Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	aaron_n	apostle_n	sacrifice_n	23	3	7.2672	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11886	Sacrilege sacredly handled That is, according to Scripture onely. Diuided into two parts: 1. For the law. 2. For the Gospell. An appendix also added; answering some obiections mooued, namely, against this treatise: and some others, I finde in Ios. Scaligers Diatribe, and Ioh. Seldens Historie of tithes. For the vse of all churches in generall: but more especially for those of North-Britaine.	Sempill, James, Sir, 1566-1625.	1619 (1619)	STC 22186; ESTC S117106	109,059	172

of Salem that is King of Peace Without Father without Mother without kindred and hath neither beginning of his dayes neither end of life but is likened to the Sonne of God and continueth a Priest for euer Now consider how great this man was vnto whom euen the Patriarch Abraham gaue the Tithe of the spoiles For verily they which are the children of Leui which receiue the office of Priest-hood haue a commandement to take according to the Law Tithes of the people that is of their brethren though they came out of the loynes of Abraham But he whose kindred is not counted among them receiued Tithes of Abraham and blessed him that had the promises And without all contradiction The lesse is blessed of the greater And heere men that dye receiue Tithes but there hee of whom it is witnessed That he liueth And to say as the thing is Leui also which receiueth Tithes payed Tithes in Abraham For he was yet in the Loynes of his Father when Melchisedec met him § II Now because this is our last re-encounter in this conflict Paul in the speciall of Tithes the last passage of all Scripture touching Tithes yea our A and ● reuiuing as by a circular course our neuer dying Melchis in our eternal Verity Christ wherein almost each word may goe for an argument we must therefore pierce a little more deeply in it by helpe of the same Spirit that proposeth it vnto vs and that so briefely as may be First then of his End next of his forme of arguing in this Chapter The chiefe End of this Epistle being to proue Christ our al-sufficient Sauiour King Prophet and Priest figured by the Law whose Ceremonies must therfore cease he handleth in this Chapter his Priest-hood only His course in arguing goeth from the Types to their Verities in a most perfect comparison both in simili and diss●mili The Types are two-fold the one moral perpetuall Melchisedec The other ceremonial and temporall Leui. Their natures are either simple in themselues or in Relation to their Verities Their Simple nature is that the Morall Type is noted heere with no Ceremoniall action for no such thing had he in him and the Ceremoniall Type with nothing Morall as he is compared heere to Christ in simili For though he also Tithed a Morall action yet it holdeth heere but in dissimili Their Relatiue nature with their Verities is of two § III considerations one from the matter of their actions Types how to be matched with their Verities another from the manner or their Orders In matter they hold both thus Whatsoeuer the Types did as Types the Verity must doe or answere being rightly matched as Aaron sacrificed Ergo so must Christ Aaron sacrificed with blood Ergo so must Christ But not Aaron sacrificed Bullocks Ergo so must Christ Our Golden rule in this is to goe no further then Scripture clearely leadeth vs and not from silence of the Apostles or priuatiue speeches to impose a positiue sacrifice of the Masse vpon Christ In manner or Order they hold not so Aarons and Melchisedecs Orders for whatsoeuer Christ did answering to Aaron yet that same did Christ after Melchisedecs Manner and Order not Aarons So that ONCE recorded only of Melchisedecs actions signifieth in Christ EVER and OFTEN to bee done and that OFTEN of Aarons actions signifieth in Christ ONCE onely yet that same ONCE ALL-sufficient in Melchisedecs Order For Perfection and Imperfection Perpetuitie and perishing are the Essentiall differences of their Orders So Christ in Melchisedecs Order perfected both Orders an heauenly difference and worthy to bee obserued Hebr. 7.8 9 10. chap. being fully cleared by the Apostle opposing that two thousand yeeres yeerely offering of Aaron to that One and Al-sufficient of CHRISTS And that ONCE blessing of Melchisedec of Abraham to that Euer blessing of CHRIST of Abraham and his posteritie Our conclusions then go thus through this Epistle from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Melchisedec to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Christ and from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Aaron to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Christ for these are the Apostles owne notes Againe hundrethes of Aarons with thousands of his associates thousands of yeeres and millions of redoubled actions binde but only Christ and Christ onely once they binde not the Ministery of the Gospell belonging to Christs Priest-hood But Melchisedecs one onely blessing designing his Priest-hood bindeth Christ euer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all his Ministery euer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 May we not hereupon inferre then that if Melchisedecs seruice binde our Ministery his maintenance must also be due to them We see then that Vnity or Pluralitie is not euer requisite to passe alike betweene Types and Verities either in Person or action for One as is said may argue thousands and thousands but One otherwise we shal roue to Rome-ward § IV Of these grounds then will it follow that whatsoeuer the Apostle vseth as a Medium to draw on any conclusion from these Types to their Verities it must bee euen as the Types either a Morall or a Ceremoniall thing and the conclusion must follow the nature of the Medium for Aarons sacrifice being Ceremoniall cannot bind a Morall Conclusion on Christ or his Ministery and consequently Tithing being vsed here as a Medium of a Morall and perpetuall Conclusion must it selfe be also Moral and perpetuall as by a true Analysis of our Apostles purpose in the texts cited shall plainly appeare CHAP. V. This Analysis proueth Christs Priest-hood more excellent then Leuies His proofes are from the prerogatiue of Person Blessing and Tithing THe Apostle will proue in those first eleuen verses § I Melchisedecs Order of Priest-hood whereof Christ was the onely High Priest and perfection to be farre aboue and better then the Order of Aaron and Leui and so in it selfe onely al-sufficient He setteth downe first his Priest-hood till the fourth verse then the Collation His Priesthood in two points Function and Order Melchisedecs endlesse Priesthood His Function vers 1. He was a Priest and blessed Abraham He was also accepted and acknowledged as a Priest vers 2. Because Abraham gaue him Tithes of all These two points are the summe and perfection of peaceably setled Priest-hood For Blessing after this sort heere being Real and exhibitiue is the End and perfection of all Priest-hood and Priestly Office for that Legall forme of blessing vnder Leui Num. 6.23 is but as a prayer for Blessing as we yet vse to this day and had no Ceremonie it And againe to giue Tithes as did Abraham heere is the most proper testification of our due obedience to Christs Ministers the very fruits of our faith And this for his Function Next vers 3. commeth his Order Dignitie and Excellency § II thereof Without Father Mother Kindred Beginning Ending like the Sonne of God Remaineth a Priest for euer Those strange notes must be applied and vnderstood as well

seemes Sacrilege most sweete As seruing for all lusts cloath drinke and meate And seldome ends where once it doth beginne Stolne goods seeme sweetest and what greater stealth Then cosen Christ by colour of a Law And all his Leuites liuings to withdraw Curse to the Kirk wrack to the Common-wealth The faithfull childe he feares his Fathers rod He sayes He sweares he shall not do 't againe But these pernicious persons and profane They feare not though they feele the plagues of God Poore Sacrilegious soules Repent Amend And proue not Achans in your latter end DAV DICKSONI In Sacram hanc Sacrilegij confutationem QVo decimas cumules ad opes opes ad honores Quo tibi opes honor quo mihi vita petis Ah nescis nec scire cupis quibus ista parentur Res decus vere uita beata modis Qui se posse putat spolijs ditescere Divûm Desipit rem augens dissipat ipse suam Iacob c. 5. v. 2. Aerugo en nummos vestes tinca horrea vermes Consumunt solus non tamen ista vides Decidet iniustas per opes qui captat honores Nam pennas Aquilae miscuit ipse suis Sint tibi opes sit honos miserum tamen esse necesse est Sejani infaustum quisquis equum retinet Malac. c. 3. v. 10. Ergo vt haec atque his maiora tibique tuisque Perpetuo constent redde Deo decimas EIVSDEM CReditus Antaeus ferro inuiolabilis olim est Dum Tellus vitam quam dederat reparat Cautior Alcides vim fati vt perspicit vlnis Tollit humo caesum Pendulus ecce perit Sacrilegam simili fato qua sacra profanat Harpriam peperit subdola Auaritia Saepe hominum haec telis cecidit iam saepe reuixit Matris ope vacua est tandem hominum pharetra Sed Tu tela Dei torques super astraque rap●as Matre procul Macte haec qua pereat ratio est Aliud FAtere tandem victus es Quicuunque captus illice Odore lucri splendido Sacra temerauisti dolo Fatere furtum candide Quod arte lege vi minis Tectum volebas hactenus Nec amplius praetexe Ius Huc vsque iura ludere Et fraude Ius propellere Et lege Legem scindere Tibi licebat in foro Sed iustus orbis arbiter Tandem reclusit ius suum Et Sacra iure vendicat Sacro quis audet hiscere Faults escaped PAge 41. line vlt. for Word reade World p. 62. l. 10. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 64. l. 1. for new r. meere p. 69. marg l. vlt. for Tithing r. Priest-hood p. 76. l. 20. r. at a Priesthood p. 90. marg l. vlt. for Vernus r. Vernas p. 98. l. 17. r. May not Leuies hired seruants labour Leuies lands In the Appendix PAge 11. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 13. l. 23 for how r. howsoeuer p. 15. l. 7. r. such as are first p. 16. l 19. for presently r. presented p. 27. l. vlt. for leauing r. leauying and for enioyning r. enioying p. 28. l. 8. for either r. rather p. 38. l. 6. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also l. 15. SACRILEGE SACREDLY HANDled according to onely Scripture First For the Law THE FIRST PART CHAP. I. The Etymologie and subiect of Sacrilege Sacrilege heere specially meant of Tithes Church maintenance diuided defined SACRILEGE is from Sacra and Legere § I Legere heere is to Gather Etymologie of Sacrilege and not to Reade holy things for lacke of reading or at least of vnderstanding increaseth this Gathering And though a holy gathering both may and must bee hauing God for the head-gatherer his Ministery as his Officers for gathering his holy people to his heauenly foldes his Patrimony to bee gathered by them as the life of their labours yet our Christian world so ouerfloweth with heapes of vnholy and godlesse gatherers that Sacrilege now signifieth nothing but filthy profanation of holy things To know this sinne well then wee must first know what are the sacred and holy things wherein hee hath his being § II Things or Creatures sacred are either by Creation or Separation Subiect of Sacrilege By Creation heauenly Angels earthly Man to his owne Image By Separation holy are such of all his earthly creatures as are separated from prophane or common vse to Gods seruice Things separat to this holy vse are generally fiue First A forme of worsh p to be done answering How or What. Secondly Time When. Thirdly Place Where Fourthly Person Who. And last Maintenance for his calling Of all these fiue is Sacrilege cōmitted whensoeuer any point is with-holden from the vse it is ordained for § III But to come to that point wherof we minde to treat it signifieth onely Sacrilege of Tithes with-holding of Maintenance the thiefe-exercise of men of our age chiefly where the light is greatest and the Person greatest Any Religion will rob their Gods but a Sacrilegious Protestant surpasseth all So that no man now in shew more religious then some who in substance bee most Sacrilegious that is Sac-religi●us for that Religion feedeth best their soule that filleth best their sack A greedie kind of Gospellers Pharisaically proud of their profession Luke 18.12 all saue one thing The Pharisie vaunted that he gaue Tithes of all he had they will not if they can giue the Tithes of any thing they haue The Gospell should be preached purely therefore the Preachers liue Poorely Almes for Maintenance § IIII But Scripture giueth a two-fold Maintenance from God immediatly Maintenance diuided or from mans Liberalitie from God either Perpetuall or Temporall Maintenance § V Perpetuall whereby God from all beginning till the end of the world Maintenance defined Num. 18 20.2i prouided for the whole Ministerie of his worship in generall and called euer in Scr●pture Gods inheritance viz. the first Tithing Temporall whereby God prouided in speciall for such a seruice such an Officer and such a period of time So were the portions of the Sacrifices c. a part of Leuies Maintenance for his ceremoniall seruice Maintenance flowing from Man is when Gods inheritance being first set apart Hee separateth any thing from the common vse to the Lord of all that he hath Leuit. 27.28 Of these two sorts of Maintenance maketh Sacrilege his chiefe muster which in proper speech in place of Sacrilegium Holy gathering should haue said Rom. 2.22 Sacri-furtum holy theft or Sacri-raptum holy robbery Pauls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this for his Etymologie followeth his nature and Definition CHAP. II. Sacrilege defined diuided Some obiections answered SAcrilege by Scripture defined is a Leuit. 5.15 22.14 A taking away § I of things consecrated vnto the Lord. Sacrilege Defined Diuided It is done either of b Ibid. Ignorance or knowledge If by Ignorance it craued by the Law both Restitution and

