Til.
τὸν 1 Ἰησοῦν- 2. " πιστὸν ὄντα τῷ ποιήσαντι αὐτὸν, ὡς καὶ Μωσῆς 2 3. "Πλείονος γὰρ δόξης οὗτος ὃ παρὰ Μωσῆν
> , > J , Ἂς ” -“ 3, ς , 12; Matt. ἠξίωται, καθ οσον πλείονα τιμὴν EXEL TOU οἰκου ὁ κατασκευάσας
xvi. 18.
1 Delete Χριστον with SABC*D*MP, 17, 34, 47. 2 Moons in SABDEM ; Μωυσῆς in CKLP, 17. ἔουτος δοξης in KABCDEP; δοξης ουτος KLM.
single article brackets the two designa- tions and Bengel gives their sense: “' τὸν ἀποστ. eum qui Dei causam apud nos agit. τὸν ἀρχ. qui causam nostram apud Deum agit”. These two functions em- brace not the whole of Christ’s work, but all that He did on earth (cf. i. 1-4). The frequent use of ἀποστέλλειν by our Lord to denote the Father’s mission of the Son authorises the present application of ἀπόστολος. It is through Him God has spoken (i. 1). Moses is never called ἀπόστολος (a word indeed which occurs only once in LXX) though in Exod. iii. 10 God says ἀποστείλω oe πρὸς Φαραώ. Schoettgen quotes passages from the Talmud in which the high priest is termed the Apostle or messenger of God and of the Sanhedrim, but this is here irrelevant. καὶ ἀρχιερέα, a title which, as ap- plicable to Jesus, the writer explains in chaps. v.-vill. τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν, “ΟΥ̓ our confession,” or, whom we, in distinction from men of other faiths, confess; chiefly no doubt in distinction from the non-Christian Jews. ὁμολογία, as the etymology shows, means “οὗ one speech with,” hence that in which men agree as their common creed, their con- fession, see ref. As Peake remarks: “1 this means profession of faith, then ‘ the readers already confess Jesus as high priest, and this is not a truth taught them in this Epistle for the first time’.” [Carpzov quotes from Philo (De Somn.): ὃ μὲν δὴ μέγας ᾿Αρχιερεὺς τῆς ὁμολογίας, but here another sense is intended.] Ἰησοῦν is added to preclude the possi- bility of error. ᾿Ιησοῦς occurs in this Epistle nine times by itself, thrice with Χριστός.
Ver. 2. The characteristic, or par- ticular, qualification of Jesus which is to hold their attention is His trustworthi- ness or fidelity. πιστὸν ὄντα might be rendered “as being faithful”. The fidelity here in view, though indirectly to men and encouraging them to trust, is directly to Him who made Him, sc., Apostle and High Priest. τῷ ποιή- σαντι αὐτόν. The objection urged by Bleek, Liinemann and Alford that
ποιεῖν Can mean ‘appoint’? only when followed by two accusatives is not valid. The second accusative may be under- stood; and in 1 Sam. xii. 6 we find Κύριος 6 ποιήσας τὸν Μωυσῆν καὶ τὸν ᾿Ααρών, words which may have been in the writer’s mind. The Arian transla- tion, ‘‘to Him that created Him,” is out of place. Appointment to office finds its correlative in faithfulness, creation scarcely suggests that idea. The fidelity . of Jesus is illustrated not by incidents from His life nor by the crowning proof given in His death, nor is it argued from the admitted perfections of His character, but in accordance with the plan of the Epistle it is merely compared to that of Moses, and its superiority is implied in the superiority of the Son to the servant. He was faithful ‘‘as also Moses in all His house,”’ this being the crowning in- stance of fidelity testified to by God Himself, 6 θεράπων pov Μωυσῆς ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ οἴκῳ μου πιστός εστι (Num. xii. 7), where the context throws the emphasis on ὅλῳ. ‘The ‘house of God’ is the organised society in which He dwells” (Westcott), cf. 1 Tim. iii. 15. Weiss says that the words ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ οἴκῳ αὐτοῦ “necessarily belong” to πιστὸν ὄντα. This is questionable, because the writer’s point is that Jesus is faithful not “in” but “over” the house of God (ver. 6). Ver 3. The reason is now assigned why Jesus and His fidelity should eclipse in their consideration that of Moses. The reason is that ‘‘this man”’ (οὗτος, “' the person who is the subject of our con- sideration”) ‘‘has been and is deemed worthy of greater glory (‘amplioris gloriae,’ Vulg. πλείονος, qualitative as in xi. 4) than Moses, in proportion as he that built the house has more honour than the house.” The genitive follows the comparative πλείονα. The ‘ greater glory” is seen in the more important place occupied by Him in the fulfilment of God’s purpose of salvation. This glory of Jesus is as much greater than that of Moses, as the cause is greater than the effect, the builder than the house. [The principle is stated by Philo (De Plant...