Ep/le to the Hiu Evv s. - wrathand hatred. The Spiritof there men afterwards pofl'ef ing the Ebonite:, they de- fpifed St. Paulas aGrecian andDefertor of theLaw,as Epiphanias tefifies. And even the heft among them, who either inthe ufe of their liberty,' or upon ail Indulgence given them, continued inthe TempleWorship, had a jealous eye over him, left he had notthat elteem for Mofis, which they imagined became them to retain, Ads 21.21. howgreat a prejudice againtt his Dodrive and Reafonings, theft thoughts and jealoufies might have created, hadhe at the entrance of his dealingwith them , prefixed his Name and ufüal Salutation ;is not hard to conje&ure. This being the State and Condition of things in reference unto St. Paul, andnot any other knownPenman of the Holy Ghoá, or eminent Dilcipleof Chriá in thole dayes, thisdefefí of Igription, asBeza well obferves, proves the Epiltle rather to be his, than anyother Perlons whatever. And though I know thatthere may be Come Reply made unto this Anfver, both from the Difcovery whichhe makes of himfelf in the endofthe Epiffk, and from the high probability that there is , that theHebrew: upon the firif receipt of it, would diligently examine by whom it was written, yetI judge it veryfiefcient to fruftrate theException infiftedon, thoughperhaps not containing the true, at leak the whole Caufe ofthe Omi lion of an Apo(iolical Salutation in the entranceof it. If then we would know the True and Juif Caufe of the Omiffion of the Authors name, and mention of his ApoffolicalAuthoriyin the entranceof this Epif le, we must ,confider what were theDuff Reafon ofprefixing them untohis otherEpiáles;Cbryfootome in his Proemunto theEpiffle to theRomans gives thisas the only Reafon of the menti- oning the Name of the Writer of anyEpi/fle, in the Frontifpiece of it , otherwife than wavdonetryMofès and theEvangeliJis in their Writings; namely, becaufe they wrote unto them that wereprefent, and fo had no caufe tomake mention of their own Names, which were well enough known without the premifing ofthem in their Writings: whereas thofe who wrote Epi(fles, dealing with themthat were abfent, were neced& tated to prefix their Names untothem, that theymight know from whom theycame. But yet this Reafon is not abfolutely fatisfad ory : for as theywho prefixed not their Names to their Writings , wrote, not only for the ufe and Benefit of thofe that were prefent and knew them , but of all fucceeding Ages , who knew them not ; fö many of them who did Preach and Write the Word of the Lord unto thole that lived with them and knew them , yet prefixed their Names unto their writings , as did the Prophets. of Old , and force who did write Epiffles to them whomere abfent , omitted fo to do, as StJahn, and the Author of this Epiltle. The real caul then of prefixing theNames ofany oftheApoffles unto their Writings, was meetly the Introduelion thereby of their Titles, at Apgßdes of Jefus Chrft, and therein an Intimation of that Authority; by, andwithwhich they wrote. This then was the true and only realon why the Apoále St. Paul prefixed his Name unto his Epiftles ; fome- times indeed this is omitted when he wrote unto fume Churches where he was well known, andhis Apoßfolical Power wasfuficiently owned, becaufe he joyned others with himfelf in his Salutation whowere not Apoffles, as theEpiJile to thePhilippians, chap. s. and the fecoud of theTlseffalonians : Unto all others, he 1ä1l prefixeth this Titk, decía., ring himfelf thereby tobe one, fo authorized to reveal theMyfteries of the Gofpel, that they to whomhe Wrote, were toacquiefce inhis Authority, andto refolve their faith into theRevelation ofthe Will ofGod, madeunto him, and byhim, the Church being tobe built on the f undation of the Prophets andApoffks. And hence it was, that when fomething he had taught, was called in queftion, andoppofed, Writing in the Vindi- cationof it,andfor their eftablifhment in the Truth, whom before hehad inifru&ed,he doth in the entrance ofhis Writings; lingularlyand Emphaticaly mention thishis Autho- rity, Gal. 1. 1. Paul anApoflie, neither of man, nor by man, but by 3efies Chriff, andGod the Father that railed him from the dead: fo intimatingthe abfolute obedience that was due unto the Doctrineby him revealed. By thisTitle, I fay, he dire&s'them towhomhe wrote,to refolvetheir affent intothe AuthorityofChriftfpeaking in him,whichhe tenders unto them as the proofand foundationof the Mjfferies wherein they were inftru&ed. In his dealing with the Hebrews the cafe was far otherwife ; They whobelieved amonglt them, never changed the old foundation , or Church-State, grounded on the Scriptures, though they had a new addition of Priviledges by their Faith in Chrift 7efus, as theMeßah now exhibited. And therefore he deals not with them, as with theft whole Faith was built abfolutely oit Apoffolical Authority and Revelation, but upon the common Principles of theOld7effament, on whichthey ifitl food, andout of whichEvangelicalFaith was educed. Hence the beginning of the Epiifle, wherein he F appeals 33 4. 9
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=