Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	day_n	mean_v	sabbath_n	3,442	5	10.6221	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70260	Several tracts, by the ever memorable Mr. John Hales of Eaton Coll. &c. Viz. I. Of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. II. Paraphrase on St. Matthew's Gospel. III. Of the power of the keys. IV. Of schism and schismaticks, (never before printed by the original copy.) V. Miscellanies	Hales, John, 1584-1656.; Hales, John, 1584-1656. Tract concerning sin against the Holy Ghost.; Hales, John, 1584-1656. Tract concerning schisme.	1677 (1677)	Wing H276A; Wing H280; ESTC R14263	61,040	260

is not meant the very next immediate Instant of time to that when he spake the last words going before but such a convenient portion of time wherein the twelve Disciples might have gone about those parts whereunto they were sent and returned back again So St. Matthew having spoken newly of Christs dwelling in Nazareth when he was a Child of about two years old immediately subjoyns In those days came John the Baptist as if John had come within some few days after his coming into Nazareth when we know there passed eight and twenty years between Scholar I believe it as you say and therefore shall pass to that which doth more trouble me and that is What that was which the Disciples did which was not lawful on the Sabbath day Master How come you to be troubled at that Is it not said in plain Terms they plucked the Ears of Corn did eat them Why should not you think that this was their fault Scholar I shall tell you why To my thinking there are three things said 1. That they went through the Corn. 2. That they plucked the Ears 3. That they eat them Now whether all these or one of these was their Fault I cannot tell and I shall tell you the Reason of my doubt First It is true that their very Walking might have been their fault because it was not lawful on the Sabbath to walk above the space of two thousand Cubits and we know not how far Christ the Disciples might have come that day But yet methinks if that had been it they should have reproved Christ as well as his Disciples because 't is very likely they walk't the one as much as far as the other Secondly It is true that their plucking the Ears of Corn might have been their fault but yet methinks it should not in regard the Law is so clear in the 23. Deut. 25. When thou comest into the standing Corn of thy Neighbour then thou mayst pluck the Ears with thine hand but thou shalt not move a Sickle unto thy Neighbours standing Corn. And truly why that which is so plainly lawful at another time should be unlawful on the Sabbath being it is so far from being any kind of labour or servile work I cannot imagine 3. It 's true that they did eat them and I cannot see what fault there is in that unless you can shew me Mast And peradventure I shall shew you more in that than you thought on It is true that the general consent of Expositors runs on their plucking the Ears upon the Sabbath-Day as being the thing condemned by the Pharisees for an unlawful thing But I think they would be much troubled to prove it The custom and manner of the Jews especially since the times of the Macchabees being to allow Acts of greater labour and pain than the plucking of an Ear namely waging War against their Enemies the Travelling of Carryers and Merchants with such others even on the Sabbath-Day I should rather encline to think that their Fault was Eating especially if that be true which the very Heathen Poets tax and scoff them so with namely their Sabbath-Fasts For if all things be well considered I believe there will more be said for this than for the other Crime And if a man will go no further than that Answer which our Saviour makes for them he he shall find ground enough to be of this opinion For if the pretended fault had been working or labouring our Saviour Christ might have easily laid his Answer upon Joshua or upon many others who did greater work than this upon the Sabbath But laying it as he doth upon David and upon his Eating that which was forbidden He seemes to Answer one unlawful Eating with another when Necessity was a sufficient dispensation for both I do not oblige you to believe this as a positive Truth but only tell you that as much may be said for the one as the other but if you would be sure to know what their fault was you had best put them both together and you will not miss Scholar I thank you for this Light I wish you could give me as good in my next Objection Master I shall do my best what is that I pray Scholar Our Saviour saith in the third Verse of this Chap. that David did eat of the Shew-Bread and they that were with him and the Holy Ghost saith 1 Sam. 21. 