Benjamin. Keach Minister of the Gospel▪ Aetat. 57.

THE JEWISH SABBATH ABROGATED: OR, THE Saturday Sabbatarians confuted. In Two Parts.

First, Proving the Abrogation of the Old Seventh-day Sabbath.

Secondly, That the Lord's-Day is of Di­vine Appointment.

Containing several Sermons newly preach'd upon a special Occasion, wherein are many new Arguments not found in former Authors.


Gal. 5. 1. Stand fast therefore in the Liberty where­with Christ hath made us free, and be not again intangled with the Yoke of Bondage.

LONDON; Printed and sold by John Marshall at the Bible in Grace-Church-street, 1700.

To the READER.

THere is not one Controvertable Point in and about Religion that I less thought to have been concerned with this way, than that contained in these Sermons presented here to thy view, until I was alarm'd on a sudden, and provoked (some few Months ago) to undertake it; there being one Person especially under my charge (who for some time, by his unsettled and wavering Spirit, and aspiring Temper, I feared would be troublesome) who had for some considerable time, unknown to me, suck'd in the Notion of the Jewish Sabbath, and laboured to corrupt many others of the younger sort, some of which, with himself, fell into the Practice of keeping that Day, and cast off the Lord's-day, as not being of Divine Appointment. Some of them being Apprentices, declared they would and could do any Busi­ness or Work for their Masters upon the first Day of the Week: And this Principle they received without acquainting me or the Church with it, or ever coming to me to hear what I had to say against it; insomuch that when it was publickly known, it had almost put the whole Congregation into a flame; but to prevent which, I was desired by divers Members to endeavour to con­vince them by Scripture and solid Arguments, which I laboured to do, but found all was in vain as to several of them.

So that the Brethren saw it was necessary for me to preach upon this Subject, which I my self perceived an absolute ne­cessity to do; and praised be the Lord who hath blessed my Undertaking herein, and answered my hopes, which was not so much to regain those hot-headed and conceited young Men, as to establish, confirm and strengthen all others; many being much startled, and doubting which Day they ought to observe, which the Ringleaders I perceived much gloried at, some of them giving it out, that they hoped to bring over great part of the Congregation to their Opinion; but these seasonable and timely Endeavours, through the Blessing of God, have, I hope, finally prevented their Design, all generally (save them who were at first corrupted) being throughly established in the Observation of the Lord's-day in opposition to the old Seventh-day Sabbath: And several that were wavering told me how fully all their Doubts were resolved by hearing some of these Sermons preached.

[Page iv] These things first mentioned being the occasion of my in­sisting upon this Controversy, I hope all will say my Call was just; and none will or can blame me, that have no prejudice against me. And now also at the request and desire of many (some not Members with us) the Sermons are published, ho­ping they may be of some use to the Church of God in ge­neral.

As to the Work it self, all may perceive that I have taken no small Pains according to my small Ability, in searching not on­ly into God's Word, but also into the Works and Labours of many pious and learned Authors; and I have cited (to confirm my own Arguments) many Passages out of their Writings. (1.) Thinking their words might do more with some Persons, than any thing I my self might say, whose Learning and Abili­ties far exceed mine. (2.) Because few may be ever saw some of these Books. I have, 'tis true, repeated some things two or three times which I look upon emphatical, that they might make the greater Impression on such Readers, for whose sake these Sermons are published, viz. who are not learned; for others need not my help.

Reader, I did not (for some reasons) deliver from the Pul­pit great part of what is here published; and also some things I might say that are here omitted, which being not in my Notes, I could not remember.

Dr. Owen, Dr. Wallis, Mr. Warren, &c. in particular, with several other Reverend Ministers, have said enough to satisfy any on this Subject, whose Books have not ever been answered. In my Citations of divers Authors, I have transcribed both the Greek and Latin, that all may know the original words, of which our Opponents would make some earnings; and I can solemnly say I have not wilfully mist in any Quotation. And if any of these Sabbatarians make Reply to me, let them rather answer them (especially those three I have now mentioned) than me, it will be more for their Honour: And this I will say, if they do think to reply, unless they answer what these and other learned Men have said which I have here recited, I shall take it for no Answer at all: Let them therefore attempt to do it effectually, or not meddle with it.

'Tis true, I differ from divers learned Men in one or two things I have cited, and from Reverend Dr. Owen particularly, i. e. about Adam in Innocency, and the Patriarchs keeping the [...]eventh Day; yet what the Doctor saith on Heb. 4. doth well [Page v] comport with my Principle: but tho as soon as God finished his Work, he rested, and that day of Rest ensued thereon, to answer the end of Creation, and the Covenant of Works; yet I can't see any ground to believe it was given to any to observe until Moses's time, Exod. 16. for reasons I and others have given. Moreover, Dr. Wallis has shewed in his Rejoiner to Mr. Bamfield, p. 123. that that very Day before it rained Manna could not be a Sabbath, because on that day Quails covered the Camp, and they were not forbid to gather them, Exod. 16. 8, 13. But no more of that here. I expect better usage or treatment from these Opponents than I met formerly with from some others a­bout another Controversy, who left the Argument to abuse my Person; yet I may say (with a late Mr. Grascome. Writer on this Subject) as for the Leaders (he saith Deceivers) I despair of doing good to them, but shall be glad if I may be an Instrument to recover any that are misled, or deceived: Self-denial is a hard Lesson. You will find many new Arguments I think not found in former Au­thors. I shall conclude with Advice to unsettled Persons, who are ready to receive Novelties. But first, take a Note or two how you may know such: they that are firmly rooted in the Truth will not be soon shaken or removed.

Erronious Persons, 1. Are subject to cavil with Truth doubt­fully uttered, which by an honest Hearer will be well taken.

2. They are subject to contradict plain evident Truth with a delight to gainsay it, because they would not have it to be other­wise than they believe.

3. They have a vehement desire to infect others, or to draw many to be of their Opinion.

4. A desire of Conference under pretence of taking Satis­faction, but on purpose to vent their Notions more freely, and get the good opinion of others, and occasion of insulting.

5. Commend themselves thro Pride, and diminish the Cre­dit and Honour of others, and care not what pious Congregations they divide and trouble, to augment their own Company.

6. Make a Profession of new Light, that hardly any before them ever attained, and that all are in darkness but themselves.

7. Pretend to Conscience, and that they would imbrace the Truth when they see it: yet after clear Demonstration of Truth they remain stubborn, and persevere in their Errors.

8. They matter not Church-dealings, nor any just and righte­ous [Page vi] Censure, nor regard their own most solemn Church-Engage­ments, so that they can but please their own fancy, and feed on their new Notions the more greedily—And hardly can a Man re­ceive an Error, but he will prove a Seducer of others.

9. They shew great Zeal and concernedness of Mind if they find any oppose their Errors, as if their All lay at stake.

10. And if they receive one Error, they are ready to receive more.

11. They commonly seem uneasy under the Word where they are Members, and catch at any thing to blemish their Mi­nister, and will wander abroad to hear as their fancies lead them, as if under no Government, tho they grieve and afflict the Church and Members to whom they belong, breaking Christ's Bands, and casting his Cords from them.

To close, (1.) Take heed of erronious Books, and if you doubt do not presently turn your Doubts into Practice. (2.) Be­ware of your own private Interpretation of Scripture, and con­fer with such as have better Judgments than your selves. (3.) Suspect all private Opinions which differ and dissent from the general Doctrine, as taught by Christ and his Apostles, and owned in the two next Ages after them, or that dissent from the general Doctrine and Practice of such whom you believe in this Age have obtained the clearest Light: remember the way of Truth is no By-path, but trodden by the Primitive Flock or Gospel-Churches. (4.) Besure hear what can be said against your Notion, as well as what you hear for it. There is one thing I should have noted touching the Error of these Sabbatarians, viz. their Notion brings in an external force upon the Conscience in matters of Religion; for they must force their Children and Servants not only to rest, but to worship God on the seventh Day tho against their Light, or they are guilty of Sabbath­breaking. But I will add no more.

O that God would put a Rebuke on, and stop all the Errors of these evil days, and increase Love among his People! Let us all cry for more of the Anointing, or for the latter Rain, and the glorious Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, that is now just at the door. And, Reader, if thou dost receive any profit by what is here wrote, give the Glory to God, and let me have thy Prayers, who am thy Soul's Friend and Servant in the Gospel,

Benj. Keach.

The Contents of this Book.

The First Part.
  • SErmon I. The occasion of these Sermons, with the Scope of the Text, Pag. 1 to 6. The Terms opened, and eight Explanatory Propositions, p. 6 to 16.
  • Serm. II. The 9th Proposition containing many things about this Controversy, out of Dr. Owen on the Sab. p. 23 to 27. The General Proposition from whence the Author proceeds in his whole Work, in six Particulars, p. 28, 29. No Law of the Sabbath written in Adam's Heart in Innocen­cy, shewed in six Particulars, p. 29 to 35. No positive Command given to Adam to keep the 7th day as a Sab­bath, proved by 12 Arguments, p. 37 to 56.
  • Serm. III. The Patriarchs kept not the 7th day, proved in 12 Arguments. p. 58 to 74.
  • Serm. IV. The Sabbath begun in the Wilderness of Sin, Ex­od. 16. p. 75, 76. What a Moral Precept is, shew'd from the Learned, p. 88, 89. The simple Morality of the 4th Com­mand consists not in the observance of the precise 7th Day, proved by 4 Arguments, p. 86 to 91.
  • Serm. V. Eight Arguments more to prove the same, p. 93 to 124. The 7th Day a sign of the Covenant of Works, p. [...], 104. What a Shadow of, p. 107.
  • Serm. 6. The Law of the Decalogue was only given to Israel and Proselites, p. 125 to 133. Objections answered from Rom. 3. 19. Gal. 4. 5. and James, p. 133 to 135. The Moral Law in the hand of Christ as Mediator, p. 136 to 147. No Precept nor Precedent to keep the 7th day in the New Testament, p. 147 to 152.
  • Serm. VII. Ten Arguments against the 7th Day, p. 155 to 158. The Law of the 7th Day Sabbath not written in the Hearts of Gospel-Believers; p. 156, 157. Twelve dan­gerous Consequents attending the Opinion of these Sabba­tarians, p. 161 to 172.
The second Part.
  • [Page]SErmon I. The Scope of the Text opened, p. 175, 176. The first Day of Divine Appointment: Man has no power to appoint a weekly Day of Worship, p. 178, 179. The Equity of one Day in seven, p. 180. How to di­stinguish Moral Precepts from Ceremonial, p. 181, 182. Pentecost proved the first Day of the Week. A long ci­tation of Mr. Warren, who cites Dr. Ulher's Letter to Dr. Twiss, from p. 186 to 198.
  • Serm. II. The Foundation of the first Day; partly containing Citations of Dr. Owen on Heb. 4. from p. 200 to 221. This is the Day the Lord hath made, p. 210 to 214. First day confirmed by the Examples of the Gospel-Saints and Churches, p. 214 to 223.
  • Serm. III. First day proved from Acts 20. 7. p. 224. Also from Rev. 1. 10. The Lord's Day proved to be the first Day of the Week, p. 224 to 248.
  • Serm. 4. Proving there is one Day of the Week for preach­ing the Word in season, and that 'tis the first Day, p. 248, 249. The first Day proved from 1 Cor. 16. 12. p. 250. to 264. When the first Day begins, and how it ought to be kept, from p. 266 to the end.

Faults escaped the Press, which before you read pray correct with your Pen.

PAge 23. in the Contents, line 6. for no, read any. P. 93. l. 5. for six, r. eight. P. 104. l. 11. for God's Covenant, r. is called the Covenant. P. 132. last line save one, r. not without Law to God. P. 140. l. 26. for breaking, r. breakers. P. 142. last line, for by, r. is. P. 143. l. 3. blot out Law. P. 147. l. 33. r. Sabbath was made, blot out not. P. 180. l. 27. for he, r. our. P. 205. Title, for Heb. 4. 11. r. Heb. 4. 9. and so P. 207. P. 219. l. 16. f. had they met, r. meeting together. P. 249. l. 25. for ap­proved it, r. and he approved of it. P. 263. l. 26. for when they that intimate, r. when they intimate.

The Jewish Sabbath Abrogated, or the Saturday Sabbatarian confuted, &c.


The occasion of the Author's preaching on this Subject. The scope and coherence of the Text open'd. The Terms explain'd, and the Doctrines raised. Divers preliminary Propositions, shewing what Medium the Au­thor intends to take in treating on this Sub­ject.

Gal. iv. 10, 11.‘Ye observe days and months, times and years: I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.’

MY Brethren, The occasi­on of the Author's preaching these Ser­mons. I am troubled I have such a provoking occasion to enter upon this Controversy, viz. What day of the Week we under the Gospel Dispensation ought to observe as a day of Rest, and of solemn Worship to the Lord, since universally the Church and People of God [Page 2] of all Persuasions are agreed about it, and have been ever since the new World, or Gospel-day did commence, except a few Christians formerly, and a little Remnant of late times in this Na­tion, who have deserted, and err'd in this case. And had I not a clear Call to enter upon this Subject, thro the inadvertence of some young Men among us, I had not meddled with it; who have not only, without advising with me or the Congregation, presum'd to keep the Jewish Sabbath, but with an unaccountable and over­heated Zeal have prosecuted their Notion and Practice to the disturbing of the Quiet and Peace of the Congregation. My Brethren, is it not a lamentable thing to see how Satan hath prevail'd to hinder the Power of Godliness, which consisteth not in Meats and Drinks (nor in the Observation of Jewish Days) but in Righteousness, Rom. 14. 17. and Peace, and Joy in the Holy Ghost?

One while he hath endeavour'd to do this by suggesting of strange and uncouth Notions, and Principles that edify not, into the minds of Christians; at another time by raising up need­less Cavils and Objections about the mode of the discharge of a Moral as well as a Gospel-Duty, I mean that of singing the Praises of God, which formerly caus'd no small trouble amongst us, as well as in other Churches.

But when that Controversy was near van­quish'd, so another is rais'd, which I hope God will make me an Instrument to quell also, and utterly drive away hence, he having set me for the defence of the Gospel, and of all pure Gospel-Truths, in this place, in opposition to all In­novations, and Judaical Rites and Observations, which some seem too fond of.

Yet let none mistake me: I shall not censure [Page 3] such as keep the seventh day, provided they lay no stress upon it, but believe they are ob­lig'd by the Authority of Christ (who is Lord of the Sabbath) to observe religiously the Lord's-day, or first day of the Week, free from La­bor, in the Worship and Service of God; pro­vided also they are such as have the command of their own time, and can do it without wronging their Families, or are not by the Ob­servation of the seventh day necessitated to vio­late Precepts that all agree are Moral Duties.

1. In not doing their Fathers; or Masters Bu­siness, in not working six days; for tho it may be said of some, six days Work may be done, yet it may be said of others who are Servants, six days they must work, it being their indispensi­ble Duty so to do.

2. In violating the Fifth Commandment (as the whole Moral Law is in the hands of Christ) which requires Obedience to their Natural and Political Parents: in all things wherein they transgress no Law of God, they ought carefully to subject themselves to them; and in not doing it,Eph. 6. 1. they sin and are guilty before God: Chil­dren, obey your Parents in the Lord; for this is right: the Lord commands it, or it is agree­able to his Will.Rom. 13. 1. Again, it is said, Let every Soul be subject to the higher Powers, Tit. 3. 1. &c. Put them in mind to obey Magistrates, &c. And again,1 Pet. 2. 13. Submit your selves to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake; whether it be to the King, as supreme, &c. Whatsoever Magistrates or Parents do require agreeable to the Divine Will, ought faithfully to be done, and in Con­science to God.

And as to the religious observation of the first day of the week, I shall prove before I have done, that it is agreeable to the Will of [Page 4] God; and those who observe it not, do violate the Rule of the Gospel, or the new Creation, and so break both the Law of God and Man: nay, it grieves my Soul to hear what a Re­proach and Scandal some rash young Men who are Apprentices, have herein brought upon their Profession; and I hear some who know they are Members with us, have unjustly blam'd and censured me and the Church upon that ac­count, not hearing what Pains I have taken to convince them of their great Evil therein: and I do now declare my abhorrence of their Practices and unbecoming Behaviour to their Parents and Masters; and let such as encourage or countenance them, see how they will answer it in the great day.

But not to retain you any longer in a way of Introduction, I shall proceed to my Text.

And first to the occasion of the words,The occasi­on of the words o­pened. which were written by holy Paul, the great Minister of the Gentiles, to the Churches that were then at Galatia; not Church in the singular, but to the Churches (there were more at Galatia than one) so it is express'd 1 Cor. 16. 2. And thus he begins his Epistle, i. e. To the Churches of Galatia, chap. 1. 2.

1. He kindly salutes them, ver. 3. Grace be unto you, and Peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ.

2. But soon upon it he sharply reproves them, ver. 6. I marvel ye are so soon removed from him that called you to another Gospel, ver. 7. Which is not another; but there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ.

Query. What was the Error they were cor­rupted with?

1. I answer, They were by some false Bre­thren taught to mix the Law and the Gospel [Page 5] together in Justification, or to mix Works with Grace: and this is to pervert the Gospel of Christ, and obscure the Doctrine of Free-Grace.

2. They turned to Judaism in respect of the observation of Circumcision and Jewish days: How turn ye again to weak and beggarly Elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in Bondage? chap. 4. vers. 9. Ye having (as if he should say) at­tained to the knowledg of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, the glorious Mediator, Soveraign Lord, and only Lawgiver of his Church, it is strange you should turn again to Moses, and so eclipse the Glory of Christ; this doth not comport with your former knowledg, and of that Revelation you have had of the Truth as it is in Jesus.

By Beggarly Elements he doth not only mean Circumcision, but also observation of Jew­ish Days: Ye observe Days, &c. he doth not mean the Gospel, or New Testament days of Worship, but Jewish days; he could not be a­fraid of them if they had only observ'd the first day of the Week, because he had given charge to these Churches as well as others, religiously to keep it, as appears 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2, 3. but they observ'd the Jewish Sabbath, and other Old Testament days; nay, and they laid such stress upon them, as to make the observation of them necessary to eternal Life, as some do now, by affirming the keeping of the Seventh-day, or old Jewish Sabbath, is a Moral Duty, being of the same nature with the first Commandment, viz. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, or any other simple Moral Precept. True, such at Rome as did esteem some other day besides the first Day of the Week, and lookt upon it as an indifferent thing, were not reproved, as Rom. 14. 5. The converted Jews perhaps thought [Page 6] they might keep the Jewish Sabbath as well as the Lord's-Day, and Paul dealt with them for a time as Children, or Babes in Christ.

But when any came to plead for it as a Mo­ral Duty, or as necessary to Salvation, how sharp was he with them? I am afraid of you. From hence by the way observe,

That Jewish-day and shadowy Ordinances un­der the Law, in comparison of New Testament Ordinances, are but weak and beggerly Ele­ments.

The Explanation.

1. By Days, The Terms of the Text explained. I understand the Jewish weekly Sabbath-days.

2. By Months, is meant their New Moons or monthly Sabbaths, which were every new Moon.

3. By Times, the Feasts of the Passover, the Feast of Pentecost, and that of Tabernacles.

4. By Years, every seventh Year, and every fiftieth Year, which was their great Jubilee. I find divers learned Men thus explaining these Terms;Perkins on Gal. p. 285. and tho Mr. Perkins seems to go astray afterwards, yet he speaks much to the same purpose.

Now, my Brethren, the reasons why I con­clude by Days here, are meant the Jewish week­ly Sabbath-days, are,

First, Because when Moses speaks of their Feasts, and Holy-days, he brings in first of all their Seventh-day Sabbath, Levit. 23.

Secondly, If Days, Months, Times and Years, comprehend all Days, Months, Times, and Years which the Jews observed; then their Se­venth-day Sabbath is comprehended here: but Days, Months, Times, and Years, comprehend all Days, Months, Times and Years, that the Jews observed; therefore it comprehends their Seventh Day here.

[Page 7] If the Minor be denyed, let our Opponents, or any Person shew where Days, Months, Times, and Years are mentioned, and yet the Seventh-day not comprehended.

Perhaps it may be objected by some who keep the Jewish Sabbath, Object. That the Seventh Day is every where in Scripture expressed in the singular Number, i. e. Day, not Days.

That is not true;Answ. for in several places the Se­venth-day is expressed in the plural Number, i. e. Days: the Jews themselves called it Days; And they asked him, Mat. 12. 10. saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath Days? see Matth. 12. 5. My Sabbaths ye shall keep, 'tis a Sign, &c. Deut. 31. 13. In the Greek 'tis read Sabbaths, Exod. 28. 8. and Deut. 5. 12. as the Learned in that Lan­guage shew; and all Men of note, both Anti­ent and Modern Expositors of Holy Scripture, saith my Author,Dr. White p. 165. expound St. Paul, Col. 2. 17. of Weekly Sabbaths as well as Annual Sab­baths.

Again it is objected, Object. 2. That the Days, Months, Times, and Years, were not Jewish but Heathen­ish Days, &c. Thus Coppinger in his Dispute with Mr. Ives; because, 'tis said, they did Ser­vice to them who by nature are no Gods.

That there were Jews among these Galatians is evident:Answ. Yet if otherwise, i. e. tho they were Gentiles, 'tis clear they desired to be un­der the Law. Tell me ye that desire to be un­der the Law, do you hear the Law? You that desire to be circumcised, and to observe the Jewish Sabbath, and other Mosaical Times and Seasons; Do you hear the Law, i. e. do you not know that the Bond-woman and her Son are cast out, that the Sinai Covenant that gen­dered to Bondage is abolished, and the Law given on Mount Sinai as a Rule of Righteous­ness, [Page 8] is put into the hands of the Son of God considered as Mediator? Heb. 12. 2. Ye are not come to Mount Sinai, but to Mount Sion; and are not now to hear him that spoke of Earth, but him that speaketh from Heaven: as if Paul should have said, Do not you know that Circumcision, the Seventh-day Sabbaths, and other Jewish Times,2 Cor. 5. 17, 18, 19, 20. Seasons, and legal Rites, are gone, even all old things, and that all things are become new?

My Brethren, these Christians did not desire to be under the observation of Heathenish, but of Jewish Days.

They are called the Elements of the World,Object. 3. therefore not Jewish days.

1. The Jewish Rites were called the Ele­ments of the World;Answ. for does not Paul say, We when Children were in bondage under the Ele­ments of the World? Gal. 4. 2, 3.

2. Besides, they were such Rudiments as the Jews were to observe till the appointed time of the Father. Now the Father never appointed his Children Gentile idolatrous Rudiments, therefore they could not be Heathenish Days.

3. What Heathenish Nation kept the se­venth, or the fiftieth Year as a Sabbath? For by Years in our Text, our Antagonists confess are meant those Years; and I am sure by all Ex­positors 'tis so understood.

4. The Jewish Sanctuary is called a Worldly Sanctuary; see Heb. 9. 1. Then verily the first Covenant had also Ordinances of Divine Service, and a Worldly Sanctuary.

5. It is evident the Apostle means Mosaical Rudiments, by blaming of Peter, who would have the Gentiles live after the manner of the Jews, Gal. 2. 14. Moreover, he refers, as all may see, to the Jewish Yoke, Gal. 5. 1, 2.

[Page 9] 6. To put it quite out of doubt what Days he intends, read Col. 2. 16. Let no man judg you in Meats, or Drinks, or in respect of a holy Day, or of the New Moons, or of the Sabbath Days; which are a Shadow of things to come, but the Body is of Christ.

I. Now were any of the Idolatrous Days a­mong the Heathen, shadows of things to come, or of Christ? was he, or that Rest he hath brought in, the Antitype of them?

II. He speaks of a Holy Day, as a Term gi­ven to the Seventh-Day in the Old Testament, and of Sabbath-Days; and do any think he means by neither the Seventh-Day Sabbath, and yet speaks of Sabbath-Days distinct from New-Moons, Times, and Years? Certainly he must intend, in one or the other, the Jewish weekly Sabbath days. I find a very Learned Man writing on this Text, speaking thus, viz. for which also he cites St. Hierom: Paul writ this Epistle in the sixteenth year after Christ; he lays it positively down that the Sabbath was now abrogated, with the other Cere­monies which were to vanish at Christ's com­ing. Let no man judg you, &c. the Sabbath, saith he, is well match'd with Meats and Drinks, New Moons, and Holy Days, which were all Temporary Ordinances, and to go off the stage at our Saviour's entrance.’ And that Paul means the Seventh-day Sabbaths, he cites Ambrose, Hierom, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, Augustin, and their particular Books: that they understood Paul thus in Col. 2. 16. as he did,Praefat. in Galat. A­pocal. 10. take what Hierom saith as follows; ‘There is no Sermon of the Apostles, saith he, either delivered by Epistle, or by word of Mouth, wherein he labours not to prove, that all the Burdens of the Law are now laid away (that [Page 10] all those things which were before in Types and Figures, namely the Sabbath, Circumci­sion, the New Moons, and the three Solemn Festivals) did cease upon preaching the Gospel.’

In the Context, and from these Verses, the weekly Sabbath no doubt is included: For,

1. It is part of the Hand-writing, vers. 14.

2. It is a Shadow, &c. vers. 17.

3. They are commanded not to submit to the Censures of men herein, vers. 16.

And whereas it is objected, Object. The Apostle doth not mean the Weekly Sabbath.

1. It is certain that the primary (and almost constant) use of the word Sabbath, Answ. is to denote that weekly Day of Rest which God com­manded the Jews to observe;Read Mr. Baxter on the Subject. and whereas it is applied to any other Days, 'tis in allusion to this, because of the Rest from servile Work upon them; in which respect they were like to the Weekly Sabbath, as appears Levit. 16. 31. and Chap. 23, 24, 32, 39. which are all the places where the word Sabbath is expresly ap­plied to any other days: And therefore the primary and almost constant use of the word ought not to be forsaken.

2. Wherever the word Sabbaths is used ab­solutely, as here, without any expression in the Text to limit it, 'tis to be understood of the Weekly Sabbath: The reason of which Rule is obvious, because otherwise the Scripture would be of doubtful Interpretation, and, as 1 Cor. 14. 8. the Trumpet would give an uncer­tain sound.

3. Therefore, as I said, wherever the word Sabbaths is used, as here, with distinction from Holy Days, or Feasts, and New Moons, it must mean the Weekly Sabbaths, otherwise the Apo­stle would be guilty of an unnecessary Tauto­logy, [Page 11] it being certain there is no other Day cal­led a Sabbath in Scripture, but what is included in those two words. Therefore I conclude, by Sabbaths in this Text not only may, but must be understood the Weekly Sabbath; and con­sequently it proves not only that Christians are not bound to observe the Jewish Sabbath, but that they ought not so to do.

Take here what Mr. Baxter saith on this Text,Baxter on the Lord's Day, P. 167 viz. ‘How plainly and expresly Paul numbereth Sabbaths with Shadows that cease, see Col. 2. 16. to pass by other Texts; and what violence mens own Wits must use in denying the Evidence of so plain a Text. The Reason that he saith not Sabbath, but Sabbaths, is against themselves, the plural Number being most comprehensive, and o­ther Sabbaths receiving their name from this▪ And the word Sabbath is always used in Scripture for a Rest, which was partly Ce­remonial. See what Dr. Young in his excel­lent Dies Domin.saith, &c.

III. Moreover, can any serious thinking Chri­stian suppose that Paul, the great Apostle of the Gentiles, would thus write of Sabbath Days, New Moons, Times and Years, with­out exception, if the Seventh-day Sabbath had remained as the Sabbath of the Lord, and the Day of Gospel-worship? What, speak thus without restriction, or intimation, and yet not include the Seventh-day Sabbath! Had not that Day been comprehended and meant by Sabbath Days, sure he had let this Church have known it; it behoved him to be faithful to us, who was our Apostle, and so he says he was, and had declared the whole Counsel of God, Acts 20. yet makes no mention of any such Jewish Sabbath to be our duty to observe, but the direct con­trary, [Page 12] that it was a Shadow, and that we are not to be judged or condemn'd, who regard it not any more than other Times, as New Moons, &c.

But saith the Seventh-day Sabbatarian,Object. The Ordinances of the Law were glorious, therefore Paul could not refer to them when he speaks of beg­gerly Elements. Thus Tillam.

When compared to the Ordinances of the Gospel,Answ. they may be called weak and beggerly, as Paul shews, speaking of the Law written in two Tables of Stone, which he calls glorious, 2 Cor. 3. 7. yet a ministration of Death and Condemnation, vers. 9. For even that which was made glorious, had no Glory in this respect, by reason of the Glory that excelleth, vers. 10. The Shadow seems glorious till the Substance comes; but what Glory appears in it then? None at all. What is the Glory of the Moon when the Sun appears and shines forth splendidly? So what signifies the Shadow of Rest, to the true Antitypical Sabbath of Rest which we have in Christ? we that believe, do enter into Rest.

Besides, St. Paul calls Jewish Ordinances, Carnal Ordinances; which terms as much e­clipse their Glory, as to call them weak and beggerly Elements; Heb. 9. 10. Meats and Drinks, and divers Washings, and carnal Ordi­nances. Carnal Ordinances, no doubt, include all the Jewish Sabbaths, viz. Days, Months, Times, and Years, as well as Circumcision, le­gal Washings, and Sacrifices.

The Apostle calls them not only carnal, weak, and beggerly Elements, but unprofitable: There was a disannulling of the Commandment going before, Heb. 7. 18. for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. Take here what Calvin saith, tho I in some things differ from him. ‘For seeing in [Page 13] the Lord's Resurrection is found the end and fulfilling of the true Rest,Instit. 2. c. 8. Sect. 34. which the old Sabbath shadowed; by that very day, which set an end to those Shadows, Christians are admonished not to stick to the shadowing Ceremony.’ He it seems concludes, that the Jewish Weekly Sabbath, as well as their Fellows, was a Shadow of that Rest we have in Christ.

Take also what another nameless Author saith concerning the Antient Fathers.

‘St. Paul sharply reproveth those who al­lowed yet the Jewish Sabbath, i. e. they ob­served Days, Months, Times, and Years, as if he had bestowed his labour in vain upon them, Gal. 4. 10, 11. But more particularly in his Epistle to the Colossians, Chap. 2. 16, 17. Let no man judg you in respect of an Holy Day, or of the New Moons, or of the Sabbath-Days, which were a Shadow of things to come, but the Body is of Christ. Yet notwithstanding all this care, both of the Apostles in gene­ral, and more especially of St. Paul, to sup­press this Error, it grew up still, and had its Patrons and Abettors, Ebion and Cerin­thus, two of the wretchedest Hereticks of the Primitive Times: And after them Apol­linarius is said to countenance and defend it; which doubtless made the Antient Fathers declare themselves fully in it, as a dange­rous Point; it seemed to confirm the Jews in their Incredulity, and might occasi­on others to make question of our Saviour's coming in the Flesh. Hence Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Eusebius, Men of Note in the Primitive Times, affirm, that ne­ver any of the Patriarchs before Moses's Law, observed the Sabbath, which question less they must have done had that Law been [Page 14] moral, and dictated by the Light of Na­ture.’ He cites also Epiphanius and Theodo­ret on Ezech. 20. Procopius on Gen. 2. Da­mascen, and our venerable Bede concurring with the former Fathers: ‘All talk, saith he, that the Observation of the Jewish Sabbath va­nished utterly, &c: I might mention other Authors to the same purpose. But to proceed, my Brethren, because one of my Arguments against the precise Seventh-day Sabbath, will be to prove it a Sign or Shadow of that Rest Be­lievers enter into when they first close with Christ, I shall say no more now by way of Ex­planation of my Text, but proceed to those Points of Doctrine that arise herefrom.

Doct. 1. That it is not the Duty of believing Gentiles under the Dispensation of the Gos­pel, The Doc­trines rai­sed. to keep the Seventh Day as a Sabbath to the Lord.

Doct. 2. That it is a dangerous thing for any to plead for, and keep the seventh day, so i [...] to lay the same stress on the observation there­of, as on a purely natural, or simply mora [...] Precept.

These two Propositions I purpose, God assist­ing, to prosecute, and confirm in this method.

First, I shall lay down several Explanatory Pro­positions.

Secondly, Give many Arguments to prove th [...] truth of the first Proposition.

Thirdly, I shall (taking in the second Propo­sition) endeavour to prove, that the observing the seventh day Sabbath, so as to lay the same stre [...] on it as on a natural and simply moral Precept, [...] a dangerous thing.

Fourthly, I shall prove that all Believers [...] [Page 15] oblig'd to observe the first day of the week free from secular business, in religious Worship, as the time in season only under the Gospel-dispensation.

Fifthly, I shall endeavour to answer all the main Objections brought by our Opponents against the Observation of the first day of the week. To begin,

First Proposition premised. Let it be consi­dered, that the Apostles perceiving the weak­ness of the Jews who believ'd in Christ, to take them off gradually from Jewish Observation of days, and other legal Rites and Ordinances, did admit of the Practice of some of them for a time, till they were better instructed in the Truth as it is in Jesus, the nature of the new Creation, and the change of the whole Law, viz. the utter abolishing of all things Ceremo­nial, or that were Signs and Shadows of things to come, and the removing the ministration of all Moral Precepts from Moses as Lawgiver, in­to the hand of Christ as Mediator, in which ca­pacity he had all Power delegated to him in Hea­ven and Earth as our only Lord and Lawgiver.Mat. 28. 18, 19, 20. Thou seest, Brother, how many thousands of the Jews there are which believe, and they are all zea­lous of the Law; Acts 21. 20. Hence Paul com­plied with them to purify himself, and to shave his Head, v. 24. and on the like account, in com­pliance with their weakness, he circumcised Ti­mothy. I might from hence by the way note, that had we such a Passage that Paul kept one Jewish Sabbath, as we have here of his circum­cising Timothy, I suppose our Brethren would make no small advantage of it, that it is our Duty from thence to keep it; but that might have been on the same account and no better ground, than it would be for us to plead for Circumcision, and be circumcised, as Tillam, [Page 16] Skip and Cooly were (as I am informed) who cal­led themselves the Ministers of the Circumcision.

But to proceed; Upon the same reason per­haps the Jewish Rites, Days, and typical or shadowy Ordinances, might, and were called by their former and antient names, as well as for distinction sake: for tho those legal Or­dinances were dead, yet as our Annotators observe, they were not then deadly (if look'd upon as indifferent things) however God was pleased (they being his own appoint­ments) to vouchsafe them a gradual and de­cent funeral.

Second Proposition. But nevertheless after they had been better instructed into the truth of the Gospel, and the change or end of the Law, they were more plainly dealt with: I mean, he more fully and clearly informed them, and shewed them the great danger if they observed those legal Rites, Days, and Ordinances, espe­cially when he saw they laid such stress upon them, as to make them necessary to eternal Life as a Rule of Obedience.

Hence the Apostle says, I Paul testify unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing, Gal. 5. 1. And why if circumcised? because it was a shadow, and the keeping up the shadow was a virtual denying that the Substance was come; and besides, they were thereby bound to keep the whole Law. Such was the natural tendency of observing one Legal Rite, or Precept, as given by Moses, it being in that Ministration a Covenant of Works; and he that kept one was obliged to keep all, and he that broke one was guilty of all.

1. And if so, why might not Paul have told them the same thing and danger if they kept the legal Sabbath, which led them according to the [Page 17] Tenor of it, and in the strictest observance to perfect Obedience; which is implyed in those words, Thou shalt not think thy own thoughts, nor speak thy own words?

2. Or provided they made it necessary in or­der to a holy Life in point of Obedience, as a pure moral Precept, even of the same nature with the first Commandment, viz. Thou shalt have no other Gods but me; or the second, Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image, &c. or the third, or fifth, or any of the rest; I speak not of what is simply moral in the fourth Com­mandment, but of that precise seventh day: I say, may not their danger be as great, if thus they look'd upon those Jewish Sabbaths, as if circumcised, because then if they kept them not, it necessarily must follow, it would exclude them the Kingdom of Heaven, as all other im­moral Acts, or actual breach of pure moral Pre­cepts would do?

3. Because Paul tells them that those Sabbaths were a Shadow or Sign, so far as Circumcision was, as I have and shall further make appear; and so hereby unwarily they would deny that Christ was come to give us Rest, and we do not yet cease working for Life in order to enter into Rest, which was held forth as the Tenor of that Ministration of the Moral Law by Moses, and particularly in their Sabbath.

Third Proposit. Let it be consider'd that the substance of the whole Moral Law, or ten Com­mandments (I mean materially, not formally) was written in the Heart of Adam in Innocen­cy; and as written there, it contained the Co­venant of Works. And so long as he kept that Law perfectly, he stood justified, and all Man­kind in him: and also that he had but one posi­tive Precept given him to try his Obedience [Page 18] (according to the Tenor of this Covenant, and Law of his Creation) is very evident, viz. Thou shalt not eat of the Tree of Knowledg of Good and Evil, Adam broke all the Command­ments. &c. which positive Command he broke, and in breaking it broke all the ten Commandments as to the matter or substance of them, and consequently the fourth, as to what was simply moral therein.Dr. Light­foot's Mis­cel. p. 282, 283.

Thus Dr. Lightfoot: Adam, saith he, heard as much in the Garden as Israel did at Sinai, but in fewer words, and without Thunder—At one clap he broke all the Ten Command­ments.’

‘I. He chose himself another God, when he follow'd the Devil.’

‘II. He idoliz'd and defil'd his own Belly, making it (as the Apostle phrases it) his God.’

‘III. He took God's Name in vain, when he believ'd him not.’

‘IV. He kept not the Rest and State where­in God had set him.’

‘V. He dishonour'd his Father which was in Heaven, and therefore his days were not prolong'd on Earth.’

‘VI. He murder'd himself and all his Po­sterity.’

‘VII. From Eve he was a Virgin, but in his Eyes and Mind he committed spiritual Adul­tery.

‘VIII. He stole (like Achan) that which God set aside, not to be meddled with, &c.

‘IX. He bare witness against God, when he believ'd the witness of the Devil before him.’

‘X. He coveted an evil Covetousness, like Ammon, which cost him his Life and all his Progeny.

[Page 19] Fourth Proposit. That tho a time of Rest, and a sufficient time to worship God be moral, yet the particular precise day or time must be by Revelation, i. e. by some positive Precept or Example made known to Mankind; it being in God, not in Man, not in Nature, not in Grace: And God hath reserved to himself a Power to require, or to alter both the time, place, and modes of his Worship as seems good in his sight, tho the second and fourth Commandments be moral and of the same nature with the rest. Moreover, God if he please may make a po­sitive Precept perpetual, and alike obligatory as simple moral Precepts are, tho they differ in respect of their own nature.

Fifth Proposit. All natural and pure moral Precepts do, as I conceive, oblige all Mankind, and are unchangeable in their nature as to the matter of them, and differ greatly from Laws or Precepts merely positive. Pure or simple moral Precepts are good, good in themselves, and therefore commanded; but Precepts mere­ly positive and arbitrary are commanded of God, and therefore good: and that Goodness that is in simple moral Precepts I do not con­ceive, See Mr. Shep­herd on the Sabbath, p. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. as Mr. Shepherd hints (if I mistake him not) refers to Man, i. e. sutable to his good chiefly, but in reference to God, from the rectitude of whose holy Nature they proceed. Moreover, 'tis acknowledg'd also that all Pre­cepts naturally and simply moral, are written in the Hearts of all Men, tho much blur'd by Sin, for otherwise the Gentiles had not the Law written in their Hearts, but a part as to the matter of the Law.Rom. 2. 14, 15. Simple moral Precepts are known by the Light of Nature, as to the matter [...]or substance of them. Precepts naturally mo­ral may be known without Revelation, or the [Page 20] knowledg of the Scripture;What Pre­cepts are moral. tho I know some learned Men seem to differ from others here, particularly Mr. Cawdrey and Mr. Palmer, who affirm that some Precepts may be moral by a positive Command,See Mr. Caw­drey Sab­bath Re­div. p. 2, 3. and these others call moral-Positives, which I understand not; yet I deny not (as I said before) but that God may make a positive Command perpetually obligatory. But more to this word moral, when I come to speak of the fourth Commandment in Exod. 20.

Now mere positive Precepts cannot be known unless God by his Word, or in some superna­tural way, discovers them to his Creatures; and such was Circumcision, the precise seventh-day Sabbath, the Passover, and divers other things under the Law: And such is the first day of the week under the Gospel as a day of Rest, and of the solemn Worship of God, as also Baptism, the Lord's-Supper, &c.

Sixth Proposit. That the whole Moral Law is chang'd from Moses to Jesus Christ; not only chang'd as a Covenant of Works, but as a Rule of Life: for tho the Moral Law as to the mat­ter or substance of it perpetually remains as a Rule of Righteousness, yet not as given in the hand of Moses, Exod. 20. but as in the hand of Christ, consider'd as Mediator, who is our sole Lord and Lawgiver, Mat. 28. 18, 19. and that we are to receive the Law from his mouth, who is our antitypical High-Priest; And behold, a Voice from the Cloud which said, This is my beloved Son, hear him: hear him exclusively of Moses. The Disciples would have had three Tabernacles, one for Moses, one for Elias, and another for Christ; i. e. they would have Moses to teach them, or be under his Ministration: but in this Transfiguration, wherein was a clear Representation of the Gospel Church-state (sig­nified [Page 21] by the Kingdom of God) in a Figure, they saw there was none to be heard as a Law­giver but Christ alone; And when they lifted up their Eyes they saw no Man save Jesus only, ver. 8. Certainly their Eyes are not open'd through­ly, who go to Mount Sinai to know what their Duty is in respect of any part of Gospel-Wor­ship, or day of Worship: Compare this place of Scripture with Acts 3. 22, 23. For Moses truly said to the Fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to you, of your Brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatso­ever he shall say unto you. So Heb. 1. 1, 2, 3. And again it is said,Joh. 8. 35. that the Servant abideth not in the House for ever: Moses was a Servant, and he had his day, and he is gone; but the Son abideth for ever.

Seventh Proposit. That as old things are done away, and all things become new; so is the old Seventh-day Sabbath. And it behoves us to call the Gospel-day of Worship, or that Day ap­pointed by Christ in the New Testament, by that Name or Names given therein to it, viz. the first day, and the Lord's-day, and day of Rest, or Sabbath, as Dr. Owen aptly enough calls it on Heb. 4. 11. Therefore tho the day of Rest under the Gospel is not call'd a Sabbath, yet I shall blame none that so call it, since Sab­bath signifies Rest: and this is our only Sab­bath or resting day under this new and last Dis­pensation: but the great Antitype of the Seventh-day Sabbath being come, we do not find that Name directly given to our day of Rest in Gospel times.

Eighth Proposit. That the Moral Law or Law of the ten Commandments, as given Exod. 20. contain'd directly an Administration of the Co­venant of Works, and was not given to Israel as [Page 22] God's People, as in a special and peculiar relation to himself according to the new Covenant, or Covenant of Grace, but as his People in that legal external typical Covenant made with the whole House of Israel. Let it be consider'd also, that that Law and Covenant was not made with, nor given to any other People but the People and House of Israel only: so that as it had but its time, consider'd as a Law given by Moses, or as in his hands, it did cease as so consider'd, and could not oblige any to observe it as there formerly deliver'd (while it was in force) but such only as were under it; tho I deny not, but affirm the whole World were under the Cove­nant of Works in the first Adam, and oblig'd by the Law of God written in their Hearts to discharge all Duties that are naturally and sim­ply moral, &c. Moreover, I shall enquire whether the Morality of the fourth Command­ment doth lie in the Observation of the precise seventh day or not. And now Brethren, by these Propositions all may perceive upon what foot of account, or mediums I purpose to go, or take in handling this great and long controverted Sub­ject. But there is one Proposition more, which I thought to have mention'd now, but must re­fer to the next time.


The ninth Proposition by way of Premise. The method propos'd. One general Propo­sition laid down. Why the Law was added on Mount Sinai. No Seventh-day Sab­bath written in Adam's Heart in Inno­cency: Nor no positive Law given to him to observe it.

Gal. iv. 10, 11.‘Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years: I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.’

MY Brethren, the first thing I promised was to lay down several explanatory Propositions, to make my way the more easy to what I have to say: and I past thro eight; I shall add but one more.

Ninth Proposit. 9th Pro­posit. by way of pre­mise. There are several things to be consider'd in respect of this Controversy, which being noted by Dr. Owen, I shall recite them: ‘Those about the thing it self (saith he) are va­rious, Dr. Owen's Exercit. p. 7, 8, 9. and respect all the concerns of the day enquir'd after. Nothing that relates to it, no part of its respect to the Worship of God, is admitted by all, uncontended about; for it is debated amongst all Persons,’

‘1. Whether any part of time be naturally and morally to be separated and set apart to [Page 24] the solemn Worship of God; or (which is the same) whether it be a natural and moral Duty to separate any part of time in any Revolution of it, to Divine Service; I mean, so as it should be stated and fixed in any pe­riodical Revolution; otherwise to say, that God is solemnly to be worshipped, and yet that no time is requir'd thereto, is an open Contradiction.’

‘2. Whether such a time suppos'd, be abso­lutely and originally moral, or made so by positive Command, suted unto general Prin­ciples and Intimations of Nature: and under this Consideration also, a part of time is call'd moral, metonymically, from the duty of its observance.’

‘3. Whether on a supposition of some part of time so design'd, the space or quantity of it, have its Determination, or Limitation mo­rally, or be merely positive and arbitrary? For the Observation of some part of time may be moral, and the quanta pars arbitrary.’

‘4. Whether every Law positive of the Old Testament were absolutely ceremonial, or whether there may not be a Law moral positive as given to, and obligatory on all Mankind, tho not absolutely written in the Heart of Man by Nature: that is, whether there be no Morality in any Law, but what is a part of the Law of Creation?’

‘5. Whether the Institution of the Seventh-day Sabbath was from the beginning of the World, and before the Fall of Man; or whether it was first appointed when the Isra­elites came into the Wilderness. This in it self is only a matter of Fact, yet such as whereon the determination of a point of right, as to the universal Obligation to the Observa­tion [Page 25] of such a Day doth much depend,So that, according to the Doctor, if it was not in­stituted in Paradise, tho given forth in the Wilder­ness, it can't be universally obligatory on all Mankind. and therefore hath the investigation and true sta­ [...]ng of it, been much la­ [...]our'd in, and after by learned Men.’

‘6. Upon a supposition of the Institution of the Sabbath from the beginning, whether the Additions made, and Observances annexed unto it at the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai, with the Ends whereunto it was then design'd, and the Uses whereunto it was em­ploy'd, gave unto the seventh day a new state distinct from what it had before; altho natu­rally the same day was continued as before. For if they did so, that new state of the day seems only to be taken away under the New Testament; if not, the day it self seems to be abolish'd; The Doctor still, as it seems to me, builds chiefly on its Institution in Para­dise, where we can find no Institution referring to in­nocent Adam. for that some change is made therein, from what was fixed under the Judaical Oeconomy, cannot modestly be deny'd.’

‘7. Whether in the fourth Commandment, there be a foundation of a distinction between a seventh day in general, or one day in seven, and that seventh day which was the same numerically and precisely from the foundation of the World. For whereas an Obligation unto the strict Obser­vation of that day precisely is, as we shall prove, plainly taken away in the Gospel, if the distinction intimated be not allowed, there can be nothing remaining obligatory unto us in that Command, whilst it is sup­posed that that day (the Doctor means the seventh day) is at all requir'd of us from thenceSo that the Mora­lity of the fourth Com­mandment lies not in the precise seventh day..’

[Page 26] ‘8. It is especially enquir'd, whether [...] seventh day, or one in seven, or the Hebd [...] ­madal Cycle be to be observ'd holy unto th [...] Lord, on the account of the fourth Command [...]ment.’

‘9. Whether under the New Testament [...] religious Observation of days be so taken [...] way, as that there is no Divine Obligation [...]maining for the observance of any one da [...] at all; but that as all days are alike in the [...]selves, so are they equally free to be dispos [...] of, and used by us as occasion shall requir [...] For if the observation of one day in seven [...] not founded in the Law of Nature, express [...] in the original positive Command concernin [...] itHe al­ludes to Adam in Paradise, where we can find no express po­sitive Command.; and if it be not seated morally in th [...] fourth Commandment, it is, now certain th [...] the necessary observance of it is taken away.’

‘10. On the other extream, whether th [...] seventh day from the Creation of the World [...] be to be observ'd precisely under the New T [...]stament by virtue of the fourth Comman [...]ment, and no other. The assertion here [...] supposeth that our Lord Jesus Christ, [...] Lord of the Sabbath, hath neither chang'd [...] nor reform'd any thing in and about the re [...]ligious observation of an holy day of Rest unto the Lord: whence it follows, that such an Observation can be no part or act of Evan­gelical Worship properly so call'd, but only a moral Duty of the LawLet our Jewish Sabbata­rians con­sider well what the Doctor po­sitively asserts here..’

‘11. Whether on the supposition of a non-obligation in the Law unto the observation of the seventh day precisely, and of a new day to be observ'd weekly under the New Testa­ment, as a Sabbath of the Lord, on what grounds it is to be observ'd.’

[Page 27] ‘12. Whether from the fourth Command­ment, as one Day in seven, or only unto some part or portion of Time; or whether without any respect unto that Command as purely Ceremonial. For granting (as most do) the necessity of the observation of such a Day; yet some say that it has no respect at all to the fourth decalogical Precept, which is totally and absolutely abolished, with the rest of the Mosaical Institutions. Others say that there is yet remaining in it an Obligati­on to the Sacred Separation of some Time, or portion of Time, unto the solemn Service of God, (and some say that it precisely requires the sanctification of one Day in seven.)’

‘13. If a Day be so now to be observed, it is enquired on what Ground, or on what Au­thority there is an alteration made from the Day observed under the Old Testament, to that now in use, that is, from the last Day to the first Day of the Week; whether was this Translation of the Day of the solemn Worship of God made by Christ and his A­postles, or by the Primitive Church? &c.

‘14. If this were done by the Authority of Christ and his Apostles, whether by an ex­press Institution of this new Day, or whether a direct Example be sufficient, no Institution being needful for the First Day: for if we suppose there is no Obligation to the obser­vance of one Day in seven indispensibly a­biding; and on the supposition that an Ob­ligation to keep one Day in seven doth abide, then no Institution is necessary, or can be properly made as to the whole nature of itNo ex­press Insti­tution is needful for the obser­vance of the first Day; but Examples only if the 7th part of Time, or one day in se­ven, do a­bide in the 4th Com­mand..’ Thus far the Doctor, who says many other things necessary to be considered about the ob­servation of a Day of Worship, whether as [Page 28] to the Work of the Day it ought to be kept with the like strictness as the Jewish Sabbath in all respects, and what Duties are to be per­formed on it; as also as to the proper Limits of that Day, some pleading it ought to be from Evening to Evening as the Jews kept it, or from Morning to Evening, that is from after twelve a Clock in the Morning to twelve the next Evening, &c.

From what the Doctor notes, it appears that the Case in controversy calls for much study and diligence; and it may be accounted an Act of great weakness in any Persons to observe the Seventh Day to the disturbance of the Church, without enquiring of such as God has enlight­ned in these things, and to whom the care of their Souls are committed, to see what can be said against it. Is it wisdom to advise with those only that are for it, and not with such also as are directly against it? This shall suf­fice for the Propositions I first proposed.

I shall endeavour to clear most of those things that seem difficult, which may have been the occasion of some Persons (if not all) going astray, and falling into the Error I purpose clearly and largely to detect.

