Selected quad for the lemma: king_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
king_n	aaron_n	abraham_n	bless_v	39	3	8.4502	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10796	The reuenue of the Gospel is tythes, due to the ministerie of the word, by that word. Written by Foulke Robartes Batchelour of Diuinitie	Robartes, Foulke, 1580?-1650.	1613 (1613)	STC 21069; ESTC S115987	99,848	152

suburbs namely two thousand cubits from the walls on euery side of euery cittie I●sh 〈…〉 so that not in regard of an equitie respecting the multitude of the Leuites but in regard of their seruice ●n the tabernacle which they serue in the tabernacle of the congregation Numb 18 ●1 were the tythes assigned vnto them in which regard they are also now due to the Ministers of the Lord though our seruice be of another fashion it is in substance the same seruice to the same master and therefore iustly challengeth the same allowance And thus hauing shewed that the arguments of our aduersaries doe not prooue that the Israelites paid their tythes to the Leuites by a iudiciall equitie I will now proceede to our reason whereby we conclude strongly that tythes did not belong to the Iudiciall law The Iudiciall law of Moses was as it is vsually termed ●ra I●● polit 〈◊〉 by Diuines Lexhumana Mosis lex politica Iudaeorum ius ciuile Israelitarum that is the humane law of Moses the politicke law of the Iewes the ciuill law of the Israelites so that a learned man defineth it to be praeceptio Buc●●●● 19. de externis actionibus quibus regi ciuilem Israelitarum societatem oportuit that is it was an ordinance concerning outward actions whereby the ciuill societie of the Israelites ought to be gouerned But tythes did not concerne outward gouernment but the religious worship of almightie God for they are not the reuenue of the Magistrate for gouerning in the throne but the portion of the Leuite for his seruice in the tabernacle Againe when we consider more particularly those things about which the Iudiciall law was occupied as dominions inheritances contracts warres distinction betweene Iew and Gentile punishment of manifold offences we shall still obserue that the Iudiciall law medleth onely in things appertaining vnto men and which are in common vse but tythes belong vnto God and are holy vnto the Lord. Man hath nothing to doe with them but onely in the right of God and howsoeuer man doth vse them as his allowance or wages yet consider of what worke as they be the wages not of any worke of nature nor of any worke of common ciuilitie but as of a worke of religion and of Gods speciall and solemne worship and therefore tythes be not things in common vse but such as not man but God himselfe hath separated from common 〈…〉 vse Lastly as we shewed that tythes were no part of the Leuiticall ceremonies because they were before the order of Leui so also we doe now conclude that they are no part of the Iudicialls of Moses for they were before the time of Moses Seeing therefore they were before the time of Moses they are also to continue after Moses except it can be prooued that either they were types or that God himselfe did reuerse them for what God himselfe hath once enacted without expresse limitation of any time that remaineth a decree for euer vntill the same God who made it doe repeale it All the time of the priesthood of Leui the tythes were paid vnto the Leuites not as any matter Leuiticall but as a matter holy vnto the Lord and due vnto his seruice what was Leuiticall is ended but the seruice of the Lord continueth and therefore the tythes which are the reward of the seruice doe still continue with the seruice CHAP. VII The practise of tything mentioned and confirmed by the newe Testament FIrst it is a thing not of no moment that our Sauiour Christ in the new Testament speaking of the exact 〈…〉 payment of tythes which the Phatisies vsed telleth them directly that this they ought to doe and addeth not the least intimation either here or any where else either in 〈…〉 his owne words or in the writings of his Apostles that this practise of paying tythes ought to cease or might cease The Apostle Paul saith plainely that the Disciple ought to administer vnto his teacher of all his goods and that the Minister of the Gospel is to be maintained euen so as was the Minister at the altar and that was by tythes as we haue shewed cap. 4. But yet more plainely euen by the very name of tenths doth the new Testament affirme that this practise of paying tythes is to continue among Christians for Christ himselfe in the plaine testimonie of the new Testament receaueth tythes which will manifestly appeare if we duely consider the seauenth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrewes where the scope of the Apostle is to shew the excellencie of the preisthood of Christ aboue the 〈…〉 37. preisthood of Aaron to the which end hee bringeth in Christ vnder the person of Melchisedech who was a type of Christ in that he was both King and Priest without father or mother c. That Melchisedech was preist the Apostle prooueth by two arguments first from the effect v. 1. hee blessed him secondly from the adiunct v. 2. hee receiued tythes of Abraham of all things Whereby it is euident that Abraham did did paie those tythes vnto Melchisedech not by chance nor in curtesie or bountie but in bounden dutie and necessarily for to receiue a parcell of goods bee it the ninth tenth or eleuenth more or lesse at a mans hands by way of chance beneuolence or bountie is no proofe of any preisthood in the receiuer but of bountie and liberalitie in the bestower but the Apostle doth prooue that Melchisedech was preist euen by this argument because hee did receiue tythes of Abraham which also the actiue word vsed ver 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth imply for it is not said that Abrahamus decimauit seipsum but Melchisedech decimauit Abrahamum that is tooke his owne part not receaued a voluntarie gift And therefore Abraham was bound to pay his tythes to Melchisedech and tythes are due to the Priesthood wheresoeuer that bee either in Melchisech or in Leui as hath beene shewed in chap. 3. and 4. When the Apostle had demonstrated the Priesthood of Melchisedech he beginneth then vers 4. to compare the same with the Priesthood of the Leuites so as by Melchisedech he vnderstandeth Christ and saith of him ver 8. that he receiueth tythes here men that die receiue tythes but there he receiueth them of whom it is written that he liueth Some would here restraine these words to Melchisedech the type as if he of whome it is written that hee liueth must bee referred to Melchisedech and not to Christ but wee must knowe what the text speaketh most plainely that these things are spoken of Christ by the name of Melchisedech for so are the words ver 13. 14. He of whome these things are spoken pertaineth to an other tribe whereof no man serued at the altar for it is euident that OVR LORD sprung out of Iudah So then He that is our Lord that is Christ receiueth tythes and tythes belong to the Priesthood of Christ by the testimonie of the newe Testament