Selected quad for the lemma: child_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
child_n	father_n	israel_n	tribe_n	4,559	5	10.6477	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48432	A commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles, chronicall and criticall the difficulties of the text explained, and the times of the story cast into annals : the first part, from the beginning of the Booke, to the end of the twelfth chapter : with a briefe survey of the contemporary story of the Jews and Romans / by John Lightfoot ...	Lightfoot, John, 1602-1675.	1645 (1645)	Wing L2052; ESTC R21614	222,662	354

a thing in which every ordinary man woman or child that heard him could so easily have confuted him as they might have done if the twelve Patriarks had been buried in Hebron much lesse when hee spake to the Councell and to men of learning and understanding that would readily have tript him if hee had faltered in so plaine and common a story therefore it is past all doubting that Shechem was knownly and generally reputed the place of the Patriarks buriall For as although there bee mention onely of Moses bringing up the bones of Ioseph Exod. 13.19 yet R. Solomon well observeth that wee may learne from that very place that the bones of all the Patriarks were brought up with him so though there bee mention of the buriall of Ioseph onely in Sichem Iosh. 24.32 and no record of the buriall of the rest of the twelve there yet might it very well bee supposed had not Stephen asserted it that they were also buried there with him For as wee may prove the bringing of their bones out of Egypt yea though Stephen had not told it For 1. The same cause that moved Ioseph to desire buriall in the land of Canaan could not but move the other of the twelve to desire the like were it in faith in the promise or because of the interest in the Land or in hope of the resurrection all the rest had the very same principles to move them to it that Ioseph had 2. The rest of the Tribes bare the same honour to their Patriarks that the Tribe of Ioseph did to him and therefore if they in honour to Ioseph would preserve his bones that at their remoovall they might bee taken out of Egypt the children of the rest of the Tribes would do so by their Patriarks also 3. To which might bee added the kind of necessitie which there was that the twelve fathers of the Church of Israel and heires of the Land of Canaan should have their interment in that Land and not be left in the land of bondage So likewise may there bee arguments sufficient to prove that they were buried with his bones in Sichem As 1. There was no reason they should bee severed in the buriall who had been united in their removall 2. Iosephs bones were most regardable and the same Sepulcher that served him would have best befit them 3. The convocation of all Israel by Ioshua was Sichem and there upon their possessing of the land hee makes a covenant betwixt them and God and it is incomparably more probable that they should bury the bones of all the Patriarks there then in Hebron where wee doe not read that Ioshua ever came but to destroy the Citie Now the reason why Stephen speaking of the burials of Iacob and his sonnes which were in distant and different places doth yet couch their story so close together as if they were all laid together in the same place is 1. Because treating of two numbers so unequall as twelve and one hee first followeth the story of the greater number 2. Hee useth the singular number for the plurall Sepulcher for Sepulchers which is a thing so common as that nothing is more common in the Scripture Language 3. Hee useth an Ellipsis or cutting off of the conjunction Vau or And which also is exceeding common in the same Language as 1 Sam. 6.19 Psal. 133.3 2 King 23.8 and divers other places So that though hee spake so very curt and short as hee did yet to them that were well enough acquainted both with the story it selfe and with such Hebraismes his shortnesse would breed no obscuritie but they would readily take him in this sense And Iacob and our fathers died and were removed to Sichem and were laid in Sepulchers in that which Abraham bought for money and in that that was bought from the sonnes of Emmor the father of Sichem Vers. 20. And was exceeding faire Gr. Faire to God Hee was a goodly child supernaturally borne when his mother was past the naturall course of childbearing Vers. 22. And Moses was learned in all the wisedome of the Egyptians This Steven speaketh by necessary consequence from his Princely education Vers. 23. And when hee was full fortie years old There are that say that Moses was 40. yeares in Pharaohs Palace 40. yeares in Midian and 40. yeares in the wildernesse Tauchuna in Exod. 2. Vers. 43. Yee tooke up the Tabernacle of Moloch c. I. In Amos the words lie thus Chap. 5. Vers. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Rabbins Kimchi and Iarchi construe in the future tense take it for a threatning of their punishment as much as an upbraiding of their sin as if he should have said unto them yee would not take up the Commandements of the Lord to beare them but you shall beare your Idols into captivitie with you and your enemies shall lay them upon your shoulders And this might have beene a very plausible and faire sense but that Steven hath taught us to construe the Verbe in the time past and not in the time to come and to read it thus yee have borne or taken up c. II. Now the fixing of this time when Israel tooke up this Idolatry is somewhat difficult It is some facilitating of the matter if wee can bee sure it was not in the forty yeares in the Wildernesse And that appeares to bee so by the very scope of Stevens speech for 1. hee telleth that they made a golden calfe in the Verse before and that God for this Idolatry gave them up to worship all the host of heaven whereupon it is evident that this Idolatry with the calfe was neither of these mentioned in this Verse neither with Moloch nor Remphan but as it were a cause of these for for it the Lord gave them up to these 2. Hee seemeth to handle this justice of God upon them in giving them up to Idolatry under these two heads 1. In neglect of Gods own service in the wildernesse yee offered mee no sacrifice for fortie yeares And 2. in their choosing of Idols to worship afterward So that the two verses seeme to run in this sense O house of Israel yee were not content to offer mee sacrifices for 40. yeares together in the wildernesse but yee were well content to sacrifice to Idols and to worship all the host of heaven afterward III. The tabernacle of Moloch In the Hebrew in Amos it is Siccuth Malkekem which is rendred by some Siccuth your King by others the tabernacle of your King by a third sort the observance of your King as if it were derived from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deut. 27.9 Vid. Ab. Ezr. in loc Kimchi in Michol The Seventie in the unprickt Bible read it Succoth a tabernacle which Steven followeth and they both do not crosse but illustrate the sense of the Hebrew Now Molech or Moloch was the Idoll of the children of Ammon 1 King 11.17 prohibited to Israel in a singular

villaines that so much infested Iudea in the times of Sabinus and Varus Ioseph Ant. lib. 17. cap. 12. though Iosephus hath not there mentioned him by name A third sort conceive that Gamaliels Theudas was not before Iudas the Galilean who rose about the birth of Christ but a long while after namely a little before Gamaliel speaketh these words And they render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the strict propriety namely that it was but a few dayes before and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not post eum after him but praeter eum besides him In these varieties of opinions and difficulties it is hard to resolve which way to take and it is well that it is a matter of that nature that men may freely use their conjectures in it and be excusable I cannot but observe and conceive these things upon the stories of Gamaliel and Iosephus laid and compared together First that Gamaliel meeteth with the double misprision that the present Councell had concerning the Apostles with a double story First they suspected and censured them for false and erroneous teachers to this hee applies the story of Theudas Secondly they suspected them of innovation and of what might tend to mutiny and insurrection and to this he applyeth the story of Iudas Secondly that the miscariages of these two men that hee instanceth in proceeded from two different and dangerous principles pretence of new lights and revelations and pretence of liberty of conscience and of persons Theudas was for the former Iudas for the latter Thirdly that Gamaliels counsell was not of any Christianitie that was in him but of policy not that hee favored the Apostles but that hee feared if any thing were done to them by violence or injustice it might incurre a Premunire or prejudice and that is apparent in that all the Councell consent and entertaine his counsell Fourthly that Gamaliels Theudas and Iosephus his is not all one their descriptions indeed are very agreeable for as Gamaliel saith that Theudas tooke on him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bee some body of note and eminency so doth the relation about the Theudas in Iosephus Simon Magus boasted himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bee some speciall person Act. 8.9 and how did hee carry on this arrogation why by magick and doing some strange things among the people and just in the same kind hath Iosephus described his Theudas but yet these two Theudases seeme not to bee the same Fiftly for Iosephus setting the story of his Theudas so late as in the time of Claudius a dozen yeares or thereabouts after this speech of Gamaliel although it might bee said it is no strange thing with Iosephus to misplace stories and to faulter in point of exact Chronology as Baronius supposeth hee hath done in this yet seemeth it rather to bee upon the very native propriety of the time of the story And the matter to bee conceived thus that as Sects and heresies though buried yet doe oft revive and though dispersed yet doe recollect and being once begun are not suddenly extinguished but like quenched fire are ever breaking out in one place or