Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews

Ver. 16.—This verse containeth an illustration and confirmation of the foregoing assertion, by a declaration of the way and manner how this other priest, who was not of the seed of Aaron, should come unto that office. And this was necessary also for the prevention of an objection, which the whole discourse was obnoxious to. For it might be said, that whatever was affirmed concerning another priest, yet there.

was no way possible, whereby any one might come so to be, unless he were of the family of Aaron. All others were expressly excluded by the law. Nor was there any way or means ordained of God, any especial sacrifice instituted, whereby such a priest might be dedicated, and initiated into his office. In prevention of this objection, and confirmation of what was before declared, the apostle adds,

Ver. 16.—Who was made not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.

The words declare, 1. That this priest was made so; and, 2. How he was made so, both negatively and positively.

1. He was made so: ὃς yeyove, “ which priest was made,’ ‘ or ‘ who was made a priest.” The force of this expression hath been explained on ch. i. 2, and ch. v. 5. The Lord Christ did not merely on his own authority and power take this office on himself. He became so, he was made so, by the appointment and designation of the Father. Nor did he do any thing in the whole work of his mediation, but in obedience unto his command, and in compliance with his will. For it is the authority of God alone, which is the foundation of all office, duty, and power, in the church. Even that Christ himself is and was unto the church, he is and was so by the grace and authority of God, even the Father. By him was he sent, his will did he perform, through his grace did he die, by his power was he exalted, and with him doth he intercede. What acts of God in particular do concur unto the constitution of this office of Christ, and to the making him a priest, have been declared before. oe

2. The manner of his being made a priest, is expressed - negatively, ov κατα Tov νομὸν evroAne caoKikyce, ‘not after;’ or ‘not according to the law of a carnal commandment.’ Syr. sp N27p1)7, £ the law of bodily commandments.’ It is unquestionable, that the apostle by this expression intendeth in the first place the law of the Levitical priesthood, or the way and manner whereby the Aaronical priests were first called and vested with their office, and then any other law, constitution, rule, or order of the same kind.” He was made a priest neither by that law, nor any other like unto it. And two things we mustiinguire into. 1, Why the call of the Aaronical priests is said to be after the law of commandment. 2. Why this commandment is said to be fleshly.

First. For the first we may observe that the whole law of worship among the Jews is called by our apostle, 6 νομὸς των evrodwy ev doypact, Eph. ii. 15, ‘The law of commandments in ordinances.’ And it is so called for two reasons.

1. Because commands were so multiplied therein, that the whole law was denominated from them. Hence it became ζυγος δυσβασ- τακτος, ‘a yoke hardly to be borne,’ if not altogether intolerable, Acts xv. 10. 2. Because of that severity wherewith obedience was exacted. A command in its formal notion expresseth authority, and the multiplication of them severity; and both these God designed to make eminent in that law, whence it hath this denomination, ‘a law of commandments.’ Hereof the law of the constitution of the office of the priesthood, and the call of Aaron thereunto, was a part, and he was therefore made a priest by the law of commandments; that is, by a preceptive law, as a part of that system of commands wherein the whole law consisted. See this law, and all the commands of it, Exod. xxvill. throughout.

Secondly. Why doth the apostle call this commandment capxikne, ‘carnal or fleshly.’ Answ. It may be on either of these three accounts. |

1. With relation unto the sacrifices, which were the principal part of the consecration of Aaron unto his office. And these may be called fleshly on twd accounts. 1. Because of their subject-matter, they were flesh, or the bodies of beasts; as the Syriac reads these words, ‘the commandment of bodies,’ that is, of beasts to be sacrificed. 2. In themselves, and their relation unto the Jewish state, they reached no further than the purifying of the flesh. They sanctified unto the purifying of the flesh, as the apostle speaks, ch. 1x. 13. And thus the whole commandment should be denominated from the principal subject-matter, or the offering of fleshly sacrifices unto the purifying of the flesh.: Ἴ

2. It may be called carnal, because a priesthood was instituted thereby, which was to be continued by carnal propagation only; the priesthood appointed by that law, was confined unto the carnal seed and posterity of Aaron, wherein this other priest had no interest.

3. Respect may be had unto the whole system of those laws and institutions of worship, which our apostle, as was also before observed, calls carnal ordinances, imposed unto the time of reformation, ch. ix. 10. They were all carnal, in opposition unto the dispensation of the Spirit under the gospel, and the institutions thereof.

None of these ways was the Lord Christ made a priest. He was not dedicated unto his office by the sacrifice of beasts, but sanctified himself thereunto, when he offered himself through the eternal Spirit unto God, and was consummated in his own blood. He was not of the carnal seed of Aaron, nor did, nor could claim any succession unto the priesthood, by virtue of an extraction from his race, And no constitution of the law in general, no ordinance of it, did convey unto him either right or title unto the priesthood. It is therefore evident, that he was in no sense made a priest according to the law of a carnal commandment; neither had he either right, power, or authority, to exercise the sacerdotal function, in the observance of any carnal rites or ordinances whatever. And we may observe,

Obs. V. That what seemed to be wanting unto Christ, in his entrance into any of his offices, or in the discharge of them, was on the account of a greater glory.—Aaron was made a priest with a great outward solemnity. The sacrifices which were offered, and the garments he put on, with his visible separation from the rest of the people, had a great ceremonial glory in them. There was nothing of all this, nor any thing like unto it, in the consecration of the Lord Christ unto his office. But yet indeed these things had no glory, in comparison of that excelling glory, which accompanied those invisible acts of divine authority, wisdom, and grace, which communicated his office unto him. And indeed in the worship of God, who is a Spirit, all outward ceremony is a diminution and debasement of it. Hence were ceremonies for beauty and glory multiplied under the Old Testament, but yet, as the apostle shows, were all but carnal. But as the sending of Christ himself, and his investiture with all his- offices, were by secret and invisible acts of God and his Spirit, so all evangelical worship, as to the glory of it, is spiritual and internal only. And the removal of the old pompous ceremonies from our worship, is but the taking away of the veil, which hindered from an insight and entrance into the holy place.

2. The way and manner whereby the Lord Christ was made a priest, is expressed positively: ἀλλα κατα δυναμιν ζωης ακαταλυτου. ‘but according to the power of an indissoluble life.” Αλλα denotes an opposition between the way rejected and this asserted, as those which were not consistent. He was not made a priest that way, but this. How is Christ then made a priest according to the power of an endless life? that is, saith one in his Paraphrase, ‘installed into the priesthood after his resurrection.” What is meant by ‘installed,’ I do not well know. It should seem to be the same with τελειωθεὶς, ‘consecrated, dedicated, initiated.’ And if so, this exposition diverts wholly from the truth. For Christ was installed into his office of priesthood, before his resurrection, or he did not offer himself as a sacrifice unto God, in his death and blood-shedding. And to suppose, that the Lord Christ discharged and performed the principal act of his sacerdotal office, which was but once to be performed, before he was installed a priest, is contradictory to Scripture and reason itself. Ideo ad vitam immortalem perductus est, ut in eternum sacerdos noster esset. ‘He was therefore brought unto an immortal life, that he might be our priest for ever, saith another. But this is not to be made a priest according to the power of.an endless life. If he means, that he might always continue to be a priest, and to execute that office always unto the consummation of all things, what he says is true, but not the sense of this place; but if he means, that he became immortal after his resurrection, that he might be our priest, and abide so for ever, it excludes his oblation in his death from being a proper sacerdotal act, which that it was, I have sufficiently proved elsewhere, against Crellius and others..

Some think that the endless life intended is that of believers, which the Lord Christ by virtue of his priestly office confers upon them. The priests under the law proceeded no further but to discharge carnal rites, which could not confer eternal life on them for whom they ministered. But the Lord Christ in the discharge of his office, procureth eternal redemption and everlasting life for believers. And these things are true, but they comprise not the meaning of the apostle in this place. For how can Christ be made a priest according to the power of that eternal life, which he confers on others? For the comparison and opposition that is made between the law of a carnal commandment, whereby Aaron was constituted a priest, and the power of an endless life, whereby Christ was made so, do evidence, that the making of Christ a priest, not absolutely, which the apostle treats not of, but such a priest as he is, was the effect of this endless life.

Wherefore the Zwn axaraAvroc, the indissoluble life here intended, is the life of Christ himself. Hereunto belonged, or from hence did proceed that Suvvayuc, or power, whereby he was made a priest. And both the office itself, and the execution or discharge of it, are here intended. And as to the office itself, this eternal or endless life of Christ is his life as the Son of God. Hereon depends his own mediatory life for ever, and his conferring of eternal life on us, John v. 26, 27. And to be a priest by virtue of, or according unto this power, stands in direct opposition unto the law of a carnal commandment.

It must therefore be inquired, how the Lord Christ was made a priest according unto this-power. And I say it was, because thereby alone he was rendered meet to discharge that office, wherein God was to redeem his church with his own blood, Acts xx. 28. By ‘ power,’ therefore, here, both meetness and ability are intended. And beth these the Lord Christ had from his divine nature, and his endless life therein.

Or it may be the life of Christ in his human nature is intended, in opposition unto those priests, who being made so by the law ofa carnal commandment, did not continue in the discharge of their office by reason of death, as our apostle observes afterwards. But it will be said, that this natural life of Christ, the life of the human nature, was not endless, but had an end put unto it in the dissolution of his soul and body on the cross.

I say therefore, this life of Christ was not absolutely the life of the human nature, considered separately from his divine; but it was the life of the person of the Son of God, of Christ as God and man in one person. And so his life was endless. For, first, in the death which he underwent in his human nature, there was no interruption given unto his discharge of his sacerdotal office, no, not fora moment. For, secondly, His person still lived, and both soul and body were therein inseparably united unto the Son of God. Although he was truly and really dead in his human nature, he was still alive m his indissoluble person. And this the apostle hath a respect unto, in the testimony which he cites in the next verse, to prove that he is a priest for ever. The carnal commandment gave authority and efficacy unto the Levitical priests. But Christ is made a priest according to the power of an endless life; that is, through the power and efficacy of that eternal life, which is in his divine person, both his human nature is preserved: always in the discharge of his office, and he is enabled thereby to work out eternal life on the behalf of them for whom he is a priest. And so the apostle proves the difference of this other priest, from those of the order of Aaron, not only from the tribe wherein he was to be, and from his type Melchisedec, but also from the way and means, whereby the one and the other were enabled to discharge their office.