This brings me to the next general Head of Discourse proposed.

Secondly, I told you I should lay down dive [...] Arguments to prove the Truth of our Proposi­tion, That it is not the Duty of Gentile Be­lievers to keep the Seventh Day as a Sabbath i [...] Gospel-times.

First, The Gene­ral Propo­sition. I shall lay down one General Propositi­on, to discover the Method I shall pursue fo [...] proving what I have taken in hand.

[Page 29] 1. If the Law of God written in Adam's heart in Innocency, did not oblige him to keep the Seventh Day as a Sabbath, that Law cannot ob­lige Gentile Believers to keep it.

2. If a positive Law, or express Institution, sup­posed to be given to Adam before, or just after his Fall, doth not oblige Gentile Believers to keep it:

3. If the Law written in the Hearts of the Gentiles, or the most refined and enlightned among them, doth not oblige Gentile Believers to keep it:

4. If the Law of Moses, or the Law written in the two Tables of Stone, doth not oblige Gen­tile Believers to keep it:

5. If the Gospel, by any Precept or Example, doth not oblige them to keep the Seventh Day as a Sabbath:

6. And lastly, If the Law written in the Hearts of all Gospel-Believers by the Holy Spirit, doth oblige them to keep the Seventh Day as a Sab­bath to the Lord: Then I infer it is not their Duty to keep the Seventh-Day, &c. for I know no other way, or means whereby Gentile Be­lievers can pretend to know they are obliged to keep the Seventh-Day as a Sabbath, or a Day of Rest and solemn Worship. But by none of these ways or means, believing Gentiles are ob­liged to keep the Seventh-Day as a Sabbath, &c. therefore it is not the Duty of Gentile Believers to keep it. To proceed,

1. Let it be considered, that if the keeping of the Seventh-Day as a Sabbath, i. e. that pre­cise Day from the Creation of the World, were a purely natural or simply moral Precept, no doubt but it was legibly written in Adam's Heart; I mean as a Law of Creation, and so part of the holy Image of God, or of the same nature with all other moral Precepts that re­sult from the Perfections of God's holy Na­ture, [Page 30] and not from the Soveraignty of his Will only: And if it was so written in Adam's Heart in Innocency, he needed no positive Law to make it known to him. What, was any thing that was purely or simply moral, even that which belonged to good Manners, or to true natural Godliness or Righteousness, not made known to Adam, to perfect Adam? this certainly cannot be.

That spiritual Worship which is due to God,Charnock on the At­tributes, p. 131. saith Mr. Charnock, is known by the Light of Nature: But much more, say I, was it clearly manifested to Adam in Innocency. ‘But fur­thermore, saith he, the outward means or matter of that Worship which would be ac­ceptable to God, was not known by the Light of Nature: the Law for a spiritual Worship by the Faculties of our Souls was natural, and part of the Law of Creation; tho the deter­mination of the particular Acts, whereby God would have this Homage testified, was of po­sitive Institution, and depended not on the Law of Creation. Tho Adam in Innocence knew God was to be worshipped, yet by nature he did not know by what outward Acts he was to pay this Respect, or at what Time he was more solemnly to be exercised in it than another: This depended on the Di­rections God, as the Soveraign Governor and Lawgiver, should prescribe; you shall there­fore find the positive Institution’ It is observa­ble that this great Man is not here concerned to confute the Seventh-day Sabbatarians, but about another thing; yet affirms (with many other Learned Men) that Adam by the Law of Creation, did not know in Innocency at what time God was more solemnly to be worshipped than another.

[Page 31] 2. No doubt but the substance of all the ten Precepts was wrote in Adam's Heart;The Sub­stance of all Moral Precepts written in Adam's Heart. yet it appears the knowledg of the Seventh-day to be kept as a Sabbath was not written there, tho that which was simply and naturally moral of the fourth Commandment was.

Secondly, I argue thus: If the precise Seventh-day was written in Adam's Heart,The Law of the 7th day Sab­bath not written in Adam's Heart. there had been no need of an Institution or positive Law to make it known to him; for, what more need had he of an outward Revelation of this, than of the other Commandments?

Take here what a Learned Man hath said: Mr. P. a Minister at Rouen in France, p. 3. If the keeping of the Seventh-day were a Moral Duty, our Father Adam, by that Light of Nature God put in his Mind when he created him, would have known it, as well as he knew all other things in themselves good and necessary; but he neither had, nor should have had any knowledg thereof, if God had not injoined it to him by a particular Com­mand, (as those which maintain the morality of the Sabbath do avouch.)’ So that this fol­loweth manifestly, that the observation of the Seventh-day depends merely on Institution.

My Brethren, Let this be considered well, that if the knowledg of the Seventh-day wholly depended on the Will of God, or on mere In­stitution, and resulted not, as all pure and sim­ple moral Precepts do, from the holy Recti­tude of God's Nature, it follows that the pre­cise Day pertains not to the Essence of the Fourth Commandment, but the simple Mora­lity of that Precept lies only in a time of Wor­ship: And certainly if God by a mere positive Command had not given it to Israel, they had no more known it their duty to keep it, than the Pagan World did, who were wholly igno­rant [Page 32] thereof, as I shall prove. And be sure if God wrote not the Law or knowledg of the Seventh-day Sabbath on Adam's Heart; the Seventh-day is not of the same nature with simply moral Precepts, which God en­graved on his Heart, even the substance or tenor of all the Ten Commandments, and made him know them naturally, without any instruction by word of mouth. But it appears by their own Assertion, it was instituted, &c. Therefore the knowledg of the Seventh-day as a special time of Worship, was not wrote in his Heart. Our Opponents dare not deny but the substance of the whole Moral Law was wrote in his Heart, and they foresee it is dangerous to deny it: From whence it appears, that all the other Precepts are simply moral, and so is a time of Worship; but the precise Seventh-day, by their own concession, was instituted in Man's Innocency, and so depends wholly upon an express positive Command, declared to Adam by audible Words resounding in his Ears.

Mr. Tillam says, Tillam's Book, p. 7. It was instituted before the Fall, and founded in Mount Paradise.

Answ. Tho I believe no such matter, nor can any Man prove it, yet to grant it, for Argu­ment-sake, then I say it follows, it was not writ­ten in Adam's Heart; for the being perfect, he would naturally have known it without being told it was his Duty to keep it. For consider that he was created on the Sixth Day, and under­stood what was naturally and universally good▪ i. e. all those Duties that were essential parts of Godliness, and Righteousness, or things belong­ing to good Manners. Now if so, why need he be told he must keep the Seventh-day? or why must that Precept come under ex­press [Page 33] Institution, and none of the rest?

Object. God saw good to bring all the ten Com­mandments under express Institution on Mount Si­nai, as well as he brought the seventh-day Sab­bath in Paradise under express Institution.

Answ. I deny it not; God did then see good so to do, considering how the Nature of Man was corrupted, and his Law written in his Heart was blotted and blur'd by the Fall. But let it be consider'd, that the Law was not writ­ten in two Tables of Stone, so much for a Rule of Life, as for other reasons:The Rea­sons why God added the Mini­stration of the Law wrote in two Tables of Stone.

1. It was added and written there, to aggra­vate Sin on the Conscience; It was added (saith Pual) because of Transgression, Gal. 3. 19. it was to make Sin appear exceeding sinful, Rom. 7. 13.

2. It was written there to shew the Creature his sad and woful condition, and to make known how unable fallen Man was to fulfil the Righ­teousness of God.

3. And as a Schoolmaster to lead such as were under it, to Christ, in whom perfect Righteous­ness only is to be found; Man being not able to keep perfectly that holy and just Law.

4. And to shew them, as I conceive, that no­thing but the Finger of God could write his holy Law in the stony Hearts of Sinners, as shall be further demonstrated hereafter; for that whole Ministration of the Law and Co­venant I shall prove was a shadow and typical, and so no standing Law or Ministration as there written, but as it is in the hand of Jesus Christ.

5. That whole Law, and consequently the Seventh-day Sabbath, was given on Mount Si­nai as it suted the Judaical Oeconomy, as well their Political as Ecclesiastical state. There are many Additions made to the Seventh-day Sab­bath, [Page 34] together with other Ends annex'd, and Designs and Uses thereto employ'd; which is granted by such as assert it was given to Adam in ParadiseThis gave a new state to it, saith Dr. Owen, p. 8, 9..

Secondly, If it had been given to Adam in Innocency, he not knowing without an Institu­tion it was his Duty to keep it, I argue from hence: it follows that he had the same need of knowing what special Worship he outht to be found exercised in on that day. What, a Sab­bath instituted, and no Sabbath-Service appoint­ed on that day? But this I shall further handle when I come to speak of the pretended Insti­tution and express Command given to Adam in Innocency.

Thirdly, If the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath was wrote in Adam's Heart, some Re­mainders of the knowledg of that day would have been left in the Heart of his Offspring, as there is of all other Precepts that are simply moral: tho much blur'd, and almost quite ob­literated in some, yet there were many Hea­thens who retain'd, or recover'd much know­ledg of God's Law first written in the Heart of Man; yea, they were led to the knowledg of all pure moral Precepts, i.e. that there was but one God, and that he was to be worshipped, and his Name not profan'd; that they should not murder, commit Adultery, steal, &c. nay and also to the knowledg of the fourth Command­ment, as to what was simply moral in it, viz. a sufficient time to worship that God; yet they were none of them led to know that they ought to keep the seventh day as a Sabbath.

Fourthly, Moreover, if the Seventh-day Sab­bath had been a simple, or pure moral Precept, and written in Adam's Heart, it would have been written in the Hearts of all God's New-Covenant [Page 35] Children, as he promised he would write his Law there, in Gospel-times: and evi­dent it is that all Believers in Christ, whether Jews or Gentiles, have the Image of God re­stor'd to them, it being stampt upon their Hearts by the Spirit of God; hence it is said, who after God are created in Righteousness, and true Holiness, Eph. 4. 24. nay, they are all said to be renew'd in Knowledg, after the Image of him that created them, Col. 3. 10. But in the second Impression of God's holy Law and Image thus written on our Hearts, there is not one line, nor lineament of any knowledg that it is our Duty to keep the seventh day as a Sab­bath to the Lord, which I shall further evince hereafter.

Fifthly, Take what a learned Man saith: ‘If Adam was bound to keep the Sabbath, I de­mand by what Law? by the Law written in his Heart? Why then he was bound to keep a Sabbath before there was a Sabbath to keep: for the Law was ingraven on his Heart on the sixth day, as a branch of that Divine Image of God concreated with him; whereas the Sabbath (to be sure) could not be instituted till the seventh day, if then.’

Sixthly, Before I close this, let me note here what is said concerning this very thing by the Antient Fathers, and Primitive Christian Wri­ters, who it appears deny'd the knowledg of the Seventh-day Sabbath was written in Adam's Heart.Just. Mart. Respon. ad qu. p. 69. Theod. on Ezek. c. 20. See Justin Martyr. Theodoret saith, that these Commandments, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit Adultery, Thou shalt not steal, and others of that kind, were generally implanted by Nature in the minds of Men; but for the keeping of the Sabbath, it came not in by Nature, but by Moses's Law.

[Page 36] Chrysostom affirms (saith my Author) that neither Adam nor any Man liv'd without the Law imprinted on the Soul of Man, as made a living Creature; but neither he nor any other of them say the seventh day was one of those Laws. Also Rivet and others, who plead for the Anti­quity of the Sabbath, dare not, saith he, refer the keeping of it to the Law written in Adam's Heart.

So that I may from what has been said posi­tively affirm, the Precept of keeping the seventh day was not written in Adam's Heart in Inno­cency; and therefore that believing Gentiles are not oblig'd to keep the seventh day from that Law.

From hence also I infer, it could not be written in the Hearts of any of the Jews or Gentiles; for doubtless Adam by nature knew that which corrupt Man never so perfectly knew: and it were great Presumption in any, since Sin was so generally prevailing, to say they knew in a natural way that which Adam knew not. Besides, is it not great folly for any to say this, since the Law in Adam's Heart was the original? And shall a blur'd Copy be deem'd more perfect than that, or the muddy Stream be clearer than the Chrystal Fountain?

Therefore, since it appears the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath was not written in Adam's Heart, but that he needed an express positive Law to know it, or discover it to him, I infer, much more need there was for poor Gentiles, nay for Believers, to have an express Law to discover it to them. And since our Opponents affirm that the Commandment of the precise seventh day as a Sabbath, is of the same nature and quality with the first Commandment, and all other simply moral Precepts, i. e. not only [Page 37] a time of Worship, or one day in seven, but the precise seventh day from the Creation; I infer then what a woful condition are all we in, that break, or violate in the very Letter a simply moral Command, nay and teach Men so to do? may, and how could our Saviour then be with­out Sin, who made Clay on that day, and did many other Works, and commanded a Bur­den to be born, and also commended Acts of Mercy (which was but a moral Duty) above keeping of the Seventh-day Sabbath;Matth. 12. compa­ring the strict Observation of that with Sacri­fices, which all know were but mere positive Laws to Israel under that Legal Dispensation. But more of this hereafter.

Object. But tho it was not written in Adam's Heart that he should keep the seventh day as a Sabbath, yet it was given to Adam in Innocency by a positive Institution.

Answ. This is sooner said than proved:No positive Law given to Adam to keep the Seventh-day Sab­bath. but let me tell you, that the Law of Nature our Opponents acknowledg was antecedent to the Institution of the Sabbath, and that all purely moral Precepts were certainly written in Adam's Heart. Now can the precise seventh day be Adam's Duty to keep before it was sanctified to that end? this is to say a thing was before it was, and that the Law of Creation teaches that which it was impossible to teach, and also that Revealed Religion may be known by natural Dictates or Principles, which is absurd to affirm; besides, all confess that mere positive Precepts or Commands in instituted Worship may be al­ter'd or chang'd, as the great Lawgiver pleaseth.

But to proceed to answer what is affirm'd about its Institution in Paradise, as given to innocent A­dam; we will come to, and well weigh the words of this pretended positive Precept given to [Page 38] Adam in Paradise: Gen. 2. 2. And on the se­venth day God ended his Work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his Work which he had made. Ver. 3. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all Work, which God created and made. These are the words which contain what is call'd the Institution and Com­mand of the Sabbath to Adam in Paradise. Tillam and others make a great noise of the Sab­bath instituted in Paradise, and given to Adam to keep: but Brethren, I must tell you that the Learned strangely differ among themselves, who would have the Antiquity of the Sabbath thus early; some of them affirming it was given to Adam in Innocency; others say not till he fell. One speaks thus;Mr. Geo. Walker's Doctrine of the holy Sabbath, p. 10. And for the time when God first instituted the Sabbath, I conceiv'd it to have been not in the state of Innocency, but after Mans Fall immediately, and yet upon the seventh day, wherein God rested. These are his very words. From hence I observe, he believ'd Adam did not stand in his Innocency one day, and this he endeavours to prove; and others as well as he, Men of great Learning and Wis­dom. Let me cite here one moreSee Mr. War­ren's Jew­ish Sab­bath anti­quated., ‘I shall propose (saith he) and endeavour to prove a counter Position, namely, that it seems more consonant to Scripture (tho at the beginning) yet after the Fall in Man's corrupt and vitia­ted state, the probation whereof depends much (tho not altogether) upon the deci­sion of that often canvassed Question, whe­ther our first Parents sinned the same day on which they were created.’

Others not of less note and Learning, say, ‘That the Sabbath did not commence till Israel came into the Wilderness, and at the fall of [Page 39] Manna: Mr. Prim­rose in his Treatise of the Sab­bath in his Preface. it appeareth not at all, that God gave any Commandment to Adam, either be­fore or after his Fall, binding him or his Pro­geny to the keeping of any such day whatso­ever, as to a thing moral and necessary: nei­ther is there any trace of such a Command­ment to be found till the coming of the Isra­elites to the Wilderness—and that God assign'd to them the seventh day of the week,P. 20. as a particular point of Ecclesiastical Govern­ment, whereof he prescrib'd unto them all the particular Rites.’

Now my Brethren, I shall shew you,

1. What is said by those who affirm it was given to Adam in Innocency, whose Arguments seem to me of no weight at all.

2. I shall take notice what is said by those learned Men who deny it was given to Adam in Innocency, and affirm it was not given as a Command till Israel came into the Wil­derness. To begin with those who affirm God gave it to Adam before his Fall in Paradise, or in his state of Innocency.

1. They ground it upon what Moses saith in Gen. 2. because it is there mention'd as the day on which God rested from all his Works.

2. Because God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it. Owen on the Sab­bath, p. 42, &c. Dr. Owen, after he had shew'd that some Jews and Rabbins affirm, the Sabbath did not begin till the Israelites came into the Wilderness, tho some of them differ'd in their Opinions about its Commencement; comes to tell us,P. 55. ‘That the Opinion of the Institution of the Sabbath from the beginning of the World, is founded principally on a double Testimo­ny: First, From the Old Testament, Gen. 2. 1, 2, 3. because Moses saith, God blessed the seventh day, P. 62. and sanctified it; not, saith he, [Page 40] that God kept it holy himself, nor that he pu­rified it, and made it inherently holy, which the nature of the day is not capable of; nor that he celebrated that which in it self was holy; but that he set it apart to sacred use. Secondly, The Testimony to the same pur­pose, saith he, taken out of the New Testa­ment, is in Heb. 4. 3, 4. For we which believe do enter into Rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my Wrath, if they shall enter into my Rest, altho the Works were finished from the Founda­tion of the World. For he speaketh in a certain place on this wise, And God did rest the Se­venth Day from all his Works. Now, saith the Doctor, the Works, and the finish­ing of them, did not at all belong to the A­postle's Discourse, but only as they denoted the beginning of the Seventh-day Sabbath; for it is the several Rests of God alone that he is enquiring after.’ But to pass by what the Doctor saith;

1. Let this be considered, that in this place only of all Paul's Writings mention is made of the Seventh-day; but not one word here intimating that 'twas our duty to observe that Day under the Gospel; which had it been the Christian Sabbath, no doubt he would have given some hint of at this turn.

2. By the manner of his Words and Ex­pressions, comparing these two Verses together, it seems the Sabbath did not commence from the beginning of the world; for tho God rest­ed on the Seventh-day, and might then set it a­part, yet he might give no Command to keep it till after-times, when Sabbath-day Service or Worship was appointed: This I rather think from these words, Altho the Works were finished from the Foundation of the World; yet the Day, [Page 41] as Man's Duty, was not given till long after; for, as our Annotators observe, Paul alludes to Exod. 31. 17. For he speaks in a certain place on his wise, &c.

Thus having given you the Proofs of those who assert the Sabbath was given to Man in In­ [...]ocency, I shall now give you the Reasons urg'd [...]y others who affirm it was not given till Israel came into the Wilderness: Their Argu­ments are of two sorts.

1. Many of them affirm, that Moses wrote [...]ere in Gen. 2. by a Prolepsis, or way of antici­ [...]ation.

2. Others do not so much assert that, but [...]low it might be set apart in the design of God from his finishing his Work, and yet af­ [...]rm it was not given to any to keep till Israel's [...]oming into the Wilderness, when God was a­ [...]out to form them into an Ecclesiastical and Po­ [...]itical Church-State; and appointed them Laws and Ordinances, particularly the Worship, Duties, and Sacrifices they were to discharge on their Sabbath-day. And indeed it may seem un­reasonable to believe that the wise God shall give a Sabbath, not only for Rest, but for Di­vine Worship, before he appointed those Du­ [...]es of Worship he would have them to per­ [...]orm on that day; which were essentially ne­ [...]essary for all to know, as well as the special [...]recise Day it self.

1. But to begin with the first Argument, that Moses wrote those words in his History by way of Prolepsis, or Anticipation, and so to be [...]ead, as it were, in a Parenthesis: that is, Moses being the first Man that wrote by Revelation or Inspiration; and having before he began to write, received the Command of the Seventh-day Sabbath, and the reason of its Institution, [Page 42] coming to write of the Time when God fi­nished his Work, put in this concerning the Sabbath by way of Anticipation, saying, God blessed the Seventh-day, and sanctified it; not that Adam knew any thing of it, or that he gave him a Command to keep it.P. 64, 65. Dr. Owe [...] owns there are sundry things asserted in Histo­ry by way of Anticipation, tho he suppose they fell out commonly in the same Age: but methinks he saith little to the purpose to confut [...] what other learned Men have said on this ac­count; and to reserve my own thoughts to m [...]self, I shall give you an account of what two [...] three of them assert, who believe Moses wrot [...] this in Gen. 2. by way of Anticipation. On [...] Author having shew'd that some believe God [...] the beginning of the World did set apart th [...] seventh day,Heylin's Hist. of the Sabbath, p. 3. and commanded Adam to keep it says, that others, and those antienter, and o [...] more Authority, conceive these words to be spoken by a Prolepsis or Anticipation, and to relate to the times wherein Moses wrote; and intimated only the reason why God required of the Jews to sanctify the seventh day rather than any other: no Precept to that purpose be­ing given to Adam and to his Posterity, nor any Mystery in the number seven, why it should be thought most proper for God's Publick Wor­ship: And this, saith he, is indeed the anti­enter and more general Opinion, unanimously deliver'd both by Jews and Christians, and not so much as question'd till these latter days: And tho some ascribe it to Tostatus as the first Inventer of it, yet it is antienter far than he; tho were it so, it could not be deny'd but it had an able and learned Author, who, consi­dering the times in which he lived, and the shortness of his Life, hardly ever had his equal. [Page 43] [...] is true, Tostatus makes this Query, Whether [...] Sabbath being sanctified by God in the In­ [...]cy of the World, had been observ'd by Men [...]o the Light of Nature; and returns this An­ [...]er, that God commanded not the Sabbath to [...] sanctified in the beginning of the World, [...] it was commanded afterwards by the Law [...] Moses, when God did publickly make known [...] Will on Mount Sinai; and that whereas [...] Scripture speaks of sanctifying the seventh [...] in Gen. 2. it is not to be understood as if [...] Lord did then appoint it for his publick [...]orship, but to be refer'd to the time wherein [...]oses wrote, which was in the Wilderness, &c. [...] so the meaning of the Prophet will be [...]iefly this, that God did sanctify that day, [...]at is, to us that are his People of the House [...] Jacob. So far Tostatus. Our Author also cites [...] Josephus speaking after the same manner:Antiq. l. 1, 2. and, [...]th he, Solomon Jarchi, one of the principal [...]abbins, speaks more expresly to this purpose, [...] makes this Gloss or Comment upon Moses's words: God blessed the seventh day, i. e. in Manna, because for every day of the week an Homer of it fell upon the Earth, and a double [...]ortion on the sixth; but none fell on the seventh [...]ay at all. He also quotes Mercer, one much [...]onversant in the Rabbins, who confesses the Rab­ [...]ins generally refer'd Gen. 2. to the following [...]mes, even to the Sanctification of the Sabbath [...]stablish'd by the Law of Moses.—Doubtless [...]he Jews who so much doted on their Sabbath, would by no means have robbed it of so great Antiquity, had they had any ground to approve [...]hereof, or not known the contrary: so that the [...]cope of Moses in this place was not to shew the time when, but the occasion why God did afterwards sanctify the seventh day, because [Page 44] that on that day he rested from all his Works.

Moreover, the same Author saith; Nor [...] it otherwise conceiv'd, than that Moses did he [...] speak by way of Prolepsis or Anticipation, [...] Ambrose Catharini One of the Trent Council. opened the contrary, th [...] next falls foul upon Tostatus: Yet, saith he, [...] same Catharini affirms in the same Book, th [...] nothing is more frequent in holy Scripture th [...] these Anticipations; and among others our A [...]thor mentions one or two: it is said of Abr [...]ham, that he removed to a Mountain eastwa [...] of Bethel, whereas it was not called Bethel till [...] hundred years after, and Abraham knew it [...] by that name; but Moses writing the Histor [...] of Abraham (saith a French Protestant Divine [...] calls it by Anticipation Bethel, which was [...] so called till Jacob gave it that name,Gen. 28. 13. which b [...]fore was call'd Luz. So in Judg. 5. 9, 19. [...] said, the Angel of the Lord came up from G [...]gal to Bokim, which was not so call'd till afte [...]wards. Ver. 32. We also find in Exod. 16. that Mos [...] said, This is the thing that the Lord commanded▪ Fill an Omer of it to be kept for your Generati­ons, that they may see the Bread wherewith you have been fed in the Wilderness, when I broug [...] you forth from the Land of Egypt.Ver. 33.—So Aaron laid it up before the Testimony to be kept. Calvin saith this Author, tells us on this Text, indeed it could not well be otherwise interpreted (i. e. but by Anticipation) for how could Aaron lay up a pot of Manna to keep before the Testimo­ny, when as yet there was neither Ark nor Ta­bernacle, and so no Testimony at that time▪ Moreover, Moses tells us in the place before mention'd, that the Children of Israel eat Man­na forty years, which, saith he, is not other­wise true in that place and time, but by Anti­cipation.

[Page 45] Now I argue thus: If Moses by way of Anticipation speaks of that as being done, [...]ich was not actually done till forty, fifty, or [...]undred years after, why might he not in [...]. 2. put that in after the same manner, that [...]s not indeed done till his time, when God gave [...] the Commandment of the Sabbath? If he [...]ts that into his History as done, which was [...] done till a hundred years after, why not [...] other thing till two thousand years? The [...]stance of time to me signifies nothing, tho [...]. Owen seems to intimate as if it did. I [...]ll leave this to all Mens serious thoughts, [...] what little reason the Sabbatarians, or others [...] to cast so much contempt on what these [...] have said.

Secondly, As to the other sort, who insist not [...] much on this, yet deny that God gave Adam [...] Command to keep the seventh day, tho it [...] said, God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified [...]

Now by the way consider,

1. The Scripture expresses not the manner [...] the Lord sanctified it:God by way of Destina­tion from the begin­ning ap­pointed the Sabbath for after­times. (1.) Whether by [...]parting any special Holiness to that day, [...]hich (as Dr. Owen saith) it was not capable [...], there being no inherent Holiness in that day [...]ore than another. (2.) Or by dedicating the [...]me to any Religious Worship for Adam to be [...]und in on that day. Or, (3.) Whether he [...]ight not then by a Decree or Purpose only [...]estine that day to religious Worship for future [...]mes: for he foresaw Man would fall, and need [...] Sabbath for himself, and a particular day to [...]orship God in. Now 'tis evident a Law may [...] institutedTho I do not say the Sabbath was insti­tuted in Paradise. long before the time of its Com­ [...]encement, or being in force. Divers great [...]en both Antient and Modern,Treatise of the Sab. p. 41. as Dr. White [...]timates, affirm that God by a Decree only [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page 44] [...] [Page 45] [...] [Page 46] destin'd that day to religious Service in future time; he instances in venerable Bede, and be­fore him, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Ire­n [...]us, that God sanctified the seventh day, Gen. 2. by his Decree and Destination only, not by any present Imposition.

The Arguments on which this Opinion [...] grounded are very weighty, which shall [...] next consider'd.

First, All generally conclude that God ga [...] to Adam but one positive Law, and in brea [...]ing of that (as Dr. Lightfoot, and others shew [...] he broke all the ten Commandments, which [...] to the matter or substance of them were wro [...] in his Heart; and that this greatened his Si [...] viz. that tho he had but one Commandment▪ he violated it.

Secondly, Suppose Adam had had this positive Law given to him also, to keep holy the seventh day, and had broke it, had he thereby been guilty of the breach of all the others? For I have just now shew'd that most believe him guilty of all in breaking that one Command, Thou shalt not eat of the Tree of Knowledg of good and evil. But being every way guilty, it must be sup­posed he broke both those positive Commands, if he had two given him, and so was guilty of the breach of the fourth twice. Nay, if what I say be consider'd, and that which I inquire about be granted, he was doubly guilty of the breach of them all.

Thirdly, The Law of the Sabbath was (as it is conceiv'd) that Adam should keep that day holy; nay, he must be so oblig'd, if any Com­mand was given to him, yea and keep it more holy than any of the other six. Now if so, would it not follow that Adam was not perfect in Innocency? Doth Perfection admit of any [Page 47] [...]urther degree of Holiness, or require more [...]anctity on that day than any other? Certain­ [...] while he stood, every day must be kept with [...]e Holiness and Sanctity. Or I say, what [...]ason can be given that Adam, who was so [...]ly and perfect, and capable in the same de­ [...]ree of contemplating every day the Perfecti­ [...]ns of his blessed Creator, should need one [...]ecial day to do this in, having nothing to [...]vert his thoughts, nor any need of a day of [...]st from toilsom Labor? If so, doth not what [...]ey say argue some Imperfection attending [...]? how then was he created in the Image of [...], and perfect, if he was capable of keeping [...]y one day more holy than the rest whilst in [...]nocency? If any should say he was capable [...] rest from dressing the Garden on one day: [...] answer, if the dressing the Garden was any [...]nderance to him in Divine Contemplation, [...] any holy Duty, it argues still he was not [...]erfect, nor compleatly happy.

Fourthly, If one special day was appointed to [...]orship God in, and this he stood in need of, [...]ill it not follow by the same reason, that he [...]eeded to be told what special parts of Wor­ [...]ip he should perform to God on that day? [...]or, as I hinted before, it seems strange he [...]ould need a special day of Worship by a po­ [...]ive Law to be appointed him, and no Duties [...]f Worship be instituted sutable to such a day. [...]vident it is, when God commanded his Peo­ [...]le Israel to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath, he [...]old them how they should do it, and what [...]cts of Worship they should discharge on that [...]ay.

Fifthly, It may seem strange that any wise [...]an should affirm that Adam was injoyned to [...]eep a Sabbath, from what is said in Gen. 2. [Page 48] whenas we read not one word of a Sabbath there; all that Moses says is, that, God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it. Now, as one observes, the seventh day is three times men­tioned in this Text, but the term Sabbath not at all, nor indeed any where else, till it came to be given to the Children of Israel in the Wilderness; nor can they ever prove that the seventh day mentioned Exod. 16. or 20. wa [...] the precise seventh day immediately succeedin [...] the six days of the Creation: but more [...] that hereafter.

Sixthly, Since we read of no day call'd [...] Sabbath till near two thousand years from th [...] Creation, how should any before the Flood [...] or before Moses, know of such a day? for th [...] bear Expression, that God sanctified the sevent [...] day, &c. if that was known to the old World and afterwards (which I much doubt of) could not without some other Revelation discover that they were obliged to keep it as a Sabbath in religious Worship: tho it is said, God sancti­fied the seventh day, yet it is not said that Ada [...] also sanctified it, nor can they tell how Adam should know that God then sanctified it; for being not created till the sixth day, how could he, without some special Revelation, know the next day after was the seventh day from the Creation? Could he tell how long God was in making the Heavens and the Earth? &c. More­over, 'tis worth noting how strenuously our Opponents do urge that there is no express Com­mand to keep the first day. Now may not w [...] say, there is no express Command for Adam in Innocency, or when fallen, or for any till Moses's time to keep the seventh day as a Sabbath? yet they boldly affirm it was their duty to keep it.

[Page 49] Again, Should it be granted that God com­manded Adam to keep that very seventh day on which he himself rested from his Work, and that Adam did sanctify that one day, yet it is not [...]aid that he did, or was bid to keep holy every [...]eventh day to the world's end; and that he must [...]egin every such day just at the same time as God did his seventh day, or just at the same time [...]f the day as it was in Paradise, at that moment [...]hen God ceas'd to work.Dr. Wallis Answ. to Mr. Ban­field, p. 12, 13. Thus Dr. Wallis, who [...]rther saith, It is not expresly said that all Man­ [...]ind must for ever after observe the seventh day, [...] every week of days, reckoned continually from [...] first Creation.

Let me here add what another Author saith [...]s to the words of the Text blessed and sancti­ [...]ed: Mr. Gilb. Ironside, on the Sab. p. 20, 21. ‘That this was done (saith he) we all agree; when it was done is the question: for this Circumstance we have not expresly in the Text. Things are said in Scripture to be sanctified two ways:’

‘1. By way of Purpose and Destination on­ly, as God sanctified Jeremiah to be a Pro­phet to him before he was born.’

‘2. By way of actual use and imployment, as when the Levites were admitted to the actual Service of the Tabernacle. God's resting from his Works,He calls it Sabbath. and sanctifying the seventh day, were coetaneous in the first sense, i. e. by way of Purpose and Intention, which Moses relates; but not in the latter, by way of actual Execution. As soon as he had end­ed his Work, he ordained the seventh day, the day of his own Rest, to be that on which his Church should rest, and follow his Ex­ample; and this was the great Blessing and Prerogative bestowed on that day.Muscul. loc. com. Muscu­lus saith,’ he dos well express Sanctificatus by [Page 50] destinatus, a day sanctified, by a day destina­ted and afore-appointed.Byfield a­gainst Bre­rewood. Mr. Byfield has ob­serv'd, ‘That the word in the original signi­fies to prepare: to prepare is one thing, and actually to appoint is another. So then the Sabbath had not an actual existence in the World from the beginning, it had only a me­taphysical being, as all natural things are said to be in their Causes: for the cause or reason of the Sabbath's Sanctification (God's Rest) was from the beginning, tho the Sanctifica­tion it self was a long time after. Yet he owns God did sanctify the day then by way of Destination—That as God then actually rested, so he actually sanctified the day; but that therefore he then commanded Adam to observe it, doth not follow: for that God did then sanctify, that is, destinate that day to be the Church's Sabbath in due time, is one thing; and to command Adam to observe it▪ is another.’—He proceeds to shew how the Medes were call'd God's sanctified ones, that is▪ destinated to be in time Destroyers of Babylon and the Father sanctified his Son, and sent hi [...] into the World; Joh. 10. 36. Also Cyrus, Isa. 45. 1.

Seventhly, Besides, the Law of the Seventh day Sabbath ran thus, Six days thou shalt work▪ and do all thou hast to do, but the seventh is the Sabbath, &c. Now the Old Testament Sabbath was the last day of the week: they were to work six, the six first; but this he could not do I mean the six first from the Creation, because he was not created till the sixth day. So that the first six days, tho the six days in which th [...] Lord did all his Work, could not be Adam's six working days. But if the Sabbath was given to him in Innocency, no doubt, as Tilla [...] [Page 51] says, he kept the first Sabbath; and then it [...]ollows he begun with God, and rested before [...] labour'd six days, contrary to the Order and [...]ommand of the instituted Sabbath, Exod. 20.

Moreover,Warren's Jewish Sabbath, &c. in his full Answer to Tillam's Book, p. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. many learned Men believe Adam [...]ll the same day he was created, namely, on [...]he sixth day, and so could not keep one Sab­ [...]ath in Innocency. But I desire such as would [...] further inform'd of this, to read Mr. Edw. [...]arren's Treatise, who shews,

‘1. That Adam fell the same day he was created, appears from the words of our blessed Saviour, Joh. 8. 34. that the Devil was a Mur­derer from the beginning, a Liar, and the Fa­ther of Lies: not, saith he, from the begin­ning of the World's Creation, but of Man's Creation, which most properly and precisely implys the sixth day.’

‘2. He says, the parly betwixt the Woman and the Serpent intimates as much; for both the Serpent's demand, and the Woman's re­ply speak plainly that as yet they had not tasted the sweets of Paradise: Hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every Tree of the Garden? the Serpent had not been so subtile to ask whether that might be done which had been done already. Besides, we may conclude that, had not the Serpent immediately set upon the Woman, his Craftiness had not been so great; and Adam hearing of a Tree of Life, we may suppose would have first tasted of that; and Satan it may be fearing the Effects of it, immediately set upon the Woman. And, says our Author, the Tree of Life being sa­cramental, hence may it well be thought that if Adam had stood one Sabbath, he had tasted of the Tree of Life, so had been out of a possibility of falling.’

[Page 52] ‘3. Satan besure would take the fittest season and therefore tempts the Woman timely.’

‘4. 'Tis said they heard the Voice of th [...] Lord God in the cool of the day, or in th [...] evening;Robert's Myster. p. 39. and as he notes, Mr. Roberts saith th [...] this is the Evening mention'd after the Cre [...]tion of Adam, and the Covenant made with him. Adam was arraign'd and sentenc'd to [...]wards the Evening of the sixth day, therefore he sinned the same day, and so kept [...] Sabbath in Innocency.’

‘5. He mentions that Text, Adam in hono [...] lodged not a night, Psal. 49. 12. but was like the Beasts th [...] perish; for, saith he, so it is in the Hebre [...] word for word.’

‘He further confirms what he says her [...] and answers all Tillam's Objections, and tha [...] about the work Adam did of giving Names [...] all living Creatures, which he shews he might soon do; and as to that of God's saying o [...] the sixth day he saw all his Works that the [...] were good, therefore Man had not then sinne [...] he replys, that God's days works were don [...] each day by a word speaking, or in a mo [...]ment; he did not work as Man doth: so tha [...] on the sixth day early, or as soon as Ma [...] was created, he might say all his Works wer [...] good, yet Man might sin and fall before night.’

‘6. He argues from Adam's not knowing hi [...] Wife till he had sinned, and shews that [...] good reason can be given why he should no [...] have known her,’ had he stood one day Now these things tho doubtful, with the othe [...] being well observed, why should any affir [...] the Sabbath was given to Adam in Innocency and that he kept the first Sabbath in Paradi [...] with his Creator? for so saith Tillam.

Eighthly, A Sabbath was not agreeable to [Page 53] Adam in Paradise, either in respect to himself, [...]o rest from Labor, or as a special day to wor­ [...]ip God in: Such was the happiness of his [...]ate, that he had no Burdens to bear, nor [...]y toilsom Labour; nor was there any Curse [...] the Creatures, that they should need a day [...] Rest; he had no need of Servants, &c. [...]o doubt the Sabbath refer'd only to the state [...] fallen Man, and was given in Mercy to [...]rael, God's own Covenant-People, under the [...]aw; I say, in Mercy to them, and to the [...]asts who groan under their Burden. Adam's [...]bour, if any, in Innocency was matter of [...]light, and every day was a Sabbath to him: [...]nd, as Tertullian observes, Man lived in Pa­ [...]dise in a fruition of God. Let me close this [...]ith what a Reverend Author says.

First, Walker on the Sab. p. 8. They all go too far, and have not one word in Scripture for their Opinion, that say Adam in Innocency should or would have kept every seventh day for holy Rest, and that God would have required it at his hands: for all Scriptures which mention the Sabbath, speak of it as of a holy Sign looking towards Christ, and the state of Grace and Glory in him, and not towards the state of Innocency. It is most certain, Adam in that state was perfect with all natural Perfections, and at all times equally disposed to obey and serve God, to remember his Creation, and to honour his Creator: he needed no obser­vation of any day to be put in mind of any thing he had before known, and which God had revealed to him; his Memory was per­fect; his Will was every day ready to do whatever he knew to be right; he needed no Sign to admonish him of his Duty, or to move him to do it in due season: he did not [Page 54] labor nor weary himself; every day to him was a day of Delight and Pleasure, of Rest and Recreation.—In a word, his whole Life was a constant and obedient serving o [...] God; and there was no inequality, nor les [...] Worship of God perform'd by him in on [...] day than in another, for he fully served God at all times. Whoever denies this, must needs deny Man's Perfections, and constant Con­formity to God in the state of Innocency For where one day is kept better than an [...]ther, there is an inequality, and no consta [...] Uniformity in himself, nor Conformity to [...] Will of God.’

‘In the second place, they who hold the Sab­bath was first instituted after Man's Fall, and yet written in Man's Heart in Innocency, and that he was then bound to keep it, fall into many Absurdities; as,’

‘1. That Man was bound to keep a Sabbath before ever it was instituted.’

‘2. That God did by his Word teach Man in vain, i. e. that which he was fully taught already, and had written in his heart.’

‘3. That God gave Man a Law in vain af­ter his Fall, because he was become unable to keep it.’

‘4. They that hold that the Law of the Sab­bath was not written in man's Heart, but was by a Positive Law given in the State of Inno­cency, of the same nature with that of eat­ing of the Tree of Knowledg, make this Com­mandment of the Sabbath utterly void by Man's Fall, even as that of eating, &c. is now void.’ Thus far Mr. Walker. I might add, certainly there was a vast difference as to the Cause and Design of God's giving a Sab­bath to Man in Innocency, and when fallen▪ [Page 55] Could a Sabbath sute equally with perfect and [...]allen Man? Or could there be the same need of a Sabbath to both? Certainly if God had [...]ot given that Command by Moses, the keep­ [...]g that precise Day would not have been known [...] be the Duty of any of Adam's Off-spring, [...]om a positive Law given to him in Innocency.

Ninthly, To put the matter further out of [...]oubt, pray mind the words of this pretended [...]ositive Command, God rested on the Seventh­ [...]y; what then? but he also blessed and sanc­ [...]fied it: what tho? Because God sanctified [...] Priest, may others do so too? He might [...] the Seventh-day apart for his People in after­ [...]es. Because God sanctified it, must Adam [...]nctify it or keep it holy without a Com­ [...]and? Is it said therefore, Thou Adam shalt [...]eep this Day as a Sabbath? No doubt Moses [...]ould not only have mention'd God's blessing [...]nd sanctifying that Day, had it been given to Adam as a Sabbath; but God's express Com­mand would have been mention'd by him, and would also have called it the Sabbath-day.

I might now come to the last Argument, viz. If it had been commanded Adam and all his Posterity to keep the Seventh-day after he fell, [...]he Patriarchs that lived before Moses kept it: But more of this next time.

Tenthly, If Adam had the Sabbath positively given to him in Innocency, besure it was in­joined with some Penalty, as the Command of not eating of the Tree of Knowledg was. We also find the Penalty of the breach of the Se­venth-day Sabbath was Death: but as we read of no Positive Command given to him to keep that Day, so of no threatning if he broke or violated it; therefore certainly it was never en­joyn'd upon him.

[Page 56] Elevehthly, When the Sabbath was institured for the House of Jacob, God declared it was a Sign between him and them, or a Shadow of things to come, Col. 2. 16, 17. it referred to Christ, or to that Rest all Believers do enter into.Exod. 31. 13, 14. Speak thou unto the Children of Israel, say­ing, Verily my Sabbaths, it is a Sign between me and you throughout your Generations, Ezek. 20. 21. that ye may know that I am the Lord that sanctify you, Exod. 31. 13. Ye shall keep my Sabbath, therefore it is holy unto you; every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: For every one that doth any work on the Sabbath-day, shall be cut off from amongst his People, vers. 14. It was a sign God set apart that People with a Ceremonial San­ctification, to signify that alone by Jesus Christ all the true spiritual Israel should have Gospel-Sanctification, as well as it was a sign of the Covenant of Works: but it could be no sign of this Sanctification to Adam in Innocency, nor of any other Gospel-blessing, therefore doubtless the Sabbath was not given to Adam in Inno­cency.

Twelfthly, What reason can be given that God should allow Adam in Innocency six days to labour in, and require but one, i. e. the se­venth, as a day to his Creator? No, it is evi­dent from hence the Sabbath refer'd to fallen Man, who God foresaw would need six days to do all his Labour; and it shews God's great Mercy to Man and Beast in that woful condi­tion of Servitude,It might not be our Duty to keep the Sabbath, tho given to Adam in Innocency. under the Curse.

I might add, should it be granted that God gave Adam a positive Command to keep the se­venth day in Innocency, how can our Oppo­nents thence prove it the Duty of all to keep the said day? A Command to him in Innocen­cy may not oblige any Man in his fallen state, [Page 57] except the same be renewed. I find two of the chiefest Writers I have met with, who are ap­proved Orthodox, plead not for the Sabbath as given to Adam in Innocency,See Sabba­tum Redi. Part 3. p. 336. viz. Mr. Dan. [...]awdrey, and Mr. Herbert, Palmer: Take their words, We purpose not to maintain that the Sab­bath was given to Adam in Innocency before the Fall: but they hint it might be given to him after the Fall, and that he fell the same day he was created.P. 337. Moreover, they say, ‘If it was given before his Fall, it doth not follow it should oblige at this day; for the positive Pre­cept of not eating of the Tree of Knowledg, was given in Innocency, and yet doth not universally oblige Adam's Posterity, nor should if the Tree were at this day known. A po­sitive Precept binds only during the pleasure of the Lawgiver, &c. so say I, the same must be granted, when it was given Exod. 16. & 20. the precise seventh day being there a po­sitive Precept.’


Proving the Patriarchs kept not the Seventh-day Sabbath: That the knowledg of the se­venth day was not written in the Hearts of all Mankind by Nature.

Gal. iv. 10, 11.‘Ye observe days, and months, &c.

MY Brethren, there are three sorts of Persons I have little hopes of doing good to in preaching on this Subject.

1. Such as thro self-conceit are so fond of their own Apprehensions, that they resolve not to regard the strongest Arguments against what they believe: thus it is with some who have sucked in dangerous Errors; who if a Book be presented to them, presently cry, away with it, we will not read it: they are not like him that said, What I know not, teach thou me; nor like the great Appollos, who was ready to re­ceive further Light by a poor Man and his Wife, much inferior to him both as to Parts, Knowledg, and Learning, Acts 18.

2. The second sort are such as thro the weak­ness of their Capacities are not able to take in the strength of an Argument; and therefore, let never so much be said, do intimate it is all little or nothing to them.

3. The third sort are such as seem indifferent whether they keep the seventh, or the first day, [Page 59] or perhaps any at all, as a special day to the Lord: these not seeing the danger of observing the old Jewish Sabbath, nor of their indiffe­rence about keeping any day at all, trouble not themselves at all about this matter. But to [...]ass this, and proceed.

I have proved, 1. That the Command for, or knowledg of keeping the Seventh-day Sabbath was not written in Adam's Heart. 2. That there was [...] positive Command given to him, to observe that [...]ay above any other, either before or immediately after his Fall. A time to worship God was wrote in Adam's Heart no doubt; and indeed all his time, while in Innocency, he was natu­rally led to give up to his blessed Creator. All Adam's time in In­nocency ta­ken up in adoring his blessed Cre­ator. What had he to do, but to adore, and contemplate the Perfections of his bountiful Creator? and could he have done it better on one day than another? The best and highest Acts of Worship he was capable of performing would have been his work and delight for ever, had he abode in that state: for Perfection admits of no greater Number, Measure, Degrees, or Additions.

Now I may infer from hence: If the Com­mand of God to observe the seventh day was not wrote in Adam's Heart, then it is not written in the Hearts of any of his Offspring by Nature: For as I have said, the muddy Stream cannot be clearer than the Chrystal Fountain.

But our Brethren who keep the seventh day, and some others affirm, that the Patriarchs from Adam to Moses did keep that day.

Answ. This I deny, and if I put them to prove it,The Patri­archs did not keep the seventh day Sab. they can never do it.

First, I grant that from Adam to Moses the holy and pious Patriarchs not only discharged all Duties of natural Religion, but all Duties [Page 60] given by express Command to them; yet we read not that God commanded them to keep the seventh day, or reminded them of a for­mer Precept given to Adam, and in him to them. And no doubt they observed a sufficient time for the Worship of God, it may be a part of every day, or more than one in seven: for they not only improved their natural Light and Knowledg, but had a special Revelation of the Will of God to them; yet we find not the least intimation that any of them kept the se­venth day.

Abel we read sacrificed; and this of offering Sacrifices could not be known by the Light of Nature; God therefore commanded him so to do, or revealed it some way or another in a supernatural way to him, because him and his Offering God had respect unto: besides, he did it in Faith, and Faith must have a Rule to act by; but we do not read he offer'd Sacrifices on the seventh day, or kept that day as a Sabbath: had he kept one Sabbath-day, tho no mention is made of any Command he had so to do, we should no more doubt of it, but conclude he had such a Command, as we believe he had for his offering Sacrifices; but if he or any other of the Patriarchs had kept the seventh day as a Sabbath, would it from thence follow it was a mo­ral Precept, and obligatory on us, any more than their offering Sacrifices obliges us so to do?

We read of Men who began to call upon the Name of the Lord, Gen. 4. 26. or to call them­selves by the Name of the Lord, as one reads it,See Ainsw. Annot. on the place. but not a word of such a Sabbath observ'd by them. Ainsworth reads it thus, Then began Men profanely to call upon the Name of the Lord: and one of the Rabins Rabbi Maimon. saith, in those days Idolatry took its first beginning; so that from [Page 61] hence there can no Proof be taken that they kept the seventh-day as a Sabbath. Enoch walked with God three hundred years, and certainly if he had kept the Sabbath we should have had [...]ome account of it; but as we read of no such matter, so Justin Martyr, as I find him cited by approved Authors, declares Enoch was one if those that was not circumcised, neither kept the Sabbath.Lib. 4. c. 30. Ad Ju­daeos. And Irenaeus mentioning Enoch, with my Author, speaks thus, viz. Enoch that righteous Man, being neither circumcised, nor a Sabbath-keeper, was by the Lord translated.

And as it cannot be proved that the seventh day was observed before the Flood, so we have [...]o reason to believe it was kept by Noah, in those days the Flood overflow'd the World: [...] is said, Noah was only righteous in that Ge­neration, and therefore a true Worshipper of God; but we read not of his keeping the Se­venth-day Sabbath.

I know some would catch at that Expression, Gen. 8. 10, 12. that Noah stay'd seven days before he sent out the Dove; as if this might re­ [...]er to the Sabbath.

But in Answer to this (which indeed needs [...]one at all) take what a learned Man hath [...]id for a reason why Noah stay'd seven days, and again other seven days:Abulensis. Noah, saith he, desired to know whether the Waters were decreased. Now the Waters being regulated by the Moon, Noah was most especially to regard her Motions: for as she is either in Opposition or Conjunction with the Sun in her increase or wane, there is proportionably an increase or falling of the Waters. Noah then considering the Moon in her several quarters, which commonly we know are at seven days distance, sent forth his Dove to [Page 62] bring him tydings: for the Text tells us, that he sent out the Raven and the Dove four times; and the fourth time, the Moon being in the last quarter, when both by the ordi­nary course of Nature the Waters usually are, and by the Will of God were then much de­creased; the Dove which was sent out, had found good footing on the Earth.’ There is greater reason to believe this than to suppose it refer'd to the Sabbath.De E­mendat. Temp. l. 5. Scaliger, saith my Author, one while thought the day on which, Noah left the Ark and offered Sacrifices, to be the seventh day; but in the next Edition he fixed that day to be the fourth day of the week. Now after the Flood we find God gave to Noah and his Sons some express Laws and Commands, i. e. not to eat Blood, and forbidding Murder, &c. Now this is the time doubtless to hear of a Sabbath, and of the charge about it, if God had given it either to Adam before or after the Fall; but not one word is mention'd, for 'tis not said, Remember the seventh day, &c. or ye shall observe my Sabbath.Gen. 9. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Now from Shem, Ham and Japhet, both Jews and Gentiles, pro­ceeded even the whole World; and to me it seems not probable, had the Sabbath been com­manded, that Jehovah should not at this time have given them a charge about it, there being then so few positive Laws instituted; here is Blood forbid to the whole World, and Mur­der, but not one word of a Sabbath, or seventh day to be observ'd.Seven Pre­cepts given to Noah, but no Sab­bath. The Rabbins speak of seven Precepts given to Noah and his Sons, but ex­clude the Seventh-day Sabbath out of that num­ber. If we have it not mentioned here, besure we shall not meet with it till we come to Mo­ses; but here we have it not, nor indeed was it possible for some of them to keep that precise [Page 63] day, being scatter'd to the furthermost ends of the Earth. We read of Abraham, that he kept all God's Commandments, yet he kept no Se­venth-day Sabbath: he built an Altar, and sa­crificed, which were mere positive Precepts, and [...] the Seventh-day Sabbath is not mention'd, [...]or commanded him, nor a hint given to re­member him to keep it.

