A47576:206
The Jewish Sabbath abrogated, or, The Saturday Sabbatarians confuted in two parts
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 preached upon a special occasion, wherein are many new arguments not found in former authors / by Benjamin Keach.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 / by Benjamin Keach.
London: printed by John Marshall, 1700
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.
The Arguments on which this Opinion […] grounded are very weighty, which shall […] next considered.
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 wrote in his Heart; and that this greatened his Si• viz. that tho he had but one Commandment▪ he violated it.
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 showed that most believe him guilty of all in breaking that one Command, Thou shalt not eat of the Tree of Knowledge 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 considered, and that which I inquire about be granted, he was doubly guilty of the breach of them all.