Weighty questions discussed I. Whether imposition of hands in separating a person to the…

2dly. I think it is a good rule to help to understand the Scriptures, if one Text be obscure, and there be clearer texts in the Scripture speaking to the same thing: Carry the obscure Text to them, which are •lear. We have several clear Texts for Ordination with imposition of Hands, but not one now that gives the least shadow to prove such an Interpretation as this. It falls out very unhappily with some Men, saith Dr. Owen in another Case, who think they see some peculiar Opinion, in some singular Text of Scripture, and will not bring their Interpretation of it to the Analogy of Faith, and see how contrary it is to the Current of the word in other places.

2dly. I think it is a good rule to help to understand the Scriptures, if one Text be obscure, and there be clearer •exts in the Scripture speaking to the same thing: Carry the obscure Text to them, which are •lear. We have several clear Texts for Ordination with •mpositio• of Hands, but not one now that gives the least shadow to prove such an Interpre••tion as this. It falls out very unhappily with some Men, saith Dr. Owen in another Case, who think they see some peculiar Opinion, in some singular Text of Scripture, and will not bring their Interpretation of it to the Analogy of Faith, and see how contrary it is to the Current of the word in other places.

3dly. Paul knew how Imposition of Hands in separation to Office, came into the Jewish Church, by the positive Command of God, and how it continued in that Church. Secondly, He know the Practices of the Apostles. Now, Thirdly, He knew how he himself was separated. Fourthly, He can tell Timothy how he, i. e. Timothy, was separated, and charge him that he take care how he laid Hands upon others. Can any rational Man think, that Paul now would in these Churches, separate Man to Office without Imposition of Hands? I think no Rational Man will believe it. Why then is this Text abused?