Iaacob Gen. 49.7 and scatter them in Israel to wit for teaching the people Gods Law not tyed Onely to that Tabernacle Act. 15.21 c. 2. Chro. 11.14 For Moyses in olde time hath in euery City them that preach him c. This point is Generall Morall and so Perpetuall deriued from the first Adam and by course prorogued to the second comming of the second Adam The second point of their function To put incense c. A seruice indeed Ceremoniall because tyed to the Tabernacle Onely beginning and ending with Leui. Then Morall scattered seruices craue euer a like Maintenance and Ceremoniall tyed seruice the like also and during the Law one Officer Leui discharging both the Morall and Ceremoniall seruices did eate of both sorts of Maintenance And this for proofe of the first point The Onely Tabernacle was not Leuies whole function The second point That Tithes were giuen them for § III their whole function not for one part and also to the whole Tribe and not one part thereof and chiefly if there be any ods to that scattered part and Morall seruice it is proued by the same text brought against vs as shal best appeare by a true Analysis of that whole Chap. Num. 18. Three degrees of Leuites The Tribe of Leui being distinguished by order of Office in High-Priest Priest and inferiour Leuites he setteth downe in this Chapter the Office of all and the Maintenance for all Their offices mixtly from verse 1. till 8. from 8. till 20. their maintenance common to the Priests but not to inferiour Leuites Nehem. 10.37 From 20. till 25. he setteth downe their common maintenance viz. Tithes Inheritance proper to the whole Tribe now because the Leuites were restrained from the portions of the Priests Vpon Deut. 12.6.17 Lyra and others conclude that Tithes heere are only for the inferiour Leuites exempting the Priests But the text is ill taken vp so for from the beginning till ver 20. he treateth only of the Priests Ceremoniall seruice touching Sacrificing and of the Ceremoniall maintenance which ariseth from the sacrifices and offrings in which Inferior Leuites had small handling and so as small a portion But from 20. he setteth downe their Inheritance by the onely name of Tithes This for Lyras guessing Anti 3. lib. 4. cap. 4. C. vita Ioseph fol. 534 I. in the English translation to whom we oppose Iosephus both a Iew and a Leuite yea of the Priests plainely allotting Tithes both to Priest and Leuites So to ascribe Gods inheritance to the least officers only hath no better warrant then Deliria Lyrae § IV But to climbe the tree of Knowledge by the owne true branches Tithes due to the whole Tribe Num. 18.20.21 heare what the Scripture saith Abraham gaue Tithes first to Melchisedec euen a great Priest before the Law And vnder the Law the Lord said to Aaron Thou sh lt haue none Inheritance in their Land I am thy Inherita●ce And I haue giuen all the tenth of Israel for an Inheritance to the children of Leui. Shall not Aaron the High-Priest and the children of Leui comprehend the whole Tribe Further seeing the Priests heere are debarred all ciuill Inheritance as well as the Leuites why should they not liue of the Ecclesiastick as well as Leui Againe Neh. 10.37.38 Nehemiah with the people made a couenant to giue the Tithes of their Land vnto the Leuites in all the Cities of their trauell And a Priest the sonne of Aaron shal be with the Leuites when the Leuites take Tithes Some thinke this Priest the sonne of Aaron was but an ouerseer of Leuies Tithing that by their portion hee might know the true proportion of Decimae Decimarum which the Leuites were to take vp to Ierusalem and giue to his Father Aaron I rather hold with some others that the Priests heere were partners with the Leuites in Tithes Inheritance And that this Priest was not one single person for how could one man ouersee all the Leuites Tithing at one time in all the corners of the Countrey but a Priest in each place lifting for his brethren Priests as the Leuites for theirs in the Cities of their residence for they were mixed and dwelt together But if the Priests had no part in these Tithes tell vs whereupon they liued all that time of the yeere they remained at home out of Ierusalem They were diuided in foure and twentie Classes each Classe serued in his turne but for a Sabbath so each Classe