will continue to them but as a day during their owne dayes and to some it dureth not during their own dayes For sometimes God is in a manner driven by the contumacy or disobedience of men either to take from them the preaching of his word or to harden their stubborn hearts that were fore-hardned by their own malice lest as himself saith Seeing they should see and hearing they should hear they should be converted and healed or lastly hee wholly turnes the day of Grace and Salvation into a day of his wrath and punishment All which things by the just judgement of God hapned at last to the nation of the Jewes Wherefore by these words of the Psalmist they are admonished that they would speedily shew themselves tractable to God and assoon as they shall heare his voice by Christ they yeeld obedience thereto without procrastinating or delaying the matter from day to day 8. Harden not your hearts Your hearts that is your mindes the member is oftentimes put for the faculty of it Then a man hardens his heart when he resisteth the voice of God and suffers not himselfe to be perswaded by it when he doth the act of opposing and besides hath a will to continue it As hard things suffer not themselves easily to be handled or moulded and yeeld not to him that would figure or fashion them into another shape This is done when a man hath a will not to beleeve or obey the word of God whether formerly hee beleeved or obeyed it or did not As in the provocation He notes that notable contention of the Israelites with Moses at Rephidim for want of water which ennobled the place where it was made with the names of Meriba and Massa i. Provocation and tentation whereof see Exod. 17. That Contention is here called Provocation because in contention there is commonly provocation for he that contends with another doth anger and provoke him The Israelites as much as lay in them did in the first place provoke Moses and then by him even God also For this provocation must primely and properly be referred to Moses and not to God as contrarily the temptation must primely be referred to God and not to Moses For so Moses himselfe expressed it to the people in saying Why chide you with me wherefore do ye tempt the Lord Exod. 17.2 And thereupon the place was called Chiding and Tempting But while the Israelites chide quarrell with Moses who did nothing but by Gods command they are by that meanes reckoned to have chidden and striven with God For when a second time in like manner they murmured at Cades for want of water those waters also are called the waters of Meriba that is of contention or strife because the children of Israel strove with the Lord. Numb 20.13 When notwithstanding they strove not with the Lord himselfe but with Moses and Aaron as appeares in the same chapter verse 3 4 5. So they strive with Moses and therefore with God himselfe while they demand water of him with disdaine and anger ver 2. while reproachfully and most unworthily they upbraid him that hee had brought them out of Egypt to kill them their children and cattell with thirst in the wildernesse ver 3. While therefore the Israelites in this manner contend and chide with Moses the servant of God did they not bewray the hardnesse of their hearts when by so many miraculous works of God and by so many marveilous benefits bestowed upon them they could not be induced to confide in God nor perswaded that he would provide them of water The particle as notes the similitude or likenesse of the case and the sence is Doe not you harden your hearts against God to diffide and distrust him and his voice by Christ as the Israelites did in the Provocation at Meriba when they did chide and strive with God in chiding and striving with Moses The like speech we have Job 29.2 O that I were as in months past i. that my case were like to what it was some months since In the day of temptation in the wildernesse These words are referred both to the Induration and Provocation mentioned before and are the two circumstances of them for in the day of Temptation shews the time of the Provocation that it was then upon the very same day that they tempted him they provoked and tempted him both on a day And in the wildernesse shews the place of it for it was at Rephidim a dry plaine neere Horeb or Mount Sinai where Moses fought with Amaleck To the end that notorious provocation and tentation might be the more remarkable by the place and thereby be distinguished from others that fell out in other places afterward The matter of the Tentation wherein it consisted was this that they said of God Is the Lord among us or not as the text expresseth Exod 17.7 In which words they doubt of the Divine presence i. they were diffident of God which distrustfulnesse of God and doubtfulnesse of his goodnesse or power is called a tentation of God For every tentation ariseth from some distrust or at least from some doubting He therefore tempteth God that having many arguments of Gods goodnesse toward him and his power yet is not sure of his goodnesse or power but doubts