AN EXEGESIS OF HEBREWS 8:7

by

Redeem-Mel B. Fernan

Submitted in

partial fulfilment

of the requirements in

BI 31 Biblical Greek 2

Baptist Theological College

March 2011
 AN EXEGESIS OF HEBREWS 8:7

INTRODUCTION TO HEBREWS 8:7

Hebrews is a letter address to a group of Jews. There is no clear statement in the letter that it is

written to Christian Jews. Tradition says that the receivers of this letter were Christian Jews, most

probably to the Jews in the Diaspora (Morris 1981, 4). The writer of this epistle is generally considered

anonymous although some believe that it is Apostle Paul who wrote this letter However, it could be that

the writer of this letter was among the inner circle of Paul (Lane 1991, xlix). The most recurring theme of

Hebrews is the supremacy of the person and work of Jesus Christ (Guthrie 2002, 7).

The word “covenant” is the repeated word in the eighth chapter of Hebrews. Particularly, the

focus in this chapter, as well as in the whole epistle of Hebrews, is the “new covenant.” The covenant, as

used in Hebrews, involves the shed blood, the mediator, and the inheritance (A. McCaig, “Covenant, The

New,” in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1979 ed.). The making of a covenant involves

death, usually of an animal. The death of an animal “symbolizes the death of the contracting parties in a

sense that thereafter, in the matter involved, they would no more change their mind that can the dead” (D.

F. Estes, “Covenant (NT),” in The International Standard Bible Encycopedia,1979 ed.). Hebrews chapter

8 states that the new covenant was ratified in the death of Jesus Christ.

THE TEXT IN GREEK BIBLE

eij ga;r hJ prwvth ejkeivnh h\n a[memptoV, oujk a[n deutevraV ejzhtei:to tovpoV.

THE TEXT IN ENGLISH TRANSLATION

For if that first (covenant) was complete, there would be no place to look for a second.

1
PARSING AND CONJUGATION OF THE TEXT

eij ga;r hJ prwvth ejkeivnh h\n

particle conjunction article noun dem. verb
eij gavr nominative nominative pronoun imperfect
“if” “for” feminine feminine nominative active
singular singular feminine indicative
oJ prw:toV singular 3rd person
“the” “first” ejkei:noV singular
“that” ejimiv
“was”

a[memptoV, oujk a[n deutevraV ejzhtei:to tovpoV.

adjective particle particle noun verb noun
nominative ouj untranslatabl genitive imperfect nominative
masculine “not” e in English feminine passive masculine
singular singular indicative singular
a[memptoV deuvteroV 3rd person tovpoV
“blameless” “of second” singular place
zhtewv
“he was
being looked
for”

EXEGETICAL IDEA: The second covenant is necessary because the first covenant is not

complete.

SUBJECT: Covenant

COMPLEMENT: The first covenant cannot bring salvation.

IDEA: The second covenant gives salvation.

EXEGETICAL OUTLINE

I The first covenant is not complete, 8:7a

A. It is lacking, 8:7a

B. It is has faults, 8:7

II The second covenant is needed, 8:7b

A. It is better than the first, 8:7b

2
 B. It is perfect than the first, 8:7b

COMMENTARY

I The first covenant is not complete, 8:7a

eij ga;r

eij is a particle used to introduce a conditional statement. It is used in the verse

indicatively which means that it is denoting “assumptions relating to what has already happened”

(BAGD 1979, 219). It implies that there is a possibility that the assumption is true or “contrary to

fact conditions” (Dana and Mantey 1927, 246).

The word ga;r is a conjunction used “to express a cause, inference, continuation” or

explanation (BAGD 1979, 151). It is a postpositive word which means that it is never placed

first in a clause (Dana and Mantey 1927, 242 and BAGD 1979, 151). Combined, eiv and ga;r

makes one conditional conjunction. It means that a condition in the statement must occur before

a certain action or conclusion can take place (Wallace 1996, 675). Translated, eiv ga;r means

“for if.”

The writer to the Hebrews used the conditional conjunction eiv ga;r to denote that hJ

prwvth ejkeivnh h\n a[memptoV is not real or true. Considering the context in the preceding

verses, the author states that the first covenant did not meet the conditions to be complete. There

are two reasons why the first covenant is not complete.

