Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A37989
|
A discourse concerning the authority, stile, and perfection of the books of the Old and New-Testament with a continued illustration of several difficult texts of scripture throughout the whole work / by John Edwards.
|
Edwards, John, 1637-1716.
|
1693
(1693)
|
Wing E202; ESTC R29386
|
927,516
|
1,518
|
Iosephus who was kill'd a little before the final Overthrow of Ierusalem For the Words of Christ relate not to any one who had been slain already but they are a Prophecy concerning the last of all the Martyrs of the Jews who should be put to Death before the Destruction of the last Temple and the Dissolution of that Nation Such a Zachary the Son of Baruch was kill'd in the middle of the Temple as the Jewish Historian assures us But first it is plain that Christ speaks of something that had already happen'd not of something that was to come It is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not a future but an aorist and so denotes what hath been done before not what shall be done afterwards Therefore Christ's words are to be understood of one that had been in time past kill'd by the Jews Secondly It is unquestionable that Christ speaks of some very Holy Man whose violent Death is recorded in the Old Testament for you find this Zacharias joyn'd with Abel of whom you read in Gen. 4. 8. and for that reason we may infer that this Baruch is not meant here Thirdly It is doubtful whether the Blood of this Person whom Iosephus speaks of may be call'd righteous Blood as this is here for it was upon a Civil Account that that Son of Baruch was put to Death viz. because he was thought to take part with the Romans and so he cannot be well parallell'd with Abel You see how improbable the foresaid Opinions are therefore I choose to imbrace that of St. Ierom and some Learned Men of late who conceive that this Zacharias is he who is mentioned in 2 Chron. 24. 20. And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the Son of Jehoiada the Priest who stood above the People and said unto them Thus saith the Lord Why c. And they conspired against him and stoned him with stones at the Commandment of the King in the Court of the House of the Lord. Thus Joash the King remembred not the Kindness which Jehoiada his Father had done to him but slew his Son This is the Person whom our Saviour speaks of and the shedding of whose righteous Blood he imputeth to the Jews of that Age. Him ye slew saith he for though 't is said the King slew him because he commanded him to be slain yet 't is said likewise the People slew him because they not only conspired against him as you read but actually stoned him And this they did in the Court of the House of the Lord which is the same with what our Saviour saith between the Temple and the Altar And his Blood may justly deserve the Epithet of Righteous and he may justly be reckon'd with Righteous Abel because he lost his Life in a Righteous Cause because with great Boldness and Zeal he reproved the People for their Sins but especially for their Idolatry and foretold them what Misery these would certainly bring upon them For this zealous Freedom of his they took away his Life This was a very Eminent Man among the Jews There are in their Writings remarkable Stories concerning him not only relating to his Life but his Death They kill'd him being both a Priest and a Prophet and before the Temple and on the day of Expiation and from several other Circumstances his Murder is aggravated in the Talmud This was Zachâ—riaâ— the Son of Iehoiada but called here the Son of Barachias because it was common to have two Names among the Jews His Father's Name being both Iehoiada and Barachias he is call'd in the Chronicles the Son of Jehoiada and by our Saviour the Son of Barachias But in this it is likely Christ had reference to the words of Isaiah Chap. 8. 2. Zachariah the Son of Jereberechiah or Barachiah as the Septuagint and Vulgar Latin give it us It appears hence that Barachiah as well as Iehoiadâ— was his Father's Name as our Christian Rabbi makes it clear Thus our Saviour's words are reconciled with those in the Chronicles by attending to what I before observ'd viz. That it is usual in Scripture to affix two Names to the same Person one is given him in one place and another in the other So that in Mark 2. 25 26. may be understood Have ye never read what David did when he had need and was an hungred how he went into the House of God in the days of Abiathar the High-Priest and did eat the Shew-bread If you look into 1 Sam. 21. you will see that it was in the days of Ahimelech the High-Priest which Ahimelech it seems was call'd also Abiathar otherwise our Saviour would not have used that Name Which I will yet further confirm to you by some other Instances Ierubbaal and Gideon are the same Man Iudg. 6. 32. Ch. 7. 1. Achish and Abimelech are one Person 1 Sam. 21. 11. and the Title of the 34th Psalm So are Araunah and Ornan 2 Sam. 24. 1 Chron. 21. Caleb and Carmi are the same 1 Chron. 2. 18. Ch. 4. 1. So are Ioah and Etham 1 Chron. 6. 21 41. Amminadab and Izhar 1 Chron. 6. 2 22. Ioel and Vashni 1 Sam. 8. 2. 1 Chron. 6. 28. The same is to be said of Daniel and Chileab 1 Chron. 3. 1. 2. Sam. 3. 3. Of Ammiel and 〈◊〉 2 Sam. 11. 3. 1. Chron. 3. 5. Thus Ieâ—oiakim Eliakim 2 Kings 23. 34. 1 Chron. 3. 15. Ahaziah and Azariah are Names of the same Kings 1 Chron 3. 11. and 2 Chron. 22. 6. 〈◊〉 and Ishboshetâ— are the same Son of Saul 2 Sam. 2. 8. 1 Chron 8. 33. Mephibosheth and Merib-baal are the same Son of Ionathan 2. Sam. 4. 4. 1 Chron. 8. 34. Zimri and Zabdi are one Man 1 Chron. 2. 6. Jos. 7. 1. Esar-haddon and Asnappar are the same Ezr. 4. 2 10. So are Salmanassar and Shalman 2 Kings 18. 34. Hos. 10. 14. Zerubbabel and Shesh-bazzar are the same Person Ezra 1. 8. compared with Ezra 5. 14. Iehoahaz and Shallum are the Names of the same King as appears from comparing 2 Kings 23. 30. with Ier. 22. 11. The King of Assyria who is called Sennacherib 2 Kings 18. 13. is called Sargon Isa. 20. 1. Yea we find three or four Names given to one as Moses's Father-in-Law is call'd Iethro Exod. 3. 1. Ch. 4. 18. Iothor by the Septuagint Exod. 3. 1. Raguel by the same Interpreters Exod. 2. 18. Revel in the same place according to the Original Hobab Numb 10. 29. And I remember Iosephus saith his Name was Iethlegé Of Solomon the same is observable besides that Name he hath three others given him for we find that he is call'd Iedidiah 2 Sam. 12. 25. Lemuel Prov. 31. 1. Coheleth Eccl. 1. 1. which last is rendred Ecclesiastes and Preacher and a great deal of dispute there is why Solomon is call'd so especially in the Feminine Gender but if we take it to be his Proper Name then all Questions of that nature are at
