; sometimes ad- verbially, for “ boldly,” “openly,” “plainly,” especially by John in the Gospel; sometimes substantively, for “ boldness,” or “ confidence;” but constantly in an indifferent sense. Nowhere doth it denote any Christian grace, but only in this epistle of Paul and the first epistle of John.
Kal ro xadynue ris taridos. Vulg. Lat., “et gloriam spei,” “the glory of hope.” So the Rhemists. “Gloriationem spei,” “the glorying” (or “boasting”) “of hope,” Arias, Hrasm., Vatab. Ours,“the rejoicing of hope,” wanting a word to render “gloriatio ;” usual, [7. ¢., indifferent, ] and not restrained to an ill sense, And xavxnue is sometimes used for dyarrlaue. Beza, “ Spem illam de qua glori- amur,” “that hope whereof we boast.” This word is peculiar to Paul, and not used in the New Testament but by him, and by him frequently; as are also xevyeoue: and xavynorc. And it is a word, as that foregoing, ex ray wéowy, of an indifferent sense and acceptation, which may be applied either unto good or evil. Some zavynue, or “ boasting,” is not good, James iv. 16; and there is a xavynpece which here and elsewhere our apostle commends, a rejoicing, or exultation in that which is good.
Tas caridos. Syr., 79304, “ of his hope;” that is, the hope we have in fiieni? Ethiop., “ If we hold fast our grace, and our rejoicing, and our hope.”
BeCorloey war ho yay, “firmam retinuerimus.” BeCa/av is properly referred to rapénolav, not agreeing with ~avxnwe in gender, nor with ¢Aridec in case; which latter it may have yet respect unto, supposing a trajection in the words. Our translators have fitly rendered these words by “ holding fast our hope firm;” for “firm” regards the thing held, and not our manner of holding. Beza supposeth — it ought to be @eCa/ov, but unnecessarily (as such conjectures were the only fault of that great interpreter), for it refers principally to regénolay. ‘The Syriac ex- presseth it not.
The rest of the words are plain and obvious. Only the Vulgar Latin stumbles oft
VER. 3-6.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 531
in this verse. It renders ov vines eowev, “quae domus sumus nos,” as the Rhemists; * which house we are,” for “whose house are we.” The translator seems to have read 6s, not ov: and so Beza affirms that he found it in one Greek copy.
And again, “Christ as a son in domo sua,” “in his house;” that is @y oi’xa avrov, for éai rev oixov, “over his own house.” The Rhemists retain “in his house,” corrupting the sense.
Avrov, not avrov, “ his own house,” not “ his house;” or, if the relative be re- tained, it refers unto Christ,—* I will,” saith he, “build my church,”—and not to God the Father.
Ver. 3-6.—For this [man] was counted worthy of more glory [was more honourable| than Moses; inasmuch as he who hath builded the house [an house] hath more honour than the house. For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God. And Moses verily [was] faithful in all his house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were [after] to be spoken. But Christ [was faithful] as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of Lor glorying in] the hope firm unto the end.
The apostle proceeds in these words with his design of evidencing the excellency and prelation of Christ above Moses, as he had done before in reference unto angels and all other revealers of the will of God unto the church, reserving an especial consideration for him who was of especial esteem with the Hebrews. Herewithal he expresseth the reason of his desire that they would seriously “consider” him, namely, in his person and offices.
Two things in general are to be borne in mind for the right under- standing of these words, and the meaning of the apostle in them :—
First, That he is now dealing with the Hebrews in the last and greatest instance of the excellency of the gospel, taken from the con- sideration of his person by whom it was revealed; for here he pre- fers him above Moses, whose dignity was the last plea and pretence of the Hebrews for retaining their old church-state and customs, But no plea or pretence will prescribe unto the authority and honour of Jesus Christ.
Secondly, That the subject he here treats of is not his utmost in- tention; but he useth it as an argument or medium to prevail with
>
1 READINGS.—Lachmann and Tischendorf read 2éy instead of tavxep. The latter also omits entirely péxps téAovs, and instead of ofxoyv airod he gives oixoy airov. The English translation of the words, “his own house,” is founded on ‘the former reading; which is corroborated by the Vulgate, “in domo sua.”
Exvosition.—Ebrard finds athreefold difference between Christ and Moses;— .the former filling the place of the xaracxevecas, the latter that of a part of the familia;-the former being Lord of the living house, the latter serving in a house ‘which was for a testimony of a future revelation; the former being the Son, the latter a servant.—Ep.