A00888:434
The devils banquet described in four sermons [brace], 1. The banquet propounded, begun, 2.…The deuills banket described in foure sermons [brace], 1. The banket propounded, begunne, 2.…
The devils banquet described in four sermons [brace], 1. The banquet propounded, begun, 2. The second service, 3. The breaking up of the feast, 4. The shot or reckoning, [and] The sinners passing-bell, together with Physic from heaven / published by Thomas Adams ...The deuills banket described in foure sermons [brace], 1. The banket propounded, begunne, 2. The second seruice, 3. The breaking vp of the feast, 4. The shot or reckoning, [and] The sinners passing-bell, together with Phisicke from heauen / published by Thomas Adams ...
London: printed by Thomas Snodham for Ralph Mab, 1614
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.
Christ, that had the best method of teaching, and could make hearts of flint penetrable, moved his Disciples minds, removed his adversaries doubts, frequently by questions. He starts Peter, that was (numinis Dei, et nominis sui immemor) forgetful of his God, of himself, with a quid, dormis? what, sleepest thou? He rectified the mistaking judgements of his Apostles, that turned his spiritual dehortation from the Pharisees leaven, to the literal sense of forgotten bread; with a double demand. Obliti ne estis? &c. 1Do ye not yet understand, nor remember the five loaves of the five thousand? &c. Could so miraculous a Banquet, as quickly slip from your minds, as it did from your mouths? So he informed their understandings concerning himself, which so much concerned them to know; Whom do men say that I am? 2All which implied not his own ignorance, but impelled their knowledge. He knew all the former questions so well as the latter; whereof he could no less be ignorant, then of himself. Only he spake in a catechising ⟨p. 228⟩form, as the Ministers question succours the Novices initial understanding. His reproofs to his enemies were often clothed in these interrogatory robes. How say they that Christ is Davids Son? When David himself calleth him Lord? 3confuting that false opinion, that the Jews had of their Messiah, whose temporal Monarchy they only gaped for. If he was, only to be the Son of David in the flesh, how doth he call him Lord, and equal him with the Father? A question, that did enforce a conclusion, himself desired, and a confusion of his enemies conceits. The like, ver. 4. He cramped their critical and hypocritical exceptions with a question. The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? which confuted their arrogance,4 though they would have salved it with ignorance, ver. 7. We cannot tell. This manner of discussing is not more usual with God, then effectual. It converteth the Elect; it convinceth the Reprobate. Wheresoever it is directed, it pierceth like a goad, & is a sharp stroke to the conscience: and howsoever the smart is neglected, it leaveth a print behind it.