ฮีบรู 1:3 วิจารณ์

In this chapter we have a twofold comparison stated: I. Between the evangelical and legal dispensation; and the excellency of the gospel above that of the law is asserted and proved (Heb 1:1-3). II. Between the glory of Christ and that of the highest creatures, the angels; where the pre-eminence is justly given to the Lord Jesus Christ, and clearly demonstrated to belong to him (Heb 1:4 to the end).

The intention of this epistle being to demonstrate the superior excellency of the Gospel revelation to the legal one, the apostle begins with the divine author of it, in which they both agree, and observes that in other things they differ. The revelation under the law was made in times past, the Gospel revelation in these last days; the former was made to the Jewish fathers that were of old, the latter to the then present apostles; the one was made at sundry times, and in divers manners, the other was made at once, and in one way; the one was made by the prophets of the Lord, the other by his own son, Heb 1:1 and therefore the latter must be the more excellent; in proof of which the author enlarges on the character of the Son of God, with respect to his person, office, and glory; showing that he is heir of all things, the Maker of the worlds, of the same nature and glory with his Father; is omnipotent, and upholds all things by the word of his power; is the High Priest of his people, who has made satisfaction for their sins, and purged them from them, and is now at the right hand of God, Heb 1:2 He goes on to prove that he is more excellent than the angels, by a variety of arguments, and these supported by testimonies from the Scriptures; as that he has a more excellent name than any of them, being called the Son of God, Heb 1:4 which is proved from Psa 2:7 that he is the object of the worship of angels, Heb 1:6 which is required of them, Psa 97:7 that he is their Maker and Creator, Heb 1:7 which appears from Psa 104:4 that he has an everlasting kingdom, is a righteous King, and is richly anointed above his fellows, Heb 1:8 which is the sense of some passages in Psa 45:6 and that he is the founder and former of the heavens, and of the earth, and will endure when they shall not, Heb 1:10 which is confirmed by testimonies out of Psa 102:25 that he sits at the right hand of God, where none of the angels were ever admitted, Heb 1:13 as is clear from Psa 110:1 and besides, the angels, as they are ministers made by him, they are sent out from him to wait on his people, the heirs of salvation, and minister to them, and therefore he must be greater than they, Heb 1:14.

Who being the brightness of his glory,.... Or "of glory"; of God the Father, the God of glory, and who is glory itself; so called on account of his glorious nature and perfections and because of the glorious manifestations of them in his works of creation and providence, and in the various dispensations of his grace, and especially in his Son; and because he is the author of all glory, in the creatures, in the whole world, in Christ as man and Mediator, and in his own people. Now Christ is the "brightness" of this, as he is God; he has the same glorious nature and perfections, and the same glorious names, as Jehovah, the Lord of glory, &c. and the same glory, homage, and worship given him: the allusion is to the sun, and its beam or ray: so some render it "the ray of his glory"; and may lead us to observe, that the Father and the Son are of the same nature, as the sun and its ray; and that the one is not before the other, and yet distinct from each other, and cannot be divided or separated one from another: so the phrase , "the brightness of his glory", is used of the divine Being, in the Chaldee paraphrases (r); see the Apocrypha. "For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness.'' (Wisdom 7:26) And the express image of his person; this intends much the same as the other phrase; namely, equality and sameness of nature, and distinction of persons; for if the Father is God, Christ must be so too; and if he is a person, his Son must be so likewise, or he cannot be the express image and character of him; See Gill on Col 1:15. And upholding all things by the word of his power; the Syriac version renders it, "by the power of his word", to the same sense, only inverting the words. The Targumist on Ch2 2:6 uses a phrase very much like this, of God, whom the heaven of heavens cannot contain; because, adds he, , "he bears", or "sustains all things by the arm of his power"; and the words are to be understood not of the Father, upholding all things by his essential and powerful Word, his Son; but of the Son himself, who upholds all creatures he has made; bears up the pillars of the universe; preserves every creature in its being, and supports it, and supplies it with the necessaries of life; rules and governs all, and providentially orders and disposes of all things in the world, and that by his all powerful will; which makes it manifest, that he is truly and properly God, and a very fit person to be a priest, as follows: when he had by himself purged our sins; the Arabic and Ethiopic versions seem to refer this to God the Father, as if he, by Christ, made the expiation of sin, and then caused him to sit down at his right hand; but it belongs to the Son himself, who of himself, and by himself alone, and by the sacrifice of himself, made atonement for the sins of his people; which is meant by the purgation of them: he took their sins upon himself, and bore them, and removed them far away, and utterly abolished them, which the priests under the law could not do: and when he had so done, he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; by "Majesty" is meant God the Father, to whom majesty belongs; who is clothed with it, and which is before him: and his "right hand" designs his power, greatness, and glory, and is expressive of the high honour Christ, as man, is possessed of; for his sitting here denotes the glorious exaltation of him in human nature, after his sufferings, and death, and resurrection from the dead; and shows that he had done his work, and was accepted, and was now enjoying rest and ease, honour and glory, in which he will continue; and the place of his session, as well as of the habitation of God, at whose right hand he sits, is on high, in the highest heavens. (r) Targum in 2 Sam xxii. 13. & in Cant. v. 10.

This is the way, dear friends, in which we found our salvation, Jesus Christ, the high priest of our offerings, the protector and helper of our weakness. Through him we fix our gaze on the heights of heaven. In him we see mirrored God’s pure and transcendent face. Through him the eyes of our hearts have been opened. Through him our foolish and darkened understanding springs up to the light. Through him the Master has willed that we should taste immortal knowledge. For, since “he reflects the glory of God,” “he is as much superior to the angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.” For thus it is written: “He makes his angels winds, and his servants flames of fire.” But of his Son this is what the Master said: “You are my son, today I have begotten you. Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.” And again he says to him, “Sit at my right hand till I make your enemies your footstool.” Who are meant by “enemies”? Those who are wicked and resist his will.

There are two coinages, the one of God, the other of the world, and each has its own stamp impressed on it. Similarly, the unbelievers bear the stamp of this world, and the believers the stamp of God the Father in love through Jesus Christ. Unless we willingly choose to die through him in his passion, his life is not in us.

If He made all things freely, and by His own power, and arranged and finished them, and His will is the substance of all things, then He is discovered to be the one only God who created all things, who alone is Omnipotent, and who is the only Father rounding and forming all things, visible and invisible, such as may be perceived by our senses and such as cannot, heavenly and earthly, "by the word of His power;" and He has fitted and arranged all things by His wisdom, while He contains all things, but He Himself can be contained by no one: He is the Former, He the Builder, He the Discoverer, He the Creator, He the Lord of all; and there is no one besides Him, or above Him.

For God the Father none ever saw, and lived. And accordingly it is agreed that the Son of God Himself spake to Moses, and said to the people, "Behold, I send mine angel before thy"-that is, the people's-"face, to guard thee on the march, and to introduce thee into the land which I have prepared thee: attend to him, and be not disobedient to him; for he hath not escaped thy notice, since my name is upon him.

"Because," he answered, "God planted the vineyard, that is to say, He created the people, and gave them to His Son; and the Son appointed His angels over them to keep them; and He Himself purged away their sins, having suffered many trials and undergone many labours, for no one is able to dig without labour and toil. He Himself, then, having purged away the sins of the people, showed them the paths of life." ... "Listen," he said: "the name of the Son of God is great, and cannot be contained, and supports the whole world."

The beloved generates love, and the light immaterial the light inaccessible. "This is my beloved Son," He who, being manifested on earth and yet unseparated from the Father's bosom, was manifested, and yet did not appear. For the appearing is a different thing, since in appearance the baptizer here is superior to the baptized. For this reason did the Father send down the Holy Spirit from heaven upon Him who was baptized. For as in the ark of Noah the love of God toward man is signified by the dove, so also now the Spirit, descending in the form of a dove, bearing as it were the fruit of the olive, rested on Him to whom the witness was borne. For what reason? That the faithfulness of the Father's voice might be made known, and that the prophetic utterance of a long time past might be ratified. And what utterance is this? "The voice of the Lord (is) on the waters, the God of glory thundered; the Lord (is) upon many waters." And what voice? "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." This is He who is named the son of Joseph, and (who is) according to the divine essence my Only-begotten. "This is my beloved Son"-He who is hungry, and yet maintains myriads; who is weary, and yet gives rest to the weary; who has not where to lay His head, and yet bears up all things in His hand; who suffers, and yet heals sufferings; who is smitten, and yet confers liberty on the world; who is pierced in the side, and yet repairs the side of Adam.

In my opinion, the Son is the reflection of the total glory of God, according to Paul who said, “He reflects the glory of God,” anticipating, however, a partial reflection on the rest of the rational creation from this reflection of the total glory. For I do not think that anyone except the Son can contain the whole reflection of the full glory of God.

Now this Son was begotten of the Father’s will, for he is the “image of the invisible God” and the “effulgence of God’s glory and the impress of God’s substance.” … Let those who dare to say, “There was a time when the Son was not” understand that this is what they are saying: “Once wisdom did not exist, and word did not exist, and life did not exist.” But it is not right, nor is it safe for us, in our weakness to rob God … of God’s only begotten Word, who ever dwells with God, who is God’s wisdom, in whom God rejoiced. For if we do this, we shall think of God as not always rejoicing.

