Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	chronicle_n	king_n	samuel_n	2,348	5	9.6126	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12215	A surreplication to the reioynder of a popish adversarie VVherein, the spirituall supremacy of Christ Iesus in his church; and the civill or temporall supremacie of emperours, kings, and princes within their owne dominions, over persons ecclesiastical, & in causes also ecclesiasticall (as well as civill and temporall) be yet further declared defended and maintayned against him. By Christopher Sibthorp, knight, one of his majesties iustices of his court of Chiefe-place in Ireland.	Sibthorp, Christopher, Sir, d. 1632.	1637 (1637)	STC 22525; ESTC S102608	74,151	92

Nicholaus de Lyra your ordinarie Glosse did comment upon it and so they read to this day as also many written coppies which I have seene saith hee And therefore it is no small blemish to the Papists that in former times they had also thus corrupted even that which they call S. Ieromes translation Hee further sheweth that the originall Hebrew and the Greeke translation of the Septuagints bee also directly against that their then corrupted translation in this point And so did S. Cyprian also repeate this Text. Lib. 1. epist 3 8.1● libr. 3. epist 4 epist 9 Et homo quicunque fecerit in superbia ut non exaudiat sacerdotem aut Iudicem quicunque fuerit in diebus illis morietur homo ille Et omnis populus tum audierit timebit And the man whosoever shall in pride not heare the Priest or the Iudge which shall be in those dayes that man shall die and the people when they shall heare of it shall feare First then obedience is by the wordes of this text commaunded aswell toward the Iudge that is to say the civill Magistrate as toward the Priest For you see the Priest and the Iudge therein to bee not all one but directly distinguished yea by Iudges as by the chiefe rulers was Israel sometimes governed and that for sundrie yeares untill kings were appointed as the Booke of Iudges it selfe declareth And when Kings were appointed both Priests and Iudges were subject to the Kings as the Bookes of Samuel of the Kings and of the Chronicles doe shew And for an evident proofe hereof you may take the example of that godly and religious King Iehoshaphat amongst the rest For hee not onely set Iudges in the land throughout all the fenced Cities of Iudah Citie by Citie but hee said likewise to those Iudges Take heede what yee doe 2. Chron. 19. v. 5 6.7.8 9.10.11 for yee judge not for man but for the Lord who is with you in the judgement wherefore now let the feare of the Lord bee upon you take heede and doe it For there is no iniquitie with the Lord our God nor respect of persons nor taking of gifts Moreover in Ierusalem did Iehoshaphat set of the Leuites and of the Priests and of the chiefe of the Fathers of Israel for the iudgement of the Lord and for controversies when they returned to Ierusalem and he charged them sayng Thus shall you doe in the feare of the Lord faithfully and with a perfect heart And what cause soever shall come unto you of your brethren that dwell in the Cities betweene bloud and bloud betweene Law and Commaundement Statutes and Iudgements yee shall warne them that they trespasse not against the Lord and so wrath come upon you and upon your brethren this doe and yee shall not trespasse And behold Amariah the Priest shal be the chiefe over you in all matters of the Lord and Zebadiah the sonne of Ishmael a ruler of the house of Iudah for all the Kings matters and the Levites shall be Officers before you Deale couragiously and the Lord shall be with the good Where you see that in the time of the Kings the Iudges and the Priests also were subject to the King and at his ordering and appointment For all these both Iudges Priests and Levites did King Iehosaphat thus constitute and appoint But now secondly observe that both the Priest and the Iudge Deut. 17.11 mentioned in this Text of Deut. 17. were to Iudge and give sentence not as they listed themselves but according to the Law which God himselfe had given in those cases So that the sentence Mal 2.7.8.9 Isa 6.10.11 12 Ier. 23 11.12.13 Esai 56.10.11 Ier. 6.13.14 Ezec. 22.25.26 Micah 3.5 6 7. Exod. 32.1 23.4.5.6.7.8 c. Iere. 26.7.8 Act. 23.1.2 3. Act. 4.18 Act. 5.40 not onely of the inferiour Priests but even of the chiefe or high-Priest himselfe was not alwayes certainely true and evermore infallible as you say it was unlesse it were directed and done according to that law For otherwise they might and did erre in their judgements Yea many complaints were in the old Testament against them for their errours and going astray from Gods law insomuch that although they said as the Papists likewise doe of their Priest of Rome Non peribit lex à Sacerdote That the law shall not perish from the Priest Ierem. 18.18 yet God himselfe sayed otherwise namely that Lex peribit à Sacerdote The law shall perish from the priest Ezech. 7.26 And for further proofe hereof remember that Aaron was the high Priest and yet that he with the rest of the Priests and people erred when they made the golden Calfe Againe were they not the Priests and Prophets that gave sentence of death against Ieremie Gods true Prophet was that therefore a just sentence which was so given against him Was it not also in a Councell that Ananias the high Priest commaunded men that stood by to smite S. Paul on the mouth was it therefore well done and justifiable Was not moreover the high Priest present in that Councell which commaunded the Apostles to teach no more in the name of IESVS was that therefore a good commaundement or a good and allowable decree that was thus made against them Yea was not the high Priest present in that Councell wherein CHRIST himselfe was condemned Math. 26.59 62.63.65.66 And did not hee in that Councell say expressely of Christ that hee had spoken blasphemie It is then verie apparant that not onely the inferiour Priests but even the high Priest also though joyned assembled with others in a Councell might neverthelesse possibly erre and did erre sometimes in his sentence and giving of judgement And therefore so also may the Pope of Rome erre not onely as hee is singly considered by himselfe but even though hee be joyned with others in a Councell admitting that hee were the high Priest Heb. 9.11 Hebr. 5.5 Heb. 4.14 Heb. 7.26 1. Pet. 5.1.2 3.4 Hebr. 13.20 in the Christian Church which hee is not as I have shewed in my Reply pag. 10.11 whereto you have made no Answer in your Reioynder For the sacred Scriptures acknowledge no other high Priest in the Christian Church but CHRIST IESVS onely nor any other to be the chiefe Sheepheard or Supreame Pastor over all the severall Pastors of all the severall flockes in the world but onely CHRIST IESVS But yet here thirdly observe that this Text of Deut. 17. which you cite concerneth onely the Iewish policie or Common-wealth of the Iewes as being a part of the Iudiciall law proper to that nation and which is now abrogated and abolished For to determine those harder and difficulter questions and litigious cases concerning bloud and the other things there mentioned the partie grieved is required to resort to the Leviticall Priests Deu 17.8.9 of which sort there be none at this day amongst Christians and againe To the place which the Lord their God should

Cohanim that is Princes or great Rulers so it is explayned 2. Sam 20.26 and declared in 1 Chron. 18.17 And so it is likewise said of Ira the Iairite that hee was Cohen le David that is a Prince or chiefe Ruler about David For to conster these to be Priests in the proper and usuall signification of the word they not being of the Tribe of Levi were verie absurd And to these thus formerly alledged in my Reply you have answered nothing in your Rejoynder Yea S. Ierome himselfe in his owne observation sheweth that the Hebrew word though he translate it Sacerdotes in the one case and Sacerdos in the other case yet signifieth as I before affirmed For saith he Ira Iairites erat sacerdos David Hier. tradit Hebr. in libros Regum to 3 id est Magister sicut alibi scriptum est Filij autem David erant sacerdotes idest Magistri fratrum suorum But because you also object S. Augustine as the Iesuites likewise did object both S. Ierome and S. Augustine in this case writing upon this Psalm 99. to prove Moses to bee a Priest I had rather you should take your Answer thereunto from the wordes of that reverend and learned Bishop Doctor Bilson then from me who answereth the Iesuites and consequently you in this sort In his Booke called the difference betweene Christian subiection unchristian rebellion part 3. pag. 102.103 Hier. in Psal 98. Aug. in Psal 98. All that S. Ierome saith is this that Moses had the rule of the Law and Aaron of the Priesthood and that eyther of them did foreshew the comming of Christ with a Priestly kinde of Proclamation Moses with the sound of the Law and Aaron with the Bels of his garments Where S. Hierome calleth the Propheticall function of Moses to teach the people the lawes of God a Priestly kinde of Proclamation foreshewing that the Son of God should come in the flesh to teach us the will of his Father S. Augustine useth the word in the like sence for that sacred service which Moses yeelded to God in reporting his lawes and precepts to the people And therefore in the same place he saith of Samuel also that hee was made high Priest which is expressely against the Scriptures if you take the Priest for him that was annointed to offer sacrifice unto God For Samuel was but a Levite and no Priest much lesse an high Priest The sons of Samuel 1. Chron. 