Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	day_n	lord_n	sabbath_n	3,174	5	9.9898	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30704	The judgment of Mr. Francis Bampfield late minister of Sherborne in Dorsetshire for the observation of the Jewish, or seventh day Sabboth with his reasons and Scriptures for the same, sent in a letter to Mr. Ben of Dorchester : together with Mr. Ben's sober answer to the same and a vindication of the Christian Sabboth against the Jewish : published for the satisfaction of divers friends in the west of England.	Bampfield, Francis, 1615 or 16-1683.; Benn, William, 1600-1680.	1672 (1672)	Wing B624; ESTC R22838	34,738	95

because as I said your Paper gives me no occasion to say any thing of it However this I must say for the proof of what hath been said I cannot but assert this that it is an Article of my Faith that the Lord Jesus rose again the third day 1 Cor. 15.4 Luk. 32. Mat. 16.21 and that as certain it is that the first day of the week after his Passion week is and was the third day after his Passion the Lord of Life laid down his life and was obedient unto death the sixth day of the foregoing week which with us is called Friday lay in the Grave the remaining part of that day that night and all the seventh day when the old Sabbath I think was buried with him and then that night and arose early the next morning which was the first day of the week after his Passion so that his blessed body continued in the Grave two whole nights one whole day and some part of the two other dayes the sixth and the first of the week following in all about thirty six hours And this was accounted three dayes and three nights according to the allowed Dialect of that Nation as one of the most learned in the Jewish Antiquities I think this Nation affordeth by several instances makes good And indeed there seems to be something in the Scripture for it Esthers Fast was for three days and three nights yet on the third day after her Feast began she presents her self before the King and invites him to a Banquet Est 5.1 This then is evident the Resurrection of Christ notwithstanding any thing that I think can be said against the Translation was upon the first day of the week besides what hath been said already the Scripture is express for it Luk. 24.13 The same day i. e. the day of Christs Resurrection the two disciples were travelling to Emaus and vers 21. they say this day was the third day thus the Resurrection of Christ being upon the first day of the week though to speak properly it was not so much the ground as the occasion of the choice of the day because then it was manifested that the price of our Redemption was both paid and accepted the day of Christs Passion could not give the like occasion because though the price was paid the Surety was not discharged the Grave was a part of his humiliation he was not raised from all the sorrows of death till he was raised from the Grave Acts 2.24 And as the day of Christs Passion could not for this cause give this occasion for the change of the day so neither could the day of his Ascension On that day indeed he entred into the place of Rest to sit down on the right hand of the Father but it was on the day of his Resurrection that he entred into the state of Rest and this day as I said on the first day of the week gives as fair and strong a ground for fixing of the day of holy Rest on the first day of seven as Gods resting from the work of the Creation did for fixing it at first upon the last of seven If it be said by this means we blot out the memory of the Creation which ought not to be done Is is true it ought not to be done that marvelous great work comes within the compass of that Text Psalm 111.4 which ought to be had in remembrance and the serious consideration of it is a great relief in difficult cases for what cannot he do that made Heaven and Earth of nothing Thus they reason their hearts into a believing frame Psalm 124. ult that their hope and their help did stand in the name of the Lord that made Heaven and Earth we ought therefore as Elihu saith to magnifie God in his works which men behold Joh. 36.24 25. Only the work of Redemption ought more especially to be remembred as the more glorious and indeed the most glorious work as therefore the work of Creation ought not to be forgotten so the change of the day gives no cause for it for as the first day of seven preserveth the memory of our Redemption so one of seven preserveth the memory of our Creation only preeminence is given to the work of our Redemption But it will still be enquired where is the word of Institution I Answer 't is acknowledged that as I said before I find no express word for the Institution of the last day of seven so we have no express word in so many letters and words or syllables for the Institution of the first day of seven but we have several particulars which not taken apart but laid altogether will clearly and I think undeniably imply it and which was observed in the fourth Proposition which way soever God speaks his minde to us we ought not to despise him that speaks from Heaven Now among all these particulars I desire these may be in all sobriety and seriousness taken into consideration 1. The first is this which I think none will deny that Jesus Christ the Mediator had power to change the day I do not I dare not say that he hah power to change the moral substance of the Commandment for it was not in his Commission He came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil it not to change the day from one of seven but that he had power to change from one day of seven to another day that Text which you quote three several times sufficiently proves it He is Lord of the Sabbath i. e. of the day and might do with his own what he pleaseth even as he was Lord of the Vineyard and might let it out to what Husbandmen he pleased Matth. 21. and that which we read John 5. carries a probable appearance that even then he began to manifest that he had a purpose to change the day for there we read that having healed the poor diseased man who had been bedrid for thirty eight years together he bids him take up his bed and walk but why did he so this was expresly against the letter of the Law there was no necessity of it for the evidencing of the Miracle that might have been done by his leaping and walking and the like was Acts 3. and Acts 14. he might have gone home and come again for his bed the next day Why then might it not be to shew that he had power and authority over that day equal to what he had over the desease To this purpose it is worthy our observation that all along in that chapter he justifies his Acts against the cavilling Jews by asserting his power as may be seen verse 17. to the end of verse 22. As it appears by this that he had power to change the day what if it should be said that he did according to his power actually change the day though when and how it be not recorded Let the fifth Proposition be consulted for this there it appears that there was word for