Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	advice_n	advise_v	answer_v	16	3	4.8325	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45832	Saturday no sabbath, or, The seventh-day Sabbath proved to be of no force to the beleeving Gentiles in the times of the Gospel, by the law of nature, Moses, Christ being an account of several publique disputations held at Stone-Chappel by Pauls, London, between Dr. Chamberlain, Mr. Tillam, and Mr. Coppinger ... and Jer. Ives ... : together with an appendix in which the said question is more fully and plainly discussed ... / by Jer. Ives.	Ives, Jeremiah, fl. 1653-1674.	1659 (1659)	Wing I1104; ESTC R24396	120,548	256

Jews and Gentiles in point of precept Mr. Ives It is both in the 15 of the Acts and 21 of the Acts and I can assigne other places but first I say it is in Acts the 21. 20 21 22 23 24 25. verses the words are these Thou seest brother how many thousands of the Jews there are which BELIEVE and they are all zealous of the Law And they are informed of thee that thou teachest all the Jew which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses saying That they ought not to circumcise their children neither to walk after the customs What is it therefore the multitude must needs come together for they will hear that thou art come Do therefore this that we say to thee We have four men which have a vow upon them them take and purifie they self and be at charges with them that they may shave their heads and all may know that those things whereof they were informed concerning thee are nothing but that thou thy self also walkest orderly and keepest the law But as touching the Gentiles which believe we have written and concluded that they observe no such things c. Whence I observe these two things First that here was an Injunction laid upon Paul and other believing Jews that was not laid upon the believing Gentiles that they were believing Jews see verse 20. that this Injunction was not laid upon believing Gentiles see verse 25. where the Gentiles that believe are expresly forbidden such Observations Secondly these were no mean persons that did enjoyn these things but they were a holy Convocation of Apostles and Elders among whom the Holy Ghost was president as appears Acts 15.28 compared with Acts 21 25. So that if ever there was an unerring Council in the world this was one who were guided by the Holy Ghost that was sent to lead into all truth and therefore it is horrible presumption to think that these did erre and yet these do enjoyn such things upon the believing Jews that they expresly charge the believing Gentiles not to observe Mr. Coppinger These Jews that they advise him to condescend unto they were such as had conspired the death of Paul and therefore in point of prudency they advise him to condescend unto them Secondly this could not be a precept because the text saith That they offered an Offering according to the Law verse 26. now to enjoyn such a thing as this would be to deny Christ come in the Flesh and therefore it was no other then a prudent advice that the Apostles and Elders gave to Paul to save his life from those Jews that had conspired his death Mr. Ives If the words to the Jews verse 24. are but a bare advice then we may say so of their precepts to the Gentiles verse 25. and of all others that we like not Secondly whereas you say They were Jews that did conspire Pauls death and therefore they advised Paul thus to do to save himself from their malice and fury I answer that these were believing Jews that were zealous of the Law and not those unbelieving Jews that went about to kill him verse 31. which unbelieving Jews went about to kill him notwithstanding this condescention to the Law therefore the condescention was for the sake of the Jews that believed and not for the sake of those that conspired his death But thirdly whereas he saith the Apostles did advise Paul to condescend but did not enjoyn it for if they had enjoyned him to observe the Law of purification then they did enjoyn him to do those things which by consequence did deny Christ come in the flesh To which I answer that according to Mr. Coppingers Notion upon the text they did ADVISE Paul to do that which by consequence did deny Christ come in the flesh and so the absurdity falls nigh-hand as heavy upon him as he would make it to fall upon me for is it not a great piece of wickedness for any body to give advice or to take advice supposing it to be but a bare advice which by consequence denies Christ come in the flesh meerly to save themselves from persecution Now therefore supposing with Mr. Coppinger that it is but an Advice which the Apostles and Elders give Paul I demand whether it be a good or a bad advice Mr. Coppinger As Circumstances might be an advice may be good and as Circumstances may be an advice may be bad Mr. Ives But as this case was circumstanced was the advice good or bad Mr. Coppinger The advice may be good when it is given to a good end the same advice may at some times be bad when the like end is not intended Mr. Ives We must not do evil that good may come 〈◊〉 so that they ought not to advise Paul to do that which you say denyed Christ come in the flesh upon the pretence of saving Pauls life Mr. Coppinger I say as Circumstances may be a man may be advised to do that which at another time under other circumstances may not be done Mr. Ives But I pray speak to the Case in hand was this advice good or bad which the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem gave Paul This Question Mr. Ives put over and over to Mr. Coppinger who though he said that it was but an advice which the Apostles and Elders gave to Paul yet he would not answer whether it was a good or a bad advice Mr. Coppinger If I should grant that this WAS a precept that the Apostles and Elders gave to Paul yet this doth not prove that there IS NOW a difference in point of precept though there was then for my Argument speaketh of the present tense viz. that there IS no difference between the believing Jews and believing Gentiles in point of precept and this text onely speaks of what WAS. Moderator Sir the Scripture ought to be our rule and I humbly conceive that we know not what is a duty but by reading of the Scriptures and therein finde what was a duty Mr. Ives First I answer to Mr. Coppinger by shewing him that in his Argument he told us that there was no difference between believing Jews and believing Gentiles in point of precept either in Acts 15 or Acts 21. So that if this precept was but for that age or for that particular occasion yet I have confuted his Argument because his Argument saith Acts 15 and Acts 21. assignes no difference Secondly this precept was to bind Jews under the like circumstances to the worlds end which under no circumstance could bind the Gentiles because the Apostles and Elders by the assistance of Gods holy Spirit did expresly charge the Gentiles to observe no such thing Thirdly how far the observation of the Law of Nazarenes was a type of Christ I am not so well acquainted with it as to give an exact account yet this I know That when it was most in force it was but a voluntary service as appears Num. 6. So that if any man

