The Pulpit Commentary — Hebrews — Section 22

vii.-fx.; xi. 1, 10: Jer. xxiii. 5: xxxiii. 15; 11e1<pi#v: and Rom. i. 4, -rov bpur9frror vlov 0,ov Micah iv.-v.; Zech. vi. 12, etc.). Its 11ppli- lv livv&I'" •.• i~ baa-ro.<1•"'• vEt<p&v: cf. Ach 011tion to Christ in the New 'festo.ment is ii. 30 and Acts xiii. 32, etc., "The premisu distinct and frequent (of. Acts iv. 25: xiii. that was made unto the fathers,! God bath 33; Rev. ii. 27: xii. 5; xix. 15). As to the fulfilled the same unto their children, in phrase, "This day have I begotten thee," that he bath raised up Jesus again: as it is there is a difference of view among both also written in the second psalm, Thou art ancient and modem expositors. The word my Son: this day !,ave I begotten thee." "begotten" (-ye-ylv11111<a) naturally suggests This last text, be it observed, is almost con- p.ovo-y•v~s, and is hence to.ken by some as clusive against the eternal generation being referring to the eternal generation of the understood as referred to; as is also tho ap- Son: in which case it c11n have had no ap- plication of the same text infra, eh. v. 5, plication in any conceivable sense to the where it is quoted in proof of Christ's ap- human type. " Thie day •• he,s also in this pointment to the eternal priesthood_ [" The case to be explained e,s denoting the ever- title of begetting is ofitimee in sacred lan- present to-day of eternity. So Origen, in a guage to be measured, not by the scale of striking pe,esage, "It is e11.id to him by God, philosophers' or naturalists' dialect, but of to whom it is always to-day. For God he,e no moral or civil langnage or interpretation. evening, nor (as I deem) any morning, but For they that are sons by adoption only, or the time which is coextensive with hie own next heirs by reversion to a crown or dignity, unbegotten and eternal life is (if I may so are said to be begotten of those which adopt speak) the day in which the Son is begotten, them, or of whom they be the immediate there being thus fonnd no beginning of his heirs or successors : and in this sense in the generation, as neither is there of the day." sacred genealogy (Me.tt. i. 12) J econiah is Athanaeiue takes the same view; also Basil, said to have begotten Salathiel. So that Primasius, Thomae Aquinas, and many David upon his own occasions (whether upon others. The main objection to it is the in- his anointing to the crown of Judah in applicability of such a meaning of the words, Hebron, or of Israel in Zion) might in the even in a subordinate sense, to David or any literal sense avouch these words of himself, other king of Israel. Allard, indeed, urges 'I will preach the law whereof the Lord that this meaning agrees best with the con- hath said unto me, Thou art my son; this text in the Epistle, on the ground that the day have I begotten thee.' For David to eternal being of the SoN, having been stated call the day of his coronation, or of his in the exordium, might be expected to be re- designation to the crown of Judah, or of all ferred to in tho proof. But this is hardly to Israel, his birthday, or begetting of Goel, the point. The writer has now begun his by whose special power and providence he argument from the Old Testament, o.nd is was crowned, is not so harsh as some haply engaged in showing tbe idea involved in the would deem it that either know not or con- term SoN as applied therein to the Messiah. sider not that it was usue.l in other states Thie, therefore, and not what he has said or kingdoms beside Judah to celebrate previously, is what we have to regard in two natalea dies, two solemn ne.ti vities or our interpretation; and the most obvious birthdo.ys in honour of their kings o.nd view of the phrase, as it occurs in the psalm emperors : the one thoy co.lied diem natalem itself, is to regard it ns a figure denoting impera!oris, the other diem natalem imperii; forcibly the paternity of God; cf. Jer. ii. 27, the one the birthday of the emperor when "They say to the wood, Thou art my father: he was born of hie natural mother, the other to the stone, Thou hast begotten me." It the birthday of him o.s he was emperor, which expresses the idea that the " Son of God" we coll the coronation day. 'fhe reo.son spoken of derives his existence as such might hold more peculiar in Do.vid than in from him, and not from human ancestry. o.ny other princes, beco.uee he wns the first Chrysostom, among the ancients, under- of all the seed of Abraham that took posses- st11nds the phrase as thus referring to the sion of the hill of Zion, and sottled the sonship assigned to the Messiah in time, kingdom of Judah, prophesied of by his and not to his eternal being. This view father Jacob, upon himself o.ud his pos- being taken, " this day," in reference to the terity. . . . Thus Ego hodie genui te, with king, may mean the day of the "decree," or submission of my opinion to better j udg- that of his enthronement on Mount Zion. ment, is a predictiou typico.lly prophctic,\l, In reference to Christ it has been variously which kind of prediction, as hu.th been understood of the time of his incarnation, observed before, is the most concludent; or resurrection, or ascension. Ifit be thought and this one of tbe highest rank in that necessary to assign any definito time to it in kind; that is, an orncle truly meant of its application to Christ, the view of its being David according to the literal sense, and the day of the resurrection is supported by yet fulfilled of Christ, the Son of God, hy such passages as Col. i. 18, ,rpr,,-r&-ro,cos l,c -r0111 his resurrection from the dead, both ac- 12 THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. [en. I. 1-14.