The apostle Paul says, that the only begotten Son is … “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.” Now, we find in the treatise called the Wisdom of Solomon the following description of the wisdom of God: “For she is the breath of the power of God, and the purest emanation of the glory of the Almighty.” Nothing that is polluted can therefore come upon her, for she is the splendor of the eternal light, the stainless mirror of God’s working and the image of his goodness. Now we say, as before, that Wisdom has her existence nowhere else but in him who is the beginning of all things, from whom also is derived everything that is wise, because he himself is the only one who is by nature a Son, and is therefore called the Only Begotten.

In order … to more completely understand how the Savior is the figure of the person or subsistence of God, let us use an illustration. While it does not describe the subject of which we are treating either fully or appropriately, it may nevertheless be employed for this purpose only: to show that when the Son of God, who was in the form of God, emptied himself, his object was to display to us by this very emptying the fullness of his deity. For instance, suppose that there were a statue of so enormous a size as to fill the whole world, and because of this could be seen by no one. If another statue were formed altogether resembling it in the shape of the limbs, and in the outline of features, and in form and material, but without the same immensity of size, then those who were unable to behold the one of enormous proportions, should, on seeing the latter, acknowledge that they had seen the former, because it preserved all the features of its limbs and appearance, and even the very form and material, so closely as to be altogether undistinguishable from it.

As the apostle, writing to the Hebrews, says, “who being the brightness of his glory and the stamp of his nature,” and David too in the eighty-ninth Psalm, “And the brightness of the Lord be upon us,” and “in your light shall we see light.” Who has so little sense as to doubt the eternity of the Son? For when did anyone see light without the brightness of its radiance, that one may say of the Son, “There was once when he was not,” or “Before his generation he was not.” And the words addressed to the Son in the hundred and forty-fourth Psalm, “Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,” forbid anyone to imagine any interval at all in which the Word did not exist.

Who that has heard the words of John, “In the beginning was the Word,” will not denounce the saying of [Arius and his followers] that “there was a time when he was not”? Or who that has heard in the Gospel, “the only begotten Son” and “all things came into being through him,” will not detest their declaration that he is “one of the things that were made”? For how can he be one of those things that were made by himself? Or how can he be the only begotten, when, according to them, he is counted as one among the rest, since he is himself a creature and a work? And how can he be “made of things that were not,” when the Father says, “My heart has uttered a good Word,” and “Out of the womb I have begotten you before the morning star”? Or again, how is he “unlike in substance to the Father,” seeing he is the perfect “image” and “brightness” of the Father, and that he says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father”? And if the Son is the “Word” and “Wisdom” of God, how was there “a time when he was not”? It is the same as if they should say that God was once without Word and without Wisdom. And how is he “subject to change and variation” who says by himself, “I am in the Father, and the Father in me,” and “I and the Father are one”; and who by the prophet says, “I the Lord do not change”? For although one may refer this expression to the Father, yet it may now be more aptly spoken of the Word, that, though he has been made man, he has not changed. But as the apostle has said, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever.” And who can have persuaded them to say that he was made for us, for Paul writes, “for whom and by whom all things exist”?

Therefore, he is true God, existing consubstantially (homoousios) with the true Father, while other beings to whom he said, “I say, ‘you are gods,’ ” have this grace from the Father only by participation in the Word through the Spirit. For he is the “very stamp” of the Father’s “being,” and “light” from “light,” and the “power” and true “image” of the Father’s substance.

“He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high” because of the flesh he put on.

Of the most beautiful flower; the mother of the Creator; the nurse of the Nourisher; the circumference of Him who embraces all things; the upholder of Him

When we speak of God the Father and God the Son, we do not speak of them as different, nor do we separate each: because the Father cannot exist without the Son, nor can the Son be separated from the Father, since the name of Father cannot be given without the Son, nor can the Son be begotten without the Father. Since, therefore, the Father makes the Son, and the Son the Father, they both have one mind, one spirit, one substance; but the former is as it were an overflowing fountain, the latter as a stream flowing forth from it: the former as the sun, the latter as it were a ray extended from the sun. And since He is both faithful to the Most High Father, and beloved by Him, He is not separated from Him; just as the stream is not separated from the fountain, nor the ray from the sun: for the water of the fountain is in the stream, and the light of the sun is in the ray: just as the voice cannot be separated from the mouth, nor the strength or hand from the body.

For he who denies that the brightness of the glory existed, takes away also the primitive light of which it is the brightness. And if the image of God was not always, it is clear also that He was not always, of which it is the image. Moreover, in saying that the character of the subsistence of God was not, He also is done away with who is perfectly expressed by it.

That He is equally with the Father unchangeable and immutable, wanting in nothing, and the perfect Son, and like to the Father, we have learnt; in this alone is He inferior to the Father, that He is not unbegotten. For He is the very exact image of the Father, and in nothing differing from Him. For it is clear that He is the image fully containing all things by which the greatest similitude is declared, as the Lord Himself hath taught us, when He says, "My Father is greater than I." And according to this we believe that the Son is of the Father, always existing. "For He is the brightness of His glory, the express image of His Father's person." But let no one take that word always so as to raise suspicion that He is unbegotten, as they imagine who have their senses blinded.

The majesty of the Father is expressly imaged in the greatness of the power of the Son, that the one may be believed to be as great as the other is known to be. Again, as the radiance of light sheds its brilliance from the whole of the sun’s disk … so too all the glory which the Father has is shed from its whole by means of the brightness that comes from it, that is, by the true Light. Even as the ray is of the sun—for there would be no ray if the sun were not—the sun is never conceived as existing by itself without the ray of brightness that is shed from it. So the apostle delivered to us the continuity and eternity of that existence which the Only Begotten has of the Father, calling the Son “the brightness of God’s glory.”

Since we recognize two natures in Christ, one divine and the other human, the divine by nature but the human in the incarnation, we accordingly claim for the Godhead that which is eternal, and that which is created we ascribe to his human nature. For as, according to the prophet, he was formed in the womb as a servant, so also, according to Solomon, he was manifested in the flesh by means of this servile creation. But when [the Arians] say, “If he was, he was not begotten, and, if he was begotten, he was not,” let them learn that it is not fitting to ascribe to his divine nature the attributes which belong to his fleshly origin. For bodies that do not exist are generated, and God makes those things to be that are not. But does not he come into being from that which is not? For this reason also Paul calls him “the brightness of glory.” He does this so that we may learn that, just as the light from the lamp is of the nature of that which sheds the brightness and is united with it (for as soon as the lamp appears the light that comes from it shines out simultaneously), in like manner the Son is related to the Father, and the Father is never without the Son. It is impossible that glory should be without radiance, as it is impossible that the lamp should be without brightness. It is clear that his being brightness is a testimony to his being in relation with the glory, for if the glory did not exist, the brightness shed from it would not exist. Therefore, to say that the brightness “once was not” is a declaration that once the glory also was not, that is, when the brightness was not, for it is impossible that the glory should be without the brightness. As therefore it is not possible to say in the case of the brightness, “If it was, it did not come into being, and, if it came into being, it was not,” so it is in vain to say this of the Son, seeing that the Son is the brightness. Let those who speak of “less” and “greater,” in the case of the Father and the Son, learn from Paul not to measure things immeasurable. For the apostle says that the Son is the express image of the person of the Father. It is clear then that, however great the person of the Father is, so great also is the express image of that person, for it is not possible that the express image should be less than the person contemplated in it. And this the great John also teaches when he says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.” For in saying that he was “in the beginning” and not “after the beginning,” he showed that the beginning was never without the Word. In declaring that “the Word was with God,” he signified the absence of defect in the Son in relation to the Father, for the Word is contemplated as a whole together with the whole being of God. For if the Word were deficient in his own greatness so as not to be capable of relation with the whole being of God, we are compelled to suppose that that part of God which extends beyond the Word is without the Word. But in fact the whole magnitude of the Word is contemplated together with the whole magnitude of God, and consequently, in statements concerning the divine nature, it is not admissible to speak of “greater” and “less.”

When he was asking how to give a name to what cannot be grasped in thought and did not discover a word expressing an interpretation of the incomprehensible, he called “glory” and “substance” whatever underlies all good and is not sufficiently known or spoken of. The underlying essence of being he dismissed as unnamable. However, interpreting the unity and inseparability of the Son and the Father, and the Son’s being contemplated indefinably and invisibly with the indefinable and unseen Father, he addressed him as “radiance of glory” and “image of substance,” indicating the unity of their nature by the word radiance and their equality by the word image. For, in connection with a radiant nature, there is no middle point in a beam of light, nor is there an inferior part of an image in connection with a substance determined by it. The observer of the radiant nature will know the radiance in its entirety, and the person comprehending the size of the substance measures it in its entirety with its accompanying image.

The Logos “upholds the universe by his word of power” from nonexistence to existence. For all things, as many as exist in connection with matter and as many as have received an immaterial nature, have one cause of their substance: the Word of unspeakable power.

