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	moses_n	tribe_n	85	3	9.3989	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49796	An exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrewes wherein the text is cleared, Theopolitica improved, the Socinian comment examined / by George Lawson ...	Lawson, George, d. 1678.	1662 (1662)	Wing L707; ESTC R19688	586,405	384

Moses spake nothing concerning the Priest-hood These words are added to signify that no man of that Tribe had right to officiate as a Priest For before he had said that no man of that Tribe did serve at the Altar but this was but matter of Fact for though none of Judah did serve at the Altar de facto yet some might de jure as having a right to officiate But these prove as none did serve so none could jure justly and lawfully do it For it they could they might prove their title out of the Books of Moses Yet this cannot be done because Moses never wrote of any such thing there is not in all his Books the lest tittle of the right of any of Judah to officiate as a Priest And the rule of the first Constitution of the legal Priest-hood is to be found there and no where else These words imply that a negative argument from the Scripture in matters of Religion is valid For that which is not to be found in the Scriptures truly understood either expresly delivered or by consequence to be deduced cannot be of divine authority so as to bind men to believe it or do it But those arguments which prove a Negative not only from the silence but also from exclusive terms are the strongest And in this particular cause we find Moses not only silent and saying nothing of the Tribe of Judah concerning the Priest-hood but also speaking so positively of the Levitical Priest as that he so confirms him to the Tribe of Levi and the House of Aaron that he peremptorily and clearly excludes all other persons of all other Tribes from that Office And here we may take notice of the wisdom of God which contrived this business so that he made Augustus though he thought of no such thing an Instrument of this evidence For though the Cense and Enrolment was general of all Countries within the Roman Empire whereof Judea was one yet by this he brought Mary to Bethlehem when she was ready to be delivered of Christ that so he might be born there according to the prophesy of Micah and that it might be evident that he was of the linage of David and so of the Tribe of Judah § 21. Hitherto the Apostle hath manifested that the Priest-hood was changed because the Tribe was changed and another Priest was risen of another Tribe But not content with this he proceeds to make this far more evident For so it followeth Ver. 15 16. And it is yet far more evident for that after the Similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another Priest Who is made not after the Law of a Carnal Commandment but after the power of an endless life HEre the Apostle seems to insist upon two words in the Text of the Psalm 1. After the Order or Similitude of Melchisedec 2. A Priest for ever after that Order By both which he is thought to prove the change of the Priest-hood and the Law by the Introduction of a Priest of another Order and a Priest for ever The former proof was evident and sufficient yet this seems to make the change more evident and not only more but far more evident And so the words may be taken as by our Translatours they are turned That this must be understood we may consider 1. What that thing or proposition is which is made far more evident 2. How it is far more evidenced The thing evidenced is the change and abolition of the Levitical Priest-hood and the Law A thing is made evident when it is so clearly represented to the Understanding that if it be rightly disposed it must needs assent unto the truth of it once received as it is represented This evidence may be either immediate from Connexion of the terms distinctly understood or mediately from a third Argument This evidence of this change abolition abrogation is mediate And that argument whereby it 's made so evident is 1. That there must be and then was risen a Priest after the Order of Melchisedec 2. His Priest-hood must be personall and perpetual In the words we may observe two propositions The 1. That another Priest ariseth after the Similitude of Melchisedec The 2. This Priest is made not after the Law of a carnal Commandment but after the power of an endless life In this Proposition you must 1. Remember what hath been said formerly concerning the explication 2. You must note that Order mentioned before and Similitude here are the same and to be a Priest after the Similitude is the same with being a Priest after the Order of Melchisedec so that if Christ be of the same Order then he must be like unto Melchisedec By Order is meant a distinct and different kind of Priest-hood and though Christ's Priest-hood be like both to Aarons and Melchisedec's yet it was far more like unto Melchisedec which was far more exellent then that of Aarons This Order might be the better known if we knew the Law and Covenant whereof he was a Priest which was not only the Law of Nature according to which he did minister and serve the most high God as Creatour and Judge of this World but of the Law of Grace according to which he worshipped God as Redeemer by Christ promised to Abraham Seth Enoch Noah Shem and the rest of the Patriarchs before him who believed in Christ to come yet not as to descend from Abraham Whereas it 's said That another Priest ariseth you must know that his rising is his constitution manifestation and beginning of his Officiation And the rising of him was the fall of the Levitical Priest and the abolition of that Priest-hood The force of this proposition considered as a reason is in this That this other Priest is not only of another Tribe and in particular of Judah but after another Order For it might have been said That though Christ was a Priest of the Tribe of Judah yet he might be after the Order of Aaron and so he might be essentially the same kind of Priest though accidentally he might differ from the rest of the Levitical Priests as they were of that Tribe To take away all colour of any such conceit this is added That he was after the Similitude of Melchisedec and not of Aaron This doth prove the change far more strongly and therefore the evidence is far greater The second proposition to evidence the difference yet to be far greater informs us according to what Law he was made a Priest and this is done 1. Negatively not after the Law of a carnal Commandment 2. Affirmatively after the power of an endless life In the Negative we have 1. A Commandment 2. A carnal Commandment 3. The Law of a carnal Commandment 1. By Commandment we may understand the whole System of the Ceremonies and Mosaical Rites prescribed from God by Moses to that People For whatsoever else it may signify or include here yet these are principally if not solily meant 2. This Commandment or body