A63997:22
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.
Secondly, that ⟨image 10⟩the proportion of this time he hath defined to be one day in seven. Thirdly, that the particular day under this proportion was designed to be the seventh, and that unto the Jews in correspondency to the seventh day from the first creation, whereon God commanded them to rest from all their works, like as on that day the Lord rested from his works. And I think, there is no question amongst Christians, but that all this ought to be religiously observed by the people of God, until the Lord himself manifest his pleasure for alteration, and no farther, in any particular, than God shall manifest his pleasure for alteration. As for example. First for the time, then son the rest, lastly, for the service of the day it self. First, If God hath not manifested his will for any alteration, of setting apart some time for divine service; we must still continue to set some time apart for divine service. Likewise, if God hath not manifested his pleasure, to have the proportion of time altered, which hath bin originally allotted unto his service; we must not presume to allow a less proportion of time for his service, than hath been formerly prescribed by him. Only both Gomarus and Rivet concur in this, that we may allow more; and that in reason, it is fit now under the Gospel to allow more time for Gods service, rather than less, in comparison to that which he would have allowed him under the Law. And as for the particularity of the day, if God hath manifested his pleasure to have it altered, it must be altered, (as in case it appear to have been ceremonial, in respect of the rest commanded thereon) and another in the seven substituted in the place thereof, and that according to Gods direction, and not otherwise. Secondly, so as touching the rest of the day commanded upon Mount Sinai unto the Jews (not so unto Adam upon the Creation; but only we read that God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, which sanctification yet on mans part draws a rest with it) if there be found a just distinction between a rest moral, (so ⟨image 10⟩far forth as the sanctification of the day requireth) and a rest ceremonial, of a more rigorous nature, and that prefiguring some thing in Christ; it will follow herehence that the rest moral still continueth, together with the sanctification of the day, as much as ever, and that the rigorous rest must fall and be abolished.
Secondly, that