came but twice a yeere so it seemeth they liued abroad some eight and fortie weekes and no part of oblations or sacrifices might be transported nor eaten out of Ierusalem Iudicent doctiores But heere they obiect Ios 13.14 The sacrifices of the Lord God of Israel are the Inheritance of the Tribe of Leui as he said vnto § V him So this word Inheritance Sacrifices not properly Inheritance maketh no more for perpetuall Tithing then for perpetuall Sacrificing For this Tremellius wisely noteth this speech to be both Synecdochicall in putting Sacrifices for all sorts of Offrings whereof Tithes was one And Metonymicall in putting Things consumed by fire for things reserued from fire Againe seeing these things were onely eaten by the Priests and their Families and onely at Ierusalem as all Scripture testifieth it is most cleare that Sacrifices were not Inheritance for the whole Tribe And 18. 7. But Iosua explaineth all this in the last of this same Chapter For the Lord God of Israel is their Inheritance as hee said vnto them Marke these last words as he said vnto them This he said onely in Num. 18. and there only Tithes are the Lords Inheritance and that for the whole Tribe as is said The very like Synecdoche is in that speech of gisting the Tithes for their seruice in the Tabernacle of the Congregation where Tithes were as due if not more for their scattered seruice But seeing the principall seruice of the Law was Typicall and Ceremoniall Moyses had reason to talke in Typicall and Ceremoniall termes as by Tabernacle to comprehend their whole seruice and that very iustly seeing all their seruice was discharged in but not onely in the Tabernacle This Synecdoche is frequent to this word Tabernacle of the Congregation for it being properly but that place where the Priests serued yet is it extended to Sanctum Sanctorum where Aarons rod was as in the Chapter proceeding vers 4.7 compared with Hebr. 9.4 and Leuit. 10.9 and Numb 1.49 c. § VI But how is Leui said to haue no Inheritance amongst their brethren How Leui is said to haue no inheritance seeing both of their labours and from their hands they receiue their Tithes and so seeme more to bee mixed among the Tribes then any one Tribe with another First I thinke because they had no such portion of the Land as they secondly for the different prerogatiue of their portions and tenures The Israelites

found in their Hebrew copies shenith hamaigsher which they tooke for the second Tithe knowing that in truth that place meant no other But how sha●l we know this that their Hebrew copies did beare the words so we haue none of them now And were their authoritie neu●r so great shall we rely rather vpon their vnknowne copies then the Authenticke receiued text Selden Diuers passages in their Translations are vpon such differences and they oftentimes giue thence Ibid a kinde of Commentarie as well as a Translation So are they in many places both different and defectiu● And if they knew so well as you alledge the true meaning of that place of Deut. as they would eue● rectifie so that text why did they not also either conforme Tobits text to it in reading or reconcile them by Commenting Is not this of Deut the onely place which distinctly points out these three Tithes Yet the Septuagint make the 23. vers but as an Exegesis of the former verse and so turnes both a Feasting and turnes the Leuites to fasting Shall this goe for good coyne too or for a Shekle of the Sanctuarie Ibid. Selden Neither is it ill context that shenith of the foeminine gender should be ioyned to Ma●●sher of the masculine It is not without frequent example in holy writ This frequencie should haue been shewed by some few specially in the very word in q estion Maigsher which is so frequent in Scripture and yet I hope neuer so mixed No doubt but all Languages haue their owne Anomalies but by confusion of a gender to confound two Tithings such context destroyes the text And so much concerning our Diuision of Tithes differing from Scaliger and Selden vnder the Law Followeth concerning the Gospell with Selden onely THE HISTORIE OF TITHES WRITTEN BY MASTER IOH. SELDEN CHAP. I. IN this matter of Tithes M. Selden intending no more then an Historie to relate as it were all things but iudge nothing as Chap. 7. pag 174. hath so painfully and learnedly performed it as I who can adde nothing to it will detract nothing in or from it Meane while I must craue pardon in following his History so farre onely as Scripture carrieth him to diue a little deeper in the true Mystery and End of things lest the common and carelesse Reader by