A42757:57
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.
CHAP. XIII. M. Prynnes argument from 1 Cor. 10. (which he takes to be unanswerable) discussed and confuted.
Mr Prynne in expounding that Text of the Passover differeth both from the Apostles, and from Erastus himself. His argument (if good) will necessarily conclude against his own Concessions. If scandalous sinners had been suspended from the Manna, and Water of the Rock, they had been suspended from their ordinary orporal meat and drink. That the scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle, were committed, not before, but after their eating of that Spiritual meat, and drinking of that Spiritual drink. The Argument strongly retorted. The scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle were National sins, and so come not home to the present Question, which is of persons, not of Nations.
Mr Prynne in expounding that Text of the Passeover differeth both from the Apostles, and from Erastus himselfe. His argument (if good) wil necessarily conclude against his owne Concessions. If scandalous sinners had been suspended from the Manna, and Water of the Rocke, they had been suspended from their ordinary orporal meat and drinke. That the scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle, were committed, not before, but after their eating of that Spirituall meate, and drinking of that Spirituall drinke. The Argument strongly retorted. The scandalous sins mentioned by the Apostle were Nationall sins, and so come not home to the present Question, which is of persons, not of Nations.