319
of priests who had human weakness: the word of the oath (already explained in vv. 20-22), τῆς μετὰ τὸν νόμον, “which [oath-swearing] came after the law,’’ and therefore showed that the law needed revisal and supplementing [‘‘ Debent posteriora in legibus esse per- fectiora’’ (Grotius)]. It might have been argued that the Law coming after Mel- chizedek introduced an improved priest- hood. It is therefore worth while to point out that the adoption of the Melchizedek priesthood as the type of the Messianic was subsequent to the Law, and conse- quently superseded it. υἱὸν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τετελειωμένον [appoints], “Ὰ son who has been made perfect for ενεγ”. υἱὸν, without the article, be- cause attention is called to the nature of the new priest, as in i. 1. ‘‘ Son,” in the fullest sense, as described in i. 1-4, and in contrast to ἀνθρώπους. He also, though a Son, became man, and was exposed to human temptations, but by this experience was “ perfected”’ as our Priest.’ Cf. vv. 7-10. ‘For ever perfected” is directly contrasted with the sinful yielding to infirmity exhibited by the Levitical priests, and must there- fore be referred to moral perfecting, as explained in chap. v. This perfectness of the Son is confirmed and sealed by His exaltation; He is for ever perfected in the sense, as Grotius says, “αἴ nec morti nec ullis adversis subjaceat”. Cf, ix. 27, 28. The A.V. translates ‘‘ conse- crated,” which Davidson denounces, with Alford, as “ altogether false”. But this translation at any rate suggests that it is perfectness as our priest the writer has in view; and the use of τελειόω in Lev. xxl, 10 and other passages cannot be thus lightly set aside.
CuapTer VIII.—Vv. 1-6. The idea of Christ’s priesthood, merely suggested in i. 3, expressly affirmed in ii. 17, has been from iv. 14 onwards enlarged upon and illustrated. It has been shown that Christ is a priest, called by God to this office and proclaimed by God as High Priest. The superiority of His orders as belonging not to the hereditary Aaronic line, but as being ‘‘after the order of Melchisedek,” has also been exhibited. Passing now from the person and qualifications of the Priest, the author proceeds in chap. viii. to illustrate his greatness from a consideration of the place of His ministry. It is in heaven He is seated, a minister of the real tabernacle, not of that which had been pitched by Moses as an image and
220
τὸ
ai. 3, 13, et
αλα et! 5