Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	king_n	know_v	word_n	1,874	5	3.7805	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B04938	A poem on the test dedicated to His Royal Highnes the Duke of Albanie.	Paterson, Ninian, d. 1688.	1683 (1683)	Wing P701A; ESTC R181526	32,197	41

be the proper meaning of the Mishpat Hameleck in 1 Sam. 8 11. That a King not only de jure may but will in case of necessity require the goods of his subjects without any suspition of Tyranny or oppression And my arguments for this my opinion are 1. Because as I find the word Mishpat translated here and else where manner and Custome so I find it also oftentimes translated Judgment Statute Law or Right Judgment or Right from Shapat judicavit therefore may be translated the Kings Right or Prerogative Royal for this is its most proper signification as its original imports so Iudg. 16 31. He judged Israel twenty years Id est Rex erat qui jure justitia vindicaverat As Buxtorf on the word Shapat pag. 838. And so in many other places there cited to which I referre the doubter And the word Mishpat is taken many times so Psal 105 5. Ier. 4 12. Psal 72 1. The word signifies both the Sentence of a Judge and the Right that is done to a man by that Sentence as is observed by the excellent Drusius on Ioel 3 2. This being its most proper signification but the word Custome and manner but Metaphoricall there is great reason we should rather read it the Kings Right and accordingly the Vulgar hes turned it jus Regis And Iunius and Tremellius 1 Sam. 10 25. which we call the manner of the Kingdom hes turned it jus Regni so we read of a place Gen. 14 7. called Enmishpat the Fountain of Judgment as the King may properly be called And the septuagint turns this Mishpat into dikaioma tou basileos which word dikaiomad if we beleeve Beza on Rom. 1 32. will signifie sometime legem naturae vel jus gentium 2. Consider we what it was the Israelites sought it was not a Tyrant but a King Rescripta sunt interpretanda juxta petita according to the rule in the civil Law except we would say of God according to that Mat. 7 10. when we Ask a Fish he will give us a Serpent which is horrid blasphemy 3. Why should Samuel say this was the peculiar maner of Kings Is not this the custome of any other judges and Magistrats as well as of Kings to degenerat some times and be Tyrannical as we see what Iotham sayes of Abimeleck Iudg. 9 14. That he was become a Bramle in stead of a Vine See also what was said of the Sons of Eli and Samuel that were no Kings 1 Sam. 2 16. That they turn'd cruel Tyrannical Base and oppressive so that men abhorred the Offering of the Lord 1 Sam. 8 3. It s said of his Son that he turned aside after Lucre took brybes and perverted judgment Why then should this be called the maner of Kings only since it 's also incident to inferior Magistrats and perhaps much more 4. I would gladly know if by the maner of the King and Kingdom 1 Sam. 8. verss 11. and 10. and 25. Any thing that is unjust and unlawful be mean'd as Tyranny and oppression as in their opinion the words must needs importe Do they think that the excellent Samuel should have taken the paines to have written these unjust Laws in a Register and laid them up beside the Ark of the Covenant Or rather if we believe Iosephus lib. 6. antiquit Iud. Cap. 5. in the Ark it self for a perpetual memorial Nay he is so just a judge would have rather caused burn and destroy all these monuments of iniquity Wherefore this Mishpat Hameleck cannot be rationally supposed to involve any Tyrannical exactions or oppression of the People as they expone it Samuel to make a Law for oppression a man both wise and holy and to consigne it to that publick and holy repository being a monument of iniquity to preserve it to the knowledge and use of the posterity I hope scarce any sober man will be induced to admit it amongst the least atomes of his beliefe 5. I would know in effect if David Salomon and all the rest of the Kings of Iudah and Israel did not all this that is here exprest And yet no where are accused of Tyranny Had ' not they their Tables in times of peace magnificently and splendidly furnished which is intimat here by taking their Sons and Daughters to be confectioners and Cooks Had not they in time of war their Horses Chariots Footmen and Captains and Souldiers of all ranks And what disparadgment is that to be the Kings Servants who himself is the representative of God unto us And by the way we have a remarkable instance of this in Salomon who 2 Chron. 9 25. Is said to have had 4000 Stalls for Horses and the 1 King 4 26. He is said to have had fourty thousand Stalls for Horses the word translated Stalls is different in the Original yet only a Iod added And signifies either a particular standing for one Horse or else a Stable having in it many such standing places Tho I have heard some Fools bogle at this yet it may be reconciled considering 4000 Stables with ten Stalls a piece and each holding ten Horses will make just fourty thousand We read also 2 Chron. 1 14. He had 1400 Chariots and 12000 Horse-men that attended him in State But consider with me what a laborious and vast work he had in building of the Temple of God and of his own Palaces And how many Horses that great work would need And how many Queens and Concubins he had and what a number of attendants both of pride and necessity they would require Or consider also how provident so wise a man would be in case of warr In which case we read the Philistins brought to the Field 1 Sam. 13 5. thirty thousand Chariots and would Salomon think you be behind with them on these considerations It had been unjust to have imputed that to Salomon either as Tyranny or oppression But certainly rather it was the jus Regium his prerogative Royal to have and maintaine them And altho in the most strict sence these things be the Kings prerogative yet good and gracious Kings make use only of their prerogatives as Christ did of his Miracles meerly in cases of necessity and for the publict good to which they will make their Pomp and State subservient Omne culmen attigit Virtutis altae qui timeri se timet Amore fidens qui patrem se non herum Studet Vocari Baudius And for these passages of Ezekiel of Achab and the tenths bestowed on the Levits they are easily answered by what is said allready For 1. that of Ezekiel is thou shall not take away the possession of the subject by oppression not in case of necessity and conveniency of State Therefore Ezek. 44 9. what in one part of that same verse is called exactions in the other it is called violence and spoile There exactions being neither with justice nor moderation Ezek. 46 18. It s also clear as the Beames of the Sun the Prince shall not

learned Brissonius de regio Persarum principatu 5. The prerogative of the Germans out of Tacitus de moribus Germanorum 6. Of the French out of Caesar de bello Gallico lib. 7. Out of all which by a judicious and serious Reader might be collected a full complete Volume of the prerogatives of all Nations Which if it be yet done in whole or in part I know not Only I could wish this would animat the generous attempt of some learned head but this being the work rather of a Lawyer then a divine and not belonging to our design but by way of annotation and digression Let these few remarckes suffice An Appendix concerning the Kings Treasure as a consequent of his Prerogative HE that walkes on the Battelments of Soveraignity had need of some massy weight to keep him steddy A poor Governour as Euripides sayeth being a scorn to Authority and a burden to the People Wherefore in all ages to support their Prerogative either in peace or warr it hes been the laudable Custome of all Kings to masse up a great store of treasure Hence nothing so celebrated amongst all Authors as the Gaza Persica Quintus Curtius in his 5 Book describs it and Isod lib. 20.9 and the 70 retain ordinarly the word Gaza as Esth 4 7. Haman vow'd to pay ten thousand Talents of Silver to the Kings treasure which in English money will amount to three millions fifty thousand and seven hundreth pounds ô Pride O Revenge How dear guests are ye Pomponius Mela in his first Book of Geographie confounds Gaza a Town in Palestin with Gaza a treasure or at least sayes he the one had the name from the other not considering that Gaza a Town with the Hebrews is writen with Hajin a treasure with Gimel In the Scriptures also we read of the treasures of Egypt The treasures of the Kings of Israel and Iudah 2 Kings 18 15. and 20 13. and 39 2 4. 2 Chron. 36 18. Ezeck 28 4. Dan. 11 43. Neh. 13 12. The Latine word Thesaurus imports the providence of a Prince eis-aurion tithenai to lay up something for to morrow See Scaliger derives aurum from oorein custodire They have other two words also Fiscus And aerarium But with this difference as Budeus observes that aerarium is pecunia publica imperii but Fiscus is pecunia Imperatoris Fiscus a Fisu quod eo ad vitam degendam subsidio homines fidere soleant As in the Hebrew Mammon from Emunah fides The word aerarium is from aes aeris because the first money used by the Romans was Brasse as Plin. lib. 3. cap. 33. and their casting their Accompts was likewise with Brass pieces which we call Compters called by the Ancients aera Of this way of compting and of the aera a Reckoning see Scaliger de emendatione temporum lib. 5. Where he alleadges what they called aera we now call item The Scripture makes mention not only of the treasures of Heathen Princes as Ezra 5 17. and 6 1. But also God allowed a treasurie in his Church Mark 12 41. Luk. 21 1. Ioh. 8 20. These things spoke Iesus in the treasurie What this treasurie was ye will read it explained by Shindler in his Lexicon in the word Lishcah and by Caspar Waserus who hes written learnedly on that subject de pecuniarum repositoriis Amongst Politicians the question is not of the Lawfulness but of the expediency of Princes treasures Some court-flatterers with the fox in the fable intending to cheat the crow of his cheefe they will tell the Prince that his glory stands rather in his bounty then his baggs and will confirm it by the examples of Alexander and Caesar who by their generous and oblidging liberality did atchive great matters that Sardanapalus left ten millions to them that murdered him Nero gave above 12 millions to them that flattered him which gifts Galba afterward did revocke But they consider not that these great and warlyk Princes as Alexander and Caesar were liberal rather out of the spoils of their enemies then their own treasuries But it is certain that a Prince that is not this way provident shall never be able to defend his prerogative and maintain his right but fall under contempt and danger the effect of Poverty as by many pregnant instances might be proven See a treatise intituled Englands treasure by forraign Trade by Thomas Mun Londoner Appendix 2. Concerning a peculiar Prerogative THere is a peculiar Prerogative mercifully and miraculously granted by God unto some Princes as to the Kings of Brittain and some say the French King too to heale that disease Scrofula commonly called the Kings evil So Plutarch in the life of Pyrrhus affirmes that he cured all these that were diseased of the Spleen with a touch of his foot only And Swetonius in Vespasian Cap. 7. makes mention that a blind man and a crooked at least debili crure as he speakes were both restored by the Emperour to intire health the one by spitting in his Eye the other by a touch of his Heel So divine a prerogative hes but the touche of the worst part of a Prince Which made not only a confirmation but an accession both to his Majesty and authority And that Princes by vertue of their Office are indued from Heaven with a Sagacity more then ordinary as in King Iames's finding out the poweder plot is consented to by all interpreters to be Solomons meaning in Prov. 16 10. a divine sentence some reads it Prophesie or divination See Petrus Molinaeus decus illud Theologorum as Spanhemius calls him in his 1 Book de praecognitione futurorum Cap. 20. Where he not only brings in the instance of Solomon deciding betwixt the two whoors but of one Ariopharnes King of the Thracians who when the King of the Cymmerians was dead and three contending for the Succession all pretending to be Sons to the defunct whereas it was certain he had left only one Son being elected Arbiter of the contention commanded the body of the dead King to be hanged on a Tree and appointed the three to shoot with Arrows and who came nearest to his Heart should obtain the Kingdom the first shot through the Shoulder the next through the Arm the thrid abhorring so unnatural an experiment was content rather to lose the Kingdom then to mangle the Corps of his Father And to him he adjudged the Crown the Story is in Diodorus Siculus By Ezekia David Solomon all which ye will see cited and cleared from their particular places of Scripture by Seth Ward Lord Bishop of Sarum his Sermon before the King against resistance of Lawfull powers the first of his six Sermons Printed Anno 1672. CHAP. VI. Concerning Melchisedeck who he was GReat hes been the toil of learned Men in all ages both Jews and Gentiles to loose this knot and some after all their labour have concluded the mystery not only profound but incomprehensible alleadging where the great Apostle makes difficulty the