Selected quad for the lemma: hand_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
hand_n	david_n	king_n	saul_n	6,232	5	10.0779	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19328	The ungirding of the Scottish armour: or, An ansvver to the informations for defensive armes against the Kings Majestie which were drawn up at Edenburgh, by the common help and industrie of the three tables of the rigid covenanters of the nobility, barons, ministry, and burgesses, and ordained to be read out of pulpit by each minister, and pressed upon the people, to draw them to take up armes, to resist the Lords anointed, throughout the vvhole kingdome of Scotland. By Iohn Corbet, minister of Bonyl, one of the collegiate churches of the provostrie of Dunbartan.	Nicanor, Lysimachus, 1603-1641.	1639 (1639)	STC 5753; ESTC S119005	43,296	68

with Your next example is of Iehojada who commanded Athaliah to be slaine 2 King 11. The very bare reading of the History answers you sufficiently Athaliah was an usurper of the Crowne which by right belonged to Ioash which was hid six yeeres from her cruelty After Iehojada the High-Priest Ioash's Uncle and Tutor with the Captaines and Hundreds with the Levites and chiefe Fathers of Israel had brought forth Ioash and put on him the Crowne and declared him King then by authority of Ioash the King thus seated in his throne Iehojada caused slay that bloudy usurper of the Kingdome Athaliah So this was done by the authority of the King Now nothing can be gathered from this but if any Subjects for certaine yeeres have taken upon them Royall authority if the righteous King doe recover his own authority he may command the usurpers to be slaine This point shall not be denied you Your last example from Scripture is also against you cōcerning the men of Keilah If you wil without prejudice judiciously consider the place you shall see that if you will prove the lawfulnesse of your defence it must be from Davids flying from Saul I have often seene both in the Fathers and modern Writers Davids example produced for to shew the unlawfulnesse of resisting Princes but never till now for the lawfulnesse of resistance Consider first then in generall that as Saul was ever invading David so he was ever flying from him 2. That where David did hide himselfe he found oft-times treacherous men to discover him promising to deliver him unto Saul So the Ziphits ran to Saul saying Doeth not David hide himselfe with us in strong holds in the wood in the hill of Hachilah Now therefore come downe and our part shall bee to deliver him into the Kings hand And thus being oft betrayed he was forced to forsake the Kingdome altogether to goe to the King of Gath. Now for the men of Keilah they were much obliged to David for delivering them from the Philistims and therefore the place being indebted to him and also farre from Saul he desired to remaine there so long as he might as having no certaine dwelling place else-where Saul hearing that he was there said God hath delivered him into mine hand for hee is shut in by entring into a towne that hath gates and barres By all appearance it was some of Keilah that brought Saul this newes shewing him what advantage he now might have of David being in such a close towne As for David being wise as the Angel of God when he heard of his discoverie to Saul he foresaw that if the men of Keilah would bee unthankfull they might keepe him within the towne to the King and not suffer him to flie away Therefore he enquires of God first if Saul would come there to seeke him for hee had no purpose to goe from Keilah if Saul were not to come for poore man he had no place to goe to Secondly hearing that Saul would not faile to come downe hee began to suspect the men of Keilah of deceit that they would shut the gates and keep him in till the King should take him having such advantage of the gates and barres that hee could not flie as his usuall custome was Therefore hee demands of God the second time Will the men of Keilah deliver me 1 Sam. 23 12. and my men into the hand of Saul that which is here translated deliver in the originall is shut up Will the men of Keilah shut mee up as is also exponed in the Margent of the Bible in that place So the meaning is not as you most seditously expound it Will the men of Keilah not defend mee but deliver me to Saul who am resolved to keepe this walled Citie against him But this is the meaning Will the men of Keilab not let mee goe away but shut me up close the gates that I cannot eseape by flying This lets us see that David had a purpose to flie from Saul which makes him so carefull to try whether the men of Keilah would hinder him by shutting their gates that finding them deceitfull he mightflee in time And therefore it 's without warrant you say that David with his six hundred men purposed to defend themselves in the citie agaist the King If hee had purposed to keepe the towne he would have beene well pleased how close soever the gates had been shut and would rather have enquired Lord will the men of Keilah open the gates and let in the King then will they shut the gates upon me 2 Though your exposition were true that David purposed to keepe the towne against the King the question yet remaineth Whether he ought to have done so or not a facto ad jus non valet consequentia 3 It proveth not your conclusion David was but one man who tooke an army of six hundred men to defend himselfe against the King as you dreame Therefore when the King persecuteth a private man he may gather an army and resist the King which I hope you will not at least cannot sustaine and yet you must sustaine this or else passe from your Argument Finally if any of you were in the case that David was in to be the Anointed of God and appointed by God to succeed Saul it feares mee you would take more upon you then David did for ye have done more already and some of you are not ashamed to call the Nobility Ephori and that they put on the Crowne with the King in his Coronation turning all to a finistrous and seditious sense As for your examples from reformed Churches since we live not by Examples but by Lawes I will not stand upon them as not knowing the Lawes and Government of forraigne Kingdomes If they have Lawes for their resistance you produce these examples most impertinently 2. From facts to prove the Lawfulnesse of resisting is ridiculous 3. None of these by resisting gained so much as by suffering as experience too late doth shew Covenanter From Testimonies not onely of Popish Writers 8. Argument but of the Divines of the reformed Churches even such as will bee strong pleaders for Monarchie Neither is Calvin against us but for us From the testimonies of most judicious Lawyers and learned men who have written contra-Monarchomachos Anticovenanter I grant Iesuites yet not all are for your tenet for herein you agree contrary to the Doctrine of al sound Divines ancient and moderne You name not any Protestant Divine but Calvin who is flat against you for this purpose I referre you to learne it out of the Duplie of the most learned Doctors of Aberdeen You nominate no judicious Lawyers I know your Advocate Master Iohnstone is for you but the question is too Deepe for his shallow brain Covenanter From the mutuall contract betweene the King and the people as may be seene in the Acts of Parliament 9. Argument and Order of Coronation Anticovenanter Answ 1. To this I give