I Have perused this Comment or Exposition upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, and finding it to be learned and judicious, plain and very profitable, I allow it to be Printed and published:  
JOHN DOWNAME.   

THE EXPIATION OF A SINNER. IN A COMMENTARY Upon the Epistle to the HEBREWS.  
LONDON, Printed by THO. HARPER, and are to be sold by CHARLES GREEN, at his Shop in Ivy Lane, 1646.   

TO THE CHRISTIAN READER.  
THe History of Christ, for his life, doctrine, and miracles; for his death, resurrection and ascension, is copiously described by the four Evangelists: But the Mystery of Christ, for the reasons, causes and effects of his sufferings and actions, especially since his ascension into heaven and session on the Throne of God, is exactly revealed in the Epistle to the Hebrews; which seems in manner of an Appendex unto the Evangelists.  
For that Epistle is frequently interserted with several deep mysteries, containing, as it were, the history of Christ in heaven. How there in the behalf of the faithful, he executes the sacred office of his everlasting Priesthood; whereby he is able to save them for ever, who come unto God by him, because he ever liveth to make intercession for them. How he commiserates and succours them in all their afflictions and trials; for having himself been afflicted and tried, he thereby learned the compassion of a merciful high Priest. How he expiates and propitiates them from all their former sins, and from all their after-lapses whereinto they fall through ignorance or infirmity; for by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. How he justifies and here difies them to that eternal blessedness, whereof he is the heir and the donor, to admit them as coheirs with him; for he is become the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him. How he consecrates and dedicates their persons and all their sacrifices or holy services of prayers, praises, and thanksgivings, which through him become acceptable to his Father; for he is a Minister of the heavenly Sanctuary, and of the true Tabernacle which God hath pitched, and not men.  
And therein is further accurately discoursed, what admirable benefits and prerogatives are from Christ redundant to the faithful; for whom he hath obtained a Ministry so much more excellent, by how much he is the Mediator of a better covenant established upon better promises. What necessary duties of holiness the faithful on their part, over and besides their faith to believe, are bound to perform, for the application and efficacy of those benefits, to render them effectual to their salvation, which without holiness can never be attained; for as without faith it is impossible to please God: so without holiness no man shall see God. What virtue and power those benefits have upon the conscience, to withdraw her from dead works, and to engage her in all endeavours of holiness to serve the living God, by way of thankfulness to God for his grace in Christ; for otherwise the soul is ingrateful and ungracious. What solid comforts and assurances, under all the distresses of this life, arise unto the soul from her endeavours of holiness, without which no soul is capable of solid and assured comfort? for a sensual and sinful soul may be sometime flattered and deceived, but effectually comforted and assured she can never be, until in some measure she be purged from her sinfulness, and qualified by deeds or desires of holiness.  
In the prosecution of these and the like points, the divine Author of that Epistle proceeds after a grave and solid manner, yet soaring sometime into expressions and reasonings so sublime, that he seems to penetrate the highest heavens, and there to behold our Saviour's actions. For the points he prosecutes are high mysteries, of things so distant and remote from sense, that (as himself acknowledgeth c. 5. v. 11.) many of them are hard to be uttered; and therefore certainly, hard to be understood. Yet for the easier apprehension of them, he always   

CHAPTER I.  

GOD] The supreme and universal father, styled in the old Covenant, the God of Israel, but in the new, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. At sundry times] in the several ages of the world; as in the time of the servitude in Egypt, in the time of the Judges, of the Kings, and of the Captivity, and a while afterward, till about the finishing of the second Temple. And in divers manners] At one time after one manner, at another after another: as to Moses God spoke in a singular and familiar manner, otherwise then to any other Prophet; for he spoke with Moses mouth to mouth. Num. 12.6. And he knew Moses face to face. Deut. 34.10. But to other Prophet's God spoke after another manner; either by Angels as his delegates, or by a voice sounding in their ears, or by a vision before their eyes while they were awake, or by a dream while they were asleep. Spoke] Declared his will and pleasure for precepts, promises or judgements; whether by voice, vision or dream. In times passed] Anciently, during the time of the Tabernable, and the first Temple: for after the finishing of the second Temple, God spoke very rarely any way. Unto the Fathers] Not to the Patriarches, but to the people of Israel and Judah, who lived in the time of the Prophets, and were ancestors to those Hebrews to whom this Epistle is written. By the Prophets.] As by Moses and Samuel, by Elias and Elisha, and by the rest of the Prophets whose works are extant in the sacred Canon of Scripture.  
2. In these last days] The time of the Gospel is called the last days; partly as opposed to the words before in times past; partly because the time of the Law and the Prophets was before it; but chief because the Church under the Gospel shall not receive from God any more Innovation or alteration; for the time of the Gospel shall last till time shall be no more, till eternity; and therefore is commonly called in Scripture the last days. See Act. 2.17. By his son] Jesus Christ who here is opposed to the Prophets, by whom God spoke in time past. Not that the Prophets were no way the sons of God, but because in comparison of Christ they were not so accounted. For Christ by whom God spoke the Gospel was more eminently the son of God than any of the Prophets, 4 ways: 1. By his conception; because he was conceived of a Virgin by the power of the Holy Ghost. 2. By his function; because he was sanctified by God and sent into the world, to publish and confirm the new Covenant; for which function he must needs resemble God as a son the father, in divine wisdom, holiness and power. This reason Christ gives why he called himself the son of God, John 10.36. 3. By his Institution; because God appointed him his universal heir as an only son is to his father. 4. By his Resurrection; because thereby he was immortalised, or enfranchised from death and mortality; and consequently deified as the son of God. This reason St. Paul gives applying to the Resurrection of Christ the words of the Psalm, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee. Act. 13.33. Whom he hath appointed heir] God hath appointed Christ to inherit the sovereign dominion and Kingdom of God; first by granting him a right or title to it; and afterward by giving him the real possession of it. Yet he possesseth it not successively after his father, as the manner is among men; but accessorily and jointly together with his father. Of all things] His universal heir; he alludes to an only son, who is the sole heir of all his father's estate. For Christ is the unigenit or only son of God; not that God hath not other sons, but that he hath none such as he. Seeing then God is the universal proprietary and Lord of all things; therefore Christ being his only son and heir, becomes universal Lord also of all things, over all Angels and men, whether alive or dead. By whom also he made the world.] God by the mediation or mean of Christ did reform and restore mankind who is the chiefest part of the world, by giving him a new state and condition by a new Covenant. For the Hebrews who have no or few compound verbs, say a thing is made, when in regard of some qualities it is altered or renewed, or made otherwise then it was before, by assuming a new form or fashion for a better condition. So we are said to be created in Christ to good works, and we are called a new creature; not in regard of any new creation, or new nature; but because of new relations unto God, or new qualities in ourselves.  
3. Who being the brightness of his glory] Christ was the lustre, ray or beam of God's Majesty. For seeing God is invisible and cannot be seen of men, by reason of his immense and infinite light; therefore God sent forth Christ as a ray or beam of his light, that in Christ men might have a kind of sight of God's Majesty. And the express image of his person] These words do but interpret the former. Adam and in him every man made is made in the image of God, to resemble God in some of God's attributes: but Christ is the character or image of God's person; for God did as it were imprint his person upon Christ, that Christ might be his substitute upon earth to personate, represent and resemble the person of God; to be in wisdom as God, by publishing the mysteries and secrets of God, and by knowing the thoughts of men; to be in holiness as God, without all stain of sin; to be in power as God, having dominion over all creatures, over winds, seas, and devils. For such divine wisdom, holiness and power, are brightnesses, images, or marks of God's Supremacy, or Sovereign Majesty. Upholding all things by the word of his power.] Christ carried all things by his powerful Command; for according to the Hebrew sense, Word is put for Command; as Psal. 33.7. and Psal. 143.15. And the Word of his power, is an Hebraisme also, for his powerful word. q. d. Christ did personate God, not only for the acts of his power; but also for the manner of his acts, because he wrought all his miracles by his sole Word or Command. For at his Word or Command the winds ceased, the sea calmed, diseases were healed, the devils were ejected, and the dead raised. And to this the Centurion applied his faith, when he said, Lord, Speak the word only and my servant shall be healed. Mat. 8.8. When he had by himself purged our sins.] Christ offered up himself in his own person, and did not as the levitical Priest, who used to offer sacrifices that were not himself; but Christ was both the Priest who offered, and the sacrifice which was offered. And by this oblation of himself, he expiated or purged away our sins, by removing our guiltiness and the punishment due to our sins. Christ was a sacrifice to expiate our sins; and the slaughter of this sacrifice was made on earth upon the cross: but the offering of this sacrifice was then performed, when he entered into heaven, and made his Appearance in the presence of God; as the levitical Priest after the sacrifice was slain, entered into the Sanctuary to offer the blood of it. And this Oblation of Christ had then only an efficacy or power to expiate our sins; but the effect of it follows not upon us, till we on our part perform our office, by believing in Christ and obeying him. Sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.] The levitical high Priest when he went into the Oracle, where God was said to dwell and sit between the Cherubins, did not sit down with God, between the Cherubins: but stood as a minister or waiter with great reverence of the Divine Majesty, offering and sprinkling that blood wherewith he entered. But Christ ascending on high, and entering into heaven, did not stand before the Throne of God as a minister or supplicant, but sat down at the right hand of God's Majesty. Yet he sat not by way of an Assistant unto God, as Nobles and Councillors do to earthly Princes: but by way of Corregnant to reign with him, having absolute power over the people or Church of God, and for the Church's sake over all other things. For according to Saint Paul, 1. Cor. 15.25. To sit at the right hand of God, is to reign and govern as God; And Christ doth now reign and govern absolutely and arbitrarily in all things not defined by God's law; but where God's law orders things, there he governs accordingly.  
4. Being made so much better than the Angels.] The Apostle formerly having tacitly preferred Christ before all the Prophets, and before the high Priests; proceeds now to compare and prefer Christ before the Angels, to wit (which must be marked) from the time of his session at God's right hand, corregnant with him. Whereupon he lays down this position or doctrine, That Christ sitting at God's right hand, reigning with him in absolute power, is become more excellent than the Angels. This doctrine he presently proves, by several arguments following. As he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.] This is the first argument whereby he proves his former doctrine; because Christ hath obtained a more excellent name then the Angels. By name here, we are not to understand that dominion or dignity of Christ, whereby he reigns with his Father in absolute power; for this were to argue tautologously, seeing he mentioned that before. But by name he means the Appellation or title given to Christ, noting his state and condition: For from Appellations and titles, especially given by God, we may easily gather the dignity and excellency of any person. And this excellent name, Christ hath obtained by Inheritance, Which shows, that he had it not by nature nor from eternity, but in time, by grace from the favour of God.  
5. For unto which of the Angels said he at any time thou art my son.] He confirms his former reason, by a testimony from Scripture, Psal. 2.7. Why Christ hath a more excellent Name then Angels; Because God gave Christ the Name or title of Son, which is a title of honour above that of Angels, whose name or title signifies them, to be the Messengers or Legates of God. The Angels in general are some time in Scripture called the Sons of God, as job 1.6. But God on his part never calls them so in general; much less doth he single out any one peculiar Angel apart from the rest, to entitle him by the name or Son. But God entitles Christ by that Name, Thou art my Son; thou and no other person properly: For the Pronoune thou, is here put exclusively, to sequester all other persons beside, from the participation of that name as a proper and personal title. Indeed as the Angels in general, so all Christians are in common called the Sons of God: but Christ only is so called peculiarly, personally and singularly. This day have I begotten thee.] He confirms, why Christ is singularly entitled and named the Son of God; because God after a singular manner hath begotten him, i. Raised him from the dead (for in David's Psalms from whence this testimony is taken, extreme dangers resemble death) and made him most resemblant and like to God himself, by giving him Immortality and universal Royalty to be King over his people. For this generating or begetting of Christ hath respect to his Resurrection and Ascension; for so Saint Paul expressly refers it, Acts 13.33. Not that Christ was not begotten or not called the Son of God before his Resurrection; but because by his Resurrection he was most assimilated and made semblant unto God, by being made an immortal and universal King, whereby he had the highest degree under God; therefore God is said to have then begotten him, and then to call him his Son: For God is called God by reason of his supreme power and dominion; whereof they also are called Gods and the sons of God, that have power and dominion; and the greater their power is, or the nearer it resembles God's power, so much the rather, and more nearly are they his sons. And he is most of all his Son, whose power and dominion is made either the same with Gods, or equal to it. Christ was the Son of God before his Resurrection; for during his prophetic function, he was a great Potentate, and wrought powerful miracles: but after his Resurrection upon his Regal office, he became most nearly and highly the Son of God, because than God made him an immortal and universal Potentate; for then all Power was given him in heaven and earth, Mat. 28.18. This day] It is an Hebraisme, frequently added to speeches, wherein some remarkable matter is either done or given, or promised, or commanded; as in this place; to the end that day might be kept in memory, or as it were remain for a day of Commemoration, that the action of that day might be kept in perpetual remembrance, See Gen. 4.14. Jer. 1.10. and many places in Deuteronomie. And again; I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son.] He confirms that Christ is the Son of God from another testimony of Scripture, 2. Sam. 7.14. which was literally spoken of by Solomon; as the former testimony of David, but both mystically of Christ; Intimating the dear love and affection of God toward him; whereupon it must needs follow, that Christ must be exalted to a most excellent state and condition above all other persons, And as these words were spoken of Solomon futurely before he was borne, and indeed the Son of God: so also of Christ.  
6. And again, when he bringeth in] Another testimony of Scripture to prove Christ better than the Angels; because all the Angels are commanded to worship him; which must needs follow upon the state and condition of his filiation. For all servants must worship or reverence their master's son and heir, especially then, when his father had made over his inheritance or estate unto him. This testimony is taken out of 97. Psalm; whereof the inscription in the Septuagint, is, A Psalm of David when the land was restored unto him; namely, when his kingdom was restored, after his expulsion from it by Absalon, but mystically meant of Christ. And therefore again, may well be referred to his bringing in: For after Christ was expelled the world by his death and burial, God brought him into the world again by his Resurrection, in raising him from the grave. The first begotten] Christ is the first begotten Son of God; because God begot him before all his other sons, who are called the brethren of Christ; for God first begot Christ, in that manner wherein God is said to beget sons; for those he begets whom he assimilates and makes like unto himself, and so Christ was the first that was assimilated or made like unto God in holiness; in such holiness as he requires in the new Covenant. Secondly, Christ is the first begotten of God by his Resurrection, because by the power of God he was raised and brought in again from death to an immortal life; for which cause he is called the first begotten from the dead; and the first fruits of them that slept. 1. Cor. 15.20. Lastly, he is the first begotten in all things whatsoever, whereby the faithful of Christ, become the sons of God; for Christ hath preceded them all, that (as St. Paul speaks) he in al● things might have the preeminence. Col. 1.18. Into the world,] First to be upon the earth a while after his Resurrection from the grave, but chief when he brought him into heaven, which is the superior and future world, and seated him at his right hand; for then Christ became the Lord and head over men and angels; and till then the angels worshipped him not. For in this sense the Apostle here takes the world as himself shows in the next cap. ver. 5. where he saith, tha● the world to come is the world whereof he spoke. And let all the angels of God worship him.] The words are Imperative, laying a Command upon all the angels of God, none excepted, to worship Christ; and therefore it follows that Christ is made much better than the angels. In the Hebrew of the Psalm it is, Worship him all ye Gods; where the word Gods is opposed to Idols, which were the Heathen Gods, whose wo●shippers are there commanded to be ashamed; and again to those Idols Christ is opposed, who not only is not an Idol, but so true a God, that all other Gods who are not idols must worship him. But because by Gods there, we can understand none but the Angels, therefore the Septuagint transl●tes it, the Angels of God, whom this divine Author follows. Worship him.] Use divine reverence before him, and unto him, by standing up, bowing down, and falling down before him; in ●he very same manner that is done or due to God himself. Because Christ sustains the person of God, and commands all things in the Name of God, and therefore in Christ. God himself is worshipped. And the execution of this Command that the Angels do really perform this worship, appears in the Revelation, where they are said to stand round about the Throne, and to fall down before the Throne on their faces to worship Christ. Revel. 7.11.  
7. And of the Angels he saith,] A third argument from the testimony of Scripture. Psal. 104.4. to prove Christ made better than the angels. Who maketh his angel's spirits.] This is not spoken of their Creation, but of their Emission, that God employeth them as his Emissaries, or Messengers, to show their state and condition to be servants unto God, wherein they greatly differ from the state of Christ, sitting at God's right hand, and is not sent forth any whether. And his Ministers a flaming fire.] Herein the Author aims at no more, than what he saith at the last verse of this Chapter, that they are all Ministering spirits; saving that he alludes from the Psalm to the manner of their Ministry; which is like a spirit or a wind, very forcible, and yet invisible; and like a flaming fire or lightning, very penetrable, subtle and agile, moving almost in an instant from one part of heaven to another.  
8. But unto the Son he saith, Thy Throne O God] Herein he opposeth Christ to the Angels, and prefers him above them, from a testimony of Scripture, Psal. 45.6. which is literally spoken of Solomon, but mystically of Christ; And therein Solomon is said to have a throne, and called God, for the royalty of his throne, and sublimity of his power over God's people. And therefore Christ, of whom Solomon was but a shadow, is by a fare greater right called God; because the Throne of Christ is fare more royal, in being seated at the right hand of God. And consequently, Christ is fare better, and superior to the Angels, as the King sitting on his throne, is greater than his servants that minister unto him. Is for ever and ever.] Solomon's throne or kingdom, is said to be everlasting or perpetual, because he was promised to reign in his person, and in his posterity after him for many ages; Namely, so long as the carnal and earthly state of God's people should require an earthly King, See Psal. 89.28,29. and verse 36, 37. For that Solomon's posterity were deprived of the kingdom before the coming of Christ; (which notwithstanding was restored in Christ, though after a more divine and spiritual manner) that happened through the soul sins of his posterity, which God neither would nor could any longer tolerate. Seeing God put this Article or condition in the Covenant which he made with David and his posterity, that his posterity should observe his Law, See 1. Chron. 28.7. But this perpetuity of throne or kingdom agrees fare more eminently unto Christ; because Christ was made immortal to live for ever, and to reign in his own person for ever, without any posterity to succeed him; and he is to reign so long as the people of God shall need such a King; which Throne must needs last to the end of the world, till all his enemies be destroyed. And consequently the Throne or Kingdom of Christ is most properly and truly everlasting for ever and ever. A Sceptre of righteousness is the Sceptre of thy Kingdom.] Sceptre, is figuratively put for government, because it is the ensign of Royal government; and Sceptre of righteousness is by an Hebraisme put for a righteous government. Literally, Solomon's government was very just & righteous; and mystically the government of Christ, is most just and righteous over the faithful, who are God's people.  
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity,] These words do but amplify and illustrate the former. Literally, Solomon did not only govern righteously, but loved to do it, and hated to do the contrary. And mystically Christ loved it much more; for he committed no iniquity nor sin at all; he never did any man injury, nor suffers it to be done unpunished. Therefore God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness.] He alludes to the anointing of Kings, or rather to the anointing of guests at feasts, which was an ancient custom, because oil doth exhilerate and refresh the spirits, and cheer up the mind, especially being perfumed with some sweet odour. And therefore Oil of gladness is an Hebraisme put for exhilerating and cheering oil. To this custom the Psalmist relates, Psal. 23.5. and our Saviour, Matt. 6.17. and Luke 7.46. The literal sense is; God did entertain Solomon more delicately than other men, endowing him with extraordinary gifts and graces; particularly with these three, Wisdom, Riches, and Glory; for he gave him his own ask, and that besides which he asked not, See 1. Kings 3.5. for his extraordinary wisdom, See 1. Kings 3.12. and 1. Kings 4.29. for his Riches and Glory, See 1. Kings 3.13. and 1. Kings 10.21. to the end of the chapter. The mystical sense is, That as God was the God of Solomon to endow him: so he was the God of Christ also, who endowed Christ anointing him with the holy Ghost, and with spiritual graces in fare more extraordinary manner, for spiritual wisdom, whereby he knew the secrets of God, and the thoughts of men; with spiritual riches, which is holiness and righteousnsse; with spiritual power and glory to have dominion over all men and angels, See Luk. 1.15. and Luk. 4.1. and Luk 2.40. and Mat. 12.42. and Joh. 1.14. and Joh. 1.16. Above thy fellows.] The literal sense is; Solomon's brethren, who were the rest of David's children, were cheerfully anointed, or blessed of God, with Wisdom, Riches, and Honours; but Solomon was blessed above them all in a singular and eminent degree, and advanced by God to the Kingdom of Israel before and above them, so that all they were not only rejected from the Crown, but made subject to him. The Mystical sense is. All the faithful like Solomon's fellows or brethren, are begotten from the same Father that Christ is begotten; and are anointed with the holy Ghost, and have many things common with Christ; yet notwithstanding Christ is anointed by God above all the faithful; hath an immense measure & power of the holy Ghost poured upon him; especially after his resurrection from the dead, when he was totally sanctified, and advanced to be King and Lord over the faithful.  
10 And, thou Lord, etc.] A fourth Argument to prove Christ, better than the Angels taken from a testimony of Scripture, Psal. 102. vers. 25, 26, 27. And here we must note, that this Testimony doth so fare only belong to Christ, as it conduceth to the scope of the Author; which as appears at the fourth verse of this chapter, is to prove, that Christ after that he was seated at the right hand of God, was made better than the angels. To which purpose the Creation of heaven and earth makes nothing at all: For that cannot be referred to Christ, unless the Author had taken it for granted, and for a ground that Christ is the supreme God; because all this testimony out of that Psalm is manifestly spoken of the suprem God; but that Christ should be that God is not intimated by any word in all that Psalm. And therefore if the Author had taken this for granted, that Christ is the supreme God, certainly the Author had discoursed very impertinently and ambiguously, to furnish himself with such store of arguments, and so many Testimonies of Scriptures, (and those much more obscure than the point to be proved) thereby to evince, that Christ was better than the angels; the Creator, better than the creature. This had been to bring proofs no way necessary for a point no way doubtful; seeing all might have been dispatched in one word. We must therefore further observe, that this Testimony out of Psalm 102. contains three clauses. The first concerning the Creation of the world. 2. Concerning the destruction of the world. 3. Concerning the Duration of God; for these three things are the subjects of three verities contained in that Testimony, and all three are spoken supremely, and primarily of God the Father: But the first can no way be referred to Christ, because (as is before noted) it could not make for the Author's purpose. The last, refers both to God and Christ; for the Duration of Christ is perpetual and everlasting; yet this clause makes nothing for the Author's purpose, to prove Christ better than the Angels, because for Duration, the angels are equal to him, seeing they also are immortal, and incorruptible, perpetual and everlasting. The second clause refers to God supremely and primarily, and to Christ subordinately or secondarily; for God by Christ will destroy the world; God hath given to Christ a transcendent power to destroy and abolish heaven and earth. And this makes fully to the Author's purpose, and proves Christ clearly better than the angels; who have not this power granted to them. Now to the words of this Testimony in particular. Thou Lord in the beginning] God when first he began the world; even in the first beginning of ●is visible works, Hast laid the foundation of the earth.] He alludes to buildings which are raised upon a foundation; for the earth is as it were the foundation and groundwork of the world. And he mentions the earth in the first place, because in the raising of all buildings, men begin from the foundation. Now the earth is termed the foundation, because it seems  and fixed, as all foundations ought to be. And the heavens are the works of thine hands.] The heavens are all those vast bodies which do circumvest the earth and one another. And they are called heavens, plurally, because they are built and raised to the height of three regions or stories each above the other. The first and lowest heaven is vulgarly called the air; wherein fly the fowls of heaven; and therein are the supernal waters that are said to be above in the heavens, as clouds, rain, hail and snow. The second or middle heaven, is vulgarly called, the firmament, wherein are all the fires that give light and heat to all the world; as the Sun, Moon, and Stars. The third and highest heaven, is called by St. Paul Paradise; wherein God, and Christ, and the angels do manifest themselves. All these are the works of God's word, and were wrought at his command: For God said, Let them be, and they were so, Gen. 1.6. God commanded, and they were created, Psal. 148.5. Yet the Psalmist terms them the works of God's hands, alluding to the speech of the vulgar, whose hands and not their words are the instruments of their works, which therefore are called the works of their hands. Hitherto of the first clause of this Testimony, concerning the Creation of the world, referred to God only, who only was the Author of it.  
11. They shall perish.] Now follows the second Clause of this Testimony concerning the destruction of the world; referred to God supremely and primarily, but to Christ subordinately and secondarily, because the power to destroy the world is given to Christ, and therefore principally serves to the Author's purpose to prove him better than the angels. They shall perish.] The heavens and the earth shall perish, or be utterly destroyed and abolished; as this Author phraseth it afterward in this Epistle, chap. 12.27. they shall be removed, as things that are concussible and corruptible. And as St. Peter saith more expressly, 2. Epistle 3.10. The heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also shall be burnt up. Now things that pass away and are not where, must needs have no being, and a thing burnt up must needs perish. Here we have a clear testimony that this present world shall be destroyed and abolished. For if (as some have imagined) it shall only be endued with perfecter qualities, and be changed into a better state, so to remain under that state, how is it said to perish? Certainly things changed into a better state to be permanent under that state, cannot be said to perish. Shall the Saints be said to perish, when they are changed from mortal and corruptible creatures to become immortal and incorruptible, and be made partakers of a nature and state far more pure and perfect than they had before? certainly no. Or if the world shall have a perpetual permansion or abiding for ever; how is it opposed to Gods and Christ's permansion or abiding for ever? which is the scope of this reasoning, as appears in the words immediately following: But thou remainest; and thy years shall not fail. And they shall wax old as doth a garment.] The heavens are compared to a garment, because as hath been said before, they do circumvest, envelop, and enwrap the whole earth round about, as a garment envolves the body; and therefore the attribute of a garment, which is to veterate and wax old, is by a Metaphor fitly applied to the heavens: Not that the heavens do insensibly wax old, and wear out with length of time, as garments usually do: but because at last they shall wholly be abolished; therefore they are said, to wax old as a garment, because a garment waxed old, and worn out, is at last wholly abolished and cast away: For veteration or waxing old, is a motion or passage toward destruction and abolition. Seeing that which decayeth and waxeth old, draws near to vanishing away, as this Author expresseth it afterward in this Epistle, cap. 8. v. 13. But how shall the heavens wax old, if they shall be renewed into a better state. Is a garment said then to wax old, when it is new dressed, by making it somewhat better and neater?  
12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up,] When a garment is waxen so old that we have no mind to wear it any longer, than we usually fold it up and lay it aside; for properly a garment is a lose vest which we use to wear outwardly over the rest of our clothing; and therefore being laid aside, is usually solded up. Hence it appears, that at last, the time shall come, that the heavens shall no longer circumvest, or enwrap the earth, and therefore must needs be destroyed and abolished. And they shall be changed.] What change must here be understood, moe have showed before; namely, a destruction, abolition or perishing; a change, not for the better, but for the worse; a change from being to not being; as a garment waxed old, and thereupon folded up, becomes changed for the worse, till first it fall into clouts and rags, and at last rots quite away. Hitherto of the second Clause of this testimony concerning the destruction of the world; referred primarily by the Psalmist to God; but secondarily and subordinatly by this Author to Christ, by whose power under God, this destruction shall be made, and thereby is proved to be better than the angels. But thou remainest.] Now follows the third Clause of this testimony, referred both to God and Christ, as the second Clause was; yet we shall speak of it only in reference to Christ, because the main purpose of the Author in this Clause, is to prove, not that Christ herein is better than the angels, but to show upon the by, that the Duration of Christ's person and Kingdom, doth not only exceed the age of the world which shall be destroyed, but shall be everlasting and perpetual remaining for ever. The world shall not remain, but shall cease to be: But Christ shall remain and never cease to be: but if the world be Innovated into a better state, to remain ever under that state, wherein shall stand the opposition between the Duration of the world and Christ? certainly in nothing. Thou art the same,] The heavens and earth shall not be the same always, but at last shall be changed from being to not being. But Christ once seated at the right hand of God, continues always the same, and shall be the same everlastingly. And thy years shall not fail.] The world had a beginning, and then her years began, but because she shall be destroyed and abolished, therefore her years shall fail and come to an end. Christ also had a beginning of his age and years, but because he is now immortal, therefore his years shall never have an end; but shall run forth in to eternity, and last everlastingly.  
13. But to which of the angels said he at any time,] The fift and last Argument to prove Christ better and greater than the angels, taken from a testimony of Scripture, Psal. 110.1. Showing that God never vouchsafed them that high dignity and degree of honour, as to sit at his right hand. Sat on my right hand] The meaning of this phrase, see before in this chapter, verse 3. For so great a dominion and power, as to correigne with God over all things in heaven and earth, was never granted to any of the angels. Until I make thine enemies thy footstool.] Here is declared the expiration and term of that spiritual Kingdom, which Christ now administers upon earth: and such a term as therewithal shows one of the greatest and most excellent effect of that Kingdom; In so much as it is no marvel his Kingdom should determine after the production of that effect. All which tends to the highest commendation of that Kingdom. For if Christ had obtained that Kingdom for some short time, or should relinquish it before he had destroyed and abolished all his enemies, much would be wanting to the dignity of his Kingdom. The term therefore, unto which the Kingdom of Christ must be produced, which also is a most glorious effect of his Kingdom, is expressed, when God saith, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. By enemies here we must understand, not only the adversaries to the person of Christ, who once reproached and crucified him, or since to this day blaspheme and oppose him: but also all things adverse and hurtful to the people of Christ, who are the faithful. Of which enemies the chiefest is death, so far forth as it doth hurt, or may hurt the faithful, who are the people of Christ; as the Apostle teacheth, 1. Cor. 15.26. For the death which domineers and remains upon the ungodly and unbelievers, shall not be abolished; because their death is no enemy unto Christ, but militant and subservient unto him in doing the work upon which he employs it. And the enemies of Christ, are then made his footstool, when they are so fully conquered, that all power of doing hurt is taken from them: or as St. Paul expounds it, 1. Cor. 15.26. when they are destroyed and abolished. And God is said to put Christ's enemies down; not that Christ shall be no agent in that action, but because God gives Christ the power to perform it, and Christ shall execute it by virtue of that power that is given him. As in the Scripture, 1. Kings 5.3. God is said to have put David's enemies under his feet; yet David was not idle in the wars, but very active. Or as some King, when his enemies were conquered, should say that God had subdued them unto him; because God had given him power and courage to perform it: For that Christ also himself shall subdue his enemies, it plainly appears from the words of St. Paul, 1. Cor. 15.24. and Phil. 3.21.  
14. Are they not all ministering spirits,] They, i. the Angels. In the former verse, having showed the Sublimity and Majesty of Christ in his seat at God's right hand, and in the victory over his enemies, he now on the other part opposeth the condition of the angels; that the great dignity of him above them, may evidently appear. Christ doth sit; and he sits at the right hand of God: i. he reigns as a King; and the manner of Kings is to sit. But all the angels (none excepted) are ministering spirits; i waiting spirits, and the manner of waiters is to stand and appear, and be sent forth at his command upon whom they wait. Sent forth to minister.] The angels are Gods messengers and ministers; for they are sent forth, and the end of their sending forth, is to minister or do service: What ministry or service that is, he will presently show, and withal will intimate how long their ministry shall last, namely, till the persons for whose sake they minister, shall attain salvation. For them who shall be heirs of salvation.] The angels are properly ministers unto God and Christ; for properly a man ministers unto him that hath a right to command him, though his ministry or service be many times performed for the use and behoof of another. So the angels are ministers, not unto the Saints and heirs of salvation; but for the Saints, i. for the benefit and commodity of the Saints: they minister unto Christ for the use of the Saints, and then they minister to the Saints, when they are sent for the custody and guard of their bodies and souls to provide for their safety in both respects. For seeing Satan and the other devils do not only pursue and hurt the bodies of men, but their souls also: so likewise we believe it the office of the angels to protect, not the bodies only of the Saints, but their souls also. Satan hath power to inject evil thoughts into the minds of men, and to incite them to divers sins; whom therefore the Scripture makes the Author and Parent of all sin, who works effectually in the children of disobedience; whom she calls the Prince and god of this world; who put it into the heart of Judas to betray Christ, and into the heart of Ananias to lie unto the holy Ghost. Now if Satan can do this, why cannot good angels inject good thoughts, and by divers objects draw the mind to that which is acceptable unto God? And when an angel is sent to deliver a man from danger, he commonly delivers him no otherwise, then by casting into his thoughts some advice or counsel, whereby he may decline the danger, or by putting some thought upon his adversary, whereby to divert him from his intended enterprise. Neither are we to understand that the angels are sent forth only and solely for this end, to minister to the Saints, but that is the principal and chief end; for many times the emissions redound to the benefit and profit of others, both persons and kingdoms; but especially concerning the affairs of the Church, whereof Christ is Lord and Protector.   

The Contents of this first Chapter.  

1. Doctrine. Christ is greater than any of the Prophets. 

Reason. 1. Because God hath spoken by Christ, in these last days, verse 2.  
2. Because Christ is appointed heir of all things. eod.  
3. Because by him God made the new world. eod.    
2. Doctrine. Christ is greater than any of the high Priests. verse 3. 

Reason. 1. Because Christ is the brightness of God's glory, and the express image of his person. eod.  
2. Because Christ hath expiated our sins by himself, even by his own blood. eod.  
3. Because Christ is now set down, at the right hand of God's Majesty on high. eod.    
3. Doctrine. Christ is much greater than the Angels. verse 4. 

Reason. 1. Because Christ hath a greater name than they; for he is called, and is the true Son of God. verse 4. 5.  
2. Because the Angels are his subjects and servants; for they must worship him and minister unto him. verse 6. 7.  
3. Because Christ hath a kingdom of righteousness, with a Throne and Sceptre of righteousness, verse 8. 9  
4. Because Christ hath power finally to destroy and abolish this visible world, and at the last day shall actually destroy it, verse 11. 12.  
5. Because Christ sitteth on God's right hand on the Throne of God, whereas the Angels minister and wait, verse 13. 14.       

CHAPTER II.  

1. THerefore,] Because we have formerly proved, that Christ is far more excellent than the Angels. We ought to give the more earnest heed,] greater attention, diligence and care. To the things which we have heard,] to the doctrines, precepts, and promises of the Gospel, the Author whereof who first published it upon earth, was a person far more excellent than the Angels, who published the Law upon Mount Sinai; as the Author subjoins it afterward at the third verse. Lest at any time we should let them slip.] He here expresseth the scope and end of their earnest attention and heed, not to decline or revolt from the Gospel of Christ; and he alludes to a leaking vessel, that lets the liquor run out. Now then, we let the Gospel slip and run from us, when either we forget it, or give no further credit to it, or neglect the precepts of it, to conform our lives to the holy rules therein delivered. For, when the Gospel hath not the force upon our souls, to make us obedient to the rules of it, than it may be said to leak or slip away from us.  
2. For, if the word spoken by Angels] He gins to bring a reason, why we should take earnest heed that the Gospel slip not from us, by an argument à mineri; for, if God punished the transgression of the Law which was less, much more them of the Gospel, which is greater. The Law was the word or speech of God, for God spoke it to the people, partly by himself, and partly by Moses, see Exod. 20.1. and in the same Chapter, ver. 22. Yet God spoke not the Law, either to Moses or the people immediately by himself, but by the mediation and means of Angels, who published and proclaimed it upon Mount Sinai; see for confirmation hereof, Acts 7.53. and Gal. 3.19. The Law therefore being published but by Angels, is fare inferior to the Gospel, which was published by Christ, a person greater than the Angels. Hence we may collect two verities: 1. That God truly and properly did not descend down upon Mount Sinai, and there publish the Law; but an Angel sustaining the Name and person of God, published it in the Name of God. For, if God himself, besides the Angels, and accompanied with them, had descended from heaven into the Mount to publish the Law; then, not only the Author's argument had been void, but also the contrary must needs be concluded, That the Law in this respect was more excellent than the Gospel, because God himself who exalted Christ, and made him head over the Angels, came from heaven to earth, and did publish the Law; but the Gospel was published but by him, who was exalted by God from earth to heaven. 2. The second verity is, That the Lord, who published the Law upon the Mount, was not the Son of God, in the person of his deity. For, if the Law were given by the Son of God, how can this Author affirm it was delivered by Angels, and in that respect make it inferior to the Gospel? Or, how is it at all inferior to the Gospel, in respect of the publishing, if both it and the Gospel were published by one and the same person? Was steadfast] The Law was ratified and established, made steadfast and firm, when it was strengthened with power and force for obedience, and supported with judgements and punishments against the transgressors of it. For, when a Law is but a bare precept, and hath no penalty annexed to it, than it is infirm and weak; but, when it is fortified with penalties, than it is made steadfast, and becomes a sanction; for thereupon men dare not so easily violate and break it. And every transgression and disobedience] The Law was made steadfast for this end, that it might be fortified and supported against every transgression and disobedience, whereby men would presume to break it. A transgression is a sin against an express and known Law; for, every transgression is a sin, but every sin is not a transgression; yet, every sin may become a transgression, namely if it be forbidden by an express and known Law: Otherwise where there is no Law to be transgressed, there can be no transgression. A disobedience is a transgression done with malice and contumacy; for as a transgression is one kind of sin, so a disobedience is one kind of transgression; yet, every transgression may become a disobedience, namely, if it be committed out of malice and contumacy. Received a just recompense of reward] Punishment is then a just recompense of reward, when it is congruous and suitable to the sin, according to the due desert of the sin. But, these words of the Author cannot mean, that every transgression of the Law without exception, had a capital punishment ordained by Law, or was the facto inflicted; for, every penal Law was not always put in execution. And those transgressions which were committed out of ignorance or infirmity, had their expiation appointed by Law, but disobedients, or contempts, or, as the Scripture terms them, sinning presumptuously, or with a high hand, could not be expiated any other way, then by that capital punishment that by the Law was ordained, see Numb. 15.27. And, seeing it is apparent, that the Author speaks of a matter openly and vulgarly known, it is not credible, that he would be understood of those private and secret judgements or punishments that God himself inflicted, for such for the most part were concealed and not known. Wherefore we must needs conceive, that this Author takes not the particle every, logically and strictly, but vulgarly, for the most part of transgressions and disobediences, and hath special respect to the sacred precepts of the Law, and to the examples of those persons, whose transgressions against those Laws are mentioned, and whom the Scripture testifies to have been severely punished of God, according to their demerits. For, if in some cases the rigour of the Law was mitigated, as in the case of David; those cases being extraordinary and rare, must not take place against the general rule. Although David also had no small punishment from God upon him; so that here the Author speaks of divine punishments which God himself inflicted; for, otherwise it would not follow, that the Law was made steadfast with God, therefore because the Magistrate punished transgressors; but, because God himself did it, or took order it should be done, either by the Magistrate, or by others. For, when he speaks on the opposite part, concerning the contemners of the Gospel, the punishments are understood to be inflicted by God himself.  
3. How shall we escape] If the transgressions of the Law were deservedly and justly punished by God's hand, much least shall we escape it; If we neglect so great salvation?] If we neglect the Gospel. He might have called the Gospel, the word spoken by Christ, as before he termed the Law, the word spoken by Angels; for, this had been enough to infer his conclusion, and also a more eloquent opposition; but he calls the Gospel Salvation, for three reasons. 1. To express the effect and fruit of the Gospel, which is Salvation; for, as S. Paul saith of it, It is the power of God to salvation, to every one that believeth, Rom. 1.16. 2. To intimate the dignity and excellency of the Gospel above the Law, because the Law contained no open promise's of salvation, but only hidden under shadows of things, and coverts of words; neither did the Law specify that condition, whereby men might attain salvation, but that only whereby they incurred condemnation, and the punishment of death. Hence S. Paul saith, The Law worketh wrath, Rom. 4.15. and he calls the Law, the ministration of death, and a kill letter, 2 Cor. 3.6,7. So that the Law might be justly called rather the word of death and damnation, then of life and salvation. 3. To add force and strength to his argument against the danger of neglecting the Gospel; seeing thereby we neglect salvation itself, to which the Gospel is the means. And, he calls not the Gospel simply salvation, but great salvation:] Salvation may be manifold and various, as of our bodies and goods in this life; and such a salvation was to God's people under the Law, whereby God saved them from their enemies, and thereupon is frequently in Scripture called their Saviour. Hence David saith of them, They forgot God their Saviour, Psal. 106.21. See Isai. 45.15. and 49.26. and 63.8. But, the salvation promised in the Gospel, is a great and mighty salvation, even the salvation of souls by the inheritance of eternal life. Neglect] This great salvation in the Gospel is neglected, when either we despise the acceptance of it, or believe not the promises of it, or observe not the precepts annexed to the promises, but live so, as if there were no salvation at all, or no promises extant of it, or no precepts concerning it, or as if none of these were known unto us. So that the neglect here mentioned, means not some one small sin of negligence, by the single breach of some one precept, but includes a contempt and despising of the Gospel; for, it is opposed to the transgressions and disobediences against the Law, that were punished with death, as a just recompense of reward, at the former verse. If therefore they escaped not punishment, who transgressed the Law, which promised not salvation, but only threatened condemnation: how shall we escape if we neglect the Gospel, wherein eternal salvation is openly promised, and a total remission of all our sins is offered? yet, only upon condition, that afterward we pollute not ourselves with any wickedness, or accustom ourselves to any sin, (with pardon, notwithstanding of our infirmity) but live holily in the sight of God, as fare as our faith in his promise, and our hope of salvation may support us. If, I say, we neglect or despise these things, so worthy of all reverence and acceptance, what greater ingratitude can we possibly show to God, whose grace, the greater it is towards us, the greater is our sin to despise it, and to despise the greatest grace, must needs make up the greatest sin? Which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord] The Lord Christ was not the first Author of the Gospel, as the Angels were not of the Law, but God was the prime and first Author, both of the Law and the Gospel. But, as the Angels were the first publishers and proclaimers of the Law upon Mount Sinai, by commission received from God: So Christ was the first publisher and preacher of the Gospel upon earth, by a like Commission from his Father. So the Gospel was preached by him who is Lord over the Angels, and whom they reverence and adore as their Lord. But, because this Gospel of salvation was preached by others also, therefore to show the difference in the order of time between him and others, it is said of him, that he preached it first, and after him others preached it, that were instructed in it by him. And, in this preaching first begun by Christ, is included all whatsoever that he either taught, or did, or suffered, to gain belief to his preaching, that he might first also confirm it by himself, as afterward it was confirmed by others. And, lest any man might say, that all men did not hear the preaching of Christ himself, therefore he saith, that Christ was not the sole, but the first preacher of it; and after him others, who were taught it by him, and sent forth by him, to preach it universally over all parts of the world, who therefore were called the Apostles or Emissaries of Christ. And was confirmed unto us by them that heard him.] In the confirmation of the Gospel, the preaching of it is included, or thereby supposed. The Law was confirmed or made steadfast, not only by judgements and punishments annexed against the transgressors of it, but also the publishing of the Law was confirmed and certified with wonderful sights and sounds, as the lightnings and thunders, and trembling of the Mount, and the voice of a Trumpet exceeding shrill, that sounded long, waxing louder and louder, so that all the people in the Camp trembled, Exod. 19.16. Now, lest any man should think, that the Gospel either in this regard was inferior to the Law, or was but a vain novelty, that wanted solid arguments and proofs, both for the verity of it, and the publishing of it; therefore the Gospel also was confirmed and certified with most divine testimonies, that were without all exception, and such as were never seen nor heard of in the world before. Unto us] To this Author, and others. By them that heard him] that heard Christ publish and preach the Gospel. The Gospel was first confirmed firmed by Christ, by virtue of his miracles and sufferings, and afterward his publishing of the Gospel, his miracles and sufferings were confirmed by them that heard his preaching, & saw both his miracles and sufferings; even by them that were constant auditors of his doctrines, and spectators of his miracles; such as were especially the Apostles and disciples of Christ. Hence it may not improbably be gathered, That Paul was not the Author of this Epistle. For he never exempts himself from the number of the Apostles, nor reckons himself as a hearer of the Apostles, as the Author of this Epistle here doth. Paul always preserved his Apostolic authority, and maintained it entire against all that maligned it; and he was especially so to do, when he had to deal with the Hebrews or Jews, who depraved and slighted his authority. Neither was any Apostle the Author of it: but some Apostolic person, who had learned the Gospel from some Apostle.  
4. God also bearing them witness,] The Apostles after Christ, did second Christ in preaching and confirming the Gospel; yet they confirmed it not by their own power, but by divine power; for the confirmation of it was from God, because God did bear witness of their doctrine, and gave his suffrage to their say. Who therefore would not yield his faith and belief, to so great a confirmation, and to so great a testimony of so great a witness? Neither could these things be denied by these Hebrews to whom this Epistle is written, seeing they themselves had seen and heard the preaching of the Gospel confirmed before them. Both with signs and wonders and divers miracles.] Here he shows by what means God did confirm the preaching of the Gospel by the Apostles; namely, by means of two sorts; by the works of miracles, and by the gifts of the holy Ghost. Signs were testimonies in general, that the Apostles were sent of God, and spoke the truth. Wonders were signs also, yet but one sort of signs, namely, the sublimest and most powerful kind that bred astonishment in the people; such as raising the dead, and the falling down of Ananias dead; And these signs and miracles were not all of one sort, but various and divers; as casting out of devils, raising the dead, others falling down dead, giving sight to the blind, and blindness to others, as to Elymas the sorcerer; by healing diseases, not only by their word, but by the shadow of Peter, and by the handkerchief of Paul. Concerning this confirmation of the Gospel, St. Austin speaks very wittily. We know (saith he) that almost all the world was drawn unto Christ by the force of miracles. They that deny this by eluding miracles, they themselves make a greater miracle. For when so few Apostles, so unlearned men, preached things so incredible to humane reason, that all the world anciently seasoned with other Religions, should believe them without any miracles; this is a more incredible miracle, than any of those miracles, which they are said to have done. And gifts of the holy Ghost,] for gifts, the original hath distributions: The second means of confirming the Gospel preached by the Apostles, was by the distributions or gifts of the holy Ghost. This the Author names in particular, because it is a most divine work, & most peculiar to the Gospel, That at the preaching of the Apostles, or at the laying on of their hands, the holy Ghost was given to those that believed at their preaching. He calls them distributions or gifts diversely imparted, because the gifts in themselves were divers, and also were diversely imparted to divers persons. Not one and the same gift to all, but one to one, and another to another; one to divers, and divers to divers, in divers manners, to one in a less measure, to another in a greater, according to the measure both for quantity and quality, that it pleased Christ to confer these graces. See 1. Cor. 12.11. and Ephes. 4.5. For this variety and diversity in distributing the gifts and graces of the holy Ghost; did greatly redound to the benefit and necessity of the Church, who is one great Corporation or body mystical, composed of various and divers members; that some standing in need of others help, might more mutually conspire in love and unity among themselves. According to his own will.] The power to diversify and  the gifts and graces of the holy Ghost, was not at the will and pleasure of the Apostles, but was a prerogative reserved to God, and the distribution was varied according to his own will.  
5. For unto the Angels] He returns to his former point of preferring Christ above the Angels; for which he brings a new Argument, and withal tacitly shows the cause, why Christ being one somewhat inferior to the angels, in respect of his mortal nature, was at last advanced to be far greater and higher than they. The reason hereof was, because the future world to come was to be subject to Christ, and not to the angels: For to this purpose, the words cited out of the eighth Psalm, that the world to come must be subject to a man, are by the Author applied to Christ; as the like is done by Paul, 1. Cor. 15.27. and Ephes. 1.22. And this testimony of Christ being made better than the angels, seems to be reserved for the last place; because by this means, he might both dissolve the doubt, why Christ being first lower then the angels, was at last made much higher than they; and also might prepare himself an entrance to explicate the cause of that Imminution of Christ, whereat he principally aimed; and so gradually proceed to handle the Priesthood of Christ. He hath not put in subjection the world to come] The world future or to come, is that place wherein now dwelleth God, and Christ, and all the holy Angels; but hereafter in time to come all the godly shall dwell there. And it is called future or to come, in respect of the godly, to whom it is yet future or to come; whereas the place in respect of itself, of God, Christ, and the Angels is already, present, and really extant. The right or title of dominion and inheritance, God hath neither given, nor decreed to give unto the angels. The angels now inhabit in that future world, but yet as the house and kingdom of another, and not as their own; for God should do them no injury, if he should please to translate them from that seat, and command them to settle elsewhere: because they are not Lords of that world, but servants there. And that hither we may apply the words of Christ, John 8.35. The servant abideth not in the house for ever, i. hath no right to abide for ever, though de facto of grace he may abide for ever: but the son abideth ever, i. hath a right to abide for ever. Whereof we speak.] These words as we noted in the former chapter, vers. 2. are added respectively to his former words, wherein he mentioned the worlds simply, without adding the word future, or to come; that he might here give us to understand, that there also he meant the world to come; for that was the world whereof he spoke both there and here.  
6 Eut one in a certain place testified, saying, It was not for want of knowledge or memory, that this Author here quotes this text of Scripture indefinitely, without citing the place; for seeing he knew to recite the words so exactly, and the words themselves were so vulgarly known, how could he be ignorant of the place? But because this Scripture and the place of it was so vulgarly known, especially to the Hebrews, to whom he writes, therefore he neither noted the place, nor named the Author of them. And it was his manner so to do, though he cite many texts of Scripture. Indeed afterward, chapter 4.7. he quotes David as Author of a saying formerly cited by him: but his intent there is to manifest, the order of time, and not the name of the Author. What is man that thou art mindful of him] The words are Psal. 8.4. To be mindful of a man, is to be careful for him, and make provision for his good. The literal sense is, God made provision for the man Adam, the head and father of all mankind, and gave him the right of dominion over this visible, earthly, and present world, and over all the creatures therein contained, Gen. 1.28. The mystical sense is; God made provision for the man Christ, the head and father of all the faithful; & gave him the right of dominion over the invisible, heavenly, and future world, and over all the creatures therein contained, 1. Cor. 15.27. Ephes. 1.21,22. and Phil. 2.9,10. For by man here is understood in both senses, the first Head and Parent of mankind, natural and spiritual; namely, Adam the first man, and Christ the second Adam. For in both these persons, that which is expressed in the words, is fulfilled fully, though diversely. Or the Son of man that thou visuest him?] To visit, is frequently to regard and often to look unto; and argues the mindfulness or carefulness formerly mentioned; for the person, of whom we are mindful and careful, him we frequently visit, go to see, and look unto him. The literal sense is, That mankind, for his natural birth is the son or posterity of the man Adam. God gave Adam the dominion over this earthly world, yet not personally for himself only, but for him and his sons, or posterity after him. For, though he were sole Lord over his sons, during their minority, while they were under age, and under his power; yet afterward as they grew up in the world unto maturity, or fullness of age, than the like right should be communicated and imparted unto them, that they also might be Lords over this earthly world. For God gave the earth also to the children of men, Psal. 115.16. The mystical sense. The faithful for their spiritual birth are the sons of Christ. God hath given to Christ the dominion over the heavenly world, yet not personally for himself only, but for him and the faithful, who are his sons and posterity after him. For though now Christ, the sole Lord over the faithful, during their minority, or nonage in this world, while they are under the power and tuition of Christ, yet when they come to spiritual maturity, which is their immortality, than the like dominion shall be communicated and imparted unto them, and they also shall be Lords and possessors of that heavenly world to come. For, than they shall no longer be under Christ, but besides him, to reign with him, 2 Tim. 2.12.  
7. Thou madest him a little lower than the Angels] The literal sense is. God made man lower or inferior than the Angels, a little in degree for his nature, because he made man by nature mortal, but the Angels by nature are immortal; and a little in time, for man continues in this lowness of his mortal nature for a little time, respectively to the time of his immortality, though absolutely it be a long time, even from the Creation to the Resurrection. The mystical sense is. God also made Christ lower than the Angels, a little in degree for his mortal nature, but a very little in time, only during his mortal life, which was but as a moment. Thou crownedst him with glory and honour:] The literal sense. The dominion that God gave man over this present world, was a great glory and honour to him, even a Crown or high degree of glory. For, all dominion is honourable, and the highest is coronable. The mystical sense. The dominion that God gave Christ over the world to come, was much more glorious and honourable, because a heavenly dominion over Angels is more glorious, than an earthly dominion over beasts. And didst set him over the works of thy hands.] These words do but express wherein man's dominion consisted, that was such a glory and honour to him; namely, in bearing rule over the earthly creatures, which were the works, not of his own hands, but of Gods. So the Dominion of Christ consisteth in ruling over the Angelic and heavenly creatures, who are the works of God's hands also.  
8. Thou hast put all things in subjection under him:] These words are but correlative to the former; for, if man were set in dominion over all things, than all things were put in subjection under him. But the particle all must be restrained from its absolute universality, concerning all things whatsoever, to be limited only to all earthly creatures, as all sheep and oxen, and the beasts of the field, the Fowls of the air, and the Fish of the sea, etc. as they are immediately reckoned up in the Psalm. But, in the mystical sense, the particle all must be left wholly to his absolute universality and full amplitude, for all things both in heaven and earth; namely, all creatures whatsoever are put in subjection under Christ; because, from the universality of Christ's dominion, God only is excepted, who did put all things besides in subjection under Christ, 1 Cor. 15.27. For, in that he put all, be left nothing not put under him:] In these and the words immediately following, the Author discovers and teacheth us, that this place of the Psalm must be understood of some other man then an earthly man: For the words being absolutely uttered, are a clear argument, that the holy Ghost would have them taken in some other sense altogether universally, in which latitude S. Paul also takes them, 1 Cor. 15.27. In so much that in them, the world to come is also comprehended. And taking the words universally, who sees not, that during this mortal life, they cannot be verified and fulfilled of a mortal man? And therefore the Author immediately adds; But now we see not yet all things put under him:] Now: while man lives this present and mortal life; not yet: not from the beginning of the world, to this present time, we see not all things universally made subject to any mortal man, when notwithstanding man was made less or lower than the Angels, but for a little time, as we shown before. And therefore the fulfilling of these words, that all things universally, even the world to come should be subject to man, cannot be meant of any mortal man, but of some man translated to immortality. Yet, who that immortal man should be, the Author hath not hitherto declared. But, in the following verse, he shows that it is Jesus Christ translated to immortality. Whence it appears, that if we respect the mystical sense of the words in this Psalm, they must be taken principally and properly of Christ; but of Christians, only respectively and as it were proportionably. For, no one of the faithful shall solely and singly possess all things; but, all jointly as coheires shall possess all things: yet, not all the faithful jointly shall possess all things universally, though ye sever them from Christ their head; for they shall not have dominion over the Angels, but Christ only shall possess all things universally; for, he only shall rule over the Angels, that hath dominion over the faithful. And yet again there is one person excepted from the dominion of Christ, and that is God the Father, who hath given to Christ his universal dominion.  
9 But we see jesus who was made a little lower than the Angels] Here he declares who that man was, in whom the words of the Psalm were to be fulfilled; namely, that Jesus Christ was the man, to whom all things universally, and therefore the world to come was to be subject; and therewithal makes way to handle the Priesthood of Christ. And hence now it appears, that in this there is no absurdity or repugnancy to truth, that he, who in respect of his mortal nature was a little lower, for a little time than the Angels, should be exalted to become much higher than they for ever after. Yea, seeing the Scripture testifies, that the man who was less than the Angels, must become Lord of all, who sees not that the exaltation of the man Christ, far above all the orders of Angels, doth excellently agree with Scripture? And, hereby the Author removes the absurdity that seems in this, That Christ, a man, should become far greater than the Angels, and be said to be their lord For the suffering of death] The Reason, or cause why Christ for a little time was made a little lower than the Angels, was this, that he might suffer death. And this was not the formal cause of his lowness, for he was not made lower than Angels in this respect, by his suffering death; an evil which they suffer not, though it be true that he was also lower therein. But the formal cause of his lowness was his mortal nature, in respect whereof he was made for a little while a little lower than the Angels. And the final cause of his lowness in that mortal nature, was actual death; for, he was made in a mortal nature to this end, that he might suffer death under it; for, unless his nature had been dyable, he could not have died. Christ was made a mortal man, whereby for a little while he was a little lower than the Angels; but why, to what end was he not at first made immortal, but mortal? It was to this end, that he might be passive to suffer death; for, had he been at first made immortal he could not have died. We see him crowned with glory and honour:] Christ hath now an universal dominion over all, not only over this visible and present world and all the creatures here, but also over the invisible and future world, and all the creatures there, which is a crown or highest degree of glory and honour to him, whereto he was exalted after his suffering of death. And though it be most true, that his suffering of death was the cause or occasion of his exaltation to glory; for, Paul expressly so affirms it, Phil. 2.8,9. Yet in this place the Author here intends not to speak of Christ's death as the cause of his glory, as appears by the words here following; For, in what sense can it be said, that Christ, because he suffered death, he was crowned with glory and honour, that he should taste death for every man; as if after his crowning with glory he suffered or were to suffer death? But here his intent is to show Christ's death for the order of it, that for time it was antecedent to his glory, and his glory for time was consequent after his death. We see him crowned] We see him so by faith, with the eyes of our soul; and not by sense, or the eyes of our body; for, we believe it from the pregnant testimonies of the holy Ghost in the Scriptures. That he by the grace of God should taste death for every man:] To taste death, is to die for a little time, as for a day or two, as Christ did: for, when we take but a little of a thing, than we are said to taste of it. The final cause why Christ in nature was for a little while a little lower than the Angels, was this, That he might suffer death. And the super-finall cause why he suffered death, was this, That his death might be propitious and salutiferous to men. For the glory of God, and the salvation of men required it, that the Prince of salvation should taste of death to bring men to salvation, yea God had so decreed. Now that he might bring men to salvation by this means, i. By suffering of death, he must by nature be a mortal man, and not an Angel; because by nature, Angels are immortal, and naturally cannot die. And the efficient cause of both these subordinate finals of Christ's dying, and his dying for men's salvation, was the grace of God; the free love and favour of God did bestow this transcendent benefit upon men, that Christ should taste death for them. For the Author had no sooner made open mention of Christ's death, but presently he adds the great and weighty causes of it, both final and efficient, lest any man should slight it, and think it not a matter of such moment, that therefore the Lord of the faithful should be less than the Angels for that end.  
10. For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things:] These words are a circumlocution or a designation of God, from his two great attributes of being the last end, and the first cause of all things; and are introduced as a ground, whereby to answer this tacit objection. Had it not been fare more convenient and decent, That Christ the Lord and King over God's people, (though he were not an Angel, but a man by nature mortal) should not taste of death and other sufferings, but always remain in his happiness and glory, as it became the worth of so great a King. To this the Author answers, That it wonderfully became God to proceed this way, and not to do otherwise then he did; because this way did especially suit to his end, and was a most convenient means to attain the end by God intended. For God himself is the last end of all things, for whom all things are; and he is also the first efficient of all things, from and by whom all things are; and therefore it became God, who gins all things by himself, and finisheth them for himself, to apply such means as are most conducent to his end; for, it becomes the wisest agent to work most wisely. The particle by whom] notes not God as an instrumental or mean cause, as if some higher agent did work by him; but supposeth him the principal and prime agent; which is always so, when it is used of God as an efficient or agent of some thing. For that particle referred to God, carries with it this force in sense, that the thing mentioned, was not only primely invented and decreed by God, but by him also brought to issue by effectual means proceeding from himself, and not borrowed elsewhere. This working of God, as being sole Author and sole means, is distinguished by Paul, by these two phrases; Of him, and through him are all things, Rom. 11.36. But by this Author both are comprised in this one, by whom are all things] And the universal particle all things, must be restrained to his proper respective subject, formerly mentioned, namely all things concerning the salvation of the faithful. In bringing many sons unto glory:] Here is expressed the intention or end, whereat God aimed, which was to bring many sons unto glory. The faithful are the sons of God in a double spiritual respect. 1. Of their spiritual birth; because they are regenerate, begotten and borne of God, by the action of his holy Spirit upon them. 2. Of their spiritual right, because they are adopted or instituted to be the universal heirs of all his estate, by having the same right with Christ, whereby they become and are called his brethren. For in a rural sense, he that hath a right to another's estate, becomes his son. And the estate whereto God brings them is glory; whereby is meant all that future happiness and heavenly inheritance, which eminently for the honour of it is called glory, and which was mystically understood, Psal. 8.5. and wherewith a little before Christ is said to be crowned. And the sons brought to glory are many: not as many is a parcel opposed to all, but as it is a multitude opposed to few; for, God hath ordained to bring to glory not a few sons, but a great many, even many multitudes. God is not as man, who can have but a few sons, and cannot bring each of them to all his estate; but God hath many multitudes of sons, and yet will bring each of them to glory, even to all his whole estate. And therefore no marvel if for so many son's sake, God would not spare their Captain, whom he might have spared partly, though not wholly, had their number been but few. To make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings:] Here is expressed the mean whereby God wrought his end, in bringing a multitude of sons to glory; namely, by giving them a Captain, and perfecting him through sufferings. For, seeing God hath so many sons, or rather so many multitudes, therefore they being so great an army, required a Captain. Now Christ is the Captain, or in modern language, the General over the army of the faithful in two respects. 1. By leading them in their journey, going before them in all their troubles and afflictions. 2. By governing them as their head and Lord to command over them; for, in an Army the General doth both lead and govern it. And he is the Captain of salvation to the faithful, because he leads and governs them in their journey to salvation: that is, to the eternal glory wherewith himself is crowned, as before: which to them is salvation, because thereby they are safe, not only from destruction, but from all affliction, and all other evils. And because Christ is their captain, by whom God brings them to salvation, & by whom, God saves them from death, therefore Christ is called and is their Saviour: And Christ their captain passed thorough sufferings] whereby is meant death, especially a violent death, comprising also all the miseries and evils that do precede and accompany it, through all which sufferings Christ passed, which therefore are called and are his passion. And by these sufferings Christ was made perfect. His mortality was finished and ended; and he being translated to immortality was crowned with eternal glory and honour, as before; which was his ultimate consummation, and final perfection, wherein nothing was wanting to him, that might accrue to his supreme happiness. Now seeing therefore that this journey to salvation leads for the most part, through divers calamities and afflictions, through death, and a violent death, did it not become the wisdom of God, that the leader or captain in this journey should pass through divers sufferings, and death, yea a violent death, before he could penetrate and arrive at the mark of eternal salvation, that by his example he might teach us, that this so rough and craggy way, which seems to precipate men into eternal destruction, should lead to the highest tower of eternal salvation, by finishing our mortality, and perfecting us into immortality. And did it not become the wisdom of God, that he, into whose hand God had put the salvation of all his sons, and whom he would ordain for their high Priest, should in all things be made like unto his brethren, and taste of the same cup of sufferings with them, that being himself acquainted with sufferings, he might learn to secure them in theirs.  
11 For both he that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, are all of one.] Here he shows the great alliance between Christ and Christians, and what good cause there is, why not only Christ, but also the faithful are styled by the name of the sons of God, seeing Christ and they have the same parentage, and come as it were from one stock. And he seems to deliver it as a general rule, that the sanctifier, and sanctified are all of one. i. draw their original from one person, as procreated from one and the same Father. To sanctify, is to expiate or purge away sin; and to be sanctified is to have their sins expiated or purged away; for as sin doth pollute and profane us: so Expiation doth sanctify and hollow us. And in this sense the word sanctified is often taken in Scripture, especially by this Author. Now Christ is he that doth sanctify; for he doth expiate or purge away our sins: and the faithful are they that are sanctified; for by Christ their sins are expiated or purged away. And therefore Christ and the faithful are all of one lineage and parentage; for he and they draw their original from one person, even from God who is the common Father to them both; and consequently Christ and the faithful make up between themselves, but as it were one nation or one people under God; and consequently again, he and they are brethren one to another. An example hereof was under the Law among the Hebrews, to whom this Author writes, and to whom therefore this rule of union and fraternity, by means of sanctification was the better known. For among them the high Priest was he, that did sanctify the people by expiating and purging away their sins, making atonement to God for them: and the people were they who were sanctified, by being expiated and purged from their sins; And both Priest and people were of the same nation, sprung from Jacob, who was one common Father to them; whereupon they used to call one another brethren. In like manner the case stands between Christ who is the high Priest to sanctify; and the faithful who are God's people to be sanctified; as we have already declared it. For which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren.] Indeed this cause is very pregnant to make this consequent to follow upon it. For seeing that Christ and the faithful are all of one God, as of one common Father, therefore they are the brethren of Christ; and Christ is not ashamed to call them so: for all children proceeding from one common Father are brethren, and should not be ashamed to call one another so. Indeed, the condition of the faithful is in this life so contemptible and shameful, that Christ might think it a shame to him, to have such brethren. In which sense this Author saith afterward, chap. 11. 16. That God was not ashamed to be called the God of Abraham, Isaac, and jacob. For how vile are those Patriarches compared to God, the Sovereign Lord of all things, especially then being rotten to dust for so many ages before. So all Christians how vile and wretched are they, how poor, contemned, and despised? insomuch that Christ now so great a King, of so great Majesty and glory, might justly disdain to call such creatures his brethren: but Christ is not ashamed either to acknowledge them his brethren, or to call them by the name of brethren.  
12. Saying, I will declare thy Name unto my brethren; in the midst of the Church will I sing praise unto thee.] By three Testimonies out of Scripture, he proves that Christ is not ashamed to call the faithful, brethren. The first Testimony is taken from Psal. 22.22. The literal sense is; David was King over the people of Israel; yet he calls them his brethren, and when God had saved him from death, he professeth to praise God in their company, in the midst of the Congregation or assemby. The mystical sense is, Christ is a King over the faithful, yet he calls the faithful his brethren; and when God had raised and saved him from death, he appeared to his disciples where they were congregated, and in the midst of their assembly, he really declared the power of God in raising him from the dead; and with out all doubt, did celebrate the Name of God with words of praise and thanksgiving. For hence it is we read, John 20.17. That Christ after his Resurrection, willed Mary to go unto his brethren, and say of him; I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to my God and your God. In which words he gives the reason, why he calls them his brethren; namely, because he and they had one common God and Father.  
13 And again, I will put my trust in him.] The second Testimony to prove the former point, is taken (as I conceive) out of Psal. 91.2. because that Psalm is so frequently applied to Christ, though this testimony be extant in several other places. The literal sense: David makes God his God, and confidence, to put his trust in him, and persevering, will put his trust in him. The literal sense: Christ in like manner made God his God and confidence to trust in him, and persevered to trust in him. For before his Resurrection, when he hanged on the Cross, he said, My God, my God, Why hast thou forsaken me? Which words argue no despair, but a confident and persevering trust in God, that though God did seem to forsake him, yet he should be his God; and he would trust in him. Yea, the Priests and Scribes mocked at his confidence and trust in God, Matth. 27.43. And after his Resurrection, he calls God his God; in the place precited, Joh. 20.17. But now the Quere will be, what this makes to the purpose of proving the faithful to be the brethren of Christ. The answer is; It proves it directly, though not immediately; For seeing Christ and the faithful, have God for their God, and for their confidence to put their trust in him; therefore he and the faithful are of one.] i. are confidents and dependants upon one and the same God and Father; and by means of that they must needs be brethren, as was before concluded, upon verse 11. So this testimony proves their unity in God; and their unity in God, proves their fraternity between themselves: For when the first truth is the reason of the second, it is also the reason of all other truths, whereof the second is the reason. And again; Behold, I and the children which God hath given me;]. The third Testimony to prove the former point taken from Esai. 8.18. The literal sense: God had given the Prophet children; and he and they were brethren in this, that they were to be for signs and wonders; and were so appointed to be from God. The mystical sense; Christ is the Son of God, and the faithful are the children of God, God's postnati after Christ, and therefore are the brethren of Christ. And God hath given them unto Christ, by bringing them to believe in Christ, and committing them to the care of Christ; See John 6.39.40. and John 17.6,7. And by giving him power to give them eternal life, Joh 17.2. For he did predestinate them to be conformed to the image of Christ, that Christ might be the firstborn among many brethren, Rom. 8.29. And Christ and the faithful are brethren in being signs and wonders. For Christ was for a sign which should be spoken against, Luke 2.34. And the Apostles were made a spectacle to the world, unto angels, and to men, 1. Cor. 49. yet the faithful are not the sons of God, before they be given to Christ and believe in him; for by faith they are made the sons of God: But as soon as a man is given to Christ, than he becomes the son of God; and unless he be so given, he cannot be the son of God. See John 6.44,45.  
14. For as much then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood] After the Author had taught us, the near alliance of brotherhood, between Christ and the faithful; he now shows what is the state and condition of the faithful, that from thence he might conclude, that Christ also their Captain and high Priest, must needs have the like condition with them. And so returns to what he had said at the ninth verse before, That Christ was made a little lower than the Angels, expressing here the impulsive cause of that lowness. By flesh and blood] Here is understood, an infirm, frail, and ruinous nature and condition, subject to divers evils, even to death and corruption. Of this nature and condition, the faithful, who are Gods children, are all partakers. He also himself likewise took part of the same:] Therefore Christ also, the Captain and high Priest of the faithful, to whom he was so nearly allied, as to be their brother, did himself also in the very same manner partake of the very same nature and condition of flesh and blood, to be as infirm, frail and ruinous as they, subject to as many miseries as they, even to death and corruption; For, he suffered death actually, and was by nature subject to corruption, yet he suffered not corruption actually; for God by his power and by his grace rescued him from it, and would not suffer his holy One to see corruption. Acts 2.27. The sum of the Reasoning is: Seeing Christ must be the Captain and high Priest of mortal and frail men, therefore he must not be Angel, but lower than the Angels, even a mortal and frail man like his brethren, subject to divers sufferings, even to death itself. But the Incarnation of Christ cannot be concluded from these last words; for, then by the same reason, the Incarnation of the faithful (or the rest of God's children) must needs be concluded from the former, seeing Christ is said to partake of flesh and blood likewise, or in like manner with them. But seeing the faithful, the rest of God's children are not incarnate, no more is Christ their Captain and high Priest; otherwise between Christ and the rest of God's children, there must be a great difference and unlikeness, in that wherein they are here concluded to be most semblant and alike, namely in their partaking of flesh and blood. And granting the Incarnation here, then from the death of Christ and his Resurrection following it, the faithful cannot take an example of their resurrection or immortality after death, by death to be acquired; and therefore by the death of Christ, cannot be delivered from the fear of death, as the Author infers it in the verse next following. That through death he might destroy the Devil.] The final cause to what end Christ did partake of a mortal condition, and of death itself, whereby he was lower than the Angels, is here expressed to be double; whereof notwithstanding one end is dependent and consequent from the other. The first is, That by his death he might destroy the devil. Christ by his death destroys not the devil for his person; for, the devil by his person is an angel, and therefore by nature indestructible, incorruptible, and immortal. But, Christ by his death destroys the devil for his power; he abolisheth and abrogates the kingdom and power that Satan hath in the world, particularly his power of death; and therefore he describes Satan by this circumlocution, him that had the power of death.] The power of Satan consists in this, that he detains men mancipated to his command, and enslaved at his beck, most obsequious to commit any sin; from the yoke of which slavery, they have of themselves no means to pull their neck. This power is by an Hebraisme called the power of death. i. a mortiferous or deadly power, because Satan by sin brings men to death, and that death is eternal to them. Christ therefore suffered death, that he might overthrow the tyranny of Satan, breaking all his forces, that he might take from this power of holding men in deadly bondage, and deliver them from it. For hence it is that we are said to be delivered from the power of Satan. See Acts 26.18. and Col. 1.13. And it is by the death of Christ, that Satan is said to be devested and spoiled of all his dominion and power. See John 12.31,33. and Col. 2.15. Now the reason why Christ destroys the deadly power of Satan by his death is, Because Christ by his death hath obtained the supreme power over all things, whereby he is enabled to master all his enemies (whereof Satan is the head) first, breaking their forces; and last, utterly destroying them. This way of destroying Satan's deadly power, if we respect the nature of the action, though Christ might have done it without his death: yet it was so ordered by the decree and counsel of God, that it should not be effected, but by the means of his death; and that for the second end of his death, which is expressed in the next verse following; namely, to deliver them who through fear of death, etc.  
15. And deliver them who through fear of death, were all their life time subject to bondage.] The second or subordinate end of Christ's death, is to vindicate men from a fearful bondage. This servitude or bondage, is the fear of death, and of eternal death, or as it may be feared, to last eternally; for, as it is the manner of slaves to fear, so fear itself is a fearful slavery; hence S. Paul terms it the spirit of bondage, Rom. 8.15. And they are subject to this slavery of fear, not who stand in actual fear, but who are liable to fear, or by right aught to fear. Hence it plainly appears, that all they who fear death, have no share in this deliverance or liberty by Christ, but remain in a grievous slavery. And all they are forced to fear death, and the eternity of it, who have not a sure hope of their Resurrection. And how grievous this slavery or bondage of it is, appears from the duration of it, in that it continues upon men all the time of their life.] No minute of their life is free from the fear of it; for though every minute they do not actually fear it, yet every minute they are subject to fear, and may justly fear it. From this slavish fear of death, Christ hath delivered men by his death, while by his death, he not only passed to an immortal life, but also obtained power to repress and destroy the power of Satan. Hence Christ saith to John. Fear not, I am the first and the last; I am he that liveth, and was dead; and behold, I am alive for evermore, and have the keys of hell and of death, Revel. 1.17.18. For what man now will fear death to be his eternal undoing, when he sees a deliverance from death with a most glorious issue, if he imitate Christ; when he sees that the forces of his enemy, who before oppressed him, and enthralled to eternal death, are no longer to be feared, but are broken and destroyed by him, who himself underwent a bloody death? And hence it further appears, that with the death of Christ here, we must join his Resurrection; for that we might no longer fear death, Christ must needs not only suffer death, but must again be raised from death. For if Christ be not raised, our faith is vain; we are yet in our sins, and the dead in Christ are perished, 1. Cor. 15.17,18.  
16 For no where he taketh hold of Angels.] Here he confirms the doctrine delivered at the ninth verse; That Christ was not made in the nature of an Angel, but was made a little lower than the Angels, for the suffering of death. Why so? The reason is here laid down; because Christ was not ordained, to secure and help the Angels, who by nature are immortal and die not; and therefore need not be succoured or helped from death. For no where,] There is no testimony or authority extant in Scripture, whereon to ground this: for it is not where said, that he takes hold of Angels to help them. Taketh hold] The word in the original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies properly to take a man with thy hand, either to lead him some whither, or to uphold him, thereby to help him. See Mark 8.23. and Luke 9.47. and Luke 14.4. Hence figuratively it is translated to signify succouring or helping. For when we would help one from falling or sinking under some burden, or would raise him being fallen, than we put our hand to him and take hold of him. Hence it is said of Wisdom that she exalteth her children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and layeth hold of them that seeketh her, i. she helpeth or aideth them that seek her. And there is the same sense of the counterverbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; because when we would help a man up with his burden, we take hold of it over against him. And this sense of the word is explicated afterward by the Author, at the last verse of this Chapter; for, what he calls here taking hold of, there he expresseth by the word succouring; That Christ suffering himself, being tempted, is able to secure them that are tempted; for, in both these verses he treats of the same thing, and the reason of the consequence proposed in this verse is explicated in that. Thus for the sense of the word; now for the sense of it. It is not of the preter-tense, as if referred to a time past, particularly to that time, when (as it is at the ninth verse before) Christ was made a little lower than the Angels: for at that time, being the time of his birth, he did neither help Angels nor men: but it is of the present tense, he taketh not hold; in reference to the time of his death, upon which the Author groundeth all this argument; For, by his death he destroys the devil, and delivers men from the fear of death; What is the reason of that? Because, by his death he taketh not hold of Angels to help and secure them, or deliver them from the fear of death, who being immortal by nature cannot fear it. Neither can here be any enallage of the present tense for the preter, but rather of the present for the future; Christ was made lower than the Angels; Why so? Because by his death he was not to take hold of the Angels, to help and secure them from the fear of it. Now, both this sense, and this sense of the word was well perceived by our last Translators of the Bible into English; for, they have noted it in the margin of this verse, though in the Text they correspond with some other Translations. Hence it plainly appears, how these words are mistaken by some Translators and Interpreters, who from hence would show, that Christ took not on him the nature of Angels, which assertion, though it be in itself most true, yet it cannot be the meaning of this place. For, 1. It is against the sense of the words, whereof there are but two, and it goes against the sense of them both. For, to apprehend or take hold of a thing, cannot signify to assume or take on us the nature of it. And the word Angels in the plural number cannot imply an assumption of their nature, for than it must have been Angel in the singular. 2. It is against the context or reasoning of the Author, who could not, nor ought not to take that for an argument or a reason, which by argument and reason he was to prove; for, no one and the same truth can be an argument or a reason to itself why itself should be true. At the seventh verse before, this truth is laid down, That Christ took not on him the nature of Angels, but was made lower; whereof, how can a reason be given by this, that he took not on him the nature of Angels, seeing these two sayings are identical, whereof neither can be the cause or reason of the other? But, if we understand these words of not helping or succouring the Angels, than all things cohere most elegantly and rationally, thus. Christ took not the nature of Angels, but was made lower than them, because by his death he was not to help or secure the Angels from fear of death, but to secure a creature lower than they, who is all his lise in bondage of death, and subject to the fear of death. But he took hold of the seed of Abraham:] That Christ should help the Angels is not where said in Scripture; but it is said in some one or several places of Scripture, that he was ordained to take hold of the seed of Abraham, to help and secure it: For to take hold in this clause of the verse, carries the very same sense that it did in the former, where it was denied of the Angels. The word seed, especially among the Hebrews, is for the most part a Noun collective, and signifies a multitude of persons; and therefore the Author fitly useth the word seed, importing a multitude, that he might oppose it, to the Angels in the plural number. And the seed of Abraham, are the children or posterity of Abraham, whether they be carnal by birth only, or spiritual by faith only, or both by birth and faith. And he rather said the seed of Abraham in two respects. 1. Because we often read in Scripture, that Christ is promised to no other men properly, but to the posterity of Abraham, or at least to his seed, chief and in the first place. 2. Because this word would be most pleasing to the Hebrews, to whom he writes, who were themselves the seed, or posterity of Abraham. But, by this ambiguous appellation, which might signify the seed of Abraham, whether carnal or spiritual, he so ingratiates the Hebrews, that withal he might tacitly invite them, to continue Christians; because, Christians only, of what Nation soever they be, are the spiritual seed of Abraham, Gal. 3.29. For, Christ was destinate to take hold of, to help, succour, and save only that spiritual seed, as being their only merciful and faithful high Priest. And by the words here, we must understand rather the spiritual seed of Abraham, than the carnal: but they that are his seed both ways, both carnally and spiritually, as these Hebrews were, may challenge Christ in a manner by a double right, to be their aider and helper. The sum of all is. As in the former clause of this verse, the Author proved the negative, That Christ was not made an Angel, because he was not to take hold of them, to help and secure them: So in this clause he proves the affirmative, why he was made lower than the Angels, why he took part of flesh and blood: Because by his death he was to take hold of the seed of Abraham, to help and secure the faithful, in delivering them from the fear and bondage of death. So the words show, not what Christ was by his birth, but what he did by his death. Hence now it plainly appears how incongruously these words are wrested, to Christ's taking on him humane nature. For, this sense is contrary to the context, and altogether cross to right reasoning; for, by it the same truth is made a reason whereby to conclude itself. At the fourteenth verse before, this is laid down for a truth, That Christ took part of our flesh and blood, i. he did partake of humane nature; of which truth, how can a reason be given by this, that he took on him our humane nature, seeing these two truths are identical, though not in words, yet altogether in sense? But if we understand these words of helping and succouring the faithful, then there runs a vein of evident reasoning. Christ was made lower than the Angels, and took part of flesh and blood; to what end? that he might suffer death: Why so? To destroy the Devil's power of death. Why that? Because he was to deliver men from the fear and bondage of death: Why did he that? Because he was to take hold of men, to help and secure them who are the seed of Abraham.  
17. Wherefore in all things] Hitherto he hath showed that Christ must be a mortal man, to suffer death; now from the last cause of his helping or succouring men, he teacheth that he must not only be mortal, but subject to divers afflictions; and not only subject, but actually to suffer them, and that not some few, but even all wherewith the rest of the faithful are afflicted. It behoved him, to be made like unto his brethren] How, and why the faithful are the brethren of Christ, hath before been showed and proved. Yet, in this place again the word brethren carries a powerful force of reasoning. It behooveth a brother to help and secure his brother; and Christ therefore takes hold of the faithful, to help and secure them, because they are his brethren; especially the seed of Abraham, who are his brethren, both by God and man. And it behooveth also a brother to be like a brother; and the more alike they are, the more lovely they are to all, and the more loving one to another. And therefore it behoved Christ to be made like unto his brethren, not only in some one thing, as in their nature, to be made a little lower than the Angels, as his brethren were, or to take part of flesh and blood as they did; but also to be like them in all things, even in their whole condition, to be subject to afflictions and temptations as they are, and actually to suffer all sorts of them as they do; yet he was not like them in sin, for that is excepted, Heb. 4.15. and a universal saying must always abate, when a particular exception is expressly made against it. That he might be a merciful and faithful high Priest.] Christ must be made like unto his brethren in nature, that he might be their high Priest; for, the Priest and the people must be of one Nation; he that sanctifieth, and they that are sanctified, must be all of one: and he was made like them in condition for suffering afflictions, and therefore he must be unto them a merciful and faithful high Priest. 1. He must be merciful, to be touched with a sense of his brethren's miseries and sorrows; and to think them so his own or so near him, that he may be moved readily to secure or help them as himself. For, mercy is a sorrow for another's misery, moving us to secure him. 2. He must be faithful, to administer and perform all things with all care and diligence in their behalf, that concerns their sanctifying or succouring; to expiate their sins, and help them from misery. And this faithfulness takes some root and growth from mercifulness; for mercy doth beget and nourish faithfulness. Now that Christ might be truly merciful and faithful to his brethren in all things, therefore he must be made like them in all things, even in all their afflictions and sorrows. In things pertaining to God:] The office of the high Priest in general was this; to administer in things pertaining to God, as to offer gifts and sacrifices for sin: (as the Author explicates it afterward, chap. 5.1.) And it was peculiar and proper to the high Priest, to expiate or make atonement for the sins of the whole people together; and not of single persons by themselves, for that was common to other Priests. This popular Expiation was performed by Christ our high Priest, when after the shedding of his blood on earth he entered into heaven, as into the Sanctuary or holiest of all, there to appear in the presence of God, to make Intercession for us; that is, that resting in heaven with God, he might administer and perform all things, that concerns our deliverance from the punishments of our sins. To make reconciliation for the sins of the people] The end of the office of the high Priest was, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. i. To propitiate or expiate their sins. The word in the original signifies to cover; hence the cover of the Ark was called the propitiatory, because it covered the Tables of the Law that lay in the Ark; and was a figure of God's mercy, whereby he was propitious to forgive, or cover the sins against the Law. For sins are no other way propitiated or expiated, then as it were by covering or hiding, that they may no more appear against us in the sight of God. Hence God's people are said to be reconciled unto God; that is, to be sanctified and purged from their sins; for, when the Tabernacle was sanctified and purged from the sins of the people, it was called reconciling, Levit. 16.20. And, hence God is said to be propitiated or pacified, or appeased; not as if hereby he were always turned from anger which was in him before, but many times, that he should not desist from being propitious, but continue pacified or appeased towards us; and that he should pass by just causes of anger which otherwise he might have. For, thus God was anciently pacified by the Sacrifices ordained by his Law; for, it is no way likely, that God was really angry with his people for those sins, for which he granted an expiation under the Law, then when the people procured the timely expiation of their sins, according to the prescript of God's Law, then certainly God was not actually angry; for then God must be angry at set times of the year yearly, at every solemnity of the Expiation. By those sacrifices therefore God was not pacified, by being drawn from anger; but thereby order was taken, that God might still continue pacified, and not turn away his grace and favour from his people, by reason of their sins. Hence it appears, that from these words of Reconciling, and Pacifying, we must not conclude that God's wrath against us was appeased by Christ: but when we hear these words referred unto sins, we must thereby understand nothing else, but their expiation or purgation made by Christ; as this Author termed it before, chap. 1. v. 3. But, how Christ now residing in heaven, and exercising the office of his Priesthood, doth purge away our sins, shall be declared hereafter; namely, no other way then by the power God hath granted him to forgive them, that we should not be punished and perish eternally for them. The faithful are the people of God, who are reconciled, and whose sins are expiated. And this, as was noted before, was proper to the office of the high Priest, who used not to make reconciliation for single persons, but for the people on the day of Expiation.  
18. For in that he himself hath suffered, being tempted] He saith not simply that Christ hath suffered, but he adds being tempted. The sufferings of Christ were not punishments but temptations or trials of his excellent fidelity and piety. For, there was no sin in Christ for which he should be punished, seeing punishments are only for sin. And therefore chap. 4. v. 15. speaking of Christ's being tempted or tried, he expressly addeth, that he was without sin, i. his trial was not a punishment, as no way merited by sin. He is able to secure them that are tempted] Afflictions to the faithful are temptations of their faith and righteousness; whether they will persevere in their obedience to God, or be beaten off by worldly calamities: as the offering of Isaac was a temptation to Abraham; and our whole spiritual warfare against Satan, the world, and the flesh, is a daily temptation or trial of us. In these their trials Christ doth secure them, by his assistance of them from perishing under the miseries that press them. And this he doth, when he affords them strength and courage to sustain the afflictions, lest by force thereof they fall from the faith and forsake it. Or when he so moderates the afflictions, that they be not too great, for pain, or too long for time, by lightning of them if they be too or shortening them if they be too long; or, lastly, when he receives their spirits at their death, to restore them again in due time with supreme glory. And when Christ succours the faithful in this manner, he doth even thereby expiate their sins. For thereby he endeavours and provides with all care, lest that sinking under their afflictions, or being destitute at their death, they should by this means suffer punishment for their sins. And therefore the word able to help] must be ampliated and extended, to be both able, willing and careful, for otherwise he should not be a merciful and faithful high Priest; if having power to secure, he had neither will nor care to perform it. Hence appear three verities. 1. That Christ our high Priest expiateth our sins, by succouring us in our temptations. 2. That the principal function of his Priestly office is performed now in heaven; and was not performed at this death, wherein there was only a preparation toward it. 3. That neither the Priestly function of Christ, nor his Expiation of sins thereby procured, consist in this, that Christ should suffer punishment for our sins, seeing that can have no place in heaven.   

The sum or Contents of this second Chapter are 5.  

1. We Christians have more cause to persevere in the Gospel, than the jews had to persist in the law. verse 1. 

Reason 1. Because if we neglect it, our punishment will be more certain than theirs.  
2. Because it was first taught by Christ, and confirmed by his Apostles, by miracles and gifts of the holy Ghost.    
2. Christ was made lower than the Angels. verse 7. 

Reason. 1. Because he was to suffer death; not thereby to secure them but men.    
3. Christ and the faithful are brethren. verse 11. 

Reason. 1. Because they come of one Father who is God. Testimonies 3. out of Scripture.    
4. Christ suffed death. verse 14. 

Reason. 1. Because he was to destroy the devil that had the power of death.  
2. Because he was to deliver the faithful from the fear and bondage of death: for he was to secure not Angels but them    
5. Christ was afflicted and tempted like the faithful in all things. ver. 17. 

Reason. 1. Because he was to be their high Priest, to expiate their sins.  
2. Because he was to secure them, when they are afflicted and tempted.       

CHAPTER III.  

