or censer whereon he was first to burne incense must needs bee without the oracle or else he could not first come at it And the arke of the Covenant overlaid round about with gold The Arke was a strong chest or coffer the matter forme and measures whereof see Exod. 25.10 This was called the Arke of the Covenant for the use of it which was to inclose the tables wherein the first Covenant was written Wherein was the golden pot that had Manna Wherein must be referred to the Arke as appears by the beginning of the next verse for in this verse the Author would shew what was in the Arke and in the next what was over it This pot of Manna was gathered before the building of the Tabernacle and commanded to be laid up before the Testimony there to be kept when the Tabernacle should be built See Ex. 16.33.34 And Aarons rod that budded Concerning Aarons rod how it budded and upon what occasion and for what purpose it did so See Num. 17. And the tables of the Covenant There were severall parcels of the old Covenant for there were the tables of the Covenant which the Lord wrote with his owne finger in stone containing the Decalog and there was the booke of the Covenant which Moses wrote and read in the audience of the people and sprinkled it with bloud when the Covenant was confirmed with a solemne sacrifice See Exod. 24.4 and afterward in this Chapter vers 19. Now wee finde none but the tables of the Covenant to bee laid up in the Arke yet not those tables that were first written for they were broken upon the indignation which Moses had at the worshipping of the golden Calfe but the tables written afterward were there reserved But how could the pot of Manna and Aarons rod bee in the Arke when wee read expresly that nothing was in the Arke save the two tables of stone 1 King 8.9 and 2 Chron. 5.10 The Answer is Either wee must say that in successe of time the pot of Manna and Aarons rod came to bee put into the Arke which before were not so Or wee must say that the particle In here must be a little extended in sense to include those things that were adjacent to the Arke being neare or about it So John is said to baptise in Bethabara because he baptised neare or about it John 1.28 So Joshua is said to be in Jericho when he was by or neare it Josh 5.13 And in this sense the Author first expresseth those things which were by or neare the Arke as the pot of Manna and Aarons tod then the things in the Arke as the tables of the Covenant And lastly in the following verse the things over the Arke as the Cherubims And this might happily bee the cause why under the particle in hee would first comprise the things by the. Arke before those in it that he might make use of this gradation 5. And over it the Cherubims of glory shadowing the Mercy-seate The Cherubims were two Images of solid gold fashioned like winged men whose wings did over shadow the Mercy-seate being one at the one end of it and the other at the other having their faces looking one towards another Of them see Exod. 25.17 And they were called the Cherubims of glory by an Hebraisme for glorious Cherubims because of their lustre and brightnesse which in Scripture is often called glory The Mercy-seate had two uses one to bee a Cover for the Arke to shut up the Tables of the Covenant the other to represent the seat or throne of God where God would speake with Moses to give answers for the people and to shew himselfe mercifull And the originall word in the Hebrew carries a twofold sence to answer and fit this two-fold use for Capporeth derived from the verbe Caphor which signifies to cover a vessell and to cover sinne which last is the proper act of mercy Therefore though the Hebrew word might have beene simply and fully enough rendred the Cover yet the Septuagint following the other signification of the word have translated Hilasterion i. a Propitiatory or Mercy-seate which distinguisheth this cover from all others as a peculiar use and property of it And it is very consonant to reason that by the ambiguity of the word the Spirit of God would signifie so much Of which we cannot now speake particularly Though each of these particulars concerning the first Covenant might require particular explication and serve highly for advancing the dignity of Christs Priesthood and of the new Covenant yet the time will not now permit it because our purpose calls us on to other matters 6. Now when these things were thus ordained Having briefly described the Tabernacle and the severall furniture of it now he comes to describe the way of divine service therein which according to the two partitions or roomes of the Tabernacle was twofold whereof he toucheth the first in this verse and handleth the other in those following The Priests went alwayes into the first Tabernacle accomplishing the service of God The ordinary Priests went onely into the first Tabernacle for none but the high Priest went into the second And into the first they went alwayes that is every day daily for herein they are opposed to the high Priest who went into the second Tabernacle once every yeare The daily services of God accomplished by the Priests in the first Tabernacle were to burne Incense on the golden Censer and to light up or mend the Lamps of the Candlestick c. 7. But into the second went the high Priest alone once every yeare The high Priest went in alone and therefore he onely yet he went not in daily but yearely once every yeare at the solemne fast of Expiation whereof see Levit. 16. Not without bloud which he offered Not without bloud is with bloud and with bloud onely for the high Priest offered in the second Tabernacle nothing else but bloud For he must enter thither with the bloud of a Bullock and of a Goate and offer it by sprinkling it with his finger upon and before the Mercy-seate seven times Whence it appeares that this offering of the high Priest did not consist in the slaughter of those beasts whose bloud he offered and therefore neither did the offering of Christ answerable thereto whereof the Author treates consist in the death of Christ but by his entrance into heaven after his death Indeed the death of Christ is called an offering and sacrifice yet it is so called for the resemblance of it with the free-will and peace-offerings and therefore especially because it was most gratefull and acceptable to God in which respect also other notable works of piety may be and are called in Scripture offerings and sactifices unto God For himselfe and for the errours of the people Here is a little trajection of the words for the right sence is thus for the errours of himselfe and of the people For in this sacrifice the Priest
But we have already shewed that the Israelites in Massa tempted God not with excesse of trust but with defect of it The like words in the like sence are used by Peter Acts 15 10. Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoake upon the neck of the Disciples c. q.d. Hath not God already given us experiments and arguments enough and sufficient that we should not impose upon the Disciples the yoke of legall Ceremonies seeing he hath given the holy Ghost to them as well as to us seeing he hath made no difference betweene us and them purifying their hearts by faith why therefore as if the thing were not already apparent enough do ye require more arguments and tokens of it and so tempt God 9. When your fathers tempted me Me here is referred to God whom the Israelites tempted for here according to an usuall forme in Scripture the person is changed and God himselfe is brought in speaking of himselfe whereas in the words before David spake of God in the third person but now brings in God speaking in the first person of himselfe In the Originall it is not when but where for here the circumstantiall particle is not temporall for the time when they tempted but locall for the place where they tempted and that place hath reference to the wildernesse immediately before mentioned For in the wildernesse they tempted God not onely at that time but afterwards also at divers other times and in other particular places of that wildernesse For at Cadeshbarnea whence the twelve spies were sent to search the land of Canaan and upon their returne the people bad stone Caleb and Joshuah because they discented from the other ten who had brought up an evill report upon the Land then the Lord complaines that they had provoked him long and often that they had long distrusted him notwithstanding all the signes he had shewed amongst them Numb 14.11 And againe at ver 22. he complaines that they had tempted him now ten times i. very many times Proved me He expresseth the same thing in another word For as to tempt a man argues distrust and doubt of him so also to prove him And saw my workes The particle and is by an Hebraisme put for although q.d. If they had not seene my wondrous works it had beene lesse wonder that they tempted me but now although they see them yet they doubt of my power and goodnesse toward them what a strange diffidence and distrust is this What works God wrought both in Egypt and in the Wildernesse to certifie the people of his promise and to gaine faith for their passage into Canaan are largely described in the books of Exodus and Numbers Forty yeares This space of forty yeares as the history it selfe and the Hebrew text and this Author also signifies at ver 17. must be referred forwards to Gods indignation whereby he was grieved with them for the space of forty yeares Yet it is true also that this space may be referred backward as the Septuagint have pointed it to the peoples tempting of God and seeing his works for the space of forty yeares for so long the people tempted him and so long saw his works For even at the expiration of those yeares when Miriam was dead in Cadesh they againe murmured against Moses and Aaron for want of water as their fathers had done before at Meriba and Massa and that place also was branded by the name of Meriba or waters of strife where the diffidence or distrust in God was greater then any formerly for it was extended even to Moses and Aaron who were also infected with the sin of it Numb 20. And this seemes to be cause of the Greek pointing and reading which this Author followed having fallen upon it that he might not seeme to make any alteration in it though afterward at the 17. verse he plainly shews that he was not ignorant of the true reading as it was pointed in the Hebrew But here is meant that other tentation mentioned Numb 14. upon which God sware the people should not enter into his rest as appeares by the verses here following Hence appeares their errour who from hence conclude that the holy Ghost is that God who was tempted of the Jews therefore because here God himselfe speakes and saith he was tempted of their fathers and the Author affirmes that the holy Ghost spake these things