Ψεττο. λαληθείσης yap πάσης ἐντολῆς. . . . “For when Moses had spoken to the people every command- ment of the law,” this being the need-’ ful preliminary, that the people might clearly understand the obligations they assumed on entering the covenant, he then took the blood of the calves and the goats, etc. In Exod. xxiv. 3 ff., an ac- count is given of the inauguration of the first covenant. To that narrative certain:
.
18—22,
oar
καὶ πάντα τὸν λαὸν ἐρράντισε, 20. "λέγων, “Τοῦτο τὸ αἷμα τῆς: Exod.
διαθήκης ἧς ἐνετείλατο πρὸς ὑμᾶς ὁ Θ
» wn , kal πάντα τὰ σκεύη τῆς λειτουργίας τῷ αἵματι ὁμοίως ἐρράντισε. t ‘ x 3 ᾳ , ὰ x / ‘ ‘ ΧΧΙΧ. και σχεδὸν ἐν αἵματι πάντα καθαρίζεται κατὰ τὸν νόμον, καὶ χωρὶς Lev.
additions of no importance are here made. In Exodus no mention is made of goats, only of μοσχάρια. (See Westcott on this discrepancy.) Probably this addition is due to an echo of vv. 12,13. Water, which was added to the blood to prevent coagulation or possibly as a symbol of cleansing; (cf. Jo. xix. 34; 1 Jo. v. 6) scarlet wool, κόκκινος, so called from κόκκος “the grain or berry of the ilex coccifera’”’ used in dyeing (cf. Lev. xiv. 4) and the Ayssop or wild marjoram on which the wool was tied, are all added as asso- ciated with sacrifice in general, and all connected with the blood and the sprink- ling. ἐράντισεν here takes the place of the κατεσκέδασε of Exodusand the action is not confined to the people as in the original narrative but includes αὐτὸ τὸ βιβλίον, the book itself, that is, even the book in which Moses had written the words of the Lord, the terms of the covenant. Everything connected with the covenant bore the mark of blood, of death. Again, in ver. 20, instead of the ἰδοὺ of the LXX, which literally renders the Hebrew we have τοῦτο τὸ αἷμα κ.τ.λ., a possible echo of our Lord’s words in instituting the new covenant, and instead of διέθετο of Exod. xxiv. 8 we have éve- τείλατο corresponding with the ἐντολή of ver. το.
Ver.21. καὶ τὴν σκηνὴν δὲ.... “And he also in like manner sprinkled with the blood the tabernacle and all the instruments of the service”. The taber- nacle, however, was not yet erected when the covenant was instituted. Delitzsch supposes that a subsequent though kin- dred transaction is referred to; and colour is given to this supposition by the separa- tion of this verse from ver. 19. But against it is the article in τῷ αἵματι, ‘“‘the blood,” apparently the blood de- fined in wv. 19 and 20; although it is just possible the writer may have meant ‘the blood” which formed part of the means of service. Neither was it by Moses but by Aaron the tabernacle and the altar were sprinkled with blood and so cleansed on the day of Atonement. When first erected ἡ σκηνὴ καὶ πάντα τὰ σκεύη αὐτῆς were anointed with oil (Exod. xl. 9) but Josephus records a tradition that it
νο Dye
4 xxiv. 8;
εός ᾿- 21. "καὶ τὴν σκηνὴν δὲ Matt. XXVi. 28,
22)ς Exod.
36;
viii. 15, Ig, et
t Lev. xvil. 11.
Xvi. 14. was consecrated not only with oil but also with blood (Ant. iii. 8, 6). It seems that the author adopts this tradition, and ascribes to Moses at the original consecra- tion of the tabernacle the cleansing rites which afterwards were annually per- formed by Aaron on the day of Atone- ment.
Ver. 22. καὶ σχεδὸν ἐν αἵματι πάντα .. . ““Απά one may almost say that according to the law ail things are cleansed with blood, and without blood- shedding is no remission”. oyeSdv qualifies the whole clause and not only πάντα. Whether it qualifies both clauses, as Bleek, Weiss and others suppose, is more doubtful. Westcott and Delitzsch confine its reference to the first clause. ἐν αἵματι “with blood” the usual instrumental ἐν. πάντα, all things, especially, of course, those that were used in God’s worship or brought into His tabernacle. Water was used for cleansing from certain pollutions. κατὰ τὸν νόμον, it was not only a contrivance of man but the law of God which enacted that cleansing must be by blood. καὶ χωρὶς αἱματεκχυσίας, “without blood-shedding,” a word which occurs only here in Bibl. Greek. See Steph- anus s.v. In all the instances cited in Stephanus it means the shedding of blood. Rendall, then, is quite wrong in main- taining (after Tholuck and De Wette) that it means, not the shedding but the outpouring of the blood at the foot of the altar. ‘‘The essential idea attached to the one act was destruction of life, of the other devotion of the same life to God. Hence the typical significance of the two acts was also quite distinct; outpouring of blood typified in fact, not physical death, but spiritual martyrdom by the surrender of a living will to God in perfect obedience even unto death”. Weiss is strictly accurate in his remark, “αἷμ. kann ohne eine lokale Naherbe- stimmung nicht die Ausgiessung des Blutes am Altare bezeichnen”. The evidence is furnished by Bleek. The words, if not suggested by, inevitably recall our Lord’s words (Matt. xxvi. 28) τοῦτο γάρ ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά pov τῆς διαθήκης τὸ περὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυννόμενον