Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	new_a	scripture_n	testament_n	8,305	5	8.0705	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45430	Of the power of the keyes, or, Of binding and loosing	Hammond, Henry, 1605-1660.	1651 (1651)	Wing H569; ESTC R14534	153,935	168

semper quotidie fallunt How many things have alwayes deceived and daily do deceive men that are not suspicious nor upon their guard And if all the Fathers of the Church beginning from those that were nearest Ignatius's time must be involved in the number of these incautious cheatable men I shall be afraid to mention the consequences that will too readily be deducible from hence I shal only say May not this liberty or licence rather be soon extended very inordinately to the invasion of the sacred Canon of Scripture Nay when the same current and consent of Fathers which delivers down all the books which make up our Canon of Scripture for Canonicall and Theopneust shall be found at the same time to deliver down and make use of these Epistles of Ignatius onely with the distinction of Apocryphal and mean by that not supposititious books or books which are under suspition that they are not their off-spring whom they call Father but only books of inferior authority as Apocryphal is opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the books of divine Scripture legi Domini to the Law or word of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those that are put in the Canon and in a word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you may see in the end of Nicephorus's Chronography and in others inter scripta novi Testamenti novi apocrypha numbred among the apocryphal books not of Ignatius but of the New Testament and appointed to be read by pious men though not allowed that same authority and dignity in which the books of Sacred Scripture have been justly estated when I say the same hands of the antient Church shall deliver both the Epistles of St Peter for Divine Scripture and these Epistles of Ignatius for the Epistles of Ignatius though not for Divine Scripture who can say that Salmasius when he had thus confidently thrown off these Epistles from being written by Ignatius did not consequently and agreeably to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in throwing off one of St Peters Epistles also And who can think it reasonable that our warinesse and censoriousnes shall enable us at 1500 years distance to judge more truly of a matter of fact which none but they that are near be they never so wary and suspicious can discern any thing of then they that lived in those times which were nearest to the scene of action Nay how much more rational is that of the same Salmasius who in the controversie about the parts of the Crosse i. e. when he conceiv'd antiquity to be favourable to that opinion which he defended hath made this argumentative against his adversaries An credibile est Gregorium qui vixit tanto tempore postquam crucis supplicio nemo amplius afficebatur certiorem esse testem de habitu crucis totius c. quàm eos authores qui scripsere cùm adhuc passim in usu esset communissimo nocentum crucifixio Is it credible that he that lived so long after the use of that kind of death was left off should be a surer witnesse of any thing that belongs to it then those Authors that wrote when it was in use De Cruce p. 255. And again if Blondel may say without proof that the Fathers were incautious in general and thence conclude that they were actually deceived in this particular Why may not I as reasonably affirm having given my reasons when he hath not that Blondel is too censorious and partial and willing to bring all to the cause he hath espoused and thence conclude knowing how contrary these Epistles are to his interests that he hath actually exprest his passion and injustice in this causlesse censure of these Epistles I have done with this learned mans observations in this matter and when I shall hear of any other argument which can seem of force against these Epistles I shall be glad to consider it professing my self to conceive that as long as that one Author stands in the Church in his just value the cause of Prelacy and Hierarchy cannot want supports every page almost of those Epistles being sufficient which the adversaries acknowledge in saying he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in season and out of season at all turns assert Episcopacy to interpret the obscurer vestigia in the New Testament and to assure us what was the practise and doctrine of the Apostles and Primitive Churches in that point and that is the reason I have insisted so long on a thing which may seem so extrinsecall to my first undertaking and shall not think my self out of my way if I be content to return to this controversie again as having such an immediate influence on the cause in hand whensoever I shall be call'd to it In the mean I shall content my self with this view of that matter and for the present as I cannot but conceive it rashnesse to cast an Epistle of St Peter upon a bare affirmation in a Parenthesis quae sola planè genuina est so will it be in a lower degree but in like manner to deal with a most antient Apostolical-spirited volume upon such unproved censures as these and it is observable that the first writer that ever undertook to be thus severe against that whole volume of Epistles did with as much confidence and as little pretention to argument cast off one of the books of Canonical Scripture This I thought not amisse here to insert to vindicate the writings of that antient Martyr though it may be taken for a parergon in this place Supposing then this writer to stand in the same repute in Sect. 5 the Church of God in which he did before he was observed to be unreconcileable with the designs of the new Reformers I shall proceed to make use of his testimony He commands obedience to be paid to Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to the Apostles to the Presbyters as to the Seventy to the Deacons as to the Deacons in the Acts. The passage is known and although in another place he makes the Presbyters parallel to the Apostles and the Bishops to Christ yet these places are easily reconciled it being clear that that latter place considers the Apostles at the time when Christ was here on earth at which time they were indeed but a second rank and in that respect it is that Origen saith Tr. in Mat. 24. Propriè Episcopus Dominus Jesus est Presbyteri Apostoli Christ is properly the Bishop and the Apostles Presbyters but the former place considering that after Christs departure is that which more properly belongs to this matter this power though promised before being not yet instated on them till after his resurrection immediately before his leaving of this world or indeed till the coming of the Holy Ghost at which time they were left the Governors of the Church as Christ had been before and the Bishops their successors ever since To which purpose St Cyprian Ep. 65. Apostolos i. e. Episcopos Praepositos Dominus

