Charles Ellicott Commentary Hebrews 4:10

"For he that is entered into his rest hath himself also rested from his works, as God did from his." — Hebrews 4:10 (ASV)

Into his rest.—That is, into God’s rest.

Has ceased.—Rather, has rested from his works as God did from His own works. This verse is added to explain and justify the reference to a “sabbath” in Hebrews 4:9. Man’s sabbath-rest begins when he enters into God’s rest (Genesis 2:2); as that was the goal of the creative work, so this rest is the goal for the people of God in their life of “works.”

As the whole argument is reviewed, the question may naturally be asked: To what extent is this wide meaning present in the Psalm itself? Where must the line be drawn between the direct teaching of the words and the application made here? The apparent expansion of the meaning of the Psalm relates to Hebrews 4:11 alone. There, in the first instance, a historical fact is mentioned—the exclusion of the rebels from the promised land. But though the mention of God’s oath is derived from Numbers 14:28-30, the language of the historian is significantly changed; for you shall not come into the land, we read, they shall not enter into My rest.

True, the land could be spoken of as their rest and inheritance (Deuteronomy 12:9); but the language the Psalmist chooses is, in any case, susceptible to a much higher and wider meaning, and, as some of the passages quoted in the Note on Hebrews 3:11 serve to prove, may have been used in this extended sense long before the Psalmist’s age. It seems unreasonable to doubt that Hebrews 4:8, when placed beside Hebrews 4:11, shows that the higher meaning of the words was in the Psalmist’s thought and implies that the offer of admission to God’s rest was still made.

As the people learned through ages of experience and training to discern the deeper and more spiritual meaning that lay in the promises of the King and the Son of David, so it was with other promises that at first might seem to have no more than a temporal significance. If these considerations are well founded, it follows that we have no right to view the argument of this section as an “accommodation” or a mere application of Scripture: the Christian preacher merely fills up the outline the prophet had drawn.