Then, using degrees of ascent, he uttered that which is far greater than all this, saying, "Who, being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." O! the wisdom of the Apostle! or rather, not the wisdom of Paul, but the grace of the Spirit is the thing to wonder at. For surely he uttered not these things of his own mind, nor in that way did he find his wisdom. (For whence could it be? From the knife, and the skins, or the workshop?) But it was from the working of God. For his own understanding did not give birth to these thoughts, which was then so mean and slender as in nowise to surpass the baser sort; (for how could it, seeing it spent itself wholly on bargains and skins?) but the grace of the Spirit shows forth its strength by whomsoever it will. For just as one, wishing to lead up a little child to some lofty place, reaching up even to the top of Heaven, does this gently and by degrees, leading him upwards by the steps from below, then when he has set him on high, and bidden him to gaze downwards, and sees him turning giddy and confused, and dizzy, taking hold of him, he leads him down to the lower stand, allowing him to take breath; then when he hath recovered it, leads him up again, and again brings him down; just so did the blessed Paul likewise, both with the Hebrews and everywhere, having learnt it from his Master. For even He also did so; sometimes He led His hearers up on high, and sometimes He brought them down, not allowing them to remain very long. See him, then, even here, by how many steps he led them up, and placed them near the very summit of religion, and then or ever they grow giddy, and are seized with dizziness, how he leads them again lower down, and allowing them to take breath, says, "He spake unto us by [His] Son," "whom He appointed Heir of all things." For the name of Son is so far common. For where a true [Son] it is understood of, He is above all: but however that may be, for the present he proves that He is from above. And see how he says it: "Whom He appointed," saith he, "heir of all things." The phrase, "He appointed Heir," is humble. Then he placed them on the higher step, adding, "by whom also He made the worlds." Then on a higher still, and after which there is no other, "who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person." Truly he has led them to unapproachable light, to the very brightness itself. And before they are blinded see how he gently leads them down again, saying, "and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty." He does not simply say, "He sat down," but "after the purifying, He sat down," for he hath touched on the Incarnation, and his utterance is again lowly.

Since then "He hath purged our sins," let us continue pure; and let us receive no stain, but preserve the beauty which He hath implanted in us, and His comeliness undefiled and pure, "not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing." Even little sins are "a spot and a wrinkle," such a thing, I mean, as Reproach, Insult, Falsehood.

Everywhere indeed a reverential mind is requisite, but especially when we say or hear anything of God: Since neither can tongue speak nor thought hear anything suitable to our God. And why speak I of tongue or thought? For not even the understanding which far excels these, will be able to comprehend anything accurately, when we desire to utter aught concerning God. For if "the peace of God surpasseth all understanding" (Phil. iv. 7), and "the things which are prepared for them that love Him have not entered into the heart of man" (1 Cor. ii. 9); much more He Himself, the God of peace, the Creator of all things, doth by a wide measure exceed our reasoning. We ought therefore to receive all things with faith and reverence, and when our discourse fails through weakness, and is not able to set forth accurately the things which are spoken, then especially to glorify God, for that we have such a God, surpassing both our thought and our conception.

And to show thee that even Paul is weak and doth not put out his illustrations with exactness; and to make thee tremble and refrain from searching too far, hear what he says, having called Him Son and named Him Creator, "Who being the brightness of His Glory, and the express image of His person." This we must receive with reverence and clear of all incongruities. "The brightness of His glory," saith he. But observe in what reference he understands this, and so do thou receive it: that He is of Him: without passion: that He is neither greater, nor less; since there are some, who derive certain strange things from the illustration. For, say they, "the brightness" is not substantial, but hath its being in another. Now do not thou, O man, so receive it, neither be thou sick of the disease of Marcellus and Photinus. For he hath a remedy for thee close at hand, that thou fall not into that imagination, nor doth he leave thee to be hurried down into that fatal malady. And what saith he? "And the express image of His person" [or "subsistence"]: that is, just as He [the Father] is personally subsisting, being in need of nothing, so also the Son. For he saith this here, showing the undeviating similitude and the peculiar image of the Prototype, that He [the Son] is in subsistence by Himself.

For he who said above, that "by Him He made all things" here assigns to Him absolute authority. For what doth he add? "And upholding all things by the word of His power"; that we might hence infer not merely His being the express image of His Person, but also His governing all things with absolute authority. See then, how he applies to the Son that which is proper to the Father. For on this account he did not say simply, "and upholding all things," nor did he say, "by His power," but, "by the word of His power." For much as just now we saw him gradually ascend and descend; so also now, as by steps, he goes up on high, then again descends, and saith, "by whom also He made the worlds."

But the very thing which he said, "the brightness of the glory," hear also Christ Himself saying, "I am the Light of the world." (John viii. 12.) Therefore he [the Apostle] uses the word "brightness," showing that this was said in the sense of "Light of Light." Nor is it this alone which he shows, but also that He hath enlightened our souls; and He hath Himself manifested the Father, and by "the brightness" he has indicated the nearness of the Being [of the Father and the Son]. Observe the subtlety of his expressions. He hath taken one essence and subsistence to indicate two subsistences.

And he adds that He is "the express Image." For the "express Image" is something other than its Prototype: yet not Another in all respects, but as to having real subsistence. Since here also the term, "express image," indicates there is no variation from that whereof it is the "express image": its similarity in all respects. When therefore he calls Him both Form, and express Image, what can they say? "Yea," saith he, "man is also called an Image of God." What then! is he so [an image of Him] as the Son is? No (saith he) but because the term, image, doth not show resemblance. And yet, in that man is called an Image, it showeth resemblance, as in man. For what God is in Heaven, that man is on earth, I mean as to dominion. And as he hath power over all things on earth, so also hath God power over all things which are in heaven and which are on earth. But otherwise, man is not called "Express image," he is not called Form: which phrase declares the substance, or rather both substance and similarity in substance. Therefore just as "the form of a slave" (Phil. ii. 6, 7) expresses no other thing than a man without variation [from human nature], so also "the form of God" expresses no other thing than God.

"Who being" (saith he) "the brightness of His glory." See what Paul is doing. Having said, "Who being the brightness of His glory," he added again, "He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty": what names he hath used, nowhere finding a name for the Substance. For neither "the Majesty," nor "the Glory" setteth forth the Name, which he wishes to say, but is not able to find a name. For this is what I said at the beginning, that oftentimes we think something, and are not able to express [it]: since not even the word God is a name of substance, nor is it at all possible to find a name of that Substance. And what marvel, if it be so in respect of God, since not even in respect of an Angel, could one find a name expressive of his substance? Perhaps too, neither in respect of the soul. For this name [soul] doth not seem to me to be significative of the substance thereof, but of breathing. For one may see that the same [thing] is called both Soul and Heart and Mind: for, saith he, "Create in me a clean heart, O God" (Ps. li. 10), and one may often see that it [the soul] is called spirit.

"And upholding all things by the word of His power." Tell me, "God said" (it is written), "Let there be light" (Gen. i. 3): "the Father commanded, and the Son obeyed"? But behold here He also [the Son] acts by word. For (saith he), "And upholding all things" - that is, governing; He holds together what would fall to pieces; For, to hold the world together, is no less than to make it, but even greater (if one must say a strange thing). For the one is to bring forward something out of things which are not: but the other, when things which have been made are about to fall back into non-existence, to hold and fasten them together, utterly at variance as they are with each other: this is indeed great and wonderful, and a certain proof of exceeding power. Then showing the easiness, he said, "upholding": (he did not say, governing, from the figure of those who simply with their finger move anything, and cause it to go round.) Here he shows both the mass of the creation to be great, and that this greatness is nothing to Him. Then again he shows the freedom from the labor, saying, "By the word of His power." Well said he, "By the word." For since, with us, a word is accounted to be a bare thing, he shows that it is not bare with God. But, how "He upholdeth by the word," he hath not further added: for neither is it possible to know.

Then he added concerning His majesty: for thus John also did: having said that "He is God" (John i. 1), he brought in the handiwork of the Creation. For the same thing which the one indirectly expressed, saying, "In the beginning was the Word," and "All things were made by Him" (John i. 3), this did the other also openly declare by "the Word," and by saying "by whom also He made the worlds." For thus he shows Him to be both a Creator, and before all ages. What then? when the prophet saith, concerning the Father, "Thou art from everlasting and to everlasting" (Ps. xc. 2), and concerning the Son, that He is before all ages, and the maker of all things - what can they say? Nay rather, when the very thing which was spoken of the Father, - "He which was before the worlds," - this one may see spoken of the Son also? And that which one saith, "He was life" (John i. 4), pointing out the preservation of the creation, that Himself is the Life of all things, - so also saith this other, "and upholding all things by the word of His power": not as the Greeks who defraud Him, as much as in them lies, both of Creation itself, and of Providence, shutting up His power, to reach only as far as to the Moon.

