Selected quad for the lemma: death_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A32695
|
The harmony of natural and positive divine laws
|
Charleton, Walter, 1619-1707.
|
1682
(1682)
|
Wing C3674; ESTC R19926
|
100,936
|
250
|
lawful to raise such Pillars Altars Monuments c. at his pleasure provided he did it not in Cultum Extraneum within the Promis'd Land lest from such example encouragement might be taken for Idolatry it was no more permitted to the Stranger than to an Israelite either to set up a Statue or plant a Grove or make Images or do any other thing of that kind no not meerly for ornament sake as Mr. Selden hath truly observ'd De Iure Naturali Gentium lib. 2. c. 6. The Rabbins hold a Humane Image protuberant to be unlawful but not that which is made in plano flat or in concavo in a hollow Of Caelestial bodies neither prominent nor plane made for ornament were lawful but made for teaching or learning as in Diagrams Astronomical and the like they were permitted Other figures as well an Israelite as a Noachid might form as they pleas'd Of the same respect is that interdict Deut. 7. 26. Non inferes quidpiam ex idolo in domum tuam Thou shalt not bring as our Translation renders it an abomination into thy house which the Iewish Masters thus interpret To have use and enjoy an image made only for ornament was Lawful the same being part of domestick furniture but one made by a Gentile for worship sake was not to be admitted into promiscuous use with other utensils nor was it permitted either to possess or to sell Victims Oblations Vessels instruments consecrated to idolatrous uses Nor was any thing whose use had been interdicted to be retain'd but either burned or broken in pieces and thrown into the Air River or Sea nay the very ashes or coals thereof were an abomination But an Idol it self if melted or broken in pieces and applied to common uses by a Gentile before it came into the possession of an Israelite might be kept and among other utensils commodious to life used because the liquation comminution and application thereof to common uses by the Gentile was a manifest Resecration or Solution of the Religion of it and the Idol being once resecrate all furniture and utensils belonging to it are so too But whatsoever has not been made by Man as a Mountain Fountain River four-footed Beast and other Terrestrial things the works of Nature tho' worship'd as an Idol the use and possession thereof was not prohibited A Grove or Tree planted by a Gentile for Worship or only to shadow or adorn an Idol was so abominable that to an Israelite it was unlawful either to shelter himself from heat cold rain or wind under the boughs of it or to pass through it if there were any other way or to eat the Eggs or Young of Birds building their nest in the branches of it to bring home the wood for building instruments of agriculture or fewel or to eat any bread or meat dress'd with fire made of the wood or to wear cloth woven with a shuttle of the wood or to make use of the ashes And yet the use of herbs growing there was not unlawful because the soil it self was unpoluted Now of all these things whatever was unlawful to an Israelite to do or possess the same was equally unlawful to a Proselyte of the House And this is a Summary of the most learned Rabbins exposition of this first Precept against Extraneous Worship or Idolatry CHAP. V. The second Precept Of Malediction of the Most Holy Name or Blasphemy SO agreeable is this Interdict to the Law of Nature or Light of Reason that even the old Egyptians themselves tho' overspread with the Leprosie of Polytheism acknowledged themselves under a most strict Obligation punctually to observe it as may be inferr'd from hence that Hermippus in the life of Pythagoras whose doctrines were all deriv'd from Egypt among many other Statutes of that Sect concerning the Soul's purification c. sets down this for one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to abstain from all Blasphemy To the Israelites God expresly gives the same Lev. 22. 