Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	father_n	place_n	son_n	5,610	5	5.5818	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42965	Moses and Aaron civil and ecclesiastical rites, used by the ancient Hebrews : observed, and at large opened, for the clearing of many obscure texts thorowout [sic] the whole Scripture, which texts are now added at the end of the book : wherein likewise is shewed what customs the Hebrews borrowed from heathen people, and that many heathenish customs, originally, have been unwarrantable imitation of the Hebrews / by Thomas Godwyn ...	Godwin, Thomas, 1586 or 7-1642.	1685 (1685)	Wing G984A; ESTC R40480	198,206	288

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one part of an hundred Mint Anise and Cummine seemeth to have been of these doubtful things in which though their decree of the Sanhedrim required but one in the hundred yet the Pharisees would pay a just tenth Mat. 23. 23. and hence it is that they boasted They gave tithes of all that they possessed Luke 18. 12. In which they outstripped the other Jews who in these payments took the liberty granted them by the Sanhedrim CHAP. IV. Of their Marriages IN this Chapter of their Marriages we are to consider First the distinction of their wives Secondly the manner of their betrothings Thirdly the rites and ceremonies of their Marriage Lastly the form of their Divorce The Patriarchs in the Old Testament had many of them two sorts of Wives both of them were reputed lawful and true wives and therefore the Children of both were accounted legitimate The Hebrews commonly called the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naschim Primary-wives Married with nuptial Ceremonies and Rites requisite Some derive the word from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nascha-Oblitus fuit quasi Obliviosae dictae because for the most part womens memory is not so strong as mens but they think not amiss who say that women are so called from oblivion or forgetfulness because the Fathers family is forgotten and in a manner extinct in their daughters when they are married Hence proceeds that common saying of the Hebrews Familia matris non vocatur familia and for the contrary reason a male child is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zacar from his memory because the memory of the Father is preserved in the Son according to that speech of Absolom I have no Son to keep my name in remembrance 2 Sam. 18. 18. The other sort of Wives they call Pillagsehim secondary wives or half wives the English translates them Concubines and that not unfitly for sometimes the Hebrew word it self denoteth an infamous Strumpet or common Harlet The differences between these Concubines and the chief or primary wives are many 1. A disparity in their authority or houshold government the Wife was as Mistress the Concubine as an hand-maid or servant She had only Justori a true and lawful right unto the marriage bed as the chief Wife had otherwise she was in all respects inferiour And this appeareth in the History of Sarah and Hagar Secondly the betrothiing was different the chief Wife at her Espousals received from her Husband certain Gifts and Tokens as Pledges and Ceremonies of the Contract Thus Abrahams steward who is probably thought to be Eliezer of whom we read Gen. 15. 2. gave in Isaacs name unto Rebecca jewels of silver and jewels of gold and raiment Gen. 24. 55. This custom was in use also among the Grecians who calleth these gifts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moreover the chief Wife likewise received from her husband a bill of writing or matrimonial letters whereas the Concubines received neither such gifts nor such letters Thirdly only the children of the cheif wife succeeded the father in his inheritance the children of the Cencubines received gifts or legacies Abraham gave all his goods to Isaac but unto the sons of the Concubines which Abraham had Abraham gave gifts Gen. 25. 5 6. And here by the way we may take notice that the first born by right of primogeniture received a double portion of his fathers goods the father shall give him a double portion of all that he hath for he is the first of his strength Deut. 21. 17. Unto this custom the Prophet Elisha's speech alludeth when he prayeth Elijah that his spirit might be double upon him 2 King 1. 9. that is that he might have a double portion of his spirit in comparison of the other Prophets or rather the sons of the Prophets amongst whom he obtained the place of an elder Brother and therefore prayeth for the right of primogeniture so that we are not to understand him as if he did ambitiously desire a greater measure of the spirit than rested upon his Master but that he desired to excel the other remaining Prophets unto whom afterward he became a father The Hebr. phrase is in both places the same Secondly in their betrothing we are to consider 1. The distance of time between the espousals and the confirmation of their marriage which some have conceited to have been a full year at least ten months and this they observe from Rebecca her brother and mothers answer unto Abrahams servant desiring that the Maid might not depart presently but remain after the Espousals at least ten days Gen. 24. 55. Which Text they interpret ten months understanding thereby that which elsewhere is phrased a year of days Gen 41. 1. But if we should yield this interpretation although our English at least ten days is more agreeable unto the Septuag●●t and the Original yet it followeth not that this time was craved for the fulfilling of any prescribed distance between the Espousals and the Marriage but rather it implieth the tender affection of the mother towards her daughter as being loath so suddenly to part with her Notwithstanding it is not unlikely that there was a competent distance of time between the first affiancing and the confirmation of the marriage though not prescribed or limited to any set number of days weeks or months The second thing considerable in their betrothing is to enquire the manner of their contracting which might be done in Israel three ways First By peice of money Secondly By writing Thirdly By copulation and all these in the presence of witnesses By a peice of money though it were but a farthing or the worth thereof at which time the man used this or the like form of words Lo thou art betrothed unto me and he gave her the money before witnesses By bill and then he wrote the like form of words Be thou betrothed unto me which he gave her before witnesses and it was written with her name in it else it was no betrothing By copulation and then he said likewise Lo thou shall be betrothed unto me by copulation and so he was united unto her before two witnesses after which copulation she was his betrothed wife If he lay with her by way of fornication and not by the name of betrothing or if it were by themselves without the fore-acquainting of Witnesses it was no betrothing however he might not lye with her the second time before the Marriage was accomplished And though the betrothing might be any of these three ways yet usually it was by a peice of Money and if they would they might do it by writing but betrothing by copulation was forbidden by the wise men of Israel and who so did it was chastised with rods howbeit the betrothing stood in force These solemnities in betrothing were performed by the man and woman under a Tent or Canopy made for the purpose called in their language Chuppa a Tabernacle or Tent

