The Lord's day Vinaicated: OR The First day of the WEEK THE Christian Sabbath. In Answer to Mr. Bampfields' Plea for the Seventh day, in his Enquiry, Whether Jesus Christ be Jehovah, and gave the Moral Law? And whether the Fourth Command be Repealed or Altered? BY G. T. a Wellwisher to Truth and Concord.  Prov. 18.17. 
He that is first in his own Cause seemeth just, but his Neighbour cometh and searcheth him.  
LONDON: Printed for Samuel Clement, at the White Swan in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1692.   

TO THE READER.  
THo' there be many Books already written on this Subject, the following Preface will justify the Seasonableness of this Modest and Judicious Reply to Mr. B. especially among serious Professors in the West of England. But it cannot be unfit upon other Considerations, that such a Discourse be now Published, when the Doctrinal Truth, in the Controversy of a Weekly Sabbath, is opposed by so many, and the Practical Sanctification of it neglected by so many more.  
It has been generally observed, that the Power of Godliness hath Flourished or Abated in every Age, and in every part of Christendom; as the strict and conscientious Observation of a Weekly-Day of Holy Rest did obtain, or not: And particularly in our own Country, no outward Means can be assigned, that hath more availed to help the Preservation of Pure, Reformed, Christianity among us.  
On which account, it concerns all Christians to inquire what is our Warrant for the Observation of One day in Seven? and likewise whether the Seventh, or the First day of the Week, (which according to a true Account, may also be called the Seventh) ought to be observed as the Christian Sabbath.  
What is said on this Argument in the following Reply to Mr. B. discovers so much the Candour and Moderation of the Author, as will recommend it to every Impartial Reader. His Distance from London, and nothing else occasions, or needs this Epistle; as will doubtless be thought, even by such as have some different Conceptions from him, in some lesser Matters of this Controversy.  
That it may advance the Honour of Christ, and help to satisfy the Minds of some Wavering, and less Established Christians, and promote the real Interest of Practical Godliness; (upon which the Doctrine of the Weekly Sabbath will have a great Influence,) as it will answer the Author's Design, so our Desires and Prayers,  
John whither. John Shewer.   

The PREFACE.  
IT may afford cause of Wonder to considering and serious Persons what should be the Inducements of the Author of the Enquiry whether the Lord Jesus etc. to Print and divulge it at such a time, and under such circumstances, as we are brought into: And though he hath proposed no Preface to his Book, to plead for its Emission; yet I think there has scarce been a Piece sent into the World, these many Years, that more required and needed it. For,  
1. He well knows that the whole Christian World is engaged against him herein, and that they have Sciptural grounds, and the practice of the most ancient Churches, the Doctrine and Testimonies of the must Orthodox and Learned Fathers, derived immediately from the Apostles, with an uninterrupted Succession through several Centuries; and their own Education, Custom and Practice, received down from many Generations, with their own blessed Experiences of the Light of God's countenance; the operations of his Spirit, the activity and growth of their own Graces on that blessed Day, etc. for their consecrating of the first day of the Week to Divine Service and their Religious and Devout appropriating it to, and employing it in those Duties, which immediately concern the Glory of God, and the Spiritual and Eternal Weal of their own Souls: Which things are not easily overcome and laid aside; with as great and Rooted Prejudices against his opinion, of the Seventh-day-Sabbath; as that 'tis Judaical, Fanciful, and Singular, such at least as has had but very few Favourers and Abetters either in the ancient Churches, (and these branded for Heresy) or else in the modern, some three or four starting up of late years among ourselves, daring by Writing and Printing to endeavour the Introduction of this Novelty into the belief and practice of Universal Church. All which, and other Prejudices against this Opinion cannot slightly be eradicated out of the minds of Men; and therefore he could hardly imagine any great success to this undertaking, unless he could have produced undeniable demonstrations to our Reason, or irrefragable Testimonies of Scripture to our Faith: Which I hope we shall see he has been far enough from.  
2. He should also have considered, and concluded, that these Arguments which have been produced heretofore by those of his persuasion, are not likely now to convince and convert the whole Christian World to his thoughts and practice: Seeing they have been so often, and by so many worthy, Learned, Orthodox, and Pious Divines, answered, and in the judgement of Wise and gracious Persons, fully confuted, and satisfactorily baffled, to the deeper Rooting and more firm Establishment of the Churches of Christ in their constant Observance of the Lords day. Wherefore, if he would have effected any thing by this attempt, he should have offered some new Inventions of his own, that have never yet encountered with any opposition: But in all his Book (to the best of my Remembrance) I have not met with any one place of Scripture, nor argument drawn therefrom, nor Improvement thereof, for his own Sentiments: Nor yet any Text of God's word, or Topick against ours, no, nor any one solution of our Authoritative or Rational proofs, for the confirmation of our Contrary Belief and Practice to his, which has not been already produced by others, and as largely and strenuously managed as by himself; and that too in the same manner. 'Tis no great Prudence in a Combatant to make use of the same Weapons, Modes, and Arts, against his Antagonists which have been frequently Baffled, Defeated, Broken and retorted into his own Bowels. Wherefore, 'tis strange to me, if any Victory over any considerate studious Person, could be hoped for by such a casting of the Gauntlet.  
3. But suppose he could have expected to have proselited some to his Opinion (as who has not, though the Doctrine be never so absurd, Heterodox and Impious,) yet sure it could not be thought a sufficient means to prevail upon all the Churches; no, nor upon the universality of the National Church, of that Collection of so many millions of counterminded Christians and Protestants, whereof he is. He could not certainly presume, that all the Authority of these Nations, both Ecclesiastical and Civil, would follow his Dictates, or receive new Light from his Torch, and acknowledge themselves to have been in gross Error, and in a sinful Practice ever since, and always before the Reformation, since they Professed Faith in the Lord Christ: And that they should alter all their Acts and Statutes, all their Canons and Articles, in this particular. And herein acknowledge him to be the infallible Apostle, or at least the only happy Doctor, of this great part of the Christian World, no nor of the greatest, or any considerable part thereof; but only of a few, here and there of unsettled Scruplous, Superstitious minds. No person could have a Rational and probable Prospect of a greater Return from such an Adventure, or Crop from such a sowing: And so wisely have judged, that all his expectations would never quit his cost, nor be worth his Risk. Especially considering that,  
4. He should deeply have weighed the sad and sinful Consequences and scandalous Effects that his appearance in Print has a direct tendency to produce. (Though I trust such a tendency will be obstructed, and frustrated, by the good Spirit of God, and by the Wise and settled Principles of our people.) The Natural Tendencies are such as these,  
1. An encouragement to the Profaners and deniers of the Lordsday in their Principles and Practices. They who have no Inclination to separate any Day as Holy, to the Holy God, in a performance of Holy Duties, will take advantages from hence, to decry the strict observance of the Lordsday, and to fortify themselves in their Idleness, Recreations, Worldliness, and sinfulness thereon; and withal slight and deride the Seventh-day-Sabbath, as Judaical, Fanatical, and Singular, and so being taken off from the First-day-Sabbath, they will acknowledge none; but give that, and all the following days of the Week to their Interests, and to their Lusts; to Earth and to Hell: And we have heard that this Book has already produced this fearful effect in our City.  
2. An Offence and Stumbling-Block to sincere and affectionate Saints; who have their Hearts established in Grace, and their Heads in the grand Fundamentals of Faith and Practice; but are not acquainted with disputations about such remote things as these; and therefore having very tender Consciences and dreading to offend God, and to approach unto any moral evil, hearing of such a piece as this, from such an Author, (so known to some of them) will be apt to be startled, and excessively troubled with Fear, lest they have hitherto lived in Sin, and provoked God all their days, by a Holy resting upon the Lord's day, and Working upon Saturday; and so all their Services of God upon the one, in the works of their General, and the services of themselves, their Families, and the humane Society (of which they are Members) upon the other, in the works of their particular Callings; have been provocations, and evils to be Repent of, (for we know what Aggravations scrupulous Consciences, and a tempting Devil, are apt to make of smallest things) and to live in perpetual fears and doubts, in their continuance in attendance upon God's Ordinances on those days, whereon they are only to be had (in the most solemn manner, and all of them at least) in the professing Church of God: And so they will be deprived of much of that Spiritual Comfort, and saving profit thereby, which they formely received in, and by them: And still would, had not such an unhappy Scandal been laid in their way: Which is no small Offence and Sin against Christ. And this also we know to be another product thereof, such Christians not daring to neglect the observance and Ordinances of the Lordsday because of their former Persuasion, Practice, and Experience, and yet doing it with doubts and fears, lest they should Sin thereby, because of this Piece.  
2. A perverting and withdrawing of the more simple and unstable into this Opinion, which we doubt not to assert, and question not to evidence, to be ill grounded and false; and so will prove a scandal indeed, even to lead into and to build up in Sin, and an unwarrantable Practice: And thus to Offend weak ones in Christ is a very great Evil, 1 Cor. 8.11, 12. But suppose the Author's notion be Orthodox, and the contrary Heterodox; yet another pernicious Tendency of it is,  
4. By a Proselyting of some Persons, or some Ministers, so many as may make Assemblies and Congregations, he will be the Author of a needless Schism and Separation, and of inevitable Feuds, Rancours and mutual Reproaches and Condemnations: The Observers of the Lords day will decry and exclaim against the others, as Jews, and proud Schismatics; and the keepers of the Seventh day will censure and condemn the other, as wilful breakers of Gods express Command, and profane compliers with the will and Traditions of Men. And he that has not the Gift of Prophecy, may easily foretell what sinful and dismal fruits will grow upon such a Root of Bitterness. Men should be cautious how they disturb the peace of the Church, and rend our Saviour's seamless Garment.  
5. He should seriously have pondered the Days and Times we are fallen into; the sad and deplorable Divisions of the Church of God among us, and the dangerous and fearful Prejudices, Rancours, and Enmities begotten and fomented thereby; with the uncharitable and inexcusable Effects they have produced already in Tongue, Pen and Hand, as the general Division between Conformists and Non-Conformists: and the divers Opinions, Parties, and Separated Societies of the Latter. (Though blessed be God, the most considerable and Orthodox of them, the Independents and Presbyterians, have coalesced in their Subscriptions to Articles of Agreement) and how unseasonable and inconvenient 'tis therefore to broach new Opinions among them, and to increase their Divisions and Animosities; and so also give an Advantange to their observers to increase their prejudices, and augment their Accusations against them, and their Insulting over them, as fickle, inconstant, and heady, not knowing where to fix, nor what to hold and Practise, now that they have forsaken an universal and uninterrupted Conformity unto them. Such a stout Nonconformist to the Church of England, aught to have used all caution, not to have given the least occasion of weakening or vilifying his own Party.  
6 Lastly, All these things laid together in the Balance of a sound Judgement, would have informed him, that no such thing as he hath hereby attempted, should have been undertaken, unless it had been about the most weighty and necessary Truths of our Religion; such as do necessarily concern the Glory of God and the Salvation of Souls, or very near bordering thereupon. Which I hope he does not believe the Controversy to be; seeing 'tis not not about the Substance of Duty or the very heart of a Command, but only about the least Circumstance (if I may so term it) of it. Not about what Proportion of time God shall have Consecrated to his service; For that is agreed to be the Seventh; But only what day, of two of them must be that day of the Week? And therefore he that observes the Firstday, gives and devotes to God the Seventh part of his time, as well and as much as he that does the Seventh-day.  
Wherefore though the Author's Integrity and Intent may not be questioned, yet certainly his Prudence in this Work, and the Work under such Circumstances, are no way plausible: And he should have applied that of the Apostle, Rom. 14.21, 22. to have deterred him therefrom.  
Wherefore seeing this Piece is so dangerous, and may do, and already has done, so much hurt, it's very Expedient, if not morally Necessary, to endeavour a prevention of its evil Consequences; and there especially where the Author is resident, and it may most infect; and it may well be deemed a Duty of some one of the Dressers of that part of the Vineyard of the Lord Christ, where this Weed or Thorn is sprung up, to endeavour its eradication, before it spreads any farther, or wounds any deeper.  
That Province therefore which I (most unable for, and Naturally altogether averse from, Polemical Disputes) shall undertake, and with the best skill and faithfulness, that God shall afford, perform, shall only be, with all possible Brevity and Perspicuity, to weaken all the Arguments, the Author manages for his Notion; and to confirm and Ratify all these which he endeavours to weaken, and evacuate, for the ancient, general, Scriptural Doctrine of the Lords-day-Sabbath, or Sacred Rest; and herein to follow his own method; Giving some transient Glances upon things that may occur, some what Excentrical or Alien from the Great design of this Book: Which I shall study to do with all Candour, and due Deference to the Gentility, Gravity, and (I hope) real Piety, of the Author.   

THE CONTENTS.  

Sect. I. SOme general Observations premised, whether the World were made by Christ, as Jesus Christ God-man? page 4  
Sect. II. Of Christ's being Jehovah, and in what sense the Law was given by him? p. 8  
Sect. III. Whether after the Creation the Lord rested on the Seventh-day, and so Sanctified and Instituted it, and did himself observe it; as that even Adam in a State of Innocence was bound by it, and all Mankind, without distinction, before the Fall? p. 12  
Sect. IU. Whether the Ten Commandments were given by Christ to Jews and Gentiles? p. 21  
Sect. V. Whether Christ in the Flesh did confirm all the Ten Commandments, and every tittle of the Fourth? And whether Christ and his Apostles did enjoin, or did not rather speak against the Observation of the Seventh-day-Sabbath? p. 24  
Sect. VI Of the Word Seventh in the Fourth Commandment; the Sabbath not recommended by Christ to his Disciples. Of Commenius' desire of Reformation, etc. p. 30  
Sect. VII. Of the Ceremonial Law, and what is Moral and Positive; what is truly Moral, that the Saturday Seventh-day-Sabbath is not; more may be pleaded for Circumcision. p. 35  
Sect. VIII. Whether Christ in his own Person Observed the Seventh-Week-day-Sabbath and no other, and what may be gathered from it? The Arguments for the Seventh-day-Sabbath equally hold for all the Jewish Ceremonies. Of the Pre-Antiquity of that Day and the falsity of that Argument. p. 41  
Sect. IX. Whether Christ Rested on the Seventh-day-Sabbath, while he lay in the Grave? And what may be Argued from it? p. 44  
Sect. X. Upon what day of the Week, Christ ascended into Heaven, whether the Seventh-day or Saturday? p. 48  
Sect. XI. Whether after the Resurrection and Ascension of Christ, the Seventh-day-Sabbath was observed by the Apostles and First Christians? How long the Apostles met the Jews in their Synagogues on the Seventh-day, and for what Reason? p. 51  
Sect. XII. The Argument from Christ's Resurrection, for the Firstday of the Week to be the Christian Sabbath Vindicated. Circumcision not more abolished than the Seventh-day-Sabbath: That abolished, the First succeeds on the Account of Our Lord's Resurrection, since that Time, with equal or stronger Reason than the former continued till he Risen from the dead. p. 57  
Sect. XIII. Other Arguments for the First-day-Sabbath Vindicated from the Objections of Mr. B. Of a Sabbath-days Journey. After three Days, may be understood on the third Day he risen again. John 8.56. Psalm 118.22. Psalm 2.7. Acts 20.7. cleared and Vindicated. Of the beginning of the Christian Sabbath. p. 61.  
Sect. XIV. More Texts cleared, Rev. 1.9, 10. of being in the Spirit on the Lordsday, Math. 12.8. Mark 2.27. Jesus Christ Lord of the Sabbath. Of the Lord Supper. Christ's Resurrection commemorated on the Firstday of the Week, by Institution. p. 79  
Sect. XV. Gal. 4.9, 10. Explained. What days excluded from binding Christians. Col. 2.16. What Sabbaths meant as Shadows, to vanish when Christ came. Math. 24.20, no Argument for the Seventh-day-Sabbath. p. 92  
Sect. XVI. Of the Morality of the Fourth Command: The difference between Moral and Positive: Between Naturally or Absolutely Moral, and positively or secondarily Moral: What the Fourth Commandment requires as Moral and Perpetual. p. 101  
Sect. XVII. When to begin the Christian Sabbath, and of the fit Time for Public Worship on that day. p. 116  
Sect. XVIII. The Argument of Tradition considered. p. 118  
Sect. XIX. How far the Decalogue is in Force, as to us Gentiles. p. 125  
Sect. XX. The Tradition of the Lords-day's Rest, or Firstday of the Week from the Apostles time to the end of the Fourth Century. Of Easter and its Observation. The change from the Seventh to the Firstday not introduced by the Bishop of Rome. p. 127  
Sect. XXI. The Conclusion of the whole, with a Summary of what hath been Proved for the Observation of the Firstday of the Week, as the Christian Sabbath. p. 130    

