weak, and dying as he was, God had exalted him, and had given him a dominion and a rank almost like that of the angels. The wonder of the Psalmist is, that God had given to human nature so much honour — a wonder that is not at all diminished when we think of the honour done to man by his connexion with the divine nature in the person of the Lord Je sus. If in contemplating the race as it appears; if when we look at the dominion of man over the lower world, we are amazed that God has bestowed so much honour on our na ture, how much more should we won der that he has honoured man by his connexion with the divinity. Paul applies this to the Lord Jesus. His object is to show that he is superior to the angels. In doing this he shows that he had a nature given him in itself but little inferior to the angels, and then that that had been exalted to a rank and dominion far above theirs. That such honour should be put on man is what is fitted to excite amazement, and well may one con tinue to ask why it has been done? When we survey the heavens, and contemplate their glories, and think of the exalted rank of other beings, we may well inquire why has such honour been conferred on man? ^[ Thou crownedst him with glory and honour. That is, with exalted honour. Glory and honour here are nearly synonymous. The meaning is, that elevated honour had been conferredon human nature. A most exalted and extended dominion had been given to man, which shoAved that God had greatly honoured him. This appeared eminently in the person of the Lord Jesus, " the exalted Man,'* to whom this dominion was given in the widest extent. ^[ And didst set \ him over, &c. Man has been placed over the other works of God (I) by the original appointment (Gen. i. 26);
8 Thou hast put all things j is not put under him. Buta now in subjection under his feet. For j we see not yet all things put
in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that
(2) man at large — though fallen, sin ful, feeble, dying; (3) man, eminently in the person of the Lord Jesus, in whom human nature has received its chief exaltation. This is what is particularly in the eye of the apostle — and the language of the Psalm will accurately express this exaltation.
8. Thou hast put all things in sub jection, &c. Ps. viii. 6. That is, all things are put under the control of man, or thou hast given him domi nion over all things, ^[ For in that lie put all in subjection. The mean ing of this is, that ' the fair interpre tation of the passage in the Psalm is, that the dominion of man, or of hu man nature over the earth, was to be absolute and total. Nothing was to be excepted. But this is not now the fact in regard to man in general, and can be true only of human nature in the person of the Lord Jesus. There the dominion is absolute and univer sal.' The point of the argument of the apostle may be this. ' It was the original appointment (Gen. i. 26) that man should have dominion over this lower world, and be its absolute lord and sovereign. Had he continued in innocence, this dominion would have been entire and perpetual. But he fell, and we do not now see him exsrting this dominion. "What is said Df the dominion of man can be true only of human nature in the person of the Lord Jesus, and there it is completely fulfilled.' ^[ But now we see not yet all tilings put under him. That is, ' It is not now true that all things are subject to the control of man. There is indeed a general do minion over the works of God, and over the inferior creation. But the control is not universal. A large part of the animal creation rebels, and is brought into subjection only Jith difficulty. The elements are under him. 9 But we see Jesus, not entirely under his control; the tempest and the ocean rage; the pestilence conveys death through city and hamlet; the dominion of man is a broken dominion. His government is an imperfect govern ment. The world is not yet put wholly under his dominion, but enough has been done to constitute a pledge that it will yet be done. It will be fully accomplished only in him who sustains our nature, and to whom dominion is given over the worlds.'
9. But we see Jesus. ' We do not see that man elsewhere has the ex tended dominion of which the Psalm ist speaks. But we see the fulfilment of it in Jesus, who was crowned with glory and honour, and who has re ceived a dominion that is superior to that of the angels.' The point of this is, not that he suffered, and not that he tasted death for every man; but that on account of this, or as a re ward for thus suffering, he was crowned with glory and honour, and that he thus fulfilled all that David (Ps. viii.) had said of the dignity and honour of man. The object of the apostle is, to show that he was ex alted, and in order to this he shows why it was — to wit, because lie had suffered death to redeem man. Comp. Phil. ii. 8, 9. ^ Who was made a little lower than the angels. That is, as a man, or when on earth. His assumed rank was inferior to that of the angels. He took iipon himself not the nature of angels (ver. 16), but the nature of man. The apostle is probably here answering some im plied objections to the rank which it was claimed that the Lord Jesus had, or which migJit be urged to the views which he was defending. Those ob jections were mainly two. First, that Jesus was a man; and secondly, was made a little lower than | and honour; that he b by the the angels, l for the suffering of death, crowned a with glory that he suffered and died. If that •was the fact, it was natural to ask how he could be superior to the an gels? How could he have had the rank which was claimed for him? This he answers by showing first, that his condition as a man was vo luntarily assumed — ' he was made lower than the angels;' and secondly, by showing that as a consequence of his sufferings and death, he was im mediately crowned with glory and honour. The state of humiliation became him in the great work which he had undertaken, and he was im mediately exalted to universal domi nion, and as Mediator was raised to a rank far above the angels. ^[ For the suffering of death. Marg. By. The meaning of the preposition here rendered 'for' (§tci, here governing the accusative) is, 'on account of;' that is, Jesus on account of the suf ferings of death, or in virtue of that, was crowned with glory and honour. His crowning was the result of his Condescension and sufferings. See Notes, Phil. ii. 8, 9. It does not here mean, as our translation would seem to imply, that he was made a little lower than the angels in order to suf fer death, but that as a reward for having suffered death, he was raised up to the right hand of God. ^[ Crown ed with glory and honour. That is, at the right hand of God. He was raised up to heaven. Acts ii. 33; Mark xvi. 19. The meaning is, that he was crowned with the highest ho nour on account of his sufferings. Comp. Phil.ii. 8, 9; Heb.xii. 2; v. 7—9; Eph. i. 20—23. f That he. Or rather, * since he by the grace of God tasted death for every man.' The sense is, that after he had thus tasted death, and as a consequence of it, he was thus exalted. The word here rendered "that' — OTTO)?— means usually and properly that, so that, in order that, to grace of God should taste death for every man.
the end that, &c. But it may also mean when, after that, after. See Notes on Acts iii. i9. This is the interpre tation which is given by Prof. Stuart (in Zoc.), and this interpretation seems to be demanded by the connexion. The general interpretation of the pas sage has been different. According to that, the sense is, ' We see Jesus, for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour, so as that, by the grace of God, he might taste of death for every man.' See Robinson's Lex. on the word OTTOS'? an(i Doddridge on the place. But it is natural to ask when Jesus was thus crowned with glory and honour? It was not before the crucifixion — for he was then poor and despised. *I Vie connexion seems to require us t,> understand this of the glory to whj:h he was exalted in heaven, and thi i was after his death, and could not be in order that he might taste of jeat'-i. I am disposed, therefore, to regard tins as teaching that the Lord Jxsus was exalted to heaven in v/riae of the atonement which he had made, and this accords with Phil. ii. V. 9, and Heb. xii. 2. It accords both with the fact in the case, and with the design of the apostle in the argument before us. f By the grace of God. By the favour of God, or by his benevolent purpose towards men. It Avas not by any claim which man had, but was by his special fa vour, ^f Should taste death. Should die; or should experience death. See Matt. xvi. 28. Death seems to be represented as something bitter and unpalatable — something unpleasant —as an object may be to the taste. Or the language may be taken from a cup — since to experience calamity and sorrow is often represented as drinking a cup of woes. Ps. xi. 6; Ixxiii. 10; Ixxv. 8; Isa. Ii. 17; Matt. xx. 22; xxvi. 39. ^ For every man. For all
— whether Jew or Gentile, bond or free, high or low, elect or non-elect. How cou'd words affirm more clearly that the atonement made by the Lord Jesus was unlimited in its nature and design? How can we express that idea in more clear or intelligible lan guage? That this refers to the atone ment is evident— for it says that he * tasted death' for them. The friends of the doctrine of general atonement do not desire any other than Scripture language in which to express their belief. It expresses it exactly — with out any need of modification or ex planation. The advocates of the doc trine of limited atonement cannot thus use Scripture language to ex press their belief. They cannot in corporate it with their creeds that the Lord Jesus 'tasted death FOR EVERY MAN.' They are compelled to modi fy it, to limit it, to explain it, in or der to prevent error and misconcep tion. But that system cannot be true which requires men to shape and modify the plain language of the Bi ble in order to keep men from error! Comp. Notes on II. Cor. v. 14, where this point is considered at length. Learn hence (vs. 6 — 9), from the in carnation of the Son of God, and his exaltation to heaven, what an honour has been conferred on human nature. When we look on the weakness and sinfulness of our race, we may well ask, what is man that God should honour him or regard him? He is the creature of a day. He is feeble and dying. He is lost and degraded. Compared with the universe at large, he is a speck, rm atom. He has done nothing to deserve the divine favour or notice, and when we look at the race at large, we can do it only with sentiments of the deepest humiliation and mortification. But when we look at human nature in the person of the Lord Jesus, we see it honoured there to a degree that is commensurate with all our desires, and that fills us with wonder. We feel that it is an honour to human nature — that it has done much to elevate man— when we, look on such a man as Howard or j
Washington. But how much more has that nature been honoured in the person of the Lord Jesus! ( 1.) What an honour to us it was that he should take our nature into intimate union with himself — passing by the angelic hosts, and becoming a man J (2.) What an honour it was that human nature there was so pure and holy; that man — everywhere else so degra ded and vile — could be seen to be no ble, and pure, and godlike! (3.) What an honour it was that the divinity should speak to men in connexion with human nature, and perform such wonderful works — that the pure pre cepts of religion should come forth from human lips — the great doctrines of eternal life be uttered by a man, and that from human hands should go forth power to heal the sick and to raise the dead! (4.) What an ho nour to man it was that the atone ment for sin should be made in his own nature, and that the universe should be attracted to that scene where one in our form, and with flesh and blood like o*\ own, should perform that great work. (5.) What an honour it is to ma» that his own nature is exalted fn ubove all heavens! That one in our form sits on the throne of the universe! That adoring angds fall prostrate before him! That \o him is in trusted all power in heaven and on earth! (C.) What an honour to man that one in his nature should be appointed to judge the worlds! That one in our own form, and with a na ture like ours, shall sit on the throne of judgment and pronounce the final doom on angels and men! That as sembled millions shall be constrained to bow before him, and receive their eternal doom from his hands! That prince and potentate — the illustrious dead of all past times, and the mighty men who are yet to live, shall all ap pear before him, and all receive from him there the sentence of their final destiny! I see, therefore, the most honour done to my nature as a man, not in the deeds of proud conquerors; not hi the lives of sages and philar
10 For it became a him, for b | whom are all things, and by
thropists; not in those who have car ried their investigations furthest into the obscurities of matter and of mind; not in the splendid orators, poets, and historians of other times, or that now live — much as I may admire them, or feel it an honour to belong to a race which has produced such illus trious men— but in the fact that the Son of God has chosen a body like my own in which to dwell; in the in expressible loveliness evinced in his pure morals, his benevolence, his blameless life; in the great deeds that he performed on earth; in the fact that it was this form that was chosen in which to make atonement for sin; in the honours that now cluster around him in heaven, and the glories that shall attend him when he shall come to judge the world.
