A63997:184
The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians…
The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians of our age: wherein is showed that the morality of the fourth Commandment is still in force to bind Christians unto the sanctification of the Sabbath day. Written by that learned assertor of the truth, William Twice D.D. late prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines.The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians of our age: wherein is shewed that the morality of the fourth Commandement is still in force to bind Christians unto the sanctification of the Sabbath day. Written by that learned assertor of the truth, William Twisse D.D. late prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines.
London: printed for Thomas Pierrepont, 1652
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.
Doctor Walaeus his second argument is, because those places of Scripture, Rom. 14. Gal. 4. & Coloss. 2. in which the Apostle takes away all difference of days can hardly be reconciled with this opinion, or if Christ himself not by example only, but by an ordinance commanded unto his Disciples the observation of this day, it cannot be imagined as it seems, that any liberty should now remain in the observation of this day; for that which Christ hath determined is not left under Christian liberty any more then the observation of the seventh day from the Creation was left free to the Jews; when God not only by his example, but also by precept separated it from all other days to his service. To this I answer, 1. I find no liberty at all left to the Church to change the day, by the Doctors own grounds, for he holds it to be invariable p. 168.
Doctor Walaeus his second argument is, because those places of Scripture, Rom. 14. Gal. 4. & Coloss. 2. in which the Apostle takes away all difference of dayes can hardly bee reconciled with this opinion, or if Christ himselfe not by example onely, but by an ordinance commanded unto his Disciples the observation of this day, it cannot bee imagined as it seemes, that any liberty should now remaine in the observation of this day; for that which Christ hath determined is not left under Christian liberty any more then the observation of the seventh day from the Creation was left free to the Jewes; when God not onely by his example, but also by precept separated it from all other dayes to his service. To this I answer, 1. I finde no liberty at all left to the Church to change the day, by the Doctors owne grounds, for hee holds it to bee invariable p. 168.