A REPLY TO Mr. Bampfield's PLEA FOR THE Seventh-day-Sabbath.  
THE very Title of the Book is justly liable to Exception, as that which does not fairly state the Question; the second Enquiry being [whether the fourth Command be repealed or altered] for he very well knows, that these against whom he Disputes, even those who acknowledge the Morality of a Sabbath-day, do neither pretend to the Repealing of the Command, nor yet to the Alteration of it as such; for they strenuously assert the Ratification of the preceptive part of it, though they allow a practical Mutation of a single Clause therein; which was at its first Injunction, added as a Motive for the observance of the Seventh Weekly-day: And therefore he should rather have stated the Enquiry after such a manner as this, Whether every Clause in the Fourth Commandment be Moral, or whether every Clause of it, be absolutely Immutable, or so imposed from the beginning, as to be so. 'Tis not Ingenuous nor Candid, so to propose the Controversy, as though the Dissenters from him, were either Repealers, or Alterers of the Fourth Command. Moreover, the Annexion of this Query to the former, and the Subservience of the former to this, (For 'tis very evident, that that weighty fundamental Enquiry, is made to serve this Hypothesis, by his Connexion thereof, Page 5. thereto) as though the Immutability of every Tittle to this Command, was founded upon the Deity of our Lord Christ, his creating the World, and giving the Moral Law; and the Denial of the one, were virtually and consequentially the Denial of the other; and so those that are for the observance of the Lords day, (for so I take leave now to call it) are really and consequentially Ebionites, and Socinians; and so worse than Arians: Which is either to tax them all as gross Heretics, or at least ignorant and inconsiderate Persons, that do either not know, or not heed the direful and damning Consequences of their own Doctrine. But I hope we shall see, that either the first Query is but little concerned in the second; or that those who are contrary to his Sentiments in this, are throughly Orthodox in that. To which, as 'tis proposed, with a good and plain distinction, may be replied both negatively and positively; that the Lord Jesus Christ made the World, is Jehovah, etc. and that the Lord Jesus Christ was not Jehovah, made not the World, etc. and that altogether according to the Scriptures; and so the very stress of his Argument enervated, and this Foundation of this Structure, supposed to be eternal and immutable, proved to be Sandy, Temporary and Human; which we shall endeavour to evince in its proper place.  
I shall purposely wave any Reflections upon his Four first Pages, (though Remarks might be made thereon) because I suppose if there be any thing which he judges of moment in this Case, they are to be found in the following Discourse; to which they are but an Introduction: Only shall hint my Belief of his not having seen Mr. Warren of Colchester's Book against Tillam; seeing he does not mention him, Page 4. among the Writers he there quotes for the First-day-Sabbath. A most worthy Author who has so fully and convincingly confuted his Adversary, that I am prone to believe, had Mr. B. perused, and duly studied him, he would not have troubled the World or the Church, with his Book; and were that Book commonly to be gotten, or a new Edition thereof to be Printed, there could need no other Reply to this; much less should I have put Pen to Paper, being so far Inferior to him: However, a Pygmy upon a Giants Back, may see a little farther with his own Eyes.  

SECT. I.  
HE states the first Question, Page 5. Whether the World were made by Jesus Christ? and that too, as affording help to his Sabbatarian Notion; but rightly apprehended, it conduces nothing at all thereto: For Evidence whereof, we say that it may be orthodoxly denied and asserted, that Jesus Christ did not make the World, for the World was 4000 Years before ever Jesus Christ was: For these two Names J. C. do necessarily imply, or include his Human Nature with his Divine: For his Divine Nature formally and abstractly considered, cannot be Christ, that is, not Anointed; not fitted nor qualifyed by any other, for any Offices, Employments or Designs: It belongs to his Human Nature alone. Neither could his Godhead so considered, be our Jesus; for the Godhead can neither obey the Law, nor bear the Curse; both which were to be done by our Jesus: And these appertain only to his Humanity, though his Divinity gives the Merit of our Salvation to his active and passive Obedience; so that actually and formally, Jesus Christ could not be till his Incarnation: Though his Merits extended to all the Generations of Relievers from Adam, according to that, Rev. 13.8. For though an actual Existence be necessary in Physical Causes, before they can be Causes and produce their Effects, yet 'tis not so in Moral; but their Effects may be before the actual Existence of the Cause; as Persons may be redeemed and let lose from Prison, upon the foresight of a Ransom, or a Payment to be made, Months or Years after. And so God out of an Infallible Foresight of our Saviour's paying the Debts, and laying down the Ransom of the Elect in the fullness of time, and giving to himself a full meritorious Price, (even the Blood of God, Act. 20.28.) for all their spiritual and eternal Mercies, delivered, blessed and saved all the Saints and Believers, before our Lords being actually a meritorious Saviour, with an Eye and Regard thereto; and so he was not actually Jesus, neither could he be, till he had actually done and suffered all these things for which they were Redeemed and Saved: And therefore here, as Jesus Christ could not make the World, though as God, we acknowledge he did.  
In the Old Testament Christ is Prophesied of, as to come, Dan. 9.25, 26. How could he then create the World? And when he is born of the Virgin Mary, he is then pronounced by the Angel to be Christ, Luk. 2.11. as being then the Accomplishment of Daniel's and other such Prophecies, that went before of his future Messias-ship. And upon his Incarnation, he had the Name of Jesus, given him by God, Math. 1.21. How then could he as Christ Jesus, create the World? I desire that this might be duly considered by the Reader, because 'tis of great weight to overthrow the chief Prop of his Sabbatarian Structure; and to prove them to be but of ill tempered Mortar: For in this and the two following Queries, he builds upon a fallacious Composition, as though whatever God is, or did, that Jesus Christ must be, and do; and so he must create the World because God did so. Just as if we should suppose the Platonic Existence of Souls, Thousands of Years Solitary, without Bodies, and impute what ever those Souls Did, Thought, Resolved, etc. in that Condition, to those Men of whom they came in time to be an essential part; and say this Man so thought, and so resolved, this would be a very improper Speech; for the Man was not, till the Soul came to be essentially conjoined to the Body: And therefore in Propriety, 'twas the Soul, and not the Man that was the Author of these Cogitations and Resolutions; for they were Thousands of Years before the Man was. So the Godhead of Jesus Christ made the World, but the Godhead was throughout a beginning less Eternity, before Jesus Christ; and therefore he could not be the Creator of the World. 'Tis somewhat strange to me, that Mr. B. did not see this gross Fallacy. All Scriptures therefore which he brings to prove this Assertion, must be thus understood, as for Example, Col. 1. v. 12, 13, 14. with v. 16. which Scripture confutes his Suggestion, and confirms our Assertion: For surely he cannot say that the Creator, as, and when Creator, had Blood: But Christ as such, had Blood; and therefore Christ was not Creator, but his Godhead. So must also, John 1.1, 3. where the Creator is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; which we translate the Word; it might as well have been translated the Wisdom which was eternally with God, in God, and is God; and so must be the Creator. But 'tis very observable, that St. John doth not call him Jesus Christ, till v. 17. when he had before spoken of his Incarnation, v. 14.  
Just such another is Heb. 1. where 'tis said, that God made the Worlds, (taking them for the created Worlds, visible and invisible; though other excellent Divines interpret them otherwise) by his Son, even his Coeternal and Coessential Son: But it is not here said, that he made them by Jesus Christ, but Christ, the Son of God, spoke to us in the last days; he did it in and by his Humanity, but so he created not the Creatures.  
In the last Proof, Eph. 3.9. 'Tis indeed expressly said, That God created all things by Jesus Christ; which if meant of the old and whole Creation, must be meant as above; and 'tis as much as if he had said, God the Father created all things by God the Son; which Son is now Jesus Christ. Wherefore we conclude our Reply to this Query, by asserting that the Godhead of the Lord Christ, created the World; but that Christ consisting of that Godhead, and the Humanity hypostatically united to it, did not so.   

SECT. II.  
HE asserts Page 9 that Proposition which not Christian ever denied or questioned; and whoever does so, deserves not the Name Christian, viz. That the Lord Jesus Christ is Jehovah: Which he proves at large, home to Page 22. which in these days might have been very seasonable and commendable too, had it not been made a progressive Step toward the supremely intended Doctrine of the necessary Obligation of the Seventh-day-Sabbath. But yet I must say, that our Lord Christ's Deity, or Jehovah-ship, has been more fully proved, and more methodically, and from more Topics, and all these demonstrated and confirmed from Scripture, than here it is; and that by many Orthodox Divines. We acknowledging his Thesis to be good and orthodox; we hope he will acknowledge this to be so likewise, viz. That Jehovah was not always Christ: Christ is, and must be everlastingly Jehovah. But Jehovah was throughout a past Eternity, before there was ever any other Being, and in the beginning of time, before there was a sinful Being: And therefore necessarily before Christ Jesus had a Being. For Christ Jesus in an orthodox Notion, and according to Scriptural Revelations, does pre-suppose a created, and a fallen sinful Being. And so this orthodox Proposition, will but contribute very little to that other, which we deem heterodox. I shall make no Reflections at all upon what he has written in all these Papers, save only upon that Medium which he uses Page 12, and 13. which is Christ's giving the Law; (for that's his Expression) where again we urge, according to our former Interpretation, that Christ properly apprehended, did not give the Law before his Incarnation, not being Christ before it: He gave it not to Man before the Fall. When the whole absolute and primary Moral Law, was implanted by God on his Mind, to know all the Duties he ought to perform towards his God, according to his Excellencies and Attributes revealed unto him, according to his Works and his Obligations laid upon him, and all his Duties toward all his Fellow Creatures: In his Will, by a perfect and full Compliance with, and active and exact Conformity to all these moral Dictates of his Understanding, in all the Inferior Affections, Appetites, Inclinations, Motions, Senses, Organs and Members of the Body; by a ready and complete Subjection to the holy Will, and a most harmonious Obedience thereto. Which the Apostle calls Knowledge, Righteousness and true Holiness, Col. 3.10. Eph. 4.24. Neither did Christ Jesus give the Law just upon the Fall, as I suppose the Moral Law must be supposed to be given to Adam; seeing that by the Fall, he had greatly defaced and blotted the former clear and perfect Edition of it, in his Heart and Soul. Neither did he give it in the Third Edition, when 'twas brought and delivered by the Hand of Moses, from the Finger and Mouth of God, to the Israelites: For all these were long before Jesus Christ came into, and so was in, the World: And St. John himself tells us, John 1.17. The Law was given by Moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ. So that the Law was given long before Jesus Christ came, and preached, and purchased the Grace and Truth of the Gospel. But all this is made use of by this Author to insinuate, that even Christ Jesus, in the Flesh, was the Author of all the Ten Commands, as they are verbatim recorded in Moses' Books, or were written upon the Tables of Stone; and so particularly of that very Clause in the Fourth Command; which is given as a reason of the Sanctification of the Seventh day to be the Sabbath, home to his own Resurrection.  
But this we shall prove in the Sequel to be a very great Mistake: The only Proof that he brings for this, which has not been sufficiently answered already, or may not be so, by what has been formerly said and proved, is John 14.15. If ye love me keep my Commands: And such other like Passages. Here I would feign inquire, in what Sense he understands the Commands to be Christ's Commands: Either as he is Jehovah; and so before his Incarnation: If so, than the Ceremonial and Judicial Commands were his as well, and as much, as the Moral; for he gave the one as well as the other. And so by this arguing, and from this Topick, we are bound to keep the one as well as the other: If we would evince to our own Consciences, or others Observations, that we sincerely love Christ. If he understands them to be his, after his Incarnation, as taught, commanded and confirmed by his own blessed Mouth and Doctrine: So we confess that all the Moral Law was his, and that he taught it in the discharge of his Prophetical Office in the Flesh. But then we affirm, and doubt not to prove, that in all his Doctrine, Discourses and Commands, there is not one word that teaches or enjoins the Seventh-day-Sabbath, but much to the contrary: Or if there be only a perfect silence in this particular, without any thing spoken or done by Christ contrary to it, whilst he particularly enjoins and presses all those other Precepts, which are acknowledged by all to be Moral: I suppose this very Exclusion of it, out of all his Discourses, carries more weight in it, to cashier it from being any one of the Commands of Christ Jesus, than all his former Endeavours to prove Christ to be the Maker of the World, to be Jehovah, and here to be the Giver of the Law, have of moment to prove the Morality, and so the necessary observance of the Seventh-day. I have been here a little the more large, because I find the Author, Page 24. referring unto his having proved the Law to be given by Christ, as to that which highly conduces to his grand Design; but being duly weighed, we see that 'tis of little or no use at all thereto.   