Job liv'd also,Job liv'd, 'tis thought about A­braham's time. it is concluded, about Abra­ham's time, which may be gather'd by the num­ber of years he liv'd, which was about two hundred years, which few attain'd to after Abra­ham. Joseph liv'd but a hundred and ten. 'Tis said Job liv'd a hundred and forty years after his sore Trials were ended:Job 42. 16. the Jews speak of his living in all two hundred and eighty years. [...]ow, as one observes, when he pleads his In­ [...]grity and Innocence even to very minute Par­ticulars, he neither alledges his strict observa­tion of the Seventh-Say Sabbath, nor apologizes for the neglect thereof; nor do this Friends, who rak'd up every thing against him, speak a word about this, nor of the Sabbath through­out the whole Book; which treats in a manner wholly about Worship and Devotion towards God: the Sabbath therefore no doubt had not [...]ap'd (as he minds) if it had been known, [...] been a Duty in his days.

As to Isaac, he was a most devout Man, and [...] Life was taken up in a continual course of [...]ety: his custom was to go into the fields to meditate, but it is not said he did it on the [...]eventh day, or that he kept this day as a Sab­bath.

Jacob was a Man that fled from Idolatry [...] God's Command, and liv'd a godly Life: and tho we read of his performing many Acts of Worship, yet nothing of his keeping the [Page 64] seventh day as a Sabbath; no, tho we read of his hard Service when he kept Laban's Sheep both in Winter and Summer, which might have caused him to complain of his being incommo­ded from a strict observation of that day, had he known it as his Duty; but in all his Com­plaints not one word of this. We know a­mong us how Shepherds are hindered in Sab­bath-Observations, of which many have com­plained, or may have occasion to do. Moreover during Joseph's being in Pharaoh's Court, nor be­fore, do we read of his observing this Sabbath, and when Jacob came into Egypt, we read [...] of his observation thereof, nor of the Egyptian keeping of it; or had they forgot it, besu [...] there would have been some notice taken of Jacob's keeping it, nor would he have avoided i [...] that he might please Pharaoh and his Servants.

Nor can it be thought on any good grounds that the Children of Israel kept the Seventh-day Sabbath under their Taskmasters in Egypt, th [...] some would infer they did from these words, that you make the People rest from their Burdens, Exod. 5. 5. they would have these words to mean, you make them keep a Sabbath, where as no such thing seems to have the least counte­nance, because Pharaoh's Officers complain not of their resting or being idle on one day only▪ but two days together; see Exod. 5. 14. Where­fore have you not fulfilled your Task in making of Brick, both yesterday and to day, as heretofore?

Now since there is no mention that any [...] the Patriarchs kept the seventh day as a Sab­bath, we infer this as the first reason why they observ'd it not.

Secondly, Let it be consider'd that we read [...] many positive Commands given to Noah, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but none to keep [Page 65] the Seventh-day Sabbath, nor no reminding them of any former Institution or Precept to observe it; wherefore we may conclude they kept it not.

Thirdly, The Patri­archs not commend­ed for keep­ing the Se­venth-day Sabbath. We read how the faithful Patriarchs were commended for doing whatsoever God commanded them, but not of any of them be­ing commended for keeping the seventh day as a Sabbath: yet after Moses's time, when the Sabbath was instituted and given by God's ex­press Command to Israel, he took (we find) as much notice of their observing his Sabbaths as of any other Duty injoined on them, and this to their great Commendation. Therefore had the Patriarchs been oblig'd to keep it, no doubt they had as faithfully discharged their Duty therein, as any of God's Servants did in after times; and God besure would have left something on Record to their Commendation.

Fourthly, The old World not charg'd with Sab­bath-breaking. We read of divers Sins the old World was guilty of, which provoked God, and brought the Flood upon them, but not one word or hint given that they were guilty of Sabbath-breaking. Now if it had been known either by the Light of Nature, or by any po­sitive Precept given to Adam, and handed down to them by Tradition or otherwise; they being so universally corrupted and polluted, no doubt had profan'd that day; and if so, the sacred Record had mention'd that great Sin doubtless as well as others.

Fifthly, Sodom not charg'd with Sab­bath-breaking. Moreover, we read of the crying Sins of the People of Sodom, &c. and no doubt but they had violated all God's Commands, or whatsoever were their known Duties; but no­thing of breaking the Sabbath is charged a­gainst them. Now can it be imagin'd they should not have fail'd in this case, or that God [Page 66] would overlook or take no notice of it?

Sixtly, We have a Catalogue of almost all immoral Evils before and after the Flood, as Idolatry, Gluttony, Drunkenness, Lascivious­ness, Incest, Murder, Lying, Covetousness, Theft, &c. and how Sin had possessed the Thoughts, Hearts, and Lives of Men; but no account of their Violation of the Sabbath-day.

Seventhly, None from Adam to Moses re­prehended for not keeping the Sabbath. Let it be consider'd, that since God so severely reprehended the Jews for profaning his Sabbaths, and hardly reproved them more sharply for any one Sin than for this; certainly in his enumerating the Sins [...] his People, and of the Wickedness of those that liv'd from Adam to Moses, he would have re­proved them for Sabbath-breaking, and not have utterly passed it by in silence, had they been guilty of it: or can it be rationally sup­posed that tho they fail'd in all other respects, yet that they did not in this? No doubt, had it been a known Duty, (and that some of them had been guilty of the breach of it, as in all likelihood they would) but God would have severely reprehended them for it.

Eighthly, Since we read of no Sabbath till Moses's time, Exod. 16. only that God sancti­fied the seventh day; what makes our Brethren so boldly say that Adam in Innocence kept it, and all the Patriarchs from Adam to Moses? This may seem strange to any thinking Man, i. e. that they should affirm this, seeing they require an express Command from us for the keeping of the first day, or else all is nothing with them. Brethren, this I will say, that had we no more ground to keep the Lord's day in solemn Worship, as a day of Rest, than they can find for the Patriarchs keep­ing of the seventh day as a Sabbath, we [Page 67] should not say one word more for it: I challenge them to shew us one place where a Sabbath is so much as once mention'd, or any express or implicit Command given to any to observe it; or one Example from the Creation of the World that any Man or Woman ever kept the seventh day as a Sabbath until we come to Moses, Exod. 16. I shall, God assist­ing, shew that we have more than meer Ex­amples of the Gospel Primitive Churches for observing in a solemn manner the Lord's-day, or the first day of the week, when I come to that part of my Work.

Now let them produce but one Example, that [...]ne, tho but one of the Patriarchs did keep the [...]eventh day as a Sabbath, I will conclude it might be given to Adam after his Fall; for be­fore his Fall it could not be a Law to him, for the reasons I have urged: but if they could produce such an Example, yet say some learned Men, it doth no more prove that precise day is a moral Precept, or that it from hence follows, that it is our Duty in Gospel-times to observe it, than it proves 'tis our Duty to offer Sacri­fices, which we read (before the Ceremonial Law was given) they frequently did.

But since there is not one Instance to be given of any one Person that kept that day till Moses's time, but that the Word of God is wholly si­lent about it, we must and may say, according to that common Maxim used by Divines, i. e. Where God hath not a Mouth to speak, we ought not to have an Ear to hear.

Ninthly, The Proofs of the Learned for the Pa­triarchs keeping the Sabbath. Let us now consider what some learned Men have produced for their pretended Proofs that the Patriarchs kept the seventh day as a Sabbath, which I fear hath imboldned the Jewish Sabbatarians to affirm with such Confi­dence [Page 68] that all the Patriarchs did keep it.

But by the way, Dr. Owen, who is one that asserted what I utterly deny, doth yet confess that many of the Jewish Masters or Rabbins ascribe the original of the Sabbath to the Sta­tute given to them in Mara, Exod. 15. and others of them to Exod. 16. yet the said Reverend Doctor cites some of the probable grounds to prove that the Patriarchs kept it.Dr. Owen on the Sab. p. 72.

1. The first and chief place I find he men­tions is that in Gen. 18. 19. For I know him, that he will command his Children and his Hous­hold after him, and they shall keep the ways of the Lord, and do Justice and Judgment.

Answ. That Abraham had this Charge and Commandment given to him is granted: but what little reason there is from hence to conclude he kept the Sabbath, or gave charge to his Chil­dren so to do, I will leave to all Mens Conside­ration. God gave to Abraham Commands, we find that evident enough; and some of them not very easy to Flesh and Blood, as that of offer­ing up his only Son. Moreover, none doubt of the faithfulness of the Patriarch Abraham; but if the Sabbath was not then instituted, nor any Command given to him to keep it, there could not be any such Command meant or compre­hended in that Charge given to him. The truth is, my Brethren, learned Men, who are Men also of great natural Parts, can put a fair gloss on any thing, and make that seem to be a Truth that there is not the least ground to be­lieve is so.

Abraham did all he did in Faith, and there­fore he had Divine Authority for all he did in God's Service.

Dr. Twiss's main Argument to prove that the Patriarchs observed the Seventh-day Sabbath, [Page 69] is this,Dr. Twiss on the Christian Sab. p. 57. viz. The Lord blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, therefore saith he the Patri­archs did observe it.

Answ. I answer, God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, but did not give any Com­mand to Adam to keep it; therefore the Pa­triarchs from thence could not know, or see they had any ground to observe it.

Dr. Twiss saith in the same place, i. e. ‘And the truth is, until the coming of the Chil­dren of Israel out of Egypt we read not of any Church of God any where but in single Families; neither do we read of the Patri­archs before the Flood, or a long time after, that they kept any day consecrated to God's Service.’

But we say with him, that it doth not there­fore follow that they kept no day at all in God's Service. They owned the True God, and wor­shipped him, and knew that there must be a time, a sufficient time to discharge that Ho­mage or Worship to him; and tho perhaps they observ'd one day in seven, yet, as I con­ceive, they did not know what precise day they ought to observe above any other, until God by some express positive Command made it known, which was not till he constituted the whole House of Israel into a Typical Church­state, and gave them an instituted Worship, and commanded their Legal and Typical Sabbath.

Besides, how could the Patriarchs know what Duties proper for Sabbath-observation they should perform, except it had by some positive Law or Precept been discover'd to them, of which we read not? When God gave to Israel a Sabbath, he told them how they should keep it, as well as the Reasons, End and Causes wherefore.

[Page 70] Tenthly, I might also add here what some learned Men seem to affirm, i. e. that 'tis doubt­ful whether the Patriarchs had the distinction of Days into Weeks, but rather reckon'd by Months and Years; so that the precise seventh day from the Creation cannot be certainly known: and 'tis thought that the Jews ob­serv'd their seventh day from the falling of Manna six days, The Jews reckon'd their Se­venth-day Sabbath from the falling of Manna. but none on the seventh. No doubt but it is impossible for any to know that that was the precise seventh day from the Creation.

But it may not be amiss to answer our Op­ponents as to what they say about the Scrip­ture not mentioning any Sabbath from Adam to Moses, or any Precept or Remembrance of it, and yet things of less moment are punctual­ly recited.

1. This they say, that we read not of Circum­cision perform'd during all the time of Israel's being in Egypt, which was near four hundred years, till Zippora circumcised her Son.

2. Also say they, we read not of the Sabbath in the Books of Joshua and Judges, &c.

Answ. This is no parallel case; for after the positive Command given to Israel to keep it, there needed no such constant relation of it; for no doubt but after that time it was continually observ'd.

Let me close this with what I find recited by many learned Men concerning the Judgment of divers of the antient Fathers about the Patri­archs observing the Sabbath.The Judg­ment of the an [...]ient Fa­thers.

Justin Martyr saith,Just. Mart. [...] cum [...] that Melchisedec (who it is supposed was Shem the Son of Noah) was neither circumcised, nor kept the Sab­bath.

[Page 71] Irenaeus saith,Iren. l. 4. c. 30. Abraham believed, and it was imputed to him for Righteousness before he was circumcised, and without observing of the Sabbath.

Tertullian saith,Tert. adv. Judaeos, de praescr. c. 2, 4. Abel, Enoch, Noah and Mel­chisedec observ'd not the Sabbath. And again, he saith that not any of the Patriarchs kept the Sabbath, neither Adam, Enoch, Noah nor Abra­ham, for 2455 years. And hence Tertullian saith,Justin. de verit. l. 2. in Tryph. it is manifest therefore that that cannot be moral, nor perpetual, that began with Moses (as Justin says) and ended in Christ.

Eusebius saith, Moses brings in Melchisedec Priest of the most High God,Dem. l. 1. c. 6. neither being circumcised, nor anointed with Oil (as was afterwards commanded in the Law) no nor so much as knowing there was a Sabbath.

Justin Martyr again saith,Cont. Tryph. in the days of Enoch People observd not Circumcision, or the Sabbath; before Abraham there was no Cir­cumcision, and before Moses no keeping holy the Sabbath.

I might also add several of the Jewish Rab­bins asserting the same thing. But to proceed.

I infer from hence, that that Text Gen. 2. doth not contain in it any present Institution of the Sabbath, but signifies God's Destination or Purpose to give it as a Law to his People Israel in after times, and was not given to Adam in Innocence for him to sanctify it. God might sanctify that precise day to his own Rest after Adam fell, with respect had to Christ, in whom he took up his perfect Rest; and afterwards ap­pointed the seventh day as a sign thereof. How­ever, it is one thing for God to sanctify or set apart a thing for this or that use, and another thing to command that thing, or immediately to put it into being. Our Lord Jesus was long [Page 72] sanctified or set apart to be our Redeemer,Joh. 10. 36. be­fore he was sent into the World actually to redeem us. Jeremiah the Prophet was sancti­fied or set apart to his Work and Office, long before he was actually call'd to the execution thereof.

So that if these words, Gen. 2. concerning God's blessing and sanctifying of the seventh day, Mr. Sam. Grascom, p. 18. are to be extended, saith one, to relate to any thing further than to that particular seventh day following the Creation, it doth not refer to any immediate Institution of the Sabbath, but is a historical Narration telling us what was done, and not when it was done. If therefore we can find out a certain time when the Sab­bath was indeed instituted, there is good rea­son to conclude this Text refers to that time, as giving us the reason why God in the Institu­tion of the Seventh-day Sabbath made choice of that day.

And to sum up what I have said, take these Arguments.

1. We may infer,The Argu­ments a­gainst the Patriarchs keeping the Sabbath [...] up. that if the Patriarchs kept the seventh day, they had the knowledg of it by the Light of Nature, or by a positive Com­mand; but they had not the knowledg of it by the Light of Nature, nor by any positive Command, therefore they observ'd it not.

2. If they kept it by virtue of an express Command and Institution, they had no doubt some Directions about the due observation there­of, and instituted Sabbath-days Worship: but they had no Directions about it, nor instituted Sabbath-days Worship; therefore they did not observe it.

3. Certainly if the Patriarchs were obliged to observe the seventh day as a Sabbath, God would either have commended them, or some [Page 73] of them for keeping it, or else reprehended others for not keeping it: but God neither commended any of them for the keeping it, nor reprehended any others for profaning, and not [...]eeping it; therefore none of them did observe [...].

Eleventhly, Let me add one Argument more [...] prove that the Patriarchs did not observe the seventh day as a Sabbath, viz. If the Pa­triarchs and all Mankind from the beginning of the World were or had been obliged to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath, certainly there had [...]een some account given of the Penalty or Pu­nishment due to Sabbath-breakers: but we read of no Penalty or Punishment to be inflict­ed on Sabbath-breakers; therefore we conclude they were not oblig'd to the observation there­of. How can it be thought that the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath should be imposed up­on them, and yet God should hide the Punish­ment due to the breach thereof from the World for more than two thousand years? Evident it is that they knew what Punishment was to be in­flicted for the breach of other moral Precepts, as Murder, Adultery, &c. and if this were of like nature, i. e. a pure moral Duty, how came it to pass that God discover'd not the Penalty to them for violating this Precept?

Twelfthly, My last Argument is this; The Sabbath under the Old Testament had a respect to a stated, and stinted instituted Worship in a National Church: but the Patriarchs, and all God's People from Adam to Moses were not brought into such an Ecclesiastical and Political Church-state; and from hence it seems to me they were not injoyn'd to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath: that is, they had no instituted, stated, and stinted Worship, nor any in a Ma­gistratical [Page 74] Capacity to inflict Punishment [...] such as violated the pretended Sabbath; [...] had they been put into such a Capacity, [...] doubt but God had given them his Sabbath with the like Sanction to them as afterward that the Penalty might have been inflicted [...] Offenders, as he did after the Sabbath was [...]deed given to the House of Israel in the Wi [...] ­derness of Sinai.

Nehemiah clearly intimates that the Sa [...] ­bath was only made known to Israel, T [...] madest known to them thy holy Sahbaths: was first made known to Moses, Exod. 16. 20. and then him to the Children of Israel; therefore [...] known to him or them before.

The Scripture is certainly to be taken [...] this sense, and not in that sense which so [...] would have the Holy Ghost intend, viz. th [...] it was made known more clearly to that People with the mode of its observation, &c. but cer­tainly it was never known till God reveal'd [...] to Moses, nor given as a Law to any till give [...] to the People of Israel in the Wilderness [...] Sin.


[...] the Commencement of the Sabbath, and that it was in the Wilderness of Sin. What a moral Law or Precept is. That the Mo­rality of the fourth Commandment lies not in the precise seventh day. Four Argu­ments urg'd to prove this.

Gal. iv. 10, 11.‘Ye observe days, and months, &c.’

I Have, my Brethren, endeavour'd to shew and prove,

1. That God did not write the Law of [...] Seventh-day Sabbath in Adam's Heart; that [...] is no Law of Creation wrote in the Hearts of the Gentiles, and of all Mankind, and so no [...]atural or simple moral Precept.

2. That it was not given to Adam by any express positive Command either before or im­mediately after he fell; and so none of the Pa­ [...]riarchs did observe it. We can find no origi­nal of the Seventh-day Sabbath (as to any ob­servance of it) hitherto, therefore must look for its beginning or original, or any actual or express Command for the observation thereof, somewhere else; which indeed we have in Exod. 16. 23.

True,The 7th day Sab. begun in the Wilder­ness of Sin. some of the Jewish Rabbins affirm that it was given to Israel, Exod. 15. 25. at Marah: There he made them a Statute and an Ordinance, [Page 76] and there he proved them. It is called a Statut [...] and Ordinance in the singular, not Statutes [...] Ordinances; and probably it might be the Sta­tute of the Sabbath, tho 'tis not expressed [...] the falling of Manna, chap. 16. tho others by [...] figure think it may comprehend not only th [...] Sabbath, but all other Precepts of the Law.

I know that Dr. Owen seems not to be of opi­nion, that this Statute refers to the Sabbath neither can we determine the case, yet it is ve­ry probable it might be that. But we find [...] directly and expresly commanded, chap. 16. 2 [...] ▪ To morrow is the Rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord, &c. And many learned Men do asse [...] that here was the Institution, and original [...] the observance of it:Mr. Gras­come. Thus a late Writer ex­presses himself; ‘The first time we find the ob­servation of the Sabbath-day injoyned is [...] the Wilderness of Sin, before they came [...] Mount Sinai, where the ten Commandment [...] were deliver'd; as if it were purposely [...] distinguish the day, which is Ceremonial, an [...] of divine positive Institution, from the Wo [...] ­ship it self.’

The words in Exod. 16. 23. express plainly enough the Institution of this day, by way of Information to the People, viz. To morrow is the Rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord bake that which you will bake to day, &c. And when the day came or begun, Ver. 25. Moses said, Eat that to day, for to day is a Sabbath to the Lord▪ And in ver. 26. Six days ye shall gather it, but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none.

Observe by the way, that here is not one word on what day the Manna first fell, so that none can tell this was the seventh day from the Creation; but that it was the seventh day after [Page 77] the six days of its raining of Manna, is evi­ [...]ent.

But to return to our business in hand: Here, [...] [...]ay, is the original, or first beginning of the [...]bbath, that we read of, as to any Precept or [...]junction on the People, or any observation of [...] ▪ which was, as one observes, about a month [...]fore Moses receiv'd the Law on Mount Sinai.

Some, it is true, would infer, that the Sab­ [...]th was known, and observ'd by the Jews be­ [...]re, because (they say) it is here spoken of [...] a thing well known.

1. I answer in the words of our late Author:Grascome's History of the Sab. p. 76. This is a force put upon the words, and a gross mistake; for it is evidently spoken of as a new thing, else what means that frequent Inculcation to make the People take notice of it, if it had been familiar to them before? And what means the coming of the Rulers of the Congregation to Moses to consult him as on an unusual and unknown matter? Exod. 16. 22.

2. And let me add, they were told that they should gather it six days, and that there should be none found on the seventh; and yet some of the People went to gather it on the seventh day, as not being yet well acquainted with their Sabbath, ver. 26, 27. and this displeased the Lord; and therefore Moses again told them, ver. 29. See, for the Lord hath given you the Sab­bath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day Bread for two days.

He hath given you the Sabbath; Doth not [...]his imply he had not given it to any before? To you, and none else; to you, and to none that went before you, as he spake to them after­wards, Deut. 5. 2, 3. As to his Laws and Co­venant on Mount Sinai, the Covenant which God made with us in Horeb, the Lord made not this [Page 78] Covenant with our Fathers, but with us, even [...] who are alive this day.

Their Fathers had the Covenant and all the Precepts before materially, as to the substance of them, or what was simply moral; but the [...] had not this Covenant, nor those Precepts for­mally given to them, and so not the precise se­venth day.

3. If the People did know there was a Sab­bath given in charge to Moses before Manna it might refer to that chap. 15. yet they might not know what particular day it was to begi [...] on, or which day should be the day of their first Sabbath, nor know yet how to keep it. Fo [...]

4. As the same Author notes, the case of th [...] Man who gather'd Sticks on the Sabbath-day▪ shews they were still unacquainted with Sab­bath-days Duties,Numb. 15. 32, 33. or rather wholly ignorant of the Penalty of the breach of it: they knew no [...] what they should do with him, and this was whilst they were in the Wilderness; and they put him in ward, for it was not yet declar'd what should be done unto him. By which it appears (saith he) to be a new thing not yet adjusted: for had it been a Law from the Creation, it is scarce possible that all Men should have been ignorant whether any Punishment or not, or what Punishment did belong to the Viola­tion of a Law of such standing.

Object. I know that Dr. Owen saith, Dr. Owen on the Sab. p. 62. if the original of the Sabbath was here, then the Na­tional Observation of it is introduced with a strange abruptness, &c.

Answ. To which I answer, that it doth not so appear to me; however, let every Man read the words of Moses again, and how he repeats the same over and over, To morrow is the Sab­bath, &c. To day is a Sabbath unto the Lord; [Page 79] [...]gain, The Lord hath given you the Sabbath: [...]an any thing be brought in more solemnly? [...]ut I see how Men will try their Wits to de­ [...]nd their own Scriptureless Notion of a Sab­bath given in Paradise, as well as in pleading [...] other groundless Practices.

Object. But since you grant a Sabbath before [...] Law on Mount Sinai or Ceremonial Laws [...]ere given, doth not this prove it is a moral Pre­ [...]pt?

Answ. No, not at all, because we find that sacrifices, and offering the Firstlings of the [...]locks,Gen. 4. 7. & 7. 2. & 14. 20. & 28. 2. and first Fruits of the Ground, were offered to God from the beginning: and there­fore should we grant that the Seventh-day Sab­bath had been practised from the beginning [...]so, yet that would no more prove it a moral [...]nd perpetual Law, than it proves the offering [...]f the Firstlings of the Flocks, and the First- [...]ruits, &c. to be perpetual Laws, or moral Duties; the Sabbath being a sign and shadow as well as they were so. We come now to the [...]urth part of our first general Proposition.

Object. The seventh-day Sabbath was given in the 20th. Chapter of Exodus, The grand Argument for the Jewish Sabbath consider'd and an­swer'd. with all the other [...]ine moral and perpetual Commandments wrote in two Tables of Stone, by the finger of Jehovah himself; and therefore it obliged believing Gen­tiles to keep it, and all Mankind.

1. To this I answer, that if I can prove it is not the Duty of Gentile Believers, nor any Believers in Christ in all the World to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath from hence, I shall over­throw our Opponents strongest Fort, and so utterly confute them; which I doubt not by God's Assistance I shall fully do, and in or­der hereto shall lay down three Propositions.

[Page 80] First, The me­thod pro­posed in answering this Argu­ment. I affirm the Morality of the fourth Commandment lies not in the observation of the precise seventh day from the Creation.

Secondly, That the Law of the ten Command­ments, as formally given to Moses, and written with the finger of God in two Tables of Stone, and given to the whole House of Israel, were not given to the Gentiles, nor to any other People in the World, save the Strangers that were within their Gates, or were proselyted to the Jewish Religion.

Thirdly, That the whole Law is changed▪ and that what was Ceremonial, or shadows [...] things to come, ceased at the death of Christ: and all Precepts of the Moral Law, or what [...] simply moral, as they were formally given by Mo­ses, are taken out of his hand, and put into the hands of Christ consider'd as Mediator, our Lord, and only Lawgiver.

I shall now begin with the first of these Pro­positious.

First, I shall give you the sense of the Learned about a pure moral Precept.

First, The Term Moral being but a scholasti­cal Expression, and not properly signifying that which is usually understood by it,Cawdry's Christian Sabbath, p. 1, 2, 3. say Mr. Caw­dry and Mr. Palmer, we have ever judg'd it a Bone of Contention: Moral (relating to a Law) signifies in it self any Precept serving to regu­late the Manners of Men.

Dr. White saith,White on the Sab. p. 26. ‘A Divine Law call'd Mo­ral is a just Rule or Measure imposed by God, directing and obliging to Obedience of things holy, honest, and just. The same is twofold, simply moral, or moral only by some external Constitution or Imposition of God. Divine Law simply moral, commands or pro­hibits Actions good or evil, in respect of their inward nature and quality.’

[Page 81] Dr. Owen saith,Owen on the Sab. p. 118. Moral Laws are such as have the Reasons of them taken from the na­ture of the things themselves requir'd in them; for they are good from their respect to the nature of God himself, &c. Laws Positive, as they are occasionally given, so they are esteem'd alterable at pleasure, being fixed by mere Will and Prerogative, without respect to any thing that should make them necessary antecedently to their being given; they may by the same Authority at any time be taken away and abolished.’

Mr. Shepherd saith,Shepherd on the Sab. p. 6, 7. ‘A Law strictly and espe­cially moral, is that which concerns the Man­ners of all Men, of which we now speak, and may be thus describ'd, viz. It is such a Law as is commanded, because it is good; and it is not therefore merely good because it is com­manded. And thus Austin, saith he, describ'd it long since. Also Cameron, and multitudes of other Writers and learned Men. But mere Divine positive Laws are commanded of God, and therefore good.’

Some say, that is simply moral that is the Law of Nature, or which naturally obligeth all Men, and is distinguished from Laws Ceremo­nial, and Judicial. Thus one expresseth him­self, i. e. Primrose of the Sab. p. 4. ‘This Law Moral all Men take to be the Law of Nature, and reciprocally they take the Law of Nature for this Law, for that which is naturally and universally just.’

Mr. Cawdry and Palmer say,Cawdry Sabbatum, p. 3. ‘It implys any Law of God exprest in Scripture, whether it can be prov'd natural or not, which from the time it was given to the end of the World binds all succeeding Generations of their Poste­rity to whom it was given, and more especi­ally it obliges the Church,’ &c.

[Page 82] I think Mr. Baxter in this case has said ex­cellently well:Baxt. on the Sab. p. 77. Moral, saith he, signifieth that which by nature is universal and perpetually obligatory.’ He answers this Question, Do not Divines say the Decalogue written in Stone is the Moral Law, and of perpetual Obligation? Answ. Yes, for by moral they mean natural, and so take moral not in a large sense, as it signifies a Law de moribus, as all Laws be whatsoever; but in a narrower sense, as sig­nifying that which by nature is of universal and perpetual Obligation.’

Now then that which I call a pure of simple Moral Law or Precept, is that which is a Transcript of God's holy Nature, and there­fore commanded, whether written in the Heart of innocent Adam, or in God's Word or Law; and doth universally and perpetually oblige the whole World to conform thereunto.

Now having let you know what is to be un­derstood by a simple Moral Law, I shall shew that the Law of the precise Seventh-day Sab­bath is not a Law of this nature, i. e. a pure moral Precept universally and perpetually ob­ligatory on all Men: tho I deny not but there is that in the fourth Commandment which is moral in the sense I have given, viz.

1. A time,Three things con­tain'd in the fourth Command­ment. a sufficient time to be set apart from all worldly Business, for Rest, and the Worship of God; and this is all I can find sim­ply moral in the fourth Commandment.

2. There is something more contained in it, which God by a positive Command requir'd from the Soveraignty of his Will, as that which he sees just and reasonable; namely, that one day in seven be set apart as a day of Rest, and for his Service, and that this should be perpetual to the end of the World. I know [Page 83] Divines call this positively moral; and tho I can­not see reason so to call it, yet I grant as much I think as they mean thereby.

3. God did also command the whole House of Israel under their Legal and Typical Church- [...]tate, to observe the seventh, or last day of the week in remembrance of his finishing the Works of the first Creation.

And now that the precise seventh Day was a [...]hadow or a sign, I have and shall prove; and [...] was only a Law to the Israelites during that Typical Dispensation, and their Political Church- [...]tate, which Christ nailed to his Cross, and [...]uried with all other Shadows and Legal Cere­monies.

But before I proceed, I might give you the Observations of divers Expositors on the order and manner of the Expressions in the fourth Commandment: As first, the essential part, Re­member the Sabbath-day to keep it holy; not the seventh day. True, in the next words God declar'd that the seventh Day should be the Jews Sabbath, whom he took into a Legal and Typical Covenant, and Church-state, to be his own People: The seventh Day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; not thy God in Christ upon the terms of the new Covenant; no, no, but thy God in a legal, and external Covenant. And so their Sabbath was given to them upon the terms of the Law of Creation, or the Co­venant of Works, which is a legal, relative, and external Covenant God enter'd into with the whole House of Israel, or Nation of the Jews, even them and all their natural Seed as such.

My Brethren, upon this foot of account was the Seventh-day Sabbath founded; not in Christ, or on a new Covenant bottom; nor given to [Page 84] New-Covenant Children as such; but it wa [...] bottom'd upon the Covenant of Works, and only given to that People whom God brought out of the Land of Egypt, and redeem'd from Egyptian Bondage. And when he enters into that Covenant with them, he positively says therefore he gave them his Sabbaths,Deut. 5. 1. which was a shadow of a far greater Work than that [...] Creation, and of a greater Redemption th [...] that out of Egypt. I heard lately of one [...] said, this was his chief reason of observing [...] Seventh-day Sabbath, because it was given [...] God's Covenant-People, &c. not being able to discern between that legal and typical Cove­nant made with the whole Nation of Israel (which took in their fleshly Seed as such) an [...] the Covenant of Grace.

Moreover, Expositors observe concerning the close of this Commandment, ver. 11. Where­fore God blessed the Sabbath-day, and sancti­fied it, that 'tis not said the seventh day here▪ but the Sabbath-day. One day in seven, and not the precise seventh Day from the Creation, is by a positive Command in this place intima­ted to be God's Will and Pleasure to be ob­served to the end of the World.

But the precise Seventh-day Sabbath given to Israel. I shall prove is not the moral part of the fourth Commandment, but a shadow of what was to come, and principally refers to Christ, and to that spiritual Rest Believers en­ter into when they first close with him.

I know Divines call one Day in seven a moral positive, as I just now told you: by moral they [...], as I conceive, that which ought perpe­ [...]ally to be observed; but that Day which God from the Soveraignty of his Will commanded the Jews, was 'tis plain the seventh: and when [Page 85] Christ came, who has given us the true Rest, and rose from the dead, he appointed, as I shall hereafter prove, the first Day of seven upon the account of his finishing his Work, i. e. the work of Redemption, as God commanded the Israe­ [...]tes to keep the seventh-day, because on it he [...]ested when he had finished his Work, viz. [...]hat of Creation.

Now then, tho there is something naturally [...]nd simply moral in the fourth Commandment; [...]nd tho God doth here intimate from his own [...]rerogative or Arbitrary Will, that he will [...]ave one day in seven perpetually observed as a [...]ay of Rest and sacred Worship; yet that [...]art of it that speaks of the seventh-day was [...]erely positive and typical, and so ceased with [...]he Covenant of Works.

Indeed Dr. Owen has excellently shewed how his Commandment is of a mixt or compound [...]ature, partly simply moral, partly positively [...]oral, and partly typical or Ceremonial: the [...]st he refers to the precise seventh day, when he says,P. 120, 121. ‘It was instituted for an outward pre­sent religious Observation, to signify and re­present something to come: And such, saith he, were all the particulars of the whole System of the Mosaical Worship, whereof the Law of the Sabbath was a part. And in [...]rief, the whole Law of the Sabbath was, as [...] its general nature, positive and arbitrary, [...]nd so changeable, and particularly ceremo­ [...]ial and typical, and so is actually changed and abolished.’

Now to proceed: The precise Seventh-day Sabbath cannot be a simple moral Precept, and therefore in that lies not the Morality of the [...]ourth Commandment. In order to prove this, [...]et me lay down this Proposition, viz. If the [Page 86] Law of the observation of the precise seventh Day hath not in it one Character of a Law that is sim­ply moral; then the Morality of the fourth Com­mandment doth not confist in the observation of that precise Day: but that it has not one Characte [...] of such a Law, I shall endeavour to prove,

First, That the precise se­venth Day is not the Morality of the fourth Command­ment, pro­ved large­ly. A simple moral Precept (that I me [...] which is naturally moral, obliging all Manki [...] for ever) as to the very matter of it, or this it self as so considered (abstracted from [...] positive Command) is naturally holy, as [...]sulting from the Nature of God.

But the seventh Day (in which our Breth [...] place the essence or substance of the four [...] Commandment, or the Morality of it) is [...] more holy naturally than any other day of [...] week.

Object. If they say, but God sanctified th [...] Day.

1. I answer, they will not say that God ad­ded any inherent Holiness to that Day.

2. But if they should say he did, then [...] would overthrow the Morality of it, i. e. as [...] this first property of a simple moral Precept for then it will follow it was made holy [...] an Act of God's Arbitrary Will and Pleasure▪ and that it was not so naturally, as that Day was created, or proceeded from the Holiness of God: because, as we have shew'd, all pu [...] moral Precepts as to the matter of them are not good merely because God commands them, [...] are in themselves good as resulting from the Holiness of his Nature.

For evident it is, that every Day of the [...] had one and the same efficient Cause, namely▪ Divine Creation; and all days and things Go [...] made were very good; and God's sanctifying the seventh Day was but his setting it apart fo [...] [Page 87] some holy use:Dr. Owen on the Sab. p. 82. the Day, saith Dr. Owen, was not capable of any inherent Holiness. ‘God then sanctified, says he, this Day, not that he kept it holy himself, which in no sense the Divine Nature is capable of; nor that he purified it and made it inherently holy, which the nature of the Day is not capable of, nor that he ce­lebrated that which in it self was holy [mark that well] but he set it apart to holy use.’ So that from hence it follows, if the Morality of the fourth Commandment lay in the precise seventh Day, it wants the first Character of a simple moral Precept. God might have set apart at first any other day if he had pleased, as well as the seventh.

Secondly, The seventh Day never known uni­versally to be a Sab­bath. Every Precept or Law simply mo­ral (which obliges all Men to Obedience per­petually) must be made known to all Men ei­ther by the Law of Nature, or by Revelation from God himself in some supernatural way: the Righteousness of God requires this, because the Violation of simple moral Pre­cepts is damnable. (1.) Now were there such a Law written in Mens Hearts, I mean to keep the seventh Day, some one Man or another would that way have known it. But no Man hath ever so known it, therefore no such Law is written in any Man's Heart; and if not one Man that way ever knew it, then not all Men universally besure. (2.) And as the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath is not revealed to all the World by the Lord this way, so he never gave any Commission to Moses, nor to any of his Prophets to promulgate it, or reveal it to all Mankind; therefore I argue, it wants the se­cond Character of a simple moral Precept.

Thirdly, That Law which upon urgent ne­cessity may be omitted or laid aside, or be bro­ken, [Page 88] can be no Precept simply moral; but the keeping of the Seventh-day Sabbath, upon di­vers urgent necessities, might be omitted or bro­ken: Josh. 6. 15. the Jews themselves might war, and go to battle on that day;1 King. 20. 29. and our Saviour shews they might pull a Sheep or any other Beast out of a Pit or Ditch on the Sabbath-day;Joh. 5. 10. nay, our Lord wrought with his Hands, and made Clay on that day, did many Miracles, and com­manded the Man he healed to bear a Burden, i. e. to carry his bed on that Day.

But Precepts simply moral, in respect of the negative part, oblige perpetually, and by no means must be transgressed; for, as a Divine saith, A Man must not tell a Lye to save the World. Can any pretended necessity make it lawful to worship another God, or prophane his Name, or steal, murder, or commit Adulte­ry? I know what is said about the Israelites borrowing of the Egyptians; and of God's commanding Abraham to slay his Son: but those actions are to be accounted for, as being extraordinary cases.

Obj. Works of Mercy may be done on the Sabbath-day, and Christ speaks of Works of Mercy.

Answ. Of what nature are works of Mer­cy? I hope not of a higher concern than the discharge of a simple moral Precept. And can one simple moral Precept have more Sanctity in it than another? What, violate the very letter of one moral Law, to do that which is but im­plyed as the necessary consequence of another! nay, break a Command of the first Table, to keep a Command of the second Table! This is a hard case.

Fourthly, That Law or Precept which is e­qualled to, or compared with Sacrifices, is no [Page 89] simple moral Precept: but such is the Law or Precept of the Seventh-day Sabbath; there­fore 'tis not a simple moral Precept.

That our Saviour himself doth equal it to, or compare it with Sacrifices, see Mat. 12. 3, 4, 5, 6.

1. Our Lord justifies his Disciples in pluck­ing the Ears of Corn on the Sabbath-day, and compares their so doing to David's eating the Shew-bread, vers. 3. which was unlawful by a mere positive Law.

2. He shews them how the Priests in the Temple prophaned the Sabbath, and were blameless, vers. 5. Some think they slew Beasts on that Day; however our Lord saith, they prophaned the Sabbath, &c.

But then, says he, If ye had known what that meaneth, I will have Mercy and not Sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless, vers. 7. What can he intend less than this; viz. If ye had known the difference between a pure moral Precept and such a Precept as is nothing more than a Sign, a Shadow, like those of Sacrifi­ces, or a mere positive Law that I am Lord of, and can take away, and give another at my pleasure, you would not have condemn'd the guiltless. For tho all God's mere positive Pre­cepts have great Sanctity in them, and ought carefully to be kept; yet when a simple moral Duty comes in competition with such as are but positive or ceremonial, the lesser must give place to the greater; as we commonly say, Of two evils choose the least.

But if the precise Seventh-day Sabbath was a pure moral Precept, equal with, and of the same nature of that Precept of shewing Mercy, there had been no ground for our Lord thus to have answered the Jews: for if it had been [Page 88] [...] [Page 89] [...] [Page 90] so, no doubt he would have said, I must indeed blame my Disciples, because they have broke one of God's righteous Precepts, whose Na­ture and Quality is above that of David's eating of Shew-bread, or Sacrifices. But he who was the great Expounder of the Law, knew best the vast difference between a moral Precept, and such as their Sabbath and Sacri­fices were.

Our late Annotators on this place, express themselves to this purpose: The meaning is, that God preferreth Mercy before Sacrifices; where two Laws in respect of some Circumstan­ces, seem to clash one with another, so as we can­not obey both, our Obedience is due to the more excellent Law. Now, saith our Saviour, the Law of Mercy is the more excellent Law; God pre­fers it before Sacrifice; which had you consider­ed, you would never have accused my Disciples, who in this point are guiltless. Why a more excel­lent Law? Is it not because the one is a moral Law proceeding from God's Nature, and the other but merely positive and Typical, and so arbitra­ry? And why do the Annotators apply that to Sacrifices? Our Lord remotely refers to that, but directly and immediatly to the Seventh-day Sabbath, and mentions Sacrifices to show that the precise Seventh-day Sabbath was no moral Law, but of the same nature with the Law of Sacrifices, and that of the Shew-bread.

Besides, our Saviour's bringing in (on this occasion) those words, for the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath, clearly shews that he as Mediator had power to change, dispose of, or take away the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath: for what a Person is Lord of, he may do what he will with. So that it may be lawful for any man to do any work on that [Page 91] Day, when it ceas'd and was abolished, as in­deed it now is, with all other Shadows and legal Ceremonies.

But none sure will say, Christ as the Son of Man, or as Mediator, is Lord of any pure moral Precept; so that he can give liberty to men to worship other Gods, or to make graven Images and bow down to them, or take God's ho­ly Name in vain, or commit Murder, Adulte­ry, or steal, &c. No, no, it would be Blas­phemy with a witness to say this; such is the vast difference between Laws that result from the nature of God, and mere positives, shadowy and Ceremonial Precepts, which were given for a time as an Act of God's Prerogative and good Pleasure, and when the Antitype is come, were to cease for ever.

Obj. But what say some? If Christ brake the Seventh-day Sabbath, he sinned: thus a rash Person lately exprest himself.

Ans. 1. Because our Lord came not to de­stroy the Law, &c. but to fulfil it, and was obliged exactly to keep the whole moral Law of God (that it might be imputed to us with his passive Obedience, to justify us before God, as his full and perfect Righteousness) that there­fore he was obliged to conform to all Typical and Ceremonial Laws, of which he himself was the Antitype, none I think ever asserted; he had another way to fulfil all such Laws, than by his actual Obedience to them. And,

2. Let it be considered in respect to the Typi­cal Sabbath, the Antitype being now come, which was that Evangelical Spiritual Rest in and by Christ, which all entered into that believed in him at that time: for having given rest to all that came to him, he had thereby in part fulfilled that figurative and typical Law; and by his [Page 92] shewing such strange indifference about his observance thereof, and his carriage towards it at every turn, did clearly intimate that that Typical Sabbath was departing, or in a dying condition, tho not quite dead, till he himself suffered and dyed on the cross; and was after­wards gradually, and decently buried, it hav­ing, as one observes, an honourable Funeral, when further light was given to God's People about it. But no more at this time.


Six Arguments more to prove the Seventh-day Sabbath not moral. That it was a Sign and Shadow to Israel of the Covenant of Works.

Gal. iv. 10, 11.‘Ye observe days, and months, &c.’

THE last Day I gave four Reasons to prove that the simple moral part of the fourth Commandment lies not in the observation of the precise Seventh-day Sabbath. I have six more to add.

Fifthly.The 7th day Sabb. not given forth a­fresh by Christ or his Apo­stles. That the precise Seventh-day Sabbath cannot be that part of the fourth Commandment which is purely moral, I argue thus: Whatso­ever is a simple moral Precept, universally and perpetually obligatory, is by our Saviour or his Apostles confirmed or given forth anew in the New Testament; but the Seventh-day Sabbath is not so confirm'd or given forth, therefore is not a simple moral Precept.

To prove the Major, or first Proposition, let it be considered, that the moral Law is transfer'd from Moses to Jesus Christ, or taken out of Moses's hands as a Lawgiver, and put into the hands of Christ considered as Mediator: and this was signified by those words,Mal. 2. 7. The Priests Lips should keep knowledg, and they should seek the Law at his mouth; for he is the Messenger of the Lord of Hosts. Whatsoever was doubt­ful, [Page 92] [...] [Page 93] [...] [Page 94] the High-Priest Deut. 17. 9. was to determine. In this the Priests under the Law were a Type of Christ, signifying that when Christ came, who is God's Messenger, all should receive the Law from his Mouth, who was to be the great In­terpreter of it: and accordingly we find he opened the nature of the moral Law in Mat. 5. and other places, shewing the spirituality thereof; and how men may be said to break the Commands against Adultery, Murder, &c. by the lusts and malice in their hearts, tho they never actually commit either of those Sins. Nay, I know not one simple moral Precept, which our Lord or his Apostles did not confirm or give forth anew, who no ways extenuated the guilt of the breach of it, but with far greater severity aggravated every transgression thereof.Rom. 1. 18. Paul shews how the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness, and unrighteousness of Men.

Now neither our Lord nor his Apostles seem­ed to confirm or give forth anew the old Jewish Seventh-day Sabbath; but contrarywise, as I have shew'd, he seemed to excuse his Disciples when charged with the breach thereof, and allow'd others to do that which was deem'd un­lawful on the Sabbath-day, as bearing a bur­den, &c. If our Adversaries can prove that every simple moral Precept of the Decalogue was not confirm'd by Christ or his Apostles, let them do it.

Obj. I know they say, that neither Christ nor his Apostles ever confirmed, or gave out anew that Command, Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image, &c.

Answ. As to Idols, they are directly for­bid: 1 Cor. 8. 4. An Idol is nothing in the world; there is none other God but one. And St. John saith, [Page 95] Little Children, 1 Joh. 5. 11. keep your selves from Idols: and again, Flee from Idolatry. Now what is a Graven Image but an Idol? Every Graven Image made to be worshipped is an Idol, tho every Idol is not a Graven Image. Where do they read that an Image made of Bread is for­bid in Moses's Law? True, the second Com­mand forbids all Idols, and all Idols are forbid in the Gospel. Nay, Idols are in a more nice manner defined and condemned in the Gospel, than by the Law of Moses. We read that a Man may idolize or make a God of his Belly; Phil. 3. 19. and Paul declares that Covetousness is Idolatry. Col. 3. 5.

Object. But where do we read in the New Testament that it is unlawful for a Man to marry his own Sister?

Answ. 1. Where all Uncleanness, and Lusts of Concupiscence and Fornication are forbid, there a Man is forbid to marry his own Sister.

2. Is not this sort of Incest forbidden and con­demned, 1 Cor. 5. 1. where the incestuous Per­son is condemned for marrying his Father's Wife? If it be unlawful for a Man to marry his Brother's Wife, or his Father's Wife, it is unlawful to marry his own Sister, because nearer of kin.

3. All manner of Incest is forbid to believing Gentiles in Acts 15. 29. this was one of those things contain'd in the Law that is given forth anew to believing Gentiles. The Holy Ghost inspir'd the Apostles to write to the Gentiles to abstain from Blood, Meats offered to Idols, things strangled, and from Fornication: now Incest is by Paul call'd Fornication, 1 Cor. 5. 1. I hear there is Fornication amongst you, &c. ‘Tho in strict speaking (say our late Annotators) by Fornication we mean Uncleanness of single Persons, yet by this word often in Scripture [Page 96] is understood all species of Uncleanness.’ Nor is it probable that the Holy Ghost refers to the Uncleanness of single Persons in Acts 15. but to somewhat more doubtful: and therefore I conceive all sorts of Incest in this place are for­bidden.

4. If any should say, How can they know it was unlawful for a Man to marry his own Sister?

I answer: 'Tis not only known (as I have shew'd) by the New Testament, and forbid there, but also by the very Light of Nature: for such Fornication, 1 Cor. 5. 1. saith Paul, is not so much as once nam'd among the Gentiles; that is, among the more civiliz'd Heathens, who had no other Law than the Light of Nature, which teaches Men to abhor such a Marriage. For doth the Light of Nature teach a Man that it is a shame to wear long Hair, and not teach him it is a shame to marry his own Sister?

5. Moreover, tho I said the whole Moral Law is transfer'd from Moses as a Lawgiver, to Christ as Mediator; yet the Old Testa­ment and the Law as written by Moses, as well as the Prophets, are of great use in many re­spects: 2 Tim. 3. 16. All Scripture is profitable for Doctrine, for Reproof, for Correction, and Instruction in Righteousness, &c.

Sixthly, The Se­venth-day Sabbath proved to be a sign of the Cove­nant of Works. The Morality of the fourth Command­ment consists not in the observation of the pre­cise seventh Day, because that day was a sign or shadow of something to come. I did at first prove, in opening my Text, that the weekly Jewish Sabbath is comprehended in those days the false Brethren taught the Galatians to ob­serve; Gal. 4. 10. and gave many Arguments to evince, that tho there is one day in seven by a positive Law perpetually to be kept,Col. 2. 16. yet the old Jewish [Page 97] seventh day from the Creation, and under the Covenant of Works, was a shadow of things to come.

But I shall add here something out of an approved Author, further to confirm this: ‘That Sabbath,Warren on the Sab. a­gainst Til­lam, p. 106, 107, &c. saith he, and the particular se­venth day which the Jews observed, was certainly of a shadowy nature; being insti­tuted at first with reference to Christ, as all other Shadows were, having a Type after fix'd to it. And of this we may safely ex­pound that forementioned Text, Col. 2. 16. Let no man judg you in Meats or in Drinks, or in respect of an holy day, or New Moons or Sabbaths, which were shadows of things to come: but the Body is of Christ. The only question is, whether their weekly Sabbath was here in­tended. Some are jealous lest in pressing it so far, it should prove prejudicial to our weekly Christian Sabbath; but this is a mere causless Jealousy. For let us ponder the scope and design of the place, and it will appear that the Apostles design is not to level Christian Days and Duties, but such as the Jews observ'd, and would have introduced with Circumcision. 'Tis apparent that in all those three places, Rom. 14. 5, 6. Gal. 4. 10, 11. Col. 2. 16. he crys down the Ordinances of the Law or Old Testament, not the Insti­tutions of the Gospel.’

‘Look what the Jewish false Teachers cry'd up, St. Paul cried down. So as to argue from hence against all difference of days under the Gospel, is evidently to stretch the Text be­yond the Scope; but to urge it against all Jewish holy days (their weekly Sabbath and all) is not to force it. For,’

‘1. The Apostle seems to speak distinctly and [Page 98] distributively, enumerating the several sorts of days in observation among the Jews, Holy-days, New-Moons, Sabbaths: and the gradation from yearly Holy-days to monthly New-Moons, and from them to weekly Sabbaths, is visible enough to such as are not blinded with Prejudice.’

Mr. Shepherd speaks much to the same pur­pose: Sheph. on the Sabb. Part 2. ‘The plural term [Sabbaths] is usually put for the singular, the Sabbath or seventh day,Thes. 20. p. 204. now under dispute. Yea, I cannot find any one Text in all the New Testament, where it is applied in the same number to any other day or Sabbath, but the old Seventh-day Sabbath.Mat. 12. 15. Mark 1. 21. cap. 2. 24. cap. 3. 2. Luk. 4. 31. cap. 13. 10. Act. 13. 14. Seven or eight times the same word as is here set down in the plural number, is used for the old weekly Sabbath, and not so much as once for any yearly Sabbath: there­fore in all reason that precise weekly Sabbath must be here (I will not say included only, but) principally intended.’

‘Even in the Old Testament, wherever New Moons and Sabbaths are coupled together (unless the Phrase be figurative, as in Isa. 66. 23.) the Jews weekly Sabbath is denoted by it, as appears by those Scriptures cited in the Margin 2 Kings 4. 23. 1 Chron. 23. 31. ch. 8. 13. ch. 31. 3. Neh. 10. 33. Ezek. 45. 17. Amos 8. 5., in most of which their annual Sabbaths are excepted, and distinguished by another name, scil. [Feasts] to which answers the word Holy-days in this place, Col. 2. 16. For indeed the word in the Original signifies a Feast or Festival-day. Thus let Scripture expound Scripture, and Truth will be Truth in spite of Error: take the whole Sentence together, Holy-days, New-Moons, Sabbaths, and (if it be an Old Testament Phrase) it always implies the old Seventh-day Sabbath; or take the word [Sabbaths] singly by it self, and (if it be a New Testament Term, as 'tis [Page 99] like it is) it ever signifies the same seventh day; unless when put for week, which here it cannot be. The Conclusion then is unde­niable, that the Jews Seventh-day Sabbath was a shadowy Sabbath.’

