by Eusebius That he was the most eminently learned and knowing person of the Roman or Latine Church in those dayes will I suppose not be greatly questioned Now to suppose that he knew not the customes opinions and practice of that Church but would suffer himself to be imposed on by a stranger destitute of those advantages which he had to come unto an unquestionable certainty in it is a very fond thing Besides he doth not any where speak as one that reported the words and Judgement of another but in three or four places expresly affirms it as of his own knowledge when at the same time in opposition thereunto he contends that it was received by all other Churches in the world and all Writers from the dayes of the Apostles § 15 Neither yet doth it appear from any thing delivered by Caius Hippolitus Eusebius or Hierome that the Latine Church did ever reject this Epistle Yea we shall find that many amongst them even in those dayes reckoned it unto the Canon of the Scripture and owned St. Paul as the Penman of it Eusebius himself acknowledges that Clemens useth sundry Testimonies out of it in his Epistle ad Corinthios And others also there were concurring with his judgement therein But these two things I allow on the testimonies insisted on 1. That sundry particular persons of note and esteem in the Roman Church owned not the Canonical authority of this Epistle as not esteeming it written by St. Paul 2. The Church it self had not before the dayes of Hierome made any publick Judgement about the Author or Authority of this Epistle nor given any Testimony unto them For it seems utterly impossible that if any such Judgement had passed or testimony been given that Hierome living in the midst of that Church should know nothing of it but so often affirm the contrary without haesitation And this undenyably evinceth the injustice of some mens pretensions that the Roman Church is the only proposer of Canonical Scripture and that upon the Authority of her proposal alone it is to be received Four hundred years were passed before she her self publickly received this Epistle or read it in her Assemblies so far was she from having proposed it unto others And yet all this while was it admitted and received by all other Churches in the world as Hierom testifies and that from the dayes of the Apostles whose judgement the Roman Church it self at length submitted unto No impeachment then of the Authority of this Epistle can be taken from this defect and inadvertency of the Roman Church it being convinced to be so by the concurrent suffrage and Testimony of all other Churches in the world from the dayes of the Apostle as we shall afterwards more fully declare Neither are the occasions of this haesitation of the Western Church obscure The Epistle was written it may be in Rome at least it was in some part of Italy Chap. 13.24 There no doubt it was seen and it may be Copied out before its sending by some who used to accompany the Apostle as Clemens who as we have shewed not long after mentioned divers things contained in it The Originall was without question speedily sent into Judea unto the Hebrews to whom it was written and directed as were all others of the Epistles of the same Apostle unto those Churches that were immediately intended and concerned in them That Copies of it were by them also communicated unto their Brethren in the East equally concerned in it with themselves cannot be doubted unless we will suppose them grosly negligent in their duty towards God and man which we have no reason to do But the Churches of the Hebrews living at that time and for some while after if not in a seperation yet in a distinction by reason of some peculiar observances from the Churches of the Gentiles especially those of the West they were not it may be very forward in communicating this Epistle unto them being written as they supposed about an especial concernment of their own By this means this Epistle seems to have been kept much within the Compass of the Churches of the Jews untill after the destruction of the Temple when by their dispersion and coalescency with other Churches in the East it came to be generally received amongst them and non solum ab Ecclesiis orientis sed ab omnibus retro Ecclesiis Graeci sermonis Scriptoribus as Hierom speaks But the Latin Church having lost that advantage of receiving it upon its first writing it may be also upon the consideration of the removall of its peculiar Argument upon the finall destruction of the whole Judaical Church and Worship was somewhat slow in their inquiry after it Those that succeeded in that Church it is not unlikely had their scruples increased because they found it not in common use amongst their Predecessors like to the rest of St. Pauls Epistles not considering the occasion thereof Add hereunto that by that time it had gradually made its progress in its return into the West where it was first written and attended with the Suffrage of all the Eastern Churches began to evince its own Authority sundry persons who were wrangling about peculiar opinions and practices of their own began to seek advantages from some expressions in it So did in particular the Novatians and the Donatists This might possibly increase the scruple amongst the Orthodox and make them wary in their admission of that Authority which they found pleaded against them And well was it for them that their opinions about which they disagreed with their Adversaries were according unto truth seeing it may justly be feared that some then would have made them their Rule and Standard in their reception or rejection of this Epistle for it was no new thing for the Orthodox themselves to make bold sometime with the Scripture if they supposed it to run cross unto their conceptions So Epiphanius informs us in Ancorat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And also he wept for so it is read in the uncorrected Copies of the Gospell according to Luke and St. Irenaeus useth this Testimony in his Book against Heresies for their confutation who affirmed that Christ took flesh only in appearance but the Orthodox or Catholicks being afraid of the importance of that expression took away that word out of the Copies not understanding its use and sense So also Sixtus Sinensis after he hath informed us out of Hilary that many Orthodox persons denyed the story of our Saviours Agony and bloody Sweat adds of his own Suspicor à Catholicis sublatam esse pio sed simplici zelo quod favere videbatur Arianis I suspect that the Story was taken out of the Copies by some Catholicks out of a godly but simple zeal because it seemed to favour the Arians So great is the power of prejudice and so little occasions have men taken whom others have esteemed Orthodox and pious to make bold with that word whereby both we
matter manner of writing and present usefulness between any of the books that being written by divine inspiration are given out for the Churches rule they are all equall as to their canonical authority being equally interested in that which is the formal reason of it so whatever usefulness or respect in the Church any other writing may have they can no way give them any interest in that whose formal reason they are not concerned in In the sense explained we affirm the Epistle to the Hebrews to be Canonical that is § 10 properly and strictly so and of the number of them which the Antients called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every way genuine and Catholick In the confirmation whereof we shall first declare by whom it hath been opposed or questioned and then what reasons they pretend for their so doing which being removed out of our way the arguments whereby the Truth of our assertion is evinced shall be insisted on We need not much insist on their madness who of old with a sacrilegious licentiousness § 11 rejected what portion of Scripture they pleased The Ebionites not only rejected all the Epistles of Paul but also reviled his person as a Greâ—k and an Apostate as Irenaeus and Epiphanius inform us Their folly and blasphemy was also imitated and followed by the Helescheitae in Eusebius Marcion rejected in particular this Epistle to the Hebrews and those also to Timothy and Titus as Epiphanius and Hierome assure us who adds unto him Basilides And Theodoret as to the Epistle unto the Hebrews joyns unto them some of the Arians also Now though the folly of those Sacrilegious persons be easie to be repelled as it is done by Petrus Cluniacusis yet Hierome hath given us a sufficient reason why we should not spend time therein Si quidem saith he redderent causas cur eas Apostoli non putant tentaremus aliquid respondere sorsitan satisfaciere lectori nunc vero cum haeretica autoritate pronunciant dicunt illa Epistola Pauli est haec non est ea autoritate refelli se pro veritate intelligant qua ipsi non crubescant falsa simulare They did not so much as plead or pretend any cause or reason for the rejection of these Epistles but did it upon their own head and Authority so they deserve neither answer nor consideration It is of more importance that this Epistle was a long time though not rejected by § 12 yet not received in the Church of Rome Eusebius informs us that Cains a Presbyter of that Church whom he much commends for his learning and piety admitted but of thirteen Epistles of St. Paul rejecting that unto the Hebrews as Photius also affirms And the same Photius acquaints us with the same Judgement of Hippolitus another eminent member of that Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among other things not exactly answering the truth he saith also that the Epistle to the Hebrews was not Pauls And Eusebius adds unto his information of the Judgement of Cains that it was not generally received in the Church of Rome in his time Neither is it any way acknowledged as St. Pauls by either Tertullian Cyprian Lactantius or Macrobius Yea the same Eusebius affirms that some excepted against it upon this account because it was opposed as none of St. Pauls in the Roman Church Hierome grants that Latinorum consuetudo non recepit Epistolam ad Hebraeos inter Canonicas