A practical exposition of the X. Commandments with a resolution of several momentous questions…A practical exposition of the X. Commandements with a resolution of several momentous questions…

4. The divine Institution of the chang may be argued from the title thus, if that which is called the Lords, be his by divine institution and separation from other things not so called; then this first day must be his by divine institution and separation from other days, but all that is called the Lords, is his after this manner, Ergo, Let the minor be confirmed these three ways, 1. By looking to what is called the Lords generally in the Old Testament, as his house, his Altar, his Priests, his Tithes, &c. are they not still his, because by him separate for distinct uses in his worship: 2. By looking more particularly, how the Seventh day was called his day, or the Sabbath his, is not this the reason, because it was appointed by him for his worship beside other days? And can can any reason agree better to this? 3. By looking how any thing is called the Lords in the New Testament, there is no other or better phrase or designation to try by, then that 1 Cor. 11.20, 21. [Greek or Hebrew] is opposed to [Greek or Hebrew], even as this First day, called the Lords day is opposed to our days or common days, and that is called the Lords Supper, because instituted by him, for such and such spiritual ends and uses: And ⟨p. 275⟩therefore there can be no better ground gotten for showing why this is called the Lords day beside others, th •n by comparing it with other Scriptures, and if in other things that phrase import a divine institution, why not in this? I do not mean that this is an institution, or that it will prove that there must be a clear and express institution shown, but I mean this, that it will infer there is one, and that it is divine, seeing God is to choose and not we. We might here again produce the four Witnesses already attested for the morality of this fourth Command, to wit, 1. the general practise of primitive Christians, 2. their general opinion and judgment, 3. mens consciences, 4. the dispensations of God; which will also all clearly depone in this, about the change of the day.

4. The divine Institution of the chang may be argued from the title thus, if that which is called the Lords, be his by divine institution and separation from other things not so called; then this first day must be his by divine institution and separation from other days, but all that is called the Lords, is his after this manner, Ergo, Let the minor be confirmed these three ways, 1. By looking to what is called the Lords generally in the Old Testament, as his house, his Altar, his Priests, his Tithes, &c. are they not still his, because by him separate for distinct uses in his worship: 2. By looking more particularly, how the Seventh day was called his day, or the Sabbath his, is not this the reason, because it was appointed by him for his worship beside other days? And can can any reason agree better to this? 3. By looking how any thing is called the Lords in the New Testament, there is no other or better phrase or designation to try by, then that