1 where this History is recorded That there was no man with him for it is said there that Ahimelech the Priest was afraid at the meeting of David and said unto him Why art Thou alone and why is no man with Thee How shall I reconcile this Contradiction to my Thinking Master The truth is The Words of our Saviour in St. Matthew are too plain and evident than to admit of any other Construction but that there were some other men with David and if they could admit of it yet St. Mark would put all out of doubt for he saith expresly that David did eat the Shew-Bread and gave it to them that were with him Mark 2. 26. And therefore when the Priest saith that there was no man with him in Samuel it is best to understand that of no man in sight because peradventure David might have caused them to withdraw for the present till he had got relief from the Priest both for himself and them And this I conceive the best Satisfaction unto that doubt Scholar I think it not improbable but before I leave this story of David I pray tell me how it comes to pass that our Saviour saith David entred into the House of God in v. 4. of this Chap. when as yet the House of God was not built i. e. when as yet there was no Temple Master It was well Objected and the Answer to be given is this That our Saviour calls that place where the Tabernacle then was The House of God which afterwards became the proper appellation of the Temple Scholar It is very likely Now if you please let us pass from this Answer concerning David to that concerning the Priests in the 5th V. where Christ saith That the Priests on the sabbath-Sabbath-Day prophane the Sabbath and are blameless What doth he mean by that Master In those words our Saviour useth another Argument in behalf of his Disciples which they call an Argument from the less to the greater to justify their Plucking and their Eating on the Sabbath-Day Amongst the Jews the Law of the Sabbath was ever so to be interpreted as that it hindred not the Works of the Temple and therefore it was a kind of Rule in the Jewish Law that in the Temple there was no Sabbath From this submission of the Law of the Sabbath to the works of the Temple Our Saviour argueth to that which is greater than it The works of a Prophet who was above a Priest His Answer is in brief this The Priests by their works in the Temple upon the Sabbath were

not thought to prophane the Sabbath and therefore there is less reason that my Disciples who are Prophets should be thought to prophane it in doing of that which is a less work than theirs And that this is the Scope of his Reply will appear by that which follows when he saith That in this place there is One greater than the Temple in the 6th Verse For the truth is every Prophet was greater than the Temple that is he was obliged in no case to the Laws Customs of the Temple but might sacrifice out of it when he pleased as appears in the practice of Eliah And whereas it may be Objected That the Priestly Function on the Sabbath could not be performed without the Labour of Offering but the Prophetical Function of the Disciples might be performed on the Sabbath without plucking ears and eating The answer is that both our Saviour and his Disciples were so intent upon their Prophetical Employment that as elsewhere they forgat to take Bread So here they either forgat or had no time for the provision of victuals before the Sabbath whereon to feed on the Sabbath Scholar I apprehend your meaning and desire you to make the force of Christs third Argument as evident unto me which follows in the seventh Verse where he saith But if ye had known what this meaneth I will have mercy and not sacrifice ye would not have condemned the guiltless Master His meaning is no more but this That when two Laws seem to clash so against one another that both cannot be kept the better is to be observed and the worse omitted The Law which willeth us to do good to all men and to further them in the means of their Salvation which to a Christian is a Law Moral never to be omitted is better than the Law which willeth us not to work or eat upon the Sabbath which is onely a Law Ritual Christ could not intend to teach and the Disciples intend to prepare and fit the minds of the people to be taught and withall intend the preparing of such things as were requisite to the strict observation of the Sabbath And therefore in Equity the Law of the Sabbath ought to give place to the Law of Instructing the World in the ways of Happiness and not to have justled with it Schol. I conceive this Argument but yet methinks there follows somewhat like a Reason which I do not yet conceive in the next verse For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath Pray shew me what the meaning is of that Master They that by the Son of Man here understand Christ or the Messias do mistake for in that acceptation of the Words the Reason doth not hold for if Christ had meant onely that he as the Messias was Lord of the Sabbath and so could abrogate it at his pleasure then what needed all the three other Arguments that went before By the Son of Man therefore is to be understood every common ordinary man as appears most evidently by that of St. Mark 2. 