Hebrews 1:3

The apostle, in the pursuit of his argument, proceeds in the description of the person of Christ; partly to give a further account of what he had before affirmed concerning his divine power in making the worlds; and partly to instruct the Hebrews, from their own typical institutions, that it was the Messiah who was figured and represented formerly unto them, in those signs and pledges of God's glorious presence which they enjoyed. And so by the whole he confirmeth the proposition he had in hand concerning the excellency and eminency of Him by whom the gospel was revealed, that their faith in him and obedience unto him might not be shaken or hindered.

Hebrews 1:3. Ος ὢ῝ν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὐποστάσεως αὐτοῦ , φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῤήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, δι᾿ ἐαυτοῦ καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος τῶν ἀμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσόνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς.

Δι᾿ ἐαυτοῦ is wanting in MS. T.; but the sense requires the words, and all other ancient copies retain them. ῾Ηυῶν is wanting in some copies; and one or two for ἐκάθισε have καθίζει, which hath nothing whereunto it should relate. Some also read, τῷ θρόνῳ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης, taken from Hebrews 12:2, where the word is used. ῝Ος ὢ῝ν, “qui est,” “qui cum sit,” “qui existens;” “who is,” “who when he is,” or “was;” “who existing:” as Philippians 2:6, ῝Ος ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, “Who being in the form of God.”

“Who being ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης,” “splendor,” “radius,” “jubar,” “effulgentia,” “refulgentia,” “relucentia;” “the splendor” “ray,” “beam,” “effulgency,” or “shining forth of glory.” Syr., צֶמְחָא, “germen;” so Boderius; “the branch.” Tremellius and De Dieu, “splendor,” the Arabic concurring.

Αὐγή is “lux,” “light,” particularly the morning light: Acts 20:11, ῾ομιλήσας ἄχρις αὐγῆς, “He talked until the break of day,” or the beaming of the morning light. Αὐγὴ ἡλίου, Gloss. Vet., “jubar solis” “the sun-beam.” And sometimes it denotes the day itself. It is also sometimes used for the light that is in burning iron. ῾Απαυγή is of the same signification; properly “splendor lucis,” “the brightness, shining, beauty, glory or lustre of light.” Hence is αὐγάζω, to a shine forth,” to “shine into” to “irradiate:” 2 Corinthians 4:4, Εἰς τὸ μὴ αὐγάσαι αὐτοῖς, “That the light of the gospel should not irradiate” (shine) “into them.” ᾿Απαυγάζω is of the same importance; and from thence ἀπαύγασμα. The word is nowhere used in the New Testament save in this place only; nor doth it occur in the Old of the LXX. Only we have it, Wis 7:26. Wisdom is said to be ἀπαύμασμα φωτὸς ἀϊδίου, “a beam of eternal light;” to which place the margin of our translation refers. And it is so used by Nazianzen: Μεγάλου φωτὸς μικρὸν ἀπαύγασμα, “A little beam of a great light.” It answers exactly to the Hebrew נֹגַהּ, or אוֹר נֹגַהּ that is; that is, “The morning light:” Proverbs 4:18, “The path of the righteous כְּאוֹר נֹגַהּ,” “ut lux splendoris,” Jerome; “as the light of brightness,” that is, “of the morning,” αὐγή, Acts 20:11. And it is also applied to the light of fire, or fire in iron, Isaiah 4:5, נֹגַהּ אֵשׁ, “The light of fire;” and the fiery streaming of lightning, Habakkuk 3:11.

The brightness, shining, ray, beam, τῆς δόξης, “of glory.” Some look on this expression as a Hebraism, ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης, “the beam of glory,” for ἔνδοξον ἀπαύγασμα, “a glorious beam;” but this will not answer the design of the apostle, as we shall see afterwards.

Our translators have supplied “his,” “the brightness of his glory,” by repeating αὐτοῦ from the end of the sentence; perhaps, as we shall find, not altogether necessarily, in which case alone such supplements unto the text are allowed in translations.

Καὶ χαρακτὴρ, “character.” “Imago,” “forma,” “figura,” “expressa forma,” “figura expressa,” צָלְמָא, Syr.; “the character,” “image,” “form,” “figure, “express form,” “express figure:” so variously is the word rendered by translators, with little difference. It is nowhere used in the New Testament but only in this place. In other authors it hath many significations. Sometimes they use it properly and naturally; sometimes metaphorically and artificially, as when it denotes several forms of speech or orations. Properly, from χαράσσω or χαράττω, to engrave with a tool or style, is χάραγμα and χαρακτήρ which is firstly and properly the note or mark cut by a tool or instrument into wood, or any other subject capable of such impression, or the stamp and sign that is left in the coining of money. The mark or scar also left by a wound is by the LXX. termed χαρακτήρ, Leviticus 13:28. It is in general an express representation of another thing, communicated unto it by an impression of its likeness upon it, opposed unto that which is umbratile and imaginary.

Τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, “substantiae,” “subsistentiae,” “personae.” Syr., יִאיתוּתֵהּ, “substantiae ejus;” “hypostasis,” “substance,” “subsistence,” “person.” The word is four times used in the New Testament, thrice in this epistle, in this place, and Hebrews 3:14, and Hebrews 11:1, as also 2 Corinthians 9:4, everywhere in a different sense; so that the mere use of it in one place will afford no light unto the meaning of it in another, but it must be taken from the context and subject treated of. The composition of the word would denote

“substantia,” but so as to differ from and to add something unto οὐσία , “substance,” or being; which in the divine nature can be nothing but a special manner of subsistence. But the controversy that hath been about the precise signification of these words we shall not here enter into the discussion of.

Φέρων, “agens,” “regens,” “moderans;” “acting,” “disposing,” “ruling,” “governing.” Also “portans,” “bajulans,” “sustinens;” “bearing,” “supporting,” “carrying,” “upholding.” Which of these senses is peculiarly intended we shall afterwards inquire into.

Τῷ ῤήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, “by the word of his power,” “by his powerful word.” Syr., בִּחַיְלָא דְּמִלְּתֵהּ, “by the power of his word,”

changing the order of the words, but not the meaning of them: “By the power of his word,” or, “the word of his power;” that is, his powerful word. Αὐτοῦ; some would read it αὐτοῦ, and refer it unto the Father, “By the powerful word of him;” that is, of the Father, by whose power, they say, the Son disposed of all things. But all copies with accents have αὐτοῦ constantly, none αὐτοῦ, nor will the disposition of the words bear that reference.

Δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ, “by himself,” “in his own person.”

Καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος, “purgationem faciens,” “purgatione facta;” “having purged,” “cleansed,” “expiated” or “purified” (us from) “our sins.” “Having made a purgation or purification of our sins.”

᾿Εκάθισεν. Καθίζω is used both neutrally and actively, answering to יָשַׁב both in Kal and Hiphil, signifying “to sit down,” and “to cause to sit down.” Chrysostom seems to have understood the word in the latter sense, referring it to God the Father causing the Son to sit down. But it is hard to find any antecedent word whereby it should be regulated, but only ὅς, “who,” in the beginning of the verse, that is, he himself; and, as Erasmus observes, γενόμενος in the following words, will not grammatically admit of this construction; for if ἐκάθιοε be to be understood actively and transitively, it must have been γενόμενον. And the apostle clears the neutral sense of the word, Hebrews 8:1. It is well, then, rendered by our translators, “he sat,” or “sat down.”

᾿Εν δεξιᾷ. Psalms 110:1, שֵׁב לִימִינִי. LXX., κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν, in the plural number. So is the same thing expressed, Acts 7:55; and by Mark, ἐν δεξιοῖς, Mark 16:5. Our apostle constantly keepeth the singular number, with ἐν, Hebrews 8:1; Hebrews 12:2. The same thing in both expressions is intended; only that of ἐκ δεξιῶν, or ἐν δεξιοῖς, in the plural number, is more eminently destructive of the folly of the Anthropomorphites; for they cannot hence pretend that God hath a right hand, unless they will grant that he hath many, which were not only to turn the glory of the invisible God into the likeness of a man, but of a monster. And Austin well observes that in the psalm where that expression is first used, “Sit on my right hand,” it is added, אֲדֹנָי עַלאּיְמִינְךָ. “The Lord on thy right hand,” at the right hand of him who sat on his right hand; which removes all carnal apprehensions from the meaning of the words.

Τῆς μεγαλωσύνης. This word is seldom used in other authors: twice in this epistle, here, and Hebrews 8:1; once by Jude, Jude 1:25; and nowhere else in the New Testament; by the LXX. not at all. The apostle evidently expresseth by it כָּבוֹד or גְּבוּרָה not as they are used appellatively for glory, power, or majesty, but as they are names and denote the essential glory of God, “The glorious God.” So that

μεγαλωσύνη is God himself; not absolutely considered, but with reference unto the revelation of his glory and majesty in heaven, God on his throne; as our apostle declareth, Hebrews 8:1.

᾿Εν ὑψηλοῖς, “in the highest.” Μεγαλωσύνη ἐν ὐψηλοῖς is ὐψίστος; that is, עֶלְיוֹן, “the Highest,” God himself. See Luke 1:35. [3]

[3] ED. VARIOUS READINGS. Owen, though perhaps it is a misprint, reads αὐτοῦ after ὑποστάσεως both in the text of the verse and in the subsequent explanation of the words; the textus receptus has αὐτοῦ. He reads δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ in agreement with the textus receptus; Tischendorf here gives αὐτοῦ. The words δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ are omitted by Lachmann and Tischendorf; who, together with Hahn, omit ἡμων also. EXPOSITION. ᾿Απαύγ. τ. δ. plainly means the same as the Hebrew כָבוֹד, namely, splendor, brightness. Comp. Luke 2:9,” etc. Stuart. “The idea that God in the Λόγος finds and reflects himself as in his counterpart is expressed by Paul when, 2 Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:15, he calls the Logos εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ, denotes the splendor which surrounds God, Luke 2:9.” Tholuck. “Nouns ending in μα denote not the act as continuing, but the result of the act as finished. ᾿Απαύγ. denotes not the brightness received from another body, and thrown back as a reflection or a mirrored image, not the light continually proceeding from a shining body, as a light streaming out and losing itself in space; but a light radiated from another light, in as far at it is viewed as now become an independent light. It is more than a mere ray, more than a mere image, a sun produced from the original light.” Δόξ., “the eternal essential glory of the Father.” According to the explanation which refers it to the Shechinah, “the Son would be degraded beneath the Old Testament imperfect typical form of the divine manifestation; seeing that he would be represented as an ἀπαύγ of the latter, which was not even itself an ἀπαύγ., but a mere reflection.” Ebrard. Χαρακ. τ. ὑ. α. plainly retains the more ancient meaning of substance or essence.... Christ is “the development of that substance to our view, the delineation of it.... Ancient Greek annotators, and after them most of the modern ones, have applied these words to the divine nature of Christ. In the opinion that the verse now under consideration relates to the incarnate Messiah, I find that Scott and Beza concur.” Stuart. “ ῾Ψπ. means being, essence. Many expositors, offended at the Son being called only the copy of the Being, took ὑπ. in the sense adopted by the church, of Person.” Tholuck. Δόξ signifies the essence of the Father,with reference to the glory in which he represents himself before the eyes of the suppliant creature; ὑπ., this essence as essence, and without regard to its outward manifestation. Χαρ. is here used “in the sense of a form cut out or engraven.” The δόξ represents itself in a form composed of rays, a sun; the ὑπ. stamps itself out in a manifest figure. These appositions belong more properly to the Logos qua eternally pre-existent. Ebrard.

Φέρ. corresponds to the Hebrew נָשָׁא Isa 46:3; Isaiah 66:9, curo, conservo, to sustain, to preserve, as a mother does her child. Τῷ ῥήμ. τ. δ. α., by his own powerful word, the word of the Son, not the word of God, as αὐτοῦ would mean. Stuart. According to Bleek, αὐτοῦ corresponds to ἐμαυτοῦ of the first person, αὐτοῦ to ἐμου. If the former, the emphasis being on “self,” the phrase would be, By the word of his own power.” “There is no occasion for this emphasis here.

Αὐτοῦ applies in a reflexive sense to the Son, and not to the Father.” Ebrard. Καθ. , purification; in Hellenistic Greek e xpiation, e.g., Exodus 29:36; Exodus 30:10 not purification by moral means, because it is joined with δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ, which is explained in Hebrews 2:14 by διὰ τοῦ ζανάτου; in Hebrews 9:12 by διὰ τοῦ ἰδίου αἵματος; and in Hebrews 9:26 by διὰ τῆς ζυσίας αὐτοῦ. Stuart. “The purification in the Biblical sense consists in the atonement, the gracious covering (כַפֵר Leviticus 16:30) of guilt.” Ebrard. ᾿Εκάθ. corresponds to the Hebrew יָשַׁב; which applied to God and to kings, does not mean simply to sit, but to sit enthroned, Psalms 2:4. Stuart. “As man, and continuing to be man, he was exalted to a participation in the divine government of the world.” Ebrard. TRANSLATIONS. ᾿Απαύγ. κ. τ. λ. the radiance of his glory and the exact image of his substance. Stuart. An emanation of his glory and an express image of his substance. Conybeare and Howson. The radiance of his glory and the impress of his substance. Craik. The brightness of his glory and the exact impression of his manner of existence. Pye Smith. The refulgence of his glory and the impression of his essence. De Wette. The ray of his glory and the stamp of his substance. Turner. Φέρων κ. τ. λ. Controlling all things by his own powerful word. Stuart. Καθαρ. π. After he had made expiation. Stuart. Having made expiation. Bloomfield. When he had made purification. Conybeare and Howson. When he had made atonement. Craik. After he had by himself purified us from sins by making an expiation. Turner.

Hebrews 1:3. Who being the brightness of glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding [or, disposing of] all things by the word of his power, having by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; The apostle proceeds in his description of the person in whom God spake in the revelation of the gospel, ascending unto such a manifestation of him as that they might understand his eminency above all formerly used in the like ministrations; as also how he was pointed out and shadowed by sundry types and figures under the Old Testament.

Of this description there are three parts; the first declaring what he is; the second, what he doth, or did; and the third, the consequent of them both, in what he enjoyeth.

Of the first part of this description of the Messiah there are two branches, or it is two ways expressed: for he affirms of him, first, that he is the “brightest beam,” or “splendor of the glory;” and, secondly, “the express image,” or “character of his Father's person.”

In the second also there are two things assigned unto him, the former relating unto his power, as he is the brightness of glory, he “sustaineth,” or ruleth and disposeth of “all things by the word of his power;” the latter unto his love and work of mediation, “by himself,” or in his own person, he hath “purged our sins.”

His present and perpetual enjoyment, as a consequent of what he was and did, or doth, is expressed in the last words: “He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.”

Some of these expressions may well be granted to contain some of those δυσνόητα, “things hard to be understood,” which Peter affirms to be in this epistle of Paul, 2 Peter 3:16; which unstable and unlearned men have in all ages wrested unto their own destruction. The things intended are unquestionably sublime and mysterious; the terms wherein they are expressed are rare, and nowhere else used in the Scripture to the same purpose, some of them not at all, which deprives us of one great help in the interpretation of them; the metaphors used in the words, or types alluded unto by them, are abstruse and dark: so that the difficulty of discovering the true, precise, and genuine meaning of the Holy Ghost in them is such as that this verse, at least some part of it, may well be reckoned among those places which the Lord hath left in his word to exercise our faith, and diligence, and dependence on his Spirit, for a right understanding of them. It may be, indeed, that from what was known and acknowledged in the Judaical church, the whole intention of the apostle was more plain unto them, and more plainly and clearly delivered than now it seemeth unto us to be, who are deprived of their advantages. However, both to them and us the things were and are deep and mysterious; and we shall desire to handle (as it becometh us) both things and words with reverence and godly fear, looking up unto Him for assistance who alone can lead us into all truth.

We begin with a double description given us of the Lord Christ at the entrance of the verse, as to what he is in himself. And here a double difficulty presents itself unto us; first, In general unto what nature in Christ, or unto what of Christ, this description doth belong; secondly, What is the particular meaning and importance of the words or expressions themselves.

For the first, some assert that these words intend only the divine nature of Christ, wherein he is consubstantial with the Father. Herein as he is said to be “God of God, and Light of Light,” an expression doubtless taken from hence, receiving, as the Son, his nature and subsistence from the Father, so fully and absolutely as that he is every way the same with him in respect of his essence, and every way like him in respect of his person; so he is said to be “the brightness of his glory,” and “the character of his person” on that account, This way went the ancients generally; and of modern expositors very many, as Calvin, Brentius, Marlorat, Rollock, Gomar, Pareau, Estius, Tena, a Lapide, Ribera, and sundry others.

Some think that the apostle speaks of him as incarnate, as he is declared in the gospel, or as preached, to be “the image of God,” 2 Corinthians 4:4. And these take three ways in the explication of the words and their application of them unto him:

First, Some affirm that their meaning is, that whereas God is in himself infinite and incomprehensible, so that we are not able to contemplate on his excellencies, but that we are overpowered in our minds with their glory and majesty, he hath in Christ the Son, as incarnate, contemperated his infinite love, power, goodness, grace, greatness, and holiness, unto our faith, love, and contemplation, they all shining forth in him, and being eminently expressed in him. So Beza.

Secondly, Some think that the apostle pursues the description that he was entered upon, of the kingly office of Jesus Christ as heir of all; and that his being exalted in glory unto power, rule, and dominion, expressing and representing therein the person of his Father, is intended in these words. So Cameron.

Thirdly, Some refer these words to the prophetical office of Christ, and say that he was the brightness of God's glory, etc., by his revealing and declaring the will of God unto us, which before was done darkly only and in shadows. So the Socinians generally, though Schlichtingius refers the words unto all that similitude which they fancy to have been between God and the man Christ Jesus whilst he was in the earth; and therefore renders the participle ὥν, not by the present, but preterimperfect tense, “who was;” that is, whilst he was on the earth, though, as he says, not exclusively unto what he is now in heaven.

I shall not examine in particular the reasons that are alleged for these several interpretations, but only propose and confirm that sense of the place which on full and due consideration appears, as agreeable unto the analogy of faith, so expressly to answer the design and intendment of the apostle; wherein also the unsoundness of the two last branches or ways of applying the second interpretation, with the real coincidence of the first, and first branch of the latter exposition, will be discovered. To this end the following positions are to be observed:

First, It is not the direct and immediate design of the apostle to treat absolutely of either nature of Christ, his divine or human, but only of his person. Hence, though the things which he mentioneth and expresseth may some of them belong unto, or be the properties of his divine nature, some of his human, yet none of them are spoken of as such, but are all considered as belonging unto his person. And this solves that difficulty which Chrysostom observes in the words, and strives to remove by a similitude, namely, that the apostle doth not observe any order or method in speaking of the divine and human natures of Christ distinctly one after another, but first speaks of the one, then of the other, and then returns again to the former, and that frequently. But the truth is, he intends not to speak directly and absolutely of either nature of Christ; but treating ex professo of his person, some things that he mentions concerning him have a special foundation in and respect unto his divine nature, some in and unto his human, as must every thing that is spoken of him. And therefore the method and order of the apostle is not to be inquired after in what relates in his expressions to this or that nature of Christ, but in the progress that he makes in the description of his person and offices; which alone he had undertaken.

Secondly, That which the apostle principally intends in and about the person of Christ, is to set forth his dignity, pre-eminence, and exaltation above all; and that not only consequentially to his discharge of the office of mediator, but also antecedently, in his worth, fitness, ability, and suitableness to undertake and discharge it, which in a great measure depended on and flowed from his divine nature.

These things being supposed, we observe,

Thirdly, That as these expressions are none of them singly, much less in that conjunction wherein they are here placed, used concerning any other but Christ only, so they do plainly contain and express things that are more sublime and glorious than can, by the rule of Scripture or the analogy of faith, be ascribed unto any mere creature, however raised or exalted. There is in the words evidently a comparison with God the Father: he is infinitely glorious, eternally subsisting in his own person; and the Son is “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.” Angels are called “the sons of God,” are mighty in power, and excellent in created glory; but when they come to be compared with God, it is said they are not pure in his sight; and he charged them with folly, Job 4:18; and they cover their faces at the brightness of his glory, Isaiah 6:2: so that they cannot be said so to be. Man also was created in the image of God, and is again by grace renewed thereinto, Ephesians 4:23-24: but to say a man is the express image of the person of God the Father, is to depress the glory of God by anthropomorphitism. So that unto God asking that question, “Whom will ye compare unto me? and whom will ye liken me unto?” we cannot answer of any one who is not God by nature, that he is “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.”

Fourthly, Though the design of the apostle in general be to show how the Father expressed and declared himself unto us in the Son, yet this could not be done without manifesting what the Son is in himself and in reference unto the Father; which both the expressions do in the first place declare. They express him such an one as in whom the infinite perfections and excellencies of God are revealed unto us. So that the first application of the words, namely, to the divine nature of Christ, and the first branch of the second, considering him as incarnate, are very well consistent; as a Lapide grants, after he had blamed Beza for his interpretation. The first direction, then, given unto our faith in these words, is by what the Son is in respect of the Father, namely, “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person;” whence it follows that in him, being incarnate, the Father's glory and his person are expressed and manifested unto us.

Fifthly, There is nothing in these words that is not applicable unto the divine nature of Christ. Some, as we have showed, suppose that it is not that which is peculiarly intended in the words; but yet they can give no reason from them, nor manifest any thing denoted by them, which may not be conveniently applied thereunto. I say, whatever can be proved to be signified by them or contained in them, if we will keep ourselves within the bounds of that holy reverence which becomes us in the contemplation of the majesty of God, may be applied unto the nature of God as existing in the person of the Son. He is in his person distinct from the Father, another not the Father; but yet the same in nature, and this in all glorious properties and excellencies. This oneness in nature, and distinction in person, may be well shadowed out by these expressions, “He is the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.” The boldness and curiosity of the schoolmen, and some others, in expressing the way and manner of the generation of the Son, by similitudes of our understanding and its acts, declaring how he is the image of the Father, in their terms, are intolerable and full of offense. Nor are the rigid impositions of those words and terms in this matter which they or others have found out to express it by, of any better nature. Yet I confess, that supposing with some that by the first expression here used, “The brightness of glory,” the apostle intends to set forth unto us the relation of the Son to the Father by an allusion unto the sun and its beams, or the light of fire in iron, some relief may thence be given unto our weak understandings in the contemplation of this mystery, if we observe that one known rule, whose use Chrysostom urgeth in this place, namely, that in the use of such allusions every thing of imperfection is to be removed, in their application unto God. A few instances we may give unto this purpose, holding ourselves unto an allusion to the sun and its beams

1. As the sun in comparison of the beam is of itself, and the beam of the sun; so is the Father of himself, and the Son of the Father.

2. As the sun, without diminution or partition of its substance, without change or alteration in its nature, produceth the beam; so is the Son begotten of the Father.

3. As the sun in order of nature is before the beam, but in time both are co- existent; so is the Father in order of nature before the Son, though in existence both co-eternal.

4. As the beam is distinct from the sun, so that the sun is not the beam, and the beam is not the sun; so is it between the Father and the Son.

5. As the beam is never separate from the sun, nor can the sun be without the beam, no more can the Son be from the Father, nor was the Father ever without the Son.

6. As the sun cannot be seen but by the beam, no more can the Father but in and by the Son.

I acknowledge that these things are true, and that there is nothing in them disagreeable unto the analogy of faith. But yet as sundry other things may be affirmed of the sun and its beam, whereof no tolerable application can be made to the matter in hand, so I am not persuaded that the apostle intended any such comparison or allusion, or aimed at our information or instruction by them. They were common people of the Jews, and not philosophers, to whom the apostle wrote this epistle; and therefore either he expresseth the things that he intends in terms answering unto what was in use among themselves to the same purpose, or else he asserts them plainly in words as meet to express them properly by as any that are in use amongst men. To say there is an allusion in the words, and that the Son is not properly, but by a metaphor, “the brightness of glory,” is to teach the apostle how to express himself in the things of God. For my part, I understand as much of the nature, glory, and properties of the Son, in and by this expression, “He is the brightness of glory,” as I do by any of the most accurate expressions which men have arbitrarily invented to signify the same thing. That he is one distinct from God the Father, related unto him, and partaker of his glory, is clearly asserted in these words; and more is not intended in them.

Sixthly, These things, then, being premised, we may discern the general importance of these expressions. The words themselves, as was before observed, being nowhere else used in the Scripture, we may receive a contribution of light unto them from those in other places which are of their nearest alliance. Such are these and the like: “We beheld his glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father,” John 1:14. “He is the image of the invisible God,” Colossians 1:15. The glory of God shines forth in him, 2 Corinthians 4:6. Now in these and the like places, the glory of the divine nature is so intimated, as that we are directed to look unto the glory of the absolutely invisible and incomprehensible God in him incarnate. And this in general is the meaning and intendment of the apostle in these expressions: ‘The Son, in whom God speaks unto us in the revelation of the gospel, doth in his own person so every way answer the excellencies and perfections of God the Father, that he is in him expressly represented unto our faith and contemplation.'

It remaineth, then, in the second place, that we consider the expressions severally, with the reasons why the apostle thus expresseth the divine glory of Jesus Christ: ῞Ος ὣν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης· “Who being the brightness” (“light, lustre, majesty”) “of glory.” The apostle, in my judgment (which is humbly submitted unto consideration), alludes unto and intends something that the people were instructed by typically under the old testament, in this great mystery of the manifestation of the glory of God unto them in and by the Son, the second person in the Trinity. The ark, which was the most signal representation of the presence of God amongst them, was called “his glory.” So the wife of Phinehas, upon the taking of the ark, affirmed that the glory was departed: 1 Samuel 4:22, “The glory is departed from Israel, for the ark of God is taken.” And the psalmist, mentioning the same thing, calls it “his glory” absolutely: Psalms 78:61, “He delivered his glory into the enemy's hand;” that is, the ark. Now, on the filling of the tabernacle with the signs of God's presence in cloud and fire, the Jews affirm that there was a constant ἀπαὺμασμα, a תפארה, or “majestic shining glory,” resting on the ark; which was the ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης , “the splendour of the glory of God,” in that typical representation of his presence. And this was to instruct them in the way and manner whereby God would dwell amongst them. The apostle, therefore, calling them from the types, by which in much darkness they had been instructed in these mysteries, unto the things themselves represented obscurely by them, acquaints them with what that typical glory and splendor of it signified, namely, the eternal glory of God, with the essential beaming and brightness of it in the Son, in and by whom the glory of the Father shineth forth unto us. So that the words seem to relate unto that way of instruction which was of old granted unto them.

Besides, they were wont to express their faith in this mystery with words unto this purpose: כָּבוֹד, “glory,” is sometimes put for God himself: Psalms 85:9, לִשְׁכֹּן כָּבוֹד בְּאַרְצֵגוּ, “That glory may dwell in our land;” that is, the God of glory, or glorious God. This glory the Targum calls יקרא; and the majesty of that glory, שכינה. See Haggai 1:8; Psalms 44:24, they render these words, לָמָּהאּפָנֵיךָ תַסְתִּיר, “Why hidest thou thy face?” למה שכינת יקרךְ תסלק, “Why takest thou away the majesty of thy glory?” as both the Venetian and Basle Bibles read the place: for the Regia have only שכינה, omitting יקרךְ. And in the vision of Isaiah, Isaiah 6:1, they say it was הכבוד, so Kimchi; שכינה, so Rashi; יקרא דיי, so the Targum. And they affirm that it was the same which came down and appeared on mount Sinai, Exodus 19:20; where these words, עלאּהַר סִינַי וַיִּרֶד יְהָֹוה, “And the LORD descended on mount Sinai,” are rendered by Onkelos, ואתגלי יקרא דיי, “The majesty of God was revealed;” which words, from Psalms 68:18, are applied by our apostle unto the Son, Ephesians 4:8. ᾿᾿Απαύγασμα τῆς δόξης, then, is nothing else but יקרא שכינת, or שכינת הכבוד, “the essential presence or majesty of the glorious God.” This, saith he, is Christ the Son. And thus of old they expressed their faith concerning him.

The words, as was showed before, denote the divine nature of Christ, yet not absolutely, but as God the Father in him doth manifest himself unto us. Hence he is called שכינה, or שכינתא, or שכינא. The word is from שכַן, “he dwelt.” Elias in Tishbi gives us somewhat another account of the application of that name, in the root: קראו דזיל לרוח הקדש שכינה על שם שהוא שכן על הנכאים, “The rabbins of blessed memory called the Holy Ghost Shechinah, because he dwelt upon the prophets.” But that this is not so may be observed throughout the Targum, wherein the Holy Ghost is always expressly called רוח הקדש; and the Shechinah is spoken of in such places as cannot be applied unto him. But as the fullness of the Godhead is said to dwell in the Lord Christ σωματικῶς , Colossians 2:9, and he, as the only-begotten Son of God, to dwell amongst us, John 1:14; so is he said in the same sense to be שכינה הכבוד, or ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης, “the majesty, presence, splendor of the glory,” or “the glorious God.”

This, then, is that whereof the apostle minds the Jews: God having promised to dwell amongst them by his glorious presence, from whence the very name of Jerusalem was called, “The LORD is there,” Ezekiel 48:35, he who in and under that name was with them, as sent by Jehovah, Zechariah 2:8, was the Son, in whom he had now spoken unto them in these latter days. And this must needs be of weight with them, being instructed that he who had revealed the will of God unto them was none other but he who had dwelt among them from the beginning, representing in all things the person of the Father, being typically revealed unto them as the “brightness of his glory.”

The apostle adds, that he is χαρακτὴρ ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ , “the express figure” (or “image”) “of his person;” that is, of the person of God the Father. I shall not enter into any dispute about the meaning of the word ὐποστασις, or the difference between it and οὐσία. Many controversies about these words there were of old. And Jerome was very cautious about acknowledging three hypostases in the Deity, and that because he thought the word in this place to denote “substantia;” and of that mind are many still, it being so rendered by the Vulgar translation. But the consideration of these vexed questions tending not to the opening of the design of the apostle and meaning of the Holy Ghost in this place, I shall not insist upon them.

1. The hypostasis of the Father is the Father himself. Hereof, or of him, is the Son said to be the “express image.” As is the Father, so is the Son. And this agreement, likeness, and conveniency between the Father and Son, is essential; not accidental, as those things are between relations finite and corporeal. What the Father is, doth, hath, that the Son is, doth, hath; or else the Father, as the Father, could not be fully satisfied in him, nor represented by him.

2. By “character” two things seem to be intended:

(1.) That the Son in himself is ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ, “in the likeness of God,” Philippians 2:6.

(2.) That unto us he is εἰκὼν Θεοῦ, “the image of God,” representing him unto us, Colossians 1:15. For these three words are used of the Lord Christ in respect unto God the Father, μορφή, εἰκών, χαρακτὴρ. And their use seems thus to difference them:

(1.) It is said of him, ᾿Εν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, Philippians 2:6, “Being” (“existing, subsisting”) “in the form of God:” that is, being so, essentially so; for there is no μορφή, or “form,” in the Deity but what is essential unto it. This he was absolutely, antecedently unto his incarnation, the whole nature of God being in him, and consequently he being in the form of God.

(2.) In the manifestation of God unto us, he is said to be Εἰκὼν τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἀορα. του, Colossians 1:15, “The image of the invisible God;” because in him, so partaker of the nature of the Father, do the power, goodness, holiness, grace, and all other glorious properties of God, shine forth, being in him represented unto us, 2 Corinthians 4:6. And both these seem to be comprised in this word, χαρακτήρ; both that the whole nature of God is in him, as also that by him God is declared and expressed unto us.

Neither were the Jews of old ignorant of this notion of the Son of God. So Philo expresseth their sense, de Confusione Linguarum:

Κἂν μηδέπω μέντοι τυγχάνῃ τις ἀξιόχρεως ὥν υἱὸς Θεοῦ προσαγορεύεσθαι, σπούδαζε κοσμεῖσθαι κατὰ τὸν πρωτόγονον αὐτοῦ Λόγον, τὸν ἅγγελον πρεσβὺτατον ὠς ἀρχάγγελον πολυώνομον ὑπάρχοντα, καὶ γὰρ ἀρχὴ, καὶ ὄνομα Θεοῦ, καὶ λόγος, καὶ ὁ κατ᾿ εἰκόνα ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ὀρῶν ᾿Ισραὴλ προσαγορεύεται

“If any one be not yet worthy to be called the son of God, yet endeavor thou to be conformed unto his first-begotten Word, the most ancient angel, the archangel with many names; for he is called ‘The beginning,'‘The name of God,'‘The man according to the image of God,'‘The seer of Israel.'”

And again,

Καὶ γὰρ εἰ μήπω ἱκανοὶ Θεοῦ παῖδες νομίζεσθαι γεγόναμεν, ἀλλά τοι τῆς ἀϊδίου εἰκόνος αὐτοῦ Λόγου τοῦ ἱερώτατου· Θεοῦ γὰρ εἰκὼν Λόγος ὁ πρεσβύτατος

“For if we are not meet to be called the sons of God, let us beso of his eternal image, the most sacred Word; for that most ancient Word is the image of God.”

Thus he, expressing some of their conceptions concerning this eternal “character” of the person of the Father. We have seen what it is that is intended in this expression, and shall only add thereunto a consideration of that from whence the expression is taken. The ordinary engraving of rings, or seals, or stones, is generally thought to be alluded unto. It may be also that the apostle had respect unto some representation of the glory of God by engraving amongst the institutions of Moses. Now, there was scarcely any thing of old that more gloriously represented God than that of the engraving of his name on a plate of gold, to be worn on the front of the mitre of the high priest; at the sight whereof the great conqueror of the east fell down before him. Mention of it we have Exodus 28:36, “Thou shalt make a plate of pure gold, and grave upon it, like the engravings of a signet,” ליהָֹוה קֹדֶש, “Holiness of Jehovah,” or “to Jehovah.” Here was that name of God which denotes his essence and being characterized and engraven, to represent his holiness and glory to his people.