SECT. III.  
WE have a third Interrogation proposed, Page 22. Whether after the Creation the Lord rested on the Seventh day: And, Whether the Seventh-day-Sabbath was sanctified and so instituted by him, and was observed by him who made the World? To the first Clause whereof we have sufficiently answered, That it was not the Lord Christ that created the World and rested, but it was indeed Jehovah; and though Christ be Jehovah, and the Maker of all things as such; yet the same Lord Christ is also the Son of Man, and made by Jehovah, as such; And therefore as Christ, as God-man, he neither created the World, nor rested from that Creation. Though in the Body of the Question, the Efficient of the Creation be only styled Lord, by which may be equally understood the Son of God, before and after the Incarnation, yet in the Margin he interprets this by the word Christ; and therefore we have given a proper, a direct and sufficient answer to that part thereof: And here it will be worth our observing, that in a proper and strict Sense, Jehovah, the Creator of the World, cannot be said to rest; because it is impossible that he should either admit of any Weariness, or Pain in himself; yea, or of any the least new motion in himself; God being an Infinite, Perfect, Immutable, Act and Life, cannot possibly admit of any such thing; and all the Changes that he makes, either substantially of nothing into Being; or Alteration of the Qualities and Conditions of Being, etc. without himself, are and must be without the least Mutation, and Alteration within himself: And this the very Light of Nature, and Metaphysics, will teach us, as well as the light of Scripture and Theology; as Mal. 3.6. Jam. 1.17. So that though God may properly be said to conclude, or end his work of Creation, yet cannot he properly be said to rest from it, or after it; because this, in its formal Notion, implies Motion, Activity and exerting of Power and Ability, with a Weariness thereby, which the Deity is infinitely free from: Which I desire may be heeded, because I perceive the Author would fain have every Clause in the Fourth Command to be Moral, and of necessary and perpetual Observance; and especially this of Gods resting on the Seventh day. Now that which is Moral, as to Motive and Obligation to the Humane Nature, is that which the light of Nature, right Reason, or (to go higher) the perfectly irradiated Mind of our first Parents, would have of its self discerned and closed with, as a Motive and Engagement to Piety or Charity, or any Duty: Which I think Gods resting on the Seventh day may well be asserted not to be, because,  
1. Reason or the illuminated Mind of Man, could never suppose God to take after his work, any real Rest or Refreshment in himself, which he had not before. And Secondly, God's working in the maintaining of the Creation in its Being, Order and Operation, is altogether as great, and as much, as it was in the Production of it; and therefore the Schoolmen say, That Preservation is a continual Act of Creation, because the same Word and Power is exerted in the one as in the other. Yea, if we respect the Work itself, or the Term of it without God; we may well say that the Preservation of the World is a greater work than the Creation of it: Though as to the Act itself in God, all is the same, (being the Act of the same infinite Power, Wisdom and Godhead) because of the contrary Qualities of the Creatures mutually tending to each others Destruction; but especially because of the Malice of Devils, and the sinful wretched Depravity of Fallen Man; which without an infinite Wisdom and Power exerted to the contrary, would soon bring all to Ruin, at least it would do so by the Humane Nature, for which all other things of this World were made and are continued: And therefore this Motive to a Seventh-day-Sabbath, cannot be in, and of itself Moral. And this our Saviour clearly shows, John 5.17. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work: Which he gives by way of Reply to those, who in the former Context, taxed and condemned him for a Breach of the Sabbath. Grounding it seems (tacitly at least) their Accusation, from that Passage in the Fourth Command of God's resting on that day, as though it had been of a Moral and Perpetual Obligation: And therefore our Saviour here tells them, It was not so; for both he and his Father did work on the Seventh day, as well as on any other day of the week; from which 'tis clear this Clause in the Command, is not Moral, but Positive.  
As to the Second Part of the Question, whether the Seventh-day-Sabbath was Sanctified, and so Instituted by him; and was observed by him who made the World. We answer, 'twas Sanctified, and Instituted by the Lord, as Jehovah, but not as Jesus Christ: And then that 'twas observed by Jesus Christ Incarnated, but not as Jehovah; because the Observation of it, seems to import some dutiful Obligation upon its Observer, which cannot be supposed with respect to the Godhead, but may be so with respect to the Lord Christ, as Mediator in his Human Nature. But then this Observance makes no more for the keeping the Seventh-day-Sabbath, than for the Observance of Pentecost, the Passover, the Feast of Tabernacles, and other Ceremonial and Judicial Laws, under which our Lord Christ was, and which he observed in the days of his Flesh; the Mosaical and the Ceremonial Administration being in force all the while he lived, and expired with his Death, and were buried in his Grave, as to their Virtue and Obligation: And so we assert the Seventh-day-Sabbath did also; which I hope we may evince in the progress of this Discourse.  
By what has been said, we have a sufficient Reply to his Three Proofs which follow his Querly, for it's Affirmative, and how they may be orthodoxly admitted, or else as Heterodox rejected. And here we may take notice that all the former Particulars which the Author makes use of, as Foundations to build his beloved Notion upon, do as equally militate and plead for the Observance of all the Ceremonial and Judicial Laws, as for the Seventh-day-Sabbath; for the Creator of the World enjoined them, as well as this. The great Jehovah imposed them, as well as this. The Lawgiver gave those Laws, as well as this. And our Lord Instituted and Sanctified those, as well as this, as he was God; and observed those, as well as this, as Christ Jesus, as God-man. 'Tis as Prejudice sufficient against all those (supposed) Achillean Arguments, that if they prove what they are pleaded for, We must all turn Jews.  
But before I leave this Query, I must reflect upon one Paragraph or two, under it, Page 23. wherein we have him laying down all his former great Postulatas, that the Lord Christ made the World, rested on the Seventh day, observed, blessed and sanctified it: By which Repetition, we may see how much he depends upon these, for the carrying off his Design: But withal, we have formerly seen how little, yea, how not at all, they conduce thereto. But to these, he superadds another grand Postulatum, as though 'twere a Particular, which either he had undeniably demonstrated before, or were granted by his Adversaries: Which is, that the Lord instituted this Seventh-day-Sabbath for, and imposed it upon Adam, and in him, to all Mankind without distinction; and that before the Sin and Fall of Adam. And hence concludes that 'tis a Moral Law incumbent upon Adam, and all his Posterity; which is a Conclusion, either from rotten Premises, or from such as will never logically infer the Conclusion: Which we shall show as briefly as we can; and what is spoken here, may lessen some of our Work hereafter. 1. Hereby is employed that this Command of the Seventh-day-Sabbath, was given to Man in the State of Innocency; which he can never prove. For though the Institution thereof, be inserted in the beginning of the 2. of Genesis yet 'tis clear, the Scripture doth not always keep a Chronical Order: We must not expect in our Bible, a constant Prius and Posterius; (as they say) but the sacred History, admits of many hysterons proterons; of many Misplacing with respect to the order of time; relating those thigns before, which were done after; and Vice Versa: And 'tis most clear that 'tis so in this very place. For here the Sabbath is recorded before the Plantation of Paradise, v. 8. which was not spoken of before; yet was Paradise part of the Works of the Creation, and consequently created before the Seventh day, though spoken of afterward; which proves that the order of the relation of the Sabbath, is no infallible proof that it was instituted before the Fall, but might be after it; though antecedently mentioned. And Mr. Warren brings many probable Arguments to prove that Adam fell before the Sabbath-day; and consequently before the giving or declaring of that Precept; because therein God's resting on the Seventh-day, is proposed as an Example and Motive to his keeping of it; which could not be done before the Seventh-day came: And so the Command must be given after the Fall. Which Arguments of his, aught to have been fairly debated, their Moment considered, and a due Answer and Solution given to them, before this had been so peremptorily asserted. But,  
2ly. This seems to imply, that whatever Injunction God gave to Adam before the Fall, was of things that are purely Moral, or so in themselves; or else it can never regularly be drawn from this Medium, that therefore the Seventh-day-Sabbath was so. But this we know was not so, for God prohibited him to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; which was purely positive, and a Duty only resulting from the Will of the Legislator. Again, if we should take it for granted, that the Institution and Injunction of the Seventh-day, was antecedent to the Fall, yet this would rather prove the Negative, than the Affirmative of its pure Morality. For whatever was purely Moral, and a Duty of its self, resulting from the Nature, Qualifications and Obligations of the rational Creature, Adam in the perfect Knowledge of that Nature, must know and discern, in and of himself; and consequently would have known the Seventh-day to be so: And if he knew it, there needed no Institution thereof, by God at all. Besides, 'tis very observable, that from the Creation of our first Parents, till their Fall, we do not read of one Moral Duty enjoined them, either of the First or Second Table; (unless this be supposed to be so) and what reason can be given for it, but this, that it needed not; because they were all fully and distinctly implanted in Man's Soul. If therefore the Seventh-day-Sabbath, had been so Moral, 'twould not have needed a singular Institution; much less such Arguments to enforce its Observance upon perfectly wise, and holy Adam. From whence, in my Apprehension, a good Argument may be drawn against its Morality.  
3. It implies, that all the Commands that were given to Adam in Innocency, are authoritatively incumbent upon all his Posterity. The contrary whereto, is clear in the prohibition of the Tree in the midst of the Garden; for that ceased both to himself and all his Posterity upon his Fall: By all which, we see the weak reasonings of this Author.  
In the following Paragraph, he tells us that all those things were recorded for the Glory of the Lord Jesus Christ; where as none of them do at all concern Jesus Christ: For all those things in the foregoing Paragraph by his own Doctrine, and according to his own Sentiments, were effected and agitated before the Fall of Man: In which time there could not be so much as any need or use of a Jesus, or a Christ. Nor was there so much as the least Hint of him given, by either Prophecy or Promise; much less was he himself in being: And consequently none of these things could conduce to his glory; for there can nothing appertain to that which is not. And thus these supposed unmoveable Foundations of this Tenent, are found not to be so much as Sandy: For they are found to be nothing at all, as he would have them refer to our Lord Christ. We acknowledge therefore that all these Particulars which he named, are for the Glory of Jehovah; and that the Observance of the Seventh-day-Sabbath, home to the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ from the Dead, was to his Praise as Creator and Legislator. But withal, we hope to prove that the Change of it, and dedicating another day of the Week to our Lord Jesus Christ, the same Jehovah, and spotless Son of the Virgin, does highly conduce to his Honour, as Lord and Glorious Redeemer; as Conqueror of Hell and Death; as Accomplisher of that Great and Glorious Work of our merited Salvation. (A Work unconceivably more glorious in itself, and infinitely more advantageous to us, and really laborious and grievous to himself) and as he entered into his real Rest on that day, even the first day, out of the Depths of his Humiliation. Here in the next Paragraph he quotes, Mat. 12.8. The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath, with that Gloss or Interpretation which he puts upon it, which I doubt not, is very false, and has been already proved to be so: But because he refers it to another Place, we shall attend him there, and then endeavour to give its true meaning. About the Fourhth Question, Page 23. I shall not contend, for I verily believe the ancient Patriarches, did Observe and Sanctify the Seventh-day.   

SECT. iv  
THE fifth Question: Whether the Ten Commands were given by Christ to Jews and Gentiles? Page 24. He thinks he hath proved the Legislation of Christ from the Beginning: But how this is to be understood, and wherein he has taken false Measures, has been before shown. Whether he gave them to Jews and Gentiles, that is, to all Mankind, he takes this for granted also, Which we also assert, even that all the Moral Law was given to the Humane Nature, and so to all Mankind in Adam: But withal, that the Seventh-day-Sabbath was no part of the Moral Law; no nor yet a seventh part of time to be Consecrated and Sanctified to Divine Worship. (I mean not Primarily and in itself Moral) which I should endeavour here to prove; if I did not foresee a more convenient Opportunity for it hereafter. Only let us here consider what he himself here grants, viz. That the Moral Law was written upon Man's Heart; that it did consist in Knowledge, Righteousness and Holiness; wherefore the Seventh-day-Sabbath is no part of it; because it was not written upon Man's Heart at first. 1. Because God revealed it to Man after his Creation; which needed not, if it had been in him before. 2. Because there are obscure Remains of the Moral Law, in the Humane and Rational Creature, with respect to all the other Commands (as might be easily manifested by an Induction) but none as to the Seventh-day-Sabbath. It is true, as to the Moral Substance of the Law, that is found in Mankind, even a Separation of time, and proper Seasons for the Worship of God; but this is not: Nay, it is so rare, that not one among Ten thousand does dream of it, or scarce one in an Age does so much as fancy it. 3. Because by his own Orthodox Assertion in this very place, the Moral Law is reingraven, that is, more fully, clearly and distinctly, and in its Spiritual Sense and Latitude upon the Hearts of those that are revived by the Spirit of God, which is the Image of God, reinstamped upon the Regenerate and Converted; as St. Paul saith Col. 3.10. Eph. 4.24. Now it is as clear as the Sun, that the Generality of the Called, enlightened and sanctified, have not the Law of the Seventh-day-Sabbath written in their Hearts: Nay, they have an Aversion from it. Of all truly Religious ones, that ever I knew, Mr. B— is the Solitary Person of this Persuasion; whence it must necessarily follow, that it is no part of the Moral Law, or of that Image of God which was instamped upon Man plainly and fully at first; and remains imperfectly and obscurely in all Men; and is restored to the Saints in their Regeneration, and is increased in them in their progressive Sanctification: Whence it is also clear, that this Command, thus stated, was not given by Christ to Jews and Gentiles in the Creation: And his proof for it is very weak and invalid; which is taken from those express Commands given by God to the Jews, of causing them that were either their Substance, (Slaves bought with their own Money) or Proselytes, Strangers by Nation, but yet joining themselves to them, and dwelling among them; and so were of their Body; who were bound, as he himself there acknowledges and proves, to be Circumcised, to observe the Passover, etc. And now what Tendency hath this to prove, that the Seventh-day-Sabbath was given to Jews and Gentiles? When this proves only, that those Gentiles were bound to keep it, who were within the Gates, and of their Body Politic: But has no reference to, nor does at all concern other Gentiles; some of which might never hear of the Name of Israel; or of any of their Laws and Sabbaths. It pities me to see such weak and invalid Arguments; which if they have any force, it is to Judaize all the Christian World.  
As to the second part of the Question, whether the weekly Seventh-day-Sabbath were observed ever after, during the Old Church: We acknowledge it was so still among the Jewish Nation; and he needed not to have produced any proofs for it: But withal we say, never among any other Nations, nor any Footstep of it, which is a sure Proof against its proper Morality. As to that Observation, Page 28. That the Seventh Day, throughout the Old and New Testament, was called the Sabbath day. It was fit it should be so all along till our Saviour's Resurrection; because it was the Sabbath day till then: And afterward, if it be so called, it was in compliance with the Jews, who still held it so to continue, or to use the Expression which was in most common use, whereby the day might be known they spoke of; (as we do of Sunday, Monday, etc. only to declare what day of the Week we mean) or else to declare the Abolition thereof: And (if we remember it) we may make some use of that Assertion, that the Seventh day and Sabbath are Synonimous in the Language of the Old and New Testament.   