of either and requires more arguments or tokens thereof It is a vulgar errour in men to thinke that God is then tempted when a man trusteth too much upon God that is when he casteth himselfe into danger rashly and unnecessarily in confidence of Gods assistance This errour seemes to spring from the answer of Christ to Satan who required him to cast himselfe downe headlong from the pinacle of the Temple but Christ answered Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God As if to tempt God were to cast himselfe into danger rashly upon too much trust of Gods help But Satan in saying to Christ If thou be the Son of God cast thy selfe downe c. did not intend to draw him to too great a trust in God but rather to distrust and doubt whether he were truly the Son of God by seeking a further experiment or signe thereof in casting himselfe downe in as much as it was written of the Son of God that Gods Angels had charge over him to beare him up in their hands c. To whom Christ rightly answers It is written againe Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God q.d. Seeing it is already abundantly evident to me that I am the Son of God and most deare to God I will make no further triall thereof and so tempt God which deed he hath forbidden Wherefore this precept of Scripture alledged by Christ pertaines nothing at all to any excesse of trust but must be referred to distrust and doubting as all other places are concerning the tentation of God especially seeing in the very text when Christ quoteth this Scripture of not tempting God it is added as ye tempted him in Massa Deut. 6.16
whence it runnes and the marke of it whereto it runnes Consider Iesus Christ Ye six your mindes and hearts upon Moses to consider him in all particulars consider also Jesus Christ The Apostle and high Priest of our profession Our profession is our Religion whereby we professe to serve God and to be saved Of this our Religion Christ is the great Prophet the grand Apostle Emissary or Legate or the first Messenger of it because he was the first that was sent from God to bring it into the world and to publish or preach it unto men For every Prophet sent with a message immediatly from God is therefore an Apostle And of this our Religion Christ is the high Priest or chiefe President to order it because he perpetually administers and officiates all things pertaining to it and because by him all the professors of it have their accesse to God because hee expiates and purgeth away their sins and because hee takes care that all things pertaining to divine worship be rightly performed in the Temple of God dedicate to this Religion For in this place the Author remarkably calls Christ by the name of high Priest because anciently the high Priests were Presidents over the Temple and holy things of God From both these offices thus united in Christ appears his transcendent dignity For anciently there was an Apostle or Prophet of the Jewish Religion who was Moses for he first taught and published it but then among them there was another high Priest who was Aaron and his Successors But Christ alone in one person was both the Apostle and high Priest of our profession But in this place we must ampliate extend the word high Priest so largely that it may also comprehend the Regall dignity or office of Christ For it is not likely that the Author in this breviate of Christs offices would wholly omit the chiefest especially in this place where hee would move them to consider Christ especially when he had before tearmed him such a high Priest as was able to succour them that are tempted which thing belongs also to his Regall power and had in the first chapter so lively expressed his Regall dignity by severall testimonies of Scripture 2. Who was faithfull to him that appointed him It had been enough to move the Hebrewes to consider Christ by what the Author had delivered before in preferring him above the Angels by severall arguments of reason and testimonies of Scripture but the Author not content with this doth here single out Moses and equall Christ with him because the Hebrewes had Moses in high esteeme opposing him to Christ and preferring him before Christ The particular wherein he equals Christ with Moses is the faithfulnesse of Christ and he instanceth the rather in this particular because that when God gave a singular commendation of Moses the Lord instanced in the particular of his faithfulnesse to God He therefore declares that Christ was as faithfull to God as ever Moses was Now the faithfulnesse of Christ relates to both his offices of high Legate or Apostle and high Priest The faithfulnesse of a Legate consists in these two things 1. That he deliver his Message wholly and truly according to his Commission 2. That he use all meanes to perswade and gaine faith to his Message especially if he be thereto enjoyned by him that sent him And the faithfulnesse of a high Priest is To provide all things pertinent to the worship of God and then to propitiate God toward those that worship him