Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	write_n	write_v	writer_n	42	3	7.6583	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78427	Sabbatum redivivum: or The Christian sabbath vindicated; in a full discourse concerning the sabbath, and the Lords day. Wherein, whatsoever hath been written of late for, or against the Christian sabbath, is exactly, but modestly examined: and the perpetuity of a sabbath deduced, from grounds of nature, and religious reason. / By Daniel Cawdrey, and Herbert Palmer: members of the Assembly of Divines. Divided into foure parts. 1. Of the decalogue in generall, and other laws of God, together with the relation of time to religion. 2. Of the fourth commandement of the decalogue in speciall. 3. Of the old sabbath, 4. Of the Lords day, in particular. The first part.; Sabbatum redivivum. Part 1	Cawdrey, Daniel, 1588-1664.; Palmer, Herbert, 1601-1647.	1645 (1645)	Wing C1634; Thomason E280_3; ESTC R200035	350,191	408

writing is more observable then the first as more abundantly testifying that God meant to have it observed that Himself would write these Lawes which yet He did to none else besides these for though he put Moses to hew new Tables of stone Exo. 34. after that he had broken the first in zeale and indignation against Israels idolatrie in the Golden Calfe Exod. 32. yet he puts not over the writing upon the Tables to Moses but Himselfe we say with his own finger as the Scripture phrase is did write them again and so again we say He never wrote any other Lawes besides these Thirdly When they were thus written VIII 3. The reserving them alone in the Ark. He doth not as we may say trust any Man or Men with the keeping of them but takes a most singular order to have them most remarkably under His own custodie His own hand or wing for He appointed an Ark to be made on purpose to keep them in which Ark was the principall signe of His presence among that people untill the Babylonish Captivity and his prime Ordinance and call'd his glory his face his strength in divers places of Scripture and was also covered with the Mercy-seat or Propitiatory which was a most singular Type of Christ In this Ark were these Lawes kept and no other nor nothing else as to intimate that of all the Lawes He took most care for these And so giving to these Lawes first of any number of Lawes together the Title of His Covenant and of the Testimonie See 1 King 8.6.21 and though other Lawes afterward were taken into the Terme of His Covenant and the Scripture mentions His Testimonies in the plurall yet there was somewhat eminent in these as being first so intituled and so most properly those termes belonged to them From thence was the Ark called the Ark of the Covenant and the Ark of the Testimony and even the Tabernacle called the Tabernacle of Testimony as implying still that these were the chiefest Lawes which he most regarded of all that he gave out to men And thus we suppose the Minor is sufficiently confirmed And by considering of all these together the Major may be put out of all just Question in as much as it cannot we suppose with any reason be imagined that God intending to make some of his Lawes perpetuall to the worlds end should single out these Ten from all the rest and give them this preheminence in all these respects as He doth above all others and call them together again and again the ten words the Decalogue and not mean to make them and every one of them perpetuall As also declare that even by these very things He would have them all to be taken for perpetuall by all his people untill the Worlds end Each of these Prerogatives single hath a great weight in it to recommend these Lawes But all of them together doe make such a strong chaine of obligation and doe so wonderfully difference these from all the rest as that we cannot but think that any conscience that desires to give God our great Law-giver a good account of his obedience and holding himselfe bound to any of the Lawes of God had need to produce a most certaine demonstration against any of these Lawes to prove it to be repealed if he will reckon himselfe no longer tyed to it We say he had need have a demonstration not meerly against any circumstance annexed to any Command or any particularity belonging to it but against the body and substance and formall words of it which because we have not yet met with in all our Disputers bookes we dare not count our selves loose from the bonds of any one And what they say against the Fourth in speciall we shall hereafter consider in due place Mean time we forget not that there are Exceptions against both the Propositions of this Argument IX The Argument confirmed by which we shall speak to when we have first produced a four-fold further Testimony to confirme our Major 1. A Prophet 2. An Apostle 3. An Ancient Father and 4. One of our Adversaries 1. The Prophet Jeremie 1. The Prophet is Jeremiah who in the name of God ch 7.21 thus calls for obedience to these Lawes as preferring them far before Sacrifice c. I spake not unto your fathers nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings and sacrifice But this thing I commanded them saying Obey