Chapter 10: An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews

There are two parts of this Chapter. The first concerneth the necessity and efficacy of the Sacrifice of Christ; from the beginning to v. 20. The other is an improvement of the doctrine of it to faith, obedience and perseverance; from v. 20. to the end of the Chapter.

Of the first general proposition of the subject to be treated of, there are two parts: (1.) A demonstration of the insufficiency of legal sacrifices for the expiation of sin: v. 1, 2, 3, 4; (2.) A declaration of the necessity and efficacy of the Sacrifice of Christ to that end; from v. 4. to v. 19. Of this declaration there are two parts. (1.) The substitution of the Sacrifice of Christ in the place and room of all legal sacrifices, because of its efficacy to the end which they could not attain and without which the Church could not be saved, v. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. (2.) A final comparison of his priesthood and sacrifice with those of the Law, and their absolute preference above them; to v. 20.

In the first particular, of the first general part, there are three things: (1.) An assertion of the insufficiency of legal sacrifices to the expiation of sin, wherein a reason of it also is included; v. 1. (2.) A confirmation of the truth of that assertion from the consideration of the frequency of their repetition, which manifestly evidenceth that insufficiency; v. 2, 3. (3.) A general reason taken from the nature of them, or the matter whereof they did consist; v. 4.

The first of these is contained in the first verse.

There is no difficulty in the reading, nor much difference about the translation of the words. Syr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; For the Law, a shadow was in it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; not the substance itself. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that shall offer them; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that translator omits; supposing it the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But it has its own signification: Continenter; in assiduum; in perpetuum. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; habens, obtinens, continens. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; ipsam expressam formam; ipsam imaginem. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Sanctificare, perfecte sanctificare; perfectos facere; Vulg. Lat. make perfect. Perficere, confirmare, to perfect, to confirm.

For the Law having a shadow of good things to come, not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offer year by year continually, make the comers thereunto (the worshippers) perfect.

There are in these words, (1.) A note of inference, giving a connexion to the preceding discourse, For. (2.) The subject spoken of, The Law. (3.) An ascription made to it; it had a shadow of good things to come. (4.) A negation concerning it, derogatory to its perfection; it had not the very image of the things themselves. (5.) An inference or conclusion from both; can never with those sacrifices, &c.

1. The conjunctive particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, For, intimates that what follows or is introduced thereby, is an inference from what he had before discoursed, or a conclusion made thereon. And this is the necessity of the Sacrifice of Christ. For having declared that he had perfectly expiated sin thereby, and confirmed the New Covenant, he concludes from there and proves the necessity of it, because the legal sacrifices could not effect those ends which they seemed to be appointed for. Therefore they must be taken away, to give place to that whereby they were perfectly accomplished. This therefore he now proceeds to prove. God having designed the complete consummation, or sanctification of the Church, that which only made a representation of it, and of the way whereby it was to be done, but could not effect it, was to be removed. For there was an appointed time wherein he would perfectly fulfil the counsel of his infinite wisdom and grace towards the Church herein. And at this time which was now come, a full clear understanding of the insufficiency of all legal sacrifices for that end, was to be given to it. For he requires not faith and obedience in any, beyond the means of light and understanding which he affords to them. Therefore the full revelation and demonstration hereof was reserved for this season, wherein he required express faith in the way whereby these things were effected.

2. The subject spoken of is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; The Law. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. That which he immediately intends is the sacrifices of the Law, especially those which were offered yearly by a perpetual statute, as the words immediately following do declare. But he refers what he speaks to the Law itself; as that whereby these sacrifices were instituted, and whereon all their virtue and efficacy did depend. They had no more of the one or other, but what they had by and from the Law.

And the Law, here, is the covenant which God made with the people at Sinai, with all the institutions of worship thereunto belonging. It is not the moral law which originally and as absolutely considered, had no expiatory sacrifices belonging to it; nor is it the ceremonial law alone, whereby all the sacrifices of old were either appointed or regulated: but it is the first Testament, the first Covenant, as it had all the ordinances of worship annexed to it, as it was the spring and cause of all the privileges and advantages of the Church of Israel; and whereunto the moral law as given on Mount Sinai, and both the ceremonial law and the judicial also did belong. This he calls the Law (chap. 7:19), and the Covenant or Testament completely (chap. 9).