"By Himself" (saith he) "having purged our sins." Having spoken concerning those marvelous and great matters, which are most above us, he proceeds to speak also afterwards concerning His care for men. For indeed the former expression, "and upholding all things," also was universal: nevertheless this is far greater, for it also is universal: for, for His part, "all" men believed. As John also, having said, "He was life," and so pointed out His providence, saith again, and "He was light." "By Himself," saith he, "having purged our sins, He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." He here setteth down two very great proofs of His care: first the "purifying us from our sins," then the doing it "by Himself." And in many places, thou seest him making very much of this, - not only of our reconciliation with God, but also of this being accomplished through the Son. For the gift being truly great, was made even greater by the fact that it was through the Son. For in saying, "He sat on the right hand," and, "having by Himself purged our sins," - though he had put us in mind of the Cross, he quickly added the mention of the resurrection and ascension. And see his unspeakable wisdom: he said not, "He was commanded to sit down," but "He sat down." Then again, lest thou shouldest think that He standeth, he subjoins, "For to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit thou on My right hand."

"He sat" (saith he) "on the right hand of the Majesty on high." What is this "on high"? Doth he enclose God in place? Away with such a thought! but just as, when he saith, "on the right hand," he did not describe Him as having figure, but showed His equal dignity with the Father; so, in saying "on high," he did not enclose Him there, but expressed the being higher than all things, and having ascended up above all things. That is, He attained even unto the very throne of the Father: as therefore the Father is on high, so also is He. For the "sitting together" implies nothing else than equal dignity. But if they say, that He said, "Sit Thou," we may ask them, What then? did He speak to Him standing? Moreover, he said not that He commanded, not that He enjoined, but that "He said": for no other reason, than that thou mightest not think Him without origin and without cause. For that this is why he said it, is evident from the place of His sitting. For had he intended to signify inferiority, he would not have said, "on the right hand," but on the left hand.

The Greeks call “to be” ousian (substance) or hypostasin; we call it in Latin by one term, substance; and a few Greeks use ousian (substance) and rarely; all use hypostasin (hypostasis). Certainly one differs from the other, but for the moment let us omit this.The divine Scripture has often used hypostasin in Greek, substance in Latin. And it has said of the substance of God in the prophet Jeremiah “that if they had stood in the substance of the Lord they would have seen my word.” But what is it “to stand in the substance”? To know the substance of God, which is “true light,” which is infinite Spirit. If they had known that, they would have known the Logos of the Lord; that is, “they would have seen the word” of the Lord. And shortly after, the same Jeremiah uses the same words. David says, “And my substance is in the lower regions of the earth.” He speaks also of God and says “substance.” And it is clear what this is. The apostle says to the Hebrews, “He who is the character of his substance.” He said that Christ is the character of the substance of God. There are many other examples. But what is the point of all this? To show that the word substance is in Scripture and is used of the substance of God.

Does not the divine Word [Scripture] indicate to us that the Son exists in the form of God, and does it not say that he is the image and stamp of the one who begot him?

He continues with the following words: “When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.” Having demonstrated that he is the stamp of the Father’s hypostasis and, indeed, the brightness of his glory, he necessarily passes over to the economy of the incarnation, through which we have been saved and enriched by the forgiveness of sins and sanctified through his blood.

Every grace is given by the Father through the Son, who also acts together with the Holy Spirit. There are not some graces that come from the Father and different graces from the Son and others again from the Holy Spirit. There is but one salvation, one giving of power, one faith; and yet there is one God the Father, our Lord, his only begotten Son, and one Holy Spirit, the Paraclete. Let us be content with this knowledge and not busy ourselves with questions about the divine nature or hypostasis. I would have spoken of that had it been contained in Scripture. Let us not venture where Scripture does not lead, for it suffices for our salvation to know that there is Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

Recall also what I have often said regarding the sitting of the Son at the right hand of the Father, according to the sequence of the creed: “and he ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father.” Let us not too curiously inquire into the precise nature of this sitting, for it surpasses our understanding. Let us not endure those who perversely assert that it was only after his cross and resurrection and ascension into heaven that the Son began to sit at the right hand of the Father. For he did not gain his throne by way of advancement, but from the time he is—and he is eternally begotten—he sits with the Father. The prophet Isaiah, having beheld this throne before the coming of the Savior in the flesh, says, “I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up.” For “no one has ever seen” the Father, and he who then appeared to the prophet was the Son. The psalmist also says, “Your throne is established from of old; you are from everlasting.” There are many testimonies on this point, but we will content ourselves with these only, because of the lateness of the hour.

The “glory” is eternal. Therefore, the “brightness” is also eternal. Brightness is of the same nature as fire. Therefore, the Son is of the same nature as the Father. And since the metaphor of brightness so manifestly demonstrates their coeternity and consubstantiality, he allows an opportunity for those sick with the blasphemy of Sabellius and Photinus, according to which the brightness does not subsist by itself. By another metaphor he excludes this blasphemy, for he goes on to say “and the very stamp of his nature.”

I wish and I pray that I may follow the footprints of the holy fathers, and I earnestly desire to keep undefiled the evangelic teaching that was in sum delivered to us by the holy fathers assembled in council at the Bithynian Nicaea. I believe that there is one God the Father and one Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father. Also that there is one Lord Jesus Christ, only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages, brightness of his glory and express image of the Father’s person, on account of humanity’s salvation incarnate and made human and born of Mary the virgin in the flesh. For so are we taught by the wise Paul …, “Concerning his Son who was descended from David according to the flesh and designated Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness.” On this account we also call the holy virgin “Theotokos” and deem those who object to this appellation to be alienated from true religion.

In this way the divine apostle in several terms brought out the reality of the begetting, the oneness in being and the shared eternity of the Father and the Son. Since the divinity transcends all understanding, and it is impossible to bring out in one single image the mystery of the true doctrine of God, the preachers of the truth are obliged to do so by means of many.… Blessed Paul called him “Son” to show him to be different from the Father in regard to personhood; he spoke of him “as creator of the ages” to bring out in these ways his eternity and called him also “effulgence of glory” to indicate by this his shared eternity and the sameness of being, the effulgence being of the nature of the fire. He added that he is “stamp of his nature” to bring out both things at the same time, that he subsists of himself and that he reveals in himself the paternal characteristics. He adds also something else: “upholding all things by the word of his power.” He not only made everything but also directs and guides it.

Seeking to present more clearly that the Word was begotten of the essence of the Father, he makes mention of the “radiance.” For the radiance is from the essence of that of which it is an efflux of light, and it is continuously conceived both from it and never apart from that of which it is the radiance. But since “radiance” implies a lesser nature than that of which it is the radiance and existence not in the same nature, he uses a different word and states that Christ is “the exact image of his nature.” The first phrase (“radiance of his glory”) demonstrates that Christ cannot be separated from the essence as God; the second phrase (“exact image of his nature”) proves that he is not without God’s nature. For just as John, calling Christ “the Word,” adds, “he was with God and was God,” so also Paul, having said “radiance,” added, “and the exact image of his nature.”

This is what Jeremiah calls “his strong works of words.”

Even if the Word became flesh, he nonetheless was in the glory and nature of divinity and was not kept far from the highest thrones of God the Father. And although “he was made a little lower than the angels” because of the measure of his humanity—for human nature is subordinate to the glory of the angels—he was still “above every name that is named.”

“Who, being the radiance of glory and the exact representation of his substance.” Quite appropriately he does not say “God” but “glory.” In this way he does not allow us to meddle in the things of that nature when we are thunderstruck by his name, since of course the only “glory” worth mentioning is God’s nature. Paul uses the analogy of “radiance” for that which he deemed most essential, and by the next phrase he explicates the point of the analogy. For he says that Christ preserves an accurate representation of God’s nature, so that whatever you would think God’s nature to be, so you must also think Christ’s nature to be, inasmuch as Christ’s nature bears the accurate representation of God’s nature since Christ’s nature does not differ from God’s in the least.

Indeed, there is a great deal of similarity [between the opening of John’s Gospel and] the apostle’s statement. After Paul calls him “the brightness of his glory,” he adds, “the very stamp of his nature.” With great care he turns from a statement of their distinction to an indication of their perfect likeness.

He is the “Father of glory” in that Paul is accustomed to use the word glory to refer to the divine nature, because it is glorious and marvelous. So in Hebrews he says the Son is the “brightness of his glory.” Instead of this he might have said “God” or “divine nature.”

He not only says that he is the maker of all things, but that he certainly also makes them by the great abundance of his power, for all things hang upon his voice, as it were. For this expression “who calls into existence the things that do not exist” does not differ from the account of blessed Moses, who says, “And God said, ‘Let there be light’ and there was light … ‘Let there be a firmament’ and there was a firmament.”