my voyce c. Now what is properly the voyce of God distinguished from the law of Sacrifice and the like ceremonious commandements but the Ten Commandements which were delivered by the voyce of God And because they were His voyce therefore they were of singular and perpetuall regard 2. The Apostle James The Apostle is St. James who in the 2. chap. of his Epistle urging to the obedience of all the Commandements of the Law one as well as another and saying that otherwise he who offends in one point is guilty of all ver 10. That we may be sure to know what Law he meanes Jam. 2.10 explained he instances in two of the Commandements of the Decalogue and to prove his saying good he alleadges this Reason for it That He who spake one of these spake also the other ver 11. He the same God who said Thou shalt not commit Adultery said also Thou shalt not kill c. Where plainly he doth two things One is that He makes all the Lawes which GOD spake together as He did these two he names to be Perpetuall alike because they were spoken alike one as well as another by the same Lawgiver GOD at the same time and in the same manner The other is that He makes this an argument of their Perpetuitie that GOD did speak them Which must be understood of his speaking of them in a singularly Majesticall manner as we have shewed above And we say that whosoever shall goe about to interpret the word said of any other kinde of speaking then this if referring it to God will wholly make void the Apostles argumentation and make him bring for a proofe that which had no strength at all in it For thus a Ceremonious Jew might have retorted this Argument upon him He that keeps not Circumcision breaks the whole Law For He that said Thou shalt not commit Adultery said also even to Abraham long before He gave that Commandement to Israel Every man-childe among you must needs be circumcised What answer can now be made hereunto to preserve the authority of the Apostles argument but this That he meanes it of GODS speaking in his Majestie when He delivered the ten Commandements And so whatsoever He said at that time and in that manner doth stand still in force and even by vertue of such a Majestick speaking and delivery of it But of other kindes of speaking it holds not But if any object that the Margent of the

Tables of stone c. VIII Except 6. It is further pretended Gods writing was His Framing and creating by his Power the Externall Letters and Characters of the Tenne Commandements But it appears by the example of Ionah his Gourd and many other things immediately formed that all such things are not Eternall Solut. To this we answer briefly thus This is nothing to the purpose For we do not think the world shall be eternall because immediately Framed by Gods Power much lesse Ionah his Gourd But it is another matter to frame the Characters of Lawes which inevitably note out some intention of continuance and to frame so the Characters of these Lawes and none other by his immediate Power in Tables of stone may well argue that none other Lawes should be more Perpetuall then these and that is enough for us To note out as one of themselves hath told us their dignity above others and the Perpetuity of Observance which was due unto them IX Except 7. Writing in Stone was to note out the hardnesse of the Peoples Hearts not the Perpetuall Obligation of the Lawes see Ezek. 11.36 2 Cor. 3.14 and Ioshua had Moses Law wherein were many Ceremonialls and Iudicialls upon stone Ios 8.32 Solut. Againe we must say not writing simply in stone but the Lords writing in stone argues the Perpetuity of it what men writes in stone may be perishing like themselves even though it should out last the writer But doubtlesse if we should see a King or State command to have some Lawes and not others written upon stones or like durable matter we could not but thinke that they meant to have those Lawes to be and be accounted among the cheifest of their Perpetuall Lawes How much more when God shall doe it himselfe The rather still because these Lawes were not like those by Ioshua written in stone for every one to read them But layd up in secret in Gods Privy Cabinet his sacred Arke So though the writing of them in stone might partly note the hardnesse of the Peoples Hearts yet the writing them by God himself in stone and laying them so up may appear to be specially to note out their Perpetuity But he still goes on and we follow him X. Except 8. If Gods immediate speaking and writing argues such Precepts to be Perpetually Morall Then his not speaking and writing argues others to be Temporary For proper signes and affections conclude both Affirmatively and Negatively But the consequence is false Ergo the Antecedent To this we answer first By denying the sequell God may write Sol. 1 Morall Precepts and command others to write Morall Precepts also and yet God may write only Moralls There is a clear difference between these two Propositions Only God writes Moralls and God writes only Moralls The latter may be true The former is certainly false 2. The confirmation of the sequell is Petitio Principij taking Sol. 2 it for granted that Gods writing is made a Proper signe or