27. The Sabbath was made for Man and not Man for the Sabbath Besides at this time Christ neither had preached nor would have others to preach that He was the Messiah and a good while after this as you may see in Matth. 16. 20. He charged that they should tell it no man c. The sense therefore of the words is this That which is ordained for another thing ought to give place to that thing for which it is ordained But the Sabbath was ordain'd for Man every Man therefore it ought to give place unto Him namely when a thing so nearly concerning Man as his Salvation steppeth in between For to be Lord of the Sabbath is to dispose and order the Sabbath unto his own use and to have a Right so to order and dispose it Scholar I thank you for the pains and because I have put you to so much already I shall trouble you with nothing concerning the next Story of the man which had the withered hand because I think I do well enough understand it only let me desire you to give me your opinion why when our Saviour Christ had healed him and divers other men of their diseases It is added in the 16th verse of this Chapter And he charged them that they should not make him known Master Truly that which was the cause of his secess or his withdrawing himself from them in the Verse before may very well be conceived the cause also of this injoyn'd silence namely that He might be fafer from all violence and force But they which say that He did it out of charity to those Pharisees who did seek his life say not amiss as Origen reports of Aristotle that he withdrew himself from Athens not for his own sake but for the Athenians sake lest he should give them an occasion of committing another murther after the murther of Socrates Hitherto as yet this Zeal and endeavours of the Pharisees to maintain the Traditions of their Elders and the Religion of their Fathers might seem somewhat excusable and therefore Christ adding Miracle to Miracle did wait for their repentance and amendment in the mean time preventing them by escapes and concealing of himself from doing him any violence or mischief till such time as that resisting the Light and Testimony of their own Conscience as some of them did very shortly after as we shall see anon they had more deservedly drawn upon themselves the guilt of that innocent blood which afterwards fell upon their heads So that when Christ charged them that they should not make Him known He meant only that they should not discover where He was that so with the more silence and less opposition He might do the business of his Father and this sense is agreeable to that which follows out of the Prophet Isaiah in the 17 18 19 20 and 21 Verses Schol. I take it to be so indeed but in these words out of Isaiah there is somewhat which does much trouble me how to understand and that is the latter part of the 20. verse where it is said Till he send forth Judgment unto Victory Pray what do you take to be the meaning of those words Mast I shall run through the whole words of the Prophet and by that you will better understand that part These words of the Prophet Isaiah are produced by St. Matth. for a confirmation of that Meekness Humility Quietness and Silence with which the great business of our Salvation was to be dispatched For by these words I will put my Spirit on Him is understood the Spirit of Meekness Gentleness and Humility which was emblem'd in the Dove when it came upon him and by those words and he shall shew Judgment unto the Gentiles is understood the preaching of the Christian Law and therefore if you mark it in the 42 of Isaiah and the 4th verse it is added as an explication of the word Judgment going before And the

the Quality of the Mind by the common Actions or Habits of their Life as they do of Trees by the Fruits which they produce be they good or evil And that this is true saith Christ you may judge by your own selves For How can ye being evil speak good things saith He ver 34. That is you can never do it A dissembled and forc'd Mind will quickly shew it self some way or other and will return unto its wonted habit and therefore as you may judge by your selves that because you speak and do nothing but that which is evil therefore you your selves are evil So you should judge of Me that because you see I say and do nothing but that which is Good therefore I am good and therefore that Spirit which works in Me is good Schol. I apprehend all this and therefore shall save you the labour of expounding that which follows for I see it all tends to the same end and scope only methinks I am much streightned in my mind about the 36th verse which forbids all idle words for if we must give account of every one such God be merciful unto me and to many thousand more Pray make me to understand the full latitude of this Commination of Christ Mast Whatsoever is meant by this idle Word here you may be sure it hath reference to that Word which the Pharisees had spoke of Christ when they said He cast out Devils in the name of Beelzebub for Christ hath not done with this Calumny of theirs yet but continues his discourse