You'll need to review this passage in the Greek to follow the comments in this page, even though the relevant comparison clauses are (phonetically) typed in the Greek as well. What follows is not well written, sorry: I don't write well when (still!) too excited. The webpage reads more like spontaneous exegetical notes (and reactions, lol), right now.
Heb10:15-17 is one of the most thrilling passages in Scripture for me: for YEARS I didn't understand precisely how Israel and Church were connected, nor how the OT system differed, even though I'd been taught the answer for decades. It's like an accounting conundrum, where you have lots of data you know well, but can't make SENSE of what you know. Of course, Christianity has for centuries been totally confused as to the differences and similarities of its covenant versus that of Israel.
The stress on "right now" is a rhetorical style throughout Book of Hebrews -- like Mark keeps on interruptively using "euthus" ("immediately") in his very mordant Gospel, and for the same reason -- the Temple was RIGHT NOW ON THE VERGE OF DESTRUCTION, under the heel of Titus. Paul had just been executed; looks like Peter was as well (but NOT in Rome -- Peter NEVER WENT to Rome -- see the end of 1Peter, 2Peter); Nero would soon kill himself (maybe had just done so, when this letter was written). So God knew how "the Year of the Four Emperors" (68-69AD) would end with Vespasian, Titus' adopted father. So Titus could no longer negotiate a truce with the Jews of Jerusalem -- Titus would have to bring a BIG victory to Daddy (to at least help defray donative costs!), and Masada wouldn't have much booty. So it would have to be Jerusalem, Titus sacked. So, about two years before this happened, God knew He'd use Titus to adminster the promised Daniel 9:26 prophecy of destroying the Temple. RIGHT NOW it was all about to happen: Greek word "euthus", which must occur a bizillion times in Mark's Gospel. So RIGHT THEN, God had Mark's Gospel and Hebrews, written. So RIGHT NOW the readers of those books had to hear the Holy Spirit interrupt, since RIGHT NOW they were largely IGNORING how the covenant had CHANGED. So RIGHT NOW they were going to get swept up on the wrong side of history (10:25ff), if RIGHT NOW they didn't change their dull-knives' thinking (Heb5:11, 6:12 scathing Greek) and GET His Thinking. Euthus.
"Now in fact [dramatic interruption] The Holy Spirit testifies with reference to us; for, after He said, 'This is the covenant which I will covenant face-to-face with them after those days, He [lit., kurios] says [new testimony begins here] "HAVING PUT [lit., GIVING] My Laws/Norms/Standards upon their [OT folks'] hearts, even HIS OWN THINKING I will engrave upon them [Church, and via Church, believers post-Rapture]; and I will never anymore remember [added wit due to reflexive, since we are His Body! Play on 'soma' in the reflexive spelling!] their sins and their lawlessness."
Here's the the Jer38:33 (LXX) portion typed in partially-phonetic Greek (eta="ay" as in "play"): "phaysin kurios didous dwsw nomous mou eis tayn dianoian autwn kai epi kardias autwn grapsw autous"
Next, the Heb8:10 portion: "legei kurios didous nomous mou eis tayn dianoian autwn kai epi kardias autwn epigrapsw autous"
Next, the Heb10:16 portion: "legei kurios didous nomous mou epi kardias autwn kai EPI tayn dianoian autwn epigrapsw autous"
The special placement of "legei kurios" covers the text left of it, and introduces the text right of it, separating them. Most translations treat all of the text as being a requote, but it's BREAKING between the old and the new, even in the Jeremiah text. Moreover, the Jeremiah text uses phaymi, which is used when "says" is BETWEEN two quotes -- but in Chapter 8 and 10 requotes, the writer changes it to LEGEI -- denoting a BREAK with the past quote. Very clever. So the new testimony of the Spirit in Heb10:16, especially since its words are CHANGED versus the old, begins after legei kurios. So both Chap8 and 10 should be treated as as breaks. That you can still treat the whole as a requote, is definitely intended. So you are to look for differences in the text, to precisely understand what has changed in the covenants now that Christ is seated (10:12-14).
