Obs. V. God himself, in and by his own sovereign wisdom, grace, goodness, all-sufficiency, and power, is to be considered as the only cause and author of the new covenant; or, the abolishing of the old covenant, with the introduction and establishment of the new, is an act of the mere sovereign wisdom, grace, and authority of God. It is his gracious disposal of us, and of his own grace;—that whereof we had no contrivance, nor indeed the least desire.
4, It is declared whom this new covenant is made withal: “ With
Aéyes Kupios.
VER. 10-12. ] EPISTLE TO THE WEBREWS. 139
the house of Israel.” Verse 8, they are called distinctly “the house of Israel, and the house of Judah.” The distribu- tion of the posterity of Abraham into Israel and Judah ensued upon the division that fell out among the people in the days of Rehoboam. Before, they were called Israel only. And as in verse 8 they were mentioned distinctly, to testify that none of the seed of Abraham should be absolutely excluded from the grace of the covenant, however they were divided among themselves; so here they are all jointly expressed by their ancient name of Israel, to manifest that all distinctions on the account of precedent privi- leges should be now taken away, that “all Israel might be saved.” But we have showed before, that the whole Israel of God, or the church of the elect, are principally intended hereby.
5. The time of the accomplishment of this promise, or making of this covenant, ‘is expressed, “ After those days.” There are various conjectures about the sense of these words, or the determination of the time limited in them.
Some suppose respect is had unto the time of giving the law on mount Sinai. Then was the old covenant made with the fathers; but after those days another should be made. But whereas that time, “those days,” were so long past before this prophecy was given out by Jeremiah, namely, about eight hundred years, it was impossible but that the new covenant, which was not yet given, must be “ after those days;” wherefore it was to no purpose so to express it that it should be after those days, seeing it was impossible that otherwise it should be.
Some think that respect is had unto the captivity of Babylon and the return of the people from thence; for God then showed them great kindness, to win them unto obedience. But neither can this time be intended; for God then made no new covenant with the people, but strictly obliged them unto the terms of the old, Mal. iv. 4-6. But when this new covenant was to be made, the old was to be abolished and removed, as the apostle expressly affirmeth, verse 18.. The promise is not of new obligation, or new assistance unto the observance of the old covenant, but of making _ a new one quite of another nature, which then was not done.
' Some judge that these words, “ after those days,” refer unto what went immediately before, “ And I regarded them not:” which words include the total rejection of the Jews. ‘ After those days wherein both the house of Judah and the house of Israel shall be rejected, I will make a new covenant with the whole Israel of God.” But neither will this hold the trial; for,—
(1.) Supposing that expression, “ And I regarded them not,” to intend the rejection of the Jews, yet it is manifest that their excision and cutting off absolutely was not in nor for their non-continuance
Te olxw "Ie- ahr.
Mere ras nce pus txeivas.
140 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. VIII
ain the old covenant, or not being faithful therein, but for the rejec- tion of the new when proposed unto them. Then they fell by un- belief, as the apostle fully manifests, chap. ii. of this epistle, and Rom. xi. Wherefore the making of the new covenant cannot be said to be after their rejection, seeing they were rejected for their refusal and contempt of it. i
(2.) By this interpretation the whole house of Israel, or all the natural posterity of Abraham, would be utterly excluded from any interest in this promise. But this cannot be allowed: for it was not so “ de facto,” a remnant being taken into covenant; which though but a remnant in comparison of the whole, yet in themselves so great a multitude, as that in them the promises made unto the fathers were confirmed. Nor on this supposition would this predic- tion of a new covenant have been any promise unto them, or any of them, but rather a severe denunciation of judgment. But it is said expressly, that God would make this covenant with them, as he did the former with their fathers; which is a promise of grace and mercy.
Wherefore “ after those days,” is as much as in those days,—an indeterminate season for a certain. So, “in that day,” is frequently used in the prophets, Isa. xxiv. 21, 22; Zech. xii 11. A time, therefore, certainly future, but not determined, is all that is in- tended in this expression, “ after those days.” And herewith most expositors are satisfied. Yet is there, as I judge, more in the words.
“Those days,’ seem to me to comprise the whole time allotted unto the economy of the old testament, or dispensation of the old covenant. Such a time there was appointed unto it in the counsel of God. During this season things fell out as described, verse 9. The certain period fixed unto these days is called by our apostle “the time of reformation,” Heb. ix. 10. “ After those days,’—that is, in or at their expiration, when they were coming unto their end, whereby the first covenant waxed old and decayed,—God would make this covenant with them. And although much was done towards it be- fore those days came absolutely unto an end and did actually expire, yet is the making of it said to be “ after those days,” because being ‘made in the wane and declension of them, it did by its making put a full and final end unto them.