Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

word properly is, "by many parts," "fully," " by several parts at several times," as our translation intimates; yet so that a diversity of parts and degrees, rather than of times and seasons, is intended.

66

Kal Tohuτpóñas. 17, Syr., "in all forms." 'Multisque modis," Vulg. Eras., A. Montan., Beza, "many ways;" or as ours, "divers manners."

99.66

Пára. 1, Syr.," ab initio," "from the beginning." "Olim," the Latin translation, "of old," "formerly," "in times past." Iáha is "olim," "quondam," "pridem," jamdudum,” any time past that is opposed τ åρti, or vy, to that which is present, properly time some good while past, as that was whereof the apostle treats, having ended in Malachi four hundred years before. Tois Tarpά. EN DY, Syr., "with our fathers," " to the fathers."

'ED TOTS πрOPÝTαis. 2, Syr., " in the prophets." So all the Latin translations, "in prophetis."

66

Syr., and in those last ,וַבְּהָלֵין יַמָתָא אַחֲרַיִא

Επ ̓ ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων. days." "Ultimis diebus hisce," "ultimis diebus istis," "in these last days." "Novissime diebus istis," Vulg.,-" last of all in these days." Some Greek copies have ἐπ ̓ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων, “ in extremo dierum istorum, "" in the end of these days." The reason of which variety we shall see afterwards.

'E, Ti, as before, "in the prophets;" not "by his Son," but "in the Son." The emphasis of the expression is necessarily to be retained, as the opening of the words will discover.

Τοὺς αἰῶνας. "Mundos," "secula." ?, Syr., "the ages," " times," "worlds." In the remaining words there is no difficulty, as to the grammatical signification; we shall then read them,1—

1 VARIOUS READINGS.-On the authority of manuscripts ABDEJK, most of the versions, and the majority of the fathers, Tischendorf, in his second edition of the New Testament, inserts axárov in the text. In most critical editions since the time of Bengel, the same reading has been preferred and adopted. Our author himself, to judge from a remark which he makes in the course of exposition, had a decided leaning to it.

EXPOSITION.Π. καὶ πο "Of the two modes of interpreting these words, I rather prefer that which separates them, and gives a distinct meaning to each: 'God, who in ancient times made communications to the fathers by the prophets, in sundry parts and in various ways, has now made a revelation to us by his Son;' i. e., he has completed the whole revelation which he intends to make under the new dispensation by his Son, his Son only, and not by a long-continued series of prophets, as of old."—Stuart. They have been considered merely a rhetorical amplification."-Tholuck. "Ionvuɛpas means, not 'many times,' but manifoldly, in many parts.' The antithesis is not that God has spoken often by the prophets, but only once by his Son; the opposition is between the distribution of the Old Testament revelation among the prophets, and the undivided fulness of the New Testament revelation by Christ." -Ebrard.

66

[ocr errors]

̓Επ ̓ ἐσχ. τῶν ἡμ. "Under the last period, viz., of the Messiah.”—Stuart. "On the confines of the former period, and of the new everlasting epoch; not within the latter, and also not within the former."-Tholuck. "The end of this time, in reference to the y of the Jews, the period of the world which preceded the coming of Christ, whose work was to form the transition from it to the period terminating in the resurrection."- Ebrard. "The period of the gospel, the last dispensation of God.”—Bloomfield.

'E Ti. A specimen of the arbitrary use of the article, for "Ti is monadic: it designates one individual peculiarly distinguished, and the pronoun avrou is omitted after it; on all which accounts, according to theory, the article should be added."-Stuart. "God spake to us by one who was Son,' who stood not in the relation of prophet, but in the relation of Son to him. If it were T Ti, then Christ would be placed as this individual, in opposition to the individuals of the prophets; but as the article is wanting, it is the species that is placed in opposition to the species, although, of course, Christ is the single indi

Ver. 1, 2.-By sundry parts, and in divers manners, God having formerly [or, of old] spoken unto the fathers in the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us in the Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all, by whom also he made the worlds.

The apostle intending a comparison between the Mosaical law and the gospel, referreth it unto two heads,-first, Their revelation and institution, whence the obligation to the observance of the one and the other did arise; and, secondly, Their whole nature, use, and efficacy. The first he enters upon in these words, and premising that wherein they did agree, distinctly lays down the severals wherein the difference between them doth consist; both which were necessary to complete the comparison intended.

That wherein they agree is the principal efficient cause of their revelation, or the prime author from whom they were. This is God. He was the author of the law and gospel. He spake of old "in the prophets," he spake in the last days "in the Son." Neither of them was from men; not one from one principle, and the other from another, both have the same divine original. See 2 Tim. iii. 16; 2 Pet. i. 20, 21. Herein they both agree.