Concerning this Law or Covenant, the Apostle declares two things; (1.) Positively and by way of concession; it had a shadow of good things to come. (2.) Negatively, that it had not the very image of the things themselves; which we must consider together, because they contribute light to one another.

These expressions are metaphorical, and have therefore given occasion to various conjectures about the nature of the allusions in them, and their application to the present subject matter. I shall not trouble the reader with a repetition of them; they may be found in most commentators. I shall therefore only fix on that sense of the words, which I conceive to be the mind of the Holy Ghost; giving the reasons why I conceive it so to be.

Both the expressions used and the things intended in them, a shadow, and the very image, have respect to the good things to come. The relation of the Law to them is that which is declared. Therefore the true notion of what these good things to come are, will determine what it is to have a shadow of them, and not the very image of the things themselves.

The good things intended may be said to be [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], either with respect to the Law, or with respect to the Gospel; and were so, either when the Law was given, or when this Epistle was written. If they were yet to come with respect to the Gospel, and were so when he wrote this Epistle, they can be nothing, but the good things of Heaven and Eternal Glory. These things were then, are still, and will always be to the Church Militant on the earth good things to come; and are the subject of Divine Promises concerning future things. In hope of Eternal Life, which God that cannot lie promised before the world began (Titus 1:2).

But this cannot be the sense of the words. For,

1. The Gospel itself has not the very image of these things, and so should not herein differ from the Law. For that the very image of these things are the things themselves shall be immediately declared.

2. The Apostle in this whole discourse designs to prove that the Law with all the rites of worship annexed to it, were a type of the good things that were really and actually exhibited in and by the Gospel, or by the Lord Christ himself in the discharge of his Office. Therefore they are called good things to come with respect to the time of the administration of the Law; they were so while the Law or first Covenant was in force; and while the institutions of it were continued. They had indeed their original in the Church, or were good things to come, from the first promise. They were more declared so to be, and the certainty of their coming more confirmed by the Promise made to Abraham. After these promises and their various confirmations, the Law was given to the people. Howbeit the Law did not bring in, exhibit, or make present the good things so promised, that they should no more yet be to come. They were still good things to come while the Law was in force. Nor was this absolutely denied by the Jews, nor is yet so to this day. For though they place more in the Law and Covenant of Sinai than God ever placed in them; yet they acknowledge that there are good things to come, promised and fore-signified in the Law, which as they suppose are not yet enjoyed. Such is the coming of the Messiah; in which sense they must grant, that the Law had a shadow of good things to come.

Hence it is evident what are those good things to come; namely, Christ himself, with all the grace, and mercy, and privileges which the Church receives by his actual exhibition and coming in the flesh, upon the discharge of his Office. For he himself firstly, principally, and evidently was the subject of all promises; and whatever else is contained in them, is but that whereof, in his Person, Office, and Grace, he is the Author and cause. Hence he was signally termed [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩]; He who was to come, he that should come. Are you he who is to come? And after his actual exhibition, the denying of him to be so come, is to overthrow the Gospel (1 John 4:3).

And these things are called [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], these good things; (1.) Because they are absolutely so without any allay or mixture. All other things in this world, however in some respect, and as to some peculiar end, they may be said to be good, yet are they not so absolutely. Therefore, (2.) these things only are good things: nothing is good either in itself, nor to us, without them, nor but by virtue of what they receive from them. There is nothing so but what is made so by Christ and his Grace. (3.) They are eminently good things. These good things which were promised to the Church from the foundation of the world, which the Prophets and wise men of old desired to see; the means of our deliverance from all the evil things which we had brought upon ourselves by our apostasy from God.

These being evidently the good things intended, the relation of the Law to them, namely that it had the shadow but not the very image of them, will also be apparent.

