Selected quad for the lemma: friend_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
friend_n	job_n	kindle_v	wrath_n	1,892	5	10.0410	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07919	The suruey of popery vvherein the reader may cleerely behold, not onely the originall and daily incrementes of papistrie, with an euident confutation of the same; but also a succinct and profitable enarration of the state of Gods Church from Adam vntill Christs ascension, contained in the first and second part thereof: and throughout the third part poperie is turned vp-side downe.	Bell, Thomas, fl. 1593-1610.	1596 (1596)	STC 1829; ESTC S101491	430,311	555

to eate their owne bread but also to weare their owne clothes that so they be no way burdenous to him And yet as our Iesuite Bellarmine and other papists woulde haue it vnderstood in Genesis the text must yeeld this sense Wee will eate our owne bread and weare our own garments and desire onely that wee may inuocate thy name and make our prayers to thee when thou art dead Which sense is most absurd as euerie childe may perceiue for first if this had beene the meaning of the women in vaine had they made mention of eating their owne bread and wearing their owne garments as which coulde neither profite nor disprofite the man Secondly these women knew not whether the man should be a saued soule in heauen or a damned spirit in hel and therefore would they neuer make such a request to him Thirdly praying to him being dead could not take away their reproch on earth Fourthly the man might suruiue and liue after them all and so their desire was in vaine Fiftly Saint Hierome expoundeth this text euen as I haue saide For these are his words Tantùm ne absque marito esse videantur sub●acere illi maledicto quod scriptum est maledicta sterilis quae non facit semen in Israel Onelie least they seeme to bee without an husband and to bee subiect vnto the curse which is written Accursed be the barren which bringeth not foorth seede in Israel In sundry places of the Scripture the selfe same phrase is found which can not possibly yeelde any other sense and therefore most impudent are the papists who blush not to father their praying to Saints vpon this fact of Iacob Peruse the ninth chapter of Daniel the eighteene and nineteene verses where it is thus written Beholde the citie wherevpon thy name is called For thy name is called vpon thy citie and vpon thy people That is to say it is named thy citie and they are called thy people Ponder well these words of Saint Iames the second chapter 7. verse Doe not they blaspheme the good name that is inuocated vpon you that is you that of Christ are called Christians The like phrases are in Ieremie the seuenth in Esay the 44. chapter in the booke of kinges and in other places But our Iesuite thinketh the wordes aforegoing in Genesis to prooue his purpose effectually For Ioseph praied to the angel to blesse the sonnes of Ioseph But I answere that that angel whereof Iacob spake is Christ himselfe And I prooue it by other places of the same booke where Iacob calleth God an angell The angel of God saith Iacob said to me in a dreame Yet in y e verse following the angel calleth himself the God of Bethel Which God was the angel that deliuered Iacob from all euill Which God was that Christ in whom Iacob and his seed are blessed And so by conferring place with place it is euident that Iacob praied to God not to the angel Our Iesuites vrge yet another Scripture to prooue inuocation of saintes Call now if anie wil answere thee and turne thee to some of the saintes I say first that these be the wordes of Elyphas the Themanite one of Iobes frindes and therefore not a sufficient warrantize for an article of our faith I say secondly that he speaketh not of the saints departed but of the godly then liuing Whose behauiour he willeth Iob to consider if any of the godly rage against God as he did I say thirdly that our Iesuite confesseth elswhere as I haue prooued that before Christes ascension praying to saintes was not vsed The second conclusion To pray to Saintes departed is a thing at the least vaine and needles I prooue it because God is most able and most willing to helpe vs. Most able for that hee is omnipotent the fountaine of all grace and the giuer of euery good gift Most willing in that he hath not onely mercifully inuited vs to call vpon him but withall faithfully promised to heare and graunt our petitions If any man lacke wisedome saith S. Iames let him aske of God which giueth to all men liberally and reprocheth no man and it shalbe giuen him If any man sinne saith S. Iohn we haue an aduocate with the father Iesus Christ the iust and hee is the reconciliation for our sinnes euen for the sinnes of the whole world Call vpon me in the day of trouble saith God by his prophet and I will deliuer thee The scripture telleth vs in many places that whosoeuer asketh any thing of God shall receiue and whosoeuer seeketh shall finde and to euery one that knocketh the dore shall be opened And that whatsoeuer we shall aske in Christes name we shall attaine the same vndoubtedly The 1. obiection God will often accept the praiers of others for vs when hee will not heare our selues For when his wrath was kindled against Eliphaz the Themanite and his two friendes he would not heare them but yet accepted Iobs praiers for them The answere I answere that God meant not vtterly to reiect Eliphaz his friends for if he had so determined he would neuer haue accepted Iobs praiers for them But because they had contemned Iob and preferred their owne righteousnesse God to giue a testimonie of Iobs innocencie true faith and patience and to confound the proud conceites of Eliphas and his fellowes sent them to Iob and said that hee woulde accept his praiers for them Which my exposition is grounded on these words my wrath is kindled against thee and against thy two friendes for yee haue not spoken of me the thing that is right like my seruaunt Iob. As if God had saide yee haue offended much more then my seruaunt Iob in that yee condemned him by his outward afflictions and did not comfort and solace him with my mercies And therefore doe I send you vnto him that you may know that he hath greater fauour in my sight Thus God shewed the faith of Abraham praying for the Sodomites of Moses for the Israelites and of Paule for the 276. persons in the ship with him The replie If it were true that because God is most willing and most able to helpe vs therefore it is needles and vaine to inuocate or call vpon saintes departed by the same reason it is needlesse to inuocate and call vpon the saintes liuing which yet the scripture commandeth vs to doe The answere I say first that in proper kind of speech inuocation is a speciall part of diuine worship comprehending the affection of the minde that appealeth to his grace help and aid whom it doth inuocate and so it is proper to God alone yet in a large acception it may bee giuen to the liuing I say secondly that the one is vaine and needlesse not so the other The reason is this because we haue commaundement and promise for the one not so for the other For that is neuer to be deemed vaine or

in his hands at his last supper that selfe same body that was borne of the virgine Mary and suffered the next day after And yet if the valure of the sacrifice of the m●sse be finite then doubtlesse that sacrifice can not be the sonne of God for he is of infinite power of infinite glorie of infinite maiestie of infinite valure Yea whosoeuer denieth Christes body bloud subsisting in the person of God by hypostaticall vnion to be of infinite valure hee is become a flat Arrian beleeuing Christ to bee pure man and not God And consequently howsoeuer the papistes thinke or speake of their masse yet in making it a sacrifice they are blasphemous and that must needs followe though it were freelie graunted them that Christes body were present really in the Sacrament I prooue it tenthly because our Iesuite cannot denie but that a reall destruction is necessarily required in euery true reall sacrifice Wherefore since Christ dieth not in the popish masse it cannot be that he is truly sacrificed in the same For as Bellarmine truely saith Abraham did not truely sacrifice his sonne Isaac because he was not really slain Now that this discourse may be made more manifest I will propound the strongest obiec●ions for the aduerse part and adde briefe solutions to the same The first obiection S. Paul saith that Christ is a priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech and Melchisedech offered bread and wine as he was Gods priest saith holy Moses To which we must adde that the thing figured is more excellent then the figure that Christ truely offered sacrifice in bread and wine otherwise hee shuld not haue exactly fulfilled y e figure of Melchisedech For al the fathers graunt that he was a true figure of Christ euen as he was a priest The answere I say first that Melchisedech did not sacrifice bread wine but as the Hebrew text saith brought forth bread wine that is sufficient victuals for the refection of Abraham and his souldiers after their returne from the slaughter of Chedor-laomer and the other kings For the whole course of y e scripture telleth vs that bread by Synecdoche signifieth meate So Moses saith that the Egyptians might not eate bread with the Hebrewes that is meate In Esay 7. women say we will eate our owne bread that is our owne meat King Dauid promised Mephibosheth that he should eate bread alwaies at his own table which had been a very small reward of a king if by bread were not signified all kinde of meat King Iehoiachim ate bread at the table of Euil-merodach the king of Babel that is al delicate fare So it is called bread that Iobs friendes ate in his house when it is certaine that they had right sumptuous cheere The like examples are in S. Mathew sundry other places of scripture This I note against the papistes who fondly vse to answere that bread was a slender refection for all Abrahams companie I say secondly that Christes priesthood is after the order of Melchisedech not in any sacrifice of bread and wine which Melchisedech can neuer be prooued to haue offered but in y t as man he was without father wonderfully cōceiued as God without beginning without ending without mother woonderfully begotten for which cause the prophet demaundeth who shall declare his generation in these points Christes priesthood differeth not from Melchisedech who as S. Paule saith was without father without mother without kinred without beginning of his daies without end of his life likened to the son of God and a priest for euer Yet in the oblation of bread and wine the priesthood of Melchisedech was not perfitly distinguished from the priesthood of Aaron as the scripture witnesseth S. Paul therfore describeth the priesthood of Melchisedech without the mention of bread and wine in such sort as it is perfitly distinguished from the priesthood of Aaron So Eusebius Caesariensis comparing the priesthoode of Christ with the priesthood of Melchisedech doth not say that it consisteth in the sacrifice of bread and wine but in the vnction the diuine similitude the eternitie and want of succession These are his expresse words Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech Hic autē Melchisedech in diuinis voluminib sacerdos fuisse Dei summi refertur sed qui non oleo communi perunctus sit neque qui ex successione generis suscepit sacerdotium sicut apud Hebraeos fieri mos erat ideo secundum ordinem ipsius sacerdos futurus dicitur Christus qui non olei liquore sed virtute coelestis spiritus consecretur Thou art a priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech And this Melchisedech is called in the holy scriptures the priest of God most high but one which was not annointed with common oyle neither yet receiued his priesthood by the succession of kinred as the manner was among the Hebrews and therfore Christ is called a priest after his order who is consecrate not with the liquor of oyle but with the vertue of the holy ghost I say thirdly that Melchisedech in his action towards Abraham shewed himself both to be a priest and a king a priest in that he blessed Abraham a king in that he releeued Abraham and his souldiers with bread wine that is with al competent corporall sustenance I say fourthly that if there had bin any force in the oblation of Melchisedech touching Christs priesthoode S. Paul who handled euery least thing exactly in that comparison would neuer haue omitted his sacrifice in bread and wine and yet he passed it ouer as a thing of no importance I say fiftly that Christ offering himselfe vpon the crosse for the sinnes of the world was not a priest after the order of Aaron but properly and truely after the order of Melchisedech I proue the former part First because perfection could not come by the priesthood of the Leuites as the apostle beareth witnes Againe because our Lord Iesus was of the tribe of Iuda of which tribe Moses spake nothing at al touching the priesthood Thirdly because the sacrifice of the crosse was the most perfit sacrifice of all other as which did cōsummate them that are sanctified for euer I proue the latter part first because it must be after some order but not after the order of Aaron as is proued ergo after the order of Melchisedech Secondly because the apostle doth in expresse terms cal Christ a priest euen after the order of Melchisedech These are his words And being consummate was made the cause of eternall life to all them that obey him and is called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedech Lo Saint Paule ioyneth the order of Melchisedech with the sacrifice of the crosse offered for mans redemption as if he had said Christ is therefore called a priest after the order of Melchisedech because he