The Spirit in the essence of divinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and is properly called one God. But according to the distinction of the persons, the Father’s unique characteristic is that he is by nature without a beginning, and he begot the Son before the ages. It is the unique characteristic of the Son that he is, as an essential part of his nature, begotten by the Father. It is the unique characteristic of the Spirit that he proceeds from the Father and the Son. Their eternity and power, equally part of the essence of each person, performs everything that the Godhead desires in heaven and earth by inexpressible love and cooperation. Although these things are presently understood as incomprehensible and unexplainable to us in their essential nature, still many of the Fathers propose a certain comparison with physical and existent objects. We find these three properties in the sun: first, there is a bodily substance, which is the sun. Then there is the brightness of the sun that remains in it. Third, is the heat that comes forth even to us from its brightness. If there is even any comparison for such a great matter that can be devised, I think that this comparison should be construed in this way: the bodily substance in the sun could be understood as the person of the Father. The brightness that is in the sun could stand for the person of the Son in the Trinity, as the Apostle says: “the brightness of his glory.” The heat in the sun could be understood as the person of the Holy Spirit in the Trinity, as one reads in Scripture: “Who is able to hide himself from its heat?”

Then, lest you think that the heir is not called an heir by nature, but by a certain grace and adoption, Paul adds: "He is the radiance of His glory," saying practically: Although I have said that the Father appointed him as heir, understand that nothing humble or unworthy of God is implied. For it is not said that the heir is to be made by the act of adoption and that he is to be considered as such, but rather it is a declaration of the relationship of the Son to the Father as a cause according to nature of reference and consent: and lest you think the Son exists without a principle, alienating him from the paternal kinship, and imply two principles separated from each other. Indeed, for this very reason he was also called by me heir, so that you may immediately understand from whom the inheritance descends, nor may you suspect him to be unbegotten like the Father: for this reason it was said by me, Heir, and, He appointed. Therefore, I immediately added: Who, being the radiance. But if it is not established that there was or would be radiance (for Paul says: when there was radiance), nor is the heir truly appointed, but only in the way I mentioned above. But see how significantly and precisely he has spoken, when he says Radiance, having said a representation, and being, and of the glory. For by radiance, he reveals the natural progression [πρόοδον] of the Son from the Father. Indeed, the radiance of anyone never proceeds entirely through grace or adoption, neither from the sun, nor from fire, nor from any other source from which radiance is usually derived. However, by saying "he is," he shows that this is not something newly made for him to be radiance, but that it has always been from eternity. For who is [ὤν], since He does not have a recent existence but is from eternity and always is. Then also the divine attribute is presented through who is. For thus also the Father says, "I am the the One who is [Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν]," speaking to Moses (Ex. 3:14). Therefore, there are testimonies to demonstrate both the natural progression of the Son from the Father and the consubstantiality [ὁμοούσιον], and coeternal [συναΐδιον], as well as what he says: "The Radiance," and what he states: "who is." Indeed, he also adds "of his Glory," so that you may say: "His radiance is the Son," which is most honorable, and it comes from nature, and there is nothing greater in the Father. You see how and whose heir the Son is? Then, explaining more clearly what has been said, Paul adds: "and the exact representation of His being." That is, having embraced the essence and substance in Himself, God is of infinite authority, omnipotent, Creator, and whatever else expresses the being of the Father, besides being the Father, all these things are the Son: therefore, He encompasses and sustains all things by His powerful word, and governs them. Do you know how he is truly the heir and sustains all that belongs to the Father? Afterwards, when Paul spoke of the divine and supernatural about the Son, he also transitions to the rest: which are most admirable and no less supernatural, yet by hearing they seem humble and lowly, for example, death and killing! But…………………………………………………….

Speaking of the bare Word [λόγου] of God, He came into humanity, lest they be overwhelmed by the sublimity of what has been said. By Himself, Paul says, that is, He did not send another minister, but worked the purification by Himself, through His cross and death, when He had freed us from sins in baptism. "of majesty”, that is, of the Father. For after the remission of sins was first made, He sat down at the right hand of God with His flesh. "on high." Above all, he says, he ascends to the paternal throne. However, these signify consubstantiality [ὁμοούσιον]. "having become so much superior to the angels." The discourse is about the privilege itself. For His flesh was made: for the Word of God is not made, but begotten. Therefore, His flesh is so much more excellent than the angels, as can be known from the excellence of the names.

Or what is said to be Generated [Γενόμενος], do not take it concerning the flesh, lest you think it to be divided from this: but concerning Christ, who is worshiped in one essence [ὑποστάσει] even with His flesh. For where it has once touched what pertains to the privilege, it speaks of humble things without fear.

"He is." It is called a radiance, indicating the manner in which it originates from the Father, as if in some way it is an outward procession, neither entirely freed from the source of its existence, nor entirely constituted, but rather emerging, as if to stand by itself, and to have its own existence. Thus, the holy Cyril in the fifth book On the Trinity. The manifestation of the consubstantial and coeternal, as light from light. The character, as the likeness of the glory, is the Son of the Father. For the Son of the Father is similar and unchangeable, and as if into a character in different being [ὑποστάσεσι]. "sustaining all things." As if carrying the invisible and the visible in the word, bearing and governing. And he said word [Ῥῆμα], showing that he easily leads and carries all things.

"he has inherited a more excellent name." For the Son, having a name from the beginning, the Word, and after the flesh, He possessed it. Therefore, it is rightly said, "he has inherited," as through the incarnation. He has been called Christ. To say of Christ that he has acquired it by hereditary right means that he has obtained that which he had already possessed long ago.

The inheritance primarily belongs to those who are entitled, but not to those who are alienated. Thus, what was fitting for the heavenly Word was received below through the flesh that was also assumed. But what is that? The Son, of the God of all, who is also the Father of that flesh, is to say, "I have begotten you." (Ps. 2:7) What he says: "today" is not a sign of time, but that the Father has never been separated from the legitimate paternal relationship that He has with the Son. But if he were to say: I have always been affected towards you in this way: not as if a generation has come, but that it may always persist and continuously derive a beginning, with no end. Indeed, consider whether it may be adapted in such a way that both are indeed said of Christ, namely, "You are my Son," and "Today I have begotten you" (Ps. 2:7): but that, "You are my Son," insofar as He is the Word: for it signifies His eternal birth; whereas "Today I have begotten you" refers to the flesh: for it designates a recent birth. For He was born by the good pleasure of the Father."The Holy Spirit,” said the angel, “will come upon you”; and then also: “The power of the Most High will overshadow you." (Luke 1:35)

He ascended to the very height of the laudatory discourse about the Son, and calls Him "the radiance of glory," so that you may know that He is from Him—impassibly, without diminishment or degradation, of one and the same essence, that is, Light from Light. For He illumined our souls as well, and He Himself revealed the Father. Therefore He also said: "I am the light of the world" (Jn. 8:12), because together with Him He shone from eternity; for the radiance shines simultaneously with the one radiating. And the sun is never seen apart from its radiance, and the Father is inconceivable without the Son. Therefore, when you hear the Arians saying that if the Son is from the Father, then He must be after Him, say to them that the radiance is also from the sun, yet not after it, for the sun and the radiance exist at the same time. Having said "radiance," and through this having shown the consubstantiality and co-eternity of the Son with the Father, again, since radiance is not self-subsistent, the apostle removes from this example an inappropriate thought, lest you side with Marcellus and Sabellius, who say that the Son cannot exist in His own hypostasis alongside the Father. For this reason he also says: "and the express image (χαρακτήρ) of His hypostasis"; this means: just as the Father is self-subsistent and has need of no one for His perfection, so also is the Son. After having shown the perfect likeness in all things, by these words the apostle also shows the distinct image (χαρακτήρα) of the archetype. For the image is something other in comparison with the archetype, as existing by itself, although resembling the original to the point of indistinguishability. Gregory of Nyssa says: just as through "radiance" he showed the commonality of the Son with the Father, so through "image" he showed their equality. For the mind that has grasped the greatness of the hypostasis can, through the visible image, in any case also measure the hypostasis. For the image does not exceed the hypostasis, lest it be without hypostasis to the extent that it exceeds; nor is the hypostasis greater than the image: otherwise that portion would be unrepresented. Having likewise said in another place that the Son exists "in the form (ἐν μορφῇ) of God" (Phil. 2:6), the apostle gives us to understand this very same thing, namely, that μορφή signifies the hypostasis, while χαρακτήρ signifies the Lord contemplated in that form (ἐν μορφῇ). In any case, the apostle shows the equality of the Son with the Father. For in the form μορφή is perceived the greatness of the Father, in no way exceeding that form, since indeed it would be formless and unsightly — that which would project beyond the form — and to think such a thing of the Father is unfitting. But if the greatness of the Father is such as the form — μορφή — is, and the express image — χαρακτήρ — is equal to the form — μορφή, then the express image — χαρακτήρ — also has the same greatness as that which is perceived in the form — μορφή — of God. Previously you dwelt on the expression "through Whom" (δι᾿ οὗ) and considered the Son to be, as it were, a helper to the Father; listen now, if you can understand, how Paul here ascribes authority to the Son. He did not say "upholding by power," but "by the word of His power," that is, by a word full of power, demonstrating His might. For just as you say that the Father said, "Let there be light. And there was light" (Gen. 1:3), so also the Son upholds all things by His word, that is, He governs all things and sustains all things. And it is far greater than bringing everything into being to preserve things that are in conflict with one another and tending to revert into non-existence. He did not say "governing," but "upholding"—this metaphor is borrowed from those who move something and turn it with a single finger. Such a great and extraordinary weight of creation He bears as nothing, by His almighty word alone. For the word of God is not powerless, as it is with us. After so many heresies refuted at the very beginning of the epistle, how do some dare to reject it as though it did not belong to Paul, on the grounds that its style differs from the style of his other epistles? They must be convinced that the loftiness of thought and their irresistible force belong to none other than Paul, who has Christ speaking in him. But if they are troubled by the style of speech, let them learn that Paul wrote this epistle in the Hebrew language, since he was addressing Hebrews; and it was translated into Greek, as some think, by Luke, or, as others suppose, by Clement, whose style it does indeed more closely preserve. Therefore, those who take this epistle away from Paul commit, so to speak, an error similar to taking Paul away from Christ. Having spoken of the greatness of the Divinity of the Word, he speaks also of His care for mankind through the incarnation, which is far more important than upholding all things. Here he presents two proofs: one, that He purified our sins, and the other, that He did this "by Himself." And in many places the apostle marvels at what was accomplished by the Son Himself. For through the cross and the death that He underwent, He purified us — not only as the sinless One who died for our transgression, bearing the punishment to which He Himself was not subject, and liberating human nature altogether from the condemnation for the sin of Adam — but also as the One who gave us baptism, the likeness of His death, through which we who are baptized receive each time the remission of sins inherited from our forefathers, and the strength to not easily succumb to sin for the rest of our lives. Having reminded about the cross, he speaks of the resurrection and ascension of the Lord. He did not say: He was commanded to sit, but "He sat down" and "at the right hand," and "on high." This does not mean that God is limited by place, but it is said to show His equal honor with the Father. For He reached the very throne of the Father, and as the Father is "on high," so also is He. If someone should say: however, it is written, "The Lord said to my Lord: sit at My right hand" (Ps. 110:1); to this we shall say, first, that it does not say: He commanded, but "He said." Then, lest you think that He does not have a beginning and cause in God the Father, for this reason the speech is expressed so figuratively.