The allusion in my judgment to the art of painting, wherein a shadow is first drawn, and afterwards a picture to the life, or the very image itself, has here no place, nor does our Apostle anywhere make use of such curious similitudes taken from things artificial, and known to very few; nor would he use this among the Hebrews, who of all people were least acquainted with the art of painting. But he declares his intention in another place, where speaking of the same things, and using some of the same words, their sense is plain and determined (Colossians 2:17). They are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. They are a shadow of things to come, is the same with this, The Law had a shadow of good things to come: for it is the Law with its ordinances and institutions of worship concerning which the Apostle there discourses, as he does in this place. Now the shadow there intended by the Apostle from where the allusion is taken, is the shadow of a body in the light or sunshine, as the antithesis declares: but the body is of Christ.

Now such a shadow is, (1.) a representation of the body. Any one who beholds it, knows that it is a thing which has no subsistence in itself, which has no use of its own, only it represents the body, follows it in all its variations, and is inseparable from it. (2.) It is a just representation of the body, as to its proportion and dimensions. The shadow of any body represents that certain individual body, and nothing else: it will add nothing to it, nor take anything from it; but, without an accidental hinderance, is a just representation of it: much less will it give an appearance of a body of another form and shape, different from that whereof it is the shadow. (3.) It is but an obscure representation of the body; so as that the principal concernments of it, especially the vigor and spirit of a living body, are not figured nor represented by it.

Thus is it with the Law or the Covenant of Sinai and all the ordinances of worship wherewith it was attended, with respect to these good things to come. For it must be observed that the opposition which the Apostle makes in this place, is not between the Law and the Gospel, any otherwise but as the Gospel is a full declaration of the Person, Offices, and Grace of Christ; but it is between the sacrifices of the Law, and the sacrifice of Christ himself. Want of this observation has given us mistaken interpretations of the place.

This shadow the Law had; [in non-Latin alphabet]; Having it. It obtained it, it was in it; it was inlaid in it; it was of the substance and nature of it; it contained it, in all that it prescribed, or appointed; some of it in one part, some in another, the whole in the whole. It had the whole shadow; and the whole of it was this shadow. It was so,

1. Because in the sanction, dedication, and confirmation of it by the blood of sacrifices, in the Tabernacle, with all its holy utensils, in its High Priest and all other sacred administrations, in its solemn sacrifices and services, it made a representation of good things to come. This has been abundantly manifested and proved in the Exposition of the foregoing Chapter. And according to the first property of such a shadow, without this use it had no bottom, no foundation, no excellency of its own. Take out the significancy and representation of Christ, his offices and grace out of the legal institutions, and you take from them all impressions of divine wisdom, and leave them useless things which of themselves will vanish and disappear. And because they are no more now a shadow, they are absolutely dead and useless.

2. They were a just representation of Christ only, the second property of such a shadow. They did not signify any thing more or less, but Christ himself, and what belongs to him. He was the Idea in the mind of God, when Moses was charged to make all things according to the pattern shewed him in the Mount. And it is a blessed view of divine wisdom, when we do see and understand aright, how every thing in the Law belonged to that shadow which God gave in it, of the substance of his counsel in and concerning Jesus Christ.

3. They were but an obscure representation of these things, which is the third property of a shadow. The glory and efficacy of these good things appeared not visible in them. God by these means designed no further revelation of them, to the Church of the Old Testament, but what was in types and figures, which gave a shadow of them, and no more.

Secondly, this being granted to the Law, there is added thereunto what is denied of it, wherein the argument of the Apostle does consist. It had not the very image of the things. The [in non-Latin alphabet] are the same with the [in non-Latin alphabet] before mentioned. The negation is of the same whereof the concession was made, the grant being in one sense, and the denial in another. It had not [in non-Latin alphabet]; the very image itself. That is, it had not the things themselves. For that is intended by this image of them. And the reasons why I so interpret the words, are these:

1. Take the image only for a clear express delineation and description of the things themselves, as is generally conceived, and we invalidate the argument of the Apostle. For he proves that the Law by all its sacrifices could not take away sin, nor perfect the Church, because it had not this image. But suppose the Law to have had this full and clear description and delineation of them, were it never so lively and complete, yet could it not by its sacrifices take away sin. Nothing could do it but the very substance of the things themselves, which the Law had not, nor could have.

