Hebrews 10:5-10

The provision that God made to supply the defect and insufficiency of legal sacrifices, as unto the expiation of sin, peace of conscience with himself, and the sanctification of the souls of the worshippers, is declared in this context; for the words contain the blessed undertaking of our Lord Jesus Christ to do, fulfill, perform, and suffer, all things required in the will, and by the wisdom, holiness, righteousness, and authority of God, unto the complete salvation of the church, with the reasons of the efficacy of what he so did and suffered unto that end. And we must consider both the words themselves, so far especially as they consist in a quotation out of the Old Testament, and the validity of his inferences from the testimony which he chooseth to insist on unto this purpose.

Hebrews 10:5. Διὸ εἰσερχόμενος εἰς τὸν κόσμον, λέγει, Θυσίαν καὶ προσφοράν οὐκ ἠθέλησας, σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι· ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ὑμαρτίας οὐκ εὐδόκησας. Τότε ει῏πον, ᾿Ιδοὺ ἥχω (ἐν κεφαλίδι βιβλίου γέγραπται τερὶ ἐμοῦ) τοῦ ποιῆσαι, ὁ Θεὸς, τὸ θέλημά σου. ᾿Ανώτερον λέγων, Οτι θυσίαν καὶ προσφορὰν καὶ ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας οὐκ ἠθέλησας, οὐδὲ εὐδόκησας· (αἱτινεσ κατὰ τὸν νόμον προσφέρονται) τότε εἴρηκεν, ᾿Ιδοὺ ἥκω τοῦ ποιῆσαι, ὁ Θεὸς, τὸ θέλημά σου· ἀναιρεῖ τὸ πρῶτον, ἵνα τὸ δεύτερον στήσῃ· ἐν ᾧ θελήματι ἡγιασμένοι ἐσμὲν διὰ τῆς προσφορᾶς τοῦ σώματος τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐφάπαξ.

Some few differences may be observed in the ancient and best translations.

Διὸ. Vulg. Lat., “ideo quapropter.” Syr., מֶטוּל הָנָא, “for this, for this cause.”

Θυσίαν καὶ προσφοράν, “hostiam et oblationem,” “ sacrificium, victimam.” The Syriac renders the words in the plural number, “sacrifices and offerings.”

Σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι , “aptasti,” “adaptasti mihi,” “praeparasti,” “perfecisti.” “A body hast thou prepared;” that is, ‘fitted for me, wherein I may do thy will.'Syr., פַגְיָא דֵּין אַלְבֶּשְׁתָּנִי, “but thou hast clothed me with a body;” very significantly, as unto the thing intended, which is the incarnation of the Son of God. The Ethiopic renders this verse somewhat strangely: “And when he entered into the world, he saith, Sacrifices and offerings! would not; thy body he hath purified unto me;” making them, as I suppose, the words of the Father.

Οὐκ εὐδόκησας. Vulg., “non tibi placuerant;” reading the preceding words in the nominative case, altering the person and number of the verb Syr., שֵׁאלְתְ לָא, “thou didst not require,” “non approbasti;” that is, “they were not well pleasing,” nor “accepted with God,” as unto the end of the expiation of sin.

᾿Ιὸοὺ ἥκω. “Ecce adsum,” “venio.”

Οὐκ ἠθέλησας, οὐδὲ εὐδόκησας. The Syriac omitteth the last word, which yet is emphatical in the discourse.

Τότε εἵρηκεν. Vulg., “tunc dixi,” “then I said;” that is, ει῏πον, for “he said” for the apostle doth not speak these words, but repeats the words of the psalmist.

The reading of the words out of the Hebrew by the apostle shall be considered in our passage. [4]

[4] EXPOSITION. Five views have been taken in regard to the difference between the Hebrew original and the LXX. rendering, as given in verse 5. 1. Even before the days of Kennicott some resolved the difficulty on the hypothesis of a corruption of the Hebrew text. Kennicott conjectured that אָזְנַיִם כָּיִיתָ was a corruption for אָז גֵוָה נָתַתָּ, “Then a body thou hast given.” Since אָז, however, is an adverb of time, it cannot be taken in the sense of “therefore.” Pierce adopts the emendation so far, but leaves the verb as it stands. Pye Smith inclines to this view, and holds that. כָיָה signifies “to prepare.” 2. Bleek supposes a corruption in the LXX., σῶμα, instead of ω῏τα, or ὤτια originally. 3. Rosenmuller, with Owen, a synecdoche, “Thou hast opened mine ears;” ‘given a capacity to hear, and therefore to obey thy commands.'4. Michaelis, Storr, Kuinoel, Hengstenberg, and Stuart, paraphrase it somewhat thus, “Thou hast opened, i.e., spoken closely and effectually into mine ears;” ‘I have ears to hear, and I understand the secret meaning of the laws concerning sacrifices. I know that that requires not oxen and goats, but a BETTER SACRIFICE; and for that purpose I present myself.'5. Olshausen and Ebrard adhere to the explanation derived from the boring of the servant's ear, Exodus 21:6. All agree that the meaning is substantially conveyed by the LXX. ED.

Hebrews 10:5. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared [fitted for] me: in burnt-offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, O God; [that I should do thy will.] Above when he said, Sacrifice, and offering, and burnt-offerings, and [offerings] for sin, thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure [therein,] which are offered by the law; then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified,, through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all.]

A blessed and divine context this is, summarily representing unto us the love, grace, and wisdom of the Father; the love, obedience, and suffering of the Son; the federal agreement between the Father and the Son as unto the work of the redemption and salvation of the church; with the blessed harmony between the Old and New Testament in the declaration of these things. The divine authority and wisdom that evidence themselves herein are ineffable, and do cast contempt on all those by whom this epistle hath been called in question; as sundry other passages in it do in a peculiar manner. And it is our duty to inquire with diligence into the mind of the Holy Spirit herein.