Their difference in this respect, namely, in their revelation, he refers to four heads, all distinctly expressed, saving that some branches of the antithesis on the part of the gospel are only included in the opposite expressions that relate unto the law.

Their difference, first, respects the manner of their revelation, and

vidual of his species."-Ebrard. "Tiós may in this use be considered (like Χριστός, put for Ο Χριστός τοῦ Θεοῦ) as an appellative converted into a sort of proper name."-See Middleton on the Greek article, note Matt. i. 1, and iv. 3; Bloomfield. Kanporóμos. "The Son inherited the world neither by lot nor by he demise of the possessor. Like the Hebrew, of which inherit is only a secondary sense, it means to take into possession in any manner."-Stuart. "The prophets were heralds of the promised future inheritance; Christ is the heir himself. . . . The principal idea is, not that of a possession which any one receives through the death of another, but a possession which he on his part can transfer as an inheritance to his posterity; consequently a permanent possession, over which he has full authority."-Ebrard. "Kai connects a new thought with what precedes; the same being who, according to his divine-human nature, shall possess all things in the world, is also, according to his divine nature, the author of all things."-Tholuck. "Al must necessarily signify the world. This is decisively shown by the parallel passage, Heb. xi. 3, and likewise by that in the Epistle to the Colossians, i. 15-17, and Qέρwy тà Tάvτa in verse 3."-Tholuck. TRANSLATIONS.-Π. καὶ πο "Often, and in various ways."—Stuart. many portions, and in many ways."-Craik. Τοὶς πατ. "To our fathers."-De Wette. Πάλ. "Since primeval times."-Tholuck.

66

"In ancient times."-Stuart.

Επ' ἐσχ. κ. τ. λ. "In the end of these days."-Conybeare and Howson. 'E, T. "In the person of the Son."-Conybeare and Howson.

Κλ.

"Lord of all things."-Stuart. Αιών. "The world."—Stuart.

son.-ED.

66

"In

"The universe."-Conybeare and How

that in two particulars:-1. The revelation of the will of God under the law was given out by "divers parts;" that under the gospel at once, or in one dispensation of grace and truth. 2. That "in divers manners; "this one way only, by the Spirit dwelling in the Lord Christ in his fulness, and by him communicated unto his apostles.

Secondly, The times and seasons of their revelation. That of the law was made "of old," "formerly," "in times past; " this of the gospel "in these last days."

Thirdly, The persons to whom the revelation of them was made. That was to the "fathers," this to "us."

Fourthly, and principally, The persons by whom these revelations were made. That was by "the prophets;" this by "the Son." God spake then in the prophets; now he hath spoken in the Son.

The whole stress of the apostle's argument lying on this last instance, omitting the prosecution of all the other particulars, he enters upon the further description of this immediate revealer of the gospel in whom God spake, the Son, and lays down in general, 1. The authority committed unto him,-God made him "heir of all;" 2. The ground and equity of committing that great power and trust unto him, in these words, "By whom also he made the worlds:" whereby he opens his way to the further declaration of his divine and incomparable excellencies, wherein he is exalted far above all or any that were employed in the revelation or administration of the law of Moses, and the holy worship instituted thereby.

Ο Θεός.

All these particulars must be opened severally, that we may see the intendment of the apostle, and the force of his argument in the whole; and some of them must necessarily be somewhat largely insisted on, because of their influence into the ensuing discourse. That wherein the law and gospel do both agree is, that God was the author of them both. About this there was no difference as to the most of them with whom the apostle treated. This he takes for granted. For the professing Jews did not adhere to Mosaical institutions because God was their author, not so of the gospel; but because they were given from God by Moses in such a manner as never to be changed or abrogated. This the apostle lays down as an acknowledged principle with the most, that both law and gospel received their original from God himself; proving also, as we shall see in the progress of our discourse, to the conviction of others, that such a revelation as that of the gospel was foretold and expected, and that this was it in particular which was preached unto them.

