A42757:935
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.
that some learned men are of opinion that1 Christ had that night first his paschal supper, at the close whereof he instituted his own Supper. Secondly, an ordinary supper which succeeded the institution of his own, in imitation whereof the Corinthians and Primitive Christians had their love feasts, which they did eat immediately after the Lords Supper: and this is more then intimated John 13. v. 2, 12, to 31, &c. therefore Lukes after Supper he took the cup, must be meant only after the Paschal supper, not th• other Supper.
that some learned men are of opinion that1 Christ had that night first his paschall supper, at the close whereof he instituted his own Supper. Secondly, an ordinary supper which succeeded the institution of his own, in imitation whereof the Corinthians and Primitive Christians had their love feasts, which they did eat immediately after the Lords Supper: and this is more then intimated John 13. v. 2, 12, to 31, &c. therefore Lukes after Supper he tooke the cup, must be meant onely after the Paschall supper, not th• other Supper.
- 11 Cor. 11. 21, 22. Ter•ul. apolog.