As unto the general nature of the arguing of the apostle, it consists in two parts:

First, The introduction of a pregnant testimony out of the Old Testament unto his purpose, Hebrews 10:5-8, and part of the 9th.

Secondly, Inferences from that testimony, asserting and confirming all that he had pleaded for.

In the testimony he produceth we may consider,

1. The manner of its introduction, respecting the reason of what is asserted; “Wherefore.”

2. Who it was by whom the words insisted on were spoken; “He saith.”

3. When he spake them; “When he came into the world.”

4. The things spoken by him in general; which consist in a double antithesis:

(1.) Between the legal sacrifices and the obedience of Christ in his body, Hebrews 10:5;

(2.) Between God's acceptance of the one and the other, with their efficacy unto the end treated of, which must be particularly spoken unto.

FIRST, The introduction of this testimony is by the word “wherefore,” “for which cause,” “for which end.” It doth not give an account why the words following were spoken, but why the things themselves were so ordered and disposed. And we are directed in this word unto the due consideration of what is designed to be proved: and this is, that there was such an insufficiency in all legal sacrifices, as unto the expiation of sin, that God would remove them and take them out of the way, to introduce that which was better, to do that which the law could not do. ‘Wherefore,'saith the apostle, ‘because it was so with the law, things are thus disposed of in the wisdom and counsel of God as is declared in this testimony.'

SECONDLY, Who spake the words contained in the testimony: “He saith.” The words may have a three-fold respect:

1. As they were given out by inspiration, and are recorded in the Scripture. So they were the words of the Holy Ghost, as the apostle expressly affirms of the like words, Hebrews 10:15-16, of this chapter.

2. As they were used by the penman of the psalm, who speaks by inspiration. So they were the words of David, by whom the psalm was composed. But although David spoke or wrote these words, yet is not he himself the person spoken of, nor can any passage in the whole context be applied unto him, as we shall see in particular afterwards. Or if they may be said to be spoken of him, it was only as he bare the person of another, or was a type of Christ. For although God himself doth frequently prefer moral obedience before the sacrifices of the law, when they were hypocritically performed, and trusted unto as a righteousness, unto the neglect of diligence in moral duties; yet David did not, would not, ought not, in his own name and person, to reject the worship of God, and present himself with his obedience in the room thereof, especially as unto the end of sacrifices in the expiation of sin. Wherefore,

3. The words are the words of our Lord Jesus Christ: “When he cometh into the world, he saith.” And it is a vain inquiry, when in particular he spake these words; unto whom or where any mention is made of them in the story of him. It is no way needful that they should be literally or verbally pronounced by him. But the Holy Ghost useth these words in his name, as his, because they declare, express, and represent his mind, design, and resolution, in His coming into the world; which is the sole end and use of words. On the consideration of the insufficiency of legal sacrifices (the only appearing means unto that purpose) for the expiation of sin and the making of reconciliation with God, that all mankind might not eternally perish under the guilt of sin, the Lord Christ represents his readiness and willingness to undertake that work, with the frame of his heart and mind therein.

The ascription of these words unto the Lord Christ on the reason mentioned, gives us a prospect into,

1. The love of his undertaking for us, when all other ways of our recovery failed, and were disallowed as insufficient;

2. Into the foundation of his undertaking for us, which was the declaration of the will of God concerning the insufficiency of these sacrifices;

3. Into his readiness to undertake the work of redemption, notwithstanding the difficulties that lay in the way of it, and what he was to undergo in the stead of the legal sacrifices.

Obs. 1. We have the solemn word of Christ, in the declaration he made of his readiness and willingness to undertake the work of the expiation of sin, proposed unto our faith, and engaged as a sure anchor of our souls.

THIRDLY, The season of his speaking these words in the manner declared, was on his coming into the world: “Wherefore, coming (or “when he cometh”) “into the world, he saith.” Εἱσερχόμενος, “veniens,” or “venturus;” when he was to enter into the world, when the design of his future coming into the world was declared. So ὁ ἐρχόμενος is, “he that is to come,” Matthew 11:3; and ἔρχεται, John 4:25. That, therefore, may be the sense of the words: upon the first prediction of the future coming of the Son of God into the world, the design, mind, and will wherewith he came, was declared.

Refer the words unto some actual coming of the person spoken of into the world, and various interpretations are given of them. “When he came in sacrifices, typically,” say some. But this seems not to be a word accompanying the first institution of sacrifices; namely, “Sacrifices thou wouldest not have.” “His coming into the world, was his appearance and public showing of himself unto the world, in the beginning of his ministry, as David came out of the wilderness and caves to show himself unto the people as king of Israel,” saith Grotius. But the respect unto David herein is frivolous; nor are those words used with respect unto the kingly office of Christ, but merely as unto the offering himself in sacrifice to God.

The Socinians contend earnestly, that this his coming into the world is his entrance into heaven after his resurrection. And they embrace this uncouth interpretation of the words to give countenance unto their pernicious error, that Christ offered not himself in sacrifice to God in his death, or whilst he was in this world. For his sacrifice they suppose to be metaphorically only so called, consisting in the representation of himself unto God in heaven, after his obedience and suffering. Wherefore they say, that by “the world” which he came into, “the world to come,” mentioned Hebrews 2:5, is intended. But there is nothing sound, nothing probable or specious in this wresting of the words and sense of the Scripture. For,

1. The words in the places compared are not the same. This is κόσμος only; those are οἰκουμένη, and are not absolutely to be taken in the same sense, though the same things may be intended in various respects.

