The Law of Moses: of Moses is implied, as in verse 19. The original readers knew which Law was meant, but most present-day readers need to be told.
In some languages the verb appoints requires the use of direct discourse; for example, “The Law of Moses declares, ‘You men who are imperfect are to become high priests.’ ” However, it may be impossible to speak of “the Law of Moses appointing men,” since only a person may appoint someone else. The Law of Moses appoints men … to be high priests may be rendered as “According to the Law of Moses, men become high priests.” In this type of context who are imperfect may involve a concession; for example, “According to the Law of Moses, men, even though they are imperfect, are appointed to be high priests.”
Imperfect is literally “weakness” (4.15; 5.2). The words “weak” and “weakness” cover a wide range of meaning, including sickness, moral weakness, and ritual imperfection. A sick animal could not be offered as a sacrifice, and a human being suffering from certain types of illness was not allowed to take part in sacrifice. See 4.15 and 5.2. Who are imperfect in this context may be rendered in some languages as “who are unable to do what they should.”
God’s promise made with the vow is literally “God’s oath-taking,” as in verses 20-21; compare 6.16, 17.
There may be a problem in speaking of “God’s promise … appointing the Son” since, as in the case of the Law of Moses, a “promise” cannot do any appointing. It is, however, possible to say “God appoints his Son by means of a vow” or “… by means of a strong promise.”
Which came later than the Law: some cultures assume that what is older is more worthy of respect than what is more recent. Where this is so, it may be necessary to make explicit that God’s vow not only came later, but superseded what had gone before; compare 4.6-8; 7.18; 8.7. It was an accepted principle among the rabbis that “a new act of God supersedes the old” (see Jer 6.16 and Luke 5.39). It may be necessary to restructure the clause which came later than the Law, since two events are involved, both of which include God as an agent. Therefore which came later than the Law may be expanded as “God made his solemn promise at a time later than he gave the Law through Moses” or “… caused Moses to announce the laws.”
Appoints is not the same Greek word as that which was translated chose in 3.2, but the meaning is similar. See comments on 3.2.
The Son is literally “a son”; so “one who has the title and status of son,” as in 1.2 (see the comments). In many languages a “son” must be possessed, so it is impossible to speak of “the Son”; one must say “his Son.”
Who has been made perfect, as in verse 11, for example, implies more than being without sin. “Who has reached his full achievement” (Knox) is part of the meaning. Two other ideas are also involved: (a) “fulfillment of a purpose,” and (b) “fulfillment not only for Christ himself but for others.” If (as perhaps in English) perfect is understood too narrowly in moral terms, it may be slightly expanded in translation as “one who, as Son, has done forever all that God intended him to do.” One may also render has been made perfect as “has become the one who is able to do everything that he should.”
Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Letter of the Hebrews. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .