Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
heaven_n aaron_n altar_n office_n 16 3 5.7144 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A27392 An answer to the dissenters pleas for separation, or, An abridgment of the London cases wherein the substance of those books is digested into one short and plain discourse. Bennet, Thomas, 1673-1728. 1700 (1700) Wing B1888; ESTC R16887 202,270 335

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

made by incense the coals were to be taken from thence and therefore surely 't was peculiar to those offices Nay just after the account of the extraordinary way of lighting the fire follows this relation of Nadab and Abihu to shew wherein they offended For before it was the office of Aaron's Sons to put fire upon the Altar and now they suffer'd for attempting to do as formerly because Heaven had declar'd to the contrary There was also a Conformity between the punishment and the sin for as fire from the Lord consum'd the burnt-offering so fire from the Lord consum'd them So that their case seems like that of Vzzah 1 Chron. 13.7 10 15.2 for they acted contrary to God's command I may add that in other places also the phrase not commanded is apply'd to things forbidden such as are call'd abominations that is idolatrous worship false Prophets c. Deut. 17.3 4. Jer. 7.31 19.5 32.35 so that since the phrase is always spoken of things plainly forbidden 't is a sign that 't is rather God's forbidding that made them unlawful than his not commanding But say they why shou'd the phrase be us'd at all in such matters if not commanded is not the same as forbidden To this I answer that not commanded is only a softer way of speaking which is usual in all languages and frequently to be met with in Scripture Thus God saies that hypocrites chuse that in which I delighted not Is 66.4 that is their abominations as we read v. 3. So the Apostle saies the Gentiles did things not convenient Rom 1.28 29. that is envy murther c. And the phrase not commanded is of the like kind when the things it 's apply'd to are alike abominable Besides if not commanded be the same as forbidden then the very notion of indifferent things is destroy'd and there is no indifferent thing in the world because a thing indifferent is as I said before that which is neither commanded nor forbidden But 't is said that all things not commanded in God's Word are additions to it and that such additions are unlawful because God saies Ye shall not add unto the Word which I command you neither shall ye diminish ought from it Deut. 4.2 and the Scribes are condemn'd Matth. 15.9 because they taught for doctrines the Commandments of Men. Now to this I reply that if by adding to the Word they mean doing what the Word forbids or appointing somewhat else instead of what God has appointed or expounding away the design of the Word or making that which is not the Word of God to be of equal authority with it as the Scribes did or giving the same efficacy to human institutions as God does to his if I say by adding to the Word they mean any of these things we think that adding to the Word is unlawful And if by diminishing they mean neglecting what the Word requires or thinking God's institutions not compleat we think that diminishing from the Word is unlawful But if they say that doing any thing not commanded in the worship of God tho' it have none of the ingredients before spoken of is a sinful adding to the Word we therein differ from them 1. Because Christ and his Apostles and all Churches have done things not commanded 2. Because this destroys the nature of indifferent things which cannot be indifferent if they be sinful additions to God's Word Besides adding is adding to the Substance and diminishing is diminishing from the Substance so that when the Substance remains intire without debasement or corruption it cannot be call'd an addition or diminution in the Scripture-sence However our Adversaries themselves are really guilty of what they charge upon us for they forbid as absolutely unlawful to use any thing in the worship of God which is not prescrib'd and certainly he that forbids what the Scripture do's not forbid do's as much add to it as he that commands what the Gospel doth not command As for the Words of the 2d Commandment Thou shall not make unto thee any graven image c. they do by no means prove that we must worship God by no other Religious rites than what he has prescrib'd 'T is true we are there commanded to worship none besides God and to worship God in a manner sutable to his Nature and agreeable to his Will but surely rites instituted by Men for the Solemnity of God's Service are not there forbidden It has been said indeed that Ceremonies being invented by Man are of the same nature with images but we must observe 1. That Images are expresly forbidden and Ceremonies are not 2. That Images tend to debase God in the thoughts of those that worship him after that Manner but Ceremonies do not and therefore Ceremonies are not a breach of the 2d Commandment Ceremonies are not Essential parts of Divine Worship but only circumstances of it and certainly our Brethren cannot find fault that such circumstances are us'd to further Devotion For they themselves do plead for sitting at the Lord's Supper c. upon this very account because they think such external circumstances do further Devotion But say they if there be not a Rule for all things belonging to the Worship of God the Gospel wou'd be less perfect than the Law and Christ wou'd not be so faithful in the care of his Church as Moses who was faithful in all his house Heb. 3.2 Therefore as Moses laid down all the particular Rules for God's Worship under the Law so has Christ under the Gospel and it is as dangerous to add as to detract from them Now to this I answer that the design of the Epistle to the Hebrews is to compare Moses and Christ or the Law and the Gospel and to shew the exact Correspondence between the Type and the Antitype and not to shew that our Saviour had as particularly prescrib'd the Order of Christian Worship as Moses had that of the Jewish The Gospel is not so particular in the Circumstantials of Worship as the Law was and we must not affirm that it is because we wou'd have it so We cannot prove that Christ has actually done this because we imagine that he shou'd have done it We may better argue that since these things are not expresly determin'd under the Gospel as they were under the Law therefore they are left to the determination of our Superiours whom we are commanded to obey Nor are the sufficiency of Scripture and faithfulness of Christ to be judg'd of by what we fancy they shou'd have determin'd but by what they have Since we do not find in the Scriptures such particular prescriptions in Baptism as in Circumcision nor in the Lord's Supper as in the Passover nor in our Prayers as in the Jewish Sacrifices therefore 't is plain that the sufficiency of Scripture and faithfulness of Christ do respect somewhat else and that they are not the less for want of them Christ was faithful as Moses to him that
circumstances and may be different according to those circumstances That thing may tend to Order Decency and Edification in one Country or Age which in another may tend to the contrary Thus being cover'd in the Church and the Custom of Love-Feasts c. were once thought decent but afterwards the opinions of Men alter'd So that Order Decency and Edification being changeable things as circumstances vary only general rules can be prescrib'd but the particulars must be left to Authority to determine 2. Our Saviour and his Apostles did use indifferent things which were not prescrib'd in Divine Worship Thus he join'd in the Synagogal Worship John 18.20 c. tho' if the place it self were at all prescrib'd the manner of that Service was not so much as hinted at Thus he us'd the Cup of Charity in the Passover tho' it was not instituted Luke 22.16 The Feast of Dedication was an human institution yet he vouchsaf'd to be present at it Nay he comply'd with the Jews in the very posture of the Passover which they chang'd to Sitting tho' God had prescrib'd Standing The Apostles also observ'd the hours of Prayer which were of human institution Acts 3.1 Now if Christ and his Apostles did thus under the Jewish Law which was so exact in prescribing outward Ceremonies certainly we may do the same under the Gospel I may add that the Primitive Christians not only comply'd with the Jews in such Rites as were not forbidden but also had some ritual observations taken up by themselves Thus they (a) 1 Tim. 5.10 Ambros De Sacram. lib. 3. cap. 1. wash'd the Disciples feet in imitation of Christ and (b) Tertull De Orat. cap. 14. us'd Love-Feasts till they thought it convenient to lay them aside From whence it appears that prescription is not necessary to make a Rite lawful 't is enough if it be not forbidden If it be said that these usages of the Christian Church were civil observances and us'd as well out of God's worship as in it and therefore what there needed no institution for might be lawfully us'd without it I answer 1. That this justifies most of our usages for a white Garment was us'd in civil cases as a sign of Royalty and Dignity c. 2. A civil observance when us'd in Religious worship either remains civil when so apply'd or is religious when so apply'd If it be civil then kneeling in God's worship is not religious because 't is a posture us'd in civil matters If it be religious then a rite that is not prescrib'd may be us'd in worship to a religious end 3. 'T is evident that (c) Buxtorf Exere Hist S●c Caen. neither the washing of feet nor the holy Kiss were us'd as civil rites and that the latter is call'd by the Fathers the Seal of Prayer and the Seal of Reconciliation 4. If a rite's being civil makes it lawful in Divine worship then any civil rite may be us'd in worship and consequently all the ridiculous practices of the Church of Rome wou'd be warrantable 5. If a rite's being civil makes it lawful in worship then how can our Adversaries say that nothing is to be us'd in worship but what is prescrib'd by GOD except the Natural circumstances of action For there are many civil Rites which are not natural circumstances of action Feasting and Salutation are civil usages but Divine worship can be perform'd without them And if these and the like were antiently us'd in worship then we have the same liberty to introduce such customs 3. If things indifferent tho' not prescrib'd may not be lawfully us'd in God's worship then we cannot lawfully join with any Church in the World For all Churches do in some instances or other take the liberty of using what the Scripture has no where requir'd Thus the (d) Vid. August Epist 118 119. Basil De Sp. S. cap. 27. Ambros De Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 7. lib. 3. cap. 1. antients observ'd the Feasts of the Passion Resurrection c. Stood in their devotions on the Lord's Day c. These things they all agree'd in and thought it unlawful to act against an universal practice Besides some Churches had peculiar customs within the bounds of their own Communion The Church of Rome fasted on Saturdays others indifferently on any Day That of Milan wash'd the feet of persons to be Baptiz'd but that of Rome did not Thus in our daies some receive the Lord's Supper kneeling others standing c. So that if we must have an Institution for every thing done in the worship of God and if we must join in nothing which has it not then we cannot be members of any Church in the World Nor indeed can I learn how a Christian can with a good conscience perform any part of God's worship if this principle be admitted for true For habits and gestures are not determin'd in Scripture and God's worship cannot be perform'd without them and if they are unlawful for not being commanded then a man must sin every time he Praies or receives the Sacrament Nay those that condemn the use of such things as are not commanded do in their practice confute their opinion For where I pray are they commanded to sprinkle the Children that are Baptiz'd or to receive the Lord's Supper sitting or to use conceiv'd Prayers or to touch and kiss the Book in Swearing Or to enter into a particular Church-covenant Nay where do they find that the Scripture saith that there is nothing lawful in divine worship but what is prescrib'd or that what is not commanded is forbidden Where are we told that God will be angry with us for doing that which he has not forbidden Our brethren themselves will allow that the time and place of God's worship may be prescrib'd by Authority and why then may not necessary circumstances such as gestures and habits be thus determin'd tho' they be not commanded Certainly the command of a lawful power does not make that unlawful which was not forbidden and by consequence was lawful before They say indeed that Nadab and Abihu sinn'd because they offer'd strange fire before the Lord which he commanded them not c. Lev. 10.1 c. and therefore there must be a command to make any thing lawful in divine worship But to this I answer that the phrase not commanded is constantly apply'd to such things as are absolutely forbidden The fire also is call'd strange which phrase when apply'd to matters of worship signifies as much as forbidden Thus strange incense Exod. 30.9 24. is such as was forbidden because it was not rightly made strange vanities is but another word for strange Gods Jer. 8.19 and thus the fire of these Men was strange that is forbidden fire For there was scarce any thing belonging to the Altar of which more is said than of the fire burning upon it Lev. 9.24 6.12 16.12 'T was lighted from Heaven and was to be always burning When atonement was to be