315.
πρὸς αὐτὸν, “Ὥμοσε Κύριος καὶ οὐ μεταμεληθήσεται, Σὺ ἱερεὺς εἷς
τὸν αἰῶνα κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδέκ
37 - ‘ sae 1”. 22, Ἢ κατὰ τοσοῦτον “ πὶ viii. 6.
1T.R. in ΝΕΑΡΕΚΤΙΕ, d, e, Copt., Syrutr, Aeth.; om. κατα τ. ταξιν Med x. with
ΝΣ ἾΒΟ, 17, 80, f, vg., Sah., Basm., Arm.
2T.R. ScD°EKL ; τοσουτο with ΔΝ ΑΒΟ, 17, 23, 39, 115. Both forms found in Attic though τοσοῦτον is more frequent. See Blass, Gram., p. 36.
xxi. 20, ἦσαν γὰρ προεωρακότες.]. ὃ δὲ μετὰ Spx. “but the other [the new priest] with an oath,” μετὰ of course not being instrumental, but ‘ interposito jurejurando”; where and how this oath is to be found is next explained, it is διὰ τοὐλέγοντος ... “through Him that saith to him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art,” etc. There is no call to translate πρὸς αὐτόν «ἴῃ reference to Him”; neither is there any difficulty in referring the words ὤμοσε . . . μεταμελ. toGod. “ Though the words are not directly spoken by the Lord, they are His by implication. The oath is His ” (Westcott). On the distinction between µετανοέω and µετα- μέλομαι see Trench, Synonyms, 241. “ He who has changed his mind about the past is in the way to change everything ; he who has an after care may have little or nothing more than a selfish dread of the consequences of what he has done.” This, however, does not apply to the LXX (from which the quotation of this verse is taken) where both words are
used to translate OFT),Cf. 1 Kings xv.
29 and 35. κατὰ τοσοῦτο “by so much,” that is, the superiority of the new covenant to the old is in the ratio of eternity to time, of what is permanent and adequate to what is transitory and provisional. κρείττονος διαθή- κης “of a better covenant” [‘‘id est, non infirmae ef inutilis. Frequens in hac epistola epitheton,kpe(rtwy, item αἰώνιος, ἀληθινὸς, δεύτερος, διαφορώτερος, ἕτερος, ζῶν, καινὸς, μέλλων, νέος, πρόσφατος, τέλειος (Bengel)], here first mentioned in the Epistle, but whose character and contents anda relation to the “ foregoing’ covenant are fully explained in the following chapter. Here already its “" betterness ” is recognisable in this, that it supersedes the older, and is itself permanent because perfectly accomplishing the purposes of a covenant.
Ver. 22. διαθήκη in classical Greek means a disposition (διατίθημι) of one’s goods by will; frequent in the orators and sometimes as in Aristoph., Birds, 439,
a covenant. In the LXX it occurs nearly 280 times and in all but four
passages it is the translation of M73
“covenant”. (See Hatch, Essays im Bibl. Greek, 47.) Itis used indifferently of agreements between men and οἱ contracts or engagements between God and man. See Introduction and on ix. 16 and Thayer s.v. Of this “better covenant” Jesus “has become and is”’ [γέγονεν] ἔγγνος “surety”. €yyvos is explained in the Greek commentators by ἐγγυητής, which is the commoner of the two forms, at least in later Greek. ἔγγυος occurs several times in the fragments from the second century B.C. given in Grenfell and Hunt’s Greek Papyri, series ii.; also in the fragments from first century A.D. given in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri. It isnot the exact equivalent of μεσίτης (found in a similar connection viii. 6, 1x. 15, xii. 24) which is a more comprehensive term. It has been questioned why in this place ἔγγυος is used, and Peirce answers: “1 am apt to think he was led to this by his having just before used the word ἐγγίζομεν, and that he did it for the sake of the paronomasia”’. And Bruce says: “ There is literary felicity in the use of the word as playfully alluding to the foregoing word ἐγγίζομεν. There is more than literary felicity, for the two words probably have the same root, so that we might render ἔγγυος., the one who insures permanently near relations with God.” More likely he chose the word because his purpose was not to exhibit Jesus as negotiating the covenant, but especially as securing that it should achieve its end. It has been debated whether it is meant that Jesus was surety for men to God, as was held by both Lutheran and Reformed writers,or with others (Grotius, Peirce, etc.), that He was surety for God to men [‘ His being a surety relates to His acting in the behalf of God towards us and to His assuring us of the divine favour, and to His bestowing the benefits promised by God” (Peirce)} or, with Limborch, Baumgarten and Schmid (see Bleek) that he was surety for both.