2. Οἰκουμένη is the habitable part of the earth, and can on no pretense be applied unto heaven.

3. I have fully proved on that place, that the apostle in that expression intendeth only the days and times of the Messiah, or of the gospel, commonly called,among the Jews, עולם העתיד, “the world to come;” that new heaven and earth wherein righteousness should dwell But they add, that κόσμος itself is used for heaven, Romans 4:13, Τὸ κληρονόμον, that “he should be the heir of the world;” ‘that is, of heaven, the world above.'But this imagination is vain also. For Abraham's being “heir of the world” is no more but his being the “father of many nations;” nor was there ever any other promise which the apostle should refer unto of his being heir of the world, but only that of his being the father of many nations, not of the Jews on]y, but of the Gentiles also; as the apostle explains it, Romans 4:8-12. Respect also may be had unto the promised Seed proceeding from him, who was to be the “heir of all things.”

That which they intend by his coming into the world, is what himself constantly calleth his leaving of the world, and going out of it. See John 13:1; John 16:28; John 17:11; John 17:13: “I leave the world; I am no more in the world, but these are in the world.” This, therefore, cannot be his coming into the world. And this imagination is contrary, as unto the express words, so to the open design of the apostle; for as he declares his coming into the world to be the season wherein a body was fitted for him, so that which he had to do herein was what he had to do in this world, before his departure out of it, verse 12. Wherefore this figment is contrary unto common sense, the meaning of the words, the design of the place, and other express testimonies of Scripture; and is of no use, but to be an instance how men of corrupt minds can wrest the Scripture for their ends, unto their own destruction.

The general sense of the best expositors, ancient and modern, is, that by the coming of Christ into the world his incarnation is intended. See John 1:11; John 3:16-17; John 3:19; John 6:14; John 9:4; John 9:39; John 11:27; John 12:46; John 16:28. The same with his “coming in the flesh,” his being “made flesh,” his being “manifest in the flesh;” for therein and thereby he came into the world.

Neither is there any weight in the objection of the Socinians unto this exposition of the words; namely, that the Lord Christ at his first coming in the flesh, and in his infancy, could not do the will of God, nor could these words be used of him. For,

1. His coming into the world, in the act of the assumption of our nature, was in obedience unto, and for the fulfilling of the word of God. For God sent him into the world, John 3:16. And “he came not to do his own will, but the will of him that sent him,” John 6:38.

2. His doing the will of God is not confined unto any one single act or duty, but extends itself unto all the degrees and whole progress of what he did and suffered in compliance with the will of God, the foundation of the whole being laid in his incarnation.

But as these words were not verbally and literally spoken by him, being only a real declaration of his design and intention; so this expression of his coming into the world is not to be confined unto any one single act or duty, so as to exclude all others from being concerned therein. It hath respect unto all the solemn acts of the susception and discharge of his mediatory office for the salvation of the church. But if any shall rather judge that in this expression some single season and act of Christ is intended, it can be no other but his incarnation, and his coming into the world thereby; for this was the foundation of all that he did afterwards, and that whereby he was fitted for his whole work of mediation, as is immediately declared. And we may observe,

Obs. 2. The Lord Christ had an infinite prospect of all that he yeas to do and suffer in the world, in the discharge of his office and undertaking. He declared from the beginning his willingness unto the whole of it. And an eternal evidence it is of his love, as also of the justice of God in laying all our sins on him, seeing it was done by his own will and consent.

FOURTHLY, The fourth thing in the words is, what he said. The substance of it is laid down, Hebrews 10:5. Unto which the further explication is added, Hebrews 10:6-7; and the application of it unto the intention of the apostle in those that follow. The words are recorded, Psalms 40:6-8, being indited by the Holy Ghost in the name of Christ, as declarative of his will.

Of the first thing proposed there are two parts:

First, What concerneth the sacrifices of the law.

Secondly, What concerneth himself.

1. The expression of the subject spoken of, that is, זֶבַח וּמִנְחָה; which the apostle renders by θυσία, “sacrifice and offering.” In the next verse, the one of them, namely θυσία , is distributed into עוֹלָה וַחֲמָאָה; which the apostle renders by ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ περὶ ἁμαρτίας , “burnt- offerings,” or “whole burnt-offerings” and “sacrifices for sin.” It is evident that the Holy Ghost in this variety of expressions compriseth all the sacrifices of the law that had respect unto the expiation of sin. And as unto all of them, their order, especial nature, and use, I have treated at large in my exercitations before the first volume of this Exposition (Exerc. 24), whither the reader is referred.

2. Of these sacrifices it is affirmed, that “God would them not,” Hebrews 10:5; and that “he had no pleasure in them,” Hebrews 10:6. The first in the original is לֹא חָפַצְתָּ which the apostle renders by οὐκ ἐθέλησας, “thou wouldest not.” We render it in the psalm, “thou didst not desire.” חָפַצ is “to will,” but always with desire, complacency, and delight. Psalms 51:8, “Behold, חָפַצְתָּ,” “thou desirest, thou wilt,” or “art delighted with truth in the hidden part.” Verse 18, לֹאאּתַחְפֹצ, “thou wouldest not,” “thou desirest not sacrifice.” Genesis 34:19, “He had delight in Jacob's daughter.” Psalms 147:10. So חֵפֶצ, the noun, is “delight,” Psalms 1:2. The LXX. render it generally by ἐθέλω, and θέλω, “to will;” as also the noun by θέλημα. And they are of the same signification, “to will freely, voluntarily, and with delight.” But this sense the apostle doth transfer unto the other word, which he renders by εὐδόκησας, verse 6. In the psalm it is שָׁאָלְתָּ, “thou hast not required.” Εὐδοκέω is “to rest in,” “to approve, “to delight in,” “to be pleased with.” So is it always used in the New Testament, whether spoken of God or men. See Matthew 3:17; Matthew 12:18; Matthew 17:5; Luke 3:22; Luke 12:32; Romans 15:26-27; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 1Co 10:5; 2 Corinthians 5:8; Colossians 1:19, etc. Wherefore if we shall grant that the words used by the apostle be not exact versions of those used in the psalmist, as they are applied the one unto the other, yet it is evident that in both of them the full and exact meaning of both those used by the psalmist is declared; which is sufficient unto his purpose.