Ver. 17.—Tue proof of all before asserted, is given in the testimony of the Psalmist so often before appealed to: ‘ For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.’

The introduction of this testimony is by paprupe yao, or ‘ he witnesseth or testifieth? that is, David doth in the Psalm, or rather the Holy Ghost speaking in and by David, doth so testify. He doth not absolutely say that so he ‘speaks,’ but ‘ testifies τ᾿ because he used his words in a way of testimony unto what he had delivered. And although one thing be now principally intended by him, yet there is in these words a testimony given unto all the especial heads of his discourse. As, 1. That there was to be another priest, a priest that was not of the stock of Aaron, nor tribe of Levis For he says unto the Messiah prophesied of, who was to be of the seed of David, ov ἱερευς, ‘Thou art ἃ priest,’ although a stranger from the Aaronical line. 2. That this other priest was to be after the order of Melchisedec, and was not to be called after the order of Aaron. For he was ‘mat >5y—xara ταξιν, ‘after the order:᾿ sis a redundant, and not ἃ suffix. maz is from 927, and signifies ‘a state or order of things: ‘a mat dy sada ὋΝ sony, vant Eccles. 11. 18, ‘I said in my heart concerning the estate of the sons of men,’ their condition and order of all things; that is, ra€ve. The priesthood of Christ in the mind of God, was the eternal idea or original exemplar of the priesthood of Melchisedec. God brought him forth, and vested him with his office, in such a way and manner, as that he might outwardly represent in sundry things, the idea of the priesthood of Christ in his own mind. Hence he and his priesthood, became an eternal exemplar of the priesthood of Christ, as unto its actual exhibition; and therefore is he said to be made a priest after his order, that is, suitably unto the representation made thereof in him. 3. That he was made a priest, namely, by him and his authority, who said unto him, ‘Thou arta priest; as ch. v. 5, 6, 10. 4. That he was so after the power of an endless life; for he was a priest for ever. This word is applied to the law and legal priesthood, ~and signifies a duration commensurate unto the state and condition of the things whereunto it is applied. There was an b> y of the law, an age whereunto its continuance was confined. So long all the promises annexed to it stood in force. And as ascribed unto the new state of things under the gospel, it doth not signify eternity absolutely, but a certain unchangeable duration, unto the end of the time and works of the gospel. For then shall the exercise of the priesthood of Christ cease, with his whole mediatory work and office, 1 Cor. xv. 28. Christ therefore is said to be a priest for ever. 1. In respect of his person, endued with an endless life. 2. Of the execution of his office unto the final end of it—he lives for ever to make intercession. 3. Of the effect of his offices, which is to save believers unto the utmost, or with an everlasting salvation.)

And the apostle had sufficient reason to affirm that what he proposed was eminently manifest, namely, from the testimony which he produceth thereof. From what can ke more evident, than that the Aaronical priesthood was to be abolished, if so be that God had designed and promised to raise up another priest in the church, who was neither of the stock nor order of Aaron, nor called the same way to his office as he was, and who, when he was so raised and called, was to continue a priest for ever, leaving no room for the continuance of that priesthood in the church, nor place for its return when it was once laid aside? And we may observe that, |

Obs. VI. The eternal continuance of Christ’s person gives eternal continuance and efficacy unto his office.—Because he lives for ever, he is a priest for ever. His endless life is the foundation of his endless priesthood. Whilst he lives, we want not a priest; and therefore he says, that because he lives, we shall live also.

Obs. VII. To make new priests in the church, is virtually to renounce the faith of his livmg for ever as our priest, or to suppose that he is not sufficient to the discharge of his office.

Obs. VIII. The alteration that God made in the church by the introduction of the priesthood of Christ, was progressive towards its perfection.—To return therefore unto, or look after legal ceremonies in the worship of God, is to go back unto poor beggarly elements and rudiments of the world.

Ver. 18, 19.—In the twelfth verse of this chapter, the apostle affirms, that the priesthood being changed, there was of necessity a change made of the law also. Having proved the former, he now proceeds to confirm his inference from it, by declaring that the priest and priesthood that were promised to be introduced, were in all things inconsistent with the law. In that place, he mentions only a μεταθεσις, or change of the law. But he intended not an alteration to be made in it, so as that being changed and mended, it might be restored unto its former use. But it was such a change of it, as was an αθετησις, an abrogation of it, as in these verses he doth declare.

Now this was a matter of the highest concern unto the Hebrews, and of great importance in itself. For it included, and carried along with it, an alteration of the whole state of the church, and of all the solemn worship of God therein. This therefore was not to be done but on cogent reasons, and grounds indispensable. And no doubt but the apostle foresaw what a surprisal it would be unto the generality of the Hebrews, to hear that they must quit all their concern and special interest in the law of Moses. For he had three sorts of persons to deal withal in this great cause.

1. Such as adhered unto, and maintained the Mosaic institutions, in opposition unto Christ and the whole way of our coming unto God.

by him. These esteemed it the greatest blasphemy imaginable for any to affirm, that the law was to be changed or abrogated. And this was the occasion of the death of the first martyr of Jesus Christ, under the accusation of blasphemy, which by the law was to be punished with death. For this they made their charge against Stephen, that he spake ‘blasphemous words against Moses, (whom they put in the first place,) and against God,’ Acts vi. 11. And the proof of this blasphemy they lay on those words, that Jesus should change the customs which Moses had delivered to them. Accordingly, on this © very account, they stirred up persecution with rage and madness against the holy apostles, all the world over. The mouths of these cursed un-. believers were to be stopped, and therefore cogent and unanswerable reasons, were in this case to be urged by the apostle; and they are so accordingly. And they were to know, that notwithstanding all their rage and bluster, those that believed were not ashamed of the gospel; and they must be told that the law was to be abrogated, whether they would hear or forbear, however they were provoked or enraged thereby.

2. There were others of them who, although they received the gospel, and believed in Christ, yet were persuaded that the law was still in force, and the worship prescribed in it still to be observed. And of these there were very great multitudes, as the apostle declares, Acts xxi. 20, This error was, in the patience of God, for a while tolerated among them, because the time of their full conviction was not yet come. But those who were possessed with it, began after a while to be very troublesome unto the church, and would not be content to observe the law themselves, but would impose the observance of it on all the Gentile converts, on the pain of eternal damnation, - Acts xv. 1. They said and contended, that unless they were circumcised after the manner of Moses, they could not be saved. These also were to be restrained and convinced; and those of them who were. obstinate in this persuasion, not long after apostatised from the whole of Christianity. And,

3. There were sincere believers, whose faith was to be strengthened and confirmed. With respect unto them all, the apostle laboureth with great diligence in this argument, and evidently proves, both that it was the will and purpose of God, that the administration of the law should have an end, and also that the time was now come, wherein it was to cease and be abrogated. This therefore he proceeds withal in these verses.

Αθετησις, Vul. Lat. Reprobatio. Rhem. ‘ Reprobation,’ most improperly. Syr. ΝΘ ΤῊ, mutatio, ‘a change,’ which reacheth not the force of the word. Ar. Abrogatio. Bez. Fit irritum; that is, mandatum. Αθετεω is rendered, loco moveo, abrogo, abdico, irritum facio; ‘to take out of the way,’ ‘to abrogate,’ ‘ to disannul,’ ‘ to make void;’ and for the most part it hath respect unto a rule, law, or command, that was or is in force. Sometimes it is used of a person, who ought in duty to be regarded and honoured, but is despised, Luke x. 16; John xii. 48, where it is rendered ‘to despise.’ So 1 Thess. iv. 8; Jude 8. Sometimes it respects ‘ things,’ Gal. ii. 21; 1 Tim. v. 12, but commonly it respects ‘a law,’ and is applied to them who are absolutely under the power of the law, or such in whose power the law is. The first sort are said to make void the law, when they transgress it neglecting the authority whereby it is given, Mark vii. 9; Heb. x. 28. But when this word 15 applied unto him who hath power over the law, it signifies the abrogation of it, so far as that it shall have no power to to oblige unto its observance. Αθετησις is used nowhere in the New Testament but here, and ch. ix. 26. Here it is applied unto the law, being the taking away of its power to oblige unto obe-

IIpoayovone evroAne, preecedentis mandati. The Syriac thus renders the verse, ‘The change which was made in the first commandment, was made fer its weakness, and because there was no profit in it.’

Ava τὸ αὐτῆς acSevec, propter ipsius imbecillitatem; infirmitatem; propter illud quod in eo erat infirmum aut imbecille.

The Arab. changeth the sense of the place, reading to this purpose: ‘For there is a transgression where the commandment went before, because that was weak and of little advantage.’

Our own translation fully expresseth the original in all the parts of it, only it determines the sense of ver. 19, by the insertion of that word did.

Ver. 18, 19.— For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before, for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect; but the bringing in of a better hope by which we draw nigh unto God.

1. The subject spoken of is the command; 2. Described by the time of its giving—‘ it went before;’ 3. Hereof it is affirmed, that it is disannulled; and, 4. The reason thereof is adjoined from a twofold property or adjunct of it in particular. For, First. It was weak. Secondly. It was unprofitable. 5. As unto its deficiency from its general end—‘ it made nothing perfect;’ 6. Illustrated by that which took its work upon itself, and effected it thoroughly—‘ the hope brought in, by which we draw nigh unto God.’

