A42757:947
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.
4. That conditional love and conditional intention or meaning, could not have place in the Son of God. For as Spanhemius doth rightly argue in his late learned Exercitations de gratia universali pag. 746. it doth not become either the wisdom or goodness of God to will and intend a thing upon such a condition as neither is nor can be. And pag. 829. he saith, that this conditional destination or intention cannot be conceived, as being incident only to such as do neither foreknow nor direct and order the event, and in whose hand it is not to give the faculty and will of performing the thing. Which can not without impiety be thought or said of God. Thus he.
4. That conditionall love and conditionall intention or meaning, could not have place in the Sonne of God. For as Spanhemius doth rightly argue in his late learned Exercitations de gratia universali pag. 746. it doth not become either the wisdome or goodnesse of God to will and intend a thing upon such a condition as neither is nor can be. And pag. 829. he saith, that this conditionall destination or intention cannot be conceived, as being incident onely to such as doe neither foreknow nor direct and order the event, and in whose hand it is not to give the faculty and will of performing the thing. Which can not without impiety be thought or said of God. Thus he.
The third argument (which I shall now add) is that whereby Hilarius Can. 30. in Matth. and Innocentius the third lib. 4. de mysterio miss. cap. 13. prove that Judas received not the Sacrament, neither was present at the receiving of it. Because that night while Judas was present, Christ in his gracious and comfortable expressions to his Apostles did make an exception, as John 13. 10, 11. Ye are clean, but not all. For he knew who should betray him, therefore said he, ye are not all clean, vers. 18. I speak not of you all, I know whom I have chosen. So vers. 21. even as before Joh. 6. 70. Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil. But at the Sacrament all his sweet and gracious speeches are without any such exception, This is my body which is given for you, &c. Yea he saith positively of all the Apostles to whom he gave the Sacrament, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the Vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom,