Hebrews 9:9-10

῝Ητις παραβολὴ εἰς τὸν καιρὸν τὸν ἐνεστηκότα, καθ᾿ ὅν δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίαι προσφέρονται, μὴ δυνάμεναι κατὰ συνείδησιν τελειῶσαι τὸν λατρεύοντα, μόνον ἐπὶ βρώμασι καὶ πόμασι καὶ διαφόροις βαπτισμοῖς, καὶ δικαιώμασι σαρκὸς, μέχρι καιροῦ διορθώσεως ἐπικείμενα.

῞Ητις παραβολὴ . Vulg. Lat., “quae parabola est.” Syr., מַתְלָא, “an exemplar,” or “example.” So all render it, though it answers the Hebrew מָשָׁל, “a parable” or “proverb.” “quod erat exemplar;” so Beza and others.

Εἰς τὸν καιρόν τὸν ἐνεστηκότα. Vulg. Lat., “temporis instantis,” “of the instant time” or “season;” which Arias rectifies into “in tempus praesens,” “for the time present;” Beza, “pro tempore illo praesente,” “for that present time;” “pro tempore tum praesente,” “for the time that was then present;” Syr., לְזַבְנָא הָו, “for that time,” omitting ἐνεστηκότα.

Καθ᾿ ὅν. Vulg. Lat., “juxta quam.” It being uncertain what he refers “quam” unto, Arias rectifieth it, “juxta quod;” for ὅν answereth unto καιρόν, and not unto παραβολή. “Quo,” “wherein;” Syr., “in quo,” “wherein.”

Δῶρά τε καὶ θυσίαι. Vulg. Lat., “munera et hostiae,” “dona et sacrificia.” Syr., “gifts (that is, meat and drink offerings) and sacrifices by blood.” Syr., קוּרבָנֵא וְדֶבְחֵא, “oblations and victims,” or “bloody sacrifices.”

Κατὰ συνείδησιν τελειῶσαι τον λατρεύοντα. Vulg. Lat, “juxta conscientiam perfectum facere servientem,” “make him that did the service perfect according to conscience;” others, “in conscientia sanctificare cultorem;” others, “consummare:” of the sense of the word we have spoken before. Syr., “perfect the conscience of him that offered them.”

Μόνον ἐπὶ βρώμασι. Syr., “in meat and drink,” in the singular number.

Καὶ διαφόροις βαπτισμοῖς. Syr., וַבְּמַעֲמוּדִיתָא דַּזְנֵין זְנֵין “And in the washing of kinds kinds,” that is, various kinds; with respect not unto the various rites of washing, but the various kinds of things that were washed. Δικαιώμασι σαρκός. Vulg. Lat., “justitiis carnis;” so it renders δικαίωμα by “justitia,” or “justificatio,” constantly, but very improperly. Syr פוּקָרֵא דְּבֶסְרָא “precepts of the flesh.” “Ritibus carnalibus,” “ordinances, institutions, rites of the flesh, concerning fleshly things.”

᾿Επικείμενα . Vulg. Lat., “ impositis;” others, “imposita;” “incumbent on, lying on them.” [4]

[4] VARIOUS READING. Scholz, Lachmann, Tholuck, and Theile, prefer δικαιώματα to δικαιώμασι. “According to the dative reading, the translation and punctuation will run thus ‘ Being only along with meats, and drinks, and various washings, fleshly ordinances things imposed until the time of reformation.'With the nominative it will be thus: ‘Being only along with meats, and drinks, and various washings fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.'” Turner. ED.

Hebrews 9:9. Which [was] a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices that could not make him that did the service perfect, as per-raining to the conscience; [which stood] only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.

I shall not alter the translation, but show what might be more properly expressed, as unto some instances, in our exposition.

Expositors have made use of various conjectures in their commentaries on this place. What is material in the most eminent of them, the reader may see in Mr. Poole's Collections. But I must needs say, that in my judgment they have brought more difficulty unto the text than they have freed it from. Wherefore I shall not detain the reader in the examination of them; but I shall give that interpretation of the text which I hope will evidence its truth unto such as impartially seek after it, and are in any measure acquainted with the things treated of.