These men marke not that from the first words of this place and so from the former of the whole Psalme wherein David himselfe speakes in very deed in his owne person and professeth himselfe one of Gods people to worship and serve God it will by the same reason follow that the holy Ghost is also David For the former words wherein David is brought in speaking are no lesse attributed to the holy Ghost When the sayings of holy Writers are attributed to the holy Ghost we are not thereby to understand that the holy Ghost is that person who indeed speaks or to whom those things really agree which he attributes to himselfe that speakes or is brought in speaking but onely that those sayings were uttered by the vertue and motion of the holy Ghost and not onely by the will and pleasure of men whosoever the person be that speaketh as Peter teacheth 2 Pet. 1.21 For otherwise there must be one onely person alwaies brought in speaking namely the holy Ghost to whom alone all sayings must be attributed which he attributes to himselfe that speaketh then which nothing can be further from the truth For the Prophets for the most part use to speake in their owne persons sometime they bring in God speaking whose Spirit the Holy Ghost is sometime they bring in other persons Besides from this that the words of God are attributed to the Holy Ghost we cannot rightly conclude that therefore the Holy Ghost is God himselfe Are they not rightly attributed to him therefore because God speaks by him as we read that the words of Christ are attributed to the Spirit Rev. 2.7 although the Spirit be not Christ So Paul Rom. 11.4 attributes the words of God to the oracle and this Author cap. 12.5 attributes the words of God to the Exhortation not that either the oracle or the exhortation is God but because God is supposed to speake by the oracle and the exhortation 10. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation That is a Generation according to Scripture which comprehends the men that live within the period of one and the same age And that generation wherewith God was grieved were those persons of Israel whom hee brought out of Egypt who saw his mighty workes and received the Law at Mount Sinai This generation provoked and tempted God and therefore God was grieved with it God is not passively grieved as man but then he is said to be grieved when he doth such actions as persons grieved use to doe especially being thereto provoked by the sinnes of men And said they doe
held to make the fact excusable and not the former But indeed there is also an ignorance of Law that deserves some excuse namely when the number of Laws are become so great that they can neither be comprehended in minde nor retained in memory and especially when the Laws are not grounded upon naturall honesty or the dictates of right reason but upon the sole will and pleasure of the Legifer For in such Laws the minde and memory doth easily faile especially seeing all mens capacities are not equall Now both these considerations tooke place in the Laws of Moses for their number was so great that it exceeded six hundred and the ground of them such that most of them depended not upon naturall honesty and right reason but upon the sole will and positive pleasure of God Therefore all sins committed through ignorance of Law if any way they were excusable were expiated under the Law by prescript of Law and without doubt are here by the Author called Ignorances And on them that are out of the way On the Errant The word Errant is either the same with the ignorant or if it differ the difference is this that the ignorant are such as mistake in the Law and the Errant such as mistake in the fact or the circumstances of it and the sin thence proceeding is called an Errour Or rather by Errour is noted not so much the errour of the minde as the errour in the action So that by errours are meant not onely those trespasses that proceed from some errour of the minde but also those which flow from humane frailty though there precede no errour in the minde and are committed in matters that in their owne nature are but of light importance And there is no doubt but the Author by these two words of Ignorances and Errours would comprehend all lighter trespasses not committed out of meere malice of minde or as the Scripture termes it by a high hand but were done either out of excusable ignorance or of humane frailty in things of lesse moment for which onely the benefit of expiation was granted under the Law This affection and compassion toward them that sin of ignorance or frailty and not of malice and contempt though it be no lesse in Christ our high Priest then anciently it was in the Legall high Priest yet in the reddition of this comparison wherein he speakes of Christ this compassion is concluded to be in Christ neither is the comparison brought for that purpose but onely it is to shew the compassion and pitty that Christ beares toward the afflicted and distressed And this appeares plainly from that which is here subjoyned touching the efficient cause of this compassion for it followeth For that he himselfe is compassed with infirmity He shews the cause and fountaine of this compassion which in the Legall high Priest was his infirmity in sin but in Christ it was his infirmity in sufferings i. the Legall high Priest was infirme because himselfe also might fall through ignorances and errours but Christ was infirme because he was subject to afflictions and trials no lesse then another man That infirmity in the Legall high Priest bred in them compassion and gentlenesse towards the ignorant and errant this in Christ our high Priest bred in him a compassion toward the afflicted and distressed Besides the Legall high Priest was encompassed with infirmities alwayes but Christ onely for some time and there was good cause for both For the Legall high Priest because he was yearely to renew his offering for the sinnes of the people but Christ because by one oblation he expiated for ever all the sins of the faithfull therefore he was compassed with infirmity but once onely and that before his owne oblation For that a man should be prone to pitty he need not be perpetually in misery for it is sufficient that once he made triall of misery but to the end he may help those that are in misery and having delivered them from their misery might actually make them happy for ever it is necessary that he himselfe be pressed with no further misery but that he be blessed to the end he may be able alwayes to help others And this ability is not a simple faculty to help or have compassion but a will and readinesse to doe it as was before explicated chap. 2. ver 4. 3. And by reason hereof The fourth property of a high Priest is taken from his owne infirmity for by reason thereof he must offer no lesse for his owne sinnes then for the sins of the people By reason hereof i. By reason of his infirmity for the high Priest through his infirmity might fall into ignorances and errours and therefore it is likely yea almost necessary that he did often fall into then Hee ought as for the people so also for himselfe to offer for sins His infirmity in falling into sinnes of ignorance and errour was a cause to make him offer for his owne sinnes not onely at particular times when he stood guilty in his conscience of some particular sin but yearely also at the solemne time though then his conscience were touched with no particular sin yet then he must offer for those sins whereof his conscience never tooke notice In like manner the infirmity of Christ i. not onely his passible nature from whence sufferings flow not necessarily but his state and condition of suffering whereinto he was put by Gods decree was a cause that he also should offer for himselfe while he was in his afflictions and miseries And these afflictions in Christ are in this comparison answerable to the finnes of the ancient high Priest and therefore by a little abusion of the word are tacitly comprehended with them under the sole name of sinnes That the Legall high Priest was to offer no lesse for his owne sinnes then for the peoples yea first for his owne sinnes before the peoples it plainly appeares Levit. 16.6,11,17 c. His offering for his owne sinnes was a young Bullock and for the peoples a Hee-Goate And therefore it is said afterward that he was to enter the Sanctuary by the bloud of Goates and Calves chap. 9.12 But how Christ offered for himselfe is explicated in this chap. ver 7. 4. And no man taketh this honour unto himselfe The fifth property of the high Priest that no man must arrogate the office to himselfe and usurpe upon the rights of it of his owne authority This office here is called an honour because of the dignity of it for offices are of diverse kindes some are meerely servile others profitable onely a third sort are honourable that draws dignities and precedency with it Now the office of the Priesthood is of this last sort and therefore is called an honour But he that is called of God He onely hath a right to administer in the honourable office of Priesthood that is designed and called by God to take it upon him This he illustrates by the
example of Aarons calling As was Aaron Aaron did not of his owne accord intrude himselfe into the office of high Priesthood but being thereto enjoyned and commanded by God he accepted of it by way of obedience to him that enjoyned it For God first did choose Aaron and after him his eldest son and by proper Laws determined the rights of succession in this office which were alwayes observed while the state was administred by the Laws of God Hitherto he hath specified severall properties of the high Priest all which may be reduced to three heads The first is that he offer for sinnes and negotiate the cause of men with God to which this may be referred that he must be a man 2. That he must be mercifull and propense toward sinners whereto this belongs that he himselfe be compassed with infirmity and thereupon offer for his owne sinnes as well as for the peoples 3. That he must be called to this office of God himselfe Now in an order retrograde or reverse beginning with the last he demonstrates that all these agree with Christ Whence it followes that Christ hath a truly Priestly dignity which he received from God and is touched with singular compassion toward the afflicted and will afford his owne people not onely opportune helpe but eternall happinesse 5. So also Christ glorified not himselfe to be made an high Priest Hee begins now with the last property of the high Priest and shewes that it agrees with Christ because Christ did not arrogate to himselfe the honour of this office This he doth to no other end then thereby to shew that the Priesthood of Christ was true and lawfull and that Christ had not been a true Priest if he had assumed this office of