A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's worship. Or a triplication unto. D.…A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D.…

A further reason of this conclusion was added: viz: then most of the other Tribes should have had use of it, and also reason, to have set up Altars of devotion at every three-way-leet, as Crosses stand. The Rejoinder is 1. that the other Tribes (no doubt) had use of it, as of a witness that the Lord is God. Now let any man consider, whether they which ordinarily resorted to the Tabernacle, and Altar of God, had need of a humane Altar, far removed from their sight, to put them in mind, that the LORD was God? And whether the two Tribes and a half, without the consent, or knowledge of the chief Priests, the chief Magistrates, the far greater part of people, and power to appoint unto all Israel a solemn significant Ceremony, for their common use? The Rej. addeth in the 2. place, that all are not bound to the same helps to devotion, and the other tribes needed no such monument, or pattern, having the Altar it self in possession. Where 1. except he holdeth the two Tribes, and a half bound to set up this Altar, he maketh in that no difference: if he so holdeth, then it is no instance of a ⟨p. 426⟩mere Arbitrary Ceremony. 2. The two tribes had the Lords Altar in present possession, as well as divers of the other: so that by this reason, they also for the present need no such monument and pattern: which is the very point in this place questioned.

A further reason of this conclusion was added: viz: then most of the other Tribes should have had use of it, and also reason, to have set up Altars of devotion at every three-way-leet, as Crosses stand. The Rejoynder is 1. that the other Tribes (no doubt) had use of it, as of a witnesse that the Lord is God. Now let any man consider, whether they which ordinarily resorted to the Tabernacle, and Altar of God, had need of a humane Altar, farre remooved from their sight, to put them in minde, that the LORD was God? And whether the two Tribes and a halfe, without the consent, or knowledge of the chiefe Priests, the chiefe Magistrates, the farre greater part of people, and power to appoint vnto all Israel a solemne significant Ceremonie, for their common use? The Rej. addeth in the 2. place, that all are not bound to the same helpes to devotion, and the other tribes needed no such monument, or patterne, having the Altar it selfe in possession. Where 1. except he holdeth the two Tribes, and a halfe bound to set up this Altar, hee maketh in that no difference: if hee so holdeth, then it is no instance of a ⟨p. 426⟩