stead of proposing the direct proofs whereby that fact is ascertained, judged it more proper to answer the objections advanced by the doctors for disproving it. And the rather, because the particulars of which the direct proof consisted, had all been exhibited in the most public manner in Judea where the Hebrews dwelt, and were well known to them, Acts x. 36.-42. Namely, that God himself in the hearing of many witnesses, had declared Jesus of Nazareth his Son, by a voice from heaven at his baptism; and by a like voice at his transfiguration; and by a third voice in the hearing of the multitude assembled in the temple. Also, that Jesus had proved himself the Son of God, by many miracles performed in the most public manner, during the course of his ministry, and had often appealed to these miracles, as undeniable proofs of his pretension. Above all, that his resurrection from the dead, after the rulers had put him to death, as a blasphemer for calling himself Christ the Son of the Blessed, demonstrated him to be the Son of God. Farther, these proofs had often been appealed to by the apostles, Acts x. 38, 39. And to their appeals God himself continually bare witness, by signs, and miracles, and distributions of the Holy Ghost. The Hebrews, therefore, being well acquainted with the direct evidence on which our Lord's claim to be the Son of God rested, when the apostle affirmed, that in these last days God had spoken by his Son, he in effect told them that he had spoken by Jesus of Nazareth, and at the same time called to their remembrance all the proofs by which Jesus of Nazareth's claim to the dignity of God's Son was established. Nor was it necessary to enter into that matter more particularly, for the sake of others who might read this epistle: as these proofs were soon to be published to all, in the evangelical histories. In short, if the Hebrews in Judea were not convinced that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God, it was not owing to their ignorance of the proofs by which his claim to that dignity was established, but to the objections urged against it, which it seems had much more influence to make them reject Jesus, than the multiplied miraculous attestations above described, had to make them acknowledge him as the Son of God.

Of these objections, the most weighty arose from the lofty descriptions, given in the scriptures, of the nature and dignity of the Son of God. For by these the Hebrews were led to conclude, that the Son of God could not possibly be a man; far less could he be born of a woman, or die. This, with other conclusions of a

like nature, being extremely plausible in themselves, and strongly urged by the doctors, the apostle rightly judged that he would more effectually convince the unbelieving Hebrews, by confuting these arguments and objections, than by repeating the direct proofs above mentioned, with which they were perfectly well acquainted already. Accordingly, this is what he does in the second chapter. Only, as these objections were all founded on the accounts given in the Jewish scriptures, of the nature and dignity of the Son, the apostle with admirable address, before he attempted to confute them, introduced in this first chap. ver. 5.-14. the principal passages of the Jewish scriptures, which the doctors and people applied to the Son of God. For, by thus displaying his transcendant greatness, he gave the objections of the Jews their full force. At the same time, by applying these passages to Jesus of Nazareth the author of the gospel, he not only affirmed him to be the Son of God, but raised his dignity and authority to the highest pitch. See chap. ii. 1.-3.

His account of the dignity of the Son, the apostle begins with telling us that he is superior to the highest angels, because no where is it recorded in scripture, that God said to any of the angels, as he said to his Son, My Son thou art; to day I have begotten thee, ver. 5.-Instead of speaking to them in that manner, when he brought his Son a second time into our world, in the human nature, by raising him from the dead, he ordered all the angels to worship him, ver. 6. So that although he became man and continues to be so, he is still superior in nature to the highest angels. Farther, the apostle observes, that the greatest thing said of angels in the scriptures is, that they are spirits, and God's ministers, ver. 7.-Whereas by saying to the Son, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, he hath declared him the Governor of the world, ver. 8.-Also, by saying, Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness, therefore—God hath anointed thee; he hath declared the Son worthy of that dominion, ver. 9. And, by saying to him, Thou Lord in the beginning foundedst the earth, and the works of thy hands are the heavens, the Psalmist hath taught us, that the dominion of the Son is originally founded in his having created the material fabric of the world, ver. 9.— And, by adding in the same passage, They shall perish, but thou dost remain, and they all as a garment shall grow old, he hath ascribed to the Son eternal existence, ver. 11, 12.-Morcover, God having never said to any of the angels, Sit thou at my right hand

&c. it is evident, that none of the angels ever received from God any proper dominion over the world, ver. 13.-What interference any of them have in human affairs, is merely that of ser vants, who, under the government of the Son, minister for the benefit of them who shall be heirs of salvation, ver. 14.

