VERSE 7.
Tlddw rive opiCes nuepay, Simepor, ev Aalld Aeyov, were rooovroy xpéovov, xa0MG Eipyras, SH wEpoy, Ed” THS Quvhs adrod anxovonre, wr) onAnpLYNTE Tas AO POIAS YMG. ;
Some MSS. for efonres, “said,” or “spoken,” read xpos/pyres, “forespoken,” or “foretold.” Mera rosotrov xpcvov, “ post tantum tempus,” or “ temporis,” as the Vulg. Lat.; that is, “ tantum temporis spatium elapsum,” “ after so great a space of time past.” Syr., “from after so much time;” and adds, “as it is said above that David said.”
Ilaaiw, “again.” It may denote either the repetition of an old act, or the in- troduction of a new testimony. Our apostle often useth this word on this latter occasion. So he doth several times, chap.i. And here it may seem to be so ap- plied: ‘“ Again,” to confirm further what hath been spoken.’ But it doth rather express in this place the repetition of the thing spoken of, and is to be joined in construction with “he limiteth:” ‘ After the determination, limiting, or appoint- ing the day before mentioned, the day of rest,—that is, the rest itself, and a “ cer- tain day” for the representation of it and entering into it, with all that concerned it and fell out about it, both at the beginning of the world, and also at the en- trance of the people into Canaan,—* again he limiteth,” or “ he limiteth again.”’
VER. 7.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 303
“Opi€et, “he limiteth ;”’—that is, absolutely God doth so, whose authority alone in these things is the rule of our faith and obedience; particularly the Holy Ghost, this limitation being made in the Scriptures, which were given by his immediate and peculiar inspiration, 2 Pet, i. 21. “Limiteth;” that is, either describes or defineth it in a prophetical prediction, or determineth and appoints it by an autho. ritative institution. He describes it initself, and appoints it unto us. The word may comprise both, and we have no ground to exclude either.
Twa qutpay, “a certain day ;” that is, another determinate day, in answer to the days forementioned, and whose season was now elapsed and past. It is certain that the apostle doth principally intend to evince the new rest of God under the gospel, and to persuade the Hebrews to secure their entrance into it, and posses- sion of it. But he here changeth his terms, and calls it not a “rest,” but proposeth it from the psalmist under the notion of a“ day.” And this he doth because he had before proved and illustrated the rest of God, from the day that was set apart as a pledge and means of it, as also because he designs to manifest that there is another day determined, as a pledge and representation of this new rest, or as an especial season for the enjoyment of the privileges thereof.
Sauepov. The day he intends is that which in the psalmist is called 0%, or oneepov, “to-day.” The former day he called s€dcvny, the seventh day.” This was the day of rest from the foundation of the world unto the giving of the law, as also under the law itself; but now there is to be “ another day,” expressive of the other rest promised. The seventh day from the beginning of the creation was separated to this purpose, with respect unto the rest proposed to man in the state of innocency, and the typical rest promised to the people under the law; but this new, spiritual rest in Christ by the gospel, is to have “ another day” to express and declare it. Thus is oyuspoy, “ to-day,” in the psalmist, left at liberty to be any day in the prophecy, but limited to the first by the resurrection of Christ. « Again, he limiteth a certain day,” called aepoy, “ to-day.”
Aévyay év AwGid, “ speaking in David,” who was the person by whom this matter was revealed to the church, in a psalm that he composed by divine inspiration for that purpose. And “David” may be here taken properly for the person of David himself; and so this expression declares the way and manner whereby he came to reveal this thing. It was from the speaking of the Holy Ghost in him, whereby he was oa¢ Ilveduwaros dylov Depowevos, 2 Pet. i. 21,—acted by him to receive and deliver his inspirations. So the apostle by év renders the intention of the Hebrew s. He spake in them; as David of himself, "223 77" 0, 2 Sam. xxiii. 2,— « The Spirit of the Lorp spake in me.” And so our apostle, in the beginning of this epistle, “ God spake év trois xpoQyrais, and éy Lig,”—* in the prophets, and in the Son.” So, as was said, the words not only express the revelation itself, but the manner of it also, The Holy Ghost spake in them whom he employed as his instruments; using their minds, tongues, and pens, for the receiving and declaring his sense and words, without leaving any thing unto their own inventions and memories. So David adds in the foregoing place, %27>2 ‘M221,« He spake in me, and his word was upon my tongue.” Or, secondly, the name “ David” may be taken by a metonymy for the psalm itself, whereof he was the penman: “ Speaks in the psalm which Dayid wrote.” Thus not his inspiration of David is intended, or his speaking in his person, but the continued speaking of the Holy Ghost unto the church in that psalm, as in and by all other Scriptures: for the Scripture is the voice of God, and he always speaks unto us thereby; and itself is said to speak, because of God’s speaking in it.