1. WHerefore] It refers to all that hath been spoken hitherto concerning the dignity of Christ; who seeing he is so excellent a person as ye have heard, therefore ye have great reason to consider him well. Holy brethren,] Separated from the profane vulgar and worldly, by your knowledge in divine mysteries; and allied to me, not by a vulgar and carnal fraternity: but by a spiritual affinity in Christ. Partakers of the heavenly calling.] Who together with me and all other Christians have one common spiritual calling whereto we are called. And this calling is called heavenly, not only because it was notified from heaven, and comes from thence: but also because it is directive to heaven to teach us the way thither; and conductive to heaven to carry us safely thither: So that heaven is the double term of our spiritual calling; for heaven is the start of it from whence it runs, and the mark of it whereto it runs. Consider jesus Christ] Ye six your minds and hearts upon Moses, to consider him in all particulars; consider also Jesus Christ. The Apostle and high Priest of our profession.] Our profession is our Religion, whereby we profess to serve God and to be saved. Of this our Religion Christ is the great Prophet, the grand Apostle, Emissary or Legate, or the first Messenger of it; because he was the first that was sent from God, to bring it into the world, and to publish or preach it unto men. For every Prophet sent with a message immediately from God, is therefore an Apostle. And of this our Religion, Christ is the high Priest, or chief Precedent to order it: because he perpetually administers and officiates all things pertaining to it; and because by him all the professors of it, have their access to God; because he expiates and purgeth away their sins; and because he takes care that all things pertaining to divine worship, be rightly performed in the Temple of God, dedicate to this Religion; For in this place, the Author remarkably calls Christ by the name of high Priest, because anciently the high Priests were Precedents over the Temple and holy things of God. From both these offices, thus united in Christ, appears his transcendent dignity. For anciently there was an Apostle or Prophet of the Jewish Religion, who was Moses, for he first taught and published it: but then among them there was another high Priest, who was Aaron and his Successors. But Christ alone in one person was both the Apostle and high Priest of our profession. But in this place we must ampliate & extend the word high Priest so largely, that it may also comprehend the Regal dignity or office of Christ. For it is not likely that the Author in this breviate of Christ's offices would wholly omit the chiefest, especially in this place, where he would move them to consider Christ; especially when he had before termed him such a high Priest, as was able to secure them that are tempted: which thing belongs also to his Regal power, and had in the first chapter so lively expressed his Regal dignity, by several testimonies of Scripture.  
2. Who was faithful to him that appointed him.] It had been enough to move the Hebrews to consider Christ, by what the Author had delivered before, in preferring him above the Angels, by several arguments of reason, and testimonies of Scripture: but the Author not content with this, doth here single out Moses, and equal Christ with him; because the Hebrews had Moses in high esteem, opposing him to Christ, and preferring him before Christ. The particular wherein he equals Christ with Moses, is the faithfulness of Christ, and he instanceth the rather in this particular, because that when God gave a singular commendation of Moses, the Lord instanced in the particular, of his faithfulness to God. He therefore declares that Christ was as faithful to God as ever Moses was. Now the faithfulness of Christ relates to both his offices, of high Legate, (or Apostle) and high Priest. The faithfulness of a Legate consists in these two things. 1. That he deliver his Message wholly and truly, according to his Commission. 2. That he use all means to persuade and gain faith to his Message; especially if he be thereto enjoined by him that sent him. And the faithfulness of a high Priest is, To provide all things pertinent to the worship of God; and then to propitiate God toward those that worship him. The person to whom Christ was thus faithful, was the supreme God, who made him his Legate and high Priest, by appointing him to the execution of these offices, wherein he might exercise his singular faithfulness; for Christ assumed not these offices of himself, but was thereto appointed of God the Father; as afterward more fully. As also Moses was faithful in all his house.] Moses was a great Prophet and Legate sent from God; in so much that when Aaron and Miriam had spoken against him, the Lord to publish his great esteem of him, would vindicate him by his own mouth, and thereupon prefers him before all other Prophets, in that he would deal more familiarly with him then with any other; for, he would speak to others by visions and dreams, and dark speeches; but he would speak to Moses mouth to mouth, even apparently, and he should behold the similitude of the Lord; of which dealing with Moses, the Lord gives this reason, because Moses was faithful in all the Lords house, Numb. 12.6,7,8. In which words, who sees not how highly God esteemed Moses above all other Prophets? Now, whether we take house for God's Tabernacle, or for his family; yet Moses was most faithful in both respects, in that he neglected nothing that pertained to the care and good of either. The sum is: Lest by this singular testimony given by God to Moses for his faithfulness, any man should hereby think, that herein Moses was greater than Christ; therefore the Author adorns Christ with the very same commendation of faithfulness that God had given to Moses; that thereby he might take from Moses all prerogative of his being above Christ in any thing, and consequently infers Christ equal to Moses.  
3. For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses] Having shown that Christ was no way inferior to Moses; here he advanceth a degree higher, and affirms that Christ was much superior to Moses, and counted worthy of more honour, that he might further move them to the consideration of Christ. And yet more determinately, that the honour of Christ is a great distance above that of Moses. And the following words show how much: As much as he who hath builded the house, hath more honour than the house.] He properly builds the house that either frameth it himself, or causeth it to be framed for himself; for, whosoever is the owner, is properly the builder, and not the mercenary, who is hired to build it for another. Now the builder is more honourable than the building; for, the Builder by his building becomes the Lord or Owner of it; which is the first original or natural ground of honour. And look how much the builder is more honourable than the building, though the degree be never so indefinite: so much is Christ more honourable than Moses. For, Moses was but a part of the building in God's family; but Christ under God is the builder of his whole Church.  
4. For, every house is builded by some man:] No house doth raise or build itself, but is built or raised by some person or other, who builds it himself for himself, or causeth it to be builded for himself. But he that hath built all things is God.] Here he expresseth what person he understands for the architect or builder of the house, whereof he speaks; namely, that he means God himself. Hence it appears that the Author's mind was to say, That Christ is so much more honourable than Moses, as God is more honourable than his house which he hath built; that is, than his people, who are the house of God. For, as Moses must be joined with the house of God, whereof he was a principal part: so Christ must be joined with God, who jointly with God hath built his house, and exerciseth dominion or Lordship over it. So that Christ this way considered is not a part of the building, but a part of the builder, and therefore above the building. Furthermore, if the difference in dignity between Christ and Moses be the same that is between God and his house; then consequently there will be also the same proportion in dignity between God and Christ, that there is between Moses and God's house. For, in proportions consisting of four terms, the proportion is alternable. Wherefore, as Moses is in dignity inferior to the house; for he is but God's Minister or Legate there, who though he be superior to any one person there singly taken, yet he is inferior to the whole taken collectiyely or jointly. So Christ is a secondary unto God, from whom he hath received all divine power and authority, to build and govern God's house in God's Name. But we must take notice, that in all this comparison of Christ with Moses, there is no consideration had of this, that the ancient house wherein Moses was faithful to God, was one, and this new house is another, wherein God hath adjoined Christ for the building and governing of it. For, to the purpose in hand, it is enough that both of them are the houses of God; and the latter wherein Christ governs, is as it were succeeded in the room of that, wherein Moses was faithful; so that in this respect they may seem in a manner all one. But if any man shall urge them to be divers; be shall thereby, not only not diminish the dignity of Christ, for the advance whereof all these things are said, but greatly increase it; for this new house in dignity far exceeds the old.  
5. And Moses verily was faithful in all his house as a servant.] Before he delivered the Prerogative or Dignity of Christ above Moses, but generally and indefinitely; now he explicates it more particularly and clearly. Which being done, it will plainly appear, That Christ is more honourable than Moses, so much as God is more honourable than his house, which is his people; that is, Moses must be reckoned with the house, and Christ with God. The particle and here signifies not copulatively, but illatively as much as for. For Moses verily was faithful as a servant. All the dignity that Moses had in God's house was but a servile dignity, for he ordered and governed the whole house of God, not as Lord over it, but as a Minister and servant unto God. He was the steward of God's house; that is, the principal servant of the family, to whose charge the Master of the family committed the charge of it; Wherefore he was always forced to depend upon the beck and pleasure of God, as of his Lord, expecting in all things his command. For hence it was that he could neither move the camp nor pitch it, till first he had received notice of it from God. And this very argument he takes from the testimony of Scripture before cited for the faithfulness of Moses; in which verse God calls Moses his servant. For a testimony of those things that were to be spoken after.] Herein is specified the chief office wherein the service of Moses consisted. God spoke to his servant Moses mouth to mouth, and Moses was to testify and relate unto the people afterward those things which he had heard spoken of God, either concerning their present affairs in the wilderness, or concerning the Laws and Ordinances to be observed for the future in the land of Canaan: for in this place the word Testimony is figuratively taken for a relating or rehearsing of things that have been heard spoken by another. Hence the Gospel as it was first spoken by God, is called the word of God; but as it was reported and delivered by Christ or the Apostles, it is not seldom called their testimony. See 1 Cor. 1.6. and 1 Cor. 2.1. and 2 Thess. 1.10. and 2 Tim. 1.8. and Rev. 1.2. and Rev. 6.9. and Rev. 12.11. And the two Preachers in the Revelation are called the witnesses of God, to whom God will give power to preach 1260. days, Rev. 11.3. For it seems, they were therefore called the witnesses of God, because they were to prophesy or preach.  
6. But Christ as a Son over his own house.] Now he opposeth and prefers the dignity of Christ before that of Moses; because Moses was but as a servant in his Master's house; but Christ as a Son in his Father's house: that is, as the Lord and heir of God's house. And therefore Christ must not be reckoned among the goods of the house as Moses was, but must be joined with the Master of the house as Lord of the family. And consequently Christ is so much worthier than Moses, as God is worthier than his own house. For these words, Over his own house] may be referred 2 ways. 1 They may be referred to Christ, as his own house. And then the comparison between Christ and Moses will carry an opposition in three things. 1 That Moses was but the servant of God, but Christ was the Son of God. 2 (Consequently to the first) that Moses was only in the house as parcel of the house; and so with the rest of the house subject to the Master of the house; but Christ is over the house as Lord and heir of it. 3 (Consequently to both the former) that Moses ordered another's house; but Christ governed his own house, that God had given him by right of inheritance. 2. The words, Over his own house] may be referred to God, as Gods own house: for the comparison seems to require, that in each term thereof mention should be made of God's house. For the Author either takes it for granted, that this house of God whereof he spoke, was the house of Christ, or he takes it not for granted. If he take it for granted; to what purpose did he say, that Christ is over his own house, for if he be Lord and Owner of it, he must needs be over it? He might have said more briefly, That Moses was a servant in God's house as in another's house, but God's house was Christ's own house. But if he take it not for granted, than the reason of this comparison and the argument thence drawn, will not appear. For merely from hence, That Christ is over his own house, but Moses was a servant in God's house, it will not follow, that Christ is far more honourable than Moses; for many times it is a greater honour to be a servant in another's house especially in God's house, than a Master over his own. Besides, the argument here is about that house wherein both Christ and Moses were faithful to God; but faithfulness is seen more in another's house then his own, or at least not as his own, but as another's. For here is a relation to those words of God formerly cited, That Moses was faithful in all God's house. Whose house are we.] He now expresseth what we must understand by this house of God or Christ; namely all they are this house that profess the Religion of Christ, of which number these Hebrews were a part, and thereby he opens a passage to his following exhortation. The faithful are the house of God, whether by house we understand a family or a building. For they are the family of God and Christ, who serve God and Christ, and are under his care. They are also his building or spiritual Temple, because God and Christ do inhabit them by their holy Spirit; and they are a Tabernacle for divine worship, whereof are extant many testimonies of Scripture. Hence appears the great dignity of Christians, who therefore are to endeavour that they never fall from it, but that it continue stable and perpetual. If we hold fast the confidence. For confidence, the original word properly signifies liberty of speech, whereby a man speaks undauntedly, though otherwise there be cause of fear. Hence the word is figuratively drawn to signify courage of mind, and also confidence thence refulting. In this place it may be taken both properly and figuratively; not only for a confidence or assurance of mind, but for a liberty in professing Religion; so that a Christian, what fear soever assault him, must openly and publicly profess himself the follower of Christ, and not be deterred from it by any means. And in the same sense it seems the word is taken afterward cap. 10.35. for there the Author treats not only of inward faith, but of outward profession of the Christian Religion. Hence it appears that to make us become the house of God, it is required that we have confidence; and to make us continue so, we must hold our confidence fast and firm unto the end. And therefore we are the house of God, being of the present tense, must be understood as ampliated also to the future. For that we should become the house of God for the present, it is not required we should hold fast our confidence to the end, but that only for the present we should have confidence. But that we might thence forward continue and remain the house of God perpetually, we must also continue and remain in our confidence perpetually, by holding it fast to the end. And the rejoicing of the hope.] Hope is put here materially for the thing hoped for, which is eternal life, for that is the final matter of our hope. Rejoicing is either a high degree of joy exalted, or an outward expression of our inward joy, caused by our hope of eternal life; for such great hopes must needs breed in us not only joy, but rejoicing. For rejoicing is a patent sign of hope latent in us; and it is also an effect of that hope: for if our confidence and hope of eternal life be real and true in us, it will work this effect in us to rejoice of it, by having it always in our mouth, and thereby professing ourselves happy and blessed. Whence it is no marvel the Author requires this rejoicing in Christians, seeing Paul affirms of them also, That they rejoice in hope of the glory of God, Rom. 5.2. And this rejoicing of our confidence and hope doth necessarily draw with it, and in a manner compriseth our rejoicing of Christian Religion, whereon our hope both depends and relies. For we must needs perceive that the Author's aim is, we should hold fast the Christian Religion, and not only profess it freely and boldly; but also rejoice in it, because it brings us a sure hope of eternal happiness. Firm unto the end.] Unto the last gasp of our life; for this is the nature of a firm hope, for then our confidence is firm and stable if it last and hold out to the last gasp of our life: Unless we shall say, that a firm hope is opposed to a hope infirm, that is wavering and weak, which comes all to one; because an infirm or weak hope is not likely to last and hold out to the end. Hence it appears, that it is possible for a Christian endued to true faith, to fall from that faith: For otherwise, why should the Author annex this condition of persevering in faith, by holding it fast and firm; if they who are once the house of God, and have faith, can no way fail and fall from it? Why in the following admonition doth he exhort them to constancy? Why doth he will them to take heed of departing from the living God?  
7. Wherefore as the holy Ghost saith,] Here he gins an Exhortation against obstinacy, that they should not show themselves incredulous and hard hearted against the voice of God by Christ in the Gospel. Wherefore] this word intimates, that his Exhortation is drawn from his former discourse. And it may be drawn either from his last words, wherein he shown us to be the house of God; and for our continuing so, we must persevere constantly in the faith and hope of eternal salvation. For from hence the admonition may well be inferred, that seeing the matter is of such moment, therefore we should show ourselves tractable and obsequious to the voice of God, and so persist constantly in the faith. Or it may be drawn from the words before that, concerning the great dignity of Christ above Moses; for if all obedience were due to the voice of God delivered by Moses, how much more reverence and regard must be given to the voice of God published by Christ, who was much greater than Moses? As the holy Ghost saith.] q. d. That I may use unto you the words of the holy Ghost, and say unto you now, as he saith in the Psalms. He attributes the words of David to the holy Ghost, because David uttered them by the instinct of the holy Ghost. To day if ye will hear his voice.] These words whereof the Author here makes use to apply them to his present purpose are extant, Psal. 95.7. The literal sense is: Upon the solemn festival day the people were accustomed to enter the temple of God, there to celebrate Divine worship, and to hear the reading of the Law, which was the word or voice of God. Hereupon David composed this Psalm for the festival day, wherein he excites the people, that when they went into the house of God to worship him and hear his word, they should also obey it, and not harden their hearts against it. For the particle if] is put for when] when, or seeing ye will hear his voice. The mystical sense, The voice of Christ, whereby the Gospel is revealed and delivered to men, is the voice of God. And the time of the Gospel, is the festival day of Grace, wherein God offers salvation, and invites us to it by the preaching of the Gospel; which time will not last always in respect of particular persons, but will continue to them but as a day, during their own days; and to some it dureth not during their own days. For sometimes God is in a manner driven by the contumacy or disobedience of men, either to take from them the preaching of his word, or to harden their stubborn hearts that were fore-hardned by their own malice, lest, as himself saith, Seeing they should see, and hearing they should hear, they should be converted and healed: or lastly, he wholly turns the day of Grace and Salvation into a day of his wrath and punishment, All which things by the just judgement of God happened at last to the nation of the Jews. Wherefore by these words of the Psalmist they are admonished, that they would speedily show themselves tractable to God, and assoon as they shall hear his voice by Christ, they yield obedience thereto, without procrastinating or delaying the matter from day to day.  
8. Harden not your hearts.] Your hearts, that is your minds; the member is oftentimes put for the faculty of it. Then a man hardens his heart, when he resisteth the voice of God, and suffers not himself to be persuaded by it, when he doth the act of opposing, and besides hath a will to continue it. As hard things suffer not themselves easily to be handled, or moulded, and yield not to him that would figure or fashion them into another shape. This is done, when a man hath a will not to believe or obey the word of God, whether formerly he believed or obeyed it, or did not. As in the provocation,] He notes that notable contention of the Israelites with Moses at Rephidim for want of water: which ennobled the place where it was made with the names of Meriba, and Massa. i. Provocation and tentation; whereof see Exod. 17. That Contention is here called Provocation; because in contention there is commonly provocation; for he that contends with another, doth anger and provoke him. The Israelites, as much as lay in them, did in the first place provoke Moses, and then by him even God also: For this provocation must primely and properly be referred to Moses and not to God: as contrarily the temptation must primely be referred to God, and not to Moses. For so Moses himself expressed it to the people, in saying, Why chide you with me? wherefore do ye tempt the Lord? Exod. 17.2. And thereupon the place was called Chiding and Tempting: But while the Israelites chide & quarrel with Moses, who did nothing but by God's command; they are by that means reckoned to have chidden and striven with God. For when a second time in like manner they murmured at Cades for want of water; those waters also are called the waters of Meriba, that is, of contention or strife, because the children of Israel strove with the Lord. Numb. 20.13. When notwithstanding they strove not with the Lord himself, but with Moses and Aaron; as appears in the same chapter, verse 3, 4, 5. So they strive with Moses, and therefore with God himself, while they demand water of him with disdain and anger, ver. 2. while reproachfully and most unworthily they upbraid him, that he had brought them out of Egypt, to kill them, their children and cattles with thirst in the wilderness, ver. 3. While therefore the Israelites in this manner contend and chide with Moses the servant of God, did they not bewray the hardness of their hearts, when by so many miraculous works of God, and by so many marvellous benefits bestowed upon them, they could not be induced to confide in God, nor persuaded that he would provide them of water. The particle as notes the similitude or likeness of the case; and the sense is. Do not you harden your hearts against God, to diffide and distrust him and his voice by Christ; as the Israelites did in the Provocation at Meriba, when they did chide and strive with God, in chiding and striving with Moses. The like speech we have, Job 29.2. O that I were as in months past! i. that my case were like to what it was some months since. In the day of temptation in the wilderness] These words are referred both to the Induration and Provocation mentioned before, and are the two circumstances of them; for, in the day of Temptation, shows the time of the Provocation, that it was then upon the very same day that they tempted him; they provoked and tempted him both on a day. And in the wilderness, shows the place of it; for it was at Rephidim, a dry plain near Horeb or Mount Sinai, where Moses fought with Amaleck. To the end, that notorious provocation and tentation might be the more remarkable by the place, and thereby be distinguished from others, that fell out in other places afterward. The matter of the Tentation wherein it consisted was this, that they said of God, Is the Lord among us or not? as the text expresseth, Exod 17.7. In which words they doubt of the Divine presence, i. they were diffident of God; which distrustfulness of God, and doubtfulness of his goodness or power, is called a tentation of God. For, every tentation ariseth from some distrust, or at least from some doubting. He therefore tempteth God, that having many arguments of God's goodness toward him, and his power; yet is not sure of his goodness or power, but doubts of either, and requires more arguments or tokens thereof. It is a vulgar error in men to think, that God is then tempted, when a man trusteth too much upon God; that is, when he casteth himself into danger rashly and unnecessarily, in confidence of God's assistance. This error seems to spring from the answer of Christ to Satan, who required him to cast himself down headlong from the pinnacle of the Temple; but Christ answered, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God; As if to tempt God, were to cast himself into danger rashly, upon too much trust of God's help. But Satan in saying to Christ, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down, etc. did not intent to draw him to too great a trust in God, but rather to distrust and doubt whether he were truly the Son of God, by seeking a further experiment or sign thereof, in casting himself down; in as much as it was written of the Son of God, that God's Angels had charge over him, to bear him up in their hands, etc. To whom Christ rightly answers; It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God, q.d. Seeing it is already abundantly evident to me that I am the Son of God, and most dear to God, I will make no further trial thereof, and so tempt God, which deed he hath forbidden. Wherefore this precept of Scripture alleged by Christ, pertains nothing at all, to any excess of trust, but must be referred to distrust and doubting, as all other places are concerning the tentation of God; especially seeing in the very text when Christ quoteth this Scripture, of not tempting God, it is added, as ye tempted him in Massa, Deut. 6.16. But we have already showed, that the Israelites in Massa tempted God, not with excess of trust, but with defect of it. The like words in the like sense are used by Peter, Acts 15 10. Now therefore, why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the Disciples? etc. q.d. Hath not God already given us experiments and arguments enough, and sufficient, that we should not impose upon the Disciples the yoke of legal Ceremonies? seeing he hath given the holy Ghost to them as well as to us; seeing he hath made no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith; why therefore, as if the thing were not already apparent enough, do ye require more arguments and tokens of it, and so tempt God?  
9 When your fathers tempted me] Me, here is referred to God whom the Israelites tempted; for here, according to an usual form in Scripture, the person is changed, and God himself is brought in speaking of himself; whereas in the words before David spoke of God in the third person, but now brings in God speaking in the first person of himself. In the Original it is not when but where; for here the circumstantial particle is not temporal for the time when they tempted, but local for the place where they tempted; and that place hath reference to the wilderness immediately before mentioned. For in the wilderness they tempted God, not only at that time, but afterwards also at divers other times, and in other particular places of that wilderness. For at Cadeshbarnea, whence the twelve spies were sent to search the land of Canaan, and upon their return, the people bad stone Caleb and Joshuah, because they discented from the other ten, who had brought up an evil report upon the Land; then the Lord complains that they had provoked him long and often; that they had long disinherited him, notwithstanding all the signs he had showed amongst them, Numb. 14.11. And again at ver. 22. he complains that they had tempted him now ten times, i. very many times. Proved me] He expresseth the same thing in another word. For, as to tempt a man, argues distrust and doubt of him; so also to prove him. And saw my works:] The particle and is by an Hebraisme put for although; q.d. If they had not seen my wondrous works, it had been less wonder that they tempted me; but now although they see them, yet they doubt of my power and goodness toward them; what a strange diffidence and distrust is this? What works God wrought, both in Egypt and in the Wilderness, to certify the people of his promise, and to gain faith for their passage into Canaan, are largely described in the books of Exodus and Numbers. Forty year's] This space of forty years, as the history itself, and the Hebrew text, and this Author also signifies at ver. 17. must be referred forwards to God's indignation, whereby he was grieved with them for the space of forty years. Yet it is true also, that this space may be referred backward (as the Septuagint have pointed it) to the people's tempting of God, and seeing his works for the space of forty years; for so long the people tempted him, and so long saw his works. For, even at the expiration of those years, when Miriam was dead, in Cadesh, they again murmured against Moses and Aaron for want of water, as their fathers had done before at Meriba and Massa, and that place also was branded by the name of Meriba, or waters of strife; where the diffidence or distrust in God was greater than any formerly, for it was extended even to Moses and Aaron, who were also infected with the sin of it. Numb. 20. And this seems to be cause of the Greek pointing and reading, which this Author followed having fallen upon it, that he might not seem to make any alteration in it, though afterward at the 17. verse he plainly shows, that he was not ignorant of the true reading as it was pointed in the Hebrew. But here is meant that other tentation, mentioned Numb. 14. upon which God swore the people should not enter into his rest, as appears by the verses here following. Hence appears their error who from hence conclude, that the holy Ghost is that God who was tempted of the Jews; therefore because here God himself speaks, and saith he was tempted of their fathers; and the Author affirms that the holy Ghost spoke these things. These men mark not, that from the first words of this place, and so from the former of the whole Psalm, wherein David himself speaks in very deed in his own person, and professeth himself one of God's people, to worship and serve God, it will by the same reason follow, that the holy Ghost is also David. For the former words wherein David is brought in speaking, are no less attributed to the holy Ghost. When the say of holy Writers are attributed to the holy Ghost, we are not thereby to understand, that the holy Ghost is that person who indeed speaks, or to whom those things really agree, which he attributes to himself that speaks, or is brought in speaking; but only that those say were uttered by the virtue and motion of the holy Ghost, and not only by the will and pleasure of men, whosoever the person be that speaketh, as Peter teacheth, 2 Pet. 1.21. For otherwise there must be one only person always brought in speaking, namely, the holy Ghost, to whom alone all say must be attributed, which he attributes to himself that speaketh; than which nothing can be further from the truth. For the Prophets for the most part use to speak in their own persons, sometime they bring in God speaking, whose Spirit the Holy Ghost is, sometime they bring in other persons. Besides from this, that the words of God are attributed to the Holy Ghost, we cannot rightly conclude that therefore the Holy Ghost is God himself: Are they not rightly attributed to him therefore, because God speaks by him? as we read that the words of Christ are attributed to the Spirit, Rev. 2.7. although the Spirit be not Christ. So Paul, Rom. 11.4. attributes the words of God to the oracle; and this Author, cap. 12.5. attributes the words of God to the Exhortation; not that either the oracle or the exhortation is God, but because God is supposed to speak by the oracle and the exhortation.  
10. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation] That is, a Generation according to Scripture which comprehends the men that live within the period of one and the same age. And that generation wherewith God was grieved, were those persons of Israel, whom he brought out of Egypt, who saw his mighty works, and received the Law at Mount Sinai. This generation provoked and tempted God, and therefore God was grieved with it. God is not passively grieved as man, but then he is said to be grieved, when he doth such actions as persons grieved use to do; especially being thereto provoked by the sins of men. And said they do always err in their hearts.] They have a kind of frenzy or madness upon them, that is not accidental to fall on them sometimes, but natural and radical, rooted and fixed in their very hearts, so that it continues upon them to hold them always. They always meditate and agitate in their mind, that which is averse from my will, and from the way whereto I labour to persuade them. They always refuse to obey me, and follow the erroneous thoughts of their own minds, and are wedded to the counsels of their own wills. And they have not known my ways.] By the ways of God we may understand both the works of God, and the Laws of God, especially his singular commands for such or such an action in particular. For the acts and works of men are in Scripture called their ways. That generation is justly said to have known neither of these ways of God; for though they had seen his works and heard his laws, and received many particular commands; yet they carried themselves so, as if they had neither seen, heard, nor received any thing. For they neither believed God's promises, though confirmed with such mighty works, nor obeyed his Laws and Commands. Of this their gross stupidity there is a notable passage, Deut. 29.2,3,4. Ye have seen (saith Moses to them) all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt, unto Pharaoh, unto his servants, and unto all his land; The great temptations which thine eyes have seen; the signs and those great miracles: yet the Lord hath not given you a heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear unto this day. They saw God's mighty works like brute beasts, not considering how great the Agent was, and of how great power; how worthy he was to have all credit given to his promises, and all obedience to his commands. Some such like accident befell the Disciples of Christ as we may read it, Mark. 6.52. They considered not the miracle of the loaves, for their heart was hardened.  
11. Sol swore in my wrath.] God seldom swears, for the Scripture doth not bring him in swearing often: but it must be a matter of weight and moment that makes him to swear: And motives whereupon he swears are chief two; either in mercy, to confirm his gracious promises made to his children: or in his wrath to establish his judgement against the wicked. And the forms whereby he swears are chief two. 1 Surely, (for surely with God is a form of swearing) that is, the thing which he affirms and whereto he swears is no way uncertain or doubtful for the event, as if it might not come to pass, but shall most surely and certainly come to pass. In this form God swore to Abraham, that he would bless and multiply him; for so this Author reports it, cap. 6.14. 2. As I live; that is, let me not be accounted for the living God, if I perform not what I say. In this form God swears, that he hath no pleasure in the death of the wicked, Ezek. 33.11. And as among men there be degrees of oaths, in that some are more obligatory and binding, lest the Israelites might think that God would not fully bind himself, for their not entering into Canaan; therefore to divert that flattery of themselves, God did swear it by both these forms of oaths. For first he swore it by the first form. Surely they shall not see the land which I swore unto their fathers. Num. 14.23. And afterward he swore it by the second form. As I live, your carcases shall fall in this wilderness. Numb. 14.28. Thus God swearing in his wrath, did iterate his oath & aggravate it. They shall not enter.] In the original it is, if they shall enter. The particle if, after a verb of swearing is an Hebraisme put for not: they shall not enter. So the people swear for the rescue of Jonathan, As the Lord liveth, if one hair of his head should fall to the ground, 1 Sam. 14.45. So the Psalmist brings in God swearing, Once have I sworn by my holiness, if I lie unto David, Psal. 89.35. So Christ swears, that a sigre shall not be given to the Jews: Verily I say unto you, if a sign shall be given to this generation, Mark. 8.12. yet this use of the particle if did first arise from those forms of swearing, whereby if was properly taken, by adding some imprecation or curse, either expressly uttered, or tacitly employed. For men being moved do commonly in their anger use an abrupt speech, and many times silently suppress the imprecation or curse whereby they devote themselves, and leave it to be collected by him to whom they speak. Among many others we have David swearing with an imprecation or curse expressly added: So and more also, do God to the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to Naball by the morning light, any that pisseth against the wall, 1 Sam. 25.22. And Job in like manner, if my heart have been deceived by a woman, or if I have laid wait at my neighbour's door; Then let my wife grind unto another, and let others bow down upon her, Job 31.9. And ye have this curse suppressed in David also, Psal. 132.2,3,4,5. They that shall not enter, are that generation that had provoked, tempted and grieved God. God had sworn to the Patriarches (the forefathers of that generation) that their posterity should enter that land, this God had sworn at several times to Abraham, he had confirmed the same oath to Isaac, and reconfirmed it to Jacob. And God had determined or designed which generation of his posterity should enter; namely the fourth, for so particularly God covenanted with Abraham, Gen. 15.16. And this people now brought out of Egypt into the wilderness for to enter, was that fourth generation: yet to them now God swears again that they shall not enter. Yet notwithstanding there is no contrariety in God's oaths, neither doth this latter swearing any way cross the former. For the promise of God to Abraham and so the oath confirming it, for this entrance of his posterity, was conditional that his children should walk in the steps of the faith and obedience of Abraham; for the Covenant of God was made with Abraham and his seed; and therefore not only he in his own person, but his posterity also in their generations were bound to keep it. But this generation whereof we speak, was diffident and disobedient, for they provoked and tempted God, and thereby broke the Covenant: And the Covenant being broken on their part, or the condition not performed, God in all equity on his part is free both from his promise and the oath confirming it; and therefore as the case now stood might justly take an oath for their not entering. Now that faith and obedience was required as a condition for their entering, appears clearly by the last verse of this Chapter, where it is said, they could not enter because of unbelief. For if the cause of their not-entring were not-beleeving; than it must necessarily follow, that Belief was the condition of their entering. But as this oath proceeded from the wrath of God, touching the nonentry of this generation: so it was tempered and mingled with mercy for the next generation who were the children of this. For concerning those children this generation had provoked God, in saying they should be a prey and die in the wilderness. But God makes it a part of his oath, to the contrary, that their children should not be a prey in the wilderness, but they shall enter the land and possess it, Numb. 14.30,31. Into my rest.] The land of Canaan is called a Rest; because the Israelites were to reside and rest, after their hard servitude for many years in Egypt, after their tedious pilgrimage and travel through the vast wilderness where they wandered for the space of forty years; and after their several battles with their enemies which they were to conquer and extirpate from that land. Although there be another mystical use of the word in the Chapter following. And God calls it his Rest; because the people got it neither by their power not by their desert, but by God's mere benefit and donation to them, in performance of the promise he had sworn to their forefathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. For God by his mighty arm and power, brought them out of Egypt, carried them through the wilderness, and cast out their enemies before them, that they might possess the land; not for any righteousness in them, but for the wickedness of the Canaanites, thereby to perform his word sworn to their fathers, Deut. 9 4.5.6.  
12. Take heed brethren.] Here he gins another Exhortation, to diss wade them from Apostasy from the Christian Religion, from the which they were declining, and departing. For the desertion of God must needs be a greater sin than the tentation of him. Take heed. i. Bethink yourselves well, and have a great care, because the matter is very dangerous; for when dangers are at hand, we use to be heedful and careful. Lest there be.] Lest there be now at this time, or if it be not yet, lest it creep upon you in time to come; for Apostasy is as a serpent that will insinuate into your minds at any time; for it is easily introduced by diffidence and obstinacy. In any of you.] He means not this distributively for any one single person among them; but collectively of them all, that all might have a care of all, and each one of another. An evil heart of unbelief] An evil heart is an intractable or hard heart, that is contumacious and refractory against God and his word. And then the heart is especially evil and hard, when it is incredulous and unbelieving; q.d. a heart so evil that it will not believe. In departing from the living God] Here he limits the unbelief whereof he spoke before, designing particularly what unbelief he meant. For there is a double unbelief, one of them who never yet did believe in God; another of them who cease to believe, and turn Apostates to their former belief in departing from it, and consequently from God. Now he departs from God, who departs from Christ, and his Religion; as in the former Covenant, he that departed from the Law, departed from God himself. For as he that believes in Christ, doth not finally believe in Christ, but in God by Christ; as Christ himself declareth it, John 12.44. So on the contrary, he that departeth from Christ, departs not only finally from Christ, but from God who sent him, and ordained him to be our Lord and Saviour. And God is called the living God, in opposition to the Idols and false gods of the Gentiles, who were as destitute of all life and sense, as were their images and statues wherein they were worshipped. This Epithet is added here to God, thereby to strike so much the greater terror into them, that they might never think of departing from so great a God; Therefore he saith afterward, chapter 10. ver. 31. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. For he must needs have an infinite power, who is the true and living God. Yet positively God is called the living God, because he not only lives truly and perpetually, but also lives from himself, and is the fountain of life to others, from whom all living things have their life.  
13. But exhort one another daily,] Here he shows the ordinary way and means, whereby they may remedy this evil heart of unbelief; namely, if they mutually admonish and exhort one another; yet that must not be done seldom at distant times: but daily, that their mutual exhortations may be fervent and frequent. While it is called to day.] As long as that day lasteth, whereof mention is made in the Psalm before cited, To day if ye will hear his voice. Whereupon we noted above, that in the literal sense; it signified, that festival and solemn day, wherein the people resorted to the Temple, to perform the worship and service of God, where also the Law of God used to be read unto them. To this festival day in the mystical sense, doth answer our Christian festival or time of Grace, wherein we are invited to lay hold of eternal salvation, whereto by the Gospel the passage is opened unto us. While this day or time of the Gospel doth last, we must exhort one another from unbelief in departing from God. Lest any of you be hardened,] A man is then hardened, when he hath a will, not to believe the promises of God, or not to obey his precepts. Through the deceitfulness of sin.] He shows the cause of this hardness, to be sin; and the manner how sin hardeneth, by deceiving us. For therefore we are refractory to the voice or word of God, because we are deceived bysinne; for we are entrapped by the baits and snares of sin, by preferring the whispers of sin before the voice of God; for so the Serpent beguiled Eve, and so doth sin deceive us still. Yea, even from the word of God, and from his Commandment: whence we should take occasion to obey him, thence will sin take occasion to deceive us. Rom. 7.11.  
14. For we are made partakers of Christ.] He seems here to answer a  objection. For these Hebrews might think that these admonitions concerned not them, that they need to take heed of unbelief, and consequently of God's wrath, seeing they did already believe in Christ, and so were estated in Christian happiness. To this he answers, by granting that they were already made partakers of Christ; that is, of that happiness which Christ bestows upon the faith full, yet upon that condition, that they persevere in the faith of Christ to their lives end. For this partaking of Christ or Christian happiness, as it refers to this life, consisteth in a full right or title to happiness: but this right or title is presently lost, when we recede or departed from the faith of Christ. If we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end.] These words are correspondent and respective to the sixth verse of this chapter. For to be the houses of God and Christ, what is it else, then to be partaker of Christ? This at least every man may easily perceive, that these two are so connexed, that they cannot be severed one from another. And in like manner, to hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end, is the same (if we respect the Author's mind) with, To hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. The original for confidence, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which properly signifies subsistence; and our spiritual subsistence stands in this, that we believe in Christ and obey his precepts. For as long as we continue in the state of faith and obedience unto Christ; so long we have our spiritual subsistence. Yet it is well translated confidence, figuratively from the effect of it; because confidence is a subsistence of things not subsisting: for it doth as it were represent unto our view, or set before our eyes, a thing not yet seen, or not yet existing, by making us as certain of it, as if we saw it before our eyes, or did already really enjoy it. Hence afterward the Author notifies confidence or faith to be the substance or subsistence of things hoped for. Heb. 11.1.  
15. While it is said to day,] By these words cited out of the Psalm, he would show, that the matter is so, as he said in the former verses; namely, that they who persist in the faith to the end, they only are partakers of Christ and his happiness: but they who depart from the faith, shall undoubtedly perish, what ever were their happiness and condition heretofore: Harden not your hearts,] against the voice of God, who now speaks to us by Christ. As in the provocation.] Hence it plainly appears to every man, who they are that hearing the voice of God, harden their hearts against it, and provoke; namely they that unbelieve the Gospel, and departed from the Covenant of it. For as the Author addeth in the next verse.  
16. For some when they had heard did provoke.] Let us now see who hearing the voice of God, did provoke him, and who did not; and let us compare them one with another: For than we shall easily discover, That they hardened their hearts against the voice of God, and provoked him, who would not finally believe him to the end: and that they did not provoke him, who were constant in their faith, as were Caleb and Joshua. Who came out of Egypt by Moses] He shows that both these kinds who provoked, and who provoked not, came out of Egypt by Moses. i. Who followed Moses, and by his leading forsook Egypt, and for some time adhered to him: Whereby it appears, that they who have followed Christ their captain, and for some time have adhered to him, do harden their hearts against the voice of God and provoke him if they forsake Christ their Captain, and will return back to the spiritual Egypt of the world. But contrarily, they who having followed him, do adhere to him unto the end, as Joshua and Caleb did, who never forsook Moses, they shall enjoy that happiness and eternal rest.  
17. But with whom was he grieved forty years.] Now the Author from the remaining words of the Psalm doth prove the very same thing; namely, That they who have followed Christ their Captain, must take heed of offending and sinning against God; or as he delivered it before, of being hardened through the deceitfulness of sin, for thereby God will be so grieved and provoked against them, that thereupon they must needs perish. Was it not with them that had sinned,] i. God was grieved and provoked only with them that unbelieved, provoked and tempted him. Whose carcases fell in the wilderness] All that came out of Egypt, excepting only Joshua and Caleb, died in the wilderness, and heir carcases were not carried into the land of Canaan. From which words of the Psalm he in like manner concludes, that God will be grieved and provoked with Christians, sinning against him and transgressing his precepts. For, that he was offended with those offenders for the space of forty years, it hence appears, in that their carcases fell in the Desert, i. every one of them to a man from twenty years old and upward perished in the Desert, and entered not into the promised land. For this wrath of God continued upon them forty years, till they were all consumed either by natural death, or by divers plagues. See Numb. 14.29,33,34.  
18. And to whom swore he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not.] As the former words show, that those Christians shall perish, who are indulgent to sin, and will not obey God's precepts: So these in like manner make it evident, that they also shall perish, and never enjoy that heavenly and eternal rest, who incline to diffidence, and will not believe God's promises, or after they have believed, recede from their faith. For what induced God to bind himself with an oath, that the Israelites should not enter into his rest, but their unbelief, in despairing they should never attain the Land that had been promised them? See Numb. 14. from the beginning of it.  
19 So we see, that they could not enter in, because of unbelief.] From the former passages he infers this conclusion, That the Israelites though they came forth out of Egypt, yet they could not enter into the promised Land, by reason of their unbelief. From whence in like manner we must conclude, That Christians also having followed Christ their Captain, shall not enter that heavenly rest, unless by the example of Joshua and Caleb, they finally remain faithful to their Captain, and fall not into unbelief. From hence it appears, that the Author would in a manner say, what just cause he had to admonish them, that they should take diligent heed, lest in any of them, though now they did believe, or seemed to themselves to believe, there should be found an evil and unbelieving heart, that was thinking to departed from the living God. Which exhortation of his, thus drawn and demonstrated from the former passages, he more fully repeats and presseth in the entrance to the next Chapter.   

The Contents of this third Chapter are three.  

1. A Doctrine. Christ is no way inferior, but much superior to Moses. 

Reason 1. Because Moses was only a Prophet, and not a high Priest, but Christ was both, ver. 1.  
2. Moses was in God's house but as a servant, but Christ as a Son and heir, ver. 5, 6.    
2. An Exhortation. We must not harden our hearts against the voice of God in the Gospel. 

Reason 1. Because thereby we provoke and tempt God, as the Israelites did in the wilderness.  
2. Because thereby we shall never enter into eternal rest, ver. 11.    
3. An Exhortation. We must not apostate and departed from the faith of the Gospel. 

Reason 1. Because we are no longer partakers of Christ and his happiness, than we persevere in the faith.  
2. Because thereby we provoke and grieve God.  
3. Because thereby we are barred from entering into eternal rest, v. 19       

CHAPTER IU.  

1. LEt us therefore fear] Because we have already seen, that our Ancestors by reason of their unbelief were not admitted into the rest of God; and that their example is proposed unto us, as a caution to make us the more wary; therefore let us fear, that we run not upon the same rock. Lest a promise being left us] So our last Translation reads it; as if God had also left a promise unto us; hereto induced as it seems, by the following words of the Author, where he infers and concludes, That there remaineth a rest to the people of God, ver. 9 But we cannot approve of this reading, neither doth the Author use altogether the same word in both places; wherefore we conceive this the true reading, Lest the promise being relinquished] i. lest we neglect, relinquish, leave, or forsake the promise. For, a promise is then relinquished and left, when it is no longer credited and believed, as our forefathers did, whose example (as we have seen) was formerly proposed unto us. They for a time did embrace and accept of God's promise, for upon that ground and hope they went out of Egypt, but afterward in the wilderness they did relinquish and leave the promise, by their unbelieved it. Of entering into his rest] He expresseth the matter of the promise which we must not leave; God hath promised us an entrance into his eternal rest, we must not desert and leave it, by unbelieving it. Any of you should seem to come short of it] This is the effect and fruit of our deserting or leaving the promise, that thereby we shall come short of the rest promised. To come short, signifies either to remain behind, or to return back; for in this latter sense, the word is used afterward, chap. 12.25. Both these senses have an elegant agreement with the point. For as the Israelites, after they no longer believed God's promise for the giving of them possession in the land of Canaan, would go no further forward in following of Moses, but would rather choose themselves new Captains for their return back into Egypt. So they who will no longer give faith to the promises of Christ, will follow his standard no further, but endeavour a return into the Egypt of the world, from whence by faith they had once departed. Yet he saith not simply, lest any of you come short, but lest any should seem to come short; This latter of seeming is fare less than the other. For we must be so fare from this sin of stopping or returning from the Gospel, that we must give no man any just occasion to think it of us. For such an opinion of another, carries somewhat of truth with it; and if a man do not yet plainly revolt, yet at least some inclination or likelihoods of it, are wont to be in him. And this opinion a man may raise in others of himself, if by little and little he remit and abate of his practice and fervency in godliness, not serving Christ with such alacrity as is fit.  
2. For unto us it was preached as well as to them] It was preached, i. the promise of entering into God's rest, the message of which promise was sent unto us also. Herein the Author meets with an objection. For some man might say, The promise of entering into God's rest, was it not made to our forefathers of old, and long since performed unto them, in giving them possession in the land of Canaan? What doth this promise pertain to us? The Author answers; That this promise doth pertain to us, and the joyful message of entering into God's rest, was no less sent to us, then of old to our forefathers. But what kind of rest is promised to us, he expresseth afterward. But the word preached did not profit them.] In the original, it is the word of hearing by an Hebraisme, for the word heard. And by the words is figuratively meant the promise of entering into God's rest: for every promise of God is his word. Here he tacitly shows the cause, why he admonished them to believe the promise of God by Christ, because otherwise it would profit us no more, then anciently it did the Israelites, whom it so fare profited as to bring them out of Egypt; but it profited them not to bring them into Canaan, which was the land promised. Not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.] The reason why the hearing of the word of promise did not profit them, was because it was not mixed with faith in them; it was not throughly engrafted into their m●…es, nor turned into a sap or blood to do them good. For this work is done by faith, by a firm assent yielded to the word and promise of God, to assure the promise, that the thing promised might take effect.  
3. For we which have believed do enter interest.] He adds a sub-reason of his former assertion. Because they only among us who believe, enter into rest; and therefore they who believe not, do not enter into rest; neither can enter. For the particle only or some other such exclusive must be here understood; because faith is the condition of entering God's rest, which restrains the entrance only to the faithful. As he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my ●est] By this oath of God, Psal. 95. ult. as we noted in the former Chapter, it plainly appears, that they which believe not shall not enter into God's rest; for want of saith is the cause, why men are strucken with the thunder of God's wrath, and debarred from the promised entrance into his rest. As the promise of entrance proceeds from God's mercy, and is confirmed by his oath to the believer: so on the contrary, the menance of non-entrance proceeds from God's wrath, and is consi med by his oath to the unbeliever. Although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.] Here the Author teacheth, what kind of rest it is, that from those words of the Psalm must be understood in a mystical sense. And this he doth therefore, that thereby we may understand the truth of those things which he had asserted in the first and second verses of this Chapter, concerning a rest of God promised to us, and a passage thereto made open to us. Which the Hebrews could neither understand, nor would admit to be true, while their minds ran upon an earthly rest in Canaan, first promised and afterward performed to their forefathers; unless it be explicated what the rest is that is promised to us, and so their minds be drawn from an earthly to an heavenly rest. First, therefore the Author expresseth somewhat of that rest, and saith it is a Rest from works; from works that were finished, and finished long since, even from the foundation of the world. Which Rest is proper to God himself, as it is intimated in the words of the Psalm, wherein God calls this rest, his rest. For the Rest proper to God himself, wherewith he himself rested, is by a far better title called the Rest of God, then that whereof God was only the donor, such as was the Rest of the Israelites in the land of Canaan. Not that this rest proper to God is numerically the very same, with that future rest which God hath promised us; but because generically it is a Rest of the same kind. For as Gods Rest was a perpetual Rest in resting from his works for ever: so shall our Rest be perpetual in resting for ever from all our labours and troubles, wherein we shall have an eternal festival.  
4. For he spoke in a certain place of the seventh day.] Here he shows the reason why he understands that rest of God, to be his Rest from his works which he had finished from the beginning of the world; namely because the Scripture or the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture, speaketh in that manner of the seventh day as Gen. 2 2. and Exod 20.11. And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.] In these words we have showed us the Rest of God, neither in the whole Scripture to which only we must look here, is mentioned or named any other rest of God, whereof the people should come to be partakers.  
5. And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.] q d. Wherefore seeing here again in these words of the Psalm, there is mention made of God's rest, whereof God's people shall partake, therefore with good reason in a genuine and mystical sense do we understand it, of that only rest of God specified in the Scripture. But that this rest also belongs unto the people, the very festival and rest of the Sabbath commanded to God's people, is a clear argument, wherein there is not only a commemoration of God's rest past; but also a Representation of the Rest of God's people to come. Whereof we shall speak further at the ninth verse following.  
6. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein.] After he had showed, that by the words of the Psalm in a mystical sense, we must understand the proper rest of God, or that wherein God himself rested; now he proceeds on, to show that that rest of God mentioned in the words of the Psalm, doth appertain unto us, and that a passage thereto is opened unto us. And first, he lays certain grounds for this doctrine, and then removes the obstacles that may seem against it. The first ground is, That some must enter into the rest. 2. That they to whom it was first proposed and promised, entered not into it. For from these two grounds it will follow, That some other after that time must enter it. But because it might be objected, That though those Israelites who came our of Egypt, entered not that rest, yet their children entered it by the conduct of Josuah their Captain. And therefore it cannot be concluded, that Christians are they that shall enter it. This Objection or rather Exception he dissolves by showing, that in those words of the Psalm whereof he yet treats, for some several ages after the Israelites were possessed of the land of Canaan, there is another time appointed, wherein an entrance into God's Rest was to be opened; whence it follows that by the conduct of Joshuah, God's people have not yet attained the true rest. Whereupon the Author at length concludes, That as yet there remains a Sabbatisme or rest for the people of God. This being done, he repeats the exhortation begun at the beginning of this Chapter, and so returns to the point from whence he had digressed. This is the sum of all that is said unto the end of the 11 verse. Now let us consider the several words in order. That some must enter therein.] Seeing it is the will and good pleasure of God that a passage should be open to that rest, and that some should enter into it; for this the Author supposeth as a thing well known and no way doubtful. For that those first people that fell in the wilderness were by their own fault excluded from it, this nothing derogates from God's promise, whereby he assured this rest by oath upon the posterity of Abraham, to be fulfilled in other persons better and more worthy than those first that failed of it. But under the cover of carnal promises and an earthly rest, there lay hidden spiritual promises of an heavenly rest pertaining to the spiritual seed of Abraham. And the entrance of the Israelites into that earthly rest obtained by the conduct of Josuah, what is it else but a type and shadow of Christians future entrance into a heavenly rest by the conduct of Jesus Christ? And they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief.] First preached in the original; they that had the first good message for the entering of it. This is the other point that he confirms, and by occasion whereof the Holy Ghost leaves us the following admonition, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For because those first of our fathers to whom God had sent the message by Moses for the entering of that rest, deserved by their diffidence and disobedience to be excluded from it; therefore the Holy Ghost hath in these words appointed to their posterity another day or time wherein they may and must ente into God's rest; and withal exhorts them to it, lest following the like disobedience to their forefathers, they incur a like issue of their impiety.  
7. Again he limiteth a certain day,] This is very good cause, why another day should be limited for entrance into God's rest, if some must enter it at all; and they who were first invited, entered it not. For if either none were to enter it, or some had already entered it, than there were no necessity why another day or time should be limited or appointed for entering it. But in these words of the Psalm, that the holy Ghost in a mystical sense shows, there is such a day limited, which pertains to the times of the Messiah, these following arguments declare. 1. Because by these words the people are admonished, to shun the example of their forefathers, that came out of Egypt, that they may not be like them in their sin. But their forefather's sin was chief this, that they would not rest in God's promises for their entrance into his rest. Therefore if we must truly be either like or unlike to them, we also must have God's promise for our entrance into God's rest, and therefore this day here is limited unto us for our entrance into it. 2. Because in this Psalm is proposed to the people, the judgement or punishment of God whereinto their father's fell, that they being terrified thereby, and fearing the like, would not imitake their fathers: But that punishment was a rejection from entrance into God's rest; which penalty no man can incur but he, that hath had first a power to enter it, and was thereto invited. Seeing therefore that in these words of the holy Ghost, the people are admonished to avoid that punishment, it is consonant to reason, that a day or time of entrance should be limited to them, that we at this day might do what anciently our fathers would not. But that this Psalm pertaineth also to the times of the Messiah, this is an argument, That it clearly appears, there is a respect therein to some solemn and seltivall time, wherein the people were accustomed to assemble in the temple of God, and employ themselves about his worship; for this is plain from the words of the people cohorting one another to praise God, and from the word to day, which the holy Ghost useth. All which seem not to note out some common day, but some notable day, deputed for the worship and service of God, especially for the hearing of his word or voice, such as were the festival and solemn days. But what day is more solemn, what time more festival, what greater celebrity and concourse of people, then that which in the times of the Messiah was to be, and was of all expected? From these considerations therefore it may well be collected, That by those words of the holy Ghost, in a mystical sense, the people are warned to open a ready ear to the voice of God, who in his due time will call and invite them to his true and heavenly rest by the Messiah; which their forefathers would not do, when they heard God's voice promising them the earthly rest by Moses. In the literal sense, this Psalm pertained to the Israelites, who lived before the times of Christ, wherein they were admonished, that upon the day when they were to hear the Law of God, they should be obedient unto him, lest following the disobedience of their forefathers, they should be debarred from God's rest, or otherwise punished and plagued of God. But who sees not, that this sense, wherein the sin and punishment are made of one kind? doth better square with it, then that wherein both of them are made of a divers kind? Aster the Author had showed, that God had limited another day for entrance into his rest, lest any man should take this day, to be that day wherein God granted the children of those father's a power to enter into the land of Canaan by the conduct of Joshua, therefore the Author inserts these words, Saying in David, To day after so long a time. He saith the holy Ghost limiteth this day in David. i. speaking it by David; After so long a time, namely, wherein God had debarred those fathers from entrance, by reason of their unbelief, and admitted their children to it. To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts,] Whence it appears, that here is not appointed a day for entrance into the land of Canaan, neither is that entrance here aimed at. For David lived many ages after the entrance of the Israelites into the land of Canaan; yea, in the time of his reign the Israelites did most entirely possess it, and flourish in it. Seeing therefore the day of entering into God's rest, cannot be understood of the earthly rest, which the people obtained by Joshua; therefore there must needs be another rest besides that earthly rest; which yet remains to the people of God, and a rest of far greater perfection.  
8. For if jesus had given them rest, than would he not afterward have spoken of another day.] Joshua is called Jesus by the 70. Interpreters, and by other Greek writers; for both those names signify the same thing, namely, Saviour, and they differ only in dialect. Had given them rest] Joshua did give them possession in the land of Cannon, and thereby rest; yet not that perfect rest, that was yet remaining for God's people. He would not afterward have spoken of another day.] If Joshua had given them a perfect rest, beyond which there was none further to be expected; then certainly the holy Ghost, after the people once entered and seated there, would not have spoken of another day, wherein the people must enter into his rest.  
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.] From the former passages he concludes, that there remains for the people of God another rest, after the rest obtained in Canaan: for the happy state of God's people doth not stay at that earthly rest. This rest he calls not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as by the word he used hitherto: but he calls it a Sabbatisme; thereby to make us understand, that he had respect to the seventh day's rest, wherein God himself rested, and commanded the Israelites to rest in memory of it, and was therefore distinguished by the name of Sabbath, which signifies rest also; and also further to the teach us, what kind of rest remaineth to the people of God, namely, a sabbatical rest. i. a rest like to that wherewith God himself rested, whereof the festival Sabbath of the seventh day is a most slender shadow: for therein the Israelites rested from their cares and labours, after and during their earthly rest given them by Joshua.  
10. For he that is entered into his rest] By these words he proves, that there remains to us a Sabbatisme. i. such a rest as is denominated from the seventh day's rest, in Commemoration and Representation whereof, the perpetual observation of the weekly rest was commanded: But this rest consisteth in a cessation from all works, as God also ceased from his works. This he proves from this reason, because we must enter into God's rest, as appears by the words of the Psalm. But to enter into God's rest, what is it else, but to rest after the same manner that God rested, and kept the Sabbath? He also hath rested from his own works, as God did from his.] Hath rested is an Hebraisme, for doth rest; for the Hebrews many times put the tense praeter for the future. When Joshua had given the Israelites an earthly rest in the land of Canaan, they thereby had quiet possession and rested from their enemies; and they had a Sabbath also to rest from their labours: but their Sabbath was not continual and daily, but weekly only upon the seventh day of it; for the first six days of the week they rested not, but followed their labours: so their Sabbatisme was not a total and final rest from labours, but their labours were to return upon them after one day's rest in a week. But the Sabbatisme that is after the image of God's rest, is a total and final rest from all labours, never to be wearied with labour or work any more, but is an eternal festival that shall never expire. For these words may be construed with the word remaineth in the former verse, thus. Therefore I affirm, that there yet remaineth a rest to the people of God: because the Israelites did not so rest from their works, as never to be exercised with more labours afterward. But he that hath entered into God's rest, whereinto (as we have already seen) the people of God must enter, he hath so rested from works as God rested from his. For as God in making the world, dispatched all his works in the space of six days, never to make any more works, so he that hath entered into God's rest, or the like rest with God, he also hath dispatched and finished all his works, his labours, pains, cares, and troubles, and whatsoever is wearisome to man in this life, and he enjoys an eternal rest and quiet, joined with eternal happiness.  
11. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest,] Having shown that there remains a rest for the people of God, and that in the best and highest degree; he now repeats his admonition at the beginning of the chapter, exhorting them to strive with all labour, that they may enter that rest. The original word for labour signifies also haste, to work with haste and dispatch. For we must make haste in this our spiritual journey which leads and determines in an eternal rest; that is, we must be diligent and quick in tracing the path of faith ●nd holiness, not lazy and slow. Because we must always have an ardent and earnest affection after so great a blessing, and therefore must use all diligence to hasten ourselves onward and toward it, as they do that are in a journey toward their own country, or toward a place most desirable and acceptable to them. Into that rest] Not into any earthly rest, but into that heavenly rest proper to God himself, and by his infinite grace communicable to his people, and is yet remaining to them. Lest any man fall] We must therefore diligently labour after that rest, lest we fall into the like destruction with those fathers, who perished and were destroyed in the wilderness; for fall here is put for perish, lest any perish as they did. After the same example of unbelief] If we fall after their example into the same sin, we shall also fall after their example into the same judgement, and perish as they did. We have seen their unbelief, and we know what a world of miseries it brought upon them: Let both these be examples unto us, and let us therefore endeavour to shun the rock that is showed us. The Original word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies both unbelief and disobedience, and this latter more usually; for those two sins are so near allied in nature, that one word will serve to signify them both: for unbelief and disobedience are either wholly the same, or mutually consequent one to another.  
12. For the word of God is quick] By this word of God here, many think Christ is meant; but that cannot be. 1. Because Christ is called the Word of God only by John, as is observed by divers. 2. Because this word here is said to be powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword; both which qualities agree rather to things then to persons. Others by the word of God here, understand the Scripture; which cannot be neither, because then there could be no genuine connexion, nor congruity of reasoning in these words from the former; For how should this be coherent? Let us labour to enter into that rest, lest following the example of our father's unbelief, we should follow them also in their destruction; because the Scripture is quick and powerful. By the word of God therefore is meant the Decree of his Judgement, or the Menace of God, whereby he threatens and ordains unbelieving and disobedient persons to destruction and punishment; Of which kind is that very Oath of God, whereby he swore to exclude those fathers, and all such like as they from entering into his rest. For by this sense, there is an elegant coherence between this verse and the former. Therefore let us labour to enter into God's rest, and let us take heed of falling into the disobedience of those fathers; because the word of God, and his oath whereby he debars disobedient men from his rest, and devotes them to destruction, is quick and powerful. This exposition is easily confirmed, from divers other passages of Scripture, wherein the Decrees of God, whereby he wils and commands something to be done, are called by like terms of his word, and have the like attribute of being lively or quick, and the like resemblance to a sharp and two edged sword, and divers the like effects. See Psal. 105.18,19. and Psal. 107.20. and Psal. 147.15. and Isaiah 40.8. and Isaiah 55.11. which last place Peter applies to the word of the Gospel, because therein also is contained the decree of God for the saving and condemning of men, 1 Pet. 1.23,25. See also Isaiah 66.2,5. and Jerem. 23.29. and Joel 2.11. Now this word or Decree of God is called quick or lively, because it dies not, neither is exolete or frustrated with any tract of time or age. And it is called effectual or powerful, because it is not only firm and stable, in regard God never revokes it, or willingly changeth it, or suffers it to fall, as Princes often suffer their words or decrees to fall, either by oblivion, negligence, or inconstancy: but also, because it is of full power and force to execute and effect all the will of God therein contained. Hence it is compared to rain and snow. For as the rain cometh down and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sour, and bread to the eater: So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth, it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it, Isaiah 55.10,11. And sharper than any two edged sword] It strikes and wounds more fearfully and deadly than any sword how sharp soever. And in other places of Scripture, the Decree of Christ against ungodly and disobedient persons is compared to a two edged sword going out of his mouth, or at least is signified by such a sword. For God and Christ do destroy all their enemies by their word going out of their mouth, i. by their powerful and effectual command. Piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow] The sharpness of this sword hath first this effect, that it pierceth deeply, and the effect of that piercing is to divide and cut asunder soul and spirit, joints and marrow. By which words it appears, that God's Decree and command is fare more sharp and piercing then any sword; because it doth not only pierce and cut the body of man, but also his soul and spirit; yea, it pierceth the body in such manner, that it cuts not only the skin and flesh, but also all the joints and bands of the member, yea the very bones themselves, and consequently the marrow contained in the bones. So that this sword pierceth into the most secret and inmost parts of man, even the soul, spirit, and marrow. In this sense is signified, that this sword doth not only cut the outward parts that lie open to the eye, but also the inward parts that are hidden from it, i. The force of God's decree and sentence reacheth not only to those crimes which are notorious and public, as the decrees and Judgements of Magistrates do, who therefore have the power of the sword, and therewith do execution upon malefactors: but his decree also takes vengeence on those sins, which are most secret and hidden, bordering as it were upon the confines of the soul and spirit, and lie closed up as it were between the joints or within the marrow, than which places nothing can be devised more secret. Now the soul is the inferior faculty in us, containing the affections or passions, as lust, and wrath, respecting only those things which please and content the body. Hence they which follow this faculty and suffer themselves to be governed by it, are called in Scripture animal men. But the spirit is the superior faculty, which discerns between things lawful and unlawful; drawing us to things lawful and honest, and driving us from the contrary, whereby we understand, know God, and his will and our final happiness. Although the spirit may also be taken for that part of us, which doth first vivify the body and remains after death. And the soul may be taken for life itself, or for that faculty which flows from the spirit over the whole body. And is a discerner of the thoughts and intentions of the heart.] This he addeth, that what he said concerning the word of God, might be further pressed and the better understood. God doth both take knowledge of the thoughts and intents of men's hearts, and also decrees them to be punished if they deserve it. This he therefore saith, lest any man should think, that he may lie hid from God's decree and escape the force and sharpness of his sentence; if he only nourish his unbelief in his heart, and reserve it in his secret thoughts. So that no thought of ours though never so secret, no wavering in our faith can be concealed from God.  
13. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight.] Now he speaks that more generally, whereof before he spoke but in particular. God doth not only discern and know the thoughts of our hearts; but there is nothing at all in the world that can escape the sight of his eye; for by creatures he understands all things in general. But all things are naked and opened unto the eyes.] He illustrates what he said before by the contrary to it. There is nothing so covered or hidden but the sight of his eyes can discover it. And eyes are attributed to him, because he clearly seethe all things be they never so remote, and so leaveth nothing unpunished. Opened 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This word is diversely expounded; some thus; the whole face from head to shoulders is discovered and exposed to the eyes of all. Others thus; The skin is drawn over the shoulders from head to tail. Others; the creature is flayed and hanged up by the heels, having the belly and bowels opened to the chine of the back, that all lies open both without and within. But all these come to one sense; namely that there is nothing so covered and hidden, which lies not open to God's word or decree; for the sight of his eyes doth not only fall upon the outward covering of things, but pierceth inwardly all over their substance. Of him with whom we have to do.] In the original of that whereof we speak, i. of that word whereof we speak. Hereby he shows, that he understands not any word of God in general, but some certain word; namely that quick and powerful word, whereof we have hitherto spoken; and which is to be understood in all this matter of piercing, dividing and discovering.  
14. Seeing then that we have a great high Priest.] This is the second part of this Chapter, wherein he returns to treat of the dignity of Christ's Priesthood, from whence he had digressed to fall upon the exhortation hitherto explicated. Now therefore he resumes his former argument, and from thence draws another admonition for constancy in the Christian Religion. The Priestly office of Christ, that here we may speak of it a little more fully, consisteth in this, That Christ expiateth all our sins before God, and administereth all matters concerning Religion, as the chief Precedent over holy things. Therefore we say, Christ hath expiated all our sins, because it was the office of the high Priest to expiate the sins, not of one single person only, but of the whole people. But for the manner, how Christ expiates our sins, there is a great difference between him and the legal high Priest; so that in this respect Christ is like God, yea in a manner supplies the part of God, and not of the Priest: For Christ remaining in heaven, doth so expiate our sins, that by power granted him, he removes all punishment from us, and abolishes all things that may involve us in any punishment. Whence it appears that Priestly office differs not really from his regal office, but rationally only. For Christ doth not now really execute any thing about God, or perform any condition, upon the deed whereof there follows by the decree of God a purgation of our sins; as anciently the legal Priest was wont to do: For he entered into the tabernacle of God with blood, and there appearing before God, did sprinkle the blood after a form prescribed him, and offered it unto God; which being done, there followed the expiation of sin upon it. For although Christ shed his blood upon earth, and by afflictions prepared himself for the execution of his office, to the end, that by a sense of our infirmities, he might be the more readily affected toward us; all which conditions, were pre-required of God and were first to be performed by Christ: yet being now in heaven, and fullier administering his Priestly office, in procuring the expiation of our sins, he really performs no further conditions. For in that, after his bloodshed upon the cross, he entered into the heavenly tabernacle, and by this means offered himself to God; this was not any true condition upon which God decreed the remission of our sins; seeing that entrance and oblation of himself was a great benefit of God bestowed upon him: but it was only a means whereby Christ obtained supreme power both in heaven and earth, from whence followed the expiation of our sins, and which being granted unto Christ, God did openly testify, that he would not punish any of their sins who did belong to Christ. This indeed is true, that this entrance of Christ into heaven and his appearance before God, have a resemblance or likeness with the entrance of the legal Priest into the Sanctuary, and his appearance before God, as God anciently required it. Which resemblance or likeness is the cause, why Christ is compared with the legal Priest, and carrieth his name, as we shall declare a little afterward. Neither must we think, that Christ now inhabiting heaven, doth (to speak properly) intercede or pray for us; for that were repugnant to his supreme dominion and power over all things. Wherefore his Priestly office lies in this, that having power given him of God, he takes away the punishment of our sins, and by all means procures our salvation. And therefore this Priestly office of Christ is really the same with his regal office, as we said before. Hence Christ as a Priest is said to save us perfectly, or rather for ever, cap. 7.25. he is also said as a Priest to secure us being tempted, cap. 2. ult. and in this chapter, v. 16. Both which actions are regal. Hence it is that other holy Writers make no express mention of Christ's Priesthood: but this Author, chap. 3. v. 1. included the regal office of Christ in his Priestly; and chap. 5. v. 5. he interprets that testimony of Scripture to be meant of his Priestly office, which treats of his regal. Christ therefore is called a high Priest, not that this office is really divers from his regal, but because of divers resemblances which Christ hath with the legal high Priest, and of divers properties and circumstances in his regal office; upon which that resemblance is grounded, and which that Metaphorical appellation of high Priest doth better insinuate into our minds, than the proper appellation. The resemblance lies chief in this, That Christ having first shed his blood, entered into heaven to expiate our sins, or to take away the punishments which by our sins we had deserved, and appeared before God: as the legal high Priest, having shed the blood of the sacrifice, was wont to enter the Tabernacle, and there appear before God, to expiate sins, by taking away the guilt and penalty of them. But because the high Priest performed this by bringing the blood of the slain sacrifice into the sight of God, and offering it unto him with certain rites, and so interceding for finners with God, from whom the forgiveness of sins proceeded. Therefore also it is said of Christ, who was himself slain like a sacrifice, and had shed his own blood, that entering into the heavenly Tabernacle, he offered himself to God, and appearing in his sight intercedeth for us. Not that he doth properly intercede, but that as we said he is like to the high Priest offering and interceding; especially because he forgives sins, not of his own authority, but by power received from God; whereby he is not unfitly compared with him who obtained forgiveness of sins from God by his intercession. From hence in some measure may be gathered those properties and circumstances of Christ's regal office, which his appellation of high Priest doth better represent unto our minds, than his name of King, though this name be proper to him, and the other Metaphorical. His Kingly name shows not that he saves sinners; but his Priestly doth. That shows not that he is a man (for God both is, and is called our King) but this doth; for in the beginning of the fifth Chapter, the Author shows, That every high Priest is taken from among men, and is ordained for men. That shows not that he received his authority and power from another; but this doth, chap. 5. 4. That shows not that he is touched with a sense of our miseries; this doth. That shows not that he shed his blood to expiate our sins, but this doth; for a Priest must offer sacrifices for sins, which cannot be offered without shedding of blood: but Christ shed no blood besides his own. That shows not, that he shall come forth from heaven; but this doth. Hence therefore it is that the Holy Ghost gives Christ the name of High Priest. A great high Priest.] Christ is called a great high Priest, not only to distinguish him from the ordinary and inferior Priests, but also from the chief high Priest under the Law, who compared to Christ is very little; yea but a small and slender shadow of Christ. For he must needs be a great high Priest indeed, who is immortal; who expiates all sins even the most heinous: who hath power in himself, to take away all punishments of sin, among which eternal death is one; who hath right and power to give eternal life, to secure men in all their afflictions, and to comprise all with the Author in a few words, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, chap. 8. 1. which thing he intimates also here when he adds in the first place; That is passed into the heavens.] Therefore among other respects, he is great, because he hath passed through all the heavens. By heavens are understood all those regions of heaven, which are interposed between God and us; namely: 1. The whole region of the air, which in the Scripture is called the heaven. 2. The heavens wherein are the Sun, the Moon, and the rest of the Starts or lights of heaven; above all which Christ is now exalted, Eph. 3.10. and Heb. 7.26. 3. After all these, is that heaven which is the habitacle of immortality, wherein God resides, and whereinto Christ our high Priest hath entered. jesus.] Here he names this great high Priest, and shows who he is; although in this be tacitly contained, that which afterward he utters expressly, namely, that he is touched with a feeling of our infirmities. For when he called him Jesus, he called him also that man, whose sufferings and death were evident. But because he intended to set first clearly before our eyes his transcendent excellency; therefore that it might better appear how great an high Priest he is, he adds in the second place; The Son of God.] He calls him not a Son of God, but prefixeth the specifique article, calling him the Son, to show that he is no ordinary Son of God in a vulgar sense, but that singular and eminent Son of God, even he of whom he spoke in the first chap. whom God appointed heir of all things, who is become far more excellent than the Angels. For so it ought to be, that the singular and only Son of God, should obtain God's greatest love, should be in highest dignity, and have right and dominion over all his father's goods. Even him we have for our high Priest. Whence it appears, that Christ can effect all things with his Father, by reason of the great love and authority which he possesseth. Wherefore as the Author addeth; Let us hold fast our confession.] Here he infers his admonition; that seeing we have so great an high Priest of our Confession; therefore let us hold our confession fast: i. let us not only embrace the Christian Religion in our hearts but constantly profess it with our mouths.  
15. For we have not an high Priest,] He clears an objection. Some man will say, What can this great high Priest help me when I suffer misery for the confession of my faith, who the greater he is, and the more remote from me, the less is he touched with any care of us? To this he answers by saying, that he is not such a high Priest, Which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities,] Our infirmities here signify our sufferings and troubles both of mind and body, wherewith we are afflicted for the profession of our Religion. These are called our infirmities, because our natural infirmity gives way unto them; or else from the effect, because they make both our mind and body infirm. For our mind doth languish with grief as with a disease. And the Author useth this word the rather, because the legal high Priest was to have a feeling of the infirmities of God's people; although those infirmities were humane lapses & errors. Now to have a feeling of our infirmities is to be touched with an affection and sense of them. i. with mercy which is a sense of another man's misery. That cannot be touched, doth not simply here signify the faculty of compassion; for any Angel may have the faculty of compassion: but to have both the power and readiness and will to compassionate, as we explicated the same word, chap. 2. at the last verse. And it is as much as if he had said, we have not an hard hearted high Priest, who is not easily moved with the evils and troubles of another; as commonly such are who themselves never had experience of evils and troubles. But was in all things tempted like as we are.] He illustrates what kind of high Priest we have by the contrary, or rather by the cause of a contrary effect. Because he was tempted in all things, therefore he can and will be moved with all our infirmities. By temptations are many times signified afflictions; because a man is tempted by afflictions; for they make a trial of the strength and patience that is in him. See Jam. 1.2,3. In all points. He was afflicted with all kinds of evils; for he had the trial of calumnies, reproaches and bonds, of divers anguishes in soul, and tortures of the body; yea of a fearful and shameful death. Like as we are. There is no difference between his sufferings and ours; for both are all alike, as he said before that he must be made like his brethren in all things. Yet without sin.] Christ was altogether innocent, and no way deserved the evils he suffered. This he said, partly to answer their calumny, who gave it out, that he deserved the punishment of the cross; partly to admonish other Christians, to follow innocence, and to take heed they suffered not as malefactors; but rather strive to be like Christ, who suffered for no fault of his own, neither should they refuse to undergo divers calamities for the name of Christ, though they be innocent; nor make it a marvel, if such measure fall upon them that happened unto Christ their Lord and leader; and should think that Christ will much the sooner secure them, when they fall into persecutions, torments and death innocently; for the more innocence they bring with them to their sufferings, the more ready he is to help them. It is a vulgar error, to think, that in this place, Christ is said to be like us simply in all things sinne only excepted. For neither the words of the Author, nor the truth of the thing will bear this sense. For Christ was much unlike to all us in many other points besides sin, as in divine power and wisdom, and the admirable manner of his birth. For because we should not think, that he speaks here, of likeness in nature only, therefore sin is mentioned, which can no way be referred to nature.  
16. Let us therefore come boldly,] From the saying before he infers another exhortation, which notwithstanding is subservient to that he made at the 14. verse, and is to second it. Seeing we enjoy such a high Priest, that hath himself had trial of all sorts of evil, let us implore his help boldly. In the original it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with boldness, or rather with free liberty of speech, for here he treats of praying, and it signifies not only a confident hope of the mind to obtain our desires; but an audacity or undauntedness flowing from an inward confidence, whereby we are emboldened to have our access to his throne, to speak and pray unto him. For a liberty of speech than appears in us, when neither the authority, majesty, or severity of another, nor the fear of offence can deter us from speaking; which doth excellently suit with this place. For seeing there is a great Majesty of that throne, where we must become supplicants; it might easily fall out, that a man being afraid thereof, and also conscious of his own unworthiness, might not dare to approach that throne, and supplicate to him that sits upon it. Wherefore the Author endeavours to encourage our minds and raise us to a freedom of speech, when he shows us, that with so great a Majesty there is joined clemency, favour, and mercy, toward distressed Christians. Unto the throne of grace.] He names not him to whose throne we must come, or that sits upon the throne; but because he commands us to come to this throne, therefore in that we have such a high Priest who can have a feeling of our infirmities, and thereupon is ready to pity and help us; and we must come for this end that we may find mercy and help; from all these it appears, that it is the throne of our high Priest, as it is said, Psal. 45.6. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever. But he names a throne, that he may represent unto us, his exceeding great Majesty and power; that our freedom of speech there should not lessen our reverence, and that we should fully conceive him, not only merciful to be willing to help us, but also powerful to be able. And again, lest the high throne and Majesty of Christ should appall our minds, he calls it the throne of grace] that we may conceive, though our high Priest, sit in a throne, vested with great Majesty, yet he is full of love and mercy towards us. That so the throne and Majesty of Christ might raise in our minds due reverence, and his grace and favour towards us, might cherish our confidence and freedom of speech to him. They who say, This is the throne of God himself, oppose not us, seeing Christ sits in the throne of God; unless happily they say it therefore, that they may exclude Christ from this throne, against so many clear testimonies of Scripture; and the force of this passage also, thereby to wrest from us this argument for the invocation of Christ. This we easily grant, that here we may understand God, no less than Christ; and it is very likely that this Author did rather call it the throne of grace in general, then either of God or Christ in particular, that he might leave us an equal right and liberty to approach either to God in the Name of our high Priest, or immediately to our high Priest himself. For whether we go to God in the name of Christ, or to Christ himself, we shall either way find the Throne of grace: That we may obtain mercy and find grace] The final cause of our approach to this throne, is here expressed to be twofold; whereof one is a mean to the other, the former to the latter; The former is to obtain mercy and find grace; the other is, opportune help in time of need. To obtain mercy is nothing else, then to get that another have compassion on thee; which is easily got from a merciful person, such as this our high Priest. To find grace, is to be gracious with another, and to be favoured with a peculiar affection of love. In this sense, the Angel tells Mary, that she had found grace with God, Luke 1.30. And it is an easy matter to find grace and favour with him, who is most gracious and favourable. To help in time of need.] In the original it is, for opportune help. The last final cause of our approaching this Throne, and finding grace there, is for opportune help; That Christ may help us in our conflicts of godliness and patience, that we sink not under our temptations and afflictions; especially, that at our last gasp, he may receive our spirits into his hands, preserve them for us, and restore them at his coming; whereof see the following chapter, v. 7.   

The Contents of this fourth Chapter are,  

1. An Exhortation. Let us not forsake God's promise of entering into his rest. 

Reason 1. Because this promise is made to us as well as to the Israelites.  
2. Because, they who do believe, have already a right to enter.    
2. Doctrine. God's Rest is his Cessation from works after the Creation. 

Reason. 1. Because God's rest hath reference to the seventh day, wherein God rested from his works; as Scripture testifieth.  
2. Because God swore the Israelites should not enter into his rest; which could not be the rest in Canaan.    
3. Doctrine. There yet remains a Sabbatisme, or Rest from labours for the people of God. 

Reason. 1. Because some must enter his rest; and they did not, to whom it was first promised.  
2. Because God limits another day of entrance, a long time after the former, saying in David, To day if ye will hear his voice.  
3. Because Joshua gave not the true heavenly rest, which is God's rest; and therefore that still remains to be given.    
4. Exhortation. We must labour to enter God's rest, verse 11. 

Reason. 1. Because if we take example of their unbelief in the wilderness, we shall be made examples of their destruction.  
2. Because God's penal Decree, is very active and powerful to take heavy vengeance upon unbelievers, verse 12.  
3. Because Christ our high Priest, is passed into that heavenly rest before us, v. 14.  
4. Because we have free access by prayer to his Throne, which is a Throne of Grace and Mercy to help us thither. vers. ult.       

CHAPTER V.  

1. FOr every high Priest is taken from among men,] Here he expresseth some general requisites of a high Priest, which afterward he applies to Christ in a reverse order. The first requisite of a high Priest is this, that he is a Man singled out from among other men; and that, for this following reason, because he is ordained for men. i. for the benefit and good of men. This first property of a high Priest, he toucheth only by the way, and by occasion of the following property; and withal seems to reflect upon some former passages wherein he had proved that Christ must be a man and not some angel. And therefore when afterward he applies the following properties of a high Priest unto Christ, he makes no mention of this, as having sufficiently discussed it already in the second chapter. Is ordained for men] The dignity and office of high Priesthood is created and constituted for the commodity and benefit of men. In things pertaining to God] Divine and holy things pertaining to God, are the matter or object of his function or office; that he may procure and administer all things belonging to the worship of God, and to make him propitious to them that worship him. That he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins] These particularly are the things whereby God is worshipped and propitiated. Gifts are freewill offerings, such as the people were accustomed to offer of their own accord; for the Law did not command the act of these offerings, but when they were freely offered, than the Law prescribed the matter and manner of their offering. Of this sort were those sacrifices which were called Peace-offerings, whereof we may read in the three first chapters of Leviticus. These were offered, either to procure the favour of God, and as it were to oblige him with a present, or to testify their mindful and thankful hearts for some benefit received. Yet sometime the word Gifts are taken more largely for all sorts of sacrifices, and then it includes the sin-offerings. For, Christ under the name of gifts, seems to comprise all things that were laid upon the Altar, and offered unto God, Mat. 23.18. Sacrifices for sins, were living creatures, which by prescript of the Law were offered to God, to take away the guilt of sin, whereof we may read, Levit. 4. and elsewhere. The words [for sins] may be so taken, as to be construed only with the sacrifices immediately . Yet there is no incongruity, if we refer them also to the remoter word of gifts] For although sins might be expiated, and their guilt taken away without such gifts; for otherwise they had not been truly gifts, but debts: Yet there can be nothing said to the contrary, but that besides the sacrifices ordained of God for the expiation of sins, there might be offered for sins also voluntary gifts and freewill offerings. For, hence we read, that expiation of sin was attributed to the Holocaust, which was reckoned among the peace offerings, Levit. 1.4. And hereto David had respect, when speaking of the expiation of his sin, he said he would have given Holocausts, or whole  offerings, if they had been any thing available to expiates such sins, Psal. 51.16. This therefore is the chief property of a high Priest, to negotiate the cause of men with God, especially of such men as had sinned, and to provide that God might be propitiated and pacified, not left angry and offended. And this is the second property required in an high Priest.  
2. Who can have compassion on the ignorant] This is the third requisite. A compassionate man, as some Interpreters note, is he that carrieth himself humanely, moderately and gently. Therefore he hath compassion on the ignorant, who bears himself gently towards them, not despising, nor disdaining them for their falls; but doth friendly and courteously raise them, not unmindful of his own frailty. The Ignorant are they who sin through ignorance; and ignorance as it is vulgarly distinguished, is either of the Law, or of the fact; and this latter is held to make the fact excusable, and not the former. But indeed there is also an ignorance of Law, that deserves some excuse; namely, when the number of Laws are become so great, that they can neither be comprehended in mind, nor retained in memory; and especially when the Laws are not grounded upon natural honesty, or the dictates of right reason, but upon the sole will and pleasure of the Legifer. For, in such Laws the mind and memory doth easily fail, especially seeing all men's capacities are not equal. Now both these considerations took place in the Laws of Moses; for their number was so great, that it exceeded six hundred; and the ground of them such, that most of them depended not upon natural honesty and right reason, but upon the sole will and positive pleasure of God. Therefore all sins committed through ignorance of Law, if any way they were excusable, were expiated under the Law by prescript of Law, and without doubt are here by the Author called Ignorances'. And on them that are out of the way] On the Errand. The word Errand is either the same with the ignorant; or if it differ, the difference is this, that the ignorant are such as mistake in the Law; and the Errand such as mistake in the fact, or the circumstances of it; and the sin thence proceeding is called an Error. Or rather by Error is noted not so much the error of the mind, as the error in the action. So that by errors are meant, not only those trespasses that proceed from some error of the mind; but also those which flow from humane frailty, though there precede no error in the mind, and are committed in matters that in their own nature are but of light importance. And there is no doubt, but the Author by these two words of Ignorances' and Errors, would comprehend all lighter trespasses, not committed out of mere malice of mind, or (as the Scripture terms it) by a high hand; but were done either out of excusable ignorance, or of humane frailty in things of less moment; for which only the benefit of expiation was granted under the Law. This affection and compassion toward them that sin of ignorance or frailty, (and not of malice and contempt) though it be no less in Christ our high Priest, then anciently it was in the Legal high Priest; yet in the reddition of this comparison wherein he speaks of Christ, this compassion is concluded to be in Christ; neither is the comparison brought for that purpose, but only it is to show the compassion and pity that Christ bears toward the afflicted and distressed. And this appears plainly from that which is here subjoined touching the efficient cause of this compassion; for it followeth, For that he himself is compassed with infirmity] He shows the cause and fountain of this compassion, which in the Legal high Priest, was his infirmity in sin; but in Christ it was his infirmity in sufferings; i. the Legal high Priest was infirm, because himself also might fall through ignorances' and errors: but Christ was infirm, because he was subject to afflictions and trials no less than another man. That infirmity in the Legal high Priest bred in them compassion and gentleness towards the ignorant and errand; this in Christ our high Priest, bred in him a compassion toward the afflicted and distressed. Besides, the Legal high Priest was encompassed with infirmities always; but Christ only for some time; and there was good cause for both. For the Legal high Priest, because he was yearly to renew his offering for the sins of the people: but Christ, because by one oblation he expiated for ever all the sins of the faithful, therefore he was compassed with infirmity but once only, and that before his own oblation. For that a man should be prone to pity, he need not be perpetually in misery; for it is sufficient, that once he made trial of misery: but to the end he may help those that are in misery, and having delivered them from their misery, might actually make them happy for ever, it is necessary that he himself be pressed with no further misery, but that he be blessed, to the end he may be able always to help others. And this ability is not a simple faculty to help or have compassion, but a will and readiness to do it, as was before explicated, chap. 2. ver. 4.  
3. And by reason hereof,] The fourth property of a high Priest is taken from his own infirmity; for by reason thereof, he must offer no less for his own sins, then for the sins of the people. By reason hereof, i. By reason of his infirmity; for the high Priest through his infirmity might fall into ignorances' and errors; and therefore it is likely, yea almost necessary, that he did often fall into then. He ought as for the people, so also for himself to offer for sins.] His infirmity in falling into sins of ignorance and error, was a cause to make him offer for his own sins, not only at particular times, when he stood guilty in his conscience of some particular sin; but yearly also at the solemn time, though then his conscience were touched with no particular sin, yet than he must offer for those sins whereof his conscience never took notice. In like manner, the infirmity of Christ, i. not only his passable nature, from whence sufferings flow not necessarily; but his state and condition of suffering, whereinto he was put by God's decree, was a cause that he also should offer for himself, while he was in his afflictions and miseries. And these afflictions in Christ, are in this comparison answerable to the fins of the ancient high Priest, and therefore by a little abusion of the word, are tacitly comprehended with them under the sole name of sins. That the Legal high Priest was to offer no less for his own sins, then for the peoples; yea first for his own sins before the people's, it plainly appears, Levit. 16.6,11,17. etc. His offering for his own sins was a young Bullock, and for the peoples, a Hee-Goate. And therefore it is said afterward, that he was to enter the Sanctuary by the blood of Goats and Calves, chap. 9.12. But how Christ offered for himself, is explicated in this chap. ver. 7.  
4. And no man taketh this honour unto himself] The fifth property of the high Priest, that no man must arrogate the office to himself, and usurp upon the rights of it of his own authority. This office here is called an honour, because of the dignity of it; for offices are of divers kinds: some are merely servile, others profitable only, a third sort are honourable, that draws dignities and precedency with it. Now the office of the Priesthood is of this last sort, and therefore is called an honour. But he that is called of God] He only hath a right to administer in the honourable office of Priesthood, that is designed and called by God to take it upon him. This he illustrates by the example of Aaron's calling. As was Aaron.] Aaron did not of his own accord intrude himself into the office of high Priesthood, but being thereto enjoined and commanded by God, he accepted of it by way of obedience to him that enjoined it. For God first did choose Aaron, and after him his eldest son, and by proper Laws determined the rights of succession in this office, which were always observed, while the state was administered by the Laws of God. Hitherto he hath specified several properties of the high Priest, all which may be reduced to three heads. The first is, that he offer for sins, and negotiate the cause of men with God; to which this may be referred that he must be a man. 2. That he must be merciful and propense toward sinners; whereto this belongs, that he himself be compassed with infirmity, and thereupon offer for his own sins, as well as for the people's. 3. That he must be called to this office of God himself. Now in an order retrograde or reverse, beginning with the last, he demonstrates that all these agree with Christ. Whence it follows, that Christ hath a truly Priestly dignity, which he received from God; and is touched with singular compassion toward the afflicted, and will afford his own people, not only opportune help, but eternal happiness.  
5. So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high Priest,] He gins now with the last property of the high Priest, and shows that it agrees with Christ; because Christ did not arrogate to himself the honour of this office. This he doth to no other end, than thereby to show, that the Priesthood of Christ was true and lawful; and that Christ had not been a true Priest, if he had assumed this office of himself, and not been called of God to receive it. If I (saith Christ) glorify myself, my glory is nothing; it is my Father that glorifies me. By the like reason, willing to assert the truth of his doctrine, he denies that he spoke of himself, but refers his doctrine to his Father, and professeth that he received it from his Father; thereby intimating that his doctrine had not been true, had he spoken it of himself. That which the Author saith here of Christ is so much the more remarkable because the Priesthood which Christ sustaineth is of that nature, that no man can possibly take it upon him, no man can possibly have but he upon whom God collates it. But some man under the Law might arrogate the legal Priesthood, and some did arrogate it, when their state was corrupt. But this high Priesthood of Christ, to minister eternally in the Sanctuary of heaven, to have absolute power and authority to take away from us all punishments of our sins; to secure and help us in our miseries; to deliver us from death, and translate us to eternal life (for these are the functions of his high Priesthood) no mortal man can challenge this Priesthood, or usurp it, or execute the functions of it, unless God himself qualify and raise him to such high faculties. Therefore also the Author, speaking of Christ and his high Priesthood, used the word glorified, that Christ glorified not himself; because the Priesthood of Christ is a most glorious office, containing most glorious functions, all tending to eternal glory. Hence it is manifest, that Christ is not supreme God; for if he were so, from whom else could he receive this glory but from himself? But this the Author plainly denies, showing that otherwise he could not be a true and lawful high Priest; and therefore he was not the supreme God. And we will pass by this point also, that the supreme God can no way be a Priest. But he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.] The Author saith not barely, that Christ was made a high Priest by God, but presently produceth Gods edicts, wherein he ordained Christ to be a high Priest; from whence it manifestly appears that Christ did not arrogate the Priesthood to himself, but was ordained into it by God himself. The first of these edicts is taken out of Psalm 2. The other Psal. 110. That these words were spoken of God himself, no man can be ignorant: but in these very words Christ is ordained high Priest; whence it manifestly follows, that he took not this dignity from himself, but received it of God. Concerning the former of these testimonies we have spoken sufficiently, chap. 1.5. We shall here note only three things. 1. That the God who or dained Christ to be high Priest, was the Father of Christ. For the Father only hath power to call Christ by the name of his Son, as in these words he did. Whence it appears that Christ in this place how great soever he be, yea as he is the Son of God, is opposed to God; and it and of him it is denied that he took the Priesthood to himself. 2. That the Priestly office of Christ is not really distinguished from his Kingly; because these words of the Psalm, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee; which as we saw in the first chap. treat of Christ's Kingly dignity, in regard whereof he is chief the Son of God, are by the Author in this place applied to his Priesthood. We may further add here, That Christ performed not his Priestly office, at least not perfectly, at the time when he suffered the death of the Cross; neither was his death a perfect oblation expiatory; for these words of the Psalm are clearly interpreted by St. Paul of his resurrection and glory, Act. 13. and here above, chap. 1. But Christ in his death was most deeply humbled and debased. Whereas in these words of the Psalm he is declared the Son of God, and withal became far more excellent than the Angels, as appears before chap. 1.4,5. But in respect of his death, most especially, he was much less than the Angels. As Christ suffered death, he exercised not his Kingly office, but only did that, whereby he might attain it: but when he administers his Priestly office, he withal executes the parts of his Kingly function. Wherefore he did not execute it actually in his death, but was thereby prepared to execute it. 3. In those words of the Psalm, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee; there is no intimation of any generation or begetting of Christ from the essence of his Father before all worlds; but of such a generation whereby Christ was ordained a high Priest of God; and therefore of such a one as was done in time; for Christ was not made our high Priest from all eternity, but from a certain time; namely upon his Resurrection.  
6. As he saith also in another place,] The other testimony of Scripture showing the decree of God, taken Psal. 110. He saith, i. God saith. Thou art a Priest for ever,] In this testimony, there is express treating of Christ's Priesthood. Whence it appears, that it was also treated of in the former testimony; seeing both the testimonies are alleged for the same thing. Some men (that they may elude the true sense of the former testimony, which the Holy Ghost shows to be in the words, Thou art my Son, To day have I begotten thee) say, that those words are not alleged as a testimony of Gods collating the Priesthood upon Christ, but as a description of him, who conferred this office upon him. There men do a manifest injury to the truth and to the words of the Author. For how should these following words agree with the former, as he saith also in another place? doth he not by these latter words manifestly declare, that now another place or Psalm is cited by him; wherein the same point is proved, for which the former testimony was produced? For ever.] The Priesthood of Christ shall last for ever in the person of Christ, without ever having any successor in his office; for his office shall last as long as there needs any expiation for sins, even to the end of the world; and so long he shall continue in that office. After the order of Melchisedeck.] The duration or term of Christ's Priesthood shall run out like the duration of Melchisedecks' Priesthood; or as the Author expresseth himself afterward, chap. 7.15. after the similitude of Melchisedeck. But of these words we shall speak further, chap. 7. where the Author explicates this likeness more fully. But here he tacitly meets with a doubt which some man might imagine touching the Priesthood of Christ, in that Christ descended not from the family of Aaron or tribe of Levi, to which tribe the Priesthood was limited by the Law of God. For the type of Melchisedeck doth not only require an eternal Priesthood, but also requires, that no respect of tribe or family should be had therein; as we shall show hereafter.  
7. Who in the days of his flesh,] From the third property required in a high Priest, and concluded to agree with Christ, he ascends now to the second property, and saith that Christ also was compassed with infirmity, and by reason thereof offered for himself; This he shows in this 7. verse, and then at the 8. verse, he infers, that from this infirmity Christ learned to be merciful toward the distressed and afflicted. In the days of his flesh.] By flesh he understands the infirmity of Christ; for flesh is the subject of infirmity, and in a manner the cause of it. And the days of his flesh are the days wherein he suffered, for in that time chief his infirmity most appeared. For than it most appeared that Christ was flesh. When he had offered prayers and supplications.] Now he shows, that Christ offered also for himself. Of which his oblation, his infirmity, and afflictions were the cause; the sense whereof how deeply it struck into his soul, and how greatly it exercised him, appears from the things which he offered. For he shows distinctly both what he offered, and to whom; as also the adjunct of his offering, and the issue of it. The matter of his offering was Prayers; This is a general word to signify all petitions, or rather all kind of speech unto God. And supplications; which are the prayers or petitions of supplicants, whose manner is to fall upon their knees, casting themselves at the feet or touching the knees of them to whom they make their prayer. The original word is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which as some Interpreters note, doth properly signify an olive-branch, wrapped about with wool, which supplicants held in their hands. Hence we may easily imagine, in what anguish of soul Christ was, and what pangs of pain he felt, when he was driven to such earnest prayers and devout supplications. But what prayers and supplications the Author means, will appear from the words following; wherein the person to whom he prayed is described in such manner, that thence we may easily understand what he prayed; although the adjunct of his prayer doth partly also declare it. Unto him that was able to save him from death,] In these words he shows, not only the person to whom Christ offered, but also the cause why he offered him prayers, and what the thing was for which he so earnestly prayed. And this is the cause, why he would describe God after this manner, rather than simply name him; for therefore he so devoutly supplicated to God; because God only is he that can save from death; which Christ by his prayers chief requested. He indeed requested some other things besides; for in the garden he petitioned that the cup might pass from him, i. he there was an humble supplicant prostrate upon his knees, and afterward on his face, praying again and again with great ardour of mind, that he might be delivered from the great anguish and heaviness which he felt in his soul. And hanging upon the cross, he poured forth this lamentation unto God, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?] Wherein he prayed that God would put an ease and an end to his extreme pains. But the sum and breviate, or at least the head of all those prayers, was this, for his delivery from death: For he that is delivered from death, in that sense that Christ here desired, he hath found an end of all pains both of soul and body, and hath obtained supreme happiness. This delivery Christ prayed for, in commending his Spirit to God, when he was ready to expire. For to commend the spirit to God, or to pray that God would receive it into his hands; what is it else but to pray that he would preserve it, and afterward restore it, and consequently to recall him from death to life, whose spirit it is? That the Author had respect to these prayers of Christ, it may appear by their adjunct, which he also mentions in saying, That his prayers were offered up, With strong crying and tears.] The holy History of the Evangelists do testify, that Christ hanging upon the Cross, complained in the words of the Psalm, with a great cry that God had forsaken him, and afterward being ready to expire, he commended his Spirit to God. But the Sacred History mentions not any tears of Christ shed at that time; yet notwithstanding it appears that it was so, and was known to the Author to be so. Now this cry and tears do further show how deeply the sense of pain was impressed into him, when it forced him to express such cries and tears. Hence it appears further, that Christ thus exercised with so great a sense of pains himself, cannot but be moved at the miseries and pains of his people, cannot but willingly hear the doleful cries and complains, and afford his opportune succour and help in their afflictions and distresses. From these words of the Author it appears, how Christ offered for himself, namely, that he offered not himself, but his prayers for himself, and then he offered them, not when he became immortal in his heavenly Tabernacle, but in the days of his flesh or infirmity. For when he became immortal, he could not then offer for this end, that he might be saved from death, which (as we have cleared from the words of the Author) was indeed the end of his offering. Besides, being in heaven he offered himself immaculate, and therefore had no need to offer for himself there. Wherefore Christ offered one way for himself, and another way for us: for for himself he offered prayers on earth; for us he offered himself in heaven; for himself when yet he was mortal, or in the days of his flesh: for us, when he was made an immortal and eternal Spirit. And was heard] The effect and issue of these prayers offered, was this, that he was delivered and saved, not from death; for he suffered it and died, but out of death from whence he was raised. For whom God heareth praying in that manner, him he delivers and frees, though not from his misery before he suffer it, yet out of it after he hath suffered. So speaks David as a type of Christ, Psal. 22.21. Thou hast heard me from the horns of the Unicorns. i. as learned men have noted, thou hast heard to save me from extreme dangers. So that the word heard is taken here Metonymically, to include the effect of his hearing; he was heard and saved. In that he feared] He was saved from, or, out of the thing he feared, namely, out of death. The original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which some take for a passionate fear, the object whereof here in Christ was death, and so by a Metonymy fear, is here put for death, the act for the object, or thing to be feared. For of all terrors death is most terrible and fearful: and this fear was the cause of his prayers and supplications, at least of the cries and tears wherewith they were offered. And then this example of Christ may teach us, partly with what fervency of soul we must implore the help of God in the times of our distresses; partly what things especially we must pray for; partly wherein that opportune help chief consists, (whereof the Author spoke in the end of the former chapter) namely, in this, that Christ saveth us out of death, into eternal life. Others take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a reverential or religious fear: for this sense is set in the margin of our last translation: that he was heard for his piety. And then the object of his piety, reverence or fear, was God to whom he prayed. And so this fear of God, was the proper motive to this offering of Christ, and to all the circumstances of his offering. His offering itself proceeded from his piety or fear of God; for every offering is an act of piety. His prayers and supplications proceeded from it; for prayer also is an act of piety; his cries and tears proceeded from it; for they also are concurrents of piety and fervent devotion. His exaudition in being heard of God proceeded from it: for Gods hearing of our prayers is the fruit of our piety and devotion; seeing God heareth not impious and sinful persons, but such as are pious to reverence and worship him, and do his will, those he heareth, John 9.31. The prayers of Christ were supplications. i. (as before is noted) petitions exhibited upon the knees with great worship and reverence given to God. His prayers in the garden were such supplications performed with great worship and reverence, bowing toward God; for first he fell upon his knees, and afterward he went more humbly and fell upon his face. And his prayers on the cross were supplications also (as the Author termeth them) and therefore performed with reverend bowing also; such as was possible for Christ to use in that case being stretched and nailed upon the cross; where because he could not bow his knees, therefore (as the Sacred story relates it) he bowed his head, when he cried and commended his spirit unto God. Which bowing of his head was not a simple act of a dying man, (as some Interpreters slightly pass it over) but an act of worship and reverence of a pious man, that was making his offering unto God by prayers and supplications, adding cries and tears, and all religious means, for exaudition that God might hear him. Wherefore it carries a very congruous sense to say that Christ was heard for his piety, i. for the fear and reverence he used toward God in his prayers and supplications; for fear is the inward motion of the soul, from which the outward worship and reverend bowings of the body do proceed. And these outward reverences of bowing the head, bowing the body, and bowing the knees, are acts of worship unto God; which have been used by God's people in all ages of the world. For bowing the head, See Gen. 24.26.48. and Exod. 4.31. and Exod. 12.27. and Exod. 34.8. and 1. Chro. 29.20. and 2. Chro. 20.18. and 2. Chro. 29.30. and Nehem. 8.6. Hence it appears also from this example of Christ; that our prayers and supplications unto God, should proceed from inward piety and fear of God; and should be offered unto him with outward worship and reverence, accompanied with cries and tears in times of extreme distresses; if we mean to have exaudition, that God should graciously hear us.  
8. Who though he were a son] Christ by the evils which he suffered, became such a one, as to have compassion on those, who labour to obey God through difficulties and sufferings. He learned obedience] He learned what it is to obey God; what a difficult and harsh duty it is, how bitter and unpleasing to flesh and blood. For in this place he takes obedience for that part of obedience, which is seen in difficult and hard cases, such as are these, to be afflicted and suffer death for the justice and truth of God. Yet I conceive the word obedience is here to be understood more literally and derivatively from audience; for a giving of audience. Christ, who upon his prayers and supplications made to God, with cries and tears to save him from death, had audience of God, and was heard therein, did thereby learn to give audience and hearing to his people, when in their distresses they offer up prayers and supplications with cries and tears to him; thereby to have compassion on them, and deliver them from their distresses. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is here fitly rendered obedience, doth carry an elegant symploce of sense, both of audience to hear another what he would have done, and of obedience to do the thing which he hath heard. And that very act of compassion in Christ in hearing the distressed, though it be his audience to them; yet it is his obedience to God, who ordained a high Priest for that function. By the things that he suffered.] In the original it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of or from the things that he suffered; so it is rendered, Mat. 24.32. Learn a parable of the figtree. Christ by or from his own evils and sufferings learned what bitterness and trouble there lies in suffering persecutions for righteousness sake; and therefore cannot but be affected with like sense of trouble, at the troubles and pains of the innocent, that suffer for his sake; and therefore when they pray and cry unto him, he will be ready in obedience to God to give them audience to hear and help them. Though he were a Son,] He illustrates the matter ex adversis. So great a conjunction of Christ with God, such a fatherly love of God toward him as being his only Son, might seem to be against this way of exercising him upon the stage of afflictions, yet it was not against it. God might have taught his Son the lessons of obedience in some other school then that of afflictions; yet it pleased God to choose this way, and not spare him from the common condition of his brethren. Hence it is manifest, how greatly God loved mankind, who would handle his own Son so hardly to this end, that having trial of suffering in his own person, miseris succurrere discat, he might thereby learn to secure those in misery. Hence it appears also, that God's fatherly love to the faithful is no way impaired, when he exerciseth their faith and patience to make trials of them in sufferings. For whom he loveth he chasteneth and scourgeth every Son whom he receiveth, chap. 12.6.  
9 And being made perfect] In the last place, he comes to the first property of an high Priest, and applies it also to Christ; namely, that Christ procures the salvation of men, and negotiates with God, to be propitious to them, and forgive them the punishments of their sins. Which property in respect of Christ, he expresseth in these words, that he is become the Author of eternal salvation. Made perfect. This state of Christ in being made perfect or consummate, is opposed to his state in the days of his flesh] For then when Christ was infirm, and himself wanted another's help, he could not perfectly and finally help others in all things. But after that he was consummated or perfected, i. after he had attained to immortality, or a nature incorruptible, and was invested with supreme power in heaven and earth, so that nothing further was wanting to him; or after he was throughly consecrated of God, and fully installed into his Priesthood (as some think the word perfected to mean) than he became the author of eternal salvation,] For than he was a most perfect cause of salvation. In the days of his flesh he was indeed the cause of eternal salvation; for than he was the great Legate or Apostle of God to preach it: but being perfected, he becomes the most perfect cause of it; for now he is our high Priest and heavenly King, to give that, which before he preached. He is therefore the most perfect cause of eternal salvation, because he gives it in a most perfect manner; for he wants nothing, neither for faculty or power, nor for desire and will to perfect our eternal salvation. For by his power, he takes from us all punishment of our sins; he gives us everlasting life; he receives our spirits into his hands; he speedily succours us in our afflictions, lest our faith should fail, and we thereby fall into punishments due to our sins. The Author made choice of general words to describe the power and efficacy of Christ's Priesthood, in the procuring of our salvation, that he might express it with terms more proper to it. For Christ is not the cause of salvation, in the very same manner with the legal high Priest; who gave not salvation or pardon to the people himself of himself as Christ doth, but only procured God to give it, by propitiating him with offerings. And there is a great difference between Christ and the legal high Priest in the salvation procured; for he procured only a temporary and transitory salvation, but Christ gives an eternal salvation. Furthermore this place affords us an example of a rule in Scripture, that some things are said to be simply done, when they are more perfectly done. We have an instance hereof in that passage of John, 2.11. where the Disciples of Christ, who did already believe in Christ, are notwithstanding said to believe in Christ upon sight of the miracle of water turned into wine; because than they believed in him much more steadfastly and perfectly than they did before, or because than their faith received a great increase. So Christ himself (John 15.8.) saith to his Disciples, that if they did bear much fruit, so they should be his Disciples; because by this means, they should become his Disciples in a more perfect manner. This we therefore notify, lest to any it should seem strange, that the Scripture notes divers times wherein Christ became the Son of God; namely because he became so in a more perfect manner and higher degree; although from the beginning of his conception he was truly the Son of God; though not so perfectly as afterwards. Unto all them that obey him.] Here the persons are specified to whom Christ is the author of salvation; namely to the obedient, and to them universally, to all that obey him. For Christ is an high Priest properly to such, and is ordained of God to expiate their sins. Whence it appears, that all who will have their sins expiated by Christ, and obtain eternal salvation by him, must obey him. Christ indeed is the cause of salvation even to them, who as yet obey him not, in that he first makes them obedient, and consequently saves them: but to such he is but the remote cause; but he is the immediate cause of it to them that actually obey him; for therein his Priestly office is actually exercised. Not unlike to this is that saying of Peter, Act. 5.31. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour; what else is this, then to be the author or cause of salvation? and by what means Christ doth work and cause salvation, Peter expresseth in the words following, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. This latter way of saving, as being the perfecter, is contained in this place.  
10. Called of God an high Priest,] Christ becomes the author or cause of eternal salvation by this means, in being ordained an high Priest of God; for when God calls him an high Priest, thereby he makes him so. After the order of Melchisedeck.] Christ is such a high Priest unto us, that withal he is also our heavenly Lord and King, having supreme power to pardon all our sins and to free us from the punishment of them. But of this point we shall speak more largely, chap 7.  
11. Of whom we have many things to say,] He passeth to another point, wherein he reproves the slowness and dulness of them to whom he writes; to this end, that he may excite and prepare them to receive those mysteries which he had in his mind to open concerning the Priesthood of Christ. Of whom, i. of Christ our high Priest, either in reference to his Priesthood absolutely, or respectively as it is compared with the Priesthood of Melchisedeck. We have many things to say,] We have in our mind plentiful and copious matter, which we would express concerning his Priesthood. And hard to be uttered,] Not hard to the Author to utter simply, but hard for him to utter so plainly, that they might easily be apprehended and understood of them to whom he should utter them. And this hardness proceeded partly from the greatness and sublimeness of the matters to be uttered, and partly from the incapacity and dulness of them to whom they should be uttered. Seeing ye are dull of hearing.] q.d. The difficulty of uttering these things, is not so much in regard of the things themselves, or in regard of me, to whom the things are sufficiently known, as in regard of you, by reason of your dulness. For if ye were of a ready and quick capacity, it were easy for me to utter all, and for you to conceive them. Dull is he, that doth not easily hear, or attend, or not apprehend and consider things uttered unto him, especially in the holy mysteries of salvation.  
12. For when for the time ye ought to be teachers,] Their dulness of hearing holy mysteries is here declared from the effect of it, namely that they were yet unskilful and rude in the first principles of Christian Religion, when notwithstanding they had spent so much time in the School of Christ, that they were not only competently to know the Christian Religion themselves, but also aught to teach it unto others; which was a great argument and sign of their slowness and dulness. Ye have need that one teach you again, which be the first principles of the oracles of God,] For a man to be taught, is not strange, neither doth it argue idleness or dulness; but to be taught over again and anew, especially the first principles and elements, this is a sign of a heavy and dull spirit. There is an elegant opposition between him that should teach, and him that needs teaching, especially the elements of any discipline, and the first elements of all. The principles of any discipline, are those verities, which have no reasons, and cannot be proved, but are the reasons or causes to prove other verities; and therefore are learned in the first place, because they are known of themselves without the knowledge of other verities: but other verities cannot be known without the knowledge of them. These of some Divines are called fundamentals, in allusion to the foundations of buildings; because the foundations are first laid, and can lie without the buildings, but the buildings cannot be made without them; for the buildings are supported by the foundations, and not the foundations by the buildings. The oracles of God.] All the verities of Christian Religion, whether they be principles that prove, or doctrines that are proved from the principles are the oracles of God; because they are the words of God proceeding from his mouth, and revealed unto men by his holy Spirit. And are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.] This is but a circumlocution of their ignorance and childishness in Christian verities. Ye are become such, that ye have need of principles which are the most simple verities and easiest to be understood, as known of themselves; and not of abstruse and recondite doctrines, the truths whereof appear not, but by the means and trace of many principles, and foreknown doctrines; the apprehension whereof doth agitate and labour both the understanding and memory. The principles of Christianity are resembled unto milk, because as milk is a nourishment most easy of digestion and concoction, because it hath a near affinity with blood wherewith we are finally nourished, for milk is but elaborate blood: so the principles of Religion are most easily apprehended and understood; because they have a near affinity with the Spirit, whereby we are finally saved, for the principles are spirit and life. And abstruse doctrines are resembled to strong meat; because strong meat is hardly digested, and therefore is not nourishment for all stomaches: so abstruse doctrines are hardly understood, and therefore are not verities for every capacity: And as strong meat not digested breeds crudities and diseases in the body: so abstruse doctrines not understood, breed controversies and distractions in the Church.  
13. For every one that useth milk,] He had tacitly affirmed before that strong meat must not be given to them that need milk; and therein, that abstruse doctrines must not be proposed to novices and weak minds. This assertion he proves by this reason, because he that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness; and he confirms this reason by another proof, because he that useth milk is a babe. Seeing therefore a babe is unskilful in the word of righteousness; therefore also he that useth milk must needs be unskifull in the same. He that useth milk,] is not meant by him that eateth milk and other meats also; for so do many persons of full growth; but by him that eateth only milk, and can receive no other nourishment. Unskilful is he that hath yet made no trial, nor entrance into the principles of any discipline; for such a one is altogether unskilful. The word of righteousness] is an Hebraisme for the right word; that is for the true and perfect word, that is right and fit for them to know; for true right and perfect are either the same, or equipollent, or adequate; as mutual consequents one to another, and concurrent properties to the same subject. Hence in Scripture they are often confounded or substituted one for another. So David Psalm 4 1. calleth God, the God of his righteousness; i. his true right and perfect God, in opposition to the heathenish gods, their idols and images, which were not true and right gods, but false and wrong gods. So our Saviour, Luke 16.11. opposeth the riches of unrighteousness to the true, right and perfect riches. He therefore that yet useth milk only, hath not yet attained to the true right and perfect word of God for a solid knowledge of Christ, nor hath ever made trial of tasting and digesting it in his mind, and therefore is not capable of it, but his mind would instantly be oppressed with it. For a man must first make trial of his strength, and the mind by small exercises must be prepared for greater matters; as infants and babes, as long as they suck milk only, and by little and little use no solid meats, are all that while incapable of them. The words of the Author are a contracted similitude, or a transition from the simile to the matter itself; for the subject of his assertion shows in part the proposition of the simile, and the predicat makes the reddition of it. As among other places, we have the like contracted simile, Luke 9.62. For the simile explicated must run thus: As he that yet hath used only milk, is uncapable of solid meat; so he that is yet in the principles of Christianity is unskilful of the mysteries and right doctrines of it.  
14. But strong meat belongeth to them that are (perfect) of full age.] Having said that strong meat must not be given to babes; now on the contrary he shows to whom it must be given; namely, to them that are adulted or perfect in age. For the perfect or adulted who are of age, are here opposed to infants and babes; and so they are opposed, 1. Cor. 14.20. and Ephes. 4.13.14. Even those, who by reason of use have their senses exercised,] Those, is not any note of distinction, to difference some perfect or adulted persons from others: but a note of explication, to show the cause of his assertion. For the Author shows the cause or reason, why only strong meat is to be given to the perfect, or them of full age, and to them only. The reason is, because they only have their sensories, or organs of their senses exercised, as their eyes, tongue, and palate, whereby they can easily discern and judge of strong meat, which is good and wholesome for them, and contrarily, which is evil and hurtful. These sensories of their eyes, tongue, and palate, they have exercised through practice and custom, in seeing, touching, and tasting of meats. To discern both good and evil.] These words are not to be taken in a Moral sense, but a Physical. He that is of perfect or full age, and hath been accustom to make several trials of several meats, can easily find by experience what meats do agree with his stomach, and what not; for they that are agreeing and nourishing to him, they are good and wholesome for him; they which do not, are evil and hurtful. Which difference of meats being first tried inwardly in his stomach, he will afterward easily discern by his outward senses, and particularly by his eye; which upon sight of any meats will easily judge of them before he taste them. To these perfect or full aged persons, they are resembled, who have their minds exercised and trained, with frequent and daily meditations of things divine, who have tasted divers doctrines, as it were several meats, and have digested the knowledge of many divine mysteries; who have gotten a custom or habit of mind, whereby they can easily discern and judge, what doctrine is true and what false, which is consequent to Christian religion, and which is repugnant. This discretion they only have attained, who can comprehend in their mind as it were a body of Christian religion, and stick not only in the first principles of it.   