Scripturas The custome of the Latines that is the Roman Church did not receive this Epistle among the Canonical Scriptures And speaking elsewhere of it he adds the same words Licet eam latina consuetudo inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipiat And elsewhere also he confirms the same Assertion It cannot then be denied but that it was four hundred years at least after the writing of this Epistle before it was publickly received and avowed as Canonical by the Româ—n Church Nor will the quotation of it by Hilary and Ambrose prove any general admission of it as such it being their custome not to restrain the Testimonies they made use of unto Books absolutely Canonical § 13 Baronius ad An. 160 labours to take of this failure of the Latine Church The testimony of Eusebius he rejects because as he sayes he was Arianorum gregalis of the Arian faction and willing to call the authority of this Epistle into Question in complyance with them who some of them as we observed before refused it n. 42. The Judgement of Caius he resolves into the Testimony of Eusebius which because of his partiality as he pleads is not to be admitted And lastly opposeth the witness of Hierome as a person who had suffered himself to be imposed on by Eusebius whose words in his reports of Caius he makes use of n. 50. Concluding upon the whole matter that it was a meer false calumny of Eusebius against the Church of Rome which Hierome by too much facillity gave credit unto But I must acknowledge that these Answers of his which indeed are nothing but a rejection of as good witnesses in matters of fact as any we have upon the Roll of Antiquity are not unto me satisfactory no more than the testimony of its acceptance which he produceth in the Epistle of Innocentius to Exuperius which is justly suspected supposititious with the Council at Rome against Apollinaris under Damasus wherein no such thing appears Though I will not deny but that about that time it came to be publickly owned by that Church and was reckoned unto the Canon of the Scripture by Ruffinus § 14 But wherein doth it in the least appear that Eusebius reports the Judgement of Caius or the Roman Church in complyance with the Arians He himself evidently admits the Epistle to be Canonical and confirms it by the testimonies of Clemens Origen and others What would it advantage him or the cause which some pretend he favoured by reporting the opposition of others to a part of divine writt which himself accepted Besides they were not the Arians of the first rank or edition for an inclination unto whom Eusebius is suspected but some of their off-spring which fell out into such Sacrilegious opinions and practices as the first leaders of them owned not that are accused in this matter much less can he be thought to design the reproach of the Roman Church Nay these answers are inconsistent as any one may perceive He could not at the same time design the rejecting of the Epistle in complyance with the Arians and the calumniating of them by whom it was rejected and on whose Authority his intentions must be founded But indeed his words plainly manifest that he gives us a naked account of matter of fact without either prejudice or design It is yet more incredible that Hierome in this matter should suffer himself to be imposed on
and all our opinions must be judged But it being manifest at length that no colour was given unto the unjust severities of the Novatians by any thing in this Epistle it was generally embraced And by the conquest of this opposition established its Authority for the future § 17 Bellarmin chargeth Luther Brentius Chemnitius and the Centuriators with the rejection of this Epistle But because I know that some of them are falsly accused by him I am apt to suspect the same of the rest which I have not the opportunity to consult And so I shall not reckon them amongst the opposers of this Epistle The matter is more certain concerning Cajetan and Erasmus the former in his Preface unto the other in his last Annotation on this Epistle denying it to be St. Pauls and questioning yea indeed rejecting its Canonicall Authority To them we may add Eniedinus proceeding upon the same principles and making use of their Arguments to the same purpose These are the chief if not absolutely all who have at any time made any scruple at the Authority of this Epistle The reasons they make use of to justifie themselves in their conjectures are amassed together by Erasmus in his Note on the 24. Verse of the last Chapter of it But because he mixeth together the Arguments that he insists on to prove St. Paul not to have been the Penman of it and the exceptions he puts in unto its Canonicall Authority which are things of a diverse consideration I shall separate them and first take out those that seem absolutely to impeach its Authority leaving them that oppose its Penman to our ensuing Discourse on that question in particular § 18 The first thing generally pleaded is the uncertainty of its Author or Penman Sola omnium Pauli nomen non praefert saith Erasmus How unjust and groundless this pretence is we shall afterwards fully manifest At present I shall only shew that it is in generall of no importance in this cause The Author of a Writing being certainly known may indeed give some light unto the nature and Authority of it When it is confessed that the Penman of any Book was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or divinely inspired and that by him it was written for the use of the Church there can be no question of its Authority But this last of his design directed by the Holy Ghost must be no less known than the former For a man may write one Book by inspiration and others by a fallible humane Judgement as Solomon seems to have done his Philosophicall Discourses that are lost Again when the Penman of any Writing pretending unto Divine Authority is not esteemed nor doth manifest himself in any thing to have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immediately acted by the Holy Ghost the writing it self must needs be lyable unto just Exception Wherefore it is confessed that when the Author of any Writing is certainly known much light into its Authority and Relation unto the Canon of the Scripture may be thence received But when this is doubtfull nothing can thence satisfactory on either side be concluded And therefore it hath pleased the Holy Ghost to keep the names of the Penmen of many parts of the Scripture in everlasting obscurity for he borrows no Countenance or Authority unto any thing that proceeds by Inspiration from himself from the names of men There is not then the least strength in this exception for be it granted that we are altogether uncertain who was the Penman of this Epistle yet no impeachment of its Authority can thence be taken unless it can be proved that he was not Divinely inspired But yet to shew the insufficiency every way of this Objection we shall abundantly evince that indeed the very ground and foundation of it is feeble and false The Penman of this Epistle being as well and certainly known as those of any portion of Scripture whatever that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some whereof were never doubted nor called into question And at least we shall so far evince St. Paul to have been the Author of it as although we shall not from thence take any Argument to prove its Canonicall Authority because it hath it self been called into question yet as to render an Objection from the uncertainty of its Author altogether unreasonable § 19 The remaining Objections are more particular and direct to their purpose by whom they are pleaded As First that the Author of this Epistle cites sundry things out of the Old Testament which are not therein contained Such are many of the Stories related unto in the 11. Chapter and that in particular in Chap. 12. verse 21. where he affirms that Moses upon the Terror of the sight that appeared unto him said I exceedingly quake and tremble This place Erasmus supposeth Hierom to have intended when he sayes that some things are mentioned in this Epistle that are not recorded in the Old Testament And Aquinas perplexeth himself in seeking for a Solution unto this difficulty For First he would refer the place to Moses sight of the Angell in the Bush and not the giving of the Law contrary to the express Discourse of the Context And then he adds dixit saltem facto though he said not so yet he did so And lastly worst of all vel fortè Apostolus aliâ utitur literâ quam nos non habemus or it may be the Apostle used another Text that we have not But there is no need of any of these evasions The Author quotes no Book nor Testimony of the Old Testament but only relates a matter of fact and one circumstance of it which doubtless he had by Divine Revelation whereof there is no express mention in the place where the whole matter is Originally recorded Thus in the beginning of the Chronicles sundry particular Stories as that about the Children of Ephraim Chap. 7.21 no wher 's before written are reported from the same infallible directions that others of the same time were written withall when they were omitted And it is uncouth way of proving an Author not to write by Divine inspiration because he writeth Truths that he could no otherwise be acquainted withall Neither is it unmeet for him that writes by Divine inspiration to mention things recorded in other Stories whose Truth is unquestionable as those are related unto Chap. 11. It seems to be of more importance that if the Objectors may be believed the § 20 Writer of this Epistle citeth Testimonies out of the Old Testament that are no wayes to his purpose nor at all prove the matter that he produceth them for discovering at least that he wrote with a fallible spirit if not also that he dealt scarcely bona fide in handling the cause which he undertook Cajetan insists on that of the first Chapter verse 5. I will be unto him a Father and he shall be unto me a Son taken from the 2 Sam. 7.14 or 1 Chron. 17. ◠which words as he supposeth no