32. Keep my Commandments and do them I am the Lord ye shall not prophane my Holy Name that I may be sanctified in the midst of the Children of Israel Now among the Hebrews a more diligent observation of the Law is call'd Sanctification of the Divine Name and on the contrary to perpetrate any thing against the Law is call'd Prophanation of it as Mr. Selden hath out of the Princes of their Rabbins judiciously remark'd de Iure Natur. Gent. lib. 2. cap. 10. The more notable Interdicts of Idolatry Homicide Unlawful Coition were not to be violated tho' to avoid the danger of imminent Death for of a less danger no account is made In time of publick persecution life was not to be redeem'd by violation of any Law At another time it was sufficient to violation of the Law to obey the person impellent by menaces of Death rather than to be kill'd at least if the act turn'd to the emolument of the impellent as where work was to be done for him upon the Sabbath or if ten or more Hebrews were not present To a sick man it was lawful to eat things prohibited to deliver himself from death Farther a sin against more establish'd customs or manners and humane society tho' not against the Law is a Prophanation of the Holy Name Nor is such Prophanation in any case observ'd to have been fully remitted to any man before the very moment of death according to that of Isai. cap. 22. ver 14. This iniquity shall not be purged from you till ye die This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pollution or Prophanation of the Divine Name seems to be call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Apostle Rom. 2. 24. but is not that which is interdicted to the Noachid here in this second Precept and Naaman the Syrian cleans'd from the Leprosie 2. of Kings c. 5. v. 18. is brought for an Example The difference is clearly shewn by Mr. Selden de Iur. Nat. Gent. lib. 2. cap. 11. whose words therefore I here faithfully translate The Blasphemy or Malediction by this Precept forbidden is that most Horrible Wickedness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Execration of the Divine Name when any reproach and audacious contumely is openly and maliciously thrown forth against God such as was cast forth by those most impious miscreants the son of Shelomith Levit. 24. and Rabshakeh's Kings 2. ch 18. v. 30. Also when the Divine Majesty is understood to be knowingly and proudly denied from the consequence of any Act or Profession as when any man not from Ignorance but out of Malapertness and Pride professeth and endeavors to perswade others that Idolatry is to be imbraced this man tho' he hath himself worship'd no Idol denies God by consequence and is to be held a Blasphemer And against this most execrable impiety is turned the edge of that Sacred Law Numb 15. 30. But the Soul that doth ought presumptuously or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an high hand whether he
be born in the Land or a Stranger ex Proselytis tam Domicilii quam Justiciae the same reproacheth the Lord and that Soul shall be cut off from among his People Upon which Law Maimonides commenting More Neboch pa. 3. c. 41. saith No man so sinneth but he into whose Soul another opinion that is repugnant to the Law hath crept The Scripture there speaks also de Cultu Extraneo because that is opposite to the very foundation of the Law So that a Balsphemer is equal to an Idolater both denying the fundamental Principle of all Religion Other sins committed from error or ignorance or force of concupiscence or pravity of manners were to be expiated by certain Sacrifices or corrected by other sorts of punishments Idolatry and Blasphemy always to be punished by Excision or cutting off to be inflicted by Divine Vengeance but Blasphemy also by stoning Levit. 24. 16. And these explications of the Hebrew Doctors seem to me sufficient to evince the equal Obligation of these two Precepts concerning Divine Worship and common to the Noachides with the Israelites I proceed therefore to the rest which concern the mutual offices of Men. CHAP. VI. The third Precept Of Spilling Blood or Homicide THat this Precept also was contain'd in the Moral Discipline of the Olâ— Egyptians is evident from the precedent Apology of the Overseer of the Obsequieâ— in Sacred use among them in which heâ— in the name of the defuntct makes thiâ— profession 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of other men I have kill'd none And to 〈◊〉 Noachid belongs that of Gen. 9. 5. I wiâ—â— require your blood of your lives Which is to be understood of incruent or bloodless Homicide also of what kind soever Some interpret it of Suicide or Self-murder Whoso sheddeth mans blood by man shall his blood be shed not by judgment pronounced in Court but by Natural Right of Talion or like for like And this Interdict is renewed in the Decalogue Thou shalt do no Murder and elsewhere more than once in the Mosaic body of the Law Philo the Jew de Leg. special Praecept 6. 