Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	punishment_n	sin_n	transgression_n	4,361	5	10.4522	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94081	An essay in defence of the good old cause, or A discourse concerning the rise and extent of the power of the civil magistrate in reference to spiritual affairs. With a præface concerning [brace] the name of the good old cause. An equal common-wealth. A co-ordinate synod. The holy common-wealth published lately by Mr. Richard Baxter. And a vindication of the honourable Sir Henry Vane from the false aspersions of Mr. Baxter. / By Henry Stubbe of Ch. Ch. in Oxon.	Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676.; Stubbe, Henry, 1632-1676. Vindication of that prudent and honourable knight, Sir Henry Vane, from the lyes and calumnies of Mr. Richard Baxter, minister of Kidderminster.	1659 (1659)	Wing S6045; Thomason E1841_1; ESTC R209626	97,955	192

this triall there is no mention of the Tetragrammaton or sacred name yet the whole assembly unanimously condemns our Saviour for blasphemy against one of the Sacred attributes which is manifestly expressed in the text in the words Sitting at the right hand of power Vid. Selden loco citato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Power or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being by the Jewish Rabbines a thousand times reckoned amongst the attributes of God I am further to observe that the Iewes did not reckon materiall blasphemy such as is wickedness of life or the profession of a religion or way inconsistent with the truth for to be the blasphemy that was to be punished with death Thus the Blind man Ioh. 9. who avowed Christ to be no sinner but a Prophet and of God was not impleaded or condemned as guilty of blasphemy and so to dye but he was excommunicated or excluded from the converse of the Iewes And the Disciples in the Acts. ch 4. 5. though they preached that Iesus was the Christ and that Salvation was to be had onely in his name and that God had exalted him with his RIGHT HAND to be a prince and a Saviour c. yet were not they charged with blasphemy or represented as guilty of death So Paul in his declaration whatever he lay down it was not imputed to him as blasp●emous for then the people would have rent their cloaths instead of casting them off and have said he was guilty of death and not Away with such a fellow from the earth it is not fit that he should live Acts 22. v. 22 23. from whence it may be gathered what opinion the Iewes had of the Messiah that one might avowe himself to be or that another was such yet not be guilty of blasphemy or death for such his assertion yet as a sower of sedition such might be punished with stripes or imprisonment Acts 4. v. 3. Acts 24. v. 5. for if they had taught openly that Christ did sit at the right hand of power or glory as Steven Acts 7. v. 55 56 57. or had said he was the Son of God they would not have spared the Disciples who condemned the Master upon that score and told Pilate We have a law and by our law he ought to dye because he made himself the Son of God Joh. 19.7 It is very considerable how by the same law whereby Christ was condemned for blasphemy by the Iewes in asserting his deity by the same law are the Socinians condemned now for denying his deity We ought then to be very tender in committing the interpretative power of such lawes to any sort of men least analogicall blasphemy retrench upon the truth Formall blasphemy or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 maledictio seu execratio ejusdem reproachfull language or cursing of the Sacred name was counted blasphemy by them and as such prohibited viz. When the Hol●ness Power Verity Quando sanctitas potesias veritas unitas numinis aut convitio ultro ac diserte prosciaditur aut ex professione actuve aliquo palam ac procaciter negari consequenter deprehendi●ur Selden de jur natur l. 2. c. 11. and Unity of God was either reviled willfully and expresly or by some action or declaration in a way of consequence openly and malepertly denyed Of the former sort was the blasphemy of Rabshekah 2. King 8.30 Isai 36.15 And of Shelomith's Son Levit. 24.13 and that of which Naboth was accused 2 King 21. v. 10.13 the Chaldee having it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to blesse or curse according to the foregoing sense Of the second sort or consequentiall blasphemy which was not to depend upon subtile consequences deduced from words or actions innocently spoken and performed and without any evill intention or through errour as any man may prove out of Mr. Selden de jur natur l. 2. c. 11. it was accounted such if any one without lapsing himself into idolatry or embracing strange worships for that was comprised by the Iews under the precept of Idolatry was also reputed a consequential blasphemy did perswade others thereunto or profess the lawfulness equity thereof himself and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an high hand Ex prot●rvia n●n ex ignor●ntia seu disciplinae errore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of malepertnesse not ignorance or mistake in judgment Or if any Israelite did in such manner violate the Law of Moses or a son of Noah living among the Jews under an established politie in Judaea transgress the precepts of N●ah not out of weakness or hasty seductions of natural concupiscence or error but because he peevishly and malepertly refuses to acknowledge his obligation to the contrary or doth not reverence the Authority Power Vnity and Verity of God so commanding or prohibiting that is he denies it all in very deed willingly wilfully and with an high hand and despises it This is the doctrine of the Jews and to this doth that precept referre Numb 15.30 The soul that shall do with an high hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proudly and insolently the Chaldee hath it with an uncovered head 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether he be home-born or stranger the same reproacheth or blasphemeth Jehovah and that soul shall be cut off from among his people By all this that hath been alleadged as the doctrine of the Jews together with their practice in our Saviours time this Law of Blasphemy and Idolatry is particular to the Jews living under their proper polity in the land God gave them and extends coercively no farther nor therein to any consequential or figurative remote Idolatry and blasphemy proceeding from probable reasons or weaknesse of judgement or the like so that for ought I can see since neither the Scripture nor Jewish Doctors inform us what a Supream Magistrate over the sons of Noah ought to do in such cases and since in dubious matters it is best to be cautious I believe notwithstanding all this Law a Toleration must necessarily be granted But to give a punctual answer to these Laws It is evident that they are part of the Political Law of Moses and not comprized in the Moral Law I mean as to the punishment inflicted upon the Transgressor for the Moral Law It is the opinion of many Iews and also of Theodoret that the first part of one text in controversie viz. Levi● 24.15 Whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin that by this text even Idolaters were prohibited to blaspheme their gods Which interpretation as it is highly probable and conformable to reason and usage so it shews that there may be a rule to evidence a transgression yet not inferre a temporal punishment for none of them prove any punishment to have been inflicted thereupon but that the offender should hear his sin The like in stances may be brought from several Laws the breach whereof was

the Children of Israell for a possession Deut. 12.1 These are the statutes and the judgments which ye shall observe to do in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee So Exod. 34.13 They should destroy all monuments of Idolatry in those dominions and this is the judgment of the Jewish Doctors as Mr. Selden reports them de jur natur l. 2. c. 2. It is commanded us that we destroy all forreign worship out of our land but beyond our precincts it is not commanded us that we should persecute and destroy it In case they made any additionall conquest that law did not reach them yet did they by an intervenient right as Mr. Selden phraseth it abolish and extripate Idolatry in such places viz. least it should become a snare unto them Amongst the Jewes there lived sundry other people called under the generall name of Strangers which as to matters of common equity had one and the same law or justice which an Israelite had such were the Gibeonites and the reliques of the Cananites that were undestroyed such were those which joyned with them when they came out of Egypt such were the Prosclytes or Strangers in the gate who were not Jewes but were all bound up say the Jewes to the seven precepts of Noah in such cases as an Israelite might be put to death they also might suffer the like punishment so that it being death for an Israelite to worship Idolls or tempt others thereunto it was in like manner punishable for any Stranger to attempt the like But it was also death for any Stranger not becoming absolutely a Proselyte to the law of Moses for to observe any part thereof as being his law It is also remarkable that the law of Noah regarding Idolatry was Negative and onely told them they were not to worship Idols Angels Sun and Moon and such Gods as were not the Lord Jehovah but as to the positive part we find nothing expressed that they were to do necessarily though voluntarily they might offer whole burnt-offerings by the Priest in the same Temple with the Iewes and they might pay their vowes and had a particular place in the Temple to pray in As for a City falling into Idolatry it was to be destroyed with the edge of the sword the spoile to be burned and all to be made an heap for ever But in reference to this extirpating Idolatrous Cityes I observe that it is not onely not extended beyond the limits of Israel if thou shalt hear say in one of the Cityes which Jehovah thy God giveth thee to dwell there but also that it doth seem not to have extended unto any City that should cast off the yoak of their government and separate into a new reiglement for I do not find any war made upon Jeroboam and the ten Tribes for their Apostacy and Idolatry though they be reproved for the same nor do I find that the Townes taken at any time from the ten Tribes by the two were used according to the law in debate But they seem as the Samaritans after them to be left unto God for to be cut off And indeed as to particular Idolatry to be practised within Judaea by the Strangers that none should come thither who should not professe a subjection to the precepts of Noah and so relinquish his Religion or intermit ●t doth hardly seem credible that it was performed when Hiram's Servants did work with Solomons Servants or came to congratulate him 1 Kings 5. or when the Queen of