Affection of a Morall Law A signe it is not ex natura Rei but by the good Pleasure of God who never was pleased to write any other c. and therefore it will not hold both wayes God writ this Ergo it is Morall God writ not this Ergo it is not Morall It is sufficient that God would give us this as a signe of the Decalogues Perpetuity that himselfe did honour it with his owne voyce to all the people wrote it with his owne Finger in stone and commanded this alone to be put in the Arke which priviledges were never afforded to any other Lawes Ceremoniall or Judiciall nor the rest of the Moralls and therefore these to be taken to be Morall at least as much as any that wanted all these Priviledges Others doe thus except against this Rule If the Proposition be of the sound and syllables of the Decalogue XI Except 9. G. Irons p 81. so that whatsoever is written in the letter thereof is affirmed to be Morall it is utterly untrue for what thinke you of those words in the very front of the Decalogue I brought thee out of the land of Egypt c. are they Morall If any say these words are a Preface not a Law he speaketh nothing to the purpose pag. 83. for the Proposition is Vniversall of whatsoever was written in the Tables of stone with Gods owne Finger c. Our adversaries confesse the taxation of the Seventh day to be Ceremoniall though in the very heart of the Commandement and written with Gods own Finger Solut. 1 But to this we say 1. Our Proposition is not so universall of whatsoever is written in the Tables of stone But thus all the Commandements of the Decalogue written in Tables of stone are Morall not all the Reasons of those Commandements A Morall or generall Commandement may be pressed on some to whom it is given by a Ceremoniall or speciall Reason contra without any alteration of the nature of the Commandement Solut. 2 2. The difference of Lawes which we now seek respects not only us Christians but the Iewes also that God would have them know and us also that those Lawes were the principall and most respected by himselfe and most carefully to be observed by them and us The Preface and Promise at most can but intimate That those Lawes were in a speciall manner given to the Iewes which is not denied but the manner of speaking writing keeping may strongly argue God meant them for Perpetuall Solut. 3 3. And this is acknowledged by C. D. as we shewed above one of his own side The writing in Tables of stone c. was to signifie their perpetuity and dignity above the rest Solut. 4 4. We take what himselfe grants for the present in his first Answer All the Commandements of the Decalogue are Morall but every one in his proportion and degree and so is that of the Sabbath We adde in the letter of it viz. for one day in seven As for the proportion and degree whether Naturall or Positive we now contend not Only we let him know that his Adversaries as he calls them doe now deny that the taxation of the seventh day or last of seven to be in the heart of the Commandement or written by the finger of God XII Except 10. Another Exception is That the Ark it selfe was lost at the Captivitie therefore the Argument is not good The Decalogue was put and reserved in the Ark Ergo perpetuall Solut. To this we say we did never imagine that the Ark and Tables must necessarily be preserved till the end of the world but it was sufficient to denote and signifie their precedencie and perpetuitie that God was so carefull to speak write and reserve those Lawes Though this be no convincing Demonstration to a Caviller yet to Reasonable men it will no doubt passe for more than probable CHAP. V. Christ hath confirmed all the Commandements of the Decalogue

and never teaching it at all to their children and common people than those Churches should be and are that hold any one of the Commandements not now in force according to the words of it and yet still teach them in their Catechismes and cause their children to learne them 2. In taking of Gods name in vaine But secondly hence must also needs be concluded That they are all also guilty of a fearfull taking GODS Name in vaine to teach those words for his Commandement which hath not been his Commandement these 1600 yeeres And our Church most of all in making all from day to day ask GOD forgivenesse for that which is no fault for where no Law is there is no Transgression and praying to him to incline our hearts to keep this or that Law and to write all these Lawes in our hearts as His Lawes if any of them be no longer a Law to us nor to be kept by any necessity of his Divine commandement What say we can this be judged to be lesse then an horrible taking of GODS Name in vain contrary to the expresse words of one of the ten Commandements the Third namely immediately foregoing the questioned quarrelled Fourth which also is undeniably perpetuall even by the Law of Nature These things we earnestly wish all Disputers and namely of the Reformed Churches and most specially of our Church seriously to weigh and to put it home to their Consciences in cold blood whether they will cast all those imputations upon the whole Christian Church and upon our own particularly or how they can avoyd it