All the difficulty in the words may be reduced unto these two inquiries:

(1.) In what sense it is affirmed that “God would not have those sacrifices,” that he “had no pleasure in them,” that “he rested not in them.”

(2.) How was this made known, so as that it might be declared, as it is in this place.

(1.) As unto the first of these we may observe,

[1.] That this is not spoken of the will of God as unto the institution and appointment of these sacrifices; for the apostle affirms that they were “offered according unto the law,” verse 8; namely, which God gave unto the people. God says, indeed, by the prophet unto the people, that “he spake not unto their fathers, nor commanded them in the day that he brought them out. of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offerings and sacrifices,” Jeremiah 7:22. But he speaks not absolutely as unto the things themselves, but unto their manner of the observance of them.

[2.] It is not with respect unto the obedience of the people in their attendance unto them during the economy of the law; for God both required it strictly of them and approved of it in them, when duly performed. The whole law and prophets bear testimony hereunto. And it was the great injunction which he left with the people, when he ceased to grant any more immediate revelations of his will unto the church, Malachi 4:4. And the Lord Christ himself under the Judaical church did observe them.

[3.] God doth frequently reject or disallow them in the people, as they were attended unto and performed by them. But this he did only in the case of their gross hypocrisy, and the two great evils wherewith it was accompanied. The first was, that they did not only prefer the outward observation of them before internal moral obedience, but trusted unto them unto the total neglect of that obedience. See Isaiah 1:12-17. And theother was, that they put their trust in them for righteousness and acceptance with God; about which he deals, Jeremiah 7. Yet neither was this the case under consideration in the psalm; for there is no respect had unto any miscarriages of the people about these sacrifices, but unto the sacrifices themselves.

Wherefore some say that the words are prophetical, and declare what the will of God would be after the coming of Christ in the flesh, and the offering of his sacrifice once for all. Then God would no more require them nor accept them. But yet neither is this suited unto the mind of the Holy Ghost. For,

[1.] The apostle doth not prove by this testimony that they were to cease, but that they could not take away sin whilst they were in force.

[2.] The reason given by the Lord Christ of his undertaking, is their insufficiency during their continuance according to the law.

[3.] This revelation of the will of God made unto the church was actually true when it was made and given, or it was suited to lead them into a great mistake.

The mind of the Holy Ghost is plain enough, both in the testimony itself and in the improvement of it by the apostle. For the legal sacrifices are spoken of only with respect unto that end which the Lord Christ undertook to accomplish by his mediation. And this was the perfect, real expiation of sin, and the justification, sanctification, and eternal salvation of the church, with that perfect state of spiritual worship which was-ordained for it in this world. All these things these sacrifices were appointed to prefigure and represent. But the nature and design of this prefiguration being dark and obscure, and the things signified being utterly hid from them, as unto their especial nature and the manner of their efficacy, many in all ages of the church expected them from these sacrifices; and they had a great appearance of being divinely ordained unto that end and purpose. Wherefore this is that, and that alone, with respect whereunto they are here rejected. God never appointed them unto this end, he never took pleasure in them with reference hereunto; they were insufficient, in the wisdom, holiness, and righteousness of God, unto any such purpose. Wherefore the sense of God concerning them as unto this end, is, that they were not appointed, not approved, not accepted for it.

(2.) It may be inquired, how this mind and will of God concerning the refusal of these sacrifices unto this end might be known, so as that it should be here spoken of, as of a truth unquestionable in the church. For the words, “Thou wouldest not,” “Thou tookest no pleasure,'” do not express a mere internal act of the divine will, but a declaration also of what is not well-pleasing unto God. How then was this declaration made? how came it to be known? I answer,

[1.] The words are the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, considered as to be incarnate for the redemption of the church. As such, he was always in the bosom of the Father, participant of his counsels, especially of those which concerned the church, the children of men, Proverbs 8:22-24, etc. He was therefore always acquainted with all the thoughts and counsels of God concerning the ways and means of the expiation of sin, and so declared what he knew.

[2.] As unto the penman of the psalm, the words were dictated unto him by immediate revelation: which if nothing had been spoken of it or intimated before, had been sufficient for the declaration of the will of God therein; for all revelations of that nature have a beginning when they were first made. But,

[3.] In, by, and together with the institution of all these legal sacrifices, God had from the beginning intimated unto the church that they were not the absolute, ultimate way for the expiation of sin, that he designed or would approve of. And this he did partly in the nature of the sacrifices themselves, which were no way competent or suited in themselves unto this end, it being “impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sin;” partly in giving various intimations first, and then express declaration of his will, that they were only prescribed for a season, and that a time would come when their observance should utterly cease, which the apostle proves, Chapter s 7 and 8; and partly by evidencing that they were all but types and figures of good things to come, as we have at large declared. By these, and sundry other ways of the like kind, God had, in the institution and command of these sacrifices themselves, sufficiently manifested that he did neither design them, nor require them, nor approve of them, as unto this end of the expiation of sin. Wherefore there is in the words no new revelation absolutely, but only a more express declaration of that will and counsel of God which he had by various ways given intimation of before. And we may observe,