Now, God being here spoken of in distinction from the Son expressly, and from the Holy Ghost by evident implication, it being he by whom he spake in the prophets, that name is not taken oordws, substantially, to denote primarily the essence or being of

the Deity, and each person as partaking in the same nature, but Taris, denoting primarily one certain person, and the divine nature only as subsisting in that person. This is the person of the Father; as elsewhere the person of the Son is so signified by that name, Acts xx. 28; John i. 1; Rom. ix. 5; 1 Tim. iii. 16; 1 John iii. 16, v. 20;—as also the person of the Holy Spirit, Acts v. 3, 4; 1 Cor. xii. 6, 11; Col. ii. 2. So that God, even the Father, by the way of eminency, was the peculiar author of both law and gospel; of which afterwards. And this observation is made necessary from hence, even because he immediately assigns divine properties and excellencies unto another person, evidently distinguished from him whom he intends to denote by the name God in this place; which he could not do did that name primarily express, as here used by him, the divine nature absolutely, but only as it is subsisting in the person of the Father.

From this head of their agreement the apostle proceeds to the instances of the difference that was between the law and the gospel as to their revelation from God; of which, a little inverting the order of the words, we shall first consider that which concerns the times of their giving out, sundry of the other instances being regulated thereby.

Πάλαι.

For the first, or the revelation of the will of God under the old testament, it was, "of old." God spake ráı, “formerly," or "of old." Some space of time is denoted in this word which had then received both its beginning and end, both which we may inquire after. Take the word absolutely, and it comprises the whole space of time from the giving out of the first promise unto that end which was put unto all revelations of public use under the old testament. Take it as relating to the Jews, and the rise of the time expressed in it is the giving of the law by Moses in the wilderness. And this is that which the apostle hath respect unto. He had no contest with the Jews about the first promise, and the service of God in the world built thereon, nor about their privilege as they were the sons of Abraham; but only about their then present church privilege and claim by Moses' law. The proper date, then, and bound of this ráha, “of old,” is from the giving out of Moses' law, and therein the constitution of the Judaical church and worship, unto the close of public prophecy in the days of Malachi. From thence to the days of John Baptist God granted no extraordinary revelation of his will, as to the standing use of the whole church. So that this dispensation of God speaking in the prophets continued for the space of twenty-one jubilees, or near eleven hundred years. That it had been now ceased for a long time the apostle intimates in this word, and that agreeably to the confessed principles of the Jews; whereby also he confirmed his own of

the coming of the Messiah, by the reviving of the gift of prophecy, as was foretold, Joel ii. 28, 29.

And we may, by the way, a little consider their thoughts in this matter; for, as we have observed and proved before, the apostle engageth with them upon their own acknowledged principles. "The Jews, then, generally grant, unto this day, that prophecy for the public use of the church was not bestowed under the second temple after the days of Malachi, nor is to be expected until the coming of Elias. The delusions that have been put upon them by impostors they now labour all they can to conceal; and they are of late, by experience, made incredulous towards such pretenders as in former ages they have been brought to much misery by. Now, as their manner is to fasten all their conjectures, be they true or false, on some place, word, or letter of the Scripture, so have they done this assertion also. Observing or supposing the want of sundry things in the second house, they pretend that want to be intimated, Hag. i. 7, 8, where God, promising to glorify himself in that temple, the word 72, 'I will glorify,' is written defectively, without л, as the Keri notes. That letter, being the numeral note of five, signifies, as they say, the want of five things in that house. The first of these was, s D', the ark and cherubim;' the second, non pv,-the anointing oil;' the third, nayon,-'the wood of disposition,' or 'perpetual fire;' the fourth, Don '-'Urim and Thummim;' the fifth, the Holy Ghost,' or 'Spirit of prophecy.' They are not, indeed, all agreed in this enumeration. The Talmud in D, Joma, cap. v., reckons them somewhat otherwise:-1. The ark, with the propitiatory and cherubim; 2. The fire from heaven, which answers the third, or wood of disposition, in the former order; 3. The divine Majesty, in the room of the anointing oil; 4. The Holy Ghost; 5. Urim and Thummim. Another order there is, according to Rabbi Bechai, Comment. in Pentateuch., sect. ; who places the anointing oil distinctly, and confounds the ", or 'divine Majesty,' with pm, the Holy Ghost,' contradicting the Gemara. The commonly approved order is that of the author of Aruch, in the root

,

[ocr errors]

“78 317) MIÐ) -'the ark, propitiatory, and cherubim, one.' ",the divine Majesty, the second thing.' “wbw mnia) Ninw pп m,—the Holy Ghost, which is prophecy,

the third.'

[ocr errors]

D'DINI D'IN,—'Urim and Thummim, the fourth thing.' “DA D'DWN ID wx,-'fire from heaven, the fifth thing.' "But as this argument is ridiculous, both in general in wire-drawing conclusions from letters deficient or redundant in writing, and in particular in reference to this word, which in other places is written as in this, as Num. xxiv. 11, 1 Sam. ii. 30, Isa. lxvi. 5; so

« AnteriorContinuar »