Shebah came to Jerusalem with a very great train 1 Kin. 10. Or as often as any Embassadours came from forreign countreys to the upright Kings of Judah after the Captivity and their return from thence will any one think that Alexander the great when he and his army came to Ierusalem that they became Proselytes to the commandements of Noah or that the Romans did intermit their worship which was to be performed daily or particularly at the marching of the Army all the while they were in Iury Or that all those Nations recounted in the Acts 2. v. 9 10 11. had renounced their native Religion Yet is not that Toleration condemned by the Apostles as neither had it been by Christ who was able by a grant of Angelical legions to effect what possibly it may be replyed the others could not As for that other text respecting Blasphemy Levit. 24. v. 15 16. Any man when be shall curse his God then he shall bear his sin And he that b●asphemeth the name of Jehovah shall surely be put to death and all the congregation stoning shall stone him as well the Stranger as the Home-borne when he blasphemeth the name shall be put to death The Jewes observe that it is not said in the Originall he that blasphemeth From hence the Jewes became so superstitious as not to think it lawfull to name the sacred name therefore called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philo thus recordeth the law Ei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de vita Mosis l. 3. but he that nameth and that not generally God but the name Jehovah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they further remark that the Son of Selomith did curse the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and though they confesse that the law against blasphemy comprise both Iewes and Strangers living amongst them for it is not conceivable how it extended any further then their particular polity so as to oblige the Jewes at Alexandria to execute the law upon any gentile there or in the captivtiy yet the extent of the violation thereof was so little that the blasphemer must have expressed the name Jehovah The words of the Thalmudists are as Mr. Selden cites them de jur natur l. 2. c. 12. he is not to dye if he expresse not the sacred name no not though he blaspheme or curse any sacred attribute Reus mortis non est nisi qui expresserit ipsum nomen neutiquam vevò qui cognomini maledixerit But notwithstanding this and much more to this purpose which is to be seen in Mr. Selden it seems evident from the condemnation of our Saviour in the Gospell that in his dayes blasphemy was extended beyond the mention of that sacred name of the true pronunciation whereof we are now totally ignorant and so incapable of that blasphemy unto the attributes of God For Caiphas saith Matth. 26.63 c I adjure ther by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God Jesus said untohim thou hast said neverthelesse I say unto you hereafter shall you see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the cloudes of heaven Then the High-Priest rent his cloathes saying he hath spoken blasphemy what further need have we of witnesses behold now ye have heard his blasphemy what think ye They answered and said he is guilty of death Or as Marke c. 14. v. 64. hath it And they all condemned him to be guilty of death In

punished with excision or cutting off or the Law of Nature may lead us to condemn what it doth not enjoyn us to punish at least not this or that particular way This is evident as to the case in hand from the practise of sundry Nations and even that commandment which taught the Iew to keep the Sabbath and to condemn its breakers did not teach them what punishment they should inflict upon them Thus he that had gathered sticks upon that day was put in ward because it was not declared what should be done unto him Philo Judaeus de vita Mosis lib. 3. And the Lord said unto Moses The man shall surely be put to death all the Congregation shall stone him Numb 15.34 35. So the Blasphemer son of Shelomith though he had sinned against the Law delivered in the Mount Exod. 20.7 yet was he put in ward that the minde of the Lord might be shewed them and God commanded he should be stoned Levit. 24.12.16 Nor doth the example of God so punishing inferre that we ought to do in the like manner God by Moses punished Theft which is a breach of the Moral Law with a four-fold restitution amongst the Iews Exod. 22. v. 1. Luc. 19.8 Yet Mr. Selden shews how the strangers in Israel were punished for thievery with death as also amongst us they are Nor do I finde the usage to be condemned though every pettit transgression of the Sabbath we do not punish with death This then being a Political Law it cannot oblige us but upon the account of common equity and not as a part of the Iewish Polity for then all the judicial Law would be introduced into Christianity and since common equity nor the example of God doth not determine necessarily of the greatness and manner of the punishment I conceive a moderation requisite lest for the uncertain satisfying of one Law we run the certain hazard of breaking another which is that of committing no murther This will much more appear if we consider that the prohibition Exod. 22. v. 20. Is directly against Sacrificing which he that shall expound to be any sort of worship which is commanded not to be appayed to other Gods but Jehovah It is very hard measure and a Zeal not according to knowledge that because the law may without