A42757:807
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.
Add hereunto that which Gull. Vorstius annot. in Maimon. de fundam•legis cap. 5. Sect. 9. observeth ou• of Beth Joseph de Idololat. and out of aboda zara, that a Heathen man was permitted to be Phi•tian to a Jew, provided that he should not entice him to Idolatry: and that a Jew also was permitted to be Physician to a Gentile, for which purpose they alleged the example of Moses who (as their Tradition told them) did practice medicine in Egypt.
Adde hereunto that which Gul. Vorstius annot. in Maimon. de fundam•legis cap. 5. Sect. 9. observeth ou• of Beth Joseph de Idololat. and out of aboda zara, that a Heathen man was permitted to be Phi•tian to a Jew, provided that he should not entice him to Idolatry: and that a Jew also was permitted to be Physitian to a Gentile, for which purpose they alledged the example of Moses who (as their Tradition told them) did practice medicine in Egypt.
Furthermore when Master Prynne understands nothing by those words Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican, but avoid civill fellowship and keep no familiar company with him, and expounds it also by 1 Cor. 5. 11. with such a one not to eat (which he still conceives to be only meant of avoiding civill fellowship) and by 2. Jo. 10. receive him not into thy house. He is twice out, both because the Jews did keep civill company with Heathens which hath been proved: and also because (if we believe the Jewish writers concerning the customs of their ⟨p. 379⟩Nation) the Rabbis or wise men among them did not keep familiar fellowship nor civill company with the Plebeians of the Jews themselves: they were forbidden to eat and drink with or among the Plebeians. Maimen de fundam. legis cap. 5. Sect. 13. neither might they converse in the paths nor come into the houses of the Plebeians. Ibid. Sect. 14. Gull. Vorstius in his annot. pag. 73. addeth a passage in Misua that a wise man might neither lodge with a Plebeian nor receive a Plebeian to lodge with him. Nevertheless a wise man was permitted to converse not only civilly but frequently with an Heathen man, for which see Master Selden de Jure nat. & Gent. lib. 6. cap. 10. quoniam nihil mali ex Gentilium consuetudine viro scientiori iminere censebant. So that in Master Print sense, all the Plebeians of the Jews themselves were as Heathens and Publicans, or civilly excommunicated by their wise men.