COVENANTS AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES
31
`The Son of God is, in this His essential majesty, the expression and the sole expression of the Divine light - not,
as in His incarnation, its reflection' (Alford).
Apaugasma, `brightness', does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament Augazo the lesser form of the word
occurs in 2 Corinthians 4:4 where it is translated `shine'. Other variants found in the New Testament are auge
`break of day' (Acts 20:11); diaugazo `dawn' (2 Pet. 1:19) and where the Received Text reads diaphanes
`transparent', some critical texts read diauges in Revelation 21:21. Both Paul, and the Hebrews to whom he wrote,
were familiar with the writings of the Apocrypha, and so would be reminded by his words of the passage in the
Wisdom of Solomon, where speaking of Wisdom it says:
`She is the breath of the power of God ... she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the
power of God and the image of His goodness'.
Here, the word `brightness' is the Greek apaugasma, and standing alone in the Apocrypha, cannot but have some
bearing upon the apostle's intention in Hebrews. Most readers have a passing acquaintance with the findings of
science, even though none of us would venture to express opinions in a domain so far removed from our personal
experiences. But most, if not all of our readers, will know that light is itself INVISIBLE. Should any doubt this, a few
experiments would help. For example, I see the paper on which these words are being written, because the light
which is coming through the window, and which falls upon the sheet of white paper before me, is reflected by the
surface of the paper to my eye, but I do not see the light that is reflected as a visible beam. Again, when I see a
beam of sunlight tracing its gleaming path along a passage, it would be excusable perhaps to say `that shows that
light is visible, you can see the beam'. Strictly speaking, you see thousands of gleaming motes of dust floating in
the path of the light. If a red hot wire be introduced into the beam of light, a dark patch will surround the wire,
simply because the dust reflectors are destroyed but the light itself goes on. Again, we are all familiar with the term
`infra red' and `ultra violet' rays. These are rays of light that lie on either side of the spectrum (the rainbow
colours); they are powerful in their action, but invisible to the eye. One can therefore assume that God Who created
light and knows its nature would use it as a figure with full intention, and we can demonstrate the apostle's use of
the word `brightness' by appealing to the threefold disposition of light.
The Father. Invisible.
Likened to the infra red rays.
The Son. God Manifest. Likened to the central rays of the spectrum, the only part of light by which we `see'.
The Holy Spirit. Invisible. Likened to the ultra violet rays.
The only way in which we can `see' the glory of God, is `in the face of Jesus Christ', and the passage in
2 Corinthians 4, which makes this statement, contains the only occurrence of augazo in the New Testament, namely
in 2 Corinthians 4:4.
As the epistle to the Hebrews naturally speaks of the Tabernacle, its furniture, its priesthood and its offerings, it
is a thing to be expected that, if Christ is set forth as `better' than all these types and shadows, then even in this
initial setting forth of His office as `the brightness of His glory' we shall have a link with the typical teaching of the
Old Testament. The cherubim are called `the cherubims of glory' in association with the mercy seat (Heb. 9:5), and
Psalm 78:61 uses the word `glory' as a name for the ark, and Phinehas' wife said `the glory is departed from Israel:
for the ark of God is taken' (1 Sam. 4:22). The Son of God is therefore comparable to the Shekinah glory of the
tabernacle. John 1:14 tells us that He `tabernacled' among us, and Colossians 2:9 that `in Him dwelleth all the
fulness of the Godhead bodily'. Moses, it will be remembered, said `I beseech Thee, show me Thy glory', but the
Lord told him `Thou canst not see My face ... and live ... I will take away Mine hand, and thou shalt see My back
parts: but My face shall not be seen' (Exod. 33:18-23). This request apparently arose out of the promise `My
presence shall go with thee' (Exod. 33:14). Although it was made clear to Moses here that he could not see the face
of God and live, yet in the same chapter we read `And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh
unto his friend' (Exod. 33:11). These words seem to involve a contradiction. Verse 11 says that the Lord spake face
to face with Moses, yet verse 20 says `Thou canst not see My face and live'. The reader will readily call to mind
other apparent contradictions. Jacob said:
`I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved' (Gen. 32:30),