Σ a - a3 , 3 λησεν ἡμῖν ἐν υἱῷ, 2. ἢ ὃν ἔθηκε κληρονόμον πάντων, δι᾿ οὗ καὶ τοὺς > αἰῶνας ἐποίησεν,! 3. “ὃς ὧν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ
i. 16. Col. i. 15, 7; Phil. ii.6; Apoc. iv. 11.
249
Ps. ii. 8; Matt. xxi. 38; Joan. 1. 3; Eph. iii. 9; Col.
ς viii. 1 et ix. 12, etc., et xii.2; Ps. ex. 13 Sap. vii. 26; Joan. i. 4, et xiv. 9; 2 Cor. iv.4;
1T.R. in DbKLP with other MSS. and versions; και εποιησεν τ. αιωνας in
NABD%, etc., E, etc.
two revelations is found in this, that in the one God spoke ἐν rots προφήταις, while in the other He spoke ἐν vig. ‘The prophets” stand here, not for the
rophetic writings as in Jo. vi. 45; Acts
iii. 40, etc.; but for all those who had poken for God, and especially for that great series of men from Abraham and Moses onwards who had been the organs of revelation and were identified with it (cf. the Parable of the Wicked Husband- men). The prep. év is not used in its instrumental sense (cf. Habak. ii. 1), nor is it = διὰ, it brings God closer to ‘tthe hearers of the prophetic word, and implies that what the prophets spoke, God spoke. SoHofmannand Weiss. [‘‘Ipse in cordibus eorum dixit quicquid illi foras vel dictis vel factis locuti sunt hominibus,” Herveius.] The full significance of év is seen in ἐν vid. é@vvt@ without the article must be translated ‘‘in a son” or ‘in one who is a son,” indicating the nature of the person through whom this final revelation was made. The revelation now consisted not merely in what was said [προφήταις] but in what He was [vids]. This revelation was final because made by one who in all He is and does, reveals the Father. By uttering Himself He expresses God. A Son who can be -characteristically designated a son, carries in Himself the Father’s nature and does not need to be instructed in purposes «which are also and already His own, nor to be officially commissioned and em- powered to do what He cannot help doing. ‘Noman knoweth the Son but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him” (cf. John i. 18). The whole section on “The Son of God”? in Dalman’s Die Worte Ὕεσι should be read in this connection. “Son” is here used in its Messianic reference, as the quotations -cited in vv. 5, 6 prove. The attributes ascribed to the Son are at the same time Divine attributes. [So Baur and Pfleiderer. Ménégoz denies this]. The writer appar- ently experiences no difficulty in attaching to one and the same personality the
creating of the world and the dying to cleanse sin.
The Son is described in six particulars which illustrate His supremacy and His fitness to reveal the Father: (1) His -destination to universai lordship (ὃν ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον πάντων); (2) His agency in creation (δι οὗ ἐποίησεν τ. αἰῶνας) ; (3) His likeness to God (av ἀπαύγασμα κ.τ.λ.); (4) His relation to the world) φέρων τὰ πάντα); (5) His redemptive work (καθαρισμὸν . « - ποιησάμενος) ; (6) His exaltation (ἐκά- θισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ κ.τ.λ... Cf. Vaughan. ὃν ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον πάντων “whom He appointed heir of all’. Davidson, Weiss and others understand this of the actual elevation of Christ, on His ascen- sion, to the Lordship of all. [‘‘ Dass der Verfasser bei diesen Worten an den erhohten Christus gedacht habe, halten wir fur unzweifelhaft,”’ Riehm, p. 295]. But the position of the clause in the verse and the subsequent mention of the exaltation in ver. 3 rather indicate that ἔθηκεν has here its ordinary meaning (see Elsner and Bleek) of “ appointed,” and that the reference is to Ps. ii. 8 δώσω σοι ἔθνη τὴν κληρονομίαν σου κ.τ.λ., 5ο Hofmann. Through this Son God is to accomplish His purpose. The Son is to reign over all. The writer lifts the thought of the despondent to Christ’s triumph and Lordship. In the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen Christ speaks of Himself as Heir. It is involved in the Sonship; Gal. iv. 7. It is not simply possessor but possessor because of a relation to the Supreme. The Father could not be called κληρονόμος. Dalman shows that the znd Psalm ‘deduces from the filial relation of the King of Zion to God, that universal dominion, originally proper to God, is bequeathed to the Sonasan inheritance,” Worte Fesu, p. 220, E. Tr. 268. Cf. also Matt. xi. 27, πάντα μοι παρεδόθη ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός pov. [Chrysostom says the use of the term brings out two points τὸ τῆς υἱότητος γνήσιον, καὶ τὸ τῆς κυριότητος ἀναπόσπαστον. The inheritance is not fully entered upon, until it can be said