Obs. 3. No sacrifices of the law, not all of them together, were a means for the expiation of sin, suited unto the glory of God or necessities of the souls of men. From the first appointment of sacrifices, immediately after the entrance of sin and the giving of the promise, the observation of them in one kind or another spread itself over the whole earth. The Gentiles retained them by tradition, helped on by some conviction on a guilty conscience that by some way or other atonement must be made for sin. On the Jews they were imposed by law. There are no footsteps of light or testimony that those of the former sort, namely, the Gentiles, did ever retain any sense of the true reason and end of their original institution, and the practice of mankind thereon; which was only the confirmation of the first promise by a prefiguration of the means and way of its accomplishment. The church of Israel being carnal also, had very much lost the understanding and knowledge hereof. Hence both sorts looked for the real expiation of sin, the pardon of it, and the taking away of its punishment, by the offering of those sacrifices. As for the Gentiles, “God suffered them to walk in their own ways, and winked at the time of their ignorance.” But as unto the Jews, he had before variously intimated his mind concerning them, and at length by the mouth of David, in the person of Christ, absolutely declared their insufficiency, with his disapprobation of them, as unto the end which they in their minds applied them unto.

Obs. 4. Our utmost diligence, with the most sedulous improvement of the light and wisdom of faith, is necessary in our search into and inquiry after the mind and will of God, in the revelation he makes of them. The apostle in this epistle proves by all sorts of arguments, taken from the scriptures of the Old Testament, from many other things that God had done and spoken, and from the nature of these institutions themselves, as here also by the express words of the Holy Ghost, that these sacrifices of the law, which were of God's own appointment, were never designed nor approved by him as the way and means of the eternal expiation of sin. And he doth not deal herein with these Hebrews on his apostolical authority, and by new evangelical revelation, as he did with the church of the Gentiles; but pleads the undeniable truth of what he asserts from those direct records and testimonies which themselves owned and embraced. Howbeit, although the books of Moses, the Psalms, and the Prophets, were read unto them and among them continually, as they are unto this day, they neither understood nor do yet understand the things that are so plainly revealed in them. And as the great reason hereof is the veil of blindness and darkness that is on their minds, 2 Corinthians 3:13-14; so in all their search into the Scripture they are indeed supinely slothful and negligent. For they cleave alone unto the outward husk or shell of the letter, utterly despising the mysteries of truth contained therein. And so it is at present with the most of men, whose search into the mind of God, especially as unto what concerns his worship, keeps them in ignorance and contempt of it all their days.

Obs. 5. The constant use of sacrifices to signify those things which they could not effect or really exhibit unto the worshippers, was a great part of the bondage that the church was kept in under the old testament. And hereon, as those who were carnal bowed down their backs unto the burden, and their necks unto the yoke, so those who had received the Spirit of adoption, did continually pant and groan after the coming of him in and by whom all was to be fulfilled. So was the law their schoolmaster unto Christ.

Obs. 6. God may in his wisdom appoint and accept of ordinances and duties unto one end, which he will refuse and reject when they are applied unto another. So he doth plainly in these words those sacrifices which in other places he most strictly enjoins. How express, how multiplied are his commands for good works, and our abounding in them! yet when they are made the matter of our righteousness before him, they are as unto that end, namely, of our justification, rejected and disapproved.

Secondly, The first part of verse 5 declares the will of God concerning the sacrifices of the law. The latter contains the supply that God in his wisdom and grace made of the defect and insufficiency of these sacrifices. And this is not any thing that should help, assist, or make them effectual, but somewhat brought in, in opposition unto them, and for their removal. This he expresseth in the last clause of this verse: “But a body hast thou prepared me.” The adversative δέ, “but,” declares that the way designed of God for this end was of another nature than those sacrifices were. But yet this way must be such as should not render those sacrifices utterly useless from their first institution; which would reflect on the wisdom of God by whom they were appointed. For if God did never approve of them, never delight in them, unto what end were they ordained? Wherefore, although the real way of the expiation of sin be in itself of another nature than those sacrifices were, yet was it such as those sacrifices were meet to prefigure and represent unto the faith of the church. The church was taught by them that without a sacrifice there could be no atonement made for sin; wherefore the way of our deliverance must be by a sacrifice. ‘It is so,'saith the Lord Christ; ‘and therefore the first thing God did in the preparation of this new way, was the preparation of a body for me, which was to be offered in sacrifice.'And in the antithesis, intimated in this adversative conjunction, respect is had unto the will of God. As sacrifices were that which he would not unto this end, so this preparation of the body of Christ was that which he would, which he delighted in and was well pleased withal. So the whole of the work of Christ and the effects of it are expressly referred unto this will of God, Hebrews 10:9-10.

And we must first speak unto the apostle's rendering of these words out of the psalmist. They are in the original, אַזְנַיִם כָּרִיתָ לִּי, “mine ears hast thou digged,” “bored,” “prepared.” All sorts of critical writers and expositors have so labored in the resolution of this difficulty, that there is little to be added unto the industry of some, and it were endless to confute the mistakes of others. I shall therefore only speak briefly unto it, so as to manifest the oneness of the sense in both places. And some things must be premised thereunto:

1. That the reading of the words in the psalm is incorrupt, and they are the precise words of the Holy Ghost. Though of late years sundry persons have used an unwarrantable boldness in feigning various lections in the Hebrew text, yet none of any judgment has attempted to conjecture at any word that might be thought to be used in the room of any one of them. And as for those which some have thought the LXX. might possibly mistake, that signify “a body,” as נִדְנהֶ, which sometimes signifies “a body” in the Chaldee dialect, or גְּוִיָּה, there is in neither of them any the least analogy unto אַזְנַיִם, so that they are ridiculously suggested.