The person to whom Christ was thus faithfull was the supreme God who made him his Legate and high Priest by appointing him to the execution of these offices wherein he might exercise his singular faithfulnesse for Christ assumed not these offices of himselfe but was thereto appointed of God the Father as afterward more fully As also Moses was faithfull in all his house Moses was a great Prophet and Legate sent from God in so much that when Aaron and Miriam had spoken against him the Lord to publish his great esteeme of him would vindicate him by his owne mouth and thereupon preferres him before all other Prophets in that he would deale more familiarly with him then with any other for he would speake to others by visions and dreames and dark speeches but he would speake to Moses mouth to mouth even apparently and he should behold the similitude of the Lord of which dealing with Moses the Lord gives this reason because Moses was faithfull in all the Lords house Numb 12.6,7,8 In which words who sees not how highly God esteemed Moses above all other Prophets Now whether we take house for Gods Tabernacle or for his family yet Moses was most faithfull in both respects in that he neglected nothing that pertained to the care and good of either The summe is Lest by this singular testimony given by God to Moses for his faithfulnesse any man should hereby thinke that herein Moses was greater then Christ therefore the Author adornes Christ with the very same commendation of faithfulnesse that God had given to Moses that thereby hee might take from Moses all prerogative of his being above Christ in any thing and consequently inferres Christ equall to Moses 3. For this man was counted worthy of more glory then Moses Having shewed that Christ was no way inferiour to Moses here he advanceth a degree higher and affirmes that Christ was much superiour to Moses and counted worthy of more honour that he might further move them to the consideration of Christ And yet more determinately that the honour of Christ is a great distance above that of Moses And the following words shew how much As much as he who hath builded the house hath more honour then the house He properly builds the house that either frameth it himselfe or causeth it to be framed for himselfe for whosoever is the owner is properly the builder and not the mercenary who is hired to build it for another Now the builder is more honourable then the building for the Builder by his building becomes the Lord or Owner of it which is the first originall or naturall ground of honour And looke how much the builder is more honourable then the building though the degree be never so indefinite so much is Christ more honourable then Moses For Moses was but a part of the building in Gods family but Christ under God is the builder of his whole Church 4. For every house is builded by some man No house doth raise or build it selfe but is built or raised by some person or other who builds it himselfe for himselfe or causeth it to be builded for himselfe But he that hath built all things is God Here he expresseth what person he understands for the architect or builder of the house whereof he speakes namely that he meanes God himselfe Hence it appeares that the Authors minde was to say That Christ is so much more honourable then Moses as God is
Aaron saying O Lord heare the prayer of thy servants according to the blessing of Aaron over thy people Ecclus. 36.17 8. And here men that die receive tithes Now followeth the third reason whereby he proves that Melchisedec is greater then the Leviticall Priests namely Because the Leviticall Priests receive tithes yet one of them dies after another and they succeed one another in the Priest-hood but Melchisedec hath a testimony of Scripture for him that he liveth Here i. here under the law and among us But there he of whom it is witnessed that he liveth There where wee read that Abraham gave him tithes he then received them whom the Scripture witnesseth that he lives But wee must note that the Author opposeth not Melchisedec to mortall men but to dying men onely neither doth he say that he is immortall but only that he liveth For life is not opposed to mortality but properly to death And there the Scripture saith That Melchisedec doth live where shee affirmes him to bee a Priest for ever And shee affirmes it in her comparison of him with Christ when she saith Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec Psal 110.4 as we explicated it before in this Chapter vers 3. Where we shewed that Melchisedec was called a Priest for ever because he exercised his Priest-hood a long time even for the full terme of his naturall life and that he lived so long a Priest as there was any knowledge of the true God among the men of his time and any place for the Priest-hood so that Melchisedec in his Priest-hood resembled for his continuance all the Leviticall Priests who succeeded one after another which eternity of his was but umbratilous and figurative as we said of Christs eternitie And therefore