24. – Having shown Christ's greatness in regard to His unique origin, the majesty of His dominion and the power of His activity, the Apostle now shows His greatness in regard to the sublimity of His glory and dignity. This is divided into two parts: in the first he shows that Christ is worthy of His dignity; in the second he discloses this dignity (v. 2c). But he shows Him worthy of this dignity for two reasons: one is the ease with which He acts; the other is His diligence and strenuousness in acting: first, therefore, he describes this ease: secondly, His strenuousness (v. 2b). 25. – In regard to the first it should be noted that three things are required for a high dignity to be administered with ease: the first is wisdom, to avoid mistakes in governing: 'There is an evil that I have seen under the sun, as it were be an error proceeding from the face of the prince: a fool set in high dignity' (Ec. 10:15); 'Through me kings reign' (Pr. 8:15). Secondly, a person must be of noble stock, lest his commands be scorned: 'Her husband is honorable in the gates, when he sits among the senators of the land' (Pr. 31:33). The third requirement is power in acting: 'Seek not to be made a judge, unless you have strength enough to extirpate iniquities' (Sir. 7:6). These are the three marks the Apostle uses to show that Christ is worthy of His dignity: first, because He is not only wise but is Wisdom itself; hence, he says, he reflects the glory of God; secondly, because He is not only noble but is nobility itself, because he bears the very stamp [figure] of his substance; thirdly, because He is not only powerful but is power itself: upholding all things by his word of power. But these are the three things which make a person worthy to possess great dignity. 26. – The first is clarity of wisdom: 'The wise shall possess glory' (Pr. 3:35). Hence, he shows Christ's wisdom when he says, he reflects the glory of God. Here it should be noted that according to Ambrose: 'Glory is fame accompanied by praise', i.e., public knowledge of someone's goodness. But as it says in Lk. (18:19): 'No one is good but God alone.' Hence, He is good par excellence and essentially, but other things are good by participation, so that God alone is good par excellence: 'My glory I give to no other' (Is. 42:8); 'To the king of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever' (1 Tim. 1:17). Therefore, knowledge of God's goodness is called glory in a most excellent sense, i.e., clear knowledge of the divine goodness accompanied by praise. Such knowledge is possessed by men up to a certain point: 'I know now in part' (1 Cor. 13:12), but perfectly by God alone: 'No one has ever seen God' (Jn. 1:18). It is true that not even the angels, but God alone comprehends it. Therefore, only God's knowledge of Himself is glory in the full sense, because He has perfect and clearest knowledge of Himself. But because splendor is that which is first emitted by a bright object, and His wisdom is something bright: 'The wisdom of a man shines in his countenance' (Ec. 8:1), it follows that the first conception of wisdom is, as it were, a splendor. Therefore, the Word of the Father, which is a certain concept of His intellect, is the splendor and wisdom by which He knows Himself. That is why the Apostle calls the Son the splendor of glory, i.e., of the clear divine knowledge. Thus, he identifies Him not only as wise but as begotten wisdom: 'I will not rest till her just one comes forth as brightness, and her savior be lighted as a lamp' (Is. 62:1). 27. – The second mark which makes a man worthy of great dignity is noble birth, which he shows is in Christ, because he is the very stamp of his substance. For it is proper that along with wisdom there be nobility in a prince: 'And I took out of your tribes men over fifties and over tens, who might teach you all things' (Dt. 1:15). The word stamp [figure] here is used to denote a mark or an image. As if to say: the image of His substance. Yet it should be noted that although an image implies a likeness, not every likeness is an image: for the whiteness on a canvas is not my whiteness; but an image is a likeness in species. Therefore, that is properly called an image of someone, which bears a likeness to his species, or is an expressed sign of the species. But among the accidents none is such an expressed sign of a species as a thing's figure. Hence, one who draws the figure of an animal draws its image. Therefore, the Son 'Who is the image of the invisible God' (Col. 1:15) is properly called the figure. 28. – But the figure of what? Of his nature [substance]. For there are many images of things: sometimes it is a sign representing the species but yet not agreeing with it in any way; as the image of a man on canvas, which in no sense possesses the true species of man. Sometimes it is similar to it in species not only in representing, but even in being, as the Son is the true image of His Father: 'Adam begot a son in his own image' (Gen. 5:3), i.e., in the nature of his species. Therefore, the Apostle adds, of his substance, because according to Augustine a son is called the image of the father, because he is of the same nature as he. He says, therefore, that he is the figure of his nature [substance]. 29. – But why does he not say that He is the figure of His nature? Because it is possible for the nature of a species to be multiplied according to the multitude of individuals composed of matter and form. Hence, the son of Socrates does not have the same numerical nature has his father. But the substance is never multiplied; for the substance of the father is not distinct from the substance of the son: for substance is not divided according to diverse individuals. Therefore, because there is one and the same numerical nature in the Father and in the Son of God, he does not say 'the figure of His nature', but of his substance, which is indivisible: 'I and the Father are one' (Jn. 10:30); 'I in the Father and the Father in me' (Jn. 14:10). 30. – The third factor which makes a man worthy is strength; hence, it is stated in Sir. (7:6): 'Seek not to be made a judge, unless you have strength enough to extirpate iniquities.' Therefore, he shows this strength when he says, upholding all things by his word of power. For it is proper to princes and potentates to uphold: 'Under whom they stoop that bear up the world' (Jb. 9:13). Therefore, he upholds. 31. – But what does He uphold, and by what agency? In regard to the first it should be noted that anything which cannot stand by itself or walk needs to be upheld. But no creature of itself can subsist or act. The first statement is clear, because once the cause is removed, the effect is removed. But God is the cause of all subsistence, because He is no less the cause of a things' continuance in existence and of its coming into existence than a builder is the cause of a house's coming into existence. Hence, just as the house ceases coming into existence when the builder ceases to act, and just as the air ceases to be illuminated when the sun no longer shines; so, when the divine power is removed, the being, the coming-to-be and the substance of every creature is removed. Therefore, He upholds all things in their existence and in their activity: because when the divine influence is removed, all the activities of secondary causes are removed, because He is the first cause; and the first cause does more than the second: 'Upon what are its bases grounded?' (Jb. 38:6) 32. – But through what agency does he support them? By his word of power. For since the Apostle, when speaking of the creation of things, said that God made all things through the Son: By whom also He made the world, and since that through which a thing acts does not seem to act by its own power but by the power of the one through whom it acts, as the bailiff through whom the king acts by His own power. Hence, the Apostle says, he upholds all things by his word of power. For since the cause of existence and of conservation are the same, when he says that the Son is the cause of conservation, he is showing that He is also the cause of existence 33. – But is it not also by the Father's power? It is also by His power, because the power of both is identical. He works, therefore, both by His own power and by the Father's power, because His power comes from the Father. Yet the Apostle does not say, 'by His power', but by his word of power, in order to show that just as the Father produced all things by the Word: 'He spoke and they were made: He commanded and they were created' (Ps. 32:8), so the Son by the same Word that He is, made all things. By these words, therefore, the Apostle shows the strength of His power, because He has the same power as the Father: for the power by which the Father acts is the same as the power by which the Son acts. 34. – But a question arises here, because the Father, when He speaks, produces a Word; when the Word speaks, He should produce a word; and so the Word of the Father should be the word of the Son. The Greeks answer this by saying that just as the Son is the image of the Father, so the Holy Spirit is the image of the Son. This is the way Basil explains the phrase, supporting all things by his word of power, i.e., by the Holy Spirit. For just as the Son is the Word of the Father; so the Holy Spirit, they say, is the Word of the Son; consequently, the Son acts through Him just as the Father acts through the Son. Yet, properly speaking, an utterance is not called a word, unless it proceeds as something conceived by the intellect in such a way that, as consequence, it proceeds in a likeness of species. But the Holy Spirit, even though He is like, is not like by reason of the way He proceeds, because He does not proceed