other that so it was with this businesse of Theudas And so also it may bee instanced in the very sect and opinion of him that Gamaliel speaketh of immediatly after namely Iudas of Galilee Hee rose up in the dayes of the tax in the time of Augustus● as Luke 2. Hee pleaded against the Jewes being subject to the Romans and disswaded them from paying taxes and tribute to them and maintained they ought to have no ruler over them but God and so became the originall of a fourth sect among the Jewes besides the Pharisees Sadduces and Esseans as Iosephus reports of him Antiq. lib. 18. cap. 1. and de Bell. lib. 2. cap. 12. Now though Iudas himselfe perished in his errour and as many as obeyed him were scattered abroad as Gamaliel relateth yet was not his error extinguished with him but revived and grew againe So that at the least 40. yeares after his first appearing his two sonnes Iames and Simon are crucified for it by Tiberius Alexander the successor of Fadus Ios. Antiq. lib. 20. cap. 3. And many yeares after that Eleazer a branch of the same Iudas appeareth in the same opinion with a desperate company with him De bel lib. 7. cap. 30. Even so may it bee conceived of the Sect of Theudas that it began before that of Iudas and that the first author of it tooke upon him great things as to bee a Prophet and to worke miracles and the like but he was soone slaine and all that obeyed him were scattered abroad and came to nought But his folly and fancy perished not with him but however at other times in the time of Fadus one of the same foolery and name and probably his sonne would bee a Prophet againe and divide Iordan and doe I know not what whom Fadus destroyed and brought his company to ruine So that Gamaliels and Iosephus his Theudas are very probably two men but very likely father sonne or tutor and scholler agreeing so jumpe in the same folly and madnesse that they agreed in the same name and that name either given to the latter at such an accidency as Parents name their children or assumed by him in imitation of the former Theudas whom as hee delighted to imitate in his Enthusiastick folly so delighted hee to follow him in denomination And I am the rather confirmed in this opinion about these two men because that as soone as ever Iosephus hath told the story of the destruction of Theudas by Fadus hee telleth of the destruction of the sonnes of Iudas by Tiberius Alexander and I cannot but interpret both the stories in one sense that as in the latter hee speaketh of the off-spring of Iudas whose sect had begun many years before so in the former hee speaketh of the off-spring of Theudas whose sect had begun before that of Iudas Vers. 41. That they were counted worthy Or That they had obtained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seeming to interpret the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so common among the Rabbins which soundeth to that sense and so is it not onely most easily but so it must be most commonly rendred in them And of the very same sense is the Latine word Mereri when it is applyed to man with reference to good generally in the Fathers As when it is said that the Virgin Mary meruit esse mater redemptoris she obtained to bee the mother of the redeemer not she deserved Mary Magdalen Audire meruit Fides tua te salvam fecit she obtained to heare it said Thy faith hath saved thee and a thousand such examples might bee given which too many thousands interpreting by the word merit wrest an harmlesse word to their owne destruction R. Solomon speaketh of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Meritum volucrium the priviledge of birds and some fathers speaking of our obtaining Gods favour and salvation and

manner Lep. 18.21 and 20.2 yet did they worship him most familiarly 2 Chron. 28.3 Ier. 7.31 And Solomon built an high place for him on mount Olivet before Ierusalem 1 King 11.7 The Valley betweene was called Tophet and the valley of the sonnes of Hi●●om 2 King 23.10 c. This Idol and Idolatry is thus described by the Rabbins Our Rabbins of happy memory say Although all houses of Idolatry were in Ierusalem Molech was without Ierusalem and the Image was made hollow set within seven Chappels Now whosoever offered floure they opened to him the first of them who so offered Tu●tles or Pigeons they opened to him the second whosoever offered a Lambe they opened to him the third whosoever offered a Ramme they opened to him the fourth whosoever offered a Calfe they opened to him the fifth whosoever off●red an Oxe they opened to him the sixth but whosoever offered his son they opened to him the seventh Now his face was like a Calfe and his hands were stretched out as a mans that reacheth out to receive something from his neighbour And they set him over a fire and the Priests tooke the child and put him betweene the armes of the Idol and there the child gave up the Ghost D. Kimch on 2 King 23.10 Hee was made of brasse and was heat with fire under till hee was glowing hot and then the Priests put the child into his armes and there hee was burnt and the Priests made a noyse in the meane while with Drums that the father might not hea●e the