In the two next verses the apostle’ proceedeth to evince the ne- cessity and enforce the use of his preceding exhortation, from the circumstances of the example insisted on; and this he doth by way of interrogation. He proposeth in them questions on the matter of fact, and answers them from what is either directly expressed, or undeniably included in the words insisted on.
VER. 15-19.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 177
Ver. 17, 18.—But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness? And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not ?
The kind of arguing here used by the apostle is not simply in- terrogatory, but it is that which is said to be by interrogation and subjection; that is, when a question is drawn, and an answer sub- stituted out of the same matter; which hath such an efficacy for conviction and persuasion, that the great Roman orator seldom omits it in any of his orations. And it is so especially when the question proposed is “ interrogatio rei,” an inquiry into a matter of fact; and ’ the answer returned is “ interrogatio AéZews,” in form of speech an interrogation, but really an answer. Such is the apostle’s manner of arguing here. The interrogation, verse 17, “ With whom was he grieved forty years?” is “interrogatio rei;’ and the answer returned is in an interrogatory form of speech,—“ Was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness ?”
The words of the interrogation were explained on verse 10, whereunto the reader is referred. In this repetition of them, the design of the apostle.is to fix on the minds of the Hebrews the ’ consideration of the people’s sin, and God’s dealing with them . thereon.
The answer unto this first inquiry consists in a double description of them with whom God was so long grieved or displeased,—First, By their sin, “ Was it not with them that sinned?” Secondly, By their punishment, “ Whose carcasses fell in the wilderness.”
And we may consider first what is included, and then what is expressed in this answer. For the first, It is plainly included that God was not thus displeased with them all. Let not any appre- hend that God took a causeless distaste at that whole generation, and so cast them off and destroyed them promiscuously, without dis- tinction. As they were some only, and not all, that provoked; so it was with some only, and not all, that God was displeased. And two things do thence necessarily enstie to his purpose and advantage :— First, That his exhortation is enforced by showing that it was not an ordinary promiscuous event that befell their fathers in the wil- derness, but that they passed under a distinguishing dispensation of God towards them, according to their deportment, as they also were like to do. Secondly, That they might also consider that with those who sinned not, who provoked not, God was not displeased, but according to his promise they entered into his rest; which promise in a more excellent sense still remains for their benefit, if they were not disobedient.
VOL, XXI. 12
178 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [ CHAP. III.
The first thing expressed in the words, or the first part of the description of them with whom God was displeased, is their sin: “Was it not with them that sinned?” Their sin is first mentioned in general, and then the particular nature of it is afterwards declared. There were three sorts of sins that the people were guilty of in the wilderness:—1. They were universally guilty of personal sins in their distinct capacities. And these may justly be supposed to be great and many. But these are not they which are here intended; for if in this sense God should mark iniquity, none could stand, Ps. cxxx. 3. Neither were they free from sins of this nature who are here exempted from being objects of God’s displeasure. 2. H'special provocations, wherein great numbers of the people were engaged, but not the whole congrega- tion. Such was the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, with their accomplices, who were many and great, even “two hundred and fifty princes, famous in the congregation, men of renown,” Num. xvi. 2; the idolatry and adulteries of Peor, which infected many of the princes and people, with the like instances. 3. General sins of the whole congregation; which consisted in their frequent murmur- ings and rebellions, which came to a head as it were in that great provocation upon the return of the spies, Num. xiv., when they not only provoked God by their own unbelief, but encouraged one an- other to destroy those two persons, Joshua and Caleb, who would not concur in their disobedience: “All the congregation bade stone them with stones,” verse 10. This distinction was observed by the daughters of Zelophehad in their address for an inheritance among their brethren: “Our father,” say they, “died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the LorD in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin,” Num. xxvii. 3. They acknowledge him guilty of personal sins, and deny not but that he joined in the general pro- vocation of the whole congregation, but only that he had a hand in those especial provocations which God fixed an eminent mark of his displeasure upon, by cutting off the provokers with fearful, sudden, and signal judgments; whereas others were gradually con- sumed by death in a natural way. But it is this last kind of sin, in the guilt whereof the whole congregation was equally involved, that the apostle intends in this expression, “ Was it not with them that sinned?” Observe,—