SECT. V  
THis Question he endeavours to prove Assirmatively, Page 29. That Christ did in the Flesh, confirm the Ten Commands, without any Exception of the Fourth Commandment, or any part or tittle thereof. Which if we should fully grant, without the least Exception, it would make nothing for his Cause, nor against ours; for as long as Christ was in the World, so long we all agree, that the Seventh day of the Week was the enjoyed Sabbath; and therefore aught to be observed; and so might have been commanded by Christ to be kept: And so we know he ratified the Ceremonial Law, by commanding the cleansed Lepers to go and show themselves to the Priest, and offer the Gift which Moses commanded for their cleansing, Matt. 8.4. And so also the Judicial Law, by enjoining them to pay Tithe of all, even of Mint, Annis and Cummin, Matt. 23.23. (which I think few or none do hold to be purely Moral) and so the Brother's taking of his Childless Brother's Wife, he seems to confirm by a Tacit Approbation to the Sadducees, objecting that to him, to baffle and puzzle him about the Resurrection, Matt. 22.23, 30. Yet nevertheless those Laws were not permanent, but expired; the Ceremonial with himself, and the Judicial with the Judicial State and Polity. Withal we add, that our Saviour did for ever confirm the Moral Law, which is contained in the Ten Commandments: And so the Fourth, as far as Moral; and in all that it commands as such: But withal we say, that some Passages of the Fourth Command are neither Moral, nor yet commanded therein as such; or of the Substance thereof: Whereof the mentioning of the last, the Seventh Day of the Week, to be the Sacred Rest; is one: (which here is but nakedly asserted, but we defer the Proof) and such as was to expire at his Resurrection. Wherefore we say that that Passage, Matt. 5.17. Till Heaven and Earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away, must refer only to the Moral Law, Quatenus Moral; and as it refers to, and obliges all Nations; which several Passages belonging to the Ten Commands do not; whereof this is one about the Seventh day; and I think th' is may be cleared by this Argument: That which neither our Saviour himself, nor any of his Apostles, did command or enjoin to be followed by his, or their, Disciples and Followers, cannot be Moral: But neither he nor they did ever enjoin the Seventh-day-Sabbath, therefore it's not Moral. Our Saviour in none of his Discourses (that I remember) did ever expressly or particularly command the Observance of the Sabbath-day; but spoke and did things which seem to declare the Abolition of the Seventh day; neither do any of his Apostles, in any of their Writings, impose it upon, or command the Observance of it, from either Jews or Gentiles, to whom they writ; and consequently we may conclude, that they never preached it (for we truly hold, that the Sum and Substance of all their Sermons is in their Books.) Yea, their Writings have several weighty Passages against the Seventh-day-Sabbath. Now our Saviour in his Commission which he gave his Apostles, after his Resurrection, just as he was ascending up to Heaven, expressly commands them to teach all Nations to observe all things whatsoever he commandeth them, Matt. 28.19, 20. Wherefore seeing they commanded not the Nations to observe the Seventh-day-Sabbath, Christ never taught them that Doctrine, nor enjoined them to do it; and therefore this cannot be one of those Jots or Tittles of the Law, which in this Author's Sense, was not to pass from the Law; but only what was Moral in it. We acknowledge that the Lord Christ also confirmed the Moral Law, by commanding the Lawyer to love the Lord God, etc. But withal, that whoever gives to God the seventh part of his time, though it be not the Seventh day of the week; does therein love God as to the Declaration, as to the Fruit and Effect of his Love, as much as if he did the Seventh day; because it is as fully the Substance of that Command.  
The same answer will serve to Mark 12.28, 31. (Page 30.) with this Addition, That the change of the Seventh-day-Sabbath into that of the first day, is no more laying aside of the Morality of the Fourth Command; than the change of Circumcision, the Passover, and other Ceremonial Ordinances of the Old Testament into Baptism, the Lords Supper, and other Evangelical Administrations under the New. These being as really included in, and commanded by, the second Command at that time, as the Seventh-day-Sabbath is in and by the Fourth. And therefore as the change of those Rites and Modes of Worship by our Lord Christ and his Apostles, was not the laying aside of the second Command, but rather a perfect Obedience thereto, and practical Confirmation thereof; so the change of the weekly-day-Sabbath was no Infringement, but rather an Establishment of the Fourth Commandment.  
In the same Page he Insinuates, that we take away those words [The Seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God] which yet we neither do in Letter, nor Sense, for we leave the words in the Command, and obey them in their purport and meaning: For they do not so much enjoin the Seventh day in order, as in number, not so much the last day of the week, as one day of the week, to be observed and sanctified by us (as I suppose we may have an opportunity to prove.)  
Page 31. He shows from Scripture that one great Article of the New Covenant, is Gods writing his Law upon the Hearts of his People, which he, with us, expressly acknowledges to be the Moral Law: How then can the Seventh-day-Sabbath (as such) be part of that Law, which is not written upon the Hearts of Thousands, to one of God's People. I judge this to be a clear Demonstration against the Morality thereof.  
He could never have shown, that the Seventh-day-Sabbath was a part of the Law of Nature in Adam,) though the substance of the Ten Commands was it) and therefore it was instituted by God as before.  
Page 32. He shows us (for so I have a Belief he intends) that he had a mind to prove, that Set Forms of Prayers, or other parts of Worship under a Form, though never so Excellent, though in express words of Scripture; are the Pesel or Graven Image, that is forbidden in the second Command, which is a Notion, I am sure, alien from the Resentments of the most Grave, Prudent, Learned and Experienced Christians of former and Modern Ages, and very few of them have thought so uncharitably and rigorously of them, as to brand them with the grossest Idolatry; though many judge them fit to be lain aside by them, to whom God hath given a good and competent Gift; but yet much rather to be u sed, and that comfortably and profitably too, where such a Gift may be denied. And I think by this Rule, that everly Man that joins with another in Prayer is guilty of Idolatry against the second Command; for he makes the words of the Minister, or private Christian, to be the Set Form of his Prayer: And why a Prayer written as a Form, should be more an Idol than a Prayer spoken as a Form, I do not yet understand.  
In the same Paragraph he also hints, that the Lords Prayer ought only to be used in secret and alone; not in public, no, nor in private, with any others; because of those Expressions in Matt. 6.6, 9 When thou prayest, enter into thy Closet and shut thy Door and Pray, etc. Whereas the Form of that Prayer in the plural Number, the very matter of that Prayer, being the universal Concern of the Universal Church, and of every Congregation and Society of Christians, as well as of every private Christian; and our Saviour commanding his Disciples to use it without any such Limitation: Of a secret Personal Retirement, Luke 11.2. are sufficient proofs, that it may be as well used Socially as Solitarily; with others as lawfully and conveniently as by one's self.  
In the following Paragraph he seems to be of the Opinion, that it would be better to have men's or Ministers own Inventions in singing of Psalms, than the Divine Inspirations of David and other Authors in Scripture. And when I can believe, that theirs can be better than those in Scripture; or can be convinced that there is neither Psalm nor Hymn in the Bible that can fit a present Condition, either for Prayer, or Praises, or Gratitude, etc. I will think so: but as to the former of these two, I hope I shall never believe; and as to the latter, I think it is not likely to fall out in my days. These things ought as curiously to be replied, as the Author has started these Notions; and when he sees fit to endeavour a more large Explication and Vindication of them, than we may also see what may be discoursed agianst them. And I hearty wish, he had but hinted this of his Seventh day; and so saved all this labour in answering of it; for it is just another such Opinion as the former, and deserved only to be mentioned: Indeed not to be mentioned at all, at least not in Print, not in public: But of this in the Preface.   

SECT. VI  
IN the next Paragraph he tells us, he has much to do to recover the word [Seventh] of the Fourth Commandment: Whereas none, but the Deniers of the Morality of the Seventh, would wrest it from him; for we all grant it to him, and acknowledge it to be of the very substance of the Command; that a Seventh day should be set apart for an Holy Consecrated Day to Divine Worship; only we say, that the Seventh day is so, as the seventh part of the Week; as one day of the seven, and not the seventh in order; or the last day of the Week: This we say is not expressly commanded therein, and might be altered for another day of the Seven, upon very good and authentic Reasons and Grounds; as it is from it to the first.  
In this same Page he returns to our Saviour's Confirmation of the Decalogue, from Mat. 5.17, 19 Luke 16.17. and then asks why those places confirm all the 10 Commands, and not the Seventh-day-Sabbath; and tells us that he can assign no other reason for it, but the marvellous Corruption of our Nature, which inclines us to be Gods, etc. when yet he knows, that they that are for the change of the Seventh, into the First-day-Sabbath, have given him many Reasons and good scriptural Grounds and Arguments, which do amount (in their Esteems) to a divine Authority for that Change; (though they do not produce an express Command for it; (as that which he seems to require in this Paragraph yet, what amounts thereto) but it seems all these are not Reasons to him; are not so much as Shows of Reasons: But the only Reason is Man's Corruption, Pride and Rebellion. Whereas he cannot but know, that many of those, who in Doctrine and Practice, admit of this Change, are as free from these Vices, and have as much mortified them, as himself; and are as Eminent for Holiness, and Humility and Obedience to God, as any Sabbatarian can pretend to be: And their Earnestness for the First day, does not spring from the Looseness of others thereon, nor mainly and chief from their Education and Custom: But because they know 'tis not Moral, (as other Parts and Appendix's of the Ten Commandments are not) and therefore not confirmed by Christ in those Expressions; with many other good and solid Grounds.  
And here I shall ask him by way of requital, if the Seventh-day-Sabbath were really and primarily Moral, and by Christ confirmed, as well as all the other Commands, which are undeniably so. Whence comes it to pass, that in all his Sermons and Discourses that he made to the Jews about the Moral Law, he did not so much as ever mention the Sabbath to his Hearer; either by way of Recommendation of it to them, or commending of them for their Zeal for it, and tthe strict Observance of it; nor yet commanding of its Observance, or teaching them how they should Keep and Sanctify it according to its first Institution? seeing 'tis clear, that he in his Discourse, doth particularise every other Duty of the Moral Law; and Exhorts, and Requires Obedience thereto. In all his most copious and glorious Sermon upon the Mount, where he Explains, Enlarges upon, and Enjoins the other Moral Duties, we have not a Word about their Sabbath; and when ever he enumerates Particulars of the Moral Law of the Decalogue, he never mentions among them, the Sabbath; nor when so many particular and express Occasions were given him by the Pharisees, and captions Jews; (in their condemning him and his Disciples, as Profaners of the Sabbath, etc.) to expound the Duty of the Sabbath, and to show them wherein the due religious and acceptable Observance of the Seventh-day-Sabbath consisted; There is not the least Word appertaining hereunto, uttered by him; only a Vindication of his own, and his Disciples Practices, from a Profanation thereof. If I may judge at the Reasons, I think they may be such as these.  
1 Because he knew that it was not of the same nature with the others, not Moral as they, nor necessary to be kept to Salvation as they. 2. Because he saw the Jews too superstitiously and zealously affected towards their Seventh-day-Sabbath already. 3. Because neither they nor we, neither Jews nor Gentiles, should have any thing from his Mouth that might have the least colour of confirming that Sabbath-day. 4. Because he designed its speedy Absolution as the Seventh day, and its Conversion into the First day. 5. Because as Place, Priesthood, Mode, outward Ceremonies of Divine Worship, which were before his coming into the Flesh; were to be altered by his Authority, as King of the Church, so was Time also; the day on which those were chief and most slemnly observed, into another day, wherein his own Institutions were to be chief and generally practised by his Church: And for these and such like Reasons, he did not only particularly recommend and enjoin, but did also speak and do (as has been formerly hinted, and may be futurely evinced) such words and things, as had a doctrinal and practical Tendency towards its Expiration.  
Page 33. He imputes the Observation of the First day, but to a good Intention; which has been the cause of all manner of gross Superstitious Errors, Bloody Wars, etc. As though this general Opinion and Practice of the Universal Church all along, since the days of our Lord Christ, had no other Foundation, but in the deluded Brain of silly Zealots, and not the least Footing for it in the Word of God. An unworthy Suggestion, and a most invidious Comparison; and such as very ill becomes a Man of his professed Candour and Reading.  
'Tis strange that a Man should fancy that Commenius, when he exhorts to a Reformation of the Government, Doctrine, Worship and Practice of the Church; according to the Word of God, and the Pattern in the Mount, should mean as one, if not the chiest of those Particulars, the removal of the First-day-Sabbath, and the reversion of the seventh day in lieu thereof: When he knows that all the Divines and Doctors that are orthodox, and his Adversaries in this Opinion, prescribe the same rule for the Reformation, and call upon those in Authority to subserviate all their own Laws Ecclesiastical and Civil, to an Observance of the Laws of God and of Christ: And Commenius himself, in his Practice and in his own Church, was an Observer and Sanctifier of the First-day-Sabbath, (as he here acknowledgeth) so a Disowner and Rejector of the Seventh day: And therefore questionless did not esteem the Seventh-day-Sabbath to be any part of that rule, according to which he would have all Churches regulated. But here we see what a strong fancy can do; it can transfigure into its self those things that are quite dissonant, if not directly contrary thereto.   

SECT. VII.  
HE gives us his Opinion Page 34. of abrogating the Ceremonial Laws: But why does he not bring us an Express Command for their Abrogation, as he requires us to do, for not the Abrogation, but only the Mutation of the Sabbath, from one Day of the Week to another? For I assert, and can prove it, that some part of the Ceremonial Law was more confirmed by the Mouth of Christ, than his Seventh-day-Sabbath. I take leave to call it his, because though 'twas God's day before the Resurrection of Christ, yet now 'tis not so; but Men will be favourably to themselves and their own Opinions, while they are rigorous towards others, and their more Orthodox and Scriptural Resentments.  
In the same Page he gives us a Caution of not incurring the Threats of infringing the Laws of Christ, even the least of them; and by way of a charitable Requital, we warn him to be cautious lest he build again that which Christ hath destroyed, and repair the razed Synagogue.  
Here we have also his Notion of what is Moral, telling us that many call the Ten Commandments the Moral Law: I think all slid Divines do call them so; but none that I know, do say that every Clause and Word in them, or belonging to them, (by this last Expression, I mean part of the Preface to them) is Moral; and particularly not the Seventh-day-Sabbath, or that Clause appertaining thereto in the Fourth Commandment; no, nor yet the Seventh Part of Time therein expressly commanded, and perpetually too, (that is not primarily nor absolutely, and of its self so.) As to his Notion of what is Moral, I cannot call it either a Definition, or a Description of the thing; but only an Interpretation of the Word Moral, viz. pertaining to Manners. We usually in such Discourses, put Moral, in opposition to what is positive; whether it be Ceremonial, or Judicial: But this is such a Notion, as includes all Laws whatever, even Human as well as Divine, and of Divine, all of them of what sort or kind soever; for they all apertain to Manners: Yea, to Thoughts, Words and Actions; yea, and are included in the Love of God, because whoever loves God truly, will, and must yield Obedience to all his Laws of what sort soever; whether Moral or Positive. But such a lax Interpretation of the Moral Law, served to the Design of the Seventh Day, because it includes it will all other positive Laws; but had he given us a true Notion of what is Moral in its self, or in its own Nature, it would necessarily have been exclued: As may be evinced by some Properties of what is truly Moral.  
1. The Moral Law is inward, and was consecrated with the rational Creature; and does need no external Revelation, or Divine Institution; especially in the State of human Integrity before the Fall; but such was not the Seventh day: For 'twas Instituted by God, after Man's Creation. 2. The Moral Law yet remains in some Footsteps and Degrees thereof, in the Human Nature, and so in the generality of Mankind, the Heathens themselves not excepted; (as might be easily proved by their Laws and Writings) but the Notion of the Seventh day, is Universally excluded; and the Generality of Mankind totally destitute thereof. If it be here objected, That the Heathen did separate a Seventh-day to their Religious Service: To this may be applied, That 'twas but some of them, and but for some time; not Universally and Perpetually. That they did it by Tradition from the Jews, or by Satan's Institution and Injunction, who in his cursed Pride, affects to have his Votaries serve him, as the Acknowledgers of Jehovah do him. 3. All Moral Laws are clearly and distinctly engraven upon the Minds and Hearts of those that are enlightened and sanctified by the Spirit of God: But not a Tittle or punctum of his Seventh-day is seen in the Generality of them. 4. Man was made for Moral Duty, that is, to Glorify and Honour God in all Acts of Internal and External Piety; to profit and comfort his Neighbour by all Acts of Charity; to possess his own Vessel in Sanctification and Honour. And by so doing, he lives up to the end for which he was made: But now Man was not made for the Sabbath and for its Observance, but the Sabbath was made for Man, and for his Good, Mark 2.27. 5. Moral Duties are such, as a Man cannot change them, or neglect them, or do any thing beside them, without dishonouring and sinning against God. But now it is certain, That as to the Nature of the thing its self, (separated form a positive Institution) that a Man may as fully Glorify and Honour God, and as completely serve him, by appropriating and employing another day of the Week to, and in his Workship and Service, as the Seventh; provided he do dedicated another day in Seven, to that Service, the Worship is the same; and the proportion of time the same: and so God as much and as long served, as upon the last day of the Week. Let him denominate any other Propriety of what is Moral; and I will undertake to evince, That it belongs not to his Seventh-day-Sabbath. To what purpose then to urge and insist so much, and so long, upon the Moral Law, when the Seventh-day-Sabbath, is no part at all of the Morality thereof?  
Those Passages before mentioned, That Christ came not to destroy, but to fulfil the Law; that the Breaker of the least of God's Commands, shall be least in the Kingdom of God, etc. And these Page 35. He that will enter into Life, must keep the Commandments: It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away, than one tittle of the Law, to fail; do not only concern the Moral Law (though if they did, we have sufficiently shown that the Sabbath is not concerned in them) but also the Positive; even the Ceremonial Law. For while they were in Force, as they all were throughout the days of our Saviour's Animal Life; (which I so call, to distinguish it from the Glorious Life of his Humanity upon Earth after his Resurrection.) They that would enter into Life (at least of the Jews and their Proselytes, to whom only they were Laws and Obligatory) were bound to keep them. And if they did wilfully and perseveringly disobey them, they would as certainly be Damned, as if they had lived in a Contradiction to any of the Moral Laws: Because such a Refusal to observe and keep the Ceremonial Laws, is directly and ultimately a Disobedience to the Moral; and that too, to the very Soul and Foundation of all the Commandments: Even the First Command, by being a Renunciation of God's Authority in refusing a Conformity to his revealed Will. Again it was a direct and immediate Sin against the Second Command; by being a refusal to worship him according to his own instituted Worship: So Christ came not to destroy the Ceremonial Law, but to fulfil it. Which he did by being the End and Consummation thereof; by being the Substance of those Figures, and the Body of those Shadows, and no Law is destroyed which continues in its Force as long as the Legislator intended, and produces all those Ends for which he designed it. Now the Ceremonial was intended by God to be no longer a Law, than till our Lord's Death, or Resurrection, or Mission of the Holy Ghost; and it was designed only to typisie the Lord Christ, and to lead Believers to him, as to the End and Substance thereof; which our Lord, being he was so far from destroying it, that he perfectly fulfilled it, though he abrogated its future legal Authority: And so not one tittle of the Ceremonial Law did fail, for all had its Accomplishment on Christ, no more than a tittle of the Moral Law cannot: So that we have granted him his desire, in showing him what Law Christ meant in such Passages, even the Ceremonial as well as the Moral; for they were the Object of the Superstitious Jews greatest Zeal, and they persecuted him and his Disciples, as the Overthrowers of the Ceremonial Laws; and therefore Christ tells them, He came not to destroy, but to fulfil them, etc.  
By all that hath been already said, is fully shown, the Impertinency of those Quotations (Page 35. 38.) where our Saviour makes use of an confirms the Moral Law: For there is not one word of his Sabbath in them all. In our Saviour's Carriage and Language he vindicates the Sanctity of the Temple, John 2.13, 17. so he does Circumcision, and Authorises its Administrations upon the Sabbath day, and derives it from a more August Antiquity than Moses, John 7.22, 23. If our Author had any such Expression from our Saviour's Mouth concerning the Sabbath; how would he have triumphed therein, and have fetched its everlasting Establishment therefrom? But there is not one such Syllable concerning it. These have a greater show for their Authority from our Saviour's Discourses than the Seventh-day-Sabbath; yet I doubt not but he looks on them as no longer in Force, and of no Obligation in these latter and Evangelical days.  
Page 37. He produces the Church of England Articles, the Presbyterian Confession, the Independants Declaration of Faith, for the Ratification of the Moral Law; who yet are all for the Exclusion of the last day of the Week from being the Christian Sabbath; and thereby declare their Rejection of it from being any part thereof: And thus all the Authority, both Divine and Humane, that he produceth, makes nothing at all for him, but very much rather against him: With which this question is concluded.   

SECT. VIII.  
HE proposes the Question, Page 38. Whether Christ in his own Person did not observe the Seventh Week-day-Sabbath, and no other during his Life. To which we answer affirmatively with him, that he did so, that he was bound to do it, that it was part of his Righteousness which he was to fulfil; for he was born under the Authority and Obligation of the Old Testament Administrations; even of the Ceremonial ones, and therefore was Circumcised the eighth day; went up to Jereusalem with his Mother in his Childhood to keep the Annual Feasts; and in his Manhood was a Constant, Conscientious and obedient Attender upon, and observer of the Passover; as we read in the History of his Life, after his Baptism, and manifesting himself to the World, home to his Death, or just before his Sufferings; and so doubtless did by all the other Ceremonial Laws, according to God's Injunction of them, and was an Observer of all other positive Divine Laws; and so consequently must he be of this; for neither all the former, nor this particular, were to be abrogated and lain aside, as to their Authority, till he himself was lain aside and buried in the Grave. Without doubt he also dutifully kept and practised all the Judicial Laws; being born a Member of their State, as well as of their Church, as far as their Roman Lords would permit; for the Authority of these Laws lasted as long as the Judicial Polity; and with it declined and perfectly expired. Will this Pleader for the Seventh day, contend for the Authority of all those Ceremonial and Judicial Laws home to our days, because our Blessed Lord observed and kept them? He must do so, if this Argument be of any weight. And it has been the Fate of all his Arguments hitherto, to militate as much for all the Ceremonies (except that of the Sabbaths being given in innocency) of the Jews, as for the Seventh day. Enough for their own Confutation.  
Just another such Medium is cunningly insinuated, Page 39 to prove the Goodness of the Observation of this Sabbath, viz. Its Antiquity, having been the Sabbath of the Church for four thousand Years; which will introduce Sacrifices into the Worship of God, a Bloody Offering up of Beasts, for they are as ancient within a day or two (as 'tis probable) for God taught Adam to offer up such Sacrifices as the Types of the Seed of the Woman who was to have his Heel bruised by the Serpent, his Humane Nature murdered by the Devil and his Agents; but then sacrificed and offered up to God, as the Expiratory Victim for the sins of Fallen Man: And 'tis probable that those Skins which God made Coats of for Adam, might be of such sacrificed Beasts: And Adam taught his Sons to Sacrifice to God: And we read Gen. 4.4. That Abel brought to God the Firstlings of his Flock, and the Fat thereof. Will he therefore plead that their venerable Antiquity must still give them a place in the Evangelical Dispensation, now that that Grand and All-sufficient Sacrifice, the substance of those Shadows, is offered up? I trow not: So neither can the Antiquity of the former Sabbath, till our Saviour's days, and through his days, be any Argument for its Admission and Authority now; seeing by our Saviour's coming, we have the new Heaven and the new Earth, which the Prophets foretold, Isa. 65.17. & 66.22. and a more glorious and blessed Work accomplished, than that of the Creation; which doth much more deserve a Sanctification and Separation of that day, whereon its Completer rested from all his former Labours, and a new external Administration was introduced; and a new day and consecrated time suitably also instituted.   

SECT. IX.  
IT is demanded Page 40. Whether Christ did rest the Seventh-day-Sabbath when he was in the Grave. And it is affirmatively resolved, that his Soul rested in Heaven, and his Body rested in the Grave that day. All as a Proof that our Lord Christ himself, did in his state of Death, confirm that Seventh-day-Sabbath, as well as by his Practice and Doctrine in Life; and so recommended it to the Observance of all the future Churches: Which Notion, if it could be proved, would do more for the Seventh-day-Sabbath, than all the Arguments he hath yet brought. If he could rationally demonstrate, that the blessed Redeemer did rest on the Seventh day from all his Humiliation and Sufferings; he would then defeat the great ground on which all the Churches, since our Lords coming and consummating the work of Redemption, have built upon for the Change of the Seventh day, into the First-day-Sabbath. For they say, they do it, because on the first day our Lord Jesus God-man, rested from that more Wonderful, Glorious, Gracious, Profitable and Ravishing Work, than that of the Creation and more laborious and difficult work to himself; being really and dreadfully so to his Humane Nature. But indeed this Notion is a very strange and an uncouth one; because the Rest of the Mediator in this Sense, cannot be thought to be any other than a happy and Complacential Reflection upon the work of our Redemption, merited by all his Active and Passive Obedience; which could not be until he had waded through all the Degrees of his Abasement, and begun his Exaltation, and so in his Blessed and Glorious Estate, delighting himself in his Conquest of the Devil, the World, Death and the Grave; and his having perfectly satisfied Justice, and purchased Grace and Glory for Lost Sinners; which could not be till the Resurrection of his Body. Can the State of Death with any probability be thought the Mediator's Rest? Or his lying in the Grave, be deemed the end of all his Abasements, when Death was the worst thing his Enemies could bring upon him in their Rage and Fury; when they triumphed over him in the Grave; and concluded that now they had completely vanquished him, and proved him to be a Grand Deceiver, Matt. 27.62, 64. when it was that which was especially required as the utmost of his Sufferings for the Expiation of our Sins; being that which was denounced, at first against Sin, Gen. 2.17. and as the consummate Punishment thereof, and is the proper Wages of Sin, Rom. 6.23. and therefore so to be undergone and lain under by the Sinners Surety; standing in his stead, and bearing his Punishment, and being made that Curse for him, Gal. 3.13. which was the lowest Descent of his Humiliation, which saddened the Hearts of his Disciples, and filled them with fear, whose hopes almost expired at his Death, and were buried in his Grave; in which Estate if he had abode, the Devil and his Enemies would have gotten a complete Victory over him, and we could never have been justified nor saved.  
Moreover our Saviour's Body and Soul rested as much upon the Cross after his Death, as they did in the Grave after his Burial; And so the Muchammedists have as fair a Plea for their Sixth-day-Sabbath, because on that day the Dead Body of our Saviour felt no pain on the Tree, and his Soul enjoyed all Bliss in Heaven. And so in this sense rested on their day of Worship.  
How unreasonable and unscriptural to call this the Rest of our Redeemer! Besides it was impossible that as Redeemer he should rest in the State of Death, and in the Grave; for the Redeemer must be God-man; his Deity could not declaratively rest, till it had raised its own Humanity out of the Grave, and rend in sunder the Bonds of Death: And his Humanity could not really do so; because it was not, during that Condition; for we know that Death is the Separation of the Soul from the Body: Now the Soul separated from the Body, is a Spirit and not a Man; the Body separated from the Soul, is a Corpse not a Man; both Soul and Body separated are not Man; but essentially conjoined they make the Man. Wherefore though both Body and Soul in their mutual Separation were united to the Deity; and so he was always God, and had the essential parts of Man; yet being divided, he was not Man; for by Death they being dissolved, his Humanity was destroyed, and continued so, as long as Death had power over him. So that 'tis against all Reason and common Sense, to assert that the Mediator, who must be God-man, rested in the Grave; seeing in this true sense he could not be Man there. No, no, This was no part of his Rest, but his Resurrection from the Grave; the reuniting of his Body and Soul, was the first entrance into it: For as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Jehovah, is not said to rest, till he had fully completed his six days work of Creation; and then with infinite Complacency viewed all he had completed on the Seventh: So Jesus Christ, God-man, cannot be said to rest from the Work of our Redemption, till he had fully completed and ended all his Humiliation; till he had conquered all his and our Enemies; which could not possibly be while he lay in the Grave on the Seventh day; but it was when he risen from thence on the First; when indeed he had a glorious and Blessed satisfaction in himself, when he reflected upon all he had done, and all the Sufferings he waded through, and all the Humiliation he was sunk into, and had happily and triumphingly concluded, with all those inestimable Blessings that should accrue to the Church, and that infinite Glory that would redound to God thereby: And therefore as God's Resting on the Seventh day from his work of Creation, was proposed as the Example and Motive to the Old Church before Christ's coming, for the keeping the Seventh for their Sabbath: So likewise our Saviour's Resting from his work of our Redemption on the First day of the Week, may worthily be, and we say really is, proposed as a Motive and Example to the Churches, since his coming, for their consecrating of that day for their Weekly Sabbath. I am sorry that such Passages of the Author, should occasion so much Tediousness to the Reader, and enforce such Enlargedness from the Writer. As to that place, Mat. 24.20. which he tells us he will improve hereafter to his own Advantage, we shall attend his Motions, and meet him there.  
To his Query Page 41. we grant that the Jewish Believers, did keep the Seventh-day-Sabbath, while our Saviour's Body was in the Grave; and that they ought to do so, because as yet, the First day by our Lord's Resurrection, was not Consecrated to be observed as the day of the Redeemers Rest. And withal, that they were obliged during this time, to observe the unleavened Bread-Feast; and (supposing it to be the Eighth day from their Birth, to Circumcise their Children) yet I hope this is no Plea for the everlasting Permanency of these: So neither can it be for that of the Seventh-day-Sabbath.   

SECT. X.  
WE have his Conjecture Page 43. about the Weekday of our Lord's Ascension; which he would fain suppose to be on the Seventh: But if we may believe St. Luke, Act. 1.3. that he tarried on Earth Forty Days, and so was visible to his Disciples all that time, and conversed with them as oft as he saw fit, and about what was most necessary and profitable for their Knowledge; and then ascended into Heaven: If we look on this as an Historical Account of his Abode on Earth after his Resurrection, (as it lays a fairer Foundation for it, than all Human Conjectures can be) then if we reckon from the First day of the Week, to the Fortieth day, and both the First and Last inclusively, than the day of his Ascension, was upon the Fifth day of the Week; which is our Thursday, (as the Church of England observes it) If we exclude either the First or Last day only, 'twill be upon the Sixth day of the Week, our Friday, (if I mistake not;) but if we exclude both the First and Last Days, (I mean the day of his Resurrection, and the day of his Ascension) from the number of Forty days, than 'twill fall out upon the Seventh day of the Week our Saturday; which he conjectures to be the day of the Week of our Saviour's Ascension: But here we must consider that we have two to one against him in this Conjecture: And according to his Conjecture, and the usual Phrase of Scripture, our Saviour would have continued Forty Two days upon Earth: For the Scripture in the number of Days, does usually include both the First and Last day. As in calling the last day of the Week the Seventh, it takes into the Number, both it, and the First day of the Week; for there are but Seven in all: And so when it saith that our Saviour risen the Third day from the Dead, it includes the First and Last days of the Three; and therefore having the scriptural usual Phrase on our side, and the Tradition of the Churches, we have very good Ground to conclude, that he ascended upon Thursday; and he has no Ground but his own Conjecture, for his Opinion of his Ascension upon Saturday. But every little Surmise is made use of, to exalt the Seventh above all the days of the Week; and especially above the Lord's day in this Controversy. As to that Fancy of our Saviour's coming to Judgement on the Seventh day, I leave it as a Pure Fancy.  
Here also he takes it for granted, that our Saviour after his Resurrection, appeared to his Disciples upon the Seventh day, (or at least he supposes it may well be granted) because they were then assembled, etc. But he knows they met together on other days, and particularly upon the First day, on which our Lord appeared unto them. And that Assembly in the First of the Acts, if 'twere on the Ascension day, was according to Scripture numbering of days, upon our Thursday. But seeing he would make use of (if we would grant) our Lords appearing to his Disciples once on the Seventh day, what an Advantage may we justly take for the First day, from our Saviour's appearing so often unto them on the same? so that there is no other day of the Week named, whereon our Saviour manifested himself unto them after the Resurrection, but this First day: 'Tis not said that he appeared unto them on the Second or Third, nor at all on the Seventh; and 'tis very probable, that all the Appearances of our Saviour, (which were not a few) were on the First day: Except only that on his Ascension day. 'Tis worth our serious Observance, that as our Saviour would not grace the Seventh day, with one particular express word of his Mouth about it, during his Life-time, so he would not honour it with one Appearance of his Human Nature to his Disciples, throughout all the Forty days after his Resurrection: Which to me, seems plainly to signify, that he would have a perpetual Silence thereof, in his future Churches; and that he had buried it in his Grave, and would have it lie dormant there for ever.   