the life of Melchisedec was nothing but a shadow of that life which is in Christ And if we respect the scope of the Authour it makes not to the matter that Melchisedec did at last yeeld to the law of nature and die for he speaks not of Melchisedec for himselfe but for Christ who truely lives for ever It sufficeth in Melchisedec that the eternall life of Christ was in some manner shadowed and signified in the Scripture And this is the reason why the Authour opposed Melchisedec to dying men and said he liveth for ever For when wee speake of the type as of the antitype we many times so speak of it as of the anti-type it selfe although the words must be applyed figuratively to the type and properly to the antitype 9. And as I may so say Levi also who receiveth tithes payed tithes or was decimated in Abraham Here at last comes in the other of the first reason which we said was bipartite and wherewith the Author now confirmes the dignity of Melchisedec namely that when Melchisedec tooke tithes of Abraham he tithed also Levi and all the Priests sprung from his loynes who were themselves to receive tithes To shew the great dignity of Melchisedec it was not enough for the Author to say that he tithed Abraham himselfe but Levi also who tooke tithes was by him tithed in Abraham For it is as much as if hee had taken tithes of Levi when he tooke them of him in whose loynes Levi was yet latent Therefore in a figurative way of speech the Author saith that Levi was tithed through Abraham For because he could not say properly that Levi gave tithes to Melchisedec through Abraham therefore lest his words should seem harsh he mollifies them thus as I may so say whereby hee plainely declares that what hee spake here of Levi must not bee taken literally and properly but in a certaine sence and forme of speech Levi also who receiveth tithes not in his owne person but in his posteritie so that it is not strange that hee is said to have given tithes in his father who is also said to have taken them in his children But now let us see how the Author proves this 10. For hee was yet in the loynes of his father when Melchisedec met him Here he proves that Levi gave tithes to Melchisedec through Abraham thus If at that time Levi had been a person severed from Abraham and had enjoyed his estate apart to himselfe this fact of Abraham in giving tithes to Melchisedec had nothing concerned him But because Levi was then so united and joyned with Abraham that he yet lay couched in Abrahams loyns therefore he also is justly accounted to have given tithes to Melchisedec in or through Abraham Which sentence notwithstanding must not be transferred to all the actions of a father but only to those which properly consist either in the increase or decrease of his estate which useth to descend to his children by right of inheritance and the payment of tithes is such an action for it so much decreaseth the fathers estate For they are paid out of the fathers goods which thus farre are already the childrens in that the right of inheritance thereto belongs to them especially if it be certaine that the father hath or may have children to succeed him in his estate as Abraham had to whom God had for certaine promised a posterity For as the heire after his fathers death doth in a manner represent the person of his father by his succeeding to him and possessing his estate so likewise the father before his children be severed from him and have a right to dispose of his goods as their own doth in a manner also represent the person of his heire and of all the rest of his children and what he then ordereth or doth in his goods the same in a manner his heires are accounted to doe I say in a manner because properly this cannot be said neither doth the Author himselfe say properly that it was done but acknowledgeth an impropriety in his words as we noted before Hence may easily be understood that which together with the Author we affirme that such acts of the parents must be extended only to those of their successors or posterity to whom the inheritance or some notable portion of their goods shall descend either for certainty as here to Abrahams posterity or at least in all probability For otherwise that force of inheritance whereof we speake will expire and what any man orders concerning his estate cannot be attributed to his children and posterity 11. If therefore perfection After that by comparing Melchisedec with the Leviticall Priests hee had shewed that Melchisedec was a Priest and a Priest much differing from the Leviticall as a person farre greater and worthier then they Now he proceeds to the third part of the Chapter And in regard that after those Leviticall Priests there must be another Priest ordained according to the order of Melchisedec and not according to the order of Aaron therefore he thence argues and proves the imperfection of the Leviticall Priesthood and also of the Law it selfe upon which that Priesthood was ordained and upon the
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