A90286:13
A review of the annotations of Hugo Grotius, in reference unto the doctrine of…
A review of the annotations of Hugo Grotius, in reference unto the doctrine of the deity, and satisfaction of Christ. With a defence of the charge formerly laid against them. / By John Owen D.D.A review of the annotations of Hugo Grotius, in reference unto the doctrine of the deity, and satisfaction of Christ. With a defence of the charge formerly laid against them. / By Iohn Ovven D.D.
Oxford: printed by H. Hall. printer to the University for Thom. Robinson, 1656
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.
From 1 Pet. 2. 24. (says the Apologist) Grotius informs us that Christ so bare our sins, that he freed us from them, so that we are healed by his stripes.
From 1 Pet. 2. 24. (saies the Apologist) Grotius informes us that Christ so bare our sins, that he freed us from them, so that we are healed by his stripes.
This thus crudely proposed, Socinus himself would grant it, is little more then barely repeating the words; Grotius goes farther, and contends that [Greek or Hebrew] the word there used by the Apostle, is to be interpreted, tulit sursum eundo, portavit, and tells us that Socinus would render this word abstulit, and so take away the force of the Argument from this place. To disprove that insinuation, he urges sundry other places in the new Testament, where some words of the same importance are used, and are no way capable of such a signification. And whereas Socinus urges to the contrary Heb. 9. 28. where he says [Greek or Hebrew] signifies nothing but auferre peccata, Grotius disproves that instance, and manifests that in that place also it is to be rendered by tulit, and so relates to the death of Christ.
This thus crudely proposed, Socinus himselfe would graunt it, is little more then barely repeating the words; Grotius goes farther, and contends that 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 the word there used by the Apostle, is to be interpreted, tulit sursum eundo, portavit, and tells us that Socinus would render this word abstulit, and so take away the force of the Argument from this place. To disprove that insinuation, he urges sundry other places in the new Testament, where some words of the same importance are used, and are no way capable of such a signification. And whereas Socinus urges to the contrary