A90280:326
Of the divine original, authority, self-evidencing light, and power of the Scriptures. With an…Of the divine originall, authority, self-evidencing light, and povver of the Scriptures. With an…
Of the divine original, authority, self-evidencing light, and power of the Scriptures. With an answer to that enquiry, how we know the Scriptures to be the Word of God. Also a vindication of the purity and integrity of the Hebrew and Greek texts of the Old and New Testament; in some considerations on the prolegomena, & appendix to the late Biblia polyglotta. Whereunto are subjoined some exercitations about the nature and perfection of the Scripture, the right of interpretation, internal Light, revelation, &c. / By John Owen: D.D.Of the divine originall, authority, self-evidencing light, and povver of the Scriptures. With an answer to that enquiry, how we know the Scriptures to be the Word of God. Also a vindication of the purity and integrity of the Hebrew and Greek texts of the Old and New Testament; in some considerations on the prolegomena, & appendix to the late Biblia polyglotta. Whereunto are subjoyned some exercitations about the nature and perfection of the Scripture, the right of interpretation, internall Light, revelation, &c. / By Iohn Owen: D.D.
Oxford: printed by Henry Hall for Tho, 1659
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Sect. 7. 4. The silence of the Mishna Gemara, or whole Talmud concerning the Points is further urged. This Argument is also at large discussed by Buxtorfius, and the instances in it answered to the full: nor is it needful for any man to add any thing further, until what he hath discoursed to this purpose be removed. See part. 1. cap. 6. See also Glassius lib. 1. Tract. 1• de Text. Hebrai punctat: who gives instances to the contrary; yea and the Talmud its self in Nedarim, or of vows chap. 4. on Nehem. 8. 8▪ do plainly mention them: and Treatises ancienter than the Talmud ⟨p. 272⟩cited by Rabbi Azarias in Jmre Binah expressly speaks of them. It is to me a sufficient evidence, able to overbear the conjectures to the contrary, that the Talmudists both knew, and in their Readings were regulated by the points now in use, in that, as many learned men have observed, there is not one Text of Scripture to be found cited in the Talmud, in any other sense, as to the literal reading and meaning of the word, then only that which it is restrained unto by the present punctation: when it is known that the Patrons of the Opinion under Consideration, yield this constantly as one Reason of the 70 Translators reading words and sentences otherwise then we read them now in our Bibles; namely, because the books they used were not pointed, whereby they were at liberty to conjecture at This or That sense of the Word before them. This is one of the main Pillars of Capellus his whole fabric in his Critica Sacra. And how it can be fancied there should be no variety between our present reading and the Talmudists, upon supposition ⟨p. 273⟩they knew not the use of Points, I know not. Is it possible, on this supposition, there should be such a Coincidence between their and our present punctation; whereon the same principle, it seems, there are so many variations by the 70 and the Chaldee Paraphrast?
Sect. 7. 4. The silence of the Miskna Gemara, or whole Talmud concerning the Points is further urged. This Argument is also at large discussed by Buxtorfius, and the instances in it answered to the full: nor is it needfull for any man to adde any thing further, untill what he hath discoursed to this purpose be removed. See part. 1. cap. 6. See also Glassius lib. 1. Tract. 1 de Text. Hebrai punctat: who gives instances to the contrary; yea and the Talmud its selfe in Nedarim, or of vowes chap. 4. on