A64001:194
Of the morality of the fourth commandment as still in force to bind Christians…Of the morality of the fourth commandement as still in force to binde Christians…
Of the morality of the fourth commandment as still in force to bind Christians delivered by way of answer to the translator of Doctor Prideaux his lecture, concerning the doctrine of the Sabbath ... / written by William Twice ...Of the morality of the fourth commandement as still in force to binde Christians delivered by way of answer to the translator of Doctor Prideaux his lecture, concerning the doctrine of the Sabbath ... / written by William Twisse ...
London: printed by E.G. for John Rothwell, 1641London: printed by E.G. for Iohn Rothwell, 1641
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.
And it is not credible to me, that the Apostles should make such an invariable ordinance to the Church, and not be verily persuaded that it was the Will of God the Father, and of God the Son it should be so: whether manifested by Christs particular charge unto them; or by comparing Christs Resurrection with the Lords rest from the works of Creation. Otherwise in my judgement they had never called that day the Lords Day.
And it is not credible to mee, that the Apostles should make such an invariable ordinance to the Church, and not bee verily perswaded that it was the Will of God the Father, and of God the Sonne it should bee so: whether manifested by Christs particular charge unto them; or by comparing Christs Resurrection with the Lords rest from the workes of Creation. Otherwise in my judgement they had never called that day the Lords Day.
Fourthly, he excepts against the argument drawn from Christs Resurrection; denying that therehence it follows that that day was to be consecrated to God. But herein he opposeth all the ancients; neither do I think he can allege any one that doth not hereon build the observation of the Lords Day; which nuiversall concurrence doth manifestly argue to be more then probable: Austin as Waleus allegeth him professeth not as his peculiar opinion, but as he took it generally received without contradiction: that Dies Dominicus Christianis resurrectione Domini declaratus est; and that resuscitatio Domini consecravit nobis diem Dominicum. And Athanasius plainly takes notice of the analogy it hath to the fourth Commandment; (and analogy Doctor Walaeus grants, and I wonder he takes no notice of it here) by comparing the second Creation with the first Creation; and so Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester professeth that the new Creation requires a new Sabbath, especially seeing the old must be abrogated as ceremonial. But the analogy I confess may be differently shaped; Athanasius shapes it thus, that the Jews Sabbath was the end of the first Creation; and that the Lords Day is a beginning of the second Creature; to wit, as the day of Christs resurrection; in reference whereunto the ⟨p. 117⟩