Hebrews i.1-2, First three points of comparison between the law and the gospel

Hebrews i.1-2

By sundry parts, and in divers manners, God having formerly [or, of old] spoken unto the fathers in the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us in the Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all, by whom also he made the worlds.

In his comparison of the Mosaical law and the gospel, the apostle examines both under two different heads. First, the way each was revealed and instituted, from which also comes our obligation to observe each. The second is their nature, use and efficacy.

Paul examines the first of these two in this chapter. He starts by showing where they agree. They agree in the principal efficient cause of their revelation, in other words, the source of the revelation. The author of each of them is God, meaning here the first person of the Trinity. (Note: First person of the Trinity = the Father; Second person of the Trinity = the Son, Third person of the Trinity = the Spirit) Neither originated in the mind of men.

There are four main differences between them:

I. The time or season of their revelation

A. “of old” or “in the past”

The bounds of this “of old” is from the giving out of Moses’ law, the acted which marked the constitution of the Judaical church, lasting until the close of public prophecy in the days of Malachi. Paul is not opposing the lasting covenant made with Adam, Noah, Abraham, etc. but rather the external privilege of worship which the gospel replaces.

B. “these last days”

This means not “the times of the gospel,” or “the period of time until Christ returns,” as they are often taken to mean. Instead, it means the last days of the Judaical church and state. At this point, the Hebrews still existed as a political people with coherent laws and worship as given by God. These were the last days, as promised in the Scripture, into which the Messiah would speak.

Steven: It is interesting to imagine how Owen would respond to the current Jewish state that exists in modern Israel. I think his answer would be to observe that it is nothing like the real Hebrew state, which was ruled by the heirs of David, possessed a law and worship which was instituted by God, and were in a real way a theocracy. The state of Israel today is a secular state whose members happen to profess to descend from the Hebrews.

Note: This interpretation of the phrase “these last days” is not typical. But it certainly fits the argument better, and is supported by prophecy. Remember that Daniel had predicted the end of the Jewish state and its replacement with one ruled by the Messiah. Here are a few illuminating phrases from his argument:

“The nation, state, temple, sacrifices, being set apart, set up, and designed for no other purpose but to bring forth the Messiah, were to still be in place when the Messiah came. But after he came, they were of no further use, and so God put an end to them.”

There are other interesting bits and pieces as Owen examines and defends this interpretation at length.

II. The persons to whom they were revealed

A. “our forefathers”
B. “us”

Meaning, the members of the Judaical church who were living during the days of the personal ministry of Christ, and after under the preaching of the gospel. Remember that Paul assumes a Jewish audience throughout.

III. The manner of their revelation

A. “at many times and in various ways”

This means the gradual illumination of the mind and will of God, by slowly adding one thing after another, only as much as the church at that time could bear. Here Owen, almost as an aside, lays out the various branches of revelation in the Old Testament, which in a few paragraphs greatly illuminated all my subsequent examinations of it.

There are four principal parts, with additional parts subservient for each.

1. To Adam in the promise of the seed, which was the principle of faith and obedience to the fathers before the flood. Other subservient revelations made to Seth, Enos, Enoch, Lamech, and others.

2. To Noah after the flood, in the renewal of the covenant and establishing the church in his family (Hebrews xi. he became heir of the righteousness that is by faith). With subservient revelations made to Melchizedek and others in that line down to Abraham.

3. To Abraham, in restricting the promise to his seed, and more fully illustrating the nature of it, confirmed in the revelations made to Isaac, Jacob, etc.

4.To Moses, in the giving of the law and erection of the Judaical church in the wilderness; under this there were three main subservient revelations—
a. To David, which was peculiarly designed to perfect the revelation of the will of God concerning the old testament worship, in those things that they were not able to understand in their wilderness condition; also to Solomon and the other prophets of their day.
b. To the prophets from the division of the kingdom until the captivity, and during it. This was marked by pleading with the people about their defection by sin and false worship.
c. To Ezra, with the rest of the prophets who assisted in the reformation of the church after the exile, who encouraged the people in a unique way to expect and hope for the coming of the Messiah.

We see that God spoke at various times, and also that he did so in various ways, as in by promises, threats, public sermons, special messages and prophecies.

B.The contrast here is implied

The whole revelation of the will of God is in one season given, in opposition to the gradual, season by season approach of the Old. Once finished, as it was after the days of the apostles, no can or will add anything to it.

Also, the revelation of the will of God is done in one way, namely the preaching of the gospel by the one the Spirit anoints.