From these suppositions the argument is firm and stable; and there are two parts of it: 1. That as the ordinances of old, being carnal, had an efficacy unto their proper end, to purify the unclean as to the flesh; so the sacrifice of Christ hath a certain efficacy unto its proper end, namely, the “purging of our conscience from dead works.” The force of this inference depends on the relation that was between them in the appointment of God. 2. That there was a greater efficacy, and that which gave a greater evidence of itself, inthe sacrifice of Christ, with respect unto its proper end, than there was in those sacrifices and ordinances, with respect unto their proper end: “How much more!” And the reason hereof is, because all their efficacy depended on a mere arbitrary institution. In themselves, that is, in their own nature, they had neither worth, value, nor efficacy,—no, not even as unto those ends whereunto they were by divine institution designed: but in the sacrifice of Christ, ' who is therefore here said to “offer himself unto God through the eternal Spirit,” there is an innate glorious worth and efficacy, which, suitably unto the rules of eternal reason and righteousness, will accomplish and procure its effects.
Ver. 18.—There are two things in this verse, which are the ground from whence the apostle argueth and maketh his inference in that which follows: 1. A proposition of the sacrifices and services of the law which he had respect unto. 2. An assignation of a cer- tain efficacy unto them.
The sacrifices of the law he refers unto two heads: 1. “The blood of bulls and of goats.” 2. “The ashes of an heifer.” And the dis- tinction is, 1. From the matter of them; 2. The manner of their performance. For the manner of their performance, the blood of bulls and goats was “ offered,’ which is supposed and included; —the ashes of the heifer were “ sprinkled,” as it is expressed. 1. The matter of the first is “ the blood of bulls and of goats.” The same, say some, with the “goats and calves” mentioned in the verse foregoing. So generally do the expositors of the Roman church; and that because their transla-
Tadpuv xar rpayay.
288 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP. Ix.
tion reads “ hircorum et vitulorum,” contrary unto the original text. And some instances they give of the same signification of wieywv and ratpw. But the apostle had just reason for the alteration of his expression. Jor in the foregoing verse he had respect only unto the anniversary sacrifice of the high priest, but here he enlargeth the subject unto the consideration of all other expiatory sacrifices under the law; for he joins unto the “blood of bulls and of goats” the “ashes of an heifer,” which were of no use in the anniversary sacrifice. Wherefore he designed in these words summarily to ex- press all sacrifices of expiation and all ordinances of purification that were appointed under the law. And therefore the words in the close of the verse, expressing the end and effect of these ordi- nances, “sanctifieth the unclean unto the purifying of the flesh,” are not to be restrained unto them immediately foregoing, “the ashes of an heifer sprinkled;” but an equal respect is to be had unto the other sort, or “the blood of bulls and of goats.”
The Socinian expositor, in his entrance into that wresting of this text wherein he labours in a peculiar manner, denies that the water of sprinkling is here to be considered as typical of Christ, and that because it is the anniversary sacrifice alone which is intended, wherein it was of no use. Yet he adds immediately, that in itself it was a type of Christ; so wresting the truth against his own con- victions, to force his design. But the conclusion is strong on the other hand; because it was a type of Christ, and is so here con- sidered, whereas it was not used in the great anniversary sacri- fice, it is not that sacrifice alone which the apostle hath respect unto.
Wherefore by “bulls and goats,’ by a usual synecdoche, all the several kinds of clean beasts, whose blood was given unto the people to make atonement withal, are intended. So is the matter of all sacrifices expressed, Ps. ]. 13, “ Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?” Sheep are contained under goats, being all beasts of the flock.
And it is the “blood ” of these bulls and goats which is proposed as the first way or means of the expiation of sin, and purification under the law. For it was by their blood, and that as offered at the altar, that atonement was made, Lev. xvii. 11. Purification was also made thereby, even by the sprinkling of it.
2. The second thing mentioned unto the same end, is “the ashes of
seeds; x. 20 heifer,” and the use of them; which was by “sprink- pdrews pavri- ling.’ The institution, use, and end of this ordinance, Ee are described at large, Num. xix. And an eminent type of Christ there was therein, both as unto his suffering and the continual efficacy of the cleansing virtue of his blood in the church. It would too much divert us from the present argument, to consider