here referred to Him. This idea is negatived by εἰσερχόμ. It was when incarnate he used the words. Neither is
it merely meant that by his conduct Christ showed that these words were a true expression of his mind. Rather, the words are considered prophetic, depicting beforehand the mind of Christ regarding O.T. sacrifice, and His own mission. In several O.T. passages God’s preference for obedience is affirmed (1 Sam. xv. 22, Ps. |. 8, Micah, Isa. i. 11, Hosea, vi. 6) but this psalm is here selected because the phrase “‘a body hast thou prepared for me” lends itself to the writer’s purpose. In the Psalm, indeed, sacrifice is contrasted with obedience to the will of God. A body is prepared for Christ that in it He may obey God. But it is the offering of this body as a sacrifice in contrast to the animal sacrifices of the law, which this writer emphasises (ver. το). ‘Lhe con-
2—49.
θέλημά σου”.
343
8. ᾿Ανώτερον λέγων, ““Ὅτι θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν]
καὶ ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ ἠθέλησας οὐδὲ εὐδόκησας "᾿-
Ίθνσιας και προσφορας in ΝΑΟΙ, 17, 23, ἃ, ε, f, vg., Sah., Copt.; Τ.Ε. in
NcDcEKL, Aeth.
trast is between animal offerings and the offering of Himself by the Son. And what ts said is that God did not will the former, but willed the other, and that the former are thereby: abolished, and the other is established in their room, and as the will of God is effectual. The passage in the epistle is far from saying that the essence or worth of Christ’s offering of Himself lies simply in obedience to the will of God. It does not refer to the point wherein lies the intrinsic worth of the Son’s offering, or whether it may be resolved into obedience unto God. Its point is quite different. It argues that the Son’s offering of Himself is the true and final offering for sin, because it is the sacrifice, which, according to prophecy, God desired to be made” (Davidson).
The writer, in citing Ps. 40, follows the LXX, slightly altering the construction of the last clause by omitting ἠβουλήθην, and thus making τοῦ ποιῆσαι depend upon ἥκω, “1 am come to do thy will”’. Cf. ver. 9.
θυσίαν καὶ προσφοράν repre-
senting προ, TTI} οἵ the Psalm,
animal sacrifice and meal offering. Cf. Ephes. ν. 2. οὐκ ἠθέλησας “thou didst not will,’ a contrast is intended between this clause and τὸ θέλημά σου of the last clause of ver. 7. σῶμα δὲ κατ- ηρτίσω por “but a body didst Thou prepare for me,” implying that in this body God’s will would be accomplished. Cf. νετ. 10, The words are the LXX ren- mM) ON, “ears didst Thou dig [or open] forme”. The meaning is the same. The opened ear as the medium through which the will of God was received, and the body by which it was accomplished, alike signify obedience to the will of God. ὃλοκαυ- τώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας
representing som ην of the
psalm, whole burnt offering and sin- offering. περὶ ἁμαρτ. occurs frequently in Leviticus to denote sin offering, θυσία being omitted. οὐκ ηὐδόκησας “thou didst not take pleasure in”. τότε εἶπον. Then,” that is, when it was apparent that not by animal sacrifices or material offerings could God be
dering of %°
propitiated, “1 said, Lo! I am come to do Thy will, O God,” to accomplish that purpose of Thine which the sacrifices of the O.T. could not accomplish. That this is the correct construction is shown by ver. 9. For construction, cf. Burton, M. and T., 397 ; and Prof. Votaw, Use of Infin. in Ν. Τ. ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται περὶ ἐμοῦ “in a book [lit. ina roll οἵ a book] it has been written concerning me’’. κεφαλίς denoting ‘a little head” was first applied to the end of the stick on which the parchment was rolled, and from which in artistically finished books two cornua proceeded. [See Bleek, Rich’s Dict. of Antiq., and Hatch’s Concordance} In the Psalm the phrase is joined with the previous words and might be read, “Lo! I am come, with a roll of a book written for me,” in other words, with written instructions regarding the divine will as affecting me. The words can hardly mean that in Scripture predictions have been recorded regarding the writer of the Psalm. This, however, may be the meaning attached to the words as cited in the epistle, although it is quite as natural and legitimate to retain the original meaning and understand the words as a parenthetical explanation that Christ acknowledged as binding on Him all that had been written for the instruction of others in the will of God. But the likelihood is that if the writer was not merely transcribing the words as part of his quotation without attaching a definite meaning to them, he meant that the coming of the Messiah to do God’s will had been written in the book of God’s purpose. (Cf. Ps lvi. 9.)