was the fittest to be used in this employment and how well all things of this nature agree unto St. Paul we shall see afterwards § 5 Some have assigned the Writing of this Epistle unto Barnabas Clemens Origen Eusebius make no mention of him Tertullian was the Author of this Opinion and it is reported as his by Hierom. Philastrius also remembers the report of it And it is of late defended by Camero as the former concerning Luke by Grotius whose Reasons for his conjecture are confuted with some sharpness by Spanhemius mindful as it seems of his Fathers Controversie with some of his Scholars The Authority of Tertullian is the sole foundation of this Opinion But as the Book wherein he mentions it was written in his Paroxysme when he uttered not that only unadvisedly so he seems not to lay much weight on the Epistle it self only preferring it unto the Apochryphal Hermes Receptior saith he apud Ecclesias Epistola Barnabae illo Apocrypho pastore Maechorum And we have shewed that the Latin Church was for a time somewhat unacquainted with this Epistle so that it is no marvel if one of them should mistake its Author Grotius would disprove this Opinion from the dissimilitude of its style and that which goes under the name of Barnabas which is corrupt and barbarous But there is little weight in that Observation that Epistle being certainly spurious no way savouring the Wisdom or Spirit of him on whom it hath been vulgarly imposed But yet that it was that Epistle which is cited by some of the Antients under the name of Barnabas and not this unto the Hebrews is well proved by Baronius from the names that Hierom mentions out of that Epistle which are no where to be found in this to the Hebrews But that Epistle of Barnabas is an open fruit of that vanity which prevailed in many about the third and fourth Ages of the Church of personating in their Writings some Apostolical Persons wherein they seldom or never kept any good decorum as might easily be manifested in this particular instance As to our present Case the Reason before mentioned is of the same validity against this as the other Opinion concerning Luke whereunto others of an equal evidence may be added Barnabas was not an Apostle properly and strictly so called nor had Apostolical Mission or Authority but rather seems to have been one of the LXX Disciples as Epiphanius affirms And Eusebius a Person less credulous than he acknowledging that a just and true Catalogue of them could not be given yet placeth Barnabas as the first of them concerning whom all agreed Much weight indeed I shall not lay hereon seeing it is evident that the Catalogues given us by the Antients of those Disciples are nothing but a rude Collection of such names as they found in the Books of the New Testament applied without Reason or Testimony but Apostle he was none Many circumstances also concurr to the removal of this conjecture The Epistle was written in Italy Chap. 13.24 where it doth not appear that Barnabas ever was The fabulous Author I confess of the Rhapsedy called the Recognitions of Clemens tells us that Barnabas went to Rome taking along Clemens with him and returning into Judaea found St. Peter at Caesarea But St. Luke in the Acts gives us another account both where Barnabas was and how he was employed at the time intimated by him who knew nothing of those things For whilst St. Peter was at Caesarea Acts 10.1 Barnabas was at Hierusalem Acts 9.27 being a little while after sent to Antioch by the Apostles chap. 11.22 Again Timothy was the Companion of the Writer of this Epistle chap. 13.23 a Person as far as appears unknown unto Barnabas being taken into St. Pauls Society after their difference and separation Acts 15.39 chap. 16.1 He had also been in bonds or imprisonment chap. 10.34 whereof we cannot at that time learn any thing concerning Barnabas those of St. Paul being known unto all And lastly not long before the Writing of this Epistle Barnabas was so far from that Light into and Apprehension of the nature use and expiration of Judaical Rites herein expressed that he was easily mislead into a practical miscarriage in the observation of them Gal. 2.13 wherein although some after Hieroms fancy that the difference between St. Peter and St. Paul was only in pretence have laboured to free St. Peter and his Companions on other grounds from any sinful failing as it should seem in a direct opposition unto the Testimony of St. Paul affirming that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that particular he was to be blamed or condemned vâ—r 11. not unlike him who hath written a justification of Aaron in his making the Golden Calf yet that Barnabas was not come up unto any constancy in his practice about Mosaical Institutions is evident from the Text. And shall we suppose that He who but a little before upon the coming of some few Brethren of the Church of Jerusalem from St. James durst not avouch and abide by his own personal Liberty but deserted the use of it not without some blameable dissimulation Gal. 2.13 should now with so much Authority write an Epistle unto that Church with St. James and all the Hebrews in the world concurring with them in Judgement and Practice about that very thing wherein himself out of respect unto them had particularly miscarried This certainly was rather the work of St. Paul whose Light and Constancy in the Doctrine delivered in this Epistle with his engagements in the defence of it above all the rest of the Apostles is known from the story of the Acts and his own other Writings Apollos hath been thought by some to be the Penman of this Epistle and that because § 6 it answers the Character given of him For it is said that he was an Eloquent man mighty in the Scripture fervent in Spirit and one that mightily convinced the Jews out of the Scripture it self Acts 18.24 28. all which things appear throughout this whole Discourse But this Conjecture hath no Countenance from Antiquity no mention being made of any Epistle written by Apollos or of any thing else so that he is not reckoned by Hierom amongst the Ecclesiastical Writers nor by those who interpolated that work with some Fragments out of Sophronius Nor is he reported by Clemens Origen or Eusebius to have been by any esteemed the Author of this Epistle However I confess somewhat of moment might have been apprehended in the Observation mentioned if the Excellencies ascribed unto Apollos had been peculiar unto him yea had they not all of them been found in St. Paul and that in a manner and degree more eminent than in the other But this being so the ground of this Conjecture is taken from under it Origen Eusebius and Hierom in the places forecited mention a report concerning some § 7 who ascribed this Epistle unto Clemens Romanus
EXERCITATIONS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS Also concerning the MESSIAH WHEREIN The Promises concerning him to be a Spiritual Redeemer of Mankind are Explained and Vindicated His Coming and Accomplishment of his Work according to the Promises is proved and confirmed The Person or who he is is declared The whole Oeconomy of the Mosaical Law Rites Worship and Sacrifices is explained AND IN ALL The Doctrine of the Person Office and Work of the Messiah is opened The nature and demerit of the first sin is unfolded The Opinions and Traditions of the Antient and Modern Jews are examined Their Objections against the Lord Christ and the Gospel are answered The time of the coming of the Messiah is stated And the great fundamental Truths of the Gospel vindicated With an Exposition and Discourses on the Two First Chapters of the said Epistle to the HEBREWS By J. Owen D.D. LONDON Printed by Robert White for Nathaniel Ponder at the Sign of the Peacock in Chancery Lane near Fleetstreet 1668. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE S r William Morrice K t One of His Majesties Most Honourable Privy Council and Principal Secretary of State c. SIR THE Dedication of Books unto Persons of Worth and Honour hath secured it self from the Impeachment of Censure by taking Sanctuary in the Usage of all Times and Ages Herein therefore as none is needed so I shall make use of no Apology But the consideration of some Circumstances needless to be repeated seem to render an account of the reason of my particular address unto You in this manner necessary This therefore I shall give but briefly Ne longo sermone morer tua tempora That which principally in this matter I resolved my thoughts into was a design to answer my own inclination and desire in Testifying a respectful Honor to a Person who in a place of Eminency hath given so fair an example of a singular conjunction in himself of Civil Prudence and all manner of useful Literature with their mutual Subserviency unto each other an endeavour whereof the Wisdom of all Ages hath esteemed needfull though few individuals have attained unto it For whereas a defect in Learning hath tempted some otherwise Prudent and Wise in the Management of Affairs unto a contempt of it and skill therein hath given unto others a mistaken confidence that it alone is sufficient for all the ends of Humane Life an Industrious Attempt for a furnishment of the Mind with a due mixture of them both hath been greatly Neglected to the no small disadvantage of Humane Affairs It cannot therefore seem strange nor ought any to be offended that one who dares profess a great Honour unto and Admiration of both these Endowments of the mind of Man should express them with that respect which alone he is capable to give unto Him who in a Place of Eminent Trust and Employment hath given a singular instance of their happy conjunction and readiness to Coalesce in the same mind to enable it unto a regular and steady pursuit of their common ends Whether I shall by this address attain that end or no I know not but this is that which principally I aimed at therein And to the Reason whereof I leave the Judgement of my undertakings But yet I may not omit that your favour hath also given me particular grounds for this confidence and such as have been prevalent against those impressions of discouragements which I am naturally very liable to admit of and receive Your Candid Esteem of