Dr. Owen also repeats what some learned Men say upon this place,Col. 2. 16. Let no Man judg you in Meats or Drinks, or in respect of an Holy-day, or the New-Moon, Dr. Owen, p. 214. [...], or of the Sab­bath, or Sabbath-days, which were a shadow of things to come: but the Body is of Christ. ‘From hence they affirm (saith he) it will follow, that there is nothing moral in the observation of the Sabbath, seeing it was a mere Type and Shadow, as were other Mosaical Institutions; and also that it is absolutely abolished and taken away by Christ.’ And if they mean no more but that precise seventh Day, they were certainly right: Nay Dr. Owen himself, as I con­ceive, determines the matter so as to make that precise day refer to Moses, and his Oeconomy.

But indeed I see some learned Men have wrote very darkly, because they strive to preserve a Sabbath in the Gospel-day, or a day of Rest, and of solemn Worship; and that tho not sim­ply, yet positively moral, from the fourth Com­mand: and if by moral positive they mean one day in seven, which God from his Soveraign Pleasure will have perpetually observed as a day of Rest and solemn Worship, I am of their mind.

Quest. But since the Jewish seventh Day was a Sign and a Shadow, what was it a Sign and Shadow of?

Answ. Before I give a direct Answer to this, let me premise one thing, which in a special manner we ought to regard, viz. that the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath was bottom'd upon [Page 100] the Covenant of Works in that Ministration of it given to the whole House of Israel, as suting with their Ecclesiastical, Political, and Typical Church-state. And this Dr. Owen has fully proved,Dr. Owen on the Sab. p. 221. speaking of that Covenant: ‘Now, saith he, this is not absolutely and merely a Law, but as it contain'd a Covenant between God and Man. A Law it might have been, and not a Covenant, which doth not necessa­rily follow upon either its instructive or pre­ceptive Power. Yet it was originally given in the Counsel of God to that end, and ac­companied with Promises and Threatnings, whence it had the nature of a Covenant. By virtue of this Law, as a Covenant, was the observation of a Sabbath prescribed, and re­quired, as a token and pledg of God's Rest in that Covenant in the performance of the Works whereon it was instituted, and of Man's Interest in it—Again, he saith; Seeing therefore that the Moral Law, as a Covenant between God and Man, requir'd this sacred Rest—we must inquire what place, as such, it had in the Mosaical Oecono­my, whereon the true Reason and Notion of the Sabbath doth depend: for the Sabbath being originally annexed to the Covenant be­tween God and ManThe Dr. takes it for granted, which I de­ny, that the Sabbath was given, to Adam., the Renovation of the Covenant doth necessarily require a spe­cial Renovation of the Sabbath; and the change of the Covenant as to the nature of it, in like manner doth introduce a change of the Sabbath, &c.

1. From hence note, that Dr. Owen saith, the Law given Exod. 20. was a renewal of the Covenant of Works.

2. That the Seventh-day Sabbath was given as a Token or Pledg of that Covenant, and Rest.

[Page 101] 3. That the Seventh-day Sabbath of Rest was not a Type of our Eternal Rest in Heaven, but a Type or Shadow of that true Spiritual Rest we enter into under the New Covenant when we believe in Christ; and so this Rest is the Antitype of the Jewish Seventh-day Sab­bath. My Brethren, this is that Rest of God which he referr'd to, and in which he takes up his delight and complacence.

Moreover, God shewed his People Israel by their Sabbath, how impossible it was for them, by the Covenant of Works, to enter into this Rest, where they should utterly cease from sin: it was a sign between God and them, that they should perform the whole Obedience due under the Covenant of Works, signified by that Obligation, that in six days they should labour and do all they had to do, and then rest, de­noting that the whole Law must be kept, or no rest: the man that doth them shall live by them, or have Life, Rest, and Peace on that Condi­tion. This, I say, did signify Man's working for Life before he could enter into Rest; for if they could do all they had to do, or God re­quired of them, or answer all the Demands of the Law, then they should have Rest, Peace, and Justification thereby.

Here you have the Six-days Labour, and the Seventh-day's Sabbath, it being an Epitome of the Covenant of Works: For their Sabbath, as Calvin shews, in the tenor of it, put them up­on the highest Acts of Obedience, even to live and sin not, or cease from all Iniquity in Words, Thoughts, and Actions.

Now if this did not tend to Bondage, and so was a Law against them, and contrary to them, nothing could; but now in Christ, who hath kept the Law perfectly for us, or has done [Page 102] all we were to do, and suffer, we come to have true spiritual Rest and Peace. And,

Our Lord, no doubt, alludes to this, Ma [...]. 11. 28, 29. Come to me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Bre­thren, mind those two words, labour and hea­vy laden. On the Jewish Sabbath no servile labour was to be done, nor any burdens to be born, signifying that Believers in Christ cease from labouring for Life, and must not bear any burden of Sin, either in respect of the guilt or fear of the punishment; Christ having done all, and born the burden of all our sins in his own Body on the Tree; so that we must cast our Burden on the Lord, and he will sustain us.

And so we begin our Sabbath after all our Works are done, and Burdens born by our dear Lord, and blessed Surety, on the first Day of the Week, as he has directed us; and from hence we work not for Life and Rest, but from Life, Rest and Peace.

Therefore to answer that Question, what was the Jewish Sabbath a sign of? you have in part heard, but shall yet more fully hear.

1. I affirm that it was a Sign of the Cove­nant of Works in that Ministration given to Israel, written and engraven in Tables of Stone. How often is that Sabbath called a Sign between God and them; Exod. 31. 13. Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep; it is a Sign between me and you throughout your Generati­ons. Again, vers. 17. 'Tis a Sign between me and the Children of Israel. Ezek. 20. 12. More­over also I gave them my Sabbath to be a Sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctifieth them.

But still it is enquired, what was it a Sign of? Some say that Israel were in bondage in [Page 103] Egypt; others, that God created the World in six days.

Answ. I answer, but remotely, if at all, it was a Sign of either of them; for they are laid down as the Reasons why God gave Israel their Sabbath, and not as a Sign of those things. But let it now be well considered, that God never since the Fall entered into a Covenant with any People, but he gave a Sign or Token of it.

1. When he entered into a Covenant with Noah (and all the World in him) that he would no more destroy the World by Water, he gave a Sign, viz. a Rainbow: this was a Cove­nant of external Favour, without any Restipu­lation.

2. When God entered into Covenant with Abraham, and with all his fleshly Seed as such, he gave them a Sign of that Covenant, namely Circumcision: this is that which we call the Covenant of Peculiarity; tho we deny not but God entered into a Spiritual or Gospel-Cove­nant with Abraham, and with all his true spi­ritual Seed also, which contained only a free promise of Grace in Christ: but that Cove­nant with his natural Seed as such, is called the Covenant of Circumcision, Acts 7. because Circum­cision was the Sign thereof. Moreover, they that can't see a twofold Covenant was made with Abraham, are strangely blinded.

3. And that there was a renewal of the Co­venant of Works with the whole House of Is­rael given by Moses, contained in the 20th Chapter of Exodus, is most evident, tho not given for Life, but for other Reasons which I have mentioned: and this Covenant contained Ten Commandments, with the promise of Life up­on the condition of universal Obedience there­unto. [Page 104] And to this all the People consented, and joined in with God by mutual Restipula­tion: Exod. 24. 3. And all the People answered with one voice, and said, All that the Lord hath said, we will do. And now I say, their Seventh-day Sabbath was given as a sign of this Ministration of the old Covenant of Works: and hence also as Circumcision, the sign of that Legal Typical Covenant made with Abraham and his fleshly Seed as such, is God's Covenant; so the Seventh-day Sabbath is call'd also God's Covenant: Wherefore the Children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath to observe it throughout their Genera­tions for a perpetual Covenant; Exod. 31. 16. and this because it was a Sign or a Pledg to them of that Obli­gation they lay under to keep the whole Law. I might here add, that the Lord's-Supper is a sign of the Gospel-Covenant; and it is also call'd the New Testament, or Covenant in Christ's Blood.

And thus as Circumcision bound all to keep the whole Law that conformed to it, (that being a sign of that part of the legal Covenant to Abraham and his natural Seed throughout their Generations) so the Seventh-day Sabbath is a sign of the same legal Covenant in that Ministration with the House of Israel, Exod. 20. and obliged all that observe it, to keep the whole Law also. And that this is not my Judgment alone, take what Dr. Owen has said on this account.

‘Whereas the Covenant which Man origi­nally was taken into,Dr. Owen [...]n the Sab. p. 148, [...]19. was a Covenant of Works, wherein Rest with God depended absolutely on his doing all the Works he had to do by way of Legal Obedience, he was during the Dispensation of that Covenant tied up precisely to the observation of the [Page 105] seventh Day, or that which follow'd the whole work of Creation. And the seventh Day as such is a Token of the Rest promised in the Covenant of Works, and no other. And those who would advance that day again into a necessary observation, do consequentially introduce the whole Covenant of Works, and are become Debtors to the whole Law. For the Works of God which precede the seventh Day precisely, were those whereby Man was initiated into, and instructed in the Covenant of Works; and the Day it self was a Token and Pledg of the Righteousness thereof, or a moral and natural sign of it, and of God's Rest therein, and of Man's with God there­by. And it is no Service to the Church of God, nor hath any tendency to the Honour of Christ in the Gospel, to endeavour a Re­duction of us to the Covenant of Works.’

What is now become of Mr. Tillam's Flourish, who insults over such as call the Seventh-day Sabbath a sign?

The Sabbath is indeed (saith he) a sign of good things formerly produced,Tillam on the Sabb. p. 18. as the Creation, or else of good things at present enjoy'd, as God's sanctifying Grace; but never was set up for a sign of good things to come, like the Ceremonial Sab­baths. I might here retort the vaunting Language of the Preacher of Peter's (of cutting off Goliah's Head with his own Sword) for if the Morality of the Sabbath cease, by being a sign to the Jews in their Generations, upon the same account must the whole Law cease to be moral, since God's Spirit hath set it also for a sign.

Answ. 1. Tho the Marks of true Grace are call'd Signs, yet there is a great difference be­tween them, and the Signs of Covenants. Miracles also are call'd Signs; and God's Peo­ple [Page 106] are set as Signs and Wonders: but what of this?

2. He mistakes greatly when he affirms, that God saith the Sabbath was a sign of his sanctify­ing the whole House of Israel with his sancti­fying Grace. Did God so sanctify them, or were they spiritually sanctified? No, no, it signified that God took the whole Nation of Israel into an external, federal, and legal Rela­tion to himself, or set them apart as so consi­dered from all People in the World, to be his own People; and in that Covenant-relation he was married to them, as he says elsewhere.

3. To sanctify, What is meant by God's sanc­tifying the whole Na­tion of Is­rael. often in the Old Testament only refers to God's setting apart a Thing, a Person, &c. for himself, or to some holy legal Use or Service. Thus the seventh Day was sanctified, and the Priests, and Vessels of the San­ctuary, &c. were sanctified. And their Sabbath was a sign that they became God's People, in that legal and typical Covenant, or upon the terms of the Covenant of Works; they pro­mising that all the Lord commanded them they would do,Exod. 24. 2, 3. which confirms what we said be­fore.

4. Let none suppose that God took the whole House of Israel into a special Relation with himself, according to the tenor of the new Co­venant, or Covenant of Grace; or that that Co­venant, Exod. 20. was the Covenant of Grace. Let them read what the Prophet Jeremiah saith: Jer. 31. 31, 32, 33. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new Covenant with the House of Israel, and with the House of Judah: Not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the Land of Egypt; which my Covenant they broke, altho I was a Husband to [Page 107] them, saith the Lord. But this shall be my Cove­nant that I will make.—After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my Law into their in­ward parts, and write it in their Hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my People.

1. Had the former Covenant been the Cove­nant of Grace, no doubt but they had abode in that Covenant to this day and for ever: but they are cut off, and now are in no actual Covenant relation with God at all. Sure the Covenant of Grace cannot be utterly broken.

2. Moreover then they should not have need­ed to look for the Law in two Tables of Stone, because that whole Moral Law should not on­ly be written in the New Testament, the Book of the New Covenant, but in their Hearts also.

3. Now when a Covenant is abolished (as the old Covenant is) will any dare to plead for the sign of it, which obliges them to keep the whole Law? No, plain it is, the sign, i. e. the old Sabbath, is gone with the Covenant it self.

Quest. If the old Sabbath was a sign of that of which you say, what was it a Type or Shadow of?

Answ. It was a Type or Shadow of our blessed Rest in Christ:Heb. 4. For we which have be­lieved do enter into Rest. This is the Antitype of the seventh-day Rest, when no Labor is to be done, nor any burden of Sin to be born by Believers; this is that Rest God is pleased with: and here we also rest from all Labour or Works of our own, as God did from his at first. Macarius saith,Hom. 39. in Mat. 12. that Sabbath given to Moses was a Type and Shadow only of that real Rest given by God to the Soul.

My Brethren, what comfort is here to you that enter into this Rest? What Joy may hence spring in your Hearts, who are delivered from [Page 108] Bondage and grievous Burdens.Gal. 5. 1. Stand [...] therefore in that Liberty wherewith Christ has made you free, and be not again entangled with the yoke of Bondage, lest Christ profit you no­thing.

Seventhly, I might prove that the Morality of the fourth Commandment consists not in the pre­cise Seventh-day Sabbath, even from that Me­morandum that is fix'd in the beginning of the Command, viz. Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy. Now tho one day in seven be by a positive Law made perpetually obligatory in the fourth Command, yet that is not, as so con­sidered, a simple moral Precept, much less not the precise seventh Day; and this because it is brought in with Remember, denoting clearly the difference between this Command as to any particular day, and that which is purely moral in this Command: for that which is connatural to us, or an inherent Law of Nature, is so en­graven in our Hearts, that inlightned Persons especially are not very subject to forget it. But a mere positive Precept, which is not so written in our Hearts by Nature, we are too ready to forget; therefore God (as I conceive) to this Precept added this, Remember the Sab­bath-day to keep it holy. 'Tis not said, Remem­ber ye have no Gods but me; or remember you do not take the Name of the Lord in vain; or, remember you do not disobey your Father and Mother; or that you do not steal, commit A­dultery, Murder, &c. no such charge is given there; why so? because these Precepts being simply moral, are written in our Hearts. The word remember (as one notes) hath not pri­marily any reference either to the Works of God, or to the finishing his Works, but to God's destination of the Day to be in time to [Page 109] come the Churches Sabbath.—Not remember how your Fathers kept it, or God instituted it from the beginning; but it is a new Ordinance, and of another nature, i. e. the chief of all Ceremonies, &c.

Eighthly, 'Tis natu­rally im­possible for all Men to keep the precise 7th day throout the World. To prove that the precise seventh Day is not a simple moral Precept, I argue thus: That which all Men throughout the World are not able precisely to observe or keep, or which is morally impossible for them so to do, can be no simple moral Precept: but all Men throughout the World are not able to observe the seventh precise Day from the Crea­tion, it being morally impossible so to do; therefore it is no simple moral Precept.

I shall not so much insist on that part, that it is impossible for any Man, much less for the whole World, to know which is the precise seventh Day from the Creation, as what some learned Men have shewn, viz. that it is mo­rally impossible to keep such a precise seventh Day.

1. This must be premised, that the Saturday Sabbatarians affirm, that the precise seventh Day is to be kept (saying in this the Morality of the fourth Command lies) which consists of 24 hours, and hath a Morning or Sun-rising, and an Evening or Sun-setting, throughout the whole year; and it was that precise day of the week in which God rested from all his Works.

‘Now,Dr. White, p. 177, 178, 179. as one observes, in some habitable Regions, and under some Climates, the year is not distinguished by weeks, containing each of them seven days; neither are there seve­ral natural days of twenty four hours, con­sisting of Morning and Evening, by means of the rising and setting of the Sun; as these Instances and Examples following do declare.’

[Page 110] ‘Continuance of the Sun above the Horizon.’

‘1. deg. 70. In the Southern part [...] Groinland, Finmark, Lapland: and in the North of Russia and Tartaria, one day lasteth from the 10th of May unto July 14. [...] five of our days.’

‘2. deg. 75. In the North of Groinland the Isle of Chery, Nova Zembla, Lancas [...]er and Horse-Sounds; the day continueth from April 21, until August the 2d; of our day 102.’

‘3. deg. 80. In the North of Bassins [...]Bay and Greenland, the day continueth from April the 6th, until August 17, and of our days 133.’

‘4. deg. 85. In Regions and Places un­discovered, the day continueth from March 23. until August 31. of our days 161.’

‘5. deg. 90. Under this Degree, the day con­tinueth from March the 10th, until Septem­ber the 13th, of our days 187.’

‘Now from the Premisses this Argument a­riseth.’

‘The Law of the fourth Commandment en­joyneth the observation of such a Sabbath day, as is distinguished from the other days of the week, by morning and evening, by the rising and setting of the Sun, and by the pre­sence and absence thereof, within the space of every 24 hours.’

‘But in many Regions of the World, and under sundry Climats, there are no ordinary Weeks containing seven particular days, di­stinguished each from other by morning and evening, and by the rising and setting, and by the presence and departure of the Sun.’

[Page 111] ‘Therefore the Sabbath-day of the fourth Commandment cannot be observed in many Regions of the universal World, by such Nations as live under a Climate where there are no such Weeks and Days as the Law of the fourth Commandment enjoineth to be ob­served. For the Subject of that Command­ment is a natural day of 24 hours: and where that subject is wanting, how is it possible for any Law that wanteth its proper Subject to be in force?’

‘Now if any shall conceive, that altho in the Regions and Climates aforesaid, there be no such particular day as is expressed in the fourth Commandment; yet there is a suffici­ent and equivalent space of time, which may be measured by hours: My answer is, That the Law of the Decalogue requireth the keep­ing holy of such a Seventh-day, as is distin­guished from the day before, and the day af­ter, by a new return, arising, presence, and going down of the Sun: But Time and Hours in general, do not yield or constitute such a Day.’

And saith another Author;Mr. Iron­side, p. 133 ‘There is no mo­ral Law of Nature in Scripture, but is it self possible to all in all parts of the World, in regard of the thing commanded: But a natu­ral Sabbath-day, as made to consist of 24 hours, or of a Day and a Night, is absolute­ly, impossible for some men in some parts of the World to be observed.’

If it be objected, That this makes equally a­gainst the first Day as against the Seventh;

I answer, We do not say the observation of the first Day is a moral Precept, but merely positive. No doubt but the Seventh-day was instituted for Israel, whose Habitation was fixed in the Land of Canaan.

[Page 112] See a late Author on the Sabbath;T. C. recom­mended by Dr. Bates and Mr. How, c. 10. p. 40. ‘The day of God's Rest, saith he, which is the seventh Day from the Creation, is the same universal Day with all People; but it can't be the same Day of the week with all People. If the Day of God's Rest be Saturday with some, it must needs be Friday or Sunday with others. So likewise the time of Christ's coming to Judgment; if it be, saith he, on the Satur­day with some, it will be on Friday or Sunday with others.’ This he proves, because the Earth is not plain but round. ‘The Jews, saith he, neither did nor could keep the very Seventh-day on which God rested in all pla­ces; but as we, according to God's Com­mand, work six days and rest the Seventh, so did they: And as Sunday with Christians was ever the day following six days of labour, so was the Saturday with the Jews.’ If this be so, it can't be deny'd that the Seventh-day of God's resting cannot be kept by all, nor do a­ny know they do keep it.

Ninthly, Christ Lord of the Sab­bath, can dispose of it as he pleases. The morality of the fourth Com­mandment consists not in the precise Seventh-day Sabbath, because of Christ's Lordship o­ver it as Mediator. That Commandment over which Christ was absolute Lord, as the Son of Man, cannot be moral: for a moral Precept is part of God's Eternal Law,Ironside, p. 53, 54. over which the Son of Man can have no power, saith a Learn­ed Author, being made under the Law. But Christ as the Son of Man,Mat. 12. 8. was Lord of the Sabbath,Mark 2. 27. as himself twice has told us.

Object. So it is said, he is Lord of the dead and living.

Answ. This, saith our Author, is to play with the ambiguity of the words. 'Tis one thing for Christ to be Lord of the Church, to [Page 113] guide, govern, perfect, quicken, raise, and glo­rify her, Eph. 1. 20, 21, 22. and another to be Lord of a Law or Constitution, to moderate, dispense with, order, alter and abolish it: for in what other Construction can any one be said to be Lord of a Law?

Obj. Christ can't be said to refer to this, be­cause he had not then abrogated the Sabbath.

Answ. 1. I have shewed that spiritual Rest (signified by the seventh-day's Rest) was given to all them that believed in Christ; so that the Antitype being come, the Type was a fly­ing away, and was in a dying state at that ve­ry time; tho all typical Ordinances were not utterly abolished till his Death and Resur­rection.

2. 'Tis as if our Lord should have said, you magnify the Sabbath as if that was one of the greatest Commandments, and the main end of Man's Creation; but you must know the Sab­bath was made for Man, and not Man for the Sabbath, as were all legal Rites and Ceremonies. And if it be thus, I that am the Messiah, am by my Office Lord of the Sabbath; and I can and will abrogate it, and appoint another day in its room.

Certainly Man was made to discharge all pure moral Precepts, they being originally stampt on his Heart; as Christ, who was made under the Law, was ordain'd to keep the Law for us, and not the Law made for him. Man was made in the Image of God, and under a holy Law, and Covenant of perfect Obedience, to serve his Creator; and by the observation of that holy Law written in his Heart, as the Law of his very Creation, he bore the Image of God in the World,Mark 2. 27. serving him in Righte­ousness and Holiness to the Glory of his Name, [Page 114] and for this he was made; yet Man was not made for the Sabbath, but the Sabbath for him, i. e. for his good, in respect to his Body and Soul: (1.) As to his outward Rest, &c. (2.) As a help to discharge all Duties of instituted Worship the better for the good of his Soul: (3.) And chiefly to point out or shadow forth to him the true Rest by Jesus Christ; and so that typical Sabbath was to remain no longer than till that true Rest was come and finally established, for then it could be of no further use to Man, for which end it was chiefly appointed for him.

Object. I know some object from these words▪ the Sabbath was made for Man, that therefore it was for every Man.

Answ. The Woman was made for Man also, but must every man have a Wife therefore? God ne'r design'd that for such to whom he hath given the Gift to live without marrying. So neither were all Men to have this Sabbath; no, none but they to whom it was given: tho it was made for Man, yet not for every Man in the World, but only for the whole House of Israel, and the proselyted Stranger within their Gate, as I shall shew in the next place.

Tenthly, The pure Morality of the fourth Command consists not in the observation of the precise Seventh-day Sabbath, The simple Morality of the fourth Command lies not in one day in seven. because it lies not in one day in seven, but in a sufficient time for Rest, and the Worship of God; tho I do assert, and stedfastly believe, that by a positive Pre­cept contain'd in the fourth Commandment, one day in seven God will have observed to the end of the World, which I think is the sum [...] what the Learned mean by a Law positive [...] ­ral: Not that precise day; for mind the words Exod. 20. Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy. In this Clause it does not directly point [Page 115] at one peculiar day more than another: the Light of Nature requires a time, and God po­sitively lays claim to a seventh day, or one day in seven, perpetually to be observed as a day of Rest and solemn Worship. And tho the last of seven was that precise Day injoyn'd under the old Covenant upon the People of Israel, yet that Sabbath was not to continue longer than till the Antitype came; and it being a sign and shadow, it is, as I have proved, done away.

Dr. Owen, Pag. 301. speaking of the Seventh-day Sab­bath, saith, ‘That Day was not directly nor absolutely required in the Decalogue, but con­sequentially, only by way of appropriation to the Mosaical Oeconomy, whereunto it was then annexed. The Command is to observe the Sabbath-day; God blessed the Sabbath-day. And the mention of the seventh Day in the body of the Command fixes the number of the Days in whose Revolution a Sabbatical Rest returns, but determines not an everlasting or­der in them, seeing the order relating to the old Creation is inconsistent with the Law, Reason, and Worship of the new. And if the seventh Day, and the Sabbath, as some pre­tend, are the same, the sense of the Com­mand in the inforcing part of it is, but the seventh Day is the seventh Day of the Lord thy God, which is none at all.’

So, as he and all learned Men generally say, 'tis not the precise seventh Day, but one day in seven, which is perpetually obligatory in the fourth Commandment. Mind the words again, wherein the substance, or the essential part of this Command is expressed: Six days shalt thou labour, but a seventh is a Sabbath; 'tis not in the original [the seventh] but seventh, denoting not a monthly or yearly, but a weekly Sabbath: [Page 116] the Phrase is exclusive, Mr. War­ren, p. 48. as one observes, imply­ing thus much, i. e. Thou art not bound to keep the sixth day, or one in six, or the tenth, or one in ten, but the seventh, that is, one in seven, or one in a week. The term seventh is opposed to all other numbers, either ninth, or twentieth, as also to the six working days, which clearly intend such a number, as six in seven; so the seventh, as one in seven.

Suppose I give or lend a poor Man seven Pounds, on condition that he improves one Pound for me: now by the seventh is intended one in seven; so doth God here intend one day in seven for a holy Rest to himself.

Tho I deny not the last of seven, or one af­ter six working days was given to the People of Israel; yet it was a sign they should keep the whole Law, and was a shadow of that spiritual and antitypical Rest we have in Christ; and so was upon a special occasion imposed on them, with the greatest strictness and severest Penalty.

But let it be considered, that which is signi­fied in the fourth Command, as perpetually obliging us, is, that we observe one day in se­ven as a day of Rest to the Lord. Let me give you one parallel case more, viz. the Law of Tithes. Now God required the tenth of their Increase: but will any Man say, God intended any one precise tenth? No, begin where you will, the tenth Sheaf or Lamb is the Lord's. So here, God will have one day in seven; but the reason why he fixed on the last of the seven under the old Covenant, I have shewed; and shall further shew why he chuseth the first of seven in the new Covenant, neither being ex­pressed in the essential and first part of the fourth Command. Had God chose now one in six, or one in nine, he had altered, as one ob­serves, [Page 117] the substance of this Command.

It is needless to recite the words of allOwen, Twiss, Shepherd, Walker, Palmer, Hughs, Dod, Wal­lis, Dur­ham, B. of Dorchest. Weemse, Baxter, Bunyan, &c. those who hold that one in seven, not the precise last day of the seven, is perpetually to be observ'd, and that the old seventh Day is abolished: but I shall observe what Mr. Warren saith, viz. ‘Thus I grant the time of Worship, a Sabbath it self, being an inseparable Adjunct of solemn Wor­ship, is perpetual: but the old Day, the se­venth from the Creation, was made mutable —and we have a Sabbath still, a literal Sab­bath; but the old Sabbaths and old Sacri­fices being Twins, tho both honourable and serviceable in their Generations, as they liv'd together and dy'd together, let both together in God's Name be buried in the Grave of Christ, so as never to rise up again: but let our Gospel-worship and Gospel-Sabbath take life from our Saviour's Resurrection, which brought with it a new Creation, a new World, making all things new.’

But to wave this a little, 'tis well observ'd by Dr. Wallis: ‘He'll say perhaps [i. e. Mr. Ban­field] the Jews observed such a seventh Day from the Creation, and that was their Sab­bath: But that is more than he or I know, or any Man living. They had I grant a circu­lation of seven days, but from what Epocha we cannot tell. And when Moses tells them on the sixth day, To morrow is the Rest of the holy Sabbath, it seems to be the fixing of a new Epocha from the first raining of Manna; and then all his Arguments from the conti­nual observation of the Sabbath from the Creation till that time, are at an end, i. e. whether this from the first raining of Manna be the same with that from the Creation: And there is six to one odds, that it is not.’


[Page 118] 1. Observe,Mr. B. of Dorchest. p. 31. that at the opening and giving forth of the Command, Exod. 20. 8. 'tis said, Remember the Sabbath-day, that is, the day of holy Rest of God's appointing.

2. In the Conclusion of the Command, v. 11. Wherefore the Lord blessed and sanctified the Sabbath-day; 'tis not expressed the seventh day, but the Sabbath-day of holy Rest: this is evi­dent, that neither in the opening nor shutting up the Commandment (where we have the mo­ral substance of it) is there mention of any par­ticular Day at all.

3. What intervenes and comes in by way of explication, or inforcement of Obedience, be­tween the opening and shutting up of the Com­mand, ought to be observed; as,

1. In what Revolution of time God had ap­pointed this day of holy Rest to be observ'd, and that is one whole day of seven; of every seven days six for Labour, one for Rest—not one in ten, or one in twenty, but one in seven, one day in every week.

2. I observe the inforcement of Obedience to the Command from God's resting the seventh day: Here I acknowledg the last of seven is mentioned, but not as any branch of the un­changeable moral substance of the Command, nor the observation of it directly, but only con­sequentially, being instituted before, as is ac­knowledged by all. And it must be owned that the last of seven here mentioned, had first of all the honour to be the day of God's ap­pointing, and accordingly was observed till the time came that another day, the first of seven, was to succeed in the rome of it. Note,

1. As was said before, neither in giving forth, nor shutting up the Commandment, is there any mention of a precise, or particular Day.

[Page 119] 2. Nor in any thing that intervenes between.

3. Nor in any thing that expresses the Revolu­tion of Time, wherein the day of holy Rest is to be observed. Six days shalt thou labor.

Thus I understand this Limitation, or Rule for Direction.

1. Six days shalt thou labor, unless God other­wise appoint; and he did appoint in the old Administration other days to be kept holy, which tho not always, yet some times fell out on some or other of the six working days, &c.

2. Further, Six days shalt thou labor, no ex­cluding the solemn Worship of God out of those six days; for it would be no Sin to hear a Sermon, or set some hour apart for Prayer any of these six days, as it is for a Man to work upon that day of seven which God sets apart for himself.

3. And yet further, which is most of all to be taken notice of; six days, &c. rest one, not injoyning the last of seven (which was institu­ted before) but only six parts of the time shall be for your selves, the seventh shall be mine: So Gen. 47. 14. you shall have four parts, saith Joseph, the fifth shall be Pharaoh's; let all be divided into five parts, four shall be for your selves, the fifth shall be for the King; not tel­ling them which fifth, but only one of five. Thus Lev. 23. 27. let all be divided into ten, you shall have nine, the tenth shall be the Lord's; not appointing them which tenth, but only one of ten—So here I find not one word for the last of seven.

Moreover, I perceive nothing at all in God's Example for it, nothing there but one day in seven: but when the last day of seven is re­quired of Israel, that refers to the Covenant of Works, their labouring first, doing all they [Page 120] had to do, and so to rest, which was a sign (as I have proved) of the Covenant of Works, and a Pledg of their Obligation in their Resti­pulation with God, according to the Tenour of that conditional Covenant: hence their Sab­bath was called a perpetual Covenant, Exod. 31. and with that Covenant it is gone for ever.

Yet one day in seven, as a day of Rest and solemn Worship, is still to be the Lord's by virtue of the fourth Command: and tho God's Example of resting is mentioned, yet it must be acknowledg'd to relate to some special end and purpose, which may not only refer to Man's good, but to God's ceasing from the Work of Creation for ever; which being the first and greatest Work then done, the day of his finish­ing his Work was to be observ'd upon that reason.

But when Christ God-man came, and also had finished the Work of Redemption, and ceased from his Work, as God did from his; there is the same moral reason why the Day in which he rested from redeeming, i.e. the first day of seven, should be our day of Rest, because this is a far greater Work than that of Creation, as shall be made plain and clear hereafter. For we in Gospel-days (as foretold) shall not re­member the old Heavens and the old Earth any more, the new carrying away the Glory of that; i.e. remember them no more by the ob­servation of that old seventh day. To this purpose Mr. B. of Dorchester.

Now I say God's Example under the Cove­nant of Works in working six days, and then resting, is no ways obligatory on us, tho it was on Israel under the same old Covenant. But we must ground and bottom our Observation of one Day in seven upon Christ's ceasing and [Page 121] resting from his Works, and his Institution of a new Day upon the tenor or nature of the Co­venant of Grace, to rest first, and then work six days, not for Rest, or to rest, &c. but from that Rest Christ enter'd into on the first day of the week, when our Rest and Justification was compleated, which we enter actually into when we first believe.

Now the reason (saith Mr. B. to Mr. Ban­field) why herein I dissent from you,Mr. B. of Dorchest. p. 40. 'tis this, God blessed the seventh Day and sanctified it, but not as it was the last day of the seven, but as it was the day of his Rest, declaring there­by Creation-work to be perfected. Neither was his resting, so far as I can see, the ground of his blessing and sanctifying it, but as consider'd in conjunction with the reason of his Rest, i.e. his finishing his Creation; and also with the Result and Consequence of his Rest, viz. his magnifying and honouring that day, for the time being, above all other days, for the greatest work in being. For,

1. God's resting cannot refer to any thing but his ceasing from creating-work; because otherwise he ceaseth not workingMy Fa­ther, saith our Lord, worketh hitherto, and I work.; and his Example of resting, as some learned Men ob­serve, is not alledged here to lay an obligation on our Conscience, that that same Day we must ob­serve for ever.

2. It seems to relate to what God himself did, rather than any way propounded as an Ar­gument to prove that for which 'tis urged. Take a parallel case, 1 Cor. 11. 23. where we have the Institution of the Lord's-Supper repeated out of the Evangelists, and Christ's Example is related as to the time when, which was not only in the Night, but that particular Night in which he was betray'd. Now this is not recorded as [Page 122] a binding Rule on us for our Imitation. That is historically related, and so may this of God's Example in the fourth Commandment. There is one thing more worth noting.

Dr. Twiss, Dr. Owen, and many other learned Men cannot see how it can be said that God sanctified the seventh day, Gen. 2. but that it must refer to Adam in Innocence, as his duty to keep it, and not that God then only by De­stination, Decree and Purpose, set it apart for his Church and People to observe in after-times —Now grant it was, as I have last hinted, pray do not they say as much as this comes to in respect of the Gospel-Sabbath? Do not they say, that in the fourth Command (both in the first part, and close of that Precept) God only set apart or sanctified one day in seven, and so conclude the original Sanctification of the first day of the week is comprehended in the fourth Commandment? (which I will not deny) but was not this near 2000 years before he design'd his People should observe it, or that it was the absolute Duty of any so to do?

And as there was an interval from Adam to Moses, of such a state of God's People and things, as render'd them not capable to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath according to the Law of it; so there was an interval of such a state of the Church and things under the legal Covenant, from Moses to Christ, as render'd them not capable to observe the Lord's-day ac­cording to the design and purport of God there­in, tho that Day was by God's Destination set apart long before.

Eleventhly, Whatsoever is a simple moral Precept, or one of the ten Commandments, as materially so, the Holy Ghost doth convince all Believers of now under the Gospel (as I have [Page 123] shew'd before) and also he reproves them for the neglect or breach of all such Precepts: but the Holy Ghost doth not convince Believers 'tis their Duty to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath, for reprove them for the neglect or breach of [...]t, tho they work and bear Burdens on that as well as on any other day of the week; there­fore 'tis no moral Precept.

Twelfthly, That which is a pure moral Precept is written in the Hearts of all true Believers by the Holy Ghost. God promised in Gospel-times he would not write his Law in Tables of Stone, put in the fleshly Tables of our Hearts: now the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath is not written in the Hearts of Believers by the Spirit, therefore 'tis no moral Precept. Tillam saith, the moral Law is written in the Hearts of all Believers, and so saith Mr. Soarsby, and they say right; yea even the whole moral Law, we being created again in Christ Jesus in the Image of God: but no Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath is written in our Hearts; Ergo,

To conclude, we may hereby learn to di­stinguish between those parts contain'd in some of the ten Commandments that are simply moral, and oblige us as the Law is in Christ's hand, and what was judicial. For, 1. The Preface to the whole Ten was Judicial. 2. The second Command obliged the Jews to observe the whole Ceremonial Law; and that part of God's visiting the Sins of the Fathers on the Children unto the third and fourth Generation, belonged to the Covenant of Works, and not to us. 3. That in the fourth Command also of the seventh precise day belonged to the Cove­nant of Works, and so to them only. 4. The [Page 124] Promise annexed to the fifth only belonged to the Israelites that inherited the Land of Canaan. 5. In the tenth Commandment, Vsu­ry or Interest of Mony, Houses, &c. was for­bid to the Jews from their poor Brethren; but that was only a Judicial Law, and is no Law to us. Thus we may see that the moral Law is only a Law to us as in the hand of Jesus Christ.


Proving that the Law of the Decalogue was given to no People but the People of Israel: That the Moral Law is transferr'd from Moses into the Hand of Christ as Media­tor.

Gal. iv. 10, 11.‘Ye observe days, and months, &c.

THat it is not the Duty of believing Gen­tiles to keep the old Seventh-day Sab­bath, I have proved by many Reasons: The fourth was, it is not their Duty by virtue of the Decalogue given to the People of Israel in Exod. 20.

First, Because the precise Seventh-day Sab­bath is not the moral part of the fourth Com­mandment; this I have proved by Twelve Ar­guments. I shall now proceed and give you the next Reason why it is not the Duty of be­lieving Gentiles to keep the Seventh-day Sab­bath from hence.

Secondly, The Deca­logue gi­ven to none but the Jews, as written Exod. 20. It cannot be their Duty to keep that Day from thence, because the Law of the De­calogue (and particularly the Seventh-day Sab­bath mentioned therein) was given to no Peo­ple or Nation, but the People of Israel only, and the proselyted Stranger.

1. I shall prove this directly from express Texts out of the Old Testament.

[Page 126] 2. From direct and express Texts out of the New Testament.

3. I shall answer some of the chiefest Objecti­ons brought by the Seventh-day Sabbatarians a­gainst what I shall say.

But before I proceed let me premise two things.

1. That all the World were under the Law of the first Covenant as made with the first A­dam, All the World un­der the Law of Works in the first Adam. the common Head of all Mankind; and that the substance of that natural and simple moral Law is written in the Hearts of all his Off-spring, tho much darken'd by the Fall and actual Sin, especially in some.

2. That whatsoever is naturally or simply Moral, contained in the Decalogue, is given forth by Jesus Christ anew in the New Testa­ment, as I have proved; and as so consider'd, the sum or substance of those Ten words are obligatory on all Mankind. Now,

First, As to the Proofs out of the Old Te­stament.

1. The very Preface to the Decalogue declares to whom all the Commandments contained therein was given,Exod. 20. 2. viz. those very People God brought out of the Land of Egypt; that People which he sanctified or set apart for himself above all People on the Earth; as also by the promise annexed to the fifth Commandment, viz. That thy days may be long in the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. This shews the Laws of the Decalogue were only given to the People of Israel. Again,

2. 'Tis said,Deut. 4. 8. What Nation is there so great, that hath Statutes and Judgments so righteous, as this Law which is set before you this Day? Now if this Law was given to all People in the World, or to any one Nation or People [Page 127] besides Israel, then the whole World (or that particular People as well as the Israelites) had Laws and Statutes as great and righteous as Is­rael had, tho they might not have them in so clear a Revelation or manner as they had.

3. It is expresly said, Psal. 147. 19, 20. He shewed his Word to Jacob, his Statutes and his Judgments unto Is­rael: He hath not dealt so with any other Na­tion, and for his Judgments they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord.

How vain as well as sinful is it to go about to contradict God's Word? Here it is laid down Affirmatively and Negatively, It was gi­ven to Israel, and not to any other Nation, &c.

Dr. Chamberlen saith,See Mr. Ives's Sa­turday no Sabbath, p. 18, 19. ‘It was given to Is­rael as a Privilege only, and to other Nati­ons by way of Punishment to judg them by it.’

Answ. Men may say what they please after this manner: But I shall prove that no Nation or People but that of Israel (who were under that Law) shall be judged by it.

4. How often doth God by Moses, and o­ther of his Servants,Exod. 31. 17. declare that the Sabbath was given to Israel? It is a Sign between me and the Children of Israel,Neh. 9. 14. &c. Also Nehemiah speaking of Israel, saith, God made known to them his holy Sabbath: To them; and the Psal­mist says, not to any other Nation.

Take two or three Arguments further to e­vince this.

1. The Law of the Decalogue was given on­ly to a People in covenant with God:The Ten Command­ments on Mount Si­nai given only to the House of Israel. and be­cause the whole House of Jacob were taken in­to that legal typical Covenant which peculiarly referr'd to that People; therefore God gave them that Law, and the Sabbath, as a Sign that God sanctified and set them apart to be a [Page 128] peculiar People to himself; and as a Sign also of that Obligation they were laid under to keep it, as I have proved. But God entered into no such Covenant with any other People or Nation under Heaven; therefore the Law of the Decalogue could not concern any besides the House of Israel only.

Were the Heathen Gentiles, or Believing Gentiles, under that ministration of the Legal Covenant given by Moses to Israel? No, until Christ came, no other People were in covenant with God at all.

2. Because 'tis expresly said, that the Sabbath, Exod. 20. was given to the Jews and Proselyte Stranger; To thee and thy Man-servant, and Maid-servant, and Stranger that is within thy Gate: Not any Gentiles, or Strangers without the Pale of the Jewish Church, but only them who were within their Gate. So that God doth implicitly declare he injoyns none else to observe it.

3. The Law of the Decalogue could not be given to all or any other People, because God did not give any Command to Moses, or to a­ny of his Servants, to promulge, declare, or make known that Law, or the Sabbath, to any other People in the World but the Jews only.

No Law can bind without Promulgation: the Gospel is of a large extent, as appears by the Commission,Mat. 28. 18, 19, 20. Go into all the World, &c. Go teach all Nations, &c. Thus our Lord hath ap­pointed the Promulgation of the Gospel, but not a word of any such Commission for the Pro­mulgation of the Law of Moses given Exod. 20.

4. Because Moses was never made or appoint­ed a Lawgiver to any other People but Israel only:Moses no Law-giver but to the Jews. He was a Ruler over none but the Jews, [Page 129] and the Decalogue was but part of the Jewish Law as written in Tables of Stone. Others may say, Who made thee a Ruler over us, or a Legislator, or deputed Officer from God to us?

4. The Decalogue, and consequently the Sab­bath, could not be given to any other People, because it referr'd to a People in a Church-state, having many other Laws, Statutes, and Judg­ments annexed unto it; the punishment for the breach of each Precept thereof being death: he that broke the Sabbath must die.

Now certainly if that Law had been given to other Nations or People, God would have put them also into such a Church-state as the Is­raelites were, and have given them like Sta­tutes, Judgments, and Officers to execute those Judgments: but this he did not do.

5. Besides (as one observes) there were Ce­remonies belonging to the Sabbath, that were essential to the right keeping of it, which were not enjoined on the Gentiles, except Proselytes. That Law given to all People, must have the same Services, Rites and Ceremonies essentially annexed to it, given to them also; but those Services, Rites, and Ceremonies, were given to none but the Jews. Otherwise, as he ob­serves, there would be two sorts of Worship acceptable to God; and then it would follow also that God was more severe to Israel than to others, by imposing more hard and costly Ser­vices on them than on the Gentiles.

6. Take here what Mr. Bunyan hath said: ‘Good Nehemiah threatned the Gentiles that were Merchants for lying then about the Walls of the City, for that by that means they were a Temptation to the Jews to break their Sabbath;’ yet he still charges the [Page 130] ‘breach thereof upon his own People, Nehem. 13. 16, 17, &c.’

‘Can it be imagined, had the Gentiles been concerned by a Divine Law to keep this Sab­bath, that so holy and good a Man as Nehe­miah would let them escape without a rebuke for so notorious a Transgression?’

Moreover, in the Prophet Ezekiel, ch. 20. 10, 11, 12. 'tis said, I gave my Sabbaths to be a Sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctified them.

Before I close with this, take what two or three learned Writers have declared in confir­mation of what I say.Heyl. on the Sabb. p. 65, 66. ‘A Law which in it self was general and universal, equally pertains to Jews and Gentiles; the latter, which knew not the Law, doing by nature the things con­tained in the Law, as St. Paul has told us: but this Law published on Mount Sinai, and as delivered by the hand of Moses, obliged those of the house of Israel only.

Take what another saith:

‘As neither the Judicial,Zanchius de re­dempt. l. 1. c. 11. Tom. 1. nor Ceremonial, so nor the Moral Law contained in the De­calogue, doth concern us Christians, as given by Moses to the Jews, but only so far forth as it is consonant to the Law of Nature, which bind all alike, and was afterwards ratified by Christ our King.’

The Reason he asserts this, was to prove the Gentiles were never obliged to observe their Sabbath. Let me add what Mr. Baxter hath wrote:Baxter on the Sabb. p. 74. He saith, ‘That the Fourth Command­ment of Moses bindeth us not to the Seventh-day Sabbath, because that Moses's Law ne­ver bound any but the Jews, and those Prose­lytes that made themselves Inhabitants of their Land, or voluntarily subjected themselves to’ [Page 131] ‘their Policy. For Moses was Ruler of none but the Jews, nor a Legislator or deputed Officer from God to any other Nation. The Decalogue was but part of the Jewish Law, if you consider it not as written in Nature, but in Tables of Stone; and the Jewish Law was given as a Law to no other People but to them. It was a national Law, as they were a peculiar People and holy Nation; so that e­ven in Moses's days it bound no other Nati­ons of the World; therefore it needed no abrogation to the Gentiles, but a declaration that it did not bind them.’

7. To close with what we find in the Old Testament about this: 'Tis worthy our noting, that God told the Israelites that those Seven Nations of Canaan, whom they should drive out,This is a full Answ. to Mr. Soarsby, who has filled many Pages of his Book to prove the Deca­logue Law was given to all the World. were defiled with all those Sins and Abo­minations that he commanded them to abstain from; i. e. they had violated all natural or simple moral Precepts. But God never charged them with the Sin of breaking the Jews Sabbath: So that from thence I infer the Decalogue was not given to them, and so not the Sabbath.

Secondly, I shall prove out of the New Te­stament, that the Law of Moses, i. e. the De­calogue, was given to none but the Jews or Peo­ple of Israel.

1. See Rom. 9. To whom pertaineth the giving forth of the Law, &c. speaking of the Israelites: to whom, that is by way of contradistinction to any other People; or to them and none else.

2. Upon this very account Paul shews that the Jews had the advantage of all other People; Rom. 3. 1. What advantage then hath the Jew? &c. Much every way, chiefly because to them were committed the Oracles of God. Now Stephen shews by the Oracles of God are meant the [Page 132] Ten words,Act. 7. 33. who told the Jews, Their Fathers received on Mount Sinai the lively Oracles, to deliver them, saith he, to us, i. e. us Jews.

Now I argue thus: If the Gentiles had the same lively Oracles, or Oracles of God given to them, then in this the Jews had not the advan­tage above the Gentiles. He doth not speak of the Advantage the Jews had as to the clearest Revelation of those Oracles to them, above the Gentiles, but of the giving of them to the Jews and not to the Gentiles.

3. Again, two or three times Paul expresly affirms that the Gentiles had not the Law, and were without the Law: For when the Gentiles which have not the Law, &c. Rom. 2. 14. What is more plainly expressed? The Gentiles, he saith, had not the Law, that is, as given by Moses, tho they had the Law written in their Hearts.

So elsewhere he says, 1 Cor. 9. 21, 22. Vnto the Jew I became a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the Law, as under the Law, &c. to them that are without the Law, as without the Law; being not without Law to God, but under the Law to Christ; that I might gain them that are without the Law. Three times he here af­firms the Gentiles are without the Law.

Object. He means the Ceremonial Law.

Answ. True, they were without that Law as well as the Decalogue Law: but he cannot here refer to the Ceremonial Law, because it is such a Law as the Gentiles were under to Christ, or as it is in the hand of Christ; which must intend the Moral Law, for no Gentile Be­liever or Unbeliever was under the Ceremoni­al Law to Christ, because utterly abolished, but so is not the Moral Law: in which sense we are without the Law to God, but under the Law to, or as it is in the hand of Christ.

[Page 133] 4. Take this Argument:The Gen­tiles shall not be judg­ed by Mo­ses's Law. That Law which the Gentiles shall not be judged by, they were never under; but the Gentiles shall not be judged by the Law of Moses, therefore they were never under that Law.

For proof of the major Proposition, see what Paul saith:Rom. 2. 12. For as many as have sinned without Law, shall be judged without Law; and as many as have sinned in the Law, shall be judged by the Law. By the first he means the Gentiles, and by the latter the Jews. And from hence the Apostle proceeds to evince, that as the Gentiles shew'd the Works of the Law written in their Hearts, they should be judged by that Law, but not as that Law was formerly written by Moses in two Tables of Stone, ver. 15.

As to the minor Proposition; can any sup­pose, that if the Gentiles had been under Mo­ses's Law, yet they should not be judged by it? Sure none can.

Obj. If the Gentiles were not under the Law, Christ came not to redeem them; for he came to redeem none but such as were under the Law, Gal. 4. 5.

Answ. The old World was under the Law and Covenant of Works, and the Curse there­of, in the first Adam: it was his first Trans­gression that brought all the World under the Curse of the Law, or breach of the first Co­venant; and not the Law as given by Moses, tho that Law, 'tis true, pronounceth that Curse afresh on those that continued not in all things contain'd therein.

For by one Man's Offence Death reigned by one,Rom. 5. 1 [...] ▪ 17, 18. &c. By one Man Sin entered into the World, and Death by Sin—Therefore as by the Offence of one Judgment came upon all Men to Condem­nation, &c. Thus we were all under the Law [Page 134] of the first Covenant, and as the Law is written in our Hearts; but we were not all under that Ministration of the Law given by Moses.

Obj. If all the World became guilty by the breach of Moses's Law, then all the World was under it: but this Paul affirms, Rom. 3. 19. Now we know whatsoever things the Law saith, it saith to them who are under the Law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the World may become guilty before God.

Answ. Paul in the precedent Chapter, and what goes before in this, had proved that the Gentiles were under Sin, and were all guilty before God for violating the Law written in their Hearts: See Chap. 2. 12. and 3. 10.

Well what of this? the Gentiles then were cast and found guilty that way; yet they were not all, but part of the whole World.

And from hence he in this 19th Verse comes again to speak of the Jews who were under Moses's Law, and saith, What the Law (that is Moses's Law) saith, it saith to them who are under it (meaning the Jews) and what the Con­sequence of this is he shews, i. e. that every mouth might be stopped; not the mouths of the Gen­tiles only, but the mouths of the Jews also, that so all the World, that is both Jews and Gentiles, might become guilty before God. I hope all are and will be convinc'd that this is directly the meaning of Paul, if they consider the scope and coherence of the Text.

And thus I have clearly proved that the Law of the Decalogue, or Moses's Law, was not given to any but the Jews and proselyte Stran­gers; and therefore from that it cannot be the Duty of believing Gentiles to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath.

Object. But it is again objected, That the Apo­stle [Page 135] James injoineth the Royal Law upon believing Gentiles; and the Royal Law is the Law of the Decalogue, therefore all were under the Law of the Decalogue, which forbids Adultery, Murder, &c.

Answ. 1. It is a hard case that Men,Jam. 2. 8, 10, 11, 12. about ful­filling the Royal Law, opened. to prove their fond Notions, should put such an Inter­pretation on a Text of Scripture, as is directly contrary to other plain Texts: for unless they can prove we mistake those Scriptures newly mentioned, which say that Moses's Law was only given to the Jews, and not to the Gentiles, besure they urge this to no purpose, but mistake the sense of the Apostle, as others do about what he says concerning Justification.

2. We never deny'd, but readily grant that all believing Gentiles are oblig'd to keep the whole moral Law, or all simple moral Precepts, as they are in the hand of our Lord, that one Lawgiver, of which this Apostle speaks: but I have proved that the precise Seventh-day Sab­bath is not a simple moral Precept, nor any part of the Morality of the fourth Command­ment, and therefore not intended here. There­fore it followeth, that Man may fulfil the Royal Law according to the Scripture, and yet not observe the Seventh-day Sabbath.

3. The Apostle James clears the matter him­self: So speak and so do, as they that shall be judged by the Law of Liberty, ver. 12.

He can refer in these words to no Law but that of Christ, or rather Christ's Gospel; or to the Law as in his hands, who hath fulfilled the whole Law for us by his own perfect Obedience: and hence we are delivered from the Law as in the hand of Moses; because as so consi­dered it was not a Law of Liberty, but a Law of Bondage, or that which gender'd to Bondage.

[Page 136] And he shews it is a Rule of Righteous­ness to us only, as Christ is our Lawgiver, whose Law is a Law of Liberty: but as he that offend­ed in one point, was guilty of the breach of the whole Law; there he clearly alludes to the Law as in Moses's hand, and as a Covenant of Works.

We are not to do, nor speak, nor live, as the Law in Moses's hands directs, or as he was a Lawgiver; for then we should be under perpe­tual Bondage: and nothing is more plain, than that Moses's Law, as to the strict observance of its Precepts, brought the Jews into Bondage; 'tis call'd a Yoke of Bondage, Gal. 5. 1, &c.

But so speak, and so do, as they who shall be judged by the Law of Liberty, that is, the Gos­pel; for not by the Law as in Moses's hand, but by the Gospel we shall be judged at the last day, who live only under that Ministration.

And from hence let such as keep the Seventh-day Sabbath, take heed lest they are brought into Bondage, by obliging themselves to observe the whole Law; since I have prov'd it was ap­pointed as a sign or pledg of the Covenant of Works, binding them to universal and perfect Obedience, who were on their Sabbath-day not to think their own Thoughts, nor speak their own Words, but to make the Law of God their delight so as not to sin; which none ever did, or could do, save Jesus Christ, who thus kept the Sab­bath, even as long as he liv'd for us on the Earth, that we might enter into his Rest, or into the Anti [...]pical Sabbath.

Thirdly, The third Argument to prove it is not the Duty of Gentile Believers to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath from the fourth Com­mandment in the Decalogue, is, Because that Law, as there written and given, is taken out of the hand of Moses as a Lawgiver, as well as [Page 137] it was a Covenant of Works, and put into the hand of Christ as Mediator.

My Brethren,The moral Law taken out of the hand of Moses as a Lawgiver, and put in­to the hand of Christ as Media­tor. could our Adversaries prove that the Law on Mount Sinai was given to all the World, and so to believing Gentiles (which I have shewn it was not) yet this would not in the least do their business: for the believing Jews are now no longer under the Law, no not as the moral Law was given by Moses as a Rule of Life, any more than they are not under it as a Covenant of Works.

1. Indeed my Work is partly done in this respect already, by what I have said in opening the plain sense of the Apostle James in that place just now mentioned.

2. This appears, because we have but one Lawgiver,Isa. 33. 22. namely Jesus Christ: The Lord is Judg, the Lord is our Lawgiver, the Lord is our King, he will save us; that is, Jehovah our Righteousness, who came to save us.

There is one Lawgiver,Jam. 4. 12. who is able to save and to destroy. Now is not this our Lord Jesus Christ?

Obj. He doth not say we have but one.

Answ. But 'tis imply'd. Paul says, there is one God, and one Mediator: Doth not this im­ply that there is but one God, and but one Me­diator?

Who are you now that will introduce ano­ther Lawgiver, a Co-partner, or a Co-rival with Christ, to partake of part of his Honour?

3. Because our Lord declares that all Power is given to him in Heaven and Earth, Mat. 28. 18, 19. all Power consider'd as Mediator: for as he is God, it was not given to him, but was his own essentially. But this is a Power dele­gated to him, i. e. all Power as sole Lord and Lawgiver to his Church, who only is the Head [Page 138] thereof: therefore we must look to him for Laws, and how to be governed. He governed by a Substitute before, but now being come himself, the Substitute is utterly devested of his Power.

4. The Moral Law as a Rule of Righteous­ness, must only be in the hand of Christ, be­cause our Lord saith, the Law and the Prophets were until John, Luke 16. 16. that is, Moses and the Prophets were as Teachers, by whom God spake to the People; that is, at the time of their Ministration and Prophecy: but now the date of their Ministration is near expir'd; they have Moses and the Prophets. But in the Transfiguration (which was a Figure or Re­presentation of Christ's glorious Gospel-Church or Kingdom, and his Ministration) Moses disappear'd with Elias, who being one of the chiefest Prophets, might signify all the rest, and John also.

The Disciples would have three Tabernacles, one for Moses, one for Elias, and one for Christ: i. e. they would have been under their Mini­strations as Lawgivers and Teachers, and would have them to share with Christ of that Glory.

But lo, a Voice was heard from the Cloud say­ing, This is my beloved Son, hear him; and when they lifted up their Eyes, they saw no man but Jesus only. Moses and Elias were gone; and tho the Writings of Moses and the Prophets are of great use still for Comfort and Instructi­on, Heb. 1. 1, 2. &c. yet now God only speaks to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed Heir of all things.

On him all the Father's Love and Glory doth terminate: no Lord, no Ruler, no Lawgiver but he is to be heard; he being the Truth it self, and having receiv'd the whole Counsel of the Father, has revealed all things that we are to believe and practise.

[Page 139] He is the great Prophet Moses spoke of, whom we are to hear in all things.Acts 3. 22, 23. Must we [...] to Moses to know how Christ is to govern [...]s Church, or take any Law from him? No, [...]is would be to eclipse the Glory of Christ.

5. Because the Servant was not to abide in the [...]ouse for ever, viz. as a Lawgiver: that is, [...]s Ministration of the Law was to cease.

6. Because the moral Law (or the Decalogue) [...] deliver'd by Moses, had several things in it [...]at only pertained to the Israelites, or to the [...]gal Church-state of the Jews, and was given [...]y him as a Covenant of Works: mind the Preface to that Law, Exod. 20. and the Pro­ [...]ise annexed to the fifth Commandment, Ho­ [...]our thy Father and thy Mother, that thy days [...]ay be long in the Land which the Lord thy God [...]veth thee. These things shew that the Law [...]ven by Moses was not to last but till the end [...] that Dispensation, and Church-state.

7. Because we are not come to Mount Sinai,Heb. 12. 18. [...]ot to receive the Law as there delivered; but [...]e are come to Mount Sion, to the Gospel- [...]ispensation, Ver. 25. and so to hear him only that speak­ [...]h from Heaven. But such as keep the old Sabbath, go for it to Mount Sinai, and are [...]earers not of Christ, but of Moses in that [...]ase.

8. Because the whole Law is changed, or the [...]d Covenant; and all the Laws and Precepts [...]hat belonged peculiarly to that, as the old Sabbath did,2 Cor. 5. 17. are abolished. Therefore if any Man be in Christ, he is of the new Creation, or [...] new Creature: Old things are passed away, and behold all things are become new. The old Church and old Church-Membership, Rites, Privileges, and Ordinances, both the old Jewish Worship, and old Day of Worship, are gone for [Page 140] ever; and a new Church-state, new Ordinances, a new Worship, and a new Day of Worship are in­troduced in their stead.

Now since the old Sabbath was a Sign of the old Covenant, nay called the Covenant, be sure that is gone:Exod. 31. 16. wherefore the Children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath throughout their Generati­ons for a perpetual Covenant. It belonged to the old Creation in a peculiar sense; and from hence, upon the bringing in the new Creation, and making all things new, this Sabbath cannot re­main; the old Jewish, Legal, Typical Church-Worship, and Day of Worship went off all to­gether.

Can any think that the old Sabbath still re­mains, which was the sign of the old Cove­nant? This is strange; if it doth remain, be sure the Penalty annexed for the breach of it remains also: but the Penalty can't remain, therefore the Sabbath is gone. Take away the Penalty of a Law, and what is become of that Law? is it not abrogated? Now the Penalty being corporal Death, the Sabbath is gone, be­cause the Gospel-Church has no such Policy or political Power to inflict any such Punishment on Sabbath-breaking.

A Sabbatarian being in Prison with Mr. Tho. Grantham, he professed much Love to him. Ah, said Grantham, thou wouldst kill me. Who I, said he, what kill my Brother? or to that effect. Saith the other, Had you the Power of the Civil Magistracy in your hand, and should I break your Sabbath, what would you do with me? Said he, I confess Justice must take place. It is well they have not that Power in their hands.

9. Because Christ as a Testator hath made another Will, which is his last Will and Testa­ment; [Page 141] and this makes all Precepts void that were given in the Old Testament, and are not given forth or repeated in the new.

All know that no Legacy bequeathed in a former Will, that is left out in a last Will, is recoverable. Upon this account it is you have argued that the Law for Tithes is not in force now, nor Infant Churchmembership, nor an ex­ternal Canaan flowing with Milk and Honey; or have Ministers Sons a right to succeed in the Ministry, and many other things, because they are not Legacies left in Christ's last Will and Testament, tho they were in the Old Testa­ment. So the old Sabbath, being left out in Christ's last Testament, is no Legacy left to us.

10. That the Decalogue-Law is transferred from Moses to Christ, appears by the manner of the writing of the one and the other.

Moses had it to give as it was written in two Tables of Stone by the Finger of God: Christ hath wrote it not in Stone, but in the fleshly Tables of our Hearts by the Holy Spirit; which was signified by God's writing of it with is Finger, the Spirit being called the Finger of God: If I by the Finger of God cast out De­vils, &c.

To close this, take what Mr. B. hath said, viz.

The whole Law of Moses, B. on the Sabb. p. 77, 78. formally as such, [...]s ceased or abrogated by Christ; I say as such, because materially the same things that are in that Law, may be the matter of the Law of Nature, and the Law of Christ, of which I shall speak anon.

That the whole Law of Moses as such is ab­ [...]ogated, is most clearly proved:

By the frequent arguings of Paul, who ever speaketh of that Law as ceased, without ex­cepting [Page 142] any part; and Christ saith, Luke 16. 16. The Law and the Prophets were until John; that is, were the chief Doctrine of the Church till then.Joh. 1. 17. The Law was given by Moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ. No Jew would have understood this, if the word [Law] had not contained the Decalogue. So, John 7. 19, 23, 24. Acts 15. 5. it was the whole Law of Moses as such, which by Circumcision they would have bound men to, Gal. 5. 3.

The Gentiles are said to sin without Law, e­ven when they broke the Law of Nature, mean­ing [without Moses's Law.] In all these Scrip­tures it's not part, but the whole Law of Moses which Paul excludeth; which I acknowledged to the Antinomians, tho they take me for their too great Adversary.Rom. 3. 19, 20, 21, 27, 28, 31. Ch. 4. 13, 14, 15, 16. Ch. 5. 13, 20. Ch. 7. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Ch. 9. 4, 31, 32. Ch. 10. 5. Gal. 2. 16, 19, 21. Ch. 3. 2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 21, 24. Ch. 4. 21. Ch. 5. 3, 4, 14, 23. Ch. 6. 13. Eph. 2. 15. Phil. 3. 6, 9 Heb. 7. 11, 12, 19. Ch. 9. 19. Ch. 10. 28. 1 Cor. 9. 21..

3. More particularly, there are some Texts which express the cessation of the Decalogue as it was Moses's Law, 2 Cor. 3. 7, 11. Not in Tables of Stone, but in the fleshly Tables of the Heart—But if the ministration of Death writ­ten and engraven in Stone was glorious, so that the Children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses, for the glory of his Counte­nance, which was to be done away (or is done a­way.)

They that say the Glory, and not the Law, is here said to be done away, speak against the plain scope of the Text: For the Glory of Moses's Face, and the glorious manner of de­liverance, ceased in a few days, which is not the Cessation here intended.

But as Dr. Hammond speaketh [that Glory, and that Law so gloriously delivered, is done away] and this the 11th Verse fully expres­seth: For if that which is done away was glori­ous, (or by Glory) much more that which re­maineth [Page 143] is glorious (or is Glory.) So that as it is not only the Glory, but the glorious Law, Gospel, or Testament which is said to remain; so it is not only the Glory, but the Law which is said to be done away: And this is the Law which was written in Stone. No­thing but partial Violence can evade the force of this Text.

So Heb. 7. 11, 12. [under it] (the Levitical Priesthood) the People received the Law— And the Priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law. Ver. 18. For there is verily a disannulling of the Command­ment going before, for the weakness and the unpro­fitableness thereof: For the Law made nothing perfect, but the bringing a better hope did. And so much was Jesus made a Surety of a better Te­stament. In all this it is plain, that it is the whole Frame of the Mosaical Law that is chan­ged, and the New Testament set up in its stead.

Heb. 9. 18, 19. Neither was the first Testa­ment dedicated without Blood: For when Moses had spoken every Precept to all the People according to the Law, &c. Here the Law, be­fore said to be changed, is said to contain every Precept.

And, Ephes. 2. 15. it is the Law of Command­ments contained in Ordinances, which Christ a­bolished in his Flesh; which cannot be exclusive of the chief part thereof.

Object. This is the Doctrine of the Antino­mians that the Law is abrogated, even the Mo­ral Law.

Answ. It is the Doctrin of the true Antino­mians, that we are under no Divine Law, nei­ther of Nature nor of Christ: But it is the Doctrin of Paul and all Christians, that [Page 144] the Jewish Mosaical Law is abolished.

Object. But do not all Divines say that the Moral Law is of perpetual Obligation?

Answ. Yes; because it is God's Law of Na­ture, and the Law of Christ.

Object. But do not most say, that the Deca­logue written in Stone is the Moral Law, and of perpetual Obligation?

Answ. Yes; for by the word [Moral] they mean [Natural], and so take Moral not in the large sense, as signifying a Law de moribus, as all Laws are whatsoever; but in a narrower sense, as signifying that which by nature is of universal and perpetual Obligation. So that they mean, not that it is perpetual as it is Mo­ses's Law, and written in Stone formally, but as it is that which is natural: And they mean, that materially the Decalogue containeth the same Law which is the Law of Nature; and there­fore it is materially in force still.

But they except still certain Points and Cir­cumstances in it, as the prefatory Reason, I am the Lord your God that brought you out of the Land of Egypt, and especially this of the Se­venth-day Sabbath.

Quest. How far then are we bound to keep the Law?

Answ. (1.) As it is the Law of Nature.

(2.) As it is own'd by Christ, and made part of his Law: And therefore no more of it bindeth directly, than we can prove to be ei­ther the Law of Nature, or the Law of Christ. —Thus Mr. B.

Object. But Christ saith, he came not to de­stroy the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfil them; and that not one jot or tittle of the Law shall pass away till all be fulfilled.

[Page 145] Answ. The whole Moral Law Christ hath fulfilled in our Nature, for us, and in our stead, in his Life: And by his Death, he hath anti­typically fulfilled all the Prophecies concerning himself in reference to such things; and hath abolished the Ceremonial Law also; for till then not a tittle of that could pass away.

Is a fulfilling the Law a destroying it? Be­sides, all simple moral Precepts of the Law (as in Christ's hand) stand firm for ever; therefore he came not to destroy the Law: yet is he the end of it for Righteousness to every one that believeth; Rom. 10. 4. tho as a Rule of Life in his hands, it obligeth them perpetually.

Moreover,Ch. 5. 20. Brethren, 'tis said, the Law en­ter'd, Chap. 7. 9. that the Offence might abound, &c. and the Commandment came, &c. Now this entering of the Law, and coming of the Commandment,The use of the Law at in Christ's hand. chiefly refers to the Law as it is in Christ's hand, set home with Power by the Spirit upon the Conscience. The bare entrance of the Law on Mount Sinai, as in Moses's hand, was with Thundering and Lightning, but without Rain, I mean without Contrition or Brokenness of heart. Men may read Moses's Law, and hear it preach'd every day; nay write it on the Walls of their Houses, and carry it in their Bosoms; but yet it may have no operations on their Hearts: no, 'tis the Ministration of the Law in Christ's hand by his Spirit, that wounds the Conscience, pierces and melts the hard Heart, that God's Law may be written there. The Mi­nistration of the Law in Christ's hand answers the chief design of God in giving it forth, and renders the Minstration of it by Moses of lit­tle or no use: for as in his hand, it is done away; but the Law by the Spirit greatens Sin, or makes Sin abound, and Grace superabound. [Page 146] Sin thus by the Law becomes exceeding sinful; and it doth not only wound, but slay the Soul: Sin taking occasion by the Commandment, Rom. 7. 11, 12. de­ceived me, and by it slew me: Wherefore the Law is holy, &c. O blessed be God for the Law as it is in Christ's hand! Thus Sin reviv'd, [...] I dy'd, saith Paul; I dy'd as to any hope of Justification, or eternal Life by the Law. The Jews who had the Law only as in Moses's hand, were puff'd up or fill'd with Pride: they (as Paul before Conversion, or the coming of the Commandment in and by the Spirit, as in Christ's hand) were alive; so he thought him­self alive, in a justified state; but when the Commandment came, it was then quite other­wise with him.

So that Christ came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it, and also to make it of great use to all that receive the Spirit of Christ: which Spirit is a Spirit of burning, before it is a Spirit of Consolation; or a Spirit of Bo [...]dage, before it is the Spirit of Adoption, and so a Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Gal. 3. 24.

Thus we do not make void the Law through Faith, but establish it. God in Christ hath magnified the Law, and made it honourable, and that three ways.

1. In sending his own Son in our Nature to keep it perfectly, and to die for our breach thereof; Christ was made under the Law to this very end. O how doth it magnify the Law, to see Godman thus conform to it, and die to bear the Penalty thereof for us?

2. He magnifieth the Law in putting it into the hands of his own Son, as Mediator, to give it forth. Doth not the Dignity and Glory of the Lawgiver add to the Glory of the Law given? Is not Christ a more glorious Person [Page 147] than Moses? See Heb. 1. 8, 9, 10. & 2. 2, 3.— This Man was accounted worthy of more Glory than Moses, Heb. 3. 3. But alas! some would have Moses partake of some part of Christ's Glory; he must be their Lawgiver.

3. By making of it, as in Christ's hand, of far greater use to Believers, as I have shewed, than ever it was in the hands of Moses, and so to answer God's Design in it.

Let me only add, that all Moses's Law, even the Decalogue, was political, as one observes. God's Law was for the particular political Go­vernment of the Jewish Nation, as a typical Church and political Body; and therefore when their Kingdom or Policy ceased, the Law as Political, and their figurative Sabbath could not continue any longer.

And thus I close with the fourth general Ar­gument, viz. It is not the Duty of believing Gentiles to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath from the Law of the Decalogue given by Moses, Exod. 20.

Fifthly,No Precept to keep the Seventh-day Sab­bath in the New Testa­ment. It is not their Duty to keep it by any Precept given by Christ, or Precedent we have in the New Testament.

1. That which is urged concerning Christ's not coming to destroy the Law, &c. we have answer'd; as also that of Paul, we do not make void the Law through Faith.

That Text also we have answer'd, and turn'd the Sword against our Adversaries, which says, the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath, and the Sabbath was [...] made for Man.

3. And also their great Proof in that of James, if ye fulfil the Royal Law, Jam. 2. 8, 10. This I have given a full Answer to in this Discourse.

[Page 148] 4. I proceed to another pretended Argu­ment, viz. Pray that your flight be not in the Winter, nor on the Sabbath-day, Mat. 24. 20.

Answ. This Text some learned Men have not, I am satisfied, given the right sense of. But let us premise three things:

1. That Christ gave the old Names to Jew­ish Ordinances very often, and so did his Apostles.

2. That our Lord well knew how supersti­tiously zealous the unbelieving Jews were and would remain for their Sabbath.

Now pray mind the scope of this Text: Christ shews how sudden their flight would be, when Jerusalem was to be destroyed, ver. 16, 17. and v. 19. he saith, Wo to them that are with Child, and them that give suck in those days. But pray that your flight be not in the Winter, nor on the Sabbath-day: for then shall be great Tribulation.

3. It is evident there is the same reason they should pray that their flight be not in the Win­ter, as not on the Jewish Sabbath-day.

Why, not in the Winter? because of the dif­ficulties of the Ways; they might be deep and unpassable then, whereby their Escape might be hinder'd.

Why not on the Sabbath-day? because, say some, their Consciences would not admit them to fly then further than a Sabbath-day's Jour­ny. It is strange to me that our Lord should tell them a little before, that it was lawful to save the Life of a sorry Animal, a Brute, on the Sabbath-day, and bid a Man take up his Bed or bear a Burden on the Sabbath; and now hint that it was not lawful, or that they would so think, to save their Lives by flying on the Sab­bath-day: believe this who will. Was it not lawful to pull an Ox, or Sheep out of a Pit on the [Page 149] Sabbath-day; or for Men to carry their Goods out of their Houses on the Sabbath-day, if a Fire should then happen? I do not think they were ever so superstitiously blind.

Nay, to preserve human Life our Lord shew'd was much more lawful on that day than the Life of Beasts.

But, say some, it would be grievous and un­comfortable to them to fly on that day in which they used to find so much delight.

Answ. Our Lord gives a direct contrary Rea­son, i.e. for then will be great Tribulation: the unbelieving Jews, should they fly on their Sabbath, would severely handle them, may be knock them on the head; on this account our Lord bids them so to pray: therefore this could not be the meaning of it.

Moreover, he knew his own Disciples before that time came, would be convinced that the Jewish Sabbath was ceased with other Legal Rites.

Therefore this I take to be the direct mean­ing of our blessed Lord, viz. Because on the Jewish Sabbath-day, the unbelieving Jews, a­mong whom you will remain (or many of you) when the Destruction of the City comes, may be so strict and superstitious as to keep watch and ward at every Gate and Way, that you will not be able to escape, at least not above one of their Sabbath-day's Journey; therefore pray your flight be not on that day. This is all I can see in this Text.

Both David and Elijah were fain to fly on the Sabbath-day.See Pet. Heylin, p. 137. Besides, some learned Men from this Passage argue for the Christian Sab­bath, as 'tis not unknown to our Opponents, as Dr. Twiss, and many more; and that our Lord alludes to that Sabbath that he knew his Disci­ples [Page 150] would observe after his Death: but I ra­ther adhere to the former Exposition.

Obj. But the Women rested on the Sabbath-day, according to the Commandment, Luke 23. 56.

Answ. The Men themselves (I mean the Disciples) before our Lord suffer'd, were so ig­norant that they knew not their Lord should die; and some a great while after did not know that they should preach to the Gentiles: and is it any wonder that these good Women should not know so soon that the Sabbath was abro­gated? Some after that were zealous for Cir­cumcision, &c. and is that an Argument that Circumcision is our Duty? Besides, no new day for solemn Worship was then appointed, nor till after our Lord rose from the dead.

Object. Paul, as his manner was, and other Apostles, observed the Jews Sabbath-day; they preached in the Temple and Synagogue of the Jews on the Sabbath-day.

Answ. 1. They never taught the Jews nor Gentiles to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath.

2. No one Church, as we read of, ever met to celebrate any Gospel-Ordinance on the Jew­ish Sabbath-day.

3. There is not one word of any Saint that ever kept it.

4. All that is on Record is, that the Apostles preached to the Jews on that day. Why so? because they could not preach to them but when assembled together; and having a Commission first to preach the Gospel to them, they went into the Temple, and into their Synagogue, and preach'd to them on that day; and so did Paul at Mars-hill to the Athenians, Acts. 17. 22. & 16. 13. as well as to the Jews on their Sabbath.

'Tis said, that Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, Act. 13. 14. and three Sabbath-days reasoned [Page 151] with them out of the Scriptures: Acts 17. 2. Not, saith one, to solemnize the Sabbath after the Jew­ish manner (from the observation whereof the Apostles,Dr. Young, p. 10, 11. because of the Authority com­mitted to them by Christ, were far enough) especially when Paul himself did most severe­ly reprove the Colossians and Galations, because some among them stood for the Sabbath, and other Feasts of the Jews; but because they then had a fit occasion of communing with the Jews met together, that after the readings of the Law were over, they might preach the Gospel with more fruit in such a concourse of People, which upon other days they could not so easily obtain; and for no other end, as from the al­ledged Testimony is evident.

Which things let the Reader seriously weigh: for at any time, or in what place soever they could, they preached the Gospel to the Jews; therefore on the Sabbaths, as well in their Sy­nagogues as elsewhere: the Apostles were not wanting in the Office of preaching; for this cause they tarried certain days among the Macedonians, because no fit occasion for preaching the Gospel offered—which the Apostles every where greedily sought after: they preached Christ on the Sabbath days out of the City, Act. 16. 13. by a River side, to Women which re­sorted to publick Prayers.

So Paul hastened to keep the Feast of Pente­cost at Jerusalem, Act. 20. 16. only that he might have ma­ny Jews (who liv'd dispersed in divers places of the World) there together, and so preach the Gospel to them.—Chrysostom says,Hom. 43. in Act. What means Paul's hastning to this Feast? it was not for the Feasts, but for the Multitudes—he made haste to preach the Word.

[Page 152] Now had any Text said that Paul must needs hast to Jerusalem to keep the Sabbath among the Jews, what Improvement would the Sab­batarians have made of it? yet that no more would prove the Sabbath ought to be kept than the Feast of Pentecost. See what Paul saith, Rom. 16. 8. But I will tarry at Ephesus will Pentecost; for a great door and effectual is opened to me. This shews what his reason was to keep that Feast, and also in preaching on their Sabbaths.

Object. But he calls it the Sabbath.

Answ. So he calls that Feast Pentecost, and Circumcision by its own Name; must we there­fore keep Pentecost, and be circumcised? It was only for distinction-sake, the old Names of Jewish Rites being still kept up by the Jews.

Object. But the Gentiles also desired the same Word might be preach'd to them the next Sab­bath: Act. 13. 42. sure if the Apostles had kept the first day, they would rather have desir'd that Paul should preach to them the next first day.

Answ. Paul was but newly come into those parts, and there was no Gospel-Church there; nor can any think that those poor unbelieving Gentiles should have heard of any other day observ'd than the Jewish Sabbath, for they liv'd among the Jews; and if it is said, the whole City the next Sabbath came together: Ver. 44. and no doubt but 'twas in the Synagogue of the Jews in which they met, some of the Gentiles being Proselytes to the Jewish Religion. So that it is evident this is nothing to their pur­pose; for here is no more ground from hence for us to keep the Jewish Sabbath, than to meet in Jewish Synagogues.

Moreover, Dr. Young has one Passage worth observation: saith he, Justin Martyr had sa­tisfied with little ado Trypho the Jew, that’ [Page 153] ‘counselled him to observe their Sabbath: for it had been enough for Justin Martyr to have answer'd the Jew, that the Christian Church did observe the Sabbath; yet this he grants not, but plainly denies that the Jewish Sab­bath ought by the Christians to be observ'd. The same, saith he, do other Fathers against the Jews, &c.

There are one or two more pretended Rea­sons out of the New Testament, brought to prove that we ought to observe the seventh Day: but no more at this time.


Containing ten Arguments against the obser­vance of the Jewish Sabbath. The Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath not written in the Hearts of Believers, or God's new Cove­nant Children, which is in Answer to the sixth and last pretended Proof for our Ob­servation thereof. Twelve dangerous Con­sequences that necessarily follow their Princi­ple, who assert the precise Seventh-day Sab­bath is a pure moral Precept.

Gal. iv. 10, 11.‘Ye observe days, and months, &c.

BRethren, I have answer'd several pre­tended Proofs brought from the New Testament for the observation of the old Jewish Sabbath. I shall mention one morc, viz.

Object. 5. It is objected further, That it is certain that the Jews kept Sabbaths at the time of Paul's writing his Epistles, and were zealous for all the Law. Thus Mr. Soarsby.

Ans. 1. May be 'tis aptly enough put in Sab­baths, as comprehending other Sabbaths as well as the Jews weekly Sabbath.

2. But were they not as zealous for Circum­cision also? Nay, the Objection allows they were zealous for the whole Law; and it is not deny'd but Paul was forced to comply with [Page 155] their weakness for a time, till they were fully formed as to the Cessation or Abrogation of [...]ose legal Rites, nay of the whole Law as in [...]e hand of Moses.

So that Paul's forbearance with them in their [...]fancy and Weakness, is weakly urged.

These being the chief Proofs I find brought [...] prove it our Duty to keep the seventh Day out [...] the New Testament, I shall add divers Ar­guments in opposition to what they say on this [...]count.

1st. Several Arguments against the Observation of the old Jewish Sabbath. Our Saviour's Carriage and Behaviour [...]owards the old Sabbath, and his Expressions about it, which I have mention'd, shews he was far from confirming that either as a Mo­ral, or Gospel Duty.

2dly. Paul's declaring against all Jewish Days without exception, as Shadows, &c. may con­ [...]nce all that he observ'd it not in compliance with the Law of Moses, or as a Command given to him by Christ the only Lawgiver.

3dly. His putting the Estimation of the Jewish Sabbath-day among Meats and Drinks, Rom. 14. 5. or as in­different things, which a Christian may do or [...]ot do, shews that Sabbath was gone.

I do believe when Paul saith, One man esteem­eth one day above another, and another esteemeth every day alike, that he intends not all days of [...]he week without exception, but every day [...]ave the first day, or the Lord's-day; because [...]e speaks of Jewish Rites, Days, and Scruples about Meats and Drinks among them. For [...]e gave Command about the solemn Duties and Observation of the first Day of the week to all the Churches, as I shall prove.

1. Therefore let none once think that Paul was for the observance of no special day above others, in the Worship of God, in the Gospel-Dispensation.

[Page 156] 2. Neither let any conclude from hence, th [...] he gave liberty to the Saints to keep the Jewish Sabbath any further than they looked upon [...] as an indifferent thing; nor any longer th [...] till their Understanding was further inlight [...] and their Consciences better informed. F [...] how severe was he with those (as in my Te [...] who lay any stress upon it, i.e. as a moral D [...] ­ty, or of necessity to a holy Life?

4thly. This appears, because Christ, who re­ceived from his Father the whole Will of God and was faithful as a Son in declaring all thing commanded him,Heb. 2. 2. hath not commanded us ( [...] given the least ground or reason for us to be­lieve we ought) to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath. Besides, he confirms afresh all sim­ple moral Precepts, &c. as I have shew'd Observe what he saith;Joh. 15. 15. For all things th [...] [...] have heard of my Father I have made [...] unto you. ch. 12. 49. The Father that sent me, he gave [...] Commandement what I should say, and what [...] should speak.

5thly. We read Acts 15. 1, &c. of fal [...] Brethren that went from Jerusalem, and taugh [...] the believing Gentiles, that unless they were cir­cumcised and kept the Law of Moses, they coul [...] not be saved; or that it was needful for them [...] to do, ver. 15.

1. Pray observe the matter well: for no [...] we may expect to hear, if ever, whether [...] be the Duty of believing Gentiles or not [...] keep the Seventh-day Sabbath, because th [...] was none of the least Precepts of the Law [...] Moses; and this was one thing, no doubt which these false Brethren taught them to ob­serve.

2. All the great and chief Apostles meet to­gether abont this matter, and consulted what [Page 157] Answer to send; and they had the extraor­dinary presence of the Holy Ghost with them, [...]o dictated to them what to write.

3. And this was the Result, Act. 15. 29. viz. For it seem'd [...]d to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay upon you greater Burden than these necessary things, that [...]abstain from Meats offer'd to Idols, and from [...]ood, and from things strangled, and from For­ [...]cation; from which if ye keep your selves, ye [...]ll do well. Fare ye well.

Note, these things were forbidden in the [...]w, and these things they commanded them [...]t to do; but not one word that they should [...]ep the Sabbath given in Moses's Law: this is [...]ne of those things they should observe. therefore it is not the Counsel or Mind of the [...]oly Ghost that Gentile Believers should keep at Day.

6thly. Act. 20. 27. Paul says positively, that he had not [...]nned to declare to the Saints all the Counsel of [...]d. Ver. 20. And how he kept back nothing that was pro­ [...]able to them, but had shewed them all things, &c. [...]ow I challenge any Man in the World to [...]ew that Paul ever made known, or shew'd [...]em this thing, viz. that it was their Duty to [...]ep the Seventh-day Sabbath: therefore I in­ [...]r, this is none of the Counsel of God, nor [...]ofitable to Believers in Gospel-days. From [...]hence I argue thus, i.e.

Arg. 1. Paul declared all, or the whole Coun­ [...] of God: Paul did not declare the Seventh- [...]bbath; Ergo, that is none of the Counsel of [...]od.

2. If he did declare the Seventh-day Sabbath, [...] make it known to the Saints to be God's Coun­ [...], some one Man or another can shew us the [...]ace where it is written: but no one Man can [...]ew us the place where it is written that he de­clared [Page 158] or made known to the Saints that the se­venth-day Sabbath was the Counsel of God Ergo, it is none of the Counsel of God to [...] Saints or Gospel-Believers.

7thly. The holy Spirit, saith our Lord, [...] receive of mine, Joh. 16. 13, 14. and shew it unto you. Again [...] saith, The Spirit of Truth shall guide you [...] all Truth. But the Spirit of Truth neither guides Believers into the observation of the se­venth Day, &c. in the Word or New Testa­ment; nor by his inward Motions, Influence and Operations on their Hearts: therefore it [...] none of their Duty to observe that Day.

8thly. If not one Gospel-Church observed [...] Seventh-day Sabbath in meeting together as [...] Church, to discharge the Duties of [...] Worship; then it is not the Duty of Believer [...] in Gospel-days to observe it.—But not on [...] Gospel-Church, &c. observ'd the Seventh-day Sabbath, &c. Therefore 'tis not Believers Duty in Gospel-days to observe it.

Let them shew us where one Gospel-Church did observe that day in meeting together, as [...] Church, to discharge the Duties of Gospel Worship, and I will give up the Cause.

So much in this respect there is in an Apo­stolical Precedent in my Judgment: for what was the Practice of one Church as a Church was the Duty and Practice of every Church.

9thly. Gentile Believers ought not to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath, because the Churches in the Gospel time observed, in Religious Duties and Worship, the first day of the week: and we are not required to keep two days in every week in God's solemn Worship.

10thly. Because the Law of God written in the Hearts of all Believers, doth not teach them to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath. And this [Page 159] brings me to the last general Argument.

Sixthly, No Law of the Se­venth-day Sabbath written in the Hearts of God's New Cove­nant Chil­dren. If it be not the Duty of believing Gentiles to keep the Seventh-day Sabbath from the Law written by the Spirit of the living God in the Hearts of all his New-Covenant Children, it is not their Duty to keep it, be­cause by no other Law I have proved it is their Duty; and now I shall prove that it is not their Duty to keep it by virtue of this Law.

1. If it was their Duty by this Law to keep [...]t, the holy Spirit besure had left it written in the New Testament: for whatsoever Law is written in our Hearts, it is but the same in sub­stance (in respect to all simple moral Precepts) with what is written in the New Testament.

2. Consider that God expresly says in the new Covenant, Jer. 31. 33. I will put my Law in their in­ward parts, and write it in their Hearts.— Saith Paul,2 Cor. 3. 3. Written not with Ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in Tables of Stone, but in the fleshly Tables of the Heart.

This shews we are not to go to the Tables of Stone, to Mount Sinai, for the Law of God, now the Antitype of that is come. God's Fin­ger has wrote his Law in better Tables; tho naturally our Hearts were like Stone, yet his Spirit can and hath written his Law there. What is God's Law but a Transcript, or a gracious Impression of his holy Nature, or his Divine Image stampt on our Souls?

Now then read this blessed Book, ye New-Covenant Saints; look within ye holy and re­newed ones, and see if you can find the knowledg of the seventh Day, or that you have this Pre­cept written in your Hearts and inward parts. Were you ever by this Law led to know (or reproved for not observing) the Seventh-day [Page 160] Sabbath? Let me close this with an Answer given to Tillam by Mr. Warren.

1. Tillam saith, Warren on the Sabb. p. 18, 19. It was written in Adam's Heart, and for this he quotes Rom. 2.

2. That it was written afterwards in Tables of Stone, for which he cites Gal. 3. 19.

3. That it is written in the fleshly Table of renewed Hearts.

To which Mr. Warren answereth, speaking to the latter: The Experience of almost all re­newed Hearts in Heaven and Earth doth con­tradict it; for to speak in the Language of Eliphas, [...]ob 5. 1. Call now if there be any that will answer thee, and to which of the Saints wilt thou turn? either Scripture-Saints, or Church-Saints; ask St. Paul, St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, St. Au­gustine, and they will tell you that your anti­quated Sabbath was so far from being in their Hearts, that they have wrote against it with their Pens. Turn over the Works of the emi­nent Fathers—Add to these the most judi­cious, pious and zealous Ministers and Martyrs of Christ, who have liv'd, and dy'd within the compass of these sixteen hundred years; and most, if not all of them will tell you that they never owned your Saturday Sabbath; they liv'd without it, dy'd without it, and are, I doubt not, gone to Heaven without it. Be­sides, how many faithful Witnesses of late years has the Lord raised up to bear Testimo­ny against it? of whom, I suppose, the greatest part are yet alive, tho some are fallen asleep. In a word, how many precious, and gracious, and pious Christians are yet upon the Earth, Men and Women redeem'd from the Earth, and crucified to the World (of whom the World is not worthy) who look upon your Sabbath as a Cypher, can freely labor, and travel [Page 161] upon it, buy and sell upon it, and this after accurate Inquiry about it? and to this day their Consciences never reproach them, their Hearts never smote them for it. What will you say? Are all these Hypocrites, unrenew­ed, unsanctified ones? this were to condemn the Generation of God's Children, and cano­nize your self, with your few misled Associates, for the only Saints in Christendom; which I would hope you dare not do, tho I knowMeaning Tillam. you dare as much as another.

Well, the Adversary is brought to this Di­lemma; either God has no People in the World but such as are of his Perswasion, or his moral and immutable Laws are not written in their Hearts; or the Saturday Sabbath is none of those Laws. Thus this Author.

If the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath be written in the Hearts of Believers, some one Man or another can produce some one Believer that was by the Law written in his Heart convinc'd of it, without reading Moses's Law, or any Book or Books compiled by Men about the Sabbath. But no Man can produce any such Believer that will or can say this; there­fore it is not written in the Hearts of Be­lievers.

Thus it appears that it is not the Duty of Gentile Believers to keep the seventh Day from the Law of God written in the Hearts of God's new Covenant Children, which was the sixth and last part of the general Argument first pro­posed.

The last thing in speaking to the Seventh-day Sabbath I promised to do,The dange­rous Conse­quences of the Sabba­tarian Principles. was to shew you, that as some hold and maintain it, it is a dangerous Error.

[Page 162] 1. Is not that dangerous which caused Paul to fear he had bestowed on the Persons he speaks of, Labor in vain? Was it not because they observ'd Jewish Days, laying stress on those things?

2. Is not that a dangerous Error that leads Men to ratify or sign the Covenant of Works, which binds them to keep the whole Law? This I have proved is the natural tendency of this Practice;Owen on the Sabb. p. 149. and the same thing Dr. Owen, you have heard, positively affirms also.

3. Is not that dangerous that magnifies the first Creation Work above Redemption,It magni­fies Crea­tion-work above Re­demption. or the new Creation Work, when God began to create the new Heavens and new Earth, which refers to the Gospel or new Creation? What saith the Lord, the old Heavens and old Earth shall be remembered no more; that is, in a day kept to that end: for otherwise sure the great Works of the first Creation ought not to be forgot; but the new Creation excelling the old, the new Day must be kept in remembrance thereof, and not the old day.

4. Is not that a dangerous Error that tends,It eclipses the Glory of Christ. as the necessary Consequence of it, to eclipse the Glory of Christ, as the only Lord, Head and Lawgiver to his Church, and that gives part of this Honour to Moses?

5. Is not that dangerous that tends to in­tangle, and bring into Bondage, and under legal Terror, poor weak Christians, as some who have kept the Seventh-day Sabbath have con­fessed, till God open'd their Eyes, they fearing they broke the Sabbath in some way or ano­ther? for indeed no Man can perfectly keep it, any more than he can keep the whole Law, as has been hinted. I was always in a trembling state (saith one) so long as I kept it, &c. or to that purpose.

[Page 163] Brethren, it is not to be thought what Bon­dage it brought the zealous Jews under, they not knowing when they had answered the strict observance of that day; and if they brake it, they must die without Mercy, as the poor Man that gathered Sticks on that day: they were not to speak their own words, &c. How should they know when they did this?On Mat. 12. 2. p. 361. Nay live, and sin not: They would not, Mr. Trap saith, spit, nor ease themselves on that day, which is hard to believe: tho some were superstitiously zea­lous, 'tis true; yet others who were piously zealous, by means of the strictness of the Precept, continually were in fear and bondage: And sad it is for any to be entangled again thereby.

6. Is not that a dangerous thing,Jewish Sabbath genders to Bondage. that by the necessary consequence of it leads men to observe other Legal Rites and Ceremonies, as not to eat Swines-flesh, nor wear a Garment of Linen and Woolen, nor mar the corner of their Beards? Nay, some of the chief of them formerly were led to Circumcision, and to worse than that also. I saw a Book published many years ago by two of them, in which they called themselves the Ministers of the Circumcision.

That these things are the necessary Conse­quences of their Notion about their Sabbath, appears, because they go to Moses for it as the Law was in his hand, and believe many other things that were meer Judicial Laws to be in force now: They are for Moses's Law, with the Statutes and Judgments, and have declared that that Law is in force to stone to death such as break the Sabbath.

And no marvel: for if that Sabbath be in force, the Punishment is in force also. Nay, [Page 164] they believe (I hear) that a rebellious Son ought to be put to death.

7. Is not that Error dangerous,It renders all that keep it not, guilty of horrid Im­morality. and of an e­vil Nature, the necessary Consequence where­of renders all that keep not that precise Se­venth-day as the Sabbath (nor can be convin­ced 'tis their Duty to observe it) to be guilty of Immorality, i. e. in breaking a moral Precept in the very Letter of it, nay one of the Pre­cepts of the first Table? For it must be thus, if the morality of the fourth Commandment lies in the observation of the precise Seventh-day Sabbath; and it must be as great an Evil to vio­late it, as 'tis to have another God, or to bow down to a graven Image, or to swear or profane the holy Name of God, or commit actual Adul­tery, Murder, &c. and thus their Doctrin ren­ders all true Christians to be guilty of a most gross Immorality, who do not observe the precise Seventh-day.

Nay, the like Consequences attend their No­tion, who through ignorance and an over-heated Zeal, have also asserted the same Morality to consist in the observance of the first Day of the Week; as is evident by what some Mini­sters in their Parish-Churches did formerly af­firm: One in Oxfordshire said, That to do any servile Work on the Lord's Day, is as great a Sin as to kill a Man.

Another in a Sermon in Norfolk,See Dr. White on the Sab. said, To make a Feast or Wedding-dinner on the Lord's Day, is as great a Sin, as for a Father to take a Knife and cut his own Child's Throat.

A Sabbatarian also, I am told, did lately say, (having a Child to put out an Appren­tice) he knew not any that kept the Sabbath whose Trade he liked; and to place him with one that would cause him to work on that Day, [Page 165] was as bad as Adultery or Theft, or to that effect.

Another lately told us, that we in not keep­ing the Sabbath, or fourth Command, broke all the rest; or words to the same purpose.

8. And from hence also, which is the plain and necessary Consequence of their Principle, either such must perish who live and die in a palpable violation of this pretended simple mo­ral Precept without any sorrow or repentance; or else that Men may be saved, who live and die under the guilt of immoral Evil in the grossest sense.

For tho it is granted that a true Christian may be guilty in some sense of an Immoral E­vil, and who is not? yet if a moral Precept be broke in the Letter of it, or in the grossest sense, as he that commits actual Adultery or Murder; can such be saved, living and dying in those Sins, without any true sight of the Evil of them, or Repentance for them? nay, that do not on­ly live in the literal breach of this moral Precept (as they call it) but teach men so to do?

Object. But they do it ignorantly.

Answ. Ignorance of any Human Law, tho the breach of it be death, will not excuse any Man, because the Law is published, or they may know it. So ignorance cannot excuse a man that breaks any Precept of the Moral Law of God.

9. This Notion and Principle of theirs seems not only to admit of such Consequences natu­rally to attend it; but they indeed express them­selves very directly on this occasion, even to shut out of the Kingdom of Heaven all that keep not the Seventh-day Sabbath, or at least such who teach men to break it.

[Page 166] See what Mr. Soarsby saith,New Testa­ment Sab. p. 54, 55. viz. ‘The De­calogue in the New Testament—is abun­dantly confirmed by many places in the Gos­pel, which establish the Authority of the Law, and Commandments of God to Christians, both Jews and Gentiles: Our Lord came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it.

‘Some men, saith he, affirm, contrary to both, They who teach and do these Command­ments, shall be great in the Kingdom of Hea­ven; but such as break the least, and teach men so to do, shall be least in it (that is, have no part in it); for unless Christians keep them better than the Scribes, there is no entering into Heaven, Mat. 5. 20. The Summary of the two Tables, are the great Commandments on which hang all the Law and the Prophets. The doing of these, as written and read in the Law, is the way to Eternal Life, Luke 10. 26, 27. Again he saith, It is not the Hear­er of the Law that shall be justified amongst the Romans as well as the Jews, &c.

Two things note here:

1. He takes it for granted, that the precise Seventh-day Sabbath is one part of the Moral Law; and so his design is (as I conceive) to shew that such as violate this Sabbath, and teach men so to do, have no part in Heaven.

2. He says, The doing of these is the way to Eternal Life, mistaking the purport of our Sa­viour's words to the young Man, who spake to him as one under the Covenant of Works, to discover his Ignorance of the way to Heaven, which is by Christ alone, not by doing those Commands as written and read in the Law; 'tis not do, but believe, &c.

Is not this Man ignorant of the way to E­ternal Life; did our Lord come to ratify the [Page 167] Decalogue for us, to keep and fulfil in our own Persons, thereby to be justified and saved? Here is not one word of the Righteousness of Christ. No, no, but that Righteousness that must exceed the Righteousness of the Scribes, is our own inherent Righteousness only. True, we say a sincere inherent Righteousness we must have for a meetness for Eternal Life; but that is not our title to it, or the way to it, but the Righteousness and Merits of Christ alone.

Doth he not establish the Covenant of Works and Justification by the Law? What Popish Doctrin is worse?

Also in a printed Paper given one Lord's Day at the DoorOf our Meeting-house. Pag. 1, 2. by some Sabbatarian, you have these words; Christ died to procure Grace to en­able men to fulfil this Law, Rom. 8. 3. (not that 'tis fulfilled in us, that is in our head, i. e. by Christ in our Nature for us) but in us, that is, by us. O woful stuff!

Besides, doth Christ help us to fulfil the whole Law perfectly? If so, 'tis by the Law thus fulfilled that we are justified; and then al­so 'tis not by the Obedience of one Man that we are made Righteous. Rom. 5. Do not these men,Rom. 10. 3. like the Jews, go about to establish their own Righte­ousness? Moreover, their Doctrin renders all that keep not, or violate their Sabbath, to be guilty of the breach of the whole Law, which they affirm this is one Point of (i. e. a simple moral Precept) and not the least Command neither I fear with these men.

Now, my Brethren, how are these young Men and others blinded, who out of mistaken Zeal strive to bring in a Jewish Rite, or the ob­servation of the old Legal Sabbath; in promot­ing of which Error they disperse such pernici­ous [Page 168] Books and Pamphlets as tend directly to e­stablish the Covenant of Works, to the utter destroying the Doctrin of the Gospel, and the free Grace of God in our Justification by the Obedience of Christ alone, and to the palpable hazard and perdition of their own and other Peoples Souls. These Persons seek to sacrifice all that is truly valuable, to the blind observa­tion of a Day that obliges them to keep the whole Law.

10. That the natural Consequence of their Principle and Practice,P. 405, 406. Their Principle tends to harden the Jews. as Reverend Dr. Owen shews, ‘tends to the great scandal of the Chri­stian Religion, and to the hardening of the Jews in their Infidelity, is apparent to all: For the Introduction of any part of the old Mosaical System of Ordinances, is a tacit de­nial of Christ's being come in the Flesh, at least of his being King and Law-giver to his Church. And to lay the Foundation of all religious solemn Worship in the observation of a Day, as the Seventh-day precisely had no relation to any natural or moral Precept, nor was instituted or approved by Jesus Christ, cannot but be unpleasing to them who desire to have their Consciences immediately influ­enced by his Authority in all their approaches unto God. But Christ herein is supposed to have built the whole Fabrick of his Worship on the Foundation of Moses, and to have grafted all his Institutions into a Stock that was not of his own planting.’

11. Moreover, it is evident that the Conse­quence of their Opinion concerning the neces­sary observation of the Seventh-day Sabbath, as the Doctor saith,It tends to Schism. tends to the increasing and perpetuating of Schisms and Differences among Christians. ‘And those are the worst, saith [Page 169] he, and most pernicious, which occasion or draw after them any thing whereby men are hindred from joining together in the same publick solemn Worship, whereby they yield unto God that reverence of his Glory— But now upon a supposition of an adherence by any unto the Seventh-day Sabbath, all Communion among Professors in solemn Gos­pel-Ordinances is rendered impossible: For if those of that Perswasion do expect that others will be brought unto a relinquishment of an Evangelical observance of the Lord's Day Sab­bath, they will find themselves mistaken. The evidence which they have of its appointment, and the experience they have had of God's presence in its religious observation, will se­cure their practice in this matter, &c. The Seventh-day Sabbath men on the other hand, supposing themselves obliged to meet for so­lemn Worship on the Seventh-day (which the other account unwarrantable for them to do on the pretence of any binding Law to that purpose) and esteeming it unlawful (saith he) to assemble religiously with others on the First-day, on the plea of Evangelical War­ranty, do absolutely cut off themselves from all possibility of Communion in the admini­stration of Gospel-Ordinances with any other Churches of Christ. And whereas most o­ther breaches as to Communion are in their nature capable of healing, without a renun­ciation of those Principles in the minds of men, which seem to give countenance to them; the distance is here made absolutely irreparable, while the Opinion maintained is owned by any. I will press this, saith he, no further, but only by affirming that Persons truly fearing the Lord, ought to be very care­ful [Page 170] and jealous over their own Understanding, before they embrace an Opinion and Practice which will shut them from all visible Com­munion with the generality of the Saints of God in the World.’

To which let me add, How can they have Communion with us, if they consider and ob­serve the Consequences of their Principle? Are not we guilty of absolute Immorality, i. e. the literal breach of one Precept of the first Table? Can they, or we have Communion with such as bow down to a graven Image, or profane the holy Name of God, or are guilty of Murder, &c.?