retre●ching upon impossibility be expounded so therefore the man must dye speaks more then is in the Text or can be necessarily deduced from any other places of Scripture wherein if it be sometimes used for worship in generall it doth not follow that it is alwayes so used and consequently that it must but that it may be so here The whole is a fallacious arguing from the punishment of one determinate species or kind of transgression with death to the punishment of all that agree therewith in a more large and genericall relation Adultery may be and is by our lawes punished more severely then fornication yet are both forbidden by the same commandement As for the place in Deut. c. 13. it is directed against prophets and dreamers things not to be heard of in our dayes in which those delusions as well as gifts are ceased and that of Deut 17. v. 2. c. is a punishment of corporall adorations and service paid to the Sun Moon and host of Heaven of which I know not nor do I hear of any among us However since this text thus urged maketh against Paganisme and its toleration I desire that not onely the practise of the Jewes but of the primitive Christian Emperours be considered and it will be evident how they did not think themselves concluded thereby It is no good argument which doth not weigh all circumstances the opponent must prove that all Common-wealths must be as to this point like unto that of Israel that their Magistrates have the same duty incumbent upon them though by the way to destroy Idolaters and seducers thereunto Hebraeorum meribus Hebraeus a Deo Dei lege deficiens aut ducem se ad f●lsos cultus praeb●ns Deut 13. ● illico a quovis homine poterat interfici Judicium Z●l● id vocabant Hebraei quod a Phinea primo exercitum aiunt Num. 25. inde ablisse in morem Sic Jud●um quendam Graecis se polluentem ritibus occidit Matthias 2 Maccab. 24. Sic trecen●i alii Judaei a p●pularibus suis occisi reseruntur libro qui vulgo dicitur Maccabaeorum tertius Nec alio obtentu instituta lapidatio in Stephanum Act. 7.57 conjuratio in Paulum Act. 23.13 multaque alia exempla eiusmo●i ex●ant apud Philonem apud I osephum Grotius de iur bell l. 2. c. 20. §. 8. was no Magistraticall act and what wonder is it if Jehu Josiah and Elijah do that which any member of that politicall constitution might doe And that the same power not only ought to be but is actually enstated in them And when they shall have proved this we shall grant them liberty of extirpating their Idolatrous subjects In the mean while I desire it may be observed that though it be argued out of the Text Deut. 13. v. 10 11. that the precept is urged with a perpetuall reason therefore its force is everlasting Cur ob eum finem perlata lex dicitur que perpetuò valere debet Sic enim scribitur in extrema lege Vt omnes Israelitae audiant timeant nè deinceps rem adeò nefandam designent Beza de pun haeret Thou shalt stone him with stones that he dye because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God And all Israell shall hear and fear and shall do no more any such wickednesse as this is among you The latter part of which words however Beza would make them to be a reason for the Action yet from the words I can gather no more then that God to whom nothing is hid saith that by way of event it shall happen that such exemplary punishments shall be attended with the consequent of Israel's obedience nor will collation of texts help us to any more full and also necessary deduction And as for the former part because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God though I should grant the reason to be perpetuall yet doth not it therefore in Scripture ratiocination follow that the law is to be perpetual Such is the case of abstaining from blood Levit 17. v. 10 11 13 14. not to instance in other laws is not that of the Sabbath enforced with a perpetuall reason as to the determinat day and yet do not Divines absolve us from the obligation thereof Is it not now as true as ever that in Six dayes the Lord made Heaven and Earth and rested the seventh day wherefore he blessed the Seventh day and hallowed it As for Mysticall or Figurative Idolatry I understand not how this text can with any pretense be urged against it unlesse they will find out some Analogicall punishment

for as such Idolatry is not absolutely Idolatry but in some proportion for the extent whereof we have no warrant either in the customary interpretation of penall lawes which are not to be extended nor in Scripture which prohibits all addition to the text upon so severe a curse as one ought not upon probabilityes to run the danger of it nor they dreamers or false prophets The Apostle Peter Epist 1. cha 2. saith indeed That as of old there were false prophets so under the Gospel there should be false teachers which should deny the Lord that bought them Of these he saith That their Judgment now of a long time lingereth not and their Damnation flumbereth not v. 3. yet doth not be say they ought to be murthered or otherwise afflicted as of old under the Law but leaves them to God to be punished as were those of Sodom he reserves the unjust unto the Day of Judgment to be punished v. 9 and those false teachers bring upon themselves sw●ft destruction va● which neither was then nor for some hundreds of years after inflicted on them by the M●gistrate In that place of Peter I further observe in the natural signification of the words That Heresie as it is elsewhere called a work of the flesh is