2. Where the same truth is declared the same things are expressly called the body, and that of Christ; that is the substance of the things themselves, and that in opposition to the shadow which the Law had of them, as it is here also (Colossians 2:17). Which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. And we are not without cogent reasons to depart from the explication of the Metaphor there given us. For these expressions are every way the same; They had not the body which is Christ.

3. That is intended which does completely expiate sin, which does consummate and perfect the Church, which is denied to the Law. Now this was not done by an express and clear declaration of these things, which we acknowledge to be contained in the Gospel, but it was done by the things themselves, as the Apostle has proved in the foregoing Chapter, and does further confirm in this: that is, it was done by Christ alone in the sacrifice of himself.

4. It is confessed by all that there is an [in non-Latin alphabet]; a substantial image; so called, not because it is a representation of what it is not, but because it is that whereof somewhat else is an image and representation, as the Law in its institutions and sacrifices was of these good things. And this the Apostle directs us to by his emphatic expression; [in non-Latin alphabet]; ipsissimam rerum Imaginem; the things themselves; So it is rendered by the Syriac Translation, ipsam rem; or ipsam substantiam; the substance itself. And [in non-Latin alphabet] is frequently used in the New Testament in this sense. Romans 1:23. [in non-Latin alphabet]; Into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man; that is, into the likeness of a corruptible man. The image of the man is not something distinct from him, something to represent him; but the man himself. See Romans 8:29; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:15; chapter 3:10.

This therefore is that which the Apostle denies concerning the Law. It had not the actual accomplishment of the promise of good things; it had not Christ exhibited in the flesh; it had not the true real sacrifice of perfect expiation: it represented these things; it had a shadow of them, but enjoyed not, exhibited not the things themselves. Hence was its imperfection and weakness, so that by none of its sacrifices it could make the Church perfect.

Whatever there may be in any religious institutions, and the diligent observation of them, if they come short of exhibiting Christ himself to believers with the benefits of his mediation, they cannot make us perfect, nor give us acceptation with God. For, (1.) it was he himself in his own person, that was the principal subject of all the promises of old. Hence they who lived not to enjoy his exhibition in the flesh are said to die in faith, but not to receive the promises (Hebrews 11:39). But it is through the promise that all good things are communicated to us. (2.) Nothing is good or useful to the Church, but through its relation to him. So was it with the duties of religious worship under the Old Testament. All their use and worth lay in this, that they were shadows of him and his mediation. And that of those in the New Testament is, that they are more efficacious means of his exhibition and communication to us. (3.) He alone could perfectly expiate sin and consummate the state of the Church by the sacrifice of himself.

This being the state of the Law or first covenant, the Apostle makes an application of it to the question under debate in the last words of the verse: can never with those sacrifices, which they offer year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect. We must first speak to the reading of the words, and then to the sense and meaning.

Expositors generally take notice that in the original there is a trajection in the words, or that they are placed out of their proper order, which translators do rectify. [in non-Latin alphabet]: every year, or yearly, with the sacrifices which they offer; For [in non-Latin alphabet]; with those sacrifices which they offer year by year, as we have rendered the words. But the Apostle seems to place [in non-Latin alphabet] in the entrance of the words, to signalize the annual sacrifice which he principally intended. But there is a great difficulty in the distinction and pointing of the words that follow; [in non-Latin alphabet], in perpetuum, continually, or for ever; that is, which they were so to do indispensably by the Law, while the Tabernacle or Temple were standing, or those ordinances of worship were in force.