The apostle, in these two verses, gives a summary account and reason of the imperfection of the tabernacle and all its services, wherein the administration of the old covenant did consist. This was direct and proper unto his present argument. For his design is to prove the pre-eminence of the new covenant above the old, from the excellency of the high priest thereof, with his tabernacle and sacrifice. Unto this end a discovery of the imperfection and weakness of the first tabernacle and services was indispensably necessary. And if, notwithstanding its outward excellency and glory, it was no other but what it is here declared to be, as evidently it was not, then was it not only an unreasonable thing, and a plain rejection of the wisdom and grace of God, to adhere unto it in opposition unto the gospel, which was done by the most of the Hebrews, but it was altogether unmeet and useless to be retained with the profession of the gospel, which the residue of them earnestly contended for. This was that which the apostle designed ultimately to convince them of. And a work herein both great and difficult was committed unto him. For there is nothing more difficult than to dispossess the minds of men of such persuasions in religion as they have been bred up in, and received by a long tract of tradition from their fathers. So we find it to be in such persuasions and observances as are evidently false and impious, unto the understandings of all that are not under the power of such prejudices: so is it at present with them of the Roman church, and others. But these Hebrews had a pretense or plea for their obstinacy herein which none other ever had in the like case but themselves; for the things which they adhered unto were confessedly of divine institution. Wherefore the apostle labors principally to prove, that in the will and wisdom of God they were to continue only for a season, and also that the season of their expiration was now come. And this he doth in this place, by a declaration of their nature and use whilst they did continue; whence it is evident that God never designed them a perpetual station in the church, and that because they could not effect what he purposed and had promised to do for it. This is the substance of his present argument.

1. The subject spoken of, ἥτις, “which.”

2. The proper use and end of it; it was “a figure.”

3. The limitation of that use as unto time; “for the time then present.”

4. The especial nature of it; the “offering of gifts and sacrifices.”

5. The imperfection of it therein; “they could not consummate the worshippers in conscience.”

6. The reason of that imperfection; it “stood only in meats and drinks,” etc.

7. The manner of its establishment; it was “imposed.”

8. The time allotted for its continuance; “until the time of reformation.”

1. The subject spoken of is expressed by ἥτις, “which.” Some would refer it unto παραβολή following, and so read the words, “Which figure was for the time present.” But there is no cause for this traduction of the words. The verb substantive, ἧν, is deficient, as usually, and is to be supplied as in our translation, “which was.” “Which,” that is, σκηνή, “the tabernacle;” not only the fabric and structure of it, but the tabernacle in both parts of it, with all its furniture, vessels, utensils, and services, as before described.

2. As unto its proper use and end, the apostle affirms that it was παραβολή , figura, exemplar,” exemplum,” “comparatio,” “similitudo,” “typus,” “representatio :” so variously is this word rendered by interpreters. Most fix on “exemplar” or “exemplum ;” but they are τύπος and ὑπόδειγμα, not παραβολή . And in all these versions the proper sense of the word as used in the Scripture is missed. It is not תַּבְנִית that the apostle intends, but מָשָׁל, as it is rendered by the Syriac.

And this many have observed, namely, that it answers unto מָשָׁל, but yet have missed in the interpretation of it. מָשָׁל is the same with חִידָה wherewith it is joined, as of the same signification and importance, Psalms 49:5; Psalms 78:2. And whereas it is said that the queen of Sheba tried the wisdom of Solomon בְּחִידוֹת, 1 Kings 10:1; the Targum renders it by במתלין, the Chaldee מתל, and the Syriac מתלא, being the same with the Hebrew מָשָׁל. Now חִידָה is enigma, problema, γρῖφος , “a riddle,” “a hard question;” and חוּד is to speak enigmatically, obscurely, so as that one thing is to be gathered out of another. So is מָשָׁל used also, Ezekiel 20:49, “Is he not מְמַשֵּׁל מְשָׁלִים, “proverbiator proverbiorum?” “one that speaks darkly and obscurely;” that expresseth one thing and intends another, using similitudes and metaphors; an obscure, mystical instruction, by figures, signs, symbols, metaphors, and the like.