if a very Heathen were to be Judge in this particular unlesse they grant as we here argue that all the Commandements of the Decalogue are severally and joyntly in their words and plain sense universally and perpetually Morall V. Why this Argument is first And this Argument we have first propounded not as preferring the Testimony of the Church before the Scriptures or Scripture-reasons but a little to ballance the Prejudice of Disputers who charge us with Novelty and Singularity and Judaisme and Puritanisme any thing to make our Cause odious when yet we maintain nothing in this but what we have been trained up to by our Catechisme c. and necessitated unto by the forementioned considerations of the Churches recommendation of the whole Decalogue and all the words of it And for our part we must confesse that besides our Churches particular recommendation of the fourth Commandement in the Homily of the place and time of Prayer of which hereafter the perpetuitie of the whole Decalogue is so necessarily involved in all these Acknowledgements and Professions and Practises that we wonder where their Logick their Reason or their Divinitie and Conscience hath been all this while that could subscribe to the Book of Common Prayer and urge others so to it as they have done and yet not hold the words of the fourth Commandement perpetuall And if we were of their opinion we know not which way we should ever dare so much as to read the Ten Commandements publikely unlesse as a story in the 20. of Exod. or 5. of Deut. much lesse ever teach any childe or ignorant person any Cathechisme of any of the Reformed Churches which containes all the words of all the Commandements the Fourth and all thereby to teach them any words which are now wholly out of date And if the shifts our Disputers have made to evade from the force of this Argument doe satisfie their own Consciences we shall rather still admire then envy them To themselves we now leave it Mean time we forget not the usuall grand Objection That if this be so then we must still hold to the Jewish seventh day But that we deny for the present and there is a proper place reserved for the full scanning of that to which we referre it And so proceed to a second Argument VI. Arg. 2. From the eminent priviledges of this Law which we thus propound Those Lawes though but Positive which God in a most extraordinary and singular manner hath honoured and priviledged above all other Lawes namely by a most rare and admirable delivering recording reserving are Morall and Perpetuall But such are all the Lawes of the Decalogue Ergo. To strengthen this Argument we will first illustrate the Minor in the severall parts of it and then further presse and confirme the Major Accordingly we propound as we have named three things as most rare and singular priviledges wherewith God hath honoured these Lawes of the Decalogue and no other 1. In the delivery in respect First In the Delivery it was with the greatest Majesty that ever God shewed from the beginning of the World and that again in a threefold respect 1. Of the Auditory 2. Of the Terrour accompanying it 3. The Voice 1. Of the Auditorie 1. For the Auditory which was the whole multitude of the People of Israel then six hundred thousand men besides women and children to say nothing of the mixed multitude that came with them out of Egypt Exod. 12.38 and were still among them Num. 11.4 All these gathered together at once after a three dayes solemne preparation of them for that very purpose Exod. 19. to hear this Law of the ten Commandements and nothing else 2. The Majesty and terrour 2. For the immediate Antecedents and Concomitants of the Delivery most terrible Thunders and the voyce of a Trumpet exceeding loud which so affected their eares that the people trembled in the very Camp before they came to the Mount Exod. 19.16 and most frightfull lightenings and fire and the mountain of Sinai altogether on a smoke which so affected their eyes that they afterward cryed out This great fire will consume us Deut. 5. And the whole Mount quak'd and shak'd so as with the terrour of all together even Moses himself said I Exceedingly feare and quake Heb. 12.21 3. The voice of God himselfe 3. For the Voice delivering those Ten Commandements and no more most dreadfully great and said to be in a speciall manner the voice of GOD which they that heard it desired and prayed never to heare any more lest they should die Nor was there ever since the Worlds foundation till that day nor since that day to this nor ever shall be again till the last day the day of the Worlds dissolution when an account shall be taken of the transgressions of this very Law such a concurrence of wonders in so mighty an assembly so Majesticall a Preacher and so terrible a combustion and concussion of Heaven and Earth the while these Lawes were delivering VII 2. The writing of them by God himselfe Secondly These Laws being thus pronounced given out God in the next place takes a most singular order for the recording of them trusts not Moses himself with the writing of them but a first and second time Himself writes them and that upon two Tables of Stone and the second