Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	day_n	mean_v	sabbath_n	3,442	5	10.6221	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88151	A battell with a vvaspes nest, or, A reply to an angry and railing pamphlet, written by Master Joseph Heming, called Judas excommunicated, or A vindication of the communion of saints &c. wherein his arguments are answered, his abuses whipt and stript, the question whether Judas received the sacrament debated, and the affirmative proved ...	Lightfoot, Peter, 17th cent.	1649 (1649)	Wing L2073; ESTC R42276	44,133	53

He produceth this Evangelist to judge of a matter and that to gainsay the other three that averre it who speaks not one word fo the thing to be judged of And yet when I say the Supper in Iohn 13. was at Bethany he thinks this a good reason to say no because Bethany is not there named Before I come to shew that Bethany was the place of that Supper I shall first shew that that Supper was before the Passeover day and Secondly that it was two dayes before the Passeover and at Bethany although indeed the circumstance of the place be not so materiall to our dispute as the circumstance of the time I say therefore that the Supper in Iohn 13. was before the Passeover day came And that I prove from the plaine words of Iohn himself in the first verse of that Chapter Now before the feast of the Passeover c. whereupon I argue thus Argum. 1. That Supper that was before the feast of the Passeover was not on the Passeover day but before it But that Supper in Iohn 13. was before the feast of the Passeover verse 1. Ergo it was not on the Passeover day but before it To this M. Heming giveth this answer Page 10. In Iohn 13.1 Now before the feast c. 〈◊〉 not meant two dayes before as he would have it the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaning immediately before c as Luk. 11.38 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Pharisee woudred that he washed not before dinner that is immediately before dinner Reply Rarely Criticall But I doubt Animus est in patinis by the Feast of the Passeover Mr Heming understandethth the very Passeover meale and so he sheweth his meaning in pag. 11. the sop was given saith he at an Ordinary or Common Supper which Christ had the same night before he ate the Passeover 1. Let him but shew me from one end of the Bible to another where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies barely a meal and I will lose my supper to morrow night when there is mention of the feast of Tabernacles the feast of Dedication the feast of Pentecost the feast of Passeover c Mr Heming it seems thinks of victualls stirring and looks after his Commons but any man that is not a child in Scripture knows that the expression means the whole space and solemnity of these times He would make but a hungry exposition of the feast of expiation which was a most strict fasting day 2. If he had consulted Latine translators upon Iohn 23.1 he would have found that they render it Ante diem festum Paschae applying it to the day and not to the meale 3. Was not the feast of the Passeover begun before any supper that day was stirring I believe wiser men then either you or I will tell you that the feast of the Passeover began as soon as ever the Paschal lambe began to be slain And 4. Whereas he talks of a common supper which they had the same night before they are the Passeover I deny it for it was a holy suppe● of their Peace offerings as I have learned by some better acquainted with Iewish customes then I doubt either you or I shall be these two dayes And if it were so Iudas communicated in this Supper by your own confession and that 's something towards a cheese Mr Heming At that Supper Ioh. 13. Christs hour was come v. 1. so that he was betrayed the very same night as 't is evident comparing Ioh. 13.37 38. with John 18.1 2 3. and Mat. 26.34 Mark 14.30 This discourse passed betwixt Christ and Peter the very night in which he was betrayed Reply Is it most true that Christs houre was then come for the designe of his betraying was set a foot that night but that he was betrayed that night I deny as evident as it is in his looking glasse that he would shew you There is indeed in Iohn 13.37 38. a passage about the Cocks crowing that makes Mr Heming think the matter is Cock sure on his side whereas it may be but the crowing of his own brains that tunes it into a construction to serve his turn and not the sense and meaning of the place it self The words of the Evangelist are these Peter said unto him Lord why cannot I follow thee now I will lay down my life for thy sake Iesus answered wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake verily verily I say unto thee the Cock shall not crow till thou hast denied me thrice For the understanding of these words I would desire the Reader to observe these two things 1. That Christ in Mat. 26.34 saith verily I say unto thee that this night before the Cock crow c. and Mar. 14.30 That this day even in this night before the Cock crow twice c. for that was indeed the very night in which Peter did deny him but here in Iohn 13.38 he doth not so determine the time but saith onely the Cock shall not crow c. 2. That by these words The Cock shall not