Thus is παραβολή almost constantly used in the New Testament. So our Lord Jesus Christ expressly opposeth speaking in parables unto a clear, plain, open teaching, so as to be understood of all. See Matthew 13:10; John 16:28-29, “Now speakest thou openly, and no parable.” Wherefore παραβολή, in this place, is an obscure, mystical, metaphorical instruction. God taught the church of old the mysteries of our redemption by Christ, by the tabernacle, its fabric, parts, utensils, and services; but it was but an obscure, parabolical, figurative instruction. So should the word here be rendered, “a figurative instruction,” or the word “parable” be here retained, as it is in other places. This was God's way of teaching the mysteries of his wisdom and grace; which, as it was sufficient for the state of the church which was then present, so it instructs us in what he requires, what he expects from us, unto whom all these things are unfolded, made plain and evident. 3. The third thing in the text is the time or season wherein the tabernacle was so parabolically or mystically instructive. It was εἰς τὸν καιρόν τὸν ἐνεστηκότα. Some few copies for τόν read τοῦτον, as doth that now before me, “unto this present time.” This reading is generally rejected by expositors, as not suited unto the mind of the apostle in this place. For he intends not the time that was then present when he wrote the epistle, not the times of the gospel, not the time after the resurrection of Christ until the destruction of the temple, which the addition of that word would denote; for God had prepared another kind of instruction for that season, and not by parables, or mystical metaphors. But yet the word may be retained, and a sense given of the words both sound and proper. For εἰς may well signify as much as “until;” or be taken τελικῶς, as it is often.

Εἰς τοῦτον καιρόν , “unto this season;” ‘until the time that God would grant another kind of teaching, which now he hath done. It served until this present season, wherein the gospel is preached, and all the things signified by it are accomplished.'But I shall rather follow the reading of the most copies, though the Vulgar Latin reading “temporis instantis” seems to favor the first. And Arias rectifying it into “in tempus praesens,” gives the same sense also. But the word ἐνεστηκότα being of the preterimperfect tense, signifies a time that was then present, but is now past. And it is therefore well rendered by our translators, “the time then present;” as if τότε had been in the text; the time then present when the tabernacle was made and erected, ὁ καιρὸς ὁ ἐνεστηκώς, the season of the church which was then present. For the apostle in this whole discourse not only respects the tabernacle, and not the temple, but he considers the first erection of the tabernacle in a peculiar manner; for then was it proposed as the means of the administration of the first covenant and the worship thereunto belonging. It is the covenants which he principally designeth a comparison between. And he doth in that way of the disposition and administration of them, which was given and appointed at their first establishment. As this in the new covenant was the person, office, sacrifice, and ministry of Christ; so as unto the first, it was the tabernacle and all the services of it.

Wherefore “the time then present,” was the state and condition of the church at the first setting up of the tabernacle. Not as though this time were confined unto that or those ages wherein the tabernacle was in use, before the building of the temple; but this instruction, which was then signally given, was the whole of what God granted unto the church during that state wherein it was obliged unto the ordinances and services which were then instituted. The instructions which God thought meet to grant unto the church at that season were obscure, mystical, and figuratively representative; yet was it sufficient for the faith and obedience of the church, had it been diligently attended unto, and what the Holy Ghost signified thereby. So are all God's ways of instruction in all seasons. We cannot err but either by a neglect of inquiry into them, or by looking for more than God in his wisdom hath committed unto them.

And this sense those who render παραβολή by a “figure,” “type,” or “example,” must come unto: for the use of it is confined unto the time of the erection of the tabernacle, and the institution of the ordinances thereunto belonging; but a type or figure was unto them of no use but so far as it was instructive, which was obscurely and mystically. And that this is the sense of the word the apostle declares, verse 8, where he shows the substance of what the Holy Ghost signified by the building, disposal, and services of the tabernacle; that is, what he taught the church thereby parabolically and figuratively.

This kind of instruction, whatever now it seem to us, was meet and fit for them unto whom it was given. And by the administration of grace in it, it was a blessed means to ingenerate faith, love, and obedience, in the hearts and lives of many unto an eminent degree. And we may consider from hence what is required of us, unto whom the clear revelation of the wisdom, grace, and love of God, is made known from the bosom of the Father, by the Son himself.

4. The especial nature and use of this tabernacle and its service is declared: “In which were offered both gifts and sacrifices.” Καθ᾿ ὅν, the Vulgar Latin reads “juxta quam;” making the relative to answer unto ἥτις, or to παραβολή . But the gender will not allow it in the original. Καθ᾿ ὅν is as much as ἐν ᾧ, “in which time,” “during which season:” for immediately upon the setting up of the tabernacle God gave unto Moses laws and institutions for all the gifts and sacrifices of the people, which were to be offered therein. This was the first direction which God gave after the setting up of the tabernacle, namely, the way and manner of offering all sorts of gifts and sacrifices unto him. And the apostle here distributes all the קָרְבָּנִים, all the “sacred offerings,” into δῶρα and θυσίας, that is, unbloody and bloody sacrifices; as he did before, Hebrews 5:1, where the distinction hath been explained.