6. are reckoned in the Scripture it selfe among the Levites apart from the Priests office and linage And the high Priesthood was long before given to Phinees and his house Num. 25.13 1. Sam. 14. 1. Chron. 6. by covenant from Gods owne mouth and in the dayes of Samuel was held by Abiah the sonne of Ahitub who was directly of the discent of Phinees S. Augustine elsewhere debating this question of Moses and Aaron resolveth in doubtfull manner Moses and Aaron were both high Priests or rather Moses the chiefe and Aaron under him or else Aaron chiefe for the Pontificall attire and Moses for a more excellent Ministerie And in that sence Moses may be called a Priest if you meane as S. Augustine doth an interpreter of Gods will to Aaron others which is the right vocation of all Prophets that were no Priests common to them all save that by a more excellent prerogative then any other Prophet of the Olde Testament Numb 12. Exod. 33. had God spake to Moses mouth to mouth and face to face as a man speaketh to his friend But this doth not hinder his civill power which was to bee chiefe Iudge and soveraigne executor of Iustice amongst them and by vertue thereof to put them to death that were offenders against the Law of God And in his stead succeeded not Eleazar nor Phinees the sonnes of Aaron but Ioshuah and Iudah the Captaines and leaders of Israel So farre hee Thus then you see in what sence it is that both S. Ierome and S. Augustine did or might call Moses a Priest and yet not bee such a Priest strictly and properly taken as you fancie him Yea you see that S. Augustine likewise affirmeth Samuel to be a Priest who neverthelesse revera Bellarmin de verb. Dei lib. 3. cap. 4. and properly was not a Priest as before is shewed And Bellarmine also himselfe confesseth somuch of Samuel saying expressely Samulem non fuisse sacerdotem sed Iudicem tantum Non enim descendit ex familia Aaron sed Core consobrini ejus 1. Paralip 6. That Samuel was not a Priest but onely a Iudge for he descended not of the family of Aaron but of Core And he saith further that S. Hierome likewise libr. 1. in Iovinianum ostendit Samuelem non fuisse Sacerdotem shewed that Samuel was not a Priest As for those two Chapters of Exodus 28. and 29. cited by Bellarmine whereby he will prove Moses to be truely and properly a Priest If you reade those Chapters you shall finde no such matter but rather the contrary namely that not Moses but Aaron and his sonnes Exod. 28 1.2 3.4 were the Priests For God saith there to Moses Take Aaron thy Brother and his Sonnes with him from amongst the children of Israel that he may minister unto me in the Priests Office even Aaron Nadab and Abibu Eleazar and Ithamar Aarons sonnes It is true that there you may reade that Moses made holy Garments Exod. 29.1.2.3.4 c. and offered certaine Sacrifices But observe withall that all this was done by Gods owne expresse and speciall commaundement and to no other end but this viz for the conseruating of Aaron and his Sonnes to the Priesthood So that by those two Chapters it further appeareth that not Moses but Aaron onely and his Sonnes were the Priests But as the Iesuites In his booke before named part 3. pag. 103. 104. in time past would have proved Samuel to be a Priest because it is said that he Sacrificed so you say the same of King Saul that he also sacrificed and thereby would likewise prove him to be a priest Howbeit the former reverēd learned Bishop D. Bilson doth againe shew both them and you how much you deceave your selves by such phrazes and maner of speeches and that when they are rightly vnderstood they inferre no such conclusion as you and they would deduce out of them My collection saith he is grounded upon the law of God Samuel was none of the Sonnes of Aaron Ergo 1. Sam. 7. Samuel was no Priest It is true that the Scripture saith He tooke a sucking lambe and offered it for a burnt offering unto the Lord. So Iephta said Iudg. 11. That thing which first cometh out of the Dores of my house to me I will offer it for a burnt offering And yet Iephtah was neither Priest nor Levite So the Angell said to Manoah Iudg. 13. If thou wilt make a burnt offering offer it unto the