A. It is lacking, 8:7a

hJ prwvth ejkeivnh

hJ, from the lexical form oJ, is a definite article in the nominative, feminine, and singular

form (Moulton 1978, 184). This article is used to point out or draw attention to the object prwvth

(Dana and Mantey 1927, 137). In this verse, this article is used demonstratively, hence, the

demonstrative pronoun ejkeivnh [nominative, feminine, singular, lexical form: ejkeivnoV

3
(Moulton 1978, 123)] is used. A demonstrative pronoun is used to point out with emphasis the

object it is being modified. ejkeivnoV is a demonstrative pronoun used when the object is

“relatively distant in actuality or thought” (Dana and Mantey 1927, 128) or when referring to “a

thing previously mentioned or implied” (Moulton 1978, 123). If used as a modifier,

demonstrative pronouns are place in the predicate position in the sentence. Hence, the ejkeivnh is

placed after the noun hJ prwvth it is referring to. prwvth [nominative, feminine, singular, lexical

form: prw:toV (Moulton 1978, 355)] is translated “first” or “earlier” (Mounce 2003, 436). It may

refer to being first in time or order or first in importance (Moulton 1978, 341). In this context,

prwvth is used to refer to being first in time.

The context in this chapter shows that hJ prwvth ejkeivnh refers to the covenant that was

given first at the time of Moses. It refers to the old pattern of worshipping and coming to God

through the obedience of the Law that God gave to the Israelites. The old covenant was given as

the pattern or shadow of what is come; hence, the first covenant is not the complete covenant

(Hebrews 8:5). It lacks the fulfilment or the tangibility of covenant that the first is giving pattern

or shadow of. Therefore, hJ prwvth ejkeivnh is translated “that first covenant.”

B. It has faults, v. 8:7b

h\n a[memptoV,

h\n is the imperfect, active, indicative, third person, singular form of the word eijmiv

(Moulton 1978, 187). In this verse, h\n (present tense: eijmiv) is used as a copulative verb. As a

copula, it unites the subject and the predicate in the sentence (BAGD 1979, 223). It tells the

relationship between the subject and the predicate. Since it is an imperfect copulative verb, it

does not necessarily indicate an action. However, it denotes a quality or state of being of the

subject in the past. The indicative mood of the verb h\n indicates a simple assertion of the reality.

4
Indicative mood does not necessarily state a fact but a condition of a reality (Dana and Mantey

1927, 168).

a[memptoV [nominative, masculine, singular (Moulton 1978, 18)] translated in English

means “blameless, irreprehensible, or without defect” (Moulton 1978, 18. ) It is in the

nominative case even if it is in the predicate because the verb connecting it to the subject is a

copulative or equative verb. Translated h\n a[memptoV, means “was blameless.”

The writer of Hebrews states the reality of the first covenant being discussed in the verse.

Without the conditional conjunction eiv ga;r, the first covenant would be complete and without

fault. However, the writer states that contrary to the belief that the first covenant is without fault,

the opposite is true (Hebrews 8:8). A conditional statement or clause states a “supposition” in

which the fulfilment of the assumption must be secured in order for the “potential fact expressed

in a companion clause” to be realize (Dana and Mantey 1927, 286). eij ga;r hJ prwvth ejkeivnh

h\n a[memptoV is a conditional clause that contains the supposition—the first covenant was

blameless. The first covenant has faults, for if it is faultless, the second covenant would not be

given.

II The second covenant is needed, 8:7b

oujk a[n

oujk (ouj is used in before words beginning with consonants) is a particle of negation

(Dana and Mantey 1927, 263). It indicates a denial of the “reality of an alleged fact” (BAGD

1979, 590). ouj is naturally used in indicative conditional clauses (Dana and Mantey 1927, 288).

Futhermore, ouj is more emphatic as it “denies the fact” while its counterpart mhv, a “weaker

negative and the one for expressing doubt,” “denies the idea” of the statement (Dana and Mantey

5
1927, 288 and BAGD 1979, 515). In this verse, the fact that the second covenant existed would

be downright false if the first was faultless.

a[n is a particle that “denotes that the action of the verb is dependent on some

circumstance or condition” (BAGD 1979, 48). It is an emphatic particle that “implies doubt or

indefiniteness” (Dana and Mantey 1927, 288) and is “significant with the indicative in contrary

to fact conditions” because it deals with the unrealities (Dana and Mantey 1927, 260).