SECT. XI.  
HAving done with this Conjecture, we proceed to the Author's Question in the same Page, Whether the Seventh-day-Sabbath was observed after the Resurrection and Ascension of Christ: Whereof he thinks he demonstrates the Affirmative: But is far enough from it by those Instances which he brings from the Apostles, and especially and mostly from St. Paul; yea, only from him. For though we take it for granted, that many of the newly Proselyted Jews to the Doctrine and Faith of the Lord Jesus, (the ordinary and common sort of them) did continue to observe the Seventh-day-Sabbath, out of an Erroneous Conscience toward God, and a Persuasion of the perpetual Obligation of the Fourth Command, as to this Seventh day, as they did also Circumcision, the Passover, and other Mosaical Rites, and Consecrated Times (for all which, St. Paul in his Epistles to the Galatians and Colossians, does clearly and severely reprove them.) Yet we say that the Apostles themselves never did so, much less St. Paul, the great Doctor of the Gentiles, and the great Vindicator of their Freedom from the Rites and Days of the Old Testament-Administration: For they were otherwise, and better taught by their Lord, and instructed by the Holy Ghost; for they went indeed, (I mean Paul and his Companions) into the Synagogues on the Sabbath-day, I mean here the Seventh-day; though it deserves not now that Name. But 'twas not in any Observance of that day, as more Holy than another; as 'twas not in any Observance or Deference to the Synagogue, as a more Holy Place than another, that he went into it. But 'twas because that then and there, the Jews were assembled in great Numbers, because that was the time, and that the place of their Solemn and Numerous Associations for their Divine Worship: And he could not find so fit an Opportunity any other day, nor so convenient a Room in any other place to Converse with them, to Preach the Gospel to them, to prove the Lord Jesus to be Gods promised, and their expected Messiah; to Convince them hereof, and to Exhort them to Believe on him, and Embrace him as such, which his Zeal for Christ's Glory, and his Love to their Souls, strongly constrained him to. And this we assert, was the only cause of his so often, and so unusual going into their Synagogue on the Seventh day, without any Difference as to Time and Place; as if it were more holy than any other. We know how ardently he longed after the Conversion and Salvation of his own Countrymen and Kinsfolk, according to the Flesh; how fervently he panted after our Lord Christ's being acknowledged by them; as that which would be their greatest Good, and his greatest Glory in the World: For so his Enemies would become his Friends; his Basphemers of him, as the worst of Deceivers, would be turned to be his Praisers, Adorers and Relyers on him; as the Son of God, the King of Israel, and Saviour of the World: And therefore this constrained him to apply himself to them in every Place, and at every Time, where he might discourse with most of them, and with greatest Freedom and Advantage. And if the Jews had convened on other Days, in other Places, in as great Crowds; he could doubtless then and there, have applied himself unto them: And had they accustomed their Assemblies at any other time, or in any other place, he would have made it his Custom and usual Manner, to have associated with them. The Reason that the Holy Ghost gives us of Paul's going into the Jews Synagogues on the Seventh day, and making it his usual Custom, is not where said, as I remember, that he might Worship with them; much less, that he might observe the day with them; but only that he might Preach the Gospel to them, and prove the Lord Christ to be their Messiah: Wherefore seeing the Holy Ghost tells us every where, that this was his great Design, and this his great Work in their Synagogue: Therefore it hence follows, That if he could not have had such Advantages for this Work among them, he would never then nor there, have accompanied with them: So far was he from any Respect, either to Time or Place, in this his Custom, that he only made use of them, in a Subserviency to his farther Design: And therefore 'tis very remarkable, and worthy our most diligent Observance, that when the Apostle Paul, had sound the Jews given up so far to their cursed Blindness and Prejudice against the Lord Christ, that all his Pains he took with them, all the Affections he shown he had for them, all the undeniable Demonstrations from Scripture he produced before them, could prevail nothing with them, but rather they contradicted and blasphemed. He forsook them and their Society, and turned to the Gentiles, Act. 13.45, 46. and doubtless, went into their Synagogues no more on the Seventh day. In other Places he did go into the Jews Synagogues after this, on the Seventh day, as long as he had any hope of succeeding in his Preaching the Lord Christ to them; but when he saw that they were generally hardened, and took Advantage to speak Evil of the Lord Christ, and his Doctrine before others, (the Gentiles) he turned away quite from them, and forsook their Synagogue; and made the School of a Heathenish Philosopher, one Tyrannus, the common Meeting-place of his Auditors, Act. 19.8, 9 and so questionless, altered the Time and Day, as well as the Place of his Preaching, and the Meeting of his Auditors: For after this, throughout all the remaining Book of the Acts, throughout the remaining part of this Chapter, and all the other Nine, you find not the least Mention of Paul's Preaching or Praying, or Associating with any others upon the Seventh day; neither could this Author produce, because he could not find any such Passage after this Eighth Verse of this Nineteenth Chapter: Wherefore that Word of Mr. B. Pag. 45. Line 15. Continually, might well be omitted; for he did not continually go into the Jews Synogogue, on the Seventh day, but ceased from it, when his great Design thereof was frustrated; and never is said more to do it, after this time: No, not at Rome, where he lived Two whole Years in a hired House of his own, and might have appointed what day he would for the Collection of his Disciples and Hearers. Is he ever said to have called them together on the Seventh day? which I assert to be a clear Proof that he never did it before out of any Regard to that day, as more holy than other: And therefore this Discourse of Two or Three Pages, and the particular Remarks which he makes upon this Practice of St. Paul, in some few of the Chapters of the Acts, and the great Advantages he thinks he has for the Seventh day from them, are dwindled and vanished into nothing. If he would have gotten any thing for his Cause, from this Practice of St. Paul, he should have shown these, or such like Particulars.  
1. That St. Paul called his Auditors together upon that day; which he cannot do, for the Jews assembled themselves thereon. 2. That he associated himself with the Gentiles, and made their Religious Assemblies upon that day; but this he never reads. 3. That he did this perseveringly, even when he turned from the Jews; but this he can never show, and therefore all this show is but a show. Besides, we know St. Paul preached wherever and whenever he found a convenient Auditory, in the School of Tyrannus, Acts 19.9. in the Marketplace, Acts 17.17. on Mars-hill, v. 22. at the High Priests Bar, and before Festus and Agrippa; and as he made no distinction of places, so none of days, as to the preaching of the Gospel (though as to the Churches solemn stated Worship he did, though not the Seventh day) and so these days and times have as much to plead for their Sanctity from the Apostles preaching on them, as the Seventh hath. But I suppose I have said enough of this, to satisfy any unprejudiced considering Person.  
Page 46. To his Question we grant, that the Holy Scriptures do call no other day of the Week a Sabbath but the Seventh (though Dr. Lightfoot shows, that one day of the Year is called a Sabbath day, whenever it falls out upon any other day of the Week, viz. Pentecost) and do not begrudge him all the Advantage he can take from hence. Thus (I hope) by God's Assistance and Guidance, I have ran through all this Author's Arguments for his Sabbatarian Opinion, and if I deceive not myself, have proved them to be very weak and ineffectual, as to the Edifying and Establishment of it: And now I must proceed to try his Skill in plucking down, and to see if he be more Dextrous and Successful in defeating our Arguments against the Seventh day, and for the Sanctification of the First day (which from henceforth I will take liberty to call the Lords day) which he judges to be most weak and empty, even the Conjectural Mistakes of the meaning of some Passages in Scripture; let us see whether he can prove them to be such.   

SECT. XII.  
THe first Objection against the Seventh day, and Argument for the Lords day, is Page 47. from the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ upon that day, etc. Against which he has nothing directly and particularly, but only hints the Differences of Opinions about the changing of the day; but all (save one) do agree, that it is changed, and reason would judge, that their universal concurrent Suffrages, should weigh more for its Mutation, than their Differences about the Circumstances thereof, should against the Change of it. He answers, there is no express Alteration of the Seventh into the First-day-Sabbath: And he expresses his meaning to be, not by any express Precept; but we say there are other ways of Abrogating and Establishing things in Scripture, than by express Prohibitions, or positive Injunctions; even by genuine Consequences from Doctrines, from Examples of those that are proposed to our Imitation, etc. And that the Sanctification of the Seventh day is as much abrogated in the Gospel, and the Lords day established in its stead, as any of the Ceremonies of the Old Administration are. And I think we may challenge him to produce any one express Command for the Abolishing of any one of the Jewish Ceremonies, or of all of them conjunctly; which because we cannot find, consequently we must still look upon them to be in force, and keep them alive in the Christian Churches, and these days of Reformation. I do verily believe, if my Judgement were swayed with such Arguments against the Lord's day, and for the Seventh, they would lead me back to all the Jewish Religious Worship, because they were all as really commanded by the Second Command (even all instituted Worship) as the Seventh day is by the Fourth, both which are in themselves positive, though referred to, and virtually contained in the Moral Commands; yet he acknowledges the Abolition of these without an express Command, and why not of this? Let him bring his Arguments from Scripture for the Abrogation of any of them, and I do verily believe we shall be able to use the very same for the Exclusion of the Seventh day. I know not any one particular Rite of the Old Testament, more particularly spoken of in the New Testament by the Apostle towards its Exclusion from the Christian Church, than Circumcision; yet there is no express Command against it that I know of: And I assert, that let him bring what Argument he can from these Epistles against it, I will produce the same against the Seventh-day-Sabbath, and so they must either stand or fall upon the same Ground, and so must the other Ceremonies that are not so much as mentioned in the Books of the New Testament. Again, here he recurs to the Danger and Presumption of Indulging to Conjectures and Humane Fancies in the things of God, without any warrant from Scripture, or against the Commands thereof, under a pretence of honouring God and Christ thereby, and unworthily applies all this to the Assertors of the Lordsday. But to this we have answered already, and doubt not but to be as Innocent in this Respect as himself; and this is the sum of all his answer to this Argument for the First-day-Sabbath. But we must not so leave it, but speak what (I hope) God will direct to the Vindication of it: And here we must know, that this Argument is not the solitary Proof that we bring for the Lords-day's Holy Observation; for than it might seem to carry no great weight with it. But,  
First, We undertake to prove an Abolition of the Seventh day from the Word, and then propose the First day, as bidding fairest of all the other Weekdays for it; because we acknowledge one day of the Seven to be the substance of the Fourth Commandment, and to be positively and secondarily Moral in it; and that therefore there lies still an Obligation upon all the Churches unto the end of the World, to keep one day in seven Holy unto the Lord (at least all who may have the Commands entirely conveyed to them, and duly taught them, for there may be a case of Exemption in this particular, as we may see in the progress) and we say the Seventh day being cashiered, the first day ought to be its successor; and that because of the glorious Privileges of this day above all others of the Week; whereof this of our Lord's Resurrection from the Dead is chief, because this was the day of God the Redeemer's entering into his Rest. And our Argument for the Lords day is both a Pari & a Majori; from Equality and Eminence; Equality with, and Eminency to, the Rest of God the Creator upon the Seventh day; for as the Creator's having finished the Sixth days work and rested the Seventh, was made a positive Motive for the Observance of that day for a religious Rest, during all the time that Jehovah rested from no other more eminent work of his: So we say in like manner, the Rest of God the Redeemer from that his greater work of Redemption on the first day, may be as good a Motive for the Consecrating thereof to a religious Rest; for here we suppose the Seventh day excluded: Yea we argue a fortiori, and say it may much more upon this account challenges its Holy Observation. Because,  
1. The Rest of Jehovah after the works of the Creation, was no proper Rest (as has been proved) but now his Rest after the work of Redemption, was a real and proper one, from the Labours, Sufferings and Humiliation of his humane Nature. 2. The Work of Creation cost God but six words of his Mouth; but the work of Redemption cost him his Incarnation, and in his Manhood, his mean and contemptible Birth, his poor, obscure, laborious Life, for thirty Years together in his reputed Father's House, and probably at his Trade too; and after that his itinerant, wearisome, tempted, reproached, persecuted and sad Life, for 3 or 4 Years before his Sufferings, and his complete, voluntary and sinless Obedience to his Father's Will, all his days; and his fearful Sufferings, and most dreadful, shameful, painful, lingering and accursed Death. 3. By the work of Creation God brought all things out of nothing, and so could not possibly meet with any opposition thereto; but in the work of our Redemption he waded through and overcame all Opposition, all the Temptations of Men and Devils; all the Rage and Malice, the Revile, horrible Reproaches, false Accusations, unjust Condemnations of Men; all the Rage, Fury and Cruelty, of Earth and Hell, of Men and Devils: Yea, all the Wrath and Vengeance of his Father (which was infinitely worse than all the former) and at last Death and the Grave. 4. By the Creation God brought our Nature out of nothing; but by Redemption, from Satan, from Sin, from Death, from Hell, from the Wrath of God, and from the Grave. 5. By the Creation God made us perfectly Holy and Happy; planted Paradise for us; gave us an Immortality, and Abilities, and Inclinations, and infinite Obligations, so to remain for ever; but not the effectual Grace (for we speedily fell) and an animal Life (for we were to eat and drink and sleep in Innocency, to recruit the Decays of Nature) but by Redemption God brings us again into a perfect and more glorious State of Holiness and Happiness, conveys us into the third Heaven, gives us an eternal Security there, and makes us like the Angels for ever and ever; and doubtless our Condition in the third Heaven, where Redemption conveys and lodges us, will be as far more Noble, Glorious, Blessed and Happy, than our Condition in Paradise, where Creation made and stated us, as that is in Situation above this. 6. God glorified his Power, Wisdom and Goodness in the work of Creation; but much more all these in the work of Redemption (as might easily be displayed to the Reader) and withal, his Pity, his Grace, his Justice, his Holiness, his Truth, his Jealousy for his own Glory; more of God's Glory shining forth in one Line of the Redeemers Face, than in all the Creation both visible and invisible. Wherefore seeing this work of Redemption does so unconceivably surpass that of Creation, both as to Excellency, as wrought out by God; and as to its Utility to us, as wrought out for us; we say (with Reverence and without Offence) that the first day hath more to show upon this account for its Holy Separation from, and Exaltation above, the rest of the Weekdays, than ever the Seventh had, or can pretend unto: And we say withal, that it is very Congruous, that God the Redeemer should have one day of the Week consecrated to his Rest for 2000 Years in the latter days of the World; as well as God the Creator have a day throughout 4000 Years consecrated to his Rest: Especially seeing that the Honour and Glory of the Redeemer herein, is the Glory and Honour of God the Creator, for both are the same Jehovah; whereas the Glory of the Creator herein, is not the Glory of the Redeemer; for the Redeemer was not when the Creation was produced, neither should ever have been, had the Creation stood in that Estate wherein God created it, and rested in his works: So that 'tis clear from hence, that 'tis not a Pretence to honour the Lord Christ, that is pleaded for the first day; but 'tis really an Honour, a great Honour to the Redeemer, that it should be dedicated to a holy Commemoration of his Rest. That the First-day-Sabbath hath the same Argument and Motive in this particular that the Seventh hath, even God's Resting from his work; and herein a stronger, as far as the Glory and Profit of Redemption, excels that of Creation. I have been somewhat long here, and the Subject is very Glorious, Delightful and Profitable; and the Argument, with others, weighty and convincing, and ought not to be slightly passed over, how little soever is said against it; the Author seeming to fancy he could blow it out of door with a puff.   