distinct from their denying of the Lord that bought them So that pernicious Heresiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not a spiritual thing but a factiou or seditious joyning and siding with some Opinionist but in some proportion the prophet and dreamer being expresly such as shall give a sign or wonder and seduce them to the worship of strange Gods or Idols of which kind he that would make every discrepant or false notion in Theology must have recourse to other Glossaryes then I can admit of why then is there no restriction upon the punishment Or if it must stand for all Analogical Idolatry I hope that before they be punished with death who are not termed Idolaters in Scripture though they be termed Heretiques and Schismatiques that they who are positively in Scripture so termed shall be the first sufferers and then the covetous will not scape free nor they who are most vehement for persecution since Covetousnesse is a work of the flesh as Heresy It doth not appear from the text Gal. 5.20 that Heresy is a worke of the flesh as we do usually take the vvord but it signifies th●re a s●iding or factious b●andying and which the latter is not called but distinct from it Gal. 5.20 Idolatry Coloss 3.5 But to shew the difference between Heretiques and Idolaters is it not sufficient that the old Law condemn●s them to death and yet from Ezras time or not long after Tolērated these and that the Apostle bids us only avoid whom they say kill fire banish Tit. 3.10 A man that is an Heretique after the first and second admonition reject 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excuse your self unto so Luc. 14.18 knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself Concerning Heresy the word is not alwayes taken in a bad sense the Sadduces are called an Heresy Act. 5.17 and the Pharisees Act. 15.5 and Christianity it self Act. 28.22 and as often as I hear it mentioned almost me thinks I hear men speak as of a People that in a time of idlenesse and implicite faith dare enquire into the state of things and imploy their judgment Surely the case is very hard if they who having done all that was in their power to try all things if they misse of the truth and hold fast not which is good but which seems so either thorough invincible ignorance or such as he that made us knowes humane frailty to be lyable unto if they I say shall not be in as good a condition as those who received the Truth without tryall and embraced it upon no better an account then custome education or interest But however that I have no aversion upon this account for Heresy when it is named yet I do not relish accordingly that of Heretique 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For this latter denotes a person given to change often choosing or apt to doe so now I am advised by the wise man Prov. 24.21 Not to meddle with those that are given to change whereunto I may subjoyne the Apostles reason prealledged knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth being condemned of himself Questionlesse the fickle and unstable minded are subverted in their principle and when they embraced that which is good they do it upon such an account as a Christian hath little reason not to reject or excuse himself to them and they having such a sense of their own instability that they are clouds carryed with a temper trees whose fr●it withereth without fruit mistake or offend and condemn themselves in such their lapses at least of a mutability not becoming the spirit of God The converse wich such is like what the Apostle saith of Younger widowes refuse them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word is the same in both places For when they begin to wax wanton against Christ they will marry having damnation because they have cast off their first faith 1 Tim. 5.11 12. But allowing the common notion of the word if there be any common notion thereof or certain definition which I am ignorant of as not knowing in this case what to professe where the Spirit of God is silent let there have been such a thing in Pauls time when men could joyn to the Church of God and yet condemn themselves in such their practise whilst they embraced opinions different from what the Apostles upon whom the Church was built and who were as the Vrim and Thummim under the old Testament before the Captivity did reveal and determine of that such were to be declined after one or two admonitions that such were subverted that such did sin and were self condemned and might be known under the circumstances aforesaid for such is to me undoubted But why did not Paul having here occasion to speak of Heresy and what was to be done thereupon ordain or give some item that for the present they should only avoid them but in after times when they should have lesse of the Spirit of God and more of the arm of flesh to assist them then they should hang burn imprison and fine them No he was farre from that as Christ was from saying to his Apostles Go your wayes behold I send you forth as lambs among wolves for the present Luc. 10.3 but when you shall have got strength not that strength which I put upon you whereby Ananias and Saphira shall fall and others shall be delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh but saving the spirit but such strength as the Kings of this world will contribute unto you then do you become wolves also or if you retain your sheepish-nature at least put on wolves cloathing In a word the Heretick