The Expositor's Bible: The Epistle to the HebrewsEdwards, Thomas Charles
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Epistle to the Hebrews
Edwards, Thomas Charles
Bible. Hebrews -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
It is well, as St. Paul said, for every man to be fully assured in his
own mind.[399] A doubting conscience enfeebles a man’s spiritual vigour
for work. The Essenes found a remedy for morbidness in strictness as to
meats and minute directions for the employment of time. St. Paul taught
that an unhealthy casuistry would be best counteracted by doing all
things unto the Lord. “He that eateth eateth unto the Lord, for he
giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, unto the Lord he eateth not,
and giveth God thanks. For none of us liveth to himself, and none dieth
to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or whether we
die, we die unto the Lord.”[400] The author of the Epistle to the
Hebrews considers that it betokens a littleness of soul to strengthen
conscience by regulations as to various kinds of food. The noble
thing[401] is that the heart—that is, the conscience—be stablished by
thankfulness,[402] which will produce a strong, placid, courageous, and
healthy moral perception. The moral code of the New Testament is direct
and simple. It is entirely free from all casuistical crotchets and
distinctions without a difference. Those who busy themselves[403] about
such matters have never gained anything by it.
Do the Essenes repudiate the altar the sacrifice of which may not be
eaten? Do they teach that the only sacrifice for sin is the daily meal?
This is a fatal error. “We _have_” says the Apostle, “an altar of which
the worshippers are not permitted to eat.”[404] All these expressions
are metaphorical. By the altar we must understand the atoning sacrifice
of Christ; by “those who serve the tabernacle” are meant believers in
that sacrifice, prefigured, however, by the priests and worshippers
under the old covenant; and by “eating of the altar” is meant
participation in the sacredness that pertains to the death and atonement
of Christ. The purpose of the writer is to teach the entire separateness
of Christ’s atonement. It is true that Christians eat the body and drink
the blood of Christ.[405] But the words of our Lord and of St. Paul[406]
refer to the passover, whereas our author speaks of the sin-offering. In
the former the lamb was eaten;[407] in the latter the carcases of the
beasts whose blood was brought by the worshipper through his
representative,[408] the high-priest, into the holiest place on the day
of atonement, were carried forth without the camp and burned in the
fire.[409] Both sacrifices, the passover and the sin-offering, were
typical. The former typified our participation in Christ’s death, the
latter the separateness of Christ’s death.
Many expositors see a reference in the Apostle’s words to the Lord’s
Table, and some of them infer from the word “altar” that the Eucharist
is a continual offering of a propitiatory sacrifice to God. It is not
too much to say that this latter doctrine is the precise error which the
Apostle is here combating.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account