Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	aaron_n	call_v	extraordinary_a	28	3	8.1319	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61509	Jus populi vindicatum, or, The peoples right to defend themselves and their covenanted religion vindicated wherein the act of defence and vindication which was interprised anno 1666 is particularly justified ... being a reply to the first part of Survey of Naphtaly &c. / by a friend to true Christian liberty.	Stewart, James, Sir, 1635-1713.	1669 (1669)	Wing S5536; ESTC R37592	393,391	512

so must be a precedent example for judges and Magistrates in all time coming and by this example any member of the Council might lawfully rise up and execute judgment on this wicked wreatch and his cursed fraternity who have brought by their apostasy and defection from the Covenant and cause of God the wrath and curse of God upon the land 2. That Phineas was the High Priest's sone we know and that he was afterward High priest himself is truth but that he was at this time a publick Magistrate or a member of the great Sanhedrin we see not It is true there were some Princes of the tribes men of renowne Numb 1. ver 16. but he is not mentioned among those neither were these the great Sanhedrin So these princes of the assembly Numb 16 2. were not the Sanhedrin which did consist but of 70 Members Numb 11. Nor was Phineas one of them And that congregation of the children of Israel mentioned Numb 25 6. amongst whom Phineas was ver 7. was not the Sanhedrin which we never finde as I remember so called but the whole body of the People who were then mourning partly for the sin commited and partly for the execution when the heads of the People vvere hanged up and a thousand moe killed by the judges at Moses his command for Paul 1 Cor. 10 ver 8. sayes there died of the plague tvventy three thousand and here vve finde there fell in all tvventy foure thousand Againe it is remarkable that this single act of Phineas in killing two persons is so much rewarded and taken notice of by the Lord yea more then the many who were killed by the judges ver 5. So that it seemes he was no publick Magistrate and that he did it with the approbation of Moses is probable but that Moses did command him we see not only we finde that the Zeal of God moved him and therefore is he highly rewarded though he was but the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron Yea that which the Surveryer citeth out of Deodat rather confirmeth this for Deodat calleth it an act of extraordinary zeal motion of God's Spirit and he addeth that Moses the Supreme Magisstrate did approve it but what needed this if he had been a Magistrate seing there was a command given to the Magistrates ver 5. and a command is more then an approbation Aquinas and Gerhard call him it is true a judge but we see no proof unlesse they could evince that he was a member of the Sanhedrin of which Gillespy speaks in his Aarons rod. lib. I. c. I. The Dutch Annotat. on Psal 106 31. Suppose him to have been no Magistrate but say that this fact was beside his ordinary calling His 2. answere is Pag. III. That suppose he had been a meer private person yet it could prove nothing because he did it with the approbation and good liking of Moses and so he is but the executor of that unanimous sentence Answ But not only is this not written but the scripture giveth another ground of his fact then any warrand or command of Moses And so his answere in rebus facti a non scripto ad non factum non valet consequentia is not to the purpose Now I say the scripture giveth another ground viz. his zeal for his God which is not spoken of the other judges who ver 5. were commanded of Moses to execute judgment yea that word Psal 106 30. then stood up Phineas and executed judgment clearely hinteth at more then his being a meer satelles Magistratus and the ample reward which was given him and the Lord 's counting it to him for righteousnesse speak some other thing then that he had a call of the Magistrate and was his executioner In the 3 place he sayes The cases are different for then was horrible idolatry and villanous whordome committed avowedly and with a high hand in the sight of the Sun and in way of open doing despite to God but it is not so now Answ Prudence might have taught him to have concealed this for it were easy to draw such a parallel as would make him afrayed if any did intend to follow that example For I am sure what ever he account of the present apostasy and how ever he mince it as no doubt zimri would have minced his uncleannesse when he justified the fact before the Council as he told us Iosephus said yet the apostasy and perjury is open avowed abhominable and villanous committed in the sight of the Sun in despite of God and maintained as right and lawful howbeit it be such as the very heavens may be astonished at For such open avovved malapert vvickednesse defection and perjury all things considered vvas never heard of in any generation Hovv our reformation aud confession of faith is maintained vve have heard and albeit he make all the change to be only a change of the exterior forme of Church government yet when he is before his judge he shall finde in the cup of this iniquity manifest avowed perjury overturning of the work of God destroying of the interest of Christ blasphemy near unto that unpardonable sin if not the very same in fathering the works of the right hand of the Most high on Satan open and avowed persecution of godlinesse opening of a gap to all licentiousnesse horrid iniquity increase of idolatry villanous and avowed whordome Sodomy atheisme and devilry and more wickednesse then tongue can tell or pen can paint out but is on clear record before the Lord. 4. Sayes he Let it be so that he was a meer private man and had no warrand from the Supreame Magistrate to do what he did his fact cannot warrand Men to attempt the doing of such acts unlesse they can shew as good warr and and approbation from God as he could Answ That he had God's warrand and approbation vve do not doubt but that it was such an approbation as was peculiar to extraordinary un-imitable acts is the thing in question we grant with him That God is the Lord of all Magistrates and of all men's lives can when it pleaseth him crosse ordinary rules and apppoynt some to execute his judgments extraordinariely but the question is whether every thing which the Surv. accounteth extraordinary is so indeed He may sayes he send Moses to kill the Egyptian Eglon to kill Ehud he should say Ehud to kill Eglon Elias to destroy companyes of men with fire from heaven or to kill Baal's Priests He may command Abraham to kill his sone Isaac he may excite David to a bloody duëel Sampson to murther himself Ans Will the Surveyer account these instances alike extraordinary and unimitable Sure Royalists will think that Ehud's killing of Eglon may warrand any private person now to kill a tyrant without title But I lay more weight upon Iohn Knox his distinction in this matter in his debate with Lithingtoun hist. of reformation Pag. 390. edit in fol. And as touching sayes Mr.