1. The evroAn, or command, is of as large a signification, ver. 18, as νομος, ‘the law,’in ver 19. For the same thing is intended in both the words. It is not therefore the peculiar command for the institution of the legal priesthood, that is intended, but the whole system of Mosaic institutions. For the apostle having already proved, that the priesthood was to be abolished, he proceeds on that ground, and from thence, to prove, that the whole law was also to be in like manner abolished and removed. And indeed it was of such a nature and constitution that pull one pin out of the fabric, and the whole must fall to the ground. For the sanction of it being, that he was cursed who continued not in all things written in the law to do them, the change of any one thing must needs overthrow the whole law. How much more must it do so, if that be changed, removed, or taken away, which was not only a material part of it, but the very hinge, whereon the whole observance of it did depend and turn. And the whole of this system of laws is called evroAn, ‘a command,’ because it consisted, ev δογμασι, in ‘arbitrary commands and precepts,’ regulated by that maxim, ‘The man that doth these things shall live by them,’ Rom. x. >. And therefore the law, as a command, is opposed unto the gospel as a promise of righteousness by Jesus Christ, Gal. ii. 11, 12, Nor is it the whole ceremonial law only, that isintended by the command in this place; but the moral law also, so far as it was compacted with the other into one body of precepts for the same end. For with respect unto the efficacy of the whole law of Moses, as unto our drawing nigh to God, it is here considered.

2. This commandment is described by the time of its giving; it is προαγουσα, ‘it went before,’ that is, before the gospel as now preached and dispensed. It did not do so absolutely. For our apostle shows and proves, that as to the promise, whereby the grace of the new covenant was exhibited, and which contained the substance and essence of the gospel, it was given four hundred and thirty years before the giving of the law, Gal. i. 17. Wherefore, the precedency of the law here expressed, may respect the testimony produced out of David, whereby the apostle proves the cessation of the priesthood, and consequently of the law itself. For the command was given before that testimony, and so went before it, But it rather respects the actual introduction of a new priest in the accomplishment of this promise. For hereon the whole change and alteration in the law and worship pleaded for by our apostle, did ensue. The commandment going before, is the law whereby the worship of God and obedience unto him, was regulated béfore the coming of Christ, and the introduction of the gospel.

3. Of this command or law, it is affirmed that there is an aSernae, and that with some earnestness. Αϑέετησις μεν yao γινεται, for ‘ truly, verily, certainly.’ This, whatever it be, it came not to pass of its own accord, but it was made by him who had power and authority so to do, which must be the lawgiver. ASernove may respect alaw, as wag before intimated, either on the account of the lawgiver, him that hath power over it, or of those unto whom it is given as a law, and who are under the power of it. In the latter sense, aSerew is to ‘ transgress a law,’ to make it void what lies in us, by contemning the authority of him by whom it is given; that use of the word was before observed in Mark vii. 9; Heb. x. 28. In the first sense it is directly opposed unto νομοϑεσια; that is, ‘ the giving, presenting, and promulgating of a law,’ by a just and due authority, whence it hath a power and force to oblige unto obedience. Aernove is the dissolution hereof. The word, as was said even now, is once more used in the New Testament, and that by our apostle in this Epistle, ch. ix. 26. Christ hath appeared εἰς αϑετησιν ἅμαρτιας, ‘to put away sin,’ say we, by the sacrifice of: himself. That is, to the abrogation or abolishing of that power, αὶ hich) sin hath by its guilt to bind over sinners unto punishment. So the avernotc of the law, is its abrogation, in taking away all its power of obliging unto obedience or punishment. The apostle elsewhere ex-:

» Presseth the same act by καταργεω, Eph. 11. 15; 2 Tim. 1. 10. It is therefore plainly declared that the law is abrogated, abolished, disan-: nulled; but we must yet farther inquire, 1. How this could be done; 2. By what means it was done; and, 3. which himself adds expressly, For what reason it was done.

First. We must inquire how this could be done. Thisinquiry seems not to be without its difficulties. For it was a law originally given unto the church by God himself, and continued therein with his approbation for many generations. And there are multiplied instances m the sacred records, of his blessing them who were faithful and obedient in its observance. Yea, the whole prosperity of the church did always depend thereon; as_ its neglect was always accompanied with severe tokens of God’s displeasure. Besides, our Saviour affirmeth of himself, that he came not καταλυσαι τον νομον, Matt. v. 17, to dissolve or destroy the law, which upon the matter is the same with aSernoa. Forif a law be disannulled or abrogated, it is totally dissolved as to its obligatory power. And our apostle removes the suspicion of any such thing from the doctrine of the gospel, Rom. i. 31, ‘ Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.’

Answ. ‘There are two ways whereby any law may be disannulled or abrogated. First. By taking away all authority and use from it as unto its proper end, whilst it is in its pretended force. For suppose it to be made for ever or for a time only, its abrogation is its deprivation of all authority and use as a law. And this cannot regularly be done but on one of these accounts. 1. That the authority giving the law, was not valid from the beginning, but men have been obliged unto it © ona false presumption thereof. 2. That the matter of it was never good or useful, or meet to be made the matter of law. On neither of these accounts could this law be abolished, nor ever was so by the Lord Christ or the gospel, nor is so to this day. For God himself was the immediate author of it, whose authority is sovereign and over all; and thence also it follows, thatthe matter of it was good. For the commandment, as our apostle speaks, was holy, just, and good, Rom. vii. 12. And however there be a differenee between that which is morally good in itself and its own nature, and that which is so only by divine institution; yet the revealed will of God is the adequate rule of good and evil unto us, as unto our obedience. On these accounts, therefore it never was, nor ever could be abolished.

Secondly. A law may be abrogated, when on any consideration whatever, its obligation unto practice doth cease or is taken away. Thus was it with this law; for, as every other law, it may be considered two ways.

1. With respect unto its main end, and directive power to guide men therein. This, in all human laws, is the public good of the community of society unto which it is given. When this ceaseth, and the law becomes not directive or useful unto the public good any more, all rational obligations unto its observance do cease also. But yet this’

law differeth also from all others. All that any other law aimeth at, is obedience unto itself, and the public good, which that obedience will produce. So the moral Jaw in the first covenant, had no other end but obedience unto it, and the rewardableness thereon, of them that did obey it. So wasit an entire instrument of our living to God and of eternal rewards thereon. But as in its renovation it was made a part of the law here intended, it came with it to be of another nature or to have another use and end. For the whole scope and design of this law, was to direct men not to look after that good which was its end, in obedience unto itself, but in something else, that it directed unto by that obedience. The end it directed unto, was righteousness before God; but this could never be attained by an obedience unto it, hor was it ever intended that soit should do. This the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, Rom, vii. 3. And therefore, those who pursued and followed after it with the most earnestness for this end, never attained thereunto. Rom. ix. 31, 32. This end, therefore, is principally to be considered in this law, which, when it is attained, the law is established, although its obligation unto obedience unto itself, do necessarily cease. Now this end of the law was Christ and his righteousness, as the apostle expressly declares; ‘ For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness, to every one that believeth,’ Rom, x.4. And therefore, this whole law was our schoolmaster to Christ, Gal. iii. 24,25. This is called by our Saviour, πληρωσαι τον νομον, ‘to fulfil the law,’ and is opposed to the destroying of it, Matt. v. 17, “1 came not καταλυσαι, to destroy, or dissolve the law, but to fulfil it.’ That is, not to abrogate it or take it away, as that which either wanted a just authority, or was not good or useful, the common reasons of the abrogation of any law in force: but I came to bring in, and accomplish the whole end which it aimed at, and directed unto; whereon it would cease to oblige unto a farther practice. And this the apostle calls israva:, ‘to establish the law;’ ‘Do we then make void the law through faith? yea, we establish the law,’ Rom. 1. 31. That is, we declare how it hath its end and full accomplishment, which is the greatest establishment that any law is capable of. And if the fulfilling of the law, both as unto what it requires in a way of obedience, and what also in its curse for sin, be not imputed unto us, we do not by faith establish the law, but make it void.

2. The law may be considered with respect unto the particular duties that it required and prescribed. And because the whole law had its end, these were appointed only until that end might be, or was attained. So saith our apostle, ‘They were imposed until the time of reformation,’ ch. ix. 10. Wherefore, two things did accompany this law in its first institution. 1. That an obedience unto its commands, would not produce the good which it directed unto, as formally respecting the law itself. 2. That the duties it required had a limited time for their performance and acceptance, allotted to them. Wherefore without the least disparagement unto it, as unto the authority whereby it was given or as unto its own holiness and goodness, it might be disannulled as unto its actual obligation unto practice, and the observance of its commands. For the end of it being fully accomplished, it is no ΩΝ esta- blished, than if the observance of it had been continued unto the end of the world. It was therefore established by Christ and the gospel, as unto its end, use, and scope; it was disannulled as to its obligatory power, and to the observance of its commands. For these two are inconsistent, namely, that a law, as unto all its ends, should be fulfilled, and yet stand in force in its obligatory power unto obedience.

Secondly. We must inquire how this was done, or how this law was abrogated, as to its obligatory power and efficacy. And this was done two ways.

First. Really and virtually. This was done by Christ himself in his own person. For the fulfilling and accomplishing of it, was that which really and virtually took away all its obligatory power. For what should it oblige men unto? An answer is ready unto all its demands, namely, that they are fulfilled; and as unto what was significative in its duties, it is all really exhibited; so that on no account it can any more oblige or command the consciences of men, ‘This the apostle sets out, in a comparison with the relation that is between a man and his wife, with the obligation unto mutual duties that ensues thereon, Rom. vii. 1—6. Whilst the husband is alive, the wife is obliged unto all conjugal duties towards bim and unto him alone. But upon his death, that obligation ceaseth of itself, and she is at liberty to marry unto another. So were we obliged unto the law, whilst it was alive, whilst it stood in its force and vigour: but when through the death of Christ, the law was accomplished, it died as to the relation which was between it and us, whereon all its obligation unto observance was disannulled. This was that, whereby the law was really and virtually abrogated. Its preceptive part being fulfilled and its significative being exhibited, it was of no more force and efficacy asa law. The reason why it was thus to have an end put to it, is declared in the close of the verse. |

Secondly. It was so abrogated declaratively; or the will of God concerning its abrogation, was made known four ways.

