A80608:1365
The bloody tenet, washed, and made white in the blood of the LambThe bloudy tenent, washed, and made white in the bloud of the Lambe
The bloody tenet, washed, and made white in the blood of the Lamb: being discussed and discharged of blood-guiltiness by just defence. Wherein the great questions of this present time are handled, viz. how far liberty of conscience ought to be given to those that truly fear God? And how far restrained to turbulent and pestilent persons, that not only raze the foundation of godliness, but disturb the civill peace where they live? Also how far the magistrate may proceed in the duties of the first table? And that all magistrates ought to study the word and will of God, that they may frame their government according to it. Discussed. As they are alleged from divers Scriptures, out of the Old and New Testament. Wherein also the practise of princes is debated, together with the judgement of ancient and late writers of most precious esteem. Whereunto is added a reply to Mr. Williams answer, to Mr. Cottons letter. / By John Cotton Bachelor in Divinity, and teacher of the church of Christ at Boston in New England.The bloudy tenent, washed, and made white in the bloud of the Lambe: being discussed and discharged of bloud-guiltinesse by just defence. Wherein the great questions of this present time are handled, viz. how farre liberty of conscience ought to be given to those that truly feare God? And how farre restrained to turbulent and pestilent persons, that not onely raze the foundation of godlinesse, but disturb the civill peace where they live? Also how farre the magistrate may proceed in the duties of the first table? And that all magistrates ought to study the word and will of God, that they may frame their government according to it. Discussed. As they are alledged from divers Scriptures, out of the Old and New Testament. Wherein also the practise of princes is debated, together with the judgement of ancient and late writers of most precious esteeme. Whereunto is added a reply to Mr. Williams answer, to Mr. Cottons letter. / By John Cotton Batchelor in Divinity, and teacher of the church of Christ at Boston in New England.
London: printed by Matthew Symmons for Hannah Allen, 1647
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.
It is therefore less marvel, that in Answer to the preface of the Model, he breaketh forth into such vast hyperboles, That the Model awakeneth Moses from his unknown Grave: and denieth Jesus yet to have seen the earth. A speech as devoid of reason, as of truth. The observation of Moses Laws doth not awaken Moses out of his grave, nor is there any reason it should. The validity of Laws doth not (in reason) depend upon the life or resurrection of the Lawgiver: the Examiner himself (I suppose) would not doubt, but the Laws of Moses were of force to the Israelites in the Land of Canaan, when yet Moses was dead and buried before their entrance into the Land. Neither did their observation of them awaken Moses out of his grave, but argued his Laws to be in force as well after his death, as whilst he was yet living. If it be said, That Christ at his coming in the flesh when he was buried himself, buried also the Laws of Moses with him in his grave.
It is therefore lesse marvell, that in Answer to the preface of the Modell, he breaketh forth into such vast hyperboles, That the Modell awakeneth Meses from his unknowne Grave: and denyeth Jesus yet to have seen the earth. A speech as devoid of reason, as of truth. The observation of Moses Lawes doth not awaken Moses out of his grave, nor is there any reason it should. The validity of Lawes doth not (in reason) depend upon the life or resurrection of the Lawgiver: the Examiner himselfe (I suppose) would not doubt, but the Lawes of Moses were of force to the Israelites in the Land of Canaan, when yet Moses was dead and buried before their entrance into the Land. Neither did their observation of them awaken Moses out of his grave, but argued his Lawes to be in force as well after his death, as whilst he was yet living. If it be said, That Christ at his coming in the flesh when he was buried himselfe, buried also the Lawes of Moses with him in his grave.
Then the Examiner should not have said, that the Model raised up Moses out of his grave, but that it raised up Christ out of his grave.
Then the Examiner should not have said, that the Modell raised up Moses out of his grave, but that it raised up Christ out of his grave.