From my favorite theologian.
In midst of pointing to the Erastians that the logic of one of their arguments would require them to believe that the punishments of the judicial law remained valid (a view many Erastians rejected), George Gillespie, in an aside, pointed out that he sympathised with the English divines who held that the penal sanctions remained obligatory:
I know some divines hold that the judicial law of Moses, so far as concerneth the punishments of sins against the moral law, idolatry, blasphemy, Sabbath-breaking, adultery, theft, &c., ought to be a rule to the Christian magistrate; and, for my part, I wish more respect were had to it, and that it were more consulted with. This is by the way.
George Gillespie, Aaron’s rod blossoming; or, the divine ordinance of church government vindicated (1646; Edinburgh, 1844), p. 2.
In a subsequent post from the same work, we will demonstrate that Gillespie basically…
View original post 11 more words