A53678:1983
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.
2. The Difference of the Time wherein these Priesthoods were ordained, is included on the one hand and expressed on the other. For the former, it was when the Law was given, whereby they were made Priests: the latter was [Greek or Hebrew], 1after the Law, or the giving of it. This, I confess, doth not appear at first view to be to the advantage of the Apostles Design, namely, that this Oath was after the Law. For in another place he expressly argues on the other hand, that what is first in such cases hath the Preeminence; and cannot be disannulled by what doth ensue. Gal. 3. 17. And this I say, that the Covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the Law which was four hundred and thirty years after cannot disannul, that it should make the Promise of none effect. May it not be as well said that this Oath, which was declared about four hundred years after the giving of the Law, could not disannul it, or make it of none effect? The Objection being not without its difficulty, I shall spend a little time in the full solution of it. I answer therefore, That what followeth after cannot Disannul what went before,
2. The Difference of the Time wherein these Priesthoods were ordained, is included on the one hand and expressed on the other. For the former, it was when the Law was given, whereby they were made Priests: the latter was 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, 1after the Law, or the giving of it. This, I confess, doth not appear at first view to be to the advantage of the Apostles Design, namely, that this Oath was after the Law. For in another place he expresly argues on the other hand, that what is first in such cases hath the Preeminence; and cannot be disanulled by what doth ensue. Gal. 3. 17. And this I say, that the Covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the Law which was four hundred and thirty years after cannot disanul, that it should make the Promise of none effect. May it not be as well said that this Oath, which was declared about four hundred years after the giving of the Law, could not disanul it, or make it of none effect? The Objection being not without its difficulty, I shall spend a little time in the full solution of it. I answer therefore, That what followeth after cannot Disanul what went before,