" Princes to his imperial name Bend their bright sceptres down; Dominions, thrones, and powers rejoice, To see him wear the crown.
" Archangels sound his lofty praise Through every heavenly street; And lay their highest honours down, Submissive at his feet.
" Those soft, those blessed feet of his, That once rude iron tore — High on a throne of light they stand, And all the saints adore.
" His head, the dear majestic head, That cruel therns did wound — See what immortal glories shine, And circle it around!
" This ia the Man, th» exalted Man, Whom we, unseen, adore; But when our eyes behold his face, Our hearts shall love him more."
10. For it became him. There was h fitness or propriety in it; it was •Aich an arrangement as became God to make, in redeeming many, that the great agent by whom it was accom plished, should be made complete in all respects by sufferings. The apos tle evidently means by this to meet an objection that might be offered by a Jew to the doctrine which he had been stating — an objection drawn from the fact that Jesus was a man of sorrows, and that his life was a life of affliction. This he meets by stat ing that there was a fitness and pro priety in that fact. There was a rea son for it — a reason drawn from the plan and character of God. It was fit, in the nature of the case, that he should be qualified to be a complete or perfect Saviour — a Saviour just adapted to the purpose undertaken by sufferings. The reasons of this fitness, the apostle does not state. The amount of it probably was, that it became him as a Being of infinite benevolence; as one who wished to provide a perfect system of redemp tion, to subject his son to such suffer ings as should completely qualify him to be a Saviour for all men. This subjection to his humble condition, and to his many woes, made him such a Saviour as man needed, and qualified him fully for his work. There was a propriety that he who should redeem the suffering and the lost should partake of their nature; identify himself with them; and share their woes and the conse quences of their sins. ^ For ivhom are all things. With respect to whose glory the whole universe was made, and with respect to whom the whole arrangement for salvation has been formed. The phrase is synonymous with ' the Supreme Ruler;' and the idea is, that it became the Sovereign of the universe to provide a perfect scheme of salvation — even though it involved the humiliation and death of his own Son. •[[ And by whom are all things. By whose agency every thing is made. As it was by his agency, therefore, that the plan of salvation was entered into, there was a, fitness that it should be perfect. It was not the work of fate or chance, and there was a propriety that the whole plan should bear the mark of the infinite wisdom of its author. ^[ In bringing many sons unto glory. To heaven. This was the plan — it was to bring many to heaven who should be regarded whom are all things, in bring- vation b perfect throu ing many sons unto glory, to make the captain a of their sal- ancl treated as his sons. It was not a plan to save a feiv — but to save many. Learn, hence ( 1.) that the plan was full of benevolence. (2.) No re presentation of the gospel should ever be made which will leave the im pression that a few only, or a small part of the Avhole race, will be saved. There is no such representation in the Bible, and it should not be made. God intends taking the whole race together, to save a large part of the human famity. Few in ages that are past, it is true, may have been saved; few now are his friends and are tra velling to heaven; but there are to be brighter days on earth. The period is to arrive when the gospel shall spread over all lands, and during that long period of the millennium, innumerable millions will be brought under its saving power, and be ad mitted to heaven. All exhibitions of the gospel are wrong which represent it as narrow in its design; narrow in its offer; and narrow in its result. ^[ To make the captain of their salva tion. The Lord Jesus, who is repre sented as the leader or commander of the army of the redeemed — " the sacramental host of God's elect." The word ' captain' we apply now to an inferior officer— the commander of a 'company' of soldiers. The Greek word — apxyyos — is a more general term, and denotes, properly, the author or source of any thing; then a leader, chief, prince. In Acts iii. 15, it is rendered prince — "and killed the prince of life." So in Acts v. 31. " Him hath God exalted to be a prince and a Saviour." In Heb. xii. 2, it is rendered author. " Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith." Comp. Notes on that place. ^[ Per fect through sufferings. Complete by means of sufferings; that is, to ren der him wholly qualified for his work, so that he should be a Saviour just adapted to redeem man.
does not mean that ho was sinful before and was made holy by his sufferings; nor that he was not in all respects a perfect man before; — but it means, that by his sufferings he was made wholly fitted to be a Saviour of men; and that, therefore, the fact of his being a suffering man was no evi dence, as a Jew might have urged, that he was not the Son of God. There was a completeness, a filling up, of all which was necessary to his character as a Saviour, by the suffer ings which he endured. We are made morally letter by afflictions, if we receive them in a right manner — for we are sinful, and need to be pu rified in the furnace of affliction; Christ was not made better, for he was before perfectly holy, but he was completely endowed for the work which he came to do, by his sorrows. Nor does this mean here precisely that he was exalted to heaven as a reward for his sufferings, or that he was raised up to glory as a con sequence of them — which was true in itself— but that he was rendered com plete, or fully qualified to be a Sa viour by his sorrows. He was ren dered thus complete, (1.) because his suffering in all the forms that flesh is liable to, made him an example to all his people who shall pass through trials. They have before them a per fect model to show them how to bear afflictions. Had this not occurred, he could not have been regarded as a com plete or perfect Saviour — that is such a Saviour as we need. (2.) He is able to sympathise with them, and to suc cour them in their temptations. Ver. 18. (3.) By his sufferings, an atone ment was made for sin. He would have been an imperfect Saviour — if the name Saviour could have been given to him at all — if he had not died to make an atonement for trans gression. To render him complete as «• Saviour, it was necessary that he
1 1 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all a of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to brethren;
should suffer and die; and when he hur.g on the cross in the agonies of death, he could appropriately say, ' it is finished. The work is complete. All has been done that could be re quired to be done; and man may now have the assurance that he has a perfect Saviour— pei'fect not only in moral character, but perfect in his work, and in his adapteclness to the condition of men.' Comp. ch. v. 8, 9. Note on Luke xiii. 32.
11. For both he that sanctifieth. This refers, eAridently, to the Lord Jesus. The object is to show that there was such a union between him and those for whom he died, as to ina'ke it necessary that he should par take of the same nature, or that he should be a suffering man. Ver. 14. He undertook to redeem and sanctify them. He called them brethren. He identified them with himself. There was, in the great work of re demption, a oneness between him and them, and hence it was necessary that he should assume their nature — and the fact, therefore, that he ap peared as a suffering man, does not at all militate with the doctrine that he had a more exalted nature, and was even above the angels. Prof. Stuart endeavours to prove that the word sanctify here is used in the sense of, to make expiation or atone ment, and that the meaning is, " he who maketh expiation, and they for whom expiation is made." Bloomfield gives the same sense to the word, as also does Kosenmuller. That the word may have such a sig nification it would be presumptuous in any one to doubt, after the view which such men have taken of it; but it may be doubted whether this idea is necessary here. The word sanctify is a general term, meaning to make holy or pure; to consecrate, set apart, devote to God; to regard as holy, or to hallow. Applied to the
Saviour here, it may be used in this general sense— that he consecrated, or devoted himself to God — as emi nently the consecrated or holy one — th*e Messiah (comp. Note on John xvii. 19): applied to his people, it may mean that they in like manner were the consecrated, the holy, the pure on earth. There is a richness and fulness in the word when so un derstood, which there is not when it is limited to the idea of expiation; and it seems to me that it is to be taken in its richest and fullest sense, and that the meaning is, ' the great con secrated Messiah— the Holy One of God — and his consecrated and holy followers, are all of one.' ^[ All of one. Of one family; spirit; Father; nature. Either of these significations will suit the connexion, and some such idea must be understood. The meaning is, that they were united, or partook of something in common, so as to constitute a oneness, or a bro therhood; and that since this was the case, there was a propriety in his taking their nature. It does not mean that they were originally of one nature or family; but that it was understood in the writings of the pro phets that the Messiah should partake of the nature of his people, and that, therefore, though he was more exalted than the angels, there was a propriety that he should appear in the human form. Comp. John xvii. 21. ^ For which cause. That is, because he is thus united with them, or has un dertaken their redemption. ^[ He is not ashamed. As it might be sup posed that one so exalted and pure would be. It might have been an ticipated that the Son of God would refuse to give the name brethren to those who were so humble, and sunken and degraded as those whom lie came to redeem. But he is willing to be ranked with them, and to be regarded as one of their family.
12 Saying a I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the
midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.
*[ To call tJicm brethren. To ac knowledge himself as of the same family, and to speak of them as his brothers. That is, he is so represented as speaking of them in the prophecies respecting the Messiah — for this in terpretation the argument of the npostle demands. It Mras material for him to show that he was so repre sented in the Old Testament. This he does in the following verses.
