A37049:878
A37049:878
London: printed for Dorman Newman, 1675
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
As for instance, 1. when Deut. 12.5. he commandeth his people to offer their Sacrifices in the place which he should choose, here there is a stinting or astricting of them to the place which God should reveal unto them; this before the Temple was built, tied them to the Ark, and sometimes to one place, and sometimes to another, as it was removed and placed, till it was brought to Jerusalem; but after the Temple was built and chosen for the place, it astricted men to that▪ yea when the Temple is destroyed, and Christ come, it astricteth men to no place by another, but it obligeth men to worship God every where in spirit and truth: It's true, this is a Ceremonial precept, and will not hold in all things, especially as to its abolition, yet while it stood by a positive Authority or Precept, it showeth that God may command a particular, as one day of seven, and yet not instantly so determine, but that one and the same command may enforce to diverse days at diverse times, upon supposition o • Gods manifesting his mind, even as by one command men were astricted successively to diverse places.
As for instance, 1. when Deut. 12.5. he commandeth his people to offer their Sacrifices in the place which he should choose, here there is a stinting or astricting of them to the place which God should reveal unto them; this before the Temple was built, tyed them to the Ark, and sometimes to one place, and sometimes to another, as it was removed and placed, till it was brought to Jerusalem; but after the Temple was built and chosen for the place, it astricted men to that▪ yea when the Temple is destroyed, and Christ come, it astricteth men to no place by another, but it obligeth men to worship God every where in spirit and truth: It's true, this is a Ceremonial precept, and will not hold in all things, especially as to its abolition, yet while it stood by a positive Authority or Precept, it sheweth that God may command a particular, as one day of seven, and yet not instantly so determine, but that one and the same command may inforce to diverse dayes at diverse times, upon supposition o • Gods manifesting his mind, even as by one command men were astricted successively to diverse places.
2. See it instanced in the second Command, wherein God ⟨p. 242⟩requireth such a worship, as he himself should prescribe, which is the moral affirmative part of it, and dischargeth all worship by Images, that is, its moral negative part thereof; by virtue whereof Believers were then tied, to offer Sacrifices, to Circumcise, to keep the Passover, &c. but now Believers are tied to Baptize, to celebrate the Lords Supper, &c. yet by virtue of one and the same command: so here, that command which requires the Seventh day from the Jews, may require the First day from us Christians, for the Sabbath, because these particulars are not expressly, directly, and immediately called for by these commands, but indirectly and by consequence; yet this second command tied the Jews to abstain from blood, and to circumcise, before the ceremonial Law was added to them, because these commands were formerly revealed to them, but it tied them to these accidentally (to say so) and by consequence only, even so we say of the fourth command as to the Seventh day, it being instituted before: consider for this Exod. 16.26. where six days for gathering of Manna, and a seventh for rest, are spoken of.
2. See it instanced in the second Command, wherein God ⟨p. 242⟩requireth such a worship, as he himself should prescribe, which is the moral affirmative part of it, and dischargeth all worship by Images, that is, its moral negative part thereof; by vertue whereof Believers were then tyed, to offer Sacrifices, to Circumcise, to keep the Passover, &c. but now Believers are tyed to Baptize, to celebrate the Lords Supper, &c. yet by vertue of one and the same command: so here, that command which requires the Seventh day from the Jews, may require the First day from us Christians, for the Sabbath, because these particulars are not expresly, directly, and immediately called for by these commands, but indirectly and by consequence; yet this second command tyed the Jews to abstain from blood, and to circumcise, before the ceremonial Law was added to them, because these commands were formerly revealed to them, but it tyed them to these accidentally (to say so) and by consequence only, even so we say of the fourth command as to the Seventh day, it being instituted before: consider for this
A third Instance is in Tithes, which was the Lords requiring a part of their Means or Substance, as this was a part of their time; he there required the tenth part of their increase, as here he doth the seventh part of their time; yet God in proportioning their estates, did not particularly limit to any exact and precise order, but as to this proportion of their estates whatever they were; so we say here, had not the day been determined otherwise then by this command, it would not have implied any particular definite day of the Seven.
A third Instance is in Tithes, which was the Lords requiring a part of their Means or Substance, as this was a part of their time; he there required the tenth part of their increase, as here he doth the seventh part of their time; yet God in proportioning their estates, did not particularly limit to any exact and precise order, but as to this proportion of their estates whatever they were; so we say here, had not the day been determined otherwayes then by this command, it would not have implyed any particular definite day of the Seven.
