A42757:934
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
Book 3 › Chapter 8: Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper.
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.
The first argument (which was by me touched in that Sermon so much quarrelled by Mr Prynne) is this. It is said of Judas, Joh. 13. 30. He then having received the sop went immediately out. But this sop or morsel was given him before the Sacrament, whiles they were yet eating the other Supper, at the end whereof Christ did institute the Sacrament. Therefore Judas went away before the Sacrament. Let us hear Mr Prynnes four answers to this argument, pag. 24, 25. First, saith he, Judas went not out till after Supper, John 13. 2. and Supper being ended, &c. Answ. [Greek or Hebrew] will not prove that the Supper was fully ended. The Centurists Gent. 1. lib. 1. cap. 10. explain John 13. 2. thus, Magnâ caenae hujus part peractâ, A great part of this Supper being done; yea the Greek may be as well turned thus, When they were at Supper, as the late English Annotations have it. Ludovicus de Dieu chooseth this sense. Salmeron and others prove it from verse 4. He riseth from Supper, with vers. 12▪ ⟨p. 442⟩he sate down again to Supper, and dipped the sop. Take but two like instances in this same story of the passion, Matth. 26. 6. [Greek or Hebrew] Now when Jesus was in Bethany, not, after Jesus was in Bethany. Matth. 26. 20. [Greek or Hebrew] Now when the even was come, not, when the even was ended. His second answer, that all the other three Evangelists prove that Judas was present at the Sacrament, is but petitio principii. Thirdly (saith he) the Sacrament was not instituted after Supper, but as they sat at Supper. Answ. It was indeed instituted while they were sitting at supper, or before they rose from supper, so that they were still continuing in a Table gesture; yet the actions must needs be distinguished, for they did not at the same instant receive the Sacrament, and eat of another supper too. And though it be said of the bread, that as they did eat, Jesus took bread, yet of the cup Paul and Luke say, that Jesus took it after Supper, that is, after they had done eating; therefore certainly after Judas got the sop and went away, at which instant they had not done eating. Neither is there any ground at all