A42757:324
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversy concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiastical government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlessness of the chief objections made against the Presbyterial government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversie concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiasticall government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlesnesse of the chief objections made against the Presbyteriall government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...
London: printed by E.G. for Richard Whitaker, 1646
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.
Thirdly, men were kept from the Sanctuary of the Lord, not only for ceremonial, but for moral uncleanness, I mean for public and scandalous sins against the moral Law. Ezech. 44. 7, 9. God was offended when such proselytes were brought into his Sanctuary, as were either uncircumcised in flesh, or uncircumcised in heart; that is, whose practise or conversation did declare them to be uncircumcised in heart: else the Lord would not have challenged those who brought such proselytes into his Sanctuary, if their uncircumcision of heart had not been externally manifested, so that it might be perceived by his people; according to that Psalm 36. 1. The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. To the same purpose we read Ezra 6. 21. not that all proselytes, nor all uncircumcised, but only all such as had separate themselves from the filthiness of the Heathen of the Land, to seek the Lord God of Israel, did eat of the Passover. Moreover we may argue by a necessary consequence from Scripture. The ceremonial uncleanness was a cause of exclusion from the Sanctuary, and from the holy things. Therefore much more moral uncleanness. It was more sinful in its self, and more abominable in Gods sight for those who did steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, and burn Incense to Baal, to come and tread in the Courts of the house of the Lord, and to offer Sacrifices there, as if Gods house had been a den of robbers, Isa. 1. 11, 12, 13, 14. Jerem. 7. 9, 10, 11. This I say was more abominable to God then if he that had touched a dead body, or had come into the tent where a man died, should have come unto the Tabernacle in his legal uncleanness. Therefore when Christ casteth out the buyers and sellers out of the Temple, it is not for ceremonial but moral uncleanness, and he applieth to them the words of Jeremiah, Ye have made it a den of thieves, Matth. 21. 13. with Jerem. 7. 11. And as it was more sinful to the person, and more hateful to God, so it was more hurtful to the souls of others, who were in greater danger of infection from the moral, then from the ceremonial uncleanness. This