kind of death there it ought to be interpreted of Strangling For example the Law saith of the Adulterer Lev. 20. 10. Morte plectetur let him be punish'd with death because the kind of death is not here mentioned they interpret it strangling The reason of this rule is because strangling was the easiest death of the four and where the Law determineth not the punishment there they say Ampliandi favores The favourablest exposition is to be given The rule is not generally true for in former times Adultery was punish'd with stoning I will judge thee after the manner of them that are Harlots saith the Lord Ezek. 16. 38. And in the fortieth verse the judgment is named They shall stone thee with stones likewise the Scribes and Pharisees said unto Christ Moses in the Law commanded us that such should be stoned John 8. Before we treat in particular of these four punishments it may be questioned Whether the Jews had any power to judge of life and death at that time when they crucified our blessed Saviour The Jews said to Pilate It is not lawful for us to put any man to death Joh. 18. 31. Latter Jews say that all power of capital punishment was taken from them forty years before the destruction of of the second Temple and of this opinion are many Divines Answer First the Jews speech unto Pilate that it was not lawful for them to put any man to death cannot be understood as if they should have said we have no power to put any man to death for admit that power in criminals were in the general taken from them yet in this particular power was permitted them at that time from Pilate Take ye him and judge him according to your Law John 18. 31. Neither can it be said that their Law could not condemn him if he had been a trangressor thereof or that they had not out of their law to object against him for they say They had a law and by their law he ought to die John 19. 7. It was not then want of Power but the holiness of that time made them say it was unlawful For they held it unlawful upon their days of prepararation to sit on life and death as hath been shewn in the Chapter of translating Feasts And Friday on which our Saviour was condemned was the preparation of their Sabbath Secondly in the question whether power of judging capital crimes were taken from them by the Romans We are to distinguish between crimes Some crimes were trangressions of the Roman law as theft murder robberies c. power of judging in these was taken from them other crimes were transgressions only against the law of Moses as blasphemy and the like in these power of judging seemeth to have remained with them When Paul was brought by the Jews before Gallio Gallio said unto them if it were a matter of wrong or wicked lewdness O ye Jews reason would that I should bear with you but if it be a question of words and names of your law look ye to it Acts 18. 14. In handling these four punishments First observe the offenders whom the Jews make liable to each punishment and then the manner of the punishment The persons to be stoned were eighteen 1. He that lieth with his own mother 2. Or with his fathers wife 36. Or with his daughter-in-law 4. Or with a hetrothed maid 5. Or with the male 6. Or with the beast 7. The woman that lieth down to a beast 8. The blasphemer 9. He that worstippeth an Idol 10. He that offereth of his seed to Moloch 11. He that hath a familiar spirit 12. The Wizard 13. The private enticer to Idolatry 14. The publique withdrawer to Idolatry 15. The Witch 16. The prophaner of the Sabbath 17. He that curseth his Father or his Mother 18. The Rebellious Son The manner of stoning was thus The offender was led to a place without the Gates two Cubits high his hands being bound From hence one of the Witnesses tumbled him by a stroke upon the loyns if that killed him not the Witnesses lifted up a stone being the weight of two men which chiefly the other Witnesse cast upon him if that killed not all Israel threw stones upon him The hands of the Witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death and afterwards the hands of all the people Deut. 17. 17. Hence the opinion of R. Akiba is commonly received that such an Idolater it holdeth in all others condemned to this death was reserved until one of the common feasts at which all the multitude of Israel came to Jerusalem The party thus executed being quite dead was afterward for greater ignominy hanged on a Tree till towards the Sun-set at which time he and the Tree were both buried Malefactors adjudged to burning were ten 1. The Priests daughter which committed whoredom 2. He which lieth with his own daughter 3. Or with his daughters daughter 4. Or with his sons daughter 5. Or with his wives daughter 6. Or with her sons daughter 7. Or with her daughters daughter 8. Or with his Mother-in-law 9. Or with the Mother of his Mother-in-law 10. Or with the Mother of his Father-in-law The manner of burning was two-fold Some they burnt with wood and faggots this was termed by them Combustio corporis the burning of the body Others they burnt by pouring in scalding hot Lead at their mouths which descending into their bowels killed them the bulk of their body remaining whole and this was termed therefore Combustio animae The burning of their Soul This last was most in use and alone described by most of their Writers Malefactors condemned to beheading were of two sorts 1. The Murderer 2. Those of any City who were drawn unto Idolatry The manner thereof is at this day in use Malefactors strangled were six 1. He that smiteth his father or his Mother 2. He that stealeth a soul of Israel 3. An Elder which contradicteth the Consistory 4. A false Prophet and he that prophesieth in the name of an Idol 5. He that lieth with another mans wife 6. He that abuseth the body of the Priests daughter The manner of strangling was thus The Malefactor was put in dung up to the loins a towel being cast about his neck which two Executioners one on each side plucked to and fro until he was dead CHAP. VIII Punishments not capital THe lesser punishments not capital in use among the Hebrews are chiefly four 1. Imprisonment 2. Restitution 3. Talio 4 Scourging Imprisonment Under this are comprehended the Prisons Stocks Pillory Chains Fetters and the like all vvhich sorts of punishment seeing they differ very little or nothing at all from those vvhich are novv in common use vvith us they need no explication The keepers of the prison if they let any committed unto them escape vvere liable to the same punishment vvhich should have been inflicted on the party escaped This is gatherable from