lu-ra11p@6,i I{ li.u8,v,las, though ho now lives jeot of the Divine and human in Obrist, h owclµ,oa e,oii" (2 Cor. xiii. 4). The latter The following thoughts may, however, aid part of the verse corresponds in meaning solution. That Christ, in his humau ne.ture, with eh. ii. 18, but with further delineation partook of all the original e.ffeotions of of the temptation undergone by Christ. hum&nity-hope, fear, desire, joy, grief, The concluding xc,,plr a.µ.a.p-rlar (best taken indignation, shrinking from suffering, e.nd in connection with ,ca(J' tlµo,&.,..,,-ra, which it the like-is apparent, not only from his life, immedia,tely follows, rather than with ,ca-ra. but also from the fa.ot that his assumption ..-&11-ra) ii! not a categorical assertion of of our humanity would have otherwise been Christ's sinlessness, though it implies it, incomplete. Such affections are not in them- but an exclusion of the idea of siu from-the selves sinful; they only a.re so when. under likeness spoken of. His temptation was temptation, any of them become inordinate, after the likeness of ours, " apart from sin," and serve as motives to transgression of or "sin except." For similar expressions, duty. He, in virtue of his Divine person- though not with definite reference to temp- ality, could not through them be seduced tation, cf. eh. ix. 28 ; vii. 26. But how is into sin ; but it does not follow that he the exception of sin to be understood ? Is could not, in his human nature, feel their it that, though, like us, tempted, he, unlike power to seduce, or rather the power of the us, resisted temptation? Or is it that his tempter to seduce through them, and thus sinless nature was incapable of being even have personal experience of man's tempta- solicited by sin? Now, the verb ..-,,pcl(w tion. St.John says of one " bom of God" that means sometimes " to tempt to sin," as Satan he "doth not commit sin; for his seed or our own lusts tempt us ( cf. I Cor. vii. 5; reme.ineth in him, and he cannot sin, because I Thess. iii. 5; J!\S. i. 13, etc.); and also he is born of God" (1 John iii. 9). He "to pro'l'c," "to try," "to test faithfulness," does not mean that the regenerate Christi11n a.s in l Cor. x. 13 ; eh. xi. 37, etc., in which is not exposed to, and does not feel, tho sense, with reference especially to afflictive power of temptation; only that, so far forth tria.iil, the noun wEtpauµbs is commonly used as he lives in the new life from God, he is (cf. Luke viii. 13; xxi.i. 18; Acts :x.x. 19; proof against it; he gives no internal assent Gal iv. 14; I Pet. iv. 12; Jas. i. 12). That to the seduction of the tempter ; and so Christ was not only subjected to ..-e,pauµbs "that wicked one toucheth him not" (ver. in this latter sense, but was also directly 18). What is thus said of one " born of assailed by the tempter to sin (d ..-e,p&(wv), God" may be saicl much more, and without appears from the Gospel record. But here any qualification, of the Son of Go<l, without comes in a difficulty. There can, we con- denying that he too experienced the power ceive, be no real temptation where there is of temptation, though altogether proof no liability to the sin suggested by tempta- against it. Bengel says, •• Quomodo autem, tion, still less where there is no possibility sine peccaw tente.tus, compe.ti potest tentatis of sinning. But can we imagine any such cum peccato, In intellectu multo e.crius liability, or even possibility, in the case of anima salvatoris percepit imagines tentantes the Dh-ine e.nd Sinless One ? If not, wherein quam nos infirmi: in voluntate tam celeriter did the temptation consist? How could it incursum ea.rum retudit quam ignie e.qum be e.t e.ll like ours, or one through his own guttulam sibi objeotam. Expertus est experience of which he can sympathize with igitur qua. virtute sit opus 0.d tentationes us ? It was for maintaining, on the strength vincendas. Compati potest nam et sine of snch considerations, the theoretic pecce.- peccato, et ta.men vere est tento.tus." bility of Christ, that Irving was expelled as Ver. 16.-Let us therefore come boldly heretical from the Presbyterian communion. (literally, with boldness) unto the throne of TLe question has undoubtedly its 6erions grace, that we may obte.in mero:,, and 11nd difficulties in common with the whole sub- grace to help in time of need.
HOMILETICS. Vera. 1-ll.-77ie gospel re8t. In this passage the writer explains what is to be understood by the "rest" to which God had invited his ancient people, and urges the Hebrews of his own day to strive to attain it as the most Divine of all blessings. I. THE BEST OF GoD. "His rest" (ver. 1); "my rest'' (vers. 3, 5). Rest belongs essentially to God, for he is all-perfect and self-harmonious. Being infinite in purity and love, in knowledge and power, he is the God of peace, a.na dwells in undisturbed repose. The rest of God is mirrored in the institution of the sabbath (ver. 4), which commemorates his satisfaction at the close of his world-making, when be saw that his works " answered his great idea," and were " very good." God's own sabbath reat "is CII, IV, 1-16,] THE EPISTLE 'fO THE HEBHEWS. 115