SECT. XIII.  
HE proposes Page 49. our Argument from our Saviour's appearing to his Disciples on the first day of the Week, for its being the day of Christian and solemn Worship from John 20. to 26. To which he answers, all this amounts not to an Institution, but with other Arguments, it bids fairly for it, and shows the Honour our Saviour put upon this day beyond all others. As to his other, 'tis replied, that 'tis probable, that first day spoken of in v. 19 here, may be the same with that spoken of Luke 24.13, etc. and 'tis probable 'tis not so, for our Lord appeared to his Disciples on several Lord-days. But fairly to grant what he cannot get: Suppose it were so, could the two Disciples, travelling to Emaus, and our Saviour's coming to them, walking and conversing with them, any way disparage this day, or weaken this Argument? Not at all. For 1. These Disciples were yet Unbelievers of Christ's Resurrection, and so could have no thoughts of keeping a First-day-Sabbath to the Commemoration thereof. 2. Their Journey to Emaus might be but a Sabbath-days Journey; It might be for religious Ends, and we know many among us do go and ride, or have gone or rid, several Miles to hear Sermons and receive Sacraments; and yet not be adjudged as Profaners of the Lords day: And our Lord, by several Discourses of his about, and Actions of his upon, the Sabbath, might well take them off from too scrupulous and nice Observation of the Lords day. 3. The Journey seems not to be so great, nor the distance between Emaus and Jerusalem so many Miles, as Geographers relate: And therefore Beza saith (as Mr. Warren informs me) that they were mistaken: And there seems a great probability thereof, because 'tis said, Luke 24.33. That they risen up the same hour, and went to Jerusalem; and came to the Congregation of the Eleven, and the other Disciples, before ever they were dismissed: And therefore 'tis very improbable that it should be seven Miles and a half from that City, and much more probable that it was but a Sabbath-days Journey. 4. Our Saviour being risen and entered into his Glory (at least the first degree thereof) was now no longer subject to Sabbath Observance, neither could he be a Profaner thereof, whatever he did thereon: And beside, having a glorified Body, he might be with them in an instant upon the way, and so in a very small particle of time return to Jerusalem; and all his Discourse to them was most proper for the Holy Sabbath; opening to them the Scriptures, reproving them for their Unbelief, and making their Hearts to burn within them: So that our Saviour's Discourses and walking with them, do rather serve to confirm the First-days-Sabbath; and their going to Emaus no way to infringe it.  
As to that which is produced, Page 50. from John 20.26. he replies, that they might not be gathered together for religious Worship: For what else then? For fear of the Jews. A very probable Conjecture indeed! For if it had been only for fear, it had been safer to have been divided, and every one have hid and concealed himself in some Friend's House, or unsuspected and safe place or other. But to be all assembled together in a suspected House (for the Text plainly hints, that was either in a Disciples House, or some other usual meeting place) would be rather to expose themselves; and to do this without any design of religious Worship, would argue them very indiscreet: But now 'twas their duty to meet together to worship God, though with hazard; and this they did, and shut the doors upon them, that they might not be disturbed by the Jews. His denial of this second Appearing to be on the Lord's day, is taken from a Criticism about a Greek Preposition, which we translate after: Now all that know any thing of that Language, know that their Prepositions are very Polysemous, and admit of divers Interpretations, or include many of ours; and that two joined to one Case of the following Noun, as this Meta does; for it might be rendered before the Accusative, in, within, as well as after; and it might have been so translated here, but they would render it by after; well knowing that even so rendered, it would no way alter the Sense of the Holy Ghost; but according to Scripture Phrase, still intent the first day of the week following, according to the Expression in Mark 8.31. After three days the Son of Man shall rise again: Three days after he was killed he should rise again; for so the Text says expressly, where the meaning must needs be upon the third day; and the English Translation of Queen Elizabeth render this place, within three days he shall rise again And thought it well rendered according to the purport of Meta; which the Critics tell us is usually written and spoken by the Grecians in the meaning of in or upon: Other Translation render Meta by an Adverb, and not by a Preposition; as afterward in three days; and so in John, afterward in eight days; in which eight days are comprised the first Lord's day and the second, as completing the number; and so this second meeting of Christ, and his Disciples, was on the first day, as his Circumcision was on the eighth day, which the Scripture expresses by another such like Phrase as this, When eight days were accomplished for the Circumcision of the Child, Luke 2.21. As for his Evasion of that passage in Mark, by telling us the same Expositors think, that Mark reckons the time from his first being betrayed and apprehended. This no way helps him, for suppose he do so, yet his after must signify upon, or on the third day, for 'tis clear that he was betrayed in the Evening late of the sixth day; for St. John tells us, chap. 18.3. that they came with Lanterns and Torches to take him; and 'tis very probable, that that young Man who followed him with only a Linen Cloth upon his Body, as he was immediately upon his Apprehension led to the High Priests Palace, Mark 14.51. was one startled out of his Sleep and Bed by the rude Violence of the Soldiers, haling him through the Streets: Therefore this must be the former part of the sixth day; in the latter part whereof he was Crucified, and laid in the Grave, in which he continued throughout the seventh, and out of which he risen very early in the Morning of the first day: And so it could not be after, as he would fain have it, but upon the third day: And therefore without any danger of shaking the third days Resurrection, our Expositors, according to the use of Scripture, do thus interpret this Passage, and this Preposition: (See another express place for this, where, after three days, is said to be upon the third day, 2 Chron. 3.5, 12.) And because it was our Saviour's use to appear to them upon that day, even the first day: 'Tis strange that he should herein go against all the Critics of that Language, and against all the Sense of all the Expositors that I can see, to serve his own Hypothesis. 'Tis without doubt, that it was not upon the Seventh day that our Lord did now appear to his Disciples; unless we will understand it thus, after four or five days, after the eighth day he appeared to them: And thus he slily evades this other Argument for the Lords days Observance, even his Appearance to his Disciples, when gathered together for religious Worship, which as I have showed formerly, was not once only, but several times after his Resurrection: And 'tis the only day of the Week which is named by all the four Evangelists, upon which our Saviour appeared to them, and graciously discoursed with them; no other day so much as mentioned, nor the Seventh so much as hinted, to be the day of his Personal Manifestation of himself unto them; which is another high Honour and Prerogative our Lord, and the King of the Church, has bestowed upon this first day of the Week, and seems to be a practical and exemplary laying aside of the Seventh day from being the weekly Sabbath-day, and substituting the first day to be that day consecrated to the public and solemn Worship of God; and an Assurance that he will be in the midst of his People assembling themselves upon this his day; and will come and Bless them; which has been, and is, according to the Experiences of his People in their religious Devotions and public Congregations, for there have they met, and do they still meet him, in those his Galleries: Then he brings them into his Wine-Cellar, and his Banner over them is Love: Then he gives them the ravishing Kisses of his Mouth: Then they behold his Beauty in his Sanctuary, apprehend his Glory, Experience his gracious Power in and upon their Souls: Then they are abundantly satisfied with the Fatness of his House, and drink delicious Draughts of the Rivers of Spiritual Pleasures that flow therein: Then they experience that that first day of the Week in God's House, is inconceivably better to them, than all the days of the Week any where else, or about any other Employment whatever. Wherefore we have just cause to hope, that our People will not, and persuade them that they do not, neglect the Sanctification of the first day of the week, and their Assembling themselves together on that Holy day. Seeing herein they follow the Examples of the Apostles themselves, and the other Christians in their days; and experience the Gracious Spiritual Presence of our Lord in the midst of them (as they did both his Carnal and Spiritual Presence then) and turn aside after the novel and singular Opinion of this Author, being also poorly grounded, as we have seen.  
He proceeds Page 51. against that which some bring from John 8.56. Abraham saw my day, etc. as the day of Christ's Resurrection; and so the First day of the Week: He says some would have it meant of his Birthday, for the Observance of Christmas; others all the days of his Flesh; and the things which he did speak and suffered, and our Redemption thereby, which I think to be a true Notion: But then to be sure he must foresee his Resurrection, and so a day thereof; and this was the great Cause of his Joy and Gladness: Because without this, there could be no cause of Gladness in all the rest. For his Birth, Life and Death, could have brought no Glory to him, if he had still lain in the Grave; nor Good, nor Profit to us, if he had not rose out of it; but he would have been conquered by his Enemies, and we forever undone. But now his Resurrection is for his own greatest Glory, his Enemy's Confusion, and our Comfort and Triumph: This was properly our Lord's day. He calls the day and time of his Sufferings, Luk. 22.53. the hour of his Enemies, and the power of Darkness: Because than they insulted over him, and he was delivered into their Hands. But the time of his Resurrection was his own day; because he therein Triumphed over all his Enemies, and had perfectly vanquished them; and therefore this day must chief be intended by Abraham; because 'twas the chief day of his, and all Believers Joy and Gladness: Though Mr. B. does not so much as once mention it in all those Particulars he reckons up, under this Head.  
Moreover, Page 52.53. he mentions those Texts, Psal. 118.22, 24. and Heb. 4.1, 11. where the day the Psalmist speaks of, which God hath made, some do interpret of the Resurrection-day; and that therefore upon that day of the Week, Christians or the Churches, should go into the Houses of Worship; and there praise the Lord, and adore him: And Psal. 2.7. where the day of God's begetting his Son, is interpreted the day of Resurrection: And there is very good reason, nay, there is Divine Authority for it; for it's applied and appropiated to that very day, Act. 13.33. So that the Text in the Hebrews, which speaks of a Sabbath, besides the Seventh day from the Creation; and that Sabbath or Rest, which Jehovah brought Israel into, in the Land of Canaan; (which was to succeed, and as it were, to antiquate, and exclude the others) is by good and excellent Authors, understood of the Lords day; the Sabbath of the First day. Who bring many excellent Arguments, for this their Interpretation and Opinion: Which Mr. B. should have Produced, Answered and Invalidated; and not put them off only by a bare Denial, or Calling them Shifts and Windlaces: As though his only Rejection of these Passages, were enough to Counterbalance all the Arguments, and rational and scriptural Discourses, which many good Scholars, Divines and Holy Men do draw from them, and give us upon them: And therefore seeing he saith nothing to Confute what they have said, and I desire to study Brevity, I shall speak nothing more here, but only refer the Reader to these Orthodox Authors themselves; and Particularly to Mr. Warren, in whom he shall find very good Improvement of these Passages for the Lords day.  
Page 54. He mentions Act. 20.7. as an Objection against the Authority of the Seventh day, and for that of the First; and well he may: For 'tis an eminent one, and such an one as he will find very difficult to answer; but yet we must expect the utmost of his Efforts to do it: I shall tract his Endeavours. 1. He says we guess that he First day of the Week, was that day we call Sunday; as though this were but a bare Guests: (as a Blind Man shoots the Mark, or catches the Hare; as the other Three Guesses, he says we make in the very next Paragraph.) But yet 'tis such a Guests as he will not controvert; and we think 'tis because he cannot gainsay it: But yet this great Condescension to us, must be with a Grant from us to him, that St. Paul was a Keeper of the Seventh day, and an Observer of it as a Sabbath; and so for his granting us what he cannot deny, we must grant him what he can never prove; Yea, what we have denied and still do, viz. that Paul was a Keeper of the Old Sabbath-day. We grant indeed (as before) that he Preached on that day usually to the Jews in their Synagogues, because he could have no other such convenient Time and Place for it: But that he kept that Sabbath, we utterly deny. For than he would have done it among the Gentiles, as well as among the Jews; which yet we never read he did: Or if he saith he did, let him prove it; which we are sure from Scripture, he can never do: Nor after the former Chapter, that ever he did go so much as to the Jewish Synagogue (for this is all the Proof of his keeping it) upon the Seventh day. But here we find that the Disciples came together von the First day, and Paul came to them, and associated with them in Religious Duties: And why is the First day now named, and the Seventh never after, as the Solemn, Dedicated Day to their Worship; but because it was never so from that time? But yet this is not all the Condition upon which he will be so exceedingly kind to us, as to grant the First day of the Week, to be Sunday or our Lord's day; but it must be bought with another Information, even on what part of the Sunday 'twas that this Assembly was, and St. Paul's associating in them; which he takes for granted, (and I am sure does but guests that his Opponents do) that 'twas in the Evening after the Seventh day: Which he takes for the beginning of the First day, and so Paul Preached till the Midnight; and broke Bread, and discoursed only till the Light of the First day; but performed no Religious Duty upon the Morning of that day at all; but as soon as ever the first Daylight began to dawn, he betook himself to what was Profane, and Traveled. Which I think is a begging of the Question; and in a scriptural Sense, is to say, that he performed no Religious Duties at all thereon; for 'twas the Light that God called day, and the dakness he called night, Gen. 1.5 and so to contradict the express words of the Text. Besides, I would fain know of him which is the chiefest part of a natural Day, either the dark part of it, which we with Scripture call Night, or the light part of it, which with it we call Day: If the light part (as I think an unprejudiced Mind will grant) why should he suppose that all the Religious Duties of that Day, should be done in the Dark thereof; and not in the Light?  
Again, we think that the Lords day did not begin at Even, but rather in the Morning, when our Lord risen out of the Grave; that being the great occasion of its Sanctification to sacred Duties, and its being employed therein by those Disciples and Paul. And for this we have express Scripture, (I mean for the First day of the Weeks beginning in the Morning) as Mat. 28.1. in the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the First day of the Week; where the Scripture determines the Sabbath to end with the Darkness of the Night, before the Firstday Morning; and the Lords day to begin at the dawning of the Morning of the First day: So far is it from Truth, that the Evening and Night before the Morning of it, were part of that day; (at least in this Scripture Phrase) and hence we say that Paul began to Preach to them in the light part of that Day, as the beginning thereof; and continued with them till the following Midnight. Yea, throughout that Night, and so the next Morning being the Second day, on Monday took his Journey, as a proper day for it: And now we have another of our Guesses, which is, that the breaking of bread here spoken of, was the Lord's Supper; and we would fain know what other breaking of Bread should be meant. Can it be imagined that all the Disciples should come together to Feast it with Paul, and that too in the Night-season, as he would fain have it? They had Houses of their own to Eat and Drink in, and they would doubtless rather choose to receive the Consecrated Bread from the Apostle, that day being the last he was to tarry with them; having as 'tis probable, no other Apostle, or Evangelist, or Pastor with them at that time; than to eat common Bread, which they could do when they pleased in his Absence: And the Sacrament is more suitable to the Society of Disciples as such, to the Preaching of the Word of God by the Apostle, than the feeding their Bodies. Wherefore we say, that seeing 'tis clearly here implied, that the Disciples gathered themselves together von this day, as upon the usual time, and the Apostle ministerially served them then; 'tis very probable, (and more than a bare Guests) that this day was the usual day; and so to be the future day of their Solemn and Religious Devotions, Dedicated thereunto. As to what follows in the other Paragraph about Preaching and Reasoning, we may with good reason pass it over, seeing we can see in it but little to the present Case.  
Next by way of Concession, he tells us that though this were a Religious Assembly, and the breaking of Bread was the Lord's Supper, yet then all this is but once. But this is such an once, as leaves the Seventh day for ever out of mention from being the day of Association: Such an once, as clearly seems to imply the Custom of the Disciples, to be their Convention on the First day: Such an once, as the Holy Ghost is pleased here, so particularly to mention, after he had showed us before, that 'twas the usual day of the Disciples Religious Association, and our Saviour's personal Presence with them, and his gracious Discourse to them: Such an once, indeed now, (as no Meeting can be but once at a time) as with the former, makes more than once; and such an once, as with what hath been said, and what may be said, will be of force enough not to repeal a Law, or the Fourth Command, but only to alter a Circumstance and Motive therein; the whole Substance thereof continuing in its full Vigour and Authority. Once he saith, occasioned by Paul's being to departed to Morrow. Which very Circumstance, seems to me to be of some Moment against the Seventh, or for the First day. For we may well suppose, that St. Paul had determined some days before the very day of his Departure; and therefore seeing he intended the Second day of the Week to be it, he might with much more Conveniency have Met and Preached, and Administered the Lords Supper to the Disciples on the Seventh day: If that had been now the Consecrated day of the Week, and so have had more Time and Leisure with them for his Work, and not have so straitened himself, or incommoded them throughout a whole Night: But becaust the Lords day was the sacred day of the Week to be observed and kept, therefore he would defer it till then; though to his own and their greater Inconvenience. Here we have a Conjecture somewhat strange, viz. that the Apostle kept the Seventh day at Troas. What, was it alone by himself, and without any other with him? as a private Person, and not as an Apostle? and then would keep the First day of the Week as an Apostle, and with the Assembly of Believers? Doubtless St. Paul was no such Dissembler on one hand, nor Superstitious Bigot on the other; to observe Two Sabbaths in the Week, one by himself, and another with the Church; when God commands but one only. But he seems to do all he can to turn the First day into the Seventh, and to persuade us that the Assembly of the Disciples, was begun on the last day of the Week; and continued some time of the First: Whereas the Text expressly tells us, they came together on the First day, and so continued together the First day, till its Conclusion in the Second days Morning. Here he takes no notice at all, or to no purpose, that the Holy Ghost tells us expressly, that Paul abode Seven days at Troas; of which one must necessarily be the last day, the Seventh day in order of the Week: And yet never tells us that the Disciples met on that day, or Paul with them; but only on the First day. And why should this be (if for any reason) but to show us that the Lords day was the day of their Religious Conventions; and the Seventh day antiquated and no more to be mentioned, and observed among Christians as such a day? What follows has been (if I mistake not) satisfactorily answered already.  
'Tis well he recedes from and stands not much upon the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be interpeted one, for he knows that in both the Sacred Languages, the Numerical word is frequently used for the Ordinal; and if we should render this word here one, it would make the Language of the Scripture very Impertinent and Uncertain: It would be Impertinent and Superfluous, because if it were upon any day, it must be upon one day of the Week, for there is no day that is not one of the Week; and what need the Holy Ghost to tell us that was, which we are sure could not but be. And it would be uncertain and dubious, for according to this meaning we could never know what day of the Week this religious Congregation met, whether on the first, or second, or third, or fourth, etc. and the Expression seems to hint, that the Holy Ghost would acquaint us with the particular day thereof. But such an uncertain Translation would greatly befriend this Author, for than he might more confidently suppose it to be the Seventh day. Seeing that now when the Spirit clearly asserts it was upon the First day, he does persuade himself, and would persuade us, that it was upon the Seventh. What follows after, being Conjectures and Consequences drawn from his former weak Premises, I shall say nothing more to them.   