The Contents of this fifth Chapter are,  

1. Every high Priest is ordained for men. v. 1. 

Reason 1. Because he is a Mediator for men to God in things pertaining to God. eod.  
2 Because he must offer gifs and sacrifices for the sins of men. eod.    
2. Every high Priest must have compassion on men's ignorances' and infirmities. v. 2. 

Reason 1. Because he himself is subject to ignorances' and infirmities. eod.  
2. Because he must offer for his own ignorances' and infirmities, as well as for the people's. v. 3.    
3. No high Priest must take the high-Priesthood to himself. v. 4 

Reason 1. Because he must be called of God as was Aaron. eod.    
4. Christ is truly a high Priest. v. 5. 

Reason. 1. Because he took not this Priesthood to himself, but was called of God to be a perpetual high Priest, after the term of Melchisedec. ver. eod. and 6.  
2. Because Christ offered for his own infirmities in sufferings. v. 7.  
3. Because being saved from death, he becomes the Author of eternal salvation to all that obey him.    
5. The Mysteries concerning Christ's high Priesthood, were hard to be uttered to the Hebrews. v. 11. 

Reason. 1. Because they were dull of hearing. eod.  
2. Because though long taught, they had not yet learned the principles of Christianity.  
3. Because the Mysteries of Christ's Priesthood, was too strong meat for their unexercised minds.       

CHAPTER VI.  

1. THerefore leaving the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ] There is a double sense of these words found among Interpreters, and thereupon a double way of their coherence with the former Chapter. For it is plain that the words are inferred from thence, as the particle therefore shows: Both senses of the words seem to require, that they be taken in a Rhetorical communication: but in a contrary manner. For either the Author speaks personally here of himself, and saith, that himself in this place, will leave the principles of the Doctrine of Christ, and proceed to explicate more sublime Mysteries comprehended therein: or else he admonisheth them to whom he writes, that they leaving those Principles, would proceed to a fuller knowledge in Christianity. We rather approve of the former sense, as followed by many learned men; yet because the latter is not to be despised, therefore we shall explicate them both. If therefore we receive the first sense, the Author seems to say; Therefore I will leave to speak further of the principles of Christianity, and draw toward the perfection of it, and propose deeper mysteries in it; for I will not lay again the foundation of Repentance to be practised, and of Faith to rely on God; neither will I deliver the doctrine of Baptisms, of Imposition of hands, of the Resurrection of the dead, and of eternal life: Upon which verities as upon principles and foundations, the doctrines of Repentance and faith in God is raised and built up. These principles I will not handle again, for it is enough that they have been propounded once; although I refuse not to handle them again, if God permit. Which I therefore speak, because it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, etc. to renew them again unto repentance. If we follow this sense, all points will agree well enough: yet in the coherence only there will seem some difficulty. For some man may object; Seeing the Author said in the former chapter, that those Hebrews had need to be taught again the very principles of Religion, to be nourished with milk, and not with meat; How can he from this infer, that therefore he will leave the principles, and the milk, to propose strong meat and deeper mysteries, seeing rather he should infer the quite contrary? This difficulty may easily be salved, if we say that the coherence of these words must be referred to the eleventh verse of the former chapter, where the Author said, He had many things to say and hard to be uttered of Christ his high Priesthood; That in reference to these words, he might infer, Therefore leaving the principles, let us go on to perfection. So that all the intermediate verses between the eleventh of the former chapter, and the beginning of this, which were added occasionally, to excite the Hebrews to a diligent attention, must be read as it were in a parenthesis. If then we follow this sense, we must say, that the Author in the first part of this chapter doth affirm, that he will proceed in explicating the mysteries of Christ's Priesthood, notwithstanding the Hebrews by reason of their slowness and dulness, were not very capable of them; and that he would not now spend any labour in delivering the principles of Christian Religion. Thus of the former sense, now for the latter. The Author had reproved the Hebrews, for being so slow and dull in their study of Christianity, that when for the length of their time spent therein, they should become teachers of others, themselves had need to be taught again the first principles of it; and like babes, must yet be nourished with milk, and not with strong meat; Therefore he admonisheth them, that casting off this drowsiness of spirit, they would leave at last those principles, and launch themselves into a deeper knowledge of those divine mysteries. Therefore, that which before he had objected unto them, that they had need to be taught again the principles of Christianity, must not be so understood as if they had now wholly forgotten or lost them; for this, to speak generally of them all, could hardly be; but because by their negligence, they did not well remember them, but had need to have them renewed, and reinforced upon them. For, it plainly appears from passages which are read of them, both in this chapter, and other parts of this Epistle, that they began to doubt of the Christian faith and truth. Now they that are such, have need that Christian principles should be anew inculcated and confirmed unto them. Neither is it his meaning, that they should altogether leave and neglect the principles, and so go on to perfection, for this neither could nor must be done; but they should not stick and dwell wholly upon the principles, without proceeding any further; for they that proceed further, do pass by the places whereat they are already arrived. So a man may say to a boy, leave your Accedence and your Grammar, and pass on to other Authors. The principles of the doctrine of Christ] They are the fundamental verities, which being first learned, do help us to proceed in Christian Religion. Let us go on unto perfection] The principles rightly understood and applied, will by degrees carry us on from one verity to another, till we come at the deepest mysteries of Christianity, and into a full body; where being once arrived, we are at perfection, even at a fullness and ripeness in the knowledge of Christ. Not laying again the foundation] The foundation is the first principles of Christianity, which are as it were a foundation of that edifice of doctrines, wherein the perfect knowledge of God and Christ consisteth. Now to lay this foundation, is either to teach these principles, if we follow the former sense, or to learn them, if we follow the latter. And to lay this foundation again] is to initiate these principles anew from the beginning, and for a man to become the Disciple of Christ a second time, after once he had deserted the verities of them; whereof (supposing the latter sense) he would have the Hebrews to beware; for they were near approaching to this mischief, and lest they should fall into it, the Author excites them very seriously. For they had not as yet altogether deserted the Christian faith, as appears partly from this whole Epistle, and partly from a passage at the ninth verse of this chapter, where he saith, that he is persuaded better things of them, then of those (he means) who after the knowledge of the truth, have relapsed and revolted from it; and lastly, in that he continues to exhort them to constancy in Christianity. Of repentance from dead works] He being to explicate this foundation of Christianity, and lays several parts of it, whereof the first is repentance. But because in this place (as we have said) he treats of laying the foundation not in regard of Christian life, but of Christian doctrine; as it appears by the words following, of resurrection of the dead, and eternal life, which may be repeated again in respect of the doctrine or learning of them: Therefore here to lay the foundation of repentance, is either to teach or learn the doctrine of repentance; and in like manner the doctrine of faith in God, of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgement. All which doctrines are the principles of Christian discipline, and as it were the foundation of all other Christian verities. Dead works, are deadly works, such as bring and continue death upon the agent. And repentance from these deadly works which is a principle of Christianity, includes not only a sorrow of mind, that thou hast committed deadly works, but also and much rather, the effect of that sorrow, which is a course of mind and life far divers from the former. For repentance is sometimes distinguished from that sorrow as the effect from the cause. See 2 Cor. 7.9,10. And of faith towards God.] What that is, the Author shows afterward chap. 11.  
2. Of the doctrine of baptisms, and the laying on of hands,] These words may be taken two ways, either as they signify some part of the foundation, distinct from the parts, both preceding and following, namely from the doctrine of repentance and faith, of the resurrection and eternal judgement; or else as added by way of apposition for amplification sake. q.d. which doctrines of repentance and faith, belong to those that are baptised, and that receive Imposition of hands. If we follow the former sense, and take them for parts of the foundation, to signify the doctrine of Baptisms, and of Imposition of hands; then first it may be demanded, what that doctrine is? The Answer is, that doctrine consisteth chief in showing, what baptisms and imposition of hands signify, and to what ends they are used. And these doctrines are therefore accounted among the principles of Christianity, because they were used from the beginning of the Church to initiate men into Christ, and therefore it was needful that the Disciples of Christ, should at first be instructed in them, and be taught their end and scope. Secondly, it may be demanded, why he mentions baptisms in the plural number, as if he intended many, (although the Syriake translation render it baptism in the singular number) seeing Christians received but one baptism of water for repentance. Resp. This was therefore done, either because he spoke in respect of them that were baptised, who because they were many, made also many baptisms; or else because he respected both the baptism of John, who was the forerunner of Christ, and the baptism of the Apostles the followers of Christ, especially that wherewith the Apostles baptised after the Resurrection and Ascension of Christ. For the Baptism of John was the baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins, which was used as a sign and a pledge of future repentance for the forgiveness of sins; because by washing it resembled repentance and remission of sins. For both these are a washing from the filth of sin; repentance is a washing from the acts of it, and remission from the guilt and pain of it. Repentance was signified as the baptism of those that were baptised of their own accord was an action. Remission was signified, as the action of John himself, who in a manner represented the person of God, as his legate or messenger, and in the name of God did promise men the remission and purgation of their sins, and declared this by the sign of washing. But the Baptism of Christ, doth not only represent repentance and remission of sins, or is not only received as a sign of future repentance and remission; but over and above it is a sign of putting on Christ; and with him, of dying to sin and rising to newness of life, that at last with him also we may attain everlasting life; for baptism doth elegantly shadow out our death and burial with Christ by our immersion into the water, and our resurrection with him by our emersion out of the water. This Paul hath taught us, in some passages of his Epistles. See Rom. 6.3,4. and Col. 2.12. And of laying on of hands,] Some by this understand, that Imposition of hands, which was in use anciently in the Christian Church, whereby the Elders laid their hands upon such as were admitted to the communion and society of the faithful; which use as it seems was derived or drawn from the Apostles, who were wont to lay their hands upon such as were to receive the Holy Ghost. But if we follow the former sense of these words as we have already explicated them, it is better to take them for that Imposition of hands which the Apostles used for this end, that the Disciples of Christ might receive the Holy Ghost. See Acts 8.17,18,19. and 2 Tim. 1.6. Yet the sense will be no less elegant, if we take the words the latter way, to signify the doctrine which belonged to those that are baptised, and have hands laid on them. As if the Author had said, Let us not return to learn the doctrine of repentance and faith in God, which useth to be proposed to them that are baptised and have hands laid on them. For we were long since baptised and had hands laid on us. Let us leave these matters to novices, and to such as come newly to the discipline of Christ. This sense hath pleased some learned men; and if we admit it, we must read the words as it were in a Parenthesis. And of resurrection of the dead,] The two remaining points are fundamental: And by the resurrection of the dead in this place and many others, he seems to comprehend immortal life, as the reward which the godly attain after death. And of eternal judgement.] Which is the punishment ordained for the ungodly. For seeing in this place the word judgement may signify two things, either the sentence or decree in general touching men; or damnation and punishment in particular: the latter of these is more consonant to reason, because of the word eternal attributed to judgement. For this is more proper and usually called eternal punishment, than the passing of the sentence, which in itself is not eternal, though in the effect of it, it be eternal. If therefore eternal judgement signify eternal punishment, than the resurrection of the dead in this place must signify an eternal reward, i. a blessed and immortal life; which also a Popish Interpreter upon this place hath observed, by saying: " Among other things, these two were principally delivered to the catechised, the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgement, that by hope of the resurrection they might willingly expose themselves unto all dangers for Christ, and for fear of the judgement never return to their former sins."  
3. And this will we do, if God permit,] i. If God permit, we will lay the foundation again. As if he had said, Although by all means we should take heed, that the matter fall not to this pass, as to cast a necessity upon us to lay the foundation again; Yet we will do so, if God shall please to permit us; whereby he tacitly intimates, that God would not always suffer this to be done: yet the Author's words are so carried, that as he did not altogether hope it, so neither did he wholly despair it. For, in the words following, he seems to respect both these cases; the former of them in the next words, ver. 4. and the latter at the ninth verse, where he is persuaded better things of them, and things that accompany salvation; of which his persuasion or hope, he allegeth a reason drawn from the righteousness and goodness of God.  
4. For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened] In these words the Author brings a reason, partly of what he lately intimated, touching God's permission, and partly of what he had openly said, of not laying again the foundation; namely, because it is impossible that effect should follow, which hereby may be intended. Besides, as we noted before, it appears, that the Author speaks here properly of Apostates, who condemn Christian Religion as false, and thereupon desert it. Of these he saith, It is impossible for them to be renewed unto repentance] Which impossibility partly depends upon the natural difficulty, that such should be again converted unto Christ, who have once forsaken him; for, it is an easier labour to retain the Christian Religion being once attained, then to recover it being once lost; but if those men have not performed the easier work in retaining it, much less will they perform the harder in recovering it. And if Christianity could not so work upon them, as not to reject it, how shall it gain upon them to re-embrace it, and receive it for true, when it stands rejected? And the impossibility partly depends upon God's will and decree; who, when men become so ungracious, as to stain their souls with such an incredible wickedness, is wont to judge them unworthy of his grace, and thereupon to reprobate and curse them, (which word the Author useth afterward at the eighth verse, by a simile drawn from a barren soil.) Whence it comes to pass, that (as the Scripture speaks) God hardens them, and holds them captives to his judgements. Which notwithstanding must not be so understood, as if God would never release this just rigour and severity, but only that he useth not to release it. For the Civilians say. That which depends upon the pleasure of the Prince, is deemed impossible] i. That which by the common course of Law cannot be done, unless the Prince grant it by virtue of his prerogative, is not thought possible and seasable, especially if the thing be such as the Prince useth not to grant. Renovation therefore is impossible, unless God as it were make use of his prerogative to extend his singular grace and favour toward such a man, not only not to harden him, and oppose himself against his conversion, but also to further him by his special assistance, and supply him with most effectual remedies for his reclaiming. For, otherwise the saying of Jeremy must stand good, Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the Leopard his spots, then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. The man accustomed to evil cannot ordinarily recover from his evil custom; but if he do, the case is extraordinary, by an extraordinary influence of God's grace upon him. Who were once enlightened.] He gins to describe those men, that have been converted unto Christ; In which description he declares what graces such men have received from God. Whence it is no marvel, if upon their neglect and contempt of so great graces, God do afterward reprobate and reject them. Men converted are enlightened with the light of the Gospel, wherewith (as the Apostle speaks) Christ hath brought life and immortality to light, 2 Tim. 1.10. whereby he hath expelled all errors, all darkness and blindness of mind. And have tasted of the heavenly gift] The article the added to gift, doth design and specify some extraordinary and notable gift. Yet he means not the gift of the holy Ghost, because he mentions that particularly by itself presently after. And therefore he rather means, that which ariseth and followeth in the mind after it is enlightened with the Gospel; such as is the tranquillity and peace of mind, which grows from the knowledge of a plenary pardon of all our sins; and the pleasing joy which issues from the hope of eternal life. For these are truly heavenly gifts, which men converted unto Christ have tasted, by feeling the pleasantness and sweetness of them in their souls. And were made partakers of the holy Ghost] Men converted unto Christ, are made partakers of that divine power and efficacy, whereby their minds are yet more clearly and certainly enlightened; whereby those heavenly gifts are enlarged and increased unto them for the greater beauty, ornament, and comfort of their souls; whereby they are sealed unto the day of redemption, whereby they receive an earnest, a pledge, and an assurance of their heavenly inheritance; and whereby they perceive the certain truth of their Christian faith, which procures such great benefits from God unto them.  
5. And have tasted the good word of God] The good word of God, although it may signify the whole doctrine of the Gospel, which is very fair and good; every way consonant to reason and honesty: yet by use of Scripture, it seems to signify particularly that part of God's word, which contains God's promises; because when God makes us a promise, he therein gives us his word; And as Gods other revealed verities are his true word, so his promises are his good word; because they always entitle us to some good which is conveyed in his promise. So Gods promise to the Jews for the release of their Captivity, is called his good word, and his performance of that promise is called the performance of his good word; because both the promise, and especially the performance of it brought a great good to the people of God. Thus saith the Lord, that after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon, I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you in causing you to return to this place, Jer. 29.10. This promise or good word was given unto them before, as ye may read, Jer. 25.12. And so God's promise of Christ, in raising a Branch of righteousness unto David, was his good word; and the performance of it is called a performance of that good thing which he promised, See Jer. 33.14,15. And the powers of the world to come.] These powers seem to be those eminent qualities of that world and life to come; such as are everlasting pleasure, glory, beauty, dignity, strength, and force; a total freedom from all evil, and a total fullness of all good: Of these powers or qualities, men converted unto Christ have tasted; because they are not only enlightened with the knowledge of them, and delighted with the hope of them, but also affected with an unspeakable sense of them.  
6. If they fall away] We have noted before, that the Author treats not here of a simple falling into sin: but of a falling away which is Apostasy, whereof he before also made mention, chap. 3.13. This may be proved from 2. grounds. 1. Because God doth not use to reprobate men converted unto Christ, and put in that state which the Author formerly described, if after their conversion adhering still to the Christian religion, if they fall simply into whatsoever sin. For the Apostle saith. If any man sin (any man that hath given himself to Christ) we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus; Christ the righteous. 1 John 2.1. From these words it is plain, that men converted unto Christ, shall obtain pardon of God, even of those sins which they have committed after their conversion, in case they forsake them, and wholly cast off the yoke of sin, and follow Christian virtues. For if they were not pardoned for such lapses, than Christ were not their advocare. 2. The Author speaks here of such as crucify the Son of God again, and put him to an open shame, as appears in this verse. But this can agree to none but Apostates, as we shall see in the explication of those words. Yet there are some sins, which by way of analogy may be reduced to Apostasy; as those that are committed presumptuously with a high hand, after knowledge of the truth, i. casting away all fear and reverence of God. For he that yet retains and embraceth the doctrine of Christ in his mind, cannot let himself so lose unto sin; Or if a man after the knowledge of the truth, and reception of the Christian faith, have no serious thoughts of repentance and amendment of life, but indulge himself to sin as freely and as loosely as he did before; Or having cast off the yoke of sin, do again deliver up himself to the servitude and bondage of sin; The miserable and doleful condition of such men is described by Peter, 2 Pet. 2. For such men seem little to regard the holiness of Christian Religion, which they had embraced; and therefore come not much short of them, who altogether reject it. But he that in hope of retaining the reward promised by Christ, doth always carry a mind to forsake sin, and seriously endeavours it, though for some time he cast not away the custom of some vice, or make himself guilty of some heinous sin through infirmity, is not therefore so wholly reprobated and accursed, that it should prove impossible for him to be recovered from such sins, and after recovery to be justified and saved. To renew them again unto repentance,] To renew is a verb of active signification, and notes the act of another upon one so fallen away. From whence it appears, in his former words verse 1. where he said, not laying again the foundation, etc. and at the 3. verse, and this will we do, doth really speak either of himself alone, or at least as including himself as the renewer of such. For in these words he shows the cause of those, q.d. Take heed, that we be not forced to renew you again to repentance; because it is impossible to renew again to repentance those that have once been Christians, and have ceased to be so. Unto repentance,] So as they perform the acts of repentance, by changing their mind into a better frame, and by condemning their former resolution to resume that Religion again, which once they have wickedly rejected, and then to compose their life according to the rules of it. Seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,] In these words he shows the matter wherein this falling away consists, or rather the foul wickedness cleaving to it, and therefore what good cause there is, why God will not have such persons renewed to repentance. To crucify the Son of God is a damnable wickedness; how much more is it so, to crucify him afresh, after he is now become glorious, immortal, and Lord of all things? To themselves,] They do not crucify him afresh really and properly, for that cannot be, but to themselves. In respect of themselves they do it; for their falling away from the Christian Religion, is all one as if they crucified Christ; for by their falling away, they judge and condemn him again to have been a seducer, a teacher of false doctrines, and so to have been deservedly crucified. And put him to an open shame,] They cast a public ignominy and reproach upon him, as is done to those who undergo a public and infamous punishment. This very wickedness the Author expresseth in other words, signifying the same thing, chap. 10.29. where he saith, They tread under foot the Son, and account the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing.  
7. For the earth,] He illustrates and withal confirms his former assertion by an argument partly of similitude and partly of contrariety. For while he shows what is done to good men that are fruitful of good works, he shows withal what befalls men forgetful of God's benefits conferred upon them, and ungrateful to him. This simile he proposeth in a concise and contracted form of speech, confounding and mingling the members of it, as is frequently done both in Sacred and profane Writers. For hereupon he seems to say of the earth, that because it is fruitful, therefore it receives blessing from God; which cannot be said properly but only by way of compatison. For God doth not bless the earth with fruits as a reward of her fruitfulness; for the blessing of God upon the earth is the enriching her with fruits; as appears by the words of Isaac to Jacob, Gen. 27.27. See the smell of my son, is as the smell of a field, which the Lord hath blessed. But because a fruitful soil is tilled the more diligently; hence it is that it more plentifully abounds in fruits. And, as we have noted, the Author spoke in this manner, because in the reddition this simile it is properly true. For when a man becomes like a fruitful soil and abounds in the fruits of good works, than he receives ablessing from God, in reward of his godliness. Which drinketh in the rain that often cometh upon it,] The rain that often moisteneth the earth, is like the gifts of God showered down upon men, whereof he treated, ver. 4.5. which are therefore fitly resembled to the rain often falling on the earth, because they are manifold and plenteous, sufficient to moisten the soul of man, and make it spiritually fertile to produce divers fruits of good works. The rain may also resemble the frequent and daily preaching of God's word; which when it is preached, is like a shower streaming down from heaven to water and fructify the soul of man. But the former resemblance is more full and more fit to the point. And bringeth forth herbs meet for them for whom it is dressed.] The various fruits of virtue, and works acceptable to God, done according to his Laws, do resemble those herbs which the earth brings forth, meet for them that dress it; or rather meet for them, at whose charge and for whose sake it is dressed, namely for the Lord of the soil, to whom the fruits and revenues of it do belong and accrue; who in the reddition of the simile, is God. Hence the Apostle saith, We are Gods labourers; ye are God's tillage, ye are God's building, 1 Cor. 3.9. Is dressed,] The earth, besides the falling of rain upon it, must have a diligent tilling or dressing. For the rain alone is not sufficient to make the earth fruitful in herbs meet for the Owner of it, unless it be also dressed by ploughing or digging, weeding and dunging. Hence the vine-dresser pleaded for the barren figtree, Lord let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it and dung it, Luke 13.8. So also God doth not only water our souls with his gifts, as with frequent and seasonable showers, but also affords us a diligent and various dressing, by the labour of his Ministers, to instruct, exhort, reprove and comfort us. Receaveth blessing from God] Why the Author speaks thus of the earth, and what that blessing is in reference to the earth, we have showed already in the entrance of this verse. But in reference to men fruitful in good works, this blessing of God signifies, both a multiplying of his spiritual gifts in this life (for to him that hath shall be given, saith Christ, and every branch that beareth fruit, God prunes it, that it may bring forth more fruit, John 15.2.) and also chief the gift of eternal happiness in the life to come. For then God blesseth a man when he makes things to go well with him; but better things can never go with us, then when he makes us eternally blessed and happy.  
8 But that which beareth thorns and briers.] That earth which is watered with frequent rain, and diligently dressed, doth not withstanding bear thorns and briers. Whence it appears, that here the Author hath reference to men, who have received the knowledge of divine truth, as the assertion itself requires: for proof whereof, he allegeth these words; and to such men who for no small time have been endowed with divers gifts, and diligently dressed of God. These thorns and briers are all sorts of evil works, which have no use, but for evil; for hence the Apostle calls them unfruitful works, Ephes. 5.11. Among which, Apostasy or defection from Christ, leads the first rank. And from this simile it is manifest, that the judgement or punishment which expects apostates, doth also wait for them, who have affinity with apostates (whom we mentioned before) who after knowledge of the truth, and after so many gifts and benefits bestowed by God upon them, are yet indulgent to their sins, and without all endeavour of a better life conformable to God's laws. Is rejected,] In the original, is reprobated: For no man is willing to labour in vain, and to weary himself with fruitless works. When a piece of land hath been dressed and dunged with all labour and care, and yet in stead of fruits, bringeth forth nothing but thorns and briers, and other weeds, that yield no profit to the husbandman; the manner is for men to meddle no more with such a piece of land, but to reject and leave it. That which the husbandman doth to an evil ground, the same doth God to men that resemble evil ground; for God will bestow no more labour and care upon them, but will reprobate, reject and leave them. And is nigh unto cursing.] The husbandman can hardly forbear from cursing such an evil piece of ground; for it cannot be fare from a curse. So such men as are like evil ground, are not far from the curse of God, but are like the barren figtree which Christ cursed, when he found no fruit upon it; Let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever, Matth. 21.19. If this curse fall upon fruitless men, than there remains no hope of repentance and amendment. But the Author would rather say, that such ground is nigh unto cursing, then already cursed. For though fruitless men deserve Gods present curse, yet God doth not presently lay his curse upon them, but for a long time delays their punishment, and expects fruits of repentance; as in the parable of the barren figtree, the Lord of it stayed three years without any fruit of it, and yet forbore it a fourth year at the request of his vine-dresser; Luke 13. Whose end is to be burned.] When a piece of ground fails of his crops, and brings forth thorns and briers, or light straw without corn, the manner of husband men is to kindle fires upon it and burn it. So men barren of good works, shall at length have a fire kindled upon them, and be burnt with everlasting torments. Of which fire the Author speaks afterward, chap. 10.27. Now that barren land by burning is not impaired, but amended; this in this simile is not regared: For it is sufficient to the Author's intent, that both are burned, and land is burned for the barrenness of it, as it were to punish the fruitlessness. But herein is the difference, that the burning betters the barren land, but it finally destroys fruitless men, and makes them most miserable. For in every similitude, as we say, there is also some dissimilitude.  
9 But beloved] In these words he seems to meet with a  objection, and withal returns to what he had before intimated, that if need were, they should not altogether despair of his laying a foundation again. The Hebrews might think, or gather from his words of falling away, etc. that he had no hope at all of their salvation. Therefore he shows, that he doth not account them for reprobates and accursed persons, who are for no other purpose then to be punished with eternal fire; neither doth he believe them in so miserable and deplorable ●n estate, but that he hath a better opinion of them; and therefore wrote not the former words, as if he esteemed them such: but only to cast some fear into their minds, and diligently to warn them of taking heed, that they became not such. Beloved] This place was very seasonable for that term, lest they should imagine themselves in his hatred; but thereby might perceive that he carried a Christian love toward them, and love makes us always imagine the best of them we love; and when we let fall a sharp word, it is not done with intent to hurt, but to reform them. We are persuaded better things of you] Better things then to think you reprobates and rejected of God, so that God should for the present curse them, and for the future ordain them to be burnt with fire unquenchable. And things that accompany salvation] Here he opposeth salvation to malediction or cursing, q.d. I am persuaded that ye are yet in that state, that ye may be saved, if ye have a will to it. Though we thus speak] q.d. My former speech of those which fall away, and are like barren and fruitless ground, in a miserable and unhappy state, doth nothing let, but that I am persuaded you are in a better estate; which is not therefore, as if that which he had affirmed were less certain and true. So that in these words he would tacitly mollify, what he seemed before to have said a little too severely. But that either those Hebrews were not fully fallen into the state of such as fall away, because they yet ministered to the Saints, were endued with excellent virtues, and had not yet cast off the Christian Religion, but did cleave unto it. Or else that God (as appears by his following reason) had great cause to release unto them that severity; and therefore, seeing he is not unrighteous, but full of all equity and kindness, it might well be hoped that he would release it. For although these Hebrews had not yet plainly revolted from Christ; yet they were fallen into such negligence, that in a manner they had need to be taught again the first principles of the Christian Religion. Whence it appears, what cold and dull Disciples of Christ they were; for which offence, if God would deal severely with them, they were worthy to be reprobated, and finally rejected. But because it is God's manner to deal mercifully and kindly with men, and to moderate his penal Laws with equity and mercy; therefore the Author hoped better things of them.  
10. For God is not unrighteous] Here he shows the reason why he is persuaded better things of them, then that God should reprobate and reject them. And the reason is, because God will not forget their work and labour of love. And this he confirms by this, because God is not unjust; whence it would follow, that God should be unjust, if he should forget them. Some man may here demand how this can stand with what God hath testified of himself, Ezeck. 33.13.? If the righteous commit iniquity; all his righteousness shall not be remembered: but for his iniquity that he hath committed he shall die for it. We answer, that God in a divers respect is said to forget a man's former virtues, and in a divers not to forget them. He forgets them, in respect that he justifies or frees from punishment no man by reason of his former virtues if he recede from them; in which case Ezekiels words are to be understood. And God doth not forget them, in regard he spares a man the longer for his former virtues, and doth not instantly reprobate or reject him, but expects and assisteth him for repentance; especially if he be adorned with some eminent virtues, such as charity and bounty toward the godly, as these Heb●ewes were, by the acknowledgement of the Author. But should God be unrighteous or unjust, if he had no consideration of this? We answer. Righteousness, as also unrighteousness may be taken two ways. For righteousness may be taken, either for that equity which consisteth in giving every man his proper right; and contrarily unrighteousness may signify that iniquity which infringeth another man's right. Or righteousness may denote such an equity, as inclines rather to be neficence and kindness, and consisteth in giving those things, whereto a man hath properly not right; yet there may be some causes which may sway him so to grant something, that if he grant it not, we may well say he deals unequally and hardly. In this latter way God may seem to be said unrighteous, if he should be so unmindful of virtues both past and present; if he should presently reject men, though otherwise worthy of reprobation, if God should deal with them according to his Law; and no way expect their repentance, but wholly exclude them from all address to his clemency & mercy; especially if it appear not, that there are some prevalent causes which restrain God from showing mercy; as in case he be to show herein some example of his judgement. For God must not presently be said unrighteous, if he deal somewhat severely with one or two; but then, when he usually doth it, or doth it with whole Churches. Wherefore the Author brings not here any demonstrative or convictive reason, or such as that God might not lawfully do otherwise without the aspersion of unrighteousness or iniquity properly so termed; but only a reason very probable, drawn for the most part from the clemency and mercy of God, which is voluntary in him. To forget your work and labour of love] To speak properly forgetfulness is not incident unto God; but figuratively he is then said to forget, when he hath no regard of a thing, or doth that which men forgetful do. Their work as it seems, was the conflict they had in suffering afflictions, from their first entrance into the faith of Christ, as the Author speaks of them afterward, chap. 10 32. Unto which work or conflict he subjoins the labour of love; for in the place last cited, after that conflict which they endured, the Author mentions their offices of charity, which they exercised toward the Saints. And it is not likely that in this place, where especially their good works were to be mentioned, the Author would pass over their noblest act, which consisted in suffering for Christ's cause. For Paul hath joined these two together, the work of faith and labour of love, 1 Th. 1 3. where by the work of faith, he seems to understand their many sufferings for the truth's sake. For such a work grows immediately from faith; as labour and bounty toward the Saints springs only from love, and is therefore called the labour of love. And that patience which proceeds from hope is called the patience of hope, because it argues constancy in suffering afflictions under hope of reward, and is there added to the work of faith and labour of love. Their labour of love was another act of theirs no less acceptable to God, and no less remarkable in itself. Labour of love, is that labour which proceeds from love; or that labour whereto love puts us; and love makes any labour light and easy; for nothing is more powerful, nothing more imperious than love. And this labour is seen, in helping him whom we love, with all our strength, power & endeavour. Which ye have showed toward his name] Their love toward God, made them so dear to God, that it would not suffer him to reject them, and wholly exclude them from salvation. And this love was showed toward the name of God, because they shown it to no other end, but with respect to God's name. How this was thus effected he presently declares. In that ye have ministered to the Saints, and do minister] We show love when we minister; and we show love toward the name of God, when we minister to the Saints, merely therefore because they are Saints, and consecrate unto God. For he that ministereth to the Saints and shows love to the Saints, therefore because they are Saints and bear the name of God, he shows love toward the name of God; as he that ministereth to a Disciple of Christ, because he is his Disciple, he ministereth to Christ himself. As much as ye have done it (saith Christ) unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me, Mat. 25.40. This Ministry consisted herein, that in the afflictions of the Saints, the Hebrews were wanting to them in no good office, but helped them in all things to their power; as he expresseth it afterward, chap. 10.33. that they became their companions in their afflictions. And this is done, when we esteem the affliction of an other to be in a manner our own; when we have a singular care of him, and perform those offices unto him, that we would have performed to ourselves, if we were in his case. And do minister.] This virtue of ministering to the Saints was not yet quite ceased in them, albeit it may be somewhat abated.  
11. And we desire] Here he passeth to the other part of the chapter; wherein he exhorts them to a diligent and constant course of godliness; and admonisheth them never to faint in their faith and hope. And he seems here to take away a tacit objection, that might settle in their minds. From his last former words; they might be too much advanced in hope, to believe that now all must needs go well with them; seeing God without being unrighteous could not forget the things they had done and suffered, and did yet do and suffer for God's cause. Lest they should fall to imagine this, the Author shows them what he would have them yet do, and what he yet finds wanting in them; if they meant to retain and assured hope of salvation. He proceeds very prudently with them, when a little before, he seemed to have terrified them too much, and to debar them from all hope of salvation; he again erected them, and shown that he did not so conceive this, but that he was persuaded better things of them. And now again, lest they should be too confident of themselves and be puffed up in mind, and flatter themselves with an infallible hope of salvation; he shows them their wants, that being thus reduced to a temper, that they might neither despair of salvation nor presume of it. That every one of you, do show the same diligence] He calls not only upon the whole Church in general, but upon each person singly, to continue the same diligence and endeavour, that they had done from their first reception of the Gospel. To the full assurance of hope] To be assured of a thing is to have a knowledge of it, that it is thus or thus. And a full assurance is a full and certain knowledge, or as we vulgarly speak, it is a certainty. And a full assurance of hope is a certainty of those things that are the object or matter of our hope. And the hope here meant, is the Christian hope, whose object is eternal salvation; whereof our Christian hope is an expectation. And this hope is advanced & augmented by our constancy in faith and good works; whereby it is daily more and more assured; and the assurance of it daily made more full. They had a hope of salvation grounded upon the promises of God, and quickened by the work they had done and yet did for God's cause: but a full assurance of hope they had not; for they had not yet fulfilled the measure of Christian duties, whereof how much was wanting, so much they wanted of full assurance, because so much their hope was the less. Unto the end.] These words may be referred to their diligence, that they should continue that to the end. Or they may be referred to their assurance of hope, that it might last to the end. For a man may gain a full assurance of eternal life, and yet lose it again.  
12. That ye be not slothful] Slothfulness is then when a man becomes more remiss in the ways and works of godliness. Wherefore his desire is, that they would constantly hold on to the end, the same course of godliness which they held at the beginning. For a remissness and slowness ariseth from the remissness and faintness of our faith. And this is the same fault in them which he reproved before in the 4. chap. ver. 1. and chap. 5.11. But followers of them who through faith and patience] To their slothfulness he opposeth faith and patience, because faith and patience are as a remedy to cure their slothfulness in the course of godliness. Faith is a trusting to God's promises; and patience in this place signifies perseverance and constancy in faith; or a constant and lasting expectation of his promises, although they seem to be deferred. This patience requires not only, that no delay of time should weaken our faith; but also that no evils or adversities should discourage it: for if by faith we mean to attain God's promises, we must look for many sufferings to intervene in the mean while. For in this sense the Apostle useth the word patience, Jam. 5.7,8. who those men be, of whom they should be followers in faith and patience, he shows in the following verse, namely that they are the Patriarches, whereof he names Abraham as the principal. Inherit the promises.] This is the fruit of our faith and patience to inherit the promises of our faith: And this he adds the more to excite them to a constancy in faith and patience to the end; because thereby they shall reap the excellent fruit thereof by inheriting the promises. He faith inherit, in the present tense, because the present tense is commonly put indefinitely for any time, that the minds of the readers might be drawn as it were to a thing present.  
13. For when God made promise to Abraham] In these words he gives not a reason, why they should be followers of such as inherit the promises: but he only gives a reason why he makes mention of such. For some man might demand whether there were any such to be followed, and who they were? In these words therefore for an example thereof, he produceth Abraham the father of the faithful, who was most patiented and constant in his faith, and reaped the greatest fruit of his faith. And first he shows that Abraham had the promise of God, upon which his faith relied; then at the 15. verse, he mentions the constancy of his faith, and also the fruit of it. Upon the mention of Gods promise made to Abraham, he mentions also the oath of God; whereby God would confirm his promise to him. This he therefore doth, because the same promise belongs to us also in a mystical & better fence, as a little after we shall show; & therefore we should apply the greater & stronger faith unto it; and therein be followers of Abraham, and other Patriarches that followed him. And we must note the manner of speech which the Author here useth; he saith not that God promised Abraham before he swore, but when he made promise, or in promising he swore; that the truth may appear of what we noted before, that indefinite Participles joined with a Verb of the preter tense, must not always be understood of the time past, but often of the present; So afterward, chap. 9.12. Christ is said to have entered into the holy place by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption for us; Not that Christ obtained that redemption before he entered; but that he obtained it at his entrance: whereof we shall speak further there. But by the way, the Author shows the cause, why God did swear by himself; when he saith, Because he could swear by no greater, he swore by himself.] Therefore he swore not by another, because than he, by whom he was to swear, must be greater than himself, as such a one that must be invocated as an avenger of his violating of his oath, and whom by this means the swearer must revere and adore. But God hath none whom he should fear as an avenger, none whom he should adore as a Deity to him; and consequently hath none greater than himself; where fore if God will swear upon any occasion (as the occasion is expressed, verse 16.) he must needs swear by himself. And when the Author saith of God that he did swear, he respects the words whereby God made promise to Abraham, saying, By myself have I sworn, Gen. 22.16. But the solemn form whereby God useth to swear, is, As I live] q. d. Let me not be accounted for the living God; for all other forms are referred and reduced to this. As when he is said to swear by his soul, by his life, by his holiness, by his arm (that is his strength and power) and by his right hand, (that is his faith.)  
14 Saying,] He rehearseth the sum of Gods promise made to Abraham. Surely,] In the original it is a men, or e men; which is an Adverb of sweeting; commonly put after a Verb whereby we do assevere, that a thing is true or shall be done. For as an oath is a Confirmation of some thing asserted or promised; so every Confirmation is an assurance to him who receives it; and therefore the word Surely is properly an Adverb of swearing. Yet in many passages of Scripture, the word Surely is but an Adverb of Asseveration, which is a less and lower Confirmation than an oath. Blessing, I will bless thee, and multiplying, I will multiply thee.] This promise in some places of Scripture, is indeed delivered in other words: but these make up the general sum of it. And the gemination or doubling of the words, according to the idiom of the Hebrews doth intent and magnify the thing; I will greatly bless, and greatly multiply. This promise is described. Gen. 22.16. But we are to note, that this promise pertains not only to Abraham, but also to his seed; Or if we respect the literal or carnal sense of this promise, Abraham is promised to be greatly blessed in his seed: for the blessing consisted in this, as God himself declares, that God would multiply Abraham's seed as the stars of heaven, or as the sand upon the seashore; that his seed should possess the gates of their enemies; and all nations should be blessed in him. i. He should have a posterity most numerous and most happy: All which particulars pertain to Abraham no otherwise then by his seed. But if we respect the spiritual sense of that promise, the blessing of Abraham must be distinguished from his multiplying, and the blessing will consist in his justification, as the Apostle teacheth us, Gal. 3.8,9. wherein we must include his eternal happiness: which blessing pertains not only to Abraham, but also to his spiritual seed, which is Christ. i. all Christian people; whereof, see Gal. 3.16. But the multiplying must be referred to the innumerable multitude of believers; for all that believe in Christ, are the children and posterity of Abraham, Rom. 4.16,17. and Gal. 3.9.  
15. And so after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promises.] Now he mentions the constant faith of Abraham, and the fruit of his faith. For that Abraham did long expect the promises of God, and expected till his death, and died in the faith, is well known from the history of Moses, and the Author declares it afterward, chap. 11.13. And his posterity could not be ignorant, but that he obtained the promise in a literal sense. But the spiritual blessing which consisted in his perfect justification and eternal salvation; as also in the multitude of believers, how this was performed unto him, we see. For we see him the Father of so many nations, and we see that God was not ashamed to call himself his God, even when he was dead; whereof hereafter, Chap. 11.16.  
16. For men verily swear by the greater] Here he gives the reason, why he said, that God did swear by himself and not by another greater than himself. Because men when they swear, they swear by another greater, but God seeing he hath none greater than himself, swears by himself. The Author therefore shows the difference between divine and humane oaths; for God swears otherwise then men do. Men when they swear, swear by a greater than themselves, because they have another greater than themselves, namely God. But God, who hath none greater than himself, when he swears, must needs swear by himself. And an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Here he shows the certain force and use of oaths, that an oath doth determine and end every controversy arising between men; when one affirms and another denies, and the point cannot otherwise be certainly known, for then in such a case an oath is rightly required. An oath for confirmation. An oath required in controversy doth confirm the saying of the one party, and thereby it determines and ends the strife. For that is accounted firm and certain, which is affirmed and proved upon oath.  
17. Wherein God willing more abundantly] Wherein, i. For which cause or by reason whereof. For because that an oath doth confirm and certify a thing uncertain and doubtful; and by the interposing thereof, the controversy is ended; therefore and for that reason God being willing to show more abundantly the immutability of his counsel, interposed his oath. More abundantly to show the immutability of his counsel.] The end of God's oath was to show the immutability of his counsel and purpose in blessing Abraham and his seed. He saith not simply, that God was willing to show his immutability, but to show it more abundantly; because God by a simple asseveration without any oath, could have abundantly shown, with what an immutable counsel he had decreed to bless Abraham and his seed; but that he might show it yet more abundantly, and so fully that nothing might be wanting to the confirmation of it, therefore over and above he added his oath. Unto the heirs of promise] The persons whom God would show this so abundantly, were the heirs of promise, to whom the things promised do appertain. And to whom else do they appertain, but to Abraham Isaac, jacob, and their seed; which being twofold, spiritual and carnal, therefore the promises pertain to the carnal seed in a carnal sense, and to the spiritual in a sense spiritual. To Abraham and to his seed was promised an inheritance and blessing, and an entrance into God's rest, whereof he treated above, chap. 4. In a carnal sense we must here understand the Inheritance of the land of Canaan, and an earthly happiness, which long since was performed to the carnal seed of Abraham: but in the spiritual sense, it is perfect justification and immortal life, which is performed to his spiritual seed. Confirmed it by an oath.] Or rather as it is in the margin, he interposed it by oath. God interposed and engaged his oath as an hostage or surety, that the faith of his promise might be secured to the heirs of the promise.  
18 That by two immutable things. God's promise and his oath are two things immutable, whereof neither can fail, for God's oath is immutable; and makes his promise irrevocable, and and so both become immutable. In which it was impossible for God to lie.] Not that it is possible for God ever to lie, though he speak not upon oath; but that, howsoever to some man it may seem possible in other matters, yet in his promise, and that confirmed by oath, wherein man may possibly lie, yet it is impossible for God to lie; yea, (as I may say) it is most fare from all likelihood or show of possibility. God descends thus to our infirmity, when according to the manner of men that would be credited, he binds his faith unto us, not in bare words, but with the bond of an oath; that if we believe men upon the bond of their oath, much more should we think it an impiety not to believe the most holy God upon his. And there are some learned men, who think that the word lie in this place, hath somewhat a larger extent, to include also that which seems to have any show of fraud or deceit; as when he that swears conceals some condition, the non-performance whereof may frustrate the event of the oath, in respect of his intention or expectation to whom the oath was made. We might have a strong consolation] Consolation or comfort than ariseth to us, when we have a hope of some happiness: but a great and strong comfort proceeds from a hope of the highest happiness, when our hope thereof is most certain and infallible, such as is the hope of eternal salvation, assured upon the promise and oath of God. Who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us.] He speaks not of every hope, but of the hope of Christians; and of that hope which is set before us, namely the hope of eternal life; which hope God himself hath set before us by calling us unto it, and giving the means to attain it, namely his promise and oath, high pledges and seals for our assurance of it. And we have fled for refuge to lay hold of it; for as if we had been driven down with some surious storm or tempest, wherein otherwise we should have perished, we have fled to this hope as to a sacred anchor, to lay hold upon it: To lay hold, is to grasp a thing fast with our hand; which shows how closely and firmly we should apply our mind to this hope, because it is the only refuge we have in all our dangers and distresses. In all these words the heirs of the promise are described.  
19 Which we have as an anchor of the soul] He now explicates the simile which before he had but intimated. Our hope of eternal salvation he compares to a firm and strong anchor; and our soul supported by this hope, he likens to a ship riding at anchor. Our hope of eternal salvation is an anchor to our soul; because, as long as our soul is held by this anchor, it is not beaten with any tempests of miseries, nor broken with rocks and flats, and therefore in no danger of being wrecked. Both sure and steadfast] These be the chief qualities of a good anchor; first that the cable be sure and break not, and then that the anchor be steadfast and come not home. For, if the anchor fail in either of these respects, the ship is in danger to be lost. And an anchor indeed doth many times fail, for either it comes home, or the cable breaks: but the anchor of our hope can never fail, and therefore we may assure ourselves upon it. And which entereth into that within the veil] That an anchor may be sure and steadfast, this also is required in it, that being fastened to the ship, it sink down to the bottom of the sea, and that there it lie not upon the face of the ground, but pierce deep within the ground. The like quality is in the anchor of our hope; all the difference is, that the anchor of the ship falls downward, but the anchor of our hope flies upward, and reacheth unto heaven itself, and pierceth inwardly into the very closerts of it. The Author would rather signify heaven by the word veil, then call it by the proper name, because he would prepare himself a passage, or rather a return to his intended treatise of Christ's Priesthood, from whence hitherto he had digressed. For, having made mention of the veil that hanged in the Sanctuary, and parted it from the Oracle or most holy place, he presently takes occasion to speak of the high Priest, whose proper office it was to enter within that veil into the most holy place. And therefore he adds.  
20. Wither the forerunner is for us entered] Thus he speaks of Christ, that withal he may tacitly show the cause, why our hope should fly so high and enter into heaven; namely, because our forerunner Jesus Christ is entered there, and entered there for us. He calls Christ our forerunner, because he is the guide of our journey thither, and goes before, leading thither the whole Army of Saints. He as soon as he entered heaven, drew thither our hope with him. Neither did he enter heaven as a bare guide to us in our journey thither, to show us the way thither only by his example, that we might not stray or fail of the right path; but he entered heaven also as a harbinger, there to prepare a place for us that should follow him; for so he testisies of himself, in saying, In my Father's house are many mansions etc. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you I will come ag●ine and receive you unto myself, that where I am, there may ye be also, John 14.2,3. This the Author also teacheth us, by saying for us. Christ is entered heaven for us, even for our sakes, to procure unto us eternal salvation and happiness there. Even jesus made a high Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedech. In that Christ is made our heavenly and eternal high Priest, therefore eternal salvation is obtained for us. For it cannot be, but so great a high Priest doth fully expiate our sins, doth turn away from us all God's wrath, and whatsoever punishments we have deserved, doth procure us eternal life, which is the promised effect of God's favour; especially seeing our salvation is in his hand, and left to his dispose. For hence it comes to pass, that our hope doth raise itself up unto heaven and hides itself with Christ in the mansions of it; and therefore doth so firmly support our souls, that they cannot be wrecked with any storms of evils. And so the Author makes entrance to his intended treatise of Christ Priesthood, which follows in the next Chapter.   

The Contents of this sixth Chapter are,  

1. Doctrine. Christian Religion hath her principles, verse 1. 

Reason. 1. Because she hath some doctrines, that are foundations, that must be laid as grouds, eod.  
2. Because she hath doctrines that are Initiations, wherein they are instructed that are initiated into Christ, by Baptism and laying on of hands, verse 2.    
2. Doctrine. The notions of a true Christian are several, verse 4. 

Reason. 1. To be enlightened with saving knowledge.  
2. To be sensible of peace of mind.  
3. To partake of the holy Ghost.  
4. To be affected with God's promise of salvation.  
5. To be delighted with the endowments which eternal life brings with it, verse 5.    
4. Doctrine. Apostates that fall away, cannot be restored by repentance, v. 6. 

Reason. 1. Because they crucify Christ again, v. 6.  
2. Because such are reprobated and rejected by God, as barren ground is by the husbandman, v. 8.    
5. Comfort. The Hebrews were in the state of salvation, v. 9 

Reason. 1. Because they shown works and labours of love in ministering to the Saints.    
6. Exhort. We must be diligent to assure our salvation, v. 11. 

Reason. 1. Because we must be followers of those that did assure themselves, by faith and patience, as Abraham, v. 12, 13.  
2. Because God hath assured it by promise to the faithful, who are the spiritual seed of Abraham, v. 13, 14.  
3. Because God hath assured it by his oath wherewith he confirmed his promise, and consequently it is assured us by two things immutable.    
7. Doctrine. When God swears, he swears by himself, v. 13. 

Reason 1. Because he hath none greater than himself by whom to swear, eod.    
8. Doctrine. Hope is an anchor to the soul, v. 19 

Reason 1. Because hope keeps the soul sure and steadfast in all the troubles and storms of this life, ibid.  
2. Because it entereth into heaven, where Christ is fore-entred for us.       

CHAPTER VII.  

1. FOr this Melchisedec] The particle for shows, that the Author would give a reason, of his last words in the former Chapter, why Christ is said to be made a Priest after the order of Melchisedec; namely, because between Melchisedec and Christ there is a great convenience and likeness. For, Melchisedec had a name and a kingdom most agreeable to that of Christ; he was a person of so great dignity, that he exceeded the Patriarch Abraham himself; and lastly, in the order of his Priesthood he was like unto Christ. King of Salem] It is manifest that Salem was a City so called wherein Melchisedec reigned. For, we cannot assent to them who say, that he was not truly king of Salem, but only called so, because his name signified so, as it also signified King of righteousness. But if this had been only an appellation of him, the Author would not have said king of Salem, but Melechsalem; as he said not King of Sedec, but Melchisedec. For, who in relating of a man's name, will deliver it partly in a strange language, and partly in the proper language. Wherefore, when Melchisedec is in Scripture called king of Salem, it is apparent; that the name of King doth note his royal office and dignity; and Salem notes the place wherein he did reign. And many beeleeve, that this City Salem, was the same with Jerusalem, which at the first was called only Salem, and afterward by the adjection of the word Jeru, Jerusalem, as a man would say, the sight of peace. Priest of the most high God] For so the Scripture calls him, Gen. 14.18. And though the word Cohen signify also a Prince, as the Sons of David are said to have been Cohenim, 2 Sam. 8.18. which our Translation there renders chief rulers; yet being attributed to Melchisedec, it notes him a Priest. 1. Because of that addition here made of the most high God; for this addition takes away all ambiguity of the word, and declares him to be a Priest of God, and not a Prince of God. 2. Because this is brought as a reason, why he blessed Abraham in an especial manner, as shall be showed afterward. 3. Because Abraham paid him tithes, which were usually paid to Priests. Whence it appears, that the same word Cohen, which is given to Christ as he is compared with Melchisedec, Psal. 110.4. doth not simply signify a Prince only, as the Jews contend, but properly a Priest. For, it is manifest that those words of the Psalm have respect to the place in Genesis, where Melchisedec is called Cohen. And it is no strange thing, that anciently Melchisedec was both a King and a Priest; for anciently Kings were wont to perform Sacred rites; which custom grew from hence, that in every family the principal person or ruler of it, did officate in holy functions. Whence it came to pass, that they who afterward became Princes or Rulers of a whole City, became also the public Priests of that City, and executed the sacred Ceremonies for the safety of the people: For it made most for the honour of God, that the most honourable person should minister unto him. Who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the Kings] The Author mentions not this meeting, as if in that, there were any Mystery: but because he would show how Melchisedec blessed Abraham, and reciprocally how Abraham gave tithes to Melchisedec. In which two points as he shows afterward, the chief dignity of Melchisedec appeared. And he mentions this meeting only to design the occasion, the time and circumstances of the action: whereof the History is particularly related. Gen. 14. And blessed him] Him, i. Abraham; for so saith the Scripture, He blessed him and said, Blessed be Abraham of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth, Gen. 14.19. that is, Let the most high God bless Abraham, and heap his gifts upon him in great abundance. And lest any man should think that this was but an ordinary blessing, such as commonly is among friends when they mutually pray and wish all happiness one to another; therefore he prefixed these words before it, that Melchisedec was a Priest of the most high God; thereby to make us know, that this was a singular blessing, as proceeding from a person that was a peculiar Minister of God. Whence it appears, that when Melchisedec is said to be a Priest of the most high God; thereby is not showed the reason why he brought forth bread and wine, as they would have it, who say that Melchisedec offered bread and wine to God, and was therefore called a Priest: but in those words is showed the reason why he blessed Abraham, and why (as it presently follows) Abraham gave him tithes. But the error of these men, who thereby would strengthen their own opinions may manifestly be convinced from hence, that the Author who most diligently prosecutes the likeness between the Priesthood of Melchisedec and Christ, makes not any the least mention of offering bread and wine, wherein notwithstanding they think, the greatest likeness between Christ and Melchisedec doth consist, and certainly must consist, if both offered bread and wine. Either therefore the Author omitted that which was the main point in so accurate a comparison of Christ with Melchisedec, or else that Melchisedec, or Christ, or both of them offered bread and wine to God, is but those men's dream. Melchisedec brought forth bread and wine, that he might refresh Abraham and his company, that were weary after their victory and journey: but he offered none to God; for this is refuted by the very word of bringing forth, which is never used of offerings: and besides the place and time, when this is said to have been done, refutes it also. For we use not to meet men upon the way, there to celebrate divine services or perform holy Ceremonies. Also Christ is never read to have offered bread and wine to God: but only to have instituted a holy Ceremony, wherein bread is broken and eaten, and wine is drunk out of a cup: yet not to perform any offering; but to celebrate the memory of Christ, whose body was broken for us, and his blood shed for us. As for the expiatory offering of Christ for our sins; that was not performed on earth, but in heaven. Hebrews 8.4. Neither doth it consist in offering of bread and wine, but in Christ's offering of himself; as this Author testifies in sundry places; neither was it to be iterated often, but once only to be performed, as the Author clearly delivers it afterwards in this Chapter, verse 27. and Chap. 10 14. For that single oblation perfects all the Saints.  
2. To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all] The fifth particular that the Author observes in Melchisedec, was, that Abraham gave him the tenth part (as is related in his history;) whence a little after, the Author collects, how far Melchisedec exceeded the levitical Priests. The gift that Abraham gave him was a part of the spoils; for so it is expressed, at the 4. v. following, and the portion he gave was a tenth part of them; and there were none of the spoils excepted and reserved, for he gave him a tenth part of all. By these words he partly explicates some things related in Scripture of Melchisedec, and partly observes other things, whereby to make it appear, how great a person Melchisedec was, and how properly he was a type of Christ. First, being by interpretation king of righteousness.] First he ponders the name of Melchisedec, and teacheth that there was an omen in his name. For the Hebrew name Melchisedec being interpreted or translated into another language, doth signify a king of righteousnesso.] There are some who tell us, that this name signifies, my righteous king: but it is very usual with the Hebrews in Nouns compounded to add 1 to the first Noun, for sweet sounding and ornament, as Adonisedec, Adonibesec, Abimelech, Achimelech, Haminadab, Abisag, etc. and the same is done also in Melchisedec. From these words it manifestly appears, that this Epistle was not written in Hebrew but in Greek; for either these must be the words of a Greek interpreter, or of the Hebrew Author; of a Greek interpreter they cannot be; seeing they are a part of the Text itself, and of the reasoning therein. The words of an Hebrew Author how can they be? For what could be more vain; then first to interpret the name Melchisedec and Salem to the Hebrews, seeing none of the Hebrews could be ignorant of the sense of these names? and then to interpret Melchisedec Melechsedec, and Melechsalem Melechsalem. For so these names must needs be interpreted, if this Epistle were written in Hebrew; unless an Hebrew Author, writing Hebrew names to the Hebrews, should interpret them by another language than the Hebrew. It is therefore apparent that the Writer of this Epistle was a Greek, who interprets the Hebrew name Melchisedec and Salem; and from these very appellations doth tacitly draw an argument, to show that Melchisedec is a most elegant type of Christ, who is a King, of all others the most righteous and most peaceable. Whence Esay 9.6. he is called the Prince of peace, because he especially hateth and abhorreth wars, neither cares he to be famous for wars, as the Kings of this world do, but only for peace; and withal is most happy in himself, and the author of true happiness to his people. For, as it is well known, the word peace among the Hebrews signifies also all happiness.  
3. Without father, without mother] He hath showed that Melchisedeck was a Priest of the most High God; now he further declares what manner of Priest he was, and in that respect how far he was unlike to the levitical Priests; and contrarily how like unto Christ. In the levitical Priest, especially in the high Priest, the chiefest regard of all was, to know of what father, what mother, and of what family he came. But in the Priest Melchisedeck, it is apparent, there was no regard at all had of this; seeing the Scripture which testifies of him that he was a Priest, hath declared neither his father, nor mother, nor family. Melchisedeck therefore is said to be without father and mother, not that he had no father or mother; but because neither his father nor mother are declared or mentioned in the annals of the Scripture. For even among profane Writers they whose pedigree and parentage was unknown, were said to be of no family, and to have neither father nor mother. Theodoret speaks very well upon these words of the Author. " The holy Scripture (saith he) relates the Genealogy of Abraham and many others, as well who went before him as followed after: she mentions his father, grandfather and great grandfather, and all his direct ancestors; she adds also that when he was so many years old he begat a son, & when so many that he died. But she shows not the father nor parentage of Melchisedeck, nor how long he lived, nor when he died." Besides, in ordaining the levitical Priesthood it must be known of what family he was; for of necessity he must be of the family of Aaron, as Aaron himself was of the tribe of Levi; unto which tribe Jacob the Patriarch had Prophetically designed the Priesthood, as he had the Kingdom to the tribe of Judah. Regard also was had of his mother; for she must be an Israelite one of the twelve tribes; otherwise the son borne of her, being a stranger though married to the high Priest, was illegitimate for the Priesthood; and also the high Priest must necessarily be borne of a woman that was married to his father when she was a virgin, or was the widow of some other Priest; and one that was not of a plebeian and vulgar family; whereof see Leu. 21.13. Without descent, or pedigree] Whose genealogy or pedigree is not declared in Scripture. For a pedigree is a declaration of a man's parentage or descent: He is not without descent or parentage that hath no parentage at all; but because his parentage is not mentioned or extant, and therefore not known. And by this word it may appear in what sense the Author said that Melchisedek was without father, and without mother; namely, because as there is no mention in Scripture of his pedigree and ancestors, no neither of his parents; whereof the former is consequent to the latter. For he whose parents are unknown, how should his pedigree and descent be known? Having neither beginning of days nor end of life] Day's may here be taken, not for the time of his life, but for the time of his Priesthood when that began or ended; for so the Scripture mentions the days of Herod and of John Baptist. And in this sense Melchisedeck is said to have neither beginning of days, nor end of life, because the Scripture declares not, at what time his Priesthood began, nor when it ended; to make it hereby appear, that in his Priesthood there was no respect had either of his predecessor or successor. For therefore in every Priest the beginning and ending of his Priesthood is noted, that it might thence appear what predecessor and what successor each Priest had. And further the end of life is fitly opposed to the beginning of his Priesthood; because the Priesthood expired not but with his life. But if by Days we understand the time of his life, than we must acknowledge, that the beginning of his life is mentioned only for opposition and amplifications sake: For it was enough for the Author to show that Melchisedeck had no known successor in his Priesthood; that in this respect he might be a type of Christ, which he expresseth by saying, he had no end of life. But being willing to say yet more for illustrations sake, he affirms, that as he had no end of life, so he had no beginning of it; and therefore no marvel if the end of his life were not mentioned, when the beginning of it was concealed. But made like unto the Son of God, abideth a Priest continually] But compared or likened unto Christ, abides a Priest perpetually, and without any successor. He doth in these words further yet illustrate the point from the contrary. Melchisedec hath no end of life, but remains a Priest perpetually or for ever. And when he would signify where the Scripture testifies this, he saith, made like unto the Son of God; q.d. There the Scripture testifies it, where she compares and likens him to Christ. For the Scripture no where expressly saith of Melchisedec alone by himself, that he abides a Priest for ever, but only in comparing him with Christ, in the very words spoken of Christ, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. In which words the Scripture doth withal insinuate tacitly and by force of the comparison, that Melchisedec was a Priest for ever, and takes it as it were for granted. For unless she first suppose the perpetuity of Melchisedecs' Priesthood, how could she in this respect make Christ like unto Melchisedec? The Author saith, that Melchisedec was like unto Christ, when it seems he should rather have said, that Christ was like to Melchisedec. Yet the Author not only might speak so, but in a manner must. He might say so, because things alike are mutually so, and each is like the other. And he must, because when the Author would speak roundly, and refer the words of the Psalm, Thou art a Priest for ever, directly to Melchisedec himself; Melchisedec must be named in the first place, and not the Son of God; and therefore he is rightly inferred to be like the Son of God, and not the Son of God like him. For otherwise either the words of the Psalm must seem to be referred to the Son of God, as the Psalm itself refers them, and not directly spoken of Melchisedec by the Author; or certainly the perpetuity of Melchisedec must be asserted by this testimony of Scripture some other way yet not so roundly and briefly. And besides, the Author would tacitly show by this manner of speech, that the perpetuity of Melchisedec, was but typical and umbratilous compared to the eternity of Christ; and therefore in this respect, Melchisedec was rather to be likened to Christ, than Christ to Melchisedec. Abideth a Priest continually] That abides continually, which hath no intermission or cessation from being; which being applied to time signifies perpetuity. How Melchisedec is a Priest abiding perpetually and for ever, the Priesthood of his antitype who is Christ, may teach us. Christ is therefore a Priest abiding for ever, because his Priesthood lasteth a long time, and so long as there is any use of a Priesthood, or so long as the state of things shall so continue that there is no further need of any Priesthood: And then there shall be no further need of any, when the people of God are translated into heaven, and shall need no further expiation of their sins. So also Melchisedec was a perpetual Priest, because his Priesthood lasted a very long time, and together with it the knowledge and worship of the true God among men was extinguished; so that there was no further place or use of that Priesthood that was dedicated to the true God. For a thing is said to abide for ever, which both lasteth a long time, and also so long as the nature of the thing will bear. So David saith, that he will praise God for ever; so the Law is said eternal; and the Gospel in this sense is called eternal; and many other things in like manner. This way Melchisedec is called an eternal Priest, though in reference to Christ his Priesthood compared to the Priesthood of Christ hath but an umbratilous eternity, as the shadow to the body. For if the likeness were in every respect, than there would not be a figure and a truth, but either both figures or both truths. Therefore the likeness between Melchisedec and Christ in this place, consisteth in three things. 1. As in the Priesthood of Melchisedec there was no respect had of his parentage or family; for he is said to be without father, mother and descent: so neither in the Priesthood of Christ, who according to the flesh descended from that Tribe, who had no title to the Priesthood. 2. That both were perpetual Priests for ever; Melchisedec in an umbratilous and figurative way, but Christ solidly and really. 3. As Melchisedec in his Priesthood had no predecessor nor successor; so neither had Christ in his.  
4. Now consider how great this man was] Here gins another part of the Chapter, wherein the Author shows, how fare Melchisedec surpasseth in dignity the levitical Priests. That from thence it might appear, how fare more worthy that Priest is, who is after the order of Melchisedec, and of whom Melchisedec was but a shadow; for such a Priest must needs fare surpass any Priest that is after the order of Aaron. For, if the shadow were so excellent, what shall we attribute to the body itself? Now that Melchisedec was a more worthy person than the levitical Priests, he proves by three reasons. 1. Because Abraham gave him tithes. 2. Because he blessed Abraham. 3. Because hereupon the Scripture testifies, that he lives for ever. He calls therefore upon the Hebrews to consider this man, that he might stir them up to ponder and weigh the dignity of Melchisedec, q.d. I have briefly declared unto you from Scripture, how fare she speaks or is silent concerning Melchisedec. Now consider and ponder the particulars well, that thence ye may know how fare he excels the levitical Priests. Unto whom even the Patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils] The dignity of Melchisedec above the levitical Priests, appears first from this, that even Abraham gave him tithes. The particle even may be referred to Abraham; and than it seems added to exaggerate and amplify the dignity of Melchisedec from the person of Abraham; that not some vulgar person, but even Abraham himself gave him tithes. And to this opinion it elegantly agrees, that to the name of Abraham is added the title of Patriarch, and that with the article the] the Patriarch Abraham: For when we would amplify the honour of a person we put an addition of title to his name. Or as the order of the words require, the particle even may be referred to the tithes; and than it aggerates and amplifies the dignity of Melchisedec from the gift of Abraham, that Abraham gave him tithes, which is no vulgar present, but a solemn and sacred portion. So that the great dignity of Melchisedec is illustrated and magnified from two particulars, as well from the person of Abraham, who was the Patriarch, as from the gift of Abraham, which was a tenth of the spoils. The article the prefixed before Patriarch, doth not evince that Abraham only was a Patriarch, and no other men so: but it notes that he was some principal and renowned Patriarch, as indeed he was; for he was the father and Prince of the Patriarcks, and the first founder of the Jewish Nation, for whose sake the Jews became a Nation, because they were the seed which God promised him to be multiplied unto him. Now from all this, that so great a person as Abraham, the father and founder of the Jewish Nation should give a tithe to Melchisedec; from all this, I say, appears the great dignity of Melchisedec. For he that receives tithes is greater than he that gives them: and therefore Melchisedec must needs be greater than Abraham, who yet was the greatest of all the Jewish Nation; and consequently Melchisedec must needs be greater also, than all the Jewish Nation.  
5. And verily they that are the sons of Levi] He amplifies and illustrates his former argument; and compares Melchisedec with the levitical Priests in the point of taking tithes. In which respect, he acknowledgeth a great dignity and prerogative in the Levites, in that all the rest of the tribes though descendants with them from the same Abraham, yet were bound to pay them tithes. And so the dignity of Melchisedec far exceeded theirs. Who receive the office of the Priesthood] He saith not, that the sons of Levi receive the office of Priesthood; but they of them who receive it. For all the Levites had not right to the Priesthood, but only some of them, namely the posterity of Aaron, as ye may see at large, Num. 3. & Num. 18. The rest of the Levites were joined to the Priests, to minister unto them in the holy things, to keep the Temple and the holy vessels, to be●r the A●k when need required (which notwithstanding they might neither touch nor look upon, till it were wrapped up) to slay the ordinary sacrifices brought by single persons, and to perform such other services. Have a commandment to take tithes of the people] This right and privilege was granted them from God, to claim tithes of the people: For to speak properly, the commandment to take tithes was not laid upon the Priests, but the people were bound by God's commandment to give tithes; and thereupon the Priests had a right to require and exact them. According to the Law] The manner how tithes should be paid, the matter from what things, the persons to whom, and the times when, are all determined by Gods Law. For first the people must give tithes to the Levites, Numb. 18 21. Then the Levites must give tithes of their tithes to the Priests. Numb. 18.28. And herein the dignity of the Priests appears fare the greatest, because not only the rest of the Tribes, but also the Levites themselves who were of the same Tribe, gave tithes unto the Priests. That is their brethren though they came out of the loins of Abraham.] Certainly a great dignity. Which would not have been so great, if some other men had been bound to pay them tithes; but that their own brethren, who came as well as they from the loins of the same Abraham, should be bound to it by the Law of God; this was a great argument of the dignity and eminency that rested in the Priests.  
6. But he whose descent is not counted from them, received tithes of Abraham] He shows how much in this respect Melchisedec is greater than the levitical Priests, whom first he described in such words, as most elegantly agree to Christ his antitype; that he might tacitly show, that it nothing hindered Christ from the dignity of his high Priesthood, that he came not from the Tribe of Levi. For it is as much as if he had said, The levitical Priests have this right and dignity, that they take tithes of their brethren though they descend from the same Abraham: But how much greater is it, that he, who as he comes not from the same stock, so neither doth he count his kindred from them, took tithes of Abraham himself? For it is much more, and more worthy to have Abraham himself tributary to him, than those who come from the loins of Abraham. Wherefore the levitical Priests have no cause to boast, as if to their line alone this right and privilege were granted of taking tithes from the people; seeing he who neither belongs to their line, nor accounts himself of it, did (as the Author speaks) decimate Abraham himself. And blessed him that had the promises] We have said before, that the Author prefers Melchisedec before the levitical Priests for three reasons; whereof the first is bipartite, whose former part the Author hath hitherto produced; and referring the latter part to the end of the proof, he comes here to the second full reason, taken from the act of Melchisedec in blessing Abraham. Yet that the great dignity of Melchisedec might the more evidently appear in this act of blessing, he doth not name Abraham, but describes him under this notion, him that had the promises, q.d. Melchisedec blessed him, whom God was to bless, and had bound himself by promise to bless him, and make him a blessing. For God had already said unto him, I will make of thee a great Nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great, and thou shalt be a blessing. And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed, Gen. 12.2,3. To bless this man that had such promises of blessing, and those so great, that there were none greater known upon earth; and to bless him also, not by way of charity or good will, by praying for all happiness upon him; but in a singular way according to his office, as he was the Minister and Priest of God; to whose prayer and wish God would in a manner oblige himself, which certainly is an evidence of high preeminence and dignity. And from thence he means to conclude that Melchisedec was greater than Abraham.  
7. And without all contradiction, the less is blessed of the greater. He had before expressed the Assumption, that Melchisedec blessed Abraham; and now he adds the Proposition, leaving every man to frame the conclusion, that Melchisedec is greater than Abraham. And if he be so much greater than Abraham, much more is he greater than the levitical priests. Without all controversy] These words show that his assertion is so evident and manifest; that no man can well deny it, and that with good cause. For every kind of apprecation or blessing, is not here to be understood; for even the least and meanest person may bless and pray for the best and greatest, and many times doth so: but as we have often noted, a singular and sacerdotal blessing. For he that gives another a blessing, as the Priest and especial Minister of God, to whom God hath committed the right and office of it, in such manner, that God will second the blessing of the Priest with his, and in a manner be obliged to perform it: certainly that person that thus gives the blessing, is greater and worthier than he that receives it. He is greater and worthier, if not in estate and civil power, as if he bless a King, when he himself is none, (which notwithstanding had not place in Melchisedec) yet certainly in regard of sacred function: For he is nearer in degree to God than the other, as a mean person between God that blesseth, and the party blessed; to whom he gives a kind of right to obtain from God the things he prayeth for. Therefore we read, Numb. 6.27. That God, after he had commanded that Aaron and his sons should bless the people of Israel, and had prescribed also the form of the blessing, doth profess that he will second the blessing, and confirm it upon the people. They shall (faith God) put my Name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them. Hence the son of Syrach, when he supplicated God for the people, and endeavoured to move him by his prayers, he forgets not this blessing of Aaron, saying, O Lord, hear the prayer of thy servants, according to the blessing of Aaron over thy people.] Ecclus. 36.17.  
8. And here men that die receive tithes] Now followeth the third reason, whereby he proves that Melchisedec is greater than the levitical Priests; namely, Because the levitical Priests receive tithes; yet one of them dies after another, and they succeed one another in the Priesthood: but Melchisedec hath a testimony of Scripture for him that he liveth. Here, i. here under the law and among us. But there he of whom it is witnessed, that he liveth.] There where we read that Abraham gave him tithes, he then received them, whom the Scripture witnesseth that he lives. But we must note that the Author opposeth not Melchisedec to mortal men, but to dying men only; neither doth he say that he is immortal, but only that he liveth. For life is not opposed to mortality, but properly to death. And there the Scripture saith, That Melchisedec doth live, where she affirms him to be a Priest for ever. And she affirms it in her comparison of him with Christ, when she saith, Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec, Psal. 110.4. as we explicated it before in this Chapter, vers. 3. Where we shown that Melchisedec was called a Priest for ever, because he exercised his Priesthood a long time, even for the full term of his natural life; and that he lived so long a Priest, as there was any knowledge of the true God among the men of his time, and any place for the Priesthood; so that Melchisedec in his Priesthood, resembled for his continuance all the levitical Priests, who succeeded one after another; which eternity of his was but umbratilous and figurative (as we said) of Christ's eternity. And therefore the life of Melchisedec was nothing but a shadow of that life which is in Christ. And if we respect the scope of the Author, it makes not to the matter, that Melchisedec did at last yield to the law of nature and die; for he speaks not of Melchisedec for himself, but for Christ, who truly lives for ever. It sufficeth in Melchisedec, that the eternal life of Christ was in some manner shadowed, and signified in the Scripture. And this is the reason why the Author opposed Melchisedec to dying men, and said he liveth for ever. For when we speak of the type, as of the antitype, we many times so speak of it, as of the anti-type itself: although the words must be applied figuratively to the type, and properly to the antitype.  
9 And as I may so say, Levi also who receiveth tithes, paid tithes (or was decimated) in Abraham. Here at last comes in, the other of the first reason, which we said was bipartite; and wherewith the Author now confirms the dignity of Melchisedec; namely, that when Melchisedec took tithes of Abraham, he tithed also Levi, and all the Priests sprung from his loins, who were themselves to receive tithes. To show the great dignity of Melchisedec, it was not enough for the Author to say, that he tithed Abraham himself, but Levi also, who took tithes, was by him tithed in Abraham; For it is as much as if he had taken tithes of Levi, when he took them of him, in whose loins Levi was yet latent. Therefore in a figurative way of speech the Author saith, that Levi was tithed through Abraham. For because he could not say properly, that Levi gave tithes to Melchisedec through Abraham, therefore lest his words should seem harsh, he mollifies them thus, (as I may so say) whereby he plainly declares, that what he spoke here of Levi, must not be taken literally and properly, but in a certain sense and form of speech. Levi also who receiveth tithes] not in his own person, but in his posterity; so that it is not strange, that he is said to have given tithes in his father, who is also said to have taken them in his children. But now let us see, how the Author proves this.  
10. For he was yet in the loins of his father when Melchisedec met him] Here he proves that Levi gave tithes to Melchisedec through Abraham, thus. If at that time Levi had been a person severed from Abraham and had enjoyed his estate apart to himself, this fact of Abraham in giving tithes to Melchisedec had nothing concerned him. But because Levi was then so united and joined with Abraham, that he yet lay couched in Abraham's loins; therefore he also is justly accounted to have given tithes to Melchisedec in or through Abraham. Which sentence notwithstanding must not be transferred to all the actions of a father; but only to those which properly consist either in the increase or decrease of his estate, which useth to descend to his children by right of inheritance; and the payment of tithes is such an action, for it so much decreaseth the father's estate. For they are paid out of the father's goods, which thus fare are already the children's, in that the right of inheritance thereto belongs to them; especially if it be certain that the father hath or may have children to succeed him in his estate, as Abraham had, to whom God had for certain promised a posterity. For as the heir after his father's death doth in a manner represent the person of his father, by his succeeding to him and possessing his estate: so likewise the father before his children be severed from him and have a right to dispose of his goods as their own, doth in a manner also represent the person of his heir and of all the rest of his children: and what he then ordereth or doth in his goods, the same in a manner his heirs are accounted to do. I say in a manner, because properly this cannot be said, neither doth the Author himself say properly, that it was done, but acknowledgeth an impropriety in his words as we noted before. Hence may easily be understood that which together with the Author we affirm; that such acts of the parents must be extended only to those of their successors or posterity, to whom the inheritance or some notable portion of their goods shall descend, either for certainty as here to Abraham's posterity, or at least in all probability. For otherwise that force of inheritance whereof we speak, will expire; and what any man orders concerning his estate cannot be attributed to his children and posterity.  
11. If therefore perfection] After that by comparing Melchisedec with the levitical Priests, he had showed that Melchisedec was a Priest, and a Priest much differing from the levitical, as a person fare greater and worthier than they. Now he proceeds to the third part of the Chapter. And in regard that after those levitical Priests, there must be another Priest ordained according to the order of Melchisedec and not according to the order of Aaron; therefore he thence argues and proves the imperfection of the levitical Priesthood, and also of the Law itself, upon which that Priesthood was ordained; and upon the imperfection of that Priesthood and Law, he proves the abrogation of both. If perfection were by the levitical Priesthood] By perfection here he understands nothing else, but a true and perfect expiation of sin, whereby the guilt not of some sins only but of all, even of the most grievous offences and crimes is taken away; whereby all punishments of sin not only temporal concerning this life, but the eternal punishment of death itself is remitted and forgiven; whereby a right to eternal life is granted unto men: and lastly, whereby not only all guilt of all sins, but all sins themselves are taken away from men. For in these things consisteth the true perfection of men before God. If therefore this perfection could have been brought to men by the levitical Priesthood, certainly there had been no need nor use of a new Priesthood after the order of Melchisedec; for every Priesthood is ordained for the expiation of sins. But if a perfect expiation of sins could have been effected by the Priesthood after the order of Aaron, what need a new Priest be supper induced after the order of Melchisedec, to perform those actions which might have been done by the former? Wherefore seeing God would ordain a new Priest, and also now hath ordained him; hence it appears, that by the levitical Priesthood, no man could obtain perfection or perfect expiation, and certainly no man did obtain it. For by that Priesthood some sins only were expiated; namely, as we shown before, ignorances' and infirmities: but great offences as crimes and villainies were punished with death. Neither had that expiation any force to take away eternal death, but only to release some temporal punishments proper to this life. Neither in those sacrifices was there any power to withdraw men from sin itself; all which particulars the Author prosecutes in the passages following. Yet the Author useth not the word perfection in one sense only, for there are divers perfections of a thing; and therefore we must still gather from the matter handled what perfection he means. Here because he speaks of perfection flowing from the Priesthood, therefore no other can be understood but that which is seen in a perfect expiation of sin; namely, that a man be wholly spotless and blameless, subject neither to pain nor loss by any sentence of condemnation in the sight of God. In which sense he useth the same word, chap. 10. 14. For under it the people received the Law] For what purpose the Author inserted these words into his former argument, we shall see afterward; and for the present shall speak of their explication. Under it, i. under the Priesthood, as if the people had received the Law under the Priesthood; and so most Interpreters affirm. But this sense is contrary to the words in the original, which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and do not signify under it, but upon it; and contrary to the truth of the thing; for the Law was not given under the Priesthood as if the Priesthood had been extant before the Law given; but rather contrarily a great and principal part of the Law was already given before the Priesthood was ordained; so that it might be more truly said, the Priesthood was given under or after the Law, than the Law under or after the Priesthood. And lastly, this sense is contrary to the mind of the Author, and makes nothing to the purpose: For what makes it to the purpose in hand, that the Law was given in the time of the Priesthood? For would it thence follow, either that perfection must be by that Priesthood; or if perfection were by it, that there were no need of another Priesthood? or lastly, if the Priesthood were abrogated, that then the Law were abrogate? Wherefore as the Greek words sound, it is said in this place, that the people received the Law not under the Priesthood, but upon the Priesthood. And to receive the Law upon the Priesthood, is nothing else but of the Priesthood, concerning or touching it. Which sense some Interpreters do acknowledge, as Junius and Tremellius and Piscator. For the Greek particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answers the Hebrew Hall; which often notes the object or matter of a thing. Now therefore these words may seem to cohere with the mind of the Author three ways. 1. If we say, that in them he shows the cause, why he named the levitical priesthood and no other; q.d. therefore I name the levitical priesthood, because the people received the Law of it. 2. That in them he shows cause, why it might seem, that perfection came by that Priesthood; namely, because the people received the Law of it. 3. That those words contain a confirmation or peculiar reason, why if perfection came not by the levitical priesthood, there must not be another Priest ordained divers from the levitical. For though this would be sufficient of itself to exclude another Priest; yet it follows so much the more, if not only perfection be by the levitical Priesthood, but also that Priesthood was established by the Law: and of this reason we most approve. Therefore it is as much as if the Author had said, If perfection be by the levitical Priesthood, especially seeing concerning it, Laws were given to the people; what need is there, for the ordination of another Priest? for many times in Scripture a reason of a sentence is inserted, before the sentence be fully uttered in all the parts of it. Whereof among other places we have an example, 1 Pet. 4.1.2. in these words, For he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin, which must be read as in a parenthesis. For they contain the cause, why Christians must suffer in the flesh with Christ; i crucify the flesh, because he that hath suffered in the flesh; i whose body is put to death, he hath ceased from sin. And the reason is general, agreeing to all the dead. Therefore the words which follow from the beginning of the second verse, That he no longer should live, &c must not be joined with the words next preceding, Ceased from sin; but (they being included in a parenthesis as a general reason) they must be referred to the former words, arm yourselves, as to their final cause. The mind of the Author in this place will be more plain, if we transfer these words, to the end of the verse, thus. Therefore if perfection be by the levitical Priesthood; what further need was there that another Priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron; especially seeing of that Priesthood the Law was given to the people? For thence it presently follows, that together with this Priesthood the Law must be abrogated, when a Priest ordained according to the order of Melchisedec; which should not be abrogated unless there were some default in it. That another Priest should rise] From his former grounds he infers, that a Priest after the order of Melchisedec, must be another and a different Priest from those Priests that are after the order of Aaron. For Melchisedec was both a King and a Priest; the Levites were only Priests; he had no Priestly pedigree, these must have so; he had neither predecessor nor successor: these succeed one another; he is an eternal Priest; these dye: lastly, he is greater and worthier than Abraham himself, and therefore much more so then the levitical Priests. After the order of Melchisedec] The order of Melchisedec is a little otherwise taken then the order of Aaron: for by that is signified a likeness only with the Priest Melchisedec, as the Author speaks afterward, ver. 15. but in this is contained not only a likeness with Aaron, but also a natural succession into his place and Priesthood.  
12. For the Priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law] He brings a reason, (which notwithstanding was before tacitly showed in the parenthesis which we explicated) why a Priest must be ordained according to Aaron, and no other rise according to the order of Melchisedec, if by the aaronical Priesthood men's sins could have been expiated perfectly. The reason is, because the Priesthood could not be abrogated or changed, unless the Law whereby it was established were abrogated and changed also Wherefore either to preserve the authority of the Law itself, if not for the dignity of the levitical Priesthood, a Priest must have been ordained after the order of Aaron, if perfection came by that Priesthood. But because this was not done, therefore it is manifest that perfection could not be given by that Priesthood; and consequently for the imperfection of it, there was good cause it should expire. He saith the Priesthood was changed, not only for that it was translated to another Tribe (divers from that of Levi) wherein a Priest was ordained after the order of Melchisedec: but also in that the Priesthood itself was altered and changed into another kind different from the former. Although to the end the Author might use this word in this latter sense for altered, therefore from the former sense of changing the Tribe he might take occasion consequently to use it of the Law, thereby to signify the abrogation of the Law. For hence afterward at the eighteenth verse, when he speaks of the Law alone, instead of the word changed, he puts disannulling, or abrogating. And the abrogation of the Law, though in this place it properly be referred to that part of the Law, whereby the aaronical Priesthood was established, yet we must know, that upon the abrogation of that Sacerdotal Law, all the force and authority of the Law of Moses was disannulled also, especially concerning external rites and ceremonies. For together with the Priesthood, not some one Law fell alone, but many Laws and divers rites fell with it; neither is there any cause to think, but that upon the expiring of so many Laws, all the rest of the same kind and nature died also. And besides, upon the abrogation of one Commandment of Moses Law, is not that bond of the Law dissolved, which lays a curse upon him, that continues not in all things that are written in the book of the Law: but upon the dissolution of this bond, the whole frame of the Law must needs fall asunder. For from that bond it appears that it was the mind of the Lawmaker, that all the precepts or commandments of that Law should either stand together, or by the fall of one, the authority of the whole Law should fail.  
13. For he of whom these things are spoken] Hear the Author proves, that the Priesthood being changed, or another Priest after the order of Melchisedec being ordained, the Law thereupon must needs be changed or abrogated. The reason is, because the person designed by these words Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec] descended not from Levi, but from another Tribe; out of which no person descending might lawfully approach to the Altar, to offer sacrifice as a Priest. But the Law which ordained the Priesthood of Aaron, did expressly provide, that no man not of the Tribe of Levi, and no man of that Tribe not of the family of Aaron, should exercise the Priesthood. Whence it is manifest, that a Priest after the order of Melchisedec could not be ordained, unless the Law were violated. Pertaining to another Tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the Altar] Attendance at the Altar, is the performance of the Ceremonies, by officiating at the Sacrifices, and ordering those things that appertained to the Altar & to such other services. And attendance here must not be taken for the act of doing it, but for the right to do it: for it is well known, that some Kings did dare de facto to approach unto the Altar & burn Incense there, but by usurpation, and without any right to do it.  
14. For it is evident our Lord sprang out of judah, of which Tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning Priesthood] Here he confirms his former reason, that Christ our Lord of whom these words were spoken, that he was a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec, pertained to a Tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the Altar, or performed the office of Priesthood. The reason is, because it is evident that he sprang out of Judah, of which Tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning the Priesthood; and therefore by the Law had no right to the Priesthood; for this follows upon the former. And the Author takes it for granted, that he of whom the words of the Psalm are spoken, is our Lord Christ the anointed of God. That Christ sprang out of the Tribe of Judah, he saith it is evident, i. generally known to all men; for no man was ignorant that Christ came from the line of David. And he had good reason to take this for granted, because these words of the Psalm, Thou art a Priest for ever] are spoken of him, whom David in the beginning of that Psalm calleth his Lord, speaking of him in the spirit: but he that is the Lord of David, must needs be our Lord also; who seeing he is mentioned of the Lord Jehovah, or the most high and only God, as a distinct person to whom the words were spoken, from him that spoke them, Sat thou at my right hand, and Thou art a Priest for ever, certainly he can be no other than Christ our Lord the anointed of God. For that this was acknowledged of the Masters and Doctors among the Jews, it is manifest from hence, that Christ disputing with the Pharisees, supposeth it, as a thing no way doubtful but confessed of all, when he demanded of them, How David could call Christ his Lord, seeing as they had answered him, he was his son. For unless they had all acknowledged it, the answer had been easy to say, that Christ was neither that Lord, nor so called of David. The Author also supposeth it for granted, that our Lord Christ sprang from the Tribe of Judah; because he wrote to them who were already persuaded that Jesus of Nazareth was Christ. And Christ, though he was conceived by the holy Ghost, without the act of any man, yet is said to spring from Abraham, from Judah, and from David; because he was borne of Mary the wife of Joseph, who was of the posterity of David, of Judah, and of Abraham. For any son, that is borne of a man's wife, which is accounted her husband's body, though it be not begotten by the husband, so it be not begotten by any other man, is his son who is husband to the woman. For God hath free liberty to give a man a son any way, whether naturally by the husband, or supernaturally without the husband. For by the Law of God it was ordained of old, that when the husband died without issue, his brother if he have any, should marry the widow, and as soon as he had any child by her, it should be called the seed of her husband that was deceased. With how much more reason may Christ justly be called the son of Joseph, and therefore of David, Judah, or Abraham? because, though he were not begotten by Joseph himself; yet he was begotten in his life time, not by the act of any other man supplying the part of Joseph, but by the work and power of the holy Ghost; and by him begotten upon Mary the espoused wife of Joseph. The points by some disputed on this place; whether Christ by his mother's side were not of the Tribe of Levi? are doubtful in themselves, and impertinent to the matter. For among the Jews, no man was referred to any Tribe, but by his father. Hence in all the genealogies or pedigrees mentioned in Scripture, men only are named: but the genealogies of women are never described, or no otherwise but by the men, as the genealogy of judith, chap. 8. But if in any genealogy a woman be mentioned, her parents are not inserted, as Matth. 1. Boos begat Obed of Ruth; Judas begat Pharez of Thamar. David begat Solomon, of her that had been the wife of Urias. The reason is, because it mattered not for the tribe or pedigree of what woman the child were borne, whether of one or other. For the father always gave the tribe and family to the child. Wherefore the genealogy of Christ, whether by Matthew, or Luke, is not framed from the ancestors of Mary but of Joseph.  
15. And it is yet more evident, for that after the similitude of Melchisedec, there ariseth another Priest.] By another argument taken from the nature of the Priesthood, he shows, that by the rising of another Priest after the order of Melchisedec, the Law is abrogated. q. d. If it be evident, as it is, that upon the translation of the Priesthood to another tribe or family, contrary to the precept of the Law, the Law itself is thereby abrogated: much more is the abrogation of it evident, upon the rising of another Priest after the order of Melchisedec. If the Priesthood had been only translated to another tribe or family, and remained in the former quality of it, without any other alteration, certainly less violence had been done to the Law: but seeing the Priesthood is translated into another family and tribe, upon which the Law no way settled it; and also altered into a new kind of Priesthood; much more is it evident, that by this translation and alteration of the Priesthood, the Law itself is changed and abrogated. After the similitude of Melchisedec, there ariseth another Priest.] Another Priest, notlike Aaron, to be either of his family, or of his continuance: but like Melchisedec, to continue a Priest for ever.  
16. Who is made not after the Law of a carnal commandment: but after the power of an endless life.] The Priest after the similitude or likeness of Melchisedec, is not like the Priests after Aaron's order, who are made after the Law of a carnal commandment; neither is he a temporary Priest to live for a time only as they did: but an eternal Priest for ever. After the Law of a carnal commandment. By Law of commandment, he means those particular precepts in the Law, for the election and ordination of the Priest, which are called carnal, because they had respect only to the flesh, and considered only the lineage, birth, and death of the Priest; binding the Priesthood to a certain tribe, namely, of Levi, and to a certain family in that tribe, namely, of Aaron: and providing for the mortality of the Priest, by determining the rights of succession; all which considerations are carnal, respecting only the flesh. For the Law commanded that upon the death of one Priest, another should succeed him; to the end, that though the Priests died, yet the Priesthood might not die. According to this carnal commandment or Laws respecting the flesh, that Priest was not to be ordained, who was to be made after the order of Melchisedec: For he had neither predecessor nor successor, neither came he from the family of Aaron. The particle after doth here note the manner of the Priesthood, for the constitution of it, as applied to some certain rule or Law; for though the word sometime signify otherwise, yet this is the most usual sense of it. So that here is proposed unto us, the quality of that Priest, who is after the likeness of Melchisedec, and a quality contrary to the quality of the Priests after Aaron's order; because as we have often noted, every aaronical Priest was but temporary only for a time: but the Priest after Melchisedecs' order is perpetual and eternal for ever. The words following do enforce this sense, especially if we regard the proof contained in the verse following. But after the power of an endless life] The Priest after Melchisedees' order, is such a one, as hath the power of perpetuity, such as an endless life requires to be. He is not a carnal, mortal, and frail Priest, that after a little time should need a successor: but a most potent Priest that hath an absolute power; an eternal Priest that hath an endless life: For to this sense, that which follows doth excellently agree.  
17. For he testifieth, Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec. q.d. Therefore I say, that the Priest after the order of Melchisedec is an eternal Priest, because God openly testifies it, when he saith, Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.  
18. For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before.] He had said before, that if the Priesthood were changed, than the Law also must be changed; and hitherto he hath proved that consequence. Now he shows the reason why the Law must be antiquated, changed or abrogated: For he seems to look backward to the principal purpose, and the scope of the former words, partly expressed, verse 12. and in a manner repeated, verse 15. and so again, verse 16. where he saith, that Christ is not made a Priest according to the Law of a carnal commandment. In which words he shown, that the commandment of the Law for ordaining of the Priest, was neglected in Christ, and therefore abrogated. Therefore now lest any man should marvel at this; he shows the reason why the Law was justly abrogated. For the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.] This is the cause why the Law was abrogate, because it was weak and unprofitable. For all Laws use to be abrogated and disannulled, when by experience they are found to be ineffectual, weak, and unprofitable; for wise men have found out no other causes, why Laws should be disannulled and repealed. Now the infirmity of a Law appears in this, that it cannot perform the matter for which it was ordained: which infirmity or wickedness of the Law, he either explicates or amplifies by the word unprofitable; for the weakness of a Law makes it useless.  
19 For the Law made nothing perfect.] Here he proves that the Law is weak and unprofitable; whereof he gives this reason; because it made nothing perfect. i. it contained no perfect expiation for sin, as we heard before, verse 11. and shall hear it again, Chapter 10. verse 1.14. Now perfect expiation consisteth in a total taking away all guilt of all sins, and of all punishments, not only temporal but eternal. Such an expiation the Law conferred upon no man. For if (as we saw at the 11. verse) the Priesthood could not do this; how could the Law do it, seeing the Law could do nothing this way, but by virtue of the Priesthood? The Law did condemn men, but not justify them; it granted expiation to some small sins, and that only in regard of temporal punishment; but for heinous offences, upon which it ordained the punishment of death, it left no pardon; but laid a curse upon all, that offended highly. In this perfect expiation, is contained antecedently, as I may say, an obduction from sin. For perfect expiation comes to us upon that condition, as we shall see, by the opposition following. Made nothing perfect] Nothing here is put for no man, the neuter gender for the masculine; and so likewise at the seventh verse. If therefore the Law could bring perfect expiation and justification to no man, it is justly said to be weak and unprofitable; namely, in regard it could not produce the true and perfect good of men. But the bringing in of a better hope did] q.d. The Law perfected no man: but the superinduction of a better hope doth perfect men; for here is an illustration from the contrary. By a better hope, he understands the hope of eternal life, joined with a plenary remission of all sins, granted from God to all penitent persons; without which remission, the promise of eternal life made to mankind, had been ineffectual and unprofitable; seeing we have all sinned, and thereby made ourselves unworthy of eternal life. Therefore the Author describing afterward the new Covenant in the words of the Prophet, and showing that it is established upon better promises, mentions only the remission of sins granted in the new Covenant. And by the new Covenant or Gospel, and the Priesthood of Christ adjoined to it, this better hope is superinduced upon the Law. For the new Covenant brings a better hope, because it is established upon better promises; but not without the Priesthood of Christ, which doth not only confirm and establish the promises of the Covenant, but doth also perfect and perform them. For the perfect remission of our sins depends upon Christ's Priesthood; and therefore the Priesthood of Christ spoken of in this place, must here be joined with the new Covenant; as also the old Priesthood and sacrifices must be joined with the Law. Therefore the superinduction or bringing in of a better hope, that is, the new Covenant containing the Priesthood of Christ, which gives us an assured hope of eternal life, and of perfect forgiveness of all our sins, doth most perfectly expiate men, and purge them from all guilt of all sin. By the which we draw nigh unto God.] Here he gives a reason why this hope is better and doth perfect us, because it makes us to approah and come near unto God, by suing for his favour, by serving him with all our heart, and obeying him in all things commanded us. For he that hath this hope in God, purifieth himself even as he is pure, 1 John 3.3. And because we approach unto God, therefore reciprocally God also approacheth and draweth nigh unto us, i doth embrace us with a strict bond of love, that so being purged from all sin, he may deliver us from eternal death, and invest us ' with eternal life. Hence saith St. James. Draw nigh unto God, and he will draw nigh unto you, Jam. 4.8. The Law therefore because it wanted this hope, could not make us draw nigh unto God; and because it could not do that, therefore it could not make us partake of a perfect expiation. For our approach unto God, is the way to perfect expiation; seeing while we approach unto God, we cast off sin and live godly: and while God approacheth unto us, we are thereby perfectly expiated and justified. As therefore this bringing in of a better hope, makes us approach unto God, so far it justifies us: Which the Law could not do, but for the rigour of it, whereby it excludes penitents from a full remission of sins: and also for default of any open promise of eternal life, which ministers unto men great power and courage for obedience unto God.  
20. And in as much as not without an oath, he was made Priest] After the Author had showed that by the Priesthood of Christ, the Law was abrogated, and added the cause of that abrogation, and taught that in the room thereof there succeeded a far more excellent Covenant, that maketh us approach unto God. Now by a new argument he shows how much Christ our Priest is greater than the legal Priests, and how far the new Covenant excels the old. And he draws his argument from hence, that Christ was made a Priest with an oath; but the old legal Priests without an oath: from whence it plainly appears, that Christ is better than they. For an oath declares the truth and the strength of a thing. Now the things that God will have to be firm, strong, and unchangeable, must needs be better than those things which have not that firmity and strength; such as are the things whereto no oath is added, but God will have them to depend upon his will and pleasure; that he may either remove or retain them, as it shall seem good unto him. And besides, look how much better the Priest is, so much is the Covenant better. For the Priesthood takes all the dignity and excellency of it, from the Covenant of God; and by the Priesthood the effect of the Covenant is performed. And therefore from hence that Christ was made a Priest by oath, by so much he was made a surety of a better testament, as the Author rightly collects it, ver. 22. that is, by how much Christ, who was ordained with God's oath, is better than the Priest who was ordained without an oath: by so much is the new Covenant better than the old.  
21. For those Priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath] This whole verse must be read in a parenthesis, because it contains an opposition between the old Priests and Christ; in as much as they were made Priests without any oath of God, but Christ with an oath. By him that said unto him] namely by him that said those words unto him, Thou art a Priest for ever, etc. And by him that said those words to Christ, God himself seems to be understood, although the words next cited, The Lord swore and will not repent him] seem not to be the words of God himself, but of the Prophet, who relates this oath of God. But because the words following, Thou art a Priest for ever] are the words of God; therefore by him that said unto him, the Author might well mean God. For although in these words, there be no oath of God expressed; yet it is as much as if it had been expressed, seeing the Prophet testifies, that God uttering these words did swear, which therefore the Author would not omit, though he were to relate the words of God himself and not of the Prophet. But if by him who said these words unto Christ, we understand not God but the Prophet, as some Interpreters upon that Psalm do, who so expound these words, as if the Psalmist had said, The Lord swore, etc. Thou art a Priest for ever, than the Prophet must be meant, by a common form of speech, that Christ was made Priest by the Prophet, because the Prophet by these words did foretell and declare that he should be made Priest. For many times in Scripture the declaring of a thing is said to be the doing of it. In this sense Jeremy is said to have been appointed, to root out and to destroy, to build and to plant, Jer. 1.10. So the Prophet Esay is said, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, to restore the preserved of Israel, and to be given for a light to the Gentiles, because he prophesied and foretold of these things. The Lord swore and will not repent] this oath argues that the matter of it was great, certain and unchangeable; and because God will not repent it, therefore it was very good and acceptable to God. So that the thing must not be altered or undone, both in regard of the oath and of the goodness of it. Unless by not repenting we conceive the settled constancy of God, never to revoke or alter the matter. For repentance attributed to God, signifies only a change of the fact: by way of resemblance from men, who if they repent, do commonly alter the thing, if it lie in their power.  
22. By so much was jesus made the surety of a better testament] These words are clearly answerable to the beginning of the 20. verse, as appears by the particles of relation there and here, in as much, and by so much. Jesus is called the surety of the Covenant or Testament, because he contracted it with us in the Name of God, and ratified it on God's part, making faith of it unto us, that God would keep the promises of his Covenant. Not therefore, as if he became our surety to God, and took upon him the payment of our debts. For, we sent not Christ unto God is our name, but God sent him to us in his Name. And Christ came to us from God, made a Covenant with us, became surety for the promises of it, and undertook they should be performed. And therefore he is not called a Surety simply, but the Surety of the Covenant. And he undertook for the truth of God's Covenant divers ways, as by his perpetual testimony in words for the force and strength of it, by proving the faith of his function in it in many documents; by his perfect innocency and holiness of life, by several divine works and miracles which he wrought, by suffering a grievous death, to assert the truth of his doctrine. Hence his Apostle John produced those three witnesses of undoubted faith, to confirm the truth of Christian Religion; namely, the Spirit, water and blood, 1 John 5.8. Where by Spirit he understands that divine power in Christ, which he shown in his admirable works; by water, the blameless and spotless life of Christ; and by blood, his bloody death. For Christian truth approves itself by such witnesses. That divine Spirit, testified by so many wondrous works, doth it not evidently declare, that Christ was a divine man, sent from God; and therefore that he preached nothing forged of himself, but only that which he had received from the God of truth? Would that God who is most holy replenish an impostor with such & so great gifts of his Spirit? The most pure and holy life of Christ, is it not an open testimony, that Christ respected no earthly thing, that he sought no worldly wealth, no honours nor pleasures? but had reposed all his hopes in God, and in those heavenly goods which he promised unto others. From whence otherwise could so great holiness of life proceed, and so great contempt of all worldly things? For Impostors use not to trust in God, and to expect from him the rewards of heaven. Impostors use not to pass their life in such holiness & abstinence from all sin. For why do they labour to delude men with their impostures and deceits? Do they it only to deceive without any advantage to themselves, and to expose themselves to nothing but divers dangers and troubles, which commonly accompany such impostures, and making themselves guilty of this one thankless wickedness, to follow piety in all things else? certainly nothing less. Such kind of persons seek their own commodity, to gain wealth, to get a vain glorious name, and to abound in pleasure; which whoso aims at, cannot lead a life innocent and void of all blame. Hence the Apostle speaking of Impostors or false teachers doth justly affirm, that they have their belly for their god, and mind earthly things; that they are enemies to the Cross of Christ, and have their conscience seared with a hot iron, Phil. 3.18,19. and 1 Tim. 4.2. And Christ warning his Disciples to beware of false prophets, tells them, that such may be known by their fruits, i. by their works, which are an infallible sign of their deceit. Do men (saith he) gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit. Mat. 7.16. For however for a time they may dissemble and make show of godliness, yet they cannot do it constantly. For feigned holiness lasteth not long, and covert wickedness lies not long hid. The life therefore of Christ being carried on in one perpetual tenor of innocency and holiness, doth wholly vindicate him from the crime of any imposture. Hence Christ himself contends with the Jews by this argument. Which of you convinceth me of sin? and if I say the truth why do ye not believe me? John 8 46. q.d. Either convince me of sin, or if ye cannot do that, but that my innocency acquits me from all crime, why do ye reject me as an Impostor and a counterfeit, and do not rather acknowledge my doctrine for truth? Lastly, the Blood of Christ, i. his cruel and infamous death, which he suffered with such constancy, that he might assert his doctrine, and especially that he might testify himself to be Christ, and the Son of God; what possible suspicion can this leave of the least fraud or falsehood? For if Christ had been conscious to himself of any fraud or falsehood, would he have cast himself upon so infamous and fearful a death? and endure it with such patiency and constancy of mind? If he had an intent to get himself a name by lies and deceits, would he have cast himself so freely uponextreame reproach and disgrace, and get fame by no other means but by an infamous death? for being condemned to the Cross, what could he else hope for, if he were an Impostor? But if Christ were no way conscious to himself of any fraud or falsehood, but suffered death to assert his doctrine, who sees not but he must needs be void of all offence? For if his doctrine were false, it must needs be feigned of himself. For he publicly professed, that he had seen the Father, had received commands from him, and was sent from him into the world, that he was the Son of God, and the King of God's people, which God had promised long before. Now if these things were false, how could Christ be ignorant of their falsehood? but if he knew them to be false, whence could he have such a contempt of death for the asserting of them? whence could he have such an invincible constancy and courage of mind? Seeing therefore we have Jesus a surety of the new Covenant, attested with so many documents of the truth, shall we doubt to join our faith unto him, to rest upon the hope of those heavenly blessings which he hath promised in this Covenant, to cast off the yoke of sin, and to give our name up to God and his righteousness. Some man may marvel, why the Author treating of Christ's Priesthood both before and after, should suddenly call him the surety of the new Covenant, and not the Priest of it? Why did he not say by so much was jesus made a Priest of a better Testament?] For the whole context of the Chapter seems to require this. It is very credible, that in the word surety, the Priesthood of Christ is also understood. For it is the part of a surety not only to promise something in the name of another, and to interpose his faith for another; but also if the cause require, to perform the thing he promised in another's name; and among men, there is cause, if the principal perform it not, for whom the surety interposed: but here it proceeds upon a contrary cause, (for the former cannot here take place) namely, because he for whom Christ interposed as a surety, doth perform his promises to us by Christ himself; in which action the Priesthood of Christ doth chief consist. For Christ as he is a Priest, doth now in heaven nothing more intentively, then to perform God's promises unto us, i. he takes away all punishment of our sins, he endowes us with God's gifts and graces, and at last translates us into heaven.  
23. And they truly were many Priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death.] Here he brings a new difference between Christ a Priest after the order of Melchisedec, and the Priests after Aaron's order; and withal proves him far more excellent than they. And this difference is, that they were many, but Christ was but one himself only. The reason of both is taken from the 16. and 17. verses, because they were mortal, and one being dead, another must succeed; but Christ is immortal and lives for ever.  
24. But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable Priesthood] The Priesthood of Christ is said unchangeable, because it is not transitory to change the person, and pass from one to another; for seeing he lives for ever, and hath no successor, therefore the Priesthood doth always remain in his person. For, because his person is unchangeable and continueth for ever, therefore also his Priesthood is unchangeable and continueth for ever in his person.  
25. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost.] From the former verse, he draws this as a consectary; wherein appears a great difference between Christ and the legal priests, and his great pre-eminence above them. Namely, that Christ is able to save for ever, and at all times; which none of them could do. To the uttermost, in the original, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the uttermost of time, at all times, and for ever; for uttermost must be referred to the perfection or fullness of time, and not of his saving. For although the salvation itself, which Christ our Priest brings unto us, be in all points perfect and complete; yet this in this place is not deduced from the former verse, but the other only: So that to the uttermost, is all one with continually and perpetually, as appears by the latter words of this verse, wherein the Author shows the reason of this, as we shall show there. Able to save] This salvation in reference to Christ, is in itself (as we said) most perfect and absolute: For Christ saveth us, as he takes away all the guilt and punishment of all our sins; as he succours us in our infirmities, from sinking under them, and consequently from falling into punishment for our sins thereupon; as he receives our souls into his hands, which he restores us in due time, invested with eternal glory and happiness: Whereof we treated; chap. 2. and 4. and 5. That come unto God by him.] Christ doth not save all men actually, but them that come unto God by him. To come unto God, is to worship God and serve him with all our heart, by offering sacrifices unto him; as the Author speaks afterward, chap. 13.15. Let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God.] And to come to God by Christ, is to worship God in confidence of Christ, trusting upon him; and in obedience of Christ following his Commandments; and to worship him in worshipping of Christ, by adoring, praising and praying to Christ. For he that doth this, doth not so much worship and serve Christ, as God himself by Christ. Seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.] In these words he expressly adds the reason of the Consectary, at the beginning of the verse. Christ is able to save to the uttermost, continually, and perpetually, because he liveth to the uttermost, continually, and perpetually; for he liveth ever. Christ is said to make intercession, by way of resemblance, to the legal Priest, who by entering and offering in the most holy place, did make intercession: So also Christ, by his entrance into the heavenly tabernacle, by his own blood, and by his perpetual residence there, in procuring our salvation, and the expiation of our sins, is said to make intercession for us. But as he hath all power given him by his Father, as he himself saves us, and expiates our sins, as he bestows all happiness upon us; so he cannot be said to make intercession for us: although these actions differ rationally rather then really: seeing in them he conveys that to us, which he receives of his Father for us, and therefore cannot properly be said to intercede or sue for that, which he hath full power to give of himself; for God hath freely given him that full power.  
26. For such an high Priest became us.] He brings a reason, why Christ was made a Priest to live for ever, to make intercession for us; because such a Priest did become us, or was convenient for us. Whence it appears that the following attributes given unto Christ, do not notify the innocent life of Christ, which was indeed spotless and blameless; but his happy and blessed state, whereby it comes to pass that he ever lives, and ever hath a care of us. For although those attributes are most true of Christ, if we understand them of his life and innocence: yet being so understood in this place, they make nothing to the present purpose of the Author. Who is holy,] In respect of his immortal nature, which doth make him a Saint, by sanctifying and hallowing him. Harmless,] Not actively to do no harm, but passively to have no harm, by freeing him from all evil and misery. Undefiled,] His state is purely happy and blessed, not stained or blotted with any adversity or evil. Separate from sinners,] both in place and condition, not conversing any more with them, as once he did upon earth. And made higher than the heavens.] He is now exalted above the two lower regions of heaven, and seated in the highest region, at the right hand of God. All these are said of Christ in some manner by way of resemblance to the legal Priest. Although in these again there be a great disparity between Christ and him, as we shall show presently. Yet if we respect the dignity of Priesthood, the legal Priest was a venerable and holy person; he was harmless and inviolable; and as his providence and care could lead him, he was undefiled, and he was separate from sinners, not conversing with them, but residing in the Sanctuary, which resembled heaven. But all these could not be perfect in the legal Priest, by reason of his infirmities; or if they had been most perfect, yet they had been but a shadow of those most divine qualities, which were showed before in Christ. Now that such a Priest became us, the thing itself declares: for unless he were such a one, he could not be perpetually vigilant & intent over our salvation, to save all that should come to God by him. For the contraries to these qualities, would either trouble the functions of his office, or wholly hinder them: for even the legal Priest, if at any time he were defiled, might not perform the holy services to offer for others, or sacrifice for their sin, till first he had made some entrance in sacrificing for his own.  
27. Who needed not daily as those high Priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins and then for the peoples] He shows another difference between Christ and the legal Priests, depending on the former diffrences and consequent from them. For the legal Priests must offer sacrifices yearly, first for their own sins, and then for the people's: but Christ did this only once. Daily; i. upon the determine and set day for the yearly sacrifice, which was the day of expiation. For that the Author means that yearly sacrifice, it appears from his saying, that those Priests must offer first for their own sins and then for the people's. But we read not that either he did or was to do this at any other time, then at that yearly sacrifice of expiation. For at other times he must either offer for himself alone, if he stood guilty of some sin; or if he were partaker of sin with the people, he must expiate it with one only sacrifice for himself and them together; and not sacrifice first for himself, and after for them. See afterward chap. 10. v. 11. where daily is likewise taken for the appointed and set day. For this he did once] He speaks of Christ our Priest. What did Christ once? certainly nothing else, but what the old high Priest did yearly upon the set day. But it is manifest from the former passages, and from the context of the reasons, that he speaks not here principally of the offering for the people's sins on that day; but especially for the offering for the sins of the Priest himself. Sins are properly transgressions of God's Laws, which seeing they had no place in Christ, for he knew no sin, therefore there must needs be an impropriety in the word sins here, for by them must be meant the infirmities and sufferings of Christ, whereof we spoke before chap. 5.2,3. For we have already seen that the contraries to these infirmities and sufferings, were in the next verse before described by the names of holiness and harmlessness: for these two verses do mutually illustrate each other. When he offered up himself] He shows when Christ offered for himself, namely prayers and supplications, as we heard before, chap. 5.7. And then he offered for himself, when he offered himself for God, when he prepared himself for the offering of himself; i. when he was slain as a sacrifice. For the offering of Christ in this place must be so fare extended, as to comprise his death, as a necessary antecedent, or a kind of beginning and entrance to it. Therefore Christ, because he now lives happy and blessed for ever, and nothing can interrupt or hinder his happiness, therefore I say, he is now secure of himself, and need no more offer for himself, but is only careful for us and our salvation. Yet because the time was once, when he was forced to offer for himself, therefore being well acquainted with sufferings, he will so much the more readily secure the distressed. But seeing this verse depends upon the former, and is inferred from thence; it appears therefore that the former verse speaks not of the manners of Christ our Priest, but of his blessed state and condition. For Christ needs not therefore not offer any more for himself, because he was holy and harmless in respect of his manners and actions here upon earth, seeing he was always so, but because by his Resurrection to Immortality, he was freed from all harms and evils for ever. As therefore the sins of our Priest signified his sufferings and pains: so the contraries to these his holiness and harmlessness in the former verse declare him exempt and free from all such evils.  
28. For the Law made men high Priests which have infirmity] He adds the cause of this difference between Christ and the legal Priests, because the Law made men high Priests which have infirmity; i. such as can never depose their infirmity, which always held them in this condition, that after expiation for their sins and errors, they again fell into the like sins and errors, which required again another expiation. But the word of the oath which was since the Law] The word containing the oath, whereof he spoke before, vers. 20. That oath whereby Christ was ordained Priest was since the Law; and therefore the Priesthood of Christ is no way depending or established by the Law. For here the word of the oath made since the Law is opposed to the Law. Maketh the son who is consecrated for evermore] Maketh the son Priest. The son is here put eminently for the Son of God, and opposed to common men, who have infirmities, as those men had whom the Law made Priests; so in many places of Scripture Christ is opposed to the rest of men. See Gal. 1.1. and Ephes. 2.7. Consecrated for evermore.] Christ is expiated for evermore; not in respect of the time past, as of old under the Law, under which the Priests by reason of their infirmities were forced to renew their expiation every year. But Christ by his one single expiation upon the cross, was freed from all further sufferings and pains for evermore; so that he hath no further need to expiate or offer for them any more for ever. And hence again it appears, that Christ was not fully perfectly our high Priest, before he was consecrated, expiated, and perfected, for evermore. That is, before he became immortal.   

