A09383:104
A commentary or exposition, upon the five first chapters of the Epistle to the…A commentarie or exposition, vpon the fiue first chapters of the Epistle to the…
A commentary or exposition, upon the five first chapters of the Epistle to the Galatians: penned by the godly, learned, and judicial divine, Mr. W. Perkins. Now published for the benefit of the Church, and continued with a supplement upon the sixth chapter, by Rafe Cudworth Bachelor of DivinityA commentarie or exposition, vpon the fiue first chapters of the Epistle to the Galatians: penned by the godly, learned, and iudiciall diuine, Mr. W. Perkins. Now published for the benefit of the Church, and continued with a supplement vpon the sixt chapter, by Rafe Cudworth Bachelour of Diuinitie
Cambridge: printed by John Legat, 1604Cambridge: printed by Iohn Legat, 1604
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The third point is, the supposition of things impossible, on this manner. Put the case, that I Paul, or any other of the Apostles, should teach otherwise then I have taught you: neither I nor they must be believed, but be accursed. Again, put the §35case, that an angel from heaven should come and preach, otherwise then Paul preached to the Galatians, who must be believed? Paul, or the Angel? the answer is, not the Angel, but Paul: and the angel must be accursed. And the reason is, because Paul in preaching and writing, did represent the authority ⟨p. 27⟩of God, and God puts his own authority into the word which he uttered: and he was assisted by the extraordinary, immediate, and infallible assistance of Gods spirit. From this supposition, sundry things may be learned. The first, that the word preached and written by Paul, is as certain, as if it had bin written by God himself, immediately. It may be objected, that §5Paul saith, 1. Cor. 7. 12. To the remnant, I speak, not the Lord. I answer, Paul saith, I, not the Lord, not because he was deceived in his advise, for he spake by the spirit of God, c. 7. v. 40. but because he gave counsel in a case of marriage, whereof the Lord had made no express law. The meaning then is this, I speak §10by collection from the law of God, and not the Lord, by any particular and express law.
The third point is, the fupposition of things impossible, on this manner. Put the case, that I Paul, or any other of the Apostles, should teach otherwise then I haue taught you: neither I nor they must be beleeued, but be accursed. Againe, put the §35case, that an angell from heauen should come and preach, otherwise then Paul preached to the Galatians, who must be beleeued? Paul, or the Angel? the answer is, not the Angell, but Paul: and the angel must be accursed. And the reason is, because Paul in preaching and writing, did represent the authoritie ⟨p. 27⟩of God, and God puts his owne authoritie into the word which he vttered: and he was assisted by the extraordinarie, immediate, and infallible assistance of Gods spirit. From this supposition, sundrie things may be learned. The first, that the word preached and written by Paul, is as certen, as if it had bin written by God himselfe, immediately. It may be obiected, that