Let us then see what it is that is here ascribed unto the Lord Christ: Kadapiowdy romocmevos. KabapiZa doth most frequently denote real actual purification, either of outward defilements, by healing and cleansing, as Mark i. 40, vii. 19, Luke v. 12; or from spiritual defilements of sin, by sanctifying grace, as Acts xv. 9, 2 Cor. vii. 1, Eph. v.26. But it is also frequently used in the same sense with xada/pw and xadaipowas, “to purge by expia- tion or atonement,” as Heb. ix. 22, 23. And in the like variety is xadapiouds also used. But xadapiowdr rorqcus, “to make a purgation,” or purification of our sins, cannot here be taken in the first sense, for real and inherent sanctifying:—First, Because it is spoken of as a thing already past and perfected, “ Having purged our sins,” when purification by sanctification is begun only in some, not all at any time, and perfected in none at all in this world. Secondly, Because he did it d/ éaurod, “by himself” alone, without the use or application of any other medium unto them that are purged; when real inherent sanctification is with “washing of water by the word,” Eph. v. 26; or by “regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost,” Tit. i. 5. And the gloss above mentioned, that Christ should purge us from our sins in his death, by occasioning that faith whereby we are cleansed, is excluded, as was in part showed before, by the context. That is assigned unto the death of Christ, as done really and effectually thereby, which was done typically of old in the legal sacrifices by the priests; as is evident from the antithesis couched in that expres- sion, “By himself.” But this was not the way whereby sins were of old purged by sacrifices,—namely, by the begetting a persuasion in the minds of men that should be useful for that purpose,—and therefore no such thing is here intended.
Kalepita,
VER. 3.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 111
Kabapiouds, then, is such a purging as is made by expiation, lus- ch ie and atonement; that is, 925 or iPS inecomds, “ propitiatio,” “atonement, HAS propitiation.” So is that word rendered by the LXX., Exod xxix. 36: T7 juépa rod xa- bcepropuou, DYMBSNOY ,—“the day of pioneriehn or “expiation.” They do, indeed, mostly render 122 by jAdoxowou, and 2iAcoxouqs,—“to propitiate,” “to appease,” “to atone;” but they doit also by xadapiZw, “to purge,” as Exod. xxix. 37, and chap. xxx.10. So also in other authors, xadapiowss is used for xdbapua, wepindbapua; that is, “ expia- tio,” “expiamentum,” “ piaculum,’—“expiation,’ “atonement,” “diversion of guilt.” So Lucian: ‘Pipowey wiv abrdy rod xpnwvot xa- daprouiy rot orpurot éoouevor—“ We cast him down headlong, for an expiation of the army;” or, as one that by his death should expiate, bear, take away the guilt of the army. And such lustra- tions were common among the heathen, when persons devoted themselves to destruction, or were devoted by others, to purge, lus- trate, bear the guilt of any, that they might go free. Such were Codrus, Menceceus, and the Decii; whose stories are known. This purging, then, of our sins, which the apostle declareth to have been effected before the ascension of Christ and his sitting down at the right hand of God, consisteth not in the actual sancti- fication and purification of believers by the Spirit, in the applica- tion of the blood of Christ unto them, but in the atonement made by him in the sacrifice of himself, that our sins should not be im- puted unto us. And therefore is he said to purge our sins, and not to purge us from our sins. And wherever sins, not sinners, are made the object of any mediatory act of Christ, that act immedi- ately respecteth God, and not the sinner, and intends the removal of sin, so as that it should not be imputed. So chap. i. 17 of this epistle: “ He is a merciful high priest,” s¢ +d iAdoxecdas res Gupring rod Awov,— to reconcile the sins of the people;” that is, idoxecbus rov Osiy wep ray &wupriav,— to make atonement” (or “re- conciliation with God”) “for the sins of the people.” And again: “He underwent death,” cis drorbrpwow ray él rH xpairn Oiabqun rupadocay, —“for the redemption of transgressions under the first covenant ;” that is, to pay a price for them, that transgressors might be set free from the sentence of the law. So that Kadapsowiv romodpmevos ris dwapriay hua, is as much as, “Having made atonement for our sins.” And this the apostle further declareth by manifesting the way whereby he did it; that is, 6/ éavrod, “by himself,” —that is, by the sacrifice and offering of himself, as chap. ix. 12,14; Eph. v. 2. The high priest of old made atonement, and typically purged the sins of the people, by sacrificing of beasts according unto the appointment of the law, Lev. xvi.; this high priest, by the sacrifice of himself, Isa. liii. 10; Heb. ix. 12, Of the
Kadapiopas.
A? taurov.
112 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. I.
nature of propitiatory or expiatory sacrifices we must treat at large afterwards. We keep ourselves now unto the apostle’s general pro- position, expressing briefly the sacerdotal office of Christ, and the excellency of it, in-that he really purged our sins, and that by the sacrifice of himself. And this was in and by his death on the cross, with his antecedent preparatory sufferings. Some distinguish be- tween his death and the oblation of himself. This, they say, he performed in heaven, when, as the high priest of his church, he entered into the holiest not made with hands, whereunto his death was but a preparation. For the slaying of the beast, they say, was not the sacrifice, but the offering of its blood upon the altar, and the carrying of it into the holy place. But this utterly overthrows the whole sacrifice of Christ; which, indeed, is the thing by them aimed at. It is true, the slaying of the beast was not the whole sacrifice, but only an essential part of it; as was also the offering of its blood, and the sprinkling of it in the most holy place, in the anniversary sacrifice of atonement, but not in any other. And the reason why the whole sacrifice could not consist in any one action, arose merely from the imperfection of the things and persons em- ployed in that work. The priest was one thing, the beast to be sacrificed another, the altar another, the fire on the altar another, the incense added another, each of them limited and designed unto its peculiar end; so that the atonement could not be made by any one of them, nor the sacrifice consist in them. But now in this sacrifice of Christ all these meet in one, because of his perfection. He himself was both priest, sacrifice, altar, and incense, as we shall see in our progress; and he perfected his whole sacrifice at once, in and by his death and blood-shedding, as the apostle evidently de- clares, chap. ix. 12, 14