2. It doth not seem probable unto me that the LXX. did ever translate these words as they are now extant in all the copies of that translation, Σῶμα δὲ κατηρτίσω μοι. For,

(1.) It is not a translation of the original words, but an interpretation and exposition of the sense and meaning of them; which was no part of their design. (2.) If they made this exposition, they did so either by chance, as it were, or from a right understanding of the mystery contained in them. That they should be cast upon it by a mere conjecture, is altogether improbable; and that they understood the mystery couched in that metaphorical expression (without which no account can be given of the version of the words) will not be granted by them who know any thing of those translators or their translation.

(3.) There was of old a different reading in that translation. For instead of σῶμα, “a body,” some copies have ὠτία, “the ears;” which the Vulgar Latin follows: an evidence that a change had been made in that translation, to comply with the words used by the apostle.

8. The words, therefore, in this place are the words whereby the apostle expressed the sense and meaning of the Holy Ghost in those used in the psalmist, or that which was intended in them. He did not take them from the translation of the LXX., but used them himself, to express the sense of the Hebrew text. For although we should not adhere precisely unto the opinion that all the quotations out of the Old Testament in the-New, which agree in words with the present translation of the LXX., were by the scribes of that translation transferred out of the New Testament into it, which yet is far more probable than the contrary opinion, that the words of the translation are made use of in the New Testament, even when they differ from the original, yet sundry things herein are certain and acknowledged; as,

(1.) That the penmen of the New Testament do not oblige themselves unto that translation, but in many places do precisely render the words of the original text, where that translation differs from it.

(2.) That they do oftentimes express the sense of the testimony which they quote in words of their own, neither agreeing with that translation nor exactly answering the original Hebrew.

(3.) That sundry passages have been unquestionably taken out of the New Testament, and inserted into that translation; which I have elsewhere proved by undeniable instances. And I no way doubt but it hath so fallen out in this place, where no account can be given of the translation of the LXX. as the words now are in it. Wherefore, 4. This is certain, that the sense intended by the psalmist and that expressed by the apostle are the same, or unto the same purpose. And their agreement is both plain and evident. That which is spoken of is an act of God the Father towards the Son. The end of it is, that the Son might be fit and meet to do the will of God in the way of obedience. So it is expressed in the text, “Mine ears hast thou bored,” or, “A body hast thou prepared me...... Then said I, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God.” This is the sole end why God so acted towards him. What this was, is so expressed in the psalmist, “Mine ears hast thou bored,” with a double figure:

(1.) A metaphor from the ear, wherewith we hear the commands we are to obey. Obedience being our compliance with the outward commands of God, and the ear being the only means of our receiving those commands, there is nothing more frequent in the Scripture than to express obedience by “hearing” and “hearkening,” as is known. Wherefore the ascription of ears unto the Lord Christ by an act of God, is the preparation of such a state and nature for him as wherein he should be meet to yield obedience unto him.

(2.) By a synecdoche, wherein the part is put for the whole. In his divine nature alone it was impossible that the Lord Christ should come to do the will of God in the way whereby he was to do it. Wherefore God prepared another nature for him, which is expressed synecdochically, by the ears for the whole body; and that significantly, because as it is impossible that any one should have ears of any use but by virtue of his having a body, so the ears are that part of the body by which alone instruction unto obedience, the thing aimed at, is received. This is that which is directly expressed of Isaiah 50:4-5, “He wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned. The Lord God hath opened mine ear, and I was not rebellious;” or, ‘I was obedient.'And so it is all one in what sense you take the word כָּרָה; whether in the more common and usual, to “dig” or “bore, or in that whereunto it is sometimes applied, to “fit and perfect.” For I do not judge there is any allusion in the expression unto the law of boring the ear of the servant that refused to make use of his liberty at the year of release. Nor is the word used in that case כָּרָה, but רָצַע, Exodus 21:6. But it respects the framing of the organ of hearing, which is as it were bored; and the internal sense, in readiness unto obedience, is expressed by the framing of the outward instrument of hearing, that we may learn to obey thereby. Wherefore this is, and no other can be, the sense of the words in the psalmist, namely, that God the Father did so order things towards Jesus Christ, that he should have a nature wherein he might be free and able to yield obedience unto the will of God; with an intimation of the quality of it, in having ears to hear, which belong only unto a body.

This sense the apostle expresseth in more plain terms now, after the accomplishment of what before was only declared in prophecy; and thereby the veil which was upon divine revelations under the old testament is taken away.

There is therefore nothing remaining but that we give an exposition of these words of the apostle, as they contain the sense of the Holy Ghost in the psalm. And two things we must inquire into:

1. What is meant by this “body.”

2. How God “prepared” it.

1. A “body” is here a synecdochical expression of the human nature of Christ. So is the “flesh” taken, where he is said to be “made flesh;” and the “flesh and blood” whereof he was partaker. For the general end of his having this body was, that he might therein and thereby yield obedience, or do the will of God; and the especial end of it was, that he might have somewhat to offer in sacrifice unto God. But neither of these can be confined unto his body alone. For it is the soul, the other essential part of human nature, that is the principle of obedience. Nor was the body of Christ alone offered in sacrifice unto God. He “made his soul an offering for sin,” Isaiah 53:10; which was typified by the life that was in the blood of the sacrifice. Wherefore it is said that “he offered himself unto God,” Hebrews 9:14; Ephesians 5:2; that is, his whole entire human nature, soul and body, in their substance, in all their faculties and powers. But the apostle both here and verse 10 mentions only the body itself, for the reasons ensuing:

(1.) To manifest that this offering of Christ was to be by death, as was that of the sacrifices of old; and this the body alone was subject unto.