But neither the signification of the word, nor the use of it in this Epistle will allow it in this place to belong to the words and sentence going before. For it does not anywhere signify a duration or continuance with a limitation. And the Apostle is far from allowing an absolute perpetual duration to the Law and its sacrifices, were they of what use soever, especially in this place where he is proving that they were not perpetual, nor had an efficacy to accomplish anything perfectly, which is the other signification of the word. And it is used only in this Epistle (Hebrews 7:3), in this place, and verses 12 and 14 of this chapter. But in all these places it is applied only to the office of Christ, and the efficacy of it in his personal ministry. It is of the same signification with [in non-Latin alphabet] (Hebrews 7:25), for ever, to the uttermost, perfectly. Therefore that which is affirmed of Christ and his sacrifice in verses 12 and 14 of the chapter, is here denied of the Law. And the words should be joined with those that follow. The Law by its sacrifices could not perfect for ever, or to the utmost, the comers thereunto.

In the words thus read there are three things.

1. The impotency of the Law; [in non-Latin alphabet]; It can never.

2. That with respect whereunto this impotency is charged on it; that is, the sacrifices which it offered.

3. The effect itself denied with respect to that impotency; which is, to perfect for ever the comers thereunto.

1. The impotency of the Law as to the end mentioned is emphatically expressed, [in non-Latin alphabet], it can never do it: it can do it by no means, no way, it is impossible it should. And it is thus expressed to obviate all thoughts in the minds of the Hebrews, from all expectations of perfection by the Law. For thus they were apt to think and hope, that by one way and means or another they might have acceptance with God by the Law. Therefore it was necessary thus to speak to them, who had an inveterate persuasion to the contrary.

2. That with respect whereunto this impotency is ascribed to the Law is its sacrifices. For from them was the perfect expiation of sin to be expected, or from nothing prescribed by the Law. To deny this power to them, is to deny it absolutely to the whole Law, and all its institutions. And these sacrifices are expressed with respect to their nature, the time of their offering, and those by whom they were offered.

For their nature he says [in non-Latin alphabet]: Iisdem Sacrificiis; iis ipsis hostiis or Sacrificiis. Our translation renders not the emphasis of the expression. Iis hostiis quas quotannis—: with the same sacrifices, or those sacrifices which were of the same kind and nature. [in non-Latin alphabet] is omitted in our translation. [in non-Latin alphabet], is with those sacrifices; the article being demonstrative. The same; not individually the same, for they were many, and offered often, or every year, when a sacrifice was offered again materially the same; but they were of the same kind. They could not by the Law offer a sacrifice of one kind one year, and a sacrifice of another the next; but the same sacrifices in the substance and essence, in their matter and manner, were annually repeated without variation or alteration. And this the Apostle urges to show that there was no more in any one of them than in another; and what one could not do, could not be done by its repetition; for it was still the same. Great things were effected by these sacrifices; by them was the first covenant consecrated and confirmed; by them was atonement and expiation of sin made; that is, typically and declaratively; by them were the priests themselves dedicated to God; by them were the people made holy. Therefore this impotency being ascribed to them, it absolutely concludes to the whole Law, with all other privileges and duties of it.

2. He describes them from the time and season of their offering. It was yearly, every year, year by year. It is hence manifest, what sacrifices he principally intends; namely, the anniversary sacrifices of expiation, when the High Priest entered into the most holy place with blood (Leviticus 16). And he instances therein, not to exclude other sacrifices from the same censure, but as giving an instance for them all, in that which was most solemn, had the most eminent effects, at once respecting the whole Church, and that which the Jews principally trusted to. Had he mentioned sacrifices in general, it might have been replied, that although the sacrifices which were daily offered, or those on especial occasions, might not perfect the worshippers, at least not the whole congregation; but yet the Church itself might be perfected by that great sacrifice which was offered yearly, with the blood whereof the High Priest entered into the presence of God. Accordingly the Jews have such a saying among them, that on the day of expiation all Israel was made as righteous, as in the day wherein man was first created. But the Apostle applying his argument to those sacrifices and proving their insufficiency to the end mentioned, leaves no reserve to any thoughts that it might be attained by other sacrifices which were of another nature and efficacy. And besides, to give the greater cogency to his argument, he fixes on those sacrifices which had the least of what he proves their imperfection by. For these sacrifices were repeated only once a year. And if this repetition of them once a year proves them weak and imperfect, how much more were those so, which were repeated every day, or week, or month?