12. Saying. This passage is found in Ps. xxii. 22. The whole of that Psalm has been commonly referred to the Messiah; and in regard to such a reference there is less diffi culty than attends most of the other portions of the Old Testament that are usually supposed to relate to him. The following verses of the Psalm are applied to him, or to transactions connected with him in the New Testament, vs. 1. 8. 18; and the whole Psalm is so strikingly descrip tive of his condition and sufferings, that there can be no reasonable doubt that it had an original reference to him. There is much in the Psalm that cannot be well applied to David; there is nothing which cannot be ap plied to the Messiah; and the proof seems to be clear that Paul quoted this passage in accordance with the original sense of the Psalm. The point of the quotation here is not that he would ' declare the name' of God — but that he gave the name brethren to those whom he addressed. *[f / will declare thy name. I will make thee known. The word 'name' is used, as it often is, to denote God himself. The meaning is, that it would be a part of the Messiah's work to make known to his disciples the character and perfections of God — or to make tlwm acquainted with God. He per formed this. In his parting prayer (John xvii. 6.) he says, "I have manifested thy name unto the men whom thou gavest me out of the world." And again, ver 26, "And
I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it." ^[ Unto my brethren. The point of the quota tion is in this. He spoke of them as brethren. Paul is showing that he was not ashamed to call them such. As he was reasoning with those who had been Jews, and as it was necessary as a part of his argument to show that what he main tained respecting the Messiah was found in the Old Testament, he makes his appeal to that, and shows that the Redeemer is represented as address ing his people as brethren. It would have been easy to appeal to facts, and to have shown that the Re deemer used that term familiarly in addressing his disciples (comp. Matt. xii. 48, 49; xxv. 40; xxviii. 10; Luke viii. 21; John xx. 17), but that would not have been pertinent to his object. It is full proof to us, how ever, that the prediction in the Psalm was literally fulfilled. J[ In the midst of the church. That is, in the as sembly of my brethren. The point of the proof urged by the apostle lies in the first part of the quota tion. This latter part seems to have been adduced because it might as sist their memory to have the Avhole verse quoted; or because it contained an interesting truth respecting the Redeemer — though not precisely a proof of what he was urging; or because it implied substantially the same truth as the former member. It shows that he was united with his church; that he was one of them; and that he mingled with them as among brethren, ^f Will I sing praise. That the Redeemer united with his disciples in singing praise, \v<? may suppose to have been in the tiighest degree probable — though, I believe, but a single case is mentioned — that at the close of the Supper which he instituted to commemorate his death. Matt. xxvi. 30. This, therefore, proves what the apostle in-
13 And again,a I will put my
tended — that the Messiah was among them as his brethren — that he spoke to them as such — and mingled in their devotions as one of their number.
13. And again. That is, it is said in another place, or language is used of the Messiah in another place, indi cating the confidence which he put in God, and showing that he partook of the feelings of the children of God, and regarded himself as one of them. ^[ I will put my trust in him. I will confide in God; implying (1.) a sense of dependence on God; and (2.) con fidence in him. It is with reference to the former idea that the apostle seems to use it here — as denoting a condition where there was felt to be need of divine aid. His object is to show that he took part with his people, and regarded them as brethren — and the purpose of this quotation seems to be to show that he was in such a situation as to make an ex pression of dependence proper. He was one with his people, and shared their dependence and their piety — using language which showed that he was identified with them, and could mingle with the tenderest sym pathy in all their feelings. It is not certain from what place this passage is quoted. In Psalm xviii. 3, and the corresponding passage in II. Sam.
xxii. 3, the Hebrew isT2"npnit*l — 'I will trust in him;' but this Psalm has never been regarded as having any reference to the Messiah, even by the Jews, and it is difficult to see how it could be considered as having any relation to him. Most critics, there fore, as Rosenmuller, Calvin, Koppe, Bloomfield, Stuart, &c., regard the passage as taken from Isa. viii. 17. The reasons for this are (1.) that the words are the same in the Septuagint as in the Epistle to the Hebrews; (2.) the apostle quotes the next verse im mediately as applicable to the Mes- siah; (3.) no other place occurs where the same expression is found. The Hebrew in Isa. viii. 17, is "ib ^0^1 — ' I will wait for him,' or I will trust in him— rendered by the Septuagint TTfTToidois eVojU.at eV' avTw — the same phrase precisely as is used by Paul — and there can be no doubt that he meant to quote it here. The sense in Isaiah is, that he had closed his message to the people; he had been directed to seal up the testimony; he had exhorted the nation to repent, but he had done it in vain; — and he had now nothing to do but to put his trust in the Lord, and commit the whole cause to him. His only hope was in God; and he calmly and confidently committed his cause to him. Paul evi dently designs to refer this to the Mes siah.; and the sense as applied to him is, 'The Messiah in using this lan guage expresses himself as a man. It is men who exercise dependence on God; and by the use of this language he speaks as one who had the nature of man, and who expressed the feelings of the pious, and shoAved that he was one of them, and that he regarded them as brethren.' There is not much difficulty in the argument of the pas sage; for it is seen that in such lan guage he must speak as a man, or as one having human nature; but the main difficulty is on the question how this and the verse following can be applied to the Messiah? In the pro phecy, they seem to refer solely to Isaiah, and to be expressive of his feelings alone — the feelings of a man who saw little encouragement in his work, and who having done all that he could do, at last put his sole trust in God. In regard to this difficult, and yet unsettled question, the reader may consult my Introduction to Isa iah, § 7. The following remarks may serve in part to remove the diffic ulty. (1.) The passage in Isaiah (viij. 17, 18) occurs in the midst of a number of predictions relating to the Messiah — preceded and followed by passages that had an ultimate reference un doubtedly to him. See Isa. vii. 14; viii. 8; ix. 1 — 7, and Notes on those passages. (2.) The language, if used of Isaiah, would as accurately and fitly express the feelings and the condition of the Eedeemer. There was such a remai-kable similarity in the circumstances that the same language would express the condi tion of both. Both had delivered a so lemn message to men; both had come to exhort them to turn to God, and to put their trust in him — and both with the same result. The nation had dis regarded them alike, and now their only hope was to confide in God, and the language here used would express the feelings of both — ' I will trust in God. I will put confidence in him, and look to him.' (3.) There can be little doubt that in the time of Paul this passage was regarded by the Jews as applicable to the Messiah. This is evident, because (a) Paul would not have so quoted it as a proof text unless it would be admitted to have such a reference by those to whom he wrote; and (6) because in Bom. ix. 32. 33, it is evident that the passage in Isa. viii. 14. is regarded as having reference to the Messiah, and as being so admitted by the Jews. It is true this may be considered merely as an argument ad hominem — or an argument from what was admitted by those with whom he was reasoning, without vouching for the precise accuracy of the manner in which the passage was applied — but that method of argument is admitted elsewhere, and why should we not expect to find the sacred writers rea soning as other men do, and especially as was common in their own times? The apostle is showing them that ac cording to their own Scriptures, and in accordance with principles which they themselves admitted, it was ne cessary that the Messiah should be a man and a sufferer; that he should be identified with his people, and be able to use language which would ex press that condition. In doing this, it is not remarkable that he should apply to him language which they admitted to belong to him, and which would accurately describe his condi tion. (4.) It is not necessary to sup pose that the passage in Isaiah had an original and primary reference to the Messiah. It is evident from the whole passage that it had not. There was a primary reference to Isaiah himself, and to his children as being emblems of certain truths. But still, there was a strong resemblance, in certain respects, between his feelings and condition and those of the Mes siah. There was such a resemblance that the one would not unaptly sym bolise the other. There was such a resemblance that the mind— probably of the prophet himself, and of the people — would look forward to the more remote but similar event — the coming and the circumstances of the Messiah. So strong was this resemb lance, and so much did the expressions of the prophet here accord with his de clarations elsewhere pertaining to the Messiah, that in the course of time they came to be regarded as relating to him in a very important sense and as destined to have their complete ful filment when he should come. As such they seem to have been used in the time of Paul; and no one can PROVE that the application was impro per. Who can demonstrate that God did not intend that those transactions referred to by Isaiah should be de signed as symbols of what would occur hi the time of the Eedeemer? They were certainly symbolical ac tions — for they are expressly so said to have been by Isaiah himself (Isa. viii. 18), and none can demonstrate that they might not have had an ulti mate reference to the Eedeemer, And again. In another verse, or in another declaration; to wit, Isa.viii.13. ehold I and the children which God hath given me. This is only a part of the passage in Isaiah, and seems to have been partially quoted because the point of the quotation consisted in the fact that he sustained to them some-
14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh
what cf the relation of a parent to wards his children— as having the same nature, and being identified with them in interest and feeling. As it is used by Isaiah, it means that he and his children were ' for signs and em blems' to the people of his time — to communicate and confirm the will of God, and to be pledges of the divine favour and protection. See Notes on the passage in Isaiah. As applied to the Messiah, it means that he sus tained to his people a relation so inti mate that they could be addressed and regarded as his children. They were of one family; one nature. He became one of them, and had in them all the interest which a father has in his sons. He had, therefore, a nature like ours; and though he was exalted above the angels, yet his relation to man was like the most tender and intimate earthly connexions, showing that he took part in the same nature with them. The point is that he was a man; that since those who were to be redeemed partook of flesh and blood, lie also took part of the same (ver. 14), and thus identified himself with them.