some former Endeavours in this kind and which when carried without the Verge of those Lines of Communication within whose compass Men and their Writings are Judged by Party and scarce otherwise have received a fair acceptance in the world were no small encouragement unto me not to desert those wearisome Labours which have no other Reward or End but the furtherance of Publick Good especially having this only way left me to serve the Will of God and the Interest of the Church in my Generation It was also through the countenance of your Favour that this and some other Treatises have received Warrant to pass freely into the world which though I am uncertain of what advantage they may be unto any by reason of their own defects and the prejudices of others yet I want not the highest Security that there is nothing in them tending to the least disadvantage unto those whose concernment lyes in Peace and Truth in these Nations For the Treatises themselves which I desire herewith to represent to some of your Leisure hours I shall not offend against the Publick Service in detaining you with an account of them Their Subject Matter as to its Weight Worth and Necessity will speak for it self the main objects of our present Faith and principal Foundations of our future expectations our Pleas and Evidences for a blessed Etâ—rnity are here insisted on And whether the Temptations Opinions and bold Presumptions of many in these dayes do not call for a renewed consideration and confirmation of them is left to the Judgement of Persons indifferent and unprejudiced the manner of their handling is submitted unto yours which is highly and singularly estemed by March 20. 1667. SIR Your most humble and obliged Servant JOHN OWEN Christian Reader IF thou intendest to engage any part of thy time in the perusal of the ensuing Discourses and Exposition it may not be amiss to take along with thee the consideration of some things concerning the design and aim of their Author in the Writing and present publishing of them which are here proposed unto thee It is now sundry years since I purposed in my self if God gave life and opportunity to endeavour according to the measure of the Gift received an Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews A Subject this was I then knew and now acknowledge much laboured in by many eminent and learned men both of old and of late In particular some entire Commentaries composed with good judgment and to very good purpose have been published in our own Language Yea from him who first began a serious Exposition of this Epistle and whom none in all things have to this day exceeded there have passed few ages wherein some or other have not endeavoured the Explication of it And this also hath been done by men of all sorts and parties of all perswasions and Opinions in Christian Religion an account of whose several endeavours shall else-where be given Somewhat there was of encouragement unto me in my designed undertaking and somewhat of quite another tendency in this consideration The help which I might receive from the sedulous labours of so many learned men and those in Times Places Principles distant and distinguished from each other as also managing their common design with great variety as to particular intentions I looked on as a matter of no small advantage unto me Some I found had critically examined many of the Words Phrases and Expressions of the Writer some compared his
None of them give any Countenance unto it or intimate any Grounds of that supposition only Hierom affirms that there is some Similitude between the Style of this Epistle and that of Clemens which occasioned the suspition of his Translating of it whereof afterwards Erasmus hath since taken up that Report and seems to give credit unto it but hath not contributed any thing of Reason or Testimony unto its Confirmation A Worthy Holy Man was this Clemens no doubt and Bishop of the Church at Rome But none of the Antients of any Learning or Judgement ever laid weight on this Conjecture For what had he who was a Convert from among the Gentiles to do with the Churches of the Hebrews what Authority had he to interpose himself in that which was their peculiar concernment Whence may it appear that he had that Skill in the Nature Use and End of Mosaical Rites and Institutions which the Writer of this Epistle discovers in himself Neither doth that Epistle of his to the Church of Corinth which is yet extant though excellent in its kind permit us to think that he wrote by Divine Inspiration Besides the Author of this Epistle had a desire and purpose to go to the Hebrews chap. 13.22 Yea he desires to be restored unto them as one that had been with them before But as it doth not appear that this Clemens was ever in Palestine so what Reason he should have to leave his own charge now to go thither no man can imagine And to end this needless Debate in that Epistle which was truly his own he makes use of the Words and Authority of this as Eusebius long since observed § 8 Sixtus Sinensis affirms that the Work whose Author we enquire after was by some assigned unto Tertullian A fond and impious imagination and such as no man of Judgement or Sobriety could ever fall into This Epistle was famous in the Churches before Tertullian was born is ascribed by himself unto Barnabas and some passages in it are said by him to be corrupted by one Theodotus long before his time From the Vncertainty of these Conjectures with the Evidence of Reason and Circumstances whereby they are disproved two things we seem to have obtained First That no Objection on their Account can arise against our Assertion And Secondly that if St. Paul be not acknowledged to be the Writer of this Epistle the whole Church of God is and ever was at a total loss whom to ascribe it unto And it may reasonably be expected that the weakness of these Conjectures should if not add unto yet set of the credibility of the Reasons and Testimonies which shall be produced in the Assignement of it unto him § 9 The Objections that are laid by some against our Assignation of this Epistle unto St. Paul according unto the Order proposed are nextly to be considered These I shall pass through with what briefness I can so as not to be wanting unto the Defensative designed Dissimilitude of Style and manner of writing from that used by St. Paul in his other Epistles is pressed in the first place and principally insisted on And indeed it is the whole of what with any colour of Reason is made use of in this Cause This the Antients admitted The Elegancy propriety of Speech and sometimes Loftiness that occurr in this Epistle difference it as they say from those of St. Pauls writings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Oecumenius it seems not to be St. Pauls because of the Style or Character of Speech For this cause Clemens of Alexandria supposed it to be written in Hebrew and to be translated into Greek by St. Luke the Evangelist the Style of it as he sayes being like unto that which is used in the Acts of the Apostles and yet that is acknowledged by all to be purely Greek whereas this is accused to be full of Hebraisms so little weight is to be laid on these Critical Censures wherein Learned men perpetually contradict one another Origen also confesseth that it hath not in its Character 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Idiotism or propriety of the Language of St. Paul who acknowledgeth himself to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 11.6 rude in Speech and this Epistle is saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the composition of its Speech Elegantly Greek in comparison of his which if we may believe him any one will discern who can judge between the difference of Styles And Hierom Scripserat autem ad Hebraeos Hebraice id est suo eloquio disertissimè ut eo quae eloquuntur scripta fuerant in Hebraeo aliquatenus verterentur in Graecum hanc causam esse quod a coeteris Pauli Epistolis discrepare videatur It seems to differ from the rest of St. Pauls Epistles because of its Translation out of Hebrew wherein he speaks not with his wonted confidence And elsewhere he sayes that the Style of this Epistle seems to be like that of Clemens Erasmus presseth this Objection Restat saith he Jam argumentum illud quo non aliud certius stylus ipse orationis Character qui nihil habet affinitatis cum Phrasi Paulina The Style and Character of Speech have no affinity with the Phrase of St. Paul This Consideration also drew Calvin into the same Opinion and it is insisted on by Camero and Grotius to the same purpose The summ of this Objection is that St. Paul was rude in Speech which is manifest in his other Epistles but the Style of this is pure elegant florid such as hath no affinity with his so that he cannot be esteemed the Penman of it As this Objection was taken notice of by them of old and the matter of it admitted § 10 as true so because they constantly adhered to the Assignation of it unto St. Paul they gave sundry Answers unto it Origen gives us his Judgement that the Sense or Subiect Matter of this Epistle was from St. Paul which are excellent and no way inferiour to those of the same Apostle in any other Epistles as every one exercised in the Reading of his Epistles will grant but the Structure and Phrase of it he supposeth to have been the Work of some other who taking the Dictates of his Master from thence composed this Epistle But this Answer can by no means be admitted of nor accommodated unto any Writing given by Divine Inspiration For not only the Matter but the very Words of their Writings were suggested unto his Penmen by the Holy Ghost that the whole might have no influence from humane frailty or fallibility which alone renders the Authority of their Writings Sacred and Divine But this intimation would resolve the Truth in this Epistle into the Care and Diligence of him that took the sense of St. Paul and thence composed it wherein he was liable to mistakes unless we shall vainly suppose that he also was inspired Wherefore generally they who admitted of this Objection