3. We premit, that though the Seventh day be called moral, as is expressed in the command, or understood, yet it is but moral-positive, and so alterable at the will of the Lawgiver, and therefore the question would not be much different, if acknowledging the Seventh day to be commanded to the Jews, as well as one of seven, we yet asserted the seventh to be discharged, and one of seven to be still retained, for so one of seven would be binding now, and not the Seventh.
4. Yet lest we should seem to admit somewhat changeable ⟨p. 243⟩in the very command it self precisely considered, we would put difference betwixt the commanding part of the Law, and its explicatory part; the command may be moral and indefinite, although some things in reasons and motives were not so; as in the preface which enforceth all the commands, and in the promise annexed to the fifth, there was something peculiar to that people, yet cannot we cast off all because of that; suppose there had no more been in this fourth command, but remember the day of rest to keep it holy, that would not have inferred the Seventh day, though we think the Jews, because of its former sanctification, would have been obliged to keep that day by virtue of this command: And suppose that in the explications or reasons there may be something added peculiar to that people (which cannot be a Seventh day, but at the most (if any thing) the Seventh day) yet that which is in the commanding part, will still stand moral, to wit, that the day of rest should be remembered; and if it can be made out that it was determined to the Jews to sanctify the Seventh day (though it were in the reasons added) and to us afterward to sanctify the First day, they will be both found to be a Seventh day, and a day of rest, and therefore to be remembered and to be sanctified; this would resolve into the same thing on the matter; yet we conceive it safest to assert that in this command God hath set apart a Seventh day to himself, which is to be sanctified by us, by our application of it to holy uses, but doth not by it expressly, directly, and primarily bind to the Seventh day, but secondarily and by consequence, to wit, as it was otherwise before declared by him, and so it bindeth now that same way to the sanctifying of the First day of the week, as being now revealed by God, just as in the former instances or examples we touched upon.
4. Yet lest we should seem to admit somewhat changeable ⟨p. 243⟩in the very command it self precisely considered, we would put difference betwixt the commanding part of the Law, and its explicatory part; the command may be moral and indefinite, although some things in reasons and motives were not so; as in the preface which inforceth all the commands, and in the promise annexed to the fifth, there was somthing peculiar to that people, yet cannot we cast off all because of that; suppose there had no more been in this fourth command, but remember the day of rest to keep it holy, that would not have inferred the Seventh day, though we think the Jews, because of its former sanctification, would have been obliged to keep that day by vertue of this command: And suppose that in the explications or reasons there may be something added peculiar to that people (which cannot be a Seventh day, but at the most (if any thing) the Seventh day) yet that which is in the commanding part, will still stand moral, to wit, that the day of rest should be remembred; and if it can be made out that it was determined to the Jews to sanctifie the Seventh day (though it were in the reasons added) and to us afterward to sanctifie the First day, they will be both found to be a Seventh day, and a day of rest, and therefore to be remembred and to be sanctified; this would resolve into the same thing on the matter; yet we conceive it safest to assert that in this command God hath set apart a Seventh day to himself, which is to be sanctified by us, by our application of it to holy uses, but doth not by it expresly, directly, and primarily bind to the Seventh day, but secondarily and by consequence, to wit, as it was otherwayes before declared by him, and so it bindeth now that same way to the sanctifying of the First day of the week, as being now revealed by God, just as in the former instances or examples we touched upon.
That a Seventh day (whatever it be which is chosen of God) and not the Seventh day in order, is to be sanctified by virtue of this command, as enjoining that, as the substance and matter of it, may be made out by these Arguments.
That a Seventh day (whatever it be which is chosen of God) and not the Seventh day in order, is to be sanctified by vertue of this command, as injoyning that, as the substance and matter of it, may be made out by these Arguments.
Arg. 1. That which is the substance of this command is moral, and bindeth perpetually, as we have formerly proved (for if its substance be not moral, then it self is not so either) but that a Seventh day should be sanctified hath been maintained ⟨p. 244⟩in the Church by the Apostles in their retaining the First day of the week, while the Seventh hath been laid by and never used; therefore it was not the Seventh, but a Seventh day which was primarily commanded in this command; so that no particular day is instituted here more then any positive service is prescribed in the second command; yet the observation of what was prescribed, or should be prescribed, was included. Even so it is here in reference to that day; and as we may infer that the second command enjoined not such and such ordinances primarily, because they are abolished; and that such as were negative or prohibited, as not making of Images, are moral, because they are continued, and Images are to be rejected; just so may we conclude that a Sev nth day here was primarily commanded, and is moral because it it is continued, and that the Seventh was not so commanded, because it is rejected and laid aside.