Of them all he affirms, Προσφέρονται, “They are offered;” not that they were so: for the apostle erects a scheme of the first tabernacle and all its services at its first institution, and presents it unto the consideration of the Hebrews as if it were then first erected. He doth, indeed, sometimes speak of the priests and sacrifices as then in being, with respect unto that continuance of the temple and its worship which it had in the patience of God, as we have showed on Hebrews 8:4; but here, treating only of the tabernacle and its worship, as that which was granted in the confirmation and for the administration of the old covenant, then entered into, as the tabernacle, priesthood, and sacrifice of Christ were given in the confirmation of the new, he represents that as present which was past long before. The tabernacle served aptly for the use whereunto it was designed, it was meet for the offering of gifts and sacrifices; and so alone is the tabernacle of Christ for its proper end also.

5. On these concessions, the apostle declares the imperfection of this whole order of things, and its impotency as unto the great end that might be expected from it; for these “gifts and sacrifices could not make perfect him that did the service, as pertaining unto the conscience.” This was the end aimed at, this was represented in them and by them. And if they could not really effect it, they were weak and imperfect, and so not always to be continued. The end represented in and by them, was to make atonement for sin, that the anger of God being pacified, they might have peace with him. The covenant was then newly established between God and the church, before any laws were given about these offerings and sacrifices, Exodus 24. God knew that there would be among the people, and even the priests themselves, many sins and transgressions against the rules and laws of that covenant. This of itself it could not dispense withal; for its sanction was the curse against every one that continued not in all things written in the book of it: wherefore if this curse on all just and righteous occasions should rigidly have been put in execution, the covenant would only have proved the means and cause of the utter destruction and excision of the whole people; for “there is no man that liveth and sinneth not.” And on many occasions sin abounded in that state of the church, wherein light and grace were but sparingly dispensed, in comparison of the times of the new covenant. Wherefore God, in his mercy and patience, provided that by sacred gifts and offerings atonement should be made for sin, so as that the curse of the covenant should not be put in immediate execution against the sinner, Leviticus 17:11. But there were two things to be considered in those sins which God had appointed that atonement should be made for. The first was, the external, temporal punishment which was due unto them, according unto the place which the law or covenant had in the polity or commonwealth of Israel. The other, that eternal punishment which was due unto every sin by the law, as the rule of all moral obedience; for “the wages of sin is death.” In the first of these, the person of the sinner, in all his outward circumstances, his life, his goods, his liberty, and the like, was concerned. In the latter, his conscience, or the inward man alone was so. And as unto the first of them, the gifts and sacrifices mentioned, being rightly offered, were able in themselves, “ex opere operato,” to free the sinner from all temporal, political inconvenience or detriment, so as that his life and inheritance should be continued in the land of Canaan, or his state preserved entire in the commonwealth of Israel This the apostle here tacitly acknowledgeth, namely, that the gifts and sacrifices were able to free the sinner from temporal punishment, and give him outward peace in his possessions. But as unto the latter, wherein conscience was concerned, he denies that they had any such efficacy.

They were not able, μή δυνάμεναι. It agrees in gender with θυσίαι, only, and not with δῶρα, which being of the neuter gender, usually regulates the construction in such conjunctions: but most think it equally respects both the antecedent substantives; and instances may be given where a participle respecting more antecedent substantives than one may agree in gender with either of them, as, “Leges et plebiscita coactae.” But I rather think that the apostle confines the impotency he mentions unto “sacrifices” only; that is, θυσίαι, “slain and bloody sacrifices.” For those things which were δῶρα, “gifts,” and no more, were not designed to make atonement for sin; that was to be done by blood, and no otherwise: so the words should be read, “offered gifts and sacrifices that could not perfect.”

These sacrifices were impotent and ineffectual unto this end, τελειῶσαι . What the τελείωσις is which the apostle so frequently mentions in this epistle, I have before declared, and so what it is τελειῶσαι. It is indeed to “perfect,” to “consummate,” to “sanctify,” to “dedicate,” to “consecrate;” but whereas those sacrifices did all these things outwardly, and as unto the flesh, as the apostle grants, Hebrews 9:13, he doth not here absolutely deny it unto them, but in a certain respect only. They could not do it κατὰ συνείδησιν as unto the conscience of the sinner before God. What he intends hereby he doth more fully declare, Hebrews 10:2. There is a conscience condemning for sin. This could not be taken away by those sacrifices. They were not able to do it; for if they could have done so, the sinner would have had complete peace with God, and would not have had need to have offered those sacrifices any more.