himselfe and not been called of God to receive it If I saith Christ glorifie my selfe my glory is nothing it is my Father that glorifies mee By the like reason willing to assert the truth of his doctrine hee denies that he spake of himselfe but refers his doctrine to his Father and professeth that he received it from his Father thereby intimating that his doctrine had not been true had hee spoken it of himselfe That which the Author saith here of Christ is so much the more remarkable because the Priesthood which Christ sustaineth is of that nature that no man can possibly take it upon him no man can possibly have but he upon whom God collates it But some man under the Law might arrogate the legall Priesthood and some did arrogate it when their state was corrupt But this high Priesthood of Christ to minister eternally in the Sanctuary of heaven to have absolute power and authority to take away from us all punishments of our sinnes to succour and helpe us in our miseries to deliver us from death and translate us to eternall life for these are the functions of his high Priesthood no mortall man can challenge this Priesthood or usurpe it or execute the functions of it unlesse God himselfe qualifie and raise him to such high faculties Therefore also the Author speaking of Christ and his high Priesthood used the word glorified that Christ glorified not himselfe because the Priesthood of Christ is a most glorious office containing most glorious functions all tending to eternall glory Hence it is manifest that Christ is not supreme God for if he were so from whom else could he receive this glory but from himselfe But this the Author plainly denyes shewing that otherwise hee could not bee a true and lawfull high Priest and therefore he was not the supreme God And we will passe by this point also that the supreme God can no way bee a Priest But he that said unto him Thou art my Sonne to day have I begotten thee The Author saith not barely that Christ was made a high Priest by God but presently produceth Gods edicts wherein he ordained Christ to be a high Priest from whence it manifestly appears that Christ did not arrogate the Priesthood to himselfe but was ordained into it by God himselfe The first of these edicts is taken out of Psalme 2. The other Psal 110. That these words were spoken of God himselfe no man can bee ignorant but in these very words Christ is ordained high Priest whence it manifestly follows that hee tooke not this dignity from himselfe but received it of God Concerning the former of these testimonies we have spoken sufficiently chap. 1.5 We shall here note only three things 1. That the God who or dained Christ to be high Priest was the Father of Christ For the Father only hath power to call Christ by the name of his Sonne as in these words he did Whence it appeares that Christ in this place how great soever he be yea as he is the Sonne of God is opposed to God and it and of him it is denyed that he tooke the Priesthood to himselfe 2. That the Priestly office of Christ is not really distinguished from his Kingly because these words of the Psalme Thou art my Sonne to day have I begotten thee which as we saw in the first chap. treat of Christs Kingly dignity in regard whereof he is chiefly the Sonne of God are by the Author in this place applyed to his Priesthood Wee may further adde here That Christ performed not his Priestly office at least not perfectly at the time when hee suffered the death of the Crosse neither was his death a perfect oblation expiatory for these words of the Psalme are cleerly interpreted by St. Paul of his resurrection and glory Act. 13. and here above chap. 1. But Christ in his death was most deeply humbled and debased Whereas in these words of the Psalme he is declared the Sonne of God and withall became far more excellent then the Angels as appeares before chap. 1.4,5 But in respect of his death most especially he was much lesse then the Angels As Christ suffered death hee exercised not his Kingly office but only did that whereby he might attaine it but when hee administers his Priestly office he withall executes the parts of his Kingly function Wherefore hee did not execute it actually in his death but was thereby prepared to execute it 3. In those words of the Psalme Thou art my Sonne to day have I begotten thee there is no intimation of any generation or begetting of Christ from the essence of his Father before all worlds but of such a generation whereby Christ was ordained a high Priest of God and therefore of such a one as was done in time for Christ was not made our high Priest from all eternity but from a certaine time namely upon his Resurrection 6. As he saith also in another place The other testimony of Scripture shewing the decree of God taken Psal 110. Hee saith i. God saith Thou art a Priest for ever In this testimony there is expresse treating of Christs Priesthood Whence it appeares that it was also treated of in the former testimony seeing both
the testimonies are alleadged for the same thing Some men that they may elude the true sense of the former testimony which the Holy Ghost shewes to be in the words Thou art my Sonne To day have I begotten thee say that those words are not alleadged as a testimony of Gods collating the Priesthood upon Christ but as a description of him who conferred this office upon him There men doe a manifest injury to the truth and to the words of the Author For how should these following words agree with the former as he saith also in another place doth hee not by these latter words manifestly declare that now another place or Psalm is cited by him wherein the same point is proved for which the former testimony was produced For ever The Priestood of Christ shall last for ever in the person of Christ without ever having any successour in his office for his office shall last as long as there needs any expiation for sinnes even to the end of the world and so long he shall continue in that office After the order of Melchisedeck The duration or terme of Christs Priesthood shall runne out like the duration of Melchisedecks Priesthood or as the Author expresseth himselfe afterward chap. 7.15 after the similitude of Melchisedeck But of these words we shall speake further chap. 7. where the Author explicates this likenesse more fully But here he tacitly meets with a doubt which some man might imagine touching the Priesthood of Christ in that Christ descended not from the family of Aaron or tribe of Levi to which tribe the Priesthood was limited by the Law of God For the type of Melchisedeck doth not only require an eternall Priesthood but also requires that no respect of tribe or family should be had therein as we shall shew hereafter 7. Who in the dayes of his flesh From the third property required in a high Priest and concluded to agree with Christ he ascends now to the second property and saith that Christ also was compassed with infirmity and by reason thereof offered for himselfe This he shews in this 7. verse and then at the 8. verse he inferres that from this infirmity Christ learned to be mercifull toward the distressed and afflicted In the dayes of his flesh By flesh hee understands the infirmity of Christ for flesh is the subject of infirmity and in a manner the cause of it And the dayes of his flesh are the dayes wherein he suffered for in that time chiefly his infirmity most appeared For then it most appeared that Christ was flesh When he had offered prayers and supplications Now he shews that Christ offered also for himselfe Of which his oblation his infirmity and afflictions were the cause the sence whereof how deepely it struck into his soule and how greatly it exercised him appeares from the things which he offered For he shews distinctly both what he offered and to whom as also the adjunct of his offering and the issue of it The matter of his offering was Prayers This is a generall word to signifie all petitions or rather all kinde of speech unto God And supplications which are the prayers or petitions of supplicants whose manner is to fall upon their knees casting themselves at the feet or touching the knees of them to whom they make their prayer The originall word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as some Interpreters note doth properly signifie an olive-branch wrapped about with wooll which supplicants held in their hands Hence we may easily imagine in what anguish of soule Christ was and what pangs of paine he felt when he was driven to such earnest prayers and devout supplications But what prayers and supplications the Author means will appeare from the words following wherein the person to whom he prayed is described in such manner that thence wee may easily understand what he prayed although the adjunct of his prayer doth partly also declare it Vnto him that was able to save him from death In these words he shews not only the person to whom Christ offered but also the cause why he offered him prayers and what the thing was for which he so earnestly prayed And this is the cause why he would describe God after this manner rather then simply name him for therefore he so devoutly supplicated to God because God onely is hee that can save from death which Christ by his prayers chiefly requested He indeed requested some other things besides for in the garden hee petitioned that the cup might passe from him i. he there was an humble supplicant prostrate upon his knees and afterward on his face praying againe and againe with great ardour of minde that hee might be delivered from the great anguish and heavinesse which hee felt in his soule And hanging upon the crosse he poured forth this lamentation unto God My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Wherein hee prayed that God would put an ease and an end to his extreme paines But the summe and breviate or at least the head of all those prayers was this for his delivery from death For hee that is delivered from death in that sence that Christ here desired hee hath found an end of all paines both of soule and body and hath obtained supreme happinesse This delivery Christ prayed for in commending his Spirit to God when he was ready to expire For to commend the spirit to God or to pray that God would receive it into his hands what is it else but to pray that he would preserve it and afterward restore it and consequently to recal him from death to life whose spirit it is That the Author had respect to these prayers of Christ it may appeare by their adjunct which he also mentions in saying That his prayers were offered up With strong crying and teares The holy History of the Evangelists doe testifie that Christ hanging upon the Crosse complained in the words of the Psalme with a great cry that God had forsaken him and afterward being ready to expire he commended his Spirit to God But the Sacred History mentions not any teares of Christ shed at that time yet notwithstanding it appeares that it was so and was knowne to the Authour to bee so Now this cry and teares doe further shew how deepely the sence of paine was impressed into him when it forced him to expresse such cryes and teares Hence it appeares further that Christ thus exercised with so great a sence of paines himselfe cannot but be moved at the miseries and paines of his people cannot but willingly hear the dolefull cryes and complaines and affoord his opportune succour and help in their afflictions and distresses From these words of the Authour it appeares how Christ offered for himselfe namely that hee offered not himselfe but his prayers for himselfe and then he offered them not when he became immortall in his heavenly Tabernacle but in the dayes of his flesh or infirmity For when he became immortall he could not
then offer for this end that he might be saved from death which as wee have cleared from the words of the Authour was indeed the end of his offering Besides being in heaven he offered himselfe immaculate and therefore had no need to offer for himselfe there Wherefore Christ offered one way for himselfe and another way for us for for himselfe hee offered prayers on earth for us he offered himselfe in heaven for himselfe when yet he was mortall or in the dayes of his flesh for us when he was made an immortall and eternall Spirit And was heard The effect and issue of these prayers offered was this that he was delivered and saved not from death for hee suffered it and dyed but out of death from whence he was raised For whom God heareth praying in that manner him he delivers and frees though not from his misery before he suffer it yet out of it after hee hath suffered So speakes David as a type of Christ Psal 22.21 Thou hast heard mee from the hornes of the Vnicornes i. as learned men have noted thou hast heard to save me from extreame dangers So that the word heard is taken here Metonymically to include the effect of his hearing hee was heard and saved In that he feared Hee was saved from or out of the thing hee feared namely out of death The originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which some take for a passionate feare the object whereof here in Christ was death and so by a Metonymie feare is here put for death the act for the object or thing to be feared For of all terrours death is most terrible and fearfull and this feare was the cause of his prayers and supplications at least of the cryes and teares wherewith they were offered And then this example of Christ may teach us partly with what fervency of soule we must implore the help of God in the times of our distresses partly what things especially we must pray for partly wherein that opportune help chiefly consists whereof the Author spake in the end of the former chapter namely in this that Christ saveth us out of death into eternall life Others take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a reverentiall or religious feare for this sence is set in the margent of our last translation that he was heard for his pietie And then the object of his pietie reverence or fear was God to whom he prayed And so this feare of God was the proper motive to this offering of Christ and to all the circumstances of his offering His offering it selfe proceeded from his pietie or feare of God for every offering is an act of pietie His prayers and supplications proceeded from it for prayer also is an act of pietie his cryes and teares proceeded from it for they also are concurrents of pietie and fervent devotion His exaudition in being heard of God proceeded from it for Gods hearing of our prayers is the fruit of our pietie and devotion seeing God heareth not impious and sinfull persons but such as are pious to reverence and worship him and doe his will those hee heareth John 9.31 The prayers of Christ were supplications i. as before is noted petitions exhibited upon the knees with great worship and reverence given to God His prayers in the garden were such supplications performed with great worship and reverence bowing toward God for first hee fell upon his knees and afterward hee went more humbly and fell upon his face And his prayers on the crosse were supplications also as the Author termeth them and therefore performed with reverent bowing also such as was possible for Christ to use in that case being stretched and nailed upon the crosse where because he could not bow his knees therefore as the Sacred story relates it hee bowed his head when hee cryed and commended his spirit unto God Which bowing of his head was not a simple act of a dying man as some Interpreters slightly passe it over but an act of worship and reverence of a pious man that was making his offering unto God by prayers and supplications adding cryes and teares and all religious meanes for exaudition that God might heare him Wherefore it carries a very congruous sence to say that Christ was heard for his pietie i. for the feare and reverence he used toward God in his prayers and supplications for fear is the inward motion of the soule from which the outward worship and reverend bowings of the body do proceed And these outward reverences of bowing the head bowing the body and bowing the knees are acts of worship unto God which have beene used by Gods people in all ages of the world For bowing the head See Gen. 24.26.48 and Exod. 4.31 and Exod. 12.27 and Exod. 34.8 and 1. Chro. 29.20 and 2. Chro. 20.18 and 2. Chro. 29.30 and Nehem. 8.6 Hence it appeares also from this example of Christ that our prayers and supplications unto God should proceed from inward piety and fear of God and should be offered unto him with outward worship and reverence accompanyed with cryes and teares in times of extreme distresses if we mean to have exaudition that God should graciously heare us 8. Who though he were a son Christ by the evils which he suffered became such a one as to have compassion on those who labour to obey God through difficulties and sufferings Hee learned obedience He learned what it is to obey God what a difficult and harsh duty it is how bitter and unpleasing to flesh and blood For in this place hee takes obedience for that part of obedience which is seene in difficult and hard cases such as are these to be afflicted and suffer death for the justice and truth of God Yet I conceive the word obedience is here to be understood more literally and derivatively from audience for a giving of audience Christ who upon his prayers and supplications made to God with cryes and teares to save him from death had audience of God and was heard therein did therby learne to give audience and hearing to his people when in their distresses they offer up prayers and supplications with cryes and teares to him thereby to have compassion on them and deliver them from their distresses For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is here fitly renderd obedience doth carry an elegant symploce of sence both of audience to heare another what he would have done and of obedience to doe the thing which he hath heard And that very act of compassion in Christ in hearing the distressed though it be his audience to them yet it is his obedience to God who ordained a high Priest for that function By the things that hee suffered In the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of or from the things that he suffered so it is rendred Mat. 24.32 Learne a parable of the figtree Christ by or from his owne evills and sufferings learned what bitternesse and trouble there lyes in suffering persecutions for righteousnesse
are after the order of Aaron For Melchisedec was both a King and a Priest the Levites were onely Priests he had no Priestly pedigree these must have so he had neither predecessor nor successor these succeed one another he is an eternall Priest these dye lastly he is greater and worthier then Abraham himselfe and therefore much more so then the Leviticall Priests After the order of Melchisedec The order of Melchisedec is a little otherwise taken then the order of Aaron for by that is signified a likenesse onely with the Priest Melchisedec as the Author speakes afterward ver 15. but in this is contained not onely a likenesse with Aaron but also a naturall succession into his place and Priesthood 12. For the Priesthood being changed there is made of necessity a change also of the Law He brings a reason which notwithstanding was before tacitely shewed in the parenthesis which we explicated why a Priest must be ordained according to Aaron and no other rise according to the order of Melchisedec if by the Aaronicall Priesthood mens sins could have beene expiated perfectly The reason is because the Priesthood could not be abrogated or changed unlesse the Law whereby it was established were abrogated and changed also Wherefore either to preserve the authority of the Law it selfe if not for the dignity of the Leviticall Priesthood a Priest must have beene ordained after the order of Aaron if perfection came by that Priesthood But because this was not done therefore it is manifest that perfection could not be given by that Priesthood and consequently for the imperfection of it there was good cause it should expire He saith the Priesthood was changed not onely for that it was translated to another Tribe diverse from that of Levi wherein a Priest was ordained after the order of Melchisedec but also in that the Priesthood it selfe was altered and changed into another kinde different from the former Although to the end the Author might use this word in this latter sense for altered therefore from the former sense of changing the Tribe he might take occasion consequently to use it of the Law thereby to signifie the abrogation of the Law For hence afterward at the eighteenth verse when he speakes of the Law alone instead of the word changed he puts disanulling or abrogating And the abrogation of the Law though in this place it properly be referred to that part of the Law whereby the Aaronicall Priesthood was established yet we must know that upon the abrogation of that Sacerdotall Law all the force and authority of the Law of Moses was disanulled also especially concerning externall rites and ceremonies For together with the Priesthood not some one Law fell alone but many Lawes and divers rites fell with it neither is there any cause to thinke but that upon the expiring of so many Lawes all the rest of the same kinde and nature died also And besides upon the abrogation of one Commandement of Moses Law is not that bond of the Law dissolved which layes a curse upon him that continues not in all things that are written in the booke of the Law but upon the dissolution of this bond the whole frame of the Law must needs fall asunder For from that bond it