1. In general by the promulgation and preaching of the gospel, where the accomplishment and cessation of it, was declared. For the declaration made, that the Messiah was come, that he had finished his work in the world, and thereby made an end of sin, bringing in everlasting righteousness, whereby the law was fulfilled, did sufficiently manifest its abrogation. The apostles, I confess, in their first preaching to the Jews, spake not of it expressly, but left it to discover itself as an undeniable consequent of what they taught, concerning thes Lord Christ and the righteousness of God in him. This, for some while, many of them that believed, understood not, and therefore were zealous of the law, which God in his patience and forbearance did graciously tolerate, so as not to impute it unto them. It was indeed great darkness, and manifold prejudices, that hindered the believing Jews from seeing the necessary consequence unto the abolition of the law, from the promulgation of the gospel: yet this was God pleased to bear with them in, that we might not be too fierce, nor reflect with too much severity on such as are not able in all things to receive the whole trut as we desire they should..;

2. It was so by the institution and introduction of new ordinances of worship. This was wholly inconsistent with the law, wherein it was expressly enacted, that nothing should be added unto the worship of God therein prescribed. And if any such addition was made by the authority of God himself, as was inconsistent with any thine before appointed, it is evident that the whole law wasdisannulled. But anew order, a new entire system of ordinances of worship, was declared in the gospel. Yea, and those, some of them especially, as that of the Lord’s supper, utterly inconsistent with any ordinances of the law, seeing it declares that to be done and past, which they direct us unto as future and to come.

3. There was a determination made in the case, by the Holy Ghost, upon an occasion administered thereunto. Those of the apostles, who preached the gospel unto the Gentiles, had made no mention unto them of the law of Moses, as knowing thatit was nailed unto the cross of Christ, and taken out of the way. So were they brought unto the faith and obedience of the gospel without any respect unto the law, as that wherein they were not concerned, now it had received its accomplishment. But some of the Jews who believed, being yet persuaded that the law was to be continued in force, and its observance imposed on all who were proselyted by the gospel, occasion was given unto that solemn determination, which was made by the apostles, through the guidance of the Holy Ghost, Acts xv. And the substance of that determination was this; that the gospel, as preached unto the Gentiles, was not a way or means of proselyting them unto Judaism, but the bringing them unto a new church-state, by an interest in the promise and covenant of Abraham, given and made four hundred and thirty years before the giving of the law. Whilst the law stood in its force, whoever was proselyted unto the truth, he was so unto the law, and every Gentile that was converted unto the true God, was bound to be circumcised, and became obliged unto the whole law. But that being now disannulled, it is solemnly declared, that the Gentiles converted by the gospel, were under no obligation unto the law of Moses, but being received into the covenant of Abraham, were to be gathered into a new church-state, erected in and by the Lord Christ in the gospel,

4. As unto those of the Hebrews, who yet would not understand these express declarations of the ceasing of the obligatory power of the law, to put anend unto all disputes about his will in this matter, God gave a dreadful αθετησις or ‘abolition’ unto it, in the total, final, irrevocable destruction of the city and temple, with all the instruments and vessels of its worship, especially of the priesthood, and all that belonged thereunto. Thus was the law disannulled, and thus was it declared so to be.

Obs. I. It is a matter of the highest nature and importance, to set up, take away, or remove any thing from, or change any thing in, the worship of God. Unless the authority of God interpose, and be manifested so to do, there is nothing for conscience to rest in, in these things.

Obs. II. The revelation of the will of God, in things relating unto his worship, is very difficultly received, where the minds of men are prepossessed with prejudices and traditions. Notwithstanding all those ways whereby God had revealed his mind concerning the abolttion of the Mosaic institutions, yet these Hebrews could neither understand it nor receive it, until the whole seat of its worship was destroyed and consumed.

Obs. III. The only securing principle in all things of this nature,"is to preserve our souls in an entire subjection unto the authority of Christ, and unto his alone.

I have proved before, that the commandment in this verse is of equal extent and signification with the law in the next. And the law there doth evidently intend the whole law, in both the parts of it, moral and ceremonial, as it was given by Moses unto the church of Israel. And this whole law is here charged by our apostle with weakness and unprofitableness, both which make a law fit to be disannulled. But it must be acknowledged that there is a difficulty of no small importance in the assignation of these imperfections unto the law; for this law was given by God himself. And how can it be supposed that the good and holy God should prescribe such a law unto his people, as was always weak and unprofitable. From this and the like considerations, the blasphemous Manichees denied that the good God was the author of the Old Testament, and the Jews continue still upon it to reject the gospel, as not allowing the least imperfection in the law, but equalling it almost with God himself. We must, therefore, consider in what sense the apostle ascribes these properties to the law.

1. Some seek for a solution of this difficulty, from Ezek. xx. 1], compared with ver. 25. Ver. 11. God saith, that ‘I gave them my statutes, and showed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them.’ But ver. 25, ‘I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live.’ The first sort of laws, they say, were the decalogue, with those other judgments that accompanied it, which were given unto the people as God’s covenant, before they broke it by making the golden calf. These were good in themselves, and good unto the people, so as if they did them, they should live therein. But after the people had broken the covenant in making of a golden calf, God gave them that whole system of ordinances, institutions, and laws which ensued. These they say, in that ~ place of Ezekiel, God calls ordinances that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live, as being imposed on the people in the way of punishment. And with respect unto these they say it is, that the apostle affirms the commandment was weak and unprofitable.

But as the application of this exposition unto this passage in the apostle’s discourse, is not consistent with the design of it, as will afterwards appear, so indeed the exposition itself is not defensible. For it is plain, that by the laws and statutes mentioned, ver. 11, not any part of them, but the whole system of ordinances and commandments which God gave by Moses, is intended. And the two words in the text, Dprm and pwpwn, do express the whole law, ceremonial and judicial, And it was not from this or that part, but from the whole law that the people, as far as they were carnal, looked for righteousness and salvation, Rom. x. 5; Gal. ii. 12. And as these laws and statutes, mentioned ver. 11, contained the whole law given by Moses, so those intended, ver. 25, whereof it is said, that they were not good, nor could they live in the keeping of them, cannot be the laws and statutes of God considered in theniselves. For it is inconsistent with the holiness, goodness, and wisdom of God, to give laws, which in themselves and their own nature, should not be good, but evil. Nor, on supposition that he has given them statutes that were not good, and judgments wherein they should not live, could he plead, as he doth, that his ways were equal, and that their ways were unequal. For in these laws, he evidently promised that those who did them should live therein. Where is the equality, equity, and righteousness, if 1t were otherwise 7 Wherefore, if the statutes of God be intended in the place, it must be with respect unto the people, their unbelief and obstinacy, that it is said of them that they were not good; being made useless unto them by reason of sin. In that sense the apostle says, that ‘the commandment which was ordained unto life, he found to be unto death,’ Rom. vil. 10. But I rather judge, that having charged the people with neglect and contempt of the Jaws and judgments of God, which were good, God’s giving them up judicially unto ways of idolatry and false worship, which they made as laws and judgments unto themselves, and willingly walked after the commandment, as Hos. v. 11 is here so expressed. But there is no ground for such a distinction between the laws and judgments of God in themselves, that some of them should be good, and some of them should be not good; that in some of them men might live, but not in others.

Secondly. I answer that the whole law may be considered two ways. First. Absolutely in itself. Secondly. With respect, 1. Unto the end for which it was given. 2. Unto the persons to whom it was given.

First. Considering the law in itself, no reflection cam be made upon it, because it was an effect of the wisdom, holiness, and truth of God. But in the respects mentioned, it manifests its own weakness and unprofitableness. For they were sinners to whom it was given, and both defiled and guilty, antecedently unto the giving of the law, being so by nature, and thereon children of wrath. Two things they stood in need of in this condition.

1. Sanctification by an inherent purity and holiness, with a complete righteousness from thence. This, the moral law was at first the rule and measure of, and would have always effected it by its observance.

It could never indeed take away any defilement of sin from the soul, but it could have prevented any such defilement. But now, with respect unto the persons to whom it was given, it became weak and unprofitable unto any such end. It became so, saith the apostle, by reason of the flesh, Rom. vii. ὃ. For, although in itself it was a perfect rule of righteousness, Rom. x. 5; Gal. ii. 12, 21, yet it could not be a cause or means of righteousness unto them, who were disabled by the entrance of sin to comply with it, and fulfil it. Wherefore, the moral law, which was in itself efficacious and useful, was now become unto sinners, as unto the ends of holiness and righteousness, weak and unprofitable; for ‘ by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified.’

2. Sinners do stand in need of the expiation of sin; for being actually guilty already, it is to no purpose to think of a righteousness for the future, unless their present guilt be first expiated. Hereof there is not the least intimation in the moral law. It hath nothing in it, nor accompanying of it, that respects the guilt of sin, but the curse only. This, therefore, was to be expected from the ceremonial law, and the various ways of atonement therein provided, or no way at all. But this of themselves they could not effect. They did indeed represent and prefigure what would so do, but of themselves they were in-_ sufficient unto any such end. For it is not possible, as our apostle speaks, that ‘the blocd of bulls and goats should take away sin,’ ch. x. 5, And this law may be considered three ways. 1. In opposition unto Christ, without respect to its typical signification, under which notion it was now adhered unto by the unbelieving Hebrews. This being no state of it by divine appointment, it became thereby not only of no use unto them, but the occasion of their ruin. 2. In competition and conjunction with Christ; and so it was adhered unto by many of these Hebrews who believed the gospel. And this also was a state not designed for it, seeing it was appointed only to the time of reformation, and therefore, was not only useless, but noxious and hurtful. 3. In subordination unto Christ to typify and represent what was to be obtained in him alone; so during its own season it was of no use unto that end, but yet could never effect the things which it did represent. And in this state doth the apostle pronounce it weak and unprofitable, namely, on a supposition that atonement and expiation of sin was actually to be made, which it could not reach unto.