And thus you may see what the natural and genuine Consequences of this Principle are, and that it not only tends to lay the Generation of the Righteous under the guilt of the breach of a moral Precept, and renders them guilty in their sense of the breach of the whole Law, but hath other bad Consequents attending it also.

And this may tend to convince all (that con­sider of what I say) that the Morality of the fourth Commandment doth not consist in that precise Seventh-day Sabbath, and discovers how blind these Men are.

Brethren, tho I believe many who keep this Day, and affirm it is a moral Precept, are very pious and good Christians,Some of them are for free Grace, &c. and do not affirm what I say, nor may be see it not to be so, or will not say thus: What then? yet I will appeal to all thinking impartial Persons, whether I do not infer the direct natural Consequence of their Principle.

Moreover, let me ask here this Question, how it can stand consistent with a good Conscience for a Minister to forbear preaching in any Con­gregation some part of Morality, or a moral Precept. I grant that Love, Wisdom, Charity, [Page 171] Peace, &c. may prevent some Men from preach­ing some Duties of mere positive right, for a short time at least, that are disputable, and not Essentials of Salvation. But what are such things to a simple moral Precept, both mate­rially and formally one of the Ten Command­ments, as they affirm their Sabbath is?

Suppose a Minister preaches to a Congrega­tion that he knows are generally guilty of wor­shipping a Graven Image, or of profane Swear­ing, or of Adultery, or of killing their innocent Neighbours; would not he preach against these horrid Evils, for fear he should offend the Con­gregation? or if he forbear so to do, would he not be shamefully guilty of great Sin, and of their Blood also? Happy is the Man that con­demns not himself in the thing he allows.

I know what some have said about Polygamy: if they answer me, let them use that Argu­ment; I am prepared to reply.

But let none think I speak thus to expose any of them out of Prejudice; for I can appeal to Almighty God I have none against any of their Persons: But it is to expose their Principle and Practice, in love to their Souls, and to the Souls of other Persons.

But before I conclude with this old Sabbath, I must add one dangerous Consequence more of their Principle.

12. Is not that a dangerous Error that reflects, nay casts Contempt upon the Holy Ghost, in respect of his Work and Office, which is to convince Believers of all Sin, espe­cially of all immoral Evils, under his most clear and glorious Ministration, since our Saviour's Ascension into Heaven?

[Page 172] Now I ask our Opponents, Whether the holy Spirit doth convince all Believers that they ought to keep the old Seventh-day Sabbath, or re­prove them for Immorality in the non-obser­vance thereof?

Sirs, as these things aggravate their Evil in what they affirm, so it clearly tends to over­throw the pretended Morality of that precise Seventh-day Sabbath: for the holy Spirit never convinces Believers of any such Duty, nor re­proves them for working on that day, or for bearing of Burdens on it, any more than on any other day in the week, to their dying day. But it lets them silently fall asleep, without the least sense of any such pretended immoral Evil.

Besides, the generality of Believers after their utmost inquiry, search, and seeking to God in all sincerity, cannot be convinc'd it is their Duty to keep this Day.

Would the Holy Ghost thus leave the Ge­neration of the Godly under Sin, and such Ignorance (think you) were this a moral Du­ty? And as to such as do observe it, I am satis­fied the Spirit of God never taught them so to do. But they in this are left to themselves, and have a Zeal, but not according to know­ledg, which God in time I hope by his Spirit will convince them of.

Quest. If it be thus, what think you of them that observe this Sabbath?

Answ. As to such gracious Christians who observe it out of Conscience, and because 'tis put into the fourth Commandment, do think it may be their Duty so to do, but attempt not to affirm it is a moral Duty; nor dare they neglect to observe the first Day, pro­vided [Page 173] they are in a Capacity (being not Servants) to observe both Days, and make no noise nor disturbance about it, but keep it to themselves: I think it may be (as to them) a harmless Error.

And as to others, I must leave them to the Lord, and judg them not, tho I judg and must condemn their Principle. And let them take heed how they judg us in respect of the non-observation of a Jewish Rite, &c. or of Jewish Sabbath-days.

The Gospel-Sabbath; or, The Lord's-Day of Divine Institution. Containing four Sermons lately preach'd on a special Occasion.


Shewing that our Lord Christ did certainly give Directions to his Disciples to observe the first Day of the week under the Gospel. That Pentecost was the first Day of the week; and that then the first Day was confirmed to be the day of Gospel-worship.

Mat. xxviii. 20.‘Teaching them to observe all things what­soever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the World.’

OUR blessed Lord as Mediator, having received all Power in Hea­ven and Earth, as King, Head, Go­vernor, only Soveraign and Law­giver to his Church, gave forth here his great Commission to his Disciple [...]. In which, [Page 176] 1. (As our Annotators note) He asserts his own Power. 2. He delegates a Power to his Disciples. 3. He subjoins a Promise to them.

'Tis a Power to congregate Churches, and to proclaim free Justification and remission of Sins, thro his perfect Obedience in his holy Life, and thro the Death of his Cross; as also Power to give forth Laws and Ordinances to his People, and to give eternal Life to whomsoever he pleaseth.

This Power was essentially and inherently in him as God over all blessed for evermore; but given to him as Mediator, God-man, our Sove­raign Lord and Redeemer; given him when he first came into the World, but more espe­cially given and manifested, and confirmed to him when he rose from the Dead. In which words we have,

1. A Command expresly given, Teaching them, &c.

2. The universality of this Command, all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

3. A gracious Promise annexed by way of Encouragement; and lo, I am with you al­way, &c.

Doct. That many things Christ commanded his Disciples to teach others,The Doc­trine rai­sed. are included or comprehended in this his great Commission, which are not expressed.

This is evident; so that if we would know what these things are which are not expressed, we must have recourse, 1. Either to what things they doctrinally preach'd, or by their Exam­ple led the Gospel Churches into the practice of. But, 2. Let it be consider'd, that we are obliged to believe that whatsoever the holy [Page 177] Apostles did teach,Whatsoever the Apostles preached, Christ gave them Com­mand so to do. or lead the Churches into the Practice of by their Example, were such things as Christ commanded them; and this Paul doth positively declare: For I will not dare to speak of any of those things, to make the Gen­tiles obedient by word or deed, which Christ hath not wrought in me, See 1 Cor. 14. 37. or commanded me.

And indeed should it be thought other­wise, 1 Cor. 11. 23. it would render the Apostles unfaithful, and guilty of bringing Innovations into the Churches; either in respect of any one precise day of Worship, or any matter or part of Worship to be perform'd. I speak not now of the mode of Worship, but any essential part thereof.

Now that Paul, who was the Minister and great Apostle of the Gentiles, did teach the Churches to observe the first day of the week, by assembling together to discharge the Duties of Religious Worship, is evident.

Nor can it be once supposed, since he en­deavour'd to take the Churches off from the observance of the Jewish Sabbath (as I have proved) that he should not direct them, or discover to them what day of the week Christ had commanded his People to observe in the time of the Gospel: they knowing especially that one day in seven the Lord declared in the fourth Commandment he would have perpetually sequestred to his Service, as also the reasonable­ness or equitableness thereof.

Therefore, my Brethren, as I have endea­vour'd to answer all the pretended Arguments brought to prove that we ought to observe the old Jewish Sabbath, the simple Morality of the fourth Commandment, they say, consisting in the observation of that precise day: So I shall now, God assisting, attempt to prove that we [Page 178] are obliged to observe the first day of the week as a day of Rest, and solemn Worship to God; while I esteem such as are for no special or particular day to be observed by Divine Au­thority both in private Families and in Church Assemblies, to be strangely left of God, and to be no friends to our sacred Religion, but such as open a door to great Licentiousness and Pro­faneness.

If therefore any should say, that there is no one precise day in seven of Divine Authority un­der the Gospel-Dispensation, but that the Church may appoint what day she pleaseth: I reply.

1. What force or authority can such a hu­man Precept have upon any Man's Conscience,To appoint a weekly day of Wor­ship is not in the pow­er of the Church, &c. i. e. the observance of one day in every week free from all worldly Business, if God requires it not?

2. Then also it would follow, that God doth admit vile Man to share, or partake of equal Honour with himself; i. e. that tho he will appoint the Ordinances of his own Worship, and have all that Glory to himself, yet Man shall have the honour to appoint the precise, constant time of his Worship, which is next in point of honour to the other.

3. And by granting Men that Honour and Dignity, it may let in by parity of reason, a Power to alter, and change, if not add new Laws and Ordinances of Worship also.

4. Besides, it will also follow, that the Church on the first day of the week doth not meet to­gether by Divine Appointment, if all days are alike, but only by human Authority.

5. Moreover, perhaps one part of the Church may be for one day in four; and another less zealous may be for one day in a fortnight; nay, one day in a month some may say is sufficient. [Page 179] So that it would put all things into confusion; for how can a human Law, or the bare Autho­rity of a Church, without the Divine Appoint­ment of Christ Jesus himself, awe the Consci­ence? Moreover, perhaps some would be for no day at all; and what then would become of the publick and private Worship of God?

That Notion therefore, that every day is alike, is most hateful to God no doubt: for as soon as he established a visible Church, giving a stinted, stated Worship, Laws and Ordinances, he appointed himself the precise time of Wor­ship under the Law; and the equitableness, as well as the Divine Authority of one day in seven, is, as I have proved, perpetually obligatory up­on all his People. For the further clearing of this, pray consider that,

1. Christ is Lord of the Sabbath, and of that Day God would have observ'd under the Gospel: and tho he hath dispensed with the observance of the seventh Day, or abolished that, yet as Lord and Lawgiver he hath instituted a weekly day of Rest for his People, and for his so­lemn Worship in Gospel-times. And none have this Power but himself alone: For shall the Servant appoint what precise time his Ma­ster's business shall be done, or set the times when his Master's Family shall have their distinct Meals, or be fed? No certainly.

Therefore,Christian Sabbath, p. 127. as Reverend Dr. Twiss observes, if any pretend that Christ hath delegated this Power of his to his Church, it stands upon them to make it good.

What times God himself took to work in, or to rest after Creation, the same proportion of time (as Dr. Lake hints) did he assign to Men, and made his Pattern a perpetual Law. So then of our time God reserves a seventh part for his Service.

[Page 180] The reserving (saith he) a seventh part I hold to be God's Ordinance, who is not varia­ble in his choice, but as everlasting as the World.

And so should the hallowing of the Seventh-day from the Creation have been, had it not been for Sin; for what could have altered it but a new Creation?

2. But Man having sinned, and so abolished the first Creation de jure, tho not de facto, God was pleased to make by Christ an instau­ration [or renewal] of the World (he means, as I conceive, God so abolished the old Creati­on, that no precise Day remains to be observed in the remembrance of it) and by Christ in redemption hath made a new Heaven and a new Earth; and old things being passed away; all things are become new: Yea, every man in Christ is a new Creature (or of the new Crea­tion.) And as God when he ended his Work of the first Creation, made a Day of Rest, and sanctified it: So Christ when he ended the Work of Redemption, made a Day of Rest, and sanctified it; not altering the proportion of Time which is perpetual, but taking the first of seven for his portion, because it sutes with his new Creation, and with his entring into it thro him; that old being a Legal Rite, and suting with the Covenant of Works, which is abolished with the Covenant it self; but the new, the first of seven, remains for ever.

3. For the further clearing of this matter, consider, that under the first Creation God re­quired one Day in seven for himself:The equity of Precepts may abide. But the precise Seventh-day being a Judicial Law, is gone; yet the equity or equitableness of one Day in seven as due to God, to be improved to his Glory for ever, remains.

[Page 181] 4. God then gave poor Servants and Cattel,Servants and Cattel still have one day in 7. to rest in. one Day of Rest in seven; the last Day of se­ven is gone, but the equity or equitableness of one Day in seven for a day of Rest for Servants and Cattel, remains for ever.

5. God required his People to give his Mini­sters under the Law the Tenth of all their In­crease: the Law of Tithes is gone, but the e­quity or equitableness that his Ministers under the Gospel should have as sufficient a mainte­nance, remains for ever.

6. Under the Law God required his People to meet together in his material Temple; the Temple is gone, but the equity or equitable­ness of assembling together in some place or another for Publick Worship, remains for e­ver.

7. Under the Law God's People in their Prayers offered Incense: Incense was typical, and is gone; but the equitableness of our Duty in making our Prayers to God, and confessing our Sins, remains for ever.

8. They under the Law had Instruments of Musick when they sang God's Praises: Instru­ments of Musick were typical, and only served the Jewish Worship; but the equitableness of the Duty to sing God's Praises with Grace in our Hearts, remains for ever.

9. Also note, that the second Commandment (as given by Moses) injoined the Jewish Na­tion to observe the whole Ceremonial Law, and all other Precepts of the Mosaical Oeconomy. But as the Moral Law is in the hands of Christ, the second Command doth not injoyn on us the observance of those Precepts, because abolished; but it injoyns on us the observance of all Or­dinances whatsoever Christ hath commanded us. Also that Clause in the second Command­ment, [Page 182] viz. Visiting the Iniquities of the Fa­thers on the Children to the third and fourth Generation; doubtless belonged to the Co­venant of Works, and was a temporal Pu­nishment. Doth God do thus under the New Covenant? Moreover, the Promise annexed to the fifth Commandment, shews that the Law, as given by Moses, only appertained to the People of Israel; as also the Preface to them all, Exod. 20. 2. doth the like.

10. So the fourth Commandment (as in the hand of Moses) injoyned the People of Israel the observance of the Seventh-day: But as the Law is in the hand of Christ, it doth not in­joyn us to observe that day, but being a Shadow is abolished. But it doth injoyn us to ob­serve the first day of the Week, which Christ (as the Lord of the Sabbath) hath instituted under the Gospel in its room, tho not to be ob­served with that legal strictness and penalty as the old Sabbath, which was a sign of the Co­venant of Works, and gendred to bondage.

Object. But where is there a Divine appoint­ment of the first Day of the Week; and by whom was it required?

Answ. This is the cry of our Adversaries: and I answer, that I doubt not but our Lord and Saviour at this time did institute it, and al­so gave command to his Disciples to observe it. I know some others have cryed, Where is lay­ing on of hands either upon Elders, or baptized Believers as such commanded? and so of divers other things: as if every Precept of the Gospel must be laid down in express words of command because some of them are.

1. But to proceed; Let it be well considered, that as I have proved from the fourth Command, that a Time, a sufficient Time for Rest, and in [Page 183] the solemn Worship of God, is a simple Moral Duty:

2. And that God also hath there, by an ex­press positive Law, laid claim to one Day in se­ven, as perpetually obligatory on his People. And as I have also proved, that the last Day of seven was only given to the Jews, or People of Israel; and that it is utterly abolished, it being a sign of the Covenant of Works:

3. So I shall now prove that our Lord has appointed the first day of the Week for us to observe under the Gospel. For,

First, Consider, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as Mediator, is the only Head, Sovereign Lord, and Lawgiver to his Church; and therefore it may seem strange, that the special Day or Time of Gospel-worship in his own Kingdom-state, should not be given forth by himself. But that Moses should have that Honour ascribed to him, and that we should commemorate the glorious Work of the New Creation, or Re­demption on the old Day, which was partly appointed for remembrance of the Work of the first Creation,Isa. 65. 17. is very strange: for the Prophet tells us, that upon the creating of the new Heaven and the new Earth, the former shall be no more remembred; that is, (as I conceive) not in such a way of remembrance, i. e. by the observation of that former Day ap­pointed in part on that very account. For cer­tainly God's glorious Works of the first Crea­tion shall otherwise be never forgot, and 'tis evident the Text refers to the Gospel day. Je­rusalem Paul applys to the New Testament Church.

Secondly, Now in my Text our blessed Lord gives forth his Commission: Go and teach all Nations, baptizing them, &c. and then these [Page 184] words are added, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. What many of those Commands were, we know not. It is also said, Acts 1. 2, 3. that he was with his Disciples forty days and forty nights, hav­ing given Commandment to his Apostles whom he had chosen. Yet neither in this place are those Commandments expressed, only he bid them not to depart from Jerusalem till they received the promised Spirit, and were indowed with Power from on high. Now no doubt but dur­ing these 40 days, he fully settled all things ap­pertaining to his Spiritual Kingdom, and in­structed them in all matters they should both do and teach. And can any rationally judg, that he did not then command them which day in seven he would have observed as a Day of Rest and solemn Worship?

Thirdly, In the pursuit of what I aim at, consider, that from the day of his ascension in­to Heaven, till the day of Pentecost, there were but ten days, during which we do not read they had any special general Assembly for Religious Worship, tho on the two first days some were together, and on both those days he appeared to them. And remarkable it is, that there were two Jewish Sabbath-days be­tween his Ascension and the day of their first general solemn meeting. Now had not the old Sabbath been gone, certainly they had assem­bled on both those days: but no doubt our Lord had told them on what day they should first meet together, in expectation of the Gift and Promise of the Father; which day he pur­posed to ratify as the only Day of Gospel-worship, by a marvellous effusion of the Spi­rit. To me nothing deserves more to be ob­serv'd than this, viz. on what day of the Week [Page 185] the first general Gospel-Assembly was held, after our Lord's Resurrection, and just upon (or soon after) his Ascension: for no doubt that was the day which Christ did settle in his Gospel-Church. And that they were bid to be altogether on this day, and to wait till it was come, seems plainly implyed in the very words of the Text, Acts 2. 1. And when the day of Pentecost was fully come; fully come, doth not that denote they waited for it?

Quest. Well, and what then?

Answ. Why, they were all with one accord in one place. Certainly this Assembly of the Church on this day was by divine appointment; and our Lord might order their first assemb­ling together then (I mean on this first day of the Week) because Pentecost fell out then, and because he knew that great multitudes would be together then to celebrate that Feast.

And therefore, as S. Chrysostom notes, God sent down the Holy Ghost at that time of Pente­cost, because those men that did consent to our Saviour's death, might publickly receive rebuke for that bloody Act; and so bear record to the power of our Saviour's Gospel before the World.

This day, I say, was the first day of the Week; and then the mighty effusion of the Holy Ghost came upon the Apostles, &c. and no less than three thousand Souls were converted on this Day. These were two of the most wonderful things that ever were done by our Lord. And thus our Lord first ratified and confirmed the precise Day, which no doubt he had command his Disciples to meet upon, as the Day of Gospel-Worship, before he in any marvellous manner confirmed any Ordinance pertaining to Gospel-worship after his Resur­rection. The Jewish Sabbath, I must tell [Page 186] you, never was after so glorious a manner confirmed. And remarkable it is, that God first gave the Sabbath to the Jews, Exod. 16. before he gave any written Laws of Worship; they had their Sabbath a month before they came to Mount Sinai, where the Law was given. So Christ first confirmed the Gospel-day of Worship, before he confirmed any Gospel-Or­dinance of Worship after his Resurrection.

Obj. But we deny that Pentecost was the first day of the Week, because the Jewish Rabbins sup­pose that by Sabbath, Lev. 23. 11. is not meant the weekly Sabbath, but the 1st day of unleavened Bread, wherein they are followed by some Christians also.

Answ. I shall prove that Pentecost was the first day of the Week;

1. By the Word of God.

2. By Universal Tradition.

3. By the Testimony of most approved Writers: and then what will become of your fabulous Rabbinical traditional Jews, or of such Christians who too fondly admire their Writ­ings which contradict the Holy Scripture?

Now,The day of Pentecost the first day of the Week. I say, the day of Pentecost was not, as Tillam and others pretend, the seventh-day of the Week, or the Jewish Sabbath, but the first-day, or the Lord's Day. But let me premise,

1. That Pentecost is the same which is called the Feast of Harvest, Exod. 23. 16. and the Feast of Weeks, Deut. 16. 10. this all agree in.

2. That it is called by a Greek name Pen­tecost (or the fiftieth day) because always to be observed on the fiftieth day from the offer­ing of the wave sheaf, as we read Lev. 23. 15, 16.

3. Now that this day of Pentecost was not upon the Jewish Sabbath, but on the day after it, is expresly asserted in the last men­tioned Text, Lev. 23. 11. And he shall wave [Page 187] the Sheaf before the Lord to be accepted for you; [...]n the morrow after the Sabbath the Priest shall wave it. And in ver. 15, 16. they were com­manded to count from thence seven Sabbaths, and on the morrow after the seventh Sabbath to keep the fiftieth day or Pentecost. The Wave-offering was the morrow af­ter the weekly Sabbath. Observe, the Sheaf was to be waved the day after the Sabbath; this is spoken in contradistinction to the Feasts spoken of in the 2d Verse, which are elsewhere called Sabbaths: but here is an Em­phasis laid on the word [the Sabbath] i. e. the Sabbath spoken of ver. 3. And that it is not meant of any of those fore-mentioned Feasts, appears in that there are not any particular Feasts mentioned, but there is a Command to observe them, and the word is in the plural number there. Therefore no particular Feasts, as the first day of unleavened Bread, but the Seventh-day Sabbath is directly here meant. For wherever there is mention of the Sabbath without a restriction to any other Feasts, it is to be understood of the Seventh-day Sabbath, as Exod. 16. 15. To morrow is the Rest of the holy Sabbath: the Emphasis limits it to the se­venth-day Sabbath, and that because there is [...]o other Feast particularly spoken of.

Secondly, Tradition has handed it down to us that the day of Pentecost was the first day of the week; and it is the day call'd Whit-sunday. Now if Tradition has failed here, it fails also as to their seventh day: for how do we know this is the first day, or yesterday was the se­venth, but by Tradition?

Thirdly, Here I might mention many learned Writers; yea all generally do affirm that Pen­tecost was the first day of the week.

Thus Dr. Heylin, Hist. of the Sab. par. 2. p. 13. who was no friend to the Lord's-day or Christian Sabbath, saith that Pen­tecost [Page 188] was the first day of the week.

Mr. Durham saith the same.On the ten Command. p. 263.

Mr. Cawdrey and Mr. Palmer say, that Pen­tecost was the first day of the week, and answer the Arguments brought against it.Sab. Rediv. p. 491.

Dr. Wallis says, Christ. Sab. p. 37, 38. Pentecost was the first day of the week, and proves it from Levit. 23. 15. The morrow after the Sabbath the Priest was to wave the Sheaf-Offering. And then he proceeds, ‘ver. 15, 16. To the Feast of Pentecost or Feast of Weeks, ye shall count unto you from the mor­row of the Sabbath from the day you brought the Sheaf of the Wave-offering; seven Sabbaths shall be compleat, even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath shall ye number fifty days▪ inclusively taken, as the manner of the Scrip­ture reckoning is, and must needs be so here. It was called the Feast of Pentecost, or the Feast of Weeks, as Deut. 16. 9, 10. which Feast was the morrow after the Sabbath, i. e. on the first day of the week.

Dr. Owen saith,Owen on the Sabb. p. 289. Pentecost was the first day of the week. ‘When the Lord Christ intended conspicuously to build his Church upon his Work and Rest, by sending the Holy Ghost with his miraculous Gifts upon the Apostles, he did it on this day, which was then among the Jews the Feast of Pentecost, or of Week▪ Then were the Disciples gathered together with one accord in observance of the day sig­nalized to them by his Resurrection, Acts 2. 1. And by this doth their Obedience receive a blessed Confirmation, as well as their Persons a glorious Endowment with Abilities for the Work they were immediately to apply them­selves to. And hereon did they set out to the whole work of building the Church on that Foundation, and promoting the Worship [Page 189] of it, which on that day was especially to be celebrated.’ Thus Dr. Owen.

Mr. Rich. Baxter likewise proves that Pente­cost was the first day of the week, Baxt. on the Sabb. p. 168. when the Ho­ly Ghost came upon the Apostles: and, saith he, it is not a trifle that the first Sermon to the People was preach'd by Peter on that day, and three thousand converted by it, and baptized.

Dr. Vsher also fully clears that Pentecost was the first day of the week always, as you shall near by and by, who hath finally resolved this Doubt.

4 I have another Medium by which to prove it was on the first day of the week that [...]he Sheaf-Offering was to be waved before the Lord; which is this: No doubt but God did hereby signify that our Lord Christ should on that day rise from the dead,1 Cor. 15. who is said to be [...]he first-fruits of them that slept. The Wave-Offering was, I say, a shadow of Christ's Re­ [...]urrection. The Wave-Offering was a Sheaf of the first ripe Fruits of Harvest, and was to be offered the morrow after the Sabbath. So Christ [...]s the first-fruits of that great Harvest of the Saints blessed Resurrection; and he rose again [...]n the morrow after the Sabbath, and so an­swered the Type.

Here we have the Gospel Sabbath, or Gospel-day of Worship, confirm'd by our Lord Jesus Christ.

As for those who assign the Institution of his day to the Apostles, It is not, as Reverend Owen observes, Owen, p. 293. to be imagin'd that they knowing [...]he day observed under the Law of Moses was [...]emoved, would fix on another day without im­mediate direction from the Lord Christ. For in­deed they delivered, saith he, nothing to be con­stantly observed in the Worship of God, but what [Page 190] they had his Authority for, 1 Cor. 11. 23.

But to return back, because the Sabbat [...]i [...]s deny that Pentecost was the first day of the week, I shall here endeavour further to confute them and finally to resolve this Doubt, recite some Pages out of a Reverend Author, Mr. War­ren. the substance o [...] which I perceive he took out of a printed Letter wrote by the famous Vsher to Dr. Twiss, who hath, I think, put an end to this Controversy.

That Pentecost is the first day of the week, is generally taken by Christian Writers,Proofs that Pen­tecost was the first day of the week. and so it may be evidently proved by the Scripture. Let plain Scripture determine the matter: I look into the Statute Laws of Moses concerning [...] Feast of Pentecost.

Exod. 34. 21, 22. Six days shalt thou [...], but the seventh thou shalt rest, both in earing-time and in Harvest.

And thou shalt observe the Feast of Weeks, of the first-fruits of Wheat-Harvest.

Lev. 23. 10, 11, 12, 15. When ye are come [...] the Land which I give unto you, and ye shal [...] reap the Harvest thereof, then ye shall bring [...] Sheaf of the first-fruits of your Harvest to [...] Priest; and he shall wave it, together with [...] offering of a Lamb without blemish: on the [...] row after the Sabbath he shall wave it.

And ye shall count unto you from the morr [...] after the Sabbath, from the day that ye bring [...] the Sheaf; seven Sabbaths shall be compl [...] even to the morrow after the seventh Sabbath, ye shall number fifty days.

So Numb. 28. 26. Deut. 16. 7. Seven weeks shalt thou number unto thee; begin to number th [...] seven weeks from such time as thou begin [...] [...] put the Sickle to the Corn.

From the Harmony of which four Te [...] [...] appears, that this Feast had three [...] [Page 191] Names, which were all made good at that so­lemn Pentecost, Acts 2.

1. It was call'd the Feast of Weeks or of sevens, because from the waving of the Sheaf they reckoned as many weeks to this Feast as there be days in seven weeks; which evidently shadowed out some weekly Festiyal under the Gospel, the day whereof was noted by that Pentecost, Acts 2. 1, 2.

2. It was call'd the Feast of First-fruits, and of Harvest; because as they began their Har­vest upon the first of the fifty days when they offered the Sheaf of First-fruits, so they ended it upon the fiftieth day, which was properly the Feast-day: Upon which they offered the Wave-loaves. And these fifty days or seven weeks were the appointed weeks of their Har­vest; and by the offering of the Sheaf at the beginning of their Harvest there, their after-Fruits were sanctified. And the offering of the [...]oaves on the fiftieth day was not only an Eu­ [...]haristical Oblation, but also a token of the Harvest being finished.

3. It is called the Feast of Pentecost, Deut. 16. 9. because it was ever kept the fiftieth day; the fiftieth, [...]ow reckoned? from the morrow after the [...]abbath (that is, the first day of the week) [...]ut what mark had they to know their morrow [...]? Moses tells them, when you shall reap the Harvest of your Land; or when you begin to [...]eap it, for so 'tis expounded in Deut. 16. 9. Begin to number the seven Weeks from such a [...]ime as thou beginnest to put the Sickle to the [...]orn. So, that when they began their Har­vest, they must begin their account of fifty [...]ays.

And the first of the fifty was the morrow of the Sabbath, or the day following the Sabbath, [Page 192] namely the first day of the week:Dr. Usher in his Let­ter to Dr. Twiss, p. 91, 92. and as they began, so they must end their account on the same day; as the first, so the fiftieth day, or day of Pentecost, must be on the morrow of the last Sabbath, Levit. 23. 15, 16.

And this is injoin'd by the express Command of God, to be observ'd as a Statute for ever throughout their Generations.

This is the plain Scripture-account; and who can but observe the Wisdom of God in ordering the matter thus? viz.

That this Feast of Weeks should never fall upon the seventh-day, but always upon the first day of the week, the morrow after the Sab­bath, or the day immediately following it, if at least his Statute-Law had always been ob­serv'd.

And what else could this presignify, as Dr. Vsher speaks, but that under the state of the Gospel the Solemnity of the weekly Service should be celebrated upon that day?

Now I hope that famous Pentecost, Act. 2. 1. will be no Parable, tho we state it (according to the Divine Oracle) upon the first day of the week, the morrow after the Jews Sabbath. We need no Almanack to help us here, the Bible is sufficient. Nor, say I, do we need the Tradi­tions of the blind doting Rabbins.

But (to proceed) because the Sabbataria [...] stand so much upon supposed Mysteries in the Feast of Pentecost, See Dr. Usher's printed Letter. according to their Traditio­nal Account, I shall acquaint them with the real Mysteries of Christ accomplished exactly according to this Scriptural Account, where they may see the Type and the Truth admira­bly concurring: For as at the time of the Passover, 1 Cor. 5. 7. Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us, and lay in his Grave the whole Jewish [Page 193] Sabbath following: So on the morrow after the Sabbath (when the Sheaf of the first Fruits was offered to God) Jesus Christ rose from the dead,1 Cor. 15. 20. and became the First-fruits of them that slept; and many of the Saints that slept rose likewise after him.Mat. 37. 52, 53.

From hence was the Account taken of the se­ven Sabbaths, or fifty Days; and upon the morrow after the seventh Sabbath (which was our Lord's Day) was that famous Feast of Weeks, that day of Pentecost, Acts 2. 1.

Upon which day the Apostles having them­selves received the first Fruits of the Spirit, be­gat three thousand Souls with the Word of Truth, and presented them as the first Fruits of the Christian Church to God, and to the Lamb. Here was the Feast of Loaves in the Antitype, that feasted some thousands of Souls.

And from that time forward do the Walden­ses note, that the Lord's Day was observed in the Christian Church in the place of the Jew­ish Sabbath. Thus Dr. Vsher, that Library of Learning.

Object. If it be objected, That in this Dis­course he states Christ suffering at the Feast of the Passover, and so falls in with the vulgar O­pinion, which takes the morrow after the Sab­bath, Levit. 23. for the morrow after the Pass­over Sabbath.

I answer, That cannot be: for he had de­clared before that the Sabbath there intended is the weekly Sabbath; and the morrow after it is the first day of the Week: And he cites Isychius and Ruportius in interpreting it so be­fore him; to whom I shall be bold, saithMr. War­ren. Nazianze [...] Orat. 44. he, to add Nazianzen who was before them all, who speaking of the Feast of Pentecost, says, ‘This Nation (meaning the Jewish Nation) [Page 194] uses to consecrate to God, not only the first of their Fruits, and first born, but the first Fruits of their Days and Years also. Thus the illustrious number of Seven has carried the honour of Pentecost: for Seven being composed upon it self, makes fifty wanting but one day, which we have taken from this future Age, being both the eighth and the first Day.’

His Argument is clearly this, that the Jew­ish Pentecost was fain to be beholden to the Christians eighth day, or first day of the Week, to make up the compleat number of fifty days.

And the like he says a little before concern­ing their Jubilee every fiftieth year: for seven times seven makes but forty nine; to perfect the number, they borrowed the first day of the Week, and so consecrated to God the first of their Days as well as of their Land.

So that this computation of the fifty days to Pentecost, from the morrow of the Sabbath, wants no Authority to back it, either divine or humane.

But the Word of God is our best Warrant; and we may be satisfied that Dr. Twiss was no Child at Argument, nor one that would be per­swaded on slight grounds; but upon Bishop, Vsher's discovery of this Truth by the foremen­tioned Scripture-evidence, he professed he re­ceived great satisfaction, and acknowledges that the mystery of the Feast of first Fruits was o­pened to the singular advantage and honour of the Lord's Day.

Object. The only Objection against this In­terpretation, is the Judgment of Mr. Ains­worth, and our English Annotators, who take the Sabbath, Levit. 23. for the Feast of the Passover Sabbath.

[Page 195] Answ. 1. Herein they are led by the com­mon Opinion of the Hebrew Doctors, who in­deed are excellent Guides when they keep the beaten Road of Scripture; but in ma­ny things made void the Commandments of God by their Traditions. Let this Mistake lie at their door; for certainly a mistake it is, and that the morrow after the Sabbath could not be the Passover, is clear, because,

2. It must be such a Morrow after the Sab­bath as never falls upon the weekly Sabbath: the reason is plain, because it is the beginning of Harvest, when they put in their Sickle to the Corn, or their Harvest, Levit. 23. 10. Which the are expresly forbidden to do up­on their weekly Sabbath, Exod. 34. 21, 22. Six days thou shalt labour, but on the seventh thou shalt rest, both in earing Time and Harvest. And see how this is coupled with the Feast of first Fruits in the very same place, Thou shalt observe the Feast of Weeks, &c.

3. Observe it, if the morrow after the Sab­bath, Levit. 23. had been the Morrow after the Passover, this would often have fallen on the weekly Sabbath: for the Passover being fixed upon the 15th of Nisan, whenever this 15th of Nisan fell upon the Friday, the morrow after it must be Saturday, and so they must begin to reap their Harvest on the weekly Sabbath against the express Command of God.

The Hebrew Doctors foresaw this Inconveni­ence, and had no other way to salve it, but by affirming that this reaping did drive away the Sabbath, and that it was lawful on the Sab­bath-day. A most impious Opinion! for it cros­ses the very Letter of God's Law, in [...]aring-time and harvest thou shalt rest.

4. The morrow after the Sabbath, at the be­ginning [Page 196] of their Account, must be such a Mor­row as concludes it, Levit. 23. 15, 16. there­fore it could not be the morrow after the Pass­over-Sabbath, or any Festival; for there was no such Sabbath at the end of any Account whatsoever.

5. The Passover-Sabbath was fixed to a cer­tain day of the Month, namely, the 15th of the first Month;Numb. 28. 17. and thus all their other Fe­stivals had their fixed days.

But this Feast of Pentecost is no where af­fixed in all the Books of Moses to any certain day of the Month: Nor indeed could it be, un­less God should make a Ceremonial Law to cross the Law of Nature; or rather limit the course of Divine Providence, to ripen their Corn just against such a day of the Month: which, as Dr. Vsher observes, is a very great presumption that the Feast of Pentecost was a moveable Feast, but immoveable as to the day of the Week; so varying, that it might always fall upon the day immediately following the ordinary Sabbath.

6. The Antitype is the best Key to unlock the Type: And this is clear in the New Testament; for that Christ was our first Fruits in reference to his Resurrection,1 Cor. 15. 20. St. Paul assures us; and that he rose from the dead on the morrow af­ter the weekly Sabbath, all the four Evange­lists do inform us. And Tho. Tillam has granted, that these things must be punctually fulfilled by Christ, as well in the TimeTruth or Antitype. as in the Type.

From his own Grant therefore I conclude, that the Day of first Fruits was the first day of the Week, and therefore was the Day of Pen­tecost, to the everlasting honour of that Lord's Day, and the Glory of God the Holy Ghost, who sanctified it by his Presence and Power, sending down a new supply of Tongues from [Page 197] Heaven (as if all the Tongues upon Earth were not sufficient) to sound forth the Praises of this Redeemer, and spread the Gospel all o­ver the World on the first day of the Week, as an earnest whereof there was a glorious be­ginning made on this Day.

The Gospel was now published to some of all Nations, there being a great concourse even of every Nation under Heaven met at Jerusalem, Acts 2. 5. and at this Meeting three thousand Souls were converted and baptized, ver. 41. A double Baptism was indeed dispensed this Day; the Apostles were now baptized with Fire, and three thousand Converts with Water; which was such a Solemnity, as the Church of God never saw the like to that day, nor since.

Our Adversary Tillam Confesses,Pag. 81. that this was the most glorious Sabbath that ever the Church enjoyed; only he perswaded himself and others it was the Saturday-Sabbath: but herein he befools himself, and deceives others.

5. 'Tis strange indeed any should once sup­pose the Feast of Pentecost could ever fall on the Seventh-day Sabbath; because as the Wave-Offering was to be offered the morrow after the Sabbath, so from that very day inclusively they were to count seven Sabbaths, and then the morrow after the last of the seven was the fifth day, i. e. Pentecost. I need not say any more to this.

To conclude, after all attempts to the con­trary, the Glory of the Spirit's Mission rests on the first day of the Week: This day the Church of Christ was visited from on high, the Promise of the Father was sent, the blessed Spirit came; the Disciples were assembled, Peter preached, and three thousand were converted and bapti­zed; and all this is written: Why the Church [Page 198] assembled? (as Mr. Sprint argues) Why on this Day? Why the Holy Ghost? Why preaching, why conversion, and administration of the Sacraments? Why the Promise of Christ accomplished all on this Day? but still to de­clare the Will of Christ in appointing, blessing, and sanctifying of this Day to his Church, and making it a day of publick solemn Worship, as a Day in all its Prerogatives above all other Days: A Day of Christ's Resurrection, by which we are justified, in which he ceased from his Work, as God did from his on the Seventh, and so hath the same reason for a Day of Rest: the Day [...] the Holy Spirit's descen­sion, by whom we are sanctified: a Day of assembling and preaching, on which Sinners were converted, and Believers edified; by which the whole Trinity is glorified.

And where is he now, who said, none can prove one whole first Day was kept in reli­gious Worship in all the New Testament? Was not this first Day so kept, and established for us to observe and keep from morning to evening?


The Institution and Foundation of the first Day, proved from Heb. 4. 8, 9, &c. That it is the Day which the Lord hath made for Divine Worship. That the Dis­ciples and Primitive Churches assembling together upon that Day, is a full proof of the same.

MY Brethren, I have endeavoured to prove, that the first Day of the Week our Lord Jesus Christ hath appointed to be the special Day of Rest, and for the Wor­ship of God under the Gospel▪

First, By virtue of his Command, who was with his Disciples forty days giving them Com­mandments, &c. before his Ascension, which are not expressed.

Secondly, Because Pentecost was the first day of the Week, when this Day was confirmed by the miraculous effusion of the Holy Ghost. But to proceed:

Thirdly, My next Argument shall be taken from Christ's Resting, or ceasing from his Works upon that day, as God did from his.

And this indeed I take to be the Foundation of the observance of the first Day; and that which I mentioned last is a clear confirmation thereof.

In order to do this, consider, that each Day to be observed, either under the Law or Gospel, must be comprehended in the fourth Command▪ [Page 200] and that the change of the old Day takes not away the perpetual Obligation of one day in seven, nor the reason of that positive perpetual Law.

Now there are but two great and general In­stances in which God is said to rest, viz.

1. That after the first Creation was finished, God rested from all his Work, namely, from Creation-work, so as he never will create any material thing again to the end of the World. As to his creating the Soul, that is not the creat­ing of any new Species of Beings.

2. The Rest of God-man, after he had fi­nished the Work of Redemption, or the se­cond Creation, which is never to be repeated. Now there is a moral Reason which is deduci­ble from the fourth Commandment, that when­ever God rests, there is a Foundation of a day of Rest for Man, comporting with the nature and tendency of each Covenant to which that Rest doth refer.

[Thou shalt do no manner of Work, &c. for in six days, &c.] The word for implys a mo­ral Reason, which makes it applicable to any Rest of God, therefore to God's Rest from the Work of Redemption, I mean that of God­man, which is also deducible from Heb. 4 Christ rested from his Work, as God did from his.

Therefore there remaineth a Rest for the Peo­ple of God: Heb. 4. [...]. 10. [...] [...]. for he that is entered into his Rest, hath also ceased from his Works, as God did from his. Here is the Institution of the Lord's Day: For tho this Rest hath a particular rela­tion to the Gospel-day of Rest, i. e. of that Grace, Rest, and Peace Christ procured for us, by his doing all that we had to do, and of that burden of Punishment he bore, which we had [Page 201] to undergo for our Sins; yet not exclusive of a particular Sabbath or day of Rest; but it is di­rectly intended here as the Foundation and In­stitution of it, because that Rest in the former Verses, which has a more particular respect to the Rest in Canaan, is spoken of not excluding God's resting the Seventh-day.

Now in pursuit of this I shall here cite some material Passages out of Dr. Owen on the Sab­bath, who has fully confirmed what I here as­sert.

How the Creation of all things was finished,Dr. Owen on the Sab. p. 256. and the Rest of God and Man that ensued thereon, hath been (saith he) declared. It hath also in part, and sufficiently as to our present pur­pose, been evidenced, how the great Ends of the Creation of all, in the Glory of God, and the Blessedness of Man in him, with the Pledg thereof in a sabbatical Rest, were for a season as it were defeated and disappointed by the en­trance of Sin, which brake the Covenant that was founded in the Law of Creation, and ren­dered it useless unto those Ends—

Hence it could no more bring Man to rest in God; but yet there was the continuation of the obligatory Force of the Law and Covenant, and hence of the Sabbatical Rest in the Church of Israel, with the especial application of its Command to that People—

In this state of things. God had of old de­termined the Renovation of all things by a new Creation, a new Law of that Creation, a new Covenant, and a new Sabbatical Rest to his Glory by Jesus Christ—

And this Renovation of all things accordingly to be accomplished in Christ.2 Cor. 5. 17, 18. 'Tis said, Old things are past away, and behold all things are be­come new; the old Law, the old Covenant, old [Page 202] Worship,Pag. 258. old Sabbath, and all that was pecu­liar to the Covenant of Works as such, in the first Institution of it, and its renewed Decla­ration on Mount Sinai, all are gone and anti­quated. —And what now remains of them as to any usefulness in our living to God, doth not abide on the old Foundation, but on a new Disposition of them by the Renovation of all things in Christ, Eph. 1. 10.

A new Law of Obedience is introduc'd by the new Creation in Christ Jesus—And there is a great Renovation thereof shewed in God's writing his Law in our Hearts, not here to be insisted on—God brings overThat is, God brings over the Law (as given on Mount Si­nai) into the hands of Christ. in this State the use of the first Law as renewed, and repre­sented in Tables of Stone, for a directive Rule of Obedience to the new Creature, whereby the first original Law is wholly supply'd. Here­unto he makes an addition of what positive Laws he thinks meet.—So the Moral Law, tho materially always the same,—yet this old Law as brought over into this new State, is new also; for all old things are become new.

And it is now the Rule of our Obedience, not merely to God as Creator, but to God in Christ bringing us into a new Relation to him­self, in the Renovation of the Image of God in our Souls, and the transferring over of the Mo­ral Law as a Rule, accompanied with new Prin­ciples, Motives and Ends.

And now observe, all the Rests of God are founded in his own Rest in his Works; for a pledg hereof a day of Rest must be given and observed—But as the Apostle tells in another case,Pag. 262. The Priesthood being changed, Heb. 7. 12. there must also of necessity be a change of the Law—so the Covenant being changed, and the Rest which was the end of it, being changed; and [Page 203] the way of entering into the Rest of God, be­ing changed; a change of the Day must of necessity thereon ensue.

And no Man can assert the same day of Rest precisely to abide as of old, but he must likewise assert the same way of entering into [...]t, which yet, as all acknowledg, is changed. The day first annexed to the Covenant of Works (that is the seventh day) was conti­nued under the old Testament, because the outward Administration of the Covenant of Works was continued.—But now the new Covenant being absolutely established, and the other abolished, both as to its Nature, Use, Efficacy and Power, no more to be represented nor proposed unto Believers, even the whole of it: Yea, and its renewed Administration under the Old Testament being removed, taken away, and disappearing, Heb. 8. 13. the precise day of Rest belonging unto it was to be changed also, and so it came to pass.

On these Suppositions we lay,Pag. 164. § 7. and ought to [...]ay the observation of the Lord's-day under the New Testament according to the Institution of [...]t, or Declaration of the Mind of Christ, who [...]s our Lord and Lawgiver concerning it.

A New work of Creation, or work of a new Creation, is undertaken and compleatedIsa. 65. 17. ch. 66. 22, 23. 2 Pet. 3. 13. Rev. 21. 1. Rom. 8. 19. 20. 2 Cor. 5. 17. Gal. 6. 15.. This new Creation is accompanied with a new Law and Covenant, or the Law of Faith and Covenant of Grace, Rom. 3. 27. ch. 8. 2, 3, 4. Jer. 31. 33, 34. Heb. 8. 8, 9, 10, &c.

To this Law and Covenant a day of holy Rest unto the Lord doth belong, which cannot be the same with the former, no more than it is the same Law or same Covenant which was original­ly given, Heb. 4. 9. Rev. 1. 10.

That this day was limited and determined [Page 204] to the first day of the week by our Lord Jesus Christ, is that which shall now further be con­firmed.—

First, Pag. 366. On this day he rested from his Work by his Resurrection, for then he laid the Foun­dation of the new Heavens and new Earth, and finished the Works of the new Creation, when all the Stars sang together, and the Sons of God shouted for Joy.

On this day he rested from his Works,The drift of the Apo­stle here is to shew how the first day is established as our day of Rest un­der the Gospel. as God did; and was refreshed, as God was: for tho he worketh hitherto, in communication of his Spirit and Graces (as the Father continueth to do in his Works of Providence) after the fi­nishing of his Works of the old Creation, tho these Works belong thereunto; yet he ceaseth absolutely from that kind of Work, whereby he laid the Foundation of the new Creation: henceforth he dyeth no more, and on this day was he refreshed in the view of his Works, for he saw it was exceeding good.

Now as God's Rest,This the Doctor. shews the Apostle chiefly in­tends. and his being refreshed in his Work on the seventh day of old, was a sufficient Indication of the precise day of Rest, which he would have observed under the Ad­ministration of that original Law and Cove­nant; so the Rest of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of his being refreshed in and from his Work on the first day, is a sufficient Indication of the precise day of Rest to be observ'd under the Dispensation of the new-Covenant, now con­firm'd and established.

And the Church of Christ could not pass one Week under the New Testament,Pag. 267. or in a Gospel-state of Worship, without this Indication.

For the Judaical Sabbath, as sure as it was so, and as sure as it was annexed to the Mosa [...]l Administration of the Covenant, was so far abo­lish'd, [Page 205] as not to oblige really the Disciples of Christ in Conscience to the Observation of it, whatsoever any of them might for a season ap­prehend. And if a new day was not now deter­mined, there was no day or season appointed for an observance of an holy Rest unto the Lord, nor any pledg given us of our entering into the Rest of Christ.—

Accordingly this Indication of the Gospel-day of Rest,§ 10. and Worship, was imbraced by the Apostles, who were to be as the chief Cor­ner Stones in the Foundation of the Christian Church. For immediately they assembled them­selves on that day, and were confirmed in their Obedience by the Grace of our Lord in meet­ing with them thereon, Joh. 20. 19, 26.

And it appears on this day only he appeared to them, when they were assembled together, altho occasionally: he shewed himself to sun­dry of them at other seasons.—Moreover, from this time forward this day was never without its solemn Assemblies, as shall further be cleared afterwards. Thus the Doctor.

He then proceeds further to prove more fully from this of Heb. 4. the Foundation and Institution of the Lord's-day; in which he has certainly not only out-done all Expositors be­fore him, but hath made it very plain that the first day is here by the Apostle declared to be established by Christ's Rest, and our resting in him; and to be the day of Rest and solemn Worship under the Gospel, as God's resting from his Work was the Foundation of the old Sabbath.

He cites Heb. 4. 3—11. moreover, he o­pens the many Rests mentioned,Pag. 269, 230, 231, &c. and proves the Rest spoken of in the Psalms to intend the Rest of Christ and his People in the Gospel-Dispensa­tion; [Page 206] and not the eternal Rest above, but that Rest which all that believe do enter into, after Christ had done all our Work, and ceased, or finished his Work for ever, as God finished his; and as a pledg of his Rest, hath left us a day of Rest: There remaineth therefore a Sabbatism for the People of God. Here is both the Foun­dation and Institution of the first day as a day of Rest, or a Gospel Sabbath; and the manner of our entering into it, as well as the abroga­tion of the old day.

The Foundation,Pag. 279. saith he, of the whole is laid down, ver. 10. For he that is entered into his Rest, § 20. has ceased from his Works, as God did from his: i. e. that as God ceased working, rested, and took satisfaction and complacency in his Work, never working any more in crea­ting, and so a Rest followed on that day; so Christ ceased and rested from the Work of Redemption on the first day, and a Rest fol­lowed for us on that day, he taking Rest and Complacency in his Work.

There is the Rest of the one and the other; and these (saith he) also have their mutual proportion. Now God rested from his own Work of Creation,

1. By ceasing from creating, only continuing all things by his Power in their order and propagation to his Glory.

2. By his Respect to them, and Refreshment in them, as those which expressed his Excel­lencies, and set forth his Praise, and so satisfied his glorious Design.

1. So Christ also must cease working, i. e. he must die no more, suffer no more, but only con­tinue the Work of his Grace and Power in the preservation of the new Creation, and the orderly increase and propagation of it by his Spirit.

[Page 207] 2. He takes delight and satisfaction in the Works he hath wrought; for he sees of the tra­vel of his Soul, P. 284. and is satisfied.—In brief, all that he did and suffered in and from his Incar­nation to his Resurrection, as Mediator of the Covenant, with all the Fruits, and Effects, and Consequences of what he so did, whereby the Church was built, and the new Creation finished, belongs to his Works.

His Rest that ensued on these Works, hath two parts: (1.) A cessation from his Works, which was eminent, and answered God's Rest from his Works. (2.) Satisfaction in his Works, and the glorious Product of them, as those which had an Impression on them of his Love and Grace, Psal. 16. 7.

Now lest any should suppose that Christ ra­ther ceased from his Works,Christ ceased from his Work on the day of his Resur­rection. P. 284. Sect. 23. when he died, be­cause it is said 'tis finished, &c. which certainly refers to all those things that were Types or Pro­phecies of him to that time; for the Work of Redemption could not be finished till he rose from the dead: Take what the Doctor further saith to this. It remains, saith he, only that we enquire into Christ's entrance into his Rest, both how and when he did so, even as God en­tered into his on the Seventh-day. For this (saith he) must limit and determine a Day of Rest to the Gospel-Church. Now this was not his lying down in the Grave. His Body in­deed there rested for a while: But that was no part of his mediatory Rest, as he was the Foun­der and Builder of the Church. For,

1. It was part of his Humiliation: Not on­ly his death, but his abode and continuance in the state of death was so, and a principal part of it: For after the whole human Nature was united to the Person of the Son of God, to [Page 208] have it brought into a state of dissolution, or to have the Body and Soul separated from each other, was a great Humiliation. And every, thing of this nature belonged to his Work, and not to his Rest.

2. This separation of Body and Soul under the Power of Death was penal, a part of the Sentence of the Law which he underwent. And therefore Peter declares, that the Pains of Death were not loosed but by his Resurrection, Acts 2. 24. This therefore could not be his Rest, or any part of it.

3. Nor did he first enter into his Rest, at his Ascension: then he indeed took possession of his Glory—But to enter into his Rest is one thing, and to take possession of Glory another. —And it is placed by the Apostle as the Consequent of his being justified in the Spirit. 1 Tim. 3. 16.