Relation unto God in and through him they received by his means God gathering up all things to a consistency and permanency in him Ephes. 1.10 And hence also it became equal that the Rule and power over them should be committed unto him by whom although they were not like us recovered from ruine yet they were preserved from all danger of it So that in their subjection unto him consists their principal Honour and all their safety And as this act of God in appointing Christ Lord of Angels hath these equitable foundations so it hath also sundry glorious Ends. 1. It was as an addition unto that Glory that was set before him in his undertaking to redeem sinners A Kingdom was of old promised unto him and to render it exceedingly glorious the Rule and Scepter of it is extended not only to his Redeemed ones but to the holy Angels also and the sovereignty over them is granted him as a part of his Reward Phil. 2.8 9 10 11. Ephes. 1.20 21. 2. God hereby gathers up his whole family at first distinguished by the Law of their Creation into two especial kinds and then differenced and set at variance by Sin into one Body under one Head reducing them that originally were twain into one entire family Ephes. 1.10 In the fulness of time he gathered together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are in earth in him as was before declared Before this the Angels had no immediate created Head for themselves are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods Psal. 97.7 1 Cor. 8.5 Who ever is the Head must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the God of Gods or Lord of Lords which Christ alone is and in him or under him as One Head is the whole Family of God united 3. The Church of Mankind militant on the earth whose conduct unto Eternal Glory is committed unto Christ stands in need of the ministery of Angels And therefore hath God granted Rule and Power over them unto him that nothing might be wanting to enable him to save unto the uttermost them that come unto God by him So God hath given him to be head over all things to the Church Ephes. 1.22 that he should with an absolute sovereignty use and dispose of all things to the benefit and advantage of the Church This is the first branch of the Lordship and Dominion of Christ according to the distribution of the severals of it before laid down He is Lord of Angels and they are all of them his servants the fellow-servants of them that have the testimony of Jesus And as some men do wilfully cast themselves by their Religious adoration of Angels under the curse of Canaan to be servants unto servants Gen. 8.25 so it is the great honour and priviledge of true believers that in their worship of Christ they are admitted into the society of an innumerable company of Angels Heb. 12.22 Rev. 15.11 13. for they are not ashamed to esteem them their fellow-servants whom their Lord and King is not ashamed to call his Brethren And herein consists our communion with them that we have one common Head and Lord and any intercourse with them but only on this account or any worship performed towards them breaks the bond of that communion and causeth us not to hold the Head Col. 2.19 The priviledge the safety and advantage of the Church from this subjection of Angels to its Head and Saviour are by many spoken unto II. There is another sort of Angels who by sin left their primitive station and fell off from God of whom their Sin Fall Malice Wrath Business Craft in evil and Final judgment the Scripture treateth at large These belong not indeed to the possession of Christ as he is the Heir but they belong unto his Dominion as he is a Lord. Though he be not a King and Head unto them yet he is a Judge and Ruler over them All things being given into his hand they also are subjected unto his power Now as under the former head I shall consider 1. The Right or Equity and 2. The End of this Authority of Christ over this second sort of the first Race of Intellectual Creatures the Angels that have sinned 1. As before this Right is founded in his Divine Nature by vertue whereof he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fit for this Dominion He made these Angels also and therefore as God hath an absolute Dominion over them The Creatures cannot cast off the Dominion of the Creator by rebellion though they may lose their moral Relation unto God as obedient creatures yet their natural as creatures cannot be dissolved God will be God still be his creatures never so wicked and if they obey not his Will they shall bear his Justice And this Dominion of Christ over faln Angels as God makes the grant of Rule over them to him as Mediator just and equal 2. The immediate and peculiar Foundation of his Right unto Rule over faln Angels rendring the special grant of it equal and righteous is Lawful Conquest This gives a special Right Gen. 48.22 Now that Christ should conquer faln Angels was promised from the foundation of the world Gen. 3.15 The seed of the woman the Messias was to break the Serpents head despoil him of his power and bring him into subjection which he performed accordingly Col. 2.15 He spoiled principalities and powers divested faln Angels of all that Title they had got to the world by the sin of man triumphing over them as Captives to be disposed of at his pleasure He stilled or made to cease as to his power this Enemy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and self-avenger Psal. 8.2 leading captivity captive Psal. 6.18 breaking in pieces the Head over the large earth Psal. 110.6 binding the strong man armed and spoiling his goods And the Scripture of the New Testament is full of instances as to his executing his Power and Authority over Evil Angels They take up a good part of the Historical Books of it Man having sinned by the instigation of Satan he was by the just Judgement of God delivered up unto his power Heb. 2.14 The Lord Christ undertaking to recover lost man from under his power by destroying his works 1 Joh. 3.8 and to bring them again into favour with God Satan with all his might sets himself to oppose him in his Work and failing in his enterprise being utterly conquered he became absolutely subjected unto him trodden under his feet and the prey he had taken delivered from him This is the next Foundation of the Authority of Christ over the Evil Angels He had a great Contest and War with them and that about the Glory of God his own Kingdom and the Eternal Salvation of the Elect prevailing absolutely against them he made a Conquest over them and they are put in subjection unto him for ever They are subjected unto him as to their present actings and future condition He now rules them and will
is to be understood But 1. This suits not at all with the Purpose and Design of the Apostle which is plainly to prove that the Lord Christ then when he spake to us and revealed the will of God and in that work was above the Angels which is not at all proved by shewing what befell him after his work was accomplished 2. It receives no countenance from that other place of chap. 2.5 whither we are sent by these Interpreters For that the Apostle is there treating of a matter quite of another nature without any respect unto these words shall be there declared Neither doth he absolutely there mention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the world but with the addition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to come which what it is we shall enquire upon the place 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies properly the Habitable Earth and is never used absolutely in the Scripture but for the habitable world or men dwelling in it and causelesly to wrest it unto another signification is not to interpret but to offer violence unto the Text. 2. By 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then the World or Habitable Earth with them that dwell therein and nothing else is intended for as the word hath no other signification so the Psalmist in the place from whence the ensuing testimony is taken expounds it by the multitude of the Isles or the Nations lying abroad in the wide earth This is the World designed even that Earth wherein the rational creatures of God converse here below Into this was the Lord Christ brought in by the Father We are therefore nextly to enquire wherein the Fathers bringing of the Son into this world did consist We have seen formerly that some have assigned it unto One thing in particular some Another some to his Incarnation and Nativity some to his Resurrection some to his Mission of the Spirit and propagation of his Kingdom that ensued The Opinion about his Coming to reign in the world a thousand years as also that of his coming at the general Judgment we have already excluded Of the others I am apt to think that it is not any one particular exclusive to the other that the Apostle intendeth or designeth That which was intended in the Old Testament in the Promises of his coming into the world is that which is here expressed by the phrase of bringing him in See Mal. 3.2 The Lord whom ye seek shall come but who may abide the day of his coming Now it was not any one special Act nor any one particular Day that was designed in that and the like Promises But it is the whole work of God in bringing forth the Messiah by his Conception Nativity Unction with the Spirit Resurrection Sending of the Holy Ghost and preaching of the Gospel which is the subject of those Promises And their accomplishment it is which those words express When he brings the first-born into the world that is after he had kept his Church under the Administration of the Law given by Angels in the hand of Moses the Mediator in the expectation of the coming of the Messiah when he bringeth him forth unto and carries him on in his work unto the accomplishment of it he says Let all the Angels of God worship him And herein most of the former senses are comprised And this Interpretation of the words compleatly answers the intention of the Apostle in the citation of the ensuing Testimony namely to prove that in the discharge of his work of revealing the Will of God he was such an One as by reason of the Dignity of his Person had all Religious Worship Honour due unto him from the Angels themselves This sense also we are led unto by the Psalm whence the ensuing testimony is taken Psal. 97. The Exultation which the first verse of the Psalm requires and calls for is not unlike that which was in the Name of the whole Creation expressed at his Nativity Luke 2.11 And the four following verses are an Allegorical description of the work that the Lord Christ should make in and by the preaching of the Gospel See Mal. 3.2 3 4. chap. 4.1 Matth. 