By this principle they shall not hold it contrary to the will of God under the new Testament, that a man marry his fathers brothers wife, this not being forbidden in the new Testament, but in the old. Some indeed of this time have maintained, that it is not unlawful to us to marry within these degrees which are forbidden, Lev: 18. See Mr. Edwards in the third part of Gangraena, pag 3. These hold, 'tis only forbidden to commit fornication with such as are within these degrees, not being married, as if […] were not unlawful to commit fornication with any, be they never so far without these degrees. By the same principle which rejecteth old Testament proofs, they must deny the duty of children under the new Testament, to marry with their parents consent, and this is one of the foul errors of some Sectaries now adays, that though consent of parents unto children's marriage, was commanded under the law to them that lived then, yet because that was but a ceremony, 'tis now lawful to marry without their consent, because we live under the Gospel. See that same third part of Gangraena, pag: 14. By the same principle they must deny that an oath (be it never so just and necessary) may be imposed by authority▪ Or that the Magistrate ought to put to death, a blasphemer, an incestuous person, an adulterer, a Witch, or the ⟨p. 162⟩like, (the Scriptural warrants which make these crimes capital, being in the old, not in the new Testament.) Saith not the Apostle, 2 Tim: 3. 16. all Scripture (and consequently the lawful examples, and laudable presidents of the old Testament,) is given by in spiration of God, and is profitable for Doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, Rom. 15. 4. Whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning. Is not our justification by faith proved, by the example of Abraham's justification by faith? Rom: 4. Doth not Christ himself defend his Disciples there, plucking the ears of corn upon the Sabbath day, by the example of Davids eating the show bread, and by the example of the Priests killing of sacrifices upon the Sabbath day, Matth: 12. Yea, those that most cry out against proofs from examples of the old Testament, are as ready as others to borrow proofs from thence, when they think to serve their turn thereby, which Aretius, probl: theol: loc. 56.
By this principle they shall not hold it contrary to the will of God under the new Testament, that a man marry his fathers brothers wife, this not being forbidden in the new Testament, but in the old. Some indeed of this time have maintained, that it is not unlawfull to us to marry within these degrees which are forbidden, Lev: 18. See Mr. Edwards in the third part of Gangraena, pag 3. These hold, 'tis onely forbidden to commit fornication with such as are within these degrees, not being married, as if 〈…〉 were not unlawfull to commit fornication with any, be they never so farre without these degrees. By the same principle which rejecteth old Testament proofs, they must deny the duty of children under the new Testament, to marry with their parents consent, and this is one of the foule errors of some Sectaries now adayes, that though consent of parents unto childrens marriage, was commanded under the law to them that lived then, yet because that was but a ceremonie, 'tis now lawfull to marry without their consent, because we live under the Gospell. See that same third part of Gangraena, pag: 14. By the same principle they must deny that an oath (be it never so just and necessary) may be imposed by authority▪ Or that the Magistrat ought to put to death, a blasphemer, an incestuous person, an adulterer, a Witch, or the ⟨p. 162⟩like, (the Scripturall warrants which make these crimes capitall, being in the old, not in the new Testament.) Saith not the Apostle, 2 Tim: 3. 16. all Scripture (and consequently the lawfull examples, and la•dable presidents of the old Testament,) is given by in spiration of God, and is profitable for Doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousnesse, Rom. 15. 4. Whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning. Is not our justification by faith proved, by the example of Abrahams justification by faith? Rom: 4. Doth not Christ himself defend his Disciples there, plucking the ears of corne upon the Sabbath day, by the example of Davids eating the shew bread, and by the example of the Priests killing of sacrifices upon the Sabbath day, Matth: 12. Yea, those that most cry out against proofs from examples of the old Testament, are as ready as others to borrow proofs from thence, when they think to serve their turne thereby, which Aretius, probl: theol: loc. 56.