As the conclusion of this illustration it may be proper to remark, that some of the most pernicious errors that ever disturbed the Christian church, took their rise from the sublime display of the greatness of the Son of God, which is made in the Jewish scriptures. For, certain false teachers in the Christian church, probably converts from Judaism, holding the doctrine of their unbelieving brethren, fancied that the greatness of the Son of God was inconsistent with the nature of man. They therefore affirmed, that Jesus Christ had not come in the flesh; that his body was nothing but the appearance of a body; and that he was crucified only in appearance. Of these pernicious tenets we have clear traces in the epistles of John, where they are expressly condemned; and the teachers who maintained them, are called, antichrists, or opposers of Christ. See Pref. to 1 John, sect. 3.

OLD TRANSLATION. CHAP. I. 1 God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom

also he made the worlds;

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

GREEK TEXT.

1 Πολυμερώς και πολυτροπως παλαι ὁ Θεος λάλησας τοις πατρασιν εν τοις προφηταις,

2 Επ' εσχατων των ἡμερων τουτων ελάλησεν ἡμιν εν {τῳ, όν έθηκε όν έθηκε κληρονομον παντων, δι' & και τους αι

ωνας εποιησεν.

3 Ος ων απαύγασμα της δόξης, και χαρακτηρ της ποςάσεως αυτού, φέρων τε τα παντα τῷ ρηματι της δυναμεως αυτου, δι' ἑαυτου καθαρισμον ποιησάμενος των ἁμαρτιων ἡμων, εκάθισεν εν δεξια της μεγαλωσύνης εν ύψηλοις

Ver. 1.—1. In sundry parts. Πολυμερως. Peirce saith this word, according to its etymology, signifies, “ That God discovered his will anciently in seve"ral parts or parcels; so that one part was to be learned from one prophet, "and another from another."-The apostle made this observation to teach us, that the gospel being spoken all at once by Christ and his apostles, no addition is ever to be made to it in after times.

2. And in divers manners. This clause doth not refer to the different manners in which God revealed himself to the prophets; such as dreams, visions, audible voices, inspirations of his Spirit, &c. but it refers to the dif ferent ways in which the prophets communicated the different revelations which they received, to the fathers. They did it in types and figures, significant actions and dark sayings, as well as in plain language. Whereas the gospel revelation was spoken by Christ and his apostles, in one manner only; namely, in plain language.

Ver. 2.-1. Hath in these last days. The apostle means, either the days which were last, when he wrote this passage; or the last days of the Mosaic dispensation.

2. Spoken to us by his Son. God, speaking to us by his Son, being opposed to his speaking to the fathers by the prophets, overthrows the opinion of

COMMENTARY.

CHAP. I. 1 The same God, who in sundry parts and in divers manners, anciently revealed his will to the fathers of the Jewish nation by the prophets, Enoch, (Jude, ver. 14.) Moses, Samuel, David, Isaiah, &c.

2 Hath in these last days of the Mosaic dispensation spoken the gospel to mankind, all at once, and after one manner, by his Son made flesh, whom he constituted heir of all things; through whom also he made the worlds.

3 This great personage, even in his incarnate state, being an effulgence of his Father's glory, and an exact image of his substance, and upholding all things, namely the worlds, (ver. 2.) by his powerful command, when he had made atonement for our sins by the sacrifice of himself, and not of beasts, sat down at the right hand of the manifestation of the divine presence in the highest heavens, by invitation from God, who thereby declared his ministrations as a priest, both acceptable and effectual.

the antenicene fathers, that the law was spoken to the Jews by the Son. See chap. ii. 2. note 2. xii. 26. note 1.

3. Heir of all things; that is Lord or proprietor of all things: For accord. ing to Paul, Gal. iv. 1. The heir, is Lord of all.-This title, as implying universal dominion, Peter also gave to Christ, Acts x. 36. He is Lord of all: And even Crellius acknowledgeth that the phrase, Heir of all things, denotes supreme dominion over angels and men. See Whitby on this verse. 4. Through whom also be made the worlds. iv. Grotius translates this, for whom; but improperly; because Aa, with the genitive, signifies the efficient, and not the final cause. That the words Tous avas, are rightly translated, the worlds, and not, the ages, as the Socinians contend, appears from chap. xi. 3. where they denote the material fabrick of the uni