And Aaron was to wear this engraven name of God on his forehead, that he might bear the iniquity of the holy things and gifts of the children of Israel; which could really be done only by him who was Jehovah himself. And thus, also, when God promiseth to bring forth the Son as the cornerstone of the church, he promiseth to engrave upon him the seven eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 3:9, or the perfection of his wisdom and power, to be expressed unto the church in him. There having been, then, this representation of the presence of God, by the character or engraving of his glorious name upon the plate of gold, which the high priest was to wear that he might bear iniquities; the apostle lets the Hebrews know, that in Christ the Son is the real accomplishment of what was typified thereby, the Father having actually communicated unto him his nature, denoted by that name, whereby he was able really to bear our iniquities, and most gloriously represent the person of his Father unto us.

And this, with submission to better judgments, do I conceive to be the design of the apostle in this his description of the person of Jesus Christ. It pleased the Holy Ghost herein to use these terms and expressions, to mind the Hebrews how they were of old instructed, though obscurely, in the things now actually exhibited unto them, and that nothing was now preached or declared but what in their typical institutions they had before given their assent unto.

We have been somewhat long in our explication of this description of the person of the Son of God; yet, as we suppose, not any longer than the nature of the things treated of and the manner of their expression necessarily required us to be. We shall therefore here stay a while, before we proceed to the ensuing words of this verse, and take some observations, from what hath been spoken for our direction and refreshment in our passage.

I. All the glorious perfections of the nature of God do belong unto and dwell in the person of the Son. Were it not so, he could not gloriously represent unto us the person of the Father; nor by the contemplation of him could we be led to an acquaintance with the person of the Father. This the apostle here teacheth us, as in the explication of the words we have manifested. Now, because the confirmation of this allusion depends on the proofs and testimonies given of and unto the divine nature of Christ, which I have elsewhere largely insisted on and vindicated from exceptions, I shall not here resume that task, especially considering that the same truth will again occur unto us.

II. The whole manifestation of the nature of God unto us, and all communications of grace, are immediately by and through the person of the Son. He represents him unto us; and through him is every thing that is communicated unto us from the fullness of the Deity conveyed.

There are sundry signal instances wherein God reveals himself, and communicates from his own infinite fullness unto his creatures, and in all of them he doth it immediately by the Son:

1. In the creation of all things;

2. In their providential rule and disposal;

3. In the revelation of his will and institution of ordinances;

4. In the communication of his Spirit and grace: in none of which is the person of the Father any otherwise immediately represented unto us than in and by the person of the Son.

1. In the creation of all things, God both gave them their being and imparted unto them of his goodness, and manifested his nature unto those that were capable of a holy apprehension of it. Now, all this God did immediately by the Son; not as a subordinate instrument, but as the principal efficient, being his own power and wisdom. This we have manifested in our explication of the last words of the verse foregoing. In express testimony hereunto, see John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; 1 Corinthians 8:6. The Son, as the power and wisdom of the Father, made all things; so that in that work the glory of the Father shines forth in him, and no otherwise. By him was there a communication of being, goodness, and existence unto the creation.

2. In the providential rule and disposal of all things created, God further manifests himself unto his creatures, and further communicates of his goodness unto them. That this also is done in and by the Son, we shall further evidence in the explication of the next words of this verse.

3. The matter is yet more plain as to the revelation of his will, and the institution of ordinances from first to last. It is granted that after the entrance of sin, God did not graciously reveal nor communicate himself unto any of his creatures but by his Son. This might fully be manifested by a consideration of the first promise, the foundation of all future revelations and institutions, with an induction of all ensuing instances. But whereas all revelations and institutions springing from the first promise are completed and finished in the gospel, it may suffice to show that what we assert is true with peculiar reference thereunto. The testimonies given unto it are innumerable. This is the substance and end of the gospel: to reveal the Father by and in the Son unto us; to declare that through him alone we can be made partakers of his grace and goodness, and that no other way we can have either acquaintance or communion with him. See John 1:18. The whole end of the gospel is to give us “the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ,” 2 Corinthians 4:6; that is, the glory of the invisible God, whom none hath seen at any time, 1 Timothy 6:16; 1 John 4:12. That is to be communicated unto us, But how is this to be done? absolutely and immediately, as it is the glory of the Father? No, but as it “shines forth in the face of Jesus Christ,” or as it is in his person manifested and represented unto us; for he is, as the same apostle says in the same place, 2 Corinthians 4:4, “the image of God.” And herein also, as to the communication of grace and the Spirit, the Scripture is express, and believers are daily instructed in it. See Colossians 1:19; John 1:16; especially 1 John 5:11; 1 John 5:14. Now, the grounds of this order of things lie,

1. In the essential inbeing of the Father and Son. This our Savior expresseth, John 10:38, “The Father is in me, and I in him.” The same essential properties and nature being in each of the persons, by virtue thereof their persons also are said to be in each other. The person of the Son is in the person of the Father, not as such, not in or by its own personality, but by union of its nature and essential properties, which are not alike, as the persons are, but the same in the one and the other. And this inbeing of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in him, our Savior affirms to be manifested by the works that he wrought, being wrought by the power of the Father, yet as in him, and not as in the Father immediately. See to the same purpose John 14:10-11, and John 17:21.

2. The Father being thus in the Son, and the Son in the Father, whereby all the glorious properties of the one do shine forth in the other, the order and economy of the blessed Trinity in subsistence and operation require that the manifestation and communication of the Father unto us be through and by the Son; for as the Father is the original and fountain of the whole Trinity as to subsistence, so as to operation he works not but by the Son, who, having the divine nature communicated unto him by eternal generation, is to communicate the effects of the divine power, wisdom, and goodness, by temporary operation. And thus he becomes “the brightness of his Father's glory, and the express image of his person,” namely, by the receiving his glorious nature from him, the whole and all of it, and expressing him in his works of nature and grace unto his creatures.

3. Because in the dispensation and counsel of grace God hath determined that all communication of himself unto us shall be by the Son as incarnate. This the whole gospel is given to testify. So that this truth hath its foundation in the very subsistence of the persons of the Deity, is confirmed by the order, and operation, and voluntary disposition in the covenant of grace.

And this discovers unto us, first, the necessity of coming unto God by Christ. God in himself is said to be “in thick darkness,” as also to dwell “in light,” whereunto no creature can approach; which expressions, though seeming contrary, yet teach us the same thing, namely, the infinite distance of the divine nature from our apprehensions and conceptions, “no man having seen God at any time.” But this God, invisible, eternal, incomprehensibly glorious, hath implanted sundry characters of his excellencies and left footsteps of his blessed properties on the things that he hath made; that, by the consideration and contemplation of them, we might come to some such acquaintance with him as might encourage us to fear and serve him, and to make him our utmost end. But these expressions of God in all other things, besides his Son Christ Jesus, are all of them partial, revealing only something of him, not all that is necessary to be known that we may live unto him here and enjoy him hereafter; and obscure, not leading us unto any perfect stable knowledge of him. And hence it is that those who have attempted to come unto God by the light of that manifestation which he hath made of himself any other way than in and by Christ Jesus, bare all failed and come short of his glory. But now, the Lord Christ being “the brightness of his glory,” in whom his glory shines out of the thick darkness that his nature is enwrapped in unto us, and beams out of that inaccessible light which he inhabits; and “the express image of his person,” representing all the perfections of his person fully and clearly unto us, in him alone can we attain a saving acquaintance with him. On this account he tells Philip, John 14:9, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father;” the reason of which assertion, taken from the mutual inbeing of Father and Son, and his expression of his mind and glory, he asserts in the next verses. He, then, is the only way and means of coming unto the knowledge and enjoyment of God, because in and by him alone is he fully and perfectly expressed unto us.

And therefore this, secondly, is our great guide and direction in all our endeavors after an acceptable access unto Him. Would we come to that acquaintance with the nature, properties, and excellencies of the Father, which poor, weak, finite creatures are capable of attaining in this world, which is sufficient that we may love him, fear him, serve him, and come unto the enjoyment of him? would we know his love and grace? would we admire his wisdom and holiness? let us labor to come to an intimate and near acquaintance with his Son Jesus Christ, in whom all these things dwell in their fullness, and by whom they are exhibited, revealed, unfolded unto us; seek the Father in the Son, out of whom not one property of the divine nature can be savingly apprehended or rightly understood, and in whom they are all exposed to our faith and spiritual contemplation. This is our wisdom, to abide in Christ, to abide with him, to learn him; and in him we shall learn, see, and know the Father also.

Φέρω τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῤήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ. After the description of the person, the apostle returns unto an assertion of the power of Christ, the Son of God, and therein makes his transition from the kingly and prophetical unto his sacerdotal office; on all which he intends afterwards to enlarge his discourse. He showed before that by him the worlds were created; whereunto, as a further evidence of his glorious power, and of his continuance to act suitably unto that beginning of his exercise of it, he adds that he also abides to uphold, or rule and dispose of all things so made by him.

For the explication of these words, two things are to be inquired after; first, How, or in what sense, Christ is said to “uphold” or rule “all things;” secondly, How he doth it by “the word of his power.” Φέρων is taken by expositors in a double sense, and accordingly variously rendered in translations.

1. Some render it by “upholding, supporting, bearing, carrying.” And these suppose it to express that infinite divine power which is exerted in the conservation of the creation, keeping it from sinking into its original of confusion and nothing. Hereof our Savior saith, “My Father worketh hitherto,” ἕως ὔρτι, (or “yet,”) “and I work;” that is, in the providential sustentation of all things made at the beginning. “And this,” saith Chrysostom on this place, “is a greater work than that of the creation.” By the former all things were brought forth from nothing; by the latter are they preserved from that return unto nothing which their own nature, not capable of existence without dependence on their First Cause, and their perpetual conflict by contrariety of qualities, would precipitate them into.

2. Some take the word to express his ruling, governing, and disposing of all things by him made, and (which is supposed) sustained; and so it may denote the putting forth of that power over all things which is given unto the Son as mediator; or else that providential rule over all which he hath with his Father, which seems rather to be intended, because of the way expressed whereby he exerciseth this rule, namely, “by the word of his power.”

The use of the word φέρω is not so obvious in this latter sense as it is in the former; as in the proverb, Εἰ δύναμαι τῆς αι῏γα φέρειν, ὲπίθετέ μοι τὸν βοῦν. But I see no reason why we should suppose an inconsistency in these senses, and not rather conclude that they are both of them implied; for as absolutely it is the same divine power and providence which is exercised in the upholding and the ruling or disposing of all things, so all rule and government is a matter of weight and burden. And he who rules or governs others is said to bear or carry them. So Moses expresseth his rule of the people in the wilderness, Numbers 11:11-12: “Thou hast put,” saith he, משָּׂא, “the weight” (or “burden”) “of this people upon me; and thou hast said, שָׂאֵהוּ, bear” (or “carry”) “them in thy bosom.” And hence from נָשָׂא, “to bear or carry,” is נָשִׁיא, “a prince or ruler;” that is, one that carries and bears the burden of the people, that upholds and rules them. To bear, then, or uphold, and to rule and dispose, may be both well intended in this word; as they are both expressed in that prophecy of Christ, Isaiah 9:6, “The rule” (or “government”) “shall be upon his shoulder,” that together with his power and rule he may sustain and bear the weight of his people. Only, whereas this is done amongst men with much labor and travail, he doth it by an inexpressible facility, by the word of his power. And this is safe, to take the expression in its most comprehensive sense.

