Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	bear_v	life_n	live_v	4,791	5	5.2156	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38575	A treatise of excommunication wherein 'tis fully, learnedly, and modestly demonstrated that there is no warrant ... for excommunicating any persons ... whilst they make an outward profession of the true Christian faith / written originally in Latine by ... Thomas Erastus ... about the year 1568.; Explicatio gravissimae quaestionis utrum excommunicatio. English	Erastus, Thomas, 1524-1583.	1682 (1682)	Wing E3218; ESTC R20859	61,430	96

by their Commission v. 12. I can't imagine but that Agrippa and Festus too knew well enough whether it was lawful or not for their Council to do so and sure they would not have acquitted him in the manner they did v. 34 35. had not the Authority he had been committed by been warrantable for Paul should have offended no less against Caesar than against the Pharisees For he who doth an unlawful act by the permission and command of them who have no right nor authority to permit and command transgresses no less than they that command it but no such thing is charg'd upon the Accusers or Accused but Paul is fully acquitted as one that hath done nothing worthy of death or of bonds And had not the Jewish Sanedrim had this authority and liberty then lest them Pilate could not have said to them Joh. 18. 31. Take ye him and judge him according to your law And when they answer that it was not lawful for them to put any man to death this must be understood either as St. Augustin interprets it at the time of that Festival for fear of the People or as St. Chrysostom expounds it of that kind of Death which they desired that Christ should die With which latter Opinion the words of St. John which immediately follow very well agree to wit That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled which he spake signifying what death he should die To the same purpose is that of Mat. 26. 55 56. where Christ says I sate dayly with you teaching in the temple and ye laid no hold no me but all this was done that the Scriptures of the Prophets might be fulfilled They took him therefore at a time when by reason of the Feast then at hand and for fear of the People they could not put him to death vid. Mat. 26 5. and Mark 14. 2. Since therefore they could not bear that he should live any longer and they could not well take his life away themselves it follows of course that he must be deliver'd into the hands of the Romans that so all things which he had Mat. 24. foretold his Disciples might be fulfilled as the words of St. John intimate and as Augustine and Chrysostom agree And those Cries and Vociferations of the People Crucifie him crucifie him give farther Testimony to this Interpretation L. By what has been said the falsity of that Affirmation is apparently detected which says that the Sanedrim had not the power of the Sword that is the authority of Life and Death and that Stephen was ston'd tumultuously by the Rabble and not by Decree of the Council For I think I have proved beyond all contradiction that such a Power they had and for St. Stephen's case 't is clear that he was not tumultuously slain for that Acts 6. 12. he was solemnly brought and accused before the Council Witnesses were produced though false ones v. 13. they carried him out of the City and those Witnesses as the Law provides cast the first stones at him as may be easily gather'd from their laying down their Clothes at Saul's feet v. 58. The same too may be as fully proved out of other Histories for Josephus in his fourteenth book of the Antiquity of the Jews ch 12. 16 17. according to the Greek Copies tells us That the Romans gave liberty to all Nations and by name to the Jews who dwelt in or out of Judea to use their own Laws in things relating to Religion and to live freely according to their own Rites and Customs And in that twelfth Chapter he quotes Strabo for his Author that he writing of the City Cyrene says they had there a President or Chief Ruler who heard and decided their Causes and transacted all affairs as absolutely as if they had been an Independent State That also makes farther for us which we read Acts 18. 15. of Gallio the Deputy of Achaia where he tells them that if it be a matter of their Law they may look to it The same Josephus lib. 16. ch 4 5. recounts how Herod had obtained of Agrippa that the Jews in Asia might have the freedom of enjoying the Priviledges before that time indulg'd them by the Romans I take occasion to remember this because some object that Herod destroy'd and slew all the Sanedrim and stript them of all Authority as if none had succeeded those that were kill'd How likely is it that Herod should take from them in Jerusalem that power of judging in matters relating to Religion and determining therein according to their Law who endeavour'd to procure and preserve the same to all the other Asiaticks Besides the time of Christ's preaching fell not under Herod or Archelaus but under the Government of Pilate 'T is certain that the Jews forced even Pilate himself to send again out of the City the Roman Standards which he had caused to be privately introduc'd to prevent the breach of Gods Commands of suffering any Image in the City And that they reserv'd and continued this Power to themselves to the very destruction of Jerusalem may be clearly gathered from Josephus his Oration to the Besieged The Romans says he in his fifth Book of the Wars of the Jews ch 26. exact Tribute of us for that our Forefathers have a long time been wont to pay it to theirs If in this you comply they 'll neither sack this our City nor meddle with our Temple but leave both you your Goods and Families free and the free use and enjoyment of your sacred Laws Titus himself after his having taken the City said almost the very same to the Jews lib. 6. chap. 34. Whether therefore we consult the Holy Writ or the Jewish History 't is an undoubted truth that that Sanedrim which Christ commanded to tell it unto had the power of the Sword the power of Life and Death especially over those who sin'd against their Religion for in Civil matters and Causes of Right and Wrong where the Law had not specified the Punishment I do not question but that the Romans encroached and usurp'd if not all yet most of them to themselves as is easily discernable out of History and may well be conjectur'd out of Acts 18. v. 12. LI. And 't is no ways repugnant to what we have said that in Josephus his Antiquities of the Jews some of them tell Albinus that it was not lawful for the High Priest to call the Sanedrim or Council without his leave For he there as an Historian relates what others did not that he applauds or approves of the Fact thereby Besides peradventure the High Priest during the interregnum that is whilst Albinus after the death of Festus was no his Journey thither ought not to summon a Court for a matter of that weight and moment till the new Governour confirm'd him in that Authority for he had procur'd that James the Lords Brother who was vulgarly sirnamed the Just should be put to death who being a person

the boundaries and limits set unto the Jews As therefore God commanded that all that were externally circumcised should participate and communicate in the same Sacraments and Rites but that Criminals and other Transgressors should by the Sword and other civil Punishments be restrained and punished so is it Christ's Will that all who are baptized into him all that profess Christianity and have a right and sound sense of Religion should be admitted to the use of all external Ceremonies and Sacraments whilst the Wicked and Criminal fall under the correction of the Magistrate whether it be by Death Exile Imprisonments or other the like Penalties And the Parables of the Net Marriage and Tares seem to import no less XXXII We find among the Apostles Paul especially no fewer nor less plain and forcible Arguments for our Assertion First there are no Footsteps that the Apostles did either teach or practise such a kind of Excommunication This Argument though it be not so evincing and strong of it self yet will be made unanswerable if we consider that the Apostles all their time kept themselves to a strict observance of such Laws of Moses which Christ had not abrogated as may be gathered out of the 21th and 28th Chapters of the Acts of the Apostles for which cause they never did nor would attempt to put by any one from our Sacraments which differ from the Sacraments of their Forefathers in the signes and time of signifying onely if he be a professed Christian and make a right Confession of that Doctrine for they neither did nor taught any thing contrary to the Precepts of Moses which Christ had not before abrogated but kept themselves to as close and strict observance of the Law after his death as before as the chief of the Apostles bears witness in the before-cited places for that permission to live free from the Law of Moses was to the Gentiles onely not to the Convert Jews which ought carefully to be remark'd here for the sake of what follows And as to the substance of their Doctrine they taught nothing that interfer'd with Moses and the Prophets for had they taught any thing dissonant the Bereans could not have judged it agreeable to those Scriptures that they searched Acts 17. v. 11. XXXIII But to adventure yet one step farther Much may be said for the sense of Moses which jumps altogether with ours but for the contrary Opinion Paul affords us not one Argument for that Apostle in 1 Cor. 8. v. 7. excludes neither those who yet retaining some fear and conscience of the Idols thought them to be something nor those proud boasting Gnosticks who in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the House or Temple of the Idol at least in the Room that was set apart for their solemn and publick Idol-Festivals did promiscuously with the profane and impious Idolaters eat of the things offer'd to Idols A thing expresly forbid by Moses Exod. 34. v. 15. by the Apostles Acts 15. v. 29. by John Rev. 2. v. 14. This was a sin as hainous as 't would be now-a-days for a man to dare to be present and communicate at a Popish Mass as any one may easily gather out of the 10th Chapter of that Epistle for Paul there proves that such as those do not less declare themselves by that action to be Communicants and keep a Fellowship with Devils than they testifie themselves to be Members of the mystical Body of Christ by partaking of the Lords Supper XXXIV Again Paul 1 Cor. 10. 1 2 c. reasons the matter thus As says he God spared not in old time such as lusted after evil things nor Idolaters nor Fornicators nor such as tempted and murmured against Christ though all of them were baptized unto Moses in the same Baptism v. 2. and did all eat the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink v. 3 and 4. so shall he not spare even you too whoever of you are defiled with like abominations though you also all eat in like manner as did they of the same Bread and drink of the same Cup with the righteous and holy ones By this it is seen first that the Sacraments of the Jews before Christ and ours since are as to the internal and heavenly designe of them the very same else would the Apostles Argument be of no force Secondly 'T is evident that in both cases many vile and wicked Wretches and notoriously known and mark'd for such found admittance Thirdly 'T is also clear that none were commanded to keep away as the Excommunicated now-a-days always are for the Apostle doth not say that such whilst such should be kept from coming but foretels and denounces like punishments on them as befel such sinners of old Some of whom Moses with the Levites slew Exod. 32. v. 28. some God himself destroyed with Fire and Sword Serpents and Earthquakes which was these Corinthians case too for saith St. Paul 1 Cor. 11. v. 30. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you and many sleep that is are punished by Disease and Death from God XXXV In the next Chapter though St. Paul take notice of Divisions and Heresies among them and of some drunken at the Lords Supper yet neither are those Schismaticks and Sectaries those Drunkards or others of whatsoever debauched Principles commanded to be kept from eating it there 's no tittle or word of any such Interdiction Yet doth he there redress lesser matters as that every man should eat at home if he be hungry How could he have here pass'd over this in silence had he approved it had he thought it so necessary to the Church But the Apostle well knew that the Law commanded otherwise and that the use of Sacraments in the Church was to other purposes than the punishing of Moral Vices by their deprivation therefore commands he that every man examine himself 1 Cor. 11. 28. the Precept is not that they should try and examine one another Nay the Apostle there cautions them that they eat worthily For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself v. 29. He doth not in the least command that unworthy Communicants should be denied access but threatens them with sad dooms from the hand of God He divides the Eaters into two sorts according to their differing Complexions the worthy and unworthy ones he gives no Precept to either for their not eating but would that all should eat worthily XXXVI Afterwards in 2 Cor. ch 12 and 13. he threatens not those who 2 Cor. 12. v. 21. after a former admonition had not repented of the Uncleanness and Fornication and Lasciviousness which they had committed with exclusion from the Table of the Lord but 2 Cor. 13. 10. according to the power and authority which the Lord had given him to edification and not to destruction he would not spare ch 13. v. 2. and 10. that is he would proceed with rigour and severity according to his extraordinary and