by reason of or because of or on the account of our Sins for our Sins were the proper Impulsive meritorious Cause of Christ's Death though we must not exclude the Final Cause because he suffered to take away our Sins And Vossius goes something higher who assures us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ob propter pro preâ—ixed to Sins or Faults and join'd with Suffering or Punishing whether in Scripture or any other good Author always signifies the Antecedent or meritorious Cause but never the Final And I verily believe that Vossius was as good a Grammar-Scholar as Socinus whom he opposeth in this particular There are other Texts which I might have produced as Iohn 11. 4. this Sickness is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for or on the account of God's Glory and 2 Thess. 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which viz. the Kingdom of God ye suffer in both which places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denotes an impulsive Cause And perhaps that place 2 Phil. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood so It is sufficient then to have proved that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in several places of the New-Testament in the Sense before-named i. e. that it is as much as on the account or because of or for the sake that it signifies some Reason Account or Motive why a Man should do such a thing We need not search into other Authors to find whether this be the import of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among them this is not requisite for the New-Testament is able to vouch it self But though to prove this Sense of the Preposition in Classical Authors be more than I need to do yet for the Satisfaction of the Scrupulous for Vindicating my Interpretation of that Text and for the Establishing it beyond all Exceptions for the future I will shew that this very signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that with a word in the Genitive Case is not uncommon in the Pagan â—â—ile and particularly I will make it evident that it hath not always a reference to a Benefit as some think For Proof of this I might send you to Stephens's Thesaurus where in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he produces some Passages out of Herodian Demonsthenes and as I remember Plutarch which do in some measure evince the foresaid Acception of the Preposition and out of Homer's Sixth Iliad he hath a a plain place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not rendred de te as the common Veâ—sion is but causâ tuâ or propter te because of thee I hear ill of the Trojans Accordingly the great admired Scholiast Eustathius interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 't is as much he saith as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of thee or on thy account But whether this be the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place it is not so much material as that we need controvert it but this is sufficient for my purpose that this famous Commentator who understood Greek so well acquaints us that the Signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie or imply a Benefit as is clear in this place for these words of Hector cannot possibly be carried to any such Sense that is undeniable Wherefore their Fancy falls to the ground who think the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is for the benefit or emolument of such a one I have something yet more to prove and that even from Pagan Authority which is this that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 frequently imports an impulsive Cause and that directly and plainly and that it ought to be translated on the account by reason of because of To evince this I will choose out an Author against whom there can be no Exception I mean Isocrates whose Writings are famed for their Propriety of Phrase and Clearness of Stile There he hath these Expressions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to fight on account of the Leagues made between them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to fight for or on the account of their Liberty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to fight for or because of their own safety These are all Impelling Causes the Consideration of their League of their Liberty and their Common Safety excited them to do what they did As in a higher Sense I proved that many in the Apostles Times were excited to initiate themselves into the Church by Baptism by the Consideration of what the Holy Martyrs underwent for the Cause of Iesus They were Baptized on the account of by reason of for the sake of those dead Saints those glorious Champions whom they saw die with so much Courage To proceed in the same Author he expresses himself thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to fight for Rewards i. e. because of those Rewards which they expected These effectually stirred them up to behave themselves with great bravery So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Translated famae gratiâ by Wolfius to die on the account of that Fame and Glory which they knew they should purchase after Death And of the same sort is that Passage There are those saith he that would not change their Lives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on any other account whatsoever yet are most willing to lose their Lives in the Wars 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the account or for the sake of getting a Name This was the moving the Impulsive Cause of their dying And that other set of Phrases 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. To render Thanks for this or that confirms that Interpretation which I have given for those Favours and Kindnesses which they received moved them to pay that tribute of Thanks What we meet with in another place is to our purpose Is it just saith he to inflict so unequal and seveâ—e Punishments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for or on the account of such Faults And so 't is used in the same Oration again with reference to Punishment And when he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quarum rerum metu perterritus as the foresaid Translator renders it it is evident that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of the same import with because of by reason of and that he speaks of those things which excited Fear in them Lastly It may be observed in this famous Orator that when he is about winding up a Cause he uses these Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which his Interpreter rightly renders quare quapropter propterea which is in English on which account or because of what hath been said He moves them to do this or that on the Consideration of what he had propounded to them in the foregoing part of his Oration I could produce many more Quotations out of the same Author and several others