Ver. 13. This enormous change is in fact being made. ἐφ᾽ ὃν yap λέγε- ται ταῦτα... . ‘“ For He with refer- ence to whom this [ττοίῃ Ps. 4] is said hath partaken of another tribe from which no man hath given attendance at the altar”. Here for the first time definitely in this chapter the writer in- troduces the fulfilment of the Psalm. It was spoken of the Messiah, and He did not belong to the tribe of Levi, but
απο
λέγεται ταῦτα, φυλῆς ἑτέρας μετέσχηκεν, ἀφ᾽ ἧς οὐδεὶς προσέσχηκε
g Esa. xi. 1; τῷ Matt.i.2, ‘
θυσιαστηρίῳ: 14. "πρόδηλον γὰρ ὅτι ἐξ ᾿Ιούδα ἀνατέταλκεν 6
εἰς, Luc. Κύριος ἡμῶν, εἰς ἣν φυλὴν οὐδὲν περὶ ἱερωσύνης ] Μωσῆς ἐλάλησε.
iii. 33.
15. Kat περισσότερον ἔτι κατάδηλόν ἐστιν, εἰ κατὰ Thy ὁμοιότητα
1T.R. in DcKL ; περι ιερεων ουδεν in ΑΝ”, etc., ABC*D*EP, 17, ἃ, ε (de sacerdot-
ibus nihil), arm.
φυλῆς ἑτέρας μετέσχηκεν, has thrown in his lot with, or become a member of (cf. ii. 14) a tribe of a different kind from the Levitical (ver. xi. 11, 12) being characterised by this, that from it ἀφ᾽ ἧς issuing from which, not ἐξ, [as in ver. 14] no one has given attendance at the altar. (Cf. x Tim. iv. 13; Acts xx. 28; Hdt., ix. 33, γυμνασίοισι; Thuc., i. 15, τοῖς ναυτικοῖς ; and the equivalent in τ Cor. ix. 13, ot τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ προσ- εδρεύοντες.] It is doubtful whether the perfect μετέσχηκεν can bear the meaning put upon it by Vaughan: ‘a striking suggestion of the identity of Christ in heaven with Christ upon earth’. So too Weiss. It might seem preferable to refer it with Burton (88) to the class of perfects which in the N.T. have an aorist sense, γέγονα, εἴληφα, ἔσχηκα. So Weizsacker “ ρεμόσγίε᾽" ; the Vulgate, however, has ‘‘de alia tribu est,” and cf. ἀνατέταλκεν of ver. 14. But the per- fects are best accounted for as referring to the statement of the previous verse. This great change is being made, for he of whom the rroth Psalm was spoken has actually become a member of another
tribe. The result reaches to the change of priesthood. Ver. 14. He now proceeds to name
the tribe πρόδηλον γὰρ ὅτι . . . ‘ For it is evident that out of Judah our Lord has sprung, concerning which tribe Moses said nothing about priests”’. With πρόδηλον may be compared δήπου of ii. 16. The facts of our Lord’s birth were so far known that everyone con- nected Him with Judah. The accounts of Matthew and Luke were accepted (cf. Rev. v. 5). This fact of his origin would naturally militate against His claims to be Priest; but this writer here skilfully reconciles them with Scripture. Weizsacker translates by ‘‘langst be- kannt”’ giving to πρό the temporal meaning. On Clem., ad Cor., xii., Light- foot says: “It may be a question in many passages whether the preposition denotes priority in time or distinctness.” Wetstein quotes from Artemidorus kat ἐφάνη πρόδηλον τὸ ὄναρ μετὰ τὴν
ἀπόφασιν and from Polyaenus τί καὶ χρὴ γράφειν; πρόδηλον γάρ. ἀνατέ- ταλκεν is possibly a reminiscence of Zech, vi. 12, ᾿Ιδοὺ ἀνὴρ ᾿Ανατολὴ ὄνομα αὐτῷ καὶ ὑποκάτωθεν αὐτοῦ ἀνατελεῖ, a passage referred to by Philo, see Carp- zov inloc. eis ἣν φυλὴν, “εἰς is applied to the direction of the thought, as Acts li. 25. Δαυὶδ λέγει eis αὐτόν, aiming at Him, E.i. το, v. 32. Winer, 49, and so in Dion. Hal., πολλοὶ ἐλέχθησαν εἰς τοῦτο λόγοι, and cf. our own expression, “He spoke {ο such and such points”. Vulg. translates ‘‘in quatribu’”’. What- ever Moses spoke regarding priests was spoken with reference to another tribe and not with reference to Judah.
Vv. 15-19. Imperfection of the Levi- tical priesthood more abundantly proved by contrast with the nature of the Mel-
chizedek priest.
Ver. 15. καὶ περισσότερον ἔτι κατά- δηλόν ἐστιν. “And more abundantly still is it evident” [Weizsacker excel- lently ‘‘Und noch zum _ Ueberfluss weiter liegt die Sache Κατ”... What is it that is more abundantly evident ? Weiss says, It is, that an alteration of the priesthood has been made. Simi- larly Vaughan, “ And this insufficiency and consequent supersession of the Levi- tical priesthood is still more conclusively proved by the particular designation of the predicted priest (in Ps. cx. 4) as a priest, etc.”. So too Westcott. But from the twelfth verse the argument has been directed to show that there has been a change of law, and this argument is continued in νετ. 15. This change of law is evident from the fact that Jesus belongs to the non-Levitical tribe of Judah, and yet more superabundantly evident from the nature of the new priest who is seen to be no longer “ after the law of a carnal commandment’. So Bleek after GEcumenius, Davidson, Farrar and others. κατάδηλον, quite evident, asin Xen., Mem.,i. 4, 14, οὐ γὰρ πάνυ σοι κατάδηλον ; Wetstein quotes from Hippocrates, ἔτι δὲ μᾶλλον κατάδηλον γίνεται. In πρόδηλον the preposition has the force of ‘‘ob” in ‘‘ obvious ”’ ; in