Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	aaron_n	add_v	moses_n	35	3	7.5898	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A55033	Scripture and reason pleaded for defensive armes: or The whole controversie about subjects taking up armes Wherein besides other pamphlets, an answer is punctually directed to Dr. Fernes booke, entituled, Resolving of conscience, &c. The scriptures alleadged are fully satisfied. The rationall discourses are weighed in the ballance of right reason. Matters of fact concerning the present differences, are examined. Published by divers reverend and learned divines. It is this fourteenth day of Aprill, 1643. ordered by the Committee of the House of Commons in Parliament concerning printing, that this booke, entituled Scripture and reason pleaded for defensive armes, be printed by Iohn Bellamy and Ralph Smith. John White.	Palmer, Herbert, 1601-1647.; England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.	1643 (1643)	Wing P244; ESTC R206836	105,277	84

thence and from his owne words partly the Question in hand between us as farre as concernes the first Proposition I am now to proceed to his owne allegations against us In which he is so confident as he promises That Scripture excludes this and all other exceptions giving no allowance to resistance in regard of persons or causes or other pretences how true this is let what hath been said already be judge and this not only by Examples but by Precepts Conclusions Resolutions which are more safe These we are now to examine First his Allegation of the 250 Princes gathering the people against Moses and Aaron Himself satisfies that there was no cause for it Moses and Aaron did not deserve it I add they had done nothing but what appeared to be the formall will of God whose cloud and pillar was by day and night over their heads and whose many miracles had continually ratified the authority of Moses and Aaron Moses his very face by a continued miracle was sufficient to have dazeled them if he had pul'd off his vaile But to this he answers The Princes supposed they did deserve it and that is now enough it seemes to make people not only say to their Princes Yee take too much upon you but therefore to rise in Armes also Which I hope will appeare to be without cause too in the end of this Treatise Repl. 1. I have shewed there was not the least ground for them to suppose ill of Moses but all contrary 2. Because a false supposall allowes not a man to doe such or such a thing shall this forbid that action where the supposall is true and certaine By this all warre should be unlawfull for upon a false supposall it is Also all Justice should be injustice and unlawfull for upon a false supposall it is so We never said nor thought That uncertain supposals suffice to arme against a Prince but at least such as rules of reason and prudence allow in all cases of importance And whether there be now any such As he referrs so doe I to the end of the Treatise Secondly he urges 1 Sam. 8.11 Namely that God by Samuell tels Israel that if they would needs have a King he should take away their goods and make their children servants and then they should cry to God because of their King but he would not heare them which implyes they should be left without all remedy against his oppression but only crying to the Lord. To this divers Answers may and must be given Answ 1. Though this be further urged by some to authorize Kings to take their Subjects goods at their pleasure yet lesse the Kings of Israel never tooke it so For Ahab and Jezabel were not so unskillfull in the right of Kings that they would have had Naboth put to death by false witnesses for blasphemy that so his vineyard might come to the King by confiscation if by a plaine Law of God at the founding of the Monarchy he might have taken the vineyard at his will as the Text 1 Sam. 8.13 mentions his taking of vineyards even to give to his servants and much more for his own use But Ahab and Jezabel both though they wanted neither wit nor stomack to advance that Prerogative were it seemes novices in both to our Moderne Advocates for Monarchy or rather it is certain Samuell tells them what their King would do and not what he should do by right His words are Prophesies not Laws 2. Neither are the latter words of their crying to God and his not hearing them in forme of a Law and Prohibition or at the most but a Prohibition of attempting or thinking to have the government altered againe from Kings to Judges but a prediction by way of punishment what should befall them for their sinfully impetucus affecting and asking a King that they should feele him oppressing them and that God would never remove the burden as long as that King whom they should first have should live Nor yet alter the government againe from Kings to Judges though they should be never so weary of the one or other and pray never so much to him for either or both And indeed the event verifies this interpretation in both respects For Saul proved tyrant enough and particularly in taking their sons from them as it is threatned 1 Sam. 8.11 12. c. so recorded Cap. 14.51 But specially his tyranny was most prodigious in the Massacre of the Priests fore-mentioned And so did many of his successours after they had a King once they never were under any other government altogether For though they had no Kings of their owne from the Babylonish Captivity till the Maccabees time yet were they under strange Kings which was worse the Babylonians and Persians of which after their returne from captivity see their heavy complaint Neh. 9. and after them the Grecians and the Kings of Syria and Aegypt and then a while the Maccabees race possest the Kingdome till the Romans subdued them and set up Harod and his race under the Emperour who was indeed their King from thence forth the high Priest cals Caesar their King Joh. 19.15 and so doth the Prophet Zach. 11.6 till Vespasian and Titus destroyed their Common-wealth 3. This Prediction then of such punishment to them by their Kings oppressing of them cannot be a Law or punishment intended to other Nations being under a King who have not provoked God in seeking a King as Israel had God threatned and imposed on the Jews and other Nations in Nebuchadnezzars time their putting their necke under his yoake though he was not their hereditary Prince but an invading enemy From whence no man will gather I hope that any Nation are bound to yeeld to a forraigne Enemy invading them Also God threatned that the Jewes should be carried captives into other Countries and there they should serve other gods wood and stone c. where he would not shew them any favour I am sure no man will argue from hence that this is a law for other captives to submit to or was any excuse to them much lesse a law but a meere punishment to them and warning ●o other least in them also sin be punished with sin which is the forest punishment of all 4. This place then being such a prediction of punishment doth not prove so much as that to them it was unlawfull to defend their very goods against their Kings tyranny but that at the most it should be vaine to them because if God would not heare their cry their defence would be to little purpose and what they might save at one time would begotten from them at another when their King should list to attempt it 5. After all this Text let the utmost be made of it that can be reaches not to the first and maine Proposition of defending life Or the second of chastity but still the defence of those remaine lawfull and warrantable though also so doth the defence