3. He refers to the offerers of those sacrifices; which they offer, that is, the High Priests, of whom he had treated in the foregoing chapter. And he speaks of things in the present tense. The Law cannot, which they offer: not the Law could not, and which they offered. The reason hereof has been before declared. For he sets before the Hebrews a scheme and representation of all their worship at its first institution, that they might discern the original intention of God therein. And therefore he insists only on the Tabernacle, making no mention of the Temple. So he states what was done at the first giving of the Law, and the institution of all its ordinances of worship, as if it were now present before their eyes. And if it had not the power mentioned at their first institution, when the Law was in all its vigor and glory, no accession could be made to it by any continuance of time, any otherwise but in the false imagination of the people.

That which remains of the words is an account of what the Law could not do or effect by its sacrifices, it could not make the comers thereunto perfect for ever.

There is in the words, (1.) the effect denied. (2.) The persons with respect to whom it is denied. (3.) The limitation of that denial.

1. The effect denied, what it cannot do, is to dedicate, consummate, consecrate, perfect, sanctify. Of the meaning of the word in this Epistle, I have spoken often before. As also I have showed at large what that perfection is, which God designed to the Church in this world, wherein it did consist, and how the Law could not effect it. See the exposition on chapter 7, verse 11. Here it is the same with perfecting as appertaining to the conscience (chapter 9:9), which is ascribed to the sacrifice of Christ (verse 14). Therefore the word principally in this place respects the expiation of sin, or the taking away the guilt of it by atonement; and so the Apostle expounds it in the following verses, as shall be declared.

2. Those with respect to whom this power is denied to the Law are, say we, the comers thereunto. The expression is every way the same with that of chapter 9:9, and the worshippers and the comers are the same, as is declared in verses 2 and 3, those who make use of the sacrifices of the Law in the worship of God, who approach to him by sacrifices. And they are thus expressed by the comers, partly from the original direction given about the observation, and partly from the nature of the service itself. The first we have (Leviticus 1:2): the word signifies to draw nigh, to come near with an oblation. These are the comers, those who draw nigh with, and bring their oblations to the Altar. And such was the nature of the sacrifice itself. It consisted in coming with their sacrifice to the Altar, with the Priests approaching to the sacrifice; in all which an access was made to God. Howbeit the word here is of a larger signification; nor is it to be limited to them who brought their own sacrifices, but extends to all that came to attend to the solemnity of them, whereby according to God's appointment, they had a participation in the benefit of them. For respect is had to the anniversary sacrifice which was not brought by any, but was provided for all.

But as the Priests were included in the foregoing words, which they offer; so by these comers, the people are intended, for whose benefit these sacrifices were offered. For, as was said, respect is had to the great anniversary sacrifice, which was offered in the name and on the behalf of the whole congregation. And these, if any, might be made perfect by the sacrifices of the Law, namely those that came to God by them, or through the use of them, according to his institution.

That wherein the Law failed as to the appearance it made of the expiation of sin, was that it could not effect it absolutely, completely and for ever. It made an expiation, but it was temporary only, not for ever. It did so both in respect to the consciences of the worshippers, and the outward effects of its sacrifices. Their effect on the consciences of the worshippers was temporary; for a sense of sin returned on them, which forced them to a repetition of the same sacrifices again, as the Apostle declares in the next verse. And as to the outward effects of them, they consisted in the removal of temporal punishments and judgments, which God had threatened to the transgressors of the old Covenant. This they could reach to, but no further. To expiate sin fully, and that with respect to eternal punishment, so as to take away the guilt of sin from the consciences, and all punishments from the persons of men, which is to perfect them for ever, which was done by the sacrifice of Christ; this they could not do, but only represent what was to be done afterwards.