3.10 Luke 2.24 And hereon ensues that shame and ruine which was brought upon Idols and Idolaters thereby v. 7. And the joy of the whole Church in the presence of Christ v. 8. attended with his glorious Reign in Heaven as a consequent of the Accomplishment of his work v. 9. Which is proposed as a motive unto Obedience and a matter of confidence and rejoycing unto the Church And this is the Fathers bringing of the Son into the world described by the Psalmist and intended by the Apostle It remains that we enquire why and in what sense Christ is here called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primogenitus or the first-born The common Answer is Non quod post illum alii sed quod ante illum nullus Not that any was born after him in the same way but that none was born before him which as we have shewed before will agree well enough with the use of the Word And this is applied both to the Eternal Gâ—neration of his Divine Person and to the Conception and Nativity of his Humane Nature But if we suppose that his Person and Eternal Generation may be intended in this Expression we must make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the first-born to be the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or only begotten which may not be allowed for Christ is absolutely called the only begotten of the Father in his Eternal Generation his Essence being infinite took up the whole Nature of Divine Filiation so that it is impossible that with respect thereunto there should be any more Sons of God But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first-born is used in relation unto others and yet as I shewed before it doth not require that he who is so should have any other brethren in the same kind of Sonship But because this is by some asserted namely that Christ has many Brethren in the same kind of sonship whereby he is himself the Son of God and is on that account called the first-born which is an assertion greatly derogatory to his Glory and Honour I shall in our passage remove it as a stumbling-block out of the way Thus Schliclingius on the place Primogenitum eum nomine Dei Filium appellat innuens hoc pacto plures Dei esse Filios etiam ad Christum respectu habito scilicet ut ostenderet non ita Christum esse Dei Filium quin alii etiam eodem filiationis genere contineantur quanquam filiationis perfectione gradu Christo multò inferiores And again Primogenitus dicitur Christus quod eum Deus ante omnes Filios eos nimirum qui Christi fratres appellantur genuerit eo scilicet modo quo Deus Filios gignere solet eos autem gignit quos sibi similes efficit primus est Christus qui Deo ea sanctitate similis fuit qualem
Administration thereof is very righteous equal and reasonable What can be farther desired to render it so or to provoke us unto it 2. That the condemnation of those that refuse the Reign of Christ over them that will not yield obedience unto his Laws is most just and righteous On these accounts will their mouthes be stopped for ever when he comes to deal with them who know not God and obey not the Gospel 3. It is our wisdom to content our selves with the Laws of Christ in things that belong unto his Kingdom They alone as we have seen have those properties which make our obedience useful or profitable what-ever we do else in reference unto the same end with them is needless and fruitless drudging V. The righteous Administrations of the Lord Christ in his Government proceed all from his own habitual righteousness and love thereunto See this declared by the Prophet Isa. 11. v. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. VI. God is a God in especial covenant with the Lord Christ as he is the Mediator God thy God Of this Covenant I have treated largely else-where and therefore shall not here insist upon it VII The collation of the Spirit on the Lord Christ and his glorious Exaltation are the peculiar works of God the Father God thy God hath anointed thee It was God the Father who designed and appointed him unto his work who actually sent him and set him forth in the fulness of time and therefore on him was it incumbent both to furnish him unto his work and to crown him upon its performance And herein these several Acts partly Eternal partly Temporal are considerable 1. The ingagement of the Eternal Will Wisdom and Counsel of the Father with the Son about his work Prov. 8.22 23 30 31. Isa. 40.10 11 12. 2. His fore-ordination of his coming by an eternal free act of his will 1 Pet. 1.20 Act. 2.23 3. His Covenant with him to abide by him in the whole course of his work Isa. 49.6 7 8 9. chap. 50.7 8 9. 4. His Promise of him from the foundation of the world often reiterated and repeated Gen. 3.15 5. His actual Mission and sending of him in his Incarnation Zech. 2.8 9 10. 6. The exerting of his Almighty power unto that purpose and effect Luke 1.35 7. His giving of him command and commission for his work Joh. 10.18 Joh. 20.21 8. Furnishing him with all the gifts and graces of his Spirit to fit him and enable him unto his work Isa. 11.2 3. Isa. 61.1 2. Matth. 3.16 17. Joh. 1.32 33. Col. 1.19 9. Abiding by him in Care Love Power and Providence during the whole course of his Obedience and Ministry Isa. 49.2 8. 10. Speaking in him working by him and in both bearing witness unto him Heb. 1.1 Joh. 5.19 20 21 22 11. Giving him up unto death Rom. 8.32 Act. 2.23 12. Raising him from the dead 1 Pet. 1.21 Act. 2.24 13. Giving all Power Authority and Judgment unto him Joh. 5.22 Matth. 28.18 14. Exalting of him by his Assumption into heaven and glorious session at his right hand Act. 2.32 33. Phil. 2.9 10. 15. Giving him to be the Head over all unto the Church and subjecting all things under his feet Ephes. 1.20 21 22. 16. In all things crowning him with eternal glory and honour Joh. 17.5 Heb. 2.9 All these and sundry other particulars of the like nature are assigned unto the Father as part of his work in reference unto the Mediation of the Son And amongst them his Exaltation and Vnction with the Oil of gladness hath an eminent place And this are we taught that in this whole work we might see the Authority Counsel and Love of the Father that so our faith and hope through Jesus Christ might be in God who raised him up from the dead and gave him glory 1 Pet. 1.21 VIII The Lord Jesus Christ is singular in this Vnction This is that which the Apostle proves in sundry instances and by comparing him with others who in the most eminent manner were partakers of it And this we are in the consideration of as the particulars of it do occur Neither shall I at present farther insist on the ensuing Observations because I will not longer detain the Reader from the Context namely that IX All that serve God in the work of building the Church according to his appointment are anointed by his Spirit and shall be rewarded by his Power Dan. 12.3 X. The Disciples of Christ especially those who serve him in his Church faithfully are his companions in all his grace and glory Verse X XI XII IN the following Verses the Apostle by another illustrious Testimony taken out of Psal. 102. confirms his principal Assertion in the words ensuing Vers. 10 11 12. Vers. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vers. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vers. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the last verse for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one copy hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to answer unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And M.S.T. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The words are the same in the Greek Bibles as in this place of the Apostle nor is there any foot-step of any other old Translation of them in the Psalm The Syriack differs little 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and again to shew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no part of the testimony cited but serves only to the introduction of another v. 11. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they shall perish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they shall pass away alluding to that of 2 Pet. 3.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the heavens shall pass away with a noise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but thou abidest thou continuest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tu stans es tu stas tu stabilis es and Thou standest thou art standing answering the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Psalm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou shalt roll them up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which words Interpreters render variously though to the same purpose involves Boderianus roll them complicabis Tremelius fold them Duplicabis D' Dieu double them up And it is manifest that the Translator reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and I doubt not but the same word was inserted into the Translation of the Psalm from this place of the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou art the same or thou art I am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Boderia Et tu sicut existens es and thou art as thou existest Tremel Tu autem sicut es cris But thâ—u shalt be as thou art Properly And thou as thou art art that is art the same The Translation of the Apostle in all things material answereth the Original in the Psalm v. 26 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou O Lord is supplied out of the verse fore-going I said O my God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of old before it was that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