appeares that it was the minde of the Law-maker that all the precepts or commandements of that Law should either stand together or by the fall of one the authority of the whole Law should faile 13. For he of whom these things are spoken Here the Author proves that the Priesthood being changed or another Priest after the order of Melchisedec being ordained the Law thereupon must needs bee changed or abrogated The reason is because the person designed by these words Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec descended not from Levi but from another Tribe out of which no person descending might lawfully approach to the Altar to offer sacrifice as a Priest But the Law which ordained the Priesthood of Aaron did expresly provide that no man not of the Tribe of Levi and no man of that Tribe not of the family of Aaron should exercise the Priesthood Whence it is manifest that a Priest after the order of Melchisedec could not be ordained unlesse the Law were violated Pertaining to another Tribe of which no man gave attendance at the Altar Attendance at the Altar is the performance of the Ceremonies by officiating at the Sacrifices and ordering those things that appertained to the Altar to such other services And attendance here must not be taken for the act of doing it but for the right to do it for it is wel knowne that some Kings did dare de facto to approach unto the Altar burn Incense there but by usurpation and without any right to do it 14. For it is evident our Lord sprang out of Iudah of which Tribe Moses spake nothing concerning Priesthood Here he confirmes his former reason that Christ our Lord of whom these words were spoken that he was a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec pertained to a Tribe of which no man gave attendance at the Altar or performed the office of Priesthood The reason is because it is evident that he sprang out of Judah of which Tribe Moses spake nothing concerning the Priesthood and therefore by the Law had no right to the Priesthood for this followes upon the former And the Author takes it for granted that he of whom the words of the Psalme are spoken is our Lord Christ the annointed of God That Christ sprang out of the Tribe of Judah he saith it is evident i. generally knowne to all men for no man was ignorant that Christ came from the line of David And he had good reason to take this for granted because these words of the Psalme Thou art a Priest for ever are spoken of him whom David in the beginning of that Psalme calleth his Lord speaking of him in the spirit but he that is the Lord of David must needs be our Lord also who seeing he is mentioned of the Lord Jehovah or the most high and onely God as a distinct person to whom the words were spoken from him that spake them Sit thou at my right hand and Thou art a Priest for ever certainely he can be no other then Christ our Lord the anointed of God For that this was acknowledged of the Masters and Doctors among the Jewes it is manifest from hence that Christ disputing with the Pharisees supposeth it as a thing no way doubtfull but confessed of all when he demanded of them How David could call Christ his Lord seeing as they had answered him he was his son For unlesse they had all acknowledged it the answer had beene easie to say that Christ was neither that Lord nor so called of David The Author also supposeth it for granted that our Lord Christ sprang from the Tribe of Judah because he wrote to them who were already perswaded that
narrowly and therein also the same things are expressed sometime more amply and sometime more briefly Whereof we must take notice for the better understanding and reconciling of severall places So the word Faith is sometime taken so narrowly that salvation and justification is ascribed to it alone and sometime again more largely to comprise other vertues in it sometime more sometime fewer according as the sense of the word is extended or restrained I will put my lawes into their minde and write them in their hearts Here he begins to describe the new Covenant q.d. In the old Covenant I wrote some of my Lawes in tables of stone and Moses wrote other some in a booke and they were put in the Arke to be kept there But my new Covenant shall not be according to that way but by it I will write my Laws in their hearts and put them in their mindes to be kept there They shall not be arbitrary and positive Lawes flowing from my sole will and pleasure whereof their hearts can conceive no reason and whereof their memories may easily faile such as were most Lawes in my former Covenant but they shall be only naturall Lawes grounded only upon naturall honesty and upon the dictates of right reason that their mindes may easily conceive them and their memories retaine them And their owne consciences shall acknowledge them to be convenient just right and good And besides they shall not have a bare understanding of my Lawes to know them but an hearty affection to doe them Now because Gods Covenant is described in these words therefore hence it appeares that this writing of Gods Laws in mens minds and hearts dependes and proceeds from the nature of the Covenant And therefore these words must bee taken within their force and efficacie and not necessarily extended to the very effect of the writing which is alway left in the free power of man For this is intimated unto us by the following words of God at the 12. verse wherein God opens unto us the cause manner or meanes of this which containeth wonderfull grace and mercy of God offered to his people for by this means he saith it would come to passe that they would serve him and keep his Laws with so great fervency But this way Gods Laws are written upon none but willing hearts The sense therefore is I will make such a Covenant that shall have sufficient force and power to containe my people in their duties For to have Gods Laws written in our mindes and hearts is nothing else but to be so knowing so mindfull and so affected with them that we never decline from them but alwayes observe them with all our endeavour And I will be to them a God This follows from the former as the former clause opposite to this and I regarded them not followed from the people 's not continuing in his Covenant which in like manner is opposed to the writing of Gods Laws in mens hearts For God to be a God unto us is to be our sovereigne Protector to defend us from all evill and to be our sovereigne Benefactor to accumulate us with all his blessings And they shall be to me a people Either this is really the same with the former and an amplification of it consisting of a mutuall relation such as we had before in these words I will be to him a father and he shall be to me a son chap. 1.5 Or else it is as much as if the Author had said And they shall deale by me as my people ought to doe both of us shall performe our parts respectively I by protecting and benefiting them they by worshipping and serving me 11. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother saying Know the Lord They shall not need to admonish and exhort one another first to know my lawes and decrees and after upon knowledge thereof to observe them but all of them shall bee carried with such alacrity of minde to know and obey mee that none shall need any remembrancer to put him in minde of it Neighbour and brother are taken here for the same for in the Law these three names are coincident neighbour brother and friend See Lev. 19.18 For all shall know me from the least to the greatest Here againe God speaks of the efficacie of this Covenant and not of the effect it selfe for it shall be able to produce an universall knowledge of God though in some single persons it produce it not actually All of al sorts from the least age to the greatest yong old from the least state to the greatest poor and rich and from the least degree to the greatest low and high 12. For I will be mercifull to their unrighteousnesse and their sinnes and their iniquities will I remember no more Here God opens unto us the cause of his ardent affection towards us and withall unfolds the nature of this Covenant namely that therein he will be mercifull to all the sinnes of his people to their unrighteousnesses their transgressions and iniquities and will never remember them more This so great a benefit must needs oblige all mens mindes and in a manner constraine them to consecrate themselves wholly unto God and constantly to persist in the daily observation of his Lawes Which effect seeing every remission of sinne cannot produce therefore we must here understand such a one as hath the power to doe it namely a plenary and perfect remission whereby such as are truly and seriously penitent and afterward live holily are released from the guilt or bond of all their former sinnes not only in respect of temporall punishment and death but also of eternall death and withall eternall life is ordained for them For this remission of sinnes adding the condition of repentance hath this vertue and power in it to withdraw men from sinne and for the future to devote themselves to God The words unrighteousnesse sins and iniquities doe in like manner teach us that this remission is plenary and perfect extended to all manner of sinnes even the most heynous Hence we see that this plenary remission of sinnes is a promise proper to the new Covenant For in these words is evidently proved what he said before concerning the new Covenant that it was established upon better promises then the old This is the mysticall sense of those words of the Prophet the literall sense was that God would deliver the people of the Jewes from the captivity of Babylon and would so blot out their former wickednesse and foule sinnes that hee would acquit them from all further temporall punishments for them for which so great benefit the people must needs bee marveilously bound to God and induced to serve him constantly for ever after But this sense is far too slender to answer fully and solidly unto words of so high a nature For at that time to speake properly God neither made any new Covenant different from the former neither was
