Hebrews 10:2

Heb 10:2-3. For then would they not have ceased, &c. — There would not have been need to have offered them more than once: that is, if these sacrifices had made the worshippers perfect, in respect of pardon, they would have ceased to be offered; because the worshippers once purged — Or fully discharged from the guilt of their transgressions; should have had no more conscience of sin — There would have remained no more sense of guilt upon their consciences to have troubled them, and no more fear of future punishment in consequence thereof. But it was not so with them, as appears by the yearly repetition of these sacrifices, wherein there was a continual remembrance made of sin — A consciousness of their sins, as unpardoned, still remained even after those sacrifices were offered, as is evident from this, that in the annual repetition of their sacrifices, the people’s sins, for which atonement had formerly been made, were remembered; that is, confessed as needing a yet further expiation. And, though it is true we are daily to remember and confess our sins, yet that respects only the application of the virtue and efficacy of the atonement already made to our consciences, without the least desire or expectation of a new propitiation.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10:2 The perpetual nature of the sacrifices demonstrates their inadequacy. If the sacrifices of the old covenant had offered true, lasting purity, they would have stopped. • their feelings of guilt would have disappeared: Cp. 9:9, 14; 10:22; 13:18.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Heb 10:2. Ἐπεὶ) So, altogether, ἐπεὶ, with an interrogation, in ch. Heb 9:17, note.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Heb_10:2. Proof for the κατʼ ἐνιαυτὸν ταῖς αὐτ. θυσ. οὐδέποτε δύναται τοὺς προσερχομένους τελειῶσαι in the form of a question: for otherwise would not their presentation have ceased? because the worshippers, so soon as they have once been really purged from sin, have no more consciousness of sins, and thus no more need of an expiatory sacrifice. In connection with the Recepta ἐπεὶ ἂν ἐπαύσαντο, the sense itself would remain unchanged, only the words would then have to be taken as an assertory statement (for their presentation would have come to an end, because, etc.); by which, however, the discourse would suffer in point of vivacity (observe also the ἀλλά, Heb_10:3, corresponding to the question of Heb_10:2). But the process is not a natural one, when Beza, edd. 1 and 2, Wetstein, Matthaei, Stein, and others (comp. already Theodoret) will have the proposition of Heb_10:2 regarded as an assertory statement, even with the retention of the οὐκ. They then explain either (and thus ordinarily): for otherwise their presentation would not have ceased, sc. by the coming in of the New Covenant (Beza: alioqui non desiissent offerri; Matthaei: non cessavissent, non sublata essent; comp. Theodoret: Διὰ τοῦτο τέλος ἐκεῖνα λαμβάνει, ὡς οὐ δυνάμενα συνείδησιν καθαρὰν ἀποφῆναι), or, in that ἐπεὶ … προσφερόμεναι, is closely attached to the main verb of Heb_10:1, and διὰ τὸ μηδεμίαν κ.τ.λ. is regarded as belonging to the whole proposition, Heb_10:1-2 : the law was not able by its sacrifices to lead to perfection, since their presentation was an endless one; because those who are once purified have no longer any consciousness of sins. So Wetstein, who, however, will writewhat in that case, no doubt, would be necessary and perfectly justified

οὐκ ἀνεπαύσαντο instead of οὐκ ἂν ἐπαύσαντο (… quum non cessarent offerri. Ita quidem, ut haec verba, sublata distinctione majori, jungantur iis, quae praecedunt, deinde sequatur totius sententiae confirmatio: quia sacrificantes, etc.). But against the last-mentioned mode of explanation it is decisive, that the relation of the members of the sentence to each other would become obscure, and the arrangement cumbrous; against the first-mentioned, the presupposition, underlying the ἃς προσφέρουσιν εἰς τὸ διηνεκές, Heb_10:1, as well as the epistle in general (Heb_9:9, al.), that the Jewish sacrificial ritual was still in continuance at the time of our authors writing.

ἐπαύσαντο προσφερόμεναι] sc. αἱ θυσίαι. The construction of παύεσθαι, with the participle is the ordinary one, in classic as well as in Hellenistic Greek. Comp. Eph_1:16; Col_1:9; Act_5:42, al.; Hermann, ad Viger. p. 771; Winer, Gramm., 7 Aufl. p. 323 f.

τοὺς λατρεύοντας] see at Heb_9:9.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For--if the law could, by its sacrifices, have perfected the worshippers.

they--the sacrifices.

once purged--IF they were once for all cleansed (Heb 7:27).

conscience--"consciousness of sin" (Heb 9:9).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 2. Would they not have ceased to be offered?] Had they made an effectual reconciliation for the sins of the world, and contained in their once offering a plenitude of permanent merit, they would have ceased to be offered, at least in reference to any individual who had once offered them; because, in such a case, his conscience would be satisfied that its guilt had been taken away. But no Jew pretended to believe that even the annual atonement cancelled his sin before God; yet he continued to make his offerings, the law of God having so enjoined, because these sacrifices pointed out that which was to come. They were offered, therefore, not in consideration of their own efficacy, but as referring to Christ; See on "Heb 9:9".