(2.) Because, as the covenant was to be confirmed by this offering, it was to be by blood, which is contained in the body alone, and the separation of it from the body carries the life along with it.

(3.) To testify that his sacrifice was visible and substantial; not an outward appearance of things, as some have fancied, but such as truly answered the real bloody sacrifices of the law.

(4.) To show the alliance and cognation between him that sanctifieth by his offering, and them that are sanctified thereby: or that because “the children are partakers of flesh and blood he also took part of the same,” that he might taste of death for them. For these and the like reasons doth the apostle mention the human nature of Christ under the name of a “body” only, as also to comply with the figurative expression of it in the psalm. And they do what lies in them to overthrow the principal foundation of the faith of the church, who would wrest these words unto a new ethereal body given him after his ascension, as do the Socinians.

2. Concerning this body, it is affirmed that God prepared it for him, “Thou hast prepared for me:” that is, God hath done it, even God the Father; for unto him are these words spoken, “I come to do thy will, O God; a body hast thou prepared me.” The coming of Christ, the Son of God, into the world, his coming in the flesh by the assuming of our nature, was the effect of the mutual counsel of the Father and the Son. The Father proposed to him what was his will, what was his design, what he would have done. This proposal is here repeated, as unto what was negative in it, which includes the opposite positive: “Sacrifices and burnt-offerings thou wouldest not have;” but that which he would, was the obedience of the Son unto his will. This proposal the Son closeth withal: “Lo,” saith he, “I come.” But all things being originally in the hand of the Father, the provision of things necessary unto the fulfilling of the will of God is left unto him. Among those the principal was, that the Son should have a body prepared for him, that so he might have somewhat of his own to offer.

Wherefore the preparation of it is in a peculiar manner assigned unto the Father: “A body hast thou prepared me.” And we may observe, that,

Obs. 7. The supreme contrivance of the salvation of the church is in a peculiar manner ascribed unto the person of the Father. His will, his grace, his wisdom, his good pleasure, the purpose that he purposed in himself, his love, his sending of his Son, are everywhere proposed as the eternal springs of all acts of power, grace and goodness, tending unto the salvation of the church. And therefore doth the Lord Christ on all occasions declare that he came to do his will, to seek his glory, to make known his name, that the praise of his grace might be exalted. And we through Christ do believe in God, even the Father, when we assign unto him the glory of all the holy properties of his nature, as acting originally in the contrivance and for the effecting of our salvation.

Obs. 8. The furniture of the Lord Christ (though he was the Son, and in his divine person the Lord of all) unto the discharge of his work of mediation was the peculiar act of the Father. He prepared him a body; he anointed him with the Spirit; it pleased him that all fullness should dwell in him. From him he received all grace, power, consolation. Although the human nature was the nature of the Son of God, not of the Father, (a body prepared for him, not for the Father,) yet was it the Father who prepared that nature, who filled it with grace, who strengthened, acted, and supported it in its whole course of obedience.

Obs. 9. Whatever God designs, appoints, and calls any unto, he will provide for them all that is needful unto the duties of obedience whereunto they are so appointed and called. As he prepared a body for Christ, so he will provide gifts, abilities, and faculties suitable unto their work, for those whom he calleth unto it. Others must provide as well as they can for themselves.

But we must yet inquire more particularly into the nature of this preparation of the body of Christ, here ascribed unto the Father. And it may he considered two ways:

(1.) In the designation and contrivance of it. So “preparation” is sometimes used for “predestination,” or the resolution for the effecting any thing that is future in its proper season, Isaiah 30:33; Matthew 20:33; Rom 9:23; 1 Corinthians 2:9. In this sense of the word God had prepared a body for Christ; he had in the eternal counsel of his will determined that he should have it in the appointed time. So he was “foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for us,” 1 Peter 1:20.

(2.) In the actual effecting, ordering, and creating of it, that it might be fitted and suited unto the work that it was ordained unto.

In the former sense the body itself is alone the object of this preparation. “A body hast thou prepared me;” that is, ‘designed for me.'The latter sense compriseth the use of the body also; it is fitted for its work. This latter sense it is that is proper unto this place; only it is spoken of by the psalmist in a prophetical style, wherein things certainly future are expressed as already, performed. For the word signifies such a preparation as whereby it is made actually fit and meet for the end it is designed unto. And therefore it is variously rendered, “to fit, to adapt, to perfect, to adorn, to make meet,” with respect unto some especial end. ‘Thou hast adapted a body unto my work; fitted and suited a human nature unto that I have to perform in it and by it.'A body it must be; yet not every body, nay, not any body brought forth by carnal generation, according to the course of nature, could effect or was fit for the work designed unto it. But God prepared, provided such a body for Christ, as was fitted and adapted ‘unto all that he had to do in it. And this especial manner of its preparation was an act of infinite wisdom and grace. Some instances thereof may be mentioned; as,

[1.] He prepared him such a body, such a human nature, as might be of the same nature with ours, for whom he was to accomplish his work therein. For it was necessary that it should be cognate and allied unto ours, that he might be meet to act on our behalf, and to suffer in our stead. He did not form him a body out of the dust of the earth, as he did that of Adam, whereby he could not have been of the same race of mankind with us; nor merely out of nothing, as he created the angels, whom he was not to save. See Hebrews 2:14-16, and the exposition thereon. He took our flesh and blood, proceeding from the loins of Abraham.