There are major differences in the Greek text of Heb10:16 versus 8:10 and Jer31:33 (Jer38, in LXX). Compared to the Jeremiah text, the Hebrews Chapter 8 passage leaves out "Israel" and substitutes "them" (still referring to Israel); leaves out the FUTURE of didomi, leaving only the 2nd use of the verb, which is a present participle; substitutes Jeremiah's mere grapho with EPIgrapho. How clever: epi is the quintessential BUILDING preposition in the NT (see how Paul uses epi, especially in Eph2:10). Because the Mind GOT written, there's no future of didomi, but only the participle, still in the present tense, since Christ is still alive, and His LIVING Thinking, the Word, is to go into our living thinking, too.
Participle action precedes or is coterminous with the main verb (here, main verb is epigraphw). We know to interpret the present participle as 'past', because "dwsw" is EXCISED from the requote in Chapter 8. Hence the double-entendre, since Christ is RISEN, still living. See how a FOUNDATIONAL thing is communicated syntactically in a FOUNDATIONAL manner? A simple excision, plus a present participle (not a past participle), plus the switch to "epi" in Chapter 10 -- tells you really what's going on! You can't possibly translate all this. So much MISINTERPRETATION of Bible occurs when working with a translation! And as you can see, the published translations are terrible! [No one can get Bible wholly right, but sheesh -- do we have to ADD such egregious errors? The "MIND" is Christ. It's in the SINGULAR. So why ASSume that both nouns are THE SAME PERSONS, when one is in the Singular and the other, in the plural? God would know how to use a different word for "minds" (plural of nous), if that's what He intended. And then, to miss the CHANGES in the quote, when translating Heb8 and Heb10, trying to make it AGREE with Jeremiah? Yikes! This changing of little bits of a quote to SHOW ITS FULFILLMENT or interpretation, is one of the most common forms of quotation IN the Bible...Oh well.]
Another big verb change is that of mimneskomai, at the end of the quote. In Jer31:34 (38:34, LXX), that verb is in the SUBJUNCTIVE aorist passive; but is in the INDICATIVE future passive, in 10:17. But in 8:12, the writer uses the verb in the same mood as in Jeremiah. AGAIN SHOWING MESSIAH PAID THE WHOLE PRICE. Just like, eliminating dwsw shows the totality of our sanctification, so too here with the change of mood in mimneskomai. REFLEXIVE! in 10:17! God misses no nuance! His Body! All that ALSO conveyed, just by changing the mood of the verb. What Wit!
Now you know why I keep on saying that when we got saved, we LOST our brains and are to get His Thinking. A better English idiom for "dianoian" would be "body of thinking" (with stress on its FUNCTION and SKILL, DISCERNMENT). The Mind is Our Body of Thinking even as we are the Body for the Mind. See? God wants LIKE-MINDEDNESS, not works. Think the way and with the attitude of His Son, not works. That was a PROMISE in the OT -- they LOOKED FORWARD to it. But until Christ completed, that MIND couldn't go INTO them -- so it was PROMISED. But now He's Risen, so His Thinking is to be UPON us, "epi". This is HIS FACULTY OF THINKING, the very warp and woof of it -- His Thinking Pattern. Hupogrammos, for the hupogrammoi, us. Heh: Bible verses have scads of wordplay!
Thus we have in all three quotes, a repeated DIRECT reference to the LXX of Isa53:11's five infinitives (vv10-11, in our texts), focusing on the "sculpt" (plassw). Chapter 10's sculpting UPON Him as the foundation (we are built upon Christ, common NT refrain); rather than INTO Him (He being sculpted), as the Jeremiah quote stated. Because UPON Him, therefore INTO us -- what wordplay! Jeremiah knew of the Isaiah verse, too, (so we know for sure the Masoretic Text had this verse); for Jeremiah's referencing the FIRST ONE, Christ, getting that thinking INTO Him, which is the STRESSED PURPOSE of the Isaiah chapter (beginning at Isa52:13, which in both BHS and LXX announces that His Mastery of Thinking PROSPERING is the cause of our salvation -- allusively repeated, in Isa53:11, both texts (da'ath and suneisis)).
