A42757:353
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversy concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiastical government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlessness of the chief objections made against the Presbyterial government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversie concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiasticall government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlesnesse of the chief objections made against the Presbyteriall government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...
London: printed by E.G. for Richard Whitaker, 1646
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.
Twelfthly, compare Ezra 6. 21. with Ezra 10. 16, 17. First it is marked Ezra 6. 21. that such proselytes did eat the Passover with the children of Israel, as had separated themselves unto them from the filthiness of the Heathen of the Land, to seek the Lord God of Israel. If those who did eat were thus qualified, it is not obscurely intimated, that those who were not thus qualified did not eat. And if no proselyte who did not separate himself from the filthiness of the Heathen, was allowed to eat the Passover, then much less was an Israelite who did not separate himself from the filthiness of the Heathen, allowed to eat it. I like well Bede his observation upon Ezra 10. 16, 17. Israel was purged from unlawful marriages, and the strange wives put away; and this work was ended against the beginning of the first month, to the intent that none defiled with unlawful marriages might eat the Passeover, Ut ante initium mensis primi consummarentur omnes qui prophano erant connubio maculati, id est a tali scelere purgarentur, quatenus ipsum mensem primum in quo erat pascha faciendum, mundi intrarent, mundi paschalia festa peragerent &c.
Twelfthly, compare Ezra 6. 21. with Ezra 10. 16, 17. First it is marked Ezra 6. 21. that such proselytes did eate the Passeover with the children of Israel, as had separated themselves unto them from the silthinesse of the Heathen of the Land, to seeke the Lord God of Israel. If those who did eate were thus qualified, it is not obscurely intimated, that those who were not thus qualified did not eate. And if no proselyte who did not separate himselfe from the filthinesse of the Heathen, was allowed to eat the Passeover, then muchlesse was an Israelite who did not separate himselfe from the silthynesse of the Heathen, allowed to eat it. I like well Beda his observation upon Ezra 10. 16, 17