crow till thou hast denied me thrice he meaneth not thou shalt deny me thrice before any Cock crow for he denied him but once before a Cock crew as is plain Mar. 14.68 69 70 but he meaneth thou shalt deny me thrice in the space of Cocks crowing which space was the third part of the night Mat. 13.35 And so Mark helpeth to understand it when in him it is explained before the Cock crow twice c. Mar. 14.30 This therefore helpeth Mr Hemings cause never a jot nor proveth it that that night Ioh. 13. was the night that Peter denied Christ for Christ might have said as much as he saith there a twelve moneth before Peter denied him and yet the sense very sound and currant Peter art thou so confident and resolute I tell thee that the time will come when in the time of cocks crowing thou shalt deny me three times over Now whereas Mr Heming would have you compare John 13.37.38 with Iohn 18.1 2 3. his meaning is to this purpose that Christ having given Peter notice of his deniall and spoken these words in Chap. 14. 15 16. 17. he presently goes over the brook Kidron and there is apprehended but he would make you leap over a stile by the way and take no notice of it and so you may chance break your shins What makes he of that clause John 14 3● Arise let us go hence let him tell me whether Christ went now I know he will say he rose from the Table after the Sacrament and went out of doores towards Kidron and spoke the passages in Chapter 15. and 16. 17. as hee walkt along In very good time and a very likely businesse but Iohn 18.1 saith when he had spoken these words he went forth construe me that Argum. 2. A second Argument that I use to prove that the Supper in Iohn 13. was before the Passeover day is from

verse 27 28 29 of that Chapter where when Iudas had received the sop and Satan and Iesus said to him What thou doest doe quickly Some of the Disciples thought because Iudas had the bag that Iesus had said unto him buy those things that we have need of against the feast Now if they had things to buy against the feast the feast was not yet come The answer that Master Heming returns to this Argument is first thus Perhaps Christ did not eat the Paschall Lamb upon the same day the Jewes did c. And then the feast the Disciples dreamed of might very well be the Iewes Passeover kept a day after I could speak more for proof of this from Iohn 18.21 and 19.14 then ever Mr. Lightfoot will be able to answer Reply Perhaps the Evangelists are not to be believed because they speak contrary to Master Hemings humour for they tell you as plain as plaine can bee that Christ did eat the Paschall Lamb upon the same day that the Iewes did See Matth. 26.17 Mark 14.12 Luk. 27.7.8 And yet he puts a perhaps upon it to squeeze out something to his purpose Sure the man did not know that the Paschall Lambes were slaine by the Priests at the Altar and the blood sprinkled there and they slaine and the blood sprinkled in the name of a Paschall and sure he did not know how high a transgression it was reputed by the Iewes to eat the Passeover on a wrong day had he known and weighed these things perhaps he would find it a harder businesse for Christ to eat the Passeover a day before the Iewes then he dreamed of But why do I talk of such things as these to him when he puts a perhaps upon so plaine Texts of the Evangelists As for that tiring work that he would set me upon out of John 18.28 and 19.14 I will tell him this before hand that if I can make nothing of those places I will deny mine own skill judgement and opinion before I will deny the plaine text of the Evangelists as he doth But I need not to eat mine assertion for any thing that those places hold out against it Hee is it but little acquainted with Scripture or with the Iewes customes about the Passeover that knowes not that there were Passeover Bullocks and other Peace-offerings to be eaten in the week of the Feast as well as the Lamb was upon its day 2. Chron. 30.21.24 and 35 7 8. And that these are called the Passeover as well as the Lambe Deut. 16.2 compared with Exod. 12.5 And to take up these Texts which in Master Hemings conception will bee everlasting tiring irons to me in Iohn 18.28 The Iewes went not into Pilates judgement Hall lest they should be defiled but that they might eat the Pass●over that is but that they might eat the solemne Peace-offerings that were to be eaten at the Passeover and which are called the Passeover and that in Chapter 19.14 it was the preparation of the Passeover and about the sixth houre that is it was the day in which they prepared these Paschall bullocks and Peace offerings for their holy diet being the dayes of the feast What so great difficulty is there in these Texts and what incongruity is there in this exposition of them A second Answer that Mr Heming giveth to my Argument is this but I must tell you beforehand it is somewhat homely Observe saith he how he would daub over his own mistake with the untempered morter of the Disciples ignorance what some of them thought proceeded of ignorance Iohn 13. 