 |  |
time" that salvation will be received or attained (Heb. 9: 28). In the same way,
Heb.viii.7 sets aside the first covenant in favour of the second, the first covenant
becoming `old and vanishing away', while the second is established (Heb. 10: 9).
Hebrews also speaks of a `better hope', a `better covenant', `better promises' and an
infinitely `better sacrifice', even though the rejected hope, covenant, promises and
sacrifices were all ordained by God Himself originally.
We cannot help noticing too the place that pairs occupy in the early types of the
O.T.--Cain and Abel, Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob and so on. This twofoldness
goes right throughout Scripture. Without going into details here we list the following:
(1)
The whole Bible, the Old Testament and the New Testament.
(2)
The book of Genesis as a whole and in variety of pairs.
(3)
The book of the Revelation, the complement of the book of Genesis.
(4)
The book of the Revelation, the complement of the book of Exodus.
(5)
The book of the Revelation, the complement of the Gospel of Matthew.
(6)
The twofold nature of the book of Exodus.
(7)
The twofold nature of the book of Isaiah.
(8)
The twofold nature of the Gospel of Matthew.
(9)
The twofold nature of the Acts of the Apostles.
(10)
The twofold nature of the epistle to the Ephesians.
(11)
The twofold character of prophetic Truth.
There are other considerations like the twofold witness of the Apostle Paul, during the
Acts period and afterwards, but this list gives us a beginning, illustrating this twofoldness
which is found right throughout the Scriptures.
The Twofoldness of the Word of God.
The Bible comes to us in its complete form as a twofold composition commonly
referred to as (1) the Old Testament and (2) the New Testament. These titles are too
ingrained for them to be exchanged for the Old and New Covenant, but that, strictly
speaking, is what these books should be called.
The Greek word diatheke occurs 17 times in the epistles to the Hebrews, 11 times the
word is rendered in the A.V. `covenant' and 6 times `testament'. The choice of these two
terms seems arbitrary, for in Heb. 7: 22 we read that `by so much' Jesus was made a
surety of `a better testament', whereas in Heb. 8: 6 we read `by how much also He is
the Mediator of a better covenant'. In Heb. 8: 8 we read `I will make a new
covenant', but in 9: 15 we have `He is the Mediator of the new testament'. In 12: 24
He is once more the Mediator of `the New Covenant'.
Bloomfield writes on this in his Greek Testament:
"The sense properly assigned to it, testament, is now generally rejected, from its
involving something like an absurdity. For how, it is asked, can anyone be called the
mediator of a testament? How can a testament need a mediator? How can anyone be