upon it till the 38. Verse of this Chapter Now considering this Idle Word in that reference it is most reasonable to expound it not of every Word which a man speaks of which there is no profit or which is good for nought for if that Exposition should be true which God forbid yet it were not pertinent but of such a Word wherein there is no Truth For by Idle and Vain in holy Scripture is often understood that which is false And so to take the Name of God in Vain in the Commandments is to swear falsely So that the Scope of Christ in those Words is this Do you think that you shall escape for this horrid Calumny which you have cast upon me knowing it to be a Calumny in your own hearts I tell you nay for no man shall escape in the day of Judgment for calumniating another man falsely though he do not know that that Calumny is false and therefore much less shall you By which we may learn if not to avoid all idle Words which to the nature and education of man is almost quite impossible yet to beware of calumniating persons not only when we know that Calumny is false which doubtless is a very grievous sin but when we are not evidently ascertain'd that the thing is true And therefore it is the special Office of a good Christian to refrain his Tongue altogether in that Point for it is a rare thing for a man to give himself the liberty to repeat that of another which is false and not to wish it true Sch. I thank you for this Satisfaction and by Gods help shall endeavour to frame my Life and Conversation accordingly for I perceive it is a Sin which the World taketh little notice of though indeed it be the destruction of Charity without which no man is a Christian For so they avoid doing of that which is notoriously Evil they care not what they say of any man Now if you please we will proceed to that which follows I pray what do the Scribes and Pharisees mean to desire a Sign from Christ in the 31th Verse of this Chapter who had seen so many before for methinks it seems a very impertinent Request Mast Some Interpreters are of opinion that these Scribes and Pharisees were not the same who saw those late Miracles which our Saviour did and they ground their opinion upon Luke 11. 16. where it is said That others tempted him seeking a Sign from Heaven But upon examination that opinion will not hold The better answer is that they did not desire a bare sign or a Miracle of which they had seen enough already but they desired a Sign from Heaven as St. Luke speaks that is that God by some strange Prodigy there should declare him to be a Prophet sent from him if so be he were so indeed For as for those Miracles which he did on Earth they were not satisfied with them as apprehending them pendulous between two several Powers for as they they might come from God so they might come from the Devil but in Heaven they thought the Devil had no Power Schol. I like your reason well but I pray what doth Christ mean by that answer which he gives to their request in the 39 40 41 and 42 verses for I do not understand it perfectly Mast The meaning of His Answer is this You would have a Sign from Heaven and then you will believe me God that will omit no occasion to leave you unexcusable hath given you Signs enough here upon Earth but he is not bound to satisfie your humours and give them where and when you would have them he knows these which you have seen are sufficient to perswade Belief if that your Avarice and Profit and Places which you hold in the present Jewish State did not make you seek all Occasions and Cloaks for your Incredulity And therefore if those Signs which I have done on Earth will not serve you you shall have none from Heaven but if you will you shall have one from under the Earth even the Sign of the Prophet Jonas and that Sign not a Sign to convert you who after so many Signs and Miracles will not be converted but a Sign of my Innocence and your Malice which will persecute me even unto the death for all that Good which I have done amongst you Sch. By this which you have said I do not only perceive the Scope and Purport of Christs Answer which he gives them but the Drift of Verse 41 and 42 also wherein he complains That they who had had so many Signs done amongst them never would believe whereas those of Nineveh and the Queen of the South without any Sign or Miracle wrought either by Jonas or Solomon believed all that was told them But I pray how comes the next Discourse in concerning the unclean Spirit going out of a man in the 43 Verse And what is the Scope and Purport of that Discourse Mast It is not improbable That our Saviour Christ being much afflicted with the evil and incredulous hearts of the people of the Jews taketh a kind of Survey of that whole Nation even from the time wherein they were first led away captive into Babylon to the time when they were utterly destroyed by Titus Before their Captivity they were full of all manner of Wickedness as appeareth by the Prophets Under their Captivity they were a little reclaimed and