2. That the things instanced in do comprise a great part of the Levitical institutions; and his assertion concerning them may, by a parity of reason, be extended unto them all. For to render his description of them comprehensive, the apostle (1.) Expresseth them in a particular enumeration of the heads whereunto they might be reduced, “ Meats and drinks, and divers washings.” And then, (2.) To show that he intends all things of an alike nature with them, he adds the general nature of them all,—they were “ carnal ordi- nances:’
(1.) res great part of the Levitical religious observances may be reduced unto these heads of “ meats and drinks, and divers wash- ings.” Laws and institutions were multiplied about these things; what they might eat, and what they might not; what was clean, and what was unclean unto that end; what they might drink, and what vessels defiled all liquors; what were to be their eatings and drinkings, and when upon their peace-offering, and at thew solemn feasts; their great variety of washings, of the priests, of the people, of their garments, and their flesh, stated and occasional, do take up a great part of the entire system of their ordinances. And as laws’ were multiplied concerning these things, so many of them were en- forced with very severe penalties. Hence they were difficultly to be learned, and always impossible to be observed. The Mishna and Talmud—that is, the whole religion of the present Jews—consist almost wholly in scrupulous inquiries, and endless determinations, or rather conjectures, about these things and their circumstances.
(2.) All the laws concerning these things were carnal, “ carnal ordinances;” such as, for the matter, manner of performance, and end of them, were carnal. This being their nature, it evidently follows that they were instituted only or a time, ea were so far from being able themselves to perfect the state of the church, as that they were not consistent with that perfect state of spiritual things which God would introduce, and had promised so to do.
The scope and design of the apostle being thus fixed, the coherence and interpretation of the words will not be so difficult as at first view they may appear. .
Mévoy éx? Bpdwaor,— Only in meats and drinks,” ete. Our trans-
VER. 9, 10.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS, 253
lators observing the sense elliptical, have supplied it with “which stood,”—“ which stood only in meats and drinks.” And that sup- plement may give a double sense:—1. It may respect the substance of the things spoken of. “ Which,” relates to “ gifts and sacrifices.” And so the sense intended is, that they consisted “in meats and drinks, and divers washings.” And this was the natural substance of them. ‘They consisted in such things as might be eaten and drunk, being duly prepared, as flesh, flour, salt, oil, and wine. Hence were they called meat and drink-offermgs. And they had wash- ings also that belonged unto them, as the washing of the inwards, Exod. xxix. 17; and of the burnt-ofterings peculiarly, Lev. i.9, 13; of the hands and feet of the priests, Exod. xxx. 18, 19; and of the leper, Lev. xiv. 9. Howbeit it cannot be said that the gifts and sacrifices, as they were such, did consist in these things, though in them things of this nature were offered unto God. Wherefore the supplement of, “ which stood,” cannot be admitted in that sense. 2. It may respect the conswmmation of these gifts and sacrifices, or the cele- bration of the whole service that belonged unto them, and all their necessary circumstances or consequents: ‘ which stood in these things; that is, which were accompanied with them, and not per- fected without them.
The argument in the words is to prove the insufficiency of the gifts and sacrifices of the law unto the end mentioned, of perfecting conscience before God. And this is evidenced by the consideration of their necessary adjuncts, or what belonged unto them, and were inseparable from them. It is not said that these “ gifts and sacri- fices” were only meats and drinks, and so things of no value: for neither doth the apostle treat of the old institutions with such con- tempt, nor would the truth of his assertion have been evident unto the Hebrews; but he argues unto a discovery of their use and end from the things that did always accompany them, and were inse- parable from them, For those by whom they were offered were obliged, by the same divine institution, at the same time unto sundry “meats and drinks, and divers washings;” which proves both the gifts and sacrifices to have been of the same kind, and to have had respect unto carnal things, as they had. For if those gifts and sacri- fices had an immediate effect on the consciences of men unto their purification before God, by any virtue inherent in them, whence is it that the observances which by the same law accompanied them were only about “meats and drinks, and divers washings?” And this sense is not to be refused.
But whereas there is an ellipsis in the connection of the words, it may be otherwise supplied. or having mentioned the “ gifts and sacrifices” of the law, the apostle makes an addition unto them of the remaining institutions and ceremonies of