hell it self but only the immediate wrath of God But thus is it with Sathan from this ministery of Angels He sees the Church and every Member of it all whom he seeks to devour encamped about protected and defended by this Heavenly Host so that he cannot in any measure have his will at them nay that he cannot touch the soul of any one of them nor cause an hair of the head of any one of them to perish This fills him with self-devouring rage envy and wrath And thus doth God by this way accomplish his judgment upon him And these are some of the Reasons which the Scripture intimates unto us why the Lord is pleased thus to make use of the ministery of Angels which may suffice for an Answer to the first Question before proposed II. The second is Vnto what Ends and Purposes doth God make use of the ministery of Angels for the good of them that do believe The thing it self we suppose in both these Questions It is so directly asserted in the words of the Apostle and so many instances are given of it else-where in the Scripture that it needs not any especial confirmation It will also be farther declared in our annumeration of the ends and purposes of it ensuing As 1. In general God doth it to communitate by them the Effects of his Care and Love unto the Church by Jesus Christ. This God represented unto Jacob in the Vision that he gave him of the Ladder which stood upon the earth and whose top reached unto heaven Gen. 28.12 13. For although the Jews say somewhat to the purpose when they affirm this Ladder to have denoted the dependance of all things here below on them above under the Rule of the Providence of God yet they say not all that was signified thereby Our Saviour tells us Joh. 1.52 That from thence his disciples should see heaven opened and Angels ascending and descending upon the Son of man Plainly alluding unto this Vision of Jacob. For those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the son of man cannot denote meerly the Object of Angelical ministration that they should be exercised in their work about his Person but also that by him by means of his mediation the Angels ascend and descend in the work of ministring unto the Saints It is true the great instance of their ministery was given in and about the Person of Christ as Head of the Church They declared his Conception and Nativity Matth. 1.20 Luke 1.35 Luke 2 11 12. They ministred unto him after his temptation Matth. 4.11 They strengthned him in his Agony Luke 22.43 They were Witnesses of his Resurrection and Ascension Luke 24.4 Acts 1.10 11. But by him and on his account they perform the Offices of their mission towards others also even all the Heirs of salvation but this still upon the account of Christ. They ascend and descend on his mediation sent by his Authority aiming at his glory doing his work carrying on his interest as in the following particulars will appear For 1. They are sent in an extraordinary manner to make Revelations of the Will of God about things tending unto the obedience and spiritual advantage of them that do believe Hereof we have many instances in the Old Testament especially in God's dealing with the Patriarchs before the giving of the Law For although the Second Person of the Trinity the Son of God himself did often appear unto them as to Abraham Gen. 18.1 2. with chap. 19.24 and unto Jacob chap. 32.24 whom he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 48.16 yet God also made frequent use of created Angels in the revelation and discovery of his Mind and Will unto them as is evident from many passages in their story That he used their ministration in the giving of the Law we have before abundantly shewed the Holy Ghost declaring and affirming of it Psal. 68.17 18. Acts 7.63 The like also he continued to do in the Visions of them granted unto the Prophets that ensued unto the end of that Dispensation especially unto Ezekiel and Zechariah So also the same was done under the New Testament as to omit others we have an especial instance Rev. 1.1 How far God is pleased to continue this ministration of Angels unto this day is hard to determine For as many have pretended unto Revelations by Angels which have been meer delusions of Sathan or imaginations of their own brains So to say that God doth not or may not send his Angels unto any of his Saints to communicate his mind unto them as to some particulars of their own duty according unto his word or to fore-shew unto them somewhat of his own approaching work seems in my judgment to be unwarrantably to limit the Holy One of Israel Howbeit such things in particular are to be duly weighed with sobriety and reverence 2. God by them suggests good motions into the minds of his Saints As the devil sets himself on work to tempt them unto evil by suggestions suited unto the principle of sin within them so God employs his holy Angels to provoke them to that which is good by suggesting that unto them which is suitable unto the principle of spiritual life and grace that is in them And as it is difficult to discover the suggestions of Sathan in most cases from the workings of our own minds and our unbelief in them partly because of their connaturalness one to the other and partly because his impressions are not sensible nor produce any effects but as they mix themselves with our own darkness and lusts so it is no less difficult distinctly to take notice of these Angelical motions upon the like account on the other hand For being suitable unto the inclinations of that principle of Grace which is in the hearts of believers and producing no effect but by them they are hardly discerned So that we may have the benefit of many Angelical suggestions of good things which we our selves take no notice of And if it be enquired how these good motions from Angels are or may be distinguished from the motions of the holy Ghost and his actings in Believers I answer that they are differenced sundry ways as 1. These Angelical are ab extra from without Angels have no inbeing in us no residence in our souls but work upon us as an external principle whereas the Holy Spirit abideth with us and dwelleth in us and works ab intra from within the very principles of our souls and minds Whence it follows 2. That these Angelical motions consist in occasional impressions on the mind phancy and imagination by advantages taken from outward objects and present disposition of the mind rendring it meet to receive such impressions and so disposing it to affect the Heart the Will and the Affections whereas the Holy Ghost closeth in his Operations with all the facultie of the soul really and immediately exciting every one of them to gracious actings according to their nature and
world though usually by that expression they intend the World of future bliss But the world here intended is no other but the promised state of the Church under the Gospel This with the Worship of God therein with especial Relation unto the Messiah the Author and Mediator of it administring its heavenly things before the Throne of Grace thereby rendring it spiritual and heavenly and diverse from the state of the Worship of the Old Testament which was worldly and carnal was the World to come that the Jews looked for and which in this place is intended by the Apostle This we must farther confirm as the foundation of the ensuing Exposition That this then is the intendment of the Apostle appeareth First From the limitation annexed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning which we treat This is the world whereof he treats with the Hebrews in this Epistle namely the Gospel-State of the Church the Worship whereof he had in the words immediately foregoing pressed them unto the observation of And not only so but described it also by that State wherein the miraculous Gifts of the Holy Ghost were given and enjoyed And the mention of them in the words directly preceding is that description of the World to come which the Apostle in these words refers unto concerning which we speak And the Tradition of this New World or the Restauration of all things under the Messiah was one of the principal Reports of Truth received among the Jews which the Apostle presseth them withall Some suppose that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we speak is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have spoken and would have it refer unto Ch. 1.6 But what the Apostle there intendeth by the World we have sufficiently evinced and declared The World there by an usual Synechdoche is put for the habitable earth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Son of God made and came unto John 1.11 Here a certain state and condition of things in the world about which he treated with the Hebrews is intended Besides they who would thus change the word Grotius Crellius Schlictingius by the world Chap. 1.6 understand Heaven it self the state of Glory which is not here insisted on by the Apostle For Secondly He treats of that which was already done in the crowning of Jesus with Glory and Honor as the words following do manifest This crowning of him was upon his Ascension as we have before proved at large Then was not the state of Glory made subject unto him because it was not then nor is yet in being And therefore they who turn we speak into we have before spoken are forced also to pervert the following words and to interpret he hath made all things subject unto him he hath purposed or decreed so to do both without cause or reason The World whereof the Apostle treats was immediately made subject to Jesus that is the Church of the New Testament when God anointed him King upon his holy Hill of Sion and therefore in the Psalm is there mention made of those other parts of the Creation to be joyned in this subjection that have no Relation unto Heaven Thirdly The Apostle doth not treat directly any where in this Epistle concerning Heaven or the world of the blessed to come he frequently indeed mentions Heaven not absolutely but as it belongs unto the Gospel world as being the place of the constant residence of the High Priest of the Church and wherein also the Worship of it is through faith celebrated Fourthly The Apostle in these words insists on the Antithesis which he pursueth in his whole discourse between the Judaical and Evangelical Church-state for what ever power Angels might have in and over things formerly this World to come saith he is not made subject unto them Now it is not Heaven and Glory that he opposeth to the Judaical Church-state and Worship but that of the Gospel as we shall find in the progress of the Epistle which is therefore necessarily here intended Fifthly If by the World to come the eternal blessed state of Glory be designed to begin at or after the general Judgment then here is a promise that that blessed estate shall de novo be put in subjection to Jesus Christ as Mediator but this is directly contrary unto what is else-where revealed by the same Apostle concerning the transactions between the Father and the Son as Mediator at that day 1 Cor. 15.28 And when all shall be subdued unto him then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him who put all things under him that God may be all in all Which words if they do not absolutely assert the ceasing of the Kingdom of the Mediator but only the order of all things unto Eternity in their subjection unto God by Christ yet they are plainly exclusive of the grant of a new Power or Authority unto him or of a-new making subject of all things unto him Adde unto all this that the Apostle proves the subjection of this world unto the Lord Christ and not unto Angels by a testimony expressing directly the present things of this world antecedent unto the day of Judgment From what hath been discoursed we conclude that the World to come here expressed is the State and Worship of the Church under the Messiah called so by the Apostle according to the usual appellation which then it had obtained among the Jews and allowed by him until the Mosaical Church-state was utterly removed And he afterwards declares how this comprized Heaven it self also because of the Residence of our High Priest in the Holiest not made with hands and the continual admission of the Worshippers unto the Throne of Grace This is the subject of the Apostles Proposition that concerning which he treats Concerning this World the Apostle first declares negatively that it is not made subject unto Angels The subjecting of this World to come unto any is such a disposal of it as that he or they unto whom it is put in subjection should as the Lord of it erect institute or set it up rule and dispose of it being erected and judge or reward it in the end of its course and time This is denied concerning Angels and the denial proved tacitly because no such thing is testified in the Scripture And herein the Apostle either preventeth an Objection that might arise from the power of the Angels in and over the Church of old as some think or rather proceeds in his design of exalting the Lord Jesus above them and thereby prefers the Worship of the Gospel before that prescribed by the Law of Moses For he seems to grant that the old Church and Worship were in a sort made subject unto Angels this of the World to come being solely and immediately in his power who in all things was to have the preeminence And this will farther appear if we consider the instances before mentioned wherein the subjection of this World to come unto any doth consist First It was
horrid nature of sin Fools as the Wise man tells us make a mock of it Stifling for a while their natural convictions they act as if sin were a thing of nought at least not so horrible as by some it is represented And few there are who endeavour aright to obtain a true notion of it contenting themselves in general that it is a thing that ought not to be What direct Opposition it stands in unto the Nature Properties Rule and Authority of God they consider not But the last day will discover the true nature of it when all eyes shall see what it deserves in the judgement of God which is according unto Righteousness Is it a small thing for a Creature to break that Order which God at first placed him and all things in To cast off the Rule and Authority of God to endeavour to dethrone him so that he cannot continue to be the Supream Governour of all things and Judge of all the world unless he punish it Is it a small thing to set up that which hath an utter inconsistency with the Holiness and Righteousness of God so that if it go free God cannot be holy and righteous If these things will not now sink into the minds of men if they will not learn the severity of God in this matter from the Law on the threatning and curse whereof he hath impressed the Image of his Holiness and Justice as was said they will learn it all in Hell Why doth God thus threaten and curse sin and sinners Why hath he prepared an Eternity of Vengeance and Torment for them Is it because he would Nay because it could not otherwise be God being so Holy and Righteous as he is Men may thank themselves for Death and Hell They are no more than sin hath made necessary unless God should cease to be Holy Righteous and the Judge of all that they might sin freely and endlesly And this appears most eminently in the Cross of Christ for God gave in him an instance of his Righteousness and of the desert of sin Sin being imputed unto the only Son of God he could not be spared If he be made sin he must be made a curse If he will take away our iniquities he must make his soul an offering for sins and bear the punishment due unto them Obedience in all Duties will not do it Intercession and Prayers will not do it sin required another manner of Expiation Nothing but undergoing the wrath of God and the Curse of the Law and therein answering what the eternal Justice of God required will effect that End How can God spare sin in his Enemies who could not spare it on his only Son Had it been possible this Cup should have passed from him but this could not be and God continue Righteous These things I say will give us an insight into the nature of sin and the horrible provocation wherewith it is attended And this also opens the Mysterie of the Wisdom and Love and Grace of God in the salvation of sinners This is that which he will for ever be admired in A way he hath found out to exercise Grace and satisfie Justice at the same time in and by the same Person sin shall be punished all sin yet Grace exercised sinners shall be saved yet Justice exalted all in the Cross of Christ. Verse XI XII XIII THe great Reason and Ground of the Necessity of the sufferings of Christ hath been declared It became God that he should suffer But it doth not yet appear on what Grounds this suffering of his could be profitable or beneficial unto the Sons to be brought unto Glory It was the sinner himself against whom the Law denounced the Judgement of death And although the Lord Christ undertaking to be a Captain of Salvation unto the Sons of God might be willing to suffer for them yet what Reason is there that the Punishment of One should be accepted for the sin of Another Let it be granted that the Lord Christ had an absolute and Soveraign Power over his own Life and all the Concernments of it in the nature which he assumed as also that he was willing to undergo any sufferings that God should call him unto this indeed will acquit the Justice of God in giving him up unto death But whence is it that sinners should come to be so interested in these things as thereon to be acquitted from sin and brought unto Glory In these Verses the Apostle enters upon a discovery of the Reasons hereof also He supposeth indeed that there was a Compact and Agreement between the Father and Son in this matter which he afterwards expresly treateth on Chap. 10. He supposeth also that in his Soveraign Authority God had made a Relaxation of the Law as to the Person suffering though not as to the Penalty to be suffered which God abundantly declared unto the Church of the Jews in all their Sacrifices as we shall manifest These things being supposed the Apostle proceeds to declare the grounds of the Equity of this Substitution of Christ in the room of the Sons and of their Advantage by his suffering the Proposition whereof he layes down in these Verses and the especial Application in those that ensue Verse 11 12 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is no Variety in the reading of these words in any Copies nor do Translators differ in rendring the sense of them The Syriack renders the last Testimony as if the words were spoken unto God Behold I and the children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom thou hast given unto me O God The Aethiopick Wherefore they who sanctifie and they who are sanctified are altogether to what purpose I cannot ghess 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is used in this Epistle both in the Legal sense of it to separate consecrate dedicate and in the Evangelical to purifie sanctifie to make internally and really holy It seems in this place to be used in the latter sense though it include the former also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by just consequence for they who are sanctified are separated unto God The Word then expresseth what the Lord Christ doth unto and for the Sons as he is the Captain of their salvation He consecrates them unto God through the sanctification of the Spirit and washing in his own blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It may be of the Masculine Gender and so denote one Person or of the Neuter and so one thing one Mass one common Principle whereof afterwards The first Testimony is taken from Psal. 22.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the LXX render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 narrab◠annuntiabo the Apostle renders by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more properly than they by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the rest of the words there is a Coincidence the Originall being expresly rendered in them For though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be rendered simply to praise yet it s most