Pharisees, against Jerusalem, and against the Jewish nation. Yet who
will say, that this was for want of tenderness in him, or of benevolent
feelings towards those who were his enemies ? No one can say this, who
considers the whole of his character, as represented by the evangelists.
If then he might, and did in fact, utter denunciations against his enemies
and persecutors, he might be represented as doing this by the psalmist,
without any error committed in so doing.

The objections, then, do not appear to be of a conclusive nature,
which are made to the application of the fortieth psalm to the Messiah.
Still, I freely acknowledge, that had not the New Testament referred to
this psalm, as descriptive of the work of the Messiah, I should have been
satisfied, in general, with the application of it to David himself, or even
to the people of Israel collectively considered. Yet a minute consider-
ation of ver. 7, 8, [6, 7,] certainly might serve to suggest some difficulty,
in respect to such an application. Obedience is there represented as the
substitute for sacrifices. So the writer of our epistle understood it.
And it is said to be written in the sacred volume, that this would be the
case respecting the individual whose obedience is there described. Is
this anywhere written respecting the obedience of David ? Is the obe-
dience of the Jewish nation anywhere represented as a substitute for
sacrifices ? Rather, did not a part of their obedience consist in offering
them ?

After all, however, the whole passage might, perhaps, be construed as
merely affirming, that obedience is more acceptable to God than sacrifice,
and that this is so declared in other Scriptures. Compare 1 Sam. xv. 2



HEBREWS X. 5. 603

Ps. 1. 9, seq.; Isa. i. 11. seq. At least, this mode of interpretation
must be admitted to be a possible one.

Let us grant, then, what cannot fairly be denied, that the fortieth
psalm, according to general laws of interpretation, might be applied to
David. Is it not equally plain, that there is nothing in it which may not,
without doing any violence to the laws of language, be applied to David's
Son, in a still higher and nobler sense ? After what has been suggested, in
respect to this application, I shall venture to consider the application
itself as possible.

Here then is represented a case of the following kind. A psalm com-
posed by an inspired writer, is (in itself considered, i. e. the words or
diction being simply regarded,) capable of an application to David, or to
the Son of David, the Messiah. To whom shall it be applied by us ?
If there be nothing but simply the psalm itself to direct our interpre-
tation, the answer must be, " To David ;" for the natural application of
the words of Scripture, (which in themselves are not necessarily predic-
tions,) is to the persons in being when they were written. But if we
have a good reason for making the application of them in a prophetic
sense, to some future personage, then ought we to make such an appli-
cation. Consequently, the question in respect to the application of the
fortieth psalm depends on the fact, whether we have sufficient reason to
construe it as prediction, i. e. as descriptive of a personage who was to
appear at a future period, viz. of David's Son. In itself it is capable of
such an explanation. Paul has actually made such an application of it.
The nature of the case shows, too, that the Hebrews of that time were
accustomed so to explain it ; for otherwise, the argument of the apostle
would not have been admitted as of any force by his readers. Whence
did the Hebrews derive such an interpretation ? Or, (which is of higher
moment,) how could the apostle appeal to Ps. xl. 7, 8, for proof of the
efficacy of Christ's obedience unto death, as well as of the in efficacy of
ritual sacrifices ? This appeal, then, under such circumstances as show
that the stress of his argument lies upon the meaning he gives to the
passage of Scripture which he quotes, settles the question how the
fortieth psalm is to be interpreted, with all those who admit the authority
of the writer of our epistle, either as a teacher of Christian doctrine, or
an expositor of the word of God. At all events, it cannot be shown,
that the fortieth psalm has no original relation to the Messiah. To show
that it is capable of another interpretation, is effecting nothing. The
second psalm, and all other psalms relating to Christ, borrow their



604 HEBREWS X. 5.

imagery their costume, from the times when they were written, and the
persons, manners, and customs then existing ; and of course, in a greater
or less degree, appear at first view to relate only to them. In describ-
ing the future King of the Jews, the writers of ancient times would natu-
rally borrow their imagery from the kings of that day. But to affirm,
that because they did this, they had reference, and could have reference,
only to the kings of their times, would be a position as little consistent
with the principles of language and interpretation, as it is with the
numerous declarations of the writers of the New Testament.

It will be easily perceived, that in admitting the possibility of applying
the 40th Psalm to David, I have admitted that verses 7 and 8 may be
interpreted, as expressing merely the general principle, that obedience is
better than sacrifices. But if we suppose, with the writer of our epistle,
that David, when he composed this psalm, meant to intimate, that this
obedience was to be " obedience unto death, even the death of the
cross," then must it follow, of course, that the psalm is altogether inap-
plicable to David ; for neither his obedience nor death, nor that of any
other person, (the Messiah excepted,) could supersede the ritual of the
Mosaic law, and prepare the way for its abolition. Supposing, then,
the apostle to have rightly interpreted the words of Ps. xl., (and who
shall correct his exegesis ?) the impropriety of applying the psalm to
David is plain ; and the propriety of referring it to the Messiah needs no
farther vindication.




FINIS



HILLTNO,

SO, SI' P. UK



UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY,
BERKELEY



THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW

Books not returned on time are subject to a fine of
50c per volume after the third day overdue, increasing
to $1.00 per volume after the sixth day. Books not in
demand may be renewed if application is made before
expiration of loan period.







8 Mi



REC'D

APR 2 8 1962






75m-8,'31



YC 4UO'



s?



UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY