3 3o. The Birth- Priviledlge and Cavenant- holinef Ch.39 mightily firengthen it, when they were men known in the Scri- ptures , z Cor. io. r,. and did queffion their own marriage up -, on the account of the unbelief of their yoke- fellow,finding a cafe thus determined , both againfl mother and chiide for feparation; How can we imagine but they hit upon it, and were affeded with it ? 3. i do not fay that the /A./elites cafe and the Corinthians were wholly the fame, as it flood with Ifrael then , and with the Corinthians now ; .1 know it was not , for then either Ezra had been too harfh in ordering a feparation ; or Paul too indulgent in determining the lawfulnefs of the continuance of their mar- riage-fociety , and fo I may fay of their children ; but I fay their cafes were fo like and fo feemingly parallel, that it might well occafion the Corinthians (this in confcience concerned) to judge them the fame. Their cafes in fomewhat did differ-, but the Co- rinthians had need of the Apofles help to fee that they did differ; Mafler !War ¡hat indeed fayes (as Mr. Tombes quotes him, p.139.) that the cafes were the very fame , and fo they might be in them - felves but different in regard of divers adminiflrations under which they refpee`lively lived. Thefe things thus premifed, I fee no caufe to rake farther into Mafler Tombes his large difquiftion of this thing, he having nothing againfl it. He replies in-k deed to Mailer Marfhal, He that would make their cafe the fame$ mug not vary it in one particulars All Cafuifis and Lawyers deter- mine a Cafe to be varied When one material!circumfiance zù, varied. end yet Mager Martha! avouches the Cafes vo,re the very fame, though he fayes not a word to that material di fJarity I made 6etWeen them. The ?ewes being under the LaW of Mofes , and profeff ng it ; the Corinthians Chrißians not fo,andyet that doubt as if occafioned by Ithat fac"E , mug ari fe from the doubtedforce of the Law of god , as Maßer Marlhal'rightly alleadgeth. He hits right upon the differ- ence between them , which yet argues them to be fill in them - felves the fame, had not times differenced them; yet let me fo farre fpeak to his reply, where he fayes , The Jeweswere under . ti'efes Law profefling it but the Corinthian-Chriftians not fo. I hope he will not deny they were under the Moral Law, the Apoftle even in this Epiflle prefling it upon them, icor. 9.9. z Cork 14.34. And it was not fo eafie for them to de- termine that the Command, Deut. was judicial, purely retpe- dive to their relation to thofe Nations and fo their cafe then better
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=