The Pulpit Commentary — Hebrews — Section 16

who.t we mean by the eub,tanoe of the the impression left on the wo.x were the Godhead; o.nd hence came misunderstand- xa.pa,c-r¾,p of the seal. Thie misconception ings during the Arian controversy. Bull would mialeo.d (as might e.leo li.1ravya<rµ.a, (' Def. Fid. Nie.,' ii. 9. 11) gives o. co.tcno. if rendered " reflection ") in that it wou Id of insto.ncoe of this uncerto.in ueo.ge. '.rhe seem to represent the Son as distinct from definite doctrine of thc '.rrinity, though God, though stamped with his likeness and apparent in the New '.resto.ment, had not irradiated by his glory. Arian views e.bout as yet come under discussion at the time the SoN, or even mere humanitarian views of the writing of this Epistle, or been as yet abont the Christ, might thus seem coun- scientifico.lly formulated; and hence we must teno.nced. The two words d,ra.{ryanµ.a. and take the word in its general e.nd original xapa1tT¾/p, as has been said, express a similar sense, the same as that now o.tto.ched to its relation to 5o(a e.nd tnr6<r.-auis respectively, etymological equivalent, eubstantia. It o.nd convey the same general idea of tho meo.ne litero.lly, "a standing under," o.nd is Son's eternal rele.tion to the Father. But used (1) in a physical sense, for "founda- both are, of course, bnt figures, each ne- tion," ae in Ps. lxix. 2, " I sink in deep cessarily inadequate, of the inscrutable mire where there is no standing," where reality, If we may distinguish between the LXX. has ~1r&<r.-a<r1s: (2) metnphoric- them, it may be said that the former o.lly, for "confidence" or "certainty," e.e especially intimates the view of the opero.- below, eh. iii. 15 and 2 Cor. ix. 4 ; (3) tion and energy of the Godhead being metaphyeico.lly, for tho.t which underlies through the Son, while the latter more the phenomena of things and constitutes distinctly brings out the idea of the Son their essential being. Of the substance, being the Manifestation of who.t the God- understood in the last sense, of God the head is, e.nd especially of what it is to us. Son ie the xapa1<.-¾,p, which word expresses And upholding all things. We ha.ve hero o. eimile.r kind of relation to the Di vine still the present participle, denoting the substance e.s li.1ra{yya<rµ.a does to the Divine intrinsic operation of him who was re- glorv. Derived from xapd.<r<rw (equivo.lent to vealed ns SoN. 1'hough the word <f,<pE<v, in "mark," "grave," or "stamp," with an the sense of upholding or sustaining crea- engraven or imprinted che.re.cter), its proper tion, does not occur elsewhere in the;New meaning is the perceptible image on Testament, it co.n ho.rdly ho.rn any other the mo.terie.l eo stamped or engraved, of meaning here, considering tho context. We which it thus becomes the xapan¾,p. 'l'hus find a similnr use of it in Numb. xi. H; the "image and superscription" on a coin Deut. i. 9, "to bear (<f,<pE<V) o.11 this people ie its xapa,c.-¾,p, manifesting what the coin alone." And in the lo.ter Greek and ro.bbioi- is. The instance of the tribute money cal writers parallels o.re found. Chrysostom (Matt. xxii. 20) o.t once occurs to us: our interprets <f>•P"'" o.s meaning 1tvfl•pvwv, .-a Lord pointed to the xapal<T'i/p on the coin 61a1rlTrTov.-a <rvy1tpa.-wv, which comes to the as mo.nifesting its ~&,,...a<r<s, as being same thingns "upholding" or "sustaining." Crosnr'e money. Thus o.leo the lineaments The meaning is tho.t not only were "the of a countenance o.re called ita xapa1<.-¾,p, e.e worlds" mo.de through him; in his Divine in Herod., i. llG, 'O xapa,c-r¾,p .-oii 1rpo<rdiTrou. nature he ever " upholds" the '' all thiugs " A paeso.ge in Philo is illuetro.tive of the which were made through him, o.nd of sense intended; and it is to be observed which, as SoN, he was appointed "Heir;" (both with rego.rd to the expression before cf. Col. i. 17, "And in him o.11 things con- us and to the preceding li...-a{yya<rµ.a) that sist." And this upholding operation must the Alexo.ndrian theologians are important not be supposed to have been in abeyance guides to the interpreto.tion of phraijes in during the period of his humiliaLion. He this Epistle, their influence on its modes of was still who.t he ho.u been eternally, though thought ond expression being perceptible. he had "omptied himself" of the state o.nd He so.ye ('De Plant. Noe.,'§ 5) that Moses preroge.tives of Deity (Phil. if. 7); cf. called the rational soul the image ( ,l,cova) (though the text is somewhat doubtful) of the Divine and Invisible, ae being John iii.13, "The Son of man, which is (&v) o~<r,016,i'<rav ,cal TIITl'w6,i<rav <r<f,pa-yw, e,oii, ;js in heaven." By the word (p-1,µ.an) ot his 6 xapa,c.-¾,p lu.-111 6 li.,6,os ;\&-yos. Here, be it power is an expression elsewhere used of o_bserved, xapa1<.-~p is used for the form or the voluntas efficaz of Deity-the utterance hnee.ment of the Divine see.I itself, not for of Divine power; cf. eh. xi. 3, "The worlds the copy stamped on the plo.stio material. were fro.med by the Word (~-1,µ.an) of God." Aud it is applied, as here, to the "Eternal The writer could hardly have used it in this Wo1·d," llB being the mo.nifestation of who.t conneetion, if speaking of o. created being. the unseen Godhead is. Hence it would As to the reference of "his" before " power,'' bu wrong to understand the word, as some whether to the subject of the sentence or to lmvo ,lone, as deuoting the form impressed God, there is tho same ambiguity in the Ly ono substcmco on anolhcr-as though Greek as in the English trnnslation. Evea  6 THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. [cu. I, 1-14,