seventh day sabbath Ergo all believing Gentiles are bound to observe the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives Pray explain what you mean when you say Christ DID teach it do you mean before his death or after Mr. Coppinger I do mean that Christ did teach the seventh day sabbath upon the Mount Mat. 5. VVhence I thus argue If Christ in his Sermon upon the Mount did preach the seventh day sabbath then all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath But Christ in his Sermon upon the Mount did preach the seventh day sabbath Ergo all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives I tell you Sir that this is not fair arguing when both Propositions are justly to be denyed however I deny the Consequence for it doth not follow that if Christ did preach the seventh day sabbath upon the Mount that therefore all believing Gentiles are bound to observe it for I shall shew some things that Christ commanded to be observed upon the Mount that Mr. Coppinger himself saith Believing Gentiles are not bound to observe Mr. Coppinger I shall prove that all that Christ did preach upon the Mount and taught others to preach believing Gentiles are bound to observe If all that Christ taught upon the Mount and commanded others to teach was to abide as long as the Sun and Moon and Heaven and Earth remain then all the believing Gentiles are bound to observe all that Christ taught upon the Mount But all that Christ taught upon the Mount and commanded others to teach was to abide as long as Heaven and Earth Sun and Moon remains Ergo all the believing Gentiles are bound to observe all that Christ taught upon the Mount Mr. Ives I deny the Minor all that Christ taught upon the Mount is not to abide as long as Heaven and Earth remain Mr. Coppinger Then you must shew us something that Christ did teach upon the Mount and command others to teach that is not binding Mr. Ives That I shall do therefore pray look into Mat. 5.23 24. Christ there commands that a man should leave his gift at the Altar and go and be reconciled to his brother and then Christ commands him to come and offer his gift these are commands given upon the Mount Secondly they are such commands as he bids others to do and teach ver 19. for they were to do and teach the least of those commandments Thirdly these commands that are taught upon the Mount are not all in force to believing Gentiles because that command of leaving the gift at the Altar and coming to offer it upon the Altar is not now in force therefore all that Christ commanded in his Sermon upon the Mount is not of force to believing Gentiles Mr. Coppinger The word altar and gift is variously taken as Heb. 13.10 We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat that serve the tabernacle and so likewise the word gift is variously taken as Christ is called The Gift of God Rom. 6.23 and Paul tells the Corinthians they came behind in no Gift 1 Cor. 1.7 and Phil. 4.7 Not because I desire a Gift and to this agree all Interpreters that gift and altar in this fifth of Matthew and 23 24. is taken allegorically Mr. Ives I answer to the last first that Mr. Coppinger doth abuse Interpreters or else he never read any for I challenge him to shew me any one Interpreter that ever understood altar and gift in Mat. 5. allegorically It is true that they sometimes make a spiritual application of these words but they all with one consent understand the words literally But secondly Mr. Coppinger hath shewed us that altar and gift is variously understood but hath not out of this variety told us which of these senses should be put upon altar and gift in this fifth of Matthew But thirdly I do challenge Mr. Coppinger or any man else to shew me that a gift at the altar is ever understood allegorically throughout the Scriptures from the Creation of the world to the death of Jesus Christ And lastly that Christ doth here intend a literal altar appears if we do but consider Mat. 8.4 where we shall finde that what Christ taught upon the Mount he exhorts the man that was cured of his Leprosie to observe for as soon as Christ descended from the Mount he cleans'd the Leper and then commanded him to offer a gift as Moses had commanded which could not be understood allegorically Mr. Coppinger The text that you last urged doth speak of a gift but not of an altar and the text under debate speaks of a gift and an altar Secondly This Christ bid the Leper do that it might be a Testimony of him to the Priest that so if the Priest should ask him how he was cleansed or who did cleanse him he might hereby have an opportunity to testifie Christ unto the Priest and tell him that Jesus of Nazareth made him whole * This cannot be the true sence of the Lepers shewing himself to the Priest for a Testimony but rather it was in observation of Moses Law which did command the Lepers to shew themselves to the Priest that the Priest having viewed the Leper he might give a Testimony to the people That this man was now fit to go abroad who before had dwelt in an out-house See Lev. 14. Mr. Ives I answer to your last first That if Christ did command the Leper to shew himself to the Priest and offer an offering according to the Law then let the end for which he did it be what it will your Argument is confuted for here is some part of the Law commanded by Christ before his death that is not binding to the believing Gentiles since the resurrection But secondly whereas you say that this text Mat. 8.4 speaks of a gift but not an altar I answer that I never heard that the Priest in Moses Law did ever offer a gift without an altar my reason is because Christ saith Mat. 23.19 That the altar sanctifieth the gift therefore this gift spoken of Mat. 8. must needs be a gift to be offered upon an Altar as well as that gift spoken of Mat. 5. Mr. Coppinger If you look into the text it is said The Leper was to offer as Moses commanded now if we will see how Moses commanded the Leper to offer let us read Lev. 14.4 5 6 7. we shall there read of the Priests taking two birds and his killing one of them over running water and that he did dip the living bird in the blood of that which was killed and then the Priest was to let the living bird fly away into the open field this indeed was to be done for the cleansing the Leper but here is not one word that the Priest was to offer any thing upon the Altar in all this Chapter Mr. Ives Have a care Sir what you say utter nothing rashly for if you look but into the 20 verse of this