Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n author_n old_a testament_n 1,997 5 7.8593 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
B04938 A poem on the test dedicated to His Royal Highnes the Duke of Albanie. Paterson, Ninian, d. 1688. 1683 (1683) Wing P701A; ESTC R181526 32,197 41

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

preface it is fit for them to make dispair the conclusion Heb. 5 11. Gesnerus in his Commentaries on Gen. 14 quest 3. pag. 307. tells us of one Copres an Abbot in Scythia who observing his Disciples to contend much about this same controversie pronunced a woe on himself for searching so much in it Saint Ierom. 3. Tom. Epist 136. speaking of it sayes Si vas electionis stupet ad mysterium dum disputat ineffabile confitetur quanto magis nos vermiculi culices solam debemus scientiam inscitiae confiteri Mr. Bailly our Countrey-man in the first Book of his Chronologie pag. 18. Quis mortalium hic fuerit frustraneus est curiosissimorum labor inquirere and ends his discourse of him Necesse est desinant homines in lucem velle protrahere quod Deus decrevit in tenebris occultandum Rainolds on Psal 110. pag. 462. I cannot but wonder that men should toil themselves in the dark to find out that of which they have not the least ground of solide conjecture speaking of Melchisedeck But yet with all humility following the conduct of the Scriptures by the threed of solide reason we shall crave liberty to propone other mens Sentences and to interpose our own There have been then 7 several opinions ancient and modern concerning Melchisedek 1. Some have thought that that whole business concerning him was a mystery known to God only and should never be revealed to man 2. Some that he was some power and vertue of God greater then Christ the Son of God 3. Some that he was an Angel 4. That he was the Son of God who in a preludie to his future humanity appeared to the Sons of Men. 5. Some that he was the Holy Ghost 6. Some that he was Shem the Son of Noah But the opinion I shall fix upon is different from all these The first is the opinion of Prudentius whom Gennadius in his Catalogue illustrium virorum Cap. 13. calls Poeta Palatinus sed Christianus saeculari literatura insignis His words are in his preface to his Psychomach Dei Sacerdos Rex idem praepotens origo cujus fonte inenarrabili secreta nullum prodit Authorem sui Melchisedeck qua stirpe queis majoribus ignotus uni cognitus tantum Deo Of this opinion are many other modern Authors see Ravanel in his Bibliotheca in voce Melchisedeck To which I answer I darr not be so impudent to obtrude into the World any scrible of mine with that vain glorious and boasting preface En reserata orbi magni secreta tonantis as Scaliger observeth of a German in his time For I must confesse with the great Apostle that what concerns Melchisedeck is hard to be uttered that is is both profound and mysterious Heb. 5 11. Yet this was not the obscurity so much upon the matter as in the dulness and incapacity of the Hearers to receive so excellent doctrine otherwise he had superseded all labour of any further explication and the several sentiments of learned men in all ages are enough to refute this faint and floating conjecture The 2. That he was some great power of God greater then Christ was the peculiar opinion of these Heretickes called by Epiphanius in his 2 Book adversus Hereses Heres 55. Melchisedeciani Megalen ten dunamin phaskousi alla kai Meizoteron tou Christou Theodoret. de maleloquentia haeretica Lib. 2. calls them Griveous Heretickes So said Augustine lib. de Heresibus ad quod vult Deum Cap. 34. The ground of this opinion was because it s said of Christ he was to be after the order of Melchisedeck Therefore say they he was inferior to him in dignity This Epiphanius there refutes shewing a Servant is not equal to his Master Christ was God and Melchisedeck but a Man Doctor Gouge in his Lexicon on the Hebrews shews that their own argument refutes themselves for Christ being an High-priest after the order of Melchisedeck Melchisedeck was a Type of Christ and Christ the Truth of that Type but the Truth is alwayes greater then the Type and by that expression as shall be manifested Melchisedeck is so farr from having any prerogative to that he hes not so much as an equality with Christ The 3. That he was an Angel A. Sixtus Senensis in his Bibliotheca Sancta lib. 5. Annot. 90. hath observed out of Saint Ierom. in his Epistle to Euagrius That Origene was the first Author of this opinion and sayes that Dydimus his Scholar was of the same mind and in his Annot. 91. he tells us that Saint Augustine in his Book of the Questions on the Old and New Testament quest 109. endeavours to prove that Melchisedeck was an Angel or the Holy Ghost But Alphonsus à Castro in his 10 Book against Heresies proves that that Book cannot belong to Saint Augustine For in his Book of Heresies before cited he condemned it for Heresie Cap. 34. and no mention made of it in his retractations But be the opinion whose it will it s easily refuted by the description of an High-priest Heb. 5 1. That he must be a Man Neither doth this any way accord to the History delivered of Melchisedeck Gen. 14. Neither any where in the whole Scripture is the Priest-hood attributed to the Angels Besides what a ridiculous prerogative had that been to tell us an Angell had neither Father nor Mother nor Genealogie So Gouge Slegelius Tena and Molineus de praecog futurorum Lib. 4. Cap. 11. The 4. opinion is That he was the Son of God And this Epiphanius tells us was
learned Brissonius de regio Persarum principatu 5. The prerogative of the Germans out of Tacitus de moribus Germanorum 6. Of the French out of Caesar de bello Gallico lib. 7. Out of all which by a judicious and serious Reader might be collected a full complete Volume of the prerogatives of all Nations Which if it be yet done in whole or in part I know not Only I could wish this would animat the generous attempt of some learned head but this being the work rather of a Lawyer then a divine and not belonging to our design but by way of annotation and digression Let these few remarckes suffice An Appendix concerning the Kings Treasure as a consequent of his Prerogative HE that walkes on the Battelments of Soveraignity had need of some massy weight to keep him steddy A poor Governour as Euripides sayeth being a scorn to Authority and a burden to the People Wherefore in all ages to support their Prerogative either in peace or warr it hes been the laudable Custome of all Kings to masse up a great store of treasure Hence nothing so celebrated amongst all Authors as the Gaza Persica Quintus Curtius in his 5 Book describs it and Isod lib. 20.9 and the 70 retain ordinarly the word Gaza as Esth 4 7. Haman vow'd to pay ten thousand Talents of Silver to the Kings treasure which in English money will amount to three millions fifty thousand and seven hundreth pounds ô Pride O Revenge How dear guests are ye Pomponius Mela in his first Book of Geographie confounds Gaza a Town in Palestin with Gaza a treasure or at least sayes he the one had the name from the other not considering that Gaza a Town with the Hebrews is writen with Hajin a treasure with Gimel In the Scriptures also we read of the treasures of Egypt The treasures of the Kings of Israel and Iudah 2 Kings 18 15. and 20 13. and 39 2 4. 2 Chron. 36 18. Ezeck 28 4. Dan. 11 43. Neh. 13 12. The Latine word Thesaurus imports the providence of a Prince eis-aurion tithenai to lay up something for to morrow See Scaliger derives aurum from oorein custodire They have other two words also Fiscus And aerarium But with this difference as Budeus observes that aerarium is pecunia publica imperii but Fiscus is pecunia Imperatoris Fiscus a Fisu quod eo ad vitam degendam subsidio homines fidere soleant As in the Hebrew Mammon from Emunah fides The word aerarium is from aes aeris because the first money used by the Romans was Brasse as Plin. lib. 3. cap. 33. and their casting their Accompts was likewise with Brass pieces which we call Compters called by the Ancients aera Of this way of compting and of the aera a Reckoning see Scaliger de emendatione temporum lib. 5. Where he alleadges what they called aera we now call item The Scripture makes mention not only of the treasures of Heathen Princes as Ezra 5 17. and 6 1. But also God allowed a treasurie in his Church Mark 12 41. Luk. 21 1. Ioh. 8 20. These things spoke Iesus in the treasurie What this treasurie was ye will read it explained by Shindler in his Lexicon in the word Lishcah and by Caspar Waserus who hes written learnedly on that subject de pecuniarum repositoriis Amongst Politicians the question is not of the Lawfulness but of the expediency of Princes treasures Some court-flatterers with the fox in the fable intending to cheat the crow of his cheefe they will tell the Prince that his glory stands rather in his bounty then his baggs and will confirm it by the examples of Alexander and Caesar who by their generous and oblidging liberality did atchive great matters that Sardanapalus left ten millions to them that murdered him Nero gave above 12 millions to them that flattered him which gifts Galba afterward did revocke But they consider not that these great and warlyk Princes as Alexander and Caesar were liberal rather out of the spoils of their enemies then their own treasuries But it is certain that a Prince that is not this way provident shall never be able to defend his prerogative and maintain his right but fall under contempt and danger the effect of Poverty as by many pregnant instances might be proven See a treatise intituled Englands treasure by forraign Trade by Thomas Mun Londoner Appendix 2. Concerning a peculiar Prerogative THere is a peculiar Prerogative mercifully and miraculously granted by God unto some Princes as to the Kings of Brittain and some say the French King too to heale that disease Scrofula commonly called the Kings evil So Plutarch in the life of Pyrrhus affirmes that he cured all these that were diseased of the Spleen with a touch of his foot only And Swetonius in Vespasian Cap. 7. makes mention that a blind man and a crooked at least debili crure as he speakes were both restored by the Emperour to intire health the one by spitting in his Eye the other by a touch of his Heel So divine a prerogative hes but the touche of the worst part of a Prince Which made not only a confirmation but an accession both to his Majesty and authority And that Princes by vertue of their Office are indued from Heaven with a Sagacity more then ordinary as in King Iames's finding out the poweder plot is consented to by all interpreters to be Solomons meaning in Prov. 16 10. a divine sentence some reads it Prophesie or divination See Petrus Molinaeus decus illud Theologorum as Spanhemius calls him in his 1 Book de praecognitione futurorum Cap. 20. Where he not only brings in the instance of Solomon deciding betwixt the two whoors but of one Ariopharnes King of the Thracians who when the King of the Cymmerians was dead and three contending for the Succession all pretending to be Sons to the defunct whereas it was certain he had left only one Son being elected Arbiter of the contention commanded the body of the dead King to be hanged on a Tree and appointed the three to shoot with Arrows and who came nearest to his Heart should obtain the Kingdom the first shot through the Shoulder the next through the Arm the thrid abhorring so unnatural an experiment was content rather to lose the Kingdom then to mangle the Corps of his Father And to him he adjudged the Crown the Story is in Diodorus Siculus By Ezekia David Solomon all which ye will see cited and cleared from their particular places of Scripture by Seth Ward Lord Bishop of Sarum his Sermon before the King against resistance of Lawfull powers the first of his six Sermons Printed Anno 1672. CHAP. VI. Concerning Melchisedeck who he was GReat hes been the toil of learned Men in all ages both Jews and Gentiles to loose this knot and some after all their labour have concluded the mystery not only profound but incomprehensible alleadging where the great Apostle makes difficulty the