A63997:307
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.
As for the Papists, we shall take notice of them in the next Section.
It is confessed that this proof is good, God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; therefore he commanded it to be kept holy by his people. The sanctifying of the day in the true notion thereof being nothing but Gods commanding man to sanctify it, which yet if any man deny, I appeal to my former argument, delivered in the former Section, for the justifying thereof. Only it is said that thence it followeth not that Then or at that time, to wit, the very day whereon God rested, he commanded it to be kept holy by his people. Now this exception also I have removed in the former Section. And it is very strange we should be to seek of the time in reference whereunto this is delivered; most of all, if spoken only in reference to 2500 years after, and not the least intimation of so strange an anticipation beyond all example, as Walaeus and Rivetus have proved. When Abulensis saith that Moses spake this by anticipation rather to show the equity of the Commandment then the Original; If the book of Genesis were written before the Commandment was given on mount Sinai, this interpretation must suppose that the Lord had already revealed to Moses what he would do on Mount Sinai; and what ground is produced for the building of so much as any conjecture hereof thereupon? And what wise man would expect that any man should be satisfied herewith? Doth it not concern them who maintain this affirmative to make it good by Texts of Scripture? If after the Commandments were delivered on Mount Sinai; what need of representing the equity thereof, seeing the equity, and that in this very way, is expressed in the Commandment it self, and ⟨p. 202⟩that in such manner as to manifest evidently that God did not now begin to command this, but that he commanded it of old, even from the Creation, as already I have disputed and proved. And though Abulensis were of this opinion, yet Catarinus was not; and though Perorius the Jesuit took part with Tostatus, yet Rivetus hath showed that Cornelius de lapide, Emmanuel Sa. Ribera, all Jesuits do not, but with Catarinus rather, or that Steuchus, Eugubinus, Genebrard, and Jacobus Salianus concur with them, against the opinion of Tostatus, Gomarus acknowledgeth Marius also to be of the same mind, all Papists; and let me add unto these all the Rhemists, as appears in their notes upon