Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	apostle_n	church_n	prove_v	3,145	5	6.1841	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85889	A defence of A treatise against superstitious Iesu-worship, falsely called scandalous, against the truely scandalous answer of the parson of Westminston in Sussex. Wherein also the whole structure of his Antiteichisma, so farre as it concernes the po[i]nt in controversie is overthrowne, the truth more fully cleared, and the iniquitie of that superstition more throughly detected. By M.G. the author of the former treatise, published Anno Dom. 1642	Giles, Mascall, 1595 or 6-1652.	1643 (1643)	Wing G46; Thomason E64_6; ESTC R16778	55,127	71

in the sense above spoken therefore it followes that it cannot be understood of the Name Jesus because the name in the Text is a name of power and authoritie as that parallel place proves it Matth. 28. 18. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} all power is given me So Master Calvin on that place Quo etiam pertinet illud Pauli to which pertaines that of Paul hee emptied himselfe wherefore God exalted him and gave him a name which is above every name Again the scope of the name proves it for Subjection must be given in this name signified by bowing the knee Authority subjection are relatives there is no Subjection due where there is no Power or Authority Now the Name Jesus is a name of Salvation and not a name properly denoting Command and Authority Secondly though it should be granted that the Name Jesus is a name of Authority yet it is not a name of the highest Authority Doctor Page your own witnesse shall be Judge whom you judge unreproveable in his judgement who in his answer to Master Prynnes Reply to Widdowes Master Prynne having brought many places to prove that the name Christ denominates Christs Sacraments his Church his Apostles his Ministers his Saints his Kingdome and therefore a Name especially venerable amongst Christians doth acknowledge that the name Christ may be of greater Authoritie and dignitie then the Name Jesus though not of greater savour and mercy Now let Doctor Page with all his learning and Master Barton with all his Sophistrie reconcile this if they can how the Name Jesus can be above every name yet it be possible that any other name may be of greater dignitie and authority than it seeing Name in the Text doth expresly denote dignitie and authoritie Thirdly thought it should be granted that the Name Jesus is of highest authority in regard of the Church only yet in this respect neither can it be the name above every name in the Text for this name is of highest authority in regard of the whole creation heaven and earth and therefore without controversie in respect of Angels Devils and all men whatsoever according to the forecited place Matth. 28. 18. All power is given me in heaven and earth Christ in this name commands the whole heaven and earth Now the Name Jesus cannot command the Angels because to them he is not Jesus by redemption as the name signifies much lesse can it command the Devills and it cannot command the whole earth for many nations have no knowledge of his written Law much lesse the Gospell therefore neither doth he command them as Jesus neither can any of these submit and bow to him as Jesus Therefore here the Name Jesus standeth as a bare name to Angels devills reprobates and many nations of the earth And let not Master Barton be angry if I affirme that he and his fellowes adore the bare Name Jesus For first understanding the Text of the Name Jesus they appoint the bowing to the Name onely and not to the person as I have proved and they cannot intend it to the person except they adde to the Text Secondly when the person of our Saviour is as fully denominated under his other titles as Jesus they move not but onely at the name Jesus Thirdly when they stand or sit to heare the Word a gesture allowable by the Word as soone as the Name Jesus is mentioned they immediatly bow and when oftentimes the great mercy of God in saving us is largely and copiously laid open in a Sermon or when in reading of a Chapter many excellent sentences are related wherein the sense of our salvation is more clearely notified to our understanding then by the Name Jesus yet there is no stirre no adoration but onely at the Name Jesus no not at the title Saviour which is the very sense of the name Jesus and better understood of all Fourthly it is ordinary with these men when they be upon their knees at the prayers to God and Christ then to make a speciall incurvation of the body at the sound of Jesus a plaine argument that these men are guilty of Syllabicall worship and worship the bare name more then God or Christ himselfe That I alone doe not so charge them Master * Calvin and Master * Babington do both of them lay syllable worship to their charge Therefore I returne Master Bartons scoffes upon himselfe and I would faine see how not poore silly flies but such mighty Elephants as this Saphister is can escape out of these nets and therefore his Crambe so often Cocta cast upon me is more then ridiculous viz. Name above every name as a bare name cannot be understood of the Name Jesus as a bare name and this shall serve to answer it every where when it is brought To the second part viz. If it should be understood of a proper name yet may it not bee understood of the Name Jesus my first reason is because the word Jesus doth no where denote the name Jesus but onely Matth. 1. 21. and Luke 2. 21. where it must needs so signifie but hee will have my meaning to be this that the word Jesus doth not signifie the word Jesus which is a Crotchet of his owne devising I say the word Jesus doth not signifie the name not the word your instance of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} to signifie Jehovah in the old Testament is nothing to the purpose for I speake here of Jesus neither is the Parallel brought right for you should have produced where the word Jehovah is taken for the Name Jehovah and if you did it is besides the Question which is onely there concerning the Name Jesus But you can prove you say that name is often used for Jesus and instance in one place which if true it is not for your turne for you must prove that Jesus is taken for the Name Jesus but that place of Acts 5. 41. is not for you doth the Apostle speake there barely of the name or appellation Jesus you thought belike you should never be answered these be the words they rejoyced that they were counted worthy to suffer rebuke for his name what is name taken for the name Jesus here properly did the Appellation Jesus offend the Apostles enemies did not they call him Jesus as well as the Apostles This is that offended them for preaching that Jesus not the name but person was the Christ no quarrell at all about the name Jesus Would it be thought that one that professeth himselfe such a Scholler as Master Barton is should run into such an absurditie To my second reason viz. that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is never taken for the name Jesus you object that I take the word without the sense but Sir you must not take the sense without the name the question is about the name Jesus as a name and though you take the sense with it yet you cannot bring any

doe not overthrow all there spoken But whereas you say that the confession of Jesus is the utmost end in regard of our selves because there is no other name wherein we shall be saved This is nothing to the Text For Angels Devils and Reprobates that must bow as well as wee cannot have this end for it is not a Name to them for salvation Againe you wrest the said Text pitifully for your owne ends for what orthodox expositour can you produce to make Name there the literall Name Jesus that it is meant of the person of our Saviour the precedent words are plaine * Explicatio est proximae sententiae c. It is the explication of the next sentence in Christ alone is salvation for by name he understands the cause or meane * Againe you translate {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} cunningly and purposely to hide your craft Wherein is as much as whereby and so our last translation reads it {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} hath the force of a Causall and if you meane so too then understanding Name for the literall Name Jesus it cannot be avoided but you must make the Name Jesus our Saviour which is flat Idolatry Next you fall foule upon my Argument and tell me that it is very false to say that Christ shall come as a Lord to all and not as Jesus and that the simple people are abused by my misapplying the Text Matth. 25. 37. 44. But that I have neither abused the Text nor the people I have made good sufficiently but that you have done both it is evident to your shame But you have not set downe my words right for I say thus He shall not come as a Jesus to all that shall bow But by two reasons you will prove that I have misapplyed the Text The first is by a Question Who is Lord say you but Jesus Here you absurdly confound these two Names making them all one I deny not that Jesus the person is Lord but I deny that the Name Jesus is the Name Lord Your second reason is because Jesus being the Saviour of us is the confounding Jesus of his and our enemies this is your Argument to whom he is not a saving Jesus he is a confounding Jesus so one way hee is a Jesus to all But Sir the name Jesus is a saving not a confounding Name and it was given not for Angels Devils and Reprobates but for his people onely and that for salvation not for destruction all this is plaine from Matth. 1. 21. Seeing then you affirme that the bowing in the Text must bee done in the sense of this Name the Angels cannot bow in the sense of this Name except you will make them sinners for Jesus is a Saviour from sinne much lesse can Devils and Reprobates bow to him in that sense except you will have them to be saved Againe it is utterly against the Scripture to hold that Jesus as Jesus is a confounder for all the while that he was most commonly called by this Name and was in the state of saving us Hee was meeke mild went about doing good would not breake the bruised Reed nor quench the smoaking Flax. When his Disciples requested of him to command fire from heaven to destroy those that would not receive him he rebukes them saying The Sonne of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them marke the reason he would not destroy because he came to save So againe If any heare my words and beleeve not I judge him not consider the reason for saith he I came not to judge the world but to save the world You see then he cannot judge or destroy as Jesus salvation and destruction are contrary If any object that this was in the time of his humiliation but he shall come otherwise to judgement I answer the sense of the Name can never be altered God cannot deny his word If at any time salvation be opposed to destruction or judgement it is ever so The name Jesus therefore being an humble lowly name as you confesse and a saving name cannot be the Name in which he shall come as universall Judge but that must be a Name of power and authority over all as I have proved But might I grant as I will not that Jesus is a confounding Name to some yet it cannot be a confounding Name to those nations that never knew him for these never offended him in this name His Spirit of illumination they never resisted His Gospel they never rejected His precious blood they never trode under their feete Christ is an upright Judge and shall come to recompence every one according to his workes Now therefore it would bee injustice in Christ which were blasphemy once to thinke if he should destroy them as Jesus against whom as Jesus they never offended This is contrary to Rom. 2. 12. They that sinne without Law shall perish without Law Christ shall judge them indeed as Jehovah for the breach of the Law of nature which he hath written in their hearts but not as Jesus for so they never offended him I will bring your owne witnesse Zanchy against you Causa Vnica The onely cause why the creature boweth knees to God is not because he is Judge or Mediatour but onely because he is Jehovah which he proveth from Deut. 6. 13. Isa. 45. 23. Rom. 14. 11. Now let us briefely summe up all you have not proved by any cleare Scriptures that Jesus shall be named at the day of judgement if you could it would not follow thence that bowing shall bee at the mention of that name You cannot prove that In the name doth anywhere signifie at the mention of the Name Sundry Scriptures you have wickedly falsified for it as I have proved Sect. 4. If you could prove it from some Scriptures yet seeing this phrase is often used and hath other meaning in other Scriptures yet there will be a just doubt whether it be so meant in this place or no Then those that shall stand to bee judged at that day whom you damne to hell for not performing it now shall have just cause to plead against Christ in this manner Lord in all thy other Commandements thou deliveredst thy will plainely unto me but here in this Text thou hast delivered it in such words as are not agreeable in sense to any part of thy word elsewhere or so as I could not understand thy meaning whether it were according to thy will or no so that because I might justly doubt it I could not practise it without sinning against thee and how derogatory will this be to Christs honour that the judged shall have just cause of exception against the Judge Again it is against the Scripture to hold that he shall confound any in the sense of the name Iesus It signifyeth a Saviour and so Angels Devils and Reprobates cannot bow to him It is against the Scriptures to