But they were multiplied and often repeated, because of their disability unto this end. Wherefore τελειῶσαι κατὰ συνείδησιν, is to give peace of conscience unto men, through a sense of perfect atonement made for sin, in the sight of God, with an interest in his love and favor thereon. This, it is to be “perfect” or “consummated, as pertaining to conscience” in the sight of God, namely, to have a conscience condemning for sin taken away. This those sacrifices of the law could not effect. It will be said, then, ‘Unto what end did they serve? Were they of no use but only to free men from the penalties of the law or covenant, as it was a rule of the polity or commonwealth of Israel, and the tenure of their possessions in Canaan?' Yes, they were moreover part of the παραβολή or “mystical instruction” which God granted the church in those days, directing them unto the one sacrifice and offering of Christ, typically representing it, and through faith applying the virtue and efficacy of it unto their consciences every day.

6. The person is described towards whom this effect of purifying the conscience is denied. They could not thus perfect τον λατρεύοντα , “him that did the service,” saith our translation, I think not so properly. He that did the service was the priest only; but respect is had unto every one that brought his gift or offering unto the altar. ᾿Επιτελεῖν τὰς λατρείας, “sacredly to accomplish the services,” was the work of the priest alone, Hebrews 9:6. But ὁ λατρεύων , is the same with ὁ προσερχόμενος , Hebrews 10:1; that is, every one who brought his sacrifice to be offered, that atonement might be made for him. And λατρεύων comprehends the whole of divine worship in all individuals: Τῷ Θεῷ λατρεύσεις , Matthew 4:10. But he also may be said to do the service, on whose account and in whose stead it was performed.

But the defect charged doth not in the first place reflect on the persons, as though it was by their default. They worshipped God according unto his own institutions; but it was in the sacrifices themselves. And if they could not make the worshippers, those who did the service, perfect, they could make none so, for it was they alone who had the benefit of them.

The note of Grotius on this place is, “Isti cultus non possunt sectatorum suorum animos purgare a vitiis quemadmodum evan-gelium;” most remote from the mind of the Holy Ghost: for he speaks not of purging our minds from vices, but of purifying conscience by atonement made for the guilt of sin; and opposeth not those sacrifices unto the doctrine of the gospel, but unto the sacrifice of Christ. And we may hence observe,

Obs. 1. There is a state of perfect peace with God to be attained under imperfect obedience. For it is charged as a weakness in the legal administrations, that they could not give such a peace where any sin remained; it is therefore to be found in the sacrifice of Christ, as is proved at large in the next chapter. “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God.”

Obs. 2. Nothing can give perfect peace of conscience with God but what can make atonement for sin. And whoever attempt it any other way but by virtue of that atonement, will never attain it, in this world nor hereafter.

Hebrews 9:10. “Only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.”

It is acknowledged that there is no small difficulty in the connection of these words, or their relation unto what doth immediately precede; and therefore expositors have multiplied conjectures about it, in whose examination we are not concerned. I shall therefore no further consider any of them, but as they relate unto what I judge to be their true coherence. Two things are plain and evident unto this purpose:

1. That the design of the apostle in the words themselves, is to manifest and declare the weakness of the services of the tabernacle, and their insufficiency for attaining the end proposed in them. This end in general was the perfecting of the church-state in religious worship; and in particular, to make the worshippers perfect as unto their consciences before God. And he gives such a description of them as of itself will sufficiently evince their weakness and insufficiency. For what is it possible that things of that kind and nature which is here described can contribute unto these ends

2. That the things instanced in do comprise a great part of the Levitical institutions; and his assertion concerning them may, by a parity of reason, be extended unto them all. For to render his description of them comprehensive, the apostle

(1.) Expresseth them in a particular enumeration of the heads whereunto they might be reduced, “Meats and drinks, and divers washings.” And then,

(2.) To show that he intends all things of an alike nature with them, he adds the general nature of them all, they were “carnal ordinances:”

(1.) A great part of the Levitical religious observances may be reduced unto these heads of “meats and drinks, and divers washings.” Laws and institutions were multiplied about these things; what they might eat, and what they might not; what was clean, and what was unclean unto that end; what they might drink, and what vessels defiled all liquors; what were to be, their eatings and drinkings, and when upon their peace-offering, and at their solemn feasts; their great variety of washings, of the priests, of the people, of their garments, and their flesh, stated and occasional, do take up a great part of the entire system of their ordinances. And as laws were multiplied concerning these things, so many of them were enforced with very severe penalties. Hence they were difficultly to be learned, and always impossible to be observed. The Mishna and Talmud that is, the whole religion of the present Jews consist almost wholly in scrupulous inquiries, and endless determinations, or rather conjectures, about these things and their circumstances.