28.29 c. and a little after For the Disciples ignorance and Mr Lightfoots grounded upon theirs Christ had no moe Feasts Reply Now come out good manners he that useth the Disciples so uncivilly I may put off my Hat and thanke him that he useth me no worse then he doth I must tell the Apostles and Evangelists that let them take heed what they say and how they place their words for if they speak but one syllable awry from Mr. Hemings humour he will tell them what they are before all the Parish And I pray you Sir what were the Apostles ignorant of that one may dawbe walls with their ignorance Could they not tell whether the feast were come or no That 's the question that you and I are upon out of the words in Iohn 13.28 29. and if you say they were ignorant of that you speak like Mr. Heming in state and majesty and if they were ignorant of that they were ignorant to the purpose Come on my boyes and girles when Holidayes were in fashion could you tell when a Holiday came If you could you were wiser then Mr. Heming holds the Disciples were But it may be he will say that he doth not mean they were ignorant of this but of something else as he saith They knew not that he was to be betrayed that night why what is this to our question The Evangelist saith They thought Iesus had bidden Judas buy something against the feast hereupon I say if it were against the feast the feast was not yet come To this he gives this answer what some of them thought proceeded of ignorance for they knew not that he was to be betrayed Is not this an answer as profound and direct in it selfe as it is well mannered towards the Disciples I say still the Disciples thought Judas had been bidden to buy something against the feast ergo the Disciples knew that the feast was not yet come Let him answer me this directly and like a man that desireth to find out the truth Arg. 3 And third Argument that I give to prove that that supper Joh. 13. was before the Passeover day and not on it proves a pitfall to Mr. Heming beyond my expectation for I did not think he had been so blind as to have been so caught My words were these We know that the Lords Supper was given the Passoever day at night viz. the first Sabbath of the Feast the meaning of my argument I shall give by and by Now Mr. Heming thinketh that I speak the savourest and bravest nonsense that ever did man I shall give his censure in his words at length and not in figures for it is pity any of it should be lost Pag. 1 Whereas he saith saith he That we know the Lords Supper was given on the Passeover day at night viz the first Sabbath of the Feast whereon the Iews are the Paschall Lamb I am afraid he understandeth neither what hee saith nor whereof be affirmeth But be it so and then 1. How was Christ upon the Crosse on the preparation day the day before the Sabbath according to those Scriptures Mat. 27.62 Mark 15.42 Luke 23.54 Ioh. 18.28 19.14 31 42 verses 2. How could he rise the day after the Sabbath namely the first day of the week Mar. 16.2 Mat. 28.1 since hee lay-three dayes in the grave Doth the man beleeve thinke yee that Christ

ate the Passeover a day or two after he was dead or that be did rise the next day after he had eaten it Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici What day thinks be Christ was betrayed and taken or how long-was it between his taking and crucifying I wish the man bee not found tardy here Repl. You have your wish into your own bosom that with a witness It is not I that am found tardy here but yourself so as that you 'l be ashamed of it when you see it I warrant you Mr. Heming and his Disciples have had many a pleasant laughing and triumphing fit over this poor sentence of mine and have hug'd one another in this advantage of nonsense as he has set it out no doubt most learnedly to them Mee thinkes I see him scratch the elbow and hear him laugh hither But I must put him in mind of Seneca's wifes fool again hee cries out I am blind when the blindnesse is his owne This great Master of Israel never dreamed in all his life of any Sabbath but only the ordinary weekly Sabbath and from this ignorance comes all this laughter but it seems I must be his teacher now and inform him that the first and last day in the Passeover week was a Sabbaticall day or a Sabbath and so was also the first and last day of the Feast of Tabernacles c. Had he but well weighted Exod. 12.16 Levit. 23.7 and seriously consulted how the word Sabbath is to be understood in Levit. 23.15 I am sure he would have gone a mile on my errand before he would have given this censure upon those words of mine for his own credits sake Why do you not laugh now Mr. Heming I hope I have you here at a full check mate and I suppose by this time you see that the more you have triumphed over mee here the more shamefully you have discovered your own ignorance Would you not give a gray groat now with all your heart that these words of yours had never been born Be wiser another time you know not what an art I have of setting mousetraps I say therefore again that on the Passeover day at night the first Sabbath or first Sabbaticall day of the feast was entred and hereupon I argue thus The Disciples when Iudas had received the sop and Jesus bad him Quod facis fac cito thought that he bad him buy something But if that were the Passeover night the Sabbath was now entred and buying any thing was neither lawfull nor possible Therefore that