childs cry And therefore it was called Tophet from Toph a Drum or Taber Vid. R. Sol. on Jer. 7.31 These seven Chappels if there bee truth in the thing helpe us to understand what is meant by Molechs Tabernacle and seeme to give some reason why in the Prophet he is called Siccuth or the Covert God because he was retired within so many Cancelli for that word Kimchi useth before one could come at him And so the translation of the Seventy is but a glosse or exposition of that phrase in the Prophet yee tooke up Siccuth or the Covert God your King which they render according as the nation readily understood the thing the Tabernacle of Moloch that Idol you so highly prize as your chiefest King Now Molech or Moloch or Milchom or Malcham for all these names are but one and the same was also called Baal in a speciall and distinctive sense as is apparent by Ier. 7.31 and 19.5 compared together and this consideration helpeth to understand divers places where the word Baal is singly used as 1 King 16.31 32. and 18.19 c. And according to this sense should I understand the matter of Baal-peor in which Israel was joyned to him to have been sacrificing their children to Molech And answerably should I interpret that speech of the Psalmist They are the sacrifices of the dead Psal. 106.28 that is sacrifices offered up when they offered up their children to bee burnt And this was the first time they committed this horrid idolatry in the very close of the forty yeares in the Wildernesse in which 40. yeares they had not cared to offer any sacrifices to God And this abomination with Molech they committed also presently after they were come into the Land Psal. 106.35 36 37. Iudg. 2.13 IIII. And the Star of your God Remphan Here is the maine difficulty of this Verse and that not onely in regard of the difference of these words of Stephen from those of Amos but also in regard of the obscuritie of the matter it selfe Amos readeth thus Chijim your Images the starre of your God Now the question in the first place is what is meant by Chijim and it may bee scrupled whether it bee the proper name of an Idol as some thinke or a word appellative to another sense I should rather take it the latter way although I know generally it is construed for an Idols name either for Hercules who among the Egyptians was called Chon or for Saturne who among the Arabians was called Chevan as see Aben Ezra on Amos and Beza on this place For there are two things in this passage of Stephen and Amos very considerable toward the understanding of this place 1. That Stephen saith God gave them up to worship all the host of heaven now if Chijim betoken but one Idol or one Planet this commeth very short of the intent that hee aimeth at their worshipping of all 2. That Amos saith Chijim ●salmecem the latter word in the plurall number and as it seemeth by the very posture of it the latter of two substantives and not in apposition For if Chijim were but one Idol it is somewhat improper to say Chijim your images as speaking of more I should therefore construe Chijim appellatively for the ordering or disposing of their Images as that it meaneth thus that they had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or representations as Stephen calls them of the whole heaven and hoste of it in one Series or in one body beset with varietie of starres and figures representing this or that Planet and this or that constellation And that Amos meaneth thus you tooke up Siccuth your King and the frame or disposall of your Images in one compact peece the starres of your Gods which you have made to your selves shewing that when they would worship all the hoste of heaven in Images and representations that they made a fabrick and compacture in one bulke or in one roome representing in severall fashions and formes in it the severall plants and constellations of Heaven and this hee calleth Chijim ●salmekem the ordering or disposing of your Images See 2 King 23.4 5. V. Now for the word Remphan in which lieth the most obscuritie of all many conjectures are given upon it The Seventie have rendred Chijim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mistaking one peece of a letter as it is conceived by Buxtorfius and reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza conceiveth it was purposely done for that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a Giant is to bee understood Hercules and yet hee scrupleth whether it should not be rather read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as ayming at the God of the Syrians 2 King 5.18 But not to insist upon producing such varietie of conjectures upon this matter which are to bee seene in severall authors it seemeth to mee 1. that Stephen doth something follow the Seventie in this word as well as hee doth in the rest of the Text and for the new Testament to follow them differently from the Hebrew Text is no wonder and needeth nothing to bee said upon it 2. That Stephen doth adde a letter to the word or doth a little change it from those very syllables that the Septuagint use that hee might give the sense of the Prophet the more clearely and speake out the matter hee