Both Jeremiah and Heb8 reference Israel, with the Chapter 8 requote to show both the "old" and the precedence for the new, covenants; but Chapter 10's is for CHURCH. What's so cool is the usage of autwn and autous, to signify an ongoing stepping-stone function; Our Mind, Christ, gets written into us -- and as a result WILL get written into them (post-Church). The Law which got written into Christ, so got written into them, so gets written written into us. If the Holy Spirit didn't reverse dianoian and kardias in 10:16, you'd not see this circularity.
So the writer of both NT passages here in Hebrews tells us how the "sanctification" of verse 14 got accomplished (again referring to the whole of LXX Isa53:10-11, and its result). As in Gen 2:17 and Isa 53:9, which show TWO deaths, Jeremiah's quote was a FUTURE promise of TWO lives (spiritual and physical -- LXX uses Hebraistic tense structure like Gen2:17's two (spiritual, then physical) muths). Deft way to say the entire content of what would become Romans 6 via that structure: dying spiritually, we die physically. But He living spiritually, dying spiritually ON the Cross (not real, but substitutionarily), we live spiritually, and hence when we die physically, we will live physically AND spiritually.. with Him, forever. Awesome!
You are meant to understand God the Holy Spirit is out to create a Living Thinking Flow That Forever Gives Father Sweet Savor, smelling the yummy aroma of Son's Thinking. Ola! That's why the worst sin a believer can commit is to leave or never get into God's System ("drift off course from Grace" verse, and 2Cor13:14's "Grace of Our Lord" clause). Hence to NOT USE 1Jn1:9 when needed, is Worse Than Sin. If my pastor taught that once, he taught it a bizillion times ("Law of Double Punishment" subseries in 92 Spiritual Dynamics). There's nothing worse than denying the Spirit the writing HE wants to do upon you: such refusal is the worst form of infidelity. (Search on "wrongdoing" in LordvSatan3.htm and read though the end of the green table, for details. Chapter 10 ends with a severe warning for that reason, and "not forsaking the assembling" is a MISTRANSLATED verse -- it means assembling under a TEACHER, to hear that TEACHING. Why do translations always truncate a word's meaning? Heb 10:25's episunagogue means assembling-for-hearing-teaching -- synagogue was a place where everyone went to hear the RABBI teach! So the translation cuts out the TEACHER! AAARRRRRRGGGGGHHHH)
And the woman was built (Hebrew verb "banah") FROM/upon Adam's rib. So the Last Woman is built FROM/UPON/EPI the Last Adam, Christ.
There's extraordinary wordplay here; wish scholars would remember that back in ancient times wordplay was the #1 method of entertainment, so proficiency was cherished (drama was an Olympic event, with a grand prize in the millions of dollars). So we should be looking for wordplay every time we analyze a Scripture verse (yet another reason no translation is worth much in teaching or study). The usual translation just assumes a requote of the prior Heb8:8-12 is in view, and there's been quite a lot of commentary which claims some scribe reversed the words "hearts" and "mind" ('to defend Bible, assuming IT wrong first rather than assuming US wrong first). Big mistake. My pastor spent lots of time stressing that this is an interpretive quote showing how the New Covenant is to be implemented using Church. Now I see why: the two epi ("upon") prepositional clauses are keys, because epi takes the genitive, dative AND the accusative. Word order is critical, here.
Look: drama Greek rhetoric often omits a preposition to stress ALL the usages go with the case. LXX of Isa53:10-11 is a classic example of this style. Also, for elegance, if the preposition will be next mentioned, it's not to be repeated in close proximity (we have the same rule in English). So notice: "autwn EPIgrapsw". Preposition "epi" will be the NEXT word after "autwn". So it's not going to be written twice. No "epi autwn epigrapsw", for that's inelegant in this verse. And it's the Holy Spirit, speaking dramatically, interrupting, even. (In Greek Drama, that's called an "interjection", and it's always to the audience, not to the actors.)