was not on the Passeover night but some night before For it is senselesse and groundlesse to think that the Disciples should think of Christs bidding him buy something when nothing was possibly to be bought Upon that text therefore Iohn 13.29 Some thought that Iesus had said unto him Buy those things that we have need of against the feast I conclude 1. That that was not at the Passeover supper because then nothing could be bought a Sabbaticall day being entred And 2. That that was before the feast of the Passeover because the Disciples thought of buying something against the feast If this my arguing be not direct let him correct mee if it bee let him give mee direct answers if hee can Pag. But before I leave this text and argument will you heare a piece of Logicke that he venteth upon my arguing from it If from this Scripture saith he be will conclude that there was another feast why may not I conclude that Judas gave something to the poore Reply Braines and staires are not better Ryme then this is Reason I know not what Your Logick may conclude but another to conclude so I must tell him it is to take up more then comes to his share If I had concluded from this Scripture that Judas bought something against the feast you might have concluded in equity that Judas gave something to the poore but when I conclude no more but this that there was a feast your share of concluding comes to no more but this that there were some poore And as properly as one may conclude that there were some poore to whom something was to be given from this because they thought he bad give something to the poore so as properly may it be concluded that the feast was to come against which something was to bee bought from this because they thought he bade him buy something against the feast Arg. A fourth Argument I use to prove that the Supper in Joh. 13. at which the sop was given to Judas was not on the Passeover day but before is this The Devill entred into Judas before the feast of the Passeover came But the Devill entred into Judas at the Supper in Joh. 13. Ergo That Supper Joh. 13. was before the feast of the Passeover came The major is proved Luk. 22.3 Satan entred into Judas c. ver 7. Then came the day of unleavened bread c. By which it is apparent that Satan was entred into Judas before the day of unleavened bread or the Passeover day came unlesse Mr. Heming will except at the Evangelists Order which if he doe let him give a good reason why lest hee shew himself too bold with the text for his own turn To the force of this Argument he answers nothing but only because I said The Devill entred into Judas at Bethany hee catches up the word Bethany and keeps a coyle with that but to the pith of the Argument he saith nothing Only in what answer he giveth to this Argument which indeed is to no purpose let me challenge him upon one passage which is utterly shamelesse and that is when he saith The conspiracy is as cleerly placed before the sop as before the Passeover but Dic quibus in terris Phyllida solus habeto Let him but shew me where and then I 'le say he speaks like a Scripture man but if he cannot I must say it is extreame impudence and impiety to assert any such thing for he makes his fancy equall with the sacred text There is not one syllable letter or tittle in all the Gospel that Judas conspiracy was before the sop but there is as plaine an evidence that his conspiracy was before the Passeover as there is of any thing in the Gospel and yet because this Gentleman hath fancied that the sop was given on the Passeover night he dares to equall his fancy with the divine writ and say The conspiracy is as cleerly placed before the sop as before the Passeover That is in his brains but no where else well fare a bold face in time of need Another Argument and wherewith I will clench up all to prove the supper Joh. 13. at which Judas received the sop was before the Passeover day is this That it is not probable nor can be conceived that Judas should receive the sop and so the Devill with it and go to the High Priests and bargain with them receive a Band

John 13. was at Bethany The major proposition that Judas conspiracy began from the Devils entring into him is as cleare in Luke 22.3 4. as the Sunne at noon Then entered Satan into Judas Iscariot being one of the number of the twelve And he went his way and communed with the chiefe Priests and Captaines how he might betray him unto them and they were glad c. and then in vers 7. Then came the day of unleavened bread c. Now let all the world nay his very boyes and girles judge upon this matter Children when did Judas begin his treason Why Satan entered into him and then he went his way and communed with the High-priests c. what was this before the Passeover day or no yes it was before for Satan entered into him and he communed with the chiefe Priests c. and then the day of unleavened bread came afterward Would not any boy or girle that hath any capacity and would not any man or woman that reads the Scripture consci●ntiously and is led by the Scriptu●e and leads it not to his owne opinion that he hath taken up understand these words of Luke in this manner Let M. H. give a satisfactory and convincing reason why they are not to