the naked name of History might conceiue there were no more in it but Hodie mihi cras tibi For though M. Selden hath giuen vs veram Historiam as he found it recorded yet haec ipsa Historia non est vera but leaueth dangerous insinuations and preiudicial impressions in Ius diuinum and therefore as Hee said iustly in his Title-page Sumpsimus arma Consilijs inimica tuis Ignauia fallax I may as truely say heere Sumpsimis arma Consiliis inimica tuis Historia fallax but in rem non personam IT was well therefore obserued by Learned Antiquitie that in Scripture texts for most part foure things may be or must be considered First History that is a simple narration of what is done Secondly Artiologie that is The Reason why such things were so and so done Thirdly Allegorie that is When one thing is pickt out to point at another by some mysticall signification as are Types of their Verities Fourthly Anagogie that is a forcible Conclusion transferring all things represented by the Type in and vpon the prefigured Veritie which last as Prophecies and Reuelations are neuer perfectly perceiued till they be fully performed All these foure points foresaid are most considerable in the matter of our question specially in Melchisedec and Abrahams practise and Iacobs Vow before the Law and in Dauids prophecie and Pauls application after the Law The onely naked and simple Historie is in Genes 14. IT and all the other three are fully in Hebr. 7. There beginneth he w th 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For this Melchisedec c. he was euen likened to the Son of God vers 3. and remaineth a Priest for euer Heere then the Cause of this meeting of Melchisedec with Abraham was To point and paint out the Eternall Priest-hood of Christ the Allegorie of his names and offices he explaineth in the first three verses His Anagogie and Conclusion hee hath vers 13. as wee haue at length obserued The like may be applied to Aaron and all Types keeping euer true Scripture limits in all To our purpose then Abraham M. Selden cap. 1. §. 1. gaue Melchisedec Tithe of all c. but what that All was is not cleerely agreed vpon it is taken to be Of all that he had as the ordinary Glosse of Salomon Iarchi there interprets and so expresly are the Syriaque and Arabique translations of the new Testament where this is spoken of But it is hard to conceiue it of any other All that he had then All the substance or All the Spoiles that he had by that expedition So did Iosephus the Targum vnderstand it c. Here wee finde two different opinions The first that no Tith of Spoiles are here meant To this wee haue answered par 2. chap. 8. § 1. The other is That M. Selden here will haue nothing Tithed but Spoiles both are too restraining As for the Authorities here alleadged for both opinions two for each I hold the first two brought by M. Selden for All hee had as good as the other two for All onely Spoiles We goe on M. Selden Ibid. And to free it from all doubt saith he The holy Author of the Epistle to the Hebrewes first vsing the text of Genesis in those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Tithe of all after a f●we words interposed explaines it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Tithe of the Spoiles as if he had saide 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Tithe of all the Spoiles But why must either those two be ioyned or the one abbridge the extent of the other Paul here expl●ineth all things but restraineth nothing That they cannot be ioyned ●is cleare For Pauls first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath not onely a few words interposed two whole verses but is also diuided from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a d fferent preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the former whereof is a plaine enlarging of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as who should say Behold how great this Melchisedec was to whom Abraham the Patriarch gaue a Tithe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen of the Spoiles So Spoiles was specially brought in in this last which might haue seemed doubtful in the generalitie of the first But that other preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot admit a coniunctiue reading of both for that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is still more d●iunctiue and to ●core out both Co●iunction and Preposition thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It were but a Caption a Diuisis ad Coniuncta ●co●ing out All in Genesis All in Iacobs Vowe and All vnder the Lawe by coupling All