The Contents of this seventh Chapter, are,  

1. Melchisedec was a Priest, v. 1. 

Reason. 1. Because he blessed men sacerdotally; for so he blessed Abraham. v. 1.  
2. Because he received tithes; for Abraham gave him a tenth, v. 2.    
2. Melchisedec was a singular Priest, v. 3. 

Reason. 1. Because there were no more Priests of his order; for he was without father or mother, without predecessor or successor, v. 2.  
2. Because he was a perpetual Priest: for he had neither beginning of days, nor end of life, but remained a Priest continually, v. eod.    
3. Melchisedec was greater than Abraham, v. 1. 

Reason. 1. Because he blessed Abraham sacerdotally, v. eod.  
2. Because he received tithes from Abraham, v. 2.  
3. Because he was in a manner an eternal person, that had no parentage, neither beginning of days, nor end of life.    
4. Melchisedec was greater than the levitical Priests, v. 5. 

Reason. 1. Because he blessed them in Abraham, who had the promises of them, that they should be his seed, v. 6.  
2. Because he tithed them in tithing Abraham, for they were then in the loins of Abraham, v. 5. 9 10.  
3. Because he was a singular and an eternal Priest: but they were many and mortal, for they died and succeeded one another, v. 8.    
5. Christ is not a Priest after the order of Aaron, v. 11. 

Reason. 1. Because Christ sprang not from the tribe of Levi as Aaron did, but from Juda, another tribe. v. 13. 14.  
2. Because Christ was not ordained by virtue of any carnal law, that respected his birth and parentage, as Aaron and his successors were, v. 16.  
3. Because Christ was made with an oath, to make his Priesthood immutable and irrevocable, but they without an oath, v. 20. 21.  
4. Because Christ was a singular and eternal Priest, whose Priesthood is unchangeable: but they were many and mortal, and their Priesthood transitory, changing upon death from one person to another, v. 23, 24.  
5. Because Christ is in a divine and blessed state; for he is inviolable, unharmable, undefileable, separate from sinners, and seated in heaven: They had not the substance of this state, but only some shadow of it, v. 26.  
6. Because Christ needed but one offering for himself, whereby to expiate and put off his infirmities for ever: they needed yearly a new expiation for their infirmities, v. 27, 28.    
6. Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedec, chap. 6. v. ult. 

Reason. 1. Because Christ is a Royal Priest, both a King and a Priest, as Melchisedec was, v. 1.  
2. Because Christ is a singular Priest, having no other Priest after his order but himself, for he was without predecessor and successor, as Melchisedec was, v. 3.  
3. Because Christ is an eternal Priest, who liveth for ever, as Melchisedec is said to have done.    
7. The levitical Priesthood is expired, v. 11. 

Reason. 1. Because Christ another Priest is raised up, who is not after Aaron's order, v. eod.  
2. Because the Priesthood is translated from the tribe of Levi, upon whom the Law had settled it, v. 13, 14.  
3. Because that Priesthood was ruled by a carnal law, with respect to the birth, life and death of the Priest, v. 16.  
4. Because it made no perfect expiation for sins, for thereto it was weak and unprofitable, v. 18, 19    
8. The levitical Law is expired, v. 12. 

Reason 1. Because that Priesthood is abrogate and changed, v. eod.  
2. Because the commandments and precepts of it were carnal, touching the line, the birth and death of Priests, touching washings of the flesh of men, and sacrificing the flesh of beasts, v. 16.  
3. Because it made no perfect expiation for sin, but to that effect was weak and unprofitable.       

CHAPTER VIII.  

1. Now of the things which we have spoken, this is the sum. We have such an high Priest] He had before spoken many things concerning Christ our high Priest, both for his quality what manner of person he is, and for his dignity, how fare he exceedeth the legal Priests: Now being partly to add something further, and partly to repeat something formerly spoken, he calls this repetition the sum of what he had spoken. Now the sum may signify either the breviate of what he had spoken, or else the main head and principal point, which last sense is most agreeable to this place: q.d. Of all those things which have been or may be spoken concerning Christ our high Priest, the main head or principal point is this, That we have such an high Priest who is set on the right hand, etc. Who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens] Of these words we treated chap. 1.3. And by them is signified unto us so great a dignity and Majesty in Christ our high Priest, that there was scarce extant any shadow of it in the ancient legal Priests; seeing none of them did ever sit at the right hand of that throne, which was placed in the oracle of the Sanctuary, namely of the Mercy-seat or covering of the Ark, which was all over shadowed by the wings of the Cherubins, and called the Throne of God; whereupon God was said to sit between the Cherubins: But all those legal high Priests, when they entered into the oracle (or most holy place of the Sanctuary) were forced to stand before the Ark, and so before the Mercy-seat upon it. But Christ is so great an high Priest, that he sits on the right hand of the throne of Majesty, and that in heaven. The throne of the Majesty, is the Majestic and stately Throne, whereon he sits, who is King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, who only is Almighty, who only hath immortality, and dwells in a light unapproachable.  
2. A minister of the Sanctuary, and of the true Tabernacle] The Epithet or Attribute true, must be added both to Sanctuary and Tabernacle; that Christ is a Minister of the true Sanctuary, and of the true Tabernacle; which is God's heavenly habitation. This is called the true Sanctuary and Tabernacle, not in reference to false and feigned Sanctuaries, but in respect of umbratilous and terrene Sanctuaries, which did but represent and signify the true, perfect, solid, and heavenly Sanctuary wherein God himself doth really and truly dwell; and whereto the name of the true and right Sanctuary doth perfectly agree. Of this true and heavenly Sanctuary Christ is the Minister, as anciently the legal high Priest was the minster of the terrene Sanctuary. For these words serve somewhat to declare the residence of Christ at the right hand of God's throne. Now to be a Minister of the Sanctuary is nothing else, but to Minister unto God in the Sanctuary, to officiate and be busied about the Sanctuary, to procure and order the things that pertain to the worship of God in the Sanctuary. And Christ recideing in heaven doth Minister there, by executing Gods decrees, by ordering heavenly things, and whatsoever pertains to God's heavenly worship and service, prescribed and commanded in the new Covenant. The word Leiturgist or Minister doth not always signify a simple officer, waiter, or hand-servant: but many times such a one, who with special authority and power doth execute some charge; as the legal high Priests in the Tabernacle had the chief authority and presidency over all things pertaining to divine worship. Which the Lord pitched and not man] Either these words contain the cause, why that heavenly Sanctuary is called the true Tabernacle, because it was erected, not of man, as that was under the Law, but God himself, who is our Sovereign Lord. For that Sanctuary must needs be the true and right one, which the hand of man did not frame for God, but which God raised for himself by his own hand. Or else these words are added, to amplify and illustrate the point, to make it the more evidently appear, how much this heavenly Sanctuary differs from the earthly, and exceeds it. So also Paul to the earthen and frail tabernacle of our mortal body opposeth that heavenly building of our glorious body made of God, and not by the hand of men. Ye have the same opposition afterward in this Author between the earthly Sanctuary and the heavenly, chap. 9 verse 11.24. in like manner between cities made by the hand of men, and that heavenly city prepared for the godly, whose Architect and Builder is God himself, Chapter 11.10.  
3. For every high Priests is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices:] He proves that Christ our high Priest is a Minister of the Sanctuary; because he is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices; for this function is natural to the office of a Priest; and he that offers gifts and sacrifices must needs be the Minister of a Sanctuary. Wherefore it is of necessity this man have somewhat also to offer.] The sense of these words is not so to be taken, as to leave a scruple in us; as if Christ had only somewhat that he might offer; and yet we might doubt whether he would offer, or must offer, or doth indeed offer; but that according to the nature of his office, he doth actually offer: For in this sense we often say, I have something to give, or to say unto you. i. I will, or must give, or say something unto you. From these words of the Author it is most manifest, that Christ doth now offer in heaven; for as the Author will show afterward, he offers himself too God. For he proves (as we have said) that Christ doth minister in the heavenly Sanctuary, as appears by the precedent and subsequent passages. And this he proves from hence, because every Priest, and therefore Christ, is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices; and therefore if he will perform his office, he must indeed offer; which if he do, than it follows that he is a minister of the Sanctuary.  
4. For if be were on earth, he should not be a Priest.] Here he confirms the other part of the second verse, that Christ is a Minister, not of the umbratilous and terrene Sanctuary, but of the true and heavenly; because if he were on earth, he should not be a Priest at all. Hence it appears that Christ is a Minister of the heavenly Sanctuary, and doth offer unto God there. Whence it necessarily follows, that Christ while he was upon earth, did not finish his perfect expiatory offering, whereof the Author treats in this Epistle. For could he perform and finish it, being out of his proper Sanctuary which is heaven? Seeing that there are Priests that offer gifts according to the Law.] He gives here a reason why Christ should not be a Priest, if he ministed on earth; because there are already other Priests ordained of God, to Minister on earth, and to offer gifts; of whose number Christ is none, nor can be, as was showed in the former Chapter. These terrene Priests are said to offer according to the Law; because the Law hath granted them only, this right and privilege, that no other person beside themselves without breach of the Law, should usurp the office of offering upon earth, or ministering in the earthly Sanctuary.  
5. Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.] In these words, either the Author gives a reason, why Christ if he were on earth, could not be a Priest; namely, because those Priests who offer here on earth, serve but for a shadow of heavenly things: but Christ our high Priest, must not serve for such a shadow. Or else he illustrates from the contrary, that Christ is a Minister of the true Tabernacle: but the legal Priests did only serve as patterns and shadows of the heavenly Sanctuary. By heavenly things, he means the Sanctuary and holy functions, wherein Christ doth minister in heaven. As Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle. For see (saith he) that thou make all things according to the pattern shown to thee in the mount. He proves from a testimony of Scripture; that the ancient legal high Priests served but as a pattern and shadow of the true and heavenly Sanctuary. And he citys the words wherein Moses is commanded to make that ancient Tabernacle, and all things pertaining to it, according to the model or pattern shown him in the Mount. Exod. 25.40. Therefore the Tabernacle shown him in the Mount, was the type or model; and the Tabernacle made by Moses was but a sample or copy of that model. Now that model shown by God in the Mount, according to the pattern and fashion whereof, Moses should take order to frame the Tabernacle, as near as the art of man's hand could work it, and as the materials would bear, was without all question for the fashion of it fare more excellent than that which was framed to the likeness of it out of gross and earthly materials. And because it was showed him upon the Mount, it was therefore in a manner heavenly, in respect of that Tabernacle which was to be made below the Mount. Although that original pattern or model also was but an empty shadow of that true Sanctuary whereof Christ is the Minister. So that the ancient Tabernacle was but a pattern of a pattern, and the shadow of a shadow.  
6. But now hath he obtained a more excellent Ministry] The particle now here notes not a difference of time, but is an adverbe adversitive, to express the dignity of Christ's Ministry above the Legal Priests. They served as shadows of heavenly things: but Christ our Priest hath obtained a more excellent Ministry; because he is the Minister of a fare more excellent Sanctuary; which also requires a more excellent way of administering, convenient and suitable unto it. By how much also he is the Mediator of a better Covenant] He proves yet further that Christ hath obtained a better Ministry; because he is the Mediator of a better Covenant, and so much better, by how much the Covenant is better. For, look how much the Covenant, whereof Christ is the Mediator, is better than the former Covenant; so much is his Ministry under it, better than theirs, who ministered under the former Covenant. For the Covenant and the Priesthood must correspond in dignity; seeing (as we said in the former Chapter) the dignity of the Priesthood doth chief depend upon the end & use of it. And the end & use of the Priesthood depends upon the Covenant; for God's promises are settled by the Covenant, and we obtain them by the Priesthood. And here gins another part of the Chapter, wherein is contained a comparison of the new Covenant with the old. To be the Mediator of God's Covenant, is nothing else, but to be the Interpreter of God, or the Intercessor, passing between God and men with mutual messages, to make and finish up the Covenant on both parties: by which Inter-messenger God declares and testifies his will to men, and they again informed in the knowledge of God's will, do comply with God and contract with him, are reconciled with him, & enjoy their peace afterward. For what is here employed, that Paul expresseth, Gal. 3.19. where he shows that there was a Mediator also of the old Covenant, even Moses. And we must take notice, that even in this respect Christ hath surpassed the Legal Priests; because they were Priests only to the old Covenant, and not Mediators of it: but Christ is both Priest and Mediator of the new Covenant, that is fare more excellent than the old. Which was established upon better promises] In these words he proves that the Covenant whereof Christ is the Mediator, is better than the former; because it is established upon better promises. Every man sees, that any Covenant is so much the better, by how much the promises are better therein contained. Seeing therefore, that in the new Covenant, whereof Christ is the Mediator, there are contaiend better promises; therefore it must needs be better than the old; and be so much better, as the promises are better. Hence it is appearent, that eternal life was not openly promised in the old Covenant, nor a full forgiveness of all sins. For, seeing nothing can be found better to men then these two things; if both these were promised in the old Covenant, how can the new Covenant be said to be established upon better promises? But we urge this principally concerning the full remission of sins; for this only is epresly mentioned in the description of the new Covenant; and we deny not but that eternal life was occultly and secretly comprised in the promises of the old Covenant; as Paul doth manifest it, who interprets and takes the words of the Law, promising life to them who exactly keep all the precepts of it, to be understood of eternal life and justification, such as we obtain by Christ. See Rom. 10.5. and Gal. 3.12. The Law therefore did promise life eternal in a secret and hidden sense; but withal under condition of exact and absolute obedience in all points, and therefore granted no expiation in respect of eternal death; and the expiation which it granted for some temporal punishments, did not extend to all sins, but only to errors and frailties, or such lapses whereinto men are prone to fall. Notwithstanding, when the whole Nation had been severely punished of God, and by that punishment were brought to a sense of their sins, and to return to the service of God, than the Law by an everlasting Covenant, granted them forgiveness of all their grievous offences, in respect of all temporary punishments for this life without any Sacrifices intervening, See Levit. 26.40. to the end of the Chapter. But the new Covenant contains a most open and clear promise of eternal life; and therefore is truly said to promise eternal life. For a hidden promise and unknown to the party to whose benefit it is made, or being such that no man can be certainly assured of it, or at least doth not appear to be certain, must not be truly called a promise, especially in that fence wherein a promise is here to be taken, when we speak of the promises of the Covenant. Besides, the new Covenant requires of no man an exact and absolute obedience in all points; but is content with true repentance and with such an amendment of life as carrieth a will never to offend God more; and therefore trusting to the assistance of God's Spirit, we accustom ourselves afterward to no sin, but walk in the ways of all virtues; although it may fall out, that afterward through humane frailty we may sometime slip; in which point is contained the forgiveness of our sins. They who think the contrary to what we have asserted, do affirm, that the promises of the new Covenant are therefore called better, because they are clearer. But we thereupon demand, whether they think the old promises so clear that men may certainly know and believe them by virtue of the Covenant, or not? If they say the first that they are so clear; then we deny it, not only of the remission of sins, which the very nature of Moses Law requiring the merit of works doth reject, but also of eternal life. Neither could the Author call the promises in the new Covenant simply better therefore, because they are therein proposed either somewhat more clearly or much more clearly; much less could he gather from thence that he dignity of the new Covenant was greater than that of the old; and yet again, much less could he thence infer, that the Priesthood of Christ is better than the Legal: neither was it any way convenient that therefore the old Covenant should be abrogated and a new one made. For a declaration of an old Covenant is not a new Covenant, divers from the old; neither doth such a declaration abrogate the old, but rather illustrate and establish it. And a new Covenant doth require, not a declaration of the old, but new conditions, and new promises made of God's Name. Neither had Christ been the Mediator of the new Covenant, but only an Interpreter and explainer of it. But if they say the latter, that they were not so clear; we willingly grant that, of eternal life: but not of a full remission of all sins given to such as amended their ways; for this was no way contained in the old Covenant, either openly or covertly, but was altogether repugnant to that Covenant. And (as we have already said) such a covert promise, must not be truly accounted for the promise of a Covenant, but only such a promise as every man may understand, and be assured of it from the Covenant, if he perform the conditions. Was established] In the Original it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. was enacted or ordained as a Law; because every Covenant is a Law upon the parties between whom it is made; and the new Covenant is most justly so, because it contains divers precepts, which every man is bound to observe, if he mean to obtain the promises therein made to him.  
7. For if that first Covenant had been faultless, then could no place have been sought for the second] Here he proves, what he formerly affirmed, that the new Covenant was established upon better promises; because the old Covenant was faulty; not that it was absolutely evil, but only respectively, because it had some imperfections and defects which might be bettered. Whence it plainly appears, that so good promises cannot be therein contained; for if it did contain them it could not be justly blamed, nor truly said to be faulty. For how can that Covenant be justly blamed, which both contains the best promises, and also prescribes the best conditions whereby those promises may be attained? But that it was indeed , and was not faultless, he proves from hence, because there was place sought for a second] God promised to make a second and a new Covenant with his people. But why should God abrogate the old Covenant and make a new, if the old were without all fault, and contained both promises and conditions equal in goodness to the new? For old Covenants use not to be abolished but for their defects and faults, as above he said of the Law, that it was disannulled for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof, chap. 7.18.  
8. For finding fault with them, he saith] He proves by the words of the Prophet, why the old Covenant was faulty, and therefore place sought for the second; because God found fault with it. With them] must not be referred to the persons of the Jews in this place, though otherwise God did find fault enough with them; but to the promises of the old Covenant, for God finds fault with them; for the Author seems to reflect upon the last words of the sixth verse before, where he saith that the new Covenant was established upon better promises; now because the promises of the old were not so good, therefore God finds fault with them. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord] He relates the words of the Prophet, Jer. 31.31. wherein God promiseth to make a new Covenant with his people, different from the former Covenant; which God mentions in such a manner, that he apparently reprehends and blames it; as afterward shall be declared. When I will make a new Covenant with the house of Israel and the house of judah.] The house of Israel is the posterity of Jacob; and the house of Judah the posterity of Judah one of jacob's sons. He distinguisheth these two people, not that the posterity of Judah was not also the posterity of Israel or Jacob: but because at that time the posterity of Jacob was divided into two Kingdoms; in one whereof were ten Tribes, who therefore were called by the common name of the Israelites; in the other Kingdom were only two Tribes, Judah and Benjamin, which two were denominate from Judah only; because he was the more illustrious Tribe, wherein the race of the Kings descended: as the other Tribes were sometime called Ephraim, because among them, that was the Tribe Royal.  
9 Not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers] He proves here, that the second Covenant should be a new Covenant; because it should not be like the former, or not according to it, but different from it. In the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt] Day is put for time, an especial word for a general; in the time that I brought them out of Egypt. This plainly designs the Covenant made by Moses at Mount Sinai. Because they continued not in my Covenant] Here he opens the cause, why God would make a new Covenant with his people, different and unlike the former. Because that old Covenant was not of force, to contain the people in their duty. For hence it came to pass that the people continued not in it, but transgressed it. For he lays down this consequent, to make us understand the antecedent of it, which is the faultiness and weakness of that Covenant. For if there had been no fault nor flaw in the Covenant, but only in the people, the Covenant itself must not have been abolished for the fault of the people only. And therefore it appears, that not only the people, but also the Covenant itself was in fault, why it was not observed. And I regarded them not, saith the Lord.] This is necessarily consequent from the former. For he that continues not in God's Covenant, he is neglected of God; i. deserted and forsaken, and not only deserted, but punished, for God lays those judgements upon him that are specified in the Covenant, in case it be not observed. Hence it is manifest, that that former Covenant was infirm and unprofitable, seeing it could not effect, that the people who were parties to it, might worship God duly and constantly, and obey his Laws; that reciprocally they might be loved of God, and graced with his blessings.  
10. For this is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel (saith the Lord) He brings a reason why he said, that this new Covenant is not according to the former, but unlike and different from it. Because it was to be such a one, as must have sufficient power to continue the people in their duty. And this he signifies unto us by the words following. The house of Israel is taken here a little more largely than before, not now opposed to Judah, but including it, and signifying the whole people of God. For it is usual in the holy Scripture, for the same words to be taken sometime more largely and amply, sometime more strictly and narrowly; and therein also the same things are expressed sometime more amply, and sometime more briefly. Whereof we must take notice for the better understanding and reconciling of several places. So the word Faith, is sometime taken so narrowly, that salvation and justification is ascribed to it alone; and sometime again more largely to comprise other virtues in it, sometime more, sometime fewer, according as the sense of the word is extended or restrained. I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts] Here he gins to describe the new Covenant: q.d. In the old Covenant I wrote some of my Laws in tables of stone, and Moses wrote other some in a book, and they were put in the Ark to be kept there. But my new Covenant shall not be according to that way; but by it, I will write my Laws in their hearts, and put them in their minds to be kept there. They shall not be arbitrary and positive Laws flowing from my sole will and pleasure; whereof their hearts can conceive no reason, and whereof their memories may easily fail, such as were most Laws in my former Covenant: but they shall be only natural Laws grounded only upon natural honesty, and upon the dictates of right reason, that their minds may easily conceive them, and their memories retain them. And their own consciences shall acknowledge them to be convenient, just, right and good. And besides, they shall not have a bare understanding of my Laws to know them, but an hearty affection to do them. Now because God's Covenant is described in these words, therefore hence it appears, that this writing of God's Laws in men's minds and hearts depends and proceeds from the nature of the Covenant. And therefore these words must be taken within their force and efficacy, and not necessarily extended to the very effect of the writing, which is always left in the free power of man. For this is intimated unto us by the following words of God at the 12. verse; wherein God opens unto us the cause, manner or means of this, which containeth wonderful grace and mercy of God offered to his people; for by this means he saith, it would come to pass, that they would serve him and keep his Laws with so great fervency. But this way God's Laws are written upon none but willing hearts. The sense therefore is. I will make such a Covenant that shall have sufficient force and power to contain my people in their duties. For to have God's Laws written in our minds and hearts, is nothing else, but to be so knowing, so mindful, and so affected with them, that we never decline from them, but always observe them with all our endeavour. And I will be to them a God] This follows from the former; as the former clause opposite to this, [and I regarded them not] followed from the peoples not continuing in his Covenant; which in like manner is opposed to the writing of God's Laws in men's hearts. For God to be a God unto us, is to be our sovereign Protector to defend us from all evil, and to be our sovereign Benefactor to accumulate us with all his blessings. And they shall be to me a people] Either this is really the same with the former, and an amplification of it, consisting of a mutual relation, such as we had before in these words, I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son, chap. 1.5. Or else, it is as much as if the Author had said; And they shall deal by me as my people ought to do, both of us shall perform our parts respectively: I by protecting and benefiting them, they by worshipping and serving me.  
11. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying. Know the Lord] They shall not need to admonish and exhort one another, first to know my laws and decrees, and after upon knowledge thereof to observe them: but all of them shall be carried with such alacrity of mind to know and obey me, that none shall need any remembrancer to put him in mind of it. Neighbour and brother are taken here for the same; for in the Law these three names are coincident, neighbour, brother and friend. See Leu. 19.18. For all shall know me from the least to the greatest.] Here again God speaks of the efficacy of this Covenant, and not of the effect itself; for it shall be able to produce an universal knowledge of God, though in some single persons it produce it not actually. All of all sorts, from the least age to the greatest, young & old, from the least state to the greatest, poor and rich; and from the least degree to the greatest, low and high.  
12. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more] Hear God opens unto us the cause of his ardent affection towards us, and withal unfolds the nature of this Covenant; namely, that therein he will be merciful to all the sins of his people, to their unrighteousnesses, their transgressions and iniquities, and will never remember them more. This so great a benefit must needs oblige all men's minds, and in a manner constrain them, to consecrate themselves wholly unto God, and constantly to persist in the daily observation of his Laws. Which effect, seeing every remission of sin cannot produce, therefore we must here understand such a one, as hath the power to do it; namely, a plenary and perfect remission, whereby such as are truly and seriously penitent, and afterward live holily, are released from the guilt or bond of all their former sins, not only in respect of temporal punishment and death, but also of eternal death, and withal eternal life is ordained for them. For this remission of sins, adding the condition of repentance, hath this virtue and power in it, to withdraw men from sin, and for the future to devote themselves too God. The words unrighteousness, sins and iniquities, do in like manner teach us, that this remission is plenary and perfect, extended to all manner of sins, even the most heinous. Hence we see, that this plenary remission of sins is a promise proper to the new Covenant. For in these words is evidently proved, what he said before concerning the new Covenant, that it was established upon better promises then the old. This is the mystical sense of those words of the Prophet; the literal sense was, that God would deliver the people of the Jews from the captivity of Babylon, and would so blot out their former wickedness and foul sins, that he would acquit them from all further temporal punishments for them; for which so great benefit the people must needs be marveilously bound to God, and induced to serve him constantly for ever after. But this sense is far too slender to answer fully and solidly unto words of so high a nature. For at that time, to speak properly, God neither made any new Covenant different from the former, neither was that benefit of such efficacy and power, as to contain the people in their duty perpetually after. And therefore it is apparent, that the Holy Ghost intended some other sense fare more excellent. In the literal sense then, that remission, must be understood to be really performed for the taking away of their temporal punishment: but in the mystical sense, it must be understood of God's promise to be performed in due time, for the releasing especially of eternal death, under condition of repentance, as the nature of the new Covenant requires it. And hence it is, why the jews being afterward forgetful of this divine benefit, as of a thing past, did again fall into divers sins, and forsake God's law. But the Christian, or the people of the new covenant, may be excited to do their duty perpetually, and serve God cheerfully, to the end they may at last really obtain the blessing promised them, a right whereto they now enjoy, and not make themselves unworthy of it by their own fault.  
13. In that he saith a new Covenant, he hath made the first old.] By these words he shows that the old Covenant is in a manner condemned and rejected: For when God saith he will make a new Covenant, he thereby antiquates and abrogates the old. Whence it plainly appears, that the old Covenant was in itself  and faulty; and therefore contained no great and excellent promises in it. And from hence it is most manifest that the new Covenant is clearly different from the old: neither differs it, only in perspicuity and clearness (as many men beleeye) but in the very promises and conditions of it. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old, is ready to vanish away.] From the former words he infers by the way, that the old Covenant, although at that time it seemed to be of force among the Jews, and to stand while their Temple and their state were standing; yet by little and little it grew to decay, as a thing waxing old, and already antiquated of God. For that which waxeth old, though it be yet for a time extant and appear; yet after a while it will wholly decay and vanish; seeing to wax old is nothing else, but by little and little to be destroyed and abolished. This the Author doth ominate of Moses Covenant, and the event was answerable to his prediction. For not long after the Temple and State of the Jews was overthrown, whereupon the Mosaic religion, and the public worship of God prescribed in the old Covenant did fall and vanish; so that at this day, there appears nothing of it, but only some relics and shatters, in the tolerated Synagogues of that scattered Nation.   

The Contents of this eighth Chapter, are,  

1. Doctrine. Christ is a greater Priest than any of the legal Priests, verse 1. 

Reason. 1. Because he is set at the right hand of God's throne, whereas the legal Priest stood before the Mercy-seat, which was but the shadow of God's throne, verse 1.  
2. Because Christ Ministers in the true heavenly Sanctuary, whereof the legal Sanctuary was but a shadow, verse 2.  
3. Because Christ offers himself to God a gift and sacrifice; whereof the legal offerings were but shadows, verse 3. 4.  
4. Because Christ is the Mediator of a better Covenant, established upon better promises then the former, verse 6.    
2. Doctrine. The Gospel or new Covenant, is better than the old legal Covenant. verse 6. 

Reason. 1. Because the Gospel hath a better Mediator, so much as Christ is better than Moses, verse eod.  
2. Because the Gospel is established upon better promises, eod.  
3. Because the old Covenant was faulty, for God found fault with it, as weak and unprofitable, verse 7. 8.  
4. Because the Gospel hath better Laws, for they are written in the minds and hearts of the faithful, ver. 10.  
5. Because the Gospel breeds an universal knowledge of God in all men from the least to the greatest, verse 11.  
6. Because the Gospel allows an universal pardon of all sins whatsoever, v. 12.  
7. Because the new Covenant doth antiquate and abolish the old, v. ult.       

CHAPTER IX.  

1. THen verily the first Covenant] The particle then, for therefore, shows, that these words so follow the former, that in a manner they are deduced or inferred from them. Yet they seem not inferred from the words immediately preceding, though they have some connexion even with them also: but rather from the words near the beginning of the former chapter where the Author made a comparison of Christ with the legal Priests, and affirmed, that their Tabernacle, their Ministry, and offerings to God, were but terrene shadows of that heavenly Sanctuary, wherein Christ doth minister and offer himself to God; and therefore, that the Priesthood of Christ was fare more excellent than theirs. To this point he seems now to return, and to handle a little more largely, what before he had but briefly touched concerning the ministry and service of the legal Priests. The word first in the original hath no substantive with it, wherewith to agree; yet must not be referred to the Tabernacle, as some copies translate it: for it hath a clear reference to the Covenant, which in the last verse of the former chapter, is called the first, and here again repeated so: for by this reference of it, all things will most rationally correspond, and comply both with the preceding and subsequent passages. Had also ordinances of divine service] Ordinances are institutes. i Arbitrary and positive Laws or precepts depending on the sole will and pleasure of the Lawmaker or ordainer; to determine any action for the manner and other circumstances, which in itself, and by the Law of nature is indifferent and may be done many ways, to be notwithstanding performed after some one way. For God's Covenant doth not contain promises only, which are to be performed on God's part solely: but they also comprehend Commandments and Precepts of services and duties to be performed on our part, which we if we enter the Covenant must promise and covenant to perform, as God on his part doth covenant to perform his promise. The matter or subject of these ordinances was divine service, how God should be publicly worshipped and served. 
The true nature of divine worship and service.  The original word here is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; which properly signifies worship, and not service; for worship and service in reference to God, though by most Interpreters on the holy Scriptures they be confounded and put indifferently each for other: yet indeed their natures are very different and contradistinct. For worship properly signifies any holy reverence, which by some lowly gesture we perform to God, as by standing up, bowing down, kneeling down, or falling down before him; whereof the Scriptures afford us many examples. But service properly signifies any holy action performed immediately to the honour of God; as prayer, praise, thanksgiving, and sacrificing; whereof also the examples are frequent in Scripture; and particularly, all the Ministry of the legal Priesthood by offering gifts and sacrifices, and incense, are commonly termed the services of the Sanctuary. See Exod. 35.19,21,24. and Numb. 4.4,19,24,27. and Numb. 8.11,15,22,24,25. and Numb. 18.4,6,7,21,23,31. Thus the public honour of God, hath two main branches; namely, worship, by holy reverences; and service, by holy actions: and each of these again have their particular kinds under them. And in many passages of Scripture these two generals of worship and service are joined together, thereby as well to include all the ways of honouring God, as to exclude all the ways of honouring Idols and Images. See Exod. 20.5. and Deut. 4.19. and Deut. 8.19. and Deut. 11.16. and Deut. 30.17. and 1 Sam. 1.3. and 2 King. 17.36. and Jer. 13.10. and Mat. 4.10. And we are to note that the worship of God is in a manner determined by the Law of nature; for it is generally the same in all Ages, and among all Nations, who before, under, and since the Law have worshipped God with gestures of holy reverences almost alike; so that God hath prescribed no particular ordinances to regulate how we should honour him in respect of worship, because the light of nature doth sufficiently instruct us that this is to be done with most humble, lowly and reverend gestures. But for the service of God, God hath made especial provision, by divers particular Ordinances under the first Covenant; for therein are several Laws and Precepts for all the several services of the Sanctuary, how the offerings of incense, gifts and sacrifices should be performed. For men must not serve God after their own will and pleasure, but after his: seeing service must not be done after the servants pleasure, but after the Lord's pleasure to whom the service is done. But now that first Covenant being abrogated, the divine services thereunto appropriated, are also abrogated. And weare further to note, that when these two words of worship and service are not conjoined in one sentence, but either of them is put singly alone; then many times it is ampliated and extended, so generally as to signify the whole honouring of God, and to include the other; for we find worship put for itself and service; and service for itself and worship. And many times they are interchanged, and by a Metonymy of the adjunct, either is put for the other; as here, though the original be latria, which is properly worship; yet it is here put for service, and therefore rightly so translated; for the Ordinances of the first Covenant prescribed nothing for divine worship, but only for divine service. Hence manifestly appears the true and proper difference between latria and doulia, whereof the first properly signifieth worship, and the other service; yet both are honour; and when these honours are divine (for they may be used humanely and civilly; seeing honourable reverences and honourable services may be due to a Landlord by tenure of a Fee) than they are so proper unto God, that divinely they cannot be communicated either to Saints or Angels. And they are so concurrent or connexed each with other, that the right of the one cannot be separated from the other; but to what person soever the one is due, to him the other is due also: so that if we grant unto the Saints or Angels cultum douliae; i divine service, we must also necessarily grant them cultum latriae; i divine worship. Neither can divine service be performed without divine worship; for then the service is without reverence, seeing worship is nothing else but that reverence which is used at or during our service. And a worldly Sanctuary.] A Sanctuary is a divine or holy place where divine and holy honours are to be done; where divine worship and divine service are by divine ordinance to be performed. And the legal Sanctuary under the first Covenant is called a worldly Sanctuary, because it was seated in this present world, and stood in opposition to the Sanctuary of the world to come, whereof it was a figure and a shadow. So that by worldly Sanctuary is properly meant a temporary and earthly Sanctuary; whereas the other is eternal and heavenly.  
2. For there was a Tabernacle made] Having specified two principal things contained in the first Covenant; namely, Ordinances for divine service, and a worldly Tabernacle; he severally explicates these, showing the defects of both: but he gins first, with that which he named last, to wit the Tabernacle: for Orders were first for the erecting of the Tabernacle, before any Ordinances were prescribed for the services of it. For the materials, frame and cover of the Tabernacle, see Exod. 26. The first wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread] The Tabernacle was but one single edifice for the fabric or frame of it: yet there were in it two partitions, divided by a rich hanging called the second veil, in opposition to the first veil at the door of the Tabernacle. In the first of these partitions, which for distinction from the inward partition is here called the first Tabernacle (and first for entrance only, not for dignity) was the Candlestick, whose matter, frame, parts and use are described, Exod. 25.31. etc. and the table, whose matter, frame, measures and parts are described, Exod. 25.23. etc. and the show bread, which were twelve flat loaves or cakes, set upon the table in two rows with frankincense, and changed every Sabbath, whereof see the making, Levit. 24.5. Which is called the Sanctuary.] This first partition of the Sanctuary, was for distinctions sake from the other, called the Sanctuary or holy place.  
3. And after the second veil, the Tabernacle which is called the holiest of all.] That partition or room of the Tabernacle, which was inmost, and separated from the outward partition or room, by the second vail, was called the Oracle or the most holy place. The Hebrews called it the holy of holies; for because their language hath no superlatives, therefore they used to express a superlative sense, by a repetition of positives.  
4. Which had the golden censer] The golden Altar, because the use of it was for incense to be burnt upon it, is called here the golden censer. So that for the frame or fashion of it, it was an Altar, and for the use of it, a censer. For the matter, form and measures of it, see Exod 30.1. This altar or censer was indeed in the fust Tabernacle; but because it was placed close up to the veil, which parted the second Tabernacle from the first, and the insense burned thereon, was principally to perfume the second or inmost room, therefore the Author attributes it to the second or inmost room of the Tabernacle. For we read nothing either in the books of Moses, or else where, that besides that altar of incense, there was any other censer in the oracle or most holy place. Neither can it stand with reason, there should be any; for it was not lawful for the Priest to enter into the oracle or most holy place without burning incense before he entered; and therefore the altar or censer whereon he was first to burn incense, must needs be without the oracle, or else he could not first come at it. And the ark of the Covenant overlaid round about with gold] The Ark was a strong chest or coffer, the matter, form and measures whereof, see Exod. 25.10. This was called the Ark of the Covenant for the use of it, which was to enclose the tables wherein the first Covenant was written. Wherein was the golden pot that had Manna] Wherein] must be referred to the Ark, as appears by the beginning of the next verse; for in this verse the Author would show what was in the Ark, and in the next what was over it. This pot of Manna was gathered before the building of the Tabernacle, and commanded to be laid up before the Testimony, there to be kept when the Tabernacle should be built. See Ex. 16.33.34. And Aaron's rod that budded] Concerning Aaron's rod, how it budded, and upon what occasion, and for what purpose it did so, See Num. 17. And the tables of the Covenant] There were several parcels of the old Covenant, for there were the tables of the Covenant, which the Lord wrote with his own finger in stone, containing the Decalog: and there was the book of the Covenant which Moses wrote and read in the audience of the people, and sprinkled it with blood, when the Covenant was confirmed with a solemn sacrifice. See Exod. 24.4. and afterward in this Chapter, vers. 19 Now we find none but the tables of the Covenant to be laid up in the Ark; yet not those tables that were first written, for they were broken, upon the indignation which Moses had at the worshipping of the golden Calf; but the tables written afterward were there reserved. But how could the pot of Manna and Aaron's rod be in the Ark, when we read expressly, that nothing was in the Ark save the two tables of stone, 1 King. 8.9. and 2 Chron. 5.10? The Answer is, Either we must say that in success of time, the pot of Manna and Aaron's rod, came to be put into the Ark, which before were not so; Or we must say, that the particle In here must be a little extended in sense, to include those things that were adjacent to the Ark, being near or about it. So John is said to baptise in Bethabara, because he baptised near or about it, John 1.28. So Joshua is said to be in Jericho, when he was by or near it. Josh. 5.13. And in this sense the Author first expresseth those things which were by or near the Ark, as the pot of Manna and Aaron's tod; then the things in the Ark, as the tables of the Covenant: And lastly, in the following verse, the things over the Ark, as the Cherubims. And this might happily be the cause, why under the particle in he would first comprise the things by the. Ark, before those in it, that he might make use of this gradation.  
5. And over it, the Cherubims of glory, shadowing the Mercy-seat] The Cherubims were two Images of solid gold fashioned like winged men, whose wings did over shadow the Mercy-seat: being one at the one end of it, and the other at the other; having their faces looking one towards another. Of them see, Exod. 25.17. And they were called the Cherubims of glory, by an Hebraisme; for glorious Cherubims, because of their lustre and brightness, which in Scripture is often called glory. The Mercy-seat had two uses; one to be a Cover for the Ark, to shut up the Tables of the Covenant: the other to represent the seat or throne of God, where God would speak with Moses to give answers for the people, and to show himself merciful. And the original word in the Hebrew carries a twofold sense, to answer and fit this twofold use; for Capporeth derived from the verb Caphor, which signifies to cover a vessel, and to cover sin, which last is the proper act of mercy. Therefore though the Hebrew word might have been simply and fully enough rendered the Cover, yet the Septuagint following the other signification of the word, have translated, Hilasterion, i. a Propitiatory or Mercy-seat, which distinguisheth this cover from all others, as a peculiar use and property of it. And it is very consonant to reason, that by the ambiguity of the word, the Spirit of God would signify so much. Of which we cannot now speak particularly] Though each of these particulars concerning the first Covenant, might require particular explication, and serve highly for advancing the dignity of Christ's Priesthood, and of the new Covenant; yet the time will not now permit it, because our purpose calls us on to other matters.  
6. Now when these things were thus ordained] Having briefly described the Tabernacle and the several furniture of it; now he comes to describe the way of divine service therein; which according to the two partitions or rooms of the Tabernacle was twofold, whereof he toucheth the first in this verse, and handleth the other in those following. The Priests went always into the first Tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God] The ordinary Priests went only into the first Tabernacle, for none but the high Priest went into the second. And into the first they went always, that is, every day daily; for herein they are opposed to the high Priest, who went into the second Tabernacle once every year. The daily services of God accomplished by the Priests in the first Tabernacle, were to burn Incense on the golden Censer, and to light up or mend the Lamps of the Candlestick, etc.  
7. But into the second went the high Priest alone; once every year] The high Priest went in alone, and therefore he only; yet he went not in daily, but yearly once every year, at the solemn fast of Expiation; whereof see Levit. 16. Not without blood which he offered] Not without blood, is with blood; and with blood only; for the high Priest offered in the second Tabernacle nothing else but blood. For he must enter thither with the blood of a Bullock and of a Goat, and offer it, by sprinkling it with his finger upon and before the Mercy-seat seven times. Whence it appears that this offering of the high Priest did not consist in the slaughter of those beasts whose blood he offered; and therefore neither did the offering of Christ answerable thereto, whereof the Author treats, consist in the death of Christ, but by his entrance into heaven after his death. Indeed the death of Christ is called an offering and sacrifice; yet it is so called for the resemblance of it with the freewill and peace-offerings, and therefore especially, because it was most grateful and acceptable to God: in which respect also other notable works of piety may be and are called in Scripture offerings and sactifices unto God. For himself, and for the errors of the people. Here is a little trajection of the words; for the right sense is thus; for the errors of himself, and of the people; For in this sacrifice the Priest offered no otherwise for himself then for the people; for so we read it before in this Epistle, chap. 5.3. Now the cause of this his offering for himself and the people, in that anniversary and yearly Sacrifice, was only for the errors of both. And by Errors we must here as we did before, understand such sins, as proceed either from the ignorance or forgetfulness of some divine Law, (for in such a multitude of Laws, and so various, respecting not only matter of natural honesty and true morality, but of positive Ceremony, something might easily escape from men's knowledge or memory) or from the ignorance of some fact and the circumstances of it; or from humane frailty or infirmity, which might make the fact as excusable, as ignorance doth, especially that ignorance which is of the Law. And therefore those universal words in Levit. 16. ver. 16. where in this yearly sacrifice of Expiation, the Priest is commanded to expiate all the sins of the people, and to purge the Sanctuary from them, must be restrained only to these sins of Errors.  
8. The holy Ghost this signifying, That the way into the holiest of all, was not yet made manifest, while as the first Tabernacle was yet standing.] In these and the following verses, the Author declares, both the imperfection of the old Covenant, and the infelicity of those times, wherein the Tabernacle and that carnal service of God lasted. For first he shows, that during those times, the way into heaven was not yet manifested and opened; and then he shows the infirmity of those sacrifices for the expiating of sin; the latter of these he doth afterward, but the first is delivered in this verse. For here he teacheth, what was the meaning of this. That no man might enter into the second Tabernacle or most Holy place, except the high Priest, nor he neither, but only once a year. To this he saith, That the holy Ghost; by whose instinct all this was ordered, would thereby declare unto us, that the way was not yet open into the holiest of all, namely, into the true and heavenly Sanctuary, as long as that earthly Tabernacle was yet standing, and continued in that state of holiness, which God for a time had assigned unto it. But the abrogation of that Tabernacle, or as I may term it, the profanation of it, when the veil of it was so rend and opened, that any man might lawfully enter it, this did declare that the entrance of the heavenly Sanctuary was now open to all. The opening of the way, and the liberty of entering that Tabernacle, being granted unto all (which was then done, when God would have that Tabernacle to be holy no longer) doth design unto us a liberty and freedom granted unto all, of entrance into the heavenly Sanctuary, which is truly and indeed the most Holy place of all. For hence it was, that as soon as Christ had given up the Ghost and was dead, whereby our passage into heaven was made open, the vail of the Temple was rend from the top to the bottom, that it might no longer keep any man from entering into the holy place. That none are yet actually entered into the Sanctuary of heaven, beside Christ our high Priest, the cause is not, that the faithful have not a right and a liberty to enter, but because they must first put off the rags of their mortal nature, which being done, then in their due time, namely, at the coming of Christ, they shall enter by multitudes into that heavenly Sanctuary, the palace of Immortality, and then take possession of that inheritance, whereto now they have but a title.  
9 Which was but a figure for the time then present] He teacheth here the main use of the Tabernacle, and of the divine service annexed unto it; that all was but for a figure or a show, a mystery, or a mask of something to be further understood by it; which as before we have expressed, was the true heavenly Sanctuary, and the true worship and service of God to be performed there by Saints and Angels. And it was but a temporary figure to last only for a time, during the time present, as it is opposed to the time to come, or as the Author determines it in the next verse, until the time of Reformation. Wherein were offered both gifts and sacrifices] He intimates here that the divine service by gifts and sacrifices was also figurative as well as the Tabernacle; and thereupon he declares the time which was assigned for this figurative Tabernacle, how long it should continue and when it should determine: Namely, that the figurative Tabernacle must last as long as the figurative service, for whose sake it was ordained, as long as gifts and sacrifices were to be offered. Whereby he yet further intimates, that with great reason it stood, that the Tabernacle (or Temple in the room of it) stood not now in force; for seeing the figurative services of offering gifts and sacrifices were but temporary, ordained only till the time of Reformation; therefore those figurative services being abolished, the figurative Tabernacle also which was but subservient to those services must needs be abolished. Which could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience] By him that did the service, is not meant the Priest only who made the offering, but also any other person, who brought his offering for a gift or sacrifice, thereby to worship and serve God; who thereupon might justly be called the worshipper and servitor of God. The services therefore by offerings of gifts and sacrifices, could not make the servitors perfect. To make perfect, here, is fully to expiate sin, as we heard before, chap. 7. ver. 11.19. And to perfect as pertaining to the conscience, is nothing else, (as appeareth by the opposition of those sins, which in the verse following are said to be expiated by the Legal sacrifices) but to purge away, or expiate those sins, which polluted and burdened the conscience itself, and not those only which defiled the flesh and made the party outwardly unclean; nothing else but to abolish all guilt even of the most heinous sins; and so to abolish it, that thou shalt not fear not temporal punishments only, but not eternal also: and besides that thou mayest hope for eternal life, and be assured, that thy sins past, though they have been very grievous, shall not exclude thee from salvation; upon condition, thou change the course of thy life, and carry thyself holily for the time to come; and as much, as such a tried hope of salvation can draw thee, and so great a favour of God can excite thee, and thy trust in his help can support thee, to endeavour by all means to keep thyself unblameable and free from all sin.  
10. Which stood only in meats and drinks] He shows what sins the Legal sacrifices did expiate, and for what purposes they were ordained; namely, for the sins of Legal impurity or carnal uncleanness; as if a man had eaten or tasted any of those meats which by the Law were declared unclean, and forbidden to be eaten; for which see Levit. 11. or if a man had drunk in an unclean vessel, or had tasted of any water, wine or liquor whereinto some unclean thing had fallen; for see Levit. 16.32,33. And divers washings and carnal ordinances] Or if a man had neglected to wash himself or his clothes, after he was casually unclean, either by touching some unclean thing, or by an issue, or by the Leprosy: And carnal ordinances] and such other Ceremonies, ordained of God after an arbitrary and positive way pertaining not to the conscience, but to the body and the flesh, as the touching of a dead carcase, or of any other unclean thing. For although some moral sins committed against the moral Laws as we call them, were expiated by Sacrifices; yet none such as were committed presumptuously or with a high hand, and in contempt of God's Law, and thereupon truly polluted the conscience: but only such (as we have already noted) wherein some excusable ignorance or infirmity had place, being lapses and falls very familiar to man, and not unworthy of God's pardon. Besides, these sins were expiated by those Sacrifices only thus fare, that after a full restitution in case of injury, no other punishment of those sins was thereby taken away, but that which pertained to the flesh or body in this life; for to take away eternal punishment those Sacrifices were not able. Imposed on them] It is true, that meats and drinks and divers washings were imposed upon God's Legal people for a time only: yet the word imposed hath not reference to them here, for the Greek text will not bear that construction: but it refers to gifts and sacrifices in the former verse; for they were imposed to expiate the sins touching meats and drinks and divers washings. Hence we see plainly, for what sins principally under the Law, those Legal sacrifices were ordained, and what sins were thereby expiated. We see also what force those sacrifices had in expiating those sins, that they could not reach unto the consciences to wash away the true and foul spots that had stained it; neither could they free them whom they expiated from all fear of divine punishment; for they chief washed away the stains of the flesh, whereby men were accounted unclean, and thereupon forbidden civil conversation and public commerce; so that these impediments from conversation and commerce were expiated by those Sacrifices, than men might pass about their worldly affairs. Until the time of reformation] The gifts and sacrifices imposed on the people to expiate their corporal or carnal stains, were not perpetual ordinances, but temporary only for a time; and the term of that time expired at the time of Reformation. Which is a general correction or amendment of all things whatfoever pertaining either to the service of God, or to the happiness of God's people, whereby things should be brought to an excellent state and condition. The time of this Reformation or correction is also called the fullness of time, and that time was fully come at the coming of Christ; who as the woman of Samaria said of him, at his coming would tell us all things; she meant, all things concerning the true worship and service of God. For at the time of his coming, the carnal service of God was turned into spiritual; and such a sacrifice ordained that by the benefit thereof men might be throughly expiated in their consciences; so that freed before God from the guilt of all their sins whatsoever, and delivered from the fear not only of temporal but of eternal punishment, they might exult and rejoice in the hope of immortal life; and then being inflamed with such high graces and favours from God, and with a care never to lose the fruits of them, might burn in love of God and godliness, and forcibly be carried to every good work.  
11. But Christ being become an high Priest of good things to come] Hitherto we have had the proposition of the comparison between the old Covenant and the new, in respect of the Tabernacle and divine service; Now follows the reddition of it, wherein the high Priest is opposed to the high Priest, the Tabernacle to the Tabernacle, the service to the service, the Sacrifice to the Sacrifice, the Offering to the Offering, and the Expiation to the Expiation. And all this he comptiseth in two verses, this and the next; which afterwards in the rest of the Chapter, he amplifies and illustrates. Christ was ordained an high Priest long before, and that by oath, as we have heard before, but he did not actually execute the office of it while the Tabernacle or Temple was yet standing and in force: but when the veil of the Temple was tent, that the Tabernacle was disannulled, and the time of Reformation was come, than Christ entered upon his office & became an high Priest, to execute it for ever after the order of Melchisedec. And Christ is a high Priest of good things to come, in opposition or difference to the old high Priest. By good things to come may be understood, either those that were to come in respect of the Law, or those to come in respect of this world. In respect of the Law; a perfect expiation of sins was to come; and in respect of this world eternal life is to come, which is the superperfection or compliment of perfect expiation. Now Christ is our high Priest for these good things, because we attain them by his sacrifice and offering; for he it is, who provides and takes order for them, as the Legal Priest did to procure unto the people the good things present for this life. By a greater and more perfect Tabernacle] If these words depend upon the verb entered in the next verse; how can Christ be said to enter into the holy place by a Tabernacle that is greater and more perfect, for than he must enter into a Tabernacle by a Tabernacle? Therefore, either the particle by in this place is put for in; and so referred to the preceding words of this verse, considering the Tabernacle as an adjunct to Christ's Priesthood, wherein he doth minister; as if the Author had said, Christ is become a high Priest both of better things, and of or in a better Tabernacle, greater and more perfect, then that wherein the legal Priest ministered; Or else we must say, that the Author, because he mentioned a double Tabernacle terrestrial, with two partitions or rooms in it; therefore also he considers a double Sanctuary celestial, in a manner answerable to the two holy places of the old Tabernacle, the first and the second. The one of those celestial Sacraries is larger and more common, wherein the Angels abide: the other is more inward and most sacred, wherein is the throne of the divine Majesty. For although happily the one be not so separate from the other, as the two holy places were in the Tabernacle and Temple disjoined by a veil and a wall: yet it sufficeth if they differ in beauty and glory; as in the Courts of great Kings, we may distinguish the place where the King's throne or chair of State is seated, by the footpace Canopy and furniture of it, from the rest of the room, though it be not severed by any partition. In the old Tabernacle the inmost and most holy place, was at first continuous with the rest of the Tabernacle, and not severed but by avail; for without some such cross material, the one could not be severed from the other: But in heaven the difference of brightness and glory serves for a veil. Christ therefore being to enter into the inmost and most holy place of heaven, to sit at the right hand of God's throne, must needs pass through the large and common mansion of heaven; as the Legal high Priest entered the second Tabernacle by passing through the first. There are three things that seem to favour this opinion. 1. Because the Author did mention and describe a double Tabernacle before; therefore the resemblance of the comparison doth require, that to a double Tabernacle on earth, there should be answerable a double place in heaven, one a holy place, and the other the most holy. 2. Because these words do indeed seem to depend upon the verb entered in the next verse, as appears by the particle neither at the beginning of that verse, for that particle doth use to couple those things that are contained under one verb, which is here the verb entered. 3. Because the high Majesty of the Deity seems to require, that in his heavenly Mansion, which (no question) is most ample and spacious, there should be some most holy place, sparkling and glittering with the brightness of unapproachable light, where the most high God and supreme Lord of all things hath his throne and residence, answerable to the most holy place in the Tabernacle, wherein the throne of God was said to be seated. This first Tabernacle of heaven through which Christ passed, is said to be greater and more perfect; i. than the terrene Tabernacle under the Law; and it is greater and perfecter not only in quantity but in dignity. Not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building.] He would give one instance at the least to declare the dignity of Christ's Tabernacle to be greater and more perfect than the legal, because it is not made with hands, or by art of man, as the legal was. Yet because the Author would show, that by these words he comprehends something more, then appears at the first sight; therefore he declares, what he means thereby; namely, that Christ's Tabernacle is not of this building. It is not only not made by the hand or art of man, but also it is not of the number of visible creatures; which though they be not made by the hand and industry of men, yet they are like to handy: works, because they are visible and corruptible as handiworks are. In which sense, the Apostle opposing the house of our glorious body to this of our corruptible and frail body, saith of it, that it is no handiwork made with hands, 2 Cor. 5.1. Or rather, the Tabernacle of Christ is said, not to be of this building or creating; because it is not framed of visible materials or any other stuff subject to the eye, whereof all handiworks wrought by man's art, are made. Therefore these words, not of the building, must be extended more largely, than the other, not made with hands, do properly signify. For it doth not presently follow, that if it be not made with hands, therefore it is not of this building; unless as we have said, we take a handiwork made by hand; to signify metaphorically, that also which is like to a handiwork made by hand; as are all things of this building or creating, which have been made from the beginning of the world; or else so (which comes all to one) as to comprehend all things, which in respect of their matter are of the same kind with handy-workes, as are all things made of God from the beginning of the world; for of these are all handy-workes framed. Hence it appears, that there is another building or creature of God, far more excellent than the building or frame of this world, whose form and matter is of another kind, far more fair, pure, sublime, and stable, than this which we see. And to this building, pertains that heavenly Tabernacle of Christ our high Priest, which is the Temple and residence of the most high God.  
12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves] Here he opposeth the sacrifice of Christ to the sacrifice of the old legal Priest. The old high Priest entered the most holy place by the blood of goats and calves. But Christ entered, not by such base blood, but by most precious blood, which could be no other, besides his own; for as his person was most precious, so must needs his blood be. The blood of man is more precious than the blood of a beast: but the blood of Christ is far more precious than the blood of all men besides. Seeing Christ himself is far more excellent than all other men, yea then all other ereatures; for he is more dear and near unto God then all, as being his unigenit and only begotten Son. But by his own blood] We are to note, that the Author to suit the elegancy of his comparison, did in the first member of it use the particle by; although the legal high Priest entered the holy place, not only by the blood of goats and calves, i. having first shed the blood of those beasts, or after the shedding of their blood; but also with their blood, which he carried into the holy place with him and offered it by sprinkling it, upon and before the Mercy-seat. But in the sacrifice of Christ the resemblance could not be extended so far, seeing Christ shed not the blood of an other creature but his own blood; neither in his heavenly Tabernacle did he offer his blood after his death but himself, when he was become immortal, and had cast off the rags of flesh and blood, because they cannot possess the Kingdom of God. And therefore he entered the holy place of heaven not with his blood, but only after he had shed his blood. Now because Christ entered thus, therefore the Author said less of the legal high Priest then indeed the thing itself was, and used the particle by to fit the comparison. For in the sacrifice of Christ, the matter was in part somewhat otherwise, then in the old expiatory sacrifice. In that old sacrifice, as also in other sin-offerings, the beast itself that was slain was not offered unto God, nor burnt as a sweet savour unto him (as the Scripture terms it) but the kidneys and the fat of it only; neither was the carcase brought into the holy place, but the blood of it only. But in the sacrifice of Christ, not his blood which he shed when he was slain, but he himself must be offered, and he must enter the holy place of heaven by himself. For hence afterward at the 14. verse it is said, that Christ offered himself to God, and not his blood; although otherwise the comparison with the expiatory sacrifices seem to require this latter resemblance. He entered in once into the holy place] The entrance into the most holy place is necessarily required to that sacrifice; for the Offering (wherein the nature of the sacrifice chief consisteth) could not be performed before the entrance, because it must be made in the holy place, by sprinkling upon and before the Mercy-seat. Hence it is manifest that the offering and sacrifice of Christ our high Priest was not made upon the Cross, but was performed in heaven, and is yet in the performing. Into this true holy place of heaven Christ entered but once, not often and yearly as the legali high Priest did. Having obtained eternal redemption] Now he opposeth the Expiation obtained by the offering or sacrifice of Christ, to the old Expiation obtained by the legal Priest. By Redemption he understands expiation or deliverance from the guilt of sins. For to be guilty of sin, and thereupon bound over to death and damnation is a grievous captivity and slavery. When he calls this Expiation eternal, he tacitly gives a reason, why he said before, that Christ entered once only into the holy place; namely, because by his entrance and offering of himself he expiated or atoned men for ever; as it is said chap. 10.14 Christ therefore obtained an eternal redemption, because he hath fully expiated all the sins not only passed, but to come, of all men believing in him, who have lived heretofore, or do now live, or shall live hereafter to the world's end. So that this expiation doth pertain to all sins, of all times and of all men, who truly pertain to Christ. But the legal expiation performed yearly every year, did not extend to all sins, but only to Ignorances' and Infirmities; nor to all times, not at all to the time future, but only to the time passed within the circuit of one year; nor to all persons, but only to those who were then living when the expiation was made; and therefore it was not eternal, but only annual. The word having obtained, must not be understood preteritively, as if Christ had obtained the redemption before he entered; but presentively, that he had obtained it by and upon his entrance; or when he entered than he obtained. See what we explicated before concerning indefinite participles, Chap. 6. ver. 13.  
13. For if the blood] He confirms his former assertion, That Christ by his one oblation of himself hath obtained an eternal expiation for us. And that he might compass this the better, he proves by an argument, à minori ad majus, that Christ hath purged away those sins that pollute our consciences. For the expurgation of these doth produce this effect, that laying aside all sin, we shall serve God ever after in all holiness and righteousness: and if we do this, we shall need no further offering for our sins. As on the contrary, if we finally forsake not our sins, but after expiation of them relapse into them again (which we then do when this expiation doth not so far prevail with us, as to withdraw us from our sins) than we have need of another offering and sacrifice, to obtain remission of our relapses. For it stands not with reason; that men should be expiated with one only sacrifice, and yet be still enslaved to the same sins, and be nothing the better for their expiation. Therefore either the expiation is prevalent and of force to withdraw men from sin, and make them live holily ever after; or else as men always return to their sins, so the expiation must be always iterated, and then it cannot bring eternal redemption to them. It is therefore manifest, that the offering of Christ, seeing it is but one, can really profit no man, but him that having received the faith of Christ, doth shake off the yoke of sin, and wholly devote himself to God, to live in a holy course of life ever after. Of bulls and goats] He calls those Bulls which in the former verse he called Calves; as well for their age being of a middle growth between Calves and Bullocks, in which sense also a Heifer is sometime put for a Cow; as by a synecdoche putting either of these indifferently for any beast of the herd, as opposed to those of the flock which were goats or sheep. For in the yearly sacrifice for the sins of the whole people, to which the Author's words refer; to speak properly, there was no Bull slain, but only an heifer (or as our Translation renders it, a Bullock) for the sins of the Priest, and a goat for the sins of the people. And this is the reason why the Author joins these beasts here, as likewise he doth it afterward, Chap. 10.4. And the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling the unclean] How the water of separation was made of the ashes of a burned heifer, and sprinkled upon the unclean; see Numb. 19 It is not necessary for the concluding of the Author's argument, that the ashes of the heifer should be put here for a type of the blood of Christ; for the argument here is not drawn from the type to the antitype (unless it be accidentally) but from terms of disparity, and excellency of Christ's offering. This we therefore note, lest any man should think it might be gathered from hence, that the Author compares this sacrifice of Christ, with any other legal sacrifices, besides the anniversarye, at which the high Priest entered the most holy place. Although we willingly acknowledge, that those ashes were a type of Christ's blood, and a most lively type; because those ashes were a kind of perpetuity, and must always be in a readiness, and had force at any time to cleanse any person sprinkled therewith from his legal uncleannesses of the flesh; and this force or effect of it depended not on the pleasure of any man, but only from the decree of God alone. So the blood of Christ is a perpetual & standing remedy, that hath force and power at any time to cleanse men from the guilt of their sins, if they be truly sprinkled with it, by being washed from the filth of their sins; i. if they cast them off for the time to come; and this force the blood of Christ hath from the good pleasure of God. These ashes are said to sprinkle, not efficiently, as if the action began at them, and they sprinkled themselves; but instrumentally because the unclean was sprinkled with the water wherein they were infused; as we say, the sword woundeth, because the sword is the instrument wherewith the wound is made. Sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh.] To sanctify is to cleanse; for sanctified is commonly opposed to polluted; as polluted and common and promiscuously used, is easily polluted, and cannot be clean; seeing then a thing is clean when it is separated from ordinary and common use. For this sanctifying (as the word following shows) consisteth only in purifying of the flesh. All the sanctifying that proceeded from the offerings of the blood of calves and goats, or from the sprinkling of the ashes of an heifer, was but a carnal purifying to cleanse the flesh. The Ceremonial uncleannesses wherewith men by chance were defiled, were expiated by these offerings and sprinklings; and the party predefiled became purified; so that now it was lawful for him to converse with other men, to come to the Temple, to be present at divine servivices, and to partake of the Sacrifice; from all which his former uncleanness debarred him. So that this Purity or cleanness of the flesh, was both the end and effect of the offering of blood and sprinkling of ashes.  
14. How much more shall the blood of Christ] Some man may think, that the Author should not have drawn his argument à mirori, but rather à pari; seeing there seems an equality of reason on both sides, that as well the legal sacrifice, as that of Christ had a like force to produce their effects; the blood of beasts to purify the flesh, and the blood of Christ to purify the conscience. But we must note, that the blood of beasts and the offering of it, is not altogether of like nature to purify the flesh, as the blood of Christ offered to God by the spirit, is to the cleansing of the conscience: For if we look upon the nature of the thing, what force hath the blood of beasts offered in the Sanctuary, that thereby it should cleanse the flesh, or be reputed to cleanse it? Was not this effect of purifying the flesh, tied to the shedding and offering of that blood; only by the decree of God? and that it might be accounted to have this effect, must they not have a knowledge of God's decree by some other means? But for the blood of Christ, after the shedding of it, there followed the offering of Christ himself in the heavenly Tabernacle; or the shedding of Christ's blood joined with the offering of Christ himself (as the Author considers the blood of Christ here) seeing Christ therefore shed it, that he might offer himself in the Sanctuary of heaven, both as a Priest and as a Sacrifice; The blood of Christ, I say, if we respect the nature of the thing, hath a potent force to purge our consciences, or is the true and effectual cause of their being purged. For in the offering of Christ, as we have already said somewhat, and more shall afterward, is contained his singular and only care of our salvation in heaven; from whence the purifying of our consciences, and the plenary remission of our sins, doth flow and proceed, as from the proper cause of it. Furthermore, that the blood of Christ may be known to have so great force, looking on the nature of Christ's death, and the circumstances of it, every man may easily be admonished of it; For Christ by his blood did strongly maintain the truth of his doctrine; having shed his blood he entered into heaven, the habitacle of immortal life, that what he had promised by his words he might testify to all men by his example; having shed his blood and entered into his heavenly Sanctuary, he offered himself an immaculate sacrifice to God for us; having shed his blood he obtained all power both in heaven and earth, all judgement and arbitrement of our salvation. Neither to obtain this was the bloodshed of Christ a bare condition, that of it own nature and proper efficacy conferred nothing to it: but seeing it containeth so hard a work of virtue and obedience, a work so acceptable to God, and so advancing to his glory, even of it own nature it had force and power to procure this power unto Christ, and to produce in us the cleansing of our conscience. He that ponders all this in his mind, can he doubt, but that by the blood of Christ he is expiated from all stain of sin, if he embrace the faith of Christ with all his heart, and afterward as fare as the hope of eternal life can encourage him, keep himself undefiled and pure from all stain of sin? Thus the nature and force of Christ's death being considered, the Author with very good reason doth draw and conclude this his argument, not from a parity of reason but from a disparity, or from the less to the greater. The blood of Christ] There seems an Emphasis in these words of the Author, to make it yet more fully appear, how great force his blood hath in cleansing our consciences; As if he had said, The blood, not of an ordinary man, which yet is better than that of beasts, but of Christ, who is the unigenit son of God, seated in heaven at the right hand of God, and reigning over all creatures: Shall not this blood have much more force to purge the conscience, than the blood of beasts had to purify the flesh? Now, that we may a little prevent the words of the Author, the cleansing of our conscience is attributed to the blood of Christ, both as it is the blood of the Covenant, whereby the new Covenant is established, and as it is the blood of the sacrifice which is offered for us in that heavenly Sanctuary; both which the Author hath conjoined, saving that he explicates the first last, and the last first, because it belongs to his Priesthood, as the former is referred to his Mediatorship; which two functions of Christ were fitly conjoined in the mention of his blood; for they are both coupled in the death of Christ; for his Mediatorship ended in his death, and his Priesthood began there: But how the blood of Christ purgeth our consciences, as it is the blood of the Covenant, we shall see hereafter. Yet now we shall add thus much, that the new Covenant was established by the blood of Christ, not only as appointed so by God, in manner as the blood of calves and goats was of old appointed for the establishing of the old covenant: but even the very nature and condition of his blood, was of great efficacy thereto. For who can doubt of the truth of that covenant, for confirmation whereof the blood of Christ was shed, who made this covenant in the name of God, and afterward became our heavenly King? Who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God] Hear the Author clearly expresseth, by what means the blood of Christ as it was the blood of the sacrifice, had so much power & force as to purge our consciences; namely, because Christ having shed his blood, did through the eternal Spirit, offer himself without spot to God in the heavenly Sanctuary. Hence it is manifest, that the blood of Christ had so far power to expiate our sins, as the shedding of it was seconded by Christ his offering of himself in heaven; which could not follow unless Christ had first shed his blood: For the blood of Christ, not only as it is the blood of the Sacrifice, takes efficacy and force to purge sin from the subsequent oblation of Christ in offering himself in heaven: but also as it is the blood of the Covenant, it received great force from the subsequent resurrection and glory of Christ. For the death of Christ is as it were animated and quickened by his Resurrection and glory, and then are the mighty effects of it, when he that suffered death to confirm the new covenant, is thereupon acknowledged to be the Son of God, and the Christ: which certainly could not have been without his Resurrection and the subsequent glory of it. For than we plainly perceive the boundless love of God in delivering Christ to death for us; and the boundless love of Christ in dying for us: from both which we may easily draw an undoubted hope of our salvation. And then also we see from his most shameful death, a passage open to immortal life; and lastly, than we esteem the Covenant most sacred, that was confirmed by a death so precious. But if Christ had not risen from the dead, who therefore died that he might appear to be the Christ, and the King over God's people; his death had thereby lost all the force of it; yea, it would have been of force to nullify the faith of all his promises. But he had promised us eternal life in the Name of his Father, and that he himself would give it us, by raising us from the dead; yea, he openly said of himself that he would rise the third day, thereby to confirm his doctrine; wherefore unless the event had been answerable, his doctrine had been stripped of all authority. But let us return to the offering of Christ, which the Author opposeth to the offering of the old high Priest for several respects. 1. In that Christ offered through the Spirit, and the eternal Spirit: but the high Priest under the Law, did enter the Holy place, and offer through his infirmity; a weak man compassed with the flesh. But Christ was filled with the eternal Spirit, i. with the power of God, which clarified him from all mortality, and made him eternal, subject to no destruction. Now this Spirit seems to be called eternal, not only because it eternally resides in Christ, but because it makes him to become eternal. Of which Spirit, if Christ had been destitute, he could not have offered himself in that heavenly Sanctuary, to have remained there for ever. Therefore in these words, (about which Interpreters have divers disputes, as men must needs do, when the genuine sense of any place is either not perceived or not allowed) is expressed the cause, how Christ being before not only of a mortal nature and compassed with flesh, but also slain as a sacrifice, could afterward enter the heavenly Sanctuary, the palace of immortality, and there as a Priest offer himself too God. This he saith was effected by the benefit of the eternal Spirit, who throughly consecrated Christ, and devested him from all natural and terrene infirmities. That which he had spoken before, chap. 7. ver. 16. that Christ was made a Priest after the power of an endless life; now he saith again in other words, that Christ offered through the eternal Spirit; for if we look into the thing itself, what is the power of an endless life, other than this eternal Spirit? In a like manner Paul treating of Christ, as he is ordained and declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, i. as God after his resurrection made him the celestial and eternal King of his people with supreme power, mentions the Spirit of holiness or sanctification, Rom. 1.4. and he saith, that Christ was declared the Son of God according to the Spirit of holiness as he was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. For, seeing he opposeth this Spirit to the flesh of Christ, i. to whatsoever was humane in his nature, what can he else understand, but the power of God's Spirit poured upon Christ, which abolishing from him all his mortal condition, did throughly consecrate him unto God, made him a person most divine, and most like unto God in nature and power, and rendered him fully capable of a celestial and eternal kingdom? Hither also must that of Peter be referred, where he saith, (as it is in the Greek) that Christ was mortified in the flesh, but vivified by the Spirit, 1 Pet. 3.18. where as the flesh of Christ is made the cause of his mortality, and consequently of his death: so is the Spirit, (namely of God in Christ) made the spring and fountain of his vivification or life. 2. He opposeth the offering of Christ to that of the old high Priest, in that Christ offered himself; but the Legal Priest offered not himself, but the blood of slain beasts: but what force could that blood have being offered and sprinkled before the Mercy-seat for the purifying of the flesh, if we respect the nature of the thing? But Christ himself being offered for us in the heavenly Tabernacle, was he not a most acceptable sacrifice to God? Is there any sin of those that are truly faithful in Christ, which by the offering of so holy a Sacrifice, and by the authority and care of so great an high Priest with his heavenly Father could not be expiated? 3. In that he offered himself without spot or blemish. For the old sacrifice must be very pure and free from any spot; wherefore seeing our high Priest himself was the sacrifice, he must needs be void of all spot or blemish. But the old high Priest when he entered the most holy place and offered, was not without spot or blemish; for even then he was to procure the expiation no less of his own sins then of the peoples. But Christ when he entered the heavenly Sanctuary, and offered himself to God, was then free from all spot, not only in respect of his most innocent life, which he passed without the least spot of sin; but also, which as we said in the seventh Chapter, the Author chief respecteth, in respect of his immortal nature; which he obtained free from all spot of infirmity, when he was quickened with that eternal Spirit, whereby he entered the heavenly Sanctuary. But what is meant by this offering of Christ, we have declared before. For these things are not properly spoken of Christ: but only comparatively and allusively to the ancient high Priest. So that by this offering of Christ is signified, his singular and only care for the expiation of our sins, and for our salvation. Yet it is a care worthy and suitable to so great an high Priest, who is not destitute of power in himself to confer salvation upon us, but is forced to obtain it from another, as the old high Priest was: but is one, that enjoyeth all command both in heaven and earth, one that exerciseth all Judgement delivered over unto him from his Father; and one that by his own proper power doth release us from all guilt of our sins, frees us from all punishment, and lastly makes us capable of eternal life. Whence it so much the more appears, how the purging of our consciences doth certainly follow upon the blood and death of Christ, and upon his subsequent offering in heaven. Purge your conscience from de●d works] How much more shall the blood of Christ purge? Shall is so the future tense here, that it carries the force of the time present. For, in such arguments drawn from comparison, we love to use the future tense in the consequent member of it. If this be so, much more shall that. For herein we respect not any futurity of time, but a futurity of consequence and of truth; for many times we conclude in that manner of things past. The conscience here is opposed to the flesh; for as the blood of beasts offered did purge the flesh, so the blood of Christ offered through the Spirit, doth penetrate unto the conscience and purge it. And sins are called dead works, not formally as if they had no life or activity in them: but effectively, because they are deadly works, that brings death to the sinner, and of their own nature keep the sinner dead for ever. These deadly works are the spots and blots that defile our conscience; and from these our conscience is purged by the blood of Christ; not only in that we are freed from the guilt of them in the sight of God, and consequently from all punishment of them; but also in that we are delivered from the sense of that guilt, and from the fear of punishment, and so our conscience is cased of a grievous burden. And it was not for nothing that the Author would rather say, purge our conscience, than our mind, the inward part of us, opposite to the flesh; Because thereby he would show, that the blood of Christ doth also cleanse away, that misery and torment of the conscience, whereby men conscious of their wickedness, do tremble and quake for fear of God's Judgements. This is most certain, that true and solid peace of conscience in them that have sinned, doth ground itself upon this, that God hath declared his will, they should be free from all the guilt of their sins; And yet it may be, that men freed in the sight of God from the guilt of their sins, may not enjoy a peaceable and quiet conscience, because they are destitute of the knowledge or faith of it. Therefore the blood of Christ offered to God through the eternal Spirit, doth not only abolish all the guilt of our sins, but also doth certify and make faith thereof unto us; as we heard before. Whence it cometh to pass that there ariseth a great calm and quiet of conscience in their minds, who have tasted the efficacy and virtue of Christ his blood and sacrifice; and we may well say that though formerly their conscience were oppressed with many crimes; yet than their conscience is wholly disburdened, and they find no guiltiness in it. And this is the scope which God proposed unto himself in the death of Christ and the things following thereon. For he would not therefore bind himself by the blood of Christ and establish a new Covenant, because there might be danger, that he would not stand to his promises who is most true and faithful of his word; but because we should want no assurance of his grace and mercy towards us. And hence also it is, that when Christ was raised from the dead and invested with immortality, God exalted him into heaven, and committed unto him the whole care and arbitrement of our salvation. For the efficacy and force of Christ's death and the consequents upon it, must be distinguished from their scope whereat God aimed; although that efficacy were subservient to this scope, and effectual to the compassing of it. The efficacy of Christ's death and the consequents upon it, was very great, both to oblige God to perform his promises, and to produce the real effect of them upon us: but the scope is, (as we have said) to make assured and undoubted faith unto us, of so great grace of God, of so great salvation and remission of sins; to the end that we being fully certified thereof, might again on our part perform our duty, and wholly devote ourselves too God. Whence the Author adding afterward this end or effect of purging our conscience, to be performed by us on our part, doth thereby teach us, that in this purging of our conscience he included, not only an Immunity from punishment, arising from the abolishing of our guilt before God, but also a security from them, proceeding from our certain knowledge that our guilt is abolished. Now for the matter of our Impunity or freedom from punishment; our punishment is not only temporal, but also eternal, opposite to life eternal. From the punishment of eternal death, those sacrifices 〈◊〉 the Law were so fare from freeing any man, that they could exempt no man from temporal death, or capital punishment, for they only took away some other light penalties or inconveniences of this life. Neither did God write all his Laws in blood, ordaining death for every offence; but moderated the rigour of his Law with singular justice and equity. Upon some offences he laid the penalty of death, which no sacrifice could release; upon others he laid a fine and a sacrifice. The mulct or fine was to be paid to the party grieved; but the sacrifice to himself, for thereupon he remitted the penalty due to himself; but would have restitution made of the injury done to man. So for example for theft, the penalty was a restituon of the double, triple or quadruple, to be paid to the party thereby damaged: but besides this restitution, the theft was expiated by sacrifice, which was instead of a penalty to the most merciful God. Lastly, there some things totally void of all true offence: as for example, if any man had touched a dead body, though it were of duty to bury him (which was rather a matter of piety then of offence) yet because this and other such like cases were condemned by the Law of uncleanness, therefore they were to be expiated either by some sacrifice, or by the holy water of separation. Therefore all the use of those sacrifices was to expiate some lighter faults or uncleannesses of the flesh; but great offences were punished with death. Hence David acknowledging his sin exiable by no sacrifices of beasts, saith to God, Thou desirest not sacrifices, else would I give them: but thou delightest not in burn: offerings, Psal. 51.16. He means in the expiation of such crimes as his was; and therefore he flies to the sole mercy and clemency of God; and resolves to pacify God with the sacrifice of a broken and contrite heart. The force of which sacrifice, if it be made seasonably, and abound afterward in the fruits of good works, is established and ratified by the Law of the Gospel. Now the blood and sacrifice of Christ takes away all guilt and penalties of all sins, even of the most heinous, in them who having tasted the force of that sacrifice, do afterward live holily: I say, all kind of penalties not only of temporal death but of eternal, which by force of the law all incurred, that had truly and morally sinned. For temporal life opposed to temporal death proceeded from the observation of the Law otherwise, then eternal life did opposed to eternal death. For to attain or preserve temporal life it sufficed to keep the Law taken in an open and literal seize (as they call it) and to expiate certain offences by certain rites and sacrifices. But the latter could not man attain by force of the Law, unless a man had kept the precepts of it, taken in a mystical sense. i. most fully and perfectly as the Gospel proposeth them. For seeing eternal life was not contained in the promises of the Law, but in a mystical sense; it was great equity, that he who would attain it by the benefit of the Law, should likewise keep the precepts of the Law in a mystical sense. Neither only so; but it must be kept exactly, and without any sin: so that there should need no sacrifices or expiations. For no sacrifices were of such force as to take away the guilt of eternal death; and so estate a man in a right to eternal life; neither did the Law open any other way to arrive at a plenary justification joined with the reward of eternal life, then by the merit of works. To serve the living God] Here is the effect of this Expiation wrought in us by the blood and offering of Christ. For when our conscience doth clearly acknowledge, that in respect of God, it is freed from all guilt of all sin even the most grievous, and nothing can hinder us but ourselves, from enjoying the real effect of our being acquitted from all sin; it comes to pass here by that we must needs have strong motives to carry us on to the worship and service of God, and to receive the faith of Christ; to the end we may effectually enjoy so great a blessing, and having once enjoyed it never lose it, but afterward abstain from all sin with all our possible endeavour, knowing well that so great a blessing is attained and preserved with true piety. Hence it appears that this purging of our conscience gotten by the blood of Christ, must be so understood in this place, that for the real effect of it, it depends upon our duty on our part; i. than it gins to have it effect in us, when our faith and obedience gins toward God and Christ; and is continued by the continuance of our faith and obedience, and by constancy and perseverance in faith and godliness to the end, is at length consummated, and doth rest in a full and immutable right to eternal life, the effect whereof will most certainly follow in due time. For unless this effect and compliment of our expiation depend reciprocally upon our duty, and our duty and will to serve God flowed immediately from it, what one man among a thousand would serve God upon the expiation of his fins, if he knew that without this, he could be expiated effectually, and released from the guilt of all his sins, and enjoy a full right to eternal life? because therefore this offering of Christ doth withdraw us from sin, and makes us afterward serve the living God; hence it comes to pass, that Christ doth expiate us by one only offering, or that our expiation flowing from the offering and sacrifice of Christ is eternal and lasteth forever. For what need the offering be iterated, if men once expiated, sinne no more? For although sometime by error or infirmity the true worshippers of God may offend; yet because the offering of Christ doth not so properly intent to expiate such light offences, as sins that are more heinous; as appears by the proper nature of the new Covenant, as it stands distinguished from the old; therefore the oblation of Christ must not be iterated for our light infirmities and lapses. Therefore for the removing of the guilt of such light offences, the perpetual residence of Christ our high Priest in his heavenly Sanctuary, and his intercession to his Father for us, is abundantly sufficient; so that for them he need not shed his blood again, and after the shedding of it enter into his Sanctuary. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not always signify all kind of obedience and service done unto God, but chief that divine service done to God publicly & most properly, as hath before been showed, those holy reverences which we perform in the worship of God▪ Yet the Author useth it here by a Metonymy, for all divine service that is joined with the worship of God; for worship and service are mutual adjuncts connexed each to other. For so great a benefit of God as the expiation of all our sins should easily move us to perform divine services unto God, by praises and thanksgivings and wholly to devote out selves to worship to good a God; for than we take courage to approach unto God to worship and serve him, and to hope that the honour we do him will not be unacceptable unto him, when we feel our conscience clean & quiet, as purged from all sin. Or else the word here is taken by way of Metaphor, whereby all good works pleasing unto God and done for his sake, are accounted for sacrifices and offerings acceptable to God; and that wholly endeavours them may fitly be said to serve God. God is here called the living God according to the ordinary phrase of Scripture; which notwithstanding in this place wants not an emphasis: Not only because hereby the true God is distinguished from all the feigned gods of the Gentiles, which because they were nothing but wooden or stony Idols, and therefore wooden and stony gods, were called vain and liveless gods, and are opposed to the living God. But also to show the cause, why we should worship and serve God, and withal the happiness of those that devote themselves unto him. For seeing he is the living God, he is also the true God, who can reward his worshippers and servitors with great benefits, and recompense them with fearful judgements who neglect him. To this end Paul writing to the Thessalonians saith, Ye are turned from Idols to God, to serve the living and true God, 1 Thess. 1.9. And the word there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which properly signifies to serve. And God is eminently called the living God, not only because he truly lives, but also because he is the fountain of life to all other things which do live. In which sense sometimes, he alone is said to live, or to have life and immortality in himself.  
15. And for this cause] Hear the Author confirms his former assertion by a new argument, in that Christ is the Mediator of the new Testament, or that Christ made the New Testament and sealed it with his blood. For this is the nature of the New Testament (as we shown in the former Chapter) to contain the remission of all our sins, even the most heinous, and consequently to be of force to purge our conscience. And because it is a Testament, therefore it was first to be confirmed by death, which here neither can nor must be any other than the death of Christ. Whence it is manifest that the death or blood of Christ, as it confirms the New Testament, doth purge our conscience from dead works. The particle and shows that a new argument is alleged; and the words for this cause note the final cause, for which Christ died. He is the Mediator of the New Testament.] We now use the word Testament and not Covenant, because the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifies a Testament and not a Covenant (though sacred Writers use it to signify also a Covenant.) And the ambiguity of the word did well serve the Author to draw his argument from that which must needs be done in a Testament. And to speak a little yet more accurately, Testament and Covenant differ but alternly, as genus and species. For every Testament is a Covenant, though not è contra; for though the heir do not covenant with the Testator at the making of the Testament, because that may be done altogether without his knowledge, which is necessarily required in him that covenanteth: Yet he covenants at the validity of the Testament; for when the Covenant takes effect by his acceptance of the condition specified in the Testament, and by his entrance upon the Inheritance, than (though before he were free) he covenants ex Lege, to perform the will of the testator. So that every Testament at least when it is consummate and valid, is a kind of Covenant; and it is the best kind of Covenant; 1. Because it is most solemnly testified by sealing and witnessing, from whence it is called a Testament. 2. Because it is most preciously confirmed, even by death, and the death of him that makes it, who establisheth his own deed by his own death. 3. Because it contains an extraordinary benefit, in conveying the Testators inheritance and whole estate to the heir. And lastly, because it proceeds with the greatest freedom, in leaving the heir to his liberity, whether he will accept of the Inheritance or not. Now this New Testament is the last will of God, which must stand for ever, because it is already confirmed, and therefore cannot be revoked. But how Christ is the Mediator of it hath been partly showed before, chap. 8.6. and is partly to be showed afterward; yet his Mediatorship consisteth chief in these two acts, first in declaring or publishing it, and then in confirming or establishing it by his death, as a Testament ought to be. That by mean, of death for the transgressions that were under the first Testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance] Here is a file of final causes linked one to another, whereof the last end is, the obtaining of an eternal inheritance; the intermean is the redemption for the transgressions which were under the first Testament; the prime Mean to these two former subordinate ends whereby they are successively atrained, is death, which in a Testament must necessarily intervene. Hence we may see, that the redemption of transgressions doth properly depend and flow from the New Testament; and the death of Christ doth give force and strength to this Testament. The word Redemption is put for Expiation, as was showed ver. 12. For Expiation is one kind or sort of Redemption; both because the effect of expiation is a delivery, and because also the means or it whereby it is wrought is an expense, for it commonly costeth blood. Hence some Translators in this place render it Expiation. But because the word Redemption carries the sense of Expiation, therefore it both follows the construction of it, and is simply called the redemption of transgressions; either for their expiation, as we have said. In which sense the Scripture speaks elsewhere. For Prov 16.6. where the vulgar Latin reads it, By truth iniquity is redeemed; there our English translation hath it, By truth iniquity is purged, i. expiated; Or for redemption from transgressions. For Cicero himself in a sense not unlike, saith, Liberationem culpa, for à culpâ. And he useth the word Transgressions, whereby grievous sins are commonly signified, to show us, what sins chief are remitted in the New Testament; namely, heinous and grievous sins; for which in the Old Testament there was no expiation allowed, but the punishment of death imposed. Wherefore he addeth, Which were under the first Testament] He means which remained in force, or could not be expiated, or for which no remission was allowed under the Law. But he seems withal to intimate, that those grievous sins had their being, and were wont to be committed under the Old Testament; whereas the New Testament together with their guilt, doth wholly take away their being, in them who cordially believe the promises of it. For that this is the force and effect of the New Testament, and of the blood of Christ, we have already showed, partly in the eight Chapter, and partly here. And he mentions not the expiation of transgressions only or grievous sins therefore, as if under the New Testament also all lighter sins were not expiated: but it is as much as if he had said, Yea even of those transgressions under, etc.] For sometimes the Scripture speaketh simply, not to exclude other things, but to teach us, that those other things whereof there might be greater doubt are included, & which being thought included, much more is it to be thought so of the rest. So Psal. 25.8. David saith of God, That he is good and upright, therefore will he teach sinners in the way, i. Yea even sinners, and not righteous men only, though he will teach them also, and much rather; for so he presently adds in the verse following, The meek will he guide in judgement and teach his way. So Paul, Rom. 4.5. saith, That God justifieth the ungodly; not that he justifieth him only, but that he is so gracious as to justify him also. Or else the Author mentions only transgressions, or grievous sins, to show that they chief are expiated under the new Testament, and that this is the proper fruit of the new Testament, and of the oblation of Christ. But if the guilt of grievous sins be taken away under the new Testament, much more must it be true of lighter sins. Besides, grievous sins do much more grieve the conscience then lighter; for to lighter sins there was some expiation granted in the law, whereby men might imagine that God of his infinite goodness, would also release the penalty of eternal death; but to the other no expiation was allowed. Might receive the promise. To receive the promise of eternal inheritance, doth in this place signify, to enter the real possession of the eternal inheritance which was before promised; and not to receive the promise of it only. Therefore those grievous sins whereof men stood guilty, and for which they were subject to eternal death, must first be expiated, before they can enter and receive the eternal inheritance. For those sins did hinder men from entering it; which being purged away, now nothing hinders, but they may take possession of it. But who shall do this? shall all promiscuously? no certainly, but they which are called]. i. They to whom this eternal inheritance is offered by the Gospel of Christ, and who accept this great grace of God by a lively faith? For both of these use to be included in the word called. But he simply saith, they which are called might receive this eternal inheritance; because all which are called may receive it, if they will, and be not wanting to themselves; for in God and Christ there is no let.  
16. For where a Testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the Testator.] Here he gives the cause why he said, that by means of death, this effect of remission of sins, and receiving the eternal inheritance doth follow; because (saith he) where a Testament is, there of necessity the death of the Testator must intervene, which reason he confirms by a Super-reason in the verse following. But here some man may object, that the Author doth but sophisticate with words, and not draw a real argument from the thing itself. Seeing Christ was not the Author of any testament properly, but only the Mediator of the Covenant; although the Greek writers use the word Testament to signify a Covenant: But the ambiguity of the word, must not confound the natures and properties of the things; so that what is true of one thing which the ambiguous word signifies, should forthwith be transfered to the other, signified by the same word. We answer, That the speech is here of such a thing, as is common to both the significations of the word, the proper and improper, or rather the general, and the special; i. that is Covenant, and Testament, for we said before, that every Testament is a Covenant, an especial and best kind of Covenant. For Covenant is a general name whereby those things are called, that are more properly named leagues and testaments; both which are Covenants: And indeed, almost throughout the old testament, the original word which our English translation renders Covenant, doth properly signify a League, and were better so rendered; for because God is a public person, and so is mankind also, therefore all God's Covenants with man are properly Leagues. Hence the Latin translations, both vulgar and others, constantly render them Faedera. So for a testament, if we consider the nature of it accuratly, than any solemn act of any person testified by his death is properly a testament; and he who testifies another's act, though he be no Author, but only the assertor of it, is properly the testator of it. For hence the Civilians have borrowed their terms of Testament and Testator, which commonly concur in the same person; yet not necessarily, but accidentally: for whatsoever witness will testify, upon his death, the verity and certainty of another man's last Will and Testament, such a witness is truly a testator to that Testament. And he that mediats to certify a man's Testament, and mediats so fare as to testify it with his death, he is both the mediator and the testator of that Testament: so that a mediator and a testator, in respect of the same Testament, are not functions incompatible, but consentaneous, that may easily concur in the same person. Yea, he that in this sense is the testator of a Testament, is necessarily thereupon the mediator of it. So that Gods two solemn Covenants, or rather his Leagues, the old and the new, are truly and properly called Testaments; because they are both testified by blood and death, to certify, confirm, and establish them; for the old Testament was testified by the blood and death of calves and goats, which was therefore called the blood of the Testament, as it is declared in the verses following. But because the new Testament was testified, certified, confirmed, and established, by the death and blood of Christ, therefore Christ, though he were not the Author of it, yet is most truly and properly the testator of it. And because Christ did mediate for this Testament, to certify and publish it to the world, that the old and former testament was abrogated and revoaked, and that this new one was the last Will and Testament of his Father: therefore also be was most truly and properly the Mediator of it. And he was so constant and earnest a Mediator, to certify the truth of this new Testament, that thereupon he became the testator of it also, to testify and confirm it with his death and blood. Nay, because Christ was the Testator of it, therefore he must necessarily also be the Mediator of it; for no man will testify that truth or that cause with his blood, for which he no way mediats; seeing he ●hat no way mediats for a thing, will 〈◊〉 testify it with his blood. Wherefore in the words of these 16. and 17 verses, though the Author for a while supposeth, and takes it for granted, that not only death, but the death of the Testator (which here is Christ) must needs intervene to confirm the new Testament; yet a little after at the 23. verse, and so forward, he clearly demonstrats it. For there he teacheth, that the matter must not, nor could not be effected by the blood of beasts; because he was both the Mediator and the high Priest of the Covenant or League; who when he was to appear before God in his heavenly Sanctuary, and there to perform his offering, certainly he was not to slay some beast, to bring the blood of it into that Sanctuary: but must shed his own blood, to make himself his own offering in heaven; thereby to confirm and establish the new League or Covenant; which as he might do, so he must do it, for the great dignity and sublimity of the particulars therein contained. So that in this respect the new Covenant comes nearer to the nature of a Testament, then of a League, which was the proper nature of the old Covenant. For what effect could there be in the blood of a beast, to confirm and make faith unto us of heavenly promises? Such a Confirmation had very ill beseemed this divine and heavenly Covenant, especially seeing it might be confirmed by other blood more suitable to it, and by blood that notwithstanding was to be shed for another cause; which cause hath already been showed at the 14. verse. Whence we may perceive, that in these words in this 16. verse, as they are also extended to Covenants or Leagues, and to the Authors and Mediators of them, something must be understood to make the truth of them fully to appear, which yet is not expressed, because it makes nothing to the point in hand. For these words of the Author here must be taken, as it he had said, where a Testament is, there must needs be the death of the Testator, or at least (as in leagues which in a manner resemble Testaments) the death of some creature, whereby the League is confirmed by him that makes it; for till death intervene, a Testament or League, is of no force and strength: which exception, or rather which correction of his general saying, why it was not added here, the cause hath been already showed. We may also answer the former objection thus. That his reasoning here is comparative by way of similitude, not explicitly, but contractedly as is often used. And the words are to be taken, as if he had said; as when a Testament is made, the death of the Testator must needs accede; because it must be animated by the death of the Testator; for while the Testator lives, the Testament lives not, or is not in force: So also when the new League or Testament was ordained, his death must accede that made it, and was in stead of the Testator, that the Testament might be firm and of force. For though Christ made not the new Testament as the Author or principal agent of it, yet because he was the Mediator, and instrument of his Father to speed it in his Father's name, therefore he may be said to have made it; for we commonly attribute the same action both to the agent who is the prime cause of it, and to the Instrument who is the means of it. From hence it manifestly appears, what force the blood of Christ hath in procuring us remission of sins; namely these, two forces; first that by it the New Testament was established or confirmed; and secondly, that thereupon he offered himself to God for us in heaven. So that his blood was confirmatory to settle the eternal inheritance upon us; and expiatory to procure an eternal redemption of our sins: whereof the former is handled in this verse, the latter in those precedent. Why Christ is called here the Testator, we have before sufficiently reasoned; namely, because he was the main witness to certify the truth of the Testament by his death; and because he was the main party by whose death the Testament which till then lay dead, became alive and valid to be of force and effect. Yet here we shall add one reason more, because it will serve wondrously to animate our faith and love toward Christ; and that is, because the inheritance conveyed unto us by this New Testament, is properly the inheritance of Christ; for he is the unigenit or only begotten Son of God, and was ordained to be Lord and heir of all his Father's estate; and hath admitted us that will accept of it, to be coheirs and fellow-partners with him in it; and died as the Testator to settle the possession of it upon us. Or to speak in the words of Paul, He hath received us to the glory of God, Rom. 15.7. And the words of Christ to his Disciples tend to this sense. I appoint unto you a Kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me, Luke 22.29.  
17. For a testament is of force after men are dead] This is the reason why the death of the testator must accede to the testament he hath made, because all the while the testator lives, his testament is dead and of no force to give any possession to the heir of the inheritance and estate thereby to be conveyed: but when the testator is dead than the testament takes life and becomes of force; for then the heir hath an actual right and power to enter upon the inheritance. And therefore he adds, Otherwise it is of no strength at all, while the testator liveth. These are the same words in effect with the former, and are but a consequence from them, by that rule of reasoning which we call conversion by contraposition. For if a testament be of force when the testator is dead; than it must needs follow, that while the testator is not dead, the testament is of no force. Which kind of reasoning is frequent in Scripture; yet among many passages we shall instance but in this one, and in this the rather, because the texts of it are much obscured by Interpreters, who labour to reconcile them, as if they seemed opposite; whereas no two texts can be more according, for they are wholly equipollent, and each consequent to the other. Christ saith, He that is not with me, is against me, Mat. 12.30. and he saith again, He that is not against us, is for us; or which is all one, He that is not against me, is with me, Luke 9.50. This latter saying in Luke is so fare from being opposite or contrary to the former in Matthew, that it is a most immediate and necessary consequence from it. For if this saying be true as it is, because the truth hath said it, He that is not with Christ, is against him. Then this also from thence must needs follow for a truth, He that is not against Christ, is with him. Because this latter saying is the conversion of the former by contraposition.  
18. Whereupon neither the first was dedicated without blood] What he had said before in general of testaments, now he declares in particular, and proves by an example in the first or Old Testament, and makes way for himself to apply the same unto Christ, and to the New Testament established by him. For because under the Old Testament itself was confirmed by blood; and because almost all things were cleansed by blood, at least sins could not be cleansed without shedding of blood: Therefore from hence, he gathers by way of similitude, that death and shedding of blood must needs intervene under the New Testament, that thereby both the Testament itself might be confirmed, and our sins purged. Was dedicated. The Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; which as Interpreters note is properly said, when some solemn act is done, whereby a new thing being perfected and finished, gins to come in use. So the Consecration of Solomon's new Temple, was called the Dedication of it; and the Consecration of the new Altar erected by Judas Maccabeus was called the Dedication of it, 1 Maccab. 4.56. And the annual celebration of that dedication is called the feast of the dedication. John 10.22. yet this word applied to leagues, signifies nothing else but to confirm them. And leagues are then confirmed, when they are so ratified, as thereby they have force and strength to become obligatory and binding to all parties therein interessed. For the confirmation of a league, is some solemn act done by the confederates, or in their name, whereby they mutually so bind their faith, that it shall not be lawful for either party to rescind or revoke the league. And although there be many forms of confirmation for leagues, yet anciently the usual form was by blood, and that of the Old Testament was performed by the blood of beasts: Wherefore with good reason, the Author saith, that it was not dedicate or confirmed without blood; i. it began not to come in use among men, and to be of force, before it was ratified by the bloodshed of beasts. For this blood gave beginning to that testament, in respect of the force of it. The Author useth the very same word afterward Chap. 10.20. where our English Translation renders it consecrated. By a new and living way which he hath consecrated unto us; whereof in it due place.  
19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people] That the first Testament was not dedicated without blood he now proves, by a narration of the carriage of the action, showing the dedication or confirmation of that Testament both for the manner and matter whereby it was confirmed; and his narration hereof is for the most part taken out of Scripture. Exod. 24. Moses did both speak and read all the precepts to the people. For first he spoke them by word of mouth, as the Lord had delivered them to him; and upon his rehearsing or speaking of them, the people gave their unanimous approbation and consented to do them. Exod. 24.3. Then he wrote them in a book, and read them in the audience of the people; and the people again the second time gave their approbation. ibid. ver. 7. The word spoken includes both these actions of reciting and reading; for all reading is speaking also, because he that reads, speaks out of a book. The precepts by Moses confirmed, were all those Laws of the Old Testament, that did bind universally, both persons and times, which all persons were bound to observe perpetually; for such were properly the precepts of God's league with the people, although happily they were not all assigned to the preceding Chapters in Exod. but are related in other places, and in the following books of Moses. For those precepts which after the confirmation of the league or testament, are described in the following Chapters of Exodus, are not properly Laws, but certain Ordinances of God for the present, concerning the framing and ordering of the Tabernacle, the furniture of it, and other things, whereby the worship of God was then to be performed. And yet there bosom, who think, that the passages recited, Exod. 24. concerning the confirmation of the Covenant, are spoken only by way of historical anticipation. And this opinion is not without some show of probability. According to the Law] This is a limitation of the universal word every precept, to show, that he spoke not of all precepts in general, but of every precept in the Law delivered to Moses, and written by Moses in the book, and read by Moses to the people. He took the blood of calves and of goats] It is not expressed in the story of Moses that he took or shed the blood of goats for that action. Yet it is very credible, that there were goats among the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings then slain unto God. For that Moses nameth only calves, it might therefore be, because they are the more worthy creatures: Unless we should rather say, that first the whole people was sprinkled and expiated by Moses, which the Author chief respected, and might know it some other way; for the blood of goats was usually shed to expiate the sins of the whole people. With water and scarlet wool and hyssop] Neither do we read this in the forecited place of Moses; but the Author who undoubtedly was very skilful in the Jewish customs, doth perhaps therefore mention water, because he knew that water was mingled with the blood, which was sprinkled, as was usual in other purifyings; for blood, unless it be mingled with water, doth quickly congeal, and being congealed is unfit for sprinkling. But of hyssop and scarlet wool tied to a cedar stick, was made a sprinkler; whereof as of water mixed with blood, see Exod. 12.22. and Levit. 4.4,5,6. And sprinkled both the book and all the people.] Of the book being sprinkled, we likewise read not in Moses. Yet this divine Author knew the certainty of this no less than of the rest. But all the people is said to be sprinkled; because they among the people who stood nearest were sprinkled, and in that respect represented the person of the whole people; so that thereby all the people were accounted sprinkled.  
20. Saying, this is the blood of the Testament] In the Hebrew for this, is Behold: but the sense is the same. Now the blood of calves and goats, is called the blood of the Testament; because by means of it, the Old Testament was confirmed and established. Which God hath enjoined unto you] In the Hebrew it is which God hath made with you. God had not yet made it preteritively; but did then make it presentively: and therefore the preter tense is there figuratively put for the present. But because God himself in his own person did not confirm that Covenant with the people, but Moses did it at the command and in the name of God; therefore the Author expressing the verity of the thing, for the word made, puts the word enjoined: as if Moses had said, This is the blood of the Testament, which God hath enjoined me to make with you. Yet this injunction or command did not rest upon the person of Moses only, but was extended unto the people also; for as the confirmation of the testament was enjoined to Moses, that he should speed it is God's name: So the observation of it, was enjoined unto the people, that they should keep it; because the Testament for the matter contained Laws and Precepts which God enjoined to the people; as if Moses had further said, This is the blood of the Testament which God enjoined unto me to confirm, and hath enjoined unto you to observe.  
21. Moreover he sprinkled with the blood, both the Tabernacle and all the vessels of the Ministry] He shows, that not only the Old Testament itself was confirmed with blood; but also that under the Old Testament divers consecrations and expiation were made by blood, especially of sins (as he mentions it) ver. 22. This he doth, that from hence he might gather, that under the New Testament also the shedding of blood must fitly intervene to consecrate and expiate the conscience; and a blood so much more precious, as he is more precious, by whom the conscience is expiated. And the Author doth so join the consecration of the Tabernacle, and the vessels of it made with blood, with the confirmation of the Testament itself, that he specifies no difference of time between them. And if the Tabernacle and ministerial vessels were consecrated at the time, wherein the Testament was confirmed, then without all doubt the history of confirming the Testament, Exod. 24. is delivered by way of anticipation; seeing that after that Confirmation mentioned there, precepts are delivered in the following chapters, for the making of the Tabernacle and ministerial vessels; and for ordering of the public worship and service of God; as also the making and consecration of them is particularly described. But from the words of the Author it cannot be gathered, that both these were done at the same time; seeing he, to his former words of confirming the Testament by blood, doth simply subjoin that Moses did also sprinkle the Tabernacle, and the ministerial vessels with blood; which may as well be taken of another time, as of the same. Although Moses saith not openly, that the Tabernacle and ministerial vessels, after they were all finished, were sprinkled with blood, but only anointed with the holy oil. Yet because we read, that the Altar was not only anointed with oil, but also sprinkled and consecrated with blood; therefore hence we may gather, that in the consecration of the Tabernacle itself, and of the ministerial vessels, sprinkling of blood was joined with their anointing. For Josephus delivers this in plain words in his Antiquity, lib. 3. cap. 9 Where describing the Ceremony and form of that Consecration, he saith, Then he sprinkled the garments of Aaron and his sons with the blood of the Sacrifices-purifying them with running water, and with the ointment, etc. He sprinkled also the Tabernacle and his vessels with the ointment, and with the blood of bullocks and rams, slain every other day after their kind.] From this verse therefore it may appear, that anciently there were many things among the Jews, especially concerning external rites, of manifest truth, which notwithstanding are not written in the books of Moses; and therefore we need not marvel, that this Author doth affirm some things, which we find not delivered in the books of Moses; as we have noted already in this chapter, verse 4. and verse 19  
22. And almost all things by the law are purged with blood.] He amplifies his former instances, drawing them from particulars almost to an universal, to conclude his assertion by way of Induction. Not only the Tabernacle and Ministerial vessels, which were the principal utensils about the worship of God: but almost all things else were purged with blood. He saith, almost all things; because some things were purged without blood; for some were purged or cleansed only by the washing of water, as he that carried out the Scape-goat must cleanse himself by washing his clothes and bathing his flesh in water. Levit. 16.26. And the Priest who became unclean by the touch of a person or thing unclean, must cleanse himself by washing his flesh with water. Levit. 22.6. And some other things were first purged by melting in the fire, and afterward repurged over with the water of separation, as silver and gold, and all other metals that could abide to pass through the fire. Numb. 31.22,23. According to the Law. i. According as the Law prescribed, things should be purged. And without shedding of blood is no remission] How ever other things were purged, yet this is certain that under the Law, sins were not remitted without shedding of blood. Whence we may rationally gather, that the shedding of blood, must also intervene for the purging of our consciences, or to expiate those sins that pollute our consciences. That which the Author here affirms, is most certain universally, and suffers no exception, unless in case of extreme poverty, when the persons to be purged were so poor, that for the purging of their sin, they were not able to bring for their offering a pair of Turtles, or a pair of young Pigeons; whereof, see Levit. 5.12. Otherwise the rule holds universally, not only for a sin of the whole people, but also for the sin of any single person whatsoever, blood must be shed and a sacrifice must be offered. See Levit. chap. 4. chap. 5. and chap. 6.  
23. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things 〈◊〉 the heavens should be purified with these.] Hitherto the Author hath taught, that blood was required for the purging both of the Tabernacle and of sins. Now some man might say; Although blood were required for this purifying, yet it was not necessary that the blood of Christ should be shed for it, but the blood of beasts might have served the turn, as it did under the Law. To this  objection the Author answers in these words, and showeth, that heavenly things were to be purged with fare better Sacrifices, than the Sacrifices of beasts. For the purging of earthly holy things, the sacrifices of beasts did suffice: but for the purging of heavenly holy things, which of all other are most excellent, there needed a most excellent Sacrifice. And none could be more excellent than Christ. And besides; for the purging of any Sanctuary, there must needs be a Sacrifice, or at least some thing of the Sacrifice must be brought into it. But neither beasts themselves, nor their blood or bodies, neither must, nor can be brought into that heavenly Sanctuary. But Christ himself and his body made immortal, was brought in thither. Therefore for heavenly holy things, the blood of Christ must be shed, and not the blood of beasts. Again, the holy things under the Law were not only purged when they were first made and dedicated, but also were yearly to be purged by the annual Sacrifice. For they were accounted pollutted by the yearly sins and uncleannesses of the people. Whereof see Levit. 16.15. How the earthly holy things were patterns of those things which are in heaven, and for what cause, we have already showed, chap. 8. ver. 5. The things in the heavens are put for the holy heavenly things; from which the heaven itself, that invisible heaven which is the most holy Sanctuary, must not be excluded. But the heavenly things themselves, with better sacrifices than these.] The heavenly things, are the heavenly holy things, as the verse following shows. But it may be demanded, how those heavenly holy things can be said to be purged, seeing they never were polluted? We answer, That this is said of the heavenly Sanctuary, only by way of Comparison, as a thing very usual. And the nature of Comparisons is, to breed many abusions. For if we respect the scope of the Author, it is enough for us to understand, that the Sacrifice to be offered in the heavenly Sanctuary, must be much more excellent than those, which of old were wont to be offered in the earthly Sanctuary. For this both the nature of the heavenly Sanctuary wholly requires, and also the effect of the oblation suitable to heaven. But if any man yet demand a more near resemblance, it may be said; That heavenly Sanctuary was indeed purged by the Sacrifice and offering of Christ; First, in as much as it was so consecrated thereby, that an access is made open for us unto it; and as I may say, it is dedicated for our use hereafter. As the old Tabernacle and many things else, were not open and free for men's use, before they were consecrated; and they for their uncleanness as it was accounted: but this for our uncleanness, which must be purged away, before a right and an use of that heavenly Sanctuary can be granted us. So that in this sense, by a contrary way of speech (and yet not unusual) the Author said that heaven must be purged, for our perfect purging, that we may enjoy a right to heaven. Secondly, because by the access of sinful men, who by the doctrine of the Gospel are called to take possession of the kingdom of heaven, it seems to be polluted; which Christ himself hath expressed in other words, when he said, The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force, Matth. 11.12. As the old Tabernacle was accounted polluted by the sins and uncleannesses of the people, who lived round about it. Therefore as the high Priest of old did expiate that old Tabernacle as polluted by the sins of the people, with Sacrifices and Offerings, and reconciled it, as it were, to its due holiness: So Christ as I may say restored heaven to it due honour, when he offered himself there to God, and thereby took order, that men guilty of sins, having first deposed their sins by a lively faith and repentance, might not be thought altogether unworthy of heaven. With better sacrifices than these] He puts the plural number for the singular, to comply with his comparison, which included many Sacrifices; so that here also the comparison produced an abusion. For by those better Sacrifices, is meant that single sacrifice of Christ offered. I say offered, because by use of Scripture, that only is accounted a Sacrifice which is offered. For Christ, after he was slain, was himself offered, and therein is a difference between the old Sacrifices, especially those that were expiatory, and the Sacrifice Christ; for when the old Sacrifice was slain the beast itself was not offered to God, but only the blood of it, and those other parcels that were burnt with fire upon the Altar. But Christ himself who was slain, and not his blood, was offered to God; and he not then, while yet he lay dead; but then when he was raised to life, and such a life as was eternal. Although (as we have often said,) in this sacrifice of Christ offered, is also included the shedding of his blood and his bloody death. For although Christ offered to God not his blood, but himself; yet without the shedding of his blood he neither could nor might offer himself. And by reason of what we have said, therefore it is, that the Author comparing Christ with the legal sacrifices, doth perpetually shun to say, that the blood of Christ was offered; and yet that he might comply with his comparison, he perpetually insinuates the shedding of Christ's blood; which unless it had preceded, there could not have been so full and so fit a comparison between Christ and the old sacrifices. From hence therefore it is manifest, that into those holy places of heaven for their purification and dedication, there must be brought a most precious sacrifice; and therefore not the blood of calves and goats, nay not any blood at all, but the very Son of God himself, and he also stripped of all his mortal nature, than which there could not be imagined a more precious and more sacred sacrifice.  
24. For Christ is not entered] Here he gives the reason why he said, that the heavenly holy places were purged with better sacrifices; namely, because Christ our high Priest is entered into no other holy places but those of heaven. Whereupon it must follow, that be must enter with a far better sacrifice, and more worthy of those holy places, than the old high Priest entered into his earthly holy places. Not into the holy places made with hands] He illustrates the matter by a difference and an opposition between those heavenly holy places and the earthly; that those were not made with hands; which difference we have already shown before, ver. 11. Which are the figures of the true. For figures, the Greek text hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Antitypes are the images or figures imprinted from the mould, as the wax is figured from the seal, or money from the stamp; which in this place signifies the same that patterns did in the verse before. Now the holy places made with hands are called antitypes or figures; not as opposed efficiently to that which doth figure them; but as opposed objectively to the thing whereof they are a figure, or which they are accounted to represent; as the image or superscription upon a piece of coin, is not properly the image of the stamp which did imprint it; but of the Prince whose image it is, and whom it represents: for the person of the Prince is that verity or truth whereof the coin is but the image or figure. So that antitypes are here put simply for types, which is an usual signification of the word among the Greeks. As in this sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put simply for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when Christ is said to be a ransom, 1 Tim. 2.6. Now the true holy places whereof the earthly holy places made with hands are said to be types or figures, are the heavenly holy places; which are called the true (as we noted before) not as if the earthly were false, but because the earthly were but types, figures, and shadows in respect of the heavenly; or because those qualities which should have been in the earthly, were found most truly and perfectly in the heavenly: And yet those earthly places were called holy, primely and properly, but the heavenly metaphorically. After this manner, Christ is called the true light, the true bread, and the true vine. Now the qualities of those earthly places are these; first, to be most sacred or holy, and wholly separate from all profane uses: and 2ly, to be an house or dwelling for God. Both which qualities agreed to those earthly holy places but umbratilously, imaginarily, and imperfectly: but to the heavenly holy places truly, really, and perfectly. But into heaven itself. Christ did never enter into the earthly holy places, which were but the types & figures of heaven; but into heaven itself where are the right & true holy places. And he is entered into that heaven which is beyond and above all the visible orbs of heaven, and into that place of that heaven which is the most holy, even where the Throne of God is, at the right hand whereof he is seated. Now to appear in the presence of God for us.] He gives the reason why Christ entered into heaven; and he draws his reason from the end of his entrance. In expressing whereof he alludes to the ancient high Priest; and the better to serve his allusion, if we respect the property and usual signification of his words, he faith less of Christ, than the thing is indeed, and then the full end of his entrance came to. For the ancient high Priest entering the most holy place, is said to appear before God, because he so procured the salvation of the people, that he himself conferred it not, but obtained it from another, for he sued to God to confer it. But the appearance of Christ our high Priest before God and his offering of himself, must be so taken, that it exclude not his sitting at the right hand of the Throne of the Majesty in the heavens, i. that he himself, by virtue of a supreme power over all things given him by his Father, doth save his own people; that he himself doth release them from the guilt of all their sins, and free them from all punishments, and at last settle them in the real possession of eternal blessedness. In these words thus transferied from the old high Priest unto Christ, the metaphor is so much the neater and fit; because this way Christ is so said to procure & perfect our salvation, that withal it may appear what difference in that regard there is between God and Christ: and because Christ is thus fare like to one appearing and interceding for others, in that he is very desirous and careful of our salvation, yet hath not the power to save us from himself, but hath received it all from God. So that in this respect, Christ may be said to be and is our Intecessour and Advocate; and God of his mercy to confer salvation upon us. Besides in the Legal high Priest, his appearance was a thing different and distinct from his offering; though both were done at once and united in time; because the high Priest was one and the offering another; for the high Priest appeared, but the blood of the sacrifice was offered. But in Christ our high Priest, the offering and appearance as also the intercession were really the same; if his appearance and intercession be taken, not for his bare coming to his Father, but for his coming joined with his procuration of our salvation, as here they must be taken; because in Christ the Priest and the offering were the same. For Christ by his appearance offers himself: and by offering himself he appears; and by offering and appearing he intercedes. The particle now, is opposed to the times past, especially to those of the Old Testament, wherein no such high Priest and Advocate appeared in the presence of God for the people of God. O the hard condition of those times! and contrarily, Happy we, who have an high Priest, and Advocate with the Father jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 2.1,2.  
25. Not yet that he should offer himself often] The particle nor yet shows, that the Author delivers two negatives concerning Christ our high Priest; One is, that he is not entered into the holy places made with hands, but into heaven itself; for this he taught in the former verse. The other when he entered into heaven, yet he did not so enter, that he should iterate the oblation of himself and offer himself often; contrary to the manner of the legal high Priests under the Law, who were by Law constrained often to iterate their offering of blood in the holy place. This he teacheth in this verse; which he therefore seems to do, that hence also it may appear, how fare the sacrifice of Christ excelled the Legal sacrifices; which must needs be often offered, for no other cause but by reason of their imperfection. From which respect he gathers in the next Chapter, that they did not please God, and must at length be abrogated, and were abrogated by the sacrifice of Christ. And Christ should be said to offer himself often, if once he should break off his first appearance before God, and going out of his heavenly Sanctuary, should re enter in thither to iterate his offering. For his oblation once begun, is not iterated and multiplied by the duration or continuation of it; for then, seeing Christ doth perpetually appear and intercede for us, and therefore perpetually offer, the Author could not affirm that Christ hath offered himself only once, and by one oblation of himself to perfect for ever those that are sanctified. There was not required a double entrance into the earthly holy place to make a double oblation, when there are two things that are offered, and a double slaughter preceded, if those things were living creatures. But when the thing to be offered is but one, the offering of it cannot be iterated, unless the entrance, and the slaughter before the entrance be also iterated. For the slaughter must not be made in the holy place itself, neither can it be in heaven; but without the holy place. Therefore the Author saith, That Christ hath not so entered into the holy places of heaven to perform his offering, that he should often iterate it. As the high Priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others] It was the manner of the Legal high Priest, to iterate their oblation often. And in this opposition between Christ and the Legal high Priest; that Christ should not offer often, but the Legal high Priest every year; that Christ entered heaven to offer himself: but the Legal high Priest entered into the holy place with the blood of others, every man sees that the offering of Christ, and the entrance of the Legal Priest do answer one another. Whence it is manifest that the expiatory offering of Christ, as well as that of the Legal Priest, was performed by means of his entrance into the holy place. Entereth. He seems not to use the present tense therefore, as if he had respect to a thing yet in being and practice among the people of the Jews: but rather in an accustomed manner of speech, to draw the mind of the reader to a thing as it were present; after which form he spoke also before, ver. 22. And in the Gospel of Mark we often meet with the like manner of speech. That the Legal Priest entered with blood; hath the same sense with the saying before, that he entered by blood, ver. 12. yet in the Greek here it is in blood; which for the sense of it is truly translated with blood. So John writes, that Christ came in water and blood, i. with water and blood, though there our English Translation render it, by water and blood, to suit the particle by going immediately before, 1 John 5.6. But the Author shuns to say, That the Legal high Priest was wont to enter the holy place with blood; though this were the proper saying; left the fitness of the comparison between Christ and the Legal Priest should in this respect be lost; whereof see what we have said before, ver. 12. Of others. The blood wherewith the Legal Priest entered into the holy place was not his own, but the blood of other creatures; for he entered with the blood of Goats and Calves; as it is before, ver. 12.  
26. For than must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world] He proves why Christ must not offer himself often, by an argument from an absurdity that would follow upon it if he did so; because than he must often have suffered; seeing the oblation of a living creature cannot be made without slaughter and suffering; and he must have suffered also from the foundation of the world. But why from the foundation of the world? Of this one of these two reasons may seem to be given. The first, that the oblation of Christ should therefore be iterated, that it might have so much the greater force in expiating men's sins. But if the oblation of Christ have it force from number in the iteration and frequentation of it, than it must have begun from the beginning of the world; because the sooner it began, the greater would be the number of his oblations, and thereupon a greater force would result from them. The other reason is; that if Christ should often iterate his oblation, he must do it in this regard after the likeness of the Legal high Priest, whereby to some it may seem reason, that Christ also should often offer himself. But if we must respect a likeness to the Legal Priest, and from thence reckon the nature and number of Christ's oblations, than Christ must have made the beginning of his oblations from the beginning of the world. For by this means there must arise a kind of analogy and just proportion between the number of oblations of Christ and the Legal Priest. For seeing the people were under the Law for the space of about fifteen hundred years, it is an easy matter to reckon how often the Legal Priests offered; for, seeing they offered every year, therefore it must needs follow, that they offered about fifteen hundred times. That therefore the offerings of Christ might in some just number be answerable to so great a multitude of Legal sacrifices, must not Christ begin his offerings from the beginning of the world? For, though he should so often offer as the Legal Priest did according as the analogy required, yet he must offer often, and so often, as there might be a just proportion between the iteration and frequentation of both their offerings. But this proportion would not be, if Christ should offer only some certain times, though they were a hundred. For he must iterate his offering by spaces or distances of time answering to a less number of offerings, which distances must not be small, but great, and those set and equal as of old under the Law, as imagine once in every several age of man. But if this were done, must he not have begun from the beginning of the world, and not now at last when the world declines toward an end? For, seeing this is the last age of the world, wherein Christ appeared, it is not likely that it shall last longer than the former? But for so many offerings to be performed at spaces of time answerable, as we have said, it would scarce and nothing near have been enough to have begun at the beginning of the world. The Author therefore doth beat down the argument drawn from the multitude of the Legal offerings to conclude the frequency of Christ his offerings; and shows, that if this resemblance or likeness were to be attended, then of necessity it must follow, that Christ must not only often suffer, which of itself is absurd and inconvenient (for men have but one death before Judgement and cannot die often, as is declared in the following verse) but also must have begun his sufferings and offerings from the beginning of the world. The words since the foundation of the world, are not necessarily to be taken from the first Creation of the world: but are only opposed to the consummation or end of the world, as appears by the words immediately following. But this end of the world here, doth not signify the extreme and final term of the world, nor yet some small space of time, wherein the world must have an end, but only the old age, or last age of the world, as opposed to her infancy and first age. Wherefore also the foundation of the world in this place, must be so extended as to signify the infancy or first age of the world. So Christ saith, Luke 11.50. That the blood of all the Prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world, should be required of this generation.] Although the first blood that was shed of the Prophets was done for the space of many years after the Creation of the world. But now once in the end of the world hath he appeared. Here the Author removes the former consequent that was inconsequent and absurd, by affronting it with the contrary, and by inferring the contrary from the remotion of it. Christ then did not begin his sufferings and offerings from the beginning of the world; but now in the end of the world, and therefore in the end of it, hath he appeared; and that once only, by one Sacrifice of himself. The word appeared in this place, may be taken either to signify the appearance of Christ before God in his heavenly Sanctuary, whereof the Author spoke before, verse 24. or to note his coming into this world to perform his office. But there are chief two things that seem to withstand the former sense. First; because these words may be better opposed to the words immediately preceding, then to those said in the former verse; which latter notwithstanding the former sense of the word appeased requires. For to the offering often to be made, the appearance in heaven once made should be opposed. But that it should be opposed to the words immediately preceding, it seems both by the words in the end of the world, manifestly opposed to those since the foundation of the world, which go immediately before; and also it seems so by the manner of arguing, which the Author here useth. For as the thing itself declares, he useth an hypothetical syllogism, whose proposition is in the words immediately preceding, and the assumption in these words; for he argues from a remotion of the consequent, which is this, Christ must often suffer from the foundation of the world, to the remotion of the antecedent, that Christ must often offer himself. And he removes that consequent by the position of the contrary, as we said, namely, that Christ hath appeared once only in the end of the world, to put away sin by the Sacrifice of himself. Wherefore he seems to speak of that appearance, which preceded both his suffering and offering; namely, of that appearance whereby Christ first manifested himself unto the world, for the performance of his office upon earth, whereby he began to be known to the world; & that appearance once made, is rightly opposed to the suffering often to be made; for as often as Christ must suffer; so often he must come into the world and appear. The other thing that seems to withstand the former opinion, is, that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used by the Author, is not where read for the appearance either of the legal Priest or of Christ before God, to procure expiation; but when it is absolutely spoken of any one, as here it is, it noteth nothing else but his manifestation among men. But he saith that Christ hath appeared in the end of the world, lest any man should think that there were yet time enough for Christ to iterate his offerings, and by a just proportion equal the number of the legal offerings: although he began not to suffer and offer himself from the foundation of the world. For because he suffered and offered himself in the end of the world; hence it appears, that there is not time enough yet to come to serve for the multitude of his sufferings and offerings. But the time wherein Christ came, is therefore called the end of the world, because it is the last age of the world, and as it were the old age of it, and because the other coming of Christ, which is joined with the consummation and end of the world, is always supposed to be at hand; which could in no wise be, if the offering of Christ were to be iterated answerably to the just number and proportion of the old Legal offerings. But the holy Ghost would have us perpetually wait for the expectation of Christ's coming. For that his coming and together with it, the end of the world is yet deferred, and that so many ages have passed since his first coming into the world, & seating upon his heavenly throne; this in a manner is accidental, by reason of the long suffering of God, who is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance, 2 Pet. 3.9. To put away sin by the sacrifice of himself] He shows the final cause of the coming and appearance of Christ; which is for the putting away of sin; which is done when all the force and power of sin is destroyed. Which destruction of sin is effected two ways; the one is, when sin hath no power to condemn men; the other, when it hath no power to subdue men; by enthralling them under the yoke of it. That both these effects might be produced, Christ hath appeared; both that he might deliver men from the punishment of sin; and also from the dominion of it, even freeing them from sin itself. Now the means whereby Christ hath put away sin, in destroying the power of it, is by the sacrifice of himself. For this act may be joined as well with the word suffered, as with appeared; as other Interpreters also have observed. 
How the sacrifice of Christ purgeth away our sins.  For Christ by the sacrifice of himself hath cashired and put away sin, by taking from it all it power to condemn and to reign; which though we have declared before, yet are we willing to repeat it again, because the matter is of such moment, that if it may be, we might drive and fasten it throughly into men's minds. For as concerning the guilt and punishments of sins, can there be any sins (so that we do our duty) which a sacrifice so acceptable to God, offered in the Sanctuary of heaven, and by so great an high Priest, cannot expiate? Can there be any danger, that he will deal negligently in our cause, who offered up himself as a sacrifice for our sins? and who having himself suffered all those miseries and pressures that can possibly befall us, hath assumed a mind so prone to pity us? Hath not yet the wished effect been answerable to so holy a sacrifice, and to so careful a provision of our high Priest? Is not the power of our salvation in the power of our high Priest, and in his hand to release whom he will of sin, and to bestow eternal life and whatsoever good thing besides upon whom he will? Doth he not negotiate the matter with his most dear Father, who himself burns with a desire of our salvation, who himself hath made a sacred Covenant for the remission of our sins, who himself ordained the holy Sacrifice for our sins, who himself would have it offered unto him, and caused it to be offered, who himself ordained our high Priest with an oath, and committed unto him the whole care of our salvation? Now concerning the dominion of sin, for the excussion of the yoke of it; can it possibly be, that when we perceive so great and so certain causes and proofs of our eternal salvation, and of plenary remission of our sins, that we should not with all our souls embrace the faith of Christ, and devote ourselves wholly to him? when by this means, through the grace and mercy of our God we are effectually purged and justified from the guilt of all our sins, shall we not contend with our whole force to abandon sin for ever after, & wholly addict ourselves to holiness? shall we not labour to the utmost to preserve this great grace of God entire and whole to our last gasp, that at length we may enjoy the full fruit of it, in our deliverance from death, and inheritance of eternal life? And shall it not mightily encourage us to shake off the yoke of sin, in that our heavenly high Priest will perpetually support us with his Spirit, & supply us with power enough to live holily, if we will live so, and will strive to do it. This therefore is the manner after which Christ by the Sacrifice of himself hath put away sin, that neither it might hurt us, nor reign in us. The Sacrifice of Christ is Christ himself sacrificed; being first slain & then raised to immortal life, that he might enter his heavenly Tabernacle, and therein offer himself, and appear for us for ever. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here rendered a Sacrifice, though it come from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies to slay; yet it useth not to be taken in Scripture abstractedly for the slaughter, but concretly for the creature slaughtered, or rather for that part of it which is offered to God. But if any man keeping the same sense will join these words by the sacrifice of himself, with the verb appeared, than the particle by must be taken for with; and in that sense as we have noted before, that John saith, Christ came by water and blood, i. with water and blood; not that at his first coming into the world, he shed his blood, but because he therefore came that he might shed his blood, though not forthwith. So Christ may be said to appear with the sacrifice of himself; not that as soon as he appeared he was made a sacrifice, but that he so appeared, that in his due time, he might be made a sacrifice. But we best approve of that sense, which joins these words by the sacrifice of himself, with the words immediately preceding, to put away sin. For the final end of the appearance or coming of Christ, was to put away sin; and the means whereby he abolished it was, by the sacrifice of himself. Seeing therefore Christ came in the end of the world, that he might abolish sin by the sacrifice of himself; therefore hence it appears, that he must not often iterate his sacrifice after the manner of the legal high Priest; for otherwise he must have begun this action more early, and not have deferred it to the last age of the world.  
27. And as it is appointed unto men, once to die] He brings a new argument to confirm and illustrate the single or only sacrifice of Christ, drawn from a similitude or comparison of the death of Christ, with the common law and condition of men, who die but once, and not often. The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is well rendered by some learned men, befalleth; as one death befalleth all men. For it seems not that the Author intended, that this word by itself should signify some divine decree; although he thereby excludes it not; for this word may have such a latitude of sense as to signify, both that which is appointed unto men by the law of nature, and that which by God's decree is destinated to some particular man. In the first particle of these words, which speak of death, he seems to respect rather what is done by the force and course of nature, than what follows by force of God's decree. For that death must be here understood that is common to all men, even to the godly, and is temporal; because it is that death after which judgement follows which kind of death is due unto us rather by our natural condition, than destinated to us by force of any divine decree. And besides, we must understand, that the Author speaks not here so much of the necessity of death, that men are simply appointed to die (for that gives no help to his argument) as of the singularity of death, in that men die but once and not twice, or more often, to the end he might from thence conclude, that Christ also must die but once only; and therefore must offer himself but once only. But the singularity of men's death, that they die but once, proceeds merely from nature, and depends not from any peculiar decree of God: but for a man to die a second time or more often, cannot be, but from a peculiar decree of God. And therefore by these words nothing else is signified, than that one only death is allotted unto men, or that they die but once only. But after this the judgement.] This indeed depends from God's decree; therefore the word appointed (as we said) must be taken in his latitude and generally, to signify only a thing whose event is certain; whether it flow from nature itself, as once to die; or whether it follow upon God's decree, as the future judgement. But that judgement doth not so much consist in pronouncing the sentence upon all men both quick and dead, as in executing the sentence already adjudged. For this is no humane judgement, but a divine; for the dispatch whereof, there needs no witnesses, no proofs, no accusers or advocates, no tedious disquisition of the truth. For to Christ who is the supreme Judge, all things are already evident, and he hath already determined, who is to be condemned, and who to be justified, before he doth actually condemn or justify any one; i. either destroys or saves any one. As therefore one death befalls men, and after that, will come the judgement, wherein all shall appear again to be judged; i. either to be rewarded or punished according to every man's deeds, 2 Cor. 5.19. So also Christ once only suffered death, that he might once only perform his offering; but he shall appear again in judgement, and shall show himself to be seen of them that expect him to salvation.  
28. So Christ was once offered] His offering answers to his death; not that his offering consisteth in his death, for that is untrue (as we have showed before:) but because the offering of a creature that hath life cannot be performed without death: And therefore Christ was offered but once, because he must die but once, and but one single offering could follow one single death. To bear the sins of many] The end whereto his offering was a mean, was to bear the sins of many. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to bear; though it properly signify to lift or carry something from a lower place to an higher, or at least from one place to another: yet in this place, it simply signifies to take away. For things lifted up are first taken away from the place where they were before; and things taken or carried away from a man, must first be raised and lifted up. But in that sins are said to be taken away, is a metaphor. But that the word to bear here doth simply signify to take away or put away, as we have said, we can make it plain by divers examples extant in the Septuagint; see Jof. 24.32. and 2 Sam. 21.13. and Ezra 1.11. and Psal. 102.24. where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hath this sense. But in this place this sense is necessary, seeing this is the end for which Christ was once offered: but the offering of Christ as we have showed, was performed in heaven. Whence it follows, that this word no way signifies, that Christ took upon himself the punishment of our sins; because that cannot be done in heaven, seeing heaven is no place for punishment. Besides, it is most reasonable, that these words should have the same sense with the former, that Christ appeared to put away sin; seeing these are correspondent one to another, and the end of Christ's offering is showed in both. But he faith to bear the sins of many. Not simply of all, partly because this benefit for the effect and issue of it, pertains not by God's purpose promiscuously to all, but only to those that believe in Christ and obey him, partly because all will not believe in Christ and obey him; whence it comes to pass, that all are not in effect eased from the burden of sin, which notwithstanding in respect of God's purpose is but in event; because all to whom soever God offers his grace, and calls, both may and aught to believe and obey. The same also we say for the taking away of sins, whose end is, that men should be no longer addicted to their sins; for if we respect the event or effect itself, Christ by his offering hath put away the sins of many only, not of all, and thereby hath effected that many and not all do live holily. For in respect of the force and efficacy of Christ's offering, Christ is to be supposed to have taken away the sins themselves, and the punishment of sins from all men. He shall appear the second time without sin] The second time is in Judgement, and the words without sin may be taken two ways. First, as they may signify without an offering or sacrifice for sin, which according to a common use of Scripture is called sin; in which sense this appearance without sin, may fitly be opposed to his former appearance with sin, that is, with an offering for sin, ver. 26. And by reason of this opposition, it will not seem amiss, to join the words by the sacrifice of himself, with the word appeared, unless we had rather make this latter part of the verse opposite to the former part; that so the going of Christ from us, and his return unto us may be opposed to his offering, which was performed by his bloody death, and after it by his entrance into heaven; for thereby Christ was taken from the eyes of men and ceased to be seen: but by his return he will again show himself to be seen, and then the words without sin, are opposed to those to bear (or take away) the sins of many; and the words the second time shall be opposed to the particle once; and yet the second time may in this place be all one with afterward; that it may answer the words of the former verse after this the judgement; so in the Epistle of Judas, ver. 5. the words once and afterward are opposed. Secondly; the words without sin may be so taken, as thereby to show, that when Christ shall appear the second time, there shall be no more guilt of sin in the people of God, as there was when first he appeared, which therefore he must take away by his sacrifice. For undoubtedly the Author here alludes to the return of the Legal high Priest out of the holy place, who went into the holy place to take away the guilt of sins, and returned from thence without sin; for he had taken away the guilt of sin by his offering. So Christ entered into heaven that there offering himself to God, and appearing in his presence, he might purge his people from the guilt of their sins: but having abolished the guilt of sins, he shall return out from heaven, and appear unto his people, to give them the effect of that guilt taken away, not in words only, as the Legal high Priest gave the people his benediction and prayed for them; but in very deed; for he shall vindicate them from death, and estate them in eternal life. Unto them that look for him unto salvation] The words unto salvation may agree either with he shall appear, or with the words to them that look for him] And the Author seems to have placed them so on purpose, that they might be referred to both. For both Christ shall appear to give his people salvation; and the people of Christ shall look for his coming out of heaven to receive salvation from him. For as Christ is here tacitly compared with the Legal high Priest entered into the boly place: so his people are resembled to the people of Israel expecting without the Tabernacle. For of old the people looked for the Legal Priest, after their manner to salvation, namely, that by him they might obtain remission of their sins which were then expiated, and might hear his benediction to them in the Name of God: So the people of Christ, being without the heavenly Tabernacle upon earth, do look for Christ their high Priest unto salvation, that he coming forth out of his heavenly Sanctuary, they may by him obtain eternal salvation. The Author in these words doth elegantly describe a Christian; for this expectation doth comprehend faith in Christ; for unless men believe in Christ, they will never expect his return from heaven as their heavenly high Priest; And this expectation doth either beget holiness of life, or is begotten of it; for these afford each other their help. The expectation of salvation upon condition of obedience doth beget piety; and piety brought forth doth reciprocally bring forth a daughter like to her mother, that is, a most certain and ardent expectation of salvation. Hither belong the words of Paul to the Thessalonians, 1 Thes. 1.9,10. where he describes all Christian people and their whole duty, saying, Ye have turned to God from Idols, to serve the living and true God; and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even jesus who delivered us from the wrath to come. After a like manner he designs all believers in Christ, by the name of them that love his appearing, 2 Tim. 4.8.   

The Contents of this ninth Chapter, are,  

1. Doctrine. The tabernacle under the first Covenant was imperfect. v. 1. 

Reason. 1. Because it was a worldly manifacture; for beth in the first and second place of it, there were only bandiworks. 1, 2, 3.  
2. Because the most holy place of it was always shut to all, except to the high Priest and always to him, except once a year v. 6. 7.  
3. Because under it, the way to the holiest of all in heaven, was not yet manifest, v. 8.  
4. Because it was but a figure and resemblance of the heavenly Sanctuary v. 9    
2. Doctrine. The services, or sacrifices under the old Testament were imperfect. v. 9 

Reason. 1. Because they could not expiate the consciences of them that brought the sacrifices. v. 9  
2. Because they were only carnal ordinances concerning fleshly things, as meats, drinks, and washings. v. 10.  
3. Because they were temporary imposed for a while, until the time of Reformation. v. 10.    
3. Doctrine. The Sanctuary wherein Christ is a Priest, is more excellent than the old Legal Sanctuary. v. 11. 

Reason 1. Because it is no worldly building, wrought by the hands of men, v. 11.    
4. Doctrine. The expiatory Sacrifice of Christ is more excellent than the old legal expiations. v. 12. 

Reason. 1. Because the blood shed for his sacrifice was his own blood, and not the blood of bulls and calves. v. 12.  
2. Because his death and bloodshed doth purge the conscience; whereas the bloodshed under the old legal sacrifice, did but parge the flesh, v. 13. 14.  
3. Because his death and bloodshed doth expiate those transgressions which were inexpiable under the law. v. 15.    
5. Doctrine. Confirmations made by death are the surest. v. 15. 

Reason. 1. Because the New testament was confirmed by the death of Christ. ver. 15.  
2. Because all men's testaments are confirmed by the death of the testator, ver. 16. 17.  
3. Because the old legal testament was confirmed by the blood and death of goats and calves. v. 18, 19 20.  
4. Because all Consecrations under the law, were confirmed by blood and death. v. 21.  
5. Because all Expiations and Remissions under the law were confirmed by blood and death. v. 22.    
6. Doctrine. The sacrifice made by Christ was singular, one only once offered. ver. 12. 

Reason. 1. Because he entered into his holy Sanctuary by his blood, and the blood of any living creature can be shed but once. v. 16.  
2. Because by his sacrifice he obtained an eternal expiation, and things eternal cannot be iterated. ibid.  
3. Because than he must have suffered often, and have begun his sufferings since the beginning of the world. v. 26.  
4. Because he died before his offering it, and men are subject to death but once. v. 27.       

CHAPTER X.  

1. FOr the Law having a shadow] He had said before, that the Legal high Priest entered yearly into the holy place, not with his own blood, but with the blood of others: contrary to what Christ did, who offered himself once only. Now here he gives the reason thereof; because the Law by a continual offering of the same sacrifices yearly; can never make the comers thereunto perfect; for therefore it is that those offerings are iterated year by year. This reason he doth by the way confirm by another reason; because the law hath only a shadow of future blessings, and not the very image of them. Therefore the causal particle for, hath not reference to what was said immediately before, but must in this place be referred to his principal doctrine, though more remote: which was; That the legal high Priest offered year by year, but Christ once only. A shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things.] Those good things to come, may be understood more largely or strictly. First largely; to comprehend both eternal happiness itself, promised or bequeathed us in the new Testament, & also all the helps and means for the acquiring of it, afforded us under the same Testament, and portrayed in the legal shadows; such as are Christ himself our high Priest, his Blood, his Offering, his Sanctuary, and such like; for these were future and to come in respect of the Law, Or they may be taken strictly, only for the happiness promised us. Neither of these senses are disagreeing to the text; yet the latter is more probable by reason of those words in the former chapter, verse 11. wherein Christ is said to be a high Priest of good things to come; and so the Priest and his Priesthood are manifestly distinguished; and if ye mark it well, so is his Sanctuary and his Sacrifice. But seeing there is no open mention of these good things to come, but only in that text, and this which we have now in hand, & that in both the same thing is handled; it is most agreeable to reason, that the good things to come in this place should be taken strictly, for the happiness only promised us in the new testament, which comprehends our perpetual deliverance from all punishments of all our sins, & our eternal inheritance of eternal life. For by the admitting of this sense we shall the more easily interpret the words following, concerning the very image of the things. For this condition seems plainly taken from the Law, and attributed to the Gospel. Of those things which are not so much the parts of our happiness as the means and adjuncts of it, the Gospel doth not exhibit unto us the image, but the substances themselves: but of those promises, it proposeth to us in this life rather the image than the substance; although our deliverance from the punishments of our sins do in some measure begin in this life. But it exhibits unto us the very image of them, in as much as it describes and promiseth them most openly to us; so that are may seem in a manner to see them before our eyes. But the Law had only a shadow of those good things, from whence we could but conjecture very darkly and imperfectly, what and what manner of things they were. To that shadow contained in the Law were proportionably answering both the sacrifices, by means whereof those good things were attained, and also the high Priest, the Sanctuary, and such like. But now seeing a clear and perfect image of those celestial goods is proposed unto us, and promised us in plain and open terms, therefore there are required other sacrifices, which have an apparent and manifest virtue and efficacy to procure those goods unto us, which can beget in our souls a most assured hope of them, and can draw us to a course of life suitable to them. Can never by those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually] The words year by year, do not seem to cohere with offered; for then there is a great and hard transposition of the words: but agree rather with those sacrifices, for so the sense is facile and usual; as if he had said, the same sacrifices recurring year by year: whereby he would intimate, that under the Law the same sacrifices were offered, yet not every day, and month, but every year: and every year sacrifices were offered, yet not divers, but the same; the same kind year by year. The space of time whereby those sacrifices were distant one from another was a year; and when the year came about, the sacrifice was of the same kind. Which they offered] The persons who did make the offering were the high Priests, to whom the Law enjoined it. But here the words are put in a passive sense to signify the sacrifices which were offered. For ordinary it is, that an active form of speech doth carry a passive sense. So Luke 12.20. The words are active, This night shall they require thy soul: But the sense is passive; this night thy soul shall be required. Continually] In this there is more signified then in the words year by year: for it intimates, that the course of years wherein year by year the same sacrifices were iterated, was not interrupted nor intermitted, but constantly continued; and the continuance of this custom was not short for the space of some few years successively; but a long continuance for many ages. Can never make the comers thereunto perfect. Although the same sacrifices were year by year iterated without intermission for a long continuance: yet the Law by means of those sacrifices could never perfect the Comers thereto. The Comers were all such amongst God's people as came to worship God and serve him by means of those sacrifices: and therefore in the verse following, the same persons in the same respect are called the worshippers. For in the people's access or coming to the Tabernacle, is also included that divine worship and service which there they performed. Seeing their Access and Coming thither was but for worship and service; and seeing again, that worship and service might be done no where else but by coming there; for the Law forbade the people to offer sacrifice in any other place but the Sanctuary. To perfect signifies to expiate or purge from sin, and to expiate so fully and finally, that the party once expiate shall want nothing else; shall need no other oblation of any other sacrifice, nor no iteration of the same; and consequently shall feel no further conscience of his sins.  
2. For than would they not have ceased to be offered] This sentence should not be rendered negatively, than they would not have ceased] for this negation is quite contrary to the sense and reasoning of the Author. But affirmatively thus, for than would they have ceased to be offered. For because the same sacrifices were year by year offered continually; therefore from thence he proves, that they could not perfect the worshippers or comers to the sacrifices; and this their imperfection he further confirms ab absurdo; for if the same sacrifices could have perfected the comers thereto, they would have ceased from being iterated and offered again year by year continually. For what need the same sacrifices be iterated year by year, if they could perfect the comers to them, by expiating their sins fully and finally? for if the sacrifices had done this, than they must have finally determined and ceased. But seeing they could not do this, therefore they ceased not, but were offered & iterated year by year continually. Because that the worshippers once purged should have no more conscience of sins] Here he gives a reason of the former affirmation, why the same sacrifices should have ceased to be offered; namely, because the worshippers once purged and expiated perfectly should have no more conscience of sins. To have conscience of sins signifies two things; whereof the one is consequent to the other, as to know himself guilty of sin, and to acknowledge himself guilty of punishment. The main doctrine which the Author teacheth is this: That those sacrifices had not force to effect, that men should know themselves not guilty of sin; which is then done when they abstain from sin; and then, that men should not acknowledge themselves guilty of punishment, which is then done when they are not afraid of it: Therefore they were iterated year by year continually for a long succession of many ages, that year by year they might heal the sore of the conscience, which broke out again year by year. For where health is fully recovered and settled, the medicine is not iterated: but if there be relapses and the disease have recourses, the use of the medicine must be often applied: either therefore that Sacrifice being once offered must expiate the future sins of all the future years and ages to come, although it withdrew not men from the acts of sin; or if this be absurd, then, seeing it could not withdraw men from the acts of sin, there was good reason, it should be iterated yearly, to heal the conscience yearly wounded with sins. But it had been very absurd that the sins of so many men and ages should be purged by the blood of one goat.  
3. But in those sacrifices is a remembrance again made of sins every year] Here he teacheth the contrary to the last consequence; namely, that after those Sacrifices the consciences of the people were again guilty of sins: And this he proves thus, because at those Sacrifices year by year, the high Priest did year by year, rememorate and confess the sins of the people. For he must lay both his hands upon the head of the Scape-goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, etc. Levit. 16.21. For to this place the Author here hath reference. In those sacrifices; i. then at that solemn Fastday, when those Sacrifices were offered; the sins of the people were also remembered and confessed. For though the year before they were all laid upon the head of the Scape-goat and banished into the wilderness together with the goat: yet the next year and successively year by year another goat must be banished, because the people had more sins to be banished.  
4. For it is impossible that the blood of bulls, and of goats should take a way sins] Here he gives a reason of his principal assertion, That those Sacrifices could never perfect the comers thereto, by an argument taken from the very nature of those Sacrifices; because they were but the blood of bulls and goats, which hath no possibility to take away sins; i. it cannot effect, that men should afterward abstain from sin, and so have no further conscience of sins, and consequently fear no punishment of them. For what force can the blood of beasts have to produce this effect? But the blood of Christ hath this efficacy and force; and all men may easily acknowledge it if they will: of which point, we have formerly treated in several places. Yet the Author saith not, that the blood of those beasts had no force at all, in no measure, and for no time to take away the guilt of those sins, for which by the Law of God it was to be offered: seeing this is evidently false, for if it expiated not sin at all in no measure; to what purpose was it offered year by year? Why doth the Author himself affirm that the worshippers for whom it was offered, were once purged by it? Certainly then, they did purge some sins for some time; namely, sins of error for a year: Therefore the mind of the Author is (as we have explicated it before) that the blood of bulls and goats hath not any force, and impossible it is, it should have any, to withdraw men from their sins, and to effect, that afterward they should not sin, and so to free them from fear and guilt of all future punishment.  
5. Wherefore when he cometh into the world] From the imperfection and infirmity which he hath showed to be in the Legal sacrifices, the Author gathers or rather affirms, that therefore God hath rejected them, and in their room hath elected the only offering of Christ. This he proves by a testimony taken Psal. 40.6. Where David, and under the person of David Christ himself is brought in, speaking hereof. But in this place there is a great question, what should be understood by this coming of Christ into the world. Yet the thing itself shows, that they are much mistaken, who interpret this coming of the nativity or birth of Christ. For it is apparent that we must understand these words to be spoken of Christ, then when he prepared and addressed himself for his sacrifice, and to perform his offering in stead of the Legal sacrifices. Lo I come (saith he) to do thy will, O God. This coming therefore of Christ into the world must be so understood, as to be joined with the execution of Gods will. But this cannot be said of Christ's nativity, for Christ presently upon his birth did not perform this will of God, which the Author designs; seeing then he could not do any will of God at all. For when he was new borne and yet an Infant, how could he do the will of God? or could he then say these words? For it is apparent that the Author speaks here of Christ as man, which we therefore intimate, that no man may think here to fly to the distinction of his natures. Besides, this phrase of coming into the world, doth no where signify his nativity. For they who for this sense of the phrase bring the place, John 1.9. do not observe, that the Greek words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, if we respect the Grammatical sense, may as well be referred to the preceding Noun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies light, as to the Noun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is man: but if we respect the phrase of Scripture, then coming into the world, must much rather be referred to the word light. So that the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, must not be rendered in Latin venientem, in reference to man, as the vulgar Latin edition hath it: but veniens as referred to the light. And so the sense made to be thus; That Christ who is the true light, rising upon the earth like the Sun, and coming into the world, doth enlighten every man with his light, yet not presently at his first rising, but in process of time; as the Sun carrieth his light from one part of the world to another, and by degrees dispels the darkness. Compare this place with John 9.5. and John 12.46. There remain two opinions, which strive, as I may say, for the mastery of the truth. The one is, that this coming of Christ into the world should be taken, for that his coming when he made his first entrance among men to perform his ministerial office; The other is, that it be understood of his entrance into the future world to come, whereof this Author made mention before, chap. 1.2. and chap. 2.5. and which is called by the single name of the world, Rom. 4.13. Now the arguments which seem to persuade us for the taking of it, not for this present world, but for the future world to come, are chief three. 1. Because God did not abrogate those Legal sacrifices and offerings, before Christ entered and came into that future world: but here the Author speaks of their abrogation. 2. Because Christ saith, A body hast thou prepared me. For, how can this be applied to Christ's first entrance upon his ministerial function in this world among men? Did Christ receive from God a new body, and another different from what he had before, then when he was first made known to the world by preaching of the Gospel? And if we should here understand that mortal body in which Christ first preached the Gospel, what would this make to the abrogation of the Legal sacrifices? Certainly, either nothing at all, or no way else but by many turn and wind. But if by this coming of Christ here, we understand his entrance into that future world to come, than these words will much conduce to the matter. For, unless God had given Christ a new and incorruptible body, he could not have entered that dwelling of immortality, and there have offered himself to God, and appear before him, neither could he have sitten at the right hand of this throne. Therefore seeing God would abrogate and abolish those earthly sacrifices by the heavenly Sacrifice of Christ, for that purpose God fitted him a body proper for that heavenly Sanctuary. For that the Author in citing this testimony, had a respect to these words, is plain by his words a little after at the tenth verse, where he mentions the offering of the body of Christ. By which form of speech, seeinghe useth it not where else, he seems as it were to point at these words in this testimony, wherein God is said to have prepared a body for Christ. 3. Because in an other passage of the 40. Psalm, a little before this testimony cited by the Author, David doth sing a song of thanksgiving unto God for his deliverance from a grievous calamity, saying, He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my go; and he hath put a new song in my mouth, etc. Psal. 40.2,3. If therefore Christ may be thought to have sung these words of the Psalm with the rest cited by the Author, after his deliverance from death and the grave; then might the Author well affirm, that Christ said both these and the rest by him cited at his coming or entrance into that future world to come. Now these words cannot be meant of Christ's coming into the world by his Resurrection from the dead; because when the Scripture speaks of his coming into this world, she thereby usually understands his being made known unto the world: but Christ after and by his resurrection was not made known unto the world, but was seen of a few only, who were to be witnesses of it to the world. And therefore when the time of his death drew near, and of his departure to his Father after his death, he himself affirmed that he should be no longer in the world. He saith, sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not] Of the words themselves we shall speak upon the next verse, wherewith they wholly agree in matter. But here let us inquire, why the Author affirms, that Christ then, when he cometh into the world, saith these words? The Author seems to affirm this, from the following words which Christ allegeth presently after, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God, ver. 7. For to what purpose did Christ come into the world, whether we understand this world or that to come? If we understand this world, we must say, that Christ then when he came into this world, (or as the Author speaks before, chap 9.26. when first he appeared) said these words unto God his Father; Because the Legal sacrifices and offerings please thee not, therefore Lo, I am come, to do thy will, i. to offer thee such a sacrifice, that is, wholly according to thy good will and pleasure. But if ye please to understand the future world to come, than we must affirm, that Christ said them, when he entered in thither; Seeing, O God, thou dost no longer approve the Legal sacrifices, Lo, I come to do thy will, i. to offer up myself unto thee, that so I may wholly expiate the sins of thy people. For this is the will of God, and the pleasure of the Lord that shall prosper in the hand of Christ, Isaiah 53.10. That every one who seethe the Son and believeth on him, should be freed from the guilt and pain of all his sins, and have everlasting life, John 6.40. But a body hast thou prepared me] It is not necessary we should think, that the Author mentioned these words in respect of any sense proper to his purpose, but cited them only because they stood connexed with the other words of the testimony which were pertinent to his intention. This he himself seems to intimate at the eighth and ninth verses following, where in the repetition of this testimony, he leaves out these words, and takes only the rest that serve for his scope, which is this. That the Legal sacrifices are abrogate, and in their place the Sacrifice of Christ is established. Though at the tenth verse following the Author speaks of the offering of the body of Christ; yet it is not altogether necessary, that we therefore should say, that he had reference to these words; seeing the body of Christ might by an Hebraisme be put for Christ himself. Again, the Author might have no respect to the proper sense of these words for this reason; because in the Hebrew, other words are read for them. But because the Author followed the Greek Translation, therefore he alleged the words as they stood in the Greek, lest men well acquainted with the Greek Translation should conceive that he had corrupted or changed the text; a rule that this Author hath observed in other passages also (as hath been noted.) The Hebrew text hath it, Mine ears hast thou opened; wherein there is a manifest allusion to the custom commanded by God; when any man would give up himself to perpetual servitude, Exod. 21.6. A servant who at the end of seven years' service would not be free, was by his master brought to the door or door-post of the house, whereto his Master fastened him by boring his ear through with an awl; that this action might be a testimony, that the party must perpetually remain a servant to that house and family; And this Ceremony was performed by the ear, that the servant might remember to be always ready to hear and obey; for by the ear we hear, and hearing in the Hebrew signifies obeying; for as the Master hath power to speak and command, so the main duty of a servant is to hear and obey. David therefore signifies by these words, that because he had received from God those extraordinary benefits which before he had reckoned up, therefore he would not offer unto God the sacrifices of beasts, wherewith God was not much delighted, but would dedicate himself for ever to the worship and service of God; for this doth excellently well agree with the following words of the Psalm; seeing in them there is nothing else said but to this effect. This text and this sense may fitly be applied to Christ coming into that future world; seeing also the Lord Jesus is as it were fastened of God for ever to that heavenly Sanctuary; whereof (as the Author hath showed before) he is the Minister, there to execute the will of God, and to procure both the service of God, and our salvation. Here a man may well wonder and demand, why the Septuagint in their Greek Translation, should have it a body hast thou prepared me, so differing from the Hebrew text both in words and sense. For whatsoever other men think, it seems no way reconcileable with the Hebrew reading, which is now extant, and which we have now interpreted; for why is the word body put for ears, and prepared for opened; especially when in the Hebrew words there is so clear, so neat and elegant an allusion to that custom among the jews, whereby a servant was bound to a perpetual servitude? We must therefore herein say one of these two things; that either there was anciently some other reading in the Hebrew, than what is now extant, especially if there be some nearness of words, which in Hebrew signify ears and body; Or that the Greek translation of the Septuagint is altered in this place as in many other. The former of these two ways we rather approve, especially because, though it be not necessary, yet it is very probable, that the Author in mentioning the offering of the body of Christ a little after here, which he not where else doth, might have a respect to these words; For it is scarce credible he would have done so, if his words had wholly receded from the truth in the Hebrew. But although we would willingly leave it to them who are more skilful in the Hebrew tongue, to conjecture what the Hebrew reading might be, that was so near this which is now extant, and induced the Septuagint to render it thus in their Greek translation: yet we must not so cast this labour upon others but that we also endeavour somewhat in the matter, and submit our conjecture to the judgement of others. Concerning therefore the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, prepared, we need not much trouble ourselves, seeing the Hebrew word Carah, may also signify to cut or carve; and by a Metaphor to fashion, shape or fit the whole into his parts and members; by a similitude taken from Statuaries, Carvers or Gravers, who by cutting, carving, graving, and punching, or (as I may say) by digging, do prepare, fashion and shape Statues or others pourtraits; which in Greek is rightly termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Now if to this Verb there be adjoined a Noun, which may note a body, than the sense will be very proper. Wherefore now we must think of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a body; for which in the Hebrew we now read oznaim, ears. And to this, the word geviah often mentioned in Scripture, and signifying a body, is of near affinity. For from the word oznaim take the first letter Aleph, which might easily slip away, and the letters remaining are very like those which make geviah signifying a body; as they will easily acknowledge, who will please to write both these words in Hebrew characters. But let the more learned in the language consider further of the matter. For there is no repugnancy, that both their readings might be consonant to the mind of the holy Ghost, & both anciently received. And if the Hebrew text had this reading which we have signified, or some other like it, then with much elegancy these words may be taken of that incorruptible body of Christ, which he received of God. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signify to adapt, by joining and fitting one thing to another, as they would have it, who say that these words do signify the adaption and joining of Christ's body to his divine nature in his mother's womb: but the word properly signifies to fashion or shape a thing, by giving it all it due members and joints, proportioning them so fitly one with another, that thereby the thing is perfected and finished. Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not.  
6. In  offerings and sacrifices for sin, thou hast had no pleasure] These words with the other of like nature in the former verse, conduce mainly and properly to that purpose here of the Author, for which he cited this testimony out of the 40. Psalm. The literal sense, David would show himself most really thankful unto God, for an extraordinary benefit and deliverance, which the Lord hath conferred on him, in bringing him out of an horrible pit, and setting his feet upon a rock. Yet he would testify his thankfulness and memory of so great a benefit, not with sacrifices and offerings of beasts, but with obsequies and services of his person. The mystical sense is: Christ brought in, speaking the like words, hath no intent thereby to testify thankfulness unto God; but only to show, that he would offer unto God another kind of sacrifice, which should be most acceptable and agreeable unto God, seeing God had no pleasure in the legal sacrifices. And yet there is also another difference; for in the literal sense David saith not that God was absolutely displeased with those legal sacrifices, and would offer unto God no sacrifices at all of any beast; for such a saying during those times had been false and evil: but he speaks comparatively; as if he had said, Thou art not, O God, much delighted and pleased with the sacrifices and offerings of beasts: but there are other things that delight and please thee more; for thou wouldst rather have obedience then sacrifice: Therefore I will rather offer myself unto thee, and be a servant for ever to thy will. For to like purpose Samuel spoke to Saul; Hath the Lord as great delight in  offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold to obey, is better than sacrifice; and to hearken, than the fat of Rams. For disobedience is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubborness is as wickedness and Idolatary, 1 Sam. 15.22,23. But in the mystical sense, Christ saith absolutely, that God had no further will to them, and took pleasure in them no longer, but his will and pleasure was they should be antiquated and abrogated. Of this mystical sense, this is a good argument, that Christ is here brought in, to mention not only sacrifices of thanksgiving, which only were pertinent to David's purpose; but also expiatory offerings and sacrifices for sin: whereof if we respect David's intent, there should here be made no mention. For David's intent was a testification of his thankfulness unto God, and not an expiation of his sins at that time. But because the Holy Ghost would wrap up a mystic and deep sense in these words; therefore the Author doth here specify and reckon up all kinds of sacrifices and offerings whatsoever, which are reduced to three sorts. 1. By sacrifice and offering in the fifth verse, he seems to understand, all offerings eucharistical or of thanksgiving; whereof a part went to God, as the blood and the fat; part was a Fee to the Priest, and the rest returned to him that offered it. 2. By  offerings in this verse, are understood those which were wholly burnt and went wholly to God; which are sometime called sacrifices of praise, because they were offered wholly in honour of God, as he was the Lord Almighty, and not by way of special thanksgiving for any particular benefit then received from God; which was the proper consideration for a sacrifice of thanksgiving. 3. By sacrifices for sin, are meant all expiations or offerings to put away the guilt and punishment of ignorances' and infirmities; for which kind of sins only those sacrifices were allowed, and in the Hebrew are oftentimes called simply sins.  
7. Then said I, Lo I come] This word of coming doth show a mystical sense. For how did David come, when he spoke this word in the literal sense? Therefore in the literal sense, it signifies only, Lo I am at hand, or I am ready; I have prepared myself to do thy will. But in the mystical and proper sense, it signifies the appearance of Christ in that future world, to execute the will of God. In the volume of the book it is written of me] In these words David shows the cause, why he is ready to do the will of God; or if ye please, the manner and way of his obeying God; q. d. I am ready to do as it is written of me in the volume of the book; or else, for so it is written of me that I should do thy will. Therefore in these words we must understand, either some particle of likeness, as, according; or some casual particle, for, because, or seeing: for such particles are oftentimes concealed or silenced. But here again, we meet with another difference between the Greek translation, and the Hebrew text. In the Hebrew it is, in the volume of the book, which hath a plain and an open sense; for by the book he eminently understands the book of the Law, which is called a volume, because unciently the Law was wont to be written in skins of parchment or velum, one glued to another, and so rolled up and unrolled in the form of a Court-role, which in Latin is properly called Volumen, from the rolling of it; and hence books are called Volumes. A famous Expositor among the Romanists, prefers the Greek reading in this place before the Hebrew; and writes, that it is a vain repetition to say in the volume of the book for that is all one as to say, in the book of the book. This is a vaine cavil; for all volumes or rolls are not books, but there are volumes and rolls of many other things besides. So that the word book is fitly added to volume, to specify the differences of volumes. We meet with a like phrase, Jer. 36.2. But why doth the Greek translation read it, in a Chapter of the Book? The reason may be, because the Hebrew word Megillah, doth not only signify a whole book consisting of many skins, but also any one single skin, which may contain only some Chapter of the Book. And therefore the Greek Translator conceived, that he should not go from the sense of the words, if for the whole volume, he should put only some part or certain Chapter of it; especially because by this means the redundancy in words would seem the less or none at all; yet some there would seem to be, if he had said the volume, and that had been taken to signify the whole book. Wherefore these words must be taken as if he had said, In a Chapter of the book, namely of the Law it is written of me. By which means, not only all show of redundancy is taken away, but also a more special place is designed, where the thing is written, that is here spoken. Now let us a little inquire, what Chapter this might be? Certainly other Chapter it can be none, but that, wherein the very thing is handled, which David said, he came to do; i. that David should do the will of God. For we have said, that in these words is showed the cause why David said, he came to do Gods will, or the manner how he should do it. But where is it said, that David must do the will of God? Namely there, where the Kings of God's people are commanded to do so; which is set down in the last parcel of the 17. Chapter of Deuteronomy from the 13. verse to the end. For David in a peculiar way was ordained of God himself to be the first King over God's people, and the Kingdom was to remain in his posterity for ever. And therefore he saith, that there it is written of him; not that it is there written of him by name as David, but written of him as a King. And here also the Holy Ghost seems to have left us some footstep of a mystical sense. For it might be said of Christ properly, that there it is written of him by name; for the Holy Ghost doth every where aim chief at Christ. Hence it appears, that they are in an error, who by a Chapter in the Book, understand the beginning of Genesis; because as they think there it is written of Christ, that he created heaven and earth. But is there also any thing written of David? or of Christ there, that he should do the will of God? But in the 17. Chapter of Deuteronomy before cited, among other things which God willed to be observed by the future King of his people, this is also delivered, ver. 18. And it shall be when he sitteth upon the throne of his Kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this Law in a book, out of that which is before the Priests his Levites; And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may learn to fear the Lord his God to keep all the words of this Law, and these Statutes to do them: That his heart be not lified up above his brethren; and that he turn not aside from the Commandment to the right hand or to the left. All Gods Laws are his will, for they are that will of God which God would have done; he therefore that doth God's Laws, he doth his will. And seeing all the future Kings of his people were to do Gods will, as here it was written of them; therefore David also when he was become King was to do the will of God as in this Chapter of God's Book it was written of him. And therefore David again, was to write himself a copy of the Law in a book; he must read therein all the days of his life; he must keep all the words of it, and not lift his heart above his brethren; for in doing these things he did the will of God, as it was written of him in a Chapter of the Law. But some man may hereupon demand, how shall this belong to Christ? must he write out a book of the Law of Moses and perpetually read in it, and never departed from it? The Answer is easy, That for the mystical sense we must not tie ourselves to every single word, but only to the breviate and sum of the matter, & that which is spoken properly of the type, must be so applied to the antitype, as the nature of the antitype requires. The sum of the matter in this place is, That the King of God's people must be obedient to God's will; particularly to that will of God which God would have him to observe, and consequently to that Law of God which God would have stand in force. As long as the Law of Moses was in force, so long the Kings over God's people must observe that Law. But that Law being by God abrogated, no man is bound to observe it, much less is the King of God's people bound to it. And a new Law being surrogated, God's people and their King must observe that new Law. Wherefore the Law written in the Chapter of that book, must be so taken or understood of Christ, as the nature of the thing will bear it, and as the Majesty and divinity of Christ requires. Many things are said of the shadow, which the perfection of the body doth reject. But we must further observe, that the sense of the words in this Psalm may yet be further extended; seeing in the Hebrew text, to the sense whereof the Author might have more regard than to the Greek Translation, it is simply said, In the volume of the book, i. of the Law; and although according to the Greek Translation, we understand that Chapter of the Law, which we cited in Deuteronomy; yet that very Chapter hath reference to the whole Law of God; or it refers the King to all the words and precepts of the Law, which the King of God's people was to exccute. Wherefore in a mystical sense we may understand all those things, wherein Christ was to perform the will of God; and particularly those that belong to his expiatory Sacrifice, which here is the thing in hand. Whence it is in a manner yet left doubtful, whether Christ said these words, when he came into this world or the world to come. For, if by this will of God we understand nothing else but the sacrifice of Christ strictly and properly taken, excluding his death from it, than we must affirm, that Christ said these things when he came into that future world. But if we extend the sacrifice or offering of Christ more largely, and include his death, the necessary antecedent unto it, as in this place it seems we must do, and as we have before intimated, that we may not set aside the excellent and proper act of Christ himself, pertaining to his offering and sacrifice most acceptable to God, seeing he saith that he came to do the will of God, and that we know that Christ himself had also his part herein; then the thing itself declares, that these words must be attributed to Christ when he came into this world. And it is no obstacle to this, that both according to the Greek Translation, and according to the literal sense of the Hebrew words, we respect that place, wherein the office of the King is described, whence Christ as now made a King seems to speak these things, as David also did. For, besides that the Hebrew words of the Psalm are more large, as we have said, and therefore (especially in the literal sense) may justly be more largely extended, this also must be marked, That Christ although he were not yet a King actually, yet because he was for certain to be one, and ordained to a Kingdom by God's immutable Decree, he might very well even then refer to himself, the precept wherein the King of God's people is commanded to do Gods will.  
8. Above when he said] From the words of Christ, the Author further infers, that the legal sacrifices and offerings were abrogated, and in their place the sacrifice and offering of Christ was instituted. And he shows this to be manifest from the very manner of Christ's words, and from the clear opposition of the things therein specified. Above, i. in the first place, when he spoke of sacrifices and offerings to be rejected, before he spoke of his coming to do the will of God. Sacrifice and offering and burnt-offerings and offering for sin thou wouldst not, neither hadst pleasure therein, which are offered by the Law] The words which are offered by the Law] must be read as included in a parenthesis, whereby the Author specifies that the legal sacrifices and offerings are abrogated; because the sacrifices and offerings, which Christ saith here, that God would not have, neither had any pleasure in them, and therefore must be taken away, are no other but the legal sacrifices which were instituted by the Law of Moses, and were offered according to that Law.  
9 Then said he] Christ after he had spoken the former words for the abrogation of the Legal sacrifices, than he added these that follow. For these are the words of the Author, relating the words of Christ. Lo, I come to do thy will, O God] Because God's will was to abrogate the Legal sacrifices, therefore Christ comes to do that will and pleasure of God, which God should surrogate in stead of the Legal sacrifices. He taketh away the first that he may establish the second] q.d. What is this else, but to abrogate the former, that he may establish the latter? But that former thing was the Legal sacrifices, which Christ abrogates; the latter is the will of God, which he establisheth.  
10. By the which will we are sanctified] Here he shows what benefit we gain, by this will of God, performed by Christ, and establisheth in the place of the Legal sacrifices. For, it might be demanded, what doth this concern us and the expiation of our sins, that instead of the Legal sacrifices Christ saith he will do or hath done the will of God? Therefore the Author shows, that this will of God and the execution of it, doth consist in the sacrifice and offering of Christ made for us: whence also this will of God is tacitly compared with the Legal sacrifices, and withal is preferred before them, as fare more excellent and acceptable to God. Therefore he saith, that we are sanctified by it; even we, who (as he presently addeth) are sanctified by the offering of the body of Christ] In which words, he withal teacheth what that will of God is, namely; that it is the offering of the body of Christ once for all; or at least that it is altogether concurrent with this offering. For, how else should we be said to be sanctified or expiated by this will of God, seeing we are sanctified by the offering of the body of Christ. For this will of God seems to be opposed thus far to the legal sacrifices, that by it we are truly sanctified. For while our sanctification is attributed to the will of God, as it stands opposed to the legal sacrifices, it is tacitly taken from them. As if the Author had said: By which will of God we are sanctified, & not by the old legal sacrifices. The will of God is here put, not for the action of his will, but for the object or matter of his will, for the thing he would have done, which he approves, and wherein he hath pleasure; for it is opposed to the legal sacrifices; which he would not have done, which he approves not, and wherein he hath no pleasure. And therefore it signifies the sacrifice and offering of Christ, as the object or matter, which is now his will, as the words following teach us. Sanctified, is explated, purged, and cleansed from our sins: for which, see chap. 9.13. Through the offering of the body of jesus Christ once for all] The offering, not of legal sacrifices often made, and yearly iterated, and therefore ineffectual and imperfect; but of the body of Christ once made, is that offering, which greatly pleaseth God, and is wholly conformable to his will, and truly sanctifieth us.  
11. And every Priest standeth daily ministering, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices] Hitherto he hath compared the offering of Christ with the legal sacrifices, chief in respect of the iteration, that the legal sacrifices were offered often, that is, year by year for the whole people: but that of Christ but once only. Now he gins to compare the high Priests together, namely, the old with the new, the legal Priests with Christ; that they offered and ministered year by year, but Christ once only. For where there are many sacrifices successively iterated year by year, there the high Priest also must necessarily minister and offer year by year: but where there is but one sacrifice or offering to be made, there the high Priest ministers and offers but once only. For hitherto the author hath intended only this, to show that Christ entering into his heavenly Sanctuary; not to offer often according to the manner of the legal high Priests, but to make one only offering; as appears in the former chapter, verse 25. For to this point as to his main scope all his arguments are directed. The high Priest being en tere into the holy place, did not sit there, but was wont to stand there before the Mercy-seat, as before the Throne of God. And he stood there daily; which must not be so understood, that he did so every day in the year: but upon a set and certain day of the year, which had it circuit, and came about year by year; namely, at the solemn anniversary fast for the universal expiation of the whole people; for he daily offered upon that day; whensoever it had recourse. For in this sense he used the same word before chap. 7.27. where he openly spoke of that solemn annual sacrifice upon the day of Expiation; whereto he hath reference in this place also, as particularly appears from the third verse of this chapter; where he mentions the Commemoration of sins every year, which were constantly confessed by the whole people at that sacrifice. Which can never take away sins. The cause is here showed, why the legal high Priest must offer those sacrifices often; namely, because they could never take away sins. i. They could never so effectually free men from their sins, that they who were once expiated thereby, should have no further conscience of sins. And what this is, hath been already explicated in this chapter, verse 2.  
12. But this man after he had offered one Sacrifice for sins, for ever, sat down at the right hand of God.] Here he opposeth Christ to the legal high Priest in three particulars. First, in that Christ offered for sins but once only; for he so offered, that he never iterated his offering more. Secondly, in that after his offering, he sat down at the right hand of God. Thirdly, that he continued his seat there for ever, even unto the end of the world. And these two latter particulars are a reason of the former; for because Christ sitteth at the right hand of God; and sits there for ever to the world's end; therefore he shall never offer sacrifice more. For how can it beseem, or rather how can it befall so great a Majesty, to offer again another Sacrifice, that is, to die again, and then again to enter into heaven? For seeing Christ sitteth at God's right hand for ever, therefore the Majesty of Christ must continue for ever also; and then how can Christ ever offer again? For then a thing lasteth for ever, when it hath a continual duration through all times and ages without any intermission.  
13. From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool] Here he shows the issue or effect that will follow upon Christ's sitting at the right hand of God. For thereupon it will follow, that at the last, all his enemies shall be put under his feet, and made his footstool. So fare shall Christ be from offering again, to be violated and put to death again by his enemies, that he expects their subjection to him, to be made his footstool. And when all the enemies of Christ (among whom death is the last and chiefest) shall be made his footstool, i. shall be wholly mastered, yea abolished, what cause can there be why he should iterate his offering? That this subjection will follow, the Author gathers it, from this saying of God unto Christ, Sat thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool,] Psalm 110.1. Therefore Christ sitting at the right hand of God doth expect this. And he saith, that Christ expecteth this, fitting his words to the words of the Psalm, wherein God himself doth vindicate this subjection of Christ's enemies unto him, by putting them under his feet. But because we know, that Christ himself neither heretofore hath been, neither now is, nor hereafter shall be vacant or unoccupied in this action; neither is this subjection attributed to God, otherwise then as God doth it by Christ, or gives power and strength unto Christ, whereby he may and doth effect it; therefore in the word expecting we must acknowlegde a trope, and the signification of it must be admitted only thus far, as it argues; that Christ by the gift and benefit of God, doth reign & subdue his enemies to him: so that in this respect not Christ, but God is said to subdue his enemies, and Christ expecteth only till it be done. Besides in regard of the time, wherein at last all the enemies of Christ shall be subdued unto him, Christ may be said thus fare to depend upon his Father, as it is in his Fathers own power to order the times and seasons of things, or Christ himself doth testify.  
14 For by one offering.] He brings another reason why Christ offered only but once; because by one offering he perfected or finished all things. As on the contrary the legal high Priests offered often, because they could never perfect all things by all their oblations. He perfected for ever them that are sanctified] Perfected, is throughly and wholly expiated, see Chap. 7. ver. 11. For ever; is in respect of all future times and ages to come; not, as it was under the Law, only for the time past, and that time but for the space of one year. They that are sanctified, are they that are expiated, purged or cleansed from sin in their conscience: and the word must not be restrained to the present time only, but extended and dilated to all differences of time, to those that ever have been sanctified, or now are, or ever shall be. For Christ may be said to perfect or expiate men for ever in a double sense. First, as every man that is expiated, is not expiated for some certain time, but for ever: and secondly, as his offering is of efficacy and force to expiate all men of all times and ages to the end of the world; so that it shall never need be iterated either for the same men, or for any others.  
15. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us] After that he had proved by several reasons, that the offering of Christ must be made only once: now he further proves the same by a testimony of the Scripture, wherein the Holy Ghost witnesseth the same thing. For this truth is so evident and so material, that it hath not only the reasons formerly alleged to confirm it; but hath also a testimony of Scripture wherein the Holy Ghost doth testify it. The Holy Ghost is said to witness a thing, when the Scripture saith it; because as Peter teacheth us, that holy men of God spoke, as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, 2 Pet. 1.21. After that he had said before] After the Holy Ghost had said before; which saying follows in the next verse.  
16. This is the Covenant, that I will make with them, after those days (saith the Lord) I will put my Laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write thm] Of these words of the Holy Ghost, we have treated before, Chap. 8.10.  
17. And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more] Between the former verse, and this something must be understood, that is silenced; namely, than he said, as the Author himself speaks at the ninth verse before. For at the fifthteenth verse upon which this dependeth, the Author had written, for after that he said before] namely the Holy Ghost; therefore here must be understood, than he said; namely, the Holy Ghost again said the words of this Text, And their sins and iniquities, etc.  
18. Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin] From these words of the Holy Ghost, wherein the remission of sins and iniquities is promised to God's people; now the Author infers, that the offering of Christ must be but one only. Namely, because the Holy Ghost doth testify, that God under the New Testament, and so by Christ and his offering, will remit unto his people all sins and iniquities even the most grievous for ever. Now where there is such a remission of sins, proceeding from Gods Will and Covenant, and that universally in respect of time for ever, and also universally in respect of persons to all men, there can be given no other sacrifice for sins, and therefore one sacrifice only for sins is sufficient. But that no further sacrifice is allowed for sins, where such a remission of them is granted by Covenant, it appears from hence, because otherwise remission should be granted and ordained also by Covenant to them that persist in their sins; which were a thing very unfit and unworthy of God's grace. For if men repent and change their mind and ways into better courses, partly they abstain from sin with all care, and partly by virtue of the new Covenant, and so by the one single offering of Christ, they have ready prepared for them a remission of all those sins, which either went before their true repentance, or to follow it, that they neither lose it, nor make it void. Anciently under the Law, when remission was granted only of ignorances' and infirmities, it was no marvel, if upon the stay or return of the same sins, for which offering had been made, the offerings were often iterated; and instead of them another offering were introduced far better and perfecter which is that of Christ: but now seeing the most grievous sins are expiated by the offering of Christ under the New Testament, what place can be yet left for any other offering? For either a man engaged by so great a benefit doth afterward lead an holy life, or not. If he live holily, there needs no other offering for to expiate his sin, seeing he commits it not: if he live not holily, there must be none.  
19 Having therefore brethren boldness] Hear the Author doth in a manner sum up those things, which hitherto he had spoken of the Priesthood and sacrifice of Christ; and from thence infertes his following admonition. By boldness here he understands an assured hope, and confidence flowing from the faculty and liberty granted us of entering into heaven the most holy Sanctuary. So that by the word boldness is signified unto us both our faculty or liberty of entering into heaven, and also our confidence or assurance of mind issuing from our knowledge of our faculty or liberty to enter; which liberty is opposed to that restraint under the Law, whereby it was lawful for no man to enter into the holy place under pain of death, except the high Priest once a year. And for fear that any one should attempt it, all were forbidden it. To enter into the holiest. Heaven is that Sanctuary whereinto on God's part we have liberty that we may enter, and on our own part we have confidence that we shall enter. And of all Sanctuaries the heavenly is absolutely the holiest; wherein it is opposed to the legal Tabernacle, whereof one of the rooms was the most holy, yet not absolutely, but comparatively only in respect of the other, which was called the first Tabernacle and the holy place, because it was less holy than the second, as the second was fare less holy than heaven, which is fare the holiest of all. By the blood of jesus.] For from the blood of Jesus, we draw our boldness both for our liberty and confidence to enter; because both the New Testament, whereby is granted unto us not only leave, but a right to enter into the holiest, is confirmed by the blood of Jesus: but also the new sacrifice once only offered and never to be iterated, for the offering whereof Christ entered into the holiest, was prepared by the blood of Jesus. For by the entrance of Jesus into the holiest, who is our leader and our head, we have liberty that we may, and we take courage that we shall enter: seeing whither soever our leader and head whom God himself hath appointed unto us, doth enter and arrive, thither also a right and liberty of entering is granted unto us: for not only the same issue of the journey is promised to us, that was granted to our Captain and Head; but also therefore our Captain entered heaven and obtained all power there, that both from his example and from the power he hath there, we might have an assured faith and hope of those heavenly blessings, and in due time might really enjoy them.  
20. By a new and living way which he hath consecrated for us] Here the Author seems to declare whence it is, that we have our liberty and confidence to enter heaven; and he saith we have it hence, That Christ hath consecrated for us a way to it. Consecrated here is initiated or dedicated; for the Greek word is the same, that before we rendered dedicated, Chap. 9 v. 18. Now Christ is said to consecrate or initiate this way unto us; not only as he was the first that entered heaven after death, and a death so fearful and shameful; but also because he hath procured us a right to the same way, that we may lawfully pass along in it, and trace the steps of Christ to immortality: For Christ hath consecrated this way for us, by using it himself first, and then leaving the use of it free to us; for consecration is the first use of a holy thing, before which it might not lawfully be used by any other. Before Christ opened heaven by his entrance thither, and consecrated the way leading thither, it was lawful for no man to enter it, especially after death. But now this way being consecrated, dedicated, or initiated, any man that will, may enter it, and by it pass safely unto heaven. This way is called new, not only because it was lately or newly consecrated or initiated, but especially because it was lately discovered and newly opened, even in the latter times and last age of the world; and besides, because it is an appendent and concurrent with the New Testament; for during the Old Testament and the old Tabernacle the way to the holiest was not open: The way into the holiest of all, was not yet made manifest while the first Tabernacle was yet standing, Chap. 9.8. This new way is so marked with the steps of Christ, that no length of time can deface it; especially seeing so many thousands of the godly have heretofore followed and hereafter will follow Christ their leader in that journey; and the way by their steps is continually renewed and kept open. And it is called a living way; not formally, but finally, because life is the end of it whereto it leads; for so bread is called the bread of life and living bread; because effectually it doth vivify and make us live. He seems herein to have a  reference to the entrance into the holy places under the Law, which was a mortal and deadly way, because it was death for any man to enter them, excepting only the high Priest, and he but once a year, upon a prefixed day, to perform solemn ceremonies. And therefore he opposeth the way to the heavenly holy place, to the way of the old legal holy place; in as much as this latter is a deadly way that brings death, but the former is a living way that leadeth unto life. Besides, this entrance and way leading to the heavenly holy place is commonly made by death, and sometimes by a horrid and cruel death, and so may seem rather to lead unto destruction; and therefore he called it a living way very seasonably, to comfort us by teaching us, that it hath a far different issue from what it seems at the first sight. Through the veil, that is to say his flesh] He alludes to the veil that was spread between the two holy places of the Tabernacle, and disparted the one from the other: To which veil he saith the flesh of Christ is answerable. For as the old legal high Priest could not enter into the most holy place unless the veil were withdrawn: So Christ could not enter into the heavenly holy place, before his flesh was withdrawn, and as I may say, rend and broken. Therefore the high Priest entered by moving the veil aside, and Christ by laying his flesh aside; so Christ entered through the vail. An open sign whereof was in the death of Christ, whereby his flesh was dissolved and laid aside. For when Christ yielded up the ghost, suddenly the vail of the Temple was rend in twain. And this renting of that veil, what doth it portend else, then that by God's appointment, those holy places should be no more shut, but open and common, and become in a manner of public use; so that any man might lawfully either look into or enter them? And hereby what else was signified, but that the flesh of Christ being rend and broken by the death of the Cross, thereupon the passage unto the heavenly holy places was unlocked and set open to Christ, and to all that believe in him? so that not only Christ himself might enter, but all that are Christ's may enter also, and before they enter actually, may look in by faith and hope. While the mortal body of Christ was entire and whole, both Christ himself was debarred from the entrance of those heavenly places, and we both from the entrance and prospect of them: but after that this veil of Christ's flesh was by death dissolved, than both Christ himself did enter heaven, and procured us a right and power to enter, and before we do enter actually, to view the happiness of it by faith, and taste the sweetness of it by hope. For the entrance of Christ into heaven following upon his death, doth make us certainly to see and hope for the inheritance of heaven; which was hidden from us by Christ as by a veil, till he was withdrawn and taken from us by his death and Resurrection.  
21. And having a great high Priest] Christ is called a great high Priest, not only in respect of the faithful who are but a kind of less Priests compared to Christ; as of old under the Law among the Priests one was great and head over the rest: but in respect of the high and great Priests under the Law, who as we have heard, compared with Christ, were not only little, but in a manner very small and dim shadows. Over the house of God] By this house of God, we may understand both that heavenly Sanctuary, wherein our high Priest performs his holy offices, answerable to the Legal Tabernacle, and also the Church or people of God, who are the spiritual house of God. For Christ is precedent over both these houses, both that heavenly and this spiritual on earth.  
22. Let us draw near] Here gins the other part of the Chapter, containing an admonition drawn from the former doctrines. They were said to come or draw near (as we heard at the first verse) who while the Priest was officiating, were intentive to the divine service, for which they approached to the Tabernacle, whereby they also came near or drew near to God. The Author doth call upon us, That seeing we have a high Priest truly great resident in the Sanctuary of heaven, who there performs holy offices & offerings for us, therefore we also should approach and draw near in soul and spirit unto that heavenly Sanctuary intentively minding the worship of God. Which is nothing else, but to apply ourselves to the worship of God, and never make doubt to draw near unto him in confidence of Christ our high Priest. With a true heart] He shows what manner of persons they must be, who will exercise this spiritual worship of God, and apply themselves unto it; They must have a true heart. And a true heart is opposed to a seined, deceitful and dissembling heart, which makes only an outward show of holiness, and thereby endeavours to deceive. In full assurance of faith] A full assurance of faith is opposed to a wavering and doubting faith; for look how much doubt is mingled with faith, so much is wanting to the perfection and fullness of it. Therefore than we have a full faith, when we doubt nothing of the truth of the Christian Religion and discipline. Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience] He alludes to a Ceremony ordained under the Law, whereby they who had touched any unclean thing, must be sprinkled with the holy water of separation, before they might enter into the assembly of God's people at the Sanctuary, to perform the worship of God; for if they did otherwise they must die for it. This purging or cleansing of the flesh by sprinkling, the Author transfers spiritually to the spirit and soul, whereby the soul is cleansed from the guilt and stain of conscience, and the body from the filth of sin. Now the sprinkling or purging of the heart from an evil conscience may be taken two ways; either to signify that cleansing whereby we get a full remission of our sins by the blood and sacrifice of Christ, and are freed from an evil conscience and from fear of God's punishment, in which manner he said before, that our conscience is purged from dead works: or to signify the cleansing of our soul from inward and secret sins. For by an evil conscience in this place, by a metony my of the effect, he seems to understand the hidden and secret vices of the soul; as opposed to the filth of the body, which as in the words immediately subsequent, he teacheth must be washed away. For, what else can the filth of the body signify, than those outward sins which are committed by the body itself? not as if these did not also defile the conscience, but because open sins are exposed to the eyes and censures of other men: but the secret and inward sins of the soul, though they make no man else conscious to them, yet they agitate and burden the conscience. Therefore by the former sense of these words is signified the great benefit of God, which we attain by the blood and sacrifice of Christ; and by the latter is intimated our duty whereto we are excited and obliged by so great a benefit. And our bodies washed] We have already said, that this washing of the body must be referred to the washing away of that filth, whereby our body stands defiled before God; therefore if we receive the last sense of the former words, than the Author here puts us in mind of the same thing, whereof Paul remembers us, 2 Cor. 7.1. Having therefore these promises (dear beloved) let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. And the Author shows, that it is a most fit and convenient thing to wash the body in this sense, because anciently under the Law, they who approached to the Sanctuary for the performance of God's worship, must wash their bodies; all the difference is, that there men understood the carnal stains of sin, but here the spiritual. With pure water] There is no necessity we should by this allegory think any thing answering by name to this water; seeing the Author seems to speak in allusion to the custom used under the Law of washing the body with pure water. For, comparisons as we have often intimated are subject to many abusions. Yet if any man desire a full resemblance, we may say that hereby is meant, the spirit and doctrine of Christ, or that spiritual water, wherewith Christ sprinkleth his people, not excluding his blood. For this is the pure water for the soul, and by it only the filth of sin is washed away. They that here understand the water of Baptism are mistaken. For the water of Baptism is but only an outward sign and shadow of this washing which here the Author understands, wherewith neither can our hearts be sprinkled, nor the filth of our vices really washed away. Therefore that spiritual Baptism which doth truly save us, must be here understood, even that Baptism which as Peter saith, is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, or the outward washing of the body, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, 1. Pet. 3.21. Which is not effected by any elementary water, but only the heavenly and spiritual which washeth the conscience.  
23. Let us hold fast the profession of our faith.] He exhorts them to constancy in the profession of the Christian religion; because it is not sufficient for us, to serve God in heart and other works, unless we also confess him with the mouth. In the Greek it is, the profession of our hope; and by the word hope, the Author seems to comprise the whole Christian religion; for the Christian religion consisteth chief in hope, and in a hope most excellent, even the hope of immortal life, and eternal happiness; and all the parts and heads are directed and concur to breed in men's minds this hope, and a holiness of life suitable to it. Hence Peter under the same name of hope seems to comprehend all the heads of our Christian profession, 1. Pet. 3.15. Without wavering. We must hold this hope so fast, that we neither decline from it ourselves, nor suffer ourselves to be beaten from it by any engines of temptation or affliction. For he is faithful that promised.] He inserts the cause, why we should hold fast the profession of our hope without wavering; namely, because this hope is grounded both upon a promise, and a promise of him that is faithful to perform it, namely, of God himself. God is therefore termed faithful, because he keeps his faith, i. He always performs whatsoever he hath undertaken for his part; and never disappoints his people of his help and favour. Therefore we are never to doubt of God's faith, so we keep our own, and perform our parts with all care and diligence.  
24. And let us consider one another] This may be understood, that we should look unto both one another's state and condition of life, and also one another's behaviour and action: And for what end we should do this, he presently shows, in adding. To provoke unto love] To provoke, is to intent or increase the force of a thing: and love is then provoked, when it is quickened and increased. And it gathers increase from our mutual consideration and inspection, either in ourselves or others. In ourselves it is increased, when we are either stirred up by the notable examples of other men, or moved by their state and condition, to embrace them with more ardent affection and good will: if their estate be prosperous, that we do not only envy them, but use our endeavour to defend and advance their happiness to our power: but if they are in distress, that we secure and benefit them in what we are able. In others love is increased, when we look into their lives and manners for this end, that where they grow negligent in their duties, or suffer their love to decay, there by our admonitions and exhortations, we excite to good works, and to repair the decays of their love. Therefore this provoking to love, may be taken either passively, when the increase of love is made upon ourselves, or actively, when we increase it upon others. And to good works] Then we are provoked to good works, when we follow them with an ardent affection, or as Paul would have us, when we are zealous of good works. He adjoins good works to love, to teach us that our love should not be barren, but fruitful of works; although works may be taken more largely, and extended to all works of holiness, as well concerning God as ourselves.  
25. Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together.] Namely, for this especial end to retain and preserve, the communion of Saints, and the unity of the Spirit. Which is then done, when Christians meet together to perform the worship of God, to hear his word, to pour forth unanimous prayers unto him, to exercise that censure of manners, which Christ and his Apostles have prescribed, to celebrate the memory of Christ's death, by sacred breaking of bread according to his own institution; to make a common supply for the poor and distressed as occasion requires, and with all their forces and advices, to promote the affairs of the Church. As the manner of some is. It is apparent, that in those times there were some, who though they had not forsaken the Christian religion, yet had forsaken the assemblies of the faithful; that they might the better lie hid, and thereby more easily avoid dangers and persecutions. And it is apparent also hence, that they sin grievously, who withdraw themselves from the company of the faithful, and from the assemblies of the Saints. But exhorting one another] To the neglect of assembling, he opposeth this mutual exhorting or admonishing. Whence it is manifest that Christian assemblies were ordained among other ends for this also, to exhort and admonish one another; which may be done most opportunely, when men are assembled into some one place. And so much the more as ye see the day approaching.] The words so much the more must also be communicated to the day of approaching, as well as referred to the exhorting; By how much the more ye see the day approaching, by so much the more let us exhort one another. By the day, as the article the doth intimate, must be understood some certain day, and that well known; i. the day of judgement, and punishment for the disobedient: Which judgement seeing it is twofold, we must needs understand a twofold day or time of it. For we may take it both for the time of Gods taking vengeance upon the Jews in the final destruction of Jerusalem; and also for the last day of the whole world at the final destruction of the world. The approach of that former day, they might easily perceive, both from the signs foretold by Christ, and also from the predictions of those Prophets, who lived in those times in the Church of God. The approach of this latter day, every man sees, though not in respect of the whole world, and of the present age, yet every man sees it in respect of himself. For as death is always approaching unto every one of us, and the term of every man's life draws nearer: so also thereby every man's last day doth approach and draw nearer; not only because after death there shall be no change in respect of our salvation and damnation; but also because that whole time intercurrent between the last moment of our life and the last judgement, is none in respect of the dead. For when we are dead, and thereby void of all sense of time, the last moment of our life departing, and the first moment of our life returning (for return it shall at the last judgement) will seem one and the same to us at our rising again to life. They who lie in a deep sleep are not sensible of the time that passeth, though the time be very long; and death is a deeper sleep than any sleep of those that sleep alive. And this is the cause why the holy Scriptures do sometime speak so, as if we should wholly live till the coming of Christ, or were presently after our death translated to the Lord, and so to the joys of heaven: For they have no regard of the time intercurrent between the last end of our life, and the coming of Christ, and the future happiness of the godly; see 2 Cor. 5.8. and Ephes. 4.30. and Phil. 1.6,26. and 1 Tim. 6 14. and Jam. 5.7,8. and some others.  
26. For if we sinne wilfully] He brings a cause or a motive, why they should diligently exhort one another, because otherwise it might easily fall out, that after knowledge of the truth received they might sin wilfully, in which case how miserable and unhappy their condition would be, he presently declares. To sin in this place may be taken in two senses, either largely or strictly. Largely, as it is extended to divers sins which are committed against the Commandments of Christ. Strictly, as it eminently signifies the most grievous sin of Apostasy, which is a falling away from the Christian Religion, or rather infidelity in general; whereto if by way of difference, ye add what the Author presently addeth, after knowledge of the truth received, ye have the definition of Apostasy: For Apostasy is an Infidelity that follows after faith; or a desertion of the faith, and a rejection of the truth once known and received. So John 16.9. Christ by the word sin seems eminently to understand Infidelity. The latter sense is favoured, 1. In that the Author, ver. 28. following, being to prove that men sinning after the manner here specified, shall by no means escape the judgement of God, seems to draw his argument from them, who wholly rejected God's Law, and turned to false Gods; of whom we read, Deut. 17. and whom no men resemble nearer, than they who fall away from Christ, and his most holy Religion. 2. In that it seems proper to Apostates, to tread under foot the Son of God, and to account the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing; for this is incompatible to them who constantly adhering to the Christian Religion, are notwithstanding fallen into some single sin or vice. 3. In that this place seems most alike to that, Chap. 6.4. where we have said the Author speaks properly of Apostates. But the former sense is also favoured; 1. In that the word Sin hath a general signification, and perhaps every where; for words must not be restrained within the use of speech, when no reason constrains it. And the word Sin in the place of John 16.9. hath of itself a general signification, though afterward it be specified and explicated in particular what kind of sin he there understands. 2. From the occasion and scope of the Author: For before he had admonished them to exhort one another; and now he shows, what great danger will or at least may come of it, if this action be neglected; namely, that they may wilfully sin after they have received the knowledge of the truth; and so involve themselves into a heavy judgement. And seeing the Exhortation is at large, as must be used as a remedy against all kind of sins; why therefore should not that sin which the Author faith might easily arise from the neglect of exhortation, be extended largely also? Now in answer of the reasons brought for the other sense. To the first: we say that the Author's argument seems drawn from all them who sinned against the Law with a high hand; of whom there is a place, Numb. 15.30,31. But the soul that doth aught presumptuously (whether he be borne in the land, or a stranger) the same reproacheth the Lord, and that soul shall be cut off from among his people; Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his Commandment; that soul shall surely be cut off, his miquity shall be upon him. For to despise the Law here in this Author, is the same with despising the word of the Lord, and breaking his Commandment with Moses in Numbers. Here, to sinne wilfully, and there to do presumptuously are all one. And here, shall die without mercy, and there, he shall surely be cut off, are all one, for what is this else, but not to spare, not to show any mercy. To the second we say, That he doth tread under foot the Son of God, and account the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing, who dares violate the Covenant, which is published by Christ, and established by his blood, or dares as much as in him lies to irritate or dissolve it, that it may be void and of no effect; by committing those sins, which by the Covenant are punished by death and damnation. To the third we say, That this place is not so altogether like that Chap. 6.4. but that there appears a plain unlikeness. For there both the scope and occasion of the words, and the word itself of falling away, compared with the matter preceding do all declare, that the Author properly speaks of Apostasy; but here as we have seen, the scope and occasion of the words tend another way. Wherefore we must conclude, that the former acception of the word Sin, which includes in it also the latter, is rather to be received. Although amongst those sin's Apostasy holds the first place, and thereto the Author hath reference chief, but not only. The word wilfully as we have said, seems to signify the same sin, that the Scriptures of the Old Testament call presumptuously; and so committed in contempt of God's Majesty, or by haughtiness and pride of mind; and this kind of sin, is opposed to sins committed either out of ignorance or infirmity: Wherefore it notes unto us those kind of sins which are wittingly, advisedly and purposely; and so argue a mere malice of mind. Such under the New Testament are accounted all vicious habits and customs of sinning, and persevering in evil-doing; as also all heinous and foul wickednesses, done wittingly and advisedly. For infirmity, or humane frailty cannot be pretexed for such sins especially among Christians. After that we have received the knowledge of the truth. Sins wilfully and wittingly committed before the knowledge of the truth, are of another nature, than those that follow that knowledge; for the Sacrifice of Christ was ordained to expiate the former; but for the expiation of the latter, there is no other sacrifice to be expected, as we shall hear afterward. For crimes or foul sins committed after the knowledge of the truth, are far more heinous than those done in ignorance of it; and the malice of man appears far greater in those then in these, though otherwise the facts may be equal. Therefore it more agrees with the equity and wisdom of God, to grant a means for the expiation of those, then of these, and consequently to pardon those, and not these. There remaineth no more sacrifice for sins. In these words is expressed the miserable estate of those, who after knowledge of the truth received, sin in the manner we have said; namely, that seeing the sacrifice and offering of Christ did not profit them, there remains no other whereby their sins may be expiated. But the sacrifice and offering of Christ profited them not, because they are relapsed into their former sins, and bring not forth fruit worthy of faith and repentance. For upon this condition only it is, that the sacrifice and offering of Christ bringeth salvation to them who live after their knowledge of the truth, and their reception of the Christian faith. For sins committed before the knowledge of the truth, may be washed away by faith only in Christ, and the profession of it, and a purpose, and as it were a covenant of living holily afterward: but sins done after such knowledge are no otherwise washed away, but by an actual and total desertion or forsaking of them, and by inducing in their room all Christian virtues as fruits of the Spirit and of faith. For this is it which the Apostle hath left written unto us, Gal. 5.18. But if ye be lead by the Spirit, ye are not under the Law. Now the workds of the flesh are manifest, which are these, Adultery fornication, uncleanness, tasciviousnesse; Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revel, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, weakness, temperance, against such there is no Law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Now what can be more clear, then that these words do openly teach, that all they, who after they have received the faith of Christ, do follow the works of the flesh, and are not lead by the Spirit of God, shall not inherit the Kingdom of God, nor avoid eternal damnation? And therefore if they will aspire to salvation, they must with all speed lay aside their vices, and be effectually adorned with Christian virtues. For in this place here, the Author seems not to teach, that men sinning wilfully after knowledge of the truth, should have no hope at all lest of pardon and salvatoin; but only that they have none, till they actually put off their sins, and qualify themselves with such virtues as become Christians. For unless they do this, he saith plainly, that the sacrifice and offering of Christ will no way do them good. Seeing besides, that one only sacrifice and offering of Christ, there remains no other to be expected; as his words fully declare, in that he saith, there remaineth no more sacrifice; q. d. besides that one only offering of Christ whereof we have treated hitherto, there remaineth no other for them. Whence further it seems that by these words, all hope of conversion is not cut off to such as sinne wilfully after their knowledge of the faith; but only all hope of pardon and salvation is so long cut off, as they forsake not their sinful courses, and do not the works of true piety worthy of Christian repentance. Although it is most true, that some sins are so foul, among which is Apostasy, and such as have near affinity with it (whereof we spoke Chap. 6.) that if we look into the nature of the New Covenant, we may well say, that there is no hope of coversion from them; because without the special mercy of God, not comprehended in the Covenant, the yoke of such sins cannot be loosed and cut off. Sacrifice for sins] is sacrifice whereby sins are expiated, as appears by the following verse, whereto this sacrifice for sins is opposed a certain fearful looking for of judgement, and fiery indignation. Wherefore as in these last words punishment is signified; so in the former is pardon intimated.  
27. But a certain fearful looking for of judgement] Here he illustrates his former negation, by an affirmation of the contrary. To them who after knowledge of the faith sin wilfully, there remains no more sacrifice for their sins, but there remains for them a fearful looking for of judgement. Judgement is here as in many other places taken by a metonymy, for punishment; because by judgement punishment is decreed. It is not necessary we should take expectation or looking for properly here; seeing men given to sin, if we respect their minds and thoughts, do for the most part expect or look for nothing less, than punishment and damnation. Therefore such men are said to look for judgement metaphorically, because for certain a judgement remains unto them; or metonymically, because they ought to look for it. This expectation or looking for is called fearful in regard of the object, because the judgement or punishment looked for, or remaining to them, is for the greatness of it, horrible and fearful. And fiery indignation] In these words he expresseth what the fearful judgement or punishment shall be, that remains to such as sin wilfully after their knowledge of the faith; namely they shall be caught and devoured by an extreme hot fire, whereinto God will cast them in his indignation. There is no doubt, but by these words is signified that last judgement or punishment which in the last judgement must be inflicted upon all evil-doers. For we know, they shall be tormented, with mighty flames of fire, and destroyed for ever; although we exclude not other punishments of God in this life, which use to be the forerunners of that horrible vengeance to come. For of all punishments, that by fire, is most fearful and horrible; and therefore is used to signify the most grievous and wrathful punishments. In the Sermons of the Prophets, when there is speech of some grievous judgements or punishments of God, many time's fire is mentioned, See Deut. 32.22. and Job 15.34. and Job 20.26. and Psal. 11.7. and Psal. 21.9. and Psal. 78.21. and Psal. 97.3. and Psal 140.10. and Isaiah 10.16. Isaiah 26.11. and Isaiah 30.33. The anger also or wrath of God is in Scripture called a fire; and among other passages in the 12. chapter following, God himself by reason of the wrath wherewith he burns against the ungodly is called, a consuming fire. And in this place, by fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries of God, is understood the wrath of God. Which shall devour the adversaries] The adversaries of God are they that always were his enemies and never submitted unto him; or they that having once submitted, do afterward rebel against him. Such are they who constantly reject the Religion of Christ, or having once received it, afterward forsake it, or receiving and retaining it, do not submit their souls to the precepts of it.  
28. He that despised Moses Law] He confirms his former assertion by a comparison of this case with the like under the Law. To despise a Law is to oppose the being power, and execution of the Law, that it may be void and of no force; or so to disobey it, that he may overthrow it. And he was said to despise Moses Law, who did presumptuously violate any commandment of that Law; for which the punishment of death was ordained without mercy. And this was framed especially against them, who despised the first precept of the Decalogue, and revolted to the worship of false gods. For the first Commandment is the foundation of all the rest, and he that despiseth or opposeth it, doth seem thereby to overthrow the whole Law of God, and to revolt from it. Hence we may gather, that among wilful sinners (as appears by their description added in the verse following) they hold the first rank, who revolt from Christ. For they who forsake Christ the Son of God, do also forsake God himself, and manifestly offend against the fundamental Law of the Christian Religion. Died without mercy, under two or three witnesses] i. must die or be put to death; for here is not considered what was done, but what by the Law of Moses ought to be done.  
29. Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy] Here is the reddition of the former comparison; which as the words themselves show, was drawn from the less to the more. For it is a fare fouler offence to despise and reject the Son of God, than Moses, the Gospel, than the Law. Wherefore if to those who wilfully offended against Moses and the Law, there was granted no pardon, nor no place left for mercy; much less must they hope it, who despise the Son of God; and much more are they to fear a more heavy judgement. And therefore he can have no hope in the mercy of God, that is found to be in so high an offence, and in so wicked a state of life. Who hath trodden under foot the Son of God] They tread the Son of God under foot, first who are obstinate enemies of the Gospel; then Apostates, who forsake the most holy Religion thereof, either in their judgement and their profession, or in their profession only: and after those, who in profession adhere to the Son of God, but in their lives and manners do trample upon his holy ordinances and tread them under their feet. And there is a great emphasis in the word treading underfeets, for thereby is signified the most high contempt of the Son of God, who is most worthy of all honour; that the great wickedness whereof such wretches are guilty, may appear more evidently. And hath counted the blood of the Covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, and unholy thing. He aggravates the wickedness of these men, especially of Apostats; who count the blood of Christ, a vulgar and common thing, & therefore unholy and profane. For profane is opposed to holiness, especially to such holiness which is in the blood of the Son of God, who being in his person most holy, his blood also must needs be holy. Now they profane the blood of Christ, who either forsake God's Covenant consecrated and hallowed by the blood of Christ; or else esteem it not of that value, as for his sake whose blood it was, to abolish their sins and afterward lead an holy life. Wherewith he was sanctified; Sactified here is not referred to Christ as he had been sanctified with his own blood, but to the wicked sinner, who by his Apostasy profanes that blood wherewith he was once sanctified. For the blood of Christ is so fare from being an unholy thing, that it is most holy, and so holy, that thereby every man is sanctified or hallowed; yea, they themselves were thereby once sanctified, who afterward through their foul ungodliness counted it unholy. And we are said to be sanctified by the blood of Christ, because by it our sins are expiated through faith in Christ. For they who receive the faith of Christ, and so incorporated into the new Covenant, they obtain pardon of all their former sins, by virtue of the Covenant, and therefore also by virtue of that blood wherewith the Covenant was establisted. For an Impunity, wherein the remission of sins doth properly consist, is here by attained in such a manner, that they have not only a right to it by virtue of the Covenant, but do actually enjoy it, as long as they persist in the faith, on condition their faith be lively and working by love: because so long God doth neither really punish them, unless it be by way of correction to further their salvation; neither hath he any intention to punish or destroy them, but rather ordains and order them to eternal salvation, by removing all obstacles that may hinder it, if they be not wanting to themselves. And all this depends upon the new Covenant, and the blood of Christ, wherewith it is confirmed and established. And therefore no Christian given to vices, can have any hope from the blood of Christ, as long as he changeth not his life and manners. For that is most true which the Apostle hath written; If we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of jesus Christ his Son, cleanseth us from all sin, 1. John 1.7. Hence it appears, that we are sanctified and cleansed by the blood of Christ for the time to come, yet upon this condition, if for the time to come, we walk in the light as God is in the light. i. If we endeavour to be like God in holiness and righteousness, persisting therein constantly to our lives end. Yet the word Sanctifying in this place, may signify that separation of Christians from other men, whereby through the knowledge of God's truth, they are sequestered from the profane and common sort of men, and consecrated for the service of God. For by the blood of Christ, wherewith the new Covenant is established, men are moved to embrace Christian religion, and receive it for the true. And hath done despite unto the spirit of grace.] By the Spirit is understood that holy Spirit poured into the faithful, which is called the Spirit of grace, because it is given by the singular grace and goodness of God. To this Spirit he doth despite, whosoever rejecteth the Religion of Christ; or esteems it not so much as therefore to live holily, according to the direction and suggestion of that Spirit: For he gives not that credit to it that he ought, and besides he doth in a manner as much, as if he accounted it false.  
30. For we know him that hath said, Vengeace belongeth unto me.] He confimes here, what he said before of their fearful punishments, who wilfully run into these sins. And for this purpose he citeth here the words of God, Deut. 32.35. wherein God challengeth to himself recompense, vengeance and judgement: or professeth of himself that he will execute it. Although God speak it there of vindicating his own people, and punishing those that oppressed them: but the Author here applies them to that punishment, which God himself will inflict upon his own people, if they rebel against God and Christ. The meaning is, that God will lay a heavy vengeance and judgement upon those that are rebellious and obstinate against the Son of God. For we all know how great, how powerful and how terrible he is, that hath reserved recompense and vengeance to himself. Yet in these words, Vengeance belongeth to me, and I will recompense.] The intent is not so much to show who the person is that hath this right to take vengeance; as to leave it to our consideration, how great and potent the person is, who challengeth the execution of it to himself: that hence it may appear how grievous and how certain the punishment of the wicked shall be. Saith the Lord,] Hear the person is expressed, who challengeth to himself the execution of vengeance, yet not so much for the designing of his person, as for the notifying of his power, that he is the Lord Jehovah, the most high, only and Almighty God, maker of heaven and earth. And again, the Lord shall judge his people.] Again, is in the same place, which was cited before. And in the word Lord, lies the Emphasis and force of the argument. For if the Lord himself who is the most high God, shall judge his people; who sees not but that the judgement must needs be most heavy and fearful? To judge here, signifies to condemn and punish. In Deuteronomie (as we said) is signified by these words, that the Lord would avenge his people upon their enemies from the oppressions and wrongs done to his people. But the Author following the more frequent use and sense of those words in other passages of the Scriptures, hath applied them to the punishment of God's people falling from their faith and obedience, For it is no less true, that the Lord will punish his own people if they be refractory and rebellious against him, then that he would judge and avenge their cause, and vindicate them from injuries, if they were wrongfully oppressed. And the words his people, do also argue the fearfulness of the judgement. For it is great reason, that the people of God, if they shall presume to be rebellious and obstinate against God, should suffer a heavier punishment than other men. And they are here called the people of God, who are disobedient and obstinate, because they have received the knowledge of God, and of his truth; and in that respect stand obliged to God in a peculiar manner. Besides the appellations or names of things do often remain, when the true ground or cause of the name is altered and gone.  
31. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God] This is as it were the major Proposition of the Author's Argument, whereby he would make it appear, that the punishment of the persons forementioned will be very grievous and fearful. For he reasoneth thus, To fall into the hands of the living God is a fearful thing: but these men fall into the hands of the living God, seeing (as we have heard already) God himself will do judgement and execution upon them: And therefore their punishment must needs be fearful. But he puts the conclusion in the first place, than the assumption, and now he adds the major proposition, which is of a known verity. For what man is he, that will not acknowledge, how fearful a thing it is to fall into the hands of the living God? because the living God can punish far more fearfully then mortal men can do. Why God is called living, we have showed before Chap. 9.14. But we must note, that the Author speaks here of that punishment, whereby God puts men to everlasting destruction, and doth it in his wrath, and not of that chastisement which God sometime inflicts for the good of his people. For it is fare better to be chastised and corrected from God himself, and from his own hand, then to be left to the pleasure of wicked men; as David testifies, 2 Sam. 24.14.  
32. But call to remembrance the former days] He brings here a new argument, whereby he persuades the Hebrews to constancy and perseverance in the Christian Religion; and he draws it from their former constancy and virtue, which they shown at the beginning when first they received the Christian Faith. In which after ye were illuminated] Christ is several times called the light and the true light, because he brought into the world by the publishing of the Gospel that knowledge of God which doth truly illuminate and enlighten us; not only in respect of that natural ignorance that grows up with men concerning God, but in respect of that revealed knowledge which under the first Covenant was but dark and shady; for the Gospel doth reveal unto us those mysteries which did before lie hid: for since the veil of the old Sanctuary was rend, we now have liberty to look into the heavenly Sanctuary, where by faith we see and know many mysteries, especially touching the expiation of our sins, and salvation of our souls. Of which truth, when we receive the knowledge, we are said to be illuminated. And this illumination is the first act of our entrance into Covenant with God; for thereby it is, that we are made acquainted with the sacred contents of the Covenant. So that Illuminated here is all one with receiving the knowledge of the truth, before, ver. 26. Ye endured a great fight of afflictions] To endure afflictions for Christ, and not decline them, but patiently and stoutly to go through the trial of them, is a great conflict or fight.  
33. Partly while ye were made a gazing stock both by reproaches and afflections] Reproaches and afflictions, are put for all sorts of persecutions, whereof these two are the chief kinds; for reproaches are those persecutions whereby a man's reputation, credit, or good name is vexed; and afflictions are those whereby men suffer in their bodies and goods, as by sins, imprisonments, and punishments. And reproaches and afflictions are the means whereby God's people are made a gazing stock, or a spectacle for men to look at. Yet it is not necessary we should take this word properly, as if the Hebrews had been condemned by public decree of the Magistrate, and in the sight of all men brought upon a Scaffold, there to suffer punishment, or to be branded with reproaches; which notwithstanding did many times befall the Christians: But it may be taken metaphorically, for those reproaches and afflictions in general, which were publicly known to all, or were in a manner in all men's mouths; as for example, when a Christian was openly reviled, or beaten, or dragged through the streets, or had his house by public authority, and open force plundered and rifled. And partly when ye became companions of them that were so used] This is done, when we take care and make provision for them who are reproached and afflicted; when we harbour them, help and cherish them, make their case our own, and profess ourselves their brethren and companions. Men are used to reproaches and afflictions, when they many times and often suffer them, and by reason of them are agitated, vexed, and tossed too and fro, from place to place; for so much is here signified by the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
34. For ye had compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods] Here he declares both those particulars which in the verse going before he had expressed and attributed to them; saving that he puts the latter in the first place, and the former in the latter. For the compassion they had, belong to their accompanying of those who were reproached and afflicted; because true compassion (as in this place is meant) signifies not a bare grief of mind proceeding from another's misery, but therewithal includes the effects and deeds of a mind truly compassionate; And the spoiling of their goods, is referred to the reproaches and afflictions which they suffered. Knowing in yourselves that ye have in heaven a better and an enduring substance] He expresseth the cause why they took the spoiling of their goods joyfully, namely, because they had learned from the Religion of Christ, and thereby knew for certain, that a fare better estate, and more lasting possessions, yea everlasting, were reserved for them in heaven; for which these earthly and transitory goods are very gainefully exchanged, especially when they are made away for Christ's sake. And the place where this excellent and everlasting estate is reserved is in Heaven; which doth further argue the excellency and eternity of it; for though Christians are sometimes spoiled of their goods which they have upon earth, yet of those they have in heaven they neither shall nor can ever be spoiled. For that in heaven can be no spoil, neither by moth, rust, nor thief, Christ teacheth us. Mat. 6.20. Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thiefs do not break through nor steal. And this everlasting estate, though it be in heaven, yet the faithful even while they are upon earth have it already, though not for the possession of it, for flesh and blood cannot possess it: but for the expectation of it, by faith and hope as sons and heirs unto it; for now they have the same right that the heir under age hath to his inheritance, whereby they know, believe and hope with full assurance that they shall possess it.  
35. Cast not away therefore your confidence] From the words precedent he infers an exhortation, that seeing they have gotten such a good report for their courage and constancy, therefore they should not now be overcome with miseries and distresses, and so turn from the right course of godliness whereinto they were now entered. By confidence here he means either an undaunted courage of constancy of mind in professing the Christian Religion; or else a full trust in God, whereby we so rely upon him, and are so certain of our heavenly inheritance, that we refuse the suffering of no evil. Which hath great recompense of reward] He brings a motive whereby to persuade his former exhortation, that they should not castaway their confidence; namely because their confidence should have a great recompense of reward; and therefore it must not be idle and vain, lest it should lose the reward; for to idleness and vanity no reward can in equity be due: but their confidence must be effectual and painful in the exercises of holiness and good works, that thereby they hold and keep their title to the reward. For though faith and not good works do create as the title whereby we have the reward: yet good works do preserve or maintain that title which was created by faith, and by good works we hold our right to the reward; and without them we shall certainly lose the reward. And besides these words have reference to the former verse wherein he shown, what this recompense of reward is; namely an excellent and enduring substance in heaven.  
36. For ye have need of patience] Here is another motive to persuade the former exhortation, why they should not cast away their confidence, but be patiented under reproaches and afflictions, even to the spoiling of their goods; namely, because they have need of patience. Which may be taken in a double sense; either with a check, as if they wanted patience; or without a check; for to have need of a thing doth sometime imply a simple necessity of that thing whereby to attain somewhat, whether we have that thing or have it not; sometime it implies a necessity joined with the want of that thing. That after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise] He expresseth the use and end of patience, that he might show, to what purpose they have need of it. And the use of patience is two fold; the one more near, the other more remote; which in respect of us is the last. The nearer or former use of our patience is, To do the will of God; seeing patience itself is not the least part of God's will, and without it the other parts of godliness, and consequently the rest of God's will cannot throughly be performed. The other use and last end of patience, which follows from the former, and without which this cannot subsist, is to receive the promise, or rather the matter promised; which is the inheritance of the ever-enduring substance. For they only do at last receive the promise of God who first perform the will of God. Wherefore without patience and constancy in suffering evils, it is impossible, as to perform the will of God, so to receive the ever-enduring substance which is the promise of God.  
37. For yet a little while] Another motive to stir them up to patience in suffering, urged by way of preventing an objection. Some man might say; It is an hard case, for a man to lie under afflictions so long a time, and to expect the promise whereof you speak after many ages. To this the Author answers, that the time allotted for our patience, is not long, but short; for after a little while, we shall receive the recompense or reward of our patience promised unto us; and seeing this promise though it be delayed, yet the delay is but for a little while, therefore the delay of it should discourage no man, or dishearten him under afflictions. And he that shall come will come and will not tarry] The time remaining for the coming of Christ is but a little while, but very certain; for very certain it is, because he shall and will come; and but a little while, because he will not tarry. The reward promised cannot be fare off, and therefore we must not be wearied with the expectation and stay of it: for there is but a little while yet remaining for the coming of Christ; and at his coming is the coming of the promised reward; for he will bring the reward with him, and they shall receive it, who have done the will of God. That the time to the coming of Christ is but a little while, is gathered from hence, because that the time of each man's life is but a little while; & at the end of each man's life is the coming of Christ to him, as we have showed before, verse 25. Hence Paul saith, That the burden of our afflictions is but light, and the time but for a moment, compared with the eternity of that glory which shall follow upon it. 2. Cor. 4.17. And Peter to abate the force of our temptations and afflictions saith, That we are now for a season in heaviness through manifold temptations. 1. Pet. 1.6. And he saith again, That after we have suffered a while, the God of all grace, will exalt us by Christ into his eternal glory. 1. Pet. 5.10. Yet when the Author saith, yet a little while, he tacitly grants, that there shall be some space of time intervening; as appeareth by the words of the Prophet, to whom herein he hath reference. For the Prophet saith, If it tarry, wait for it, because it will surely come, it will not tarry. Hab. 2.3. Some tarrying therefore there will be, yet short and small; and therefore we ought to expect it without weariness.  
38. Now the just shall live by faith.] The Author proceeds in alleging further words of the Prophet; wherein is contained a new motive to constancy in faith, on which our patience and sufferings of evils depends. For from these words it appears, what great fruit grows from an invincible faith, that will not be beaten down by any afflictions; and on the contrary what great mischief follows upon a mind born down with afflictions, and falling from the faith. Now the fruit of faith is life; even everlasting life: For the just shall live by his faith. i. He therefore shall live, because he wholly trusteth upon God, and relying upon his goodness, power, wisdom, and promises, do never let fall their courage, what ever difficulties and impediments they meet withal in their obedience to God's precepts; he is not dejected with any storm of evils; he is not wearied with any waiting for the stay of the promised reward; and therefore he perseveres in righteousness to his last end. For faith in this place is considered, as it is accompanied with patience, constancy, piety and justice, and as it is a living and a lively faith that is exercised and delighted in good works. For life is not promised to every man upon faith, but to the just and righteous man; and to this faith is opposed drawing bacl in the words following. But if any man draw back] To draw bacl from God, is nothing else, but in despair of his promises to cease from our duty; and to departed from the hard conflict of patience, justice, and piety; and in a word to acquit the Christian warfare, and steal from the Army of Christ. My soul shall have no pleasure in him.] Thus the Septuagint have translated the Hebrew text, of the soul of God, and not of his soul who draws back, of whom the Hebrew text may be understood. For in that it is, his soul is not right in him. If therefore according to the Hebrew text, the words be taken of his soul who draws bacl, than the meaning is, the soul of that man is not right in him, his soul hath not a sincere and true love to virtue; because his soul being weary of virtue and good works takes thence an occasion to doubt of God's promises. And because such a soul is not right, but perverse, therefore it pleaseth not God. Wherefore seeing the just who lives by his faith, is opposed to the man that draws bacl, and the just man's condition to this man's condition, therefore the adversative particle but, is by the Author rightly applied, even to this latter clause; but in the Prophet the clauses are transposed, and this latter put in the former place, vid. Hab. 2.4.  
39 But we are not of them who draw bacl unto perdition.] Having declared the condition of the just man, who is constant in his faith; and of the man who draws bacl, or wavers in his faith and piety, he now shows that not this latter, but that former must be the condition of Christians, whose state doth require from them that they be constant in the faith, that by this means they may save their souls, and not waver in faith, to withdraw themselves from the conflicts of piety and patience, and so bring perdition to their souls. For the Author speaks not of what actually is done, but what in justice ought to be done, and is agreeing to the calling and condition of a Christian. The same sentence in a manner is contained in those words of the Apostle, where describing the condition of Christians, he saith, God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation, 1. Thes. 5.9. Now the end of drawing bacl is perdition or destruction; as the issue of faith is the saving of the soul; for perdition and salvation are opposed. But of them that believe to the saving of the soul. The soul in this place doth either signify only our life, or our spirit, which is the principal part of us; and being preserved for us, and restored unto us, Our life remanes in safety. And we save our life or spirit, when we are delivered from destruction, unto such a life that can never be destroyed.   

