Selected quad for the lemma: woman_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
woman_n	church_n	let_v	silence_n	2,878	5	10.3040	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A51998	A tract on the Sabbath-Day wherein the keeping of the first-day of the week a Sabbath is justified by a divine command and a double example contained in the Old and New Testament : with answers to the chiefest objections made by the Jewish seventh-day Sabbatharians and others / by Isaac Marlow.	Marlow, Isaac.	1694 (1694)	Wing M695; ESTC R32053	84,294	98

for the Observation of the Sabbath on the seventh-day does destroy its Moral Limitation to the seventh-day appointed to Israel next after the sixth day on which they gathered Manna as a Pattern sixing their six working days before their Sabbath because we are referred by it to the Pattern in the beginning when Gods seventh-day Sabbath was Mans first-day Sabbath and not to the time of gathering Manna nor of Israels coming out of Egypt which last appeareth from other places of Scripture to be the Reason of the Ceremonial beginning and ending of their Sabbath from Evening to Evening It 's true that seventh-day appointed in the Wilderness did answer the Moral Precept of the fourth Commandment but yet mistake me not It is not found to Answer it simply because it was that very seventh-day then appointed or simply for that very days-sake without regard to their Deliverance out of Egypt and that new Appointment for if another seventh-day had been sixed for their Sabbath it had answered the command as well as that but because that same seventh-day was appointed to them a boundary successively before and after their six working days nor did this command Morally-limit them to keep the same precise seventh-day successively from the Creation for such a Limitation is not in this Precept nor in any other place in the Holy Scriptures but it tyeth the Sabbath to the seventh-day as a boundary to their or our or any Nations six working days or to the first-day before and after them which answereth the same Law SECT IX I Shall here Instance some particular Cases in the New Testament in which we are referred to the Pattern in our first Parents which may serve as Examples to juslifie our doing the like for the Observation of the Sabbath-day as 1. It is said in 1 Tim. 2.11 12 13. Let the Woman learn in Silence with all Subjection But I suffer not a Woman to 〈◊〉 nor to usurp Authority over the Man but to be in Silence For Adam was first formed then Eve And Adam was not deceived but the Woman being deceived was in the Transgression And 1 Cor. 14.34 Let your Women keep Silence in the Churches for it is not permitted unto them to speak but they are commanded to be under Obedience as also saith the Law In these two Scriptures there are two Moral Reasons given and one Command mentioned for Womens Subjection unto the Men. 1. Because Adam had the Priority of being formed before Eve and he having her Original Humane Substance first in himself had thereby a natural Precedency to her Free and Voluntary Subjection But 〈◊〉 The Woman being first deceived and in the Transgression she fell thereby under a more absolute Law of Obedience to her Husband Gen. 3.16 Vnto the Woman he said thy desire shall be to thy or as it is in our Margin Subject to thy Husband and he shall rule over thee Now from hence we may clearly see how the Apostle confirms his Doctrine from the Order of Nature in our first Parents and the Institution of God to them and if these are of Moral Use and Perpetually binding for our Obedience then we have Reason to believe that Gods sanctifying the first seventh-day-Sabbath and the Order of Adam and Eve keeping of it before their six working days is also of Moral use unto us 2. I shall shew that an express Law of Moses is not only Abrogated by the Authority of Jesus Christ but he justifies the doing of it by the Moral Pattern in our first Parents as may be seen in Mark 10.2 3 4. And the Pharisees came to him and asked him Is it lawful for a Man to put away his Wife tempting him And he answered and said unto them What did Moses command you And they said Moses suffered to write a Bill of Divorcement and to put her away And Jesus answered and said unto them For the hardness of your Heart he wrote you this Precept But from the beginning of the Creation God made them Male and Female For this cause shall a man leave his Father and Mother and cleave to his Wife and they twain shall be one Flesh what therefore God hath joined together let no man put asunder And he saith unto them whosoever shall put away his Wife Matthew saith except it be for Fornication and Marry another committeth Adultery against her 1. To prevent any mistake about this Precept of Divorcement and to confirm what I may conclude from our Saviours Words before recited I shall consider the Original Transcript of it in Deut. 24.1 When a Man hath taken a Wife and married her and it come to pass that she find no favour in his Eyes because he hath found some uncleanness in our Margin it is matter of Nakedness in her then let him write her a Bill of Divorcement and give it in her hand and send her out of his House And here I shall note that this matter of Uncleanness or Nakedness is not to be understood of Adultery or Whoredom For the Dutch Annotations say that the Hebrew Word signifieth Nakedness or Scandalousness of any thing wherein the Husband taketh dislike to her except Whoredom or Fornication And Mr. Ainsworth saith It is any thing of Shame or Ignominy as the Greek translateth a Shameful or Vncomely thing and he also saith that this is thought of some not to be meant of Adultery for which she was to dye if it were proved but of some evil thing in her Conditions or Actions which displeased her Husband Deut. 22.22 So the Phrase was used in Deut. 23.14 for that which was uncleanly and unseemly 2. The Sence of our Saviours Words clearly sheweth that this Law of Divorcement was designed for other Matters than for Whoredom or Fornication for our Lord owning Moses Precept of Sufferance to put away their Wives excepts against it unless it be in the Case of Fornication which if it were so limited under the Law then Moses Sufferance was nothing but what our Saviour still alloweth and Christs Prohibition was nothing at all This being Premised it now follows that our Lord maketh that Adultery under the Gospel that was not accounted so under the Law And from the Moral Pattern in Adam and Eve he Abrogateth the Use and Authority of Moses Precept for suffering Men to put away their Wives for smaller Causes than Fornication and if the Pattern in our first Parents was of such Moral use as to justifie our Saviours abolishing of a written Precept of Moses we have then Reason also to believe that their Example or the Order of time of their first observing the Sabbath-day that was sanctified for them is of Moral use to us we also having the Jewish Sabbath Abrogated by Christs Authority in the New Testament SECT X. HAving opened and explained the two Foundation Scriptures for our keeping the Sabbath-day and proved the fourth Commandment to be Morally binding to all Nations and that the Jewish Pattern for the Sabbath is