Knox that ye alledge that the fact was extraordinary is not to be imitated I say That it had the ground of God's ordinary judgement which commandeth the Idolater to die the death and therefore I yet againe affirme that it is to be imitate of all these that preferre the true honour of the true worshipe and glory of God to the affection of flesh and wicked Princes and when Lithingtoun replyed That we are not bound to follow extraordinary examples unlesse we have the like commandment and assurance the same which this Surveyer sayeth He answered I grant if the example repugne to the law as if an avaricious and deceitful man would borrow Silver Rayment or other Necessaryes from his Neighbour and withhold the same alledging that so he might do and not offend God because the Israelites at their departure out of Egypt did so to the Egyptians The example served to no purpose unlesse that they could produce the like cause and the like commandement that the Israelites had And that because their fact repugned to this commandement of God Thou shall not steal But where the example agrees with the law and is as it were the execution of God's judgment expressed within the same I say that the example approved of God stands to us in place of a commandement for as God in his Nature is constant and immutable so can he not condemne in the ages subsequent that which he hath approved in his servants before us but in his servants before us he in his owne word confounds all such as crave further approbation of Gods will then it already expressed within his scriptures for Abraham said They have Moses and the Prophets c. Even so I say that such as will not be taught what they ought to do by the commandement of God once given and once put in practice will not beleeve nor obey albeit that God should send Angles from heaven to instruct that doctrine Now sure I am this fact of Phineas was according to the law and to the expresse minde of God and why then might it not be imitated in the like case what warrand command nor commisssion had Phineas which none now can expect 1. sayes he He had the Motion and direction of God's Spirit which was loco specialis mandati Answ. We know men must need the Motions and directions of God's spirit to ordinary and allovved dutyes Hovv shall these make this fact altogether un-imitable It is true Calvin sayeth it was singular and extraordinare motion which may not be drawne to a common rule but notwithstanding thereof I see not how it should be altogether un-imitable or uselesse But grant it were so as Calvin sayeth unlesse he say that it is never to be imitated in no case and that no such thing is ever to be expected which I suppose he will not say how will he prevent confusions thorow the abuse of corrupt men who can pretend as wel these singulare and extraordinare Motions as the examples of Phineas As for what he tells us Augustin and Bernard say of Samson's case is not to the poynt Because according to that solid distinction of Mr. Knox that was contrare to an expresse law Thou shall not kill and such also is the example of Abraham 2. He tells us That Phineas had not only a large reward of his fact Numb 25 ver 12 13. but an ample approbation of it Psal 106 sver 31 it was accounted to him for righteousnesse i. e. as a righteous action both as to the intention of it God's honour and as to the ground and warrand of it God's direction God doth not approve or remuner at any action which one way or other he doth not command Ausw This is all granted and as it sayeth that Phineas was no publick person or Magistrate otherwise there had been no doubt anent its being accounted to him for righteousnesse though it had not been expresly mentioned by the Spirit of God for it sayeth that sometimes private persones are allowed of God to do what he requireth in ordinary to be done by Magistrates There are none of these extraordinary actions sayes he mentioned in Scripture but either God's stirring up men to the same or his approbation of the same one way or other is noted See Judg. 3 ver 10. and 5 ver 7. and 10 ver 23. and 3 ver 9 15. and 2 16 18. Answ Will he say that all these instances were extraordinary and not imitable Whence will Royalists then prove that privaate persons may kill a Tyrant without title And if they be not altogether unimitable then the cause is here yeelded for God may be said to raise up and to stir up Mens Spritis even to imitable actions so he hath given us no reason as yet to prove Phineas fact altogether unimitable nor will the real rebukes which he saith God gave the late risers proclame that they had not his approbation unlesse he say that God's approbation of actions must alwayes be interpreted by the event which is not consonant to true Divinity In the 5. place he tells us That if once men come to presse the imitation of this instance they must say first that even when the Magistrate is godly and zealous and willing to execute judgement as Moses was private perssons may do it and without any legal processe 2. goe to mens tents and chambers and stob them and 3. that though such things be done inconsulto pio Magistratu yet the doer must not be challenged Answ. It will be sufficient if it be granted when the case is every way the like or whose It is true Moses was not unwilling but it is like at present in capacitated through the want of assistence of inferiour Magistrates many of whom were guilty and many had been executed and through grief while lying mourning before the Lord. 2. There needed no legall processe for both the law and the sentence was written with characters of blood upon the carcases of thousands this Mans fact was notour and avowed to all the Congregation 3. He had the interpretative consent of that pious Magistrate why then may not the like be done in the like case where the Ius and the factum is as clear and undenyable as here and the Magistrate who should execute the sentence is out of a present capacity and the matter admitteth of no delay as here for till this was done the plague was never stayed much more if he will not and wrath is still poured out from the Lord and the Magistrate by his place is bound to assent approve of the thing If such a fact were done in the like case would any think that the person should be challenged and not rather approved by the Magistrate In the 6. Place he giveth us the distinction betwixt extraordinary and heröical acts telling us that a heroick act doth not deviat from the rule of a common vertue but only proceeds from a more intense disposition to a