A19142:1555
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 fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's worship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgess his rejoinder for D. Morton The first partA fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part
Amsterdam: printed by the successors of Giles Thorp, 1633
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.
3. For dividing of beasts, in covenant-making, he bringeth Gen. 15. and Jer. 34. But in the first place, it is manifest, that God did immediately, and extraordinarily appoint it; and that in such a manner, as can never be showed in any idolatrous use among Heathens, much less before Abraham's time. In the second, there seemeth only to be an allusion of phrase: because in all the solemn Covenants which we read of in the History of the Jews, made, or renewed, we never find any mention of this manner; though circumstances of far less moment are recorded distinctly. But if it was a real act, ⟨p. 498⟩it is most likely, that the question then in hand, being about the freedom of Abraham's Children, which belonged to that Covenant confirmed unto Abraham, Gen. 15. they were by the Prophet directed, to use the same kind of sacrifice. Howsoever, it cannot be proved a mere human Ceremony: nor yet a mere Ceremony: because it was a sacrifice, as all grant. Beside, to ground so large a conclusion upon one dark phrase, is fitter for the Patrons of Purgatory (who allege therefore, trial by fire, and baptizing for the dead) then for the Rejoinder.
3. For dividing of beasts, in covenant-making, he bringeth Gen. 15. and Ier. 34. But in the first place, it is manifest, that God did immediately, and extraordinarily appoint it; and that in such a manner, as can never be shewed in any idolatrous use among Heathens, much lesse before Abrahams time. In the second, there seemeth onely to be an allusion of phraze: because in all the solemne Covenants which we read of in the History of the Iewes, made, or renewed, we never finde any mention of this manner; though circumstances of farre lesse moment are recorded distinctly. But if it was a reall act, ⟨p. 498⟩it is most likely, that the question then in hand, being about the freedome of Abrahams Children, which belonged to that Covenant confirmed unto Abraham,