Selected quad for the lemma: order_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
order_n	aaron_n	abraham_n	testify_v	17	3	9.6566	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11601	The quæstion of tythes reuised Arguments for the moralitie of tything, enlarged, and cleared. Obiections more fully, and distinctly answered .Mr. Seldens historie, so farre as mistakers haue made it argumentatiue against the moralitie, ouer-ly viewed. By William Sclater, D.D. and minister of Pitmister, in Somerset.	Sclater, William, 1575-1626.	1623 (1623)	STC 21842; ESTC S100049	49,451	100

Besides who knowes not their manifold aberrations in matters of no small moment as in that of the Chronologie in Genesis wherein so many haue in vaine laboured a reconcilement The obseruation out of their rendring must be confessed to be acute yet hath in it rather wittie diligence of obseruation then soliditie to build inference If any make quaestion of whether sort we dispute Tythes we meane of that Nature with those paide to Leuites which perhaps are therefore conuey'd to them in the terme of an e Num. 18. inheritance because the Lawgiuer would imply their perpetuitie and lineall descent from Ministery to Ministerie vnto all generations The why nots raised about other kindes will best be answered in discussing th'obiections Of these Tythes this is that we affirme That by the word of God they belong for euer to Ministers of holy things and therefore in these dayes to Ministers of the Gospel who alone haue now to doe with publique ministrations of the worship of God Our reasons are these The first grounded on Heb. 7.6.8 He whose descent is not counted from them receiued Tythes of Abraham and vers 8. Here men that die receiue Tythes but there he receiueth them of whom it s witnessed that he liueth Compare Gen. 14.20 The Argument which this Scripture affoords hath receiued much disaduantage by slender collection of many thus onely pressing it Tythes were paide to Priests before the Leuiticall law was giuen Therefore their payment is founded rather on Morall then Caeremoniall law To which answer is well giuen that by as good inference sacrificing of beasts may be prooued a moralitie sith it was also in vse before giuing of the Law by Moses That we may the better see the force of the Argument let vs a little consider the frame and summe of the text The Apostle by occasion of the peoples dulnesse hauing digressed from Cap. 5.11 to Cap. 6.20 returnes to his purpose that is to shew the excellencie of Christs Priesthood aboue that of Aaron by auouching him a Priest after the order of Melchisedec The conclusion is this Christs Priesthood is more excellent then that of Leui or Christ is a greater Priest then any after Aarons order The principall reason lyeth thus He that is a Priest after th' order of Melchisedec is a greater Priest then the Priests after Aaron But Christ is a Priest after th' order of Melchisedec Ergo c. The minor hath first his proofe 1. From a testimony of Dauid Cap. 5.20 2. From that absolute agreement betwixt Melchisedec and Christ the parts whereof are these 1. As Melchisedec was King and Priest of the most high God so Christ 2. As Melchisedec King of righteousnesse and Prince of peace so Christ 3. As Melchisedec his parents kinred beginning and end of life are not recorded so Christ as man without father as God without mother kinred beginning and end of life Therefore Christ is truly a Priest after th' order of Melchisedec verse 1 2 3. The Maior remaines to be prooued and that hath proofe from verse 4. to 11. the summe whereof is comprised in this principall Syllogisme If Melchisedec be greater then Leui then he that is a Priest after his order as Christ is is greater then Leui. But Melchisedec is greater then Leui Ergo c. Minor prooued Greater then Abraham greater then Leui Melchisedec is greater then Abraham Ergo then Leui Minor prooued Hee to whom Abraham paide Tythes of whom he was blessed is greater then Abraham But to Melchisedec Abraham paide Tythes and Melchisedec blessed Abraham Ergo is greater then he verse 4 5 6 7. A second Argument proouing the greatnesse of this Priest aboue those of Aarons order is laide downe vers 8. A tyth-taker that is a Priest of whom it s testified that he liues is greater then a Tyth-taker that dies But the Priest after Melchisedec is a Tyth-taker of whom it s testified that he liues Leuites take Tythes and die Ergo the Priest after Melchisedec his order is greater then the Priests Leuiticall This is in my simple Logicke the disposition of the text As for illustrations or amplifications by prosyllogismes prolepses or otherwise I purposely omit them Now me thinkes the text thus naturally resolued there should need no farther deduction of th' Argument yet that the simplest may see what footing Tythes haue here thus I collect it The portion due to Christs Priesthood is due to Ministers of the Gospel Tythes are the portion due to Christs Priesthood Ergo. The Minor is thus proued The portion due to Melchisedec his Priesthood is due to Christs Priesthood Reas 1. for that Christ is Priest after that order 2. other things enunciated of Melchisedec are true of Christ eminently alwaies as it s eminently alwaies true of Christ that he is King of righteousnes Prince of peace eminently and alwaies true of Christ he is without parēts without beginning end of life that he blesseth Abraham all his seed c. All these are more properly verified of Christ then of Melchisedec his Type Why not then also this euer true of him He taketh Tythes May we not assume Tythes are the portion due to Melchisedec his Priesthood 1. Paide they were by Abraham to Melchisedec as due to his Priesthood 2. In the Apostles Logique a Priest and a receiuer of Tythes are aequipollents In steed of saying men that die are Priests he saith men that die receiue Tythes In steed of saying he that liues is a Priest he saith he that liues takes tythes as if in his iudgmēt Tythes and Priesthood were as inseparable as kingdome and tribute The Maior of the principall Syllogisme if any doubt of to wit whether the portion due to Christ be due to Ministers let him compare 1. Cor. 9.14 where is th'expresse ordinance of Christ that Ministers should liue of the Gospel 2. Who in likelihood should be his receiuers but those that are in his stead as is said of Ministers 2. Cor. 5.20 3. The same reason which the Lord assignes of Leui his sharing in things to himselfe reserued and sanctified is true of Ministers or else of none God is Leuites portion 1. Gods portion is Leuites portion because they were taken to Minister before him Why not then also Christs portion Ministers portion because they onely are assumed to Christ to Minister in the Gospel A reason for not Tything of so plaine deduction out of Scripture if any can bring mee he shall much sway mee to his sentence This Argument I remember once to haue propounded something otherwise to this purpose The portion due to the Priesthood after Melchisedec his order is due to Ministers of the Gospel But Tythes are that portion Ergo And thus propounding it I receiued these answers Obiect The proposition seemes vntrue except you can prooue your selues Priests after that order Answ Whereto I then answered that though we be no Priests after that order yet is there truth in the proposition sith