"be excommunicated from them as a church," is only a part of the punishment which Dr. Gill believes to be contemplated in one of Ezra's decrees. (c)

III. CHARACTER. They were no synagogue of Satan, or "congregation of the dead," as such are called by Solomon.(d) They were not a confused and unlawful assembly, like Demetrius and his Ephesians.(e) Neither were they a civil society, although they were connected with such a body. When, in a certain case, they were called "the whole church of the Lord,"f) Dr. Gill says, "they don't call them the congregation of Israel, "but of the Lord, because it was not on a civil, but

religious account they were come." As they were not a civil, so they were not a military body, although they were the militant church, and when providentially called, entered the military establishment of their country: as in the case of David and the Assembly who were with him, which Dr. Gill says, was a 66 great part of" "the congregation of Israel, and church of the living God."(g) Its members were consecrated to religious privileges and enjoyments. It was given in charge to the Levites "to sanctify them unto the Lord."(h) This was to prepare them to "worship at his holy hill," which "holy hill of Zion," Dr. Gill tells us, means "the church."(i) To the same amount does he explain Joel's proclamation for a religious fast, although it speaks of children as belonging to the congregation, and partaking of their consecration and their

(c) Ezr. x. 8.

(d) Prov. xxi. 16.

(f) Josh. xxii. 16.
(1) Ps. xcix. 9.

(g) 1 Sam. xvii. 47.

(e) Acts xix. 32. 39.
(h) 2 Chr. xxx. 17.

humiliation. "Gather the people, sanctify the church, assemble the elders, gather the children, and those that suck the breast."(j) In accordance with this, Gill says that Joshua's reading to the congregation was "not before the men only, but with the women and the little ones,' who all had a concern in the things that were read to them."(k) From this consecration, the officers of the church were, of course, not excluded. "A great number of priests consecrated themselves."(1) This ecclesiastical consecration, as well as spiritual sanctification, appears to be contemplated in calling the Jews and the Christians, "the church of saints."(m) Their imperfection in spiritual sanctification is confessed by all parties, and taught in the scriptures. Sacrifices are appointed for a case in which "the whole church of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the church."(n) This is the text by which Gill and Ainsworth prove "that the church may err." But on account of their perfect Head, and that degree of sanctification which they enjoy, the scriptures call them "the church of the upright," (o) and recognize an evident incongruity between church-membership and a life of iniquity. "I was almost in all evil in the midst of the church assembled."(p) These things evidently shew that they are a visible society, acting as the consecrated depository of the oracles and ordinances of revealed religion.

IV. CONDITION. On that text which speaks of the

(j) Joel ii. 16. (comp. 15. 17.)

(k) Josh. viii. 35.

(p) Prov. v. 14.

()2 Chr. xxx. 24. (m) Ps. lxxxix. 5. cxlix. 1.
(0) Ps. cxi. 1.

(n) Lev. iv. 13.

trumpets which were made for the calling of the church, and for the journeying of the camps, (q) Dr. Gill takes occasion to remark that the Christian church is in the same condition: "Saints are pilgrims and tra"vellers; they are passing through a wilderness, their 66 way is attended with many difficulties; Canaan is the "place they are travelling to, and the gospel [like "the trumpets] is of singular use to them by the way "both to refresh them with its joyful sound, and to "direct them in the path in which they should go. But an inspired writer has said concerning Christ's presence with the Israelites, "This is he that was in the "church in the wilderness, with the angel, which spake "to him in the Mount Sina, and with our fathers, who "received the lively oracles to give unto us."(r) The context shews that this person who was with them, was the Divine prophet, priest and king of the visible church, and it connects him and them with the tabernacle and temple which were ecclesiastical buildings; and thus shews that "the church in the wilderness" was really, and not nominally only, the visible church of God. Dr. Gill says that this "must be understood of "the children of Israel, who were the then church of "God, whom he had chosen and separated from the rest "of the world, to be a peculiar people to himself, to "whom were given the word and ordinances, the service "of God, and the promises; and God always had, and "will have a church; though that is sometimes in the "wilderness; which has been the case under the gospel

(9) Num. x. 2.

(r) Acts vii. 38. (comp. 37, 44, 47.)

"dispensation, as well as before; See Rev. xxii. 6. 14, "and it was a peculiar honour to Moses, that he was in "this church, though it was in the wilderness; even a 66 greater honour than to be in Pharaoh's court." In accordance with this, Paul quotes David, as saying for himself and for his Antitype, concerning Jews and Christians, "I will declare thy name unto my brethren; "in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto "thee."(s)

You were told some time ago, of my Opponent's statement, that "the term church or kirk, is an abbre"viation of the word xvgtou oixos, the house of the Lord, and does not translate the term εκκλησια.” But if εκκλησια

κυριου

church, has a different meaning from xvgiov oixos, the house of the Lord, then it must certainly have a different meaning from εov oixos, the house of God. Yet let us hear Paul's account of this matter, according to Macknight's version, from which my Opponent, contrary to promise, has grievously departed, in his New Translation. The Apostle gives certain instructions to Timothy, "that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to "behave thyself ex eov, in the house of God, which "is exx2noia Osov 3wvros the church of the living God." (t) Here is an inspired declaration that the church means the same as the house of God, and of course, that it means the same as the house of the Lord, my Opponent's declaration to the contrary notwithstanding. When (t) 1 Tim. iii. 15.

(8) Hebr. ii, 12. (comp. context.)

Peter tells the churches that "the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God;"(u) Dr. Gill says, "By the house of God is either meant the temple of Jerusalem," "or else the church of God, which is frequently called the house of God." When Paul says that we have "an high priest over the house of God," (v) Gill says that it means "the church of God, over which Christ is as prophet, priest, and king, and as the son and owner of it." When Paul says "every house is builded by some man," Gill understands it. of "the whole church in general, of particular congregations, and of individual believers." When Paul says "he that built all things is God," Gill explains it "of Christ, and of his building the church."(w) This explanation he still continues, when it is intimated that Moses belonged to that house, as it is repeatedly, in the Epistle to the Hebrews.(x) When it is said that "Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant,"(y) Gill says, 66 a servant in holy things;" He He says, "he was not a servant in the world, and with respect to civil things, and the affairs of Providence, but in the church of God, and in divine things." And as the scriptures never once intimate that this church began with Moses, so neither does our great Baptist Commentator; but in the very same passage in which he says that "it was a peculiar honour to Moses that he was in this church," he also says that "God always had, and will have a church."(z)

(u) 1 Pet. iv. 17.
(x) Hebr. iii. 2. 3.
(z) Gill on Acts vii.

(v) Hebr. x. 21. (comp. v. 6.) (w) Hebr. iii, 4. (y) Hebr. iii. 5.

38, quoted above,