14. Forasmuch then. Since; or because. ^ As the children. Those who were to become the adopted children of God; or who were to sus tain that relation to him. ^ Are par takers of flesh and blood. Have a human and not an angelic nature. Since they are men, he became a man. There was a fitness of propriety that he should partake of their nature. See Notes I. Cor. xv. 50; Matt. xvi. 17. <j[ Hi. also himself, &c. He also became a man or partook of the same nature with them. See Notes on John i. 14. ^[ That through death. By dying. It is implied here (1.) that the work which he undertook of destroying him that had the power of death, was to be accomplished by his own dying; and (...) that in order to this, it was necessary that he should be a man. An angel does not die, and therefore he did not take on him the nature of angels; and the Son of God in his divine nature could not die, and therefore he assumed a fcrn^ in which he could die — that of a man. In that nature the Son of God could taste of death; and thus he could de stroy him that had the power of death. «f He might destroy. That he might subdue, or that 'he might overcome him, and destroy his domi nion. The word destroy here is not used in the sense of closing life, or of killing, but in the sense of bringing into subjection, or crushing his power. This is the work which the Lord Jesus came to perform — to destroy the kingdom of Satan in the world, and to set up another kingdom in its place. This* was understood by Satan to be his object. See Notes on Matt, viii. 29; Mark i. 24. f That had the power of death. I understand this as meaning that the devil was the cause of death in this world. He was the means of its introduction, and of its long and melancholy reign. This does not affirm any thing of his power of inflicting death in particular in stances — whatever may be true on that point — but that death was a part of his dominion; that he introduced it; that he seduced man from God, and led on the train of woes which result in death. He also made it ter rible. Instead of being regarded as falling asleep, or being looked on without alarm, it becomes under him the means of terror and distress. What po'cer Satan may have in in flicting death in particular instances no one can tell. The Jewish Rab bins speak much of Samrnael, "the angel of death"— njj H Tj sb tt — who they supposed had the control of life, and was the great messenger em ployed in closing it. The Scriptures, it is believed, are silent on that point. But that Satan was the means of in troducing ' death into the world, and all our woe,' no one can doubt; and over the whole subject, therefore, he may be said to have had power. To and blood, he a also himseli likewise took part of the same that through death b he might destroy thnt dominion; to rescue man; to restore him to life; to place him in a world where death is un known; to introduce a state of things where not another one would ever die, was the great purpose for which the.Redeemer came. What a noble ob ject! What enterprise in the uni verse has been so grand and noble as this! Surely an undertaking that ^contemplates the annihilation of DEATH; that designs to bring this dark dominion to an end, is full of benevolence, and commends itself to every man as worthy of his profound attention and gratitude. What woes are caused by death in this world! They are seen everywhere. The earth is " arched with graves." In almost every dwelling death has been doing his work of misery. The pa lace cannot exclude him; and he comes unbidden into the cottage. He finds his way to the dwelling of ice in which the Esquimaux and the Greenlander live; to the tent of the Bedouin Arab, and the wandering Tartar; to the wigwam of the Indian, and to the harem of the Turk; to the splendid mansion of the rich, as well as to the abode of the poor. That reign of death has now extended near six thousand years, and will travel on to future times — meeting each generation, and consigning the young, the vigorous, the lovely, and the pure, to dust. Shall that gloomy reign continue for ever? Is there no way to arrest it? Is there no place where death can be excluded? Yes: heaven — and the object of the Redeemer is to bring us there.
15. And deliver them. Not all of them in fact, though the way is open for all. This deliverance relates (1.) to the dread of death. He came to free them from that. (2.) From death.itself — that is, ultimately to bring them to a world vhere death shall be
destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15 And deliver them who
unknown. The dread of death may be removed by the work of Christ, and they who have been subject to constant alarms on account of it may be brought to look on it with calm ness and peace; and ultimately they will be brought to a world where it will be wholly unknown. The dread of death is taken away, or they are delivered from that, because (a) the cause of that dread— to wit sin, is removed. Notes I. Cor. xv. 54, 55. (6) Because they are enabled to look to the world beyond with triumphant joy. Death conducts them to hea ven. A Christian has nothing to fear in death; nothing beyond the grave. In no part of the universe has he any thing to dread, for God is his friend, and he will be his Protector every where. On the dying bed; in the grave; on the way up to the judg ment; at the solemn tribunal; and in the eternal world, he is under the eye and the protection of his Saviour — and of what should he be afraid? Who through fear of death. From th'e dread of dying — that is, whenever they think of it, and they think of it so often as to make them slaves of that fear. This obviously means the natural dread of dying, and not par ticularly the fear of punishment be yond. It is that indeed which often ives its principal terror to the dread of death, but still the apostle refers here evidently to natural death — as an object which men fear. All men lave, by nature, this dread of dying-— and perhaps some of the inferior cre ation have it also. It is certain that t exists in the heart of every man, and that God has implanted it there 'or some wise purpose. There is the dread (1.) of the dying pang, or pain. '2.) Of the darkness and gloom of mind that attends it. (3.) Of the untnown world beyond — the " evil that we know not of." (4.) Of the chilli- ness, and loneliness, and darkness of the grave. (5.) Of the solemn trial at the bar of God. (6.) Of the con demnation which awaits the guilty — the apprehension of future woe. There is no other evil that we fear so much as we do DEATH — and there is nothing more clear than that God intended that we should have a dread of dying. The REASONS why he designed this are equally clear. (1.) One may have been to lead men to prepare for it — which otherwise they would neglect. (2.) Another, to deter them from comjiiitting self-murdei — where nothing else would deter them. Facts have shown that it was necessary that there should be some strong principle in the human bosom to prevent this crime — and even the dread of death does not always do it. So sick do men become of the life that God gave them; so weary of the world; so overwhelmed with calamity; so op pressed Avith disappointment and cares, that they lay violent hands on themselves, and rush unbidden into the awful presence of their Creator. This would occur more frequently by far than it now does, if it were not for the salutary fear of death which God has implanted in every bosom. The feelings of the human heart on this subject were never more accu rately or graphically drawn than in the celebrated soliloquy of Hamlet —
No more; — and by a sleep, to say we end The heart-ache, and the thousand natural
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil Must give us pause; — there's the respect That makes calamity of so long a life: For w hn would bear the whips and scorns
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, The insolence of office, and the spurns That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life; But that the dread of something after death,— The undiscovered country from whose
No traveller returns, — puzzles the will; And makes ua rather bear those ills we
Than fly to others that we know not of? Thus conscience does make cowards of r,s
And enterprises of great pi'h anrt moment With this regard their currents turn awry And lose the name of action.
God designed that man should be de terred from rushing uncalled into his awful presence, by this salutary dread of death — and his implanting this feeling in the human heart is one of the most striking and conclusive proofs of a moral government over the world. This instinctive dread of death can be overcome only by reli gion—and then man doss not NEED it to reconcile him to life, lie becomes submissive to trials. He is willing to bear all that is laid on him. He resigns himself to the dispensations of Providence, and feels that life, evenin affliction, is the gift of God, and is a valuable endowment. He now dreads self-murder as a crime of deep dye, and religion restrains him and keeps him by a more mild and salu tary restraint than the dread of death* The man who has true religion is willing to live or to die; he feels that life is the gift of God, and that he will take it away in the best time and manner; and feeling this, he is wil ling to leave all in his hands. We may remark (1.) how much do we owe to religion! It is the only thing that will effectually take away the dread of death, and yet secure this point — to make man willing to live in all the circumstances where God may place him. It is possible that philosophy or stoicism may remove to a great extent the dread of death
16 For verily1 he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
-• — but then it will be likely to make a man willing to take his life if he is placed in trying circumstances. Such an effect it had on Cato in Utica; and such an effect it had on Hume, who maintained that suicide was lawful, and that to turn a current of blood from its accustomed channel was of no more consequence than to change the course of any other fluid! (2.) In what a sad condition is the sinner! Thousands there are who never think of death with composure, and who all their life long are subject to bondage through the fear of it. They never think of it if they can avoid it; and Avhen it is forced upon them, it fills them with alarm. They attempt to drive the thought away. They travel; they plunge into busi ness; they occupy the mind with tri fles; they drown their fears in the intoxicating bowl: but all this tends only to make death more terrific and awful when the reality comes. If man were wise, he would seek an in terest in that religion which, if it did nothing else, would deliver laim from the dread of death; and the influence of the gospel in this respect, if it ex erted no other, is worth to a man all the sacrifices and self-denials which it would ever require. *[[ All their life-time subject to bondage. Slaves of fear; in a depressed and miserable condition, like slaves under a master. They have no freedom; no comfort, no peace. From this miserable state Christ comes to deliver man. Re ligion enables him to look calmly on death and the judgment, and to feel that all will be well.
16. For verily. Truly, f He took not on him the nature of angels. Marg. He taketh not hold of angels, but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold. The word here used— e
17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he rr.ight be a merciful0- and faithful high
to seize; to surprise; to take hold with a view to detain for one's self. Robinson. Then it means to take hold of one as by the hand— with a view to aid, conduct, or succour. Mark viii. 23; Acts xxiii. 19. It is rendered took, Mark viii. 23; Luke ix. 47; xiv. 4; Acts ix. 27; xvii. 19. xviii. 17; xxi. 30, 33; xxiii. 19; Ileb. viii. 9; caught, Matt. xiv. 31; Acts xvi. 19; take hold, Luke xx. 20, 26; lay hold and laid hold, Luke xxiii. 26; I. Tim. vi. 12. The general idea is that of seizing upon, or laying hold of any one — no matter what the ob ject is — whether to aid or to drag to punishment, or simply to conduct. Here it means to lay hold with refe rence to aid or help, and the mean ing is, that he did not seize the na ture of angels, or take it to himself with reference to rendering them aid, but he assumed the nature of man — in order to aid him. He undertook the work of human redemption, and consequently it was necessary for him to be a man. •[[ But he took on him the seed of Abraham. He came to help the descendants of Abraham, and consequently as they were men, he became a man. Writing to Jews, it was not unnatural for the apostle to refer particularly to them as the descendants of Abraham, though this does not exclude the idea that he died for the whole human race. It was true that he came to render aid to the descendants of Abraham, but it was also true that he died for all. The fact that I love one of my children, and that I make provision for his education, and tell him so, does not exclude the idea that I love the others also — and that I may make to them a similar appeal when it shall be proper.
priest in things pertaining to and character. There was a pro priety that he should be like them, and should partake of their nature. The meaning is, that there was a fit ness that nothing should be wanting in him in reference to the innocent propensities and sympathies of hu man nature. ^[ It b.ehoved him. It became him; or there was a fitness and propriety in it. The reason why it was proper, the apostle proceeds to state. ^[ Like unto his brethren. Like unto those who sustained to him the relation of brethren; particularly as he undertook to redeem the descen dants of Abraham, and as he was a descendant of Abraham himself, there was a propriety that he should be like them. He calls them brethren; and it was proper that he should show that he regarded them as such by assuming their nature. 3[ Tliat he might be a merciful and faithful high priest. (1.) That he might be merciful', that is, compassionate. That he might know how to pity us in our infirmities and trials by having a nature like our own. (2.) That he might be faithful; that is> perform with fidelity all the functions pertain ing to the office of high priest. The idea is, that it was needful that he should become a man; that he should experience as we do the infirmities and trials of life, and that by being a man, and partaking of all that per tained to man except his sins, he might feel how necessary it was that there should be fidelity in the office of high priest. Here was a race of sinners and sufferers. They were exposed to the wratli of God. " They were liable to everlasting punishment. The judgment impended over the race, and the day of vengeance has tened on. All now depended on the Great High Priest. All their hope was in his fidelity to the great office which he had undertaken. If he were faithful, all would be safe; if he were unfaithful, all would be lost. Hence the necessity that he should enter
God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
fully into the»feelings, fears, and dan gers of man; that he should become one of the nice and be identified with them, so that he might be qualified to perform with faithfulness the great trust committed to him. ^f High priest, The Jewish high priest was the successor of Aaron, and was at the head of the ministers of religion among the Jews. He was set apart with solemn ceremonies — clad in his sacred vestments — and anointed with oil. Ex. xxix. 5 — 9; Lev. viii. 2. He was by his office the general judge of all that pertained to religion, and even of the judicial affairs of the Jewish nation. Deut. xvii. S — 12; xix. 17; xxi. 5; xxxiii. 9, 10. He only had the privilege of entering the most holy place once a year, on the great day of expiation,to make atone ment for the sins of the whole people. Lev. xvi. 2, &c. He was the oracle of truth — so that when clothed in his proper vestments, and having on the Urim and Thummim, he made-known the will of God in regard to future events. The Lord Jesus became in the Christian dispensation what the Jewish high priest was in the old; and an important object of this epis tle is to show that he far surpassed the Jewish high priest, and in what respect the Jewish high priest was designed to typify the Redeemer. Paul, therefore, early introduces the subject, and shows that the Lord Je sus came to perform the functions of that sacred office, and that he was eminently endowed for it. «j[ In things pertaining to God. In offer ing sacrifice; or in services of a reli gious nature. The great purpose was to offer sacrifice, and make interces sion; and the idea is, that Jesus took on himself our nature that he might sympathise with us; that thus he might be faithful to the great trust committed to him— the redemption of the world. Had he been unfaith ful, all would have been lost, and tlfle world would have sunk down to woe.
For in that he himself j he is able to succour them that suffered, being tempted ( are tempted.
f[ To make reconciliation. By his death as a sacrifice. The word here used— iXdo-Kopai— occurs but in one other place in the New Testament (Luke xviii. 13), where it is rendered "God be merciful to me a sinner;' that is, reconciled to me. The noun (iXao-ftos — propitiation) is used in I. John ii. 2;iv. 10. The word here means properly to appease, to recon cile, to conciliate; and hence to propitate AS TO sins; that is, to propi tiate God in reference to sins, or to render him propitious. The Son of God became a man, that he might so fully enter into the feelings of the peo ple as to be faithful, and that he might be qualified as a high priest to perform the great work of rendering God pro pitious in regard to sins. How he did this, is fully shown in the subsequent parts of the epistle.
18. For in that he himself, &c. Be cause he has suffered, he is able to sympathise with sufferers, f Being tempted. Or, being tried. The Greek word here used is more general in its meaning than the English word tempted. It means to put to the proof-, to try the nature or character of; and this may be done either (1.) by sub jecting a person to afflictions or suf ferings that his true character may be tried — that it may be seen whe ther he has sincere piety and love to God; or (2.) by allowing one to fall into temptation, properly so called — where some strong inducement to evil is presented to the mind, anc where it becomes thus a trial of vir tue. The Saviour was subjected to both these in as severe a form as was ever presented to men. His suffer ings surpassed all others; and th< temptations of Satan (see Matt, iv.' were presented in the most allurim form in which he could exhibit them Being proved or tried in both thes respects, he showed that he had £ strength of virtue which could bear a] that could ever occur to seduce him rom attachment to God; and at the ame time to make him a perfect moel for those who should be tried in tie same manner. ^[ He is able to ucconr, &<.c. This does not mean hat he would not have had power to ssist others if he had not gone hrough these sufferings, but that he s now qualified to sympathise with hem from the fact that he has en ured like trials.
The idea is, that one who has him- •elf been called to suffer is able to ympathise with those who suffer; one vho has been tempted, is able to sym pathise with those who are tempted n like manner. One who has been sick is qualified to sympathise with he sick; one who has lost a child, can sympathise with him who follows us beloved son or daughter to the grave; one who has had some strong:emptation to sin urged upon himself can sympathise with those who are now tempted; one who has never been sick, or who has never buried a friend, or been tempted, is poorly qualified to impart consolation in such scenes. Hence it is, that ministers of the gospel are often — like their Master — much persecuted and afflict ed, that they may be able to assist others. Hence they are called to part with the children of their love; or to endure long and painful sicknesses, or to pass through scenes of poverty and want, that they may sympathise with the most humble and afflicted of their flock. And they should be willing to endure all this; for (1.) thus they are like their master (comp. Coll. i. 24; Phil iii. 10); and (2.) they are thus enabled to be far more exten sively useful. Many a minister owes a large part of his usefulness to the fact that he has been mucli afflicted; and for those afflictions, therefore, he should unfeignedly thank God. The idea which is here expressed by the apostle —that one is enabled to sym pathise with others from having him self suffered, was long since beauti fully expressed by Virgil:
Me quoque per multos similis fortuna labores,
Jactatam, h&c demum voluit consistere terra.
For I myself like you have been distressed, Till heaven afforded me this place of rest Like you, an alien in a land unknown, I learn to pity woes so like my own.
Jesus is thus able to alleviate the suf ferer. In all our temptations and trials let us remember (1.) that he suffered more — infinitely more — than we can do, and that in all our sor rows we shall never reach what he endured. We enter no region of trial where he has not gone beyond us; we tread no dark and gloomy way where he has not gone before us. (2.) Let us remember that he is to us a brother, for he " is not ashamed to <iall us brethren." He had a nature like ours; he condescended to appear as one of our race, with all the inno cent propensities and passions of a man. What matchless condescen sion! And what an honour for us to be permitted to address him as an * elder brother,' and to know that he feels a deep sympathy in our woes! (3.) Let us then, in all times of afflic tion, look to him. Go not, suffering Christian, to philosophy; attempt not to deaden your feelings by the art of the Stoic; but go at once to the Sa viour — the great sympathising High Priest, who is able to succour you — and rest your burdens on him.
He knows our feeble frame; He knows what sore temptations mean, For he has felt the same.
His mercy and his power; We shall obtain delivering grace, in every tryiug hour."
The Jews valued their religion on many accounts. One was that it had been given by the instrumentality of distinguished prophets sent from God, and by the medium of angels. The apostle, in the previous chapters, had shown that in these respects the Christian religion had the advantage over theirs, for it had been communi cated by one who was superior to any of the prophets, and who had a rank above the angels. Next to this, they valued their religion because it had been imparted by a lawgiver so eminent as Moses — a man more dis tinguished than any other one on earth as a legislator. To him they looked with pride as the founder of their economy, and the medium through whom God had given them their peculiar laws. Next to him, their High Priest was the most im portant functionary in the nation. He was at the head of their religion, and served to distinguish it from all others, for they had no conception of any form of true religion unless the office of high priest was recog nised. The apostle, therefore, pro ceeds to show that in these respects the Christian religion had lost no thing, but had the advantage alto gether — that it was founded by one superior to Moses, and that Christ as high priest was superior by far to the high priest of the Jews.
This chapter, and to ver. 13 of ch. iv., relates to the first of these points, and is occupied with showing the superiority of the Redeemer to Moses, and the consequences which result from the admission of that fact. It consists, therefore, of two parts.
I. The first is employed in showing that if the author of the Christian religion is compared with Moses, hi has the preference. Vs. 1 — 6. Mose was indeed faithful, but it was as a. servant Christ was faithful as a son. He had a rank as much above that of Moses as one who builds a.House has ever the house itself.
II. The consequences that resulted from that. Ch. iii. vs. 7—19, and ch iv. 1 — 13. The general doctrine here is, that there \vould be special danger in apostatising from the Chris tian" religion— danger far superior to that which was threatened to the Is raelites if they were disobedient to Moses. In illustrating this, the apos tle is naturally led to a statement of the warnings against defection under Moses, and of the consequences of Lnbelief and rebellion there. He en treats them, therefore, (1.) not to garden their hearts against God, as *he Israelites did, Avho were excluded from Canaan. Vs. 7—11. (2.) To be on their guard against unbelief. Ver. 12. (3.) To exhort one another constantly, and to stimulate one another, that they might not fall away. Ver. 13. (4.) To hold the beginning of their confidence stead fast unto the end, and not to provoke God as they did who came out of Egypt. Vs. 14 — 19. In the follow ing chapter (vs. 1—13) he completes the exhortation, by showing them that many who came out of Egypt were excluded from the promised land, and that there was equal danger now; and then proceeds with the comparison of Christ with the Jewish high priest, and extends that compa rison through the remainder of the doctrinal part of the epistle.