Secondly. But it may be yet farther inquired, Why God did give this law unto the people, which, although good in itself, yet, because of the condition of the people, it could not attain the end which was intended. The apostle gives so full an answer unto this’ inquiry, that we need not farther to insist upon it. For he giveth two reasons why God gave this law. First, he saith it was ‘added because of transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made,’ Gal. ii. 19. It had a manifold necessary respect unto transgression. As, 1. To discover the nature of sin, that the consciences of men might be made sensible thereof. 2. To coerce and restrain it by its prohibition and threatenings, that it might not run out into such an excess as to deluge the whole church. 3. To represent the way and means, though obscurely, whereby sin might be expiated. And these things were of so great use, that the very being of the church depended on them. Secondly. There was another reason for it, which he declares in the same place, ver. 23, 24. It was ‘to shut up men under a sense of the guilt of sin,’ and so with some severity drive them out of themselves, and from all expectation of a righteousness by their own works, that so they might be brought unto Christ, first in the promise, and then as he was actually exhibited.

This brief account of the weakness and unprofitableness of the law, whereon it was disannulled and taken away, may at present suffice. The consideration of some other things in particular will afterwards occur to us. Only in our passage we may a little examine, or reflect on the senses that some others have given unto these words.

Slichtingius, in his comment on the next verse, gives this account of the state of the law. ‘ Lex expiationem concedebat leviorum delictorum, idque ratione pcene alicujus arbitrarie tantdm: gravioribus autem peccatis quibus mortis peenam fixerat, nullam reliquerat veniam, maledictionis fulmen vjbrans in omnes qui gravis peccassent.’ But these things are neither accommodate unto the purpose of the apostle, nor true in themselves. For, 1. The law denounced the curse equally unto every transgression, be it small or great: ‘ Cursed is he who continueth not in all things.’ 2. It expiated absolutely no sin small or great, by its own power and efficacy; neither did it properly take away any punishment, temporal or eternal. That some sins were punished with death, and some were not, belonged unto the polity of the government erected among that people. But, 3. As unto the expiation of sin, the law had an equal respect unto all the sins of believers, great and small: it typically represented the expiation of them all in the sacrifice of Christ, and so confirmed their faith as to the forgiveness of sin, but farther it could not proceed.

And Grotius on the place. ‘ Non pereduxit homines ad justitiam illam veram et internam, sed intra ritus et facta externa constitit: Promissa terrestria non operantur mortis contemptum, sed eum operatur melior spes vite eterne et ccelestis.’ Which is thus enlarged by another: ‘The Mosaical law got no man freedom from sin, was able to give no man strength to fulfil the will of God, and could not purchase pardon for any that had broken it. This, therefore, was to be done now afterwards by the gospel, which gives more sublime and plain promises of pardon of sin, which the law could not promise, of an eternal and heavenly life to all true penitent believers; which gracious tenders now made by Christ, give us a freedom of access unto God, and confidence to come and expect such mercy from him.’ Answ. 1. What is here spoken, if it intend the law in itself, and its carnal ordinances without any respect unto the Lord Christ and his mediation, may in some sense be true. For in itself it could neither justify nor sanctify the worshippers, nor spiritually or eternally expiate sin. But 2. Under the law, and by it, there was a dispensation of the covenant of grace, which was accompanied with promises of eternal lite. For it did not only repeat and reinforce the promise inseparably annexed unto the law of creation, ‘ Do this and live,’ but it had also other promises of spiritual and eternal things annexed unto it, as it contained a legal dispensation of the first promise or the covenant of grace. But, 3. The opposition here made by the apostle is not between the precepts of law and the precepts of the gospel, the promises of the law and the promises of the gospel, outward righteousness and inward obedience; but between the efficacy of the law unto righteousness and salvation, by the priesthood and sacrifices ordained therein, on the one hand, and the priesthood of Christ, with his sacrifice which was promised before, and now manifested in the gospel, on the other. And herein he doth not only show the preference and dignity of the latter above theformer, but also that the former of itself could do nothing unto these ends; but whereas they had represented the accomplishment of them for a season, and so directed the faith of the church unto what was future, that now being come and exhibited, it was of no more use nor advantage, nor meet to be retained.

Thus then was the law disannulled; and it was so actually by the means before mentioned. But that the church might not be surprised, there were many warnings given of it before it came to pass. 45,1. A mark was put upon it from the very beginning, that it had not a perpetuity in its nature, nor inseparably annexed unto it. For it had no small presignification in it, that immediately upon the giving of it as a covenant with that people, they brake the covenant in making the golden calf of Horeb, and thereon Moses brake the tables of stone wherein the law was written. Had God intended that this law should have been perpetual, he would not have suffered its first constitution to have been accompanied with an express emblem of its disannulling. 2. Moses expressly foretels, that after the giving of the law, God would provoke them to jealousy by a foolish people, Deut. xxxu. 21; Rom. x. 19, that is, by the calling of the Gentiles, whereon the wall of partition that was between them, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, was of necessity to be taken out of the way. 3. The prophets frequently declared, that it was of itself utterly insufficient for the expiation of sin, or the sanctification of sinners, and thereon preferred moral obedience above all its institutions; whence it necessarily follows, that seeing God did intend a τελειωσις, or state of perfection for his church, that this law was at last to be disannulled. 4. All the promises concerning the coming of Christ as the end of the law, did declare its station in the church not to be perpetual; especially that insisted on by our apostle, of his being a priest after the order of Melchisedec. 5. The promises and predictions are express, that a new covenant should be established with the church, unto the removal of the old, whereof we must treat in the next chapter. By all these ways was the church of the Hebrews forewarned, that the time would come, when the old Mosaic law, as to its legal or covenant efficacy, should be disannulled, unto the unspeakable advantage of the church. And we may hence observe,

Obs. IV. The introduction into the church of what is better and more full of grace in the same kind with what went before, doth disannul what so preceded; but the bringing in of that which is not better, which doth not communicate more grace, doth not do so. Thus our apostle expressly disputes, that the bringing in of the law four hundred years after the giving of the promise, did not evacuate, or any way enervate the promise. And the sole reason hereof was, because the promise had more grace and privilege in it, than the law had. But here the bringing in of another priesthood, because it was filled with more effectual grace and mercy, utterly disannulled that which was instituted before. And as we may hence learn the care and kindness of God unto the church, so also our own duty in adhering with constant obedience unto the institutions of Christ. For this must be so, until something else more full of grace and wisdom than they are, be appointed of God in the church. And indeed, this is that which is pretended by those by whom they were rejected. For they tell us that the ordinances of the gospel are weak and unprofitable, and are disannulled by that dispensation of the Spirit which hath ensued after them. But the truth is, to fancy a dispensation of the Spirit without, against, or above the ordinances of Christ, who alone doth dispense him, and that in the ways of his own appointment, is to renounce the whole gospel.

Obs. V. If God would disannul every thing that was weak and unprofitable in his service, though originally of his own appointment, because it did not exhibit the grace he intended, he will much more condemn any thing of the same kind that is invented by men. I could never yet understand, why God should abolish those ordinances of worship which himself had appointed, because they were weak, and approve of such as men should find out of themselves, which cannot have the least efficacy or signification towards spiritual ends; such as are multiplied in the papacy.

Obs. VI. It is in vain for any men to look for that from the law, now it is abolished, which it could not effect in its best estate; and what that is, the apostle declares in the next verse.

Ἐπεισαγωγη, Ke. Syr. att snvat sap mpd pt by, ‘ but for it (or in its stead) there entered a hope which is better thanit.’ Beza, Superintroducta spes potior. Ezeoaywyn, is supraintroductio, or postintroductio, ‘the bringing in of one thing after another.’ Some supply erat, here, and read the words, sed erat introductio ad spem potiorem; or, spei melioris. Hf

Ver. 19.—For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope, whereby we draw nigh unio God.

The disannulling or abolition of the law, was laid down in the preceding verse, as a necessary consequent of its being weak and unprofitable. For when a law hath been tried, and it is found liable unto this charge, it is equal and even necessary, that it should be disannulled, if the end aimed at be necessary to be attained, and there be any thing else to be substituted in its room, whereby it may so be. This therefore the apostle declares in this verse, giving the reasons in particular of what he had before asserted in general. So the causal connexion γαρ; ‘for,’ doth intimate. And,

1. He gives an especial instance, wherein it was evident that the Jaw was weak and unprofitable.

2. He declares what was to be introduced in the room thereof, which would attain and effect the end, which the law could not reach to, by reason of its weakness.

The first he doth in those words, ovdev yap 6 νομὸς ετελειωσε, ‘ for the law made nothing perfect.’ The subject spoken of is vomoc, ‘ the law;’ that is, the whole system of Mosaic ordinances, as it was the covenant which God made with the people in Horeb. For the apostle takes the commandment and the law for the same in this chapter, and the covenant in the next, for the same with them both. And _ he treats of them principally in the instance of the Levitical priesthood; partly because the whole administration of the law depended thereon; and partly because it was the introduction of another priesthood, whereby the whole was disannulled.

Of this law, commandment, or covenant, it is said that οὐδὲν ere- Agwoe, ‘it made nothing perfect.’ Ouvdev, ‘nothing,’ for ovdeva, ‘no man,’ say expositors generally; ‘it made no man perfect.’ So the neuter is put for the masculine. So it is in those words of our Saviour, John vi. 37, Παν 6 διδωσι μοι ὃ πατὴρ προς eve HEE, ‘All that the Father giveth me, cometh unto me;’ that is, ‘every one. So is οὐδὲν, as here, put for ovdeva, ver. 63, ἡ σαρξ οὐκ ὠφελεῖ ovdev, ‘ the flesh profiteth nothing, that is, say some, ‘no man.’ But I am not satisfied with this exposition, but rather judge that the apostle did properly express his intention. ‘It made nothing,’ that is, none of the things which we treat about, ‘perfect.’ It did not make the church state perfect, it did not make the worship of God perfect, it did not perfect the promises given unto Abraham in their accomplishment, it did not make a perfect covenant between God and man: it had a shadow, an obscure representation, of all these things, but it made nothing perfect.

