A63997:522
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.
For though there were a mystery figured in it, yet they do not deny that there was a moral proportioning of time for Divine Service prescribed therein, which is the seventh part of the week.
For though there were a mystery figured in it, yet they doe not deny that there was a morall proportioning of time for Divine Service prescribed therein, which is the seventh part of the weeke.
It is one thing to say that all our life time we must be religious in our conversation, and keep a spiritual Sabbath; another thing to affirm that we must not have a solemn weekly day, wherein to intend only Divine worship.
It is one thing to say that all our life time we must be religious in our conversation, and keepe a spirituall Sabbath; another thing to affirme that we must not have a solemne weekely day, wherein to intend onely Divine worship.
This last point the Fathers do not say, the former they do, and to argue from their Omission, is to extend their words beyond their meaning; at least, their meaning is not adequate to the sense of the Commandment.
This last point the Fathers doe not say, the former they doe, and to argue from their Omission, is to extend their words beyond their meaning; at least, their meaning is not adaequate to the sense of the Commandement.