Loading...
It remaineth that some must enter therein - Why our translators put in the word must here I cannot even conjecture. I hope it was not to serve a system, as some have since used it: "Some must go to heaven, for so is the doctrine of the decree; and there must be certain persons infallibly brought thither as a reward to Christ for his sufferings; and in this the will of man and free agency can have no part," etc, etc. Now, supposing that even all this was true, yet it does not exist either positively or by implication in the text. The words επει ουν απολειπεται τινας εισελθειν εις αυτην, literally translated, are as follows: Seeing then it remaineth for some to enter into it; or, Whereas therefore it remaineth that some enter into it, which is Dr. Owen's translation, and they to whom it was first preached (οἱ προτερον ευαγγελισθεντες, they to whom the promise was given; they who first received the good tidings; i.e., the Israelites, to whom was given the promise of entering into the rest of Canaan) did not enter in because of their unbelief; and the promise still continued to be repeated even in the days of David; therefore, some other rest must be intended.
Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein - That is, “Since there is a rest spoken of in the Scriptures, implying that it is to be enjoyed by some, and since they to whom it was first promised did not inherit it, it follows that it must still be in reserve.” This is the conclusion which the apostle draws from the argument in the previous verses, and is connected with Hebrews 4:9, where he says that “there remaineth a rest to the people of God” - the point to which the whole argument tended. The statement in Hebrews 4:7, Hebrews 4:8, is to be regarded as an “interruption” in stating the conclusion, or as the suggestion of a new thought or a new argument bearing on the subject, which he sets down even while stating the conclusion from his argument. It has the appearance of being “suggested” to him as a new thought of importance, and which he preferred to place even in the midst of the summing up of the argument rather than omit it altogether. It denotes a state of mind full of the subject, and where one idea came hastening after another, and which it was deemed important to notice, even though it should seem to be out of place. The “position” in this Hebrews 4:6 is, that it was a settled or indisputable matter that some would enter into rest. The implied argument to prove this is:
(1)that there was a “rest” spoken of which deserved to be called a “divine rest,” or the “rest of God;”
(2)it could not be supposed that God would prepare such a rest in vain, for it would follow that if he had suited up a world of rest, he designed that it should be occupied. As he knew, therefore, that they to whom it was first offered would not enter in, it must be that he designed it for some others, and that it “remained” to be occupied by us now.
And they to whom it was first preached - Margin, “The Gospel.” Greek “Evangelized;” that is, to where the good news of the rest was first announced - the Israelites. “Entered not in because of unbelief;” see the notes at Hebrews 3:19.
The land to which we are traveling is in every sense far more attractive than was the land of Canaan to the children of Israel.... What stayed their progress just in sight of the goodly land?.... It was their own willful unbelief that turned them back. They were unwilling to risk anything upon the promises of God.... The history of the children of Israel is written as a warning to us “upon whom the ends of the world are come.” We are standing, as it were, upon the very borders of the heavenly Canaan. We may, if we will, look over on the other side and behold the attractions of the goodly land. If we have faith in the promises of God we shall show in conversation and in deportment that we are not living for this world, but are making it our first business to prepare for that holy land.18 TMK 169.4
Read in context »