1. Wherefore. That is, since Christ sustains such a character as has been stated in the previous chapter; since he is so able to succour those who need assistance; since he assumed our nature that he might be a mer ciful and faithful high priest, his character ought to be attentively con sidered, and we ought to endeavour fully to. understand it. ^f Hoi// breth ren. The name brethren is often given to Christians to denote that they are of one family. It is possible, also, that the apostle may have used the word here in a double sense — de noting that they were 1. 3 brethren as Christians, and as Jews. The word holy is applied to them to de note that they were set apart to God, or that they were sanctified. The Jews Avere often called a " holy peo ple," as being consecrated to God; and Christians are holy, not only as consecrated to God, but as sanctified. ^[ Partakers of the heavenly calling. On the meaning of the word calling, see Notes on Eph. iv. 1. The 'hea venly calling' denotes the calling which was given to them from hea ven, or which was of a heavenly na ture. It pertained to heaven, not to earth; it came from heaven, not from earth; it was a calling to the reward and happiness of heaven, and not to the pleasures and honours of the world. ^[ Consider. Attentively pon der all that is said of the Messiah. Think of his rank; his dignity; his holiness; his sufferings; his death; his resurrection, ascension, interces sion. Think of him that you may see the claims to a holy life; that you may learn to bear trials; that you may be kept from apostacy. The character and work of the Son of God are worthy of the profound and prayerful consideration of every man; and especially every Christian should reflect much on him. Of the friend that we love we think much; but what friend have we like the Lord Jesus? ^[ Tlie apostle. The word apostle is nowhere else applied to the Lord Jesus. The word means one who is sent — and in this sense it might be applied to the Eedeemer as one sent by God, or as by way of eminence THE one sent by him. But the connexion seems to demand that there should be some allusion here to one who sustained a similar rank among the Jews; and it is proba-
2 Who was faithful to him that l appointed him, as also Mo-
ble that the allusion is to Moses as having been the great apostle of God to the Jewish people, and that Paul here means to say, that the Lord Je sus, under the new dispensation, filled the place of Moses and of the high priest under the old, and that the office of " apostle" and " high priest," instead of being now separated, as it was between Moses and Aaron under the old dispensation, was now blended in the Messiah. The name apostle is not indeed given that which eminently distinguished the Jewish religion, and because the Christian religion proposed to abolish that. It became necessary, therefore, to show that all that was dignified and valuable in that office was to be found in the Christian system. This was done by showing that in the Lord Jesus was found all the characteris tics of a high priest, and that all the functions which had been performed in the Jewish ritual were performed by him, and that all which had been to Moses directly in the Old Testa- i prefigured by the Jewish high priest inent, but the verb from which the Hebrew word for apostle is derived is frequently given him. Thus in Ex. iii. 10, it is said, " Come now, therefore, and I will send thce unto Pharaoh." And in ver. 13, "The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you." So also in vs. 14, 15, of the same chapter. From the word there used — H /t£? — to send, the word de noting apostle — rPvtZ? — is derived; and it is not improbable that Moses would be regarded as being by way of eminence THE one sent by God. Further, the Jews applied the word
Pp?8? — apostle, to the minister of the synagogue; to him who presided over its affairs, and who had the general charge of the services there; and in this sense it might be applied by way of eminence to Moses as being the general director and controller of the religious affairs of the nation, and as sent for that purpose. The object of Paul is to show that the Lord Jesus in the Christian system — as the great apostle sent from God — sustained a rank and office similar to this, but superior in dignity and authority. *{" And High Priest. Our great object of this epistle is to compare the Lord Jesus with the high priest of the Jews, and to show that he was in all respects superior. This was important, be cause the office of high priest was was fulfilled in him. The apostle here merely alludes to him, or names him as the high priest, and then post pones the consideration of his cha racter in that respect till after he had compared him with Moses. ^[ Of our profession. Of our religion; of that religion which we profess. The apostle and high priest whom we con fessed as ours when we embraced the Christian religion.
2. Who was faithful. See Note, ch. ii. 17. He performed with fidelity all the functions intrusted to him. ^f To him that appointed him. Marg. llfade. The word made, however, is used in the sense of constituted or appointed. The meaning is, that he was faithful to God. Perhaps Paul urges on them the necessity of con sidering his fidelity in order to keep them from the danger of apostacy. A leading object of this epistle was to preserve those whom he addressed from apostatising from God amidst the temptations and trials to which they were exposed. In doing this, what could be a more powerful argu ment than to direct their attention to the unwavering constancy and fide lity of the Lord Jesus? The import ance of such a virtue in the Saviour is manifest. It is seen everywhere; and all the great interests of the world depend on it. A husband should maintain inviolate fidelity to wards a wife, and a wife towards her
3 For this man was counted i builded a the house hath more
husband; a child should be faithful to a parent, a clerk and apprentice to his employer, a lawyer to his client, n physician to his patient, an ambas sador to the government that com missions him. No matter what may tie the temptations in the way, in all these, and in all other relations, there should be inviolate fidelity. The wel fare of the world depended on the faithfulness of the Lord Jesus. Had he failed in that all would have been lost. His fidelity was worthy of the more attentive consideration from the numerous temptations which beset his path, and the attempts which were made to turn him aside from his devotedness to God. Amidst all the temptations of the adversary, and all the trials through which he passed, he never for a moment swerved from fidelity to the great trust which had been committed to his hands. What better example to preserve them from the temptations to apostacy could the apostle propose to the Christians whom he addressed? What, in these temptations and trials, could be more appropriate than for them to "con sider" the example of the great apos tle and high priest of their profes sion? What more proper for us now in the trials and temptations of our Jives, than to keep that great and glo rious example continually before our •eyes? As also Moses was faithful. Fidelity to God was remarkable in Moses. In all the provocations and -sebellions of the Jews, he was firm and unwavering. This is affirmed of him in Num. xii. 7. to which place the apostle here alludes, "My ser vant Moses, is not so, who is faith ful in all his house." The word house, as applied to Moses, is used probably, in the sense of family, as It often is, and refers to the family over which he presided — that IB, the Jewish nation. The whole Jewish people were a household, or the family of God, and Moses was appointed to preside over it, and was faithful in the functions of his office there.
3. For this man. The Lord Jesus. The word 'man' is understood, but there can be do doubt that he is re ferred to. ^[ Was counted more wor thy. Was more worthy or is more worthy. The word here used does not refer to any thing that had been said of him, or to any estimate which had been made of him. It means simply that lie was worthy of more honour than Moses. How he was so, Paul proceeds to show. J[ Of more glory — $6£r)s. Honour, dignity, re gard. He really had a higher rank, and was worthy of more respect. This was saying much for the Messiah, and that it was proper to say this, Paul proceeds to show. He did not attempt in any way to undervalue Moses and his institutions. He gave him all the honour which the Jews *vere themselves disposed to render him. He admitted that he had been eminently faithful in the station where God had placed him; and he then proceeds to show that the Lord Jesus was entitled to honour superior to that, and that hence the Christian religion had more to attach its friends to it than the Jewish had. ^[ Inas much as he who hath builded the house. The idea here is, either that he who is the maker of a house— the archi tect—is worthy of more respect than the house itself; or that he who is the founder of a family is worthy of more honour than the family of which he is the founder. It seems to me that the former is the meaning— for the latter is not always true. The founder of a family may be really deserving of much less respect than some of his descendants. But it is always true that the architect is wor thy of more respect than the house which he makes. He exhibits intel lect and skill. The house, however
4 For every house is builded
splendid, has neither. The plan of the house was drawn by him; its beauty, its proportions, its ornaments, are what he made them, and but for him they would, not have existed. Michael Angelo was worthy of more honour than "St. Peter's" at Rome; and Sir Christopher Wren worthy of more than " St. Paul's" at London. Galileo is worthy of more praise than the telescope, and Fulton more than a steam-engine. All the evidence of skill and adaptedness that there is in the invention v had its origin in the inventor; all the beauty of the statue or the temple had its origin in the mind of him that designed it. An author is worthy of more honour than a book; and he that forms a work of art is worthy of more respect than the work itself. This is the idea here. Paul assumes that all things owed their origin to the Son of God. Ch. i. 2 8. 10. He was the author of the universe; the source of all wise and well-founded systems; the originator of the Jewish dispensation over which Moses presided. Whatever beauty or excellence there might have been, therefore, in that system, was to be traced to him; and whatever ability even Moses displayed was imparted by him. 'Christ is really the head of the family over which Moses presid ed, and has claims, therefore, to high er honour as such.
4. For every house is builded by some man. The words in this verse are plain, and the sentiment in it clear. The only difficulty is in see ing the connexion, and in understand ing how it is intended to bear on what precedes, or on what follows. It is clear that every house must have a builder, and qually clear that God is the Creator of all things. But what is the meaning of this passage in this connexion? What is its bearing on the argument? If the verse was entirely omitted, and the fifth verse read in connexion with the third, there would be apparently nothing wanting to by some maft; but he that built all things is God.
complete the sense of the writer, or to finish the comparison which he had commenced. Various ways have been adopted to explain the difficulty. Per haps the folloAving observations may remove it, and express the true sense, (1.)Every family must have a founder? every dispensation an author; every house a builder. There must be some one, therefore, over all dispensations — the old and the new — the Jewish and the Christian. (2.) Paul assumes that the Lord Jesus was divine. He' had demonstrated this in chap. i.; and he argues as if this were so, without now stopping to prove it, or even to affirm it expressly. (3.) God must be over all things. He is Creator of all, and he must, therefore, be over all. As the Lord Jesus, therefore, is divine, he must be over the Jewish dispensation as well as the Christian — or he must, as God, have been at the head of that — or over his own family or household. (4.) As such, he must have a glory and honour which could not belong to Moses. He, in his di vine character, was the Author of both the Jewish and the Christian dispensations, and he must, therefore, have a rank, far superior to that of Moses— which was the point which the apostle designed to illustrate. The meaning of the whole may be thus expressed. 'The Lord Jesus is worthy of more honour than Moses. He is so, as the maker of a house de serves more honour than the house. He is divine. In the beginning he laid the foundation of the earth, and was the agent in the creation of all things. Ch. i. 2. 10. He presides,, therefore, over every thing; and was over the Jewish and the Christian dispensations — for there must have been some one over them, or the author of them, as really as if must be true that every house is built by some person. Being, therefore, over all things, and at the head of all dis pensations, he MUST be more exalt than Moses.' This seems to me t\>
5 And Moses a verily ivas faith ful in all his house, as a ser vant,13 for a testimony of c those things which were to be spoken after;
be the argument — an argument which is based on the supposition that he is at the head of all things, and that he ^vas the agent in the creation of all worlds. This view will make all con sistent. The Lord Jesus will be seen to have a claim to a far higher honour than Moses, and Moses will be seen to have derived his honour, as a servant of the Mediator, in the economy which he had appointed.