(2.) All the laws concerning these things were carnal, “carnal ordinances;” such as, for the matter, manner of performance, and end of them, were carnal. This being their nature, it evidently follows that they were instituted only for a time, and were so far from being able themselves to perfect the state of the church, as that they were not consistent with that perfect state of spiritual things which God would introduce, and had promised so to do.

The scope and design of the apostle being thus fixed, the coherence and interpretation of the words will not be so difficult as at first view they may appear. Μόνον ἐπὶ βρώμασι, “Only in meats and drinks,” etc, Our translators observing the sense elliptical, have supplied it with “which stood,” which stood only in meats and drinks.” And that supplement may give a double sense:

1. It may respect the substance of the things spoken of. “Which,” relates to “gifts and sacrifices.” And so the sense intended is, that they consisted “in meats and drinks, and divers washings.” And this was the natural substance of them. They consisted in such things as might be eaten and drunk, being duly prepared, as flesh, flour, salt, oil, and wine. Hence were they called meat and drink-offerings. And they had washings also that belonged unto them, as the washing of the inwards, Exodus 29:17; and of the burnt- offerings peculiarly, Leviticus 1:9; Leviticus 1:13; of the hands and feet of the priests, Exodus 30:18-19; and of the leper, Leviticus 14:9. Howbeit it cannot be said that the gifts and sacrifices, as they were such, did consist in these things, though in them things of this nature were offered unto God. Wherefore the supplement of, “which stood,” cannot be admitted in that sense.]

2. It may respect the consummation of these gifts and sacrifices, or the celebration of the whole service that belonged unto them, and all their necessary circumstances or consequents: ‘which stood in these things;'that is, which were accompanied with them. and not perfected without them.

The argument in the words is to prove the insufficiency of the gifts and sacrifices of the law unto the end mentioned, of perfecting conscience before God. And this is evidenced by the consideration of their necessary adjuncts, or what belonged unto them, and were inseparable from them. It is not said that these “gifts and sacrifices” were only meats and drinks, and so things of no value: for neither doth the apostle treat of the old institutions with such contempt, nor would the truth of his assertion have been evident unto the Hebrews; but he argues unto a discovery of their use and end from the things that did always accompany them, and were inseparable from them. For those by whom they were offered were obliged, by the same divine institution, at the same time unto sundry “meats and drinks, and divers washings;” which proves both the gifts and sacrifices to have been of the same kind, and to have had respect unto carnal things, as they had. For if those gifts and sacrifices had an immediate effect on the consciences of men unto their purification before God, by any virtue inherent in them, whence is it that the observances which by the same law accompanied them were only about “meats and drinks, and divers washings?” And this sense is not to be refused.

But whereas there is an ellipsis in the connection of the words, it may be otherwise supplied. For having mentioned the “gifts and sacrifices” of the law, the apostle makes an addition unto them of the remaining institutions and ceremonies of it, whose very nature and use declared their insufficiency unto the end inquired after; “[And other laws] only concerning meats and drinks, and divers washings;” which in general he calls “carnal rites.” Hereby is the argument in hand carried on and completed.

There are four things in the words:

1. An account of the legal institutions, under several heads.

2. Their nature in general, with that of others of the same kind; they were “carnal ordinances,” or fleshly rites.

3. The way of the relation of the people unto them; they were “ imposed” on them.

4. The time for which they were imposed, or the measure of their duration; which was, “until the time of reformation.”

First, For the nature of them, they consisted,

1. In “meats and drinks.” Take the words in their full extent, and they may be comprehensive of four sorts of institutions:

(1.) Of all those which concerned meats, or things to be eaten or not eaten, as being clean or unclean; an account whereof is given, Leviticus 11 throughout. With reference thereunto doth the apostle reflect on the Levitical institutions in these words, “Touch not, taste not, handle not; which all are to perish with the using,” Colossians 2:21-22, are all carnal things.