But this his entring into Rest was in and by his Resurrection from the dead:—For,

1. Then and there he was freed from the Sentence, Power, and Stroke of the Law, be­ing discharged of all the Debts of our Sins, which he had undertaken to make satisfaction for, Acts 2. 24.

2. Then and therein were all Types, all Predictions and Prophecies fulfilled, which concerned the Work of our Redemption.

3. Then and therein his Work was done, which answered to God's Creating-work.

4. Then and therein he was declared the Son of God with Power.Rom. 1. 4.

Thus did the Author of the new Creation,P. 286. Sect. 24. the Son of God, the builder of the Church, having finished his Work, enter into his Rest: And this was on the morning of the first day of the Week.

And hereby he did limit and determine the Day for our Sabbatical Rest under the New [Page 209] Testament: for now was the old Covenant utterly abolished; and therefore the Day which was the Pledg of God's and Man's Rest there­in, was to be taken away, and accordingly was, as we have proved.—

And this is that which the Apostle affirms as the substance of all he hath evinced,P. 287. Sect. 25. namely, that there is a Sabbatism for the People of God, [...]; the word is framed by our Apostle from an Hebrew Original, with a Greek Termination; and he useth it as that which is comprehensive of his whole sense, which no o­ther word would be, for he would shew there is a Sabbatical Rest founded in the Rest of God, [God-man] remaining for the Church; and therefore makes use of the same word whereby God expressed his own Rest, when he sancti­fied the Seventh-day for a day of Rest thereon.

Again he further proves, that the Apostle asserts an Evangelical Sabbath, or day of Rest, to be constantly observed in and for the Wor­ship of God under the Gospel. Thus far and to this effect speaks Dr. Owen.

'Tis, my Brethren, the Apostle's business in this Chapter, as the Doctor has proved, to shew an Institution of the first day of the Week, and this upon the great Work of Redemption, and Christ's resting from his Works, as God did from his; as also the manner of his entering into his Rest, which was not till all our Work was done by our Surety, and our Burden was born by him for us; for till then we could not enter into his Rest.

And being in his Rest, he has appointed this Day as a Pledg thereof, that we may be­gin with God, give him the first Day, and so seek first the Kingdom of God. First as to the early days of our Life; first in the Day, and [Page 208] [...] [Page 209] [...] [Page 210] first in every day of the Week. Brethren, we have Rest before we work, or labour for it, and so work from Rest, Life and Peace, and not work for Life, or to enter into Rest that way, as they were to do under the old Cove­nant. Remarkable is that passage of Paul, As many as walk according to this Rule (that is, the Rule of the new Creature, or new Creation) Peace be on them. And as in matters of Wor­ship, so in respect to the new Day of Worship, the Apostle pronounceth Peace to such, &c.

And thus I have shewed how the first Day was confirmed by the miraculous effusion of the Spirit, and also the Foundation and Institution of this Day, as here laid down by the Apostle.

Fourthly,The first Day made by the Lord for a Day of Rest, Joy and Gladness in God's Worship. My fourth Argument to prove the Institution of the first Day of the Week, shall be taken from Psal. 118. 22, 23, 24. The Stone that the Builders refused, is become the head Stone of the Corner. This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our sight. This is the Day the Lord hath made, we will be glad and rejoice in it.

1. Pray observe that our Lord became the Head-stone of the Corner on the day of his happy Resurrection; on this day the Gospel-Church took its beginning: On this day he en­tered into his Rest, and was invested with actual Victory over all his Enemies, and clo­thed with Soveraign Power and Authority as King and Law-giver.

2. Well, and what saith the Holy Ghost? This is the Day the Lord hath made.

1. He speaks, as all Expositors note, of the particular day of Christ's Resurrection.

2. And that this is the Day which the Lord hath made: How made? God created that, [Page 211] and every day of the Week at first. But this Day is constituted or made for some special end and use, above any other day in the Week: Nothing lies more plain in the Text than this.

3. The Lord hath made it, i. e. instituted or appointed it to these great Ends; not the Apostles, not the Church, not Man, but the Lord himself hath made it.

4. And then the Gospel-Church, and all Gospel-Believers signified by this word [we] resolve upon this Great Authority to observe it; we will rejoice and be glad in it. Here it is foretold that God hath singularly made, cre­ated, or instituted this Day for us, to meet to­gether, and to worship him with joy and glad­ness of heart; and accordingly we have proved it was confirmed.

I challenge any man to shew us a Reason why any day besides this can be here intended.

Obj. The Prophet alludes to the general Gos­pel-day, or else only to that very precise day on which Christ rose; not that that day should suc­cessively be kept.

Answ. We deny not but that the general Gospel-days of Grace came in with this day: but in the days of the Gospel this Text also shews God hath made or appointed a particu­lar Day to be observed with rejoycing and glad­ness of Heart, not the seventh but the first Day. For it is evident this day was the day when our Lord was made or became the Head-stone of the Corner, viz. the day of his glorious Re­surrection. Where is the general Day of the Gospel called a Day made? Is not this as much as that at the beginning the Lord blessed and sanctified the seventh day? 'Tis not there said he sanctified it for men successively to keep. Now (1.) Here is expressed a particular Day; [Page 212] and what day 'tis, the Verses going before shew. (2.) 'Tis a day made or instituted for singular use. (3.) It is a day made by the Lord to that end. (4.) For us to worship God in, or to rejoice in before him with gladness of our Heart. God meeteth him that rejoiceth, and that remembers him in his ways.

1. God hath made or instituted this Day for singular, nay for the highest and chiefest End and Purpose.

2. And what day have we cause to rejoice in, keep and observe like this day? For has not Redemption-work the preference of Creation-work? The Glory of Creation-work was mar'd by Sin; but Redemption-work, Redemption-Grace, restores the Image of God to us again, and puts us into a far better condition than we were in at first.

In Redemption-work the glory of all God's Attributes shines forth, so they did not in the first Creation.

The day of Christ's Resurrection is the day of our deliverance from Sin, the Law, Wrath, Death, Devils, and all Enemies for ever. This is the Day the Lord has made more honorable and glorious, and more to be remembred than God's creating the Heavens and the Earth. Are there any dare say that the first Creation ought more to be re­membred than the second or the new Creation▪ Or doth the Covenant of Works excel the Covenant of Grace, or the Law the Gospel?

Did God's finishing his Work call for a day of remembrance, and doth not Christ's finish­ing his Work call for the same? Certainly it doth; and therefore this is the day the Lord hath made, and we will rejoice and be glad in it [...] And doth not the Apostle say, Heb. 4. 9. upon the same foot of account, There remaineth [...] [Page 213] Rest (i. e. a day of Rest) to the People of God?

This is the day in which Christ our Surety received for us our free Justification, i. e. our discharge from the Curse of the Law, from Sin and Eternal Wrath. On this day Christ made an end of Sin, finished Transgression, and brought in everlasting Righteousness; therefore this is the day the Lord hath made, and we will rejoice and be glad in it.

1. The Lord made and created the Seventh-day, and afterwards made it a Sabbath to an­swer the end and design of the old Creation and old Covenant. So the Lord created the first day; and when the new Creation was brought in, he made it for a day of sacred Rest, and for his solemn Worship, answering the end and design of the new Creation.

2. The Seventh-day Sabbath was made for Man under the legal and typical Church of Is­rael; so the first-day was made for Man, the new Man, or for all the true Israel of God, under the Gospel, or for the Gospel-Church.

3. God made the Seventh-day an honourable day, answering his design in the first Creation; and Christ has made this day a more honoura­ble day, answering his design in Redemption, or new Creation.

4. God made the Seventh-day a day of Rest, because in it he ceased for ever from first-Crea­tion Works, and took complacency in his Works. So the Lord Christ hath made the first day a day of Rest, because in it he ceased for ever from the Works of Redemption, never to die or offer any more Sacrifice for Sin, and took com­placency in his Work. This is therefore the day the Lord hath made; and we will rejoice and be glad in it. How made? saith one, not by Creation, for so it was made before.

[Page 214] 5. And as the seventh Day was instituted and confirmed before the Law was given to Israel, Exod. 16. so the first Day was confirm­ed, Act. 2. by the mighty effusion of the Spi­rit, before any other Gospel-Precept was con­firmed after the Resurrection of our Lord.

‘It is called,Dies Do­minicus, p. 71. saith Dr. Young, Dominicum, because, as Austin notes,—the Lord made it: this, saith he, perhaps will be of no great weight with some, since the Lord made all days; but he seems to have made this day after a special manner, namely, by his Re­surrection from the dead (the Commemora­tion of which Benefit exceeded the Memory of the old Creation)—or else because it was destinated for worshipping the Lord Jesus Christ,’ &c.

Thus it was prophesied what Day Christ would ordain for his Service under the Gospel, and which Believers should observe with Joy in his Worship.

Psal. 118. compar'd with Acts 4. must needs, saith Mr. Warren, be meant the day of Christ's Resurrection; and doth not the Spirit speak expresly, this is the day the Lord hath made? it is a day of the Lord's making; and will he [that is Tillam] make nothing of that? what else can be made of it, but a Prediction of a Divine Institution, which is equivalent to a Precept; especially when 'tis expounded by an Apostolical Practice, as this hath been? what can a day (made long before in respect of Creation) be stiled the day which the Lord hath made then in respect to a Divine Institu­tion? an Institution then it is, and that on the occasion of Christ's Resurrection.

Fifthly, My next Argument to prove that the [Page 215] Lord hath appointed the first day of the Week as a day of Rest and solemn Worship, shall be taken from those clear Examples we have in the New Testament of the Disciples, and Churches of Christ meeting together in God's Worship upon this day.

1. Let this be considered, That that day which the Saints and Churches in the Apostles time observ'd, must be the precise day in every week, which ought to be kept till our Lord comes again. And,

2. That an Apostolical Precedent or Exam­ple is equivalent, or of like Authority with an Apostolical Precept: so that had we no more than this, it would be a sufficient warrant for the observation of this day.

Now as the observation of the first day, as I have proved, hath its Rise, Foundation and In­stitution from the Resurrection of our Lord from the dead; so we find on that very day the Apostles were assembled, Joh. 20. 19. tho Thomas was not there; and our Lord on that day appear'd unto them: first in the morning of that day, to Mary Magdalen, Mark 16. 9. and after that (perhaps about Noon) he appeared in another form to two of them as they walked in the Coun­try: And in the Evening of the same day he appeared to many of the Disciples together. Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the Disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, Ver. 19. came Jesus and stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. Observe how the Holy Ghost records it, the same day; again, the first day of the week is twice men­tioned, that we no doubt should take notice how he approved of their assembling on that day, and of his honouring this precise day by [Page 216] his appearing three times to one or another of them upon it.

And then after eight days, again his Disciples were together, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you, Joh. 20. 26.

Observe, that here was one seventh day or Jewish Sabbath, between the time of their first assembling and his appearing to them, and the second assembling and his appearing. And I shall prove anon, by an express Text, that he did not appear on any other day of the week be­twixt these two first days.

Object. 'Tis objected, It was not the next first day, but after eight days.

Answ. 1. Tho this makes nothing for their seventh day, yet would they have it to be on the second day of the week, rather than on the first, having no mind to honour that Day Christ hath honoured.

2. But this pretended Objection is a meer Figment or idle Dream. Their second meeting, saith Dr. Young, Pag. 5. Cyril, l. 12. in Joh. p. 10, 26. was the eighth day from the first inclusive. Cyril affirms it was the eighth or Lord's-day, the first and last being included.

What tho it be said after eight days? is it not also said that Christ after three days should rise again? Mark 8. 31. yet our Lord rose from the dead on the third day of his Burial, not after the third day.

So also 'tis said, Luke 2. 21. When eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the Child, i. e. on the eighth precise day; it was not on the ninth, for the Holy Ghost speaks of the eighth day current, and not finished. So here, after eight days, or on the eighth day, is all one.

It might also be on the evening of the eighth [Page 217] day. But see what Dr. Wallis saith to this, who gives many Instances to the same purpose:Christian Sabb. p. 20, 21, 22. What we call (saith he) a third day Ague, the Latins call a Quartan; and what we call every other day, they call a tertian. Joh. 2. 19. Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up again; that is, on the third day. They tell Pilate, This Deceiver said, After three days I will rise again (meaning thereby the third day after inclusively) and therefore they pray that the Sepulchre may be made sure till the third day, not longer.

After eight days,Jewish Sabb. p. 170. saith Mr. Warren, were come, that is, on the eighth day, which reckon­ing the Resurrection-day inclusively, was just that day sevennight, or the next first day of the week.

Moreover, let it be considered, that this was (as I hinted before) the second solemn Appa­rition of our blessed Saviour after he rose from the dead. For read Joh. 21. 14. when he ap­pear'd the next time to them, 'tis said, This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his. Disciples after he was risen from the dead: tho this was not on the first day (I mean the third time he appeared to them) for they were then a fishing. Yet note, that they neither met together, nor did he ever appear to them (as we read) on the seventh Day: no, he was far from honouring the old Sabbath now abolished, after any such manner.

Nor do we read of any solemn assembling, and of his Apparition to them but on the first day only.

And ought not this duly to be considered? Has the Holy Ghost left this on record for no purpose? Therefore note, that here are two Precedents or Examples for our Imitation, to [Page 218] meet or assemble together on the first day of the week.

Were there but one such Precedent that they assembled together, and of our Lord's owning them in it by his most gracious Presence, and by breathing on them, upon the seventh day, (as I have said) we should not further contend with our Brethren in this matter.

Moreover, the third time of their general assembling together, or all with one accord in one place, was I have proved on the first day of the week also, namely on the day of Pen­tecost.

Object. Tho they did meet together on the first day of the week, yet it was for fear of the Jews, and so no Rule for us.

Answ. 1. Evident it is that the Apostles and Primitive Christians did celebrate the first day; and this was either by Divine Appointment, or for some other Reasons peculiar to themselves. If by Divine Appointment, then it is a Rule and Warrant for us; but if for some Reasons peculiar to themselves, then some can assign those Reasons.

The principal Reason alledged is, you hear, for fear of being persecuted, and therefore they could not meet on the seventh day, and this made them observe the first.

2. Persecution must not hinder us in our Obe­dience to God; what, disown God, or his Day of Worship, desert his holy Sabbath? No, had the Seventh-day Sabbath remained, they could not have done thus without great Sin, tho it cost them their Lives.

3. And can it be once imagin'd, had they by slavish fear neglected to keep that Sabbath, and changed the only time of meeting together to another day, that our blessed Lord would have [Page 219] owned them in so doing, or vouchsafed his most gracious Presence to them? no certainly, he would (had he appeared to them) rather severely have rebuked them for their great Ini­quity, and not have said, Peace be unto you.

4. Besides, it would have been a very ab­surd method to avoid Persecution not to meet on the Jewish Sabbath, because they knew how superstitious the Jews were, and that they would not attempt any such thing on their Sab­bath-day, I mean to persecute, imprison, or any way molest them, had they met on that day. And,

5. Of all days of the week they might ra­ther expect to be disturbed, persecuted, or im­prisoned, had they met together on the first day, especially on that very first-day our Lord rose from the dead; because the Guard of Soldiers were commanded to be together till that day, and besure would not soon, or just on the morning of the third day be discharged. Besides, their not finding the dead Body might inrage the Soldiers against the Disciples, should they have been together on that day.

6. We will grant the privacy of their meet­ing, and shutting the doors might be indeed for fear of the Jews: but yet meet they would, and did; and certainly they were led so to do by the Holy Ghost, in that Christ appeared in the midst of them on both those days, when they were so assembled.

Before I close with this, I cannot omit what a Reverend Author hath said about the day of our Lord's Resurrection.

It was, saith he, a remarkable day in many respects.

1. It was the eighth day in a continued reckoning of days, which was a number of [Page 220] greater Perfection than seven in some respects, witness Circumcision—The Antients insist much that this Circumcision on the eighth day was a Type of that eighth day on which our Lord rose again from the dead. Thus Cyprian.

Moreover,The first day of the week a day of great Renown many ways. the first day of the week is a day of greatest Renown, being first in order of Creation, and the first in dignity by our Lord's Resurrection; the first fruits of time, and the first of days, and the only day in which our Lord became the first fruits of them that slept, and the first-born from the dead, that in all things he might have the preheminence: And, say I, the first day of the new World or Kingdom of the Messia, or Gospel-Dispensation.—Again, we have,Mr. War­ren, p. 169. saith he, another conspicuous Mark to note this day by, above all other days in the week.

1. That these glorious Apparitions of our now glorious Redeemer were no common Fa­vors, but choice and special Evidences of his owning Providence, both as to Persons and Times—for as he appeared not to all sorts of Persons, but to some select chosen Witnesses, who were either eminently devoted to his Ser­vice, or design'd to teach others—so neither did he appear to those Persons every day, but principally and most usually upon the day de­signed by the Prophets to his Worship and Service, and now consecrated by his blessed Resurrection.

2. Altho it be said that he was seen of his Apostles forty days between his Resurrection and Ascension, yet was he not seen every day during those forty—that is, by the space of forty days at times, for some times he disap­pear'd.

3. However it may be supposed that our [Page 221] Saviour did appear on other days (as once upon a working day) yet no other day of the Week has he honoured to be denominated as the day of his appearing, but the first day of the Week only.

Not on the second, third, fourth, much less the last of the Week, the seventh day: But the first is expresly and emphatically noted by name, the same day, the first day of the Week Jesus came and stood in the midst of them. Joh. 20. 19.

4. 'Tis evident that our Lord appeared often on this day, gracing it with his Divine Pre­sence: In the morning to Mary Magdalen, and the rest of the Holy Women; in the evening of the same day to the eleven Disciples, when gathered together in the nature of a Church-Assembly.

After eight days, Mr. War­ren, p. 175. or after day-light of the eighth day was past, he appeared again. Christ appeared in the morning of the Resurrecti­on-day, as well as at the evening; very ear­ly as well as very late; to teach us that that whole day is his: 'Tis that day which the Lord hath made; not a piece of the day. Thus (saith he) I remember Dr. Hakewell long ago stopt the mouth of this Objector Tillam., Joh. 20. 19. The same day at evening, being the first day of the Week. He calls it the first day of the Week, tho the evening; to put the matter out of doubt, that this evening was part of the first day of the Week—Thus the Holy Ghost provides against future Errors.Mr. War­ren, p. 178.

By Christ's second appearance that day se­ven-night they might be better instructed, wit­ness their assembling on that day, Act. 2. 1. and Acts 2o.

To conclude this, why our Lord should neg­lect [Page 222] the Jews Sabbath, and afford his glori­ous Presence in Christian Assemblies on the First-day of the Week, thus often, and thus eminently, but to establish this day for Sacred Assemblies, and to teach us on what day espe­cially we may expect his Presence and Blessing, I confess I am to seek.

4. We may take notice of the gracious Spee­ches, Actions, and Transactions of Christ at his several appearings, tending partly to prove his Resurrection, the Ground of our Hope, and the Hinge of the Day. To this purpose, how did he condescend to his poor doubting staggering Disciples, manifesting himself on this day to all their Senses—distinguishing it from all other days by Sabbath-exercises?

1. By his Heavenly Instructions opening the Scriptures,Luke 24. 46. and preaching Peace to his Disciples, and to us as well as them;Ephes. 1. 16, 17. Having slain the Enmity by his Cross, he came and preached Peace. On this day he came with his Olive-branch in his mouth, saying, Peace be unto you.

2. By giving forth Commissions to his Dis­ciples, Matth. 28. 18, 19, 20. John 20. 19. As my Father hath sent me, so I send you. Whose Sins ye remit, they are remitted, &c. and then breathing upon them the Holy Ghost.

3. By convincing demonstrations of his Re­surrection, John 20. 26. to strengthen the Faith of Thomas.

To which some add,

4. His celebration of the Sacred Supper ac­cording to that Promise,Mr. War­ren. I will no more drink of the Fruit of the Vine, until that day I drink it new in the Kingdom of God: That is, after I rise from the dead, which therefore 'tis like he then did; yea, then he broke Bread, and was known of his Disciples in breaking of Bread as [Page 223] he sate with them (not at Meat, Luke 24. 30. as we read it) the word only implys his gesture of sit­ting. Thus Mr. Warren. [...].

'Tis probable he did again celebrate the Sa­cred Supper among them; for breaking of Bread commonly alludes to that: and his be­ing known to them in breaking of Bread, may denote that Ordinance. But this is very doubt­ful.

Another indelible mark of Honour fixed up­on the First-day of the Week, is the Mission of the Holy Ghost, or the sending the Promise of the Father as a Royal Gift of Christ upon his Coronation-day; such a Gift as was never gi­ven before: And that the day of Pentecost was the First-day of the Week I have fully proved.


Proving the First-day of the Week to be the special Day of Solemn Worship under the Gospel, from Acts 20. 7. and from Rev. 1. 10. in which last place it is called the Lord's Day.

HAving passed through five Arguments to prove the First-day of the Week to be the day which Christ hath appoint­ed for his Solemn Worship under the Gospel, I shall proceed to the next Argument.

Sixthly, Because the Churches and Disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ met together upon this day to break Bread, &c. Acts 20. 7. And upon the First-day of the Week, when the Disci­ples came together to break Bread. This was the day, it appears, on which they met together, not only for preaching, hearing, praying, &c. but also to celebrate the Lord's Supper.

1. Observe, 'tis said in the Context, that Paul stayed at Troas seven days. And by the way note, that he was there upon one of the Jews Sabbath-days, but then the Church met not together; and it is evident also that Paul waited till the First-day came, that he might not only preach to them when they were gene­rally assembled together, but also celebrate the Lord's Supper before he departed.

Now that this was the First-day of the Week, none can reasonably deny: But since Mr. Banfield, Mr. Smith, Mr. Soarsby, and o­thers, do doubt of it, take what divers [Page 225] Learned Men have said; and first Dr. du Veil.

‘Vpon the first day of the Week;Duveil on Acts 20. p. 150, 151. that is, that day, as Sozomon saith, which is called the Lord's Day, which the Hebrews called the first day of the Week,Hist. Eccl. Ch. 8. but the Greeks dedicated it to the [...] the Table of Canons lately publised by the famous John Baptist Cotele­rius: It was not before Christ's Resurrection called the Lord's Day, but the first Day; but af­ter the Resurrection it was called the Lord's Day, the Lady of all Days, &c. We have the name of the Lord's Day in Rev. 1. 10. in Ignatius his Epistle to the Trallians and Magnesians: And sometimes in Clement's Institutions; also in that place of Ireneus, which the writer of the Answers to the Orthodox in Justin Mar­tyr hath preserved to us—’

When the Disciples came together—from this place, and that in 1 Cor. 16. 2. is gathered, that the Christians did then use upon the first day of the Week to keep up solemn Meet­ings. Justin saith, Vpon the day called Sun­day, all that live in Citys or Country meet in one place.

This Meeting (another saith) was upon the first day of the Week [...]:Shepherd on the Sab. p. 215. Which phrase, tho Gomarus, Primrose, Heylin, and many others go about to translate thus, viz. upon one of the days of the Week, yet this is suf­ficient to dash that Dream.

That [...] signifys on the first day of the Week,Baxter in answ. to our Opponents, p. 157. the generality of the Anti­ents both Greeks and Latins agree; whose Te­stimony about the sense of a word is the best Dictionary. And the same Phrase used of the day of Christ's Resurrection by the Evange­lists, proveth it. Had it been said that Paul abode seven days at Troas, and on the seventh [Page 226] day of the Week when the Disciples came toge­ther to break Bread, no doubt but these Sab­batarians would have made this no small proof to observe the old Jewish Sabbath; and I con­fess it would have been a good Argument for their practice; or had Paul [...] the Churches observed the seventh day: and yet they will not allow it to be a proof for the observation of the first day.

Dr. Wallis tells us,Christian Sabbath, p. 30, 31. that Mr. Bamfield urg'd, that [...] is Greek for one, and therefore [...] may as well be rendered one day of the week, as the first day of the week.

Answ. Surely (saith the Doctor) he is not in earnest; such trifling doth more hurt than help his Cause. No doubt but when they met, it was one day of the week, we need not be told it; nor need the word week be added, he might have said one day; nor need he have said so much: But this Author cannot think (nor doth he) that [...] doth any where signify other than the first day of the week.

In the whole Story of Christ's Resurrection, and what followed on that day, in all the four Evangelists, we have no other word but [...].

The Latin word pridie is a derivative (or compound rather) from prae, prior; and postridie from post, posterior: and accordingly (in Latin) pridie Calendarum must signify a day before the Calends. But can any man think it is meant of any day? No, but the next day before.

So if we say, Christ was crucified one day before the Sabbath, and rose again one day af­ter the Sabbath: This one day is the next day. And so any man who hath not a mind to cavil will understand it. And so [...], one [Page 227] day after the Sabbath, must needs be understood of the next day after the Sabbath, nor is it ever used in any other sense. If it were to be un­stood of any day indefinitely, it should be [...], some day after the Sabbath; not [...], one day after. Thus Dr. Wallis.

See how hard these men are put to it, in la­bouring to cast away, nay tread under-foot the glorious day of our Lord's Resurrection. And 'tis strange to see how men, to maintain their Errors, will quarrel and find fault with the Translation of our Bible.

'Tis manifest therefore,Dr. Wallis, p. 32. that there was a Re­ligious Assembly of the Christian Congregation at Troas, on the first day of the week, for cele­bration of the Lord's Supper, and preaching; and Paul with them: which I take to be the celebration of the Christian Sabbath.

Obj. However this, Mr. T. Bamfield says, is but one Instance.

Answ. True (saith the Doctor) this is but one (but we have heard of more before, and shall hear of more by and by) yet this one is more than he can shew for more than two thou­sand five hundred years, from God's resting on the Seventh-day, Gen. 2. 3. till after Israel was come out of Egypt, Exod. 16. during which time he would have us think the Seventh-day was constantly observed. And if he could shew any one Instance of Enoch, Noah, Abraham, or others, where such a Religious Assembly for the Worship of God was held on the Se­venth-day in course from the Creation, he would think his Point well proved, tho no more were said of it than is of this.

Whereas now as to the time from thence to the Flood, he brings no other Proof, but that Abel, Enoch, and Noah were good Men (as no [Page 226] [...] [Page 227] [...] [Page 228] doubt but they were) and therefore it is to be presumed they kept a Sabbath, and that upon the seventh Day: which is to beg the Question, not to prove it. Thus the same Author.

Object. But it is objected that it was an oc­casional and accidental meeting for common eating.

Answ. 1. It was a full Assembly, that is evi­dent: for some were fain to get up into the Windows three stories high, as Eutychus, ver. 8. the lower Room would not hold them; there­fore it was no small meeting.

2. 'Tis said, they came together to break Bread. What, is Paul so thoughtful of eating and drinking, to refresh his Body with them, as to stay seven days for that? No, no, it was a better Feast he hunger'd after,See Mr. War­ren, p. 201. to break Bread, saith the Text; to receive the Eucharist, says the Syriac Translation, that is, to receive the Lord's-Supper upon the Lord's-day.

3. But why must Paul break the Bread to them? ver. 11. had it been common Bread, no doubt but good Manners had prevented that, and not put him upon any such Service as to cause him to carve for them all.

4. We know the celebration of the Lord's-Supper is call'd breaking of Bread, Acts 2. nor is there reason to conceive it was any o­ther sort of breaking of Bread, but that this is meant here.

That it was no festival Day, not the first day of unleavened Bread, Mr. Hughes has proved. But there is reason,Hughes on the Sab. p. 160, 162. saith he, to believe this was sacramental Bread; for the Church came toge­ther to break this Bread (so they were never said to do in breaking any other kind of Bread) and Paul brake that which was properly Bread among them; but for breaking of Bread to the hungry, it is not always meant of Bread lite­rally, [Page 229] but of means whereby they may procure them Bread and Necessaries. Neither, saith he, did the Church purposely come together for this, but rather sent it from House to House. Nothing hinders then but that this Bread bro­ken, put synec [...]ochically as a part for the whole, doth note the Lord's-Supper. Take what Dr. Du-Veil has said.

To break Bread; Du-Veil on Acts 20. 7. to wit, that was consecra­ted to be a Symbol of the Body of Christ, offered for us upon the Cross. Hence the Syrian render it, That we might break the Eucharist. The Arabick, that we might distribute the Body of Christ. The Ethiopick, To bless the Table. All understood it of this holy Rite, by which the Lord Jesus would have the memory of his bitter Death to be celebrated by his Disciples. Compare this with what he says on Acts 2. 42, 46.

Object. Again it is objected, That they did not break Bread on the first day, because Paul continued preaching till midnight.

Answ. 1. It was principally to this end they came together on the first day, which shews it was their usual Practice so to do.

2. They might break Bread first, and did no doubt; and then Paul might renew his Speech, and continue preaching till midnight. The or­der of words in a historical Relation are not always to be followed.

3. They did break Bread; and if it was after midnight, yet that extraordinary occasion of Paul's preaching, being ready to depart, might be by the Lord dispensed with, tho the proper season to administer that Ordinance be on the first day of the week. For who will say, that Ordinance upon an extraordinary occasion may not be administred on another day of the week? [Page 230] so that tho this should be granted, I see not how it hurts our Cause.

Object. The Greek reads it first of the Sab­baths; and say what you will, 'tis doubtful what day this was.

Answ. Dr. Wallis has said enough to clear this to all that are willing to be satisfied:Dr. Young's Lord's-day, p. 69. yet I shall add another learned Writer; Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. in which place (he shews) 'tis the same called by the Evangelists [...] Mat. 28. 1. Mark 16. 1. Luk. 24. 1. John 20.: so in those places una Sabbatorum must be expounded by the Lord's-day, saith Chry­sostom Hom. 45. in 1 Cor., whose Interpretation Hierom allows, and expounds the reason thereof; ad Hebidum quaest. 4. because, saith he, every week is divi­ded into the Sabbath, into the first, and second, and third, and fourth, and fifth, and sixth days; which the Heathens call'd by the names of their Idols and Elements: and therefore in those Fathers opinion, una Sabbatorum (by Enallage of the plural number for the singular; for it's seldom read in the singular number in the Old Testament, which the Writers of the New Te­stament do imitate) and prima Sabbatorum are all one: for the name of Sabbath among the Antients denoteth not only the last day of the week, but the whole week.—The Hebrews called the whole week Sabbath. And in this sense is the Pharisee to be understood about the Sabbath—he glories of fasting [...], quasi twice a Sabbath: There by Sabbath we must of necessity understand the whole week, by an Hebraism, and not the last day thereof. For the Pharisees (as most learned Searchers of Hebrew Antiquities have often observ'd, which thing Epiphanius put us in mind of) insti­tuted two Feasts every week,Cont. Haer. l. 1. c. 10. namely on Mon­day and Thursday: therefore the Lord's-day [Page 231] was called [...], or una Sabbatorum, as in the Evangelists and Apostles, so in the Writers of the following Age. He that will look into their Writings, shall find Examples enough.

Thus this place doth sufficiently tend to prove, with [...] other Text before mentioned, that the first day of the week the Gospel-Churches did observe as the special day of sa­cred Worship; and that it was the first day of the week, the generality of the Antients both Greek and Latin, it is evident, do agree.

Moreover, here are many things worthy of our Consideration.

(1.) That this meeting was for publick Wor­ship, as preaching, breaking of Bread, &c.

(2.) That the Holy Ghost on purpose re­cords the precise day; Paul having waited at Troas the six former days, till this day, the first day of the week, came: tho no doubt they might have some other private occasional meet­ings on other days before, for Paul besure was not idle.

(3.) That their coming generally then toge­ther, was not new, nor occasional, but their common practice, or usual day of assembling to­gether, to preach and administer the Lord's-Supper.

(4.) It is clear, that by a special applying of these Exercises to that Day, and by men­tioning that Day to this end, it was their most solemn Day in season to meet upon, and that the old Sabbath was not, but was abolished with the Covenant of Works.

(5.) Nor is it likely that Paul would have stay'd there, who was ready to depart, had not that day been the day of solemn Worship, when perhaps many in the adjacent places came [Page 232] together. Nor would they have slipt over the seventh Day, without any notice taken of that; for it necessarily shews they had no regard to the old Sabbath: which the Disciples would be­sure never have done, if there had been so great a Sanction for that day as for the first day of the week.

(6.) As Dr. Owen notes,On the Sab. p. 390. the Disciples came to­gether without an extraordinary warning, or be­ing sent to, or call'd together in answer to their Duty; which they were accustomed so to do. Such, saith he, is the account that Justin Martyr gives of the Practice of all Churches in the next Age, i. e. on the day called Sunday there is an Assembly of all Christians, whether living in the City or Country; and because of their constant breaking of Bread on that day, it was called Dies Panis. August. Epist. 118. And Athana­sius proved that he brake not a Chalice at such a time,Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 22. because it was not the first day of the week when it was used.

And whosoever reads this Passage without prejudice, will grant, that it is a marvellous, adrupt and uncouth Expression, if it do not signify that it was the common observance a­mong all the Disciples of Christ, which could have no other Foundation, but that only laid down before, of the Authority of the Lord Christ requiring it of them.

And, saith he, I doubt not but Paul preach'd his farewel Sermon (after all the ordinary Ser­vice of the Church was perform'd) which con­tinued till midnight. And all the Objections I have met with against this Instance, amounts to no more than this, i. e. that the Scripture says that the Disciples met together to break Bread, yet indeed they did not so. And this, by what the Doctor says, vanishes into Smoak.

[Page 233] 1. From the whole I may argue: If the Apo­stles and Primitive Christians did observe the first day of the week as their prime and chief time for solemn Worship in season, and passed over the old seventh Day; then is the first day of the week, and not the seventh, that pre­cise Day Christ has appointed to be observ'd in his solemn Worship under the Gospel. But this was the prime and chief time for solemn Worship in season, &c. Ergo.

2. And if those meetings on the first day were not such as used to be formerly on the seventh day, I desire to know a reason, 1. Why their Meetings on the first day should be parti­cularly recorded, rather than their Meetings on the seventh. 2. And why also the one is so oft mentioned, i. e. their Meetings on the first day, and no mention at all that they met on the seventh day in the New Testament, from the Resurrection of Christ, as a Church-assem­bly to worship God, or discharge any part of Religious Duties; nor of their meeting on the second, third, fourth, &c.

Object. But it seems as if they came not to­gether till the evening of this day, tho it was the first day of the week; and so it proves not that this whole day ought to be kept in solemn Wor­ship.

Answ. For this there is not the least shadow of Proof. What tho Paul continued his Speech till midnight; might not some other Ministers spend the former part of the day in Preach­ing, Exhortation, or in Prayer? Or, might not Paul (as some of us do) preach twice himself on that day, and they refresh themselves about the middle of the day? I find one Author speak­ing thus:Durham on the Ten Command. p. 264. Paul spending this whole day in that Service, and continuing his Sermon till midnight [Page 234] (yet accounting it still one day) in solemn meeting, doth confirm this Day to be more than an ordina­ry day, or than other days of the week, as being specially dedicated to these Services and Exer­cises, and totally spent in them. It is said, that they came together on the first day of the week; and no doubt but it was in the morning of that day, for so we find they did on the same day of the week, Acts 2. 1, 2. for when Peter be­gan to preach, it was but the third hour, which is our nine of the Clock in the morning.

Sixthly, The Lord's day the first day of the week, Rev. 1. 10. My sixth Argument to prove that the first day of the week ought to be observed as a day of Rest and solemn Worship under the Gospel, shall be taken from that Appella­tion given to this day, Rev. 1. 10. where it is called the Lord's-day; I was in the Spirit on the Lord's-day. Surely this Royal Name or Ti­tle adds no small honour to this illustrious Day: as it was the first day of Time men­tioned in the beginning of the first Book of the Bible; so it is the last day of Fame noted in the beginning of the last Book of the Bible, to the Praise of him who is our Alpha and Omega. The very Name speaks the Lord Christ to be the Author of it,Mr. War­ren, p. 191. who upon the day of his Re­surrection was declared both Lord and Christ. I find, saith my Author, an elegant and pious Poem written by Sedulius an Antient ChristianVid. Six­ti Senensis Biblioth. Sanct. p. 308. Jerom's Junior, being by him translated to this effect:

After sad Sabbaths th' happy Day did dawn,
Whose lofty Name from Lord of Lords is drawn:
A blessed Day, that first was grac'd to see
Christ's rising, and the World's Nativity.

[Page 235] I shall endeavour to prove that after Christ's Resurrection and Ascension there was a pecu­liar Day belonging to the Lord above any other day of the week; and that this Day was not the old Jewish Sabbath-day, but the first day of the week.

1. That there was a peculiar Day, or one pre­cise Day of the week observed to the Lord, in which the Churches assembled together for the Worship of God, none will deny: God lays claim to one day in seven as his Day.

2. And now that this was not the seventh day of the week appears, because we no where read that any one Gospel-Church ever assem­bled together on that day from the Resurrecti­on of Christ. Now if that had been the Day the Lord Christ had appointed as Mediator and Lawgiver, besure we should have had it men­tioned in some place, as the very day in which the Churches, or at least some one Church did meet together: but this we do not find, there­fore that is not, cannot be the day.

3. We read of their meeting together no less than four or five times, from our Lord's Resurrection and after his Ascension, on the first day of the week, Joh. 20. 19. and ver. 26. Acts 2. 1, 2. ch. 20. 7. to which I might add 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2.

4. No doubt the Apostle John, when he says on the Lord's-day, refers to a certain particular Day well known to all the Churches to whom he was to write, nay known to all Believers and Saints of that time.

5. And evident it is, that the Jewish Sabbath-day is no where, either in the Old or New Te­stament, Isa. 58. 3. called the Lord's Day, tho it is called the Lord's Sabbath, and the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. Lord in the Old Testament (as [Page 236] one observes) is the usual name of God indefi­nitely, Dr. Walls, p. 46. without particularizing this or that of the three Persons: And the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, doth not appropriate it to the second Person, more than to the first or third. And tho the second Person, or Christ considered as God, made the World, and gave the Ten Commandments, as well as he gave forth all the Ceremonial Law, the three Persons being the same one God; yet Christ is contradistin­guished, i. e. referring to his Human Nature, or the Anointed of God, as Mediator or God­man: And [...], the Lord in the New Te­stament is commonly and peculiarly applied to our Lord Christ, as 1 Cor. 8. 6. But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, &c. So Eph. 4. One Lord—one God and Father, &c. and to this Lord doth the Day here refer. I [...] the fourth Commandment, that which is cal­led the Sabbath of the Lord thy God (speaking of Israel) is meant of God indefinitely, and not of one Person contradistinguished to the o­ther Two.

The Work of Creation is commonly ascribed to God the Father, and so the old Seventh-day Sabbath is properly the Father's Day, not Christ's, tho all the three Persons created the World.

6. This day is called the Lord's Day, in a like sense as the Holy Supper is in some places called the Lord's Supper; 1 Cor. 10. 21, 22. ch. 11. 27. in which places is meant the Lord Christ, God and Man. This may answer their common Objection, viz.

Object. It might be called the Lord's Day in respect of God the Creator, not of Christ the Re­deemer; and therefore may be meant the Seventh-day Sabbath: Besides, the World was made by [Page 237] Christ, and he gave the Law on Mount Si­nai.

I further tell them, this Name or Appel­lation [Christ] refers to our Lord as Media­tor, or as he is God and Man: But the second Person was not God and Man when the World was made, or when the Law was given on Mount Sinai. Tho the second Person, or Christ as God, created the World, and with the Fa­ther and Holy Ghost is that one God that gave the Law; yet Christ the Anointed, or as Me­diator, God in our Nature, actually existed not till the fulness of time was come.

(2.) And why may not they call the Lord's Supper, and the Lord's Table so, with respect to God the Creator, or Christ as Creator?

(3.) Consider that in the New Testament Christ as Mediator is actually exalted to be Lord of [...]; of all Persons, Men and Angels, and of all things: For to this end Christ both died, and rose again and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living, Rom. 14. 9.

(4.) So that as the term Lord is peculiarly a­scribed to Jesus Christ as Mediator, so cer­tainly is the day here called his Day. And as the Supper is called the Lord's Supper, because he instituted it, and it wholly refers to Christ; so the first day is called the Lord's Day, because the Lord Christ instituted or appointed it as the special Day of his Worship, and as it re­fers to his glorious Resurrection.

Object. If the Scriptures be the Rule to judg whether that day be not the Lord's Day, which (and which only as distinguished from other days of the Week) the Son of Man is Lord of?

Answ. 1. Christ is Lord of all days no doubt, because he is Lord of all things; but the Se­venth-day Sabbath is no where appropriated to [Page 238] Christ as Mediator, nor ever called the Lord's Day.

(2.) When 'tis said in the New Testament, that the Son of Man is Lord also, or even of the Sabbath-day; he shews that it was in his power to dispose of it, for he gives this as a reason for his doing that which the Pharisees counted Sab­bath-breaking, and by which he oftentimes offended them. And so it is far from being a reason of his establishing it to abide a Sabbath in his Kingdom-state. And, as one well ob­serves, it seems plainly to mean, that that being a positive Law belonging to Moses, our Lord had power to change it, or dispense with it, as well as other Positive and Mosaical Laws. As it is said,Eph. 1. 22. He hath made him Head over all things to the Church, not Head to all things: So he is Lord over all Days, but all are not separated to his Worship.

As it is said,Joh. 17. 2. Thou hast given him Power over all Flesh—So it may be said, thou hast given him Power over all Days, that he may sanctify one to his own peculiar service and use, and leave the rest common to us to work in.

7. There is,On the Sab. p. 223. saith Mr. Shepherd, no other day on which mention is made of any Work or Action of Christ, which might occasion a holy day, but this only of his Resurrection, which is exactly noted of all the Evangelists to be the first day of the Week; and by which work he is expresly said to have all Power given him in Heaven and Earth, Mat. 28. 18. and to be actually Lord of the dead and living. Rom. 14. 9. And therefore why should any other Lord's Day be dreamed of? Why should Mr. Brabourn imagin that this day might be some superstitious Easter-day, which happens once a year? The Holy Ghost, on the contrary, not setting down the Month, [Page 239] or Day of the Year, but the Day of the Week wherein Christ rose; therefore it must be meant of a weekly Holy-day, here called the Lord's Day.

8. This was the day in which Christ ceased from his W [...]k, and rested, as the Father ceased from his Work, and rested on the Se­venth-day; and therefore this is his Day, as the other was the Father's Day; there being a day remaining to him, and to us thro him, from the same foot of account in the times of the Gospel, as we have proved.

9. That 'tis this day which is called the Lord's Day, because of his frequent appearance on it after his Resurrection, and because after his Ascension he crown'd it with that miraculous effusion of the Holy Spirit, to put a Glory upon it, and to confirm it as that day appointed for his People to wait upon him in.

10. John, Owen on the Sab. p. 292. in calling it the Lord's Day, did not surprize the Churches with a new Name, but denoted to them the time of his Vision, by the name of the Day, which was well known to them. And there is no solid reason why it should be so called, but that it owes its pre­eminence and observation to his Institution and Authority.

And no man who shall deny these things, can give any tolerable account how, when, and from whence this day came to be so called: it is the Lord's Day, as the Holy Supper is cal­led the Lord's Supper, by reason of his Institu­tion.

11. Because (as I have proved) the Lord hath made it, therefore it is called the Lord's Day. This is an Argument (saith a Reverend AuthorMr. Will. Fenner on the Sab. p. 81.) used by the Church of God in all Ages, for twelve hundred years. St. Austin [Page 240] used it in his time. The Psalmist prophesieth of the Resurrection of Christ; [...]sal. 118. [...]4. The Stone which the Builders refused, is beeome the Head-stone of the Corner: This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes. Our Lord (saith he) expounds it of his Crucifixion and Resurrecti­on; This is the Day the Lord hath made. And we desire to be built upon this Corner-stone; We will be glad and rejoice in this day, we will keep it as a glorious day, a day of Thanks­giving and rejoicing in God—

Again (he saith) it was prophesied that the first day of the Week should be the Sabbath-day, i. e. the Lord's Day: Isa. 11. 10. In that day there shall be a Root of Jesse, which shall stand up for an Ensign to the People; and to him shall the Gentiles seek, and his Rest shall be glorious. Not only the Father's Rest shall be glorious, as when he had created the Heaven and Earth, and rested on the Seventh-day; but Christ's Rest shall be glorious: for all Divines agree that the Prophet speaks of the Rest of Christ from the Work of Redemp­tion. As God the Father rested from his Work, and his Rest was glorious for four thou­sand years together; so Christ's Rest from his Work shall be glorious. Thus Mr. Fenner.

Object. Perhaps some will say, This only re­fers to the Gospel Spiritual Rest which we have by Christ, and not to a peculiar Day of Rest.

Answ. The Rest spoken of here may be meant of that; and from thence we have also a day of Rest allowed us: And by comparing this with Heb. 4. I can't see but it clearly has re­spect to this Day of Rest, the Lord's Day, be­cause the Seventh-day is called the Father's Day of Rest; and the day of Christ's Resurrection is also Christ's Day of Rest, as we have proved.

[Page 241] Object. It may refer to the Great Lord's Day,Rev. 20. 12. the Day of the last Judgment: I saw the dead, &c. for a thousand years with the Lord is as one day. Thus the Sabbatarians.

Answ. (1.) These men would have it to be any day, rather than the very day the Holy Apostle means, i. e. the First-day; one while 'tis the day of Christ's Birth, or the day of his Death, or some Feast-day, or else the day of Judgment: whereas we find the Gospel-Church observed no day but the First-day of the Week, the day of our Lord's Resurrection.

(2.) There is a great difference between these two Phrases, the Lord's Day, and the Day of the Lord: for such an Interpretation of the Lord's Day would render it an uncer­tain time, and so directly cross the scope of John in setting down,Mr. Ley Sund. Sab. (1.) The Place where. (2.) The Day when. (3.) The Vision it self. And, as one observes, it is void of all judgment to take it for the Day of Judgment: for in the readiest construction of the words, St. John spoke of a Day that was in being before he had the Vision, and a Day well-known to the Churches at that time. But was the Day of Judgment then come, or hath it yet been? There are more than a thousand years since John was on that Day in the Spirit, &c. This is an idle dream:Mat. 24. 36. for of that day and hour know­eth no Man.

A Learned Writer answers four Questions on this Text,Mr. Geo. Hughs of Plym. A­phorisms of the Sab. p. 135. Rev. 1. 10.

(1.) How will you prove this to be the First-day of the Week.

(2.) How will it be made good that this Name imports a Sabbath?

(3.) How can it be declared (or proved) that the Lord himself imposed this Name? [Page 240] [...] [Page 241] [...]

[Page 242] (4.) What influence had John upon him in de­claring this Name?

He gives excellent Answers to all these Que­rys: I shall cite but a part of them.

(1.) No indefinite or undetermined time is meant by this day, as some would have it; but 'tis a distinct and determined day, owned by the Lord: the word is plain, the Lord's Day, noting one single day.

(2.) Neither can it refer to the Seventh-day: 'tis as irrational to say this Lord's Day is the old Sabbath, as to affirm the Lord's Supper means the Passover.—This Lord's Day was re­vealed after his coming in the Flesh, but the Se­venth-day long before. As he was revealed newly in the Gospel, to be the one Lord Jesus Christ, our Mediator; so a new day of his was revealed also, which the Church never knew before, viz. his Resurrection, which was noto­riously known to be the Lord's Day.

(3.) He proves it can't be attributed to the day of his Nativity.

(4.) That this Title, the Lord's Day, was not imposed upon any extraordinary time, by rea­son of the great Revelation given out to John therein.

(1.) He was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day, before he received those Revelations, therefore they could not be the ground of this Appellation—To pretend to Prolepsis here, is a miserable shift.

(2.) He writes to the seven Churches in Asia, and informs them of the Time known to them when he had these Revelations, viz. the weekly Lord's Day—It is the Day which he himself made to declare himself to be the Son of God, the chief Corner-stone, the Foundation of the Church.

[Page 243] Secondly, He answers the second Question, viz. That this Title imports a new Day of Rest to be his, P. 140. for four Reasons: One is this; The word used here denoting the Lord's Day, is but once to be found in the New Testament, where we read of the Lord's Supper, and all grant it signifieth an Ordinance where-ever the word is used; and therefore so here.

Thirdly, That the Lord Jesus himself put his Name upon this Day.

(1.) The giving or bestowing of God's Name on any time, thing, or person, is reciprocal with himself; therefore none but the Lord could put his Name upon this day: Who hath the disposing of the Lord's Name but himself?— Will you say the Apostles, or the Church might do it? What, without the Lord's Com­mission or Command? They would not, they durst not; God never intrusted any of them to bestow his Glory, or call his Name upon any thing, but only declaratively from himself.

(2.) All Power in Heaven and Earth was given to the Lord Christ, to settle his Church, and to appoint Ordinances, and to change Times according to the Father's Pleasure: therefore he only authoritatively could change the Sabbath, and put his Name upon this Day.

Fourthly, To the fourth Query he saith, The Influence of Power which the beloved John had in naming this Day, is only ministeral or instru­mental; the Lord Jesus giveth it, and he wrote it. This is the highest of their claim, who are Ministers, by whom Souls are brought to be­lieve the Gospel: And no more was he but a faithful Messenger to declare that to be the Lord's Day, upon which the Lord himself had fixed his Name.

[Page 244] And thus enough hath been said to prove that this day, called the Lord's-day, was the first day of the week: but to put it further out of doubt, in the last place,

12. The Antient Fathers, whose Credit and Authority I see no cause to doubt, have positive­ly declared that it was the first day of the week that John called the Lord's-day.

The first I shall mention is Ignatius,Epist. ad Trall. & Magnes. who was John's Disciple, and writes thus: Let every one that loves the Lord Jesus Christ, keep holy the Lord's-day, which was consecrated to the Lord's Resurrection.

Ignatius, saith my Author, was not only contemporary with St. John, but was his Disciple, or Scholar: now John, according to the best account we can have from Chro­nology, Dr. Wallis Christ. Sab. Part. 1. p. 48, 49. wrote his Revelation in Pa [...]os, whi­ther he was banished by Domitian, in or about the year of our Lord 96; after which he wrote his Gospel, and dy'd anno 98, or 99. and Ignatius dy'd a Martyr under Trajan in the year 107.—How long before his Death Ignatius wrote his Epistle to the Mag­nesians, Dr. Young cites the same Pas­sage also of Ignatius, p. 53. we are not certain; nor is it mate­rial. In that Epistle to the Magnesians, even according to the genuine Edition published by Bishop Vsher out of an antient Manu­script, not that which is suspected, he doth earnestly exhort them not to Judaize, but to live as Christians—not any longer observing the Jewish, but the Lord's-day, on which Christ our Life rose again. It is manifest therefore, saith he, that within eight or ten years after John's writing, the Lord's-day did not signify the Jewish Sabbath, but the first day of the week, on which our Saviour rose again.’—Why should any longer doubt [Page 245] in this matter? besure Ignatius well knew what day it was that John called the Lord's-day, who for some years conversed with that beloved Apostle and Disciple of Christ.

I might to this (saith this Author) add the Testimony of Polycarp, Polycarp. who was also a Disci­ple of John, and collected and published these Epistles of Ignatius, and knew what St. John meant by the Lord's-day.