If any shall think meet to retain the ordinary distinction of the words, and refer [in non-Latin alphabet] to what goes before, so taking the word adverbially, they offered them year by year continually, then the necessity of the annual repetition of those sacrifices is intended in it. This they did, and this they were to do always while the Tabernacle was standing, or the worship of the Law continued. And from the whole verse sundry things may be observed.

Whatever has the least representation of Christ, or relation to him, the obscurest way of teaching the things concerning his person and grace while it is in force, has a glory in it. He alone in himself originally bears the whole glory of God in the worship and salvation of the Church; and he gives glory to all institutions of divine worship. The Law had but a shadow of him and his office; yet was the ministration of it glorious. And much more is that of the Gospel and its ordinances so, if we have faith to discern their relation to him, and experience of his exhibition of himself and the benefits of his mediation to us by them. Without this they have no glory, whatever order or pomp may be applied to their outward administration.

Christ and his grace were the only good things, that were absolutely so, from the foundation of the world, or the giving of the first promise. In and by them there is not only a deliverance from the curse, which made all things evil; and a restoration of all the good that was lost by sin, in a sanctified blessed use of the creatures; but an increase and addition is made to all that was good in the state of innocency, above what can be expressed. Those who put such a valuation on the meaner uncertain enjoyment of other things, as to judge them their good things, their goods, as they are commonly called; so as not to see that all which is absolutely good is to be found in him alone; much more they who seem to judge almost all things good besides, and Christ with his grace good for nothing, will be filled with the fruit of their own ways, when it is too late to change their minds.

There is a great difference between the shadow of good things to come, and the good things themselves actually exhibited and granted to the Church. This is the fundamental difference between the two Testaments, the Law and the Gospel, from where all others do arise, and whereinto they are resolved. Some when they hear that there was justification, sanctification and eternal life to be obtained under the Old Covenant, and its administrations, by virtue of the promise which they all had respect to, are ready to think that there was no material difference between the two Covenants. I have spoken at large hereunto in the 8th chapter. I shall now only say, that he who sees not, who finds not a glory, excellency and satisfaction, producing peace, rest and joy in his soul from the actual exhibition of these good things as declared and tendered in the Gospel, above what might be obtained from an obscure representation of them as future, is a stranger to Gospel light and grace.

The principal interest and design of them that come to God, is to have assured evidence of the perfect expiation of sin. This of old they came to God by the sacrifices of the Law for; which could only represent the way whereby it was to be done. Until assurance be given hereof, no sinner can have the least encouragement to approach to God. For no guilty person can stand before him. Where this foundation is not laid in the soul and conscience, all attempts of access to God are presumptuous. This therefore is that which the Gospel in the first place proposes to the faith of them that do receive it.

What cannot be effected for the expiation of sin at once by any duty or sacrifice, cannot be effected by its reiteration or repetition. Those generally who seek for atonement and acceptation with God by their own duties, do quickly find that no one of them will effect their desire. Therefore they place all their confidence in the repetition and multiplication of them; what is not done at one time, they hope may be done at another; what one will not do, many shall. But after all they find themselves mistaken.

The repetition of the same sacrifices, does of itself demonstrate their insufficiency to the end sought after. Therefore those of the Roman Church who would give countenance to the sacrifice of the Mass, by affirming that it is not another sacrifice, but the very same that Christ himself offered, do prove, if the argument of the Apostle here insisted on be good and cogent, an insufficiency in the sacrifice of Christ for the expiation of sin. For so he affirms it is with all sacrifices that are to be repeated, whereof he esteems the repetition itself a sufficient demonstration.

God alone limits the ends and efficacy of his own institutions. It may be said that if these sacrifices did not make perfect them that came to God by them, then their so coming to him was lost labor, and to no purpose. But there were other ends and other uses of this their coming to God as we have declared; and to them all they were effectual. There never was, there never shall be any loss in what is done according to the command of God. Other things, however we may esteem them, are but hay and stubble, which have no power or efficacy to any spiritual ends.

FINIS.