Arg. 1. That which is the substance of this command is moral, and bindeth perpetually, as we have formerly proved (for if its substance be not moral, then it self is not so either) but that a Seventh day should be sanctified hath been maintained ⟨p. 244⟩in the Church by the Apostles in their retaining the First day of the week, while the Seventh hath been laid by and never used; therefore it was not the Seventh, but a Seventh day which was primarily commanded in this command; so that no particular day is instituted here more then any positive service is prescribed in the second command; yet the observation of what was prescribed, or should be prescribed, was included. Even so it is here in reference to that day; and as we may inferr that the second command injoyned not such and such ordinances primarily, because they are abolished; and that such as were negative or prohibited, as not making of Images, are moral, because they are continued, and Images are to be rejected; just so may we conclude that a Sev •nth day here was primarily commanded, and is moral because it it is continued, and that the Seventh was not so commanded, because it is rejected and laid aside.
This Argument especially made out in the designation of the Lords day will prove this, for if that Seventh day was the substance of this command, then either it is to be continued as moral, which were against the current of the New Testament, wherein, as Christ hath set forth different ordinances, so a different chief solemn time for worship; or we must say that this fourth command belongeth not to us at all, the contrary whereof we have made out: It must then follow, that it was not the Seventh day, but a Seventh day which this command respecteth, which therefore belongeth to us, as it did to the Jews, as well as any other command (and particularly the second command) doth.
Arg. 2. If God hath put a difference some way betwixt the Sabbath commanded here, and the day of his own rest, the Seventh day, then it would seem it's not that day which it commanded: But he hath put a difference, first, in the mandatory part, Remember; what? not the Seventh day, but the Sabbath day, or day of rest: 2. In the blessing, it is not said, he blessed the Seventh day, but the Sabbath; therefore is that difference so palpable, as being specially intended; whereas if the scope of the come •nd were only the Seventh day, it had been much more clear to have set it down otherwise; and no other probable reason of the difference can be given.
Arg. 2. If God hath put a difference some way betwixt the Sabbath commanded here, and the day of his own rest, the Seventh day, then it would seem it's not that day which it commanded: But he hath put a difference, first, in the mandatory part, Remember; what? not the Seventh day, but the Sabbath day, or day of rest: 2. In the blessing, it is not said, he blessed the Seventh day, but the Sabbath; therefore is that difference so palpable, as being specially intended; whereas if the scope of the comm •nd were only the Seventh day, it had been much more clear to have set it down otherwayes; and no other probable reason of the difference can be given.
Arg. 3. Either a Seventh day is commanded primarily, and then the Seventh but secondarily and consequentially, or the Seventh was commanded the Jews primarily, and one of Seven but consequentially (for both were commanded to them) and the first, to wit, the Seventh as being in use before. But it cannot be said that the Seventh day was primarily commanded, and one of Seven consequentially only, because the general is first commanded, and then the particular; as when God required Tithes of Increase and Cattle, by the command of Tithes he first required the proportion, and then what particular proportion as to order, he himself should carve out to them; and so consequently came in the tenth Beast (which passed under the rod) by a particular command, Levit. 27.32, 33. because there God determined; but if that tenth had not been set down, the general command had but determined upon the tenth of Cattle, as of Sheaves, or bolls of Corn, even so it is as to the day, the command requireth one of Seven primarily; but that it is this Seventh, followeth from another determination.
Arg. 4. If the moral grounds and reasons which press this command do most directly respect a Seventh day, and not the Seventh; then it's not the Seventh day, but a Seventh day, which is primarily commanded in it (for the reasons bear out especially what is moral in it, and principally intended) but the moral reasons pressing it plead more strongly and directly for a Seventh day, and but indirectly for the Seventh day as it was then instituted; Ergo, &c. That the reasons do directly press a Seventh day, and in a manner stick closely to it, may thus be made out.
1. •f the reasons equally press on us the First day and the observation of it (supposing it now to be observed according to Divine warrant) then they do not primarily press the Seventh; but the reasons equally press on us the First day, Ergo, &c. the major is clear, for the same thing cannot press two different days primarily nor equally; that the reasons concern us as well as them upon the supposition aforesaid, may thus appear.
1. •f the reasons equally press on us the First day and the observation of it (supposing it now to be observed according to Divine warrant) then they do not primarily press the Seventh; but the reasons equally press on us the First day, Ergo, &c. the major is clear, for the same thing cannot press two different dayes primarily nor equally; that the reasons concern us as well as them upon the supposition aforesaid, may thus appear.
