Thirdly, Concerning all these things it is affirmed, that they were “imposed” on the people,—éaixeiueva, There is a diffi- culty in the syntax of this word, which all interpreters take notice of. If it refers unto the substantives immediately fore- going, Sumac xa? xowaos, etc. it agrees not with them in case; if unto Svofas in the other verse, it agrees not with it in gender. And the apostle had before adjoined unto it a participle of the feminine gender,—évvéuevas, Some think that the letter iota is added unto
Kai.
"Erineimeva.
256 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. Ix.
the first word, or taken from the latter, so that originally they were both of the same gender. But whereas the apostle had put together dapa xed Svoiag, the one of the neuter, the other of the feminine gender, he might apply his adjectives either to one or both) without offence to grammar. Yet I rather judge that in this word he had respect unto all the things whereof he had discoursed from the very beginning of the chapter. Concerning them all he declares that they were thus “imposed ;” and so the use of the word in the neuter gender is proper.
Many judge that there is an objection anticipated in these words. For upon the description of the nature and use of the tabernacle, with all its furniture and services, he declares that they could not all of them, nor any of them, perfect the worshippers that attended unto them. Hereon it might be well inquired, ‘To what purpose, then, were they appointed? unto what end did they serve?’ Here- unto he replies, ‘ That they were never designed unto perpetual use, but only imposed on the people unto the time of reformation.’ But whether there be a respect unto any such objection or no, he plainly declares their use and duration according unto the mind of God; which were such as their nature did require. And hereby also he ~ confirms his argument of their insufficiency unto the great end of perfecting, sanctifying, or consecrating the state of the church. And hereof there are two evidences in these words:—
1. They were things imposed; that is, on the people under the law. They were laid on them asa burden. The word is properly “incumbentia,” lying on them; that is, as a burden. There was a weight in all these legal rites and ceremonies, which is called a “yoke,” and too heavy for the people to bear, Acts xv. 10. And if the imposition of them be principally intended, as we render the word, “ imposed,” it respects the bondage they were brought into by them. Men may have a weight lying on them, and yet not be brought into bondage thereby. But these things were so imposed on them as that they might feel their weight, and groan under the burden of it. Of this bondage the apostle treats at large in the epistle unto the Galatians. And it was impossible that those things should perfect a church-state, which in themselves were such a bur- den, and effective of such a bondage.
2. As unto the duration assigned unto them, they were thus im- posed pexp! xoupot,—for a determined limited, season. They were never designed to continue for ever. And this is the great controversy which we have at this day with the Jews. The principal foundation of their present unbelief is, that the law of Moses is eternal, and that the observation of its rites and institutions is to be continued unto the end of the world. The con- trary hereunto the apostle had evidently proved in the foregoing
Meyp) xaspav.
VER. 9, 10.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 257
chapters. Whereas, therefore, he had undeniably demonstrated that they were not to be of perpetual use in the church, nor could ever effect that state of perfection which God designed unto it, he now declares that there was a certain determinate season fixed in the - purpose and counsel of God for their cessation and removal. And this he describes in the last word.
This was the season dvpidcews: “correction,” say some; “ direc- tion,” others; we, “of reformation,” restraining the word unto the things spoken of, and retaining its usual signi- fication,-most improperly. For “reformation” is the amendment and reduction of any thing in the church unto its primitive institu- tion, by abolishing and taking away the abuses that have crept into it, or corrupt additions that have been made unto it; but nothing of that nature is here intended. Many such seasons there were under the old testament, wherein the things belonging unto the worship of God were so reformed; but now not the reduction of the tabernacle and its services unto its first institution is intended, but its utter re- moval and taking away out of the service of God in the church. But if respect be had unto the whole state of the church in general, and what God designed unto it, taking the word “ reformation” in a uni- versal sense, for the introduction of a new animating form and life, with new means and ways of their expression and exercise in new ordinances of worship, the word may be of use in this place.
Those who render it, “of correction,” are no less out of the way. For “ correction” might be applied unto the abuses that had crept