(1.) There was in it 4 Avyv/a,—“the candlestick.” The Vulgar Latin .
192 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. IX.
reads “candelabra,” in the plural number. Hence many disputes arise among the expositors who adhere unto that transla- tion. Some of them contend that the apostle hath re- spect unto the temple of Solomon, wherein were ten candlesticks, five on the one side, and five on the other, 1 Kings vii. 49; which is directly contrary to his scope and the words of the text. Some suppose that the one candlestick which was in the tabernacle was intended, but is spoken of in the plural number because of the six branches that came out of it, three on each side, and that which went directly upwards made seven, having lamps in them all, Exod. xxv. 31, 32. But whereas it is constantly called “the candlestick,” and spoken of as one utensil only, the apostle could not call it “the candlesticks,” for that was but one. Wherefore the most sober of them depart from their common translation, and adhere unto the original; and make use of the expression to prove that it was the tabernacle of Moses, and not the temple of Solomon, wherein were ten candlesticks, that the apostle refers unto. The making of this candlestick is particularly described, Exod. xxv. 31, to the end of the chapter. Its frame, measures, and use, are not of our present consideration; they may be found in expositors on that place. It was placed on the south side of the tabernacle, near the veils that covered the most holy place; and over against it on the north side was the table with the shew-bread; and in the midst, at the very entrance of the most holy place, was the altar of incense. See Exod. xl. 20-27. And this candlestick was made all of beaten gold, of one piece, with its lamps and appurtenances, without either joints or screws; which is not without its mystery. To fit it for its service, pure oil olive was to be provided by the way of offering from the people, Exod. xxvii. 20. And it was the office of the high priest to “order it;” that is, to dress its lamps, every evening and every morn- ing, supplying them with fresh oil, and removing whatsoever might be offensive, Exod. xxvii. 21. And this is called “a statute for ever” unto the generations of the priests, on the behalf of the children of Israel; which manifests the great concernment of the church in this holy utensil.
(2.) On the other side of the sanctuary, over against the candle- stick, were “the table and the shew-bread;” which the apostle reckons as the second part of the furniture of this first part of the tabernacle, distinguishing them from each other: “the table, and the shew-bread.” The making of this table, with its measures and use, its form and fashion, is recorded, Exod. xxv. 23-28, xxxvii. 10, ete. new, “table.” The manner of its covering, when it was to be carried whilst the tabernacle was movable, is de- scribed, Num. iv. 7, 8. And it was a utensil fashioned for beauty and glory.
Avyvia.
“H rpawela.,
VER, 2.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 193
(3.) Upon this table, which the apostle adds, was “the shew- bread.” It is here rendered by the apostle apédeois réiv éprav,—the “ proposition of the bread” or “loaves;” by an hypallage for dpro: rig xpobécews,—the “bread of pro- position,” as it is rendered, Matt. xii, 4; the bread that was proposed or set forth. In the Hebrew it is 07”, “bread,” in the singular num- ber; which the apostle renders by é&pro, in the plural, as also doth the evangelist. For that bread consisted of many loaves; as dpro¢ properly signifies “a loaf.” So the LXX. render it by &provs, Exod. xxv. 30.
The number of these loaves, or cakes, as we call them, was twelve; and they were set on the table in two rows, six in a row, being laid one upon the other. The Jews say that every loaf was ten hand- breadths long, and five hand-breadths broad, and seven fingers thick. But this cannot well be reconciled unto the proportion of the table. For the table itself was but two cubits long, and one cubit broad; and whereas it had a border of an hand-breadth round about, nothing could lie on the table but what was placed within that border. And seeing a cubit was but five hand-breadths, it cannot be conceived how two rows of loaves, that were ten hand-breadths long, and five hand-breadths broad, could be placed within that border. Where- fore they suppose that there were props of gold coming up from the ground, that bore the ends of the cakes. But if so, it could not be said that they were placed on the table, which is expressly affirmed. Wherefore it is certain that they were of such shape, proportion, and measures, as might fitly be placed on the table within the border; _and more we know not of them.
These cakes were renewed every Sabbath, in the morning; the renovation of them being part of the peculiar worship of the day. The manner of it, as also of the making of them, is described, Lev. xxiy. 5-9. And because the new bread was to be brought in and
‘immediately placed in the room of that which was taken away, it is called absolutely 7220 pnp —_« the continual bread,” Num. iv. 7. For God says it was to be before him TA, “jugiter,’ Exod. xxv. 30,—“ always,” or “continually.” Why it is called 020 Of?, “the bread of faces,” there is great inquiry. One of the Targums renders it “inward bread;” for the word is used sometimes for that which looks inward; the LXX., dprovs évwiovs, “ present bread,” or “ bread presented.” Many think they were so called because they were set forth before the faces of the priests, and stood in their view when they first entered the tabernacle. But the reason of it is plain in the text: ‘BD D2 one —« the shew-bread before my face,” saith God. They were presented before the Lord as a memorial, twelve of them, in answer to the twelve tribes of Israel. The Jews think they were called “bread of faces,” because being made in an oblong