But whereas the phrase of speech itself is nowhere else used in the New Testament, nor is φέρω applied unto any such purpose elsewhere (though once φερόμενος be taken for “actus” or “agitatus,” 2 Peter 1:21), we may inquire what word it was among the Hebrews that the apostle intended to express, whereby they had formerly been instructed in the same matter.

1. It may be he intended מְכַלְכֵּל, a participle from כּוּל, “to sustain, to bear, to endure,” as Malachi 3:2. It signifies also “to feed, nourish, and cherish, 1 Kings 4:7; Ruth 4:15; Zechariah 11:16. φέρων τε παντα, that is, מְכַלְכֵּל כָל, “sustinens, nutriens omnia,” “sustaining and cherishing all things” But this word hath no respect unto rule or disposal. And in this sense, as the work of creation is eminently ascribed unto the Father, who is said to make all things by the Son, so that of the preservation and cherishing of all things is here peculiarly assigned unto the Son. And this is not unsuitable unto the analogy of faith: for it was the power of God that was eminently exalted and is conspicuously seen in the work of creation, as the apostle declares, Romans 1:20, although that power was accompanied also with infinite wisdom; and it is the wisdom of God that is most eminently manifested in the preservation of all things, though that wisdom be also exercised in power infinite. At least, in the contemplation of the works of the creation, we are led, by the wonder of the infinite power whereby they were wrought, to the consideration of the wisdom that accompanied it; and that which in the works of providence first presents itself unto our minds is the infinite wisdom whereby all things are disposed, which leads us also to the admiration of the power expressed in them. Now, it is usual with the Scripture to assign the things wherein power is most eminent unto the Father, as those wherein wisdom is most conspicuously exalted unto the Son, who is the eternal Wisdom of the Father. And this sense is not unsuitable unto the text.

2. נֹשֵׂא is another word that may be intended; and this denotes a bearing like a prince in government, as נָשִׂיא. And in this sense the word ought to be referred unto Christ as mediator, intrusted with power and rule by the Father. But neither the words nor context will well bear this sense: for,

(1.) It is mentioned before, where it is said that he is “appointed heir of all;” and it is not likely that the apostle, in this summary description of the person and offices of the Messiah, would twice mention the same thing under different expressions.

(2.) The particle τε added unto φέρων refers us to the beginning of this verse, ῝Ος ὥν,..... φέρων τε, “Who being the brightness of glory,..... and bearing all things.” So that these things must necessarily be spoken of him in the same respect: and the former, as we have showed, relateth unto his person in respect of his divine nature; so therefore doth the latter, and his acting therein.

3. There is yet another word, which I suppose the apostle had a principal aim to express, and this is רֹכֵב. רָכַב is properly “to ride, to be carried, to be carried over;” and it is frequently, though metaphorically, used concerning God himself: as Deuteronomy 33:26, שמַיִם רֹכֵב, “riding on the heavens;” “on the clouds,” Isaiah 19:1; “on the wings of the wind,” Psalms 18:10, and Psalms 68:5; whereby his majesty, authority, and government are shadowed out unto us. And hence also the word signifies “to administer, dispose, govern or preside in and over things.”

Thus in Ezekiel's vision of the glorious providence of God in ruling the whole creation, it is represented by a chariot (מֶרְכָבָה) of cherubim (כְּרוּבִים). The כְּרוּבִים, “cherubim,” with their wheels, made that chariot, over which sat the God of Israel, in his disposing and ruling of all things. And the words themselves have that affinity in signification which is frequently seen among the Hebrew roots, differing only in the transposition of one letter. And the description of Him who sat above the chariot of providence, Ezekiel 1, is the same with that of John, Revelation 4. Now, God in that vision is placed רכֵב, as governing, ruling, influencing all second causes, as to the orderly production of their effects, by the communication of life, motion, and guidance unto them. And though this divine administration of all things be dreadful to consider, the rings of the wheels being high and dreadful, Revelation 1:18, and the living creatures “ran as the appearance of a flash of lightning,” Revelation 1:14; as also full of entanglements, there being to appearance cross wheels, or wheels within wheels, Revelation 1:16, which are all said to be rolling, Revelation 10:11; yet it is carried on in an unspeakable order, without the least confusion, Revelation 1:17, and with a marvellous facility, by a mere intimation of the mind and will of Him who guides the whole; and that because there was a living, powerful spirit passing through all, both living creatures and wheels, that moved them speedily, regularly, and effectually, as he pleased; that is, the energetical power of divine Providence, animating, guiding, and disposing the whole as seemed good unto him.

Now, all this is excellently expressed by the apostle in these words. For as that power which is in Him that sits over the chariot, influencing and giving existence, life, motion, and guidance unto all things, is clearly expressed by φέρων τὰ πάντα , “upholding and disposing of all things,” that is, רֹכֵב עַלאּכָל; so is the exercise and issuing of it forth by the spirit of life in all things, to guide them certainly and regularly, by these words, τῷ ῤήματι τῆς δυνάμεως, “by the word of his power:” both denoting the unspeakable facility of omnipotent power in its operations. And Kimchi on the 6th of Isaiah affirms that the vision which the prophet had was of “the glory of God, that glory which Ezekiel saw in the likeness of a man;” which we find applied unto the Lord Christ, John 12:41.

I shall only add, that in Ezekiel's vision the voice of the quadriga, of the living creatures, in its motion, was as the voice שׁדַּי, “omnipotentis,” “praepotentis,” “sibi sufficientis,” of “the Almighty,” “the powerful,” “the all” or “self-sufficient;” which is also fully expressed in this of the apostle, “bearing, upholding, disposing of all things”

Our next inquiry is after the manner whereby the Son thus holdeth and disposeth of all things. He doth it “by the word of his power,” τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως. ῾Ρῆμα in the New Testament is used in the same latitude and extent with דָּבָר in the Old. Sometimes it denotes any matter or thing, be it good or evil, as Matthew 5:11; Matthew 12:36; Matthew 18:16; Mark 9:32; Luke 1:37; Luke 2:15; Luke 18:34; a word of blessing by Providence, Matthew 4:4; any word spoken, Matthew 26:75; Matthew 27:14; Luke 9:45; of promise, Luke 1:38; and ῥήματα Βλάσφημα, “blasphemous words,” Acts 6:11; the word of God, the word of prophecy, Luke 3:2; Romans 10:17; Ephesians 5:26; Ephesians 6:17; 1 Peter 1:25; an authoritative command, Luke 5:5. In this epistle it is used variously. In this only it differs from λόγος, that it never denotes the eternal or essential Word of God. That which in this place is denoted by it, with its adjunct of τῆς δυνάμεως, the λόγος ἐςδιάθετος, or the divine power, executing the counsels of the will and wisdom of God, or the efficacy of God's providence, whereby he worketh and effecteth all things according to the counsel of his will. See Genesis 1:3; Psalms 147:15; Psalms 147:18; Psalms 148:8; Isaiah 30:31. And this is indifferently expressed by ῥῆμα and λόγος. Hence the same thing which Paul expresseth by the one of them, Hebrews 11:3, Πίστει νοοῦμεν κατηρτίσθαι τοὺς αἰῶνας ῥήματι Θεοῦ, “By faith we know that the worlds were made by the word of God,” Peter doth by the other, 2 Peter 3:5, Συνεστῶσα τῷ Θεοῦ λόγῳ.

Now, this efficacy of divine Providence is called the word of God, to intimate that as rulers accomplish their will by a word of command, in and about things subject to their pleasure, Matthew 8:9, so doth God accomplish his whole mind and will in all things by his power. And therefore τῆς δυνάμεως, “of his power,” is here added by way of difference and distinction, to show what word it is that the apostle intends. It is not Λόγος οὐσιώδης, “the essential Word” of God, who is the person spoken of; nor λόγος προφορικός, the word spoken by him in the revelation of himself, his mind and will; but a word that is effectual and operative, namely, the putting forth of his divine power, with easiness and authority accomplishing his will and purpose in and by all things.

This in the vision of Ezekiel is the communication of a spirit of life to the cherubs and wheels, to act and move them as seems good to Him by whom they are guided; for as it is very probable that the apostle in these words, setting forth the divine power of the Son in ruling and governing the whole creation, did intend to mind the Hebrews that the Lord Christ, the Son, is he who was represented in the form of a man unto Ezekiel, ruling and disposing of all things, and the שׁדַּי, “the Almighty,” whose voice was heard amongst the wheels, so it is most certain that the same thing is intended in both places. And this expression of “upholding” (or “disposing of”) “all things by the word of his power,” doth fully declare the glorious providence emblematically expressed in that vision. The Son being over all things made by himself, as on a throne over the cherubim and wheels, influenceth the whole creation with his power, communicating unto it respectively subsistence, life, and motion, acting, ruling, and disposing of all according to the counsel of his own will.

This, then, is that which the apostle assigns unto the Son, thereby to set out the dignity of his person, that the Hebrews might well consider all things before they deserted his doctrine. He is one that is partaker essentially of the nature of God, “being the brightness of glory and the express image of his Father's person,” who exerciseth and manifesteth his divine power both in the creation of all things, as also in the supportment, rule, and disposal of all, after they are made by him. And hence will follow, as his power and authority to change the Mosaical institutions, so his truth and faithfulness in the revelation of the will of God by him made; which it was their duty to embrace and adhere unto.

The several passages of this verse are all of them conjoined by the apostle, and used unto the same general end and purpose; but themselves are of such distinct senses and importance, considered absolutely and apart, that we shall in our passage take out the observations which they singly afford unto us.

And from these last words we may learn:

I. Our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, hath the weight of the whole creation upon his hand, and disposeth of it by his power and wisdom.

II. Such is the nature and condition of the universe, that it could not subsist a moment, nor could any thing in it act regularly unto its appointed end, without the continual supportment, guidance, influence, and disposal of the Son of God.

We may briefly consider the sum of both these jointly, to manifest the power and care of Christ over us, as also the weak, dependent condition of the whole creation in and by itself. The things of this creation can no more support, act, and dispose themselves, than they could at first make themselves out of nothing. The greatest cannot conserve itself by its power, or greatness, or order; nor the least by its distance from opposition. Were there not a mighty hand under them all and every one, they would all sink into confusion and nothing; did not an effectual power influence them, they would become a slothful heap. It is true, God hath in the creation of all things implanted in every particle of the creation a special natural inclination and disposition, according unto which it is ready to act, move, or work regularly; but he hath not placed this nature and power absolutely in them, and independently of his own power and operation. The sun is endued with a nature to produce all the glorious effects of light and heat that we behold or conceive, the fire to burn, the wind to blow, and all creatures also in the like manner; but yet neither could sun, or fire, or wind preserve themselves in their being, nor retain the principles of their operations, did not the Son of God, by a constant, continual emanation of his eternal power, uphold and preserve them; nor could they produce any one effect by all their actings, did not he work in them and by them. And so is it with the sons of men, with all agents whatever, whether natural and necessary, or free and proceeding in their operations by election and choice. Hence Paul tells us that “in God we live, and move, and have our being,” Acts 17:28. He had before asserted that he had “made of one blood all nations,” Acts 17:26; that is, all men of one, whom he first created. To which he adds, that we may know that he hath not so left us to stand by ourselves on that first foundation as that we have any power or ability, being made, to do or act any thing without him, that in him, that is, in his power, care, providence, and by virtue of his effectual influence, our lives are supported and continued, that we are acted, moved, and enabled thereby to do all we do, be it never so small, wherein there is any effect of life or motion. So Daniel tells Belshazzar that his “breath” and “all his ways” were in the hand of God, Daniel 5:23; his breath, in the supportment and continuance of his being; and his ways, in his effectual guidance and disposal of them. Peter speaks to the same purpose in general concerning the fabric of the heavens, earth, and sea, 2 Peter 3:5.