way obliged to interpret Greek words in the New Testament by the use of the Talmudists because though the traditions concerning Hebrew customes mentioned in the Talmud may reasonably be thought antienter then Christs time and so the Testimonies brought thence be worth the heeding for such and fit sometimes to be used for the explaining the like customs mentioned in the New Testament yet the booke it self and consequently the word in it which only we have now to consider was written and set out long after the New Testament the Misnaioth or first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which contain the Text of the Talmud being set forth by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tannaim or Doctores Mischinici about the year 150 after Christ who as they professe to have had their beginning per continuam successionem acceptionis legis oralis à Mose saith Buxtorf by a continual succession of tradition of the oral law from the times of Moses so they acknowledge to end in R. Jehudah hakkàdosch stiled Hannasi the Chief or Prince and by way of eminence Rabbi when he is cited in the Gemara who lived under Antoninus in the midst of the second Century After these Tannaim are the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amoriam whom Scaliger cals 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Authours of the Gemara and of that Gemara i. e. those disputations and decisions of those learned men at Jerusalem together with the Mischna forementioned doth the Jerusalem-Talmud consist and was set forth an 230. as the collection of the like disputations and decisions on the Mischna which were had in Academiis Pombedithana Soriah and Nahardeah make up the Talmud Babylonicum which was compleated an 500. This will be sufficient to shew that the words of Christ either as they were spoken by him or repeated by the Evangelists ought not to be conceived to have imitated the phrases of the Talmudists so long after them and there will be as little reason to believe what is left the only possible that the Writers of the Talmuds have imitated the phrases in the Gospel being themselves both Jews and enemies to the Christian Religion and besides if the Idiom of the Talmudists were of any weight in this matter yet sure it is not sufficient to weigh down the contrary Interpretation of the Christian Fathers who are to us in all reason to be heeded as the veryer Talmudists of the two the Traditors and deliverers of our Gospel and Creed unto us or the use of it among the Jews that have written in Greek particularly of the Author of Ecclesiasticus who is conceived to be the famous Ben-Sira and with him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is punctually to forgive sins c. 28.2 however no way able to extend it self to that other place in St John where the phrase is varyed and the power of remitting and retaining of sins is given to the Disciples which will have no analogy with that which is here pretended for whatever should be granted of the words ligatum solutum b●ing all one with prohibited c. the retaining or remitting of sins will be distant from it for sure that will not be to declare one mans sins unlawfull anothers lawful which it must do if this interpretation be applyed to that place also This being premised as an Answer sufficient to take away Sect. 6 the force or convincingnesse of this interpretation I shall ex abundanti superadd that I have used som care to examine those words and to observe their importance in those and other Jewish writings I shall give you an account of it The Hebrew word for binding is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I shall make no scruple to acknowledge doth in the Talmud many times signifie to forbid and prohibit and from thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a thing forbidden prohibited unlawful onely by the way I shal crave leave to shew you by what degrees it comes to signifie thus The word in the Old Testament signifies to bind and sure that is the best interpreter of Idioms in the New and accordingly is rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and is used commonly for binding with cords and sometimes for that band or obligation that proceeds from having made a vow as Numb 30.4 and is then rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 definition or decree because by that vow I bind or define or determine my self to such a performance Farther then this 't is true this word is rendred by our Translators Num. 11.28 to forbid Lord Moses forbid them where yet 't is observable that the forbiding there which Joshua desires is applied to the persons and and not to the thing and signifies a checking repressing Lord Moses suffered them not cohibeto eos as when by chiding or disciplining a superior restrains another according to which use of the word it is that Philip de Aquin. makes it agree in sense with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prohibuit and cohibuit forbidding and repressing and thus it will be very agreeable with our sense of binding as that signifies Church-censure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disciplining repressing offenders by that means In the whole Scripture I believe there will not one place be found where that word is rendred by the 72. by any word signifying barely to prohibit or the like unlesse you will say it doth Dan. 6.7 8 9. where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a decree and yet if you examine that place and the nature of the decree you shall finde that it was not a bare prohibition but a binding to punishment upon non-performance for the decree was there v. 7. that whosoever shall ask any petition from either God or man but of thee O King shall be cast into the den of lions and so the decree is that designation to the punishment of casting into the den which is there call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 binding as when the Jugde decrees the Offender to be Excommunicated that act of judicature is a decree yet neverthelesse a binding this binding being a judicial act and from thence receiving its force of obligation and è converso in that a binding or obligation to punishment that it is such a decree to wit a decree sub poenâ that such a thing shall be done so saith Schindler that the Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is obligavit ad obedientiam aut poenam binding to obedience or penalty and Elias Levita that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Every thing from which either sinne or punishment commeth unto him that doth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is said to be bound or is call'd Assur and therefore Munster giving an account of the use of the word in the Commentaries of the Rabbins saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies edictum aut sententiam quâ quis tenetur c. by