---
title: "Commentary on Hebrews"
author: "John Calvin"
translator: "John Owen"
languages: [en]
shelf: "Commentaries"
section: 61 of 81
url: https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/61/
cite: "John Calvin, tr. John Owen, Commentary on Hebrews, section 61. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/61/"
---

# Commentary on Hebrews

*John Calvin, tr. John Owen*

Calvin on the Epistle to the Hebrews.

## 61. Appendix G2

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/61/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/61/#p-N

[¶0] APPENDIX G 2

[¶1] Chapter 9:9, 10. These two verses have greatly tried the ingenuity of critics, not as to the general meaning, but as to the construction. All agree as to the general import of the passage, and yet they find a difficulty in the syntax. This has arisen from not apprehending the style of the Apostle; he often arranges his sentences according to the practice of the ancient prophets. So he does here. In verse ninth he mentions two things, “gifts” or oblations and “sacrifices;” then he refers first to “sacrifices,” and afterwards to the “gifts.” Of the “sacrifices,” he says, that they could not perfect or justify “the worshipper,” for so λατρευόντα ought to be rendered here; but of “the gifts,” together with meats, etc., he says, that they were only imposed until the time of reformation. Here syntax is satisfied. The two verses may be thus rendered, —

[¶2] 9. “Which is a type for the present time, while gifts and sacrifices are offered, which (sacrifices) cannot perfect the

[¶3] 10. worshipper as to his conscience, being imposed (gifts) only, together with meats, and drinks, and divers washings, even ordinances of the flesh, until the time of reformation.”

[¶4] Now, there is here a consistency in every part; δυνάμεναι is in the same gender with θυσίαι, and what is said is suitable to sacrifices, they being not able to atone for sin; and then ἐπικείμενα is of the same gender with δῶρά, and what is said of them is also suitable, that they were imposed or required only, together with meats, etc., which were rituals referring to the flesh or body, and not to the conscience or the soul, until the time of reforming or rectifying all things came.

[¶5] Doddridge rightly states the efficacy of the Jewish sacrifices when he says, that they averted “temporal evils,” but did expiate offenses in the court above; they removed offenses against the government under which the Jews lived, and restored them to the privileges of eternal communion with the Church; and thus they were types and symbols of the efficacy of the true sacrifices by which we are restored to the favor of God, and to a spiritual communion with him.

### Appendix H2

[¶7] APPENDIX H 2

[¶8] Chapter 9:16, 17. Much has been written on the meaning of the word διαθήκη in this passage. It is rendered “covenant” throughout by Doddridge, Macknight, Scholefield, etc.; and Scott is disposed to take the same view. Macknight’s version is this, —

[¶9] 16. “For where a covenant is, there is a necessity that the

[¶10] 17. death of the appointed sacrifice be brought in; for a covenant is firm over dead sacrifices, since it never hath force whilst the appointed sacrifice liveth.”

[¶11] The difficulty here is as to the word διαθέμενος, rendered above, “the appointed sacrifice,” — by Doddridge, “he by whom the covenant is confirmed,” — and by Scholefield, “the mediating sacrifice.” But the word is never found to have such meanings in the New Testament, in the Sept., or in the classics. It is therefore impossible to accede to such a view of the passage.

[¶12] It is then said, on the other hand, that διαθήκη does not mean a testament or a will in the New Testament nor in the Sept. This is not true; for it clearly means a testament or a will in Galatians 3:15, and in connection, too, with its common meaning, a covenant, see verse 17. Besides it has commonly, if not always, this meaning in the classics.

[¶13] These two verses are to be viewed as an illustration, and may be regarded as parenthetic; and were γὰρ rendered “in fact,” or indeed, this would appear more evident, “Where indeed a testament is,” etc. As an illustration, a reference to a testament is exceedingly suitable; for with regard to Christ, his death was really the ratification of the covenant; as by death a Will attains its validity, so by Christ’s death the covenant of which he is the Mediator. Death in both instances has a similar effect. And this, and no more than this, seems to have been the intention of the Apostle. The different meaning of the same word in the same passage is to be found out by words connected with it; in the present instance διαθέμενος is sufficient, independently of the 17th verse, which can be rightly applied to nothing but to a will or a testament.

[¶14] Many agree with Calvin on these verses, such as Erasmus, Beza, Schleusner, Stuart, Bloomfield, etc.