7. saith the Exposing of Infants is among many Nations by reason of their native inhumanity a vulgar impeity To the Hebrews it was expresly forbidden either to extingusih a Foetus in the Womb or to expose Children And Tacitus could say Hist. lib. 5. Augendae multitudini consulitur Nam necare quenquam ex gnatis nefas Egyptians also if we believe the Records of Diodorus the Sicilian the best of Antiquaries lib. 1. p. 51. were obliged to nourish all their Infants for increase of Mankind which highly conduceth to the Felicity of their Countrey Voluntary or wilful Murder was ex foâ—ensi sententiâ to be punish'd by the Sword but Philo Iudaeus de Leg. special p. 617. saith the Murderer was to be suspended or hanged upon a Gibbet He that killeth any Man saith Moses Levit. 24. 21. shall be put to Death Ye shall have one manner of Law as well for the Stranger or Proselyte of Iustice not of the House as for one born in your own Country For so the Masters understand this Text And as for the punishment of this sort of Homicide they have some differences betwixt the Gentiles living within the Territories of the Israelites and the Natives and Proselytes ritely circumcised Again Moses saith Numb 35. 21. the Revenger of blood shall slay the Murderer when he meeteth him without any place of Refuge Now the Right of the Revenger of blood in the Territories of the Israelites belonged no less to the Gentiles and Proselytes of the House than to the Hebrews themselves but whether it obtained among the Noachides before the Law or among the Egyptians is uncertain but that Name seems to derive it self not so much from the Mosaic Constitution as from a Custom more Ancient However most certain it is that the Revenger of Blood was the next Heir of the Slain Homicide by chance or error had right of Sanctuary Of which Right or Cities of Refuge the Sacred Law hath ordain'd many things Numb 35. and the Masters deliver many necessary to the Interpretation of the Law To a Gentile the Priviledge of Sanctuary did not appertain he was Obnoxious to the Revenger of blood nor to a Proselyte of the House in the casual slaughter of one Circumcised but he enjoy'd the Right of Asyle when he had by chance slain another of his own kind or quality as Mr Selden hath curiously collected de Iur. Nat. Gent. l. 4. â— 2. Who in the next Chapter proceeds to the Interpretation of divers other Niceties concerning this Precept from the Commentraries of the Iewish Masters of greatest estimation and authority Thou shalt not stand against the blood of thy Neighbour saith Moses Levit. 19. 16. that is thou shalt not stand Idle when danger of Death is imminent over one of thy own Kind Stock or Nation but shalt help to deliver him The force of an Aggressor with purpose to kill also of a Buggerer of an Adulterer of an Intestuous Person was to be hinder'd tho' with loss of life that they might not commit sin And such Wicked Force was also â—o be punish'd by Private Force if it could â—e done by blows not Mortal or by â—utting off a Member if not rather than fail even by killing If an Israelite shall have delivered an Israelite or his goods into the Power of a Gentile whether by fraud or by force it was Lawful either to slay him or to give him up into the power of a Gentile that he might not betray or deliver up others in like manner To kill an Israelite a Prevaricator i. e. a Worshipper of Idols or a Sinner in Contempt of the Divine Majesty as also an Epicurean i. e. an Apostate denying the Holy Law and the Prophesies it was Lawful to any other Israelite to kill him either in Publick with the Sword or by Stratagem For by his Prevarication and Apostacy he is depriv'd of the Title and Priviledge of a Neighbour i. e. he hath ceased to be an Israelite By fraud to Circumvent a Gentile an Idolater to his destruction was not Lawful and yet notwithstanding the Law doth not command to deliver him from imminent death seeing he is not a Neighbour Other kinds of Homicide there were permitted to private men A Thief in the Night breaking into a House Inhabited might be impunely slain Which is also in the Platonick Laws and in those of the twelve Tables In Child-birth it was Lawful for the Mothers preservation to extinguish the Foetus in her Womb but not vice versâ For Worshipping the Calf three Thousand were slain not Twenty-three Thousand as the Vulgar From the notorious Example of Phinehas the Son of Eleazar Numb 25. 11. was deriv'd Ius Zelotarum the Right of Zelots by which it was lawful for private Men led by Pious Zeal whensoever an Israelite openly and before at least ten Israelites