(2.) The portion of the priests out of the sacrifices; especially what they were to eat in the holy place, as the portion of the sin-offering, Exodus 29:31-33; Leviticus 10:12-13; Leviticus 10:17; and what they were to eat of the peace-offerings in any clean place, verses 14, 15. And the prohibition of drinking wine or strong drink in the holy place, verses 8, 9, may be here respected in “drinks,” about which these institutions were. And these were such, as without which the service of the sacrifices could not be acceptably performed, verses 17, 18. And therefore are they intended in this place in an especial manner, if it be the design of the apostle to prove the insufficiency of the sacrifices from the nature of their inseparable adjuncts, which were carnal and perishing things.

(3.) The eating of the remainder of the peace-offering, whether of a vow or of thanksgiving; the law whereof is given as a holy ordinance, Leviticus 7:14-17.

(4.) The laws concerning the feasts of the whole people, with their eating and drinking before the Lord, Leviticus 23. All these divine ordinances were ἐπὶ βρώμασι καὶ πόμασι, “concerning meats and drinks,” that were necessary to be observed with their offering of “gifts and sacrifices,” declaring of what nature they were. And the observation of them all was at the same time imposed on them.

2. They consisted in, or were concerning “divers washings” Βαπτισμός is any kind of washing, whether by, dipping or sprinkling, putting the thing to be washed into the water, or applying the water unto the thing itself to be washed. Of these washings there were various sorts or kinds under the law: for the priests were washed, Exodus 29:4; and the Levites, Numbers 8:7; and the people, after they had contracted any impurity, Leviticus 15:8; Leviticus 15:16. But the apostle seems to have particular respect unto the washings of the priests and of the offerings in the court of the tabernacle, before the altar; for these were such, as without which the gifts and sacrifices could not be rightly offered unto God.

Secondly, It is added in the description of these things, καὶ δικαιώμασι σαρκός, “institutis carnalibus,” “ritibus,” “ceremoniis,” “justitiis, justificationibus carnis.” “Carnal ordinances,” say we. The signification of δικαίωμα in this place hath been spoken unto before. Rites of worship arbitrarily imposed, whose “jus” or “right” depended on the will or pleasure of God. And they are said to be of the flesh for the reason given, Hebrews 9:13, “they sanctified unto the purifying of the flesh,” and no more.

The words may be an expression of the nature in general of the law about meats, drinks, and washings; they were “carnal ordinances.” But the distinctive copulative, καί, “and,” will not admit of that sense. It seems, therefore, to contain an addition of all those other legal ordinances which any way belonged unto the purifications of the law. The force of the reasonings in these words is evident. For the design of the apostle is to prove, that, in the perfect church-state which God would bring in under the new covenant, the worshippers were to enjoy peace of conscience, with joy and boldness in the presence of God, from a perfect atonement and purification of sin. Holy this is effected by the one sacrifice of Christ, he afterwards declares. But the ordinances of the law, and the Levitical sacrifices, were weak and imperfect as unto this end; for in them and by them men were conversant wholly in carnal things, in meats, drinks, washings, and such like carnal observances, which could reach no farther than the sanctification of the flesh, as he evidenceth in the application of all these things unto his present argument, Hebrews 9:13. And the faith of believers is rather weakened than confirmed by all things of the like nature, that divert their minds from an immediate respect unto and total dependence on the one sacrifice of Christ.

Thirdly, Concerning all these things it is affirmed, that they were “imposed” on the people, ἐπικείμενα. There is a difficulty in the syntax of this word, which all interpreters take notice of. If it refers unto the substantives immediately foregoing, βρώμασι καὶ πόμασι, etc., it agrees not with them in case; if unto θυσίας in the other verse, it agrees not with it in gender. And the apostle had before adjoined unto it a participle of the feminine gender, δυνάμεναι. Some think that the letter iota is added unto the first word, or taken from the latter, so that originally they were both of the same gender. But whereas the apostle had put together δῶρα καὶ ζυσίας, the one of the neuter, the other of the feminine gender, he might apply his adjectives either to one or both, without offense to grammar. Yet I rather judge that in this word he had respect unto all the things whereof he had discoursed from the very beginning of the chapter. Concerning them all he declares that they were thus “imposed;” and so the use of the word in the neuter gender is proper.