Now, what is thus spoken of God in general is by Paul particularly applied unto the Son: Colossians 1:16-17, “All things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” He did not only make all things, as we have declared, and that for himself and his own glory, but also he continues at the head of them; so that by him and by his power they consist, are preserved in their present state and condition, kept from dissolution, in their singular existence, and in a consistency among themselves. And the reason hereof is taken, first, from the limited, finite, dependent condition of the creation, and the absolute necessity that it should be so. It is utterly impossible, and repugnant to the very nature and being of God, that he should make, create, or produce any thing without himself, that should have either a self-subsistence or a self-sufficiency, or be independent on himself. All these are natural and essential properties of the divine nature. Where they are, there is God; so that no creature can be made partaker of them. When we name a creature, we name that which hath a derived and dependent being. And that which cannot subsist in and by itself cannot act so neither.

Secondly, The energetical efficacy of God's providence, joined with his infinite wisdom in caring for the works of his own hands, the products of his power, requires that it should be so. He worketh yet. He did not create the world to leave it to an uncertain event, to stand by and to see what would become of it, to see whether it would return to its primitive nothing (of which cask it always smells strongly), or how it would be tossed up and down by the adverse and contrary qualities which were implanted in the severals of it; but the same power and wisdom that produced it doth still accompany it, powerfully piercing through every parcel and particle of it. To fancy a providence in God, without a continual energetical operation; or a wisdom without a constant care, inspection, and oversight of the works of his hands; is not to have apprehensions of the living God, but to erect an idol in our own imaginations.

Thirdly, This work is peculiarly assigned unto the Son, not only as he is the eternal power and wisdom of God, but also because by his interposition, as undertaking the work of mediation, he reprieved the world from an immediate dissolution upon the first entrance of sin and disorder, that it might continue, as it were, the great stage for the mighty works of God's grace, wisdom, and love, to be wrought on. Hence the care of the continuance of the creation and the disposal of it is delegated unto him, as he that hath undertaken to bring forth and consummate the glory of God in it, notwithstanding the great breach made upon it by the sin of angels and men. This is the substance of the apostle's discourse, Colossians 1:15-20. Having asserted him to be the image of God, in the sense beforeopened and declared, and to have made all things, he affirms that all things have also their present consistency in him and by his power, and must have so, until the work of reconciliation of all things unto God being accomplished, the glory of God may be fully retrieved and established for ever.

1. We may see from hence the vanity of expecting any thing from the creatures, but only what the Lord Christ is pleased to communicate unto us by them. They that cannot sustain, move, or act themselves, by any power, virtue, or strength of their own, are very unlikely by and of themselves to afford any real assistance, relief, or help unto others. They all abide and exist severally, and consist together, in their order and operation, by the word of the power of Christ; and what he will communicate by them, that they will yield and afford, and nothing else. In themselves they are broken cisterns that will hold no water; what he drops into them may be derived unto us, and no more. They who rest upon them or rest in them, without the consideration of their constant dependence on Christ, will find at length all their hopes disappointed, and all their enjoyments vanish into nothing.

2. Learn hence also the full, absolute, plenary self-sufficiency and sovereignty of the Son, our Savior. We showed before the universality of his kingdom and moral rule over the whole creation; but this is not all. A king hath a moral rule over his subjects in his kingdom: but he doth not really and physically give them their being and existence; he doth not uphold and act them at his pleasure; but every one of them stands therein upon the same or an equal bottom with himself. He can, indeed, by the permission of God, take away the lives of any of them, and so put an end to all their actings and operations in this world; but he cannot give them life or continue their lives at his pleasure one moment, or make them so much as to move a finger. But with the Lord Christ it is otherwise. He not only rules over all the whole creation, disposing of it according to the rule and law of his own counsel and pleasure, but also they all have their beings, natures, inclinations, and lives from him; by his power are they continued unto them, and all their actions are influenced thereby. And this, as it argues an all-sufficiency in himself, so an absolute sovereignty over all other things. And this should teach us our constant dependence on him and our universal subjection unto him.

3. And this abundantly discovers the vanity and folly of them who make use of the creation in an opposition unto the Lord Christ and his peculiar interest in this world. His own power is the very ground that they stand upon in their opposition unto him, and all things which they use against him consist in him. They hold their lives absolutely at the pleasure of him whom they oppose; and they act against him without whose continual supportment and influence they could neither live nor act one moment: which is the greatest madness and most contemptible folly imaginable.

Proceed we now with our apostle in his description of the person and offices of the Messiah.

This beginning of the epistle, as hath been declared, contains a summary proposition of those things which the apostle intends severally to insist upon throughout the whole; and these all relate to the person and offices of the Messiah, the principal subject of this epistle. Having, therefore, first declared him to be the great prophet of the new testament; and, secondly, the lord, ruler, and governor of all things, as also manifested the equity of the grant of that universal sovereignty unto him, from the excellency of his person on the account of his divine nature, and the operations thereof in the works of creation and providence; he proceeds to finish and close his general proposition of the argument of the epistle by a brief intimation of his priestly office, with what he did therein, and what ensued thereon, in the remaining words of this verse.

And this order and method of the apostle is required by the nature of the things themselves whereof he treats; for the work of purging sins, which as a priest he assigns unto him, cannot well be declared without a previous manifestation of his divine nature. For it is “opus Θεανδρικόν,” a work of him who is God and man; for as God takes it to be his property to blot out our sins, so he could not have done it “by himself” had he not been man also.

And this is asserted in the next words:

Δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος τῶν ἀμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν· “Having by himself purged our sins.”

The Vulgar Latin renders these words, “Purgationem peccatorum faciens,” not without sundry mistakes. For, first, these words, δι, “by himself,” and ἑαυτοῦ, “our,” are omitted; and yet the emphasis and proper sense of the whole depend upon them. Secondly, ποιησάμενος, “having made,” is rendered in the present tense, “making;” which seems to direct the sense of the words to another thing and action of Christ than what is here intended. And therefore the expositors of the Roman church, as Thomas, Lyranus, Cajetan, Estius, Ribera, a Lapide, all desert their own text, and expound the words according to the original. The ancients, also as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and OEcumenius, lay the chief weight of their whole exposition of this place on the words omitted in that translation.

The doctrine of purging our sins by Christ is deep and large, extending itself unto many weighty heads of the gospel; but we shall follow our apostle, and in this place pass it over briefly and in general, because the consideration of it will directly occur unto us in our progress.

Two things the apostle here expresseth concerning the Messiah; and one, which is the foundation of both the other, he implieth or supposeth:

First, He expresseth what he did, he “purged our sins;”

Secondly, How he did it, he did it “by himself.”

That which he supposeth, as the foundation of both these, is, that he was the great high priest of the church; they with whom he dealt knowing full well that this matter of purging sins belonged only unto the priest.

Here, then, the apostle tacitly enters upon a comparison of Christ with Aaron, the high priest, as he had done before with all the prophetical revealers of the will of God; and as he named none of them in particular, no more doth he here name Aaron: but afterwards, when he comes more largely to insist on the same matter again, he expressly makes mention of his name, as also of that of Moses.

And in both the things here ascribed unto him as the great high priest of his church doth he prefer him above Aaron: First, In that he “purged our sins,” that is, really and effectually before God and in the conscience of the sinner, and that “for ever;” whereas the purgation of sins about which Aaron was employed was in itself but typical, external, and representative of that which was true and real: both of which the apostle proves at large afterwards. Secondly, In that he did it “by himself,” or the offering of himself; whereas whatever Aaron did of this kind, he did it by the offering of the blood of bulls and goats, as shall be declared.

And hence appears also the vanity of the gloss of a learned man on these words. “Postquam,” saith he, “morte sun causam dedisset ejus fidei per quam a peccatis purgamur, quod nec Moses fecerat nec prophetae.” For as we shall see that Christ's purging of our sins doth not consist in giving a ground and cause for faith, whereby we purge ourselves, so the apostle is not comparing the Lord Christ in these words with Moses and the prophets, who had nothing to do in the work of purging sin, but with Aaron, who by office was designed thereunto.

Let us then see what it is that is here ascribed unto the Lord Christ: Καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος. Καθαρίζω doth most frequently denote real actual purification, either of outward defilements, by healing and cleansing, as Mark 1:40; Mark 7:19; Luke 5:12; or from spiritual defilements of sin, by sanctifying grace, as Acts 15:9; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Ephesians 5:26. But it is also frequently used in the same sense with καθαίρω and καθαίρομαι, “to purge by expiation or atonement,” as Hebrews 9:22-23. And in the like variety is καθαρισμός also used. But καθαρισμόν ποιήσαι, “to make a purgation,” or purification of our sins, cannot here be taken in the first sense, for real and inherent sanctifying: First, Because it is spoken of as a thing already past and perfected, “Having purged our sins,” when purification by sanctification is begun only in some, not all at any time, and perfected in none at all in this world. Secondly, Because he did it δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ, “by himself” alone, without the use or application of any other medium unto them that are purged; when real inherent sanctification is with “washing of water by the word,” Ephesians 5:26; or by “regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost,” Titus 3:5. And the gloss above mentioned, that Christ should purge us from our sins in his death, by occasioning that faith whereby we are cleansed, is excluded, as was in part showed before, by the context. That is assigned unto the death of Christ, as done really and effectually thereby, which was done typically of old in the legal sacrifices by the priests; as is evident from the antithesis couched in that expression, “By himself.” But this was not the way whereby sins were of old purged by sacrifices, namely, by the begetting a persuasion in the minds of men that should be useful for that purpose, and therefore no such thing is here intended.

Καθαρισμὸς, then, is such a purging as is made by expiation, lustration, and atonement; that is, כִּפֻר or כּפֹּרֶת, ἰλασμός, “propitiatio,” “atonement,” “propitiation.” So is that word rendered by the LXX., Exodus 29:36: Τῇ ἡμέρα τοῦ καθαρισμου, עלאּחַכִּפְּרִים, “the day of atonement,” or “expiation.” They do, indeed, mostly render כָּפַר by ἱλάσκομαι, and ἐξιλάσκομᾳι, “to propitiate,” “to appease,” “to atone;” but they do it also by καθαρίζω, “to purge,” as Exodus 29:37, and Exodus 30:10. So also in other authors, καθαρισμός is used for κάθαρυα, περικάθαρμα; that is, “expiatio,” “expiamentum,” “piaculum,” “expiation,” “atonement,” “diversion of guilt.” So Lucian:

᾿῾Ρίψομεν μὲν αὐτὸν τοῦ κρημνοῦ καθαρισμὸν τοῦ στρατοῦ ἐσόμενον· “We cast him down headlong, for an expiation of the army;” or, as one that by his death should expiate, bear, take away the guilt of the army. And such lustrations were common among the heathen, when persons devoted themselves to destruction, or were devoted by others, to purge, lustrate, bear the guilt of any, that they might go free. Such were Codrus, Menoeceus, and the Decii; whose stories are known. This purging, then, of our sins, which the apostle declareth to have been effected before the ascension of Christ and his sitting down at the right hand of God, consisteth not in the actual sanctification and purification of believers by the Spirit, in the application of the blood of Christ unto them, but in the atonement made by him in the sacrifice of himself, that our sins should not be imputed unto us. And therefore is he said to purge our sins, and not to purge us from our sins. And wherever sins, not sinners, are made the object of any mediatory act of Christ, that act immediately respecteth God, and not the sinner, and intends the removal of sin, so as that it should not be imputed. So Hebrews 2:17 of this epistle: “He is a merciful high priest,” εἰς τὸ ἱλάσκεσθαι τὰς ἀμαρτίας τοῦ λαοῦ, “to reconcile the sins of the people;” that is, ἱλάσκεσθαι τὸν Θεὸν περὶ τῶν ἀμαρτιῶν, “to make atonement” (or “reconciliation with God'”) “for the sins of the people.” And again: “He underwent death,” εἰς ἀπολύτρωσιν τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ διαθήκῃ παραβάσεων “for the redemption of transgressions under the first covenant;” that is, to pay a price for them, that transgressors might be set free from the sentence of the law. So that Καθαρισμὸν ποιησάμενος τῶν ἀμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, is as much as, “Having made atonement for our sins.”

