A42757:360
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.
For 1. though he saith the Apostle clearly determines, that those who were tainted with gross and scandalous sins, were admitted to the Passover; yet I find nothing of the Passover, neither in the Text, nor in the sense of any Interpreter which I have looked upon. Nay, it did not so much as fall in the thoughts of Erastus himself; for Beza having objected to him that he ought to have compared our Sacraments with the purely sacred Feasts in the old Testament rather than with the manna, and with the water of the Rock, which were for corporal nourishment; Erastus replieth nothing concerning the Passover (which had been his best answer ⟨p. 126⟩if he had seen any probability for it,) only he saith that he compareth our Sacraments with the manna and the water of the Rock, as the Apostle doth before him. 2. The Text it self seemeth rather to determine clearly, that the Passover is not there intended for all the other particulars there mentioned did agree to all the Israelites, men, women, and Children: all these were under the Cloud, and all these passed through the Sea, and all these drank of the water of the Rock; and why shall we not understand, that all these did also eat of the same spiritual meat, that is of the Manna, not of the Passover, of which women and Children under 13 years of age did not eat: neither did all the males above 13 years eat of it▪ for the unclean were excluded by the Law: those that were in a journey did not eat of it nor the hired Servant: the sick saith Erastus did not eat of it: the Jews exclude also the Dumb and the Deaf. If it be said, that vers. 1. speaketh only of the Fathers, and that therefore the Text is not to be understood of women and Children also. I answer, This is as inconsequent, as if one would argue, Paul saith Men, Brethren, and Fathers, therefore no women were among that multitude of the people Act. 21. 35. 36. 39. 40. or thus, the Apostle saith Brethren pray for us, therefore he desires not believing Sisters to pray for him. In this same Text in hand, the Apostle speaks to the whole Church of Corinth, to make them afraid of Gods judgements if they sin as the Israelites did. If he had argued only from the sin and judgement of the men, and not also of the women in the wilderness, the women in Corinth had so much the less applied it to themselves.
For 1. though he saith the Apostle cleerly determines, that those who were tainted with grosse and scandalous sinnes, were admitted to the Passeover; yet I finde nothing of the Passeover, neither in the Text, nor in the sence of any Interpreter which I have looked upon. Nay, it did not so much as fall in the thoughts of Erastus himself; for Beza having objected to him that he ought to have compared our Sacraments with the purely sacred Feasts in the old Testament rather than with the manna, and with the water of the Rock, which were for corporall nourishment; Erastus replyeth nothing concerning the Passeover (which had been his best answer