Further, Greek genitive is used both subjectively and objectively. (Latin has a similar rule, made famous by James Joyce in his first short story of Ulysses.) So "tayn dianoian autwn" -- the THINKING of the LORD's Humanity -- belongs to Him, belongs to us, so you have BOTH the subjective and objective genitive being employed. The Mind of Us -- not our own thinking, but the One Who Paid for us, Owns us, and Whom we also own. The Lord is our portion (inheritance). "Love of God" verses are the most common employment of the plenary use of the genitive (subjective AND objective), a kind of love circle. So too Thinking is a Circle. Going out, to, coming back, in. In Greek drama you'd construct a sentence which stressed EITHER the subjective or objective genitive -- again, because repetition would be inelegant. But by doing that you could either reference both (depending on how the rest of the sentence goes), or you could just reference one of them. If both, it's a "plenary use" of the genitive. My pastor taught those grammar rules until the congregation was complaining about the repetition, back in the year 2000, showing how Romans 5:5 is an example of the plenary use of the (subjective AND objective) genitive.
So here you see the same thing: EPI tayn dianoian, UPON THE MIND, His -- written ON Him by the Holy Spirit during the Incarnation -- going in; next, since NOW He is Risen, HIS MIND going OUT, UPON Church (lit., them, preposition epi not repeated).
Bauer, Danker (BDAG) lexicon in BibleWorks notes the following about "epi":
Because, we are INTIMATE with Him, even IN Him. So we belong to Him, and He Belongs to us. So that intimacy is stressed by NOTHING BEING BETWEEN "dianoian" and "autwn". Subjective genitive, because HE is the Subject, and we belong to Him. But also objective genitive, in that we RECEIVE His Mind. But notice: it's always HIS Mind, not ours. We know it's His Mind, because of the other words in the sentence and due to the requote from Jeremiah, which is a promise OF His Mind being inscribed in us. It's surely not a promise of our minds being inscribed in us! But rather, of Our Mind -- His, belonging TO us! -- being inscribed ON us!
LOL, gotta repeat why the Greek omits repetition: again, epi tayn dianoian autwn says BOTH the fact that His Mind is inscribed on us, AND that He belongs to us and we belong to Him. Deft, elegant economy of wording. To use more words, is not necessary and inelegant. So you'd not repeat tayn dianoian twice, for both HIS Mind having been written on, and then His Mind being written onto OUR minds. You'd only need to say HIS Mind -- belonging to us. Clever, huh. Writer of Hebrews uses epi as a tracking preposition throughout, like Paul did (Paul was dead at this point, see Heb13:23) -- which also helps you understand its use here in Heb10:16.
So while the kindergarten usage of the genitive is to say that the noun in the genitive is the owner of the noun the genitive noun modifies, God's NOT using kindergarten Greek here. Again, we know that due to the Jeremiah quote being interpretatively explained, by the Holy Spirit.
Another big mistake translators make with Bible is to assume the text is koine. Very often, it's Attic, especially since Attic Greek is drama Greek, and most of what the Bible talks about is dramatic -- eternity themes! Christ paying for sins! Saved for all time! Once for all! So lots of Drama Greek is used in the NT, and the elegance of Hebrews should have tipped off the translators to its use in that epistle. Oh well. (Scholars knew all this back early last century. Wasn't until the 1930's they decided to chuck the idea that Bible specialized in ALL Greek languages, not merely the koine. Bigger mistake.)
That's the case here: we're looking at Attic Greek, not koine. For what appears to play the role of THREE embedded genitive absolutes of extraordinary beauty tying here to Heb10:16, see Heb11:1's Greek. Hebrews 11:1 is terribly translated, so you need to see its Greek (i.e., search on "elegchos" in Heb111.htm, and read the next few paragraphs after it). That verse blows me away. Parallel ACTION is displayed in both verses. You want to cry with joy at the elegance!
The writer of Hebrews uses drama Greek a lot. Here, the immediate drama context began back in Heb9:28, introduced by the reason for a Second Coming -- the Rapture, here. There are a lot of reasons why you know it's the Rapture being depicted, but the baldest proof is in the author's usage of Isaiah 53:12 LXX vocabulary. That's the AWARD part of the contract (see also 1Cor3, Rev4). Bema is the AWARD ceremony, and the group getting the award is Church ("those who eagerly await", NOT the whole world). So it's not the official Second Coming down to rule, but to COLLECT.. us. Church.
