And we may see herein both the obstinacy and miserable state thereon of the present Jews. The law doth plainly declare, that without atonement by blood there is no remission of sins to be ob- tained. This they expect by the sacrifices of the law, and their fre- quent repetition; not by any thing which was more perfect, and which they did represent. But all these they have been utterly deprived of for many generations; and therefore must all of them, on their own principles, die in their sins and under the curse. The woful, superstitious follies whereby they endeavour to supply the want of those sacrifices, are nothing but so many evidences of their obstinate blindness.
And it is hence also evident, that the superstition of the church of Rome in their mass, wherein they pretend to offer, and every day
VOL. XXIII. 28
ee 43-4 AN EXPOSITION OF THE ~ [owap. x. to repeat, a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead, doth evidently demonstrate that they disbelieve the efficacy of | the one sacrifice of Christ, as once offered, for the expiation of sin. For if it be so, neither can it be repeated, nor any other used for that end, if we believe the apostle.
The remaining words of this verse confirm the argument bitched on, namely, that those sacrifices would have ceased to be offered if they could have made the church perfect; for, saith he, “The wor- — shippers being once purged, they should have had no more con- science of sing” And we must inquire, 1, Who are intended by “the worshippers.” 2, What itis to be “purged.” 3. What is the effect of this purging, in “having no more conscience of sins.” 4 How the Spore proves his intention hereby.
. The “ worshippers,” of Aarpedorres, are the same with of spossp- -xéwevor, the “comers,” in the verse foregoing; and in
ae #7 neither place the priests who offered the sacrifices, but the people for whom they were offered, are intended,
They it was who made use of those sacrifices for the PRE of a ne . Concerning these persons it is supposed, that if the sacrifices
of the law could make them “perfect” then would they have been “purged ;” wherefore xadapiCecdan Is the effect _ of reAsraieas,—to be “purged,” of being “ made perfect.” For the — apostle supposeth the negation of the latter from the negation of the former: ‘If the law did not make them perfect, then were they not purged.’ ere
This sacred nadorpiquée respects either the guilt of sin or the filth of it. The one is removed by justification, the other by sanctifica- © : tion. The one is the effect of the sacerdotal actings of Christ to- wards God in making atonement for sin; the other of the applisndion Q of the virtue and efficacy of that eoemiien unto our souls and -con- sciences, whereby they are purged, cleansed, renewed, and changed. | It is the purging of the first sort that is here intended; such a purg- ing of sin as takes away the condemning power of sin from the con- science on the account of the guilt of it. ‘If they had been purged, ; (as they would have been had the law made the comers unto its — sacrifices perfect) ;’ that is, if there had been a complete Bs of 4 sin made for them. aay
And the supposition denied hath its qualification and in the word def, “once.” By this word he ex] the eficacy of the sacrifice of Christ, which at once effected what it was designed unto. And it doth not d only the doing of a thing at one time, but the so doing of it it should never more be done.
Kenadazgetveve,
“Asred.
VER. 2, 3.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS, 435
sacrifices which were offered for them the apostle proves from hence, because they had not the necessary effect and consequence of such a purification. For if they had been go purged, eehey os oy would have had no more conscience of sins;” but that diuiev | ite they had so he proves in the next verse, from the legal 7/0 duap- recognition that was made of them every year. And se
if they had had no more conscience of sins, there would have been no need of offering sacrifices for their expiation any more.
(1.) The introduction of the assertion is by the particles da ré, “because that;” which direct unto the argument that is in the words, ‘ “ they would have ceased to be offered,” because their end would have been accomplished, and so themselves taken away.’
(2.) On the supposition made, there would have been an altera- tion made in the state of the worshippers. When they ,_ came unto the sacrifices, they came with conscience of ia sin. ‘This is unavoidable unto a sinner before expiation and atone- ment be made for it. Afterwards, if they were purged, it should be so no more with them; they should no more have conscience of sin. “They should no more have conscience of sins;” or rather, “they should not any more” (or “ further”) “have any con- science of sins;” or, “they should have no conscience of sins any more.” The meaning of the word is singu- larly well expressed in the Syriac translation: “They should have no conscience agitating, tossing, disquieting, perplexing for sins;’ no conscience judging and, condemning their persons for the guilt of sin, so depriving them of solid peace with God. It is conscience with respect unto the guilt of sin, as it binds over the sinner unto punishment in the judgment of God. Now this is not to be mea- sured by the apprehension of the sinner, but by the true causes and grounds of it. Now these lie herein alone, that sin was not per- fectly expiated; for where this is not, there must be a conscience of