\ Sa Méy ovy xai.
1 Various Reaping.—An absurd jealousy against the critical amendment of the sacred text has sometimes been imputed to our author, from his controversy with Walton. The extent to which Owen’s views have been misapprehended has been indicated in vol. xvi. of his miscellaneous works, p. 345. In this verse we have proof that his mind was under no servile thraldom to the teatus receptus. That text inserts oxy after xparn, Our author omits it, an] argues strongly for the omission of it. Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, and Tischendorf, agree in re- jecting it. In Wright’s edition of this work the word was inserted in the text of the verse, although Owen himself in the original edition had omitted it—Hp.
a
VER. 1.] EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 183
that had also ordinances of worship, as the new hath. But I see not at all that any such supposition is here made by the apostle; yea, he doth rather oppose those ordinances of divine worship unto the privileges of the new covenant, than allow the same things to be under both. And this is evident in the worldly sanc- tuary which he ascribes unto the first covenant, for he had expressly denied that there was any such under the new, chap. viii. 2. Where- fore although xa, “and,” seems to be redundant, yet it is emphatical, and increaseth the signification of the other particles, as it is often used in the Scripture. And the intro- duction of the concession, intimated by this contexture of the notes of it, “then verily even that,” shows both the reality of it and the weight that he lays upon it. Ot» we render “then;” most do it by “jgitur,” “therefore.” But the connection unto the foregoing dis- course is rather real than verbal. It is not an inference made from what was before declared, but a continuation of the same design. “And yet moreover it is granted;’ or, ‘therefore it is granted ;’ ‘verily so it was. And so wéy serves unto the protasis of the comparison, whereunto 62 answereth, verse 11, “but Christ being come.”
2. The subject spoken of is 7 spar, “the first,”—that is, dsacdjxn; ‘that first covenant whereof we treat,—the covenant made with the fathers at Sinai, which, as unto the administrations of it, the Hebrews as yet adhered unto. The nature of this covenant we have spoken unto at large on the foregoing chapter, and thither refer the reader.
3. Of this covenant it is affirmed in general, that it had two ' things: (1.) “ Ordinances of worship;” (2.) “ A worldly sanctuary ;” and the relation of them unto it is, that it had them:—
(1.) It had them, <7ys. It refers unto the time past. The apostle saith not “it hath them,” but “it had them.” ‘That is,’ say some, ‘it bad so whilst that tabernacle was standing, and whilst these things were in force; but now the covenant is abo- lished, and it hath none of them.’ But this answers not the apostle’s intention. For he acknowledgeth that covenant and all its ordi- nances “ de facto” to have been yet in being, in the patience and for- bearance of God; only he affirms that it was éyyds dpanoucd, chap. Vili. 13,—“ ready to disappear.” Nor was he to take for granted what was the principal xpiéuevov between him and the Hebrews, but to prove it; which he doth accordingly. Hence he grants that there were “priests that offered gifts according to the law,” chap, viii. 4; and some “served at the tabernacle,” chap. xiii. 10. But the apostle hath respect unto the time wherein that covenant was first made. Then it had these things annexed unto it, which were the privileges and glory of it; for the apostle hath, in the whole discourse, conti- nual respect unto the first making of the covenant, and the first in-
, Gbe
ZL Eve
Eis.
184 AN EXPOSITION OF THE [CHAP IX.
stitution of its administrations. It had them; that is, they belonged unto it, as those wherein its administration did consist.
Obs. I. Every covenant of God had its proper privileges and ad- vantages.—Even the first covenant had so, and those such as were excellent in themselves, though not comparable with them of the new. For to make any covenant with men, is an eminent fruit of goodness, grace, and condescension in God; whereon he will annex such privileges thereunto as may evince it so to be.
(2.) This first covenant had two things in general:—
[1.] Aras more Aarpefag. Both translations and interpreters have cast some difficulty on the meaning of these words, in them- selves plain and evident. Armamuware are OPN, And the word is generally rendered by d:xa/wma in the Greek versions, and next unto that by vou:xév; that which is “legal” and “right.” The Vulgar Latin renders it by “justificationes;” from the inclusion of “jus,” “justum” in the signification of it. In the New Testament it is used, Luke i. 6; Rom. 1. 32, ii 26, v. 16, vili. 4; Heb. ix. 1,10; Rev. xv. 4, xix. 8. And inno one place doth it signify “institution;” but it may be better rendered “ righteous- ness.” When alone we so translate it, Rom. v. 16. In the context and construction wherein it is here placed, it can have no significa- tion but that of “ ordinances,” “ rites,” “ institutions, “ statutes ;”’— the constant sense of 5°91, determined both by its derivation and invariable use. Wherefore all inquiries on these words, in what sense the rites of the law may be called “justifications,” or whether “ be- cause the observation of them did justify before men,” or were signs of our justification before God, are all useless and needless, What there is of just and right in the signification of the word, respects the right of God in the constitution and imposition of these ordi- nances. They were appointments of God, which he had right to prescribe; whence their observation on the part of the church was just and equal.