What the apostle intends by τελείωσις, and so ‘consequently by eteAcwwoe in this place, we have discoursed at large before on verse 1]. So that we shall not here again insist on it.

But it may be inquired why, if the law made nothing perfect, it was instituted or given by God himself? He had designed a state of perfection unto the church, and seeing the law could not effect it, nay, seeing it could not be introduced whilst the law was in force, to what end served the giving of this law 7

Ans. This doubt was in part solved before, when we showed the ends for which the law was given, although it was weak and unprofitable, as unto some other. But yet there are some other reasons to be pleaded, to represent the beauty and order of this dispensation.

1. In all these things, the sovereignty of God is to be submitted unto. And unto humble souls, there is beauty in divine sovereignty. When the Lord Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and thanked his heavenly Father that he had revealed the mysteries of the gospel unto babes, | and hid them from the wise and prudent, he assigns no other reason but his sovereignty and pleasure wherein he rejoiced, ‘ Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight,’ Luke x. 21. And if we cannot see an excellency in the dispensations of God, because they are his, who gives no account of his matters, we shall never delight in his ways. So our apostle gives no other reason of this legal dispensation, but that God had provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect, Heb. xi. 40. Therefore did he give them this law for a season, which made nothing perfect; for even so it seemed good in his sight. It is the glory of God to be gracious to whom he will be gracious, and that at what time he will, and unto what degree and measure he pleaseth. And in this glory of his are we to acquiesce.

2. Mankind having woefully prevaricated and apostatized from God, it was just and equal that they should not be at once instated in their reparation. ‘lhe suddenness of it might have taken off from its greatness. Wherefore, as God left the generality of the world without the knowledge of what he intended, so he saw good to keep the church in a state of expectancy, as to the perfection of liberty and deliverance intended. He could have created the world in an hour or moment; but he chose to do it in the space of six days, that the glory of his work might be distinctly represented unto angels and men. And he could, immediately after the fall, have introduced the promised seed, in whose advent the church must of necessity enjoy all the perfection whereof it is capable in this world. But to teach the church the greatness of their sin and misery, and to work in them an acknowledgment of his unspeakable grace and mercy, he proceeded gradually in the very revelation of him, as we have shown on ch. i. ver. 1, and caused them to wait under earnest desires, longings, and expectations, many ages for his coming. And during this season it was of necessity that they should be kept under a law that made nothing perfect. For as our apostle speaketh, ‘if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void,’ Rom. iv. 14, ‘and if righteousness come by the law, then is Christ dead in vain,’ Gal. ii. 21. And if there ‘had been a law given, which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law,’ Gal. 111. 21. Wherefore until the actual exhibition of the promised Seed, it was absolutely necessary that the church should be kept under a law that made nothing perfect.

3. That people unto whom the law was peculiarly to be given, and by whom God would accomplish his further design, were a stubborn, earthly, hard-hearted people, that stood in need of a yoke, to burden and subdue them unto the will of God. So obstinate they were in what they had once received, and so proud of any privilege they enjoyed, that whereas their privileges were very many, and very great, they would never have had any thought of looking out after another state, but have foregone the promise, had they not been pinched, and burdened, and disappointed in their expectation of perfection by this law, and the yoke of it.

4. God had designed that the Lord Christ should in all things have the preeminence. This wasdue unto him on the account of the glory of his person, and the greatness of his work. But if the law could have made any thing perfect, itis evident that this could not have been.

Perfection being thus denied unto the law, it is added, exeacaywyn δὲ κρειττονος ελπιδος. The words are elliptical, and without a supplement give no certain sense. And this may be made two ways. First. By the verb substantive nv, and so the whole of what is asserted is an effect of the law. It made nothing perfect, but it was the bringing in of a better hope, or an introduction unto a better hope, as some render the words. It served as God’s way and method, unto the bringing in of our Lord Jesus Christ: unto this end it was variously serviceable in the church. For as its institutions, promises, instructions, and types, did represent him unto the faith of believers; so it prepared their minds unto an expectation of him, and longing after him. And the conjunction δὲ, which is adversative, seems to intimate an Opposition in what the law did, unto what it is said before that it did not. It did not make any thing perfect, but it did bring in a better hope; and we know in how many things it was a preparatory introduction of the gospel. Wherefore this sense is true, though not, as I judge, directly intended in these words. ἣν ἢ

Beza first observed, that δὲ was put for adda in this place, as it is unquestionably in sundry others. If so, not an assignation of a contrary effect unto the law unto what was before denied, is intended; but the designation and expression of another cause of the -effecting of that which the law could not effect. And the defective speech is to be supplied by ετελειωσε, ‘made perfect; as we do it by ‘ did,’ that is, ‘did make all things perfect.’ To the same purpose the apostle expresseth himself in other words, Rom. vill. 3, ‘For what the law could not do, in that it was weak though the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.’ For the words are so to be supplied: what the law could not do, that God did; which what it was, and how God did it, the following words declare. Thus God had designed to bring the church unto a better state, a state of comparative perfection in this world. This the law was not a means or instrument suited unto: wherefore another way is fixed on to that end, which being completely effective of it, the law was laid aside and disannulled as unprofitable.

This the word ἐπεισαγωγη doth lead unto; for it is as much as postintroductio, or superintroductio, ‘ the introduction of one thing after,’ or ‘upon another.’ This was the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ, which were brought in after the law, upon it, in the room of it, to effect that which the law could ‘not do. This our apostle further argues and confirms, ch. x. 1—10. ‘This therefore is the sense of the words:—The introduction of the better hope, after, and upon the law, when a sufficient discovery had been made of its weakness and insufficiency, as unto this end, did make all things perfect, or bring the church to that state of consummation, which was designed unto it.

It remaineth only therefore that we show what this κρείττονος ελπι- Soc, ‘ better hope,’ is, whereunto this effect is ascribed. Whatever it be, it is called ‘ better,’ with respect unto the law, with all things that the law contained or could effect, somewhat of more power and efficacy to perfect the church state. This neither was, nor could be any thing but Christ himself and his priesthood; for in him we are complete, Col. ii. 10, and by one offering he hath for ever perfected them that are sanctified, the heavenly things themselves being purified thereby. Hope therefore is used here metonymically, to design the thing hoped for. From the giving of the first promise, and throughout understhe dispensation of the law, Christ, and his coming into the world, were the hope.of all believers, the great thing which they desired, longed, and hoped for. Hence was he called, ‘the Desire of all nations,’ Hag. ii. that which the secret desires of the whole race of mankind worked towards. And in the church, which enjoyed the promises, they rejoiced in the foresight of it, as did Abraham; and desired to see his day, as did the prophets, diligently inquiring into the time and season of the accomplishment of those revelations, which they had received concerning him, 1 Pet. i. 11, 12. It is not therefore the doctrine of the gospel, with its precepts and promises, as some suppose, which is here intended, any otherwise but as it is a declaration of the coming of Christ, and the discharge of his office; for without respect hereunto, without virtue and efficacy thence alone derived, the outward precepts and promises of the gospel would no more perfect the church-state than the law could do.

Obs. VII. When God hath designed any gracious end towards the church, it shall not fail, nor his work cease for waut of effectual means to accomplish it.—All means indeed have their efficacy, from his designation of them unto their end. His wisdom makes them meet, and his power makes them effectual. Whatever therefore seems to bea means in the hand of God unto any end, and doth not eflect it, was never designed thereunto; for he fails in none of his ends, nor do his means come short of what he aims at by them. Wherefore, although God designed a perfect state of the church, and after that gave the law, yet he never designed the law to accomplish that end. It had other ends, as we have already declared. But men were very apt to take up with the law, and to say of it, ‘Surely the Lord’s Anointed is before us.’ Wherefore God, by many ways and means, discovered the weakness of the law as unto this end. Then were men ready to conclude, that the promise itself concerning this perfect church-state, would be of none effect. The mistake lay only herein, that indeed God had not as yet used that only means for it, which his infinite wisdom had suited for, and his infinite power would make effectual unto its attainment. And this he did in such a way, as that those who would not make use of his means, but would, as it were, impose that upon him, which he never intended to make use of in that kind, — perished in their unbelief. Thus was it with the generality of the

Wherefore, the promise of God concerning the church, and to it,. must be the rule and measure of our faith. Three things do deeply exercise the church, as unto their accomplishment. - 1. Difficulties rendering it wholly improbable. 2. Long unexpected procrastination. 3. Disappointment of appearing means of it. But in this instance of the introduction of a perfect church-state in and by the person of Jesus Christ, God hath provided a security for our faith, against all objections, which these considerations might suggest. For,

1. What greater difficulties can possibly lie in the way of the accomplishment of any of the promises of God, which yet are upon the sacred record unaccomplished, as suppose, the calling of the Jews, the destruction of antichrist, the peace of the church, und prosperity of it in the plentiful effusion of the Spirit; but that as great, and greater, lay in the way of the fulfilling of this promise? All the national provocations, sins, and idolatries, that fell out in the posterity of Abraham; all the calamities and desolating judgments that overtook them, the cutting down of the house of David, until there was only a root of it left in the earth; the unbelief of the whole body of the people; the enmity of the world, actuated by all the craft and powers of Satan, were as mountains in the way of the accomplishment of this promise. But yet they all of them became at length a plain before the Spint of God. And if we should compare the difficulties and oppositions, that at this day lie against the fulfilling of some divine promises, with those that rose up against this one of perfecting the church-state in Christ, it would, it may be, abate our forwardness in condemning the Jews of incredulity, unless we found ourselves more established in the faith of what is to come, tlian for the most part we are.