And this the apostle further declareth by manifesting the way whereby he did it; that is, δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ, “by himself,” that is, by the sacrifice and offering of himself, as Hebrews 9:12; Hebrews 9:14; Ephesians 5:2. The high priest of old made atonement, and typically purged the sins of the people, by sacrificing of beasts according unto the appointment of the law, Leviticus 16; this high priest, by the sacrifice of himself, Isaiah 53:10; Hebrews 9:12. Of the nature of propitiatory or expiatory sacrifices we must treat at large afterwards. We keep ourselves now unto the apostle's general proposition, expressing briefly the sacerdotal office of Christ, and the excellency of it, in that he really purged our sins, and that by the sacrifice of himself. And this was in and by his death on the cross, with his antecedent preparatory sufferings. Some distinguish between his death and the oblation of himself. This, they say, he performed in heaven, when, as the high priest of his church, he entered into the holiest not made with hands, whereunto his death was but a preparation. For the slaying of the beast, they say, was not the sacrifice, but the offering of its blood upon the altar, and the carrying of it into the holy place. But this utterly overthrows the whole sacrifice of Christ; which, indeed, is the thing by them aimed at. It is true, the slaying of the beast was not the whole sacrifice, but only an essential part of it; as was also the offering of its blood, and the sprinkling of it in the most holy place, in the anniversary sacrifice of atonement, but not in any other. And the reason why the whole sacrifice could not consist in any one action, arose merely from the imperfection of the things and persons employed in that work. The priest was one thing, the beast to be sacrificed another, the altar another, the fire on the altar another, the incense added another, each of them limited and designed unto its peculiar end; so that the atonement could not be made by any one of them, nor the sacrifice consist in them. But now in this sacrifice of Christ all these meet in one, because of his perfection. He himself was both priest, sacrifice, altar, and incense, as we shall see in our progress; and he perfected his whole sacrifice at once, in and by his death and blood-shedding, as the apostle evidently, declares, Hebrews 9:12; Hebrews 9:14.

Thus by himself did Christ purge our sins, making an atonement for them by the sacrifice of himself in his death, that they should never be imputed unto them that believe.

And this part of this verse will afford us also this distinct observation: So great was the work of freeing us from sin, that it could no otherwise be effected but by the self-sacrifice of the Son of God.

Our apostle makes it his design, in several places, to evince that none of those things from whence mankind usually did, or might, with any hopes or probabilities, expect relief in this case, would yield them any at all.

The best that the Gentiles could attain, all that they had to trust unto, was but the improvement of natural light and reason, with an attendance unto those seeds and principles of good and evil which are yet left in the depraved nature of man. Under the conduct and in obedience unto these they sought for rest, glory, and immortality. How miserably they were disappointed in their aims and expectations, and what a woeful issue all their endeavors had, the apostle declares and proves at large, Romans 1:18, unto the end.

The Jews, who enjoyed the benefit of divine revelations, having lost, for the most part, the true spiritual import of them, sought for the same ends by the law, and their own diligent observation of it. They “rested in the law”, Romans 2:17, namely, that by it they should obtain deliverance from sin and acceptance with God; and “followed after it,” Romans 9:31; that is, to attain righteousness and salvation by it. And this seemed to be a sufficient bottom and foundation for them to build upon; for having lost the spiritual understanding, the use and end of the law, as renewed unto them in the covenant of Horeb, they went back unto the primitive use and end of it upon its first giving in innocency, and foolishly thought, as many more yet do, that it would do the same things for sinners that it would have done for men if they had not sinned in Adam; that is, have given them acceptance with God here and eternal life hereafter. Wherefore the apostle in many places takes great pains to undeceive them, to rectify their mistake, and to prove that God had no such design in giving them the law as that which they would impose upon him.

And, first, he asserts and proves in general, that the law would deceive their expectations, that “by the deeds of the law no flesh should be justified,” Romans 3:20; and that it would not give them life, Galatians 3:21, or righteousness. And that they might not complain that then God himself had deceived them, in giving a law that would not serve the turn for which it was given, he declares, secondly, that they had mistaken the end for which the law was renewed unto them; which was, not that it might give them life, or righteousness, but that it might discover sin, exact obedience, and by both drive and compel them to look out after some other thing that might both save them from their sin and afford them a righteousness unto salvation. And furthermore, he, thirdly, acquaints them whence it was that the law was become insufficient for these ends; and that was, because it was become “weak through the flesh,” Romans 8:3. The law was able to continue our acceptance with God in that condition wherein at first we were created; but after that man by sin became flesh, to have a principle of enmity against God in him, bringing forth the fruits of sin continually, the law stood aside, as weakened and insufficient to help and save such a one. And these things the apostle expressly and carefully insists upon in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. But, thirdly, Though the law, and an earnest endeavor after the observation of it in general, would not serve to save us from our sins, yet there were especial institutions of the law that were appointed for that end and purpose, as, namely, the sacrifices in particular, which were designed to make atonement for the delivery of sinners, and to procure their reconciliation with God. These the Jews principally rested on and trusted unto. And, indeed, to expect righteousness and justification by the Mosaical sacrifices, as they did, was far more rational than to expect them by the works of the moral law, as some now do; for all good works whatever are required in the law, and so far are works of the law. For in the sacrifices there was a supposition of sin, and an appearance of a compensation to be made, that the sinner might go free; but in the moral law there is nothing but absolute, universal, and exact righteousness required or admitted, without the least provision of relief for them who come short therein. But yet our apostle declares and proves that neither were these available for the end aimed at, as we shall see at large on the ninth and tenth Chapter s of this epistle.

Now, within the compass of these three, natural light or reason, with ingrafted principles of good and evil, the moral law, and the sacrifices thereof, do lie and consist all the hopes and endeavors of sinners after deliverance and acceptance with God. Nothing is there that they can do, or put any confidence in, but may be referred unto one of these heads. And if all these fail them, as assuredly they will (which we might prove by reasons and demonstrations innumerable, though at present we content ourselves with the testimonies above reported), it is certain that there is nothing under heaven can yield them in this case the least relief.

Again, This is the only way for that end which is suited unto the wisdom of God. The wisdom of God is an infinite abyss, which, as it lies in his own eternal breast, we cannot at all look into. We can only adore it as it breaks forth and discovers itself in the works that outwardly are of him, or the effects of it. Thus David, in the consideration of the works of God, falls into an admiration of the wisdom whereby they were made, Psalms 104:24; Psalms 136:5. The wisdom of God opens and manifests itself in its effects; and thence, according unto our measure, do we learn what doth become it and is suitable unto it. But when the Holy Ghost cometh to speak of this work of our redemption by Christ, he doth not only call us to consider singly the wisdom of God, but his various and “manifold wisdom,”

Ephesians 3:10; and affirms that “all the treasures of wisdom” are hid in it, Colossians 2:3; plainly intimating that it is a work so suited unto, so answering the infinite wisdom of God in all things throughout, that it could no otherwise have been disposed and effected; and this as well upon the account of the wisdom of God itself absolutely considered, as also as it is that property whereby God designs and effects the glorifying of all other excellencies of his nature, whence it is called various, or “manifold:” so that we may well conclude that no other way of deliverance of sinners was suited unto the wisdom of God.

Secondly, This way alone answered the holiness and righteousness of God. He is “an holy God,” who will not suffer the guilty to go free, “of purer eyes than to behold iniquity;” and his judgment is, that “they who commit sin are worthy of death.” Sin is contrary to his nature, and his justice requireth that it go not unpunished. Besides, he is the great and supreme governor of all; and whereas sin breaketh and dissolveth the dependence of the creature upon him, should he not avenge that defection his whole rule and government would be disannulled. But now, if this vengeance and punishment should fall on the sinners themselves, they must perish under it eternally; not one of them could escape or ever be freed or purged from their sins. A commutation, then, there must be, that the punishment due to sin, which the holiness and righteousness of God exacted, may be inflicted, and mercy and grace showed unto the sinner. That none was able, fit, or worthy to undergo this penalty, so as to make a compensation for all the sins of all the elect; that none was able to bear it, and break through it, so as that the end of the undertaking might be happy, blessed, and glorious on all hands, but only the Son of God, we shall further manifest in our progress, and it hath been elsewhere declared. And this,

1. Should teach us to live in a holy admiration of this mighty and wonderful product of the wisdom, righteousness, and goodness which had found out and appointed this way of delivering sinners, and have gloriously accomplished it in the self-sacrifice of the Son of God. The Holy Ghost everywhere proposeth this unto us as a mystery, a great and hidden mystery, which none of the great, or wise, or disputers of the world, ever did or could come to the least acquaintance withal. And three things he asserts concerning it:

(1.) That it is revealed in the gospel, and is thence alone to be learned and attained; whence we are invited again and again to search and inquire diligently into it, unto this very end, that we may become wise in the knowledge and acknowledgment of this deep and hidden mystery.

(2.) That we cannot in our own strength, and by our own most diligent endeavors, come to a holy acquaintance with it, notwithstanding that revelation that is made of it in the letter of the word, unless moreover we receive from God the Spirit of wisdom, knowledge, and revelation, opening our eyes, making our minds spiritual, and enabling us to discover these depths of the Holy Ghost in a spiritual manner.

(3.) That we cannot by these helps attain in this life unto a perfection in the knowledge of this deep and unfathomable mystery, but must still labor to grow in grace and in the knowledge of it, our thriving in all grace and obedience depending thereon. All these things the Scripture abounds in the repetition of. And, besides, it everywhere sets forth the blessedness and happiness of them who by grace obtain a spiritual insight into this mystery; and themselves also find by experience the satisfying excellency of it, with the apostle, Philippians 3:8. All which considerations are powerful motives unto this duty of inquiring into and admiring this wonderful mystery; wherein we have the angels themselves for our associates and companions.

2. Consider we may, also, the unspeakable love of Christ in this work of his delivering us from sin. This the Scripture also abundantly goeth before us in, setting forth, extolling, commending this love of Christ, and calling us to a holy consideration of it. Particularly, it shows it accompanied with all things that may make love expressive and to be admired; for,

(1.) It proposeth the necessity and exigency of the condition wherein the Lord Christ gave us this relief. That was when we were “sinners,” when we were “lost,” when we were “children of wrath,” “under the curse,” when no eye did pity us, when no hand could relieve us. And if John mourned greatly when he thought that there was none found worthy, in heaven or earth, to open the book of visions, and to unloose the seals thereof, how justly might the whole creation mourn and lament if there had been none found to yield relief, when all were obnoxious to this fatal ruin! And this is an exceeding commendation of the love of Christ, that he set his hand to that work which none could touch, and put his shoulders under that burden which none else could bear, when all lay in a desperate condition.