The Contents of this tenth Chapter, are,  

1. Doctrine. The legal Sacrifices could never perfect the worshippers of God. 

Reason. 1. Because the Law had but a shadow of perfect expiation, and not the very image of it, ver. 1.  
2. Because they were offered year by year continually; for if they could have perfected the worshippers, than they would have ceased to be offered, ver. 1. 2.  
3. Because there was a new Remembrance, guiltiness and confession of sins every year, v. 3.  
4. Because the matter of them was the blood of bulls and goats, which cannot possibly take away sins, ver. 4.    
2. Doctrine. The Sacrifice of Christ is substituted in the room of the Legal sacrifices, ver. 5. 

Reason. 1. Because it was not the will and pleasure of God that the Legal sacrifices should be any longer of force, v. 5. 8.  
2. Because God had called Christ, and fitted him a body for an expiatory sacrifice, ver. 5.  
3. Because Christ most willingly accepted of Gods will and pleasure to perform it by making himself a sacrifice, ver. 7. 9  
4. Because we are really expiated and sanctified by the will of God through the offering of Christ, ver. 10.    
3. Doctrine. The Sacrifice of Christ was singular, one only once offered, ver. 10. 

Reason. 1. Because he did not offer year by year, as the Legal Priests did, but once for ever, ver. 12.  
2. Because after he had made his offering, he sat down at the right hand of God, till his enemies were made his footstool, ver. 12. 13.  
3. Because by one offering he perfectly expiated all that are sanctified.  
4. Because by virtue of the Covenant, whereof he was the high Priest, his one offering wrought a plenary remission of sins.    
4. Duty. We must worship God with a true heart, a full assurance of faith and a good conscience, 22. 

Motive. 1. Because we have now liberty to enter into heaven, by a new and living way which Christ hath consecrated for us, 19 20.  
2. Because we have Christ a great high Priest over the house of God ver. 21.  
3. Because we are washed and sanctified with the Holy Ghost, v. 22.    
5. Duty. We must be constant and steadfast in the profession of our faith without wavering, ver. 23. 

Motive. 1. Because God who hath made us the promise, is faithful.    
6. Duty. We must provoke one another to love, and good works, 24. 

Motive. 1. Because we see the day of the Lord approaching, 25.    
7. Duty. We must take heed of sinning wilfully after we have received the truth, ver. 26. 

Motive. 1. Because there is no other Sacrifice for sins besides that one offering of Christ once made, 26.  
2. Because thereby we make ourselves adversaries to God, and so liable to his judgement and indignation, 27.  
3. Because thereby we tread under foot the Son of God, we count the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing, and do despite to the Spirit of grace, 2.  
4. Because if he that despised Moses Law died without mercy, much more shall he be punished that despiseth the new Covenant. 28. 29.  
5. Because the Lord reserves vengeance for such, and to fall into his hand is a fearful thing, 30. 31.    
8. Comfort. The Hebrews needed not fear falling away, and sinning wilfully. 

Motive. 1. Because after they were illuminated, they endured a great conflict of afflictions, ver. 32.  
2. Because they did accompany and comfort themselves, with such as suffered for the Gospel.  
3. Because they had compassion on this Author in his bonds.  
4. Because they had taken the spoiling of their goods joyfully.  
5. Because there was a great recompense of reward remaining to them.    
9 Duty. We must not cast away our confidence in Christ, ver. 35. 

Motive. 1. Because it hath great recompense of reward, ibid.  
2. Because we have need of patience, that after we have done the will of God, we might receive the promise.  
3. Because Christ will not tarry long before he come.  
4. Because the Just shall live by faith, to the saving of the soul.  
5. Because drawing back tends to perdition.       

CHAPTER XI.  

1. NOw faith is the substance of things hoped] The Author having in the former Chapter spoken of faith, doth thence take occasion to make a digression in this Chapter, for a further explication of the nature of faith; whereof he collecteth and produceth many examples in divers holy persons, that the Hebrews incited by their examples, might address themselves for imitation of them, and finally relying on God's promises, might not decline any conflict either of piety or patience. These words are not a definition of Faith whereby faith is defined; as those words afterward, Chap. 12.29. where God is said to be a consuming fire, are not the definition of God. For faith is a thing indefinite, and cannot be defined; or if it were definable, yet these words, that it is the substance of things hoped, are far too narrow to lay out the true boundaries of Faith. Neither are these words an attribute of faith, for they are not consequent to follow upon it; but quite contrary. Faith is an attribute or consequent to them. For they are a notion, an element, or an argument of faith, whereby faith may be notified or made known, and whereby it may be demonstrated or proved to be in such or such a subject, or in such a person. For though the vulgar affirmation be according to the Author, that Faith is the substance of things hoped; yet the true natural and rational affirmation runs thus: Now the substance of things hoped, is faith. For the scope of the Author is to produce many persons whom he would declare and demonstrate to have been faithful; and for that purpose he lays out two notions or principles of faith, whereby he would infer and conclude the affection of faith to be in such or such a subject; the first whereof is this, That every substance of things hoped, is faith; as if he had said, where things hoped are subsistent, there is faith; where things to come are present, there is faith. Now things hoped, and things to come, are not actually subsistent and present: but when the soul apprehends things hoped and to come, as certainly as if they were already subsistent and present, than that soul believes, and is endued with faith. And this principle or argument of faith, is taken from a partial object of faith, which is of some good to come, because hope ariseth only from such an object. The evidence of things not seen] This is the other principle or notion, or argument of faith, whereto faith is always consequent. For where there is an evidence of things inevident, or a sight of things unseen, there is faith. And for evidence some Translations render it argument; because where there is an argument persuading a man for things not seen, there is faith. And this principle of faith is taken from the total object of faith, which is always of things not seen, or absent, whether it be for distance of place, or of time, either past or to come. And therefore this principle must needs be more large than the former, and more serviceable to infer the affection of faith to be demonstrable of more persons, as the proper subjects of it.  
2. For by it the elders obtained a good report] The two former principles or notions that argue and infer faith, had also a further end, which is to show the excellency of faith: which here he confirms by the effect which faith wrought unto the Elders their forefathers. For to them their faith brought this benefit, that by it they obtained a good report. The original is, by it they had a testimony, which is well translated a good report; for so the word doth frequently signify, though it stand single and alone without any other attribute joined to it, see Act. 6.3. and Act. 10.22. and Act. 16.2. and Act. 22.12. This testimony or good report the Elders obtained from the Scripture, or of God by the relation of Scripture, which hath left it upon holy record, how graciously God dealt with those elders by reason of their faith, how greatly he favoured them for it, and commended their piety issuing from it. The elders.] i. Their progenitors and ancestors, whom the Scripture mentions to have lived from the beginning of the world down to that age wherein this Author lived.  
3. By faith we understand] He gins here to show the efficacy and virtue of faith, by certain examples or instances, which he demonstrates from the latter principle or argument of faith, in that every evidence or sight of things unseen is faith. For all men that ever had, or ever shall have faith in God, do thereby understand that God framed the world by his word; and because we understand this by an evidence or sight of things unseen, therefore we understand it by faith. We understand] i. We perceive and know for certain; and the argument or mean whereby we know this, is our faith; and the argument or mean whereby our faith attains this knowledge; is our evidence or sight of things unseen; for by the things which are now seen, we have a sight of those things which we never saw, because they were done long before our times. Though it may be evinced by strong arguments that the world was created; yet neither those arguments and the framing of them, are obvious to all men; neither are they such, but that a perverse spirit will oppose against them; because we saw not the work of the Creation: but by the Scriptures we have an evidence or sight of that Creation, which to us was unseen; and therefore we believe it, for our evidence or sight of it in the Scriptures makes faith of it unto us. And the Scriptures make faith unto us of the Creation, not only for the act of it, that such a work was done, but for the manner how it was done (as Moses describes it) even by the word, and sole command of God; and for the matter whereof it was made, in that the things seen, were made of things not seen. That the worlds were framed] World's, for world, the number plural for the singular, by a Grecisme, where originally it is ages, putting the adjuncts of the world for the subject. By the word of God] by the only fiat or command of God; God used no other instrument for the framing of the world besides his bare word. For God only said the word, Let there be light, and there was light, Gen. 1.3. And by the word of the Lord, even by the breath of his mouth, were the heavens made and all the host of them, Psal. 33.6. And as the heavens, so also the earth was framed and settled by his word; For he spoke and it was done, he commanded and it stood fast, Psal. 33.9. So that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. The particle not seems to be transposed, for it should affect the word appear, because the mind and sense of this clause is not negative, but affirmative, thus: So that things which are seen were made of things which do not appear, though for the matter it come all to one; because a term finite denied of any subject is all one with the same term infinited and affirmed; yet this latter expression leaves in our minds a clear apprehension of the matter. The Author seems as his manner is, to follow and reflect upon the Greek Translation of the Old Testament, wherein at the beginning of Genesis, it is said, that the Earth was invisible, for that which we from the Hebrew translate, that the Earth was without form and void. And the Author made choice rather to say, things not appearing, than things invisible, when he would show us the prime materials whereof the world was made: For that is properly invisible, which naturally cannot be perceived by the sight; and that is rightly termed not appearing, which though it be naturally visible, yet really it appears not; especially then when it lies hidden and covered with thick darkness. Although in this place the word not-appearing seems to have yet a more ample sense, and to comprise that want of form and force noted by the Hebrew words, for which the Greek Translation reads invisible. Wherefore by things not appearing is meant that chaos or elements of the world, which at the beginning were confused; because partly that chaos wanted form, shape, and outward beauty, in regard the several parts of it were not yet digested and disposed into that elegant order, figure, and proportion, which afterward was given it by the Creation; and therefore the Scripture saith, it was without form; and partly because it wanted virtue and force to produce those creatures, and adorn itself, that afterward God by the Creation gave it power to produce; but to any such purpose it was wholly feeble and barren; and therefore the Scripture saith it was void; and partly again because it wanted light to manifest and make it visible to the sight that it might be seen; for though in itself it were visible and appearable; yet actually it appeared not, and therefore the Scripture saith, that darkness was upon the face of it. Wherefore when God entered upon the work of the world, the first perfect creature that he made was the light, and that being finished, he framed all the other parts of the world in a most beautiful order. And this chaos is in the Scripture called the Deep, because it was vast both for quantity and quality, for it wanted the three beautiful qualities of form, force and light, which afterward were induced into it. Yet sometimes the Scriptures express it by names synecdochical, which signify only a part of it, calling it sometime the heaven, sometime the earth, and sometime the waters, because it was a Deep or chaos composed and confused of all these together, or at least of those materials whereof all these were afterward produced and created; as in the same tub of milk there lie confused together those three materials from which are afterward produced the distinct white meats of butter, cheese, and whey. Hereby the Author plainly declares, and it sufficiently also appears from the history of the Creation described by Moses, that God, when he began the Creation or frame of the world, as it is delivered in the beginning of Genesis, did not produce it merely from nothing, but from that Chaos or Deep, which positively was confused of the three materials, whereof afterward was made the three elements of heaven, earth and water; and privitively wanted the three qualities of form, force and light. And this opinion was anciently received among the people of God, as it appears by the Author of the book of Wisdom, chap. 11.17. where speaking to God, he saith, For thy almighty hand, that made the world of matter without form; for so it is in the Greek; and the vulgar Latin hath it, of matter unseen. But of the creation of this matter, there is no mention made in the Scriptures; for to the holy Ghost it seemed good to conceal it. By things which are seen, are here meant all those creatures which we see in this world, as this beautiful order and posture of all things, whereby those things which before were confused and blended together, are now digested into their several ranks and places for the use and benefit of man and beast; and all the rest of the Creatures both animate and inanimate, both in heaven, earth, and waters, were produced by the word or command of God. For in these words of the Author is signified, not only that change whereby things not appearing became appearing, by virtue of that light which God made, and made to shine upon them, (which change God made first of all by his creation of light) but also that change, whereby the things which now appear, were made of things not-appearing, as from the informed matter of the Chaos or Deep, which wanting form, force, and light, was so rude, so weak and so dark, that from itself, of itself, nothing would ever have been produced, but by the access of God's almighty power.  
4. By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain] Now he gins to reckon up special and particular examples of persons endued with faith; and withal he declares both what they performed by virtue of their faith, and also what blessings they obtained from God by it: that by so many illustrious examples he might win the Hebrews to an imitation of those persons. First of all he mentions Abel, as a person nearly approaching to the beginning of the world. He mentions not our first Parents; either because concerning them there is nothing read memorable in the Canonical books of the Old Testament, pertinent to his purpose; or because he thought them not to be mentioned, by reason of that sin whereby they made themselves and their posterity subject unto death; especially seeing in those Canonical books we not where read that God ever pardoned our first Parents for their sin; although the Author of the book of Wisdom in the beginning of the tenth chapter affirms, That Wisdom preserved the first form father of the world, that was created alone, and brought him out of his fall; that is, she freed him from the guilt and punishment of his sin. Therefore he gins with Abel their son, placing him in the first place as the first person among those whose piety towards God, and Gods love toward them is celebrated in Scripture, and then shows what Abel obtained by his faith. Of him therefore he saith, That he offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain] Some render it a more bountiful sacrifice, others a more valuable; thinking the Author intended to note, that Cain as an ungrateful and a distrustful person, offered only a few fruits: but Abel to testify his affection and faith offered things of more value, namely the firstlings and fattest of his sheep. But the more simple and certain meaning is, that Abel's sacrifice was not more bountiful or more valuable of itself then the others, but more acceptable unto God, who accepted and esteemed it better and more excellent, by reason of the righteousness and godliness of the person that offered it; for upon that ground it is that God esteems and values all offerings made unto him. Now there was no other cause of that godliness, and consequently of God's acceptation of Abel's sacrifice, but only Abel's saith, whereby he stood persuaded, that God was, and was a Rewarder of those that seek him, and sue to him for his favour by godliness and righteousness. And there was no other cause of his faith, but that he had in him, the substance of things hoped for; for his hope of God's favour and of God's reward, did breed this faith of God in him. Furthermore he whose offering God hath in esteem, his person must needs be in more esteem with God; for from this root grows the true happiness of every man. But that Cain offered the fruits of the earth, and Abel the firstlings of his cattles, the reason was because Cain was an husbandman, and Abel an herdsman: So both of them offered their sacrifice to God, out of that substance wherein each abounded. And that the word sacrifice which properly signifies an offering from the Herd which is slain, should be tacitly referred to cain's offering, which was only of fruits; this must be attributed to the run of the comparison, the fitting whereof doth many times make way to some abusions or improprieties. By which he obtained witness that he was righteous. The words by which are better referred to Abel's faith, then to his sacrifice; for the following words and by it he being dead, yet speaketh, are in like manner referred to his faith, for they express a peculiar fruit of it. But where did Abel obtain this testimony of his righteousness? even in that passage of Scripture where God had respect to him and to his sacrifice, but not to that which Cain offered: as we read it, Gen. 4.4,5. or as the Author declares himself in the words following, God testifying of his gifts] For therein God testified of his gifts or offerings, that they were acceptable unto him, in that he had respect unto them. And very probable it is, that God shown his testimony and acceptance thereof, by some fire sent from heaven, which consumed the sacrifice and offering of Abel. And when God doth accept of a man's gifts and offerings being graciously pleased to receive them; he doth thereby testify and witness that man to be a righteous person; seeing no gifts or offerings are acceptable to God, but such as come from a righteous man: for the sacrifice of fools or sinners is an abomination to him. And when God in his discourse with Cain, rendered him a reason, why he had no respect to his offering, he shown clearly enough, that both Cain did not well, and that Abel did well, which is to be just, See Gen. 4.7. And by it be being dead, yet speaketh] Another fruit of Abel's faith; which was the cause that God would be an avenger of his innocent blood, to persecute and banish from his presence his brother that had murdered him. Abel's blood is said to speak or cry unto God by way of metaphor, because God thereby is vehemently incited and moved to take vengeance for the murder of a person that was righteous and acceptable to God, as if his blood had cried and sued to God for justice to be done upon the murderer. So in the Revelation, the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, are said to cry with a loud voice, How long O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth. Revel. 6.10.  
5. By faith Enoch was translated, that he should not see death, and was not found, because God had translated him.] In the second place, he brings the Example of Enoch, and showeth what he obtained by his faith. Into what place Enoch was translated, the Scripture expresseth not: but from what the Author adds, that he should not see death, it appears, he was translated into such a place, wherein men see not death. i. Are exempt and free from dying; which seems to be no other, or at least not other known to us, than that heavenly habitacle of Immortality, wherein God, and Christ, and the holy Angels dwell. But because the Scripture expressly saith not, that Enoch obtained this favour by his faith; therefore the Author proves it, by adding; For before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God] The reason may run thus. Enoch was translated, because he pleased God (which the thing itself shows, and the Scripture testifies that before his translation he pleased God.) But without faith it is impossible to please God; therefore Enoch was translated by his faith. The consequence of this argument shall be defended afterward. Or rather the reason may thus be gathered, Enoch was translated, because he pleased God; and because he pleased God, therefore he had Gods testimonial of it; And again, because he pleased God, therefore he had in himself some substance of things hoped for, and some evidence of things not seen; and because he had in him this substance and evidence of things hoped for and not seen, therefore he had faith; and because he had faith, therefore by his faith, he was translated. For in affirmative arguments, that which is first in nature, is last in course of reason. He had this testimony; namely, either from the holy Scripture, or from the holy Ghost, by whom the Scripture was indicted. But the giving or the taking of this testimony must not be joined with the preceding words, before his translation, as if this testimony were made of him before he was translated; but must be only referred to the matter of the testimony, which is this, that before his translation he pleased God; and after his translation, the Scripture testified, that he pleased God before it. And enoch's pleasing of God, may be understood two ways; either that he pleased God in endeavour, by studying and labouring to please him: or that he pleased him in effect, by an actual service of God, which latter is consequent to the former. And the testimony of this is given in Scripture, where it is said, that Enoch walked with God. Gen. 5.22.24. For he that walketh with God, certainly he endeavours to please God, and either in effect doth actually please God, or at least God is pleased with his endeavour. So likewise of Noah it is said, That he was a just man, and perfect in his generations, and that he walked with God. Gen. 6.9. For this walking with God, which in the following verse, the Author expresseth, by coming to God, and by seeking of God, doth signify a conversation of man with God, whereby in a manner he doth always reverence God, as being always in his presence, and (as I may say) never departing out of his sight, but having ever his mind and thoughts fixed upon him, and is so addicted to God's Laws and Commands, that in all his actions through the whole course of his life, he hath God for his leader and companion, whom he follows and accompanies. He that is such a man, must needs endeavour to please God, and cannot choose but actually please him. For the Greek translation, which (as hath been often noted) the Author follows, doth render the Hebrew words of enoch's walking with God, by Greek words which properly signify his pleasing of God.  
6. But without faith, it is impossible to please God.] Now we come to the defence of that argument, which formerly we mentioned; for here the Author expressly confirms, and proves it by the following words, For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them, that diligently seek him.] He proves I say, what before he had affirmed, by this explication of faith, or rather by two specifications of it: whereof the first is, to believe the existence of God, that God is; and the second, to believe the righteousness or equity of God, that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. For is it not wholly necessary, that he who cometh to God, i. He who doth worship and serve him, he who perpetually addicts himself to observe his Laws and Commands, he who hearty endeavoureth to please him, and actually doth please him; should believe both these points, and be strongly persuaded of them? For if he believe not the existence of God, that God is, how should he worship and serve him? if he believe his existence, and yet doubt of his goodness and righteousness, whether he will be a Benefactor to his worshippers and servitors, how shall they subject themselves to his worship and service? Now to believe that God is, is to believe, that there is really existent such a person in being, who hath the supreme power or command over all things, who depends on no other person, but all other persons and things depend on him. For by the single appellation of God, this is commonly signified both here and elsewhere. And he that believeth such a Deity, must thereupon withal necessarily believe, that it is both eternal and singular; for if it were not eternal and singular, it could not be supreme. To seek God, or inquire after God; is nothing else, but to sue for his grace and favour; as we are admonished by the Prophet Esay, chap 55.6. Seek ye the Lord, while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near; let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him. Here he shows us the way, how to seek God, Namely, by calling upon him; and the way to that (at least to do it effectually) is to forsake our unrighteousness, and sinfulness, and turn to the Lord observing his laws and commands. Hence it appears what is the nature of that faith which commends us to God; for the Author teacheth it unto us in this Chapter; and how fare such faith differs from their faith, who place faith in the apprehension and application of the merits of Christ. It further appears that faith in Christ is not contained in all faith in God, in respect of all times; for in this description and illustration of that faith which the Author shows to have been in these ancient elders, there is no mention of faith in Christ. Yet from the nature of faith in God it is easy to collect, wherein the faith in Christ consisteth; namely, that we believe that Christ is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him; or rather to express it in the words of this Author, It is to believe that Christ is become the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him, chap. 5.9. For from this faith ariseth a true confidence in Christ, which naturally draws with it innocence and holiness of life: and by these we come to please God and Christ, and then being justified by his grace, we attain the inheritance of eternal life. And this also may be noted, as it will further appear by many of the following examples, That Faith, if we take it properly and strictly, doth differ from obedience from coming to God and seeking him; because faith must necessarily be in a man, before he can actually come to God and seek him; yet indeed the word faith is oftentimes so ampliated and enlarged, as to comprehend in it all the effects and fruits of it, even all the works of godliness and righteousness. And in this argumentation of the Author (for we are also to take notice of it) there is not more in the conclusion than was in the premises. For from the premises, as the Author explicates them, it seems nothing else would follow, but that Enoch was not translated without faith, and not that he was translated by, or through, or for his faith, which is more, and is also concluded by the Author. But seeing without faith we cannot please God, for faith is the true cause of our pleasing him; and seeing Enoch was therefore translated because he did please God; hence most rationally it must be concluded, that enoch's faith was the cause of his translation; and consequently he was translated by, for, through, or because, and by reason of his faith. For whatsoever is the cause of any effect, is also the cause of all things that follow that effect. Now from this argumentation of the Author, concluding enoch's faith to be the cause of his translation, it manifestly appears, That good works, and an ardent endeavour of them, whereby Enoch became to please God, are not only the cause of eternal salvation, but in some respect a cause of it more immediate and nearer than faith. For, for what cause was Enoch translated? Was it not because he pleased God? But how came he to effect this? I suppose by his righteousness, or as the Scripture expresseth it, by his walking with God: But what was the cause that made him to walk with God, and really endeavour with all his heart to please him? Certainly his faith caused this; and further yet, What was the cause of his faith? Certainly one or both those principles whereof we treated in the first verse of this Chapter; Enoch had some evidence or sight of something unseen, and he had some substance of something hoped; And what were they? Certainly the same two points whereof the Author spoke in the fifth verse; for he had a sight of God who is unseen, that he is; and secondly he had a subsistence of hope, that God is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. This is the chain, and these the several links whereof enoch's translation depends. For his evidence or sight was the cause of his hope, his hope the cause of his faith, his faith of his walking with God, his walking with God of his pleasing God, and his pleasing God was the cause of his translation. Now if we go bacl by way of Resolution, through the several links of this chain, we shall easily perceive, that without the first link none of the rest can subsist, and so consequently no one that followeth can be without the former; and therefore the Author with good reason faith that without faith, it is impossible to please God; and by the like reason it will as necessarily follow, that without good works or walking with God, it is impossible to please him also; as also without an evidence, or without a sight of God; who is unseen, it is impossible to have faith. True it is, that faith is the cause of our pleasing God, and also of that eternal salvation which we have from God; for what can be more pleasing to the supreme Lord of all things, then to see a man of whom God was never seen, to rely strongly and without any doubt of mind, upon his fidelity, bounty, goodness, righteousness, power and wisdom? But faith hath yet another virtue no less than the former, whereby it procures our salvation as it were at a great distance; namely, in working in us good works or walking with God, and causing us to come to God, and seek him, by suing to him for his favour and grace in all our desires, and all our deeds.  
7. By faith Noah being warned of God] The third example is the faith of Noah, in that he believed the oracle of God, warning him of things, whereof in the course of nature there was not the least appearance. Of this man's faith he teacheth us both what good is wrought in him, and what good it brought unto him. The word faith here must not be referred to the words immediately following, as if he had been warned of God of things not yet seen, by his faith; but including those words with a comma, his faith appeals and coheres to the words moved with fear, and to the words following, he prepared an Ark, etc. This oracle or warning of God given him is extant, Gen. 6.13. unto the end of the Chapter. Of things not seen as yet] That is, of the future flood that was to come upon the world, which then as yet was not only not seen, but there appeared no likelihood or possibility of it, but what was drawn from God's warning. Moved with fear, prepared an Ark] These were the effects of Noah's faith; first, in that he feared or was moved with fear, that God would bring upon the world the punishment he had threatened; then from the faith of the punishment and the fear of it, he was further induced to frame the Ark as God appointed him, that by means thereof he might escape the punishment by drowning the world, and so save himself and his family from destruction; and therefore the Author adds, To the saving of his house] When the flood came, Noah and his family to the number of eight persons entered into the Ark whereby they were saved, and all the rest of the world was drowned; all men and beasts that were not in the Ark perished by the flood, see Gen. 7. This faith of Noah is a good example to us for our imitation, that we may learn to apply ourselves to a firm faith and belief of God's oracles and predictions, whether they be promises concerning the future blessedness of the godly, or whether they be menaces concerning the future punishment of the wicked, and the miserable destruction of the whole world: And further, that we timely provide ourselves of an Ark, that is, of means whereby we may escape the judgements of God, and be saved for ever. Now the Ark whereby we may escape from the final destruction of the whole world, and enter into the Tabernacle of immortality, is the Answer of a good conscience toward God, as Peter teacheth us, 1 Epist. 3.21. By which he condemned the world. It is somewhat doubtful whether the relative which should be referred, whether to Noah's faith, or to the Ark, for the sense seems most inclining to the former; but the words run rather for the latter, partly because the word Ark stands nearer it, and partly because of the words following, which say, And became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. Now if the word by which be referred to faith, the sense will be this: That Noah by his faith became heir of the righteousness which is by faith; but this seems not proper: For can any man think, that Noah by his faith could have obtained any other righteousness then that which comes by faith? Neither doth the matter itself any way cross this sense. For although Noah condemned the world by his faith, yet he also condemned it by the Ark; in as much as the Ark was a manifest proof of his faith. For unless he had believed the coming of the flood, he would never have prepared the Ark, to have lost his labour therein, and make himself ridiculous to all the world. But he is said to condemn the world, because by his faith in believing the flood, and by his fact in making the Ark, he convinced the world of obstinacy, and thereby took away all excuse of sin from them who would give no credence to God, by a metaphor taken from accusers, who are said to condemn a guilty person, in that they convict him of his crime, and by that means are the cause, that he is condemned; for properly to condemn is the act of the Judge. In this sense also Christ saith, That the men of Nineveh shall rise in judgement with this generation and condemn it. And the Queen of the South shall rise up in the judgement and condemn it, Matth. 12.41,42. For by the fact of the Ninevites who reponted at the preaching of Ionas; and by the fact of the Queen of the South who came from far to hear the wisdom of Solomon, the contumacy and obstinacy of the Jews is convinced, who despised Christ that was present among them, and by many degrees greater and wiser than either Ionas or Solomon. Whence it came to pass that they were most justly punished of God. In like manner Noah, by his Faith and by his Ark which was an evidence of his faith, convicted the obstinacy of that world, and brought it to pass that with very good justice God punished it. And as by his faith, and the effect of it, which was the Ark, he procured condemnation to the world: so to himself he procured righteousness; for so it follows: And became heir of the righteousness which is by faith] Righteousness is not here taken in a moral sense, for that righteousness which flows from good works; but in a jural sense, for that right whereby a man hath a title, to have hold and enjoy some benefit or blessing from God; or for a right of liberty whereby a man stands exempted and freed from those burdens and punishments whereto others are liable; for so it is taken in divers passages of Scripture, especially in Paul's Epistles, and so it must be taken here, as plainly appears from two grounds: First, from the opposition of it to the word condemned, in the former clause: For as to be condemned, is to be adjudged to be deprived of some benefit, and to lose that right which a man had before, whether it be loss of life, limb or goods; so on the contrary to be justified, is to have some benefit adjudged unto him, or be invested in a right to that whereto before, he had no right nor title. And as the condemnation of the world, consisted in the judgement of God sentencing the people of it to lose their lives by drowning in the flood: so the righteousness or right of Noah consisted in the grant of God, whereby God gave Noah a right, that he and his house should be saved from that flood by means of the Ark, and Noah accepting of this grant by his faith to believe it and rest upon it, had thereby a right of salvation to himself and his House. 2. From the consequence of it to the word heir: for men are not heirs of moral righteousness, because such righteousness is not a thing transient to be conveyed from one person to another, and consequently, is no way inheritable, but men are heirs of jural rights, to those persons that have the property or power to dispose, convey, and grant such rights unto others. God granted Noah a right and title for him and his family, to be saved from the flood by means of the Ark; and because Noah accepted of this grant by his faith, and testified his acceptance of it by his fact in preparing the Ark, therefore he was heir to this right, and did inherit or possess it; for heir is a jural word, and signifies one that hath a right, whether in posse only, or in esse. But from this right of being saved, all the rest of the world was disinherited. i. They were condemned to be drowned. And it is called a righteousness or right by faith, because the right he had thus to be saved, proceeded from God's special grant, of God's mere grace and proper motion, without any desert of it, or suit for it on the part of Noah. For it is opposed to a right by works, or to that right which is due by desert of works or service. The Author therefore would intimate unto us, that Noah had no right by any works of his, to deserve this benefit of saving to him and his house: but all the right he had came by his faith on his part, but from the grace and favour of Gods grant on God's part, which Noah accepting by his faith was thereby settled upon him. And it is opposed to a right by petition or suit, which hath the first motion from the party that petitioneth or sueth for it, and thereupon is granted, though then also it be granted of mere grace and favour in him that confers it. And thereby the Author would further intimate unto us, that Noah on his part made no petition or suit to God for this benefit, for him and his family to be saved, and therefore the first motion to have this right, proceeded not from Noah: but God of his mere and proper motion without any suit made to him, proposed this benefit unto Noah, and promised him the grant of it freely and primely from himself; as appears in the sacred story where the thing is at large related, Gen. 6.13. where we read, that first God told Noah of the sin of the world, and then foretold him of the drowning of it; next taught him to frame the Ark; and lastly Covenanted with him to save him and his family in it. Thus we see the faith of Noah, and the effects of it; but what were the causes of it, to effect and breed this faith in him? We shall find by inspection into the words of this verse, that Noah had in him the two principles of faith, whereof we spoke in the first verse. For he had an evidence or sight of a thing unseen; for God had revealed and forewarned him of the flood, which thing to him was yet unseen. And he had in him a subsistence of a thing hoped for; for God had Covenanted with him, and promised him to save him and his family in the Ark, which salvation he hoped for. So his foresight of the flood to come, and his hope of being saved from it by the Ark, were the causes to produce in him that faith, whereby he was moved to fear the flood, and to prepare the Ark.  
8. By faith Abraham when he was called to go out into a place, which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed, and he went out not knowing whither he went.] The fourth example is of Abraham, the Father of the faithful, upon whom the Author doth much enlarge himself, relating many evidences and proofs of his faith. To Abraham he subjoins Isaac and Jacob in those particulars that were common to them. And of Abraham's faith he mentions divers effects and benefits, as his invincible courage and constancy, that we might labour to imitate him, and express the nearest resemblance of it we can, as it becomes them who profess themselves the children of Abraham. The first effect of his faith was his obedience; for when God called and commanded him to go out of his country, unto a place which God would show him; Abraham obeyed without any scruple or delay and went out, not knowing whither he went. And the causes or reasons of this faith, were as in the former persons; First, an evidence or sight of a thing unseen, for God told him of a place or country which was yet unseen of him; And secondly, a subsistence of a thing hoped for; for God had promised him, that he should receive that place or country for an inheritance. So the foresight of that country to come, and the hope to have it for an inheritance; were the causes to produce in Abraham that faith, whereby he obeyed the call of God, and thereupon went out of his own country, not knowing as yet whither he went. There were many reasons on the contrary, to withdraw Abraham from this obedience, and to remove him from so strange a journey. For it was very hard especially upon no urgent necessity, for a man to forsake his country, his house, and lands, and possessions; to leave his kindred, friends, and acquaintance, to wander without any certain abode, and become a stranger in a foreign country. It seems a rash enterprise, for a man to prepare himself for a journey, before he knows whither he should go, or to what place he should travail. But the faith of Abraham was so firm and strong, that it admitted none of these thoughts, but vanquished, and banished them all; being fully persuaded, that no man could possibly miscarry in his obedience to God, whatsoever the command might be, and how rash soever the enterprise might seem. But we must note that Abraham did not leave his country to become a pilgrim and wanderer in the world, upon any rash or unadvised motion of his own, but he was called to go out] i. He was appointed and commanded to go out; and the person calling him to it was God: at whose word and command, he thought it fit for him to leave his country and acquaintance. Whereby he becomes to us an example, that when God commands and requires any thing of us, we should refuse no burden, labour or trouble, no loss of country, friends or fortunes, that we might fulfil his will. Yet when there is no just cause, we should not by any rash or foolish humour, either deprive ourselves of those blessings that God hath given us, or involve ourselves in any calamity or misery by an unprofitable piety. For it is a more certain trial of our faith, and a thing more worthy, to do and undergo that at the command of God, or as our duty requires, which otherwise we would not do. Of this fact of Abraham, See Gen. 12.  
9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise as in a strange country] Another effect of Abraham's faith, common to him with Isaac his son, and Jacob his nephew, which withal shows us, how constant they also were in it. He sojourned, by living there as an alien or a stranger; for sojourner in this sense is opposed to a native who lives in the same place where he was borne, enjoying it by birth or right of inheritance. So we find Paul opposing strangers and foreigners to fellow-citizens, Ephes. 2.19. And the land wherein he sojourned was a strange land unto him, partly because he was not a native of it, but only a sojourner or foreigner there; but chief because he had no right of inheritance for any present possession there: for God gave him no inheritance in it, not so much as to set his foot on, Acts 7.5. But it was only the land of promise to him; for God had promised to give the inheritance and possession of it to him and his posterity after him, while yet he had neither posterity nor child, See again, Acts 7.5. Dwelling in tabernacles] Here is expressed the reason why, and the manner how Abraham is said to sojourn in the land of promise; namely, because he dwelled there in tabernacles; for this argues that to that land he was a sojourner or stranger, and that land to him was a strange country. For though God had promised to give it to him and his seed, yet he for his own particular never dwelled in it, as his own demaine, but as a stranger dwells in a strange country among the natives of it. For he built himself neither City nor house to inhabit, but only lived in Tabernacles or tents, as strangers do, who have no certain residence, nor make no long abode in any place, but being always ready to remove are for the time of their stay covered only with tents, and when they journey from one place to another carry their houses with them: for to them that have no possession of their own where they may make themselves a fixed and certain seat, tents are the most commodious dwelling, because they may suddenly and easily transport them at their pleasure. But hence is drawn an evidence of Abraham's faith and his constancy therein, in that, to show his obedience to God, he lead a travelling life all his days; and though the land were promised unto him, yet he neither founded City, nor built house, neither did he either purchase or possess any: but as a flitting inhabitant; removed his tent from place to place, and wanting the right of a native, lived there only by tenure of courtesy. Yet he possessed an assured hope, that after some few ages his posterity should possess that whole land, because it was the land of promise which the Lord had promised him. With Isaac and jacob the heirs with him of the same promise] Isaac and Jacob are not therefore joined with Abraham, as if Abraham had lived in tents all that time with both of them. For Isaac being borne many years after Abraham's coming into that land, could not all that while live in Abraham's tent; and Jacob dwelled in the land after Abraham's death. But they are therefore joined with him, because they also never came to the possession or inheritance of that land, but lived like sojourners and strangers there as Abraham had done; for as they were heirs of the same promise, so they lived in the same manner. And hence is manifested their faith and their constancy in it; because their sojourning in that manner moved them not at all to doubt any thing of the faith and truth of God's promise, though the performance of it were so long delayed.  
10. For he looked for a City which hath foundations] Here the Author gives the reason, why Abraham though he had a promise of that land from God, yet was never put in possession of it, but dwelled there all his days in tents as a sojourner and a stranger. The reason hereof was, because he expected or looked for a City having foundations. Some man may doubt whether these words are to be understood of Abraham's intent and purpose, or of the event that afterward fell out. Certainly as we will not deny, but that Abraham hoped to have from God some life and happiness after his death, in regard he knew the great goodness of God toward his servitors, and the great power of God, that he is able to raise even the dead, and can give his servants a blessing or reward after their death: and withal did easily perceive the vanity of earthly happiness, especially now in his declining years; and might have a desire of a re-surviving life to befall him after his death, a thing that seems natural to all men living: Yet he that shall consult the Sacred history and shall diligently both read and relect it, shall find nothing either written or any way intimated concerning that matter. But this divine Author, relating examples from the holy Scriptures upon their authority and infallibility, seems not to say or affirm any particular concerning those holy Elders, but what is grounded upon the holy Scriptures. Yet that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, had a hope not only of some life and happiness after death, but also of a City which hath foundations, that is, of heaven itself, and that heavenly happiness which shall never determine or have end; and upon that hope did undergo all the travels and troubles of a continual pilgrimage, to lead always an uncertain and flitting life, this the holy Scriptures have not where discovered. Yea rather, what hopes Abraham sometime had in this respect, it may hence appear, in that while he was yet destitute of children, when God spoke to him and said, Fear not Abraham, I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward, Abraham answered, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus; and behold one borne in my house is mine heir? Gen. 15.1,2. Doth it not hence appear that the sum of all Abraham's desires came to this, that he might leave behind him a son and heir of his own body, seeing he abounded already in all other goods and riches. For if at that time he had with any firm hope conceived of heaven itself, and the everlasting happiness thereof, when God promised him an exceeding great reward, would he have answered, Lord God, what wilt thou give me? For in these words he signified, that God had already abundantly rewarded him, and given him goods in a full measure, and to promise him more was to no purpose, seeing he had no child of his own to whom he might leave his estate. Whence it appears, that Abraham extended not that exceeding great reward which God promised him, beyond the goods and happiness of this life. Wherefore it is more likely, that in these words of Abraham's expectance the Author intended not to give a reason, why Abraham endured with such constancy the toils of a continual pilgrimage, and of a life always unsettled; but rather of the event (as we said) why God gave Abraham no possession in that land to inherit as his own proper right; granted him no City to dwell in, nor seat where to settle himself: but would have him dwell in tents with his son, and grandchild: Namely, because (as afterward at the sixteenth verse the Author saith) God had prepared for him a City infinitely greater and better than all the land of promise, with all the Cities in it. And the promises of God made to Abraham and his seed do in the mystical sense contain this spiritual happiness and heavenly inheritance. And in the same sense the seed of Abraham, doth signify the seed of all the faithful, who follow the faith of Abraham. For both these senses are taught us by the Apostle, Rom. 4.11,12,13. and Gal. 3.7. and Gal. 4 22. Therefore Abraham expected or looked for a City which hath foundations, rather by reason of the event and purpose of God, then from any intent and purpose of his own, whereby he might seem to fore know it. For in this sense we many times attribute expectation to a thing: so this Author, Chap. 10. ver. 27. saith, that to them who sin willingly, there remains a certain fearful expectation or looking for of judgement; whereas if we refer this to their intent and purpose of mind, sinners most times expect and look for nothing less than the punishment of their sins. Abraham then is therefore said to look for this City, because this City was by God's decree reserved and appointed for him; and because his faith was so constant in God, neither broken, nor shaken with any travels or troubles, and his whole course of life was such as theirs is, who relying upon God's promise do really expect this heavenly City, as a reward of their labours: Whereof the first is spoken by way of Metonymy, putting the effect for the cause; and this latter is said by way of Metaphor. This City the Author opposeth to Tabernacles and Tents; and the matter is not great to live a while in a Tent, that afterward we may live for ever in a City. And it is a City that hath foundations; By which attribute, Heaven is opposed not only to Tabernacles or Tents which have no foundations; but to all Cities, which though they have foundations, yet in comparison of Heaven they have none, because they have none such. And hereby is signified unto us the firmness and strength of our heavenly City; which no force, no tract of time, no change of things can possibly shake or move; which shall not be ruined by the ruin of that heaven and earth, which to us is visible; whereof see the Author afterward, Chap. 12. ver. 26, 27, 28. Whose builder and maker is God.] Certainly that City must needs be most stable & ample, most beautiful and plentiful of all happiness, which had such a builder and such a maker as God to found and raise it. He opposeth God to men, who are the founders and bvilders of all earthly Cities. And therefore this City must needs be so divine and heavenly, so firm and strong, that no hand of man can prevail against it. Cities built by men, by men may be destroyed, and many times are so: but the City whereof God is the builder and maker, is secure and safe from all hazard.  
11. By faith also Sara herself received strength to receive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age] It may here be doubted, whether the Author doth speak here of the faith of Sarah or of Abraham, as he first began, and afterward goes on. The former of these seems to be gathered first from the words of the Author, when he saith, Sarah herself. For it seems as much as if he had said, Not only Abraham, but also Sarah herself, by faith received strength: So that he joins Sarah with Abraham in respect of her faith. Secondly, because the words, She judged him faithful] which follow in the next clause of this verse, seem to be referred to the next antecedent which is Sarah. But the latter opinion seems persuasible; First, because the Author first began, and afterward proceeds to speak of the faith of Abraham. Secondly, because the sacred History, mentions not the faith of Sarah, when Isaac was promised; but rather the Scripture seems to mention something contrary to her faith; for she laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old, shall I have pleasure, my Lord being old also? and the Angel questioned Abraham upon it, to know the cause of it, saying, Wherefore did Sarah laugh? Is any thing too hard for the Lord? Gen. 18.12,13. Whence also Paul discoursing upon the same point mentions only the strength of Abraham's faith, Rom. 4.19. Thirdly, because in the next verse following, where the effect and fruit of this faith is described, no mention is made of Sarah, but only of Abraham; namely in these words, Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead so many as the stars of the sky in multitude] Whereupon we may well doubt, which of these two opnions should be embraced, seeing the reasons brought on either side may easily be answered. For to the first reason for the first opinion we may say; That the Author therefore saith, Through faith Sarah herself] to show us, that by the faith of Abraham it came to pass, that not only himself should have power to beget a son, though he were then old and barren; but also that Sarah herself should conceive, who was by nature always barren even in her youth, and besides was then spent out with years and age, yet she should both conceive and bring forth beyond all course of nature. To the second reason we may answer, That is is not necessary, that the words judged him faithful] should be referred to the next antecedent; but rather to that which is the principal antecedent, though it be more remote; as we see it done in the verse following, wherein the reference is manifestly made to Abraham. Neither is the answer difficult to the arguments of the latter opinion. To the first, it may be said, That the Author, as a little before he joined Isaac and Jacob with Abraham for dwelling in tents as a thing common to them all; so also here he might join Sarah with her husband Abraham in a matter common to them both. For in mentioning afterward the special fact of Abraham in offering Isaac, therein the Author would seem to observe the order of actions and of time. For first he must handle Isaac's birth, and the faith of Abraham concerning it, before he come to the offering of Isaac and Abraham's faith about that. To the second, Although from Sarahs' laughing, and from the cause of it, which is there expressed, and from the answer of the Lord, wherein he reproved Sarah for laughing, it appears, That the promise made her for the bringing forth of a son within the compass of the year, seemed at the first hearing ridiculous to her, and a thing not credible; especially seeing she seemed not yet to know who the prison was that promised it; (for if we look into the context of the History, it is plain, that Abraham himself did not mark that the persons who spoke with him were Angels of God, till their speech touching Sarah his wife) yet it follows not, but that afterward, when she had recollected herself, and had observed the divine Authority of the speaker, and perceived that the cause of her doubtfulness was strongly refuted by him, she continued no longer in her ●…ancie and doubting; yea the contrary is more probable both in itself, and collectively from hence, that upon her hearing of the Angel's reproof, she was terrified, and for fear denied she had laughed. For from whence came this terror and fear upon her, but because she now had observed, that she had not to deal with a man, but with God, whose sayings and promises to laugh at, or distrust, was altogether unlawful for her, though to her judgement they surpassed the whole force and course of nature? We see that Abraham himself laughed also for the same cause, when first God promised him a son by Sarah; as we may read, Gen. 17.17. not that he doubted any thing of the faith or power of him that promised it; for in the forecited place to the Romans, Paul openly testifies the contrary; but because the matter in itself considered, especially heard upon the sudden and at unawares, seemed to him in a manner absurd and ridiculous, and scarce credible. But when he had intended his thoughts upon God that promised him, and perceived his promise to be serious, he became certain of the power and saith of God, and doubted not at all. And the Virgin Mary, when first she heard it from the Angel, that she should conceive and bring forth a son, she replied, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? Luke 1.34. From which words it appears, that at her first hearing of the Angels words, there arose some scruple and doubt in her mind, which when the Angel had removed by his answer, she rested wholly satisfied: For which cause Elizabeth afterward calls her blessed, And blessed is she that believed, Luke 1.45. To the third; The following verse therefore treats of Abraham, because this verse treats not of Sarah alone; but Abraham is joined with her, in these words, Through faith also Sarah herself. For the particle also shows, that besides Sarah he intends some other person; namely, Abraham whom he named before. Notwithstanding all this; yet to us it seems more probable, that these words of the Author should be referred to Abraham's faith, as well as the rest; and that his faith is herein also commended, in that it produced so admirable an effect not only in himself, being now old, but also in Sarah his wife, who was not only old, but had been hitherto barren. Although it seems, the Author did so temper his words on purpose, as that Sarah might be admitted into the fellowship and glory of that faith with her husband Abraham. Because she judged him faithful who had promised.] Hence it appears that God is not only pleased with our obedience to his commands, but also with our faith given to his promises; when we by our faith judge him to be faithful, i constant and true of his word, always certain to perform the thing he hath promised.  
12. Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.] As if he had said, The faith of Abraham was so effectual and fruitful, that by reason thereof it came to pass, that not only Sarah conceived and bore a son; but also by this son, who was but one, and came from Abraham one man, and he a barren man, as good as dead, there was propagated a posterity innumerable. The Author in this verse, hath relation to God's promise, wherein Abraham was promised a seed and a posterity answerable in number to the stars of heaven, and to the sands of the sea, Gen. 15.5. and Gen. 22.17. The Author expresseth the effect of God's promise, which might be seen with the eye, that by experience it might appear, what faith and force there is in the promises of God.  
13. These all died in faith, not having received the promises] He declares the constancy of their faith, in that all these departed this life under faith, i. holding the faith of the promises, and certainly believing the future performance of them, though themselves obtained not the effect of the promises or the things promised. For the promises were to be fulfilled not only after their death, but many ages after. The word promises is here by way of a Metonymy put materially for the matter of the promise or the things promised. In like manner, we must endeavour to be constant in the faith to the last gasp of our life; and not only be in certain hope of those things which God hath ordained for us here in this life; but of those also which are to accrue to us after our death, and it may be many ages after. But having seen them afar off] They saw not the effect of God's promises actually fulfilled, or near to their fulfilling, but they had as it were a prospect of them a fare off. They foresaw in their mind the performance of them fare remote from themselves by a great distance of time, to be fulfilled in their posterity after many ages. So they saw the performance by faith, because they had an evidence or sight of the performance not seen. As it befell unto Abraham, who in a deep sleep saw in a vision, that four generations must expire, and that his posterity must endure a heavy servitude, before they should take possession of the inheritance promised. And without all doubt Abraham imparted that vision to his son Isaac, and Isaac unto Jacob. And were persuaded of them, and embraced them] Though they saw that these promises for their effect and performance were for the future very remote from them for several ages to come, yet they no way doubted of their performance, but were fully persuaded they should be performed, because they were fully persuaded that God who made the promises was faithful to perform them. And they were not only persuaded of them, but they embraced them; for which the word in the Original is, they saluted them, and so some Translations render it. Now saluting is but a Metaphor for embracing; because salutings are commonly performed by way of embracing. The sense therefore is, that those Patriarches did in their soul embrace and kiss those promises of God, and with an undoubted faith conceiving them already present, did salute and embrace them, as friends use to salute and embrace their friends that after a long travail return from a foreign country. For by this word, nothing else is signified, but that they nothing doubted of the performance of God's promises, but did welcome them in their souls, as if the things they looked for, were already come. And confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth] The intent of these words is to prove, that those Patriarcks while they lived, did not receive those promises, by possessing any inheritance in the land promised; for otherwise they would not have confessed themselves strangers and pilgrims in the land. But that they did confess themselves pilgrims and strangers in that land, it appears both by the words of Abraham, who requesting to have a sepulchre in the land of Canaan, wherein to bury his dead, spoke thus to the sons of Heth. I am a stranger and a sojourner with you, give me a possession of a buryingplace with you, that I may bury my dead out of my sight, Gen. 23.4. And by the words of Jacob to Pharaoh; for when the King asked him how old he was, Jacob answered, The days of the years of my pilgrimage are an hundred and thirty years; few and evil have the days of my life been, and have not attained unto the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their pilgrimage, Gen. 47.9. In which words he affirms, that he and his Ancestors, Abraham and Isaac were pilgrims all the time of their lives. On the earth.] This must not be restrained to the land of Canaan only, promised to them and their posterity: but it is in effect as much as if he had said, that they had no proper country at all upon earth, no place which was their own by possession and proper right.  
14. For they that say such things, declare plainly that they seek a Country] If the particle for may be thought in this place to retain it force, than the Author shows the consequence, why from this their confession it appears, that during their life they received not the promises. And the reason is, because they that say such things, declare plainly that they seek a country. For if they sought a country, certainly than they had no country: But a Country was promised them, and a land which they should possess by a proper and hereditary right, and not by courtesy only as strangers and sojourners. But it is more probable, that the particle for is here set for but; as if the Author had something more to speak of these Patriarcks, besides what he had already said, and would conclude something further from this their confession, thereby to make way for what follows concerning their seeking of a heavenly country. And they are said to seek a Country, because they wanted and desired a country, as appears at the sixteenth verse following. For they who live a pilgrim's life upon earth, having no settled abode, and are touched with a sense of their condition, cannot choose but be weary of their flitting and tossing from place to place, and thereupon be desirous of a country, i. some proper soil of their own, where they may settle themselves and live at rest. Besides, they undertook these pilgrimages and sojournings at God's command, that at last they might have a residence in a country and a land appointed to them by God. After the Author had proved that they sought and desired a country, now he proceeds further to show, what country they sought and desired.  
15. And truly if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out] Before he specify what country they sought and desired; first he shows that they sought not, nor desired, no nor minded that country from which Abraham departed by God's command. For if they had had any mind or thought of that country, or had desired it, when they confessed themselves pilgrims, they might have returned, seeing they had time enough for a return. But they minded it not, and therefore desired it not; for what we desire we do not only mind, but we grieve for the absence and want of it. Abraham alone only with his wife went out of the country which was properly his as being a native of it: but Isaac his son, and Jacob his grand child may in a manner be said to have gone out in him; in as much as they continued in the purpose and resolution of Abraham and would not return thither. They might have had opportunity to have returned] Because therefore they returned not into their country, for they sojourned from it for some hundreds of years, wherein they had opportunities and time enough for such an enterprise, hence it plainly appears, they were no way mindful or desirous to return to that country from whence Abraham departed.  
16. But now they desire a better country] Hear the Author infers that now they desire a better country than the former, and do seek it with all their souls. The particle but now is commonly adversative only, and all one with but as we have formerly noted; but here in this place it carrieth also with it a sense and force conclusive; as if he had said: Seeing therefore they seek and desire a country, yet neither seek nor desire the former whence Abraham departed, it must needs therefore now follow, that they seek and desire a better country than that. For if it were not better, but only as good or worse, there could be no reason, why they should desert the former, and with so great labour and care seek another. Yet the Author used in this place the adversative particle but, by reason of the opposition between these and the former words. They desire] the tense present for the preter tense they did desire; as is commonly use in argumentations, and many times in narrations; especially when the history regards not the point of time, but keeps close to the matter, and that she may the better represent things to our view, speaks of them rather as present, then past. That is an heavenly] Hear the Author expresseth in his own judgement, as well knowing the purpose of God in that point, what better country it was which they desired. For it is not necessary, we should think, that those Patriarches did expect this heavenly country by intent and purpose of mind, as hath been already declared before, ver. 10. but it sufficeth, that this should be the event of their expectation and desire, from the Decree of God, who in a mysterious and concealed way, had promised them this heavenly country; and that it should not thus fare come to pass without their desire, in as much as they desired a better country then that which they had relinquished. For a better country than this heavenly, which by God's appointment was reserved for them, and should in time accrue unto them, there could be none. Whence also if a thing befall a man suitable to his desires, though it be, or prove much better than he hoped or imagined, yet we usually say, he sought and desired, it: especially if the course of his life and endeavours be so composed, that the issue and event might well be such; which certainly was performed by those Patriarches. For their very pilgrimage upon earth, this very thing, that they had no proper and settled abode of their own upon earth, though they were most dear to God, the supreme Lord of all things, how fitly doth it suit with this issue and event, that being pilgrims and strangers upon earth, they should at last by God's goodness be settled in heaven as in their country? For why else did not God give them a settled country, and a certain abode upon earth? Therefore even those words, whereby they confessed themselves pilgrims and strangers upon earth, were not uttered but by the Spirit of God; because by them was signified, that they were not citizens of earth, but of heaven, which was their country. Because therefore this heavenly country was in the purpose of God, to be better than that country, which the Patriarches desired, therefore with good reason are they said to desire this heavenly country. But if we look into their intent and purpose, the country which they desired, was the possession of the land of Canaan ordained for their posterity. Of so great advantage it was, to leave their petty dwellings in their own country, that they might settle their posterity in possession of a whole kingdom, and place them in the eternal and peculiar favour of God. Wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God.] God therefore was not ashamed of them, because after they were dead, God both calls himself their God, and suffers others to call him so, yea he would be called so. Certainly it is a great matter, that the most high God, who is the maker of heaven and earth, would be called the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and would not be ashamed of that title. For what is Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? men dead and rotten long since; who while they lived were exiles from their country, and vagrants upon earth, having no certain abode all their whole life. From these men's names, the only Lord and ruler of all things, disdained not to take his surname. But to be the God of some person, especially when God utters it himself of himself, signifies that he is the chief Patron and Protector of that person, who will defend his client and worshipper from all evil, and benefit him with his best blessings: but when man utters it of God, it often signifies that God is his supreme Lord, whom he worships and obeys in all his commands with all his soul. And this inference of the Author from his former passages, is an argument, that he spoke of the event of the desire and vote of those Patriarches, and not of any intent and purpose in their mind to seek and expect that heavenly country. For it appears not from Scripture, that God was therefore not ashamed of them, because they had an intent and purpose of mind to seek and desire that heavenly country: but because God had decreed to restore them to life, and to put them in possession of that country, as the Author willing to explicate himself, and to show more clearly the consequence of what he infers, doth therefore subjoin; For he hath prepared for them a City. For he brings not here a new reason, why God was not ashamed to be, and be called the God of those Patriarches; but he only proposeth his former reason more openly and clearly. For we use not, when we have concluded a truth, and inferred it as firm and certain from former principles, to confirm it abruptly with an argument and reason, as if it were not yet proved, so as to leave no mark, that we bring a new reason different from the former; because than God had ordained that heavenly country and kingdom for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, therefore with good right and reason doth he call himself their Lord and Patron. This the Author without doubt had learned from those words of Christ, whereby he proves the Resurrection of the dead from hence, because God calls himself the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who then were long dead. For hence Christ doth gather, that seeing God cannot be the God of the dead, namely, if they never be restored to life; (for how can God benefit the dead, unless he first raise them?) therefore it must needs follow, that if he call himself the God of some dead, as he did of those dead Patriarches, than some of the dead must at length be recalled to life, that God may be their God in very deed, by accumulating and furnishing them with his benefits and blessings. But as in the same place Christ saith a little before; They which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage; neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. Luke 20.35,36. What is all this else, but to be an heir and a citizen of that heavenly country and city? We see then that a heavenly country and city is prepared and ordained for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: and therefore why should we doubt, but that the very same is reserved also for all us that are the worshippers and servitors of God? which right of ours we need not stand to evict from divers evidences and dark consequences; seeing hereof we have not only most open and clear promises, which to those Patriarches were never declared; but also we know for certain, that Christ our head doth now enjoy the possession of that country and city. This only remains for us, that following the example of those Patriarches, and much rather of Christ our Captain, we should finally carry ourselves obedient unto God, and extending our hopes beyond our death, should do our utmost endeavour, that our life should first fail us, before we fail of our faith and allegiance toward God.  
17. By faith Abraham when he was tried, offered up Isaac.] The Author here mentions an example of Abraham's faith, which of all other was most illustrious; namely, his offering up of Isaac; the circumstances whereof the Author doth but lightly touch, as a thing sufficiently known, and at large described in the sacred Scriptures. Offered; Abraham offered him not really and actually but (which is all one with God) purposely, with an unchangeable and constant purpose of mind, with as much endeavour as lay in his power, and proceeding so fare in the action, as had not God recalled him, the effect undoubtedly had followed. Thus he offered him; and not only slew him; for the slaughter should have preceded, and then the offering must have followed by fire for a burnt-offering; for so God had commanded. When he was tried.] For of his own election or accord it would never have come into his heart, to have sacificed unto God, who doth most abhor cruelty, with the blood of man, muchless of his own son, unless he had been commanded of God to it: And he was commanded to do it, not that he should actually perform it; but that by his willingness to perform it, and by obeying God's Command, as fare as in him lay, he should give an assured trial of his faith. And he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son] What a strange fact was this of a strange faith? where not only the father offered up his son, but his only begotten son; and what father was it? even he who had received the promises, who from the same mouth of God had received the promises of a seed & a posterity to be propagated by Isaac, and had confidently believed it, he now received a command to slay Isaac before there was any issue from him. Therefore truly here also Abraham may be said to have believed in hope against hope, that we use the Apostles words speaking of another point of his faith; who as a little after we shall show, doubted not to reconcile together two things clashing and crossing one another, namely the life and death of the same person, because it was God who had spoke concerning both. We may further add here other circumstances expressed in the history, as that three day's journey with his son to a place assigned him by God; with that thoughts and cares shall we think the soul of the poor father was agitated, journeying toward the resolved slaughter of his dear and only son, whom he drew on along with him, ignorant of his destined calamity, to become a sacrifice and a burnt-offering? what spirits were in him may we imagine, when upon his assent up that fatal Mount, he laid the wood upon his son wherewith a fire should be kindled to burn him after his father had slain him? what thought he, when his son perceiving no sacrifice besides himself, and marveling at the matter, did gently demand of his father, where was the Lamb for the burnt-offering? what thought he, when seizing upon his son with his own hands expecting no such dealing from so dear a father, he bond him, and laid him on the Altar upon the wood? when he drew his knife, and standing over him eyed his throat, and stretched forth his heavy hand that shook and trembled with fatherly love? which of us all reading and considering all these, finds not his soul melting in him? yet the invincible faith of Abraham conquered all these. And Isaac is called the only begotten son of Abraham, or as it is in the Hebrew his only son, not that he only was his son (for Ishmael also was his son) but because he was his only son by Sarah the true wife of Abraham; and because he was his only beloved son, that was borne to his parents in their extreme old age, by the singular gift and wondrous power of God; and because he was to be the only heir of his father's estate, and of God's promises; and because the seed of Abraham was to be called in him only, for the children of Isaac only were to be accounted the true posterity of Abraham. And he that received the promises] The pronoun he, whether we think it relative to Isaac, or to Abraham (which is better) yet the sense is the same, doth notify unto us a notable circumstance of this fact, that makes the faith of Abraham to appear yet much greater. Certainly that faith is very great, which is seen and tried in hard cases, as was the offering of an only son. But how much greater is that faith which staggereth not at such an action, as naturally would utterly overthrow it? Yet such was this fact of Abraham: Abraham had received promises from God, whereof one was that a numerous posterity should be borne of him; the other, that the land of Canaan wherein he was a sojourner and a stranger should be given in possession to his posterity. These promises Abraham had from God and he believed both of them with all his heart, as it is signified by the word received; and believing these promises he shown himself obedient to all God's commands, that he might not fail of his hope from so great blessings. Now what command doth God lay upon him? God commands him to take Isaac his son, in whose posterity all those promises were to be fulfilled, and from whom as yet he had no grandchild, yet him he must offer up, that is, he must slay and burn him for a sacrifice. If Abraham must do this, and look into the nature of the action, could he possibly have any hope of those promises?  
18. Of whom it was said that in Isaac shall thy seed be called] This is therefore added, lest any man should think, that Abraham might imagine, though Isaac were extinct, yet the promises might have their issue in Ishmael. For Abraham could not imagine this, because God had said unto him, in Isaac shall thy seed be called; that is, the children to be borne of Isaac, shall be accounted thy seed and posterity; namely, that thy posterity for whom I have ordained my blessing, and the possession of that land: and therefore Isaac's children only shall be called the posterity of Abraham. In this perplexity then and contrariety between the promise and the command, what issue could Abraham find for his faith? To doubt of God's promises and of their performance, he thought it impiety, and therefore he obeyed God's command for the offering up of Isaac. But then considering, that this sacrifice would in the eye of nature overthrow all his hope, therefore he builds a new and high faith upon the ground of his former faith; namely,  
19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up even from the daed] This way only the passage was open, for Abraham to believe, that God was able to raise Isaac even from the dead. This point he did believe, though he had no precedent or example for it. For he would rather ascend up to the highest pitch of faith, than relapse or retire in any degree; and would rather cumulate a high faith with a higher, then make the least doubt of God's promises. Accounting, is in the Greek reasoning; after he had reasoned within himself, casting up all the ways possible, how to salve up God's command with God's promise, at last he determined and concluded a possibility this way. And which way was that? that though he should slay Isaac, and offer him up to God as a burnt-offering, yet God was able to raise him up even from the dead. This was the sum of his account and the conclusion of his reasoning, that God was Almighty and able to do, not only all other things that are easily done, but even to raise from the dead; which is an act so difficult, and so remote from humane reason, that man might account it an act altogether impossible. That God was able] He reasoned and concluded of God's power only, because he had no reason to doubt of his will, seeing he had received the promises of God, wherein God had sufficiently declared his will. The only doubt therefore rested upon God's power, which doubt he solves by his faith. From whence also he received him in a figure] Abraham did not only believe that God was both able and willing to raise Isaac from the dead, but in a manner saw him raised from the dead, and in a manner received him again from God as raised from death. In a figure.] In the Greek it is in a parable, or in a similitude; In a figure is opposed to the propriety and truth of the thing. For truly and properly Isaac was not raised nor received from the dead, because he was not dead: but in a figure and in a manner, he was both raised and received. For Abraham accounted his Isaac for dead; and therefore seeing now he remained alive, and beyond all hope was rescued from the stroke, which his father had aimed at his throat, it was in a manner all one to Abraham, and all one to Isaac, as if Isaac had been dead and raised again from the dead. For hence we use to say of those that are delivered from some extreme danger, wherein they were given for dead, that they are as it were revived and recovered from the grave. Holy David many times makes such expressions of himself; and Paul, when God had delivered him from an extreme danger, wherein he wholly despaired of life, saith, We had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but God which raiseth the dead, who delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver; in whom we trust; that he will yet deliver. 2. Cor. 1.9,10.  
20. By faith Isaac blessed jacob and Esau concerning things to come.] Now the Author mentions the peculiar faith of Isaac with an example of it; in blessing Jacob and Esau concerning things to come. He prayed to God for blessings to come upon them that should have their event, after many ages to come. For this blessing of Isaac was no ordinary or vulgar Benediction, as that of Parents commonly is; who when they bless their children, express only the wishes and desires of their mind; but whether the blessing will succeed according to their wishes and desires, they are no way certain (although such blessings of theirs may proceed from some faith) but Isaac so blessed his sons, and so prevailed with God for the things for which he prayed, as if in a manner he had simply foretold them, nothing doubting of their event, but certainly persuaded, that God would do no otherwise then as he had wished and prayed. For when he perceived his error in the person of his sons, yet he said, I have blessed him, yea, and he shall be blessed.] Gen. 27.33. In which words he plainly signified, that the blessing he had given was so confirmed, that he could not recall it. But the Author names Jacob first, though Esau was the firstborn, because jacob had the first and the best blessing, albeit he obtained it by a wile, God so disposing the matter. For before either of them were born, God using his own freedom in bestowing his blessings upon whom he will, had appointed to prefer Jacob before Esau, the younger before the elder. Therefore God suffered not Isaac to bestow the best blessing upon Esau, that neither the decree of God, nor the blessing of Isaac might fail: especially seeing Esau had already voluntarily and freely sold away his birthright, which (as the Scripture saith) he despised. We say he sold it voluntarily and freely, because he was not driven to that sale by any destiny or decree of God. For Esau might have kept the honour and benefit of his birthright, and yet as God had decreed, his posterity might have become younger, or subject to have served the posterity of Jacob.  
21. By faith jacob when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of joseph.] Now he mentions the particular faith of Jacob, which appeared in this blessing of the sons of Joseph. And he addeth the circumstance of time, that jacob did this when he was a dying, that hence it might appear, how he persisted in the faith to his last breath, and how constantly he believed the promises of God, whereby God had settled his blessing and the possession of the land of Canaan upon his posterity. The History hereof is in Genesis 48. But we may wonder, why the Author mentions only the sons of Joseph, seeing with the very same faith Jacob gave blessings to all his children, was it because he shown a particular faith, in believing that Ephraim though the younger, should be afterward preferred before Manasses the elder, and therefore crossing his hands otherwise then Joseph expected and had placed his sons, laid his right hand upon Ephraim who stood at his left hand, and his left hand upon Manasses who stood at his right? Or was it, because he believed that these sons of Joseph should be accounted as his, and be adopted into the number of the twelve Patriarches, to give name and be heads to two of the Tribes? And worshipped] Here is mentioned another argument or proof of jacob's faith, in that he worshipped God, after that he had bound Joseph, to carry his body after his death into the land of Canaan, as we read it, Gen 47. For by this worshipping he declared that he wholly confided in God, who had promised that land to his posterity, and would in due time give them the possession of it. Upon the top of his staff] The vulgar Latin renders this perversely, that he worshipped the top of his staff. As if Jacob had worshipped the Sceptre of his son Joseph, that is, Joseph himself, by reason of the high office and power that Joseph had in Egypt. Which interpretation neither agrees to the words of the text, in leaving out the particle upon; nor to the scope of the Author. For what makes this to the declaration of jacob's faith? nay the thing itself scemes no way probable. The end is the extreme part of a thing: but if one end of a thing be the highest, and the other the lowest, the highest end is the top. Which sense must be here understood, as partly appears by the thing itself, and partly by the Hebrew word, Gen. 47. In the Hebrew for top we read head, which by a metaphor signifies the top, because the head is the end and highest part of man, and consequently of any thing else. And for staff we now read in the Hebrew, bed; which fell out because the word Mittah, there extant, pricked with other vowels, signifies a staff; for in the Hebrew Matteh is a staff, and Mittch a bed. The Septuagint whom our Author follows, read it Matteh, and so translated it staff, otherwise than we now read it in the Hebrew text. Both these readings have a commodious sense. For if we give way to the authority of the Septuagint, the sense will be, that Jacob when by reason of his age and weakness he could not lift up himself by his own strength, stayed and raised himself by the top of his staff, the common aid of old men, that he might worship God, by bowing his body before him. But if we follow the Hebrew text, as it is now extant, the sense will be, That Jacob, because he could not raise his body out of his bed, therefore he bowed his head forward upon his bed's head, and so worshipped God. For among the people of God, it hath been always the manner of worshipping God, by bowing the body, or at least the head unto him.  
22. By faith joseph when he died, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel, and gave commandment concerning his bones] Now he mentions the particular faith of Joseph, who when he was dying, mentioned the departure of the Israelites out of Egypt, and to testify his belief and assurance thereof, gave commandment concerning his bones, that when they departed out of Egypt toward the promised land, they should carry his bones with them. He gives commandment concerning his bones, and not concerning his body, because he knew for certain, either by the spirit of Prophecy, or else by the Oracle of God, as Abraham his great grandfather did, that the Israelites should not very soon after his death departed out of Egypt to take possession of the land of Canaan which God had promised, but between his death and their departure there would pass such a distance of time, that nothing of his body would remain besides his bones. Which thing doth greatly commend the faith of Joseph, because though he saw the performance of God's promises deferred for a long time yet to come, yet he neither despised them, nor doubted any thing of their verity.  
23. By faith Moses when he was borne, was hid three months of his parents, because they saw he was a proper child.] The Author being about to bring an example of the faith of Moses, doth begin it with the mention of his parent's faith; which appeared in their hiding of Moses when he was new borne. For hence it is manifest that they confided in God, that by his help the child should be preserved. And their motive to this faith was, because they saw the child was comely or proper, that is, such a one in whose countenance there appeared an extraordinary and excellent towardness; and whose very aspect seemed to presage and promise some great matter. In the seventh chapter of the Acts, ver. 20. it is said, that he was exceeding fair to God, which some Translations render by God; that is, his beauty came from God, or God in a singular manner had made him very fair and beautiful. When therefore his parents saw him so, they imagined that God would not have it be in vain, that an Infant should be borne of so beautiful and comely countenance. And therefore they doubted not but he should be preserved by the singular providence of God, so as they also provided as much as lay in their power. And the event was answerable to their faith. And they were not afraid of the King's commandment] King Pharaoh by an Edict had commanded the Egyptians, to kill the male children borne of the Israelites, after that the Midwives who feared God, had refused to execute the like command. This command of the King, the parents of Moses feared not, because they feared not, but trusted upon God and his providence, that the child which they had hidden, should not be discovered and produced to be slain by the King's command.  
24. By faith Moses when he was come to years] Here he gins to treat of Moses his own faith, and to mention the effects of it; whereof the first is, that when he was come to years, he refused to be called the son of Pharoahs' daughter. Which fact of Moses he further illustrates and amplifies in the following verses. In the Greek for come to years, it is, when Moses was become great Which greatness may be understood of that dignity which Moses attained in Egypt, where he was bred up in the quality of the son of Pharoahs' daughter. For he was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds; as we read it, Acts 7.22. But this greatness seems rather to be referred to the stature of Moses, and consequently to his age of man's estate; partly because Moses come to years is here opposed to Moses when he was borne; and p●…ly because the Scripture relating the same fact of Moses, saith that when he was grown up he went out unto his brethren, Exod. 2.11. Or as Stephen 〈…〉, When he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren, the children of Israel, Acts 7.23. This fact of Moses in refusing to be called the son of the King's daughter, was a hardy attempt; not only to despise and reject so great a dignity, such riches and pleasures, but also thereby freely to cast himself into that great calamity, under which the people of God then suffered in Egypt. Therefore the Author willing further to illustrate and more amply to describe this notable fact 〈◊〉 Moses, doth add in the verse following.  
25. Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, then to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season. The riches and dignity which Moses did possess with sin, that is, with the denial of God's people, and so of God himself, (for otherwise enjoy them he could not) he thought to be but a temporary use of sin; and he therefore thought so, either because he saw how transitory and fading these things are; or else because he thought, that God who is the avenger of sin, would not suffer him long to enjoy those riches and dignities together with such a wickedness, and that some vengeance of God, would suddenly strip him of all his riches and power, and c●st some sad punishment upon him for so foul a sin.  
26. Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt] The Author proceeds yet, further to illustrate and amplify this fact of Moses. But seeing by the reproach of Christ is signified that calamity whereinto Moses cast himself and which he esteemed greater riches than the treasures of Egypt, there must needs be some trope in those words. For properly the Reproach of Christ is that which Christ himself suffereth. But by way of Metaphor, it may signify a Reproach like unto that which was sometime suffered by Christ or his people, who are sometime termed by the name of Christ: or the Reproach which he suffers who bears the type of Christ or his people. Such was the Reproach of the Israelites in Egypt, that is, their extreme affliction and oppression joined with much shame and disgrace. Now Moses would rather become a partner of this calamity, by professing himself an Israelite, then to possess the treasures of Egypt. For whereas some imagine, that Moses is said in this place to have suffered for Christ's sake, this is a fond conceit. As if Pharaoh had ever thought of Christ, or had therefore persecuted Moses, because he professed himself a Christian, and not rather an Israelite. Yet we are to take notice, that this metaphor here, either in both the words joined together; namely, the reproach of Christ] or in the single word of Christ; so as Christ in this place may be taken for the type or image of Christ. And Christ whose type and image is here signified, will be either Christ himself, or the people of Christ, who as we have said, are sometime noted and included in the name of Christ, as 1 Cor. 12.12. So also is Christ, and Gal. 3.16. and to thy seed which is Christ. In which places it is most certain, that by the name of Christ is signified the people of Christ jointly with Christ their head. But that people of Israel were a type of both these, both of Christ himself and of all Christian people. For hence it is, that in a mystical sense, that is referred to Christ, which in a literal sense was spoken of the Israelites, Out of Egypt have I called my Son] Hos. 11.1. and Mat. 2 15. Therefore this people of Israel in bearing this type both of Christ & Christians, might very fitly by this Author be called Christ. But as we said, there may be a Metaphor in both the words conjoined, the Reproach of Christ; and so the reproach of the Israelites in Egypt may be called the reproach of Christ; because in like manner it bears a type and image of the reproach both of Christ and of Christians, by reason of Christ. For so the Author was pleased to speak, that he might speak with reference to the afflictions of Christians, who must properly and truly bear the reproach of Christ for the hope of an exceeding reward from God: which phrase the Author useth afterward, Chap. 13.13. For comparisons and allusions as we have often noted, are subject to many abusions or improprieties. For he had respect unto the recompense of the reward.] Here he shows the cause and ground from whence the faith of Moses grew, was one or both the principles of faith mentioned in the first verse: he had an evidence or sight of something unseen; he saw the unseen recompense of reward, which God would bestow on him, for his esteem of the Reproach of Christ; and he had a subsistence of a thing hoped for, in that he hoped for the recompense of reward; which sight and hope composed and framed his faith, and are both signified in the word respect, whereby he both saw and hoped for the recompense of reward. And his faith built upon these two grounds made him do and suffer hard things for God's sake from whom he expected his reward; for such is the general nature of faith to encourage and support us under hard and heavy attempts.  
27. By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the King] He mentions here another effect of the faith of Moses. And this may be understood, first of that flight of Moses out of Egypt, after he had professed himself an Israelite, not only in words, but by the slaughter of an Egyptian doing wrong to an Israelite, Exod. 2,15. In which flight especially the faith of Moses appeared, because by his flight he hoped, that by God's help he should escape, and that the wrath of so great and so potent a King, who as one said truly, have long hands, should not hurt him having avoided the danger by flying; and being at a great distance out of the King's reach, he feared not the wrath of the King; for so only we must understand his not fearing of the King's wrath. For otherwise in the forecited place of Exod. 2.14. it is written that Moses did fear, and because he feared, therefore he fled. But after that, when he was fled, than he feared not. For he endured as seeing him who is invisible.] Here he more fully declares the faith of Moses, and to show the perfection of it, doth explicate both the effect and the cause of it. The effect of it was, that thereby he endured; that is, he voluntarily underwent a grievous banishment, and constantly bore it, and cared not so much to be reconciled to the King, as to live in banishment despoiled of all his former dignity, though he could no where subsist safe or secure. And the cause of his faith was, his evidence or sight of a person unseen, for he saw God who is invisible, which sight built up his faith in God. Yet this whole verse may be referred to that fact of Moses, when returning by God's command from his flight and banishment into Egypt, and doing there so many strange miracles, that the King mastered with divers plagues and at last hardly dismissing the people, he departed out of Egypt with all the Israelites as their Leader and Captain; which act he did by faith, because he feared not, that the King incensed with wrath, as is usually done in the like case, should collect all his forces, and pursuing him and the people should assault them by force of arms, and utterly destroy those with war and slaughter, whom before he could not keep in bondage. And this will be the more fitly done, if we refer it to his purpose and preparation for his departure out of Egypt with the people. For in the verse following the Author mentions the keeping of the Passeover, which preceded the departure of the Israelites from Egypt. And it is very probable that the Author observed the order of time. He endured; that is, he was not discouraged at the troubles and crosses which hindered the departure of the people out of Egypt, partly by the offence of so great a King, and partly by the complaints of the people, who were thereupon the more oppressed. For to endure doth properly signify perseverance and constancy in matters of difficulty and trouble. All this he performed with such a courage of mind as if before his eyes he had seen that God who cannot be seen; that is, as we have said, so fully confiding in God, that neither doubted the assistance of God, nor the success of the action.  
28. Through faith he kept the Passeover and the sprinkling of blood] Another proof of the faith of Moses, in performing and keeping the Passeover. For to what end and purpose did he this, but because he was most certain, by his rest upon the promise of God, that by this means all the firstborn of Israel should be preserved from that destruction which should fall upon the firstborn of Egypt. The sprinkling of blood, was done by the blood of the Lamb slain for the Passeover, which being taken in a basin, and a bunch of hyssop dipped in it, was sprinkled upon the lintel and the two side-posts of the doors to those houses where the Passeover was eaten: whereof see Exod. 12.13.33. Lest he that destroyed the firstborn, should touch them.] The destroyer was that Angel of God, who by God's command was to destroy in one night all the firstborn of Egypt throughout their single houses. For although in the 12. Chap. of Exod. it be several times said, that the Lord would pass over the land of Egypt and destroy the firstborn; yet in the same Chap. ver. 23. God is manifestly distinguished from that destroyer; whereby it appears that God brought this destruction upon Egypt by the Ministry and service of an Angel.  
29. By faith they passed through the Red sea, as by dry land] Hitherto the Author hath produced examples of faith from single persons only: but now he would show the effects and fruits of faith in a more popular and public consideration, as it may be seated in the Church or people of God; yet not universally so as no single person should have no defect of faith; but generally for the most part, or major part. And although of the faith here mentioned, the Author speak impersonally, they passed] not naming who they were; yet the context doth clearly show us, that the impersonal they must be referred to the persons of Moses and the Israelites; because they only were the persons that passed through the red Sea. So the faith here specified was seated in Moses, yet not in him singly and exclusively, but in Moses jointly with the Israelites, or people of God, whose faith herein concurred with the faith of Moses: though therein the faith of Moses was singularly eminent; for he smote the waters so faithfully with his rod, that upon the stroke they were divided; and he was the leader and persuader of the people to their passage. But the faith of the people was but general for the most or major part; for some of them did hardly or very weakly believe. Of this public or common faith the Author mentions two effects; whereof the first is, the passage of the Israelites through the red Sea, as by dry land] That arm of the Sea, which they passed, is in the Hebrew called Suph, that is the Rushy sea, because of the Bul-rushes therein abounding: but why among other nations it is called the red sea, Interpreters agree not; whether it be from the redness of the water, or the redness of the sand, both by the shore and in the deep. or from king Erytha, whose name signifies red, and sometime possessed that Sea: neither is the knowledge of the thing any way material. This Sea, the waters of it being divided on each hand, they passed as by dry land.] The word land is not in the Greek, but must be understood according to the Hebrew phrase usual amongst them; as it is in divers passages of the Psalms, and Mat. 23.15. The causes of this their faith was, their evidence or sight of a thing unseen, and their subsistence of a thing hoped for; for God had promised them a passage thorough the midst of this Sea, as safe as on dry ground. Exod. 14.15,16. The truth of this promise being unseen, they saw and hoped for, and therefore they believed it. Which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned.] The other effect of their faith upon the Egyptians; or rather an effect of defect of faith in the Egyptians; who having in them no true faith at all, but presumption enough and too much rashness, would needs imitate the fact of God's faithful people, and in their presumption assaying to pass the red Sea, as the faithful had done before them, were therein drowned. And that fact which to the faithful was a means of their salvation, was destruction to unbelievers, who would seem to be faithful. For the drowning of the Egyptians in that Sea, was an effect of the Israelites faith; because they had a sight of it unseen; for God had promised the Israelites upon their passage thorough the red Sea, not only salvation to themselves, but destruction to the Egyptians, whom they should never see more. Exod. 14.13. For hereby the Israelites saw that destruction of the Egyptians which was not yet seen, and therefore did believe the truth of it, whereupon followed the effect of it.  
30. By faith the walls of jericho fell down, after they were compassed about seven days.] Having amply exemplified the faith of Moses, who was the first Captain over God's people to bring them out of Egypt: now he seconds Moses with the faith of Joshua, who was the second Captain of that people, to give them entrance and possession in the land of Canaan: yet this is so intended of Joshua, as the people also are joined in faith with him; for they also did partake both in the action and benefit of this faith. The action or fact of this faith was, the Compassing about of jericho seven days.] Jericho was a fortified town, so strongly defended or shut up, as the Scripture terms it, that it was impregnable, and the Israelites had no hope to take it by assault: and because it was a frontier town to the land of Canaan, therefore unless they first take Jericho, they can have no passage to march further into the land of Canaan, but are there wholly intercepted and stopped from all entrance into the land promised. Jericho therefore must needs first be taken: and because it cannot be conquered by force of arms, therefore it shall be taken by force of faith, after compassing about the walls of it seven days.] God who is so powerful that he could create the world in six days, could have destroyed. Jericho in less than seven: yet God who is so merciful, that he gave the great City of Niniveh forty days, would give little Jericho seven days; for God who sent Ionas to them of Niniveh, had provided Rahab for them of Jericho, as a Prophet and a Preacher of repentance unto them. For she who for herself had such faith to believe in God, would gladly have preached the like faith to the City, that God who is the God in heaven above and in earth beneath, had given that land to his own people, as she herself had before acknowledged to the spies of Israel. Josh. 2.9 11. But because they of Jericho were so wicked, that she durst not preach this faith among them, and so obstinate, that if she had preached it, yet they would not believe it, therefore by the faith of God's people, after seven days compassing, the walls of Jericho shall fall down. Now the cause of this faith in the people of God, was their evidence or sight of things unseen, and the subsistence they had of a thing hoped for; for God had promised them by the mouth of Joshua, that upon this fact of compassing the City seven days once a day, and the seventh day seven times, the wall of it should fall down flat. Josh. 6.4,5. The truth of this promise being yet unseen, they saw and hoped for, and thereby grew their faith to believe it.  
31. By faith the harlot Rahab] There are that think that Rahab was not an harlot, but an Innkeeper, or Taverner; which because they are wont sometimes to be harlots, or to receive harlots that frequent their houses, therefore among the Hebrews, the name of harlot is applied to hostesses. But this signification of the Hebrew word Hazzonah they prove not by examples. Neither is it for nothing, that the Scripture whensoever she mentions the example of Rahab, to whom God shown so much favour and mercy, forgets not to give her this attribute of harlot. For it seems to do this, thereby to show, the great force of a true and lively faith, because by virtue thereof, many attain to justification and impunity, who otherwise by their life little deserve it. Now if the Hebrew word Hazzonah signified only a public hostess, when it is uttered of Rahab, and not an harlot properly so called, this singular commendation of Rahabs' faith were utterly lost-which notwithstanding James and this Author endeavour to express. Perished not with them that believed not] The inhabitants of Jericho are called unbelievers, because they would not believe, that the God of heaven had granted to the Israelites the possession both of their city and of the whole land of Canaan, or because believing this grant of God yet they would not obey it, by giving way to it; for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifies as well unobedient as unbelieving. And they were disobedient, because they would not admit but opposed the people of God, whom they knew were approaching, and had heard what strange works God had done for them, and consequently would not submit to God's way. For if herein they had joined with Rahab, to have believed as she did, they might with her have escaped the destruction of their City and their own ruin. For that Law of God which had appointed so many Nations to the slaughter, was by collating it with another Law to be understood to take place, with the exception of those that should freely submit to things commanded them, and should renounce the worship of their Idols and false gods. All which appears by the example of Rahab and of Solomon who took the remnant of the Canaanites to his dominion under tribute, 1 King. 9.20,21. When she had received the spies with peace] She abstained from all injury towards those spies herself, and from all treachery in discovering them to others, and defended them from the violence of those that made inquisition after them: For these were the expressions of that peace wherewith she received them. And this her faith was not idle and empty, but testified with a notable action of trial. For she did not only receive those spies with the danger of her life, but she hide them, and afterward dismissed them with many difficulties. Which fact of hers, how available it was to her justification, both the thing itself declares, and S. James openly testifies, Jam. 2.25. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works when she had received the messengers and had sent them out another way.  
32. And what shall I more say?] As if he had said; Why should I stay longer in relating of single examples of those whose faith is testified in Scripture? For the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, Barac, Samson, and of Jephte, of David also, and Samuel, and of the Prophets. He placeth David, though latter in time before Samuel though elder, not only for the greater dignity of David, but also because Samuel came nearer in quality to the Prophets with whom he closeth; And David came nearer to those Heroes forenamed, as Gedeon, Barac and Samson; for he was a middle person between the Heroes and the Prophets, and was indeed both.  
33. Who through faith subdued kingdoms.] This is principally referred to David who subdued some kingdoms. But this was done by faith, because when God promised him victory over his enemies, he believed it, and upon his belief thereof did make war upon them; whereof we may read several Psalms of David, composed by him to that purpose; and among others, Psal. 2.18.20. and 21. Wrought righteousness] Such were also the same David, Samuel and the Prophets. Here in like manner it appears, that faith taken strictly and properly differs from the working of righteousness, as the cause from the effect; because righteousness is the effect of an effectual faith. Obtained promises] These seem rather to signify, that by faith they obtained new and extraordinary promises; such as that promise made to David, that the Kingdom should be settled upon his posterity for ever, and that Christ should be borne from his line; then that they obtained the effect of God's solemn promises. For if that effect be taken for immortal life, it is false, as it is taught afterward, ver. 39 But if we take it of the blessings of this life, they scarce seem any other, than victories and triumphs over their enemies. But these are particularly related in the verse following: unless we say that those promises which they obtained are specified and reckoned up in the verses following; and so after he had said, that by faith they wrought righteousness, he rightly adds, they also obtained the promises, namely those which presently he would specify in particular, even unto those words of verse 35. Others were tortured] And so as from thence it followeth; where after he had reckoned up divers calamities which the servitors of God supported by their faith in God, had endured, at last, he adds, that they received not the promise. It may seem therefore the Author would say, that some by their faith obtained the effect of God's promises, as namely they before mentioned, who in this life attained those great benefits of God which he reckoned up: but others afterward mentioned, though they had no less faith in God then the former, yet enjoyed not the performance of God's promise, because they were deprived of their lives for their righteousness and faith in God. Stopped the mouths of Lions] As Daniel did, the history whereof is extant, Dan. 6.  
34. Quenched the violence of fire] As those three young men, in Babylon, who seem in a manner to be accounted among the Prophets, see Daniel 3. Escaped the edge of the sword] As many of the Prophets did, whose lives were attempted by the Kings and the people, as Elias, Elisha, Jeremy, Micheas. Out of weakness were made strong] By recovering from dangerous and deadly sicknesses, as Ezechias, 2 King. 20. Waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the Armies of the aliens] As Samson and David; though we may refer this valour, not only to their courage of mind, but to their strength of body. Of Samson, see Judg. 14. and the Chapters following: Of David, Psal. 18.35.37. etc. And hither we may refer those several Worthies of David, of whom we read, 2 Sam. 23. and 1 Chron 11.  
35. Women received their dead raised to life again] Namely by the faith of the Prophets Elias and Elisha, see 1 King. 17.19. & 2 King. 4.21. and in the latter of these two miracles there was an access of the mother's faith also. And others were tortured] The word others doth show that the Author now speaks of another sort of persons eminent also for their faith: Namely, of such whose faith was not conspicuous for victories or warlike exploits, which belong not so much to Christians; nor for the sole works of righteousness, or other notable gift of God, as their faith was of whom he spoke hitherto; but of a faith whereof trial was made in suffering persecutions and grievous afflictions for God and Righteousness sake; which is more properly a Christian Faith. For of the same faith the effects are divers. The torture here mentioned is in the Greek tympanized; which is a torture whereby a man is distended or stretched alive like a drum, and then beaten with cudgels as a drum is; which kind of torture is in use at this day among many Nations. And it was inflicted upon Eleazar that reverend old man, in the time of Antiochus the persecuter, 2 Maccab. 6. For without doubt the Author in this place had respect to those times. Although some of the afflictions which he afterwards mentioneth, happened in the time of Elias under Ahab and Jesabel; see 1 King. 18.4.13. and Chap. 19.10. Not accepting deliverance] When deliverance or release from their tortures was offered them upon condition to renounce God's Law, they would not accept it, see the history of Eleazar, 2 Maccab. 6.19,30. for to those words there, the Author seems to have relation here. That they might obtain a better resurrection] He shows with what faith, and with what hope they endured their tortures; namely, because they believed and hoped, they should obtain from God a fare better resurrection. But whence did they gain this faith and hope? Certainly, not from any open or clear promise of a resurrection, extant in the Law of God: but only trusting upon the sole goodness, righteousness, and power of God. For seeing they did strongly believe, that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him; and yet saw, that unless with extreme wickedness they would forsake the Law of God, they must suffer heavy calamities, as banishment, imprisonment, tortures and cruel deaths; they were hereupon raised into this hope, that there were rewards laid up for the virtue and piety of God's worshippers to be received after this life; and that it could not possibly be, that God who is most gracious and righteous, should have no reward in store for that virtue and piety which of all other is the greatest, & doth cost men the loss of their lives, than which nothing can be dearer unto them. Thus therefore God, even under the Old Testament, did with such rudiments by little and little exercise his people toward the hope of another life: although there can be no doubt, but that the servitors of God were under those hard and sad times of persecution inspired by the Spirit of God, and did thereby so much the more taste and swallow this hope in their souls. Now if they, by hope of the future Resurrection, whereof they had no open promise of God, and knew not in any certainty the future quality and blessedness thereof, did suffer such grievous calamities for their constancy to Gods Law. How much more should we, who have an open promise of the resurrection, and know both the future qualities of it, and the great happiness that will accompany it, fear no terrors, no banishments, no torments nor punishments for Christ and for righteousness sake. As it is usual in comparisons, he tacitly calls their deliverance from punishment, a resurrection, by way of abusion, while he opposeth it to the true resurrection as to a condition much better. Therefore they despised deliverance, which was but an umbratilous and transitory resurrection, to obtain the true resurrection accompanied with eternal life and happiness.  
36. And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourge] As the mother with her seven sons, 2 Macab. 7. Yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonments.] While Antiochus did rage in his persecution, there must needs be a great number of those, who because they would not forsake the Law of their God, were cast into bonds and prisons; from whence a while after divers of them were drawn forth to divers punishements, which are presently mentioned.  
37. They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword] He recounts divers kinds of punishments, which of old the worshippers of God endured, trusting and relying upon God; that by their example he might stir up the followers of Christ to the like constancy in their sufferings. Were tempted] In the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which some suspect to be corrupted, and to be read for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they were burned. And indeed, if this word were usual, there could seem no doubt of this reading; for it might easily be written by changing the vowel into the diphthong, seeing the sense i very agreeable to the place. For here are recounted divers kinds and means of death, as stones, saws, axes, swords, and among which fire also may well be placed. But tempting seems not any of the number. For temptation is a thing general and common to all who suffer persecutions for righteousness sake. And withal temptation doth imply the constancy of them who are tempted. But if we must needs read it they were tempted, than we must understand it of some particular kind and form of temptation, wherewith persons in distress might easily be overcome, and drawn from their constancy; as for example, when a man is follicited to some feigned act, or to some ambiguous words, by promising him safety, and some good rewards besides, to condescend to this, that though he will not truly recede from his former way, yet that he seem to recede from it. For after this manner we read Eleazar was temped. Now for a man to overcome such a temptation by lending no care nor mind unto it, but rather die a cruel death, then to stain the reputation of his confession and constancy with the least show of dissembling, is a great and a brave conquest. They wandered about in sheep's skins and goats skins] For they had no means to procure other garment or covering for their body; and therefore he presently adds, being destitute, afflicted, tormented. This is the reason, why they wandered about, and why in sheep's skins, and goat's skins, because they were destitute of all worldly provision, and in all places where they came were afflicted and tormented, and therefore they wandered from place to place in that despicable and poor manner. All which miseries happened unto them in the times of the Maccabes under the persecution of the cruel Antiochus.  
38. Of whom the world was not worthy: they wandered in deserts and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth] The Author interposeth the former words of this verse, to show the indignity of the usage and foulness of the injury, which the wicked inflicted upon the true servitors of God. As if he had said, these good men were constrained to wander like wild beasts, and to hid themselves like wild beasts in deserts and mountains, in holes and caves of the earth: but among men in Towns and Cities, they could have no abode, though for their piety and faith toward God, they were of such worth and respect, that the inhabitants of the whole world were unworthy of them. Of this carriage, Christians especially aught to take notice, when they see worthy persons to be vexed, banished, afflicted and slaughtered of the unworthy, good men of evil, and the innocent of the wicked. For as the Author would intimate unto us, it may be, that the world herein did in a manner punish herself, in that she persecuted and banished such holy persons, and drove them away from her, of whose conversation and company she was altogether unworthy.  
39 And these all having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise] The word all seems in the intention of the Author, to be chief referred to those persons last mentioned, who for the love of God's Law suffered such great calamities. For the former persons mentioned before them, obtained some promises of God as rewards of their faith: but these latter that were persecuted and slain for the testimony of God's Law, had none. And yet, all their faith who were mentioned in the former place, was not such a faith, as to be of itself a saving faith, or such an one, which could procure them eternal life, which the Author here understands by the name of the promise, unless something else were added, particularly that faith which concerns only wars, or had some certain thing proposed for the matter of it, as the recovery of their health, or the raising of their dead children to life, and which was perpetual in them, working in them that had it, true righteousness and piety; for there is no cogent reason constraining us to affirm, that it was such a faith: See what the Author hath affirmed, ver. 33, 34, 35. A good report part through faith] They obtained the praise and commendation of their faith in the Scriptures, See ver. 2. through faith] Partly because their faith was the cause, why they performed such worthy acts, as deserved great praise and commendation. Partly, because such a notable faith in God, was of itself the cause and matter of that good report and commendation. Received not the promise.] The article the doth show, that some excellent promise is here designed out; namely, that which is peculiar and proper unto Christians, which hath none greater and more excellent than itself; the promise I mean, of that truly blessed and eternal life; which though it were not openly promised to them, but only to us, yet it shall be given to them as well as to us. But the word promise is taken here materially for the thing promised.  
40. God having provided some better thing for us] He adds here the cause why they have not yet received the promise. For the Hebrews might think, that God in this respect had not dealt so well with them, that they had not yet received the reward of their faith, works and sufferings. The Author therefore meets with such surmifes, and shows it was done for this reason, because God had provided some better thing for us. 
A question.  But here it may be demanded, wherein our condition is the better, in that they might not receive that promise, nor be perfected without us? For if they had received eternal happiness before, would the sum of our happiness have been any thing the less? Or is our happiness any thing the greater, because they are made to stay for it? The Answer to this may be twofold, and according to the twofold Answer, there will arise a twofold sense of these words. 
Answer 1.  The first Answer is, That God would herein provide for our dignity, and make our happiness the more illustrious. For although if we regard the thing itself, nothing would either be taken from our happiness, if they had obtained eternal life without us or before us; or will now accrue unto it, that they have it not without us, but together with us; yet respectively and comparatively, we should have been far inferior unto them, if they without staying for us, had been long since invested in heavenly joys. But now, seeing they are constrained to stay for us, and may not enjoy that promise before us; hence appears, that the dignity of Christians is very great, and that their happiness is made much more conspicuous; seeing there are none who can seem to obscure it, by preventing it with a fuller or more early happiness. And certainly very convenient it was, that God should so provide for it, that they who had obeyed him, only according to the ordinances of Moses, should not prevent in happiness those who compose their lives and manners according to the perfect Law and discipline of Christ; and that they who never had any open promise of eternal life, should enjoy that life before them, who had an open and clear Covenant for it. But rather, seeing by God's goodness they were to be made equal to Christians in the reward of that happiness, should in this be made inferior to Christians, in staying for them to receive God's promises; and that as secondary guests, who were not openly invited to the banquet, they should have their access, by, and with them, who were truly and first invited; and not enjoy those heavenly banquets so long a time before these. And therefore the words some better thing] may be taken two ways; either as our state compared with their state, may be said to be better; or as our present state compared with our future state may be said better, if they had received Gods promise long before us. But because that in itself doth neither increase our future happiness, nor in like manner doth decrease their future happiness, therefore the Author seems to say some better thing to show, that he understands some such better thing, which only in some sense and in some respect is better. For the word some thing is often used in such forms of speech, to diminish the signification, and detract somewhat from the propriety of the word whereto it is adjoined. 
Answer. 2.  The other answer which happily is more suitable to the fence and words of the Author, is this. The Author therefore speaks thus, to intimate that the end of the world is at hand, when the reward of eternal life shall be given to the godly that believe in God; wherefore, if those ancient worshippers of God had long since enjoyed it, we that were not then in being might have failed of it. Therefore lest we should be excluded of it, God did defer both the end of the world, and the reward of his worshippers; and by this means provided something better for us, than otherwise should have been, if they who went before us, without staying for us, while we were yet unborn, had alone by themselves attained eternal happiness. For the reasons why we rest not in the former sense, are. 1. Because by admitting that sense, it doth not sufficiently appear, how God hath truly and really made our condition better by this, that they who went before us, were not long since rewarded with eternal life, but are made to stay for our salvation; whether our state be compared with their state, or with our own future state. For certainly by this means our state is not made better than theirs, but only each of our states is made equal. Also how is our present state made hereby better than our future, if God had otherwise determined it? For what was it, that God had appointed unto us? was it not the reward of eternal life to be bestowed upon us at the end of the world, in the consummation of this present age? but this remains whole and entire unto us, neither is it really decreased if we suppose them long since saved: neither is it increased, if we suppose them not saved. They lose much by it, in that they yet enjoy not God's promise of eternal life; but what do we really gain by it? you will say, their condition would have been better, and ours worse; which because now it is not worse, but equal to theirs, therefore it may be said to be better now then otherwise it would have been. But all this is rather subtlety of words, than solidity of matter. If this had been the intent of the Author's mind, could he not, nay, must he not have spoken much more clearly, thus? that God therefore hath not yet given them the reward of eternal life, lest they should be fare superior unto us; and so much the rather, because it doth not forthwith follow, that our state is therefore truly better, because it is not worse than theirs. For this would indeed be true, if nothing were abated them: but seeing all that portion of happiness whereby they were ancienter than we, is abated them; certainly by this means our happiness is nothing more, but theirs only something less. And the former sense requires that the particle without in the words of the Author, should signify all one with before, that is, not to exclude us from perfecting simply, but only from the same time of perfecting. But if this were the mind of the Author, he might as easily have said before as without; yea, he should have rather said it; seeing the usual force of the latter particle is simply to separate and exclude that, whereto it is adjoined, who sees not, if we respect the proper and native signification of the Author's words, that it is all one as if he had said, they should not be perfected excluding us, or we not being perfected? And howsoever the particle something doth sometime diminish the signification, yet the matter itself in this place seems to require, that it signify no small or respective good, but some singular advantage greatly necessary to our condition, which is the usual force of that particle. For such a thing it must needs be, that was the cause, why such holy men, so dear unto God, and dead so many ages past, should not to this day enjoy the promise of God, and receive the reward of their labours and sufferings. And in this argument, wherein we debate the causes, why God should for so many ages defer the effect of his promise, what either may, or can, or must be brought of greater moment, then that by this means, God in the mean time hath exceedingly provided for us, who should otherwise have been excluded from that eternal happiness, if the time appointed for the perfecting of the godly, had been long since expired? Piscator a good Interpreter had seen this sense, and rightly explicated it, if he had not referred the word promise to the first coming of Christ upon earth, contrary to the mind and scope of the Author, but had related it to the reward of eternal life as he ought to have done. Neither hath any man cause to object, that persons yet unborn are nonentity; and nonentity as we say, have neither affections nor conditions, and therefore nothing can be done to them either better or worse, nothing ordained or provided for their good or evil: or if all should be continually borne, than we must fall upon an infinite proceeding, and so no time would be fixed for the godly wherein to attain their reward. We therefore answer, that nonentity are of two sorts, either such as actually only have not being, although afterward they shall or may have it, or such as necessarily neither have being, nor ever shall or can have it. Of these latter nothing can be truly said or affirmed: but of the former nonentity many things may and commonly are said, and their state may sundry ways be better or worse; for hence both Philosophers and Lawyers call them possibilities. So Christ said of his betrayer; It had been good for that man, if he had never been borne, Mat. 26.24. For when Judas was a nonentity or yet unborn: yet even then he was a possibility and might be borne; but his nonentity had been better, if it had been an impossibility, never to have been borne. So sometime we call them happy, who were not borne in troublesome and sad times; whereto also in a manner we may refer the words of Christ; Behold the days are coming, in the which they shall say. Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore, and the paps which never gave suck, Luke 23.29. In like manner, they who by their death have prevented some calamities by dying before they suffered under them, are in that respect commonly called happy; because they might have lived so long as to have suffered them. And in this sense a Philosopher said, That it was best for a man not to be borne; and it was next to best, to die presently after he was borne. Contrarily, we often call them unhappy, who died before they had brought their state to some happy condition, or lived not to see those happy times that immediately succeeded their death. Therefore in the number of these nonentity, they may be reckoned, who though they were yet unborn, yet might have been borne. Hence with very good reason, as we may call those unhappy who shall never be borne, but are intercepted by the end of the world, and therefore shall never attain that heavenly and eternal happiness: so much more are we happy and blessed, who are already borne because by the providence and goodness of God the perfection of the godly is deferred to our times, whereby there remains to us a passage and entrance to it. And to comprise the matter in a few words and answer briefly. In that decree of God, whereby he is said to have provided some better thing for us, who were not yet borne, than it would have been, if he had long since perfected the godly, we must be considered, neither as already borne, nor yet as to be borne after infinite ages to come; but as they who might be borne, while yet the end of the world was not for many ages to be deferred; and Gods decree being passed, must be borne. Happy therefore we are by virtue of this Decree; but otherwise we should have been unhappy. Better for us] that is, for us that are Christians; for this must not be restrained only to the Hebrews, to whom this Epistle was written: but must be extended to all men under the same covenant, namely to all Christians. Whence in a manner it appears, that the former examples of those who suffered such various afflictions, belong to the Jews under the old Covenant, and not to the Christians under the new. God having provided] God's Decree is here signified. For the thing here specified, depends only from the decree and ordinance of God; as if he had said, God having procured; for to provide, is to procure. That they without us should not be made perfect] How variously the Author useth the word perfecting in this Epistle may appear from our former explications: and here he takes it in a sense different from all the former. He said in the last verse preceding, that they received not the promises; and now he iterates the very same thing, and saith in other words, they are not made perfect. And therefore in this place to receive the promise, and to be made perfect, that is, finally to attain eternal blessedness, is all one thing. And in this sense it seems he used this word of Christ, before chap. 5.9. where he opposed Christ being made perfect, to Christ subject unto sufferings. Now they who do receive that promise of eternal life and happiness, are fitly said to be perfected; first, because before they attain it, whether they are living or dead, they are many ways imperfect; and secondly, because when they have attained it, they have filled up the measure of their happiness, and made it so absolute, that it neither hath any defect, neither can it receive any access, but is for ever finished.   

