A64001:51
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
The Preface of the Translator to the Christian Reader. › Section 1 › Exam.
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.
Rabbi David Kimchi testifies the same in his Commentary upon that Psalm, to be the doctrine delivered in their Darash, namely, that Adam the first conceived this Psalm after he was created on the Sabbath day, and that afterwards he sinned, and so profaned the Sabbath. So that notwithstanding all the bluster which this Author makes, this fourth Commandment may continue moral nevertheless. And sure I am, Irenaeus puts this difference between the words of the Decalogue (so he speaks and consequently expungeth not, but rather includeth the fourth Commandment) and the ceremonial laws, that Decalogi verba, the words of the Decalogue spoken by God himself unto 1all, do therefore continue in like manner with us, receiving extension and augmentation by the coming of Christ in the flesh, but no dissolution. But the precept of bondage (so he calls the ceremonials) by themselves he commanded unto the people by ⟨p. 18⟩Moses, fit for their instruction and discipline. And Doctor Andrewes I am sure, so great a Prelate in our Church, denies all ceremonialitie thereunto, save only so far as may justify the change of the day, and in reference to the rigorous rest of the Jews. And Azorius confesseth (as before hath been alleged) that after six days work, one day should be consecrate to divine service is a thing most agreeable to reason. Yet I know none that accounteth this a Dictate of nature simply, as this Author would fain obtrude upon us; but rather with Chrysostom, that God by creation hath taught us as much, and now God hath gone before us herein, we conceive it to be most agreeable to reason. And D. Field did profess as much upon acknowledgement of the Creation, as Master Broad confesseth.
Rabbi David Kimchi testifies the same in his Commentary upon that Psalme, to be the doctrine delivered in their Darash, namely, that Adam the first conceived this Psalme after hee was created on the Sabbath day, and that afterwards he sinned, and so prophaned the Sabbath. So that notwithstanding all the bluster which this Author makes, this fourth Commandement may continue morall neverthelesse. And sure I am, Irenaeus puts this difference betweene the words of the Decalogue (so he speaks and consequently expungeth not, but rather includeth the fourth Commandement) and the ceremoniall lawes, that Decalogi verba, the words of the Decalogue spoken by God himselfe unto