TEXT: BIB   |   AUDIO: MISLR - MISC - DAVIS - FOCHT   |   VIDEO: BIB - COMM

HELPS: KJS - KJV - ASV - DBY - DOU - WBS - YLT - HEB - BBE - WEB - NAS - SEV - TSK - CRK - WES - MHC - GILL - JFB

Heb 9:18-20 Ex 24:3-11; 34:10,27,28 De 5:2,3; 29:1,12 Ga 3:15-19

Verse 9. Not according to the covenant] The new covenant is of a widely different nature to that of the old; it was only temporal and earthly in itself, though it pointed out spiritual and eternal things. The new covenant is totally different from this, as we have already seen; and such a covenant, or system of religion, the Jews should have been prepared to expect, as the Prophet Jeremiah had, in the above place, so clearly foretold it.

They continued not in my covenant] It should be observed that the word diaqnkn, which we translate covenant, often means religion itself; and its various precepts. The old covenant in general stated, on God's side, I will be your God; on the Israelites' side, We will be thy people. This covenant they brake; they served other gods, and neglected the precepts of that holy religion which God had delivered to them.

And I regarded them not] kagw hmelhsa autwn? And I neglected them or despised them; but the words in the Hebrew text of the prophet are �b ytl[b yknaw veanochi baalti bam, which we translate, although I was a husband to them. If our translation be correct, is it possible to account for this most strange difference between the apostle and the prophet? Could the Spirit of God be the author of such a strange, not to say contradictory, translation of the same words? Let it be observed: 1. That the apostle quotes from the Septuagint; and in quoting a version accredited by and commonly used among the Jews, he ought to give the text as he found it, unless the Spirit of God dictated an extension of meaning, as is sometimes the case; but in the present case there seems to be no necessity to alter the meaning. 2. The Hebrew words will bear a translation much nearer to the Septuagint and the apostle than our translation intimates. The words might be literally rendered, And I was Lord over them, or I lorded or ruled over them; i.e., I chastised them for their transgressions, and punished them for their iniquities; hmelhsa, I took no farther care of them, and gave them up into the hands of their enemies, and so they were carried away into captivity. This pretty nearly reconciles the Hebrew and the Greek, as it shows the act of God in reference to them is nearly the same when the proper meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words is considered.

Some suppose that the letter [ ain in ytl[b is changed for j cheth, and that the word should be read ytljb bachalti, I have hated or despised them. An ancient and learned Jew, Rab. Parchon, has these remarkable words on this passage, �b :�b ytl[b yknaw hlhk ��bn �gw �g� tyjk hbljtm zy[h wzw �ytan� ytwa han� �b :yb , and I baatti baam, translate, I hated them; for y ain is here changed and stands for j cheth, as it is said, their soul bachalah bi, translate, hath hated me." None of the Hebrew MSS. collated by Kennicott and Deuteronomy Rossi give any various reading on this word. Some of the versions have used as much latitude in their translations of the Hebrew as the Septuagint. But it is unnecessary to discuss this subject any farther; the word l[b baal itself, by the consent of the most learned men, signifies to disdain or despise, and this is pretty nearly the sense of the apostle's expression.

Ver. 9. Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers , etc..] The ancestors of the Jews at Mount Sinai: in the day when I took then, by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt ; which is mentioned, not only to observe the time when the former covenant was made with the Israelites, which was just upon their deliverance out of Egypt; but also to show their weakness and inability to have delivered themselves, and the tenderness of God towards them; they were like children, they could not help themselves when God took them by the hand, and brought them forth with an outstretched arm; and likewise to expose their ingratitude, and vindicate his conduct towards them: because they continued not in my covenant ; though they promised, at the reading of it, that all that the Lord had said, they would hear and do; but their hearts were not right with God, and they were not steadfast in his covenant, and therefore their carcasses fell in the wilderness: and I regarded them not, saith the Lord ; the words in ( Jeremiah 31:32) are very differently rendered in our translation, �although I was an husband unto them�: and so it becomes an aggravation of their sin of ingratitude, in not continuing in his covenant: in the margin it is rendered interrogatively, �should I have continued an husband unto them?� that is, after they had so treated him, no; as if he should say, I will not behave towards them as such; I will reject them, and disregard them. The Chaldee paraphrase is just the reverse of the apostle's translation, �and I was well pleased with them�: some render them, �I ruled over them�, as a lord over his servants, in a very severe manner. Others, observing the great difference there is between the Hebrew text, and the apostle's version, have supposed a different Hebrew copy from the present, used by the Septuagint, or the apostle, in which, instead of ytl[b , it was read either ytljb , or ytl[g ; but there is no need of such a supposition, since Dr. Pocock has shown, that l[b , in the Arabic language, signifies to loath and abhor, and so to disregard; and Kimchi relates it as a rule laid down by his father, that wherever this word is used in construction with b , it is to be taken in an ill part, and signifies the same as ytljb , �I have loathed�; in which sense that word is used in ( Zechariah 11:8) and so here, I have loathed them, I abhorred them, I rejected them, I took no care of them, disregarded them, left their house desolate, and suffered wrath to come upon them to the uttermost.