Timothy to Hebrews - The Preterist Archive

Hebrews IV. 4-8. 393
No ; the author speaks quite generally of the works of men, of the
work of the human race, of all activit}^, all endeavours better or
worse. The idea is, in general terms, as follows : All that can
he comprehended under the term ivorJcs, has been performedfrom the time
of the creation of the world onwards, hut has never^ been sufficient to
hring man to the Kard-navati;, to a state of satisfied rest. The inference
from this is, that an entirely new way of salvation, not that
of human doings and human endeavours, but that of faith in the
salvation which God hath provided, is necessary in order to attain
to the rest.
Vers. 4, 5.—This idea is in these verses more fully explained.
The author shews here, that by '^pya he meant not the works of God,
but the works of men in opposition to those of God. " Ood^ indeed,
rested already on the seventh of the days occupied in the creation
of the world : and still he says of men, they are not yet capable of
entering into his rest."
God's works, then, were finished—internally
externally complete—but the works of men
perfect, and therefore
were internally imperfect, and hence, externally there was no mention
of a resting of men ; the work and labour still continued, and
could not cease until the result was arrived at ; the result, however,
remained ever unattained.
The first part of this idea is introduced by the words : elpriKe ydp
Tcov nepl TTJg IjSdofirjc;. On ttov compare our remark on chap. ii. 6.
The author here refers beforehand to the kfidoiir}, because he intends
afterwards to graft a further idea on this preliminary mention of it,
which he does in ver. 9, seq.
In vers. 6-8 the author passes to a new sentiment, a new point
of comparison between the work of Christ and the work of Moses.
The opposition between the work of both is twofold, just as was
that in chap. iii. 2-6 between the persons. The first imperfection
in the work of Moses consisted in this (iv. 2-5)—that his work imparted
no power for the fulfilment of it, did not unite itself to the
hearers through faith, and therefore could not conduct to the promised
rest ; the second consists in this—that the rest itself into
which the Israelites could be introduced by Moses and were actually
introduced by Joshua, was only an earthly, a typical rest, while
Christ conducts to a real, a substantial rest, which in its nature corresponds
to the Sabbath rest of God. But, as in chap. iii. the
first point of difierence was repeated in the development of the
second (Moses was a servant in the typical house, Christ a son in
the living house), so here also, when the author shews the opposition
between the Old and New Testament rest, he repeats at
the same time the first point of difierence, that, namely, between
the not being able to enter into the rest, and the being able to
enter into it, nay, he finds in the second the fuU confirmation of
the first.