the Sacrifice takes efficacy and force to purge sin from the subsequent oblation of Christ in offering himselfe in heaven but also as it is the bloud of the Covenant it received great force from the subsequent resurrection and glory of Christ For the death of Christ is as it were animated and quickned by his Resurrection and glory and then are the mightie effects of it when he that suffered death to confirm the new covenant is thereupon acknowledged to be the Sonne of God and the Christ which certainly could not have been without his Resurrection and the subsequent glory of it For then wee plainely perceive the boundlesse love of God in delivering Christ to death for us and the boundlesse love of Christ in dying for us from both which wee may easily draw an undoubted hope of our salvation And then also wee see from his most shamefull death a passage open to immortall life and lastly then we esteem the Covenant most sacred that was confirmed by a death so precious But if Christ had not risen from the dead who therefore died that he might appear to be the Christ and the King over Gods people his death had thereby lost all the force of it yea it would have been of force to nullifie the faith of all his promises But he had promised us eternal life in the Name of his Father and that he himself would give it us by raising us from the dead yea hee openly said of himselfe that he would rise the third day thereby to confirm his doctine wherefore unles the event had been answerable his doctrine had been stripped of all authority But let us returne to the offering of Christ which the Author opposeth to the offering of the old high Priest for severall respects 1. In that Christ offered through the Spirit and the eternall Spirit but the high Priest under the Law did enter the Holy place and offer through his infirmitie a weake man compassed with the flesh But Christ was filled with the eternall Spirit i. with the power of God which clarified him from all mortalitie and made him eternall subject to no destruction Now this Spirit seemes to be called eternall not onely because it eternally resides in Christ but because it makes him to become eternall Of which Spirit if Christ had been destitute he could not have offered himselfe in that heavenly Sanctuary to have remained there for ever Therefore in these words about which Interpreters have diverse disputes as men must needs do when the genuine sence of any place is either not perceived or not allowed is expressed the cause how Christ being before not onely of a mortall nature and compassed with flesh but also slaine as a sacrifice could afterward enter the heavenly Sanctuary the palace of immortality and there as a Priest offer himselfe to God This he saith was effected by the benefit of the eternall Spirit who throughly consecrated Christ and devested him from all naturall and terrene infirmities That which hee had spoken before chap. 7. ver 16. that Christ was made a Priest after the power of an endlesse life now hee saith againe in other words that Christ offered through the eternall Spirit for if wee looke into the thing it selfe what is the power of an endlesse life other then this eternall Spirit In a like manner Paul treating of Christ as he is ordained and declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead i. as God after his resurrection made him the celestiall and eternall King of his people with supreme power mentions the Spirit of holinesse or sanctification Rom. 1.4 and he saith that Christ was declared the Sonne of God according to the Spirit of holinesse as he was made of the seed of David according to the flesh For seeing he opposeth this Spirit to the flesh of Christ i. to whatsoever was humane in his nature what can he else understand but the power of Gods Spirit powred upon Christ which abolishing from him all his mortall condition did throughly consecrate him unto God made him a person most divine and most like unto God in nature and power and rendered him fully capable of a celestiall and eternall kingdome Hither also must that of Peter be referred where he saith as it is in the Greek that Christ was mortified in the flesh but vivified by the Spirit 1 Pet. 3.18 where as the flesh of Christ is made the cause of his mortality and consequently of his death so is the Spirit namely of God in Christ made the spring and fountaine of his vivification or life 2. He opposeth the offering of Christ to that of the old high Priest in that Christ offered himselfe but the Legall Priest offered not himselfe but the bloud of slaine beasts but what force could that bloud have being offered and sprinkled before the Mercy-seate for the purifying of the flesh if we respect the nature of the thing But Christ himselfe being offered for us in the heavenly Tabernacle was he not a most acceptable sacrifice to God Is there any sin of those that are truly faithfull in Christ which by the offering of so holy a Sacrifice and by the authority and care of so great an high Priest with his heavenly Father could not be expiated 3. In that hee offered himselfe without spot or blemish For the old sacrifice must bee very pure and free from any spot wherefore seeing our high Priest himselfe was the sacrifice hee must needs bee void of all spot or blemish But the old high Priest when he entered the most holy place and offered was not without spot or blemish for even then he was to procure the expiation no lesse of his owne sins then of the peoples But Christ when he entered the heavenly Sanctuary and offered himselfe to God was then free from all spot not onely in respect of his most innocent life which he passed without the least spot of sinne but also which as wee said in the seventh Chapter the Author chiefly respecteth in respect of his immortall nature which he obtained free from all spot of infirmity when he was quickned with that eternall Spirit whereby he entered the heavenly Sanctuary But what is meant by this offering of Christ wee have declared before For these things are not properly spoken of Christ but onely comparatively and allusively to the ancient high Priest So that by this offering of Christ is signified his singular and onely care for the expiation of our sins and for our salvation Yet it is a care worthy and sutable to so great an high Priest who is not destitute of power in himselfe to conferre salvation upon us but is forced to obtaine it from another as the old high Priest was but is one that enjoyeth all command both in heaven and earth one that exerciseth all Judgement delivered over unto him from his Father and one that by his owne proper power doth release us from all guilt of our sins
said where a Testament is there must needs bee the death of the Testator or at least as in leagues which in a manner resemble Testaments the death of some creature whereby the League is confirmed by him that makes it for till death intervene a Testament or League is of no force and strength which exception or rather which correction of his generall saying why it was not added here the cause hath been already shewed We may also answer the former objection thus That his reasoning here is comparative by way of similitude not explicitely but contractedly as is ofen used And the words are to be taken as if he had said as when a Testament is made the death of the Testator must needs accede because it must be animated by the death of the Testator for while the Testator lives the Testament lives not or is not in force So also when the new League or Testament was ordained his death must accede that made it and was in stead of the Testator that the Testament might be firme and of force For though Christ made not the new Testament as the Author or principall agent of it yet because hee was the Mediator and instrument of his Father to speed it in his Fathers name therefore he may be said to have made it for wee commonly attribute the same action both to the agent who is the prime cause of it and to the Instrument who is the means of it From hence it manifestly appears what force the bloud of Christ hath in procuring us remission of sinnes namely these two forces first that by it the New Testament was established or confirmed and secondly that thereupon he offered himselfe to God for us in heaven So that his bloud was confirmatory to settle the eternall inheritance upon us and expiatory to procure an eternall redemption of our sinnes whereof the former is handled in this verse the latter in those precedent Why Christ is called here the Testator we have before sufficiently reasoned namely because he was the maine witnesse to certifie the truth of the Testament by his death and because he was the maine party by whose death the Testament which till then lay dead became alive and valid to be of force and effect Yet here wee shall adde one reason more because it will serve wondrously to annimate our faith and love toward Christ and that is because the inheritance conveyed unto us by this New Testament is properly the inheritance of Christ for hee is the unigenit or only begotten Sonne of God and was ordained to be Lord and heire of all his Fathers estate and hath admitted us that will accept of it to be co-heires and fellow-partners with him in it and dyed as the Testator to settle the possession of it upon us Or to speake in the words of Paul He hath received us to the glory of God Rom. 15.7 And the words of Christ to his Disciples tend to this sense I appoâ—nt unto you a Kingdome as my Father hath appointed unto mee Luke 22.29 17. For a testament is of force after men are dead This is the reason why the death of the testator must accede to the testament hee hath made because all the while the testator lives his testament is dead and of no force to give any possession to the heire of the inheritance and estate thereby to be conveyed but when the testator is dead then the testament takes life and becomes of force for then the heire hath an actuall right and power to enter upon the inheritance And therefore he addes Otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth These are the same words in effect with the former and are but a consequence from them by that rule of reasoning which we call conversion by contraposition For if a testament be of force when the testator is dead then it must needs follow that while the testator is not dead the testament is of no force Which kinde of reasoning is frequent in Scripture yet among many passages we shall instance but in this one and in this the rather because the texts of it are much obscured by Interpreters who labour to reconcile them as if they seemed opposite whereas no two texts can be more according for they are wholly equipollent and each consequent to the other Christ saith He that is not with me is against me Mat. 12.30 and he saith againe He that is not against us is for us or which is all one He that is not against me is with me Luke 9.50 This latter saying in Luke is so farre from being opposite or contrary to the former in Matthew that it is a most immediate and necessary consequence from it For if this saying be true as it is because the truth hath said it He that is not with Christ is against him Then this also from thence must needs follow for a truth He that is not against Christ is with him Because this latter saying is the conversion of the former by contraposition 18. Whereupon neither the first was dedicated without bloud What he had said before in generall of testaments now he declares in particular and proves by an example in the first or Old Testament and makes way for himselfe to apply the same unto Christ and to the New Testament established by him For because under the Old Testament it selfe was confirmed by bloud and because almost all things were cleansed by bloud at least sinnes could not be cleansed without shedding of bloud Therefore from hence he gathers by way of similitude that death and shedding of bloud must needs intervene under the New Testament that thereby both the Testament it selfe might be confirmed and our sinnes purged Was dedâ—cated The Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as Interpreters note is properly said when some solemne act is done whereby a new thing being perfected and finished begins to come in use So the Consecration of Solomons new Temple was called the Dedication of it and the Consecration of the new Altar erected by Judas Maccabeus was called the Dedication of it 1 Maccab. 