‘sin, that is, disquieting, judging, condemning for sin.
4, The apostle speaks on the one side and the other of them, who were really interested in the sacrifices whereunto they might trust for the expiation of sin. The way hereof, as unto them of old, and the legal sacrifices, was the due attendance unto them, and performance of them according unto God’s institution. Hence are the persons so interested called the “comers” to them, and the “ worshippers.” The way and means of our interest in the sacrifice of Christ are by faith only. In this state it often falls out that true believers have a conscience judging and condemning them for sin, no less than they
had under the law; but this trouble and power of conscience doth not _ arise from. hence, that sin is not perfectly expiated by the sacrifice ~ of Christ, but only from an apprehension that they have not a due A
Ain v6
Mndsuiay 4. ew ovyelonowy,
436 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [ CHAP. X.
interest in that sacrifice and the benefits of it. Under the old testa- ment they questioned not their due interest in their sacrifices, which depended on the performance of the rites and ordinances of service belonging unto them; but their consciences charged them with the guilt of sin, through an apprehension that their sacrifices could not perfectly expiate it. And this they found themselves led unto by God’s institution of their repetition; which had not been done if they could ever make the worshippers perfect.
It is quite otherwise as unto conscience for sin remaining in be- lievers under the new testament; for they have not the least sense of fear concerning any insufficiency or imperfection in the sacrifice whereby it is expiated, God hath ordered all things concerning it so as to satisfy the consciences of all men in the perfect expiation of sin by it; only they who are really purged by it may be in the dark sometimes as unto their personal interest in it.
But it may be objected, ‘That if the sacrifices neither by their native efficacy, nor by the frequency of repetition, could take away sin, so as that they who came unto God by them could have peace of conscience, or be freed from the trouble of a continual condem- natory sentence in themselves, then was there no true, real peace with God under the old testament, for other way of attaining it there was none. But this is contrary unto innumerable testimonies of Scripture, and the promises of God made then unto the church.’ In answer hereunto, I say, The apostle did not, nor doth in these
words, declare what they did and could, or could not attain unto_
under the old testament; only what they could not attain by the means of their sacrifices (so he declares it in the next verse); for
in them “remembrance is made of sins.” But in the use of them,
and by their frequent repetition, they were taught to look conti- nually unto the great expiatory sacrifice, whose virtue was laid up for them in the promise; whereby they had peace with God.
Obs. I. The discharge of conscience from its condemning right — and power, by virtue of the sacrifice of Christ, is the foundation of ©
all other privileges we receive by the gospel. Where this is not, there is no real participation of any other of them.
Obs. II. All peace with God is resolved into a purging atonement —
made for sin: “ Being once purged.”
Obs. III. It is by a principle of gospel light alone that conscience is directed to condemn all sin, and yet to acquit all sinners that are purged. Its own natural light can give it no guidance herein.
Ver, 3,—But in those [sacrifices there is] a remembrance again [made] of sins every year.
It is the latter part of the foregoing assertion, namely, that the worshippers were not purged or perfected by them, in that they
VER. 2, 3.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. ~ 437
had still remaining a conscience for sins, which is proposed unto confirmation; for this being a matter of fact might be denied by the Hebrews. Wherefore the apostle proves the truth of his asser- tion from an inseparable adjunct, of the yearly repetition of these sacrifices, according unto divine institution.
There are four things to be opened in the words: 1 The intro- duction of the reason intended, by an adversative conjunction, dArd, “but.” 2. The subject spoken of; “those sacrifices.” 8. What belonged unto them by divine institution; which is, a renewed remembrance of sin. 4. The seasons of it; it was to be made every year.
1. The note of introduction gives us the nature of the argument insisted on: ‘Had the worshippers been perfect, they would have had no more conscience for sins. But,’ saith he, ‘it was not so with them; for God appoints nothing in vain, yet he had not only appointed the repetition of these sacri- fices, but also that in every repetition of them there should be a re- membrance made of sin, as of that which was yet to be expiated.’
2. The subject spoken of is expressed in these words, év adrass, “in them.” But this relative is remote from the ante- cedent, which is in the first verse, by the interposition of the second, wherein it is repeated, We transfer it hither from the first verse in our translation, “but in those sacrvjfices;” and we supply the defect of the verb substantive by “ there is:” for there is no more in the original than “ but in them a remembrance again