A09434:670
A godly and learned exposition upon the whole epistle of Jude, containing threescore and…A godlie and learned exposition upon the whole epistle of Iude, containing threescore and…
A godly and learned exposition upon the whole epistle of Jude, containing threescore and six sermons preached in Cambridge by that reverend and faithful man of God, Master William Perkins, and now at the request of his executors, published by Thomas Taylor, preacher of Gods word ; whereunto is prefixed a large analysis, containing the sum and order of the whole book, according to the authors own method, to which are further added, four brief tables to direct the reader ...A godlie and learned exposition upon the whole epistle of Iude, containing threescore and sixe sermons preached in Cambridge by that reverend and faithfull man of God, Master William Perkins, and now at the request of his executors, published by Thomas Taylor, preacher of Gods word ; whereunto is prefixed a large analysis, containing the summe and order of the whole booke, according to the authors owne method, to which are further added, foure briefe tables to direct the reader ...
London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Thomas Man, 1606
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
2. Quest. But why should any m•n hate the flesh, or garments of another, seeing this ceremonial uncleanne• was no sin▪ yea to bury the dead corps was a duty to be performed necessarily: and so necessary was it to touch them▪ and for garments they were natural, and no more sin to touch them than to eat or drink? Ans. Although legal defilement was not always a sin, yet i• was always an evil, and prefigured the defilement of men by original sin: and besides, upon Gods prohibition was to be hated. Secondly, although the defilement it self was no sin; yet he that wittingly without cause did touch or meddle wi•• th• thing defiled, did sin, because God commanded the contrary.
2. Quest. But why should any m•n hate the flesh, or garments of another, seeing this ceremoniall vncleanne• was no sinne▪ yea to burie the dead corpes was a dutie to be performed necessarily: and so necessarie was it to touch them▪ and for garments they were naturall, and no more sin to touch them than to eate or drinke? Ans. Although legall defilement was not alwaies a sin, yet i• was alwaies an euill, and prefigured the defilement of men by originall sinne: and besides, vpon Gods prohibition was to be hated. Secondly, although the defilement it selfe was no sinne; yet hee that wittingly without cause did touch or meddle wi•• th• thing defiled, did sinne, because God commanded the contrarie.