(2.) The greatness of this delivery. It is from “wrath,” and “curse,” and “vengeance” eternal. Not from a trouble or danger of a few days' continuance, not from a momentary suffering; but from everlasting wrath, under the curse of God, and power of Satan in the execution of it, which necessarily attend sin and sinners. And,

(3.) The way whereby he did it; not by his word, whereby he made the world; not by his power, whereby he sustains and rules the things that he hath made; not by paying a price of corruptible things; not by revealing a way unto us only whereby we ourselves might escape that condition wherein we were, as some foolishly imagine: but by the “sacrifice of himself,” “making his soul an offering for sin,” and “offering up himself unto God through the eternal Spirit,” by “laying down his life for us;” and greater love can no man manifest than by so doing. And,

(4.) The infinite condescension that he used, to put himself into that condition wherein by himself he might purge our sins; for to this purpose, when he was “in the form of God, he emptied himself of his glory, made himself of no account, was made flesh, took on him the form of a servant, that he might be obedient unto death, the death of the cross.” And,

(5.) The end of his undertaking for us, which was the “bringing of us unto God,” into his love and favor here, and the eternal enjoyment of him hereafter. All these things, I say, doth the Scripture insist frequently and largely upon, to set forth the excellency of the love of Christ, to render it admirable and amiable unto us. And these things should we lay up in our hearts, and continually ponder them, that we may give due acceptance and entertainment to this wonderful love of the Son of God.

The apostle having thus asserted in general the sacerdotal office of Christ, and the sacrifice that he offered, with the end of it, because that could not be done without the greatest dejection, humiliation, and abasement of the Son, that we may not conceive that he was left in, or doth yet abide under, the same condition, adds the blessed event and consequent of his great work and undertaking: ῾εκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὐψηλοῖς· “He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.”

These words we have already opened, as to their sense and importance. The design and meaning of the Holy Ghost in them is nextly to be considered. The things to be inquired after to this end are, first, The scope of the apostle in these words; secondly, The manner of hisexpressing his intendment, and the particulars therein intended; thirdly, What he referred unto in the Mosaical economy, whereby he strengthened the argument which he had in hand.

Two things the apostle in general designs in these words:

1. That the Lord Christ, undertaking to purge our sins, did by the one offering of himself perfectly effect it, so discharging the whole work of his priesthood, as to the making atonement for sinners. This the blessed issue of his undertaking doth demonstrate. Immediately upon his work, he entered into the glorious condition here expressed, a signal pledge and evidence that his work was perfected, and that God was fully satisfied and well pleased with what he had done.

2. The blessed and glorious condition of the Lord Jesus after his humiliation is expressed in these words. His Spirit did of old signify both his “sufferings” and the “glory that should follow,” 1 Peter 1:11; as himself interpreted the Scriptures unto his disciples, Luke 24:26. And this, upon the close of his work, he requested, as due unto him upon compact and promise, John 17:5. These are the things in general designed by the apostle in these words.

Secondly, The manner of his expression of the glory and blessed condition of the Son of God after his purging our sins, and what is particularly intimated therein, is to be considered. Some mistakes or groundless curiosities must first be removed, and then the real importance of the words declared.

Some contend that the left hand of old was most honorable; so that the placing of Christ at the right hand of God, as it denotes his honor and glory, so also an inferiority unto the Father. To this purpose they produce some sayings out of some ancient writers among the heathen, giving the preference of place or dignity unto the left hand: and these sayings are made use of by the Romanists to answer an objection of very little moment against Peter's supremacy, taken from some ancient episcopal seals, whereon the figure of Paul was placed on the right hand of that of Peter. But this conjecture may be easily disproved by testimonies innumerable out of approved authors among the Gentiles; and in Scripture the right hand doth constantly denote dignity and pre-eminence. The instance of Jacob's blessing Joseph's children testifies also the constant usage of those ancient times, from the intimation of nature itself, Genesis 48:17-19; and the disposal of the sheep and goats at the last day to the right hand and left gives the privilege to the former. So Basil: ῾᾿Η δεξιὰ χώρα δηλοῖ τὸ τῆς ἀξίας ὁμότιμον· “The right hand place denoteth a quality of dignity.” And Chrysostom: Εἱ γὰρ ἐλαττωσιν ἤθελς δηλῶσαι οὐχ ἄν ει῏πεν ἐκ δεξιῶν ἀλλ᾿ ἐξ ἀριστερῶν· “If he would have signified any lessening or diminution, he would not have said, ‘Sit on my right hand,'but on my left.” So that it is honor and glory which is signified by this expression, and that only.

Some, granting the right hand to denote the most honorable place, inquire whether this be spoken in reference unto God the Father himself, or unto others that do or may be supposed to sit on his left hand. For the first sense contends Maldonate on Matthew 16:19; for saith he, “Though it be impossible that the Son in absolute or essential glory should be preferred before or above the Father, yet as to his immediate rule over the church he may more show forth his power and glory in the rule and government of all things” Others contend that it is spoken with respect unto others sitting at the left hand, above which this is preferred. But this whole inquiry is both curious and groundless: for,

1. Though sitting at the right hand be a token of great glory and dignity, yet, as the apostle speaks in this very case, “it is manifest that He is excepted who put all things under him,” 1 Corinthians 15:27, he who thus exalted him over all at his right hand is excepted; and,

2. Here is no comparison at all, or regard to sitting on the left hand, nor is there so wherever that expression is used, but only the glory of Christ the mediator is absolutely declared.

And this may be cleared by other instances. Solomon placed his mother when she came unto him on his right hand, a token of exceeding honor; but he himself sat down on the throne of the kingdom, 1 Kings 2:19. The church is said to be at the right hand of Christ, Psalms 45:9; which, as it prefers her above all others, so it takes not off her subjection unto Christ. Nero, in Suetonius, when Tiridates, king of Armenia, came to Rome, placed him for his honor on his right hand, himself sitting on the throne of rule. And where three sit together, the middle seat is the place of chiefest honor. Hence Cato in Africa, when Juba would have placed himself in the midst between him and Scipio, removed himself to the left hand of Scipio, that Juba might not have the place of pre-eminence above Roman magistrates. It is not unlikely but that there may be an allusion in this expression unto the Sanhedrin, the highest court of judicature among the Jews. He who presided in it was called אב דין, or אב בית דין, “The father of judgment,” or, “Father of the house of judgment,” and sat at the right hand of the נשי, or “prince” of the Sanhedrin, next unto him unto whom belonged the execution of the sentence of the court. Of this ab din mention is made in the Targum, Song of Solomon 7:4, ואב בית דינא דדאן דיניךְ; “The father of the house of judgment, who judgeth thy judgments;” agreeable to that, “The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son.”

The whole expression, then, is plainly metaphorical, and taken from what is or was in use amongst men, and thence translated to signify the state and condition of Christ in heaven. And this is that which the apostle in general intimates in these words, that as the greatest honor that can be done unto any one among the sons of men is for the chief ruler to set him next himself on his right hand, so is the Son, as mediator, made partaker of the greatest glory that God hath to bestow in heaven. It is not, then, the essential, eternal glory of the Son of God, that he hath equally with the Father, which in these words is expressed, and whereof the apostle had spoken before, but that glory and honor which is bestowed on him by the Father, after and upon the sacrifice of himself for the expiation of sin. So, then, the right hand of God is not here taken absolutely, as in other places, for the power and strength of God; but with the adjunct of sitting at it, it shadows out a place and eminency of glory, as he is considered on his throne of majesty; and therefore it is here termed “the right hand of majesty,” and not of omnipotency or power.

In particular, two things are intended in this expression:

1. The security of Christ from all his adversaries and all sufferings for the future. The Jews knew what he suffered from God and man. Hereof he lets them know what was the reason, it was for the purging of our sins; and moreover declares that now he is everlastingly secured from all opposition, for where he is, thither his adversaries cannot come, as John 7:34. He is above their reach, beyond their power, secure in the throne and presence of God. Thus the fruit of the church, being secured from the rage and persecution of Satan, is said to be “caught up unto God, and to his throne,” Revelation 12:5. Hence though men do and will continue their malice and wrath against the Lord Christ to the end of the world, as though they would crucify him afresh, yet he dies no more, being secure out of their reach at the right hand of God.

2. His majesty and glory inexpressible; all that can be given of God in heaven. God on his throne is God in the full manifestation of his own majesty and glory; on his right hand sits the Mediator, yea, so as that he also is “in the midst of the throne,” Revelation 5:6. How little can our weak understandings apprehend of this majesty! See Philippians 2:9; Matthew 20:21; Romans 8:34; Colossians 3:1; Ephesians 1:20.

These are the things which the apostle sets forth in this expression. And they are plainly intimated in the context of the psalm from whence the words are taken, Psalms 110. So that it is not his rule and authority, but his safety, majesty, and glory, which accompany them, that are here intended.

Thirdly, We are to inquire what it was that the apostle had respect unto, in this ascription of glory and majesty unto Christ, in the old church-state of the Jews, and so what it is that he preferreth him above.

It is thought by many that the apostle in these words exalteth Christ above David, the chiefest king among the Jews. Of him it is said that God would make him his “first-born, higher than the kings of the earth,” Psalms 89:27. His throne was high on the earth, and his glory above that of all the kings about him; but for the Lord Christ, he is incomparably exalted above him also, in that he is sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. But, as was said, these words denote not the rule, power, or authority of Christ, typed by the kingdom of David, but his glory and majesty, represented by the magnificent throne of Solomon. Besides, he is not treating of the kingly power of Christ, but of his sacerdotal office, and the glory that ensued upon the discharge thereof.

That, therefore, which in these words the apostle seems to have had respect unto was the high priest's entrance into the holy place, after his offering of the solemn anniversary sacrifice of expiation. Then alone was he admitted into that holy place, or heaven below, where was the solemn representation of the presence of God, his throne and his glory. And what did he there? H e stood with all humility and lowly reverence ministering before the Lord, whose presence was there represented. He did not go and sit down between the cherubim, but worshipping at the footstool of the Lord, he departed. It is not, saith the apostle, so with Christ; but as his sacrifice was infinitely more excellent and effectual than Aaron's, so upon the offering of it he entered into the holy place, or heaven itself above, and into the real, glorious presence of God, not to minister in humility, but to a participation of the throne of majesty and glory. He is a king and priest upon his throne, Zechariah 6:13.

Thus the apostle shuts up his general proposition of the whole matter, which he intends further to dilate and treat upon. In this description of the person and offices of the Messiah he coucheth the springs of all his ensuing arguments, and from thence enforceth the exhortation which we have observed him constantly to pursue. And we also may hence observe:

I. That there is nothing more vain, foolish, and fruitless, than the opposition which Satan and his agents yet make unto the Lord Christ and his kingdom. Can they ascend into heaven? Can they pluck the Lord Christ from the throne of God? A little time will manifest this madness, and that unto eternity.

II. That the service of the Lord Christ is both safe and honorable. He is, as a good, so a glorious master, one that sits at the right hand of God.

III. Great is the spiritual and eternal security of them that truly believe in Christ. Of all which severally afterwards.