He proceeds to Justin Martyr,Justin Martyr an. 129. his second A­pology. who saith, He was not converted to the Christian Reli­gion till about the year 129. about thirty years after St. John's Death; yet he lived so soon after, that he could not be ignorant of the Christian Practice, and what they under­stood St. John to mean by the Lord's-day; and how that Day was observed. On that day commonly called Sunday, there is held a Con­gregation or general meeting together of all In­habitants, whether of City or Country; and there are publickly read the Memorials or Monuments of the Apostles, or Writings of the Prophets.—Again, the day called Sun­day we do all in common make the meeting-day, for that the first Day is it on which God from Darkness and Matter made the World, and our Saviour Christ did rise from the dead, &c.

‘In which places, saith he, tho it be not called Dominica The Lord's., but Dies Solis Sunday., (be­cause speaking to a Heathen Emperor) yet it was then solemnly observed.—’

‘'Tis manifest therefore that the Lord's-day, [...], Dominica, or Dies Dominicus, was the known name of a Day so called when John wrote his Revelation; that it was a day of Religious Worship, contradistinguished to that of the Jewish Sabbath, and so observed, and so called by Ignatius within eight or ten [Page 246] years at most after John's writing that Book; which he would not have done if he had not thought it to be so meant by his Master St. John.

‘And in what manner it was observed in their solemn Religious Assemblies, Justin Martyr tells us,’ He also adds Clemens, Ire­naeus, Origen, Tertullian, &c.

To which I might add Pliny that liv'd under Trajan, who, tho a Heathen, could observe how these morning Stars used to meet early on this day,Warren on the Sabb. p. 195, 196. and sing Hymns to Christ; and not only sing his Prai­ses, but celebrate his holy Supper on the Lord's-day.

And 'tis known to have been the common Question put to the Christians by the Pagans, Dost thou observe the Lord's-day?

The usual Answer was, I am a Christian, I dare not intermit it.—O blessed Souls! (saith my Author) because they were Christians, they durst not intermit the Lord's-day, tho they lost their dearest Lives for keeping it.—

The learned Dr. Du-Veil cites not only Igna­tius and Clemens,On Act. 20. p. 150, 151. but Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria, to the same purpose; also Sedulius, and divers other Antient Fathers, as Austin, Maximus, Isidore, and Gregorius Turonensis, who speaketh thus: This is the day of the Re­surrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, which we properly call the Lord's-day.—Eusebius saith, We keep holy the Lord's-day.

Dr. White cites Ignatius his Epistle ad Magnes.Ep of Ely on the Sab. p. 74. Instead of the Sabbath, let every Friend of Christ keep holy the Lord Christ's Day—in memory of his Resurrection,Note, there is a Treatise of Ignatius that is excepted against (called his Epistle to the Philippians) as spurious: see Mr. Perkins Prep. to the Dem. of the Prolem. This was also approved by Dr. Twiss, after compared with the Latin Translation, and two Manuscripts at Oxon. the Day wherein spiritual Life received beginning, and Death was vanquished.

[Page 247] This Encomium, saith the Doctor, which this holy Martyr Ignatius hath stampt as an ho­nourable Character upon the Lord's-day, de­clareth what Esteem the Primitive Church en­tertained of this day.

Moreover, Theodoret has this material Pas­sage, that they did no longer keep the Sabbath, but led their Lives according to the Lord's-day, in which our Life arose, meaning our blessed Lord.

Dionysius, See Mr. War­ren's Jew­ish Sabb. p. 22, 23. Bishop of Corinth, saith, We have spent holy the Lord's-day (or passed thro it) to the end.

Tertullian, who flourish'd about the year 200, saith, On the Lord's-day we hold it lawful to feast Or un­lawful to fast., because it is a day of Joy and Gladness: so that in his time the Title of Lord's-day was appropriated to the first day of the week.

Origen saith, Origen an. 226. The Lord rained Manna from Heaven first upon the first-Day, which is the Lord's-day, Alsted. and upon the Sabbath none. Let the Jews understand that even our Lord's-day was pre­ferred before the Jewish Sabbath.Chron. Patr.

Athanasius's Testimony is also full: Athan. an. 326. The Sab­bath was of great esteem among the Antients, but the Lord hath changed the Sabbath into the Lord's-day—not we by our authority have slighted the old Sabbath, but because it did belong to the Pedago­gy of the Law: when Christ the great Master came, it became useless, as the Candle is put out when the Sun shines. He affirmed also, that the Sabbath and Circumcision were both of them legal Observances.

Moreover, I might cite Austin, Ambrose, Hierom, and many more, who all testify that the Lord's-day was the first day of the week, and observed as the special Day in God's solemn Worship. And so all along down to this day [Page 248] 'twas kept, and observ'd even by our blessed Reformers, as the Lord's-day, or a Day of his appointing, &c. Therefore from the whole we note, it was no Popish Innovation, nor, as Tillam falsly affirms, a Device of Antichrist, who changed Times and Laws, &c. But no more at this time.


Proving there is one day of the week in season to preach the Word, and that it is the first Day. That Collections by Divine Autho­rity are to be made every first Day, &c. and that the Churches did meet on that day. That God hath inflicted dreadful Judgments on such as have profaned the Lord's-day. Several Arguments further urged, shewing when the Lord's-day begins, and how it ought to be observed.

SEventhly, The Lord's Day is that Day in sea­son in which the Word ought to be preached, &c, Another Argument for the obser­vance of the first Day, shall be taken from Paul's Charge to Timothy: Preach the Word, be instant in season, and out of season, &c. 2 Tim. 4. 2. From whence I note, there is one day above all others in the week, as the day in season when the Word is to be preached.

1. In season, implies a fit time for doing a Work; and so here a particular day Christ hath appointed for his Worship, Prayer, Preach­ing, and Administration of all other Ordi­nances.

[Page 249] 2. But if there was not one precise day ap­pointed by Christ to the end, and all days were alike under the Gospel; then on all days the Word would either be in season, or out of season: but since there is a time in season, and times out of season, I argue, there is one spe­cial Day appointed for those great things to be done upon.

3. Solomon saith,Eccl. 3. 1. to every thing there is a season, and a time to every Purpose under Heaven; i. e. a certain set time appointed by God to be ob­served with the greatest diligence to the end for which it is ordained. And hath God set a time to every thing, and for every Purpose and Work; and yet set no particular time for his Worship? This cannot be, for we have proved one day in seven he claims from the fourth Com­mand; and in Gospel-times it must be the first Day of the week, (1.) Because the old Sab­bath is gone. (2.) Because on this day Christ rested from all his Works, as God did from his. (3.) Because this Day he owned and confirmed by the miraculous effusion of his Spirit. (4.) Because on this Day his Disciples met together, and he approved it by his gracious appearance, and preaching Peace to them. (5.) Because 'tis called the Lord's-day. (6.) Because no Church met in a special manner on any other day, in the New Testament. So that this Day is the day in season, or there is none at all; but that can't be, because there is a special season ap­pointed to every thing and purpose under Hea­ven.

4. This Day is the day in season, because it sutes with the state of Gospel-Believers; we first entering into Rest through Jesus Christ, who has done for us all we had to do, and born all those Burdens we were to bear in order to [Page 250] our entering into Rest: therefore it can't sute with us to keep the old Sabbath, which in­joyn'd the Creature to do and live, i.e. to la­bor to do all that God commanded, in obedi­ence even to the whole Law, if ever they would have Rest and Peace. So that the Jews Day shewed they were to work for Life according to the tenor of the first Covenant; but our Day shews we work from Life, and we have Rest, Life, and Peace first, or are justified, and so obey; and this from better, more Evangeli­cal Principles. So that in Comparison of this day, this special season, all other days of the week are out of season for Gospel-work and Service.

Eightly The first day of the week is ap­pointed by Christ under the Gospel to be ob­served, Collections for the poor Saints to be made upon the first day of the week. because all the Gospel-Churches were required this day to make Collections for the poor Saints; 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2. As I have given order to the Churches of Galatia, even so do ye: upon the first Day of the week let every one lay by him as God hath prospered him, that there be no Gatherings when I come.

1. Observe what was the Practice of one Church as a Church, was the Practice of every Church. Besides, Paul saith, that the same thing he had given Orders about in the Churches of Galatia, and so no doubt in all Churches.

2. Paul in causing the Churches to be obe­dient in this matter, received this Authority from Christ, as he intimates plainly enough in 1 Cor. 14. 37. If any Man think himself to be a Prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledg that the things I wrote unto you are the Commandments of the Lord. And elsewhere he shews that with­out the same Authority he durst not make the Gentiles obedient either by word or deed.

[Page 251] 3. Here is a Duty injoyn'd then by Christ's Authority on all the Churches, and not by Paul any other ways than ministerially; which is upon every first Day to make Collections for the poor Saints: they must deposite their Alms all on the same day, which could not be done unless the Churches did assemble upon that day; and besure it was injoyned on that day, because they then did meet together for solemn Worship, and because such Acts of Mercy suted Sabbath-Duties, and were well-pleasing to God.

4. Besides, no Man can assingn a reason why the Churches should be required on every first Day to make Collections for the Poor, if it were not the usual Day in which they assembled themselves together.

Object. That [...] is Greek for one, and there­fore [...] may as well be rendered one day of the week as the first day of the week. Thus Mr. Bamfield on Acts 20. 7.

Answ. Take Dr. Wallis's Answer,Christian Sab. p. 30, 31, 40, 41. viz. Sure­ly this Author cannot think that [...] doth any where signify other than the first Day of the week. Moreover, all who well understood the Greek-Tongue, agree that the word is here the same as in Mat. 28. 1. Mark 16. 2. Luk. 24. 1. Durham on the Com­mands, p. 269. 'Tis clear, saith one, to be the first Day of the week, since the same Phrase used by the Evan­gelists is made use of here by the Apostle, who no question follows the Evangelists.

Moreover, our Adversaries acknowledg, and cannot help it, that by that Greek Phrase used by the Evangelists, is meant the first Day of the week, tho call'd one of the Sabbaths, or the first from the Jewish Sabbath: therefore this is a meer Cavil.

‘Now every one knows (who understand anyDr. Wallis. [Page 252] thing of this nature) that [...] is the proper name of the very day next after the Jewish Sabbath, as much as one a Clock is the proper name of one hour, which is next after twelve: It must be great ignorance, or somewhat worse, thus to object. I will ap­peal to himselfThat is Mr. Bam­field., whether ever he met with that Name in any other sense.’

Object. They must on that Day lay by them as God had blessed them, i. e. then cast up their Ac­counts, tell their Mony, reckon their Stock, com­pute their expences, &c. and not collect Mony, or lay it together on that day.

A wise Objection, saith Dr. Wallis; as tho all this could not be done before (so far as necessa­ry) and they on Sunday put so much into the Poors Box, or give it to the Deacons, &c.

2. According to this childish Objection, they were but bid, as it were, to take so much Mo­ney as they purposed to give out of one Pocket on that day, and put it by it self into another. But I will appeal to them whether this would have prevented any gatherings when the Apo­stle came to them; and no doubt Paul here put them in mind of some extraordinary Occasion, that they might have more Money collected and put together against he came than usually on that Day they might collect: yet it is clear it was all the Churches practice, by the direction of the Holy Ghost, on every First-day when the Churches met together for solemn Wor­ship, to gather Money for their poor Brethren and Sisters.

3. ‘The constant day of the Churches so­lemn assemblings,Owen on the Sabb. p. 391. being fixed, saith Dr. O­wen, Paul here takes it for granted, and directs them to the observance of a special Duty on that day.’

[Page 253] Object. But here is no mention made of any meeting that was, or was to be at this Season, or the least prescription binding the Conscience to the weekly observation of the First-day, for a Sab­bath by divine Appointment.

Answ. As the Doctor saith, this and other Churches were before fixed on the constant ob­servance of the First-day of the Week for the solemn Worship of God; and his directing them upon this Day to make Collections for the Poor, even every First-day, &c. doth fully shew that it was the precise Day of Church-Assemblies, and that among all the Churches. 'Tis enough that on this day the Churches met, not to preach only and make gatherings for the Poor,Act. 20. 7. but to administer the Lord's Sup­per: and we read of none that met as a Church to do any of these things on the Seventh-day. Besides, it is called the Lord's Day; our Lord Christ allows us all the other days to work in, but this is his Day, wholly to be sequestered to his Service, and therefore of divine Institution: Had it been said, on every Seventh-day let every one lay by him, &c. our Opponents would have urg'd it as a great proof for their Sabbath.

‘What some except,Owen, p. 391, 392. saith Dr. Owen, that here is no mention of any Church-Assembly, but only that every one on that day should lay by him what he would give, which every one might do at home, or where they pleas­ed, is exceeding weak, and unsutable to the mind of the Apostle. For to what end should they be limited to a day, and that the first of the Week, for doing of that which might as well, and to as good purpose and advan­tage, be performed at any other time, or on a­ny other day of the Week whatever? Besides, it was such a laying aside, such a treasuring of [Page 254] it in a common Stock, as that there should be no need of any Collection when the Apostle came.’

And now if this Practice and Example of the Primitive Churches be no Rule to us, or bind us not, certainly nothing they did or pra­ctised as Churches, can oblige us: Nay, if so, worse will follow also for if their Example in observing the First-day be no warrant for us, nor it is not our duty from any thing that has been said, to observe the Lord's Day, it will follow that we in Gospel-times are not obliged to keep any special weekly day at all; seeing we are by no Precept nor Precedent obliged to keep the Jewish Sabbath. So that these men from hence appear the chiefest Enemies to any Gospel-Sabbath, or day of Rest and solemn Wor­ship in the World.

Note also,Dr. Wallis. that this day was not observed, or to be observed once only, but as a thing in course, and so presumed by the Apostle when he gave particular Directions concerning a Collection for the poor Saints to be made weekly on that day: And in like manner in the Churches of Galatia, with like direction to them. And we have reason to believe, that it was observed in all other Churches also: for Paul in another case saith,1 Cor. 7. 17. as he ordained in all Churches of the Saints: they all walked by one and the same Rule, and observed besure one and the same day, and discharged the same Duties upon that day.

The First-day of the Week therefore being that on which Christ rose from the Dead, and upon which the Churches met together in one place to break Bread,Acts 2. 1, 2. & 20. 7. and which is called the Lord's Day, and on which they were injoined to make Collections for the poor Saints, besure [Page 255] is that day which our Lord commanded them to observe, while he was with them forty days, giving Commandments to his Apostles about things pertaining unto the Kingdom of God, and set­ling the Affairs of the Christian Church. And no doubt the observance of the First-day was one thing he commanded, because on that day they afterwards met together, and were most eminently owned in so doing, Acts 2. 1, 2.

And what signifies their Objection, There is no express Command to observe this Day? As if it must be expressed, as one observes, be it enacted. My Brethren, an approved practice in God's Worship, frequently repeated, attest­ed by Miracles, incouraged by Christ's own Example, with that of the Apostles and Chri­stian Churches, and continued ever since, is evidence sufficient that it is the Will of God that this Day ought to be observed: and such as cannot see it, must remain blind.

As to such as still question whether this was the First-day of the Week, let me note one thing more. Beza One or two Learned Men men­tion this. had an antient Manuscript where it is called the Lord's Day: Let every one on the Lord's Day lay by him, &c. But e­nough was said to that before; it was the First-day of the Week, and therefore the Lord's day.

And if this day had not been more holy, or more fit for this Work of Love than any o­ther, Shepherd on the Sab. p. 219. Paul durst not have limited them to this Day, nor have honoured this Day above any other, yea above the Jewish Seventh-day. Moreover, saith Mr. Shepherd, the Apostle doth not in this place immediately appoint and institute the Sabbath, but supposeth it to be so already (as Mr. Primrose is forced to acknow­ledg) and we know Dutys of Mercy and Charity, as well as of necessary Piety, are [Page 256] Sabbath-dutys: for which end this Day was more fit for those Collections than any other day, being then generally together, and their Hearts warmed under the Word, &c.

There must, saith anotherMr. Dur­ham., be some pecu­liar thing in this Day, making it fit, yea more fit for such a purpose as doing Works of Cha­rity on it, rather than on any other: And the Apostle commanding this in all the Churches, doth necessarily presuppose a Reason why he doth it, as drawn from some fitness of this Day above another.

Now if we will, saith he, enquire, no rea­son can be given but that the Seventh-day Sab­bath was expired, and the First-day instituted in its place, for otherwise any day was alike; yea, the 7th day being the last of the Week, and whereon men usually reckon their week's success, it would seem more reasonable that at the close of the Week they should lay up by them as God had blessed them, than reserve it to the beginning of another Week. The fit­ness then flows from this, that the First-day being the day of their solemn communion with God and one another, and of their partaking most liberally of Spiritual Blessings from him, therefore they should be most warm'd in their Affections, and most liberal in their Communi­cations to such as wanted, especially considering the Jews were to partake of this their Charity, whose Debtors the Gentiles were, according to that in Rom. 15. 26, 27.

I shall close this with what another noteth on this place:Young on the Lord's Day, p. 27. ‘The Apostle did ordain in the Church of Corinth, when they met for Reli­gion weekly (as the Lord's Days returned) Alms should be collected for the Poors use; [Page 257] and what they seem privately to have laid a­side, as their condition permitted, to bestow for the comfort of the Poor; and that which was thus laid aside, they kept with them­selves till the First-day of the Week, when they deposited it with the Rulers of the Church for the Poors use. He that shall more con­siderately weigh the Apostle's Phrase, may well enough see this was his meaning: for he saith [...], &c. i. e. against the First-day in every Week, or when the first of every Week comes; so as it is said among the Grecians, [...], i. e. Water ready for washing ones hands. In like man­ner the Alms which were privately laid aside of every one, were deposited on the First-day of the Week for the help of the needy; and then when the Church met, are said to be gathered, because their Collections were made (of those who privately had laid it aside) on the Lord's Day, or on the First-day of the Week.’

Leo admonished his Hearers, because on the Lord's Day there should be a Collection, to prepare themselves for a voluntary Devotion, and that every one according to his ability might have fellowship in that most Sacred Ob­lation’.

‘From which Testimony one may easily ga­ther, that the Christians laid aside by them­selves their Collections against the Lord's Day, which they deposited with the Rulers of the Church to be bestowed’. Thus Dr. Young.

So that it appears it was on the close of the 7th day, or at the weeks end, that they cast up their Accounts, computed their Stock, and not on the Lord's Day; 'twas not then to be laid [Page 258] aside, but what they had over night laid a­side, on the Lord's Day they put into the Dea­cons hand, and so prevented gatherings when Paul came.

9. And lastly, Those fearful Judgments in­flicted by God on such as have profan'd the Lord's Day, shew it is of Divine Institution. Can any think that Jehovah would punish any Person for neglecting or violating an Humane Tradition, or an Ordinance of Man?

1. A Husbandman grinding Corn in a Mill upon the Lord's Day,I find 2 or 3 Authors citing these very Judg­ments. had his Meal burnt to Ashes.

2. Another carrying Corn on this Day, had his Barn and all his Corn in it burnt with Fire from Heaven the next night after.

3. A certain Noble-man profaning the Lord's Day usually in hunting, had a Child by his Wife with a Head like a Dog, and with Ears and Chaps crying like a Hound.

4. A covetous Woman at Kingsta [...]e in France, 1659. using to work with her Maids on the Lord's Day on Flax, Fire seemed to issue out of the Flax, yet did them no harm, and was quickly quenched: But taking no warning, the third Sunday after it took fire again, and burnt the House, and so terribly scorch'd the wretched Woman and two of her Children, that they died the next day; yet a Child in the Cradle was taken out of the fire alive, and un­burnt.

5. In Paris Garden, 1582. at a Bear-baiting on the Lord's Day, the Scaffolds fell down and slew eight Persons.

6. Stratford upon Avon was twice almost consumed with Fire for profaning the Lord's Day.

[Page 259] 7. There was a Market kept at Tiverton on the Lord's-day: And their Godly Minister told them, some Judgments would fall upon them, which fell out, for on the third day of April 1598 the whole Town (save the Church and a few poor Peoples Houses) consisting of 400 Dwelling-houses, were consumed to Ashes: And again in Aug. 1612. not reforming their evil Practices, the whole Town was again consumed by Fire, save about thirty Houses of poor Peo­ple, with a School-house and Alms-house.

8. Mr. Fenner says that he remember'd above twelve Judgments were shewed within half a year for the breach of the Lord's-day.On the Sab. p. 83, 84.

9. Another Divine says that a Miller had his Mill twice burned down for grinding on the Lord's-day.

Sirs, let all tremble that despise, neglect, or profane the Lord's-day. But pray who can shew one instance of any Judgment of God that ever since Christ's Resurrection fell upon one Person for working, or bearing Burdens on the Jewish Sabbath-day. True, while the se­venth Day continued the Lord's Sabbath, there are on Record Judgments that fell on such as profaned it, but never since.

And tho God doth not usually this way pu­nish Sinners for their bold and daring Sins, and so not some that slight and contemn this Day, yet there is a day coming in which God will reckon with them and set all their Sins in order before their Eyes.

But one thing I have omitted, viz. I find these Sabbatarians would make great Improvement of the Records of Parliament, in which Saturday is called Dies Sabbati, the Sabbath-day.

[Page 260] In Answer take what Dr. Wallis hath said in his Rejoinder to Mr. Bampfield. Pag. 32.

I remember you tell us, Enqu. p. 117, 118. and you mind me of it, p. 40, 75. that I say nothing to it (being it seems a thing on which you lay great weight) i. e. that in the Records of Parliament, and the Courts at Westminster, Saturday is called Sabbati, or Dies Sabbati. True (as supposing by Tradition this day of our week to be what the Jews called the Sab­bath in their week) but do you not know also in the same Records Sunday is called Dies Do­minicus, the Lord's-day? And if those prove Saturday to be the Jewish Sabbath, why should not these as well prove Sunday to be the Lord's-day? All the difference is, as to that you were quick-sighted, but blind as to this. You may observe also that the one is Sabbati, or Dies Sabbati (in the Genitive case, in the same form with Dies Saturni, and as the other days are) but the Lord's-day is Die Dominico in the Abla­tive, meaning (I suppose) that Saturday is the day which had been the Jewish Sabbath, but this the day which is the Lord's-day. Which different Construction seems plainly to intend in our Law a different import of the words: by Dies Saturni, or Dies Lunae, we do not mean a Day instituted by Saturn or the Moon, as by Dies Dominica we do mean the Day instituted by our Lord; like as by Coena Dominica we mean the Supper instituted by our Lord▪ So that these Records do you no Service at all, but Disservice.

I shall here, before I close, add a few Syl­logistical Arguments for our Opponents to answer.

Arg. 1. If the holy Spirit doth write the whole Moral Law of God in the Hearts of all [Page 261] true Believers, but doth not write the Law of the Seventh-day Sabbath in their Hearts; then the Seventh-day Sabbath is no Moral Precept: but the former is true, Ergo.

Arg. 2. The holy Spirit doth convince all Gospel-Believers of all immoral Evils, or of every simple moral Precept; the holy Spirit doth not convince all Gospel-Believers it is an Evil not to observe the seventh Day as a Sab­bath, nor that this is a moral Precept: Ergo, 'Tis not an immoral Evil to work upon that day, &c. Or thus,

Arg. 3. The holy Spirit guides all true Be­lievers into all Truths that result from the holy Nature of God, or that are good, and there­fore commanded; the holy Spirit doth not guide all true Believers to observe the seventh Day as a Sabbath: Ergo, the Seventh-day Sab­bath is no such Truth; &c.

Arg. 4. If the New Testament be a perfect Rule of Faith and Practice, and there is no Precept nor Precedent for the observance of the Seventh-day Sabbath; the Seventh-day Sabbath ought not by us to be observed: but the for­mer is true; Ergo, 'tis not our duty to observe that Day.

Arg. 5. If Christ and Paul after him, have made known or declared the whole Counsel and Will of God, or whatsoever we should be­lieve, observe and practise; but have not made known or declar'd it is our duty to observe the seventh Day, then 'tis not our duty to ob­serve it: but the former is true, Ergo.

Arg. 6. If the Law of the Seventh-day Sab­bath, as given by Moses, belonged wholly, or was annexed to the Judgments of the Mosaical Oeconomy, and the Judgments of the Mosaical Oeconomy belong not to the Gospel-Church; [Page 262] then the Law of the Sabbath, as given by Moses, belongs not to us, but this is so, because Death was the Penalty of the breach thereof; Ergo.

Object. What if we grant that all the ten Commandments belonged, or were annexed to the Mosaical Oeconomy; are all the ten Command­ments abrogated therefore, or not in force to us?

Answ. I have shewed that the whole Moral Law is given forth by Christ considered as Me­diator; and that we are not obliged to observe them as given by Moses: and the precise seventh Day being no simple Moral Precept, but merely Judaical, pertaining to the Covenant of Works, our Lord hath not nor could confirm that Pre­cept in the Gospel: so that it appears the Sabbath only belonged to the Mosaical Oeconomy, and will you affirm that of all the Ten.

One Sabbatarian Mr. Edw. Stennett on the Sab. p. 50. saith, That all the ten Commandments had the Penalty of Death annexed to them to be inflicted by the Magistrate: which, saith he, is an evident distinction between Moral Laws and Laws Ceremonial, &c. Again he saith, Pag. 53. See the Snare bro­ken. the Sabbath having the same Penalty that the other nine have, it convincingly proves the Morality of it.

Answ. 1. This shews that none of the ten Commandments, as given by Moses, are in force to Believers, or oblige the Gospel-Church, but only belong'd to the Jewish Policy as formally deliver'd, Exod. 20. and tho the Moral Law given by Christ as Mediator, doth oblige us, yet the precise seventh Day being no Moral Precept, but only Judaical, is gone, it not be­ing given forth anew in the Gospel, nor could be given with its old Sanction, viz. the Penalty of Death to be inflicted on such that break it, because the Gospel-Church is no Political Body or Civil State, they can't inflict Death on such [Page 263] as transgress this, or other Precepts.

2. Nay, nor ought such to die that profane the holy Name of God, or disobey their Parents, or commit Adultery, &c. by any Law given by Christ in the GospelAnd do not such as affirm o­therwise, strangely Judaize?, those Temporal Punish­ments only belonged to the Mosaical Oeconomy: many in the Gospel-Church, before call'd, were guilty of the gross breach of divers moral Pre­cepts, yet were not to be put to death, Christ came not to take away Mens Lives, but to save them both from temporal and eternal Death.

3. Moreover, it is a grand mistake to say, that the Penalty of Death distinguisheth Moral Laws from Ceremonial: for he that in the days of Atonement did not afflict his Soul,Levit. 23. 29. must die, or be cut off; and whosoever toucheth the Mount, shall be surely put to death.Exo. 19. 13.And he that was not circumcised, must die, or he cut off; so for divers other SinsExod. 30. 33, 38. Lev. 7. 20, 21, 25, 27. & 17. 4, 9. that were not Moral Pre­cepts. Pray read Heb. 10. 28. Paul shews that in this respect we are not come to Mount Sinai, but to Mount Sion, Heb. 12. 18. and sad it is to see any so left, as to endeavour to carry the People back again to that fiery Law, which was so terrible, as the Apostle shews, ver. 21. But it is no marvel they do thus, when they that intimate the Law and Covenant, Exod. 20. was the Covenant of Grace. If I have an Answer (God sparing my Life) you shall see what some of their chief Writers have said as to this, and some other things, that may seem more dis­tasteful to all pious Christians.

Arg. 7. If the first Day was observed as a day of Worship by the Apostolical Church, and no other day of the week; then the first Day is that day of Worship which we should observe: but the first Day was so observed, &c. Ergo.

[Page 264] Arg. 8. If Moses as a Lawgiver abode no longer than till Christ put an end to his Mi­nistration, See Isa. 33. 22, and Christ as Mediator is our only Lawgiver under the Gospel, yet hath not commanded us to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath; then 'tis not our duty to ob­serve it: but Moses as a Lawgiver abode no longer, &c. Ergo.

Arg. 9. If all Sabbaths given to the Jews, without exception, were shadows of things to come, whereof the Body is Christ; then was their weekly Sabbath a shadow: but all their Sabbaths without exception were shadows, &c. Ergo.

Arg. 10. Whatsoever Practice it be that o­pens a door to Judaism, and genders to Bondage, can be no Truth of Christ; but the observa­tion of the old Seventh-day Sabbath opens a door to Judaism, &c. Ergo They plead for the Law as given in Horeb, with the Statutes and Judg­ments..

Arg. 11. Whatsoever Principle and Practice reflects upon the Honour of Christ as Media­tor, King and Lawgiver to his Church, who was more faithful than Moses, can be no Truth of Christ; but the Principle and Practice of the old Jewish Sabbath reflects, &c. Ergo. evident 'tis Christ hath nowhere taught or com­manded it; so that if it be our duty, we must go to Moses's Law for it: and 'tis foolish to say, Christ as Mediator gave the Law of the Decalogue, tho as God he gave not that only, but the whole Ceremonial Law also.

Arg. 12. That Principle and Practice that has many evil and dangerous Consequents at­tending it, is no Truth of God; but the Prin­ciple and Practice of some who keep the se­venth Day, is so attended, &c. Ergo.

To conclude, Let no Christian any more doubt, that the Lord's Day is that day we ought [Page 265] to observe to him in all Sacred Devotion and Piety. Consider,

1. God hath built all things upon Jesus Christ, and so this Day of Rest; wherefore it stands as fast as its Foundation.

2. God the Father declared, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee, (that is, from the dead) and this was on the First-day of the Week.

3. This was the First-day of Christ's King­dom.

4. This Day Christ rested from his Work, therefore this day remains as a day of Rest to us.

5. This Day our Redemption was finished, and Christ received our discharge from Sin and Wrath for ever.

6. On this Day the Typical Sabbath was ceased, and all Shadows of the Law vanquished.

7. In him whom the old Sabbath shadowed forth, must we seek our Rest, and a day of Rest; we in him being freed from all legal Labour, servile Fear, and from the burden of all Sin and Misery.

8. On this Day the Disciples met, and Christ preached Peace to them; and on this day mil­lions of Souls have been converted.

9. On this Day John saw Jesus Christ walk­ing in the midst of the seven Churches in Asia.

10. This Day was confirmed by the miracu­lous effusion of the Spirit.

11. On this Day the Gospel-Churches met to­gether to break Bread, and to discharge all parts of Gospel-Worship.

12. This is the Day when preaching the Word is in season.

13. On this day Collections were made for the Poor in all the Churches of the Saints.

[Page 266] 14. This is the Lord's Day; all other days he allows us to do work upon, but this is whol­ly his own Day; he lays claim to this only, O give it wholly up to him

15. This Day all the Godly have observed in every Age of the Church to these present Times.

16. For profaning this Day, God hath in­flicted many sore and fearful Judgments.

And thus I shall close what I shall say at present for the observation of the First-day of the Week, as a Day of Rest and solemn Wor­ship.

When the Lord's Day begins.

1. Some think we ought to begin it at the time when the Jews began their Sabbath;When the Lord's Day begins. o­thers from Midnight to Midnight; others from Morning to Evening. Take what Dr. Owen saith to this, which I think is very full and clear.

‘Some,Owen on the Sabb. p. 323. saith he, contend that it is a natu­ral Day, consisting of 24 hours, beginning with the evening of the preceding day, and ending with the same of its own; and ac­cordingly so was the Church of Israel di­rected, Levit. 23. 32. Altho that doth not seem to be a general direction for the obser­vation of the weekly Sabbath, but to regard only that particular extraordinary Sabbath which was thus instituted, namely the day of Atonement on the tenth day of the seventh month, vers. 27.

‘However suppose it to belong also to the weekly Sabbath; it is evidently an addition to the Command particularly suted unto the Mosaical Pedagogy, that the Day might com­prize the Sacrifice of the proceeding Evening [Page 267] in the Service of it, from an Obedience whereunto we are freed by the Gospel. Nei­ther can I subscribe to this Opinion; and that because in the Description and Limitati­on of the original Seven Days, it is said of each of the Six, that it was constituted of an Evening and a Morning; but of the Day of Rest there is no such description, it is only cal­led the Seventh-day, without any assignation of the preceding Evening unto it.’

‘2. A Day of Rest, according to Rules of natural Equity, ought to be proportioned to a day of Work or Labour, which God hath granted unto us for our own use. Now this is to be reckoned from Morning to Evening, Psal. 104. 20, 21, 22, 23. Thou makest dark­ness, and it is night, &c.—Man goeth forth to his labour until the evening. The day of La­bour is from the removal of darkness, and the night by the light of the Sun, until the return of them again; which allowing for the alte­rations of the day in the several seasons of the year, seems to be the just measure of our Day of Rest.’

‘3. Our Lord Jesus Christ, who in his Re­surrection gave beginning and being to this especial Day of holy Rest under the Gospel, rose not until the Morning of the First-day of the Week, when the beamings of the light of the Sun began to expel the darkness of the Night; or when it dawned towards Day, as is variously expressed by the Evange­lists: This with me determines this whole matter.’

‘4. Meer cessation from Labour in the Night, seems to have no place in the spiritual Rest of the Gospel to be expressed on this Day, nor to be by any thing distinguished [Page 268] from the Night of any other day in the Week.’

‘5. Supposing Christians under the Obliga­tion of the direction given by Moses before­mentioned, it may intangel them in the anxi­ous scrupulous Intrigues which the Jews are subject unto about the beginning of the Even­ing it self, about which their great Masters are at variance: which things belong not to the Oeconomy of the Gospel. Upon the whole matter I am inclinable to judg, and do so, that the observation of the Day is to be com­mensurate to the use of our natural strength on any other day, from morning to night; and no­thing is hereby lost that is needful to the due sanctification of it: For what is by some re­quired as a part of its Sanctification, is neces­sary and required as a due preparation there­unto.’

1. From what the learned and pious Doctor saith, I infer, that these Sabbatarians do not only Judaize in respect of the Seventh-day it self, but also as to the time when they begin their pretended Sabbath.

2. And as to what he says about the begin­ning of the Lord's Day, I see no just cause to dissent from him, provided none from thence take liberty to end the Day too soon. And I think it would be a reproach to any Person to begin to work before midnight of the Lord's Day, or to suffer their Servants to work after twelve a Clock on the Seventh-day at night; nay, it might be better if they left off soon­er, that so they may not be hindered in God's Service on his Day: for the natural Day with us begins at midnight, and ends at midnight; and tho 'tis the Lord's Day, not the Night, we are to observe in his solemn Worship, yet [Page 269] must we have time for preparation, and after the Day is gone, for Meditation, Prayer, &c. And let none mistake the Doctor, he hints plainly enough, that by way of preparation we ought to begin sooner, and then certainly to continue our meditation after the day is past, till it is fit to go to our natural Rest: and the contrary is a scandal and reproach to Religion and true Piety.

How the Lord's Day should be kept.

Certainly since the Lord's Day, or the First-day of the Week, is the Day of holy Rest and solemn Worship in Gospel-times, it behoveth us to know and consider well how we should keep it, or observe it to the Lord.

1. Evident it is that some are carried away by delusion, who believe all days are alike, and so every day should be kept as a Sabbath; which is nothing less than the design of the Devil, who if he can perswade men that there is no such thing as a Sacred Rest, or any one day required by Authority from Christ, will soon bring them to observe no day at all; and so all Gospel-worship, Religion, Piety, and the special Day of Worship will soon fall together.

2. Nay, and I am satisfied, that one grand cause of the lamentable decay of true Zeal and Piety, and of the grievous witherings a­mong us in these days, is that sad carelesness and looseness about a due and religious obser­vance of the Lord's Day: For when more Con­science was made of the Dutys of this Day, how did Religion and strict Godliness flourish in this Nation, and in the Churches of Christ and godly Families? Nor will it be better till a Reformation be attained in this case.

[Page 270] 3. Yet,On the Sab. P. 317. as Reverend Owen observes, several ‘Instances there are of the Miscarriages of men on the one hand and on the other: Some for­merly, and may be now, think they are ob­liged to keep the Lord's Day after the manner the Jews kept the old Sabbath.’ To which I might add, some are too Pharisaical in this matter. There hath been (saith the Do­ctor) ‘some excess in directions of many given about the due sanctification of the Lord's Day, which indeed he calls severe directions about Dutys,’ and manner of performance; on which some others have taken occasion there­by to seek Relief, and have rejected the whole Command. So that it appears in this, as in many other cases, men are ready to run into extreams on the one hand or the other.

‘Directions,Pag. 21. saith he, have been given, and not a few, for the observation of a Day of holy Rest, which either for the matter of them, or the manner prescribed, have no sufficient warrant or foundation in the Scrip­ture.’

‘Whereas some have made no distinction between the Sabbath as Moral That is, one day in seven, as he calls it, a moral po­sitive else­where., and as Mo­saical, unless it be merely in the change of the Day; and so have endeavour'd to intro­duce the whole practice required on the lat­ter into the Lord's Day.

Nay, as I shall shew you, they have asserted the simple morality of the fourth Command­ment to consist in the observance of the pre­cise First-day of the Week, or the Lord's Day, as the Saturday Sabbatarians do on the Se­venth; which is no small Error on both sides, and is attended, as I have proved, with great Absurdities, and dangerous Consequences.

[Page 271] Therefore if any ask how should we observe the Lord's Day; for we are fully satisfied, say they, that is the Day the Lord hath made as the Day of Rest and solemn Worship under the Gospel.

I answer, First Negatively, not after that le­gal, severe, or strict manner, as was the Jewish Sabbath under the Law. I am perswaded some good Men in the last Century have by an over­heated Zeal, stumbled many godly Christians, by pressing the Lord's Day observance just after the manner of the old Jewish Sabbath; as if one precise Day of Worship was a pure moral Pre­cept. But if the morality of the fourth Com­mand consisted not in the observation of the precise Seventh-day, as I have shewed, besure it doth not in the observance of the First-day, tho it be our Duty, by mere positive Right, to keep it wholly to the Lord. And should we press the observance of the Lord's Day with that severity and strictness the Seventh-day Sab­bath was to be observed, we should bring our People into equal bondage with the Jews of old.

But let us avoid all Extreams on either hand; for as I hinted, some Learned Men formerly And there are too ma­ny of this sort also in our days. opened a door to loosness and licentiousness on the one hand, by not allowing the First-day's observance to be of Divine Institution, and so allowed of Sports and carnal Delights on the Lord's Days: I might mention Mr. Prim­rose, Dr. Heylin, Pocklington, &c. So others 'tis evident have exceeded as much on the other hand; but 'tis best to keep in a medium betwixt both.

Therefore in the Negative,

1. I do not believe it is unlawful to kindle a Fire on the Lord's-day, because 'tis not forbid [Page 272] in the Gospel, as it was under the Law on the old Sabbath-day.

2. I do not believe 'tis unlawful to travel further than a Jewish Sabbath-days Journey; whether to to hear a Sermon, or to visit a sick Person, or the like.

‘We have no bounds under the Gospel,On the Sab. p. 353. saith Dr. Owen, for a Sabbath-days Journy, provi­ded it be for Sabbath Ends. In brief, all Pains or Labour that our Station and Condi­tion in this World, as Troubles may befal us, make necessary, as that without which we cannot enjoy the solemn Ends and Uses of this sacred Day of Rest, are no way incon­sistent with the due observation of it. It may be the lot of one Man to take so much pains, and to travel so far for and in the due Celebra­tion of the Lord's-day, as if another should do the like without his Occasions and Cir­cumstances, it would be a profanation of it.’

3. I do not believe it unlawful to dress a Dinner or Supper on the Lord's-day. ‘Re­freshments helpful to Nature so far as to re­fresh it, that it may have a supply of Spirits to go on chearfully in the Duties of holy Worship (saith the Doctor) are lawful and useful: to macerate the Body with Absti­nences on this day, is required of none; and to turn it into a Fast, or to fast upon this day, is generally condemn'd by the Antients. Wherefore to forbear provision of necessary Food for Families on this day, is Mosaical; and the enforcement of the particular Pre­cepts about not kindling a Fire on this day, baking and preparing the Food of it the day before, cannot be insisted on without a Re­introduction of the seventh Day precisely, to whose observation they were annexed, and [Page 273] thereby of the Spirit of the old Covenant.’

‘1. Provided always these Refreshments be seasonable for the time of them, and not when publick Duties require our attendance on them.’ And,

‘2. Accompanied with singular regard to the Rules of Temperance; As (1.) That there be no appearance of Evil. (2.) That Nature be not charged with any kind of Ex­cess, so far as to be hindered rather than assisted in the Duties of the Day. (3.) That they are accompanied with Gravi­ty and Sobriety, and Purity of Conversa­tion.’

To which let me add, certainly Masters of Families ought to take heed they do not put their Servants upon greater Labour on that dayNor their Beasts nei­ther, since God allows them this one day of the Week for Rest. than needs must, so as to hinder them from a due attendance as often as possible on God's publick Worship.

Now what Dr. Owen saith, quite differs from that overheated Zeal which appeared in some Godly Ministers in former times.

What think you of what Dr. White Bishop of Ely on the Sabbath, p. 235. Mr. Tho. Rogers Pref. before the Arti­cles. re­lates in his Treatise of the Sabbath, concern­ing some Zealots in his time about sixty years ago?

‘I have read, and many there be alive which will justify it, how it was preach'd in a Mar­ket Town in Oxfordshire, that to do any servile Work or Business on the Lord's-day, is as great a Sin as to kill a Man, or to com­mit Adultery.’

‘It was preached in Somersetshire, that to throw a Bowl on the Sabbath-day, is as great a Sin as to kill a Man.’

‘It was preached in Norfolk, that to make a Feast, or Wedding Dinner on the Lord's­day,’ [Page 272] [...] [Page 273] [...] [Page 274] ‘day, is as great a Sin as for a Father to take a Knife and cut his own Child's Throat.’

‘It was preached in Suffolk, (I can name the Man, and I was present when he was con­vened before his Ordinary for preaching the same) that to ring more Bells than one on the Lord's-day to call the People to Church, is as great a Sin as to commit Murder.’

Such unaccountable Zeal hath done no small mischief to the Cause of Christ.

Two things I observe from what the Doctor notes:

1. That these Men thought we are under the like Obligation in observance of the first Day, as the Jews were on their seventh Day.

2. That they thought the Morality of the fourth Commandment consisted in the observa­tion of the Lord's-day, or the first Day of the week, and so is a pure Moral Precept; both which I utterly deny, and the contrary I have proved.

Secondly, in the Affirmative I do say, that the first Day, tho it be of mere positive Right, ought to be observed wholly to the Lord: He that observes a day, let him observe it to the Lord; and day, much more the Lord's-day.

(1.) To the Lord, not to our selves, i.e. for our external Profit, or Pleasure.

(2.) To the Lord, that is, the whole day; not a part of it, but the whole day from Morning to Evening.

III. That we begin the Day early in the Morn­ing, first in private, and then in Family Devotion. 1. In reading some part of God's Word; and, 2. In Prayer, laying aside all worldly business but what is of absolute necessity, and as much as in us lies, all worldly Discourse, and earth­ly or worldly Thoughts; that the Lord on his [Page 275] Day may have our Hearts as well as our Ears, Tongues and Feet: and then to attend the pub­lick Worship, and that early; on the first Day of the week to seek Jesus, as Mary Mag­dalen did.

Certainly it is a horrid shame in any to take more liberty for Sleep, or otherwise to gratify the Flesh on this day than they do on other days of the week, when imploy'd in doing their own Business.

Do Men require the whole Day, and with the greatest care and diligence, to do their Work? And doth not the holy God re­quire our utmost care and diligence in his Work and Service?Mal. 1. 14. Cursed is the Deceiver which hath in his Flock a Male, and voweth and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing, &c. Again it is said,Jer. 48. 10. Cursed be he that doth the Work of the Lord negligently or deceitfully; that is, with a cold and careless Spirit.

My Brethren, God is a great King, and a jealous God for his Name, and sacred Wor­ship: Levit. 10. 3. and he will be sanctified by all that draw near to him. And we must, I say, shew greater Care and Zeal in our serving him on his Day, if possible, than in doing Work for Man. (1.) He requires it of us:Eccl. 9. 10. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might. (2.) He more deserves it from our hands: Should a Servant come to his day's Work at ten a Clock, certainly his Master would soon turn him off. O take heed lest God severely rebuke you for your sloth and carelesness in not attending early on his publick Worship.

IV. In the Evening to close the Lord's-day in reading, instructing our Families, and in repeating what we have heard, or in medita­ting thereon, and in Prayer, and singing of [Page 276] Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs. Thus the Primitive Christians kept the Lord's Day Read Dr. Young on the Lord's Day of the next Age to the Apo­stles..

V. Preparation for the Publick Worship is very necessary; therefore besure you always come into the Church from your Closets, bearing your Ministers upon your Hearts, that so the Word of God may run and be glorified, and your own Souls secretly fed and edified toge­ther. And let no small matters hinder you, neither the length of the way, nor weather; say with your self, Sure I would not make these a plea or excuse, were I to receive some great earthly Profit.

VI. As to the Publick Worship, that con­sists in reading God's Word, Preaching, Prayer, and singing of Psalms, with a free and chari­table contribution for the poor Saints on every First-day of the Week; and if our Congre­gations do not need such a weekly Collection, yet it ought to be made for others who may need our help: In which Contribution every one, save Receivers, ought to be Givers, ac­cording to their Ability, tho it be but two Mites; and often on this day also the Lord's Supper is to be celebrated. These were the practices of the Primitive Christians, as Dr. Young abundantly hath shewed out of the Writings of the first Antient Fathers, as Igna­tius, Justin Martyr, &c.

VII. Meditation is a great Duty on the Lord's Day,On the Sab. p. 345. as Dr. Owen shews; and this, (1.) In respect of God himself, whose Glory we must make our end in all we do. We ought to meditate on the Majesty, Greatness, Omni­sciency and Holiness of God, in our Approaches to him in Prayer and hearing his Word, &c. and so on all the days of our lives.

(2.) We ought to meditate on Jesus Christ [Page 277] in a peculiar manner, as the special Author of that Ordinance in which we approach to him, and come together to celebrate. Consider his Rest: God takes up his Rest in Christ, his Satis­faction and Complacency in him, and in the Way and Covenant of Rest, for us thro him; therefore this is a sutable Subject of Meditation on this day.

(3.) Let us meditate upon the Glory and Excellency of Christ's Person, and of his won­derful Love.

(4.) The Day it self, and its sacred Services, are to be meditated upon, and those Privileges we are partakers of. On this Day our Rest was perfected; for then Christ rose again for our Justification, and spoke Peace to his Disciples; and so he doth to us. On this day we were justified in Christ, accepted in Christ, par­doned in Christ, as in our Head and Repre­sentative on that very First-day he rose from the Dead. Therefore let Faith on this day be exercised, and let us labour for thankful Hearts, and rejoice with singing on this day which the Lord hath made to this end.

Caution. Let all take heed that none profane the Lord's Day, nor any way cast contempt up­on it; which may be done many ways.

1. By doing servile Work on this day out of a covetous mind;How some profane the Lords Day. and so instead of doing the Lord's Work on his day, they do their own.

2. By walking in the Fields for their own carnal pleasure and recreation. O this is an a­bominable Evil.

3. In gaming, and playing, or sporting on the Lord's Day.

4. In taking upon them needless Journeys to visit their Friends, because they cannot, they pretend, spare any other day to do it, for fear [Page 278] of outward loss to themselves and Families; Christ shall suffer the loss of his Honour and Ser­vice, rather than they will lose any part of one of their own days.

5. Some will not spare time on working days for themselves or Servants to take a Potion of Physick to remove Distempers of the Body, but refer it to the Lord's Day; which certainly is a horrid Evil: And can they think God will bless that Physick?

Is it not Sacrilege to rob God of his Day (for any external advantage) which he hath de­dicated and set apart for his own Worship? &c. ‘He that converts any time of the Lord's Day,Watson's Body of Divinity, p. 335. saith one, to worldly Business, is a worse Thief than he that robs on the High-way: for such a Thief does but rob Man, but this Thief robs God,’ he robs him of his Day.

6. Such as spend part of it in casting up their Debts, or setting their Shop-books right.

7. Such as take liberty to lie long abed on the Lord's Day, and prefer their carnal Ease above the Honour of Christ and his sacred Worship, to the reproach of his Church, and grief of his Ministers.

8. Such as spend more time on the Morning of the Lord's Day, to dress and trim their Bo­dies, than they take in Prayer, Reading, and Meditation, to prepare their Souls for God's holy Worship: These should be taken notice of and reproved; perhaps all the Morning is spent thus, and not two Minutes either in Prayer, Reading, or Meditation.

9. Such as neglect coming into the publick Worship of God on the Lord's Day, till per­haps near half the Dutys of Worship are over: by this God is provoked, and shame attends [Page 279] our Assemblies, and our Sacred Religion is ex­posed to reproach. How far do the Papists for Zeal in their false Religion out-do many who would be thought the most refined Protestants? How early are they at their Devotion on this day, as well as on other days of the Week?

Let us reform in this case for the Lord's sake, or else throw off our Profession: God's Soul loaths lukewarmness; let us either be hot or quite cold, lest God spew us out of his Mouth.

10. In worldly and needless Discourses: how much time on the Lord's Day is this way idly wasted, and the day this way profaned, as well as in many other ways, which I shall now omit to mention.

To close all, Let us make due preparation for the Worship of God on his Day, and rejoice at the approach thereof, wherein we have a Prize for our Souls put into our hands, and may in­joy God's Presence if not wanting to our selves. This is the Queen of Days (as Ignatius called it) which God hath crowned with Blessings; on which day the Spirit most gloriously de­scended, and the dew of the same Spirit still falls upon our Souls, and we may write, This was the day of our new Birth, and in which Christ often carried our Souls into his Ban­quetting-house, and also feasted us with the fat things thereof. This know assuredly, as you grow cold in respect of the day of Worship, you do certainly grow cold as to the Worship it self: and in this lies one of the great Evils of our present Day.

What Zeal did attend Christians in this Na­tion in former times! and how religiously did they observe the Lord's Day! Let us call to mind our espousal Love, and do our first Works, lest Christ remove our Candlesticks out of their places.



THE confession of Faith put forth by the Elders and Brethren of many Congregations of Christians bap­tized upon Profession of their Faith in London and the Country: The Third Edition, with almost forty of the Ministers Names prefixed to it: As also the Ca­techism agreeable to the Confession of Faith, owning Election and final Preseverance; necessary for the In­struction of Youth in the Fundamentals of Religion. The Remainder of the Impressions of these two Books, with the full and true Right of printing of them for the future, are sold to the Bookseller Mr. Marshal at the Bible in Grace-Church-street, London: It is desired that all Persons that are desirous to promote such useful Books, may apply themselves to the said John Marshal to be furnished with them.

Books printed for and sold by John Marshall in Grace-Church-street, writ by Mr. Benj. Keach.

THE Display of Glorious Grace, or the Covenant of Peace opened, in fourteen Sermons lately preached: In which the Errors of the present day about Reconciliation and Justification are detected.

The Breach Repaired in God's Worship; or, singing of Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs, prov'd to be an holy Ordinance of Jesus Christ: Wherein the chief Arguments of many Learned Divines who have wrote on that Subject are recited, as Mr. Cotton of New-England, Mr. Sydenham, Dr. Roberts, Dr. Owen, Mr. Caryl, Dr. Du-Veil, Mr. Wells, &c. With an Answer to all Objections. As also an Examination of Mr. Isaac Marlow's two Papers, one called a Discourse con­cerning Singing, &c. the other, An Appendix; wherein his Arguments and Cavils are refuted.

Spiritual Songs, being the Marrow of the Scripture in Songs of Praise to Almighty God, &c. with 100 Divine Hymns on several occasions, as now practised in several Congregations in and about London: The second Edition, with a Table of Contents.


This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.