the Second Week after Easter
Click here to join the effort!
Read the Bible
Weymouth New Testament
Hebrews 8:7
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- CondensedParallel Translations
For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second one.
For if that first Couenant had bene faultles, then should no place haue bene sought for the second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.
For if that first covenant had been free of fault, no circumstances would have been sought for a second.
If there had been nothing wrong with the first agreement, there would have been no need for a second agreement.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second.
For if that first covenant had been without fault, no place would have been sought for a second.
If the first agreement with God had been all right, there would not have been any need for another one.
Indeed, if the first covenant had not given ground for faultfinding, there would have been no need for a second one.
For if that first was faultless, place had not been sought for a second.
If there was nothing wrong with the first agreement, then there would be no need for a second agreement.
For if that first Testament had bene vnblameable, no place should haue bene sought for the second.
For if the first covenant had been faultless, then there would have been no need for the second.
If there had been nothing wrong with the first covenant, there would have been no need for a second one.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, occasion would not have been sought for a second.
For if that first was faultless, place would not have been sought for a second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second one or an attempt to institute another one [the new covenant].
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second.
For if that first agreement had been as good as possible, there would have been no place for a second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
For if the first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one.Hebrews 7:11,18;">[xr]
For if the first covenant had been faultless, no place had there been for this second.
For, if the first [fn] had been faultless, there would have been no place for this second [fn] .
For yf that first [couenaunt] had ben founde fautlesse, then shoulde no place haue ben sought for the seconde.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
For if the first had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second.
For if the ilke firste hadde lackid blame, the place of the secounde schulde not haue be souyt.
For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second.
For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for the second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, no one would have looked for a second one.
Jeremiah 31:31-34">[xr] For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
If the first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need for a second covenant to replace it.
If the Old Way of Worship had been perfect, there would have been no need for another one.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one.
For, if, that first, had been, faultless, not, in that case, for a second, had there been sought, a place.
For if that former had been faultless, there should not indeed a place have been sought for a second.
For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second.
For yf that fyrst testament had bene fautelesse: then shuld no place have bene sought for the seconde.
for if that first were faultless, a place would not have been sought for a second.
For yf that first (Testament) had bene fautles, then shulde no place haue bene soughte for the secode.
for if the first alliance had been without defect, there could have been no occasion for the second.
I mean, if that first agreement between God and his people was perfect, then there wouldn't be a need for another agreement.
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
had: Hebrews 8:6, Hebrews 7:11, Hebrews 7:18, Galatians 3:21
Reciprocal: Deuteronomy 29:14 - General Hebrews 9:1 - the first Hebrews 9:15 - the first Hebrews 9:18 - the first Hebrews 10:9 - He taketh
Gill's Notes on the Bible
For if that first covenant had been faultless,.... Not the covenant of works; that was made in paradise, this on Mount Sinai; that was made with Adam and his posterity, this with the Jews only; that had no mediator, this had one, Moses; that was not dedicated with blood, this was; that had no forgiveness of sin in it, this had; under that saints are not, but they were under this; to be under that was no privilege, but to be under this it was, as to the Israelites, who on this account were preferable to all other nations: nor is the pure covenant of grace as administered under the Gospel, meant; for though that was first made, yet is the second in administration; that includes the elect of God among the Gentiles, this only the Jews; that is made only with them, and is made known to them whom God calls by his grace in time, this was made with good and bad; that was of pure grace, this required works in order to life and the enjoyment of its blessings; that is an everlasting covenant, this is done away; and the one is manifestly distinguished from the other in this chapter: but the covenant here designed is the covenant of grace, as administered under the legal dispensation, and which was a typical one; the people with whom it was made were typical of the true Israel of God; the blessings promised in it were shadows of good things to come; the works it required were typical of Christ's obedience to the law, in the room and stead of his people, by which he fulfilled it; the sacrifices on which it was established were types of the sacrifice and death of Christ; the mediator of it. Moses, was a type of Christ, the Mediator of the new covenant; and it was confirmed by the blood of beasts, which was typical of the blood of Christ: this covenant was not "faultless", but was faulty or blameworthy; not that there was anything sinful and criminal in it, but it was deficient; there was a weakness in it; its sacrifices could not make men perfect, nor take away sin; there wanted a larger supply of the grace of the Spirit to write the law of God upon the heart, and to enable men to keep it; there was not in it so full a revelation of the mind and will of God, and of his love and grace, as has since been made; nor did it exhibit a free and full pardon for all sins, unclogged of every condition; the persons that were under it were faulty; hence it follows, that God found fault with them, they could not answer the requirements and end of it: had it been faultless,
then should no place have been sought for the second; the covenant of grace unveiled in the Gospel dispensation, called the better testament, the better covenant, and the new covenant; in order to, introduce which, the first was removed, that this might succeed it; just as because there was no perfection by the Levitical priesthood, it became necessary that another priest should arise, of another order.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
For if that first covenant had been faultless - see the note on Hebrews 7:11. It is implied here that God had said that that covenant was not perfect or faultless. The meaning is not that that first covenant made under Moses had any real faults - or inculcated what was wrong, but that it did not contain the ample provision for the pardon of sin and the salvation of the soul which was desirable. It was merely “preparatory” to the gospel.
Then should no place have been sought for the second - There could not have been - inasmuch as in that case it would have been impossible to have bettered it, and any change would have been only for the worse.
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse Hebrews 8:7. If that first had been faultless — This is nearly the same argument with that in Hebrews 7:11. The simple meaning is: If the first covenant had made a provision for and actually conferred pardon and purity, and given a title to eternal life, then there could have been no need for a second; but the first covenant did not give these things, therefore a second was necessary; and the covenant that gives these things is the Christian covenant.