Since the protasis (the statement of condition) in the conditional statement in Hebrews

8:7 is not meet, then the opposite of the apodosis or consequence in the statement is true. This

means that since the first covenant was not blameless, then there should be a second covenant to

look for (Hebrews 8:7). The writer of Hebrews in pointing out that the first covenant indeed is

lacking and a second covenant is necessary to fill what the first covenant cannot.

A. It is better than the first, 8:7b

deutevraV

deutevraV [genitive, feminine, singular, lexical form: deuvteroV (Moulton 1978, 88)] is

translated “of second” in English. It basically means “of that which follows in time” (BAGD

1979, 177). deutevraV is in the genitive case which denotes ownership of something (Dana and

Mantey 1927, 76). In the context, the place of the second (covenant) is “of that which follows”

the first.

The writer of Hebrews is pointing out in this verse that there was a second covenant

given. After stating the fact that the first condition was not achieved, the writer stresses that there

exists a second covenant, a covenant that is necessarily better that the first (Hebrews 8:6).

6
 B. It is perfect than the first, 8:7b

ejzhtei:to tovpoV

ejzhtei:to [imperfect, passive, indicative, 3rd person, singular, lexical form: zhtewv

(Moulton 1978, 115)] is an action word transliterated “he was being looked for.” It is in the

imperfect tense which points a continuous action done in the past. The imperfect tense can be

illustrated in viewing a movie rather than staring at a still picture (Dana and Mantey 1927, 186).

It means that the looking for the second covenant happened indefinitely in the past. ejzhtei:to is

also in the passive voice of the verb. It means that the subject is being acted upon rather than the

subject is doing the action (Dana and Mantey 1927, 161). In this verse, “the place of second” is

the subject and it is receiving the action “being looked for” in the past. The indicative mood

indicates the certainty of the event declared (Dana and Mantey 1927, 168). The sentence states a

fact that is “relative to someone other than either the one asserting it or the one addressed” so

that it stated in a 3rd person (Dana and Mantey 1927, 164). Contextually, the 3rd person is the

second covenant.

tovpoV [nominative, masculine, singular, lexical form: tovpoV (Moulton 1978, 407)],

translated “place,” is the subject of the sentence. It indicates a location or position in time

(BAGD 1979, 822); hence the word deutevraV is present in the statement. It is the subject being

acted upon by the action word ejzhtei:to. It is singular in form which means that there are no

more places of the second other than that of what is stated here.

The writer stresses on this verse the importance and the necessity of the second covenant.

The quality of the second covenant is also given value. The writer points out that the second

covenant was not only “looked for” but is also perfect and complete than the first covenant

(Hebrews 8:10-12).

CONCLUSION

7
 The writer of Hebrews clearly states that the first covenant that was given in the time of

Moses is not a complete, blameless covenant. In fact, it is only a foreshadow of what is to come

—that is, the second covenant. He also expresses the supremacy of the second covenant as the

final fulfilment of the first. The second covenant, by the Lord Jesus Christ, is better and perfect

covenant, far more excellent in its scope and effectiveness. As the writer addressed it, the

existence of the new covenant renders the first obsolete and is “ready to vanish away” (Hebrews

8:13 NKJV).

8
 REFERENCE LIST

Bauer, William and William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker. 1979. A
Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Dana, H. E. and Julius R. Mantey. 1927. A manual grammar of the Greek New Testament. New
York: The Macmillan Company.

Estes, D. F.”Covenant (NT).” In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. 1979 ed.

The Greek New Testament. 1975. West Germany: United Bible Societies.

Guthrie, George H. Hebrews. Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary, gen. ed.
Clinton E. Arnold, vol. 4. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan.

Lane, William L. 1991. Hebrews 1-8. Word Biblical Commentary, gen. ed. David A. Hubbard
and Glenn W. Barker, vol. 47a. Dallas, Texas: Word Books, Publisher.

McCaig, A. “Covenant, The New.” In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. 1979 ed.

Morris, Leon. 1981. Hebrews. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol.
12. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House.

Moulton, Harold K. 1978. The analytical Greek lexicon revised. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Zondervan Publishing House.

Mounce, William D. 2003. Basics of Biblical Greek grammar. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Zondervan.