For the Rapture was expected at any time, especially since the Temple was under siege, given how Daniel 9:26 was to play. Hence in the last Greek clause of Heb9:28, the writer employs the dramatic "hero" accusative (auton), classic Greek drama of the god coming DOWN at the end of the play, to rescue his clients. So of course the author deftly switches in Heb 10, back to that FIRST time He came down, to show how the Rapture is imminent (ending in Heb Chap10 brings you back full circle to NOW). So all of Chapter 10 is a parenthetical explanation for 9:28, since all of Chapter 9 was on WHY the change in covenant from the first to the second. All this, sets up Chapter 11, and 11:39-40 refer back to 9:28 and 10:25ff, finishing the point. It's real blunt. Don't know how the scholars could have missed that bald Greek drama opening in the last clause of 9:28, especially considering the content of 10:1-14.
Heb10:16b is therefore extremely unusual, intentionally embedding DIFFERENT objects with the second epi, to illustrate the SWITCH from the "first" covenant, to the better "second" just explained: the second is better, because HIS MIND is to be written on us; the "first" group didn't get that except as a future promise. We get His Mind Written as a Reality, hence Canon is to be fully written, not yet finished at the time of writing. In turn, that second epi clause has two accusative objects, one of which is Singular, THE THINKING: it HAS to mean the Lord's Thinking to show what SANCTIFICATION in v.14 means. The article is monadic. Cardinal principle of hermeneutics is to compare Scripture with Scripture, and context context context! But both are ignored, in the published Bible translation of tayn dianoian for this verse. But...
Also, same (2nd) epi in Heb10:16 has one genitive, autwn (referring to us). So note the genius: God the Holy Spirit meant tayn dianoian to be the object of both graphw and (really both instances of) epi: same, for the plural object autous, which isn't simply referring to the laws, but more importantly to those believers upon whom His Thinking will be written, I bet (look at the antecedent use of autous in v.16a). Again, I really think, in light of other Scripture and the context, that it's a mistake to shallowly view "autous" (the last word in Heb10:16) as merely referencing the "laws" (deeming the antecedent to be nomous, not noticing the OTHER autous). Especially, since it's the Holy Spirit Who's Doing The Writing...
For now, note the wordplay gives you the idea that He will write THE MIND and then write our minds with THE MIND. Embedding as in inscribing, engraving. And, as in pregnancy, Pleroma keyword. You'll thus need to cross-reference Isa53:11's sweeping five infinites in the Greek LXX, too -- for that verse is in view, here (phos, plassw, suneisis keywords -- v. 11 is mistakenly booked as beginning at the end of v.10, in the LXX verses). Heh: in Greek, like in English, all the "them" usages in a long sentence, confuse -- so you can't tell "them" apart! All of us having the Same Mind, being made Like Him! Heh. God never misses a nuance...
We just saw something of the many meanings of epi in a detailled lexicon, Bauer Danker (BDAG). Ionic dative usage of epi is in Matt16:18 and Eph2:10's "epi" clauses (1Cor10:4 and Eph2:10 refer back to Matt16:18) -- writer of Hebrews uses both verses' import, here in 10:16b, because when the Lord commits to make Church in Matt16:18 and then ratifies that choice in John 17, it's all about His Thinking, (for He is the Truth and knows it) -- going INTO us, John 17:17-21, referred back to by Heb10:10-14. How the post-salvation sanctification gets DONE.
Ok, so now you know the published translations are way off. But you also can empathize why: how the heck can you translate all this incorporation-by-reference, which uses Greek words in the other verses being incorporated? You can't. It would take a hundred years of a bevy of scholars working tirelessly on the original-language texts, tracking all the incorporations by reference to DETERMINE what ENGLISH words to use, to show the many incorporations. So everyone would be without a translation, the meanwhile!