as a concept issuing from an intellect, but as Love issuing from the will. 35. – But a question still remains about that Word. What is it? For a human command is either externally expressed by a sound, and this has no place in the godhead, because nothing is external to the divine nature, so as to proceed from the Son by Whom all things are upheld; or that command is inwardly conceived in the heart. But even that cannot stand, because nothing is conceived in God's mind but the eternal Word. Consequently, there would be two eternal Words, which it is blasphemous to say. Therefore, the answer to this argument as Augustine says in explaining Jn. (12:48): 'The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day', is that I myself, Who am the Word of the Father, shall judge him. Similarly, in the phrase, by the word of his power, i.e., by himself Who is the powerful Word. 36. – Consequently, by those three characteristics he shows three things of Christ: for by the fact that he is the brightness, he shows his co-eternity with the Father; for in creatures splendor is coeval, and the Word is co-eternal. This is against Arius. But when he says, the image of his substance, he shows the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father. For since splendor is not of the same nature as the resplendent thing, then lest anyone suppose that it is not similar in nature, he says that it is the image or figure of His substance. But because the Son, even though He is of the same nature with the Father, would be lacking power, if He were weak, he adds, supporting all things by the word of his power. Therefore, the Apostle commends Christ on three points, namely, co-eternity, consubstantiality and equality of power. 37. – Then (v. 3b) he shows the second trait, which makes one worthy of great dignity, namely, strenuousness and industry in acting. For it was a display of great industry to merit by His suffering sin the assumed nature that which he already possessed by His own divine nature. Hence it is stated in Phil (2:8): 'he became obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross: for which cause God also exalted him.' Therefore, to purify from sin, even tough it belongs to Him in virtue of His divine nature, belongs to Him also by the merit of His Passion; hence Sir. (47:13) says: 'The Lord took away his sins and exalted his horn forever'; 'he will save his people from their sins' (Mt. 1:21). 38. – It belongs to Christ to cleanse by reason of His divine nature and by reason of His special sonship. By reason of His divine nature, because guilt or sin is uniquely an evil of the rational creature, and God alone can repair such an evil. For sin lies in the will, which God alone can move: 'The heart is perverse above all things, and unsearchable; who can know it? I am the Lord who searches the heart and proves the reins' (Jer. 17:9). The reason for this is that something close to the end is brought to its end only by the first cause. But the will is concerned with the ultimate end, because it is made for enjoying God; therefore, it is moved by God alone. Therefore, since Christ is true God, it is obvious that He can cause purification from sins: 'Who can forgive sins but God alone?' (Lk. 5:21) 39. – But by appropriation it belongs also to Christ. To understand this it should be noted that in sin is involved, first of all, a transgression of the eternal law and of God's rights, since all sin is an iniquity which transgresses the law: 'They have transgressed the law, they have changed the ordinance, they have broken the everlasting covenant' (Is. 24:5). Therefore, since the eternal law and divine right stem from the eternal Word, it is clear that cleansing from sins is Christ's prerogative, inasmuch as He is the Word: 'he sent his Word and healed them' (Ps. 106:20). Secondly, sin involves a loss of the light of reason and, consequently, of God's wisdom in man, since such a light is a participation of divine wisdom: 'And because they had not wisdom, they perished in their folly' (Bar. 3:28); 'They err that work evil' (Pr. 14:22). Furthermore, according to the Philosopher, all evil is ignorance. Therefore, to set aright according to divine wisdom belongs to the One who is divine wisdom. But this is Christ: 'We preach Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God' (1 Cor. 1:24); 'For by wisdom they were healed' (Wis. 9:19). Thirdly, in sin is a deformity of the likeness of God in man: 'The heart of fools shall be unlike' (Pr. 15:13). Therefore, it belongs to the Son to correct this deformity, because He is the image of he Father: 'Therefore, as we have born the image of the earthly, let us bear also the image of the heavenly' (1 Cor. 15:49). Fourthly, there is a loss of the eternal inheritance, the sign of which was man's expulsion from Paradise: 'God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that he might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons' (Gal. 4:4). Therefore, it is obvious that it belongs to Christ to purge sins both by reason of His human nature and by reason of the divine. 40. – But how did He effect this purgation? It is clear from this. For in sin is a perversity of will by which man withdraws from the unchangeable good. To correct this, Christ bestowed sanctifying grace: 'Justified freely by his grace' (Rom. 3:24). Secondly, there is in the soul a stain left by the perversity of the will. To remove this stain He gave His blood: 'He loved us and washed us from our sins in his blood' (Rev. 1:5). Thirdly, there is a debt of punishment, which a man must pay. To satisfy this debt He offered Himself as a victim on the altar of the cross: 'Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it in order to sanctify it' (Eph. 5:25). Fourthly, there is slavery under the devil, to whom man subjected himself by sin, because 'whoever commits sin is the servant of sin' (Jn. 8:34). To save us from this slavery He redeemed us: 'You have redeemed me, O Lord, the God of truth' (Ps. 30:6). 41. – Then (v. 3c) he describes His dignity. As if to say: It does not seem improper for Him to sit on the right hand of majesty, because He is the splendor and the figure and the upholder of all things. But in the word sit three things are usually implied: One is the authority of the one seated: 'When I sat as a king with the army standing about him' (Jb. 29:25). In the divine court there are many who serve, because Dan. (7:10) says: 'Thousands of thousands ministered to him and ten thousand times a hundred thousand stood before him.' But no one is described as sitting there, because all present are servants and ministers: 'Are they not all ministering spirits, sent to minister for them' (Heb. 1:14); but He alone has royal dignity: 'And he came even to the ancient of days: and he gave him power and glory and a kingdom' (Dan. 7:13); 'When the Son of man shall come in his majesty and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty' (Mt. 25:3). Then he continues: 'Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: 'Come, you blessed of my father' (Mt. 25:34). The second implication is the stability of the one sitting: 'Stay you in he city till you be endued with power from oh high' (Lk. 24:49; 'His power is an everlasting power' (Dan. 7:14); 'Jesus Christ, yesterday and today and the same for ever' (Heb. 13:8). Furthermore, sitting sometimes implies humility, because the person seated is below those who stand: 'Thou hast known my sitting down' (Ps. 138:2). But that is not the sense in which it is taken here, but in the first two. 42. – But on the other hand, it says in Ac. (7:55): 'I see the heavens opened and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.' The answer is that sitting and standing and all such postures are said of God metaphorically. Consequently, there are various reasons why He is said to be standing and sitting. He is seated because of His immortality, but standing because that posture is best for resisting firmly. Hence, He stood as though prepared to help Stephen in his agony. 43. – But the Apostle continues, that he sits at the right hand. If this is referred to the divine nature, the sense is this: at the right hand, i.e., on a par with the Father; but if it is referred to the human nature, the sense is at the right hand, i.e., in the more excellent goods of the Father: 'He sits on the right hand of God' (Mk 16:19); 'The Lord said to my Lord, sit thou on my right hand' (Ps. 109:1). But among those who have assistants some are simply greater, as the king and emperor; others are not absolutely greater, but only in some sense, as overseers and bailiffs. But Christ is not seated on the right of any of His inferior judges, as though He were a bailiff, but on the right of one absolutely great, because He sits on the right hand majesty' (Pr. 25:27). But Christ, even though He is seated on the right hand of majesty, has a majesty of His own, because He has the same majesty as the Father: 'When the Son of man comes in his majesty' (Mt. 25:31): 'Of him the Son of man shall be ashamed, when he comes in his majesty and that of the Father' (Lk. 9:26). 44. – But he does not say of his majesty alone, but on high, i.e., above every creature: 'I dwell in the highest places' (Sir. 24:7); therefore, He sits on high, because He is raised above all creatures: 'For your magnificence is elevated above the heavens' (Ps. 8:2). According to Chrysostom, the Apostle is speaking here after the manner of one who is teaching a child, who cannot bear to have everything proposed to him, but must be led gradually, now saying difficult things, now proposing easy things. So here, he says divine things, when he says, by a Son, and human things when he says, whom he has appointed heir of all things (v.2).

Different discoveries made of the Divine will to the ancient Israelites by the prophets, Heb 1:1. The discovery now perfected by the revelation of Jesus Christ, of whose excellences and glories a large description is given, Heb 1:2-13. Angels are ministering spirits to the heirs of salvation, Heb 1:14.

The brightness of his glory - Απαυγασμα της δοξης The resplendent outbeaming of the essential glory of God. Hesychius interprets απαυγασμα by ᾑλιου φεγγος, the splendor of the sun. The same form of expression is used by an apocryphal writer, Wis. 7:26, where, speaking of the uncreated wisdom of God, he says: "For she is the splendor of eternal light, απαυγασμα γαρ εστι φωτος αΐδιου, and the unsullied mirror of the energy of God, and the image of his goodness." The word αυγασμα is that which has splendor in itself απαυγασμα is the splendor emitted from it; but the inherent splendor and the exhibited splendor are radically and essentially the same. The express image of his person - Χαρακτηρ της ὑποστασεως αυτου· The character or impression of his hypostasis or substance. It is supposed that these words expound the former; image expounding brightness, and person or substance, glory. The hypostasis of God is that which is essential to him as God; and the character or image is that by which all the likeness of the original becomes manifest, and is a perfect fac-simile of the whole. It is a metaphor taken from sealing; the die or seal leaving the full impression of its every part on the wax to which it is applied. From these words it is evident, 1. That the apostle states Jesus Christ to be of the same essence with the Father, as the απαυγασμα, or proceeding splendor, must be the same with the αυγασμα, or inherent splendor. 2. That Christ, though proceeding from the Father, is of the same essence; for if one αυγη, or splendor, produce another αυγη, or splendor, the produced splendor must be of the same essence with that which produces it. 3. That although Christ is thus of the same essence with the Father, yet he is a distinct person from the Father; as the splendor of the sun, though of the same essence, is distinct from the sun itself, though each is essential to the other; as the αυγασμα, or inherent splendor, cannot subsist without its απαυγασμα, or proceeding splendor, nor the proceeding splendor subsist without the inherent splendor from which it proceeds. 4. That Christ is eternal with the Father, as the proceeding splendor must necessarily be coexistent with the inherent splendor. If the one, therefore, be uncreated, the other is uncreated; if the one be eternal, the other is eternal. Upholding all things by the word of his power - This is an astonishing description of the infinitely energetic and all pervading power of God. He spake, and all things were created; he speaks, and all things are sustained. The Jewish writers frequently express the perfection of the Divine nature by the phrases, He bears all things, both above and below; He carries all his creatures; He bears his world; He bears all worlds by his power. The Hebrews, to whom this epistle was written, would, from this and other circumstances, fully understand that the apostle believed Jesus Christ to be truly and properly God. Purged our sins - There may be here some reference to the great transactions in the wilderness. 1. Moses, while in communion with God on the mount, was so impressed with the Divine glories that his face shone, so that the Israelites could not behold it. But Jesus is infinitely greater than Moses, for he is the splendor of God's glory; and, 2. Moses found the government of the Israelites such a burden that he altogether sank under it. His words, Num 11:12, are very remarkable: Have I conceived all this people? Have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy Bosom - unto the land which thou swearest unto their fathers? But Christ not only carried all the Israelites, and all mankind; but he upholds All Things by the word of his power. 3. The Israelites murmured against Moses and against God, and provoked the heavy displeasure of the Most High; and would have been consumed had not Aaron made an atonement for them, by offering victims and incense. But Jesus not only makes an atonement for Israel, but for the whole world; not with the blood of bulls and goats, but with his own blood: hence it is said that he purged our sins δι' αὑτου, by himself his own body and life being the victim. It is very likely that the apostle had all these things in his eye when he wrote this verse; and takes occasion from them to show the infinite excellence of Jesus Christ when compared with Moses; and of his Gospel when compared with the law. And it is very likely that the Spirit of God, by whom he spoke, kept in view those maxims of the ancient Jews, concerning the Messiah, whom they represent as being infinitely greater than Abraham, the patriarchs, Moses, and the ministering angels. So Rabbi Tanchum, on Isa 52:13, Behold my servant shall deal prudently, says, זה מלך המשיח Zeh melek hammashiach, this is the King Messiah; and shall be exalted, and be extolled, and be very high. "He shall be exalted above Abraham, and shall be extolled beyond Moses, and shall be more sublime than the ministering angels." See the preface. The right hand of the Majesty on high - As it were associated with the supreme Majesty, in glory everlasting, and in the government of all things in time and in eternity; for the right hand is the place of the greatest eminence, Kg1 2:19. The king himself, in eastern countries, sits on the throne; the next to him in the kingdom, and the highest favourite, sits on his right hand; and the third greatest personage, on his left.

THE HIGHEST OF ALL REVELATIONS IS GIVEN US NOW IN THE SON OF GOD, WHO IS GREATER THAN THE ANGELS, AND WHO, HAVING COMPLETED REDEMPTION, SITS ENTHRONED AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND. (Heb 1:1-14) at sundry times--Greek, "in many portions." All was not revealed to each one prophet; but one received one portion of revelation, and another another. To Noah the quarter of the world to which Messiah should belong was revealed; to Abraham, the nation; to Jacob, the tribe; to David and Isaiah, the family; to Micah, the town of nativity; to Daniel, the exact time; to Malachi, the coming of His forerunner, and His second advent; through Jonah, His burial and resurrection; through Isaiah and Hosea, His resurrection. Each only knew in part; but when that which was perfect came in Messiah, that which was in part was done away (Co1 13:12). in divers manners--for example, internal suggestions, audible voices, the Urim and Thummim, dreams, and visions. "In one way He was seen by Abraham, in another by Moses, in another by Elias, and in another by Micah; Isaiah, Daniel, and Ezekiel, beheld different forms" [THEODORET]. (Compare Num 12:6-8). The Old Testament revelations were fragmentary in substance, and manifold in form; the very multitude of prophets shows that they prophesied only in part. In Christ, the revelation of God is full, not in shifting hues of separated color, but Himself the pure light, uniting in His one person the whole spectrum (Heb 1:3). spake--the expression usual for a Jew to employ in addressing Jews. So Matthew, a Jew writing especially for Jews, quotes Scripture, not by the formula, "It is written," but "said," &c. in time past--From Malachi, the last of the Old Testament prophets, for four hundred years, there had arisen no prophet, in order that the Son might be the more an object of expectation [BENGEL]. As God (the Father) is introduced as having spoken here; so God the Son, Heb 2:3; God the Holy Ghost, Heb 3:7. the fathers--the Jewish fathers. The Jews of former days (Co1 10:1). by--Greek, "in." A mortal king speaks by his ambassador, not (as the King of kings) in his ambassador. The Son is the last and highest manifestation of God (Mat 21:34, Mat 21:37); not merely a measure, as in the prophets, but the fulness of the Spirit of God dwelling in Him bodily (Joh 1:16; Joh 3:34; Col 2:9). Thus he answers the Jewish objection drawn from their prophets. Jesus is the end of all prophecy (Rev 19:10), and of the law of Moses (Joh 1:17; Joh 5:46).

Who being--by pre-existent and essential being. brightness of his glory--Greek, the effulgence of His glory. "Light of (from) light" [Nicene Creed]. "Who is so senseless as to doubt concerning the eternal being of the Son? For when has one seen light without effulgence?" [ATHANASIUS, Against Arius, Orations, 2]. "The sun is never seen without effulgence, nor the Father without the Son" [THEOPHYLACT]. It is because He is the brightness, &c., and because He upholds, &c., that He sat down on the right hand, &c. It was a return to His divine glory (Joh 6:62; Joh 17:5; compare Wisdom 7:25-26, where similar things are said of wisdom). express image--"impress." But veiled in the flesh. The Sun of God in glory beams Too bright for us to scan; But we can face the light that streams For the mild Son of man. (Co2 3:18) of his person--Greek, "of His substantial essence"; "hypostasis." upholding all things--Greek, "the universe." Compare Col 1:15, Col 1:17, Col 1:20, which enumerates the three facts in the same order as here. by the word--Therefore the Son of God is a Person; for He has the word [BENGEL]. His word is God's word (Heb 11:3). of his power--"The word" is the utterance which comes from His (the Son's) power, and gives expression to it. by himself--omitted in the oldest manuscripts. purged--Greek, "made purification of . . . sins," namely, in His atonement, which graciously covers the guilt of sin. "Our" is omitted in the oldest manuscripts. Sin was the great uncleanness in God's sight, of which He has effected the purgation by His sacrifice [ALFORD]. Our nature, as guilt-laden, could not, without our great High Priest's blood of atonement sprinkling the heavenly mercy seat, come into immediate contact with God. EBRARD says, "The mediation between man and God, who was present in the Most Holy Place, was revealed in three forms: (1) In sacrifices (typical propitiations for guilt); (2) In the priesthood (the agents of those sacrifices); (3) In the Levitical laws of purity (Levitical purity being attained by sacrifice positively, by avoidance of Levitical pollution negatively, the people being thus enabled to come into the presence of God without dying, Deu 5:26)" (Lev. 16:1-34). sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high--fulfilling Psa 110:1. This sitting of the Son at God's fight hand was by the act of the Father (Heb 8:1; Eph 1:20); it is never used of His pre-existing state co-equal with the Father, but always of His exalted state as Son of man after His sufferings, and as Mediator for man in the presence of God (Rom 8:34): a relation towards God and us about to come to an end when its object has been accomplished (Co1 15:28).