The Contents of the 11. Chapter, are,  

Notions. 

The principles of Faith are two. 

1. Every subsistence of a thing hoped for, is faith.  
2. Every sight of a thing unseen, is faith, ver. 1.    
The necessity of faith is, that without it, it is impossible to please God ver. 6.  
The chief points or specialties of faith are two. 

1. To believe that God is.  
2. To believe that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him, v. 6.      
1. Doctrine. By faith we know the world was made by God, v. 3. 

Reason. Because in the things that are seen we have a sight of things unseen, ibid.    
2. Doctrine. By faith the Patriarches obtained a good report, ver. 2. 

Example. As Abel, Enoch and Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Moses, Josua and Rahab, etc.  
Reason. 1. Because they had a sight of things unseen which God had promised them.  
2. Because they had a subsistence of things hoped for, for they hoped for the things promised.    
3. Doctrine. The Patriarches have not yet received the promise. 

Reason. Because God hath so provided that they without us should not be made perfect.       

CHAPTER XII.  

1. WHerefore seeing we also] He enters upon an exhortation to the Hebrews, to be constant in the faith, especially not to be discouraged by reason of the afflictions which they suffered. And this exhortation he infers from the examples specified in the former Chapter, and confirms it with new arguments, for their better encouragement. We also, q.d. Let not us show out selves inferior to them, whose examples were formerly mentioned: but let us also perform the same things which they did. Are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses] The Author adds this, because it is of great force to stir us up unto the course and conflict of our faith. And in this his exhortation, he useth an elegant allegory, drawn from the simile of a race which was a thing then much in use. He brings us in, as it were upon a spacious theatre, whereunto a multitude of spectators are collected, which having filled all the seats and rooms doth encompass the runners round about like a thick cloud: and he makes us to be runners, having the eyes of such a multitude of spectators upon us. And as anciently such a multitude of spectators did add courage to the runners, and was a mighty spur unto them to contend for the victory; so also to us, so many witnesses, who have themselves formerly laboured in the same race, should add courage, that we might run the race begun to the utmost of our strength and breath. He calls them witnesses not only in allusion to the spectators at a race (as we said) who are a kind of witnesses of their activity that run; but also and much rather, because they testify of God, of his righteousness and goodness, and all of them with one voice, as it were, say, that God is, and is a rewarder of them that seek him; and that he as the supreme depositary keeps the prize for them that run well; that he is most faithful in his promises, and can even after death make them happy, who have spent their life for his sake. For by witnesses in this place we must chief understand them, who testify God's faithfulness and goodness with their blood; and hence are eminently called Martyrs, i witnesses. A cloud of witnesses] That is, a great multitude of witnesses, which carry the show and bulk of a cloud. Hence God himself comparing the multitude of our sins to a cloud, saith, I have blotted out as a thick cloud thy transgressions, and as a cloud thy sins, Isaiah 44.22. Let us lay aside every weight] He recedes not from his simile proposed. For they that will contend in the running of a race, must free themselves from all weights, and lighten themselves as much as they can. By weight in this spiritual race of faith, we must understand the love of this life, and the care of things pertaining to it; wherewith our souls are burdened and pressed downward to the earth as it were with a great weight. And the sin which doth so easily beset us] He seems to allude to long and lose garment, which unless they be laid aside, are a great hindrance to runners, about whose legs such garments do easily wave and wrap themselves. By sin he seems to mean all outward vicious acts, as before by weight, he signified the inward vices of the soul. For vicious acts do easily insinuate themselves upon us in our race of faith, and greatly retard us in our course begun, unless we cast off all our love to sin; for as often as we commit an actual sin, so often we fall as it were in our course of godliness. And let us run with patience, the race that is set before us] This race, is the course itself wherein we strive by running: for in the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whereby is signified all kind of strife in this manner, whether it be by running, wrestling, hurling, or any other way: but here he speaks of running. Therefore to run the race is nothing else but to strive by running; and by this strife in running he means especially the strife of our faith; which consists in this, that we never be cast in our hope of God's promises made by Christ, especially when we are to do or suffer some hard matter for Christ's sake. To this strife particularly Paul exhorts his Timothy, when he calls upon him, to fight the good fight of faith, 1 Tim. 6.12. And the very same is signified by this Author, when in the next verse willing to excite us to this strife, and to strengthen us for it, he requires us to look unto Jesus the Author and finisher of our faith. For this we must therefore do, lest we should waver in our faith, fainting and failing under it; for this is opposed to the strife of faith, for 3. This race is said to be set before us, namely by God and Christ, because the price or reward of eternal life is appointed us upon no other condition, but of our running this race. And we are commanded to run with patience] either because without patience it is impossible to keep our faith with God: or rather because this race or strife of faith appears and shows itself in nothing more, then in a constant suffering of adversities, in so much that he who with an invincible courage doth suffer all evils for God's sake and Christ, is thereby truly said to run the race of faith, things doth strive with afflictions, and will not be conquered or foiled by them.  
2. Looking unto jesus the author and finisher of the faith] Here he shows, from whence especially we must procure courage and strength for our race of faith and patience; and what should incite us to run stoutly, and bear all things patiently for righteousness sake? Namely, the example of the Captain of our faith, upon whom we must cast and fasten the eyes of our mind; considering seriously, both what he did and what he suffered; what a race he ran, and what a prize he obtained having finished his course. But he calls him not the Captain of faith simply, but of the faith, adding the article the, to specify unto us some particular and singular faith, which is denominated from him, and called the Christian faith, because Christ was the Author and Captain of it; not only because he was the first that taught it, but also the first that performed it, or the first that did run the race of it. And he is also called the finisher of our faith, because as he was the first Author that began it, so he is the finisher thereof to bring it to an issue and put an end unto it; for a thing is then finished when it hath attained the proper end. In like manner, our faith shall be finished, when it is come to the issue of it, whereby we attain the salvation of our souls, which as Peter saith, is the end of our faith, 1 Pet. 1.9. And this end is attained through Christ. For the like reason it was, that this Author before Chap. 3. ver. 1. called Christ Jesus the Apostle and high Priest of our profession. For the appellation of Apostle, though it rather note that Christ was the first teacher of our faith, than the first sufferer for it; and contrarily the appellation of the Captain of our faith, which here the Author useth, notes rather the latter than the former, yet both these appellations do tacitly include both. But Christ is our high Priest especially therefore, because it is his office to procure the expiation of our sins, and the eternal salvation of our souls: in which point (as we said) consisteth the finishing and ending of our faith. For to this present purpose this appellation of Christ is very suitable, and of great force to strengthen our minds and confirm them against all afflictions. For with what face should we forsake that faith, which hath so great a Captain to it, and hath him for the finisher of it who is the Author of it? Who for the joy that was set before him] Christ to obtain the joy that was set before him, endured the cross, and counterpoised the pain of death against the joy of eternal life. Hence it appears, that the joy of heaven, cannot be gotten at any less price than the cross, if need require. And he saith this joy was set before Christ, in allusion to the prize that is proposed to them that run in a race, or strive at some other game. By Joy he understands that supreme and heavenly happiness which Christ attained; and he calls it joy from the adjunct of it, because it is accompanied with unspeakable and perpetual joy; and withal is opposed to the pain of the Cross which he suffered. Of such high advantage it is for thee, to endure trouble and torment for a small time, that thereby thou mayest attain heavenly joys and pleasures for ever. Endured the cross] The cross hath in it two things extremely bitter; extreme pain and extreme shame: yet the shame of it, is to a noble spirit far more bitter than the pain of it; and therefore the Author adds, Despising the shame] It was a great shame and disgrace to the Son of God, who well knew the high dignity of his person, after he had delivered so many gracious doctrines, and wrought so many admirable miracles, after so great hope and expectation raised of him, to be seized upon by hangmen, dragged to execution, nailed to a cross, lifted up on high, to endure the faces and eyes of all men upon him, and be set as a mark for the spears and darts of bitter tongues. Yet Christ despised all this despite, all this shame and this disgrace, that for a momentany shame, be might attain everlasting glory, and for a temporal pain on earth, eternal joy in heaven. And is set down at the right hand of the throne of God] This is added to show, that Christ was not frustrated of his hope, but that he received a large reward of his faith and patience. To teach us, that if we also follow him in this race, we shall have the like issue of our faith and patience. But the great dignity and glory to Christ, that is signified by his sitting at the right hand of God's throne, is before explicated, Chap. 1. ver. 3. From this place and the other Chap. 8.1. it appears, that when Christ is said to sit at the right hand of God; by God's right hand is not understood his power and strength, as elsewhere it is; but in this phrase by a simile drawn from men, is signified, that the place at God's right hand is more honourable than that at his left. For otherwise it were not rightly said, the right hand of the throne of God; because a throne hath no hand nor is supposed to have any, but only a right side of it. And many times in the same sense, Christ is said to sit in the plural number at the right hands of God, or his power. For when the power of God is understood, or a right hand is attributed unto him by way of analogy, it is not called the right hands of God in the plural number, but his right hand in the singular. But when the right or left place is signified, it is commonly expressed plurally by right or left hands, though it be uttered in respect of one person only; See Mat. 20.21. and Mat. 25.33,34 41.  
3. For consider him that endured such contradictions of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.] He expresseth the end and use of the example of Christ, why we should diligently consider it; because we are to make this use of it, that our minds may not be tired with adversities and afflictions, and so we become wearied and faint in the course of our faith and patience, which here by profession of Christ we have begun to run.  
4. For ye have not resisted unto blood striving against sin.] He exhorts them with a new argument, to an invincible courage in bearing the afflictions which they suffered. For it seems, he would make them somewhat ashamed, that seeing the miseries wherewith they were pressed, were not so grievous, as that hitherto they had drawn blood from them, yet they begun to fail in courage and strength, contrary to God's express monition. Here also he alludes to strifes, yet such as were by fencing or fight, and not by running. For sin would beat us from our constancy of faith and piety toward God: but among the afflictions which come to be suffered of us for the love of Christ, is the abnegation or denial of sin, against which we must fight. In this fight therefore, while the combat is but upon our goods, our credit and reputation, the matter is not yet come to blood; but when cruelty, torture, and death chargeth upon our bodies, than the business is in good earnest, and the fight is in the heat. These Hebrews as it seems, were not yet in danger of their lives for Christ: but their sufferings were only mockings, reproaches, and spoiling of their goods, as appeareth, chap. 10. ver. 33.34. The Author therefore shows what a shameful thing it is, to turn the back and fly at the first skirmish, as it were, and entrance of the fight. But when he brings in sin for their enemy with whom they are to deal, he doth therein by a most effectual argument, encourage them to an holy valour, lest they should fail in their combat with an enemy so base and dangerous.  
5. And ye have forgotten the exhortation.] And for and yet, by way of a particle adversative. As if he had said. Though ye have not yet spent your life and blood for the love of Christ: yet the divine admonition or exhortation is slipped out of your mind, wherein ye are commanded to receive the chastning of the Lord with a ready mind, and to bear it patiently. And consequently, ye have forgotten your duty contained in that exhortation. For the Author doth not reprehend them merely for their memory that they had forgotten the words of that exhortation: but for their negligence, in not performing the duty therein commanded. We have said elsewhere, that he is said to remember a person or a matter, who hath a care of it: and therefore he that hath not such care, though otherwise he remember him in mind, doth forget him. This hath place chief in commands, counsels, and exhortations, which are not given therefore, only to remain in our memories; but they must so remain in our memories, as that they be put in execution and actually performed. And when the authority of the commander or admonisher is so great, that it is not likely, but that he who doth but only remember the command or monition, would obey it with great reason, they may be said to forget it, who though they retain it in a lively memory, yet obey it not. Which speaketh unto you as unto children] The Author commends this exhortation from the quality of it, that it is very gentle and fatherly, in regard it terms them children to whom it is directed. For who but a froward and obstinate person would not give way to such an exhortation? The exhortation is said to speak by way of Metonymy, because he that exhorteth speaketh by it, or rather because it is the very speech of him that exhorteth. Now the person who exhorteth, is openly Solomon, but secretly God, by whose instinct Solomon uttered this. Pro. 3.11. Therefore in this exhortation God himself calleth us his children; from whence it follows that we should receive it readily, and observe it diligently. My son, despise not thou the chastning of the Lord.] When we make God himself to speak and not Solomon, than the name or Noun of the Lord, must be supposed to be put for the pronoun my, after the Hebrew phrase. To despise, or (as it is in the Hebrew) to reject the chastning of the Lord, is nothing else but an unwillingness to bear it patiently, but to kick against it as against a prick. By the chastning of the Lord, the Author understands the afflictions, which the Hebrews suffered for Christ's sake: because many times God is wont to use such afflictions, not only to make trial of men, but to make men good, and to amend them by a fatherly correction. And we must conceive that this had then befallen those Hebrews. Nor faint when thou art rebuked of him.] Another abuse of Gods chastening quite contrary to the former; and that is, to faint and sink down under it. For some when they are chastened of God, are of a stubborn and impatient spirit: others are soft natured, or have no spirit at all; whence it comes to pass, that being overcome with afflictions, they faint and forsaking their trust and hope in God, turn aside from the paths of righteousness.  
6. For whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth] The reason expressed in the exhortation itself, why we should be obedient unto it, is because chastening is an effect and an argument of God's love toward us: And what proceeds from God's love, must not be despised or rejected, but be held in high esteem; neither must it deject our minds from faith and hope in God, but rather raise and encourage us to receive it. But we must note, that chastisement, that is, that correction or punishment which God inflicts upon us for our amendment, is a token and effect of God's love; and not every punishment, which oftentimes is laid on men for their destruction: for this is the effect of God's wrath and indignation, against which David supplicates in the sixth Psalm. Besides, this reason must be taken with a limitation; for God doth not chastise every one whom he loves (if we take chastising not simply for affliction, but for a punishment) but then only when they deserve chastising, as for the most part they do. But it appears by the scope and intent of the Author, that these words must be taken, as if it had been said, Whom the Lord loveth, he at last chastiseth, or sometime chastiseth. Which sentence is more fully expressed in the Hebrew text, if we look upon the following words, as we shall see presently. For otherwise we could not hence gather, that chastising is always an effect and token of God's love. For saving the truth of the words in the text, a man may imagine, that whom God loveth, he chastiseth, but not conversly, that whom he chastiseth he loveth: so that it may be doubted, whether chastising proceed from God's love or hatred. Neither are these say repugnant, Whom the Lord loveth he chastiseth; and whom he loveth not, he chastiseth; seeing God may chastise both these; unless as we said, we understand the particle at last in the latter part of the former saying; which in such say falls out very frequently. And scourgeth every son whom he receiveth] This is but a repetition of the same saying. In the Hebrew it is, even as a father the son in whom he delighteth; which is nothing else but the converse of the former saying; as if Solomon had said, whom God loveth, he chastiseth, and whom he chastiseth, he loveth. So that chastising is a most certain and undoubted effect and token of God's love. Whom he receiveth, i. whom God adopteth, acknowledgeth and accounteth for his Son. For God doth not acknowledge all for sons, who call themselves the Sons of God.  
7. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons.] From the former divine exhortation, the Author frames in a manner a new argument, to excite them unto patience in suffering of afflictions; because than God dealeth with them as with sons. Ye have this commodity by your patience, that God offers himself unto you as unto children, and he on his part performs the office of a Father; so thereby ye have God for your Father. And God delighteth in him whom he chastiseth as a father in his son. For what son is he whom the father chastiseth not? It is the office of the father to chastise the son that deserveth it; and he always doth it, unless many and great injuries have overcome his patience; and there be something that he fears, more than he blames.  
8. But if ye be without chastisement] To be without chastisement in this verse; is opposed to endure chastening in the former verse: whence it appears, that the word endure in the former verse doth not signify the virtue of patience which is a duty belonging to the godly; but only the suffering or sense of pain which concerns their state and condition. He shows on the other part, illustrating the thing from the contrary, what an inconvenience it is for a man to be without chastisement, and to receive no trouble nor evil from God. And the inconvenience is this, that such go not for sons, but are reputed of God as bastards and children of adultery, and changelings; which of all inconveniences is to man the greatest. We must therefore needs choose one of these two, either to be acknowledged for the sons of God, and so undergo chastisement: or if we will not be chastised, we must be accounted bastards. Whereof all are partakers] To be the Son of God, and to be chastised (at least as often as need requires) are conditions so connexed and coupled between themselves, that all the Sons of God must needs undergo this Law, all must needs feel their Father's hand, and be partakers of chastisement. All must needs be partakers hereof, yet not universally, but generally; because there are few sons, or rather but one only, who deserved not chastisement, neither had any need of it. And yet even he was exercised with hard conditions, not that he was partaker of chastisement properly; that is, of punishment; for what place could punishment have in him that was most innocent: but that by his stripes and wounds we might be perfectly healed? Hence the chastisement of our peace, or that brought us true peace and happiness, is said to have been upon him, Esay 53.5. in which place, the word chastisement must by way of synecdoche be taken for affliction. Then are ye bastards, and not sons.] Ye are not truly borne of God, not such whom God acknowledgeth for his sons and children; but ye are bastards and changelings. For they are bastards who go for the sons of such a man, yet indeed were not begotten of him; and such are not always acknowledged of their carnal fathers; but our spiritual Father cannot be deceived, for he knows all that are not borne of him, and acknowledgeth them for none of his, and thereupon vouchsafeth not to bestow any fatherly care and chastisement for the framing of their manners and behaviour.  
9 Further more we have had fathers of our flesh, which corrected us] He shows by another argument, which is yet of affinity with the former, that we must endure God's chastisements, and so endure them, that thereby we become corrected and amended; for such as do this, they only receive chastisement as they ought. The fathers of our flesh are our carnal fathers, that begat us according to the flesh, and produced us into this carnal life; for they are opposed unto the Father of spirits, as it presently follows in this verse. And we gave them reverence] By the chastisements of our carnal fathers we were often made ashamed, both by the punishment and by the fault, and were ashamed of both. For chastisement brings with it, not only pain but shame: But if we refer this to our fathers, the sense will be, that by their chastisement we were so affected, as to reverence them, and for shame and fear of them, durst not offend against them. But if our carnal fathers who were the authors of our carnal life only, could by their chastisement effect this in us; how much more convenient is it, that the chastisement of our spiritual Father should produce in us the like effect? Shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits?] To be in subjection, is in this place, to receive and endure that chastisement which proceeds from God with a ready and patiented mind; and thereupon to show ourselves tractable and obedient unto him in all those things for the amendment whereof he chastised us. The Father of spirits] That is God, who is opposed to the fathers of our flesh; to show us, how much more it becomes us, to be in subjection unto him, then unto these, because the spirit is far more noble and excellent than the flesh. For God is not therefore called the father of spirits, and opposed to the fathers of our flesh, as if we had received our spirit only whereby we live and understand from God, and our flesh only from our parents; seeing God is no less the Author and Creator of the one then of the other. But by spirit is meant all that which pertains to our spirit, and makes us to be spiritual; for this we own to no other person but to our heavenly father. But he is called the father of spirits, because he hath begotten us according to the spirit, and he alone hath begotten all of us. And live] He shows the fruit and end of our subjection, the more to incite us thereto. And this fruit is eternal life, which to attain is truly to live. Whence oftentimes it is eminently called by the sole name of life.  
10. And they verily for a few day's chastened us after their own pleasure] Because he had said we should live, if we would be in subjection to the Father of spirits, tacitly intimating, that this effect would not follow upon our subjection to our carnal fathers; therefore now he shows, what great difference there is, between the end and scope whereat our carnal father's aim, as they are opposed to our spiritual father, and in this respect are not subservient unto him, and that end which God proposeth in the chastisement of his children. Whereupon it also follows, that we should fare more willingly submit ourselves to endure the chastisements of God then of them; in regard they are intended for a fare greater good unto us, than the chastisements of our carnal fathers. For a few days, the good or benefit of their chastisement is of use unto us, but for a few days, that we may pass over this life which is concluded within the compass of a short time, the more conveniently and honestly. For the Author by these words intends not to say, that the chastisement of our fathers lasteth not long: but passeth away together with our childhood and youth; for what doth this make to the purpose? Must we therefore be rather the more in subjection unto God, because his chastisement lasteth a long time or through all our life? Besides, the mind of the Author is to inculcate into us, rather the shortness of God's chastisement, than the length of it; as we might perceive before, chap. 10. ver. 37. after their own pleasure] They in their chastisements of us did not always seek our benefit, but were many times indulgent to their own humours and passions; or if in some measure they sought our benefit, yet they did not always use a right judgement therein. They did therein as it seemed good unto them, sometime after our desert, and sometime after their own pleasure; and oftentimes erred through mis-affection or indiscretion. But he for our profit] But God is such a father that when he chasteneth his children, he always directs his eye to our benefit and profit; neither doth ever miss of his intent. That we might be partakers of his holiness.] Here he specifies in particular the profit we gain from God's chastisement; that thereby we are sanctified in so great a measure as to partake of his holiness; for the holiness thereby wrought in us, is in a manner divine, resembling the holiness of God. Wherein is also contained by way of Metonymy the fruit of this holiness, which is everlasting happiness.  
11. Now no chastening for the present] He seems here to take away an objection. Some man might say, that all chastisement of it own nature is unpleasing and bitter; and therefore it is an hard matter to endure it with patience. The Author confesseth this to be true, in respect of some time, that chastisement for the time present, all the while the affliction of it lasteth, seems not so good, as indeed it is. Seemeth to be joyous] It doth not appear or seem unto us to tend unto joy; or the present sourness and bitterness of chastisement, while the smart of it is upon us, doth not seem to us, of that quality, that it should determine and end in great joy and pleasure. But grievous.] It seems to bring nothing else unto us but smart and grief; for all chastisement brings grief or pain, else it should not be chastisement; for therefore we are chastised, that the pain of the punishment might repel the lust of sin. Nevertheless afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness] The fruit of righteousness signifies the fruit that is righteousness, by a genetive of the difference. And the word righteousness doth in this place signify both the habit of doing righteously, and by way of Metonymy, the effect or reward following it, which is Justification, or the having of a right to life eternal: as in the former verse holiness signified, both holiness of manners, and the happiness following upon it. And this fruit is called peaceable, not only in respect of righteousness properly taken, which brings us peace, that is, happiness: but in respect of our justification to life eternal; because that consisteth in true peace which is our final happiness, and brings it with it. In a sense not unlike, Paul said, that blessed hope, Tit. 2.13. for hope is there taken materially for the thing hoped, which is eternal life; which is called blessed, because it is blessedness itself, and makes them blessed who attain it. Unto them which are exercised thereby.] He specifies here the persons to whom this peaceable fruit accrues, and they are such as are exercised by chastisement; for chastisement is an exercise to godliness and righteousness. And they are said to be exercised by chastisement, who either simply have been agitated and afflicted with corrections, yet so as tacitly it must be supposed, that the persons thus exercised, did profit in the course of virtue and piety as much as need required; or who by their chastisements unlearned to do evil, and whose mind by that means was framed to every good habit of well-doing; so that withal is also signified the effect of that chastisement, together with the persons profited by it.  
12. Wherefore lift up the hands which hang down] After the Author had showed the great profit which we receive by the chastisements of God; he from thence infers an exhortation, that therefore we should not let fall our spirits, but rather raise them up, and with all alacrity proceed in the work and course of Christian piety. He terms their hands hanging down, because they had been remiss in the works of Christian duties, being tired as it were with divers afflictions. He would therefore have them, not yield to afflictions, but raise up their courage and stoutly go on in their works began of Christian piety; considering they saw that their afflictions proceeded from God's love for their great benefit and profit. And the feeble knees] He draws a comparison from a man wearied with running or labouring, when the strength of the sinews is so loosened, that the hands hang and the knees totter, and all the members seem as it were out of joint. The strength of these parts both of hands and knees they must resume, and proceed afresh in the course of Christianity till they have finished the race of it.  
13. And make straight paths for your feet] By paths he understands our accustomed actions, which are frequently used of us, as paths use to be. And our paths are then straight, when they answer the rule of Christian precepts and are agreeable unto it. The Author in these words seems particularly to admonish the Hebrews, that they should deal candidly and openly in the profession of Christian verity, and not seek any byways of hypocrisy and dissimulation: For they are said to walk straight, who deal candidly and openly, which Paul reproving Peter, calls walking uprightly, Gal. 2.14. Contrarily, they who deal not candidly, seem to walk in by-paths and by turn and wind. Lest that which is lame be turned out of the way] He halteth or goeth lame, that in professing of the truth, or in his life and manners dealeth not so, as becometh him. The Author intimates, that among them to whom he wrote, there were some who halted in the way of Christian verity and piety; and did incline sometime one way, sometime another; who indeed did not wholly forsake the Christian Religion, yet were greatly propense to the Jewish; or to avoid dangers and persecutions, seemed propense. In which sense Elias long since demanded of the Israelites, who to comply with Ahab joined in a manner the worship of Baal with the worship of the true God, and yet adhered firmly to neither. How long halt ye between two opinion? 1 King. 18.21. Be turned out of the way] The Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which may be taken in two senses; either for the luxation or sprayning of some member or joint necessary for walking, which being dislocated will not suffer us to walk at all, but wholly takes away all use of walking; or else for straying from the way, which to most Interpreters seems most probable. The former of these agrees best with the Metaphor of halting and healing, which the Author mentions presently after: but the latter suits best with the preceding words, wherein we are commanded to make strait paths for our feet; and that to the end, that he who halteth in the path of Christianity might not be turned out of the way, so that, to make strait paths, and be turned out of the way are in a manner opposed. For if he, who in the right way maketh strait paths, or goeth strait on, doth not err from the right way; then certainly he that erreth or turneth out of the way, maketh not strait paths, But it easily falls out, that he who halteth in the path, doth at last wholly forsake it, and turns aside to the byways of vices. But it is not necessary, that the healing which he mentions in the words immediately following, should be properly and directly opposed to turning out of the way, but only that not turning out of the way, should be somewhat less than healing. For it is clear, that the Author compares things unequal between themselves, as appears by the particle rather; when he saith; But let it rather be healed.] This healing here is opposed to the halting before, thus. Let him that halteth or goeth lame, not turn out of the way of piety; or if he have turned our of it, let him return into it again, and leave his lameness or halting therein, which is to be healed of it: that being healed, he may walk on uprightly and strongly, lifting up the knees that were feeble, and fill his mind with alacrity in the service of God and Christ; for for want of this alacrity, the spiritual lament or halting comes upon him.  
14 Fellow peace with all men] Having finished his former exhortation to constancy in the faith, he now adds some precepts of Christian piety; whereof the first is, to follow peace with all men. Which precept is especially most necessary to be observed of Christians, being persons exposed to all men's hatred, not only for the attaining of salvation, but also for the avoiding of divers calamities; as Peter teacheth us. 1. Pet. 3.13. And holiness] Some think that the word holiness in this place, signifies only chastity, as we see Paul understands it. 1. Thess. 4.3. and 1. Tim. 2.15. But there is no just reason, why we should restrain a sentence which may have most conveniently a general sense, and straighten it to design only chastity; seeing other Christian virtues pertain no less than it to Christian sanctification, and separation from the profane multitude of the world. See Ephes. 5.26. where the word sanctifying or hallowing is extended to signify the way of all piety. Without which no man shall see the Lord.] Because in the Greek the article the is prefixed before the Lord, therefore according to the common language of the new Covenant, we must here understand the Lord Jesus Christ, whom he that shall see, shall also see God himself. And to see the Lord, and by him to see God, contains all our future happiness of immortality; seeing, see him we cannot before we are made like him in nature, by being made immortal. For this sight of God must be understood of a clear sight, and such an one, whereby, as John speaks, 1. Epist. 3.2. We shall see God and Christ as they are; and of a continual sight that shall last for ever; and a sight that shall flow from our conversation and company with the Lord. Wherefore he that desires the everlasting sight of God and Christ, let him seriously endeavour to be holy, that is, to sequester and separate himself from the profane multitude of the world, not only in profession, but in life and manners. For he to whom this holiness is wanting, doth in vain, poor wretch, flatter himself with the hope of happiness.  
15. Looking ailigently] Another part of our duty is here declared; Namely, that we should not only have a diligent care of our own lives, but we should also be as it were visitors and overseers one of another; that carrying a mutual and common care for our common salvation, we might so much the more easily and certainly attain it. Left any man fall of the grace of God,] This is the thing against which we must provide and look diligently that it happen not amongst us. By this grace is understood the grace of the Gospel, which is conveyed unto men, by Christ, than which not greater grace could possibly be done to mortal men. That man is said to fail, who either stands still under this grace, or draws bacl from it; as we saw before, chap. 4.1. Such are all they who forsake the most sacred Religion of Christ, and will follow his Standard no longer. Lest any root of bitterness springing up, trouble you.] The Author here alludes to the words of Moses, Deut. 29.18. Wherein he likewise speaketh of Apostats. By root of bitterness (which is an Hebraisme for a bitter root) he understands Apostats; who are called bitter, because both they themselves are bitter and unsavoury to God, and to the godly, and also because they bring forth fruit like themselves, that is, very bitter and sour. This root springeth up, or groweth, when a man dares utter unto others that Apostasy which he had before, but conceived in his mind, and only cherished in his own bosom: or when it so increaseth and gathereth strength in one person, that at last it spreads the infection of it upon others. For the manner of it is for the most part to grow up and get strength by degrees; as faith doth, which is contrary to it; for that which at the first is but small and weak, doth afterward increase and strengthen. And Apostasy doth breed trouble, when it opposeth the growth of faith and a good life in others; as plants and trees set too near, hinder one another's growth, or as weeds hinder the growth of corn. Although the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth properly signify to trouble and hinder a man's rest; which Apostats also commit, for they trouble the quiet and peace of the Church. And thereby many be defiled] Pollution or defiling in this place, seems to be put for infection; for many times by defiling, a thing is infected. So a garment defiled by the flesh, is said to be infected or spotted. Judas 23. by a Metaphor taken from the body, and a garment thereby infected with the plague. And hither we may refer that which is said of the tongue,) that it defiles the whole body. Jam. 3.6. where defiling, seems to be put for infecting; for in this sense the Metaphor is the more elegant; whereupon it is said a little after at the 8. verse, that the tongue is full of deadly poison. The same therefore might be intended in this place, if we respect the sense of it. For things properly are not defiled by roots, but infected; for plants sometime do infect plants by their mutual contagion or touch of one another, yea by their very shadow which they cast upon other plants. But it may be the Author receding from the Metaphor of roots doth relate unto the persons of whom he spoke, who by another Metaphor are said to be defiled, as often as they are infected with error or sin.  
16. Lest there be any fornicator or profane person as Esau.] It is doubtful whether both these, the fornicator and profane person be to be referred to Esau. Of Esau's fornication we read nothing in the holy Scriptures, unless we refer hither his marriage with the women of Canaan, against the manner and custom of those holy men, who would not mingle their sons seasoned with the true worship of God, with their daughters, who were destitute of the knowledge of God. Therefore they might account such marriage unclean and incestuous. And certainly we see God was provoked in this case, and thereby induced to bring the flood upon the whole world. Gen. 6.2. etc. Besides, we read in particular of the wives of Esau, that they offended the mind of Isaac and Rebecca, in so much that Rebecca said to Isaac, I am weary of my life, because of the daughters of Heth. i. (The wives of Esau) if Jacob take a wife of the daughters of Heth, such as these which are of the daughters of the land, what good shall my life do me? Gen. 27.46. And Isaac calling Jacob to him, charged him, saying, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan; Arise, go to Padan aram to the house of Bethuel thy mother's father, and take thee a wife from thence of the daughters of Laban thy mother's brother, Gen. 28.1.2. See also in the same Chap. ver. 6 7.8. For although Esau's wives might be unpleasing and distasteful to Isaac and Rebecca by reason of their rudeness, insolences, and other vices, yet it is more likely, it was because they sprang from wicked parents and came from a profane stock, wholly allien from the Religion and worship of the true God, and were superstitiously addicted to religions false and impious. It appears also indeed that the family of Bethuel and Laban himself, whose daughters Jacob afterward married, was with all his household given to Idolatry and the worship of false gods, and was so bred from his very ancestors; as appears, Gen. 31.19,30,32. and Joshua 24.2. yet it sufficiently appears also, that in that family the knowledge and worship of the true God also was not wholly extinct, as in the time of Ahab it was not wholly extinct in the Kingdom of Israel, see Gen. 24.50,51. and Gen. 29.32,33. and Gen. 30.6,27. and Gen. 31.16,24,49,50. But the Canaanites where wholly ignorant and void of the true God. And what difference there is between those, who wholly renouncing the worship of the true God, serve only false gods and idols, and those who join the worship of the true God, with idolatry and the worship of false gods, doth easily appear from 2 King. 17.24. and so on to the end. Wherefore although Laban's daughters were not free from the worship of false gods, as appears from the passage formerly cited, Gen. 31.19,32. and Gen. 35.2. yet seeing they were also seasoned with the knowledge of the true God, they were therefore the less profane, and came from a stock the less wicked, and seeing there could be found no women better, who were addicted only to the true Religion, it was therefore most fit as the case stood, that the sons of holy men should take their wives from these, and wave the women of Canaan, who were wholly profane and wicked. The Author therefore might tax these marriages in Esau as profane, unclean and incestuous: which also are most carefully to be avoided of all Christians; and so much the more, as they are more holy than the sons of the Patriarches. Notwithstanding the Author seems properly to brand that fornication, which was so grown into custom among the Gentiles, that it was scarce accounted any vice or dishonesty, as it plainly appears by the holy Scriptures, see Acts 15.20,29. Rom. 1.29. 1 Corinth. 6.13. And this sin he would have to be far from Christians. And in the prohibition of fornication is included also the prohibition of adultery, and of all kind of unclean pleasures, because they are greater sins. Or profane person] That person properly is profane, who esteems nothing holy, who either despiseth things holy, or discerns them not from things common. How this should properly agree to Esau, it doth not equally appear. For the birthright which he despised and sold for so base a price, was not a thing properly holy, though it were a singular privilege, and not to be despised: either therefore it is not Esau who is called profane, but only he is proposed for an example of a profane person, in regard he did an act resembling profaneness. Or if he himself be called a profane person, he deserved that appellation by his likeness to a profane person, especially seeing his fact seems to be a sign of a profane person. Who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.] The first borne both seemed in a manner peculiarly sacred unto God, and were the first and chief heirs of then parents, and by a natural right had a prerogative and preeminence above their brethren. Whence under the Law the first borne was to have a double portion out of his father's inheritance, which came to as much as any two of his brethren, Deut. 21.17. Hence we read that the dignity royal was devolved from Reuben the firstborn of Jacob unto Judah, passing by also Simeon and Levi who were elder than Judah; because all these had defiled themselves with wickedness. Reuben because he had gone up to his father's bed; and the rest because they had stained their hands with the murder of the Sichemites, and had made themselves incapable of that dignity. If therefore Esau were filthy and profane, because he sold his birthright for a morsel of meat; how much more are they filthy, profane and wicked, who being chosen and adopted for the Sons of God in Christ, do esteem so basely of their rights to heaven, which God through his infinite mercy hath conferred upon them, that they countervalue them with fornications, gluttonies, and other base pleasures and sins?  
17. For ye know that afterward when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected] That we might learn what great calamity is incident to profane persons such as Esau was, and consequently how much it concerns us to shun profaneness; therefore the Author here shows what great incommondity it brought unto Esau, that afterward when he would have inherited the blessing due by the right of nature to the firstborn above others, and sued to his father Isaac for it, he was rejected, because he had already sold it unto Jacob, and Jacob had already gotten that blessing, God so ordering the matter; the same calamity therefore remains to all those, that by lusts and unclean pleasures, and such like sins disable themselves from the right of that eternal blessing, whereto God of his great mercy had admitted them by adopting them for his sons. For he had no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears] The Author therefore adds this, lest any profane person should think, that he could move God afterward by his tears and cries, not to deprive him finally of that blessing which is heavenly happiness. For the same condition will befall them that happened unto Esau, who found no place for repentance, though he sought it earnestly with tears and cries as the Scriptures testify. From this place it clearly appears, that to enjoy the birthright and the chief blessing otherwise due of course to the firstborn were things distinct. And Esau though he had not sold his birthright, might notwithstanding, God so willing and disposing, have failed of the chief blessing, because it was already settled upon Jacob. For if Esau having now sol● and lost his birthright, would yet have gotten the chief blessing, and did sue with prayers and tears to his father for it; why might not Jacob though he had not gotten the birthright, aspire to the blessing? was it not free for God to bestow it rather upon Jacob then Esau? Although therefore without the rejection of his birthright, Esau might not be preferred before Jacob for the blessing, yet seeing he had for merly despised his birthright, he was altogether worthy to lose the fruit of it also, that so he might fail of the blessing not only by God's decree and pleasure, but by his own fault and demerit. The pronoun it though it may be relative to the blessing, yet it rather seems referable to repentance; and yet not to the repentance of Esau, but of Isaac: For Esau must be supposed to seek that which he found not; for the Author doth manifestly oppose these two one to the other, but he found not repentance, and therefore he sought repentance. For to find no place of repentance is all one with not to find repentance, that the form of the opposition may the better appear; unless we say that one thing was sought, and another was not found; for the thing whose place cannot be found, that thing cannot be made existent. But now seeing Esau sought not his own repentance, for he did repent of his fact, and testified his sorrow with tears and cries, it remains therefore that by that repentance whose place could not be found, we understand the repentance of Isaac; whereto Esau by his weeping and complaints would move Isaac, that he would revoke the blessing given to Jacob, and translate it upon himself. But he was therein disappointed and frustrated; for his tears and cries came too late and did not help him. And this point the Author leaves to the consideration of all profane persons, that after they have rejected or neglected their right to eternal salvation, their tears and cries will avail them nothing, if they come too late, as all those do, which only then are poured forth, when the time is passed for amendment of life, and the time already come for judgement and punishment; or else their tears are not serious enough, and effectual to a new course of life, and to true holiness for the recovery of that right which they had lost. For the Author had determined it before, that without holiness no man should see the Lord, ver. 14. And therefore a matter of this consequence must not think to be gained only with cries and tears; wherein profane persons can be as abundant, and commonly are more fluent than the true Saints of God. Hence it is manifest, what we are to think of that repentance and sorrow of mind as they call it, which appears in persons dying; who while they lived and were healthy, followed their sins, or as the Author said before, sinned willingly after they had received the knowledge of the truth. For upon their deathbed, the time of a true fruitful repentance is past, and they are called as it were to the tribunal of God's judgement. For although it is better even then, to sue also for God's mercy with tears and cries, then by casting away of all hope, to do nothing at all for the compassing of mercy; yet by force of the new Covenant, it death follow, and no time granted them for the putting off the old man with his works, and putting on the new, they cannot be saved. Therefore such have need of some extraordinary grace and favour from God, which we have reason to think befalls but a few, and to none of those who lived profanely as Esau did.  
18. For ye are not come] Here gins another part of the Chapter, wherein the Author useth a new argument to persuade them, from falling from the Grace of God, and Religion of Christ, and from being so profane, as to be more indulgent to fornications, uncleannesses and other sins, then to enjoy that happiness whereto they have gotten a right by their faith in Christ. For he shows, of what great privileges they are made partakers, by receiving the Religion of Christ; and this he doth by framing of a comparison of them with those things which long since befell to their ancestors in the publishing of the Law at Mount Sinai. And withal he doth tacitly disparage that glorious and terrible manner wherein the Law was proclaimed, which happily was no small motive to the Hebrews, to think that they were not to forsake the Law; whose proclamation was performed with such Majesty. Having showed the great benefits accrueing by the Gospel, he thence infers, that they ought with all their endeavour to obey the voice of the Gospel; otherwise they shall fall upon terrible and infallible judgements, not amoveable by any tears and cries. First, therefore he mentions the things that of old happened to the Israelites at the publication of the Law; and afterward to them he opposeth the things happening to Christians at the publication of the Gospel. For (saith he) ye are not come to the Mount that might be touched] Ye came not, namely, then when ye were initiated unto Christ, and were made members or subjects unto him, as our ancestors came long since, when they became bound to the rules of the Law. And the things whereto the Israelites than came, he shows to be partly contemptible, partly terrible. Mount Sinai was a thing contemptible, which he therefore terms the tractable Mount, or the Mount that might be touched; not only because it might be so, but because it often had been so; for many times it had been both touched and trampled on both by men and beasts, whereto it was no less exposed than any other Mountain. The Israelites came to this Mount because by God's command they were assembled at the foot of it, that there they might hear God delivering the Law from the Mount. And that burned with fire] But the rest of the things that hereupon he mentions are very terrible; for the Mount burned with fire, which was so great and so high, that it burned up unto heaven, as the sacred History relates it. Nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest.] By blackness we may understand that thick cloud, wherein God is said to have descended; and the darkness was the great shadow which was caused by the overspreading of that cloud, which being extremely thick must needs induce an extraordinary darkness. And the Tempest was not by any violence of winds and rain, as by lightnings and thunders, which rush with as much violence as winds in a tempest, and many times are accompanied with a tempest. All things were composed and suited to inject fear and terror; for from the thick cloud and the darkness that it caused, there issued forth a horrible burning of fire, the lightnings shined out, and the thunders clapped; and besides the thunders was a noise more fearful; for the noise of a trumpet that sounded long and loud, and by degrees risen louder and louder filled the whole air; and that nothing might want for rerrour, the whole Mount from the top to the bottom trembled and quaked, to the extreme amazement of the people.  
19 And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words] The words were the commandments of the Law, and the voice was the voice of God, wherewith the words of the Law were uttered from the top of the Mount out of the midst of the fire. For after that the whole multitude summoned by the sound of the trumpet stood at the foot of the Mount ready to hear the Law, than God with a voice undoubtedly no less terrible than the sound of the trumpet, published his will in the Law. For how terrible God's voice was, hereby it appears, in that the Israclites supplicated that God would speak no more unto them. For so it followeth in the rest of the verse. Which voice they that heard, entreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more] The voice of God was so terrible to the people, that thereby they were afraid of their lives; and therefore entreated Moses, that if there were any more to be spoken, he would speak it, and not God, lest (say they) we die. See Exod. 20.18,19. and Deut. 5.25,26.  
20. For they could not endure that which was commanded] If these words cohere with the words immediately following in the verse, and if so much as a beast touch the Mountain it shall be stoned, etc. So that these words be taken for that which was commanded, and which the people could not endure; we may well doubt, how this agrees with the Sacred history, from whence no such things seems to appear, that the people therefore deprecated Gods further speech unto them, because they feared that command of not touching the Mount, and could not endure it as a thing too grievous and dangerous to them: but rather therefore, because they were terribly afraid of that fire, out of which God spoke; and because they imagined that God could not long speak with man, but that man, unable to bear the voice and majesty of God, must needs die; as appears by their words to Moses, See Deut. 5.24,25,26. Yet because by their words there it is manifest, that they feared to be consumed by the fire out of which God spoke; it seems that it could proceed from no other reason, but because they were afraid they might easily offend God and provoke him, whereupon that fire would take hold of them. For why otherwise should they be so afraid of that fearful but harmless fire, which hurt Moses nothing at all? And wherein could they sooner and more easily offend God, then if any of them should pass the bounds set them by God and touch the Mount? especially when it was also to be feared, that for the sin and rashness of some one or a few, many might suffer, that might seem in some manner involved. For the like had elsewhere fallen out in such offences committed against the Majesty of God; especially if the command were laid upon all, that no one might dare to attempt, as here it was. Therefore it is credible, that the Israelites greatly in fear of this command, of not touching the Mount, nor passing their bounds; and of not touching them that did transgress herein, but killing them afar off with stones or darts, did entreat that they might not be drawn out of their tents to hear the Law proclaimed, and thereby put in danger of transgressing that command and offending God; for while they kept within their camp, they were safer from sinning; and if any rash person should go forth, and dare to pass the bounds that God had set, he should do it at his own peril only, and not endanger the people by it, who were innocent of it. But being out of their camp, and drawn so near the Mount, it might easily fall out that some beast or man, either pressed forward by the multitude, as it often happens, or carried on with his own rash and curious desire to see God, would hardly contain himself within the bounds limited; and having once passed them, no man might follow him to draw him back, but they must kill him afar off with stones and darts. And commonly in other men's dangers, especially theirs who stand allied unto us, we forget our own; and therefore it might easily fall out, that the father willing to save his son, and the son his father, one friend another, and one neighbour another, many might involve themselves in the common danger. What marvel therefore is it, if the Israelites could not endure that which was commanded, for not touching the Mount, nor passing their bounds, and therefore entreated that God would speak to them no more, in regard of the great danger wherein they stood to hear him? To him whom this way satisfies not, we may say, that the words they could not endure that which was commanded, need not be referred to the words following, but may be read in a parenthesis, to declare what was spoken next before. But the following words, and if so much as a beast touch etc. being put by themselves serve to amplify the great terror of that spectacle; as also doth the whole verse following. If we follow this way, than the Author seems to have uttered these words in a double sense. One is historical according to the ordinary construction of the words themselves: the other is typical, which is as it were a figure or shadow of the things historied. The historical sense is, that the Israelites could not endure that voice of God, whereby he gave his Laws and commands. But this sense though it agree with the history, yet it hardly complies with the words. The other sense shows not what was really done of the Israelites, but what was represented or shadowed out by what was done. The people entreated, that the word might be spoken to them no more. Why so? Because (saith the Author) they could not endure that which was commanded; for the burden of the Commandments was too heavy for their shoulders. They do not indeed say this, neither do they feel it, but by their fact and refusal they intimate and shadow it. For as that voice wherewith the commandments were published, being grievous and terrible, was a sign of the gravity and weightiness of the commandments of the Law: so the peoples not enduring that God should speak to them and command them, was a secret token that the people could not bear the burden of the commands of the Law. For the sacred Scriptures of the new Testament, when they speak of a thing which happened under the Law, do commonly so speak of it, as if the thing were then done, which then was only typically signified. Whereof we have an evident example in Paul, when he saith, that Moses put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished. 2. Cor. 3.13. when yet, if we look into the History, that was done for another cause, namely, because the Israelites could not endure the lustre of Moses his face for the brightness of it: But because that vailing of Moses his face, was a type and shadow of the thing which Paul mentions, therefore the thing itself is said to be done. In a like manner of speech, the names of the antitypes are sometime attributed to the types. So before chap. 11. ver. 26. we see that the reproach of the Israelites in Egypt, was called the reproach of Christ. And that we may go no farther, even in this chapter a little after, at the 25. verse, this very refusal of the people, wherein they entreated, that God would speak no more unto them, is taken for that, which in like manner was signified by another type, namely for contumacy and disobedience against God. For when the Author at the said 25. verse saith, that they escaped not punishment, who refused him that spoke on earth; it is manifest that he hath relation to that refusal, which he mentioneth in this place. But the refusal, which caused the Israelites to incur God's displeasure and be punished, and which we also must by all means avoid, as by the Author we are admonished at the 25. verse, was not their refusal to hear God speak unto them without an interpreter (for that was wholly pleasing unto God, as we read, Deut. 5.28,29,30.) but the thing that under that refusal was covertly shadowed, and tacitly presaged, namely, that in future time it would come to pass, that they would indeed refuse to hear, that is, to obey the voice of God. In like manner therefore in this place the Israelites are said to refuse, that God should give them more precepts, or speak further unto them, because they could not endure more, yea, not them which they had heard already; not that this was their mind and sense, but that this was the sense of their fact, as afterward the event shown. Shall be stoned or thrust thorough with a dart.] This latter clause is not extant either in the old Latin translation, nor in the Syriak: yet it manifestly agrees with the History. Exod. 19.13. This was therefore commanded, because (as we said) it was not lawful to recall or reduce either man or beast, that had transgressed the bounds set, but it must be dispatched or slain a fare off with stones or darts. If so much as a beast] As if he had said, much less might any man touch the Mount, who is the proper subject of sin and offence.  
21. And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake. The Author amplifies the terrors of that sight; as if he had said; the spectacle or sight that appeared, was so terrible and horrible, that not only the promiscuous multitude stroke with extreme terror, entreated they might not be constrained to stand and hear any more: but even Moses also who was the Mediator and Messenger between God and the people, said, I exceedingly fear and quake, That ever Moses said this, we no where read in the sacred History: but without doubt the Author affirmed it, as known to him by some other means. See chap. 9.19.  
22. But ye are come] Here follows the other part of the comparison which the Author had framed; wherein he shows, how far the things, whereof we are made partakers by means of the Gospel, exceed those, which of old befell the Israelites at the promulgation of the Law. This access or coming must be understood of a spiritual access or approach, as unto things and persons spiritual; for it is opposed to that carnal access or coming of the Israelites to the earthly Mount. Yet this access must further be understood diversely, according to divers things and persons, which are here mentioned. In general, it consisteth in a kind of conjunction, which we have with those things and persons, as in some measure thence forward pertaining to us: although also this conjunction be divers according to the diversity of those things and persons. Unto Mount Zion.] He opposeth Mount Zion unto Mount Sinai, whereto the Israelites came when the Law was published. But Mount Zion even taken properly, was fare more beautiful and comely than Mount Sinai, neither was it seated in the wilderness, but in the land of Promise. And there can be no doubt, but by Mount Zion in this place, that must be understood, whereto the Mount was but a figure and a shadow. For as the thing figured is sometime used for the figure, as was showed a little before: so much more often is the figure taken for the thing figured. And although sometime by Zion and the holy Mount the Church itself be shadowed; yet because Jerusalem the City of the living God, which the Author mentions in the second place, may more fitly be referred to signify the Church, therefore by Mount Zion, we may better understand heaven itself, or some spiritual Mount, whose top is heaven the dwelling of everlasting blessedness. For we read more frequently, that heaven is signified by mount Zion then the Church. For as in one head of mount Zion, which was called Morea, the temple of God was built, wherein God was said to dwell: there was also in another head of it, the palace of David, who was a type or shadow of Christ the king of God's people: so in heaven truly is, the temple of the most high God, and there is also the palace of Christ our heavenly king. Therefore we say that in this place may be signified some spiritual mount, whose top is heaven; because by the heavenly Jerusalem (as we shall show afterward) the Church may seem to be understood, as it is now existent upon earth. But the allegory will be more full, if by Mount Zion we understand, not only heaven itself; but conceive in our mind some spiritual mount, whose top is in heaven, and his foot reacheth unto earth, that as of old Jerusalem was seated at the foot and forward upon the side of Mount Zion: so also the Church as it is now on earth, may be said to be built and so forward on the side of a Mount which hath his top in Heaven; that is, hath a great vicinity and contiguity with Heaven, and is already in some degree raised up into Heaven; as they who dwell at the foot and side of some Mountain, are nearest neighbours and borderers to that Mountain, and have not only liberty to ascend it, but in regard they already possess the sides of it are in some degree promoted toward the top. We therefore are come to heaven itself, or to that spiritual mount or state, whose top is heave; as we are made neighbours unto heaven, and have a right and liberty to ascend it, yea in some sense we may well be said inhabitants of it; for from the Church there is a near and open passage even to the top of heaven. Hence it appears, that not only this Mount whereto we Christians are come by the preaching of the Gospel and by our faith given unto it, is by infinite degrees, and without all comparison far surpassing Mount Sinai: but that our access also or coming to it, doth fare surpass the access or coming of the Israelites, who stood near that Mount, but had no right to ascend it, nor liberty to touch it, unless they would presently be overwhelmed with stones, or struck through with darts. And unto the city of the living God] What City this is, he presently declares by saying, the heavenly jerusalem] The attribute heavenly doth manifestly show that here he treats of that Jerusalem, whereof that earthly City, the head of the Kingdom of Israel, was but a type and a shadow. Hence also it appears, that this City whereof the Author treats, is by far greater reason called both the City of God, and Jerusalem; that is, the sight of peace (by which word the Hebrews use to understand happiness.) But this heavenly Jerusalem may be understood to be the City of the living God in a double sense. First so, as it signifies some stately place, destined for the dwelling of the godly; and so wholly different from the Church, that is the City having foundations whose builder is God, and which God hath prepared for Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and for their spiritual posterity, whereof we spoke in the former Chapter. And these buildings and palaces ordained for the habitation of the godly, are situated (as I may say) in Heaven, as the City Jerusalem possessed the spaces of Mount Zion. This City he understands in the Chapter following, ver. 14. when he saith, Here we have no continuing City, but we seek one to come] And this sense seems most proper to this place. But secondly, this City of the heavenly Jerusalem may be taken for the structure of the Church itself, which consiseth not of any houses, but of single persons jointed and composed one with another in a peculiar order and frame. And that is in a manner twofold. For one structure of the Church is upon earth, though that Church be heavenly also: the other shall be hereafter in heaven; both of these are understood by the heavenly Jerusalem in the Revelation of St. John, chap. 21.2. etc. and ver. 9.10. For that the Church or her structure is there meant, it appears by this, in that she is called the Bride of the Lamb, and the twelve foundations of her wall are said to be signed with the names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb, and many things there read of her, declare that she is there considered, both as she is for the present on earth, and as she shall be for the time to come in heaven. For the present, in that she is said to descend from heaven, and that Kings and Nations are said to bring their glory into her, and to walk in her light. For the future, in that they only who overcome, and who are written in the Lamb's book of life, have the promise of entrance into that City, and possession there. So that the great splendour and magnificence as it is there described, is much more appliable to express the future state and happiness of the Church, than the present. But yet notwithstanding, that some men as inhabitants are separate from this structure of the Church, (though the Church consist of men, seasoned with certain qualities and joined one to another in a due order) that is only in respect of single persons considered apart by themselves. So Paul said that Timothy was in the house of God, which is the Church; and Peter when he had said, that we must be built into a spiritual house, he presently adds, that we must be a holy Priesthood; that is, as it were a holy College of Priests: But Priests must remain in the house of God, and intent the service of God, and so do much differ from the house of God. But the same persons considered in a divers respect, are both the house and the Priests, yea and in a manner the sacrifices. How ever therefore this Jerusalem be taken, it is the City of the living God, and heavenly. This is manifest of that heavenly City built by God himself, wherein we shall sometime dwell, and of the Church as hereafter it shall be in heaven; and it is true of the Church as it now is on earth. For it is a City, because it is built or composed of single persons notably qualified and excellently ordered; and by this City may be also understood the very society of men. It is the City of the living God] not only because the living God hath thus built it; but also and much rather because God dwells in it in a far more peculiar, and more divine manner, than ever formerly in the City of Jerusalem. For God inhabits it not only by his Angels, but by his holy Spirit, who is the main bond between God and his Church. And also because it is wholly proper and entirely consecrate unto God, and no person hath right to dwell in it, but such as belong to God, such as fear and worship him. It is heavenly, because the Church hath her original from heaven (whence in the Revelation that new Jerusalem is said to descend from heaven) and the form or fashion of her is heavenly, and not earthly. She hath her original from heaven, because whatsoever is requisite for the constitution of her, proceeds not from elsewhere, but only from God himself out of heaven; her form is heavenly, because her doctrine is heavenly, her holiness of life is heavenly, and that charity whereby her frame is chief compacted, is heavenly. Lastly, the order and rank of her members, whereby some stand before or after others either in respect of Ecclesiastical offices, or in respect of divine gifts, is heavenly, and not earthly. And God is called the living God, as he is opposed both to false gods and to true gods: To the false gods, because he lives; whereas the false gods, saving what men's opinion attributes to them, are nothing but statues of wood, stone or metal, and so things wholly inanimate and void of life: and he is opposed to the true gods, because he hath life from himself, and is the author of life to all that live, so that he is eminently called the living God; as hereof we have spoken elsewhere. And to an innumerable company of Angels] He alludes to that multitude of Angels, which in Mount Sinai were assistant to that Angel, who sustained the name and person of God; as it appears Psal. 6.68.17. where twenty thousand signifies a plurality of myriads, for every ten thousand makes a myriad; and thousands in the plural number uttered indefinitely may signify that innumerable company, or the universal and infinite army of God's Angels. To the company of these, Christians come, as they are incorporated into one family and fellowship with them, as the Angels become fellow-servants with them, to worship and serve one common God and Lord with them. So that the Angels carry themselves no longer as superiors unto men, especially unto Christians; neither when they are seen of men, much less unseen, do they suffer any worship or divine homage to be done unto them. Also as the Angels are always present with men, as sent to minister for their sakes: and lastly, as men have a right to the same immortality, which the Angels enjoy, and shall in time so certainly attain it, that they shall become like unto the Angels.  
23. To the general assembly, and Church of the first borne] So all the Greek copies have it; though the vulgar Latin, Erasmus and the Syriack, place the word assembly in the former verse, and refer it to the innumerable company of Angels: But whether this Assembly be taken relatively to the angels, or collectively for that great corporation or society composed of Angels and Christians, it comes all to one; because these conjoined make up a general or rather an universal assembly of all the worshippers and servitors of God. By the first borne we must understand the firstborn of God, for of whom else should they be the firstborn? and there is no doubt but these signify Christians, and not those who lived before Christ; for the men of those times are not wont to be called simply and absolutely the Sons of God in the plural number, much less the firstborn of God; unless their rulers and such as have received some singular benefit of God, are sometimes called Gods and the Sons of God. But this appellation is in a manner proper to Christians, who only are endued with that filial spirit, wherein so boldly and confidently they cry, Abba Father. Besides (as afterward we shall see) that company of the godly who lived before the times & faith of Christ, is signified by another name and called the just men made perfect.] Now if the firstborn signify Christians, and yet cannot signify all them, as the word and distinction of firstborn between them and those that are come in unto them, declares; whom by this name shall we better understand, than those who first in every place received the Christian Religion, and went before those that afterward followed them? who also are sometimes called the first-fruits of that place wherein they lived; among whom the Apostles and Prophets of the New Testament lead the first file, being the first fruits of Judea itself, and in a manner the firstborn of all the Sons of God or faithful in Christ, especially the Apostles. But why we think that the Author spoke not of these only, we are persuaded by the word general assembly (for hither we conceive it should be referred, following the common authority of the Greeks') which signifies an universal concourse or huge company of people met together, which could not be made up only of the Apostles and Prophets of the New Testament: Wherefore this general assembly must be further extended; which if it be, than nothing is more probable, but that by firstborn is understood in this place (as we have said) the first-fruits of the faithful in every place. For they were worthily of greatest esteem among the Christians, they had the double portions as it were of the Holy Ghost, or to speak in the words of the Apostle, they had the first fruits of the Spirit, and were endued with divine gifts above other men. But some may demand, whether the Author alludes in the word firstborn, if he allude at all, which if he do, it seems it is either unto the firstborn under the Law, into whose place the Levites were chosen, to minister in the Sanctuary: or to the universal assembly of the Israelites when they stood at the foot of Mount Sinai to hear the Law. For the former opinion it makes, first from the word firstborn; for firstborn are most fitly opposed to the firstborn. Secondly, in that these Hebrews, to whom the Author writes, being seasoned by the Apostles with the doctrine of Christ, seem answerable to that first assembly of the Israelites at Mount Sinai to hear the Law. Which if it be so, than the first borne can scarce signify the universal multitude of the first Christians or the first common Church: seeing there must be some who had access, and other some to whom the access was had: unless we say, that these Hebrews are considered as some part of the primitive assembly of Christians, answering to that part of the Israelites assembly which first received the Law delivered from God himself. For if by the heavenly Jerusalem the Church be signified, these Hebrews can be said to come unto it, no otherwise then as the part to the whole. Thirdly, because by these firstborn some excellent and eminent men in the Church seem to be understood, as put in a mean between God and Angels; for these very fitly answer the firstborn, and to the Levites and Priests chosen into their room; as are the Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists and other excellent and eminent men, who went before all that followed them not only in time but in gifts. And it is probable that the Author would make particular mention of them; and then, they were not expressed in other words then these. The other opinion is favoured by the word general assembly, which signifies an universal meeting; and likewise the word Church. For that general assembly of the Israelites who met at Mount Sinai to hear the Law, was called the Church, Acts 7.38. Hence it appears, of what great dignity they are, who have received the Religion of Christ, because they are incorporated as it were into one body and into one Church with that Church of the firstborn; and who as S. Peter saith, have obtained like precious faith with them, 2 Pet. 1.1. and enjoy the same right with them of happiness and salvation. He calls them the general assembly and Church of the firstborn, because though all these first borne did never yet assemble in any one place upon earth, for this shall be done hereafter only in heaven, yet because of the spiritual conjunction and likeness of dignity and condition that is between them, they are considered as one assembly and in a manner as one company. Which are written in heaven] He seems to allude to the number-rolle or list of the names of the firstborn, or of all the Israelites; for God commanded Moses to taken the number of both these: but both these were written on earth: but the lift of Christians is written in heaven, and written by God. So that by these words their dignity and happiness is notified. But the Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies not simply written but recorded; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a list upon record; for their names use to be lifted upon record, who are the citizens or members of a commonwealth. By these words therefore is signified, that Christians are citizens of heaven, and have the right of a heavenly commonwealth, that their God is always mindful of them, seeing he keeps their names as it were written in a book; and therefore it cannot be but in due time he will put them in possession of his heavenly kingdom. Whence also they that come unto them, or are aggregated to their number, are reckoned with them for citizens of heaven, and members of that heavenly commonwealth. And to God the judge of all] But some may here say, that the Israelites came long since unto God, and therefore here is nothing said, that concerns Christians in particular. I answer. 1. That they when they came to Mount Sinai, did not really and truly come to God himself, but only to an angel who sustained the person and Name of God. 2. That they came not in that manner that Christians do unto God, who as S. John saith, come into a communion and fellowship with God, 1 John 1.3. and into such a communion, that they are reckoned the sons of God, and in time to come shall be his heirs; in witness whereof they have received the earnest of his holy Spirit, Ephes. 1.14. 3. The Israelites came not unto God as unto him whom they knew to be the Judge of all; or rather who then carried himself as the universal Judge of all men, of all countries and nations both quick and dead. Now the name of Judge may be here taken either largely for any Lord and governor: or strictly for him, who according to men's merits decrees and pays rewards and punishments. Anciently God took the peculiar charge and government over the people of Israel only: but now he hath a fatherly care equally over all men of what Nation soever, so they be Christians, yea he provides that they become Christians. Also he ordains rewards and punishments for all men not only in this life, but also after it; which to those first Israelites was not known, especially in regard of those transcendent rewards to be collated after this life upon the godly, without any difference of Nation. And to the spirits of just men made perfect] He seems now to mention these that he tacitly may show; what a great happiness it is, to come to the Judge of all men, both the living and the dead. By the Just he understands those men deceased notable for their righteousness, whereof he reckoned up no small number in the former Chapter treating of faith in God. And he saith that Christians are come to the spirits of the just] because there is now nothing left of them but their spirits, which God hath received into his faith and custody, as the Judge of all. And the just or righteous deceased, are said to be made perfect, not that they now enjoy final happiness, and really possess the final promise of God (for otherwise Christians had not come to their spirits only but rather to them themselves; & in the former chapter he denied that they had already received the promise of God, and were made perfect) but that their state and condition is such, that perfection and eternal happiness is now remaining to them in a way immutable; so that the certainty of attaining it is such, as if they did already really enjoy it. In this very sense Saint Paul useth the same word of himself, when he saith, Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect.] Phil. 3.12. that is, not that I am now in that state, as if I could no way fail of that blessed resurrection (for of this it was, that he spoke in the former verse;) for otherwise that he had not yet really attained eternal life, no man could be ignorant, and it were a fond thing to affirm it. The Author therefore shows that those just ones, though they had not attained eternal salvation in perfection, in regard now nothing of them was extant but their spirits, yet without all doubt should certainly enjoy it, by the immutable decree of God. Hence it appears, what it is for God to be Judge of all, and what happiness is therein contained, if a man come both to the Judge, and to the spirits of the just, and be admitted into their society. For thereby he is certain, though his life here-faile him, yet he shall not fail of the reward of eternal life.  
24. And to jesus the Mediator of the new Testament.] The Israelites heretofore came to Moses the Mediator of the old Testament: but Christians come to Jesus the Mediator of the New. But how much Jesus is better than Moses, and the new Covenant better than the old, we have showed before, chap. 3.8. and chap. 8.6. The word Mediator is in a manner proper to the holy Scripture; and peradventure no where used among profane Authors, as others have noted. Yet it is found out of the Scriptures, in Philo, who being a Jew, used a form of language that had some affinity with the sacred writers. And what this word signifies being used of Christ, we are easily taught by the example of Moses, to whom that name was first attributed. For although of it own nature, it may signify any one who intervenes as a mean between two parties: yet the example of Moses and the name of Covenant added, that thereby is signified no other but an herald, or he who intervenes as a mean between God and men to make a Covenant, for the joining of them in a mutual and firm peace and friendship. For the effecting whereof, it is not forthwith necessary to appease and mitigate the mind either of one or both parties; when it may be either both parties, as it was in the making of the old Covenant, or one of them as it was under the new, namely God, doth freely incline to peace and friendship, yea doth alone, seek, offer, and procure it. And to the blood of sprinkling] An Hebraisme for the blood which is sprinkled, or wherewith aspersion is made. He alludes to that blood of the old Covenant, wherewith Moses, after he had rehearsed all the precepts of the Law, sprinkled both the book of the Law, and the whole people; whereof he said, This is the blood of the Testament, which God hath enjoined unto you; as we had it before, chap. 9 vers. 19, 20. We Christians are in like manner sprinkled with blood, and that with the most precious blood of Christ himself. And we are sprinkled with the blood of Christ, when in our hearts we conceive and embrace the force of that bloody death which he suffered, to confirm the new Covenant; in such manner that thereby we have an infallible assurance made us of the promises comprehended in the Covenant, whence it comes to pass that we are made parties to the Covenant, and obtain a right of attaining to all the blessings promised therein. That speaketh better things then that of Abel.] He commends this blood wherewith Christians are sprinkled, by mentioning the force and effect of it; that they may joy the more for their aspersion with it, and may moreover more carefully endeavour, that they wash not the drops of that blood from their souls; that is, that they never fall away from the new Covenant, nor cease to feel the force of the blood of Christ, and so deprive themselves of that great blessing, which they gained by the shedding of it, namely, a right to eternal happiness. To the blood of Christ he ascribes speech (in a figurative sense) as likewise to the blood of Abel. Both their bloods speak, or as the Scripture saith, of the blood of Abel, both cry unto God: but Abel's blood cries for vengeance upon his fratricide: but Christ's blood cries for remission and pardon even upon parricides; for they may justly be called parricides, who murdered Christ. And unto these no less than unto all other sinners, the blood of Christ begs pardon from God of all their sins, if they will repent and be converted from them. And he begs it, as he engageth God to grant forgiveness of sins to all penitent persons, whatsoever their sins have been. And he engageth God, as he was employed of God to confirm and establish the new Covenant, which is so remarkable for that promise.  
25. See that ye refuse not him that speaketh.] To his former passages he now subjoins an Exhortation, and fortifies it with new reasons. And herein he seems to allude to that fact of the Israelites whereof we spoke before, when they were stricken with such terror of God's Majesty, that they entreated, that God would speak no more unto them; which fact of theirs was a kind of presage or token, that afterward they would not carry an ear and mind obedient to the voice of God. He therefore admonisheth Christians, that now, after they have given their ear and mind to the voice of God in the Gospel, they would not again turn their ear and mind from it; which is done both by Apostasy and by disobedience. See, i. take diligent heed; for they who take diligent heed, cast about their eyes every way, that they may escape the danger imminent. For if they escaped not] By an argument of comparison, he shows that if they do otherwise, they shall not escape a grievous punishment; for they the Israelites escaped not, namely, the punishment and avenging hand of God, whereof we treated, chapters the 3. and 4. where we saw that the Israelites for their unbelief and disobedience, were debarred from entrance into that land of Promise, wherein they should have rested after their grievous servitude in Egypt, and perished in the wilderness by divers destructions. Who refused him that spoke on earth; much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven.] He opposeth him who spoke on earth to him who spoke from heaven; Now there can be no doubt, but by him who spoke from heaven, he understands God himself; for presently after he adds verse 26. Whose voice then shaken the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, yet once more I shake not the earth only but also heaven. For here it is manifest that the whole verse is meant of God. But who shall we say is understood by him, who spoke on earth? By him may be understood both God himself, and that single Angel who bore the name and person of God in Mount Sinai. If by him we understand God himself, than here will be no opposition between divers persons, but only between divers places, from whence God delivered the Law, and from whence the Gospel; Namely, that the Law was published on earth from Mount Sinai, but the Gospel was published by God from heaven. You will say, that God then no less published the Law from heaven, than afterward he did the Gospel; seeing God himself descends not from heaven, but as he sent Christ from heaven to preach the Gospel; so he sent an Angel from heaven in his name to deliver the Law. To this I answer; There is a great difference between the mission or sending of Christ from God, and of that Angel. For Christ being sent from God carried himself always as a person divers from God (which the thing itself declares, for he was the son of man) and called himself God's messenger sent from God, did manifestly profess and testify that his doctrine was not his own but his who sent him, that he spoke nothing of himself, but what he had received and heard from the Father. But that Angel so descended from heaven, that he bore the person and name of God, and therefore he always speaks as if he had been God himself. And this was the cause why Christ had not such Majesty and visible glory about him, as had that Angel. For Christ had but that Majesty and glory, which became God's legate or messenger, and he a man, and a mortal man. But that Angel had that Majesty and glory, which was suitable to God himself, if God himself had descended from Heaven. It may therefore be well said, that God himself descended in that Angel, and must be considered as if he himself had spoken upon earth. Contrarily, because God sent Christ to preach the Gospel as his Apostle or messenger, and sent him from heaven as a person distinct from him; not as of old he sent Moses from the earth, that is, but from Mount Sinai; therefore now with good reason he is said to deliver his oracles, and to publish his pleasure to us from heaven. But it is a far greater matter to deliver oracles from heaven itself then from earth, or from some earthly mountain, seeing heaven is far higher and worthier than any mountain. Therefore although the manner which God used in publishing and revealing his Gospel, was not, if we respect the outward show and splendour of it, so illustrious, as that wherewith he published the Law: yet indeed it was far more divine and perfect, and in all respects most beseeming the perfect discipline of Evangelicall truth. For what else did it signify, that God descended on earth to publish the Law, but that the precepts of the Law were earthly and not heavenly. For they that speak from a low place seem to speak but low matter, and they earthly that speak from the earth; as we read in the Gospel of John, chap. 3.31. But contrarily, that God remaining in heaven, and not descending himself on earth either in his own person, or in the person of another, hath spoken to us by Christ sent from heaven, as his Interpreter and messenger; what else can this signify, but that he hath spoken heavenly things, and that Christ is far greater than Moses? For as it is written in the forecited place of John; He that cometh from above, is above all; and he that cometh from heaven is above all. In this sense therefore, that Angel representing God, must stand for God; and Christ must not be compared with that Angel who represented the person and name of God, but with Moses; and the difference between Christ and Moses must stand in this, that God spoke to Moses on earth, but to Christ in heaven; and that God sent Moses from the mount to the Israelites, but Christ from heaven to Christians. If this be displeasing to any man, which yet we believe to be most agreeable both to the truth, and to the Scripture, and to the Text, we may say (which is our other answer to the question proposed, and another sense of the words) that by him who spoke on earth, must be understood that Angel, who in God's name published the Law on Mount Sinai; and by him who spoke from Heaven, must be understood the most high God himself. For he that by himself delivers Laws on earth, doth thereby show that he is not the most high God. For the Majesty of the most high God, permits not, that the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords should departed from his inaccessible light, and from his heavenly throne to descend down upon earth. But he that offers himself as God to be heard from heaven, he by far greater reason must be reckoned for God himself. But you will say, when did God himself publish the Gospel from heaven? I answer, This was done then, when by his voice uttered from heaven, he testified that Christ was his beloved Son, and therefore his Ambassador, and withal commanded us to hear him. For shall not God himself be thought to speak to us from heaven, when we hear that doctrine which God himself authorised by his voice uttered from heaven? For although by the wise determination of God, the promiscuous multitude heard not this voice with their ears; yet it was heard and published by them, whose testimony is irrefragable. But in the publishing of the Law was no such thing. Whence it is manifest that even in this sense, the Author's argument wants no force. For it is a greater crime to turn away from God, who spoke from heaven, then from an Angel, who spoke on earth, though he sustained the name of God. He turns away from God, and as it were turns his back upon him, who refuseth either to believe or obey the voice of God.  
26. Whose voice then shaken the earth] From these words it seems to be gathered, that the Author by him who spoke on earth understands God himself. For here he mainifestly attributeth to God himself the shaking of the earth; i. of Mount Sinai, which happened at the publishing of the Law from thence: But nothing hinders, why this action may not be ascribed both to God and to the Angel who in publishing the Law sustained the person of God; as likewise that speaking or uttering the oracles a little before mentioned. For the Angel properly and immediately did both shake the earth or mountain, and also spoke; and God did it mediately by that very Angel. But in these words there is a tacit answer to an objection, and withal a strong reason, why Christians must obey the voice of God published by Christ. For some man might say, that the Law was published with great terror, insomuch that the earth was shaken with the voice of God: whence we may easily gather, what a fearful punishment remains to the forsakers of the Law. To this terror of the Law, he Author opposeth a far greater terror, and shows that under the Gospel's matters will be far more terrible, for not only the earth but heaven itself shall be shaken. From whence any man may easily perceive, that there shall be no place of escape from God's punishments for them who have been disobedient against the voice of the Gospel. For whither shall they fly, if the heavens themselves which do encompass the earth round about, shall be shaken, yea shall fall and perish; as we are taught in the following verse. Whose voice] 
The thunder called the voice of God.  By the voice of God we may understand those thunders, by whose cracks the Mount quaked and trembled; for in several places of Scripture the thunder is called the voice of God; See Job 37.4,5. and Psal. 18.13. and Psal. 29. per tot. Shaken the earth] Some part of the earth, as Mount Sinai and the plain adjoining. Whence it appears, that under the times of the Gospel there will be another manner of earthquake; when not only some one mountain, or some small territory, but the whole universal earth shall be shaken and broken to the lowest foundations of it. But now he hath promised saying. The word now doth not express the time of the promise, but the time of performance of the thing promised; namely the time wherein God will shake both heaven and earth. So that now must be referred to the times of the Gospel, as the shaking of Mount Sinai was to the times of the Law. Therefore the mind of the Author is to say, Now under the times of the Gospel, God will shake not only the earth, but the heaven also, as he promised by the Prophet, saying, Yet once more I shake, not the earth only, but also heaven] This Prophecy is extant, Hag. 2.6. But the Author would speak briefly, and speedily express the thing in the words of God himself; as in many passages St. Paul also doth. In the Hebrew, it is, yet once, it is a little while; i. there yet remains but a very small time for the fulfilling of that which God there promiseth for the moving of heaven and earth. But in the Greek translation of the Septuagint, whom hitherto our Author hath followed in the testimonies he hath cited out of Scripture, we read it, yet once. It may be the Septuagint did not read the Hebrew word mead, a little while, but only achath, once. But we need not marvel, why here the Author would rather follow the Greek translation, seeing it suiteth better with the mystical sense of the Prophet's words. For in the literal sense, these words contain a Prophecy, that it should come to pass that God would move heaven and earth, by raising up divers countries and nations, who should come to the Temple at Jerusalem, and bring with them the desire of all Nations; that is, that which is  and precious among all Nations, namely silver and gold, to adorn the Temple of God; as it is explicated in the words following. But because these words of moving heaven and earth are more magnificent, then only to contain so narrow a sense; therefore we must needs conceive, that they carry some other more proper sense; namely, that God shall really shake heaven and earth; to which sense the Greek translation as we said better agrees. For it cannot be but in a qualified manner, that the time should be called a little while, which is extended from this Prophecy to the end of the world. If any demand, how it can be said, that God will yet once more shake heaven and earth, seeing he never shaken heaven before? We answer, It is said, because the earth is there mentioned, which God did shake before, namely at the publishing of the Law. Not the earth only, but also heaven] The Hebrew text hath it simply, the heaven and the earth; but the Author would rather speak thus, that he might more fitly and evidently oppose that shaking, which shall come to pass in the times of the Gospel, to that shaking which fell out at the publishing of the Law; that now under the Gospel not the earth only as then it was, but also the heaven itself shall be shaken.  
27. And this word yet once more signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken] From the words yet once more, the Author gathers what manner of shaking shall come upon heaven and earth; and saith, that those words do signify or declare, the removing of the things that are shaken. By removing is signified the abolition or destruction of heaven and earth; for those things that are wholly abolished and destroyed, are extremely removed, not only from their former place, but from all place; See chap. 7. ver. 12. That are shaken is put for, that shall be shaken, the present tense for the future, a form of speech usual among the Hebrews, especially the Prophets. But how do the words yet once more signify, that heaven and earth shall be so shaken, that by their shaking they shall be removed or abolished? They signify it by this reason, that if heaven and earth should remain after this shaking, it scarce seems possible, but that they must be once shaken again, yea it must necessarily be so, if, as it appears from other words of the Prophets, heaven and earth must one day be abolished; for then at the least, when they are abolished they must be shaken, and so they shall be shaken not yet once more, but twice: It is therefore manifest that these words yet once more, do signify such a shaking of heaven and earth, as shall be accompanied with their removing or abolishing. And hence also it is plain that this Epistle was written in Greek, seeing this collection of the Author is grounded only upon the Greek translation; for in the Hebrew text it cannot take place, unless as we said, the word Mead a little while be expunged, which at this day is read in all copies, and seems necessary to the literal sense. As of things that are made] He inserts the cause which argues and shows the removing or abolishing of heaven and earth, that in due time it shall certainly come to pass; namely, because they are things made. But the words things made in this place must needs be taken somewhat strictly. For even that heaven which shall not be shaken, was made; and our future glorious and heavenly bodies shall be made. Therefore things made do in this place signify those things that were made of some gross and corporeal matter, as are all things of this creation, as the Author speaks before, chap. 9.11. or else which were made of such matter which receives a foreign form besides and beyond her natural inclination; for matter receiving such a form suffers a kind of violence, and thereupon naturally of her own accord inclines to the removing and abolishing of it; as are all things artificial that are made by art, from which the Author seems here to draw a tacit resemblance. So the form and beauty of this whole world was by the power of God induced into that Chaos which is described by Moses in the beginning of Genesis; seeing therefore that heaven and earth were made by inducing a foreign form into a gross matter that was before rude, void and dark, beside and above her natural capacity, therefore their form shall be shaken off and removed, and consequently they shall be abolished. That those things which cannot be shaken, may remain.] That things immutable only may remain alone by themselves. Now they are, not only things immutable which cannot be shaken, but also mutable which shall be shaken. But after that all things mutable which are to be shaken, shall be shaken and removed: then shall remain only things immutable which are not to be shaken, nor shall be shaken. By these words is noted of things mutable not the proper end for which they had being, but the event or end of their being, whereby their being shall cease. And the Author added this to show, that when heaven and earth shall be removed or abolished, yet there shall be remaining a most ample and spacious mansion for the righteous, as S. Peter also testifieth and calleth it, a new heaven and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness, 2 Pet. 3.13. But by these words the Author makes way to a new argument, whereby he excites and exhorts the Hebrews to faith and constancy in the Christian Religion, by subjoyning.  
28. Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved or shaken] The kingdom here is both the place itself, and also the blessed state or happiness of them that inhabit it. And this kingdom cannot be moved or shaken, not in respect of God's power; for God who is Almighty hath might and power sufficient to move and shake even that new heaven and new earth as Peter calls it: but because God hath no will ever to shake, yea it is his will it should never be shaken; and because of it own nature it is no way propense or inclinable to be shaken, but is finally immutable; and what is so? of that it may well be said, that it cannot be shaken; in which sense the Angels are immortal, and so shall we be one day. We receiving] i. accepting and embracing it with our soul, and bearing a firm faith to the promises of it, which are contained in the Christian Religion; and so apprehending it as it were with our hand upon God's offer of it unto us. Let us have grace] Have is here put for retain or hold; unless by grace here some man would understand a thankful mind; which sense notwithstanding doth not so well fit the place, especially seeing in the holy Scriptures to have grace doth not signify to have a thankful mind, but rather to give thanks. See 1 Tim. 1.12. and 2 Tim. 1.3. which sense doth not so well agree with the words following, Whereby we may serve God. 
Grace.  Grace therefore in this place, as also elsewhere, doth rather signify, either the doctrine of Christ full of God's grace, as when John saith, that grace came by jesus Christ, John 1.17. where he opposeth grace to the Law: and S. Peter writes, that he testifies, that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand, 1 Pet. 5.12. where he means that the doctrine which they had received touching the grace of God, was true: Or it signifies the favour of God, whereto God admitted us under the new Covenant, promising us eternal life and his heavenly kingdom; which divine favour is termed by Paul, the grace of God, that bringeth salvation to all men, 'tis 2.11. which in the following Chapter, ver. 4. he calls the kindness and love of God. So that to have grace, is to retain the doctrine of the Gospel which contains the grace and favour of God toward us. Whereby we may serve God acceptably] That is, according to his prescript, if by grace we understand the doctrine of Christ: or by his instinct, if we will have it signify the favour of God. May serve] In the Original it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may worship: which word sometime in holy Scripture is taken largely and generally, for all that honour which by holy offices we perform publicly unto God, whether by way of worship with holy reverences, or by way of service, with prayers, praises or thanksgivings and such like; yea sometime this word is further amplified and extended to all works of piety; because under the new Covenant all pious works are accounted spiritual sacrifices. But how the word worship is sometime taken more strictly, and so opposed to service, and what are the differences between them two, we have formerly explicated, chap. 9 ver. 1. and see chap. 9.14. Acceptably] Our worship and service of God, and our works of piety, must not be done loosely after any manner: but in such a manner only as is acceptable and pleasing to God; because all service must be pleasing to the person to whom it is done, for otherwise it is disservice. Therefore our worship and service of God must not now be legal, by carnal sacrifices, which while the Law was of force were not very pleasing unto him, (as hath been showed) but spiritual and evangelical, by holy reverences, prayers, praises and thanksgivings: neither must it be perfunctory lame or may med, but entire, serious and ardent. With reverence and godly fear] He shows the manner and way, how to make our worship and service acceptable and pleasing unto God; namely, if we worship and serve him with modesty and reverence. In the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which properly signify with modesty and reverence. Modesty or bashfulness is an affection whereby we fear to displease a man, and thereby to diminish his good esteem of us; and it extends itself to the least circumstances that seem to contain any appearance of indecency, even to those things which deserve neither punishment nor blame. For modesty requires us to avoid all indecencies, or if they cannot be avoided, but either are or have been done, to cover them, that they may not appear to others; lest thereby we lessen our esteem with them, to whom they appear. But be case modesty, though it be a very tender affection, yet for the most part doth not incite and move us so vehemently, therefore to modesty the Author adjoins reverence, which is a more potent affection; for reverence is an intense or graduated fear, when fear is in some degree augmented beyond his ordinary state, as Charity is an intense love more than ordinary. And this reverence doth properly respect a person that is superior unto us, and either hath power to benefit us, or at least a right to punish us. For fear as it respects a person is properly that affection, whereby we beware of punishment and other evils eminent: and Reverence is this fear redoubled or graduated as we have said. The manner therefore how to make our worship and service of God acceptable and pleasing unto him, is by seasoning our souls with these two affections of Modesty and Reverence; which are the true and firm foundations whereupon are framed those holy gestures of standing up, bowing down, and kneeling down to him, which are the proper acts whereof Gods outward worship doth consist; as we have formerly specified. For if the use of reverend gestures be decent and due to any person upon earth, much more is the use of them decent and due to the most high God of heaven. Seeing of all other persons in the world, we should most fear to displease God by any appearance of indecency in the least circumstance; and seeing God above all others hath all power to benefit us, and all right to punish us. In which consideration the Author immediately subjoins.  
29. For our God is a consuming fire.] Here he adjoins the reason, why we must worship and serve God in this acceptable manner with modesty and reverence; namely, because God is a consuming fire. 
God is a fire of anger,  So God is called by reason of his anger and wrath, wherewith he is so provoked by fin, that he grows hot and burns against it; and as often as he burns with wrath, he consumes and destroys ungodly men as suddenly, and as fiercely as doth a most vehement fire. And it seems that Moses, from whom the Author took these words, took occasion to call God by this name, Deut. 4.24. because that God descended down upon Mount Sinai in a great flame of fire, the smoke whereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace. Exod. 19.18. and because God spoke out of the midst of the fire, that they who heard his voice, saw no other similitude of him. Deut. 4.11. and because a fire proceeding from God burned up some, who in his worship and service carried not themselves toward him with that modesty and reverence that was acceptable unto him. So he burned up the two Priests the sons of Aaron, who durst burn incense unto him with strange fire, that was not sacred and fallen from heaven. Levit. 10.2. So he burned up those two hundred and fifty men, who being not Priests, durst approach to offer and burn incense unto him. Numb. 16.35,39. Hence also it is that God appeared unto Moses in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. Exod. 3.2. And in the Psalms of David, God is sometime introduced with a fire going before him, and burning up his enemies round about. Psal. 97.3. And in that vision of Daniel, the Ancient of days did sit, whose throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels like burning fire; and a fiery stream issued, and came forth from before him. Dan. 7.9,10. Yet we must not think that God doth burn with perpetual flames of anger. For God is rather charity as Saint John doth testify. 
And of love.  Therefore God is always a fire of love and charity towards men, especially Christians, unless it be when men's sins do quench this fire of love and charity in him, and kindle that other fire of anger and wrath. Seeing then our God is a fire to consume those who dare presume to worship or serve him immodestly, or irreverently, or in any manner not acceptable unto him; it therefore concerns us to be careful, that in all our approaches to his worship or service, we carry ourselves with all modesty and reverence; lest our God be also unto us as a consuming fire.   