2. Long and unexpected procrastinations, are trials of faith also. Now this promise was given at the beginning of the world, nor was there any time allotted for its accomplishment. Hence it is generally supposed, from the words there used in the imposition of the name of Cain on her first-born, that Eve apprehended that the promise was actually fulfilled. The like expectations had the saints of all ages; and were continually looking out after the rising of this bright morning Star. Many atime did God renew the promise, and sometimes confirmed it with his oath, as unto Abraham and David; and yet still were their expectations frustrated, so far as confined unto their own generations. And though God accepted them in their cries, and prayers, and hopes, and longing desires, yet near four thousand years were expired, before the promise received its accomplishment. And if we do believe that the faith and grace of the New Testament, do exceed what was administered under the Old; and that we do enjoy that pledge of God’s veracity in the accomplishment of his promises, which they attained not unto, shall we think it much, if we are exer-

3. Disappointment of appearing means is of the same nature. Long after the promise was given and renewed, the law is ina solemn and glorious manner delivered unto the church, as the rule of their worship, and the means of their acceptance with God. Hence the generality of the people did always suppose, that this was it, which would make all things perfect. Something indeed they thought might be added unto its glory, in the personal coming of the Messiah; but the Jaw was still to be that which was to make all things perfect. And we may easily apprehend what a surprisal it was unto them, when it was made manifest that the law was so far from effecting this pro-

‘mised state, that there was a necessity of taking it out of the way, as a thing weak and unprofitable, that the better hope perfecting the state of the church might be introduced. Such appearances of means highly probable for the deliverance of the church, are sometimes represented to us, which after a while do utterly disappear, and things are rolled into a posture quite contrary unto the expectations of many. When there is an appearance of what God hath promised, of what believers have prayed for, it is no wonder if some do earnestly embrace it. But where God hath laid aside any means, and sufficiently declared that it is not his holy pleasure to use it in such a way, or unto such a length, as we would desire for the fulfilling of his promises, it is not duty, but obstinacy and selfishness, to adhere unto if, with any such expectations.

Obs. VIII. Believers of old who lived under the law, did not live upon the law, but upon the hope of Christ, or Christ hoped for.— Christ is the same (that is, to the church) yesterday, to-day, and for ever. If justification, if salvation could be had any other way, or by any other means, then was his coming needless, and his death in vain. It was the promise of him, and not of the law, which he had _ broken, which was the relief and salvation of Adam. This being the first thing that was proposed unto fallen man, as the only means of his restoration, justification, and salvation, if any thing were afterwards added unto the same purpose, it would declare this to be insufficient;. which would be an impeachment of divine wisdom and grace. On the same promise of Christ, which virtually contained and exhibited unto believers all the benefits of his mediation, as it was frequently renewed and variously explained, did all the saints live under the Old Testament. And the obscurity of the revelations of him in comparison of that by the gospel, respected only the degrees, but not the essence of their faith.

Obs. IX. The Lord Christ by his priesthood and sacrifice, makes perfect the church and all things belonging thereunto, Col. 1. 10.

ελπιδος, the ‘hope;’ being both of the same gender. By the introduction of the better hope, we draw nigh to God; or by which hope, we draw nigh to God. Both come to the same for the substance of the sense; but the application is more natural to the next antecedent, by which hope, we draw nigh unto God. It remaineth only that we Wink what it is thus to draw nigh to God.

γγιζω is a word belonging to the sacerdotal office, denoting the approach of the priests to God in his worship. So the LXX. for the most part render ΞΡ, the general term for all access unto God with sacrifices and offerings. And this doth the apostle intend. Under the Levitical priesthood, the priests in their sacrifices and solemn services, did draw nigh unto God. The same now is done by all believers under the sacerdotal ministration of Jesus Christ. They now, all of them, draw nigh unto God. And in all their worship, especially in their prayers and supplications, they ‘have by him an access unto God,’ Eph. ii. 18. There is a similitude in these things, and an allusion in the one unto the other; yet so as that the one doth far excel the other, as to grace and privilege. For, 1. Under the law, it was the priests alone who had this privilege of drawing nigh unto God, in the solemn worship of the temple and tabernacle. The people were kept at a distance, and might never come near the sacred services of the holy place. But all believers being made a royal priesthood, every one of them hath an equal right and privilege by Christ, of drawing nigh unto God. 2. The priests themselves did draw nigh only unto. outward pledges, tokens, and symbols of God’s presence. Their highest attainment was in the entrance of the high priest once a-year into the most holy place. Yet was the presence of God there only in things made with hands, only instituted to represent his glory. But believers do draw nigh to God himself, to the throne of his grace, as the apostle declares, ch. x. 19—22. It may therefore be granted, that there is this intention in the words. For as by the law of old, the priests in the solemn worship of the church, did draw ngh to God in those visible pledges of his presence which he had appointed; and this they did by virtue of the Aaronical priesthood and the law of its institution, which was the utmost that could be attamed in their imperfect state; so now upon the introduction of the better hope, and by virtue thereof, believers in all their solemn worship, do draw nigh unto God himself, and find acceptance with him. _ And there are two reasons for the admission of this interpretation. For, 1. One part of the apostle’s design, is to manifest the glory and preeminence of gospel worship above that of the law. And the exeellency hereof, consists not in outward forms and pompous ceremonies, but in this, that all believers do therein draw nigh unto God himself with boldness. 2. Whereas it is peculiarly the priesthood of Christ, and his discharge of that office in his oblation and intercession, which he intends by the better hope, as he fully declares himself towards the end of the chapter; they are those which we have a peculiar respect unto, in all our approaches unto God in our holy worship. Our entrance unto the throne of grace, is through the veil of his flesh as offered. Our admission is only by virtue of his oblation, and our acceptance depends on his intercession. Herein, therefore, in a peculiar manner, by this better hope, we draw nigh unto God.

But yet there is a more extensive signification of this expression in the Scripture, which must not be here excluded. By nature all men are gone far off from God. ‘The first general apostasy, carried mankind into a most inconceivable distance from him. ‘Though our distance from him by nature, as we are creatures, be infinite, yet this hinders not but that in his infinite goodness and condescension, we may have intercourse with him, and find acceptance before him. But the distance which came between us by sin, cuts off all communion of that kind. Wherefore, our moral distance from God, as our nature is corrupted, is greater, with respect unto our relation unto him, than our essential distance from him, as our nature is created. Hence, being afar off, is the expression of this state of nature, Eph. i. 19, ‘ You were sometimes afar off.’ And whatever accompanieth that state in wrath and curse upon men, in fear, bondage, the power of sin and enmity against God within them; in obnoxiousness unto misery in this world and eternal destruction hereafter, is comprised in that expression. Itis to be far from the love and favour of God, from the knowledge of him, and obedience unto him. Wherefore, our drawing nigh unto God, denotes our deliverance and recovery from this estate. So it is expressed in the place named: ‘ But now in Christ Jesus, ye who were sometimes afar off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ” To represent this, all the acts of solemn worship, which respected the sa~ crifice of Christ, were called approximations. And hereunto, unto this drawing nigh to God, or that we may so do, two things are required.

First. A removal of whatever kept us at a distance from God. And the things of this nature, were of two sorts. 1. What was upon us from God for our sin and apostasy. This was his wrath and curse; and these were declared in the publishing of the law on Mount Sinai, with the terrible appearances and dreadful voices that accompanied. | This made the people stand afar off, Exod. xx. 21; as an emblem of their condition with respect to the law. 2. Guilt within, with its con sequences of fear, shame, and alienation from the life of God. Unless these things of the one sort and the other, those upon us and those within us, be taken away and removed, we can never draw nigh unto God. And to secure our distance, they were enrolled in ἃ hand-writing as a record against us, that we should never on our own account, so much as endeavour any access unto him, Epb. 1. 14; Col. u.!4. How they were removed by the bringing in of the better hope, that is, by the priesthood of Christ, the apostle declares in this Epistle, as we shall see, God willing, in our progress. This neither was, nor could be done by the law or its ordinances: neither the moral preceptive part of it, nor the ceremonial, in all its rites and sacrifices, could of themselves expiate sins, make atonement for our apostasy, turn away the wrath of God, nor take away guilt, fear, bondage, and alienation out of the minds of men.

tification and acceptance of our persons, we have faith, liberty, boldness, confidence, and assurance given unto us in our coming unto God. And this cannot be without the renovation of our natures into his image, the quickening of our souls with a new principle of spiritual life, and ability unto all duties of acceptable obedience. All these things are required unto our drawing nigh unto God, or unto a state of reconciliation, peace, and communion with him. And we may

Obs. X. Out of Christ, or without him, all mankind are at an inconceivable distance from God.—And a distance it is of the worst kind; even that which is an effect of mutual enmity. The cause of it was on our part voluntary, and the effect of it, the height of misery.. And however any may flatter and deceive themselves, it is the present condition of all who have not an interest in Christ by faith. They are far off from God, as he is the fountain of all goodness and blessedness; ‘inhabiting,’ as the prophet speaks, ‘ the parched places of the wilderness, and shall not see when good cometh,’ Jer. xvii. 6, far from the dews and showers of grace or mercy, far from divine love and favour; cast out of the bounds of them, as Adam out of paradise, without any hope or power in themselves to return. The flaming sword of the law, turns every way to keep them from the tree of life. Yet are they not so far from God, but they are under his wrath and curse, and whatever of misery is contained in them. Let them fly whither they please, wish for mountains and rocks to fall on them, as they will do hereafter; hide themselves in the darkness and shades of their own ignorance, like Adam among the trees of the garden, or immerge themselves in the pleasures of sin for a season; all is'one, the wrath of God abideth on them. And they are far from God in their own minds also; being alienated from him, enemies against him, and in all things made up with Satan, the head of the apostasy. Thus is it, and inconceivably worse, with all that embrace not this better hope to bring them nigh unto God. ' Obs. XI. It is an effect of infinite condescension and grace, that God would appoint a way of recovery for those who had wilfully cast themselves into this woeful distance from him. Why should God look after such fugitives any more? He had no need of us or our services in our best condition, much less, in that useless depraved state whereinto we had brought ourselves. And although we had transgressed the rule of our moral dependence on him, in the way of obedience, and thereby done what we could to stain and eclipse his glory; yet he knew how to repair it to advantage, by reducing us under the order of punishment. By our sins we ourselves come short of the glory of God, but he could lose none by us, whilst it was absolutely secured by the penaity annexed to the law. When upon the entrance of sin, he came and found Adam in the bushes, wherein he thought foolishly to hide himself, who could expect (Adam did not) but that his only design was to apprehend the poor rebellious fugitive, and give him up to condign punishment? But quite otherwise, above all thoughts that could ever have entered into the hearts of angels or men; after he had declared the nature of the apostasy, and his own indignation against it, he proposeth and promiseth a way of deliverance and recovery. This is that which the Scripture so magnifies under the names of grace and love of God, which are beyond expression or conception, John 11], 16. And it hath also that lustre frequently put upon it, that he dealt not so with the angels that sinned; which manifests in what condition he might have left us also, and how infinitely free and sovereign that grace was, from whence it was otherwise. Thence it was that he had a desire again unto the works of his hands, to bring poor mankind near unto him. And whereas he might have recalled us unto himself, yet so as to leave some marks of his displeasure upon us, to keep us at a distance from him, than that we stood at before; as David brought back his wicked Absalom to Jerusalem, but would not suffer him to come into his presence; he chose to act like himself, in infinite wisdom and grace, to bring us yet nearer to him, than ever we could have approached by the law of our creation. And as the foundation, means, and pledge hereof, he contrived and brought forth: that most glorious and unparalleled effect of divine wisdom, in taking our nature unto that inconceivable nearness unto himself, in the union of it unto the person of his Son. For as all things in this bringing of us nigh to God who were afar off, are expressive effects of wisdom and grace; so that of taking our nature into union with himself, is glorious unto astonishment. And.as we are thereby made inconceivably more nigh to God in our nature, than we were upon our first creation, or than angels shall ever be; so by virtue thereof, are we in our persons, brought in many things much nearer to God, than ever we could have been brought by the law of creation. “Ὁ Lord our God, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens,’ Ps. viii. 1. It is in the admiration of this unspeakable grace, that the Psalmist is so ravished in the contemplation of God, as hath been declared in our exposition on the second chapter of this Epistle.

Obs. XII. All our approximation unto God in any kind, all our approaches unto him in holy worship, are by him alone, who was the blessed hope of the saints under the Old Testament, and is the life of them under the New.—These things must be afterwards spoken unto.

Ver. 20—22.—T ne apostle had warned the Hebrews before, that he had many things to say, and those not easy to be understood, concerning Melchisedec. And herein he intended not only those things which he expresseth directly, concerning that person and his office, but the things themselves signified thereby in the person and office of Christ. And therefore he omits nothing which may from thence be any way represented. So from that one testimony of the Psalmist, he makes sundry inferences unto his purpose. As,

1. That the Lord Christ was to be a priest, which included in it the cessation of the Levitical priesthood, seeing he was of the tribe of Judah, and not of the tribe of Levi.

2. That he was to be another priest, that is, a priest of another order, namely, that of Melchisedec. And this he variously demonstrates, to prove his preeminence above the Aaronical priesthood: as also thereon, that upon his introduction, that order was utterly to cease and be disannulled.

3. He observes from the same testimony unto the same purpose, that he was to be a priest for ever, so as that there should never more, upon his death or otherwise, be any need of another priest, nor any possibility of the return of the former priesthood into the church.

4. Neither yet doth he rest here, but observes moreover, the manner how God, in the testimony insisted on, declared his purpose of making the Lord Christ a priest, which was constitutive of his office; and that was by his oath. And thence takes occasion to manifest how far his priesthood is exalted above that under the law. This is that which now lies before us in these verses. And we have in these things an instance given, of what unsearchable stores of wisdom and truth, are laid up in every parcel of the word of God, if we have a spiritual light: in their investigation.

The words of the 20th verse being elliptical, the sense of them is variously supplied. Most translators carry on the sense unto that which is the midst of the 21st in our translation, ‘Others were made priests without an oath.’ The Syriac refers the words unto them foregoing; Nniavaa 10 mm ‘and confirmed it (that is the better hope) with an oath.” And Beza, etiam guatenus non sine jurejando superintroducta est, ‘inasmuch as (that hope) is not brought in without an oath;? and another, ‘since;’ et ed potior illa spes, quatenus non absque jurejurando superintroducta est, Schmid. But this limits the comparison unto this verse, which the apostle really finisheth, ver. 22. Vul. Lat. et quantum est non sine jarejurando, which the Rbemists render ‘and masmuch as itis not without an oath.’ Ours supply, “he was made a priest: inasmuch as not without an oath he was made a priest: no doubt according tothe mind of the apostle. For he hatha prospect in these words, unto what ensues, where he expressly applies this oath unto the priesthood of Christ, and the consummation thereof.

‘Ooxwpoora is the same with ὅρκος, jusjurandum, an ‘oath.’ But it is here principally applied unto those oaths whereby conventions, compacts, or covenants were confirmed. Hence ὁρκωμοσια were the sacrifices that were offered in the confirmation of sworn covenants. It is three times used here by our apostle on this occasion, ver. 20, 21, 28, and nowhere else in the New Testament.

Exot yeyovorec; Syr. 17, ‘were,’ but the manner of their being made priests, is intended; and so the words are to be expressed fully; facti sunt, ‘ were made.’

Ver. 20—22.—And inasmuch as not without an oath. For they truly were made without an oath, but this with an oath, by him that said unto him, The Lord sware, and will not repent, thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec. By so much was Jesus made surety of a better covenant.

The same argument is pursued as in the foregoing verses, only with a new medium, and that such as leads on towards the conclusion of the whole disputation. The introduction of a new priesthood, the cesgation or abolition of the old, with the advantage of the church thereby, because of its dignity, preeminence and stability, above that which was to give place unto it, are the things which the apostle is in the proof and confirmation of.

1. A proposition of a new medium for the confirmation of the principal argument before insisted on, ver. 20. ἘΣ

2. An illustration and proof of what is asserted in that proposition, ver. 2].

3. An inference from its being so established and proved, ver. 22.

1. The connexion of it unto the preceding discourse, by the conjunction και. we,

The note of connexion καὶ, may respect ver 17; where the same testimony now insisted upon, is introduced, and so may Intimate a farther pursuit of the same argument. If so, the other two verses, 18, 19, are inserted as a parenthesis, comprising an inference of what the apostle had before proved, with the reasons of it. For whereas before, he had only made use of the words of the Father unto Christ, thou art a priest for ever, and thereon showed what would thence follow; he now proceeds to declare the manner how those words were spoken, namely, with an oath. Or it may respect the words immediately foregoing, namely, the brmging in of a better hope; for it was brought in by an oath: and this sense is followed by most translators, who supply the defect in these words, by the repetition of a better hope. But although neither of those suppositions concerning the connexion of the words, doth prejudice the sense or design of them, yet, as we have observed before, καὶ, ‘ for,’ oftentimes is as much as ‘ moreover,’ as it 1s rendered, etiam, by Beza; and then it denotes, not an immediate connexion with, or dependence on what went before in particular, but only an advancing on the same general argument. And so it is here a note of introduction, of a new special consideration for the confirmation of the same design. Thence our translators supply the words, not with any thing that went before, but with what follows after, which the apostle designed now in particular to speak unto, ‘ he was made a priest.’

The modification ef a proposition is in those words, καθ᾽ ὅσον, eatenus quantum, in quantum ‘inasmuch,’ ‘so much.’ Hereunto answers κατὰ τοσουτον, ver. 22, in tantum; quanto, tanto. The excellency of the covenant whereof Christ was made Mediator above the old covenant, had proportion with the preeminence of his priesthood above that of Aaron, in that he was made a priest by an oath, but they were not so. And we may observe in general, that,

Obs. I. The faith, comfort, honour, and safety of the church, depends much on every particular remark that God hath put upon any of the offices of Christ, or whatever belongs thereto. We have lived to see men endeavouring their utmost to render Christ himself, and all his offices, of as little use in religion, as they can possibly admit, and yet retain the name of Christians. And it 1s to be feared, that he is as little valued by some in their practice, as he is by others in their notions. This is not the way of the Scripture. Therein every concernment of him and his offices is particularly insisted on; and the apostle in this chapter makes it manifest, what important mysteries depend on such minute considerations, as some would think were little to be regarded. But all things concerning him are full of divine mysteries, and every word about them that drops from infinite wisdom, ought to be an object of faith and admiration. When, therefore, we cease to inquire with all diligence into all the revelations made concerning Christ or his offices, or any thing which belongs unto them; we do really cease to be Christians. And there can be no greater evidence of our want of faith in him and love unto him, than if we neglect a due consideration of all things, that the Scripture reveals and. testifies concerning him.

The proposition itself is in those words—‘not without an oath.’ Two things the apostle supposeth in this negative proposition.

1. That there were two ways whereby men either were or might be made priests, namely, they might be so either with, or without an oath. And he expresseth the latter way, applying it negatively unto Christ, that he might include a negation of the former way with respect unto the priests under the law; both which he afterwards expressly mentioneth.

2. That the dignity of the priesthood depends on, and is declared by the way whereby God was pleased to initiate men into that office.

These two things being in general laid down, us those which could not be denied, the apostle makes application of them in the next verse distinctly, unto the priests of the law on the one hand, and Christ on the other, in a comparison between whom he is engaged. And we may observe, that,

Obs. II. Nothing was wanting on the part of God, that might give eminency, stability, glory, and efficacy, unto the priesthood of Christ: ‘Not without an oath.’— For,

1. This was due unto the glory of his person. The Son of God, in infinite grace, condescending unto the susception of this office, and the discharge of all the duties of it, it was meet that all things which might contribute any thing unto the glory or efficacy of it, should accompany his undertakings. For being in himself the image of-an invisible God, by whom all things were created, it was meet that in his whole work, he should in all things have the preeminence, as our apostle speaks, Col. i. 15, 16, 18. He was in every thing that he undertook, to be preferred and exalted above all others, who ever were employed in the church, or ever should be; and therefore was he made a priest, not without an oath. |