p351 * * * As to αἰῶνας, Hebrews 1:2, I am not disposed to reject Alford's view;* that is, so far as it accepts a course or plan of God in the idea-world. But no person can have entered into the spirit of the Epistle to the Hebrews and seen its connection (that is, the way it meets the Rabbinical and Philonic views, giving God's thoughts on the subjects they were speculating on), and not see that αἰῶνας is not merely "ages" or "epochs." It is rab olamych, or more specifically bara olam the Creator of the worlds. You may see Bleek, Delitzsch, De Wette, Lünemann, Schleusner, Schirlitz, Wahl - not that I accept all they say, but for the use of the word. Schoetgen (Hor. Heb.) says it is so common that it is useless to quote examples. Further, Hebrews 11:3 seems to me to leave no possible doubt, because it continues, "so that the things which are seen were not made of the things which do appear" - distinctly intimating that he speaks of visible creation. I do not see how it is possible to overlook this, or after it to call the interpretation in question. Πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων shews, I think, the connection of the two. The critics refer to Ecclesiastes 3:11, as proving the same use of olam. Hebrews 11:3, and the evident and constant use of the words in Jewish literature of the time, and the character of the epistle, leave no doubt of the meaning on my mind.
{*'For whereas Ebrard includes God's revelation of Himself in a sphere whose conditions are time and space, and so would understand by it all things existing under these conditions, I would include in it also, these conditions themselves.'}

The notion of the word of the Son, in connection with His being placed heir, I should demur to. That it was the Son who spoke** when it is said, "He spake, and it was made," I have no objection to whatever; but the heir constituting the ages I cannot accept here, because the statement is, "God spoke" - ἐν Ὑιῷ. For ὁ Θεὸς λαλήσας … ἐλαλησεν ἡυῖν ἐν ὑιῷ, and so δἰ οὗ κ. τ. αἰῶνας ἐποίησεν is one phrase with one subject; and He who spoke is He who established the Heir of all things. So that I do not see how there is any possibility for the interpretation sought to be given; otherwise there is much I agree with.
{**'It is not the word spoken by angels, or fathers, or prophets that made the ages, but the word spoken by the Son. This follows from the Son being made or placed heir of all things, and that the heir constitutes the ages.' etc.}