Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	aaron_n	according_a	priest_n	58	3	6.8917	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A23663	A discourse of the nature, ends, and difference of the two covenants evincing in special, that faith as justifying, is not opposed to works of evangelical obedience : with an appendix of the nature and difference of saving and ineffectual faith, and the	Allen, William, d. 1686.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1673 (1673)	Wing A1061; ESTC R5298	108,111	235

Circumcision if the great benefits of the Covenant of which Justification was one were suspended upon that as a necessary condition And yet that h● was justified when not Circumcised there is the express Authority of Scripture for This he asserts Rom. 4. 9 10. For we say that Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness How was it then reckoned when he was in Circumcision or in Vncircumcision Not in Circumcision but in Vncircumcision Afterwards he proceeds to undeceive them in the apprehension they had that the benefits of the Covenant were entailed upon Abraham's Natural Seed as such or at least as such with the addition of a literal observation of Circumcision and the Law without respect to the Spiritual and new Birth Rom. 9. 6 7 8. They are not all Israel which are of Israel as they thought they were neither because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children But in Isaac shall thy Seed be called That is those shall be called Abraham's Seed which are born as Isaac was by Faith in the Promise which are therefore called Children of the Promise For so the Apostle expounds it saying They which are the Children of the flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed to wit such as are born after the Spirit as it is explained Gal. 4. 28 29. And this agrees to what he had said before Rom. 2. 28. He is not a Iew which is one outwardly c. Against which corrupt Opinion Iohn the Baptist did oppose himself when he admonished the Pharisees to bring forth Fruit meet for Repentance and think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our Father Mat. 3. 7 8. The Apostle labours to cure this grand Error about Literal Circumcision as disjoyned from Spiritual in many other places and shews how that Circumcision availeth nothing but a new creature such as Spiritual Cir●umcision makes a man to be Gal 6. 15. Not Circumcision but Faith Gal. 5. 6. Not Circumcision but keeping the Commandments is that which would only reach those great ends which they sought after in Literal Circumcision 1 Cor. 7. 19. But I shall have occasion to improve these Scriptures further upon another Head of this Discourse And by the way we may observe that those who build their hopes of future happiness upon their having been Baptized and their being of the Church without the inward Grace signified by Baptism which is the washing of Regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost they are much a-kin to those miserable mistaken Iews 2. They not understanding the Typical and Spiritual use of the Legal Sacrifices as they did prefigure the death and suffering of Christ and the general Atonement which was to be made thereby nor yet the Predictions of the Prophets touching his death they ran into another gross Error and that was That the promised Messias should not by suffering death become a Sacrifice for sin And therefore they said to him when he spoke to them of his death We have heard out of the Law that Christ abideth for ever and how sayest thou the Son of Man must be lift up Joh. 12. 34. They did not dream of his dying but of his Reigning visibly as a mighty Monarch among them and subduing all Nations under them Because they knew him not nor yet the voices of the Prophets which are read every Sabbath day they have fulfilled them in condemning him Acts 13. 27. Their ignorance in the meaning of the Types and Predictions touching the death of the Messias would have been the more excusable if they had not wilfully and obstinately persisted in that Error after those Types and Prophecies were fulfilled and explained to them Ignorance in this matter was found in Christ's own Disciples a great while but their slowness to believe those Types and Prophecies after they were fulfilled was a thing which our Saviour rebuked them for saying O fools and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken Ought not Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory Luke 24. 25 26. But the unbelieving Iews were tenacious of this Opinion after they had sufficient means to have been convinc'd of their Error in it In opposition to which Opinion the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews argues at large the necessity of Christ's suffering by death As first he argues it from his Priesthood For having proved him according to Prophecy to be a Priest not after the Order of Aaron but of Melchizedeck and so a Priest of greater Dignity Chap. 5. and 7. He infers Chap. 8. that as a Priest he must have something to offer in Sacrifice and that of greater value than what was offered by Priests under the Law that were but of an inferiour Order and that he shews to have been himself and his own Blood as the Antitype of all those Legal Sacrifices Chap. 9. Secondly He proves his death necessary for the confirmation of the second and new Covenant as he was Mediatour of it As the first Testament was not dedicated without Blood so neither is the second For where a Testament is saith he there of necessity must also be the death of the Testator Chap. 9. 15 23. Thirdly His death was necessary for the obtaining of Remission of Sins a Benefit promised in the new Covenant For without shedding of Blood saith he there is no Remission of Sin Chap. 9. 22. with Chap. 10. 5 18. And indeed it was a good part of the Apostle's work to beat down this Opinion that the Messias was not to dye Acts 17. 3. St. Paul as his manner was went into them and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures opening and alledging that Christ must needs have suffered and risen again from the dead Yea this Opinion had so generally obtained among them in our Saviours time that it seems the Apostles of Christ at first were not free from it For when our Saviour told them that at Ierusalem he should be delivered to the Gentiles and that they should scourge him and put him to death and that the third day he should rise again it 's said they understood none of these things and that this saying was ●id from them neither knew they the things which were spoken Though they were spoken plainly and in no Parable Luke 18. 32 33 34. Christ his being crucified became a stumbling-block to the Iews through this Error of theirs and that which they insisted upon as a Reason why they would not receive him as the Christ of God 1 Cor. 1. 23. 3. They held another Error which probably was Mother or Daughter of the former and that was That the Legal Sacrifices did expiate and take away Sin not only so as to free them from Legal penalties and temporal punishments as in many Cases they did but so also as to free them from all Obligation to Eternal punishment And so they did attribute to

Person from suffering those temporal evils which were threatned in this Covenant against those which did not continue in all things written in the Book of it Neither Sacrifices nor Legal Purifications Sanctified but unto the purifying of the flesh and to their temporal concerns only Heb. 9. 9 10 13. And here we may observe a five-fold difference in reference to Remission of Sin between the first Covenant and the Covenant of Grace 1. They differ in the nature of those Sacrifices by which Atonements were made and upon which forgiveness was promised The blood of the Sacrifice of the first Covenant was but the blood of Bulls and of Goats and the like Heb. 10. 4. But the Blood of the Sacrifice of the second Covenant is the Blood of Christ the Eternal Son of God So that the nature of the Sacrifices of the two Covenants upon which the Promise of the pardon of Sins was granted doth differ as much as the blood of Beasts and the Blood of the Son of God differ 2. Those two sorts of Sacrifices pertaining to two kinds of Covenants differ in the proportion of Efficaty and Virtue to accomplish their respective ends and effects There is a greater richness of proportion in the Blood of Christ to free the Cons●ience from the guilt of Sin or obligation to Eternal punishment than there was in the blood of Beasts to free the Delinquent person from temporal punishments This is plainly intimated in Heb. 9. 13 14. For if the blood of Bulls and of Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean sactifieth to the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the Blood of Christ who through the Eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your Conscience from dead works to serve the living God 3. They differ in the nature of the pardon promised in each of the Covenants respectively The Redemption granted in the first Covenant was but temporal as the Covenant it self was it was but from evils temporal But Christ Jesus by his Atonement hath obtained Eternal Redemption for us Hebr. 9. 12. 4. They differ in respect of the Sins made pardonable by each Covenant respectively There were many sins for which the first Covenant granted no pardon upon any terms whatsoever They that despised Moses Law died without mercy Heb. 10. 28. But the Covenant of Grace makes promise of the pardon of the greatest sins upon Repentance All manner of Sin and Blasphemy except the Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost are pardonable upon Repentance This difference is set down Acts 13. 39. And by him all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses We may well suppose that the first Covenant did finally condemn some which the Covenant of Mercy pardoned David in the matter of Vriah did that which was unpardonable by the first Covenant it was a Fact to have been punished with death by the Law but that there was none but God that could duly inflict it upon him in his capacity and yet upon his Repentance it was pardoned as to his Eternal concerns as well as temporal by virtue of God's Covenant of Mercy On the other hand a man probably might be so righteous in the Eye of the first Covenant as not to be visibly blameable and yet even then he obnoxious to the curse of the Everlasting Covenant Paul while he was Saul and in the state of unbelief was even then as touching the righteousness which is in the Law blameless as he himself saith Phil. 3. 6. So different were these two Covenants that him whom the one condemned the other might justifie and likewise justifie him whom the other condemned 5. They differed in respect of the Condition to be performed on Man's part for the obtaining of pardon Pardon was promised i● the first Covenant upon condition of doing only without reference to Faith but so are not the pardons of the New Covenant Gal. 3. 11 12. But that no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God it is evident for the Iust shall live by Faith And the Law is not of Faith but the man that doth them shall live in them So much concerning the first Part of the Sanction of the first Covenant Come we now to the second The other part of the Sanction of this Covenant did consist in the curse of it denounced against the breakers of it Though it 's true that every Man is under a condemnation that would be Eternal until he comes to be absolved by Virtue of the Law of Grace yet more than temporal death was not expresly threatned for breach of the Political Covenant as such 1. For first A violent death inflicted by the hand of the Magistrate for Capital Offences is called the Curse Deut. 22. 23. He that is hanged is accursed of God or is the Curse of God 2. Christ who did not suffer Eternal punishment for Man's Sin did yet suffer the curse of the Law in that he was hanged on a Tree Gal. 3. 13. It is true indeed that by that temporary suffering of his he redeemed us from Eternal punishment which we were obnoxious to 3. Those who Apos●atize from Christ and reject his Gospel merit sorer punishment than what was inflicted on them that despised Moses Law and yet sorer punishment for kind they cannot suffer if Eternal punishment had been the penalty of that Covenant as such Heb. 10. 28 29. 4. As the Promises of that Covenant when particularly expressed did appear to be but temporal so the curses of it appear to be no other in the particular enumeration of them As for instance a violent death inflicted by the hand of the Magistrate was the punishment threatned for many Capital Offences Such as was Idolatry Blasphemy Witchcraft working on the Sabbath invading the Priests Office and for being a false Prophet also for Murder Adultery Sodomy Buggery Man-stealing Cursing or Smiting of Parents or being stubbornly rebllious against them and some other And a cutting off from among the people whether by God's hand immediately or by Mans I determine not was the penalty threatned for eating leavened Bread within the time prohibited for not purifying ones self when unclean for profaning holy things for ones eating of the Sacrifice with his uncleanness upon him for offering Sacrifice any where but at the Tabernacle for eating of Blood and for eating of the fat of the Sacrifice for neglecting to keep the Passover and for not afflicting the Soul in the day of general Atonement and for several other Offences And those Offences for which cutting off from among the people is threatned being less criminous than the former we have no reason to think the penalty of cutting off from among the people to signifie more if so much than the suffering of a temporal death As we may observe how the Israelites various punishments are exprest for their manifold crimes in the Wilderness by God's overthrowing them