A53678:1602
A continuation of the exposition of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the…
A continuation of the exposition of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews viz, on the sixth, seventh, eight, ninth, and tenth chapters : wherein together with the explication of the text and context, the priesthood of Christ ... are declared, explained and confirmed : as also, the pleas of the Jews for the continuance and perpetuity of their legal worship, with the doctrine of the principal writers of the Socinians about these things, are examined and disproved / by J. Owen ...
London: printed for Nathaniel Ponder, 1680
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
It is therefore not only a mistake but an Error of danger in some Expositors, who suppose that this Oath was made unto Christ upon his Ascension into Heaven. For this Apprehension being pursued, will fall in with the [Greek or Hebrew]; of the Socinians in this whole Cause, namely, that the Kingly and Priestly Offices of Christ are not really distinct. Moreover it supposeth the principal discharge of the Priesthood of Christ, in his sacrifice, to have been antecedent unto this Oath which utterly enervates the Apostles Argument in these words. For if he were made a Priest and discharged his Office without an Oath, as he must be and do on this supposition that the Oath of God was made unto him after his Ascension, (or that his death and Oblation therein belonged not unto his Priestly Office) he had no preeminence herein unto the Aaronical Priests. He might so have a subsequent Privilege of the Confirmation of his Office, but he had none in his Call thereunto.
It is therefore not only a mistake but an Error of danger in some Expositors, who suppose that this Oath was made unto Christ upon his Ascension into Heaven. For this Apprehension being pursued, will fall in with the 〈non-Latin alphabet〉; of the Socinians in this whole Cause, namely, that the Kingly and Priestly Offices of Christ are not really distinct. Moreover it supposeth the principal discharge of the Priesthood of Christ, in his sacrifice, to have been antecedent unto this Oath which utterly enervates the Apostles Argument in these words. For if he were made a Priest and discharged his Office without an Oath, as he must be and do on this supposition that the Oath of God was made unto him after his Ascension, (or that his death and Oblation therein belonged not unto his Priestly Office) he had no preheminence herein unto the Aaronical Priests. He might so have a subsequent Priviledge of the Confirmation of his Office, but he had none in his Call thereunto.
Wherefore this Oath of God, though not in it self solely the constituent cause of the Priesthood of Christ, yet it was, and it was necessarily to be antecedent unto his Actual entrance upon, or discharge of any solemn Duty of his Office.