Teaching this incorporation is even harder: bored congregations, politics of hypocrisy (who is holier than whom), everyone fighting to prove you wrong, oh! Even my own church bucked it, and we were taught FROM the original-language texts on a daily basis! Hence any criticism you find in my webpages is mainly designed to show how Satan&Co. mess with us all; that they have a definite burlesqueing pattern they follow, and we are all variantly puppets for their schemes. Criticism against translations and teachings is also partly designed to justify and encourage fixing Bible translation and teaching by qualified scholars and pastors. They are qualified, trained, and probably all have a gift from God -- but they don't live in a vacuum. We need to support them: that's what God wants (i.e., "workman worth his hire" verse, but with the deeper meaning of volitional support -- without which, money means nothing). When people stopped wanting Bible in the 2nd century AD, eventually the universities stopped teaching Greek anymore. Same is happening now, not only with Greek but with Latin. We need to pray to God about this problem, or we'll have another Dark Ages with a whole new crop of dippy 'Church Fathers' and their insane misuses of Bible.
Look: everyone has to make a living. Everyone has to key to a market. Therefore they need to see us demand better Bible translation and teaching, so they can defend against those entrenched elites who'll oppose. That's how the Reformation occurred, that's how the current 'reformation' beginning in 1950 occurred, and that's how it can continue. Market demand for good Bible teaching and translation justifies and protects those who would provide it. But they can't work in a vacuum. We can't demand they do it right, alone. We must support this. So pray: don't crusade, prayer is much more powerful. Go To The Top: Pray to God. He can solve this problem, but He only WANTS to work through volition (else He could just bing things, being omnipotent and all). So vote for this to FATHER. You are a Royal Priest: use that power!
So how to illustrate all that exquisite meaning better, than to use elegant Dramatic Greek embedding within the preposition epi? Is this God GLORY, or what??? Takes your breath away. He just LOVES to make use of syntactical nuances in Bible. Every verse is pure diamonds. Takes your breath away.
My explanation and translation aren't as good as should be, either. I really should retranslate the entire Book of Hebrews, to show how the author builds from one point to the next. Even so, the wordplay in Heb 10:15-17 is necessarily masked in translation, because HOW are you gonna show the different "them" groups, yet truly translate the fact that all are called "them"? You can tell from BibleWorks Bible collections on this passage that the translators of the various versions (at least in English, Spanish and French which I can read) -- these all RECOGNIZE something unusual is afoot -- they aren't agreed on what to do with the fact that "hearts" is in the plural, but "mind" is in the singular. So they too (understandably!) try to simplify; so they mistakenly seek to make both nouns match in number, thus destroying the Greek meaning. Meaning is HIS MIND. Ties to Eph4:5, 1Cor2:16, others, as play on words -- genitive case is plural going with it, but genitive has many meanings. Surely some of them know that, too. But even so, how do you translate it, especially if the Bible will be published, and surely there will be criticism? I'm free from that worry, I don't matter to the academic community. But they aren't free from the politics. Sad story, how we humans arrogate to ourselves value, and then fight over it.
This is a classic multi-layer, multi-meaning passage: His Mind is singular, 'one' -- we are to get that ONE MIND in ALL of us, so we will have 'one' mind, together, freely. Many hearts, but all viewing the SAME TRUTH. So "THE MIND of them", literal translation of ten dianoian autwn, aha! Yes, He is to BE Our Mind -- that's why we lost our brains the nanosecond we first believed in Christ! His Heart in Our Hearts, as a result of His Mind BECOMING, hawah, our minds -- promised since the OT, the One Who Always Was will Become (YH=hayah, WH=hawah) Our Heart and Soul, Our Daily Bread, Our Treasure in Earthen Vessels, Our Way and Truth and Life! How's that for elegant Greek Drama economy, to convey all that meaning, by a simple SINGULAR use of "dianoia"? Hoo-boy: only God is that smart!
The term dianoia IS used as a collective noun, sometimes; however, to make it singular here yet use the plural of kardia, is a red flag. Of course, that's what Jeremiah had done, too. Note the double-entendre? In deference to all translators, who the heck can ever get so much wordplay properly translated for a reader? We should just study the Scripture in its original languages, hein?
So 'my' translation above is likewise not satisfactory, but the underlined meaning above is unmistakable in the Greek: God the Holy Spirit suddenly switches from plural ("hearts") to singular (Mind/Thinking) using the SAME structure. Oh: verbal nouns are more dramatic than verbs, so this switch is highly dramatic, not just ho-hum dramatic (if there were such a thing). So here Heb10:16 ALSO ties to Eph4:5, the "henotes" of His Thinking, how it gets produced in Church (see RightPT.htm for exegesis, since Eph4:5, 11-16 are always terribly translated).
Also, note that English Bibles' renderings for Heb10:16 don't recognize where the NEW testimony begins, but we know in Greek where it begins, because the first set of (single) quotes is the object of "after He said" (the earlier quote in 8:10). That's why in English Bibles the requote looks superfluous. So you don't get what the heck God is talking about, here. Inspired Greek text doesn't confuse. But again -- how can you translate it better? I tried, and of course the translation isn't quite apt either (still too narrow).
We also know that the new testimony ABOUT US begins "Having given/put", because the NOUNS IN THE QUOTE are reversed, "remember" is REFLEXIVE (vs. the original prophecy and 8:8-12 quote), and due to what context immediately preceded (10:1-14) the interruption by the Holy Spirit into the flow of writing, which was, Christ completing our sanctification forever. These changes prove that the quotation is being made again, showing how it applies to us, and how we are used to help implement the new covenant. Again, this explanation needs improving; but at least you can see what features are relevant, and thus can review them with whatever authority you trust.
Too many reputed Bible scholars today ASSume that the writers of Scripture were not inspired by the Holy Spirit. It's a sad day when you read in a reputable book about Biblical Greek a comment by one of them claiming that the Lord's Divinity is hidden (yeah, to the scholars, since they obviously didn't notice the frequent, stressed usage of LXX terminology) in the Gospels, but made clearer later -- for political reasons, lol! So no wonder these folks also mistake WHY constructions like these interpretative quotes are DELIBERATE. If someone tells you there's a mistake (i.e., in the noun reversals) in this passage, that someone is himself mistaken. Greek is obviously, deliberately, changed for purposes of interpretation, a feature of language which everybody uses from time immemorial: e.g., Windoze rather than Windows.
See for yourself: compare any OT quote with its NT counterpart (especially, the way the LORD quotes the OT in the NT). Then take great pains to figure out why the NT quotes are changed. Start maybe with Acts 2 (which quotes Joel 2) -- if that's too hard to analyze for you right now, pick some Gospel passage in which the Lord quotes. One of my favorite interpretative quotes is how He uses Matt4:4, quoting (and changing the words of) Deut8:3ff. Satan does the same thing in the 2nd Temptation, but when he quotes Ps91, he DELIBERATELY CUTS OUT a clause, so in the requote he's telling Jesus He should jump off the Temple based ON the verse. (Believers misuse Scripture this way, i.e., how Calvinists use 1Jn2:2 to support limited atonement, by chopping out the last half of the verse.) This exercise will prove very refreshing and enlightening, particularly if you or someone you love might be sensitive to the claim that the Bible contradicts itself. That shibboleth is used in ignorance of Bible. But to Christians likewise ignorant of Bible who only have a translation to look at -- whoa, it's devastating to their faith.
In sum, the wordplay in Heb10:15-17, particularly as it is the other bookend for its sister quote in 8:8-12, thus at once explains not only that Canon will be completed, but how it works during CHURCH Age to help prepare for the implementation of the New Covenant. It's very deft:
Awesome, how much information is packed inside such teeny changes versus the Jeremiah and Heb8:8-12 quotes -- in the exactly-right spots! No 'appearance' or 'vision' could be this authentic!
So each of these differences compared to the Jeremiah 31:31-34 quotation shows CAUSALITY; HOW Israel will be rescued by Church; HOW the Millenium's spiritual life will be fulfilled and aided BY MEANS OF Church. Not, because we are anything, but because CHRIST IS TA PANTA, everything!
