---
title: "Commentary on Hebrews"
author: "John Calvin"
translator: "John Owen"
languages: [en]
shelf: "Commentaries"
section: 63 of 81
url: https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/63/
cite: "John Calvin, tr. John Owen, Commentary on Hebrews, section 63. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/63/"
---

# Commentary on Hebrews

*John Calvin, tr. John Owen*

Calvin on the Epistle to the Hebrews.

## 63. Appendix M2

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/63/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/john-calvin-commentary-on-hebrews/63/#p-N

[¶0] APPENDIX M 2

[¶1] Chapter 10:22. With pure water It is evident that baptism is not here referred to, because the Apostle is instructing the Hebrews, who had been baptized, how they were daily to draw nigh to God.

[¶2] The words “pure water” are not found elsewhere in the New Testament, nor in the Sept. but once, Ezekiel. 36:25, where our version is “purifying water,” and no doubt correctly, though the early versions have “pure water.” It was a command as to Aaron, “He shall wash (λούσεται) with water his whole body (πάν τὸ σῶμα;)” So the Sept., but the Hebrew is “his flesh,” (בשרו,) though the Samaritan text has “all,” (כל) before it, Leviticus 16:4. See also Leviticus 16:24. The terms here used are sacerdotal or Levitical. The “sprinkled” with blood were the priests at their consecration, and not those who brought their offerings. See Leviticus 8:30. In no other case were any sprinkled with blood except the lepers, and the people when the covenant was made. Washing with water was also done by the priests at their consecration, (see Leviticus 8:6,) and whenever they ministered. (Exodus 30:20, 21.)

[¶3] The reason of this allusion especially to what was done as to the priests, seems to have been this, to shew that all who now draw nigh to God through Christ are priests, for they all serve God as it were in the sanctuary, and like the high priest, enter as it were into the holiest, not once a year, but daily and constantly, whenever they hold communion with God.

[¶4] As sprinkling in the case of Christians is continually needed, so is washing, as the daily washing of the priests before they engaged in their duties. (Exodus 40:32.) The sprinkling betokens forgiveness, and washing, sanctification or cleansing. See 1 Peter 1:2; and 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Thessalonians 5:23.

[¶5] It may be added that as (ζῶσαν, living, seems to have been used in verse 20 in a causative sense, so καθαρὸν in this passage; and it may be rendered, as in Ezekiel 36:25, “purifying.” The priests after washing were said to be clean, and were deemed to have been thereby purified, which proves that washing was nothing more than a symbol. Pure or purifying water signifies the sanctifying effect of divine grace.

### Appendix N2

[¶7] APPENDIX N 2

[¶8] Chapter 10:26. Willfully, etc. It is rendered by the Vulg., “voluntarie — voluntarily;” by Beza, “ultro — of one’s own accord;” by Doddridge and Macknight, as in our version, and by Stuart, “voluntarily.”

[¶9] It occurs in one other place, (1 Peter 5:2,) and is rendered “willingly;” it is found as an adjective in Philemon 14, and is rendered willingly; and in both instances in opposition to “constraint.” So that Schleusner’s explanation seems right, “with no compelling force — nulla vi cogente.” It is used in the Sept. for a Hebrew word which means freely, with free will, spontaneously. We may therefore thus render the words, “For if we sin of our own free will, (that is, renounce the faith, which is clearly the sin intended,) after having received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more a sacrifice for sins.”

[¶10] According to this verse the case of the persecuted is not here contemplated, for they are under constraint; but such are spoken of here as renounced the faith willingly, freely, by their own free choice; so that “willfully” is not what is meant, but spontaneously, without any outward constraining force or influence.

[¶11] The fathers, such as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Augustine, sadly blundered on this passage, because they did not understand the sin that is here intended, though it be evidently that of apostasy according to the drift of the whole context; and hence they said some strange things about sin after baptism, though baptism is neither mentioned nor alluded to in the whole passage. How many errors and absurdities have been introduced by the fathers into the world!

### Appendix O2

[¶13] APPENDIX O 2

[¶14] Chapter 10:30 The Lord shall judge The same meaning is given to “judge” here by Beza as by Calvin; but Doddridge, Grotius, and Macknight think it means to avenge, to vindicate, or defend. The argument is considered to be this, — “If God would avenge the injury done to his people, much more the injury or reproach done to his Son and the Holy Spirit.” Stuart and Bloomfield give the verb the sense of condemning or punishing; that is, his apostatizing people, — “The Lord will condemn (or punish) his people.”

[¶15] The two quotations are connected in Deuteronomy 32:35, 36. “Vengeance” refers to idolaters; and lest an advantage should have been taken of this, he added, as it seems, these words, “The Lord will judge his people;” that is, he will call his people to an account, so as to reward some, and to punish others. The apostates might have said, “Though we leave the Christian, and turn to the Jewish religion, we shall not be idolaters; therefore the vengeance you threaten will not belong to us. To prevent this kind of evasion, the Apostle adds, “The Lord will summon to judgment his own people, and give to each according to their works. The fact, that God is a judge, who will reward some and punish others, is what is meant; and this view accords with the passage in Deuteronomy, and also with the design of the Apostle here.

[¶16] The two verbs also, the Hebrew ידין, and the Greek κρινεῖ, will admit of this meaning. The first, indeed, though not the second, often means to vindicate, to defend; but the context in Deuteronomy 32:36, requires its sense to be that of executing what is right and just to all. See Genesis 30:6

### Appendix P2

[¶18] APPENDIX P 2

[¶19] Chapter 12:1. Which doth so easily beset us, etc. Calvin follows the Vulg., “which surrounds us, or stands around us. It is rendered by Chrysostom, “which easily surrounds us; by Beza, “which is ready to encompass us;” by Doddridge, “which in present circumstances hath the greatest advantage against us;” by Macknight, “easily committed.”

[¶20] The word εὐπερίστατον means literally, “well­standing­around.” But εὐ in composition often means readily, easily, aptly. Then we may render it, “the readily surrounding sin,” that is, the sin which readily surrounds us, and thereby entangle us, so as to prevent as, like long garments, to run our course. The runners threw aside every weight or burden, and also their long garments. These two things seem to have been alluded to. Therefore the second clause is not explanatory of the preceding, as some consider it, but is wholly a distinct thing; there was the burden and the readily entangling sin. The burden was probably worldly cares, or as Theophylact says, “the baggage of earthly concerns;” and the easily encircling sin seems to have been the fear of persecution as Doddridge suggests; which, if allowed to prevail, would lead them to apostasy.

[¶21] If the word be taken in an active sense, then what is meant is the deceptive power of sin, it being that which readily surrounds and allures us; but if it be taken passively, then what is specifically meant is, that the sin referred to is that which stands fairly and plausibly around us; for “well­standing­around” is what presents on every side a fair and plausible appearance. And apostasy might have been so represented; for the Jews could produce many plausible arguments. Scapula says that ἀπερίστατος is applied by the Greek rhetoricians to a question barely or briefly stated, unaccompanied with any circumstances; then, if instead of the negative, ευ, well, be prefixed to it, the meaning would be that it is something well stated and plausibly represented. The version in this case would be, “the sin that plausibly presents itself” If this meaning be received, then there seems to be a striking contrast in the passage; we are surrounded by a throng of witnesses, and also by sin with its plausible pretenses. It is usual with Paul to personify sin.