5. Moses ivas faithful — as a servant, Not as the head of the dispensation; not as having originated 'it; but as in the employ and under the direction of its great Founder and Author— the Messiah. As such a servant he deserves all the honour for fidelity which has ever been claimed for him, but it cannot be the honour which is due to him who is at the head of the family or IIDUSC. Paul assumed that Moses was a servant, and argued on that supposition, without attempting to prove it, because it was so often affirmed in the Old Testament, and must have been conceded by all the Jews. In numerous instances he is spoken of as ' THE servant of the Lord.' See Josh. L 1, 2; ix. 24; I. Chruii. vi. 49; II. Chron. xxiv. 9; Neh. x. 29; Dan. ix. 11; Ex. xiv. 31; I. Kings viii. 56; Ps. cv. 26. As this point was undisputed, it was only necessary to show that the Messiah was superior to a, servant, in order to make the argument clear, ^f For a testimony. To bear witness to those truths which were to be revealed; that is, he was the instrument of the divine communications to the people, or the' medium by which God made his will known. He did not originate the truths himself; but lie was the mere medium by which God made known his truth to his people— a ser-
6 But Christ as a
his own house; whose house e are we, if f we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.
vant whom He employed to make his will known. The word * after' here is not necessary in order to a just translation of this passage, and obscures the sense. It does not mean that he was a witness of those truths which were to be spoken subsequently to his time under another dispensa tion, nor those truths which the apos tle proposed to consider in another part of the epistle, as Doddridge sup poses; but it means merely that Moses stood forth as a public witness of the truths which God designed to reveal, or which were to be spoken. God did not speak to his people di rectly, and face to face, but he spoke through Moses as an organ, or me dium. The sense is, Moses was a mere servant of God to communicate his will to man.
6. But Christ as a Son over his own house. He is not a servant. To the whole household or family of God he sustains the same relation which a son and heir in a family does to the household. That relation is far differ ent from that of a servant. Moses was the latter; Christ was the for mer. To God he sustained the rela tion of a Son, and recognised Him as his Father, and sought in all things to do his will; but over the whole family of God — the entire Church of all dispensations — he was like a son over the affairs of a family. Com pared with the condition of a servant, Christ is as much superior to Moses as a son and heir is to the condition of a servant. A servant owns no thing; is heir to nothing; has no authority, and no right to control any thing, and is himself wholly at the will of another. A son is the heir of all; has a prospective right to all; and is looked up to by all with re« spect. But the idea here is not merely that Christ is a son; it is that as a son he is placed over the whole ar rangements of the household, and is one to whom all is intrusted as if it were his own. *f Whose house we are. Of whose family we are a part, or to which we belong. That is, we belong to the family over which Christ is placed, and not to that which was subject to Moses. % If tee hold fast. A leading object of this epistle is to guard those to whom it was addressed against the danger of apostacy. Hence this is introduced on all suitable occasions, and the apostle here says, that the only evi dence which they could have that they belonged to the family of Christ, would be that they held fast the con fidence which they had unto the end. If they did not do that, it would de monstrate that they never belonged to his family, for evidence of having belonged to his household was to be furnished only by perseverance to the end. ^[ The confidence. The word here used originally means the liberty of speahing boldly and without re straint; then it means boldness or confidence in general, ^f And the rejoicing. The word here used means properly glorying, boasting, and then rejoicing. These words are used here in an adverbial signification, and the meaning is, that the Christian has a confident and a rejoicing hope. It is (1.) confident— bold — firm. It is not like the timid hope of the Pagan, and the dreams and the conjectures of the philosopher; it is not that which gives way at every breath of opposi tion; it is bold, firm, and manly. It is (2.) rejoicing— triumphant, exult ing. Why should not the hope of heaven fill with joy? Why should not he exiilt who has the prospect of everlasting happiness? <5f Unto the end. To the end of life. Our reli gion, our hope, our confidence in God must be persevered in to the end of life, if we would have evidence that we are his children. If hope is cherished for a while and then aban doned; if men profess religion and then fall away, 110 matter what were their raptures and triumphs, it proves that they never had any real piety. No evidence can be strong enough to prove that a man is a Christian, unless it leads him to persevere to the end of life.
7. Wherefore. In view of the fact that the Author of the Christian dis pensation has a rank far superior to that of Moses. Because Christ has claims on us far greater than those which Moses had, let us hearken to his voice, and dread his displeasure. ^f As the Hoh/ Ghost saith. In Ps. xcv. 7—11. This is full proof that in the estimation of the author of this epistle the writer of this Psalm was inspired. The Holy Ghost speaks through the word which he has re vealed. The apostle quotes this pas sage and applies it to those whom he addressed, because the admonition was as pertinent and important under the Christian dispensation, as it was under the Jewish. The danger of hardening the heart by neglecting to hear his voice was as great, and the consequences would be as fearful and alarming. We should regard the solemn warnings in the Old Testa ment against sin, and against the danger of apostacy, as addressed, by the Holy Ghost to us. They are as applicable to us as they were to those to whom they were at first addressed; and we need all the influence of such appeals, to keep us from apostacy as much as they did. ^[ To-day. Now; at present. At the very time when the command is addressed to you. It is not to be put off till to-morrow. All God's commands relate to the present— to this day— to the passing moment. He gives us no commands about the future. He does not re quire us to repent and to turn to him to-morrow, or ten years hence. T}ie reasons are obvious. (1.) Duty per-
8 Harden not your hearts, as j of temptation in the provocation, in the day ness;
tains to the present. It is our duty to turn from sin, and to love him NOW. (2.) We know not that we shall live to another day. A command, there fore, could not extend to that time unless it were accompanied with a revelation that we should live till then —and such a revelation God does not choose to give. Every one there fore, should feel that whatever com mands God addresses to him are ad dressed to him now. Whatever guilt he incurs by neglecting those com mands is incurred now. For the pre sent neglect and disobedience each one is to answer — and each one must give account to God for what he does TO-DAY. ^ If ye wiU hear. In case you are willing to hearken to God, listen now, and do not defer it to a future period. There is much in a vriUingness to hear the voice of God. A willingness to learn is usually the precursor of great attainments in knowledge. A ivillingness to reform, is usually the precursor to reforma tion. Get a man willing to break off his habits of profaneness or intempe rance, and usually all the rest is easy. The great difficulty in the mind of a sinner is in his ivitt. lie is unwilling to hear the voice of God; unwilling that he should reign over him; un willing now to attend to religion. While this unwillingness lasts he will make no efforts, and he sees, or cre ates a thousand difficulties in the way of his becoming a Christian. But when that unwillingness is overcome, and he is disposed to engage in the work of religion, difficulties vanish, and the work of salvation becomes easy. ^ His voice. The voice of God speaking to us (1.) in his written word; (2.) in the preached gospel; (3.) in our own consciences; (4.) in the events of his Providence; (5.) in the admonitions of our relatives and friends. Whatever conveys to us the truth of God, or is adapted to impress that on us, may be regarded as his voice speaking to us. He thus speaks to us every day in some of these ways; and every day, therefore, he may entreat us not to harden our hearts.
8. Harden not your hearts. Do not render the heart insensible to the di vine voice and admonition. A hard heart is that where the conscience is! seared and insensible; where truth! makes no impression; where no reli gious effect is produced by afflictions; where preaching is listened to without interest; and where the mind is un affected by the appeals of friends. The idea here is, that a refusal to listen to the voice of God is connected with a hardening of the heart. It is in two ways. (1.) The very refusal to do this tends to harden it. And (2.) in order to resist the appeals of God, men must resort to the means of voluntarily hardening the heart. This they do by setting themselves against the truth; by the excuses which they offer for not becoming Christians; by plunging into sin in order to avoid serious impressions; and by direct resistance of the Holy Ghost. No inconsiderable part of the efforts of sinners consists in endea vouring to produce insensibility in their minds to the truth and the ap peals of God. ^f As in the provoca tion. Literally, in the embittering — ev TG> trapaTTiKpao-pff. Then it means that which embitters or provokes the mind — as disobedience. Here it re fers to what they did to embitter the mind of God against them; that is, to the course of conduct which was adopted to provoke him to wrath. ^[ In the day of temptation. In the time of temptation— the word day being used here, as it is often, to de note an indefinite period, or time in general. The word temptation here refers to the various provocations by which they tried the patience of God. They rebelled against him; they did I that which put the divine patience I and forbearance to a trial. It does i not mean that they treated God tc
9 When your fathers tempt ed me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.
10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said,
do evil, but that his long-suffering was tried by their sins. ^[ In the wilderness. The 'desert through which they passed. The word wilderness in the Scriptures commonly means a desert. See Notes, Matt. iii. 1. "One provocation was in demanding bread at Sin; a second for want of water at Massah or Meribah; a third time at Sinai with the golden calf; a fourth time at Taberah for want of flesh; a fifth time at Kadesh when they re fused to go up into Canaan, and the oath came that they should die in the wilderness. A like refusal may pre vent us from entering into rest." — Dr. J. P. Wilson, MS. Notes.
9. Proved me. " As if they would have made an experiment how much it was possible for me to bear." Doddridgc. The meaning is, they put my patience to a thorough trial. ^[ And sate mr/ works. That is my miracles, or my interpositions in.their behalf. They saw the wonders at the Red Sea, the descent on Mount Sinai, the supply of manna, &c., and yet while seeing those works they re belled. Even while sinners look on the doings of God, and are surrounded by the proofs of his power and good ness, they rebel, and provoke him to anger Men sin when God is filling their houses with plenty; when he opens his hand daily to supply their wants; when they behold the mani festations of his goodness on the sea and on the land; and even in the midst of all the blessings of redemption, they provoke him to wrath. ^[ Forty gears. The whole time during which they were passing from Egypt to the promised land. This may mean either that they saw his works forty years, or that they tempted him forty years. The sense is not materially affected whichever interpretation is preferred.
They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.
1 1 So I sware in my wrath,1
the word grieved, see Notes on Eph. iv. 30. The word here means that he was offended with, or that he was indignant at them. ^[ They do always err in their heart. Their long trial of forty years had been sufficient to show that it was a characteristic of the people that they were disposed to wander from God. Forty years are enough to show what the character is. They had seen his works; they had been called to obey him; they had received his law; and yet their conduct during that time had shown that they were not disposed to obey him. So of an individual. A man who has lived in sin forty years; who during all that time has rebelled against God, and disregarded all his appeals; who has lived for himself and not for his Maker, has shown what his character is. Longer time is unnecessary; and if God should, then cut him down and consign him to hell, he could not be blamed for doing it. A man who during forty years will live in sin, and resist all the appeals of God, shows what is in his heart, and no injustice is done if then he is summoned before God, and he swears that he shall not enter into his rest. ^[ And they have not known my ways. They have been rebel lious. They have not been acquainted with the true God; or they have not approved my doings. The word know is often used in the Scriptures in the sense of approving, or loving. See Notes, Matt. vii. 23.
11. So I sware in my wrath. God is often represented in the Scriptures as swearing — and usually as swearing by himself, or by his own existence. Of course this is figurative, and de notes a strong affirmation, or a settled and determined purpose. An oath with us implies the strongest affirma tion or the expression of the most settled and determined purpose of mind. The meaning here is, that so refractory and perverse had they showed themselves, that he solemnly resolved that they should never enter into the land of Canaan. ^ They shall not enter into my rest Marg. As in the original, if they shall enter. That is, they shall not enter. The word (£S) if lisas this negative mean ing in Hebrew, and this meaning is transferred to the Greek Avord if. Comp. I. Sam. iii. 17; II. Sam. iii. 35; II. Kings vi. 31. It is called ' my rest' here, meaning that it was such rest as God had provided, or such as he enjoyed. The particular rest re ferred to here was that of the land of Canaan, but which was undoubtedly regarded as emblematic of the ' res? in heaven. Into that rest God so lemnly said they should never enter. They had been rebellious. All the means of reclaiming them had failed. God had warned and entreated them; he had caused his mercies to pass before them, and had visited them with judgments in vain; and he now declares that for all their rebellion they should be excluded from the promised land. God speaks here in the manner of men. Men are affected with feelings of indignation in such circumstances, and God makes use of such language as expresses such feelings. But we are to understand it in a manner consistent with his character, and AVC are not to suppose that he is affected with the same emotions Avhich agitate the bosoms of men. The meaning is, that he formed and expressed a deliberate and solemn purpose that they should never enter into the promised land. Whether this rest refers here to heaven, and whether the meaning is that God would exclude them from that blessed world, will be more appropriately there be in any of you an evil11 heart of unbelief, in departing1 from the living God.
considered in the next chapter. The particular idea is, that they Avere to be excluded from the promised land, and that they should fall in the Avilderness. No one can doubt, also, that their conduct had been such as to shoAV that the great body of them were unfit to enter into heaven.
12. Take heed, brethren. In view of the conduct of the rebellious Jews, and of their fearful doom, be on your guard lest you also be found to have had the same feelings of rebellion and unbelief. See to it, that under the iieAV dispensation, and in the en joyment of the privileges of the gos pel, you be not found to manifest such feelings as shall exclude you from the heavenly world. The principle has been settled by their unbelief that they who oppose God Avill be excluded from his rest. That may be shown under all dispensations, and in all circumstances, and there is not less danger of it under the gospel than there Avas when the fathers Avere con ducted to the promised land. You are travelling through a wilderness — the barren Avilderness of this world. You are exposed to trials and temp tations. You meet Avith many a deadly and mighty foe. You have hearts prone to apostacy and sin. You are seeking a land of promise; a land of rest. You are surrounded by the Avonders of Almighty poAver, and by the proofs of infinite beneficence. Disobedience and rebellion in you Avill as certainly exclude you from heaven as their rebellion did them from the promised land; and as their great sin was unbelief, be on your guard lest you manifest the same. ^[ An evil heart of unbelief. An evil, unbelieving heart. The Avord unbe lief is used to qualify the Avord heart, by a Hebraism — a mode of speech that is common in the NeAV Testa ment. An unbelieving heart Avas the
13 But exhort a one another daily, while it is called To-day;
cause of their apostacy, and what worked their ruin will produce ours, The root of their evil was a want of confidence in God — and this is what Is meant here by a heart of unbelief. The great difficulty on earth every where is a want of confidence in God — and this has produced all the ills that man has ever suffered. It led to the first apostacy; and it has led to every other apostacy— and will con tinue to produce the same effects to the end of the world. The apostle says that this heart of unbelief is " evil." Men often feel that it is a matter of little consequence whether they have faith or not, provided their conduct is right; and hence they do not see or admit the propriety of Avhat is said about the consequences of un belief in the Scriptures. But what do they say about a want 6T con fidence between a husband and wife? Are there no evils in that? What husband can sleep with quietness on his pillow, if he has no confidence in the virtue of his wife? Y/hat child can have peace who has no confidence in a parent? How can there be pros perity in a community where there is no confidence in a bank, or an in surance office, or where one merchant hae no confidence in another; where a neighbour has no confidence in his neighbour; where the sick have no confidence in a physician, and where in general all confidence is broken up betAveen man and man? If I wished to produce the deepest distress in any community, and had the power, I would produce the same want of con fidence between man and man which there is now between man and his Maker. I would thus take away sleep from the pillow of every husband and wife; every parent and child; and make every man wretched with the feeling that all the property which he had was insecure. Among men, no thing is seen to be productive of.
lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of greater evil than a want of confidence or faith — and why should not the same evil exist in the divine administration? Arid if want of confidence produces such results between man and man. why should it not produce similar, or greater, miseries where it occurs in relation to God? There is not an evil that man endures which might not be alleviated or removed by confidence in God; and hence one great object of the Christian religion is, to restore to man his lost confidence in the God that made him. ^f In departing from the living God. Manifested in de parting from him; or leading to a departure from him. The idea is, that such a heart of unbelief would be connected with apostacy from God. All apostacy first exists in the heart, and then is manifested in the life. They who indulge in unbelief in any form, or in regard to any subject, should remember that this is the great source of all alienation from God, and that if indulged it will lead to complete apostacy. They who wish to live a life of piety should keep the heart right. He that lives "by the faith of the Son of God" is safe; and none is safe but he.
13. But exhort one another daily. This is addressed to the members of the churches; and it follows, there fore, (1.) that it is their duty to ex hort their brethren; and (2.) that it is their duty to do it daily; that is, con stantly. See ch. x. 24; I. Thess. iy. 18; v. 11; Note, Rom. xii. 8. While this is the special duty of the minis ters of the gospel (I. Tim. vi. 2; IL Tim. iv. 2; Titus ii. 6. 15), it is also the duty of all the members of the churches, and a most important, but much-neglected duty. This does not refer to public exhortation, which more appropriately pertains to the ninisters of the gospel, but to that •rivate watch and care which the inividual members of the church should have over one another. But in what oases is such exhortation proper? What rules should regulate it? I an swer, it may be regarded as a duty, or is to be performed in such cases as the following. (1.) Intimate friends in the church should exhort and coun sel one another; should admonish each other of their faults; and should aid one another in the divine life. (2.) Parents should do the same thing to their children. They are placed particularly under their watch and care. A pastor cannot often see the members of his flock in private; and a parent may greatly aid him in his work by watching over the members of their families who are connected with the church. (3.) Sabbath-school teachers may aid much in this duty. They are to be assistants to parents and to pastors. They often have un der their care youthful members of the churches. They have an oppor tunity of knowing their state of mind, their temptations, and their dangers, better than the pastor can have. It should be theirs, therefore, to exhort them to a holy life. (4.) The aged should exhort the young. Every aged Christian may thus do much for the promotion of religion. His experi ence is the property of the church; and he is bound so to employ it as to be useful in aiding the feeble, reclaim ing the wandering, recovering the backslider, and directing the inquir ing. There is a vast amount of spi ritual capital of this kind in the church that is unemployed, and that might be made eminently useful in helping Others to heaven. (5.) Church mem- "t^rs should exhort one another. There toay not be the intimacy of personal friendship among all the members of a large church, but still the connex ion between them should be regarded as sufficiently tender and confidential to make it proper for any one to ad monish a brother who goes astray. They belong to the same communion. They sit down at the same supper of the Lord. They express their assent to the same articles of faith. They are regarded by the community as uni- j ted. Each member sustains a portion of the honour and the responsibility of the whole; and each member should feel that he has a right, and that it is his duty to admonish a brother if he goes astray. Yet this duty is greatly neglected. In what churfch is it performed? How oft en do church members see a fellow-member go astray without any exhortation or admonition! How often do they hear reports of the inconsistent lives of other members, and perhaps contri bute to the circulation of those reports themselves, without any pains taken to inquire whether they are true T How often do the poor fear the rich members of the church, or the rich despise the poor, and see one another live in sin, without any attempt to entreat or save them! I would not have the courtesies of life violated. I would not have any assume a dog matical or dictatorial air. I would have no one step out of his proper sphere of life. But the principle which I would lay down is, tl.at the fact of church membership should inspire such confidence as to make it proper for one member to exhort another whom he sees going astray. Belong ing to the same family; having thesame interest in religion; and all suf fering when one suffers, why should they not be allowed tenderly and kind ly to exhort one another to a holy life? 1 While it is called To-day. While life lasts; or while you may be per mitted to use the language * To-day hear the voice of God.' The idea is, that the exhortation is not to be inter mitted. It is to be our daily business to admonish and exhort one another. Christians are liable every day to go astray; every day they need aid in the divine life; and they who are fel low heirs with them of salvationshould be ever ready to counsel and advise them. *|[ Lest any of you be hardened. Notes on ver. 8. It is pos sible for Christians to become in a sense hardened. Their minds becomeless sensitive than they were to the claims of duty, and their consciencesbecome less tender. Hence the pro-