[2.] He so prepared it as that it should be no way subject unto that depravation and pollution that came on our whole nature by sin. This could not have been done had his body been prepared by carnal generation, the way and means of conveying the taint of original sin which befell our nature, unto all individual persons; for this would have rendered him every way unmeet for his whole work of mediation. See Luke 1:35; Hebrews 7:26.

[3.] He prepared him a body consisting of flesh and blood, which might be offered as a real substantial sacrifice, and wherein he might suffer for sin, in his offering to make atonement for it. Nor could the sacrifices of old, which were real, bloody, and substantial, prefigure that which should be only metaphorical and in appearance. The whole evidence of the wisdom of God in the institution of the sacrifices of the law depends on this, that Christ was to have a body consisting of flesh and blood, wherein he might answer all that was prefigured by them.

[4.] It was such a body as was animated with a living, rational soul. Had it been only a body, it might have suffered as did the beasts under the law, from which no act of obedience was required, only they were to suffer what was done unto them. But in the sacrifice of the body of Christ, that which was principally respected, and whereon the whole efficacy of it did depend, was his obedience unto God. For he was not to be offered by others, but he was to offer himself, in obedience unto the will of God, Hebrews 9:14; Ephesians 5:2. And the principles of all obedience lie alone in the powers and faculties of the rational soul.

[5.] This body and soul were obnoxious unto all the sorrows and sufferings which our nature is liable unto, and we had deserved, as they were penal, tending unto death. Hence was he meet to suffer in our stead the same things which we should have done. Had they been exempted by special privilege from what our nature is liable unto, the whole work of our redemption by his blood had been frustrated.

[6.] This body or human nature, thus prepared for Christ, was exposed unto all sorts of temptations from outward causes. But yet it was so sanctified by the perfection of grace, and fortified by the fullness of the Spirit dwelling therein, as that it was not possible it should be touched with the least taint or guilt of sin. And this also was absolutely necessary unto the work whereunto it was designed, 1 Peter 2:22; Hebrews 7:26.

[7.] This body was liable unto death; which being the sentence and sanction of the law with respect unto the first and all following sins, (all and every one of them,) was to be undergone actually by him who was to be our deliverer, Hebrews 2:14-15. Had it not died, death would have borne rule over all unto eternity; but in the death thereof it was swallowed up in victory, 1 Corinthians 15:55-57.

[8.] As it was subject unto death, and died actually, so it was meet to be raised again from death. And herein consisted the great pledge and evidence that our dead bodies may be and shall be raised again unto a blessed immortality. So it became the foundation of all our faith, as unto things eternal, 1 Corinthians 15:17-23.

[9.] This body and soul being capable of a real separation, and being actually separated by death, though not for any long continuance, yet no less truly and really than they who have been dead a thousand years, a demonstration was given therein of an active subsistence of the soul in a state of separation from the body. As it was with the soul of Christ when he was dead, so shall it be with our souls in the same state. He was alive with God and unto God when his body was in the grave; and so shall our souls be.

[10.] This body was visibly taken up into heaven, and there resides; which, considering the ends thereof, is the great encouragement of faith, and the life of our hope.

These are but some of the many instances that may be given of the divine wisdom in so preparing a body for Christ as that it might be fitted and adapted unto the work which he had to do therein. And we may observe, that,

Obs. 10. Not only the love and grace of God in sending his Son are continually to be admired and glorified, but the acting of this infinite wisdom in fitting and preparing his human nature so as to render it every way meet unto the work which it was designed for, ought to be the especial object of our holy contemplation. But having treated hereof distinctly in a peculiar discourse unto that purpose, I shall not here again insist upon it.

The last thing observable in this verse is, that this preparation of the body of Christ is ascribed unto God, even the Father, unto whom he speaks these words, “A body hast thou prepared me.” As unto the operation in the production of the substance of it, and the forming its structure, it was the peculiar and immediate work of the Holy Ghost, Luke 1:35. This work I have at large elsewhere declared. [5] Wherefore it is an article of faith, that the formation of the human nature of Christ in the womb of the Virgin was the peculiar act of the Holy Ghost. The holy taking of this nature unto himself, the assumption of it to be his own nature by a subsistence in his person, the divine nature assuming the human in the person of the Son, was his own act alone. Yet was the preparation of this body the work of the Father in a peculiar manner; it was so in the infinitely wise, authoritative contrivance and ordering of it, his counsel and will therein being acted by the immediate power of the Holy Ghost. The Father prepared it in the authoritative disposition of all things; the Holy Ghost actually wrought it; and he himself assumed it. There was no distinction of time in these distinct actings of the holy persons of the Trinity in this matter, but only a disposition of order in their operation. For in the same instant of time, this body was prepared by the Father, wrought by the Holy Ghost, and assumed by himself to be his own. And the actings of the distinct persons being all the actings of the same divine nature, understanding, love, and power, they differ not fundamentally and radically, but only terminatively, with respect unto the work wrought and effected. And we may observe, that,

[5] On the Holy Spirit, miscellaneous works, vol. 3, b. 2, ch. 3,4. Ed.

Obs. 11. The ineffable but yet distinct operations of the Father, Son, and Spirit, in, about, and towards the human nature assumed by the Son, are, as an uncontrollable evidence of their distinct subsistence in the same individual divine essence, so a guidance unto faith as unto all their distinct actings towards us in the application of the work of redemption unto our souls. For their actings towards the members is in all things conform unto their actings towards the Head; and our faith is to be directed towards them according as they act their love and grace distinctly towards us.