be thus understood and he may then crow and triumph but if he cannot then doth he wrest the Scripture and having set downe his owne opinion he will bring the Scripture to it to speake for his purpose by hooke or by crooke I urge the Evangelists words againe Then Satan entered into Judas and he went his way and communed with the chiefe Priests c. and let Mr. Hemings owne Disciples be judges whether this prove not That Judas his conspiracy began from the Devils entering into him and that the Devill entered into him upon his receiving of the sop at the Supper in John 13. they will not deny Now I need not to prove the minor That Judas his conspiracy beganne from Bethany for Mr. Heming doth grant it when he saith Is it not plaine from these places Mat 26.16 Mark 14.11 that from the time Christ reproved Judas for his covetous indignation at the spending of the ointment Pag. 12 hee sought opportunity and from that reproofe tooke occasion to betray him p. 12. and in p. 13. he saith againe Nothing else passed at the Supper at Bethany concerning Iudas but Christs rebuking him for his indignation at the spending of the alabaster box of ointment My conclusion therefore is good till M. H. can give a cleare and satisfactory answer to the proofe of my major which I beleeve hee will hardly do this weeke That the Devils entering into Iudas when he received the sop at the Supper in Iohn 13. was at Bethany All that M. H. saies about this businesse is this Pag. 13 1. Luke 22.3 Speakes nothing at all of the Supper at Bethany nor of any thing done there 2. Though all the Evangelists place the conspiracy before the Passeover yet they place not the giving of the sop at Bethany Read Mat. 26. Mark 14. Iohn 12. and see if you can finde any such thing there Reply So may I answer him againe Iohn 13. speakes nothing of any supper at Ierusalem read the chapter through and see if you can finde any such word or any mention 〈◊〉 the Sacrament there And I may as well argue read Mat. 26. Marke ●● ●ohn 12. and see if you can find any such thing as any sop given at all ergo there was no sop given The man is at bo-peepe and where it will serve his turne you must beleeve such a thing is there though it be not written there and where it will not serve his turne you must not beleeve it because it is not written there nay sometime you must not beleeve it though it be written there I shall take the places he refers you to into handling by and by I yet go further in my assertion because I desire to deal in all plainnesse and I say That supper at Bethany from which Iudas began his conspiracy upon Satans entering into him was two dayes before the Passeover And for the proofe of this I produce Mat. 26.2 Marke 14.1 where there is mention of two dayes before the Passeover and presently after of Christs being at meate in Bethany and then of Iudas his going to the High-priests c. Now here Mr. Heming sheweth all his learning and his sincere dealing with the Scripture on a cluster will you here a new lighted Commentary upon these Texts such a one as you do not heare every day unlesse it be from him and learne but this kinde of way of expounding Scripture and you may hold what you will and bring the Scripture to maintaine it His words are these Pag. 9 The following Scriptures viz. Mat. 26.2 Mark 14.1 do not at all prove the Supper at Bethany to have been just two dayes before the Passeover but that two dayes before the Passeover the chiefe Priests and Scribes sought how they might take Christ by craft and subtilty c. and at last concluded it must bee on the feast day viz. the feast of the Passeover lest there should be an uprore c. Math. 14.1 2. The Supper at Bethany is as likely to have been six daies before the Passeover as two Then Iesus six dayes before the Passeover came to Bethany c. There they made him a supper Iohn 12.1 2. Reply You know what kinde of reading of the Bible he made that found a green bay horse or mule there truly this way of expounding is much like it he that will go such a way may find any thing he hath a minde to but God help them that are led by such an Expositor Mr. Heming reads Marke 14.1 2 3. thus Two dayes before the feast of the Passeover the chiefe Priests sought to take Christ by craft but they said not on the feast day lest there be any uproare And six dayes before the Passeover Iesus being in Bethany as he sate at meat c. Now I pray you is this according to the Gospell of Marke or according to the Gospel of Mr. Heming If this bee not shamelesse wresting of Scripture I know not what is Here are two things that he would foist upon the Evangelists that I durst sweare were never in their meanings The first is that he would perswade you that Matthew and Mark do change the proper order and time of their story telling a story of two dayes before the Passeover first and then telling a story of sixe dayes before the Passeover after it And the second is that hee would perswade you that the supper at Bethany in John 12.1 and the Supper at Bethany in Mat 26.6 Marke 14.3 was one and the same and for this purpose he hath linked Mat. 26. Marke 14. John 12. together four or five times in his discourse as if the matter were past all doubting Let me talke with him a little about