Many judge that there is an objection anticipated in these words. For upon the description of the nature and use of the tabernacle, with all its furniture and services, he declares that they could not all of them, nor any of them, perfect the worshippers that attended unto them. Hereon it might be well inquired, ‘To what purpose, then, were they appointed? unto what end did they serve?'Hereunto he replies, ‘That they were never designed unto perpetual use, but only imposed on the people unto the time of reformation.'But whether there be a respect unto any such objection or no, he plainly declares their use and duration according unto the mind of God; which were such as their nature did require. And hereby also he confirms his argument of their insufficiency unto the great end of perfecting, sanctifying, or consecrating the state of the church. And hereof there are two evidences in these words:

1. They were things imposed; that is, on the people under the law. They were laid on them as a burden. The word is properly “incumbentia,” lying on them; that is, as a burden. There was a weight in all these legal rites and ceremonies, which is called a “yoke,” and too heavy for the people to bear, Acts 15:10. And if the imposition of them be principally intended, as we render the word, “imposed,” it respects the bondage they were brought into by them. Men may have a weight lying on them, and yet not be brought into bondage thereby. But these things were so imposed on them as that they might feel their weight, and groan under the burden of it. Of this bondage the apostle treats at large in the epistle unto the Galatians. And it was impossible that those things should perfect a church-state, which'in themselves were such a burden, and effective of such a bondage.

2. As unto the duration assigned unto them, they were thus imposed μεχρὶ καιροῦ, for a determined limited, season. They were never designed to continue for ever. And this is the great controversy which we have at this day with the Jews. The principal foundation of their present unbelief is, that the law of Moses is eternal, and that the observation of its rites and institutions is to be continued unto the end of the world. The contrary hereunto the apostle had evidently proved in the foregoing Chapter s. Whereas, therefore, he had undeniably demonstrated that they were not to be of perpetual use in the church, nor could ever effect that state of perfection which God designed unto it, he now declares that there was a certain determinate season fixed in the purpose and counsel of God for their cessation and removal. And this he describes in the last word.

This was the season διορθώσεως : “correction,” say some; “direction,” others; we, “of reformation,” restraining the word unto the things spoken of, and retaining its usual signification, most improperly. For “reformation” is the amendment and reduction of any thing in the church unto its primitive institution, by abolishing and taking away the abuses that have crept into it, or corrupt additions that have been made unto it; but nothing of that nature is here intended. Many such seasons there were under the old testament, wherein the things belonging unto the worship of God were so reformed; but now not the reduction of the tabernacle and its services unto its first institution is intended, but its utter removal and taking away out of the service of God in the church. But if respect be had unto the whole state of the church in general, and what God designed unto it, taking the word “reformation” in a universal sense, for the introduction of a new animating form and life, with new means and ways of their expression and exercise in new ordinances of worship, the word may be of use in this place.

Those who render it, “of correction,” are no less out of the way. For “correction” might be applied unto the abuses that had crept into the worship of God; so it was by our Savior with respect unto pharasaical traditions: but the apostle treats here of the worship itself as it was first instituted by God, without respect unto any such abuses. This was not the object of any just correction.

The time intended is sufficiently known and agreed upon. It is the great time or season of the coming of the Messiah, as the king, priest, and prophet of the church, to order and alter all things, so as it might attain its perfect state. This was the season that was to put an end unto all legal observances, wherein they were to expire.

Unto the bringing in of this season God had ordered and disposed all things from the foundation of the world. See Luke 1:68-75 . And it is called καιρὸς διορθώσεως, because therein God finally disposed and directed all things in the church unto his own glory and the eternal salvation thereof. See Ephesians 1:10. And we may observe from the whole verse,

Obs. 1. That there is nothing in its own nature so mean and abject, but the will and authority of God can render it of sacred use and sacred efficacy, when he is pleased to ordain and appoint it. Such were the “meats and drinks, and divers washings,” under the law; which, however contemptible in themselves, had a religious use from the appointment of God. For others to attempt the like, as they do with their salt, and oil, and the like, in the Papacy, is foolishly to imitate his sovereignty, and proudly to usurp his authority.

Obs. 2. The fixing of times and seasons, for the state of things in the church, is solely in the hand of God. and at his sovereign disposal. He alone appointed this “time of reformation;” the church could neither hasten it nor was to refuse it. Wherefore quiet waiting alone is our duty, as unto the accomplishment of all promises concerning the state of the church in this world.

Obs. 3. It is a great part of the blessed liberty which the Lord Christ brought into the church, namely, its freedom and liberty from legal impositions, and every thing of the like nature in the worship of God

Obs. 4. The time of the coming of Christ was the time of the general final reformation of the worship of God, wherein all things were unchangeably directed unto their proper use.