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(2) For then.—Better, otherwise. The very repetition of the annual ceremonial was a testimony to its imperfection. The idea of repetition has been very strikingly brought out in Heb_10:1.

Once purged.—Better, because the worshippers, having been once cleansed, would have no more consciousness of sins. “Worshippers,” not the same word as in Heb_10:1, but similarly used in Heb_9:9; Heb_9:14; Heb_12:28 (Php_3:3, et al.): in Heb_8:5; Heb_13:10, it is applied to priestly service.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2. once purged] having been cleansed, by these sacrifices, once for all.

conscience] Rather, “consciousness.”

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For then would they not have ceased to be offered,.... The Complutensian edition, and the Syriac and Vulgate Latin versions, leave out the word "not"; and the sense requires it should be omitted, for the meaning is, that if perfection had been by the legal sacrifices, they would have ceased to have been offered; for if the former ones had made perfect, there would have been no need of others, or of the repetition of the same; but because they did not make perfect, therefore they were yearly renewed; unless the words are read with an interrogation, as they are in the Arabic version, "for then would they not have ceased to be offered?" yes, they would; they are indeed ceased now, but this is owing to Christ and his sacrifice, and not to the efficacy of these sacrifices; for yearly sacrifices were offered for former sins, as well as for fresh ones, as appears from the following verse.

Because the worshippers, once purged, would have had no more conscience of sins; there are external and internal worshippers; the latter are such who worship God in Spirit and in truth: but here ceremonial worshippers are meant, who, if they had been really purged from sin by legal sacrifices, and purifications, would have had no more conscience of sins, and so have had no need to have repeated them; as such spiritual worshippers, who are once purged from sin by the blood and sacrifice of Christ; not that they have no sin, or no sense of sin, or that their consciences are seared, or that they never accuse for sin, or that they are to make no confession and acknowledgment of sin; but that they are discharged from the guilt of sin, and are not liable to condemnation for it; and through the application of the blood of Christ to them, have peace with God, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

Ver. 2. No more conscience of sin] Christ, though he took not away death, yet he did the sting of death; so though he took not away sin, yet he did the guilt of sin.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For then would they not have ceased to be offered? - Margin, “Or they would have.” The sense is the same. The idea is, that the very fact that they were repeated showed that there was some deficiency in them as to the matter of cleansing the soul from sin. If they had answered all the purposes of a sacrifice in putting away guilt, there would have been no need of repeating them in this manner. They were in this respect like medicine. If what is given to a patient heals him, there is no need of repeating it; but if it is repeated often it shows that there was some deficiency in it, and if taken periodically through a man’s life, and the disease should still remain, it would show that it was not sufficient to effect his cure. So it was with the offerings made by the Jews. They were offered every year, and indeed every day, and still the disease of sin remained. The conscience was not satisfied; and the guilty felt that it was necessary that the sacrifice should be repeated again and again.

Because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sin - That is, if their sacrifices had so availed as to remove their past sins, and to procure forgiveness, they would have had no more trouble of conscience on account of them. They would not have felt that it was necessary to make these sacrifices over and over again in order to find peace. When a man has full evidence that an atonement has been made which will meet all the demands of the Law, and which secures the remission of sin, he feels that it is enough. It is all that the case demands, and his conscience may have peace. But when he does “not” feel this, or has not evidence that his sins are all forgiven, those sins will rise to remembrance, and he will be alarmed. He may be punished for them after all. Thence it follows that if a man wants peace he should have good evidence that his sins are forgiven through the blood of the atonement.

