'The fdolatrie ofthe !aft times. 693 thatthey were notonely idolaters,butalfo inf't ter ofthe Kings. I anfwet.Firfr,it moybe they tifers to idolarrie, God by expreife comman• were beleeuers, imbracii1g t!.e faith of .Abradement,did lil"ply forbid the Iewes to marry ,ham: nothiogcan befhewed ro d1e coQtrary. withthem; ;voldfe they did repent & change Secondly, ifthey wereiofidels, the couenant their religion. And in regard ofthiscomman.:. that was IJetwecilc them;was.ofpeace ondy: ~~~!)lent,the forefaid marriages were nullities) and they ayded .Abrah.,m, nor by requeQ as incdl:uousmarriages arc no marriages, by made by him, but by fe~rer al feeciall motion reafonof the abfolute prohibition ofGod< ofGod. Tftirdly, the.fath~rsdid fundiy a'&iTouching the focietie forbidden vs with ions vpon bad cuflomc, whichGod by law afd!>larers,it is thefociety •f .Amiry:that is;offanenvard reqrdfed:imd theircxalnple's may not miliarity and fpeciallloue. Twoexamples, be-followed inall things.La£lly,1 fuppofethat whereofwe finde in the word ofGod.One is .Abraham ioyned with them;a's againll:a cornofI'Qtraels ofmarriage with idolaters,w!Jich mon aduer&ry : and thurefore the prot{chon the Scripture precifely condemneth, as an•bthey minifrred to Abraham, was asncceft:ny I loomin,Nmin1 frael,&aproph4natirm.nfthen4me f0r themftlues,as fot him and·his people, ofGsd,whe1H<I4m•rriesthe.Uughm of~<Jirange. B Here one exception mufr not be omitted. god. MaCo.u. Boodndeed marriedRHth,a Put the cafe; that the husband is'an idolater, Moabrteife; but fhee was eotred and r<ceiued and is eo tent to dwel with his beleeuing wife: intothe body of the Ifrae\itcs, by a former fhee rhen is to liucwith him, notonelyin the marriage: and fhee was one that bdeeued in foctety ofpeacc,bur alfo in the focietyofami• tile Godoflfraei;Thypeople(faith fhe toN•o· ry, by doing all duties oflouethat concerne a Iudg. 14. mi, Ruth r.r6.) fo•ilbe my people,andthyGod, wife, fo far as may !land with good ciifcience. my God.Sampfonlikewife married a woman of For the preceptof Paulis , that marriage and r 4· the l'hiliflims,butthat was by diuineinll:in<!t, marriageduties,are to be preferued ofthe ber and confcquently, by a fpeciall appointment keuing party with an infidel!, fo be it the faid ofGod. Againe it is alleadged, that God by infidell.bc content. lt may be alleadged,that Deut. 21. exprelfelaw, gaue Jeaue to the Ifraelites, to thus the beleeuer txpofeth himfeife to d.\nger ro,rr. marry hcathemfh women taken captiucs in ofidolatry.! anfwer,no;becaufc Goddefends warr.,• .An[. That isalaw onely oftoleration, them that callvponhim,who thrufl not themwithout approbatiou: in which;God forrhe feluesinto danger, but bearc the danger and hardne!Te of their hearts, permits the euill, calamity,mto which ther are fallen,attending wl)ichcannot by polide be quire taken away. C vpon thmcallmgs.Agame,tfthe vnbeleeuin~ And this appeareshy two things. Firfi before partie ilia! folicitc theother,& vfe all mcanes" the marriage, thowomaa by G~cls appointboth faire and toule, to draw him orher to i~ menr mull bee deformed, by:Cutting off her dolatry, the belecuing party in this cafe, may haire,bythe growingofher nailes;by putting gocaiide for a time,and omit the duty of marotfthe garments of.hcr capti.uite, & by n\ourriage. Forrhis is all one,as ifthe idolatrous & ning for her lather and mother for the fpacc 'lnbdeeuing partielhould depart.Forindeed ofa Hl<lneth: & the ena of this was,to caufc a that partieis faid to depart,in whom thecauf: difl~,e in the Ifraelitos,oftheirintended marofdeparting is; as in the Church, he isa fchifriages,or tofignifie a chang ofreligion,at the maticke, in whom the caufeof the (chifmc is l~afi:inpretece,in the parrieefpoufod. The feand notalwaies he that feparares. Secondly: cond epmple is o£leagncsofmuruallaide & it may be obieeled, that a Chriliian may not proteCHon; which may not bc'Contralted be... becomethe memberofa harlot, muchleife of twecne beW.euorsand idolafers. lehofo(hat for an idolater; conlidering idolatry is a great fin, makingthis kindeofl~agoe with .Aha ,is thus Ianfwer: rhe reafon is nOt like. Forrhc forreprooued, •· Chron. 19· •· Wo•/J•ft th•u helpt nicatour confents to the fornication: and fo thewick!d,and looe them that hatctheLord?thcr- D cloth not the belceuing party, by d<>ing duties fo..- forthi< thing, thewMtb ofthe Lortlu vpon that pertaine eo marriage, confc:nrto the ido . thee. Agaioe, that which we may not doe,wc latryofthe vnbeleeuingparry. And the fornimay not couenant to do; nowwe.ma.y not mucatorwillingly ioynes himfdfe with an hartnally giue and take aide and protection'of ilot; whereas the beleeuing parrie,delires hee <lE>late>s.This teucls ~tl the.difhon~ur of God, might be yoked with a beleeuer, aAd notwith becaufe it mokes idolaters boall:,thatthe peo-. an lnfidell. Laflly, it may beobieeled, Iffor pie ofGod cannot !land without their aide.It adultery, diuorce maybemade, why not for is further an occalion of idolarrie; and this Idolatry which is fpirituall adultery?I anfwer leagueoften infolds the peoFle ofGod in the That not any linneby it 'felt<:, asitisalinne' fame plagues and iudgemenr with idolaters. not breaking thetroth and bond of marriage' ft hath beene the decay both of Greece and istheproper caufe of adiuorce; and notany H1mgarie, that tHey haU& heretofore entred kinde of idolatry , but the linne of adultery into.leagues ofamitie witb the Turkes.Itmay breakesthis troth. 1 be obiected , that .Ahr11h•m made this co•eHitherto haue I £hewed the meanino of nantofprotection with the Amorites, .An~r, ! ~his comm:mdement; XeepeJ6Mr feluu Jr""' Gen. t4. Efchol, Mamre: and that thereupon they ai~ r:oio!s. Now I comctothereafonof thccom- ... ded him in refcuing ofLot, and in the!laugh-· mandement, in the word ll•hes, <Jr Litt/echilJr:en·
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=