1. They are universal, and do not belong to that people more then any other, for the concession of Six days is ⟨p. 246⟩to all, and Gods example of resting, concerneth all.
1. They are universal, and do not belong to that people more then any other, for the concession of Six dayes is ⟨p. 246⟩to all, and Gods example of resting, concerneth all.
2. If the breaking of that command be equally sinful to us with them, and strike against the equity of the command, and Gods example in us as well as in them, then these reasons concern us also, and us as well as them: Now that they do so, and agredge the sin of profaning our Lords day as they did the sin of profaning their Sabbath, we must either grant, or we must deny that they concern us at all: Beside the weight of a challenge from the conscience by virtue of them, will put a tender heart out of question of it, seeing God giveth us Six days to our selves, as he did to them, and his example proposed to us ought to be respected by us, as well as by them, and the same general equity is in both.
2. If the breaking of that command be equally sinful to us with them, and strike against the equity of the command, and Gods example in us as well as in them, then these reasons concern us also, and us as well as them: Now that they do so, and agredge the sin of prophaning our Lords day as they did the sin of prophaning their Sabbath, we must either grant, or we must deny that they concern us at all: Beside the weight of a challenge from the conscience by vertue of them, will put a tender heart out of question of it, seeing God giveth us Six dayes to our selves, as he did to them, and his example proposed to us ought to be respected by us, as well as by them, and the same general equity is in both.
3. If the reasons be a sufficient ground of allowance to us for▪ Six working days together, even the last Six of the week, as they were to them for the first Six; then they determine not the Seventh day to be the day of rest primarily, but a Seventh following these Six of labour; but they do allow us warrantably to work Six days, even the last Six of the week, Ergo, they do not determine the Seventh day primarily; the connection of the major seemeth to be very clear: For first, these must stand and fall together, if the concession (to call it so) concern us in the Six working days, so must the reservation of a Seventh. 2. As the concession concerneth us in the Six working days, so must the prohibition of work on a Seventh of rest, for the one determineth the other, if the concession be for Six in number, so must the prohibition be for a Seventh in number; but if the concession be of Six in order, then it is the Seventh that is to be reserved, and if the Seventh be related to in the prohibition of work, then the concession must look to the first Six days, which it doth not, as we have showed. And therefore 3. seeing the Six days concession looketh to Six in number, so many thou mayest or shalt work together, and no more, the prohibition must also respect the number, to wit, a Seventh, and not the Seventh day: the minor will be clear to the Judicious considerer, by a particular application of the reasons of the fourth command.
3. If the reasons be a sufficient ground of allowance to us for▪ Six working dayes together, even the last Six of the week, as they were to them for the first Six; then they determine not the Seventh day to be the day of rest primarily, but a Seventh following these Six of labour; but they do allow us warrantably to work Six dayes, even the last Six of the week, Ergo, they do not determine the Seventh day primarily; the connexion of the major seemeth to be very clear: For first, these must stand and fall together, if the concession (to call it so) concern us in the Six working dayes, so must the reservation of a Seventh. 2. As the concession concerneth us in the Six working dayes, so must the prohibition of work on a Seventh of rest, for the one determineth the other, if the concession be for Six in number, so must the prohibition be for a Seventh in number; but if the concession be of Six in order, then it is the Seventh that is to be reserved, and if the Seventh be related to in the prohibition of work, then the concession must look to the first Six dayes, which it doth not, as we have shewed. And therefore 3. seeing the Six dayes concession looketh to Six in number, so many thou mayest or shalt work together, and no more, the prohibition must also respect the number, to wit, a Seventh, and not the Seventh day: the minor will be clear to the Judicious considerer, by a particular application of the reasons of the fourth command.
Further, if the concession respect not the number, but the ⟨p. 247⟩order (as it must, if the prohibition of work on the Seventh respect the order and not the number) then 1. what warrant have we for our Six work days? if it be not here, where is it? for sure we cannot take Gods time without his order and warrant: 2. and more especially, then could not we by virtue of this command plead allowance for working Six days different from the first Six; if so, we would not be astricted by the command to sanctify one (seeing the one inferreth and determineth the other, and they must go together) which were absurd.
Further, if the concession respect not the number, but the ⟨p. 247⟩order (as it must, if the prohibition of work on the Seventh respect the order and not the number) then 1. what warrant have we for our Six work dayes? if it be not here, where is it? for sure we cannot take Gods time without his order and warrant: 2. and more especially, then could not we by vertue of this command plead allowance for working Six dayes different from the first Six; if so, we would not be astricted by the command to sanctifie one (seeing the one inferreth and determineth the other, and they must go together) which were absurd.