The Contents of this 12. Chapter, are,  

1. Duty. We must be constant in professing the faith, and patiented in bearing the the crosses of it. ver. 1. 

Motive. 1. Because we have a cloud of witnesses, who eye us in our course of faith and piety. ver. 1.  
2. Because we have Christ for an example and pattern, who did endure the cross, and the contradiction of sinners, and despised the shame of it, for the glory set before him. v. 2. 3.  
3. Because the cross is but God's chastisement upon us; which argues his fatherly love to us as his children. ver. 5, 6, 7. for chastisement is universal whereof all are partakers except bastards. ver. 8. We take it patiently from our carnal fathers. v. 9 It lasteth but a few days. ver. 10. and it smarts but only for the present. v. 11.    
2. Duty. We must follow peace and holiness. v. 14. 

Motive. Because without them no man shall see the Lord ibid.    
3. Duty. We must be diligent to keep one another from falling away. 

Motive. Because Apostasy is a bitter root, that will both trouble and defile many. v. 15.    
4. Duty. We must take heed of profaneness. v. 16. 

Motive. 1. Because Esau who first despised his birthright, afterward lost his blessing finally, and could not recover it, though he sought it with tears. v. 16, 17.  
2. Because the Church whereto we come, is not an earthly mount, where a God on earth speaks all in terror, as it was with the Israelites. v. 18, 19, 20, 21. But an heavenly mount, whereof the assembly is, God in heaven, and Christ the Mediator; thousands of Angels, the firstborn of the Church, and the spirits of the Righteous. v. 22, 23, 24.  
3. Because the Doctrine we are to hear was not spoken on earth, as was the law: but from heaven. v. 25.  
4. Because the time shall once come under the Gospel, wherein God shall be more terrible than ever he was at Mount Sinai: for he shall shake both heaven and earth to pieces, even to abolsh them. v. 26.27.  
5. Because we receive from God an infinite benefit, even a Kingdom that is immutable, and inconcussible. v. 28.  
6. Because God is a fire to consume the profane. v. ult.       

CHAPTER XIII.  

1. LEt brotherly love continue] In the former Chapter he exhorted them to several duties concerning God, as to constancy in the Faith, and patience under the Cross, and to Holiness: and also dissuading from the main contrary vices of Apostasy and profaneness. Now in this Chapter he proceeds to humane duties in certain mutual good offices of men one toward another; beginning with brotherly love; which is our first and chiefest degree of Charity towards men, particularly such men as are our brethren. They are eminently called our brethren, who have one common spiritual father with us, and are begotten into Christ from our heavenly Father, by that incorruptible seed, which is the word of the Gospel. For if the faithful who are sanctified, are all brethren unto Christ who doth sanctify them, as was showed before, chap. 2.11. with much more reason are they brethren one to another, because their mutual resemblances between themselves are much more manifold. And this brotherly love consisteth in the inward affect of it, and in divers outward effects of doing good; for faith and love also are both dead, if they be ineffectual. This love must continue, and remain in that being it had amongst them, it must never cease to be, nor fail to be less; for he tacitly attributes this virtue unto them, and supposing it amongst them already, requires the continuance of it. For he had spoken before of their work and labour of love, that they had ministered unto the Saints and did minister. And therefore he seems not simply to exhort them to the duty of love as if it were not yet amongst them; but to the continuance of it as supposing it, amongst them already.  
2. Be not forgetful to entertain strangers] The second good office is that of hospitality. Hospitality is but love and charity carried upon another object, when our love is not restrained to our acquaintance only whom we know; but enlarged towards strangers in general whom we know not, whether they be our brethren or not. And it consisteth in receiving strangers into our houses, and entertaining them will all good offices of humanity and courtesy, especially according to our abilities and their necessities. And as hospitality must be exercised toward all strangers, so especially and in the first place toward Christians who are our brethren, and chief to those of them that are exiles and become strangers for the cause of Christ and his Religion. And to this hospitality may be referred our humanity toward the poor, by inviting them to our houses, and cheering them in a kind and comfortable manner. And of hospitality we must not be forgetful i. We must not neglect it. For those things that we forget, we also neglect, or as we have said before, we take no care for them: the contrary whereof we shall see in the verse following. For thereby some have entertained Angels unawares] He commends hospitality, and moves us to the exercise of it, in regard that thereby some have entertained Angels unawares. He hath reference to the history of Abraham and Lot, whereof both were wondrous hospitable, and careful to receive and entertain strangers into their houses, and both unawares, happened upon Angels sent from God, carrying themselves in the shape of men, which they received into their houses. So that by the hospitality of some, namely of Abraham and Lot, it came to pass, that they received and entertained Angels, not knowing them to be Angels then when they received them. For if they had evidently known them to be Angels, it had been no marvel, that they invited them into their houses or tents, for this they might well have done, though otherwise they had not been hospitable. For who is so inhospitable, but if he think he may procure Angels to accept of his entertainment, will delay to invite them, when he finds them at his door, though indeed this were no hospitality at all? for he that invites Angels must needs know, that Angels can be in no necessity to stand in need of entertainment; which hospitality always supposeth in the stranger that she receiveth. 
The three men seen of Abraham.  From these words of the Author it is manifest, how vainly they are mistaken, who think that the three men who were seen and invited of Abraham, Gen. 18.2. were the persons of the holy Trinity; and because he saw three and worshipped but one, calling him, My Lord, therefore they gather, that Abraham believed, that those three persons were one God. These men perceive not, upon what a fallacious conjecture they rely in matters of so high moment. For this divine Author doth openly declare and testify that they were Angels, and not three persons of the Deity; which if they had been, he might surely have commended hospitality with a far higher encomium of praise, and have said, that by reason of that virtue, not Angels, but the persons of the Deity received entertainment. And we desire leave to demand of these men, what they think, whether Abraham, when he saw those three persons and worshipped one of them inviting him into his tent, did then certainly know that he entertained the persons of the sacred Trinity, or not know it? If they affirm the first, that he did know it, than we further demand of them, why Abraham used them as men? why he dressed meat and caused it to be set before them, and exhibited other offices of courtesy to them, which are usually done unto men? was he so ignorant of things, that he knew not, that God wanted no such entertainment? And why doth this Author say that he entertained men unawares? For what can this signify else, but that he believed them to be men? Did he who did not so much as imagine them to be Angels, believe them to be persons of the Deity? But if for the second point these men confess, as the truth is, and as this Author clearly teacheth, that Abraham supposed that he saw and invited no other persons but men, with what reason do they gather, that because he saw three and worshipped one, therefore he believed, that they were one God distinct in three persons? Did he therefore believe it, because he did not so much as imagine it? But you will say, why then did he worship one, seeing he saw three? without all doubt he therefore did it, because one of them carried himself so, as seeming greater & worthier than the rest, and was eminent amongst them. And surely one of them only is called Jehovah, and is clearly distinguished from both the other. In the 18. Chapter of Genesis, compare the 17. verse and so forth, and the last verse, with the first verse of the Chapter following, where the two other Angels went to Lot in Sodom. For this may be a sufficient argument, that from this one point of worshipping one, the unity of a common essence among them cannot be collected; seeing Lot worshipped also the other two, bowing himself with his face toward the ground, and called them jointly, My Lords, Gen. 19.1,2. But if that one at Abraham's tent carried himself for a divine person, why is he alone, both worshipped of Abraham, and called Jehovah in the Scripture? Were not the other persons worthy of the same honour, and of the same name? But if that one went for the divine and common essence, where shall be the third Person of the Deity? Did therefore Abraham worship the divine Essence, and neglect the divine Persons? or did one carry himself for the Essence, and for a Person also? And why not the rest also, if the divine Essence were equally commune to them all? Eusebius in his first book, contends, that this one Person was the Son of God, because that after Abraham knew him, he is called Lord and God. For he will not have him to be the most high God, because to him it is not incident, to undergo such a change, as to assume a strange shape, and converse with men under it. (Neither may we think (to insert this by the way) that those fathers who lived before and about the times of the Nicene Council, and the whole Church in general held this opinion of God, to believe, that the Son is that one most high God who is the Father. For they were far of another mind, who yet if in these times they should appear, would now of an universal Council be no less condemned than they then condemned others.) On the other side, Eusebius seeing that the name of Lord and God was given to that person, he imagined that he could not possibly be any other but the Son of God, consubstantial to his Father as he thought, and therefore partaker of his Father's divine Name. So multiple and various is error, that when she hath once strayed from the path of truth, wanders incessantly, and finds no end of erring, and believes none that would direct her; for there is no blindness so incurable as that of the mind; because it persuades the soul that she wants no sight but sees most clearly. But Eusebius might have sufficiently known and been informed, if by no means else, yet from this one place of this Author, that this person and the rest entertained by Abraham were indeed Angels. But you will say, why then is that person called Jehovah which is the proper Name of God himself? The reason is, because he carried himself for God himself, at God's will and command. For such an one (as we heard before,) was that Angel who first appeared to Moses in the bush, and afterward at Mount Sinai in such high Majesty; both which as it appears plainly from Scripture were Angels, ●…ough they carried themselves as God and Jehovah; and therefore it can be no marvel that the Name of God was given 〈…〉 absurdity is it, for the Angels to carry themselves as God, and use the Name of God, when God wills and commands it? Yea, how can it possibly be otherwise? Are they not minisstring spi●…●…to God, to be delegated by him in what quality he pleases to 〈…〉? or cannot God will and command them to minister in this qua●…y, to procure their greater authority with those men to whom they are sent, and that men may be the more certain, that in or by those Angels they deal with God himself?  
3. Remember them that are in bonds] To remember in this place, is to have a care; for of whom we have a care, them we are wont often to remember. And the sense of this remembering here is all one with the negation of the contrary in the former verse, where he required them, that they should not be forgetful; because not to forget, is to remember. Them that are in bonds; namely for Christ's and the Gospel's sake; for though many were in bonds for other causes as for crimes and offences, yet the multitude of those that were in bonds for Christ, made fare the greater number. For afflictions and pierce quations are so incident to the truth of the Gospel, that she produceth an army of bondmen, wherein the forerunner of Christ was also the forerunner: for John Baptist suffered both bonds and death: but we must look upon Christ as the General of this Army, who led the way by the Cross, as this Author requires us, chap. 12.2. Of the like bloody cup Stephen drank and James; Peter also lies sleeping in prison between two soldiers bound with two chains, Acts 12 6. Paul and Silas are thrust into the inner prison at Philippi, and have their feet made fast in the stocks, Acts 16.24. Yea Paul was for many years so familiarly acquainted with chains and bonds, that he makes it his attribute to be the prisoner of Jesus Christ; for so he styles himself in several of his Epistles. And this Author doth acknowledge himself to be in bonds, and that therein these Hebrews had compassion on him, chap. 10.34. Yet in this place his intention is not, that they should remember him alone: but he speaks in the plural number for their charity in general to all that are in bonds. As being bound with them] He shows how carefully we should remember those that are in bonds; namely by thinking ourselves to be in the same state and condition with them; and therefore having assumed their persons upon us, whatsoever we would have done by our brethren and companions to us in the like case, the same we should carefully do unto them in their distress. 
Commiseration.  And from these words it appears that the third duty or good office whereto the Author doth exhort them, is commiseration or compassion; which though he name not in express terms, yet his words do tacitly imply it. For commiseration is but love and charity varied yet upon another object, when our love is not restrained only to our brethren, or to strangers, which (as was showed in the former verse) is hospitality; but when the bowels of our love are enlarged to all persons in misery, in what relation soever they stand unto us; especially when we assume unto ourselves and seel in our fowls the like passions that be in them, of suffering and being bound with them; for than our charity becomes true compassion or commiseration. And them which suffer adversity] In the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a general word that may be extended to all kinds of afflictions; or if it be restrained it commonly signifies those that are sick, or suffer bodily pains. And the adversity of sickness or pain is a sore misery, that doth justly require our commiseration. As being yourselves also in the body.] Here he shows a reason or motive why we should commiserate those that are sick and pained in body; namely, because was ourselves are compassed with a body of infirmity subject unto sicknesses and pains. For seeing we are men, we must therefore consider that no humane infirmity is exempted from us; and thereupon seam to commiserate other persons in their sickness, as if the like misery were already or shortly may be upon our own bodies.  
4. Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undesiled] The fourth duty or virtue whereto he exhorts them is Chastity, by avoiding the vice of lust and uncleanness. The speech of the Author is here illipticall or defective, for in the Greek there is no verb, is. Yet we must needs understand some verb, either indicative is, as here our and most vulgar Translations have it, Marriage is honourable, and the bed undefiled is honourable: Or rather we should understand a verb imperative, let. Let marriage be honourable, and let the bed be undefiled; because all the former verses in this Chapter are delivered in the imperative Mood; as Let brotherly love continue, ver. 1. Be not forgetful to entertain, ver. 2. Remember them that are in bonds, ver. 3. Secondly, because the verses following also run in the same imperative Mood; as Let your conversation be without covetousness, ver. 5. Remember them which have the rule over you, ver. 7. Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines, ver. 9 etc. Thirdly, because the fith verse next following this is without any verb in the Greek; and yet the Translators do unanimously supply it with a verb not indicative, saying, your conversation is without covetousness: but imperative, Let your conversation be so. Lastly, because the contents of this Chapter seem not to be matter of Doctrine, but of Exhortation; whose Mood is imperative, moving us (as we have said) to several duties and good offices. If then we understand these words Indicatively, by supplying them with the verb is; Then the sense will be, That marriage is in all or among men of all sorts and ranks a thing honest, and by it only the bed is undefiled; so that a man may live in marriage with the safety of piety and honesty; contrary to what is done in fornication and adultery. But if we understand them imperatively or preceptively by supplying them with the verb let be; Let marriage be honourable. Then the sense will be. Let marriage be preserved in it due honour, and let the means to preserve it so, be, by keeping the bed undefiled from adulteries; for nothing is more dishonourable to a married person, then to have his bed stained and defiled by the uncleanness of another; which is done in every adultery; for the nature of adultery is here modestly defined to be the defiling of another's bed. The words in all may be referred either to things or persons. If we refer them to things, the sense will be, that marriage be in every thing observed honestly and chastely, and that the bed be not polluted with any unclean or strange lust. But if we refer in all to persons; the sense will be, that marriage must be had in honour and esteem among all persons of all sexes; that no person should so despise it as to presume or dare to invade another's bed, whether he be a single person or married. For all persons ought to have such an opinion of marriage, as to esteem it a thing sacred and not to be polluted; for he that doth otherwise, and transgresseth the Laws of marriage, by defiling his bed and body with a stranger, incurs a heavy penalty, which God himself will one day execute upon him.  
But whoremongers and adulterers God will judge] Here he brings a Motive or Reason, whereby he would persuade us to the former duty of honouring marriage by our honesty and chastity; namely, because God will show a judgement upon whoremongers and adulteres, who are the main transgressors against marriage to violate and dishonour it; for to the honesty of marriage and the chastity of the bed, he opposeth whoredom and adultery, as a bed polluted and defiled. For marriage is dishonoured and disgraced two ways chief; first by whoremongers who despise it and will not marry, and secondly by adulterers, who violate and affront marriage. And the judgement which God hath already denounced, and will certainly execute upon whormongers and adulterers, is, that they shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven. See Gal. 5. verse 19.20.21. and Ephes. 5.5. And the Author makes God the Judge to condemn and punish these whoremongers and adulterers, to the end they might think and consider, that though they commit their wickednesses secretly, and many times escape the eyes and judgements of men, yet they shall not evade the avenging hand of God, and in vain they deal warily, if they live not chastely. For God doth severely persecute uncleanness, especially in them whom he hath seasoned with the knowledge of Christ, sequestered from profane and worldly men, and accepted as persons sacred to himself. If therefore men would avoid this judgement of God in the loss of eternal life, let them avoid the defiling sins of whoredom and adultery. 
Of single life.  Concerning celibate or single life, here is nothing ordained; because although a chaste celibate be purer and holier than marriage, yet the necessity of it is not commanded or imposed upon any man by the sacred Scripture: But Christ doth only persuade it, yet only to them, who can contain themselves. Mat. 19.11,12. and Paul more amply and openly. 1. Cor. 7. ver. 8, 26. and thence to the end of the chapter. Here therefore we must walk in a middle way. And as marriage must not be detruded into the number of fornications and uncleannesses, as some anciently did, who esteemed marriage nothing else, but a kind of licenced whoredom: so again on the other side it must not be equalled to a chaste celibate, which the Scripture clearly prefers before marriage, as containing more purity and holiness in it. But as we said, it must be exacted from no man; lest while we affect extreme purity, either we ourselves fall into mischiefs and uncleannesses, or precipitate others into them, who aspire either to the glory of celibate, or to other virtues and offices enclosed with the necessity of celibate. Whatsoever is honourable, honest, and undefiled, as the Author here testifies of maririage, that must be granted free to any man, especially if there arise a weighty cause, as in this case there may, to cut off all occasions of whoredoms, adulteries, and other defilements. And they who debar from marriage those which burn as the Apostle speaks, do all one, as if a man who cannot hinder the disease, doth yet forbid to use the remedy; for what else can follow upon this, but a soarer sickness? For marriage is the remedy for burning and lust; which when it is denied to them that burn, the issue will be, that at length they fall into a fare worse disease, and run into unclean and unlawful pleasures. Besides, it detracts much from the dignity of celibate, if it cease to be voluntary, and be forced by law, and arise not from freewill. But to return to the words of the Author. Whoredom is between those parties that are both free from the bond of marriage: but adultery is between parties, whereof either both, or one of them at least is married. Anciently under the old Testament, when husbands might have more wives than one, it was not adultery for a married man to lie with a single woman unmarried, but only whoredom. But under the new Testament, where this licentiousness of husbands is limited by the law of Christ, and restrained to the company of one wife only; adultery is committed as well on the husband's part, as on the wives; as may easily appear by the words of Christ. Matth. 19.9. where he saith, Whosoever shall put away his wife except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery. Which certainly is not, because of the mariage-bond (for that of itself is rather to avoid uncleanness then increase it) but absolutely and simply, because having a wife before he presumes to lie with another woman, when by Law the former woman ceaseth not to be his wife, because his divorce was illegal and a nullity.  
5. Let your conversation be without covetousness.] The fifth duty whereto he exhorts, is Contentedness, by avoiding the vice of covetousness, which here the Author dissuades next after uncleanness in the former verse. For these two vices of uncleanness and covetousness, love to go together, or one to follow close upon another; for we find them this coupled and joined in several passages of the holy Scriptures; as the two grand vices of the world, that are most pernicious, and yet most common. See Ephes. 5.3,5. and Colos. 3.5. and 1. Thes. 4.5,6. and divers other places of the Prophets. Wherefore of all other vices, these two unto Christians ought to be most odious, as being so jointly and fully cried out against in the Scriptures. The word for Conversation in the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which either signifies a custom and manner; although it be not usually put in the singular number for a manner: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plural for manners: yet more frequently the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the manners; or customary actions of a man. Or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the means and way of getting our livelihood. Both these senses come to one, and both agree to the point proposed. For both our manners and our means of getting our livelihood must be free from all covetousness and love of money. Now covetousness is an inordinate desire and endeavour of worldly goods; or as Saint Paul describes it, 1. Tim. 6.9,10. It is a desire to be rich; for what at the ninth verse he termed a desire to be rich, he afterward at the tenth verse, calls the love of money or covetousness; and withal he sets this brand upon it, that it is the nursery or root of all evil. And be content with such things as you have.] To covetousness he opposeth contentedness as the contrary duty and remedy against it. So doth also S. Paul. 1. Tim. 6.8. Where he limits our contentedness only to food and raiment; saying, Having food and raiment, let us be therewith content.] He is content with the things he hath for the present, who doth so rest satisfied with that estate he hath, though it be mean and small, that he is neither querulous to complain for the present, nor solicitous to care and doubt for the future, though he foresee not provision of food and raiment for the time to come; because he trusteth wholly upon God, and in cases doubtful constantly hopes for help and aid from him. To a mind thus composed it is not repugnant, if thou art poor, to desire and seek more, so thou desire and seek it moderately, and whether thou get more or not, art always of an equal and indifferent mind, and canst say with Tobias speaking to his son. Fear not my son though we are made poor, for thou hast much wealth if thou fear God, and departed from all sin, and do that which is pleasing in his sight. Tobit 4.21. But wealthy thou wilt never be, if thou distrustest God, and with an anxious and restless carefulness, givest thyself wholly to gain wealth; if thou neglect the worship of God, the serious and diligent care of thy salvation, beneficence to the poor and needy according to thy estate, if thou trace the by paths of thriving by unjust dealing, without regard to the offices and duties of piety and equity. And these are the bounds wherewith S. Paul defines contentedness, in having food and raiment, as was before noted. A godly man doth neither refuse more, nor overmuch desire it. See Phil. 4.11,12. Therefore this virtue may well agree with labour, industry, and parsimony, by which means if God give his blessing, we may raise ourselves from poverty, using withal a due mean and convenient measure. For he hath said, I will never leave thee nor forsake thee. Here he gives the reason why we should be content with what we have, without complaint or anxity for the time to come; and he draws his reason from the promise of God unto us; because God hath said, he will never leave us nor forsake us. A reason very effectual and of great moment to persuade us; for why should we be anxious and careful, when we have so great a person as God for our Patron and Protector, who the more to secure us, hath engaged himself by his promise, to provide for us? for he hath said it. There is a great Emphasis in the pronoun He like to that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He who is the most high God, the Author and Guardian of all things, and the Patron and Saviour of man. Whence it appears how firm and certain his succour is to them that are in adversity I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.] In the second member of this clause, there is in the Greek a most strong negation of God's desertion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Here is a triple negation, that thereby we might so much the more secure ourselves, that the time shall never come, wherein God will forsake us. The words are the saying of God to Joshua the captain of the Israelites. Joshua 1.5. Which saying, every Christian as being joined to God in a nearer bond, than ever Joshua was, may well apply unto himself; especially seeing the assistance and succour promised in these words to Joshua, was only in reference to the safety and benefit of the people of Israel, to whom he was leader.  
6. So that we may boldly say] He expresseth the effect or fruit, which Gods promise of never failing to help and secure us, doth or aught to produce in us; which effect is wholly opposite to anxiety and carefulness for the future. And it is twofold. The first is a full and certain confidence and persuasion of God's help; the other consequent hereto, is the confession of the mouth and as it were a glorying, That God will always be ready to help us; which he presently expresseth in the words of the Psalmist, Psal. 118.6. The Lord is my helper and I will not fear what man shall do unto me. The words here cited by the Author, do plainly declare, that God will be an helper and succour unto us, not only in time of want, but also in time of danger; for many times we fear dangers more than poverty or want; and we gather wealth not only to defend us against poverty, but to guard us against men and dangers. And therefore both out health and our wealth is in God; who will so protect us, that neither poverty nor dangers shall oppress us; unless sometime it be his good pleasure to exercise and make trial of our faith by hunger, thirst, nakedness and want of all things, by dangers, prisons, torments and a fearful death. But then in such a case no riches will advantage us: but may much hinder us, for they may easily so work upon us, that for love of them we will not willingly and readily follow Christ, when he would lead us through craggy and rough ways. For poverty makes Christian's nimble and light, but riches are a burden. What man shall do. He opposeth man unto God, that by this opposition it may appear what a strong guard God is unto us against men; and what little reason we have to fear men, when we have God for our protector. For how great and mighty is the Lord, and what a worm is man?  
7. Remember them that have the rule over you] The sixth precept or duty whereto he excites them, is to imitate and follow their leaders and rulers in the Christian Religion. These leaders and rulers were such as had taught them by their doctrine and example of life, going before them in the ways of truth and godliness; or as the Author here describes them, Who have spoken unto you the word of God] Namely God's word of the Gospel; such as first of all preached the Gospel unto them; among whom without doubt were some of the Apostles, and those who next succeeded the first. Whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation] Having designed out the persons who should be remembered, namely their rulers who had preached the Gospel unto them; here he expresseth and specifieth the matter wherein or for what their rulers should be remembered; namely, for their faith and for their conversation. They must consider and follow the faith and doctrine which their rulers delivered unto them; and they must consider and follow the conversation of their life and manners; and they must consider the end of their faith and conversation, what issue and event both these had. How they were not only constant to the end in the faith and doctrine which they delivered, and in the conversation and holiness of life which they practised: but many of them sealed the verity of their holy Religion with their blood by a bitter death. These are the things that after due consideration had, they must labour to follow, by adhering to that faith and doctrine whereto they adhered, with the same firmity and constancy that they did: and by professing it so effectually, that by virtue thereof we do not only abstain from all manner of vice, to live holily in the sight of God; but also not decline to die for the truth of it. See the manner and way whereby we must preserve the memory of the Saints departed out of this life; not by erecting Tombs and Temples unto them at vast charges; not by consecrating statues and Images unto them; not by pouring out our prayers unto them or their Images: For these ways are either superfluous and superstitious, or else unlawful and impious: But we must always remember their holy ordinances, and the course of their lives suitable to those ordinances, diligently labouring to follow them, by imitating and expressing their examples in our practice. For this way will lead us unto holiness and happiness.  
8. jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day and for ever] Because he had before said, they must remember their rulers, following their faith and considering their conversation; wherein (as we said) was also included, that they should always preserve and retain the doctrine which they had heard from them, and not decline any thing from it; Therefore now he shows that the doctrine of Christ both for our knowledge and practice is unchangeable; that in no tract of time or age, any change must be made therein, either by adding, subtracting or altering any thing therein. Jesus Christ, namely considered both in respect of his office and in respect of his doctrine; or rather the doctrine itself of Christ, by way of Metonymy, the efficient or Author for the act or effect, as often elsewhere. The same yesterday and to day and for ever] Christ and his doctrine is the very same, constant to itself, and nothing either changed or changeable, for it is the same always in reference to all times, whether past, present, or to come. For as the word to day signifies the time present; so yesterday notes the time past; yet not long passed, but lately a while since; as then was the first time of publishing the Gospel upon earth. For among the people of God, yesterday signifies the time indefinitely and lately passed, which vulgarly we express by the other day, See Gen. 31.2. and Exod. 4.10. and Exod. 5.14. and 1 Sam. 20.27. and 2 Sam. 15.20. and 2 King. 9.26. and Job 8.9. And the word for ever signifies the time to come, not for some part of it, but for all parts of it successively, while any time shall be lasting. So that nothing is, hath been, or shall be changed in the doctrine of Christ; as it was of late when it was first delivered and published to the world, so it is now at this present, & so it shall be hereafter for all times to come throughout all ages: for though the world should last never so long, yet to the world's end there shall be no change nor alteration in the doctrine of the Gospel; not that there will want men, who shall labour to corrupt and change the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, or shall indeed corrupt and change it in divers particulars (for that such men there shall be, we may gather by the words of the Author in the next verse following, wherein he warns them of declining from the purity of the Gospel, and being carried about with divers and strange doctrines) but that the doctrine of Christ considered in itself, and as it contains the truth and will of God; is no way subject to any mutation or innovation. Whence it appears what we are to think of those doctrines and opinions, which have risen since the first times of the Church of Christ, and were never delivered by the Apostles themselves, nor ever received in the primitive Church. Of these we are to think as the Apostle hath left it written, Though we or an Angel from heaven, preach any other Gospel unto you, then that we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other Gospel unto you, then that ye have received, let him be accursed, Gal. 1.8,9.  
9 Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines] The seventh precept or duty whereto he exhorts them, although it were in a manner comprehended in the former verse, where a ground was laid that will necessarily infer it. And it is, that they should not suffer them to be persuaded to divers and new doctrines, which were neither heretofore delivered unto them by their teachers and rulers in the Christian Religion, nor were agreeable to the rule of the truth delivered. Divers doctrines in this place are they, which are different and divers from themselves and opposite one to another. As if he had said. In matters concerning Christian Religion (for of these only he speaketh) see that ye receive not one while this opinion, and another while that; for to do so, is their fashion, who are not yet exercised in the knowledge of the truth, or not yet sufficiently confirmed in it. He adds the word strange, that by this means they might discern those doctrines. For strange doctrines are new doctrines, neither delivered by the first publishers of the Christian verity, nor consonant to those that were first delivered, whose very countenance and habit, as I may say, doth easily discover them to be none of the Apostles doctrines, as we see it fall out with persons that are strangers. With these divers and strange doctrines they must not be carried about; which as it seems is a Metaphor taken from ships and vessels at sea, which are many times agitated and tossed divers ways by divers and contrary winds. Which similitude St. Paul also useth, where he saith, That we henceforth be no more children tossed too and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, Ephes. 4.14. And we are carried about with a doctrine as with a wind, when we give as it were the sails of our souls unto it, by embracing and following it. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace, and not with meats. To his general exhortation he subjoins a special reason or motive. Whence it appears that the Author in this general exhortation, had chief a special reference to some particular doctrines, whereto the Hebrews bore a great propension of mind, which could hardly be any other than such as were drawn from the Law of Moses. For there could be no danger that they would decline from the purity of Christian discipline, to any other but the ordinances of the Law. And in the first place, the sacrifices and offerings which were usually made under the Law; if not, to believe that by them they obtained the expiation of their sins, for they had been sufficiently taught already under the Gospel that the sins of all believers were fully purged by the blood of Christ: yet at least, that they might enjoy the feasts of those sacrifices, and society with the rest of the Jews, communicating with them in their Religion, and consequently in their whole state; which thing they supposed might be permitted them especially in their sacrifices and peace-offerings, as being not offered for sin, but either upon vow, or upon some other voluntary devotion; and which seemed not to be excluded by the sacrifice of Christ, which was only expiatory for sin. For even in those sacrifices except the holocaust or whole burnt-offerings, part went to the honour of God, as the blood and the fat, part to the Priest, and part to the use of those that offered, whereto they invited one another in the court of the Temple, and did eat together feasting and cheering themselves before the Lord. Therefore this holy feasting together, being an argument of their communion with the rest of the people, might flatter their souls, and make them desire the legal sacrifices and offerings, if not all, yet at least the peace-offerings, and take it heavily that they were restrained from them, and withal from the society of the Jews Commonwealth, as unworthy persons, because of the Christian Religion, especially as it stood pure and refined from the legal ceremonies. As also, to be inhibited from the Religion and state of the Jew, was troublesome to the flesh, for to enjoy both was very pleasing carnally; and to eat the holy meats before the Lord had a show of piety, and might seem somewhat to prevail with God. With this error therefore, whereinto they were prone to fall, the Author meets two ways; and withal declares what sacrifices and what offerings whether for sin or peace we should offer unto God, namely spiritual sacrifices, wherein there is no use of eating. For though many are of opinion that the Author here treats of not observing that difference of meats which was so precisely and carefully ordained under the Law, yet we think otherwise for these reasons: 1. Because the Author seems to recall them from the use of meats and not to grant the use of them; for he speaks not of a liberty to eat, but of a necessity to abstain; and he opposeth grace to meats, because it is good the heart should be established or refreshed or recreated not with meats but with grace: but the heart is not recreated with meats not eaten but eaten; therefore grace is here opposed not to the use of meats, but to abstinence from them. 2. Because the following reason proposed ver. 10, 11. doth openly treat of that eating of the sacrifices; which to Christians was not convenient; neither can this reason by any means be applied to the abolishing of the difference of meats. 3. Because from the words spoken here; the Author infers at the 15. verse (as the particle therefore shows) that we must offer spiritual sacrifices by Christ. Whence it may be gathered, that by these words that service and eating of sacrifices anciently ordained under the Law, is here reprehended and condemned; for that from this is rightly and immediately inferred: but is not inferred from the abolishing of the difference of meats. But now let us consider and weigh the Author's argument. The first way is contained in these words by way of prevention. For they who desired those sacrifices and holy banquets, might say, It is good to establish the heart with meats, that is, to recreate it, after the Hebrew phrase, who call recreating of the heart, establishing of it; See Gen. 18.5. where Abraham invited the three men, of whom we treated before, to establish their heart with a morsel of bread; that is, to take some little repast. The Author seems to have reference to the words of Moses. Deut. 12.18. who speaking of eating holy things, saith, And thou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy God in all that thou puttest thine hand unto. To this objection the Author answers by opposing unto it a greater and more excellent good, by saying, It is a good thing that the heart be established with grace, not with meats. As if he had said, To establish the heart with meats is not so good, but to do it with grace is truly good as he presently demonstrates. By grace he mean; that grace of God, which is revealed and offered unto men in the Gospel, consisting in a plenary remission of the guilt and pain of all our sins, even the most heinous; in a perfect expiation of all our sins by the sacrifice and offering of Christ; in losing from the necks of men that yoke of the ceremonial law, wherein are contained the ordinances for carnal sacrifices; in justifying us not by merit of works, but by faith; and after justification in giving us possession of eternal life in due time. This is the thing, the good thing, wherewith not our bodies, but our hearts and souls are in a wonderful manner recreated and refreshed; and he that hath tasted and relished such grace in his soul, will no more desire the meats and banquets of sacrifices. And the Author speaking of grace doth very fitly and properly use the phrase of establishing the heart. For our hearts, that is, our souls which are commonly signified by the name of the heart, are established and recreated not properly with meats, which reach not to them, but with the grace of God, and is made active and lively to perform all Christian duties. Which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.] Here he brings the reason, why in a manner he denied, that the heart is established with meats, or that such establishing is not so good a thing; namely, because they that have exercised therein, have found no profit thereby. To be occupied in meats or (as the Greek hath it) to walk in meats, seeing here (as we have showed) meats signify the meats of the sacrifices or of the holy things, is nothing else, but to partake of those carnal sacrifices, and to accustom the eating of things offered and consecrated, and placing therein a part of God's worship and serice. By those who are said to be occupied in those meats, are meant the Jews, before they were illuminated in the doctrine of Christ. Which have not profited them. The Jews found no true profit by eating those meats. For as Christ saith of Manna, John 6.49. Your fathers did eat Manna in the wilderness and are dead: So may it well be said, of the meats of the sacrifices and things consecrated to God. Your fathers did eat the meats of sacrifices and are dead. But he that recreates and fills his soul with that grace of God which is revealed and exhibited to men in the Gospel, he shall live for ever. Therefore the words not profited do not simply exclude all profit and advantage wholly; for the meats of the sacrifices did profit something in respect of that time, to repair the strength of the body for a short time; but they had not a true profit belonging to the Spirit, but only a carnal profit, that was transitory and fugitive, not durable and eternal. In which sense also Christ saith of his flesh eaten in a carnal way, as his Disciples understood it, Joh. 6 63. It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing; that is, it furthereth nothing unto life, to produce in men a spiritual and eternal life. It is the Spirit that vivifies men, which, as from the spiritual eating of the flesh of Christ slain for the life of the world, and from the spiritual drinking of his blood, so from that sweet taste of that divine grace, which was confirmed by the death and blood of Christ, doth distil into our souls and so revives and quickens us. From these words of the Author it is manifest, that to Christian Religion it is nothing pertinent or profiting to eat any true meat properly, and consequently not the flesh and blood of Christ. For if the body of Christ were properly eaten, and therein consisted a part of Religion; would not the Author have opposed the meat of Christ's flesh and blood to the meats of those sacrifices? would he have said, we have an altar, whereof it is not lawful for them to eat, no not for the Priests, if it be lawful for the Priests to eat the body and drink the blood of Christ offered every day upon the altar, and unlawful not to eat and drink it? Would he have left us only the sacrifice of praise and good works, for the sacrifices and offerings of all animals and other creatures, which might be turned into meats?  
10. We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat, which serve the Tabernacle] Hitherto the Author hath showed that there is very little or no cause, why Christians should desire those sacrifices of the Law and the meats of those offerings; or should place some part of God's worship or service in them, or should take it grievously, that for the profession of Christian Religion they are drawn from commerce and communion with the Jews and their state. Now he shows further, that it is not lawful for Christians to eat the meats of sacrifices, as was anciently done under the Law. He therefore saith, We have an altar.] Any man may easily perceive that these words are figurative and improper, taken from the ordinances in the discipline of Moses, which for the most part cannot be applied to the discipline of Christ, but by way of abusion and impropriety; whereof we had no few examples formerly, especially in the comparison of Christ with the levitical Priests. For, for comparisons sake, we many times use such words of a thing, which without respect to the comparison we would never use. The same impropriety falls out again here. In the Christian Religion, to speak properly, there is no Altar, no Tabernacle to serve, no Sacrifices which can be eaten; neither if we respect the eating of sacrifices or the abstinence from them, is there any such difference between Christians, as if some were Priests and Ministers of the Tabernacle, and others were not. Therefore in such say we must not weigh every word singly by itself, as what is signified by the Altar, what by the Tabernacle, and whereto it answers, but we must inquire for the sense of the whole sentence: Wherefore these words import nothing else, but that Christians have no other sacrifices, but such whereof they have no power to eat. By those which serve the Tabernacle (which under the Law were only Priests and Levites) are signified all Christians in general. Christians therefore are said to be in that condition, as if under the Law there had been such an Altar, whereof and of the sacrifices laid upon it, and offered unto God, it was not lawful for any man to eat, no not for the Priests themselves and other Ministers of the house of God, much less for the rest of the people. For if there had been such an Altar under the Law, than it is apparent unto all men, that the eating of sacrifices and things offered unto God, should have had no place under the Law. But thus it is under the Gospel; and therefore the eating of sacrifices must be to Christians unlawful.  
11. For the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the Sanctuary by the high Priest for sin, are burnt without the camp] Hear the Author proves by his assertion in the former verse, why in Christianity the matter is so ordered, that under the Gospel there is such an Altar, whereof the Sacrifices are not permitted to be eaten of any man. Yet he proposeth his argument so concisely and briefly that he seems rather to point at it, then explicate it. And it manifestly appears that the Author takes it as granted for a ground, That Christians have no other Sacrifice, but what is resembled by the entrance of the high Priest into the Sanctuary, or by those beasts only, whose blood was brought into the Sanctuary by the high Priest, and their bodies were burnt without the camp. For unless the Author took this for granted, he could not from this (that in those sacrifices it was not lawful to eat the flesh of the offering) simply conclude, that it is not lawful for us Christians to eat sacrifices, or that we have an altar whereof we may not lawfully eat. And this he might well take for granted, because by that Sacrifice whereby our high Priest entered into his Sanctuary under the new Covenant, all things were perfomed, whether we respect the plenary expiation of our sins, or the full reconciliation of God's favour and grace towards us, that for that effect there is no further need of any Sacrifices of beasts or other things corporeal. Neither is there reason, why any man should say, that in the Christian Religion there are other Sacrifices and oblations, which Christians must offer; and therefore by that sacrifice other Sacrifices and oblations are not excluded. For the Author doth not oppose that Sacrifice to those that are wholly incorporeal and spiritual, and whereof no meat can be made, as are the Sacrifices to be offered by Christians, such as a contrite and humbled heart, as David speaks, the Sacrifices of praise, the fruits of our lips, confessing unto the name of God, communicating or doing good (as the Author hath it afterwards) and other works of piety. But he opposeth it to those Sacrifices, wherein are offered things corporeal and fit for food; so that he leaves no further place for all these. Therefore herewith the Sacrifice of the Mass must needs fall, wherein a thing corporeal that may be eaten, is said to be daily offered. But some man may demand, how it can be true, that in the Christian Religion there remains that Sacrifice, whereby the blood of slain beasts was by the Priests brought into the Sanctuary for sin, and their bodies burnt without the camp. We answer, because that under Christianity there remains the Sacrifice of Christ our high Priest, which is the antitype and solid body, whereof that Sacrifice was but a type and shadow. Which sacrifice of Christ by the coming of it, hath abolished all other carnal sacrifices, and the eating of them. Whereof this is an open and manifest argument, that in the type and shadow of it, there was no place allowed for eating, but the bodies of the beasts slain for it, were wholly burnt, and that without the camp. Yet it is not necessary, we should say, that here is a reference, to that yearly Sacrifice only, whereby the high Priest entered the Oracle, or the holiest of all; seeing the reference may be to all those Sacrifices, which were made as well for the high Priest himself, as for the whole people. For the blood of those beasts that were slain for a sin-offering, was by the high Priest brought into the Sanctuary, although not into the Oracle or holiest place of all, yet into the first Tabernacle which is properly called the Sanctuary, chap. 9 vers. 2. (which in other Sacrifices for private men was not done, wherein the blood of the beasts slain, after the high Priest had sprinkled the horns of the Altar that stood in the court at the door of the Tabernacle, was all poured down at the bottom of the Altar, Levit. 4.25) and the bodies of the beasts so slain for sinne-offerings, were no less burned without the camp, than was done in that solemn anniversary Sacrifice, as it appears in the same fourth chapter of Leviticus.  
12. Wherefore jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.] Because he had said, that in those Sacrifices, that carried a type and shadow of the Sacrifice of Christ, the bodies of the beasts slain were wholly burnt without the camp; therefore he affirms it came to pass, that Jesus also whom those beasts slain for the Expiation and Salvation of the whole people, fully represented and shadowed, suffered without the gate. And this he doth for this end, that the conformity and resemblance between the type and antitipe, between the shadow and the body might appear the better, which at the first sight would sufficiently argue, that one was referred to the other. The City of Jerusalem, wherein the people after their conquest of Canaan, seated themselves, is answerable to the camp wherewith they journeyed in the wilderness, and succeeded in the room of that camp. And therefore in this respect, it was all one for a man to be drawn without the gate or walls of Jerusalem, when the people dwelled in that City, as without the camp, when they had a camp for their City. jesus also] the particle also hath in this place the force of a comparison; as if he had said, not only the bodies of those beasts were burnt without the camp: but Jesus also himself suffered without the gate. Suffered,] namely, the death of the Cross, the genus being put for the species. And the death of Christ is answerable, not only to the slaughter of the beasts that were made within the camp and City, or compass of the Temple, but also to the burning of their bodies, which was performed without the camp and City; for this death answered their slaughter, as his blood was shed, and their burning, as his body was buried. And the things that in the type and shadow were as it were severed, were in the antitipe and body united, so that only death in Christ, answered both the slaughter and burning of the beasts. That he might sanctify the people. In these words Christ is tacitly compared with the legal high Priest, whose proper office it was to sanctify or expiate, not this or that single person, but the whole people, and the blood of Christ is compared to the blood of those beasts, which was shed for the whole people. And Jesus did sanctify and wholly expiate the people with his blood, in that by the intervention of his cruel death he entered into the heavenly Sanctuary, and appears for us for ever in the sight of God, to make intercession for us: i. to free us by his care from all the guilt and penalties of our sins. For the same saying is expressed by Saint Paul in other words, Gal. 3.13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us. For that which is sanctified or made holy, is rightly opposed to that which is execrated or made a curse. We have already observed heretofore, that the Author thought he had occasion to speak of Christ's blood brought into the heavenly Tabernacle, whereto his comparison and resemblance of Christ to the legal high Priest might invite him; yet doth purposely avoid it, and useth only words, from which it might appear, that our sins were expiated by the blood of Christ, yet not as brought into the Tabernacle of heaven and offered unto God, but only as it was shed, and prepared entrance for Christ into heaven, and there to help himself unto God. The same caution is used also by the Author in this place, who in the former verse having made express mention of the blood of beasts, brought by the high Priest into the Sanctuary for sin-offerings; yet when he comes to the blood of Christ, saith nothing else of it, but that he Sanctified his people with it, or as it is in the Greek by it, that is, by shedding it. By his own blood.] Not as the high Priest under the Law, who sanctified the people by blood, yet not by his own blood, but by the blood of beasts: but because Christ was to sanctify the people by his own blood, therefore he must suffer without the gate, and be slaughtered by an infamous death, to fit him for the subsequent offering of himself afterward to God in the heavenly Sanctuary.  
Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp] After the Author had showed that the Hebrews considering they have embraced the Christian Religion, must not eat or banquet with the meats of sacrifices, as if some part of divine worship or service were therein contained; now from the infamous death which Christ suffered without the gate, he infers, that they must not regard it at all, if for Christ's sake they be driven from the rest of the Jews, not only from their temples, sacrifices, and holy banquets, but even from their City, from their commerce and civil society; yea although they be publicly reproached as impious and cursed persons, and cut off from the body of the Jews commonwealth; or at last lose their lives by the same or the like punishment, under which Christ their head and Captain suffered. And this he therefore infers, because the hatred of the Jews against the Christians contained not itself, with prohibiting them from their Ceremonies, sacrifices and temple: but proceeded so fare as to drive them from their commonwealth and Civil commerce, with public infamy and reproach, only because they professed the Religion and name of Christ. Let us go therefore] Seeing our Lord Jesus Christ, our high Priest and heavenly King, was led out without the gate, and so separated from the rest of the corporation of men, and there put to an infamous death, therefore Let us go forth unto him without the camp. Let us willingly and freely, with an open and ready heart undergo together with him, banishment, reproaches, infamy, death and all manner of evils. Christ now lives without the camp, without the City, without the gate; shall we not willingly go forth, to be rather with him alone, then among the wicked multitude of the Jews? For we are happier without the camp with Christ, then in the camp without Christ; seeing where Christ is, there is true happiness. Why the Author names the camp, we shown the cause before, ver. 12. Bearing his reproach] To bear the reproach of Christ, is to refuse no suffering for Christ's sake, that Christ himself did bear. For in the word reproach are included all evils that can be inflicted upon a man; because evils are always inflicted with infamy and reproach. And the reproach of Christ, is any reproach like to his reproach, and for the like cause that he bore his? namely for the testimony of that truth which he published; that we may subconfirme by our death what he preconfirmed by his. For it is not the suffering but the cause that makes the martyr.  
14. For here have we no continuing City] He annexeth a new reason, why we should go forth without our camps, that is, bear it patiently to be ejected and exiled out of our Country or City; because here upon earth we have no continuing city, i. none that is durable, which cannot be taken from us, nor we from it. All the cities which we inhabit upon earth, we inhabit only for a time. Why therefore should we refuse for Christ's sake to lose that city, which otherwise we must wholly lose in a very short space? Or else the Author teacheth us, that we Christians as we are Christians, enjoy no City upon earth by any firm and proper possession: but in this respect we are always subject to expulsions, banishments and such like miseries. The Author therefore might with good reason use this admonition, to teach Christians what is their state and condition upon earth, especially the Hebrews who might imagine, because they proceeded from the stock of Abraham, therefore they had full right to enjoy the freedom of the city Jerusalem no less than others of their Nation, and thereupon must needs take it grievously to be excluded from their inheritance. Therefore he shows that Christians have another inheritance, and enjoy a right to another city fare more excellent. But we seek one to come] This is that permanent and continuing city, from the possession whereof we shall never be disturbed in any age; for to this city we have a right by Christ, who is the head and king of it, that there we may live safely under him and reign under him. But as long as we live here on earth, we are like pilgrims and strangers; who are travelling toward their country. He calls this city to come, because to us it is to come; but to God, and Christ, and the Angels it is already present. The word we seek although it signify the effect itself, yet it must not here be taken so much for the effect, as for the efficacy of Christian Religion, and our duty therein. For than we seek when we follow the power and guidance of Christian Religion: Because it is the condition and duty of Christians to seek a City to come, that is, to endeavour with all care and diligence that they may attain it.  
15. By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise] Here he proceeds to a new precept or duty, yet such a one as issues from his former words and depends on them; as the illative particle therefore shows. Yet it follows not from the words immediately preceding, but both from his principal assertion, and from what was included in the argument thereof. The principal assertion is, That the doctrine of Jesus Christ is immutable; as it was in the beginning, so shall it remain for all ages. In the argument or proof of this doctrine, Christ in a comparison with the high Priest is said to sanctify the people with his blood. Now from this, that the doctrine of Christ is always so uniform as to be one and the same, subject to no alteration; and that Christ is our high Priest, who hath sanctified his whole people with his blood, it is rationally inferred, that we must by him offer sacrifices to God. For anciently the whole people jointly, and single persons from among the people offered sacrifices to God by the Priest; the whole people by the high Priest only, but private persons by Priests of an inferior order; all which, together with the high Priest, as others were to offer sacrifices by them, are correspondent to Christ alone; for in this respect Christ alone is as much as all they together. For, although in the Christian Religion besides Christ our high Priest there are other Priests, namely all Christians, yet compared to Christ they must be accounted for the common people. And to offer sacrifices by Christ, is to offer such sacrifices as are consecrated and prepared as it were by Christ himself, and by him are made acceptable unto God; and this is done when we offer them as the worshippers and servitors of Christ, by faith in God, in and through Christ, by the prescript and command of Christ; for what is offered in this manner, is offered as it were by the hand of CHRIST himself. The Sacrifice of Praise. Here he specifies what kind of Sacrifices Christians are to offer unto God, namely, the Sacrifices of Praise; because all carnal Sacrifices used under the law are abrogated, and the spiritual Sacrifice of Praise, is succeeded in the room of all those Sacrifices which were peculiarly offered of every one under the Law. The sacrifice of praise by a genetive of the species, is the praise itself and celebration of God's name, or the act of thanksgiving unto him. And although our prayers which we pour forth unto God, be scarce at any time, at least especially and principally called sacrifices, but are rather compared with incense, because they are to be uttered and ascend unto God from an ardent spirit; yet there is nothing to the contrary, but that we may include our prayers also in these sacrifices of praise; seeing they are usually joined with our praises and thanksgivings unto God: And this very act of imploring Gods help in all things, contains no small part of celebrating and praising God's name. Continually] This sacrifice of praise must be offered, continually and daily without ceasing any day; so that no part or day of our life must be vacant or void of this sacrifice. For these spiritual sacrifices are of that nature, that they may be offered continually day after day, without ceasing any day; for seeing God multiplies his blessings continually upon us, and gives us every day our daily bread, therefore we must continually offer sacrifice unto him, giving him daily praise and thanksgiving. To God] God is the same, to whom these spiritual sacrifices must be offered by Christ; for he is the same person that was worshipped and served under the old Covenant, and must be so again under the new, only the manner and way of his worship and service is changed under the new. That is, the fruit of our lips] He yet further specifies and explicates the sacrifice of praise, that it is the fruit not of our corn or our cattles, as it was anciently under the Law, but of our lips; the fruit that grows on our lips as on the branches, whose roots are the inmost recesses of the heart, as we see it in the fruits of trees, which grow indeed and hang upon the branches, but draw their original and their sap from the lowest roots of the trees. Giving thanks to his name.] He yet declares more specially what this fruit of our lips is, and saith it is our thanksgiving to the name of God. The word in the Greek, is confessing to his name. But it is well known, that the Hebrew phrase of confessing to God, doth signify to celebrate, praise, and give thanks unto God. For confessing to God is a general word, comprehending all manner of our speech unto God, whether we speak of his attributes, perfections or works in general, which is Praise; or of his particular blessings and benefits to us, which is Thanksgiving; or of our sinfulness and offences against him, which we simply call Confession.  
16. But to do good and to communicate forget not] Here he proceeds to another precept or duty of Christians; namely, to beneficence or communicating toward the poor and needy, which he reckons among spiritual sacrifices, that he might allude to the custom observed under the Law. For in the sacrifices of the peace offerings, whereto our spiritual sacrifices are most resembling, they were wont to make feasts, to which they commonly invited the poor, and especially the Levites that ministered in the Temple, that by this means they might exercise their beneficence toward the meaner sort. This virtue the Author would not have to cease under the Gospel, although under it the sacrifices of beasts, and such other carnal things are ceased. We communicate] When as often as need requires, we impart unto others, that part of our means which was properly our own; and make that as it were common to many, which was before proper to ourselves. Forget not] Although the offerings of carnal sacrifices be ceased, and thereby the occasion of doing good and communicating may seem to be cut off: yet ye must so offer your spiritual sacrifices, that ye may be always mindful and careful of doing good, whereof fit and opportune occasions will never be wanting. For with such sacrifices God is well pleased] Here is the reason given, why we must do good and communicate, because this beneficence to the poor is a sacrifice, and such a sacrifice as wherewith God is well pleased. For the words, such sacrifices, must be referred both to the sacrifice of praise, and to the sacrifice of beneficence. For even under the Law both these sacrifices were more pleasing unto God than the sacrifices of sheep and oxen. For saith God, Will I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of goats? Offer unto God thanksgiving and pay thy vows unto the most High, Psal. 50.13,14. And again, For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than  offerings, Hos. 6.6. God would rather have the things which were anciently offered unto him, to be spent upon man who needs them, then upon himself who needs them not; and therefore he hath released his whole right thereto, that they might wholly be transferred upon needy men. Hence it manifestly appears, that the community of goods is not commanded under the Gospel; for if all goods were common, how could we do good and communicate, seeing that which is already common cannot be communicated? And how should we perform that service of God, which consisteth in the sacrifice of doing good and communicating, wherewith God is well pleased?  
17. Obey them that have the rule over you.] Here is the last general precept or duty that he gives unto Christians. By them that rule, he means the Rectors, Elders, and Bishops of the Church, who are called Rulers, because they rule and govern the Church, by doctrine, exhortation, and example of life, by Counsels, Admonitions, and Ecclesiastical censures. These Rulers we must obey, though the things they require of us, be many times harsh and troublesome to us. Yet this precept of obedience must be extended no further, then to such things as are conformable to the Laws of God, in reference whereto the Rulers of the Church are to frame all their Rules and Commands. And subject yourselves.] This is but an explication or designation of that obedience, which in the former words he required of us toward our rulers; because obedience is nothing else but a subjection of ourselves to them that have the rule over us. For they watch for your souls.] He brings a reason for this precept of our obedience, drawn from the office of our Rulers; because it is their office and duty to be very vigilant and careful for their souls, who are committed to their charge. For they that keep watch have a diligent care of them, for whom they watch, that no danger may befall them. And common watchmen watch for our bodies, but the Rulers of the Church watch for our souls, that no man's soul should perish, or that no man should fail of that true and eternal salvation of souls. Whence it appears what great reason we have to obey our Rulers, whose charge and care belongs wholly to our souls, and whose commands and admonitions we can despise, with no less danger than the loss of our souls. As they that must give account.] Now on the other side he shows a reason of the duty of our Rulers whom God hath appointed over us, why they must use all diligent care to watch for our souls; namely, because they must give an account of their office and actions to God and Christ, who hath committed his poor sheep to their care and charge; so that if any perish through their default or negligence, they must answer for it under a grievous penalty. For to this purpose tend those words of God in Ezekiel. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me. When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man! thou shalt surely die; If thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it: if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity: but thou hast delivered thy soul, Ezek. 33.7,8,9. Therefore this so weighty and so dangerous an Office, which our Rulers bear, doth altogether require on their part, that they be careful to watch for our souls; and it well deserves on our part, that we should obey and subject ourselves unto them, and not take it in ill part, if, to provide not only for our salvation, but their own, they refuse to humour and flatter our fancies. That they may do it with joy, and not with grief] He yet presseth our obedience with a further reason; namely, that our Rulers may reap some spiritual fruit of their Office, and perform it with joy, and not with grief. For certainly this their Office so dangerous to themselves, and so commodious to us, doth deserve this respect at our hands, that in the function of their Office, we should so carry ourselves, as to be a comfort and joy unto them, and not a grief. And we are a joy unto them, when we show ourselves obsequious and pliant to their doctrines, precepts, and warnings: but we are a grief to them when we are refractory and obstinate. And not with grief] In the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; which properly and adequatly signifies sighing; which is the outward effect and sign of inward grief, and sorrow. For to this effect are the words of Saint Paul 2. Cor. 2.3. And I wrote this same unto you, lest when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I ought to rejoice. And again in the same Epistle, chap. 12.21. I fear lest when I come again, my God will humble me among you & that I shall bewail many, which have sinned already, and have not repent. For that is unprofitable for you] This is spoken by way of mollifying or diminishing the matter. For to grieve our rulers by our disobedience, is not only unprofitable to us, but very hurtful. Seeing God will take sore vengeance upon us for this double offence, that we should deserve so ill at Rulers hands, who watch so piously & carefully for the salvation of our souls, as to repay their diligence & care with grief & sorrow.  
18. Pray for us.] A particular precept or request unto the Hebrews: But he speaks only of himself in the plural number, as it appears in the verse following, wherein expressing what they should pray for, he mentions a thing concerning himself only. For we trust we have a good conscience] He subjoins the ground or cause of his request; namely, because he was not a person altogether unworthy to obtain this good Office from them. But he speaks very modestly and prudently of himself, that he might decline all envy. For first, he saith not simply, we have a good conscience; but we trust we have a good conscience; so we believe, and so we persuade ourselves; which could not but be improperly spoken, seeing to speak properly, a good conscience consisteth in the persuasion of itself. Therefore a good conscience is in this place taken for the cause of a good conscience, that is, for a life unblameable or void of all offence; as if he had said, I trust and am persuaded, that I so live and so carry myself, that my conscience may well be at rest with my actions. Secondly, he speaks in the plural number, and by way of communication doth mingle himself in a manner with the multitude, seeming also to testify no more of himself then of them. In all things willing to live honestly.] He shows the reason of his confidence, why he trusteth that he hath a good conscience; namely, because he is willing to live honestly in all things. He saith not, that actually he doth live honestly in all things, but affectively he is willing to live so; which is much more modest. But his willingness herein must not be taken for the sole purpose and intention of his mind: but of his study, endeavour and labour; or of a will continually actual and effectual. For so Saint Paul testifies of himself. Acts 24.16. And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a good conscience, void of offence toward God and toward men. And this is to live well and honestly in all things, namely, in all our actions and deal; when thou carriest thyself so uprightly, that thou deservest no just reproof or blame, neither in the sight of God nor of men: Before God, in being clear from all spot, from which a Christian life ought to be free: and before men, in appearing such a one, that thou givest no just occasion to any, either to think or suspect evil of thee; and dost shun all such things, as though they be not determined by any Law of God, yet are dishonest in men's opinion.  
19 But I beseech you the rather to do this] Namely, to pray for me. And the adverbe the rather, may be referred to the next verb before it, I beseech you; as if he had said, I beseech you so much the rather to pray for me, that I may be restored unto you the sooner; or it may be referred to the verb after it to do this; as if he had said, I beseech you, that you would the rather pray for me. But for what? That I may be restored unto you the sooner.] He shows the end and fruit of their prayers to what effect they should the rather, and the more earnestly pray for him; namely, thereby to obtain from God, that he might be restored unto them the sooner; that is, that his return unto them might be speedier, than it was like to be as things now stood. For it seems he was already free from prison, and set at liberly, as may be gathered from the 23. verse following.  
20. Now the God of peace] Here gins the close of this Epistle, which first contains a devotion concluded with a doxology; then certain monitions, or rather requests, which again he ends with another devotion, and withal ends the whole Epistle. In his devotion, he first names and describes the person, of whom all those things are to be performed, which he prayeth and wisheth to them: Then are expressed the wishes themselves. He saith therefore, But the God of peace] The particle but contains a tacit opposition; as if he had said, I have hitherto proposed unto you divers monitions and precepts; but the God of peace enable you to keep them. But he describes the Author and donor of the blessings he wisheth unto them, first in calling him the God of peace. And the descriptions of God, that a●…●sed in wishes, are commonly fitted to the wishes themselves. In this place, because the Author wisheth to the Hebrews that which might render them truly happy, namely that in all respects they might please God; therefore by the word peace seems to be meant rather happiness according to the ordinary phrase among the Hebrews, than concord, or what else the word peace doth elsewhere signify; and in this sense this title is more frequently attributed unto God, but in the other seldom. And God is called the God of peace, that is, of happiness, not only because God alone can make men happy, but because he will and also doth make them so, by supplying them abundantly with all those means and helps whereby true happiness may be attained by men. And therefore in this place he describes God in this manner, thereby to teach us, that from him proceeds all happiness, and from him must be sought, and may be easily obtained all things belonging to the attaining of it, because he is ready and free to grant happiness to all that seek it by due means. That brought again from the dead our Lord jesus that great shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the everlasting Covenant] He adjoins another description of God; from whence it appears, how certainly God will make those men happy and blessed, that believe and obey him. And he mentions that mighty and admirable work of God, which to all the godly brings a most assured hope of eternal happiness and blessedness; and so he manifestly proves him to be the God of peace or happiness. And this work was, That he brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus that great Shepherd of the sheep, and that through the blood of the everlasting Covenant: wherein he describes withal our Lord Jesus himself; that hence it may appear, what an infinite blessing God bestowed upon men, by this bringing again of our Lord Jesus from the dead. If God had delivered but some ordinary man from the dead and estated him in eternal life, yet even for that he must needs be accounted the author of happiness. But now, that he hath raised from the dead not an ordinary person, but the Shepherd of the sheep, not an ordinary shepherd, but that great Shepherd; nor constituted by an ordinary way, but through the blood of the everlasting Covenant; he is much more to be accounted the author and donor of happiness: Which that this Author might declare the more amply and fully, therefore it is, that he proceeds by words that are very passionate and stately. That brought again from the dead] That raised from death to life. The word reducing or bringing again is very accommodate to signify that God was the Shepherd of Christ our Shepherd, whose office it is to lead forth his sheep and bring them again; and that God brought Christ again from the hideous den of death, and so together with him all his sheep. For the reduction of our Shepherd from the grave, is also our reduction and resurrection from it. It was in our Shepherd first that God shown an essay of his great power and goodness; and that experiment on Christ was an engagement unto us, to assure us also of our resurrection. But who this God of peace is that brought again our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead, both the thing itself and the holy Scriptures clearly show, namely that it is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. In the description of our Lord Jesus almost every word of the Author is emphatical. For first he calls him the Shepherd of the sheep, which must not be understood as restrained to that time only wherein Christ lived upon earth, but enlarged (and much rather) to the time following, since he sat on the Throne of God; for since that time, he became most perfectly & properly the Shepherd of the sheep. Now Christ is the Shepherd of the sheep, not only because he ministers to them the wholesome food of God's word and Spirit, but because he every way looks unto them; for he assembles and collects them, he governs and defends them, and finally procures their eternal salvation. For it is the part of a Shepherd, not only to feed the sheep, but to defend and govern them, and look to them in all things as need shall require. Whence Peter when he called our Saviour the Shepherd, addeth to it the word Bishop, which signifies a Guardian, especially as the Hebrews use to understand it, 1 Pet. 2.25. For when we have a great care of any thing, we often visit, inspect, and see it; from whence ariseth the word Bishop, which properly signifies a visitor or overseer. He that desires to know the properties of a good shepherd, let him read in the tenth Chapter of John the parable of the good Shepherd, which there Christ applies unto himself. The article that prefixed here before the Shepherd teacheth us, that he is no ordinary or vulgar shepherd, but an eminent and excellent person, whose description and promise also is extant, Ezek. 24. But the addition of the word great unto this Shepherd declares his excellency more manifestly, when the Author saith, that great Shepherd] For by this appellation he specifies, what manner of shepherd he understands, namely a Shepherd so exceeding great that in comparison of him all other shepherds are very little. In which sense also St. Peter calls him the chief Shepherd, or Prince of shepherds, 1 Pet. 5.4. And certainly Christ must needs be a great Shepherd indeed, seeing he is equal to God in wisdom, power and dominion, seated in heaven at the right hand of God, upon the throne of God, and feeds his sheep wholly in the same manner that God doth; seeing he appoints all other shepherds of his sheep, and hath them subject unto him, seeing he gathers his sheep out of all Nations into one sheep-fold of his Church; seeing though he hath an innumerable multitude of sheep yet he knows them all, and so provides for all that no one can stray from him, no one can perish, no one can want his care for feeding, ruling and defending; and lastly, seeing he so feeds his sheep that he recovers them from the jaws of death and hell, and settles them in possession of the Kingdom of Heaven. Through the blood of the everlasting Covenant] These words must not be referred to the words brought again, but must be construed with the word shepherd. And a shepherd by or through blood, is such a shepherd as had shed his blood; for so we read 1 John 5.6. That Christ came by water and blood, not by water only, but by water and blood; that is, he was not only pure and clear from all spot or slain of sin, which purity is signified by the word water; but also that he suffered a bloody death by shedding of his blood. The Author had intimated before, that this great Shepherd was dead, in saying, that God brought him again from the dead: but now he further shows not only the manner of his death, that it was violent, cruel and bloody; but also the cause of his death, to what end he died, which end tendeth to our infinite benefit, namely to confirm and seal the everlasting covenant. For the blood of the Covenant is that blood which is shed to dedicate, establish and confirm the Covenant, that it may never be revokeable. But the Author understands the new Covenant, which was confirmed by the blood of Christ. Whence we may easily collect, how certain and sure we may be of the promises contained in that Covenant, if we perform the conditions of it, which are most just and equal. When he calls this Covenant everlasting, he tacitly opposeth it to the old covenant by Moses, which was not to continue to the end of the world, & therefore was not properly everlasting. And by the eternity of this Covenant, that it is everlasting, is withal intimated the perfection of it; for if it were not perfect, it could not be everlasting; as the former old covenant was not everlasting, because it was not perfect, but weak and unprofitable; and therefore it was disannulled and abolished; as the Author said before, chap. 7.18. For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before, for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. And what is said of one commandment or precept, may well be referred to the whole covenant. Besides, the eternity of this covenant is mentioned of purpose to advance our comfort and strengthen our hope; for whereas it is called everlasting, that shows that it shall not only produce his full effect, but also shall last to the end of the world. Our Lord jesus] In these words the Author points out the person, whom we must understand to be that great Shepherd; namely, no other than our Lord Jesus, that is, our Lord who is Jesus; so that our Lord, holds the place of the subject, and the name Jesus is added, to declare who is meant by our Lord. By which appellation the Author teacheth us, what a great Shepherd Jesus is, seeing he is our Lord, constituted so by God his Father, who brought him again from the dead. That only Lord, by whom are all things, and we by him; whom we must worship with God the Father. Yet in all this pathetic and stately description of our Lord Jesus the Author signifies nothing more unto us, than what was formerly contained in his appellation of high Priest, so frequently attributed unto him in this Epistle. From all which, what great hope and comfort we may gather to our souls, need not here be repeated.  
21. Make you perfect in every good work] Now he expresseth the wish itself, which is wholly concerning their own duty. For to attain eternal happiness nothing else is required on our part but to perform our duty, according as it is enjoined us. To make them perfect in every good work, is so to enable them, that no good work, office, or Christian virtue be wanting in them; and that they be wanting in no good work, to perform it perfunctorily, unwillingly or disaffectedly; especially in point of temptation, and matter of persecution, wherein because it is for the trial of their faith, Patience must have her perfect work, as S. James requires it, Jam. 1.4. To do his will] The particle to here doth not signify the final cause, because to be perfect in every good work, and to do the will of God, are really the same thing; and therefore these can neither be the end nor the means one of another. But this particle is here explicative to the former words, and is all one with so as; for he that is perfect in every good work or Christian virtue, he truly and properly doth the will of God. Working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight] He expresseth the way or means whereby God is to make them perfect in every good work; namely by working in them that which is wellpleasing in his sight. That which pleaseth God is every good work. And God worketh a good work in us, when he exciteth and moveth us to it, and preventeth us with his grace while we think not of it; when he ministereth unto us sufficient strength and help thereto, suggesteth occasions unto us; and lastly, when he cherisheth and perfecteth it in us: And not that he worketh in us without our work, that is, while we are unwitting, unwilling or idle: but while we are willing, endeavouring and acting. For, otherwise there were neither need nor reason that the Author should exhort us with so many monitions, incitements and precepts unto godliness; whereto he with good reason also added his wish, to teach us, that we must join God's help with our endeavours, and our endeavours with his help. Through jesus Christ] It is doubtful whether these words must he joined with the word working, or with the words wellpleasing, to show us what is wellpleasing in the sight of God; namely that which is done through jesus Christ, and by him commanded to be done. So Peter 1 Epist. 2.5. when he had said, that we must offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable unto God, added also, by Jesus Christ; showing us thereby, what those sacrifices are, namely no other than what are commanded in the Religion of Jesus Christ. For those words in Peter seem rather to be referred to acceptable, then to offered; although the latter may be admitted. To whom be glory for ever and ever] The pronoun to whom is placed so indifferently by the Author, that it may be referred both unto God in the former verse, and to Jesus Christ, mentioned immediately before. And the Author seems to have ordered it so of purpose, and to reserve the mention of Christ for the last place, that with this one doxology he might celebrate and magnify both persons, both God and Christ. For he that is a true Christian cannot be ignorant, that glory for ever and ever must be ascribed no less unto Christ, then unto God himself. Whereof read what is written, Revel. 5.12,13. Whence also Peter concludes his 2. Epistle with the like doxology openly directed unto Christ. And John Revel. 1.5,6. speaking of Jesus Christ and magnifying him, doth so place the mention of God the Father, that the pronoun to him, with which he gins his doxology, may be in like manner referred to God the Father, and to our Lord Jesus Christ, whom he intended to bless. Hence it manifestly appears that divine worship and service is due to our Lord Jesus Christ, together with God the Father. Amen.] An Hebrew word as is well known, which signifies truly or certainly, and always carries the force of approbation; and that either in assertions, or in devotions, of wishes, prayers, and praises to the honour of God; or lastly in promises uttered of things very acceptable and . In assertions it commonly precedeth and is set before: but in the other two it followeth and closeth the sentence. For the former, we meet with many examples in the say of our Saviour recited by Matthew, Mark, and John: but Luke relating the same or the like say of our Saviour; for the word Amen, either single or double, useth the Greek word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which exactly answers the Hebrew, or Syriac. For the second, there are almost so many examples in the holy Scriptures, as there are devotions and praises of God's name in the end of Epistles. For the last, there is an example in the end of the Revelation, vers. 20. where withal the word Amen is interpreted or explicated, by addition of the affirmative particle, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although some Copies for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; which is a thing that might be easily altered.  
22. And I beseech you brethren] He yet further adds some special points as it were out of the body of the Epistle. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though in the Greek it properly signify, I exhort; yet in this place it is better translated, I beseech; as most translations render it in several languages; because the thing which he entreateth of them, is as it immediately follows, to Suffer the word of Exhortation.] The word of Exhortation is a speech whereby a man exhorts, or is exhorted, by a genetive case arguing the difference. And in Exhortation especially this which the Author here understands, is also included reprehension or reproof. For he seems here to design such speech, as is somewhat unwelcome and unpleasing to them to whom it is directed, as commonly reproofs use to be; although exhortations also are many times unpleasing, though they seem free from any reproof. For Exhortations to those who do not yet their duty, are secret reprehensions and reproofs. Therefore the Author beseecheth and entreateth them, to suffer this word or speech; that is, to take it in good part, not to disdain or be grieved at it; that they are exhorted or admonished by him. For I have written a letter unto you in few words.] Here he adds the reason why he desires them to suffer the word of Exhortation from him. The particle for doth not in this place signify simply for, but rather for also, implying a copulative causality, so that here is not brought the sole cause, but the social, and this; omitting other causes whereof they of themselves might easily take notice; As for example, that this word of Exhortation was wholesome for them, that it proceeded from a true and hearty affection toward them; that it was spoken modestly on his part, without any bitterness or reproach unto them, and such like; as if he had said: Ye ought therefore the rather to suffer my Exhortation; because I was not only diligent to apply all things that might serve to lenify my Exhortation and reproof, as becometh him that admonisheth: but also that I might not give you the least offence. I have written unto you as briefly as I could, and would not dwell long upon an argument so unpleasing to you. But if we suppose, that by this word of Exhortation is not meant that part only of this Epistle, which consisteth in Exhortation and reproose, but even the whole Epistle; wherein are not only Exhortations and reprehensions, but also excellent consolations or comforts, which in like manner are signified by the word Exhortation, and by the vulgar Latin is here translated the word of Comfort; Then to suffer this word, will be nothing else, but to accept it with a ready mind, so that in reading and hearing of it, they would not think it so prolix and tedious, as to be weary of it. To which purpose the reason here is very fit, that the Author saith, he hath written in few words. For to comprise things of special moment and worth in few words, as it is a point of great Art, so is it a great grace to the writing. But the Author calls this Epistle brief, and written in few words, because considering the Majesty of the argument, and the variety of the matter, it is very brief, and delivered but in few words. For we may easily perceive that the Author therein is not indulgent to any repetitions or prolix amplification after a Rhetorical strain: but with a singular brevity runs over only the chief points, leaving many more things to be collected by them then he expresseth; and in many things writes very concisely.  
23. Know ye that our brother Timotheus is set at liberty] Another special point added by the Author, is an advertisement concerning Timothy, because he was in good repute among the Hebrews, and went for an Hebrew; for though his father were a Greek, yet his mother was an Hebrew, and Paul circumcised him in favour of the Hebrews to ingratiate his person among them; as we read, Acts 16.1,2,3. And therefore the Author supposeth, that any good news concerning Timothy would be acceptable to them, to whom his person was so acceptable. And the Author gives Timothy the attribute of brother, thereby to signify not only their common religion that they both professed Christ; but also their common affection, that each of them was dearly beloved of other. Is set at liberty] The particular thing that he advertiseth concerning Timothy, and whereof he desires them to take notice or knowledge is, That Timothy is set at liberty, which advertisement he conceived would be very welcome to them. Whence we may easily collect, that Timothy was once in bonds and in prison for the profession of the Gospel. And it is very probable that he was so; for Paul was then in bonds when he wrote his Epistle to the Colossians; as appears, Colos. 4.3. where requesting the prayers of the Colossians for himself and his fellow-prisoners, he saith; withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds. And Paul in his Preface of subscription to that Epistle, adjoins Timothy with him, as an approver of his Epistle, Coloss. 1.1. So that it is probable Timothy was his fellow-prisoner. And if any man say, that Paul names not Timothy among his fellow-prisoners, when he mentions their several salutations to the Colossians, chap. 4 The answer is; It was not reason he should write any salutations from Timothy, no more then from himself; because he had joined Timothy with him as a Co-Authour of the whole Epistle, which was more than a salutation. This imprisonment then of Timothy is very probable, though from this place it be not fully certain. For the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is here translated, set at liberty, doth properly signify more generally, for dismissed, or dispatched, or sent away, and in this sense is frequently used in the new Testament. And then it may signify here, that Timothy was now dismissed, or dispatched there where formerly he was detained about some business of the Ministry; for certain it is, that Timothy by his especial function was an Evangelist, and therefore frequently employed by the Apostles, who sent them upon messages about the Ministry unto remote Churches. See this for Timothy, Acts 17.14,15. and Acts 18.5. and Acts 19.22. and 1. Cor. 4.17. and Phil. 2.19. and 1. Thess. 3.2. With whom if he come shortly, I will see you] He intimates unto them, that he expects the coming of Timothy to him very shortly; yet withal, that if he come not in a short time, than he himself will come to them without him. So that hereby he signifies his affection and love toward them, with an earnest desire speedily to see them, as impatient of his delay in expecting Timothy, though he were very shortly to come.  
24. Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the Saints] The name of Saints is here attributed to all Christians in general. As if he had said, I desire you to salute from me not only your Rulers as your Elders and Bishops, but all the rest of the brethren, even the whole Church. All Christians must remember that they are Saints, that is, persons consecrated and hallowed unto God; and therefore as the Apostle admonisheth, must carry themselves as obedient children, not fashioning themselves according to their former lusts in their ignorance: but as he which hath called them is holy, so must they be holy in all manner of conversation; because it is written, Be ye holy, for I am holy, 1 Pet. 1.14,15,16. They of Italy salute you] A Grecisme for the Italians, or Christians of Italy; for so the Greeks use to speak. Whence it appears, that part of the clause which tradition hath added at the end of this Epistle, is true, That this Epistle was written to the Hebrews from Italy. For if the Author had written from any other place, why should he insert a salutation from the Italians only? But the rest of that clause at the end of this Epistle is false, That is was sent by Timothy. For what could be more vain, then to write of him, by whom he sent his Epistle? Know ye that he is set at liberty] And that in the very end of his Epistle, as here he writeth of Timothy, in the verse immediately preceding. And besides in the very same verse, he advertiseth them of Timothy's coming to him, and of his own to them upon Timothy's coming to him, namely from that place where he was detained in prison; and of his coming or returning from them, as some say who would seem to defend this postscript. But there must needs be extant an argument to prove how different from the written word of God, yea many times repugnant unto it, are the written traditions of men; and therefore much more men's traditions not written. And the falsity of this subscription, may justly make a man doubt of the verity of the inscription, which carries the name of Paul, traditionally also prefixed before it.  
25. Grace be with you all. Amen.] Here the Author finisheth and closeth this Epistle with a devotion or holy wish. Grace is the only ground and means to that peace whereof he styled God the Author, before ver. 20. And therefore also the only ground of all happiness, for all happiness comes merely by grace. Yet he expresseth not whose grace and favour, he wisheth unto them, as a thing sufficiently known among all Christians; namely the grace of God our Father, and of Jesus Christ our Lord. Now the same grace of God our Father, and of Jesus Christ our Lord, be with all them that love verity and piety. Amen.   

The Contents of this 13. Chapter, are,  

1. Duty. We must be hospitable to entertains strangers. ver. 2. 

Motive. Because some thereby have entertained Angels unawares. eod.    
2. Duty. We must be merciful toward persons in adversity, ver. 3. 

Motive. Because we ourselves are also in the body, and thereby also subject: adversity, eod.    
3. Duty. Marriage must be maintained in the due honour of it. ver. 4. 

Motive. Because God will judge whoremongers and adulterers, and all that are defilers and disgracers of the marriage bed, eod.    
4. Duty. We must not be covetous, v. 5. 

Motive. 1. Because God hath promised, he will never leave nor forsake us.  
2. Because we may boldly say, The Lord is our helper, and we will not fear what man shall do unto us.    
5. Duty. We must not be inconstant, to be carried about with divers and strange doctrines, v. 6. 

Motive. 1. Because we must keep ourselves to our leaders who have taught us God's word; and must follow their faith and life, v. 7.  
2. Because the doctrine is always the same, as yesterday, so to day and so for ever, v. 8.  
3. Because it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace, ver. 9    
6. Duty. We must not eat of the sacrifices which ourselves offer to God. 

Motive 1. Because meats profit nothing to holiness, v. 9  
2. Because the sacrifices of the Christian altar are not edible, v. 10.  
3. Because the sin-offerings under the Law were not eaten but burnt without the camp, v. 11.  
4. Because Christ is our sin-offering, who suffered without the gate, to sanctify us with his own blood.  
5. Because Christian sacrifices are only spiritual; for either they are the fruit of our lips, as praise and thanksgiving, ver. 15. or the fruit of our hands, to do good and communicate, v. 16.    
7. Duty. We must be patiented to suffer any misery in this life, v. 13. 

Motive. 1. Because Christ our high Priest who sanctified us with his own blood, suffered reproach, banishment and death, for he suffered without the gate, v. 12.  
2. Because here we have no continuing city, v. 14.    
8. Duty. We must offer all our Christian sacrifices by Christ, v. 15. 

Motive. Because Christ is our high Priest, who sanctified us, ver. 12.    
9 Duty. We must be beneficial to do good and to communicate, ver. 16. 

Motive. Because beneficence is a sacrifice wherewith God is well pleased.    
10. Duty. We must obey our spiritual rulers and submit to them, v. 17. 

Motive. Because they watch for our souls, and must give account of their watching, eod.  
2. Because our unruliness will be grievous to them and pernicious to us, eod.       
FINIS.