No temporary expedient; no attempt to cover them up; no effort to forget them will answer the purpose. They “must be blotted out” if he will have peace - and that can be only through a perfect sacrifice. By the use of the word rendered “conscience” here, it is not meant that he who was pardoned would have no “consciousness” that he was a sinner, or that he would forget it, but that he would have no trouble of conscience; he would have no apprehension of future wrath. The pardon of sin does not cause it to cease to be remembered. He who is forgiven may have a deeper conviction of its evil than he had ever had before. But he will not be troubled or distressed by it as if it were to expose him to the wrath of God. The remembrance of it will humble him; it will serve to exalt his conceptions of the mercy of God and the glory of the atonement, but it will no longer overwhelm the mind with the dread of hell. This effect, the apostle says, was not produced on the minds of those who offered sacrifices every year. The very fact that they did it, showed that the conscience was not at peace.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Then they would have [2] ceased to be offered. That is, if they could have made the worshippers perfect; to wit, in such a manner as the one sacrifice of Christ, who was the Lamb of God that took away the sins of the world, by making a full reparation to the divine justice for the sin of Adam, and of all his offspring. For we must take notice that he compares the sacrifice of Christ, which wrought a general redemption, with the sacrifices of the former law, which could never make any sufficient atonement to the majesty of God offended by sin, and which, by the decree of heaven, were to cease as soon as Christ’s sacrifice of a general redemption was made: for then the worshippers would be so cleansed from sin, that they would stand in need of no more, but that the merits and satisfactions of Christ, their Redeemer, should be applied to them according to the order of God’s providence; that is, by faith in Christ, by his sacraments, by a true repentance, and the practice of virtue and good works. (Witham) --- If they had been of themselves perfect to all the intents of redemption and remission, as Christ’s death is, there would have been no occasion of so often repeating them; as there is no occasion for Christ’s dying any more for our sins. (Challoner)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Alioquin cessassent offerri. In the ordinary Greek copies, Greek: epei an ouk epausanto prospheromenai; but in other manuscripts Greek: ouk is left out.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

For then would they not have ceased to be offered? for proves the weakness of that shadowy service under the law, because it never ceased, which it would if it had perfected its users; and having reached its end, and done that work, have ceased; for these sacrifices would not of right have been repeated, neither needed they, if they could have justified and sanctified souls for ever.

Because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins: for then this effect would have followed, the worshippers who were to be atoned for or expiated by these sacrifices, if they had perfected them, i.e. pardoned, justified, and acquitted them from guilt of sin and punishment, there would have nothing remained to have troubled, vexed, or tormented their souls, they being no further accused or condemned by their conscience about sin, God having justified and sanctified them, Heb 9:14,26,28; compare Rom 5:1,2,11.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

2. Ceased to be offered—Had the law been able by a finished act, once for all, as Christ has performed, to finish men for glory, the continuity of the sacrifices would have been unnecessary. Their very continuous repetition, therefore, is the very demonstration of their inferiority.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 2, 3. For then (i.e. had it been so able) would they (the sacrifices) not have ceased to be offered, because that the worshippers, having been once purged, should have had no more conscience of sins? But (on the contrary) in those sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins year by year. The very annual repetition of the same expiatory rites on the Day of Atonement expressed in itself the idea, not of the putting away (ayethsiv , Heb_9:26) or oblivion, (Heb_10:17) of sin, but a recalling to mind of its continual presence. In the following verse the reason of this is found in the nature of the sacrifices themselves; it being impossible for the blood of irrational animals to cleanse moral guilt: it could only avail for the "passing over" (paresin , Rom_3:25) of sins, as symbolizing an effectual atonement to come in the spiritual sphere of things.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They who had been once perfectly purged, would have been no longer conscious either of the guilt or power of their sins.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

sins

Sin. (See Scofield "Rom 3:23").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2. For then would they not, etc. If the legal sacrifices secured complete forgiveness, they would not have been offered over and over. The fact that it was done showed that there was still a consciousness of sin.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

2. κεκαθαρισμένους אDEK. The κεκαθερισμένους of A is probably a mere clerical error. The rec. has κεκαθαρμένους, L.

2. ἐπαύσαντο προσφερόμεναι. The participle is classically used after παύεσθαι, Winer, p. 323.

συνείδησιν. “Consciousness.”

κεκαθαρισμένους. “Having been cleansed,” by these sacrifices, once for all.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2.] For (if it were so, if the law were able to perfect the worshippers) would they (αἱ αὐταὶ θυσίαι) not have ceased being offered, on account of the worshippers (the servers in the service of the tabernacle, used here in a wide sense, including priests and people) having no longer any conscience of sins (for construction, see reff.: = guilt of sin on the conscience, consciousness of the guilt of sin), if once (for all) purified?

That this sentence is to be read ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἄν, and as a question, is pretty universally agreed.

Some, as Thdrt. (apparently: διὰ τοῦτο τέλος ἐκεῖνα λαμβάνει), D-lat. (“nam nec cessassent offerri”), Beza (edd. 1, 2, “alioqui non desiissent offerri”), Whitby, Valcknaer, read οὐκ, and yet no question; understanding, “for then they would not have ceased to be offered,” viz. on the coming in of the N. T. dispensation. But this is surely hardly worth refutation. The rec. not reading οὐκ, might indeed be well thus rendered, “for in that case they would have ceased to be offered.” But then ἀλλά comes in awkwardly, which, when as here without any emphasis, more naturally follows a negative sentence. The taking our verse interrogatively is as old as Œc.: ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἂν ἐπαύσαντο κατʼ ἐρώτησιν ἀνάγνωθι. So also Thl.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

To be offered [προσφερομεναι] . The present participle brings out more forcibly the continuous repetition : "Ceased being offered."

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.