4.56 And the annuall celebration of that dedication is called the feast of the dedication John 10.22 yet this word applied to leagues signifies nothing else but to confirme them And leagues are then confirmed when they are so ratified as thereby they have force and strength to become obligatory and binding to all parties therein interessed For the confirmation of a league is some solemne act done by the confederates or in their name whereby they mutually so binde their faith that it shall not bee lawfull for either party to rescinde or revoke the league And although there bee many formes of confirmation for leagues yet anciently the usuall forme was by bloud and that of the Old Testament was performed by the bloud of beasts Wherefore with good reason the Author saith that it was not dedicate or confirmed without bloud i. it began not to come
the Throne of the Majesty in the heavens i. that he himselfe by virtue of a supreme power over all things given him by his Father doth save his owne people that he himselfe doth release them from the guilt of all their sins and free them from all punishments and at last settle them in the reall possession of eternall blessednesse In these words thus transferied from the old high Priest unto Christ the metaphor is so much the neater and fitter because this way Christ is so said to procure perfect our salvation that withall it may appeare what difference in that regard there is between God and Christ and because Christ is thus farre like to one appearing and interceding for others in that he is very desirous and carefull of our salvation yet hath not the power to save us from himselfe but hath received it all from God So that in this respect Christ may bee said to be and is our Intecessour and Advocate and God of his mercy to conferre salvation upon us Besides in the Legall high Priest his appearance was a thing different and distinct from his offering though both were done at once and united in time because the high Priest was one and the offering another for the high Priest appeared but the bloud of the sacrifice was offered But in Christ our high Priest the offering and appearance as also the intercession were really the same if his appearance and intercession be taken not for his bare comming to his Father but for his comming joyned with his procuration of our salvation as here they must be taken because in Christ the Priest and the offering were the same For Christ by his appearance offers himselfe and by offering himselfe he appeares and by offering and appearing he intercedes The particle now is opposed to the times past especially to those of the Old Testament wherein no such high Priest and Advocate appeared in the presence of God for the people of God O the hard condition of those times and contrarily Happy we who have an high Priest and Advocate with the Father Iesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours onely but also for the sins of the whole world 1 John 2.1,2 25. Not yet that he should offer himselfe often The particle nor yet shews that the Author delivers two negatives concerning Christ our high Priest One is that he is not entered into the holy places made with hands but into heaven it selfe for this he taught in the former verse The other when he entered into heaven yet he did not so enter that he should iterate the oblation of himselfe and offer himselfe often contrary to the manner of the legall high Priests under the Law who were by Law constrained often to iterate their offering of bloud in the holy place This he teacheth in this verse which he therefore seemes to do that hence also it may appeare how farre the sacrifice of Christ excelled the Legall sacrifices which must needs be often offered for no other cause but by reason of their imperfection From which respect he gathers in the next Chapter that they did not please God and must at length be abrogated and were abrogated by the sacrifice of Christ And Christ should be said to offer himselfe often if once he should breake off his first appearance before God and going out of his heavenly Sanctuary should re enter in thither to iterate his offering For his oblation once begun is not iterated and multiplyed by the duration or continuation of it for then seeing Christ doth perpetually appeare and intercede for us and therefore perpetually offer the Author could not affirme that Christ hath offered himselfe onely once and by one oblation of himselfe to perfect for ever those that are sanctified There was not required a double entrance into the earthly holy place to make a double oblation when there are two things that are offered and a double slaughter preceded if those things were living creatures But when the thing to be offered is but one the offering of it cannot be iterated unlesse the entrance and the slaughter before the entrance be also iterated For the slaughter must not be made in the holy place it selfe neither can it be in heaven but without the holy place Therefore the Author saith That Christ hath not so entered into the holy places of heaven to performe his offering that he should often iterate it As the high Priest entereth into the holy place every yeare with bloud of others It was the manner of the Legall high Priest to iterate their oblation often And in this opposition betweene Christ and the Legall high Priest that Christ should not offer often but the Legal high Priest every yeare that Christ entered heaven to offer himselfe but the Legall high Priest entered into the holy place with the bloud of others every man sees that the offering of Christ and the entrance of the Legall Priest do answer one another Whence it is manifest that the expiatory offering of Christ as well as that of the Legall Priest was performed by meanes of his entrance into the holy place Entereth He seemes not to use the present tense therefore as if he had respect to a thing yet in being and practise among the people of the Jews but rather in an accustomed manner of speech to draw the minde of the reader to a thing as it were present after which forme he spake also before ver 22. And in the Gospel of Marke we often meet with the like manner of speech That the Legall Priest entered with bloud hath the same sence with the saying before that he entered by bloud ver 12. yet in the Greek here it is in bloud which for the sence of it is truly translated with bloud So John writes that Christ came in water and bloud i. with water and bloud though there our English Translation render it by water and bloud to suite the particle by going immediately before 1 John 5.6 But the Author shuns to say That the Legall high Priest was wont to enter the holy place with bloud though this were the proper saying left the fitnesse of the comparison betweene Christ and the Legall Priest should in this respect be lost whereof see what we have said before ver 12. Of others The bloud wherewith the Legall Priest entered into the holy place was not his owne but the bloud of other creatures for he entered with the bloud of Goats and Calves as it is before ver 12. 26. For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world He proves why Christ must not offer himselfe often by an argument from an absurdity that would follow upon it if he did so because then he must often have suffered seeing the oblation of a living creature cannot be made without slaughter and suffering and he must have suffered also from the foundation of the world But why from
were yet time enough for Christ to iterate his offerings and by a just proportion equall the number of the legall offerings although hee began not to suffer and offer himselfe from the foundation of the world For because hee suffered and offered himselfe in the end of the world hence it appeares that there is not time enough yet to come to serve for the multitude of his sufferings and offerings But the time wherein Christ came is therefore called the end of the world because it is the last age of the world and as it were the old age of it and because the other comming of Christ which is joyned with the consummation and end of the world is alwayes supposed to be at hand which could in no wise be if the offering of Christ were to be iterated answerably to the just number and proportion of the old Legall offerings But the holy Ghost would have us perpetually wait for the expectation of Christs comming For that his comming and together with it the end of the world is yet deferred and that so many ages have passed since his first comming into the world seating upon his heavenly throne this in a manner is accidentall by reason of the long suffering of God who is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance 2 Pet. 3.9 To put away sin by the sacrifice of himselfe He shews the finall cause of the comming and appearance of Christ which is for the putting away of sin which is done when all the force and power of sin is destroyed Which destruction of sin is effected two wayes the one is when sin hath no power to condemne men the other when it hath no power to subdue men by enthralling them under the yoke of it That both these effects might be produced Christ hath appeared both that he might deliver men from the punishment of sinne and also from the dominion of it even freeing them from sin it selfe Now the meanes whereby Christ hath put away sinne in destroying the power of it is by the sacrifice of himselfe For this act may be joyned as well with the word suffered as with appeared as other Interpreters also have observed How the sacrifice of Christ purgeth away our sins For Christ by the sacrifice of himselfe hath cashired and put away sinne by taking from it all it power to condemne and to reigne which though we have declared before yet are we willing to repeat it againe because the matter is of such moment that if it may be we might drive and fasten it throughly into mens mindes For as concerning the guilt and punishments of sinnes can there bee any sinnes so that we doe our duty which a sacrifice so acceptable to God offered in the Sanctuary of heaven and by so great an high Priest cannot expiate Can there be any danger that he will deale negligently in our cause who offered up himselfe as a sacrifice for our sinnes and who having himselfe suffered all those miseries and pressures that can possibly befall us hath assumed a minde so prone to pity us Hath not yet the wished effect been answerable to so holy a sacrifice and to so carefull a provision of our high Priest Is not the power of our salvation in the power of our high Priest and in his hand to release whom he will of sinne and to bestow eternall life and whatsoever good thing besides upon whom he will Doth he not negotiate the matter with his most deare Father who himselfe burnes with a desire of our salvation who himselfe hath made a sacred Covenant for the remission of our sinnes who himselfe ordained the holy Sacrifice for our sinnes who himselfe would have it offered unto him and caused it to be offered who himselfe ordained our high Priest with an oath and committed unto him the whole care of our salvation Now concerning the dominion of sinne for the excussion of the yoke of it can it possibly be that when we perceive so great and so certaine causes and proofes of our eternall salvation and of plenary remission of our sinnes that we should not with all our souls embrace the faith of Christ and devote our selves wholly to him when by this means through the grace and mercy of our God wee are effectually purged and justified from the guilt of all our sins shall we not contend with our whole force to abandon sin for ever after wholy addict our selves to holines shall we not labour to the utmost to preserve this great grace of God entire and whole to our last gaspe that at length we may enjoy the full fruit of it in our deliverance from death and inheritance of eternall life And shall it not mightily incourage us to shake off the yoke of sin in that our heavenly high Priest will perpetually support us with his Spirit supply us with power enough to live holily if we will live so and will strive to do it This therefore is the manner after which Christ by the Sacrifice of himself hath put away sin that neither it might hurt us nor reign in us The Sacrifice of Christ is Christ himself sacrificed being first slain then raised to immortall life that he might enter his heavenly Tabernacle and therein offer himself and appear for us for ever The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here rendred a Sacrifice though it come from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to slay yet it useth not to be taken in Scripture abstractedly for the slaughter but concretly for the creature slaughtered or rather for that part of it which is offered to God But if any man keeping the same sense will joyn these words by the sacrifice of himself with the verb appeared then the particle by must be taken for with and in that sense as we have noted before that John saith Christ came by water and bloud i. with water and bloud not that at his first comming into the world hee shed his bloud but because he therefore came that he might shed his bloud though not forthwith So Christ may be said to appeare with the sacrifice of himselfe not that as soon as he appeared he was made a sacrifice but that he so appeared that in his due time he might be made a sacrifice But we best approve of that sense which joynes these words by the sacrifice of himselfe with the words immediatly preceding to put away sinne For the finall end of the appearance or comming of Christ was to put away sin and the meanes whereby he abolished it was by the sacrifice of himselfe Seeing therefore Christ came in the end of the world that he might abolish sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe therefore hence it appears that he must not often iterate his sacrifice after the manner of the legall high Priest for otherwise he must have begunne this action more early and not have deferred it to the last age of the world 27. And as it
what doth this concerne us and the expiation of our sins that instead of the Legall sacrifices Christ saith he will do or hath done the will of God Therefore the Author shews that this will of God and the execution of it doth consist in the sacrifice and offering of Christ made for us whence also this will of God is tacitly compared with the Legall sacrifices and withall is preferred before them as farre more excellent and acceptable to God Therefore he saith that we are sanctified by it even we who as he presently addeth are sanctified by the offering of the body of Christ In which words he withall teacheth what that will of God is namely that it is the offering of the body of Christ once for all or at least that it is altogether concurrent with this offering For how else should we be said to be sanctified or expiated by this will of God seeing we are sanctified by the offering of the body of Christ For this will of God seems to be opposed thus far to the legall sacrifices that by it we are truly sanctified For while our sanctification is attributed to the will of God as it stands opposed to the legall sacrifices it is tacitely taken from them As if the Author had said By which wil of God we are sanctified not by the old legal sacrifices The will of God is here put not for the action of his will but for the object or matter of his wil for the thing he would have done which he approves and wherein he hath pleasure for it is opposed to the legall sacrifices which he would not have done which he approves not and wherein he hath no pleasure And therefore it signifies the sacrifice and offering of Christ as the object or matter which is now his will as the words following teach us Sanctified is explated purged and cleansed from our sins for which see chap. 9.13 Through the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once for all The offering not of legall sacrifices often made and yearely iterated and therefore ineffectuall and imperfect but of the body of Christ once made is that offering which greatly pleaseth God and is wholly conformable to his will and truely sanctifieth us 11. And every Priest standeth daily ministring and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices Hitherto hee hath compared the offering of Christ with the legall sacrifices chiefly in respect of the iteration that the legall sacrifices were offered often that is yeare by yeare for the whole people but that of Christ but once only Now he begins to cōpare the high Priests together namely the old with the new the legall Priests with Christ that they offered and ministred yeare by yeare but Christ once onely For where there are many sacrifices successively iterated yeare by yeare there the high Priest also must necessarily minister and offer yeare by yeare but where there is but one sacrifice or offering to be made there the high Priest ministers and offers but once onely For hitherto the author hath intended onely this to shew that Christ entring into his heavenly Sanctuary not to offer often according to the manner of the legall high Priests but to make one only offering as appeares in the former chapter verse 25. For to this point as to his main scope all his arguments are directed The high Priest being en tered into the holy place did not sit there but was wont to stand there before the Mercy-seat as before the Throne of God And hee stood there daily which must not be so understood that he did so every day in the yeare but upon a set and certaine day of the yeare which had it circuit and came about yeare by yeare namely at the solemne anniversary fast for the universall expiation of the whole people for he daily offered upon that day whensoever it had recourse For in this sense he used the same word before chap. 7.27 where he openly spake of that solemne annuall sacrifice upon the day of Expiation whereto he hath reference in this place also as particularly appeares from the third verse of this chapter where he mentions the Commemoration of sins every yeare which were constantly confessed by the whole people at that sacrifice Which can never take away sins The cause is here shewed why the legall high Priest must offer those sacrifices often namely because they could never take away sinnes i. They could never so effectually free men from their sinnes that they who were once expiated thereby should have no further conscience of sinnes And what this is hath been already explicated in this chapter verse 2. 12. But this man after he had offered one Sacrifice for sins for ever sat downe at the right hand of God Here he opposeth Christ to the legall high Priest in three particulars First in that Christ offered for sins but once onely for he so offered that he never iterated his offering more Secondly in that after his offering hee sat downe at the right hand of God Thirdly that he continued his seat there for ever even unto the end of the world And these two latter particulars are a reason of the former for because Christ sitteth at the right hand of God and sits there for ever to the worlds end therefore he shall never offer sacrifice more For how can it beseeme or rather how can it befall so great a Majestie to offer againe another Sacrifice that is to die againe and then againe to enter into heaven For seeing Christ sitteth at Gods right hand for ever therefore the Majestie of Christ must continue for ever also and then how can Christ ever offer again For then a thing lasteth for ever when it hath a continuall duration through all times and ages without any intermission 13. From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstoole Here he shewes the issue or effect that will follow upon Christs sitting at the right hand of God For thereupon it will follow that at the last all his enemies shall be put under his feet and made his footstoole So farre shall Christ be from offering againe to bee violated and put to death againe by his enemies that he expects their subjection to him to be made his footstoole And when all the enemies of Christ among whom death is the last and chiefest shall be made his footstool i. shall be wholy mastered yea abolished what cause can there be why hee should iterate his offering That this subjection will follow the Author gathers it from this saying of God unto Christ Sit thou at my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy footstoole Psalme 110.1 Therefore Christ sitting at the right hand of God doth expect this And he saith that Christ expecteth this fitting his words to the words of the Psalme wherein God himselfe doth vindicate this subjection of Christs enemies unto him by putting them under his feet But because wee know that Christ himselfe neither heretofore hath beene