Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	deliver_v	law_n	sin_n	8,493	5	5.3568	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96361	Pantheologia or the summe of practical divinity practiz'd in the wilderness, and delivered by our Saviour in his Sermon on the Mount. Being observations upon the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of St Matthew. To which is prefixed a prolegomena or preface by way of dialogue, wherein the perfection and perspicuity of the Scripture is vindicated from the calumnies of Anabaptists and Papists. By Tho. White B.L. minister of Gods word at Anne Aldersgate, London.	White, Thomas, minister of St. Anne's, Aldersgate.	1653 (1653)	Wing W1806; Thomason E1466_1; ESTC R208673	167,277	207

what he doth for his own glory 7. It is not said that your Father may glorifie you but that men may glorifie him to show us that the glory of God should be more dear to us not only then the honour and glory we receive from men but even then the glory that we shall receive from God Vers 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfill Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets Our Saviours bidding them not to think shews that either they did think so or probably would or might think so and therefore he forbids them to think so 1. Observe that though ones carriage or doctrine be a probable cause of scandal or offence yet in some cases we ought not to forbear 2. But when it is so we ought to satisfie the parties offended and to take off the offence if already taken or to prevent it if likely to be taken 3. Let us see what might probably induce them to think that our Saviour came to destroy the Law or the Prophets 1. For the Law our Saviour did not preach nor did his Sermon go as the Law did by way of command for he doth not say Be ye poor in Spirit c. but by way of promise Blessed are the poor in Spirit 2. Nor is there in all the beatitudes one of the ten Commandments in plain terms or so many words not Blessed are they that keep the Sabbath or that honour their Father and Mother 2. For the Prophets he seemed to destroy them for as they thought the Messiah was to come in pomp and majesty and that his Kingdom should be of this world yet he said he was the Messiah though he was poor 2. He did not as all the rest of the Prophets did denounce judgement to come as yet nor told of things to come and indeed in all respects almost his preaching was different from that of the Prophets before him I am not come to destroy but to fulfill 1. Observe that ones actions preaching doctrine may be mis-interpreted quite contrary not onely divers for though our Saviour came to fulfill he was thought that he did come to destroy 2. Let us see how our Saviour did not destroy the Law for it may seem that he did 1. For the moral Law he did not destroy that the end vertue and power of the moral Law was 1. To set down a rule or way to heaven and to shew us what we were to do to glorifie God and to benefit our neighbour and to attain heaven 2. To justifie those that kept it and to save them 3. A condemning power to sentence them that kept it not for the two former ends they still remain for the Law hath yet a power to justifie those who keep it and to save them that it doth not actually justifie us is because we cannot fulfill it by reason of any weaknesse in the Law Rom. 8.4 Food hath a power to nourish though by reason of the weaknesse of the stomack it cannot digest or of the vicious humours that putrifie and corrupt the food it receives but for the condemning power is not that taken away since divers that keep not the Law are not condemned I answer 1. That the condemning power of the Law is not essential but accidental to the Law so that the Law may not be destroyed though none be condemned by it nay though it hath no power to condemn for the main intention of Law-givers is not that men should be punished for not keeping but that men should keep them for the penalty is not set down as a snare to entrap men but as a motive to provoke men to keep them 2. The Law hath still a condemning power and actually doth condemn all those who do not evangelically keep it those who are condemned are condemned by the Law 3. He hath for those who believe in him not abolisht the power to condemn but satisfied the condemning power and endured the penalty of the Law for he did not by force but by ransom deliver the captives of sinne and death for the ceremonial Law Christ might not be properly said to destroy that for when any thing attains the very end for which it was ordained though it perish in so doing it cannot properly be said to be destroyed for instance food the end of it is to nourish though it be consumed and corrupted in the stomack from the form it had yet it is not said to be destroyed as for example A lease for lives is not properly cancelled or destroyed but expired by the death of the parties Prophecie when the thing comes to passe is not nullified or destroyed but fulfilled though it cease to be any longer a Prophecy Ceremonies of the Law were visible Prophecies of Christ for the Jews being a superstitious people and by consequence loved Ceremonies and God fore-seeing that they would if they were not framed to their hands stuff their service of God with idolatrous ceremonies the Lord set down and chose for them such Ceremonies as might as much as Ceremonies could profit them giving them such Ceremonies as should prefigure the main and most remarkable things of the Messiast when Christ came he fulfilling all those visible Prophecies and Types of him could by no means be said to destroy the ceremonial Law but to fulfill it for the judicial Law it belonged not to the Jews as they were a Church but as a Commonwealth and so our Saviours Kingdome not being of this world he did no way alter those Laws for the Jewish Commonwealth making them more or lesse strict then they were nor imposed them upon other Kingdoms of the world 2. Christ fulfilled the Law and the Prophets 1. The Moral Law more perfectly then ever it could have been fulfilled 1. Fulfilled the righteousness of the Law by his active obedience more exactly or at least in an higher degree then Adam could have done or then the Angels do for although the Angels do and Adam if he had stood in his integrity would have exactly fulfilled the Law he would and the Angels do love God with all their strength and minde c. yet their righteousnesse neither is nor could have been so excellent as our Saviours for the minde of our Saviour being more clear and the strength of our Saviour more then theirs our Saviour loved God more excellently since he loved him with all his strength and all his minde A childe though it put all its strength to it cannot lift so much as a Gyant 2. For the penalty of the Law our Saviour by his passive obedience fulfilled and satisfied that more then any way it is or could be satisfied for the damned in hell do not so exactly fulfill and satisfie Gods justice for the breach of the Law for they are alwayes satisfying but never do nor never shall actually and fully satisfie the same for if they did

that it hath been said of them of old time as before and it hath been said as here and you have heard that it hath been said vers 38. and surely there is a reason of our Saviours varying the phrase now I shall set down the reasons You have heard that it hath been said of those of old time When our Saviour sayes so he instanceth in murder adultery perjury all breaches of the Moral Law which the Patriarches before and after the floud observed and they are said to be of old time which were before Moses wherein divorce and the positive Law for the punishment of injuries were not in force before the judicial Law was given It hath been said and ye have heard that it hath been said the reason of that may be this the matter of divorce in this verse concerning it is that which our Saviour grants was said Whosoever shall put away his wife but the doctrine that the Scribes preached concerning divorce was farre more large so that the practice of the Jews was farre more corrupt in the matter of marriage then in any other thing appears by the Polygamy of the Patriarchs and the holiest men in the Old Testament and by Gods indulging to them a sinne to wit divorce for other causes besides adultery and doubtlesse their doctrine was not lesse corrupt so that in this point they did not hear the Law in its true sense nor word but farre more liberty was given and the Septuagint indeed is not If he shall put her away but he shall put her away So it hath been said Whosoever shall c. but you have not heard that it was so said but he shall not you have been taught that he shall put her away as if he must put her away whereas it is said indeed If he shall put her away and upon that supposition gives directions what to do viz. to give her a bill of divorce the Law commands to give her a bill of divorce if he puts her away it doth not command him to put her away In this verse It hath been said not you heard it hath been said in vers 30. It is said and you have heard it hath been said in the instance vers 43. You have heard it was said but it was not so said Whosoever shall put away his wife let him give her a bill of divorce 1. As I have said It is not a man shall put away c. but Whosoever shall put away or if one shall c. 2. The reason why he was to give here a bill of divorce was that she might not be punished as an adulteresse if she married another man for by the bill of divorce the husband gave free power to the woman to marry whom she would This was the form I have determined freely uncompelled by any to dismisse divorce and forsake thee who hitherto hast been my wife therefore I do dismisse forsake divorce and put thee away from me that you may be at your own power and that you may go whither soever you please neither hath any one at any time forbidden me thus to do and be thou therefore so dismissed that it shall be lawfull for thee to marry whom thou pleasest The reason why God permitted the Jews to be thus divorced from their wives was for the hardnesse of their hearts as Chap. 19. for else they would some way or other have made them away to avoid murder God permitted divorce If you shall ask Why might not a man put away his wife by word of mouth as well as by writing I answer 1. A writing was a more continuing and ready proof of her divorce then words for they must be proved by witnesse who also might in a short time die and so the woman might come to be accused and put to death for adultery for knowing another man 2. To take away as much as might be the frequency and number of divorces for writing is a more delibarate act and requires more time to consider before he did it in which time he might haply change his minde and his anger might be appeased for if the Heathens advise to say over the Alphabet before one did any thing in ones anger surely to write over more then so many letters as are in the Alphabet might be thought a more likely time for ones displeasure to be laid especially this was a better way for the composing strifes if they did not write their bils of divorce themselves but had them written by the Scribes and so required longer time and the Scribes did or might often mediate for reconciliation moreover it being a publick act one would be ashamed to divorce Vers 32. But I say unto you That whosoever shall put away his wife saving for the cause of fornication causeth her to commit adultery and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery But I say unto you 1. Before our blessed Saviour shewed in one case to wit of adulterous desires one might be guilty of adultery now he shews how that the very act of adultery was by them accounted lawfull which was an adulterous marriage 2. Christ doth here take away the wicked use of the permission of divorce and that which fomented those unlawfull desires he spoke against before for the great abuse they made of that Law was this If a man desired another mans wife because it was a sinne punished with death he would take a way as he thought to avoid both sinne and punishment and would if he could obtain her consent perswade her to carry her self so to her husband as might occasion him to divorce her and then he would marry her and enjoy his unlawfull desires our Saviour to stop the currant of this wickednesse layes the sinne of adultery upon all three upon the husband that divorceth for causing upon the woman and the man that marry for committing of adultery and so that if the conscience of the sinne do touch any of the three that wicked plot of getting another mans wife might be frustrated In the 19th Chapter also he takes order for those who would that they might be free to marry another upon slight occasions divorcee their wives by shewing that he that did so committed adultery Whosoever shall put away his wife except for fornication It cannot haply be proved by this verse that one may put away ones wife for fornication or adultery for all that can be proved is that he that doth doth not cause her to commit adultery 2. See how milde our Saviour is for fornication before Deut. 22.21 she was to be put to death for adultery after marriage our Saviour doth intimate that she should only be put away 3. Fornication is here named not adultery for that may be concluded à fortiori if one may put away ones wife for being false before much more for being so after marriage 4. If you shall say Why not for blasphemy heresie or some other notorious sinne which are