SECT. XIV.  
HE next proposes, Page 58. the Objection against his Sabbath, and Argument for our Lord's day, which is in 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. which is taken (as we say) from the Collections for the Poor made in the public Congregations on the first day of the Week, and does what he can to enervate it: Let us see how successfully.  
1. He tells us he knows not what the order to the Church of Galatia was: But St. Paul tells him plainly, that in this particular it was to collect Money for the Poor on the Lordsday. 2. That he does not find written, that this order to that Church should oblige all others. The like may be said of all the other Orders and Directions given in Scripture, to all particular Churches therein mentioned and written to: For 'tis not there said, that they are intended for all other Churches to the end of the World: Yet I hope he looks upon the Doctrines taught them, the Ordinance and Discipline established amongst them, to be Obligatory upon the Churches now. And we may well suppose, the Apostles being inspired by the Holy Ghost in these Matters, in all their Constitutions of their prime Primitive Churches, to lay the Platform for all succeeding ones; except there may be some particular Circumstance which may necessitate or allow a Deviation therefrom; which in this matter of Collection cannot well be pretended. 3. That it was a general order for a charitable Seposition, but no order to observe the first day: True indeed, but it does imply the Observance of that day, else why should it be enjoined on that day more than on another, but because thereon public Assemblies met? 4. 'Tis an Order, he tells us, for a profane Employment, as to cast up their Accounts on that day, and to tell their Money they have got, and to reckon up how much their Stock is increased; for he here supposes a Man must on this day look over all his Stock, cast up all his Charges, etc. But certainly this is a pretty far fetched Invention, for they are commanded only to lay up by them on the Lordsday, what God had graciously enabled them to give to the Poor, by his Success on their Labours, and his providential Blessing on them, as to Earthly things; which they might very well inquire into the day before, even the Seventh; and having then discovered how God had succeeded them, the next day, even the Lordsday, to separate that charitable Portion from the rest, and carry it unto the public Assembly, and so cast it into the Poors Box. And I think 'tis clear, that the Text necessarily implies a former Inquisition into their Stock, before this Seposition; but where it implies it must be done on that day, no Man can see. Wherefore we say, that a former Examination being had of these Matters, this day that consecrated part was taken, carried to the Congregation, and put into the common Stock; that so the Apostle, when he came amongst them, might not be forced to go from House to House to gather, but find it all ready in the public Ecclesiastical Treasure. I am sure he can bring no Demonstration from the Text for his, or against my Interpretation: But then I have the Testimony of the most ancient Fathers, that on the first day they publicly assembled; and then they made Collection for the Poor in these Assemblies. Moreover, If the Apostle here enjoined such a profane or worldly Task as he supposes; why does he enjoin them to do it on the First days, seeing it might have been done as well n every day of the Week, and better on the Sixth day? If the Seventh were then their Sabbath, that so they might know, at the end of the common days, what they might well and gratefully spare of that week's Gains, and so lay it up against the ensuing Sabbath for the Poors Stock. Whence we see that this supposed Solution to this Argument, has no ground at all from the Text, and to be sure from no other Topick: And therefore conclude, that the General Collections, and so Associations of the Galatian Church, being on the First day; And the Apostle commanding the Church of Corinth to make the same Collections on that day in Imitation of them, or as they did; is, with the former, a very good Evidence, that that day was the instituted day for Worship, and so consequently the Seventh excluded.  
Page 60. That Proof for the First-day-Sabbath in Rev. 1.9, 10. where that day which St. John calls the Lordsday, we say was that day of the week, which we will by no means grant; but tells us what the Opinions of some singular Persons were concerning it; that it was Annual, not a weekly day; either the day of Christ's Birth, or of his Resurrection; either Christmas-day or Easter: Others say 'tis a great providential day to vindicate his Kingly Authority; and others, the last day of his coming; but how this day, whereon St. John was in the Spirit, should be a future day, can hardly be conjectured; but every thing must be hinted, that may seem to serve to an Undermining of the First day of the week from being the day of this glorious Vision. But at length it is granted, that some take this Lordsday to be a weekly day: But then again these some are crumbled into a Sub-division, and some of them assert it to be the First day, and some the Seventh day thereof; and this is written, as though the Assertors of the First day were as small a some, as those of the former annual Opinion, of a future day to John's Vision, and of the last day of the Week: Whereas I dare to say, put them all together, they will not amount to the hundredth part of those solid and learned Authors, which understand it of the First day of the week; but withal these some for the Seventh day, as inconsiderable for number as they are, in comparison of the other, yet they are far better founded, and proceed upon more certain and undeniable Grounds than the First-day-Men do; for they proceed upon Scripture, but these have only Tradition, if they have that for their Opinion. Now the Tradition which is pleaded for the First day to be the Lordsday, is constant, uninterrupted, and universal, from the days of the Apostles: The Generality of Christians acknowledging the Dominical day to be the First day, whatever Opinion they had of the Sabbath; till of late Years, some Sabbatarians have thought fit to question it, and virtually (if not expressly) to deny it. Which is such a Tradition, as upon which their very Scriptural Proofs are grounded; for 'tis from Tradition that they know the meaning of the very words of the Scripture. Whether the Original Languages carry the Sense they are interpreted in; and whether we have the genuine and proper Significations of the Originals, can be known by nothing but Humane Tradition; for either it must be had from Translations, or Lexicons, or oral Traditions: Wherefore if the Sabbatarians will renounce here such a Tradition as is pleaded; they must withal renounce their own Scriptural Authority, which course will make wild work in the Church.  
He very well denies it to be Christmas-day, or any annual one; but the great Query is, What day of the Week this was; and here in the entrance of his Discourse, he endeavours to invalidate the universal Tradition of the Churches for 1600 Years, by an Induction of other unlawful Traditions; as that of Polygamy among the Patriarches; of whom the Scripture mentions but a few particulars; and what is that to the Universality of Christians? And which was condemned by our Saviour as alien from the first Institution of Marriage: And how does this resemble the First days being the Lordsday, which was never blamed by him? The like he mentions in the Omission of the Feast of Booths; and the Custom of the Profanation of the Seventh-days-Sabbath before the Captivity: But these were against express Injunctions and Commands, still in force and obliging; which we deny the Seventh-day-Sabbath to be; and avouch, and may yet more prove its Abolition, as of other positive and ceremonial Commands, without any express or literal Prohibition of them in Scripture. What therefore he saith, in the following Paragraph, would be very cogent and undeniable; If he could prove the Seventh day of the week to be still enjoined by the Fourth Command, which he hath not yet done by his positive Proofs for his own Opinion, (as we have seen) nor by his Negative, in denying of ours, (as has been in some measure seen already, and may be more hereafter.) At length he comes to give us his own Judgement concerning this Lordsday, what day of the Week it was; and if he had not told us, we should have presumed that it determined for the Seventh-day, (which in all things till the end of the World must have the Pre-eminence according to his thoughts) but withal 'tis grounded upon Scripture, which we will candidly and fairly weigh and examine. 1. That the Lord Christ instituted the Seventh-day-Sabbath just after the Creation, he means too before the Fall, quoting Gen. 1. begin. which we utterly deny, because Jesus Christ then was not, nor could be, (we speak of his Existence, not God's Foresight and Decree) for then Man was Guiltless and Sinless, and so needed no Jesus, nor could have had one: But in all these Old Testament Proofs he runs upon that former Fallacy of Ill Composition; taking for granted that whatever Jehovah did, the Lord Jesus Christ did. Jehovah, the Godhead of our Saviour, did create and institute the Seventh-day-Sabbath, but not Christ himself; which necessarily includes both the Godhead and the Manhood: And therefore the Premises being false, the Conclusion cannot be true; nor the consequential Discourse thereupon of any Moment. His second and third Arguments labouring under the same Mistake, admit of the same Answer: Besides, we know that the positive and ceremonial Precepts of Jehovah before his Incarnation, were to be abolished by himself after his Incarnation, that is, by our Lord Jesus; and others more Easy, Clear and Effectual, introduced in their room, (whereof we assert the Seventh-day-Sabbath to be, which he can never prove to be Moral, and so was to be excluded with them) and a new Time, as well as new Rites, instituted by the King of the Church.  
His next Argument to prove his Assertion, is from those Passages, wherein 'tis said, The Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath-day, Matt. 12.8. Mark 2.28. Luke 6.5. A Proof which we make use of to prove our Doctrine of the First-day-Sabbath, and he thinks makes clearly and strongly for his. Though there may be some ground for the Opinion of ordinary Men, being meant by the Son of Man in these Texts; because 'tis the Appellation which the Holy Ghost usually gives them, calling them Sons of Men; and when he speaks to Ezekiel particularly, his usual Expression is Son of Man: And St. Mark relating the same History, of the Disciples gathering Ears of Corn on the Sabbath-day; and the Pharisees being scandalised thereat, and complaining to our Lord Christ that they did that which was not Lawful; as the occasion of this saying of our Lord Jesus (which the other Evangelists relate also, and no other occasion of it is recorded in them, neither do we find that he used it at any other time) seems to carry it in this Sense; for he saith Mark 2.27, 28. that Christ said unto these Censurers, The Sabbath was made for Man, and not Man for the Sabbath: And then immediately adds this Sentence with an Illative, Therefore the Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath. I suppose no Man will deny but that the first Verse is meant of ordinary (I mean) mere, Men; for 'tis brought by our Lord Christ as a Vindication of his Disciples action, who were mere Men; and not of any one of his own, who was God as well as Man. Withal I believe that we cannot find in all the Scripture, that appellative Man, thus abstractly and absolutely used, without any distinction or Limitation, antecedent or consequent to it; understood of any but of mere Men, which being granted the Illative therefore, seems to carry the next Sentence for the same Subject, and to declare that Man, common Man, is Lord of the Sabbath; not an authoritative Lord to dispose of it as he pleases, and do on it as he lists; but so far a Lord, as to be the end of the Sabbath; for whose Profit and Comfort it was ordained. As a Son may be said to be Lord of that House that is built for him; and in which he dwells and uses for his Convenience and Delight; though his Father obliges him not to sell or alienate it; and the Laws of the Land not to burn it.  
Though therefore this Interpretation of the Son of Man be no way Heterodox, nor any way strained, from this Text; neither do we by this Interpretation, give a mere Man a Lordship over the Moral Law, as he supposes, (for his taking for granted, that the Last-day-Sabbath is Moral; I look upon as his Fundamental Error; and the great cause of his Mistaken Confidence in all this Discourse:) We say that in no respect Man is Lord over any of the Moral Law; not in this that we speak of; for Man was made for the Moral Law, that is, to perform all the Duties thereof; but now Man is Lord over the Sabbath (as our Lord avouches) in this respect, viz. That the Sabbath was made for him, and therefore cannot be Moral, (as before,) But yet I say let it be granted, that 'tis spoken precisely of our Lord Christ: Likewise we grant that the Sabbath spoken of in these Texts was the Seventh-day-Sabbath, and that our Lord Christ as the Son of Man, that is, such a Son of Man as is also the Son of God; is Lord of the Sabbath; (we should have observed before to evacuate all his Proofs drawn from the Old Testament, to prove the Seventh day of the Week to be the Lord's day here spoken of; that he, who is here called the Lord of the Sabbath, is said to be the Son of Man, which he was not then.) Wherefore being such an one, it cannot be denied but that he is an Absolute Lord of the Sabbath, without Limitation; and so hath power to alter and change the day (which is no way Moral, I mean not the Seventh day at all) and so to make that to be lawful on the Seventh day, which before was not; even all sorts of honest Employments of our particular Callings, as well as charitable Actions; for when the day ceases to be Holy, and another advanced to that Honour by his Authority; then being a common day, common works are proper for it, which may seem to be the proper Intention of this Expression to the Jews; for when they blamed him as a Tolerator of the Profanation of the Sabbath by his Disciples, he takes a double Medium to refute their Slander; the one as a Doctor and Prophet of the Church; and so he teaches them, that that charitable Action of theirs toward their own Nature, was no Breach, but an allowed work of that day; and proves it by a Scriptural Precedent; and so vindicates his Disciples Action from Sin: Wherefore supposing (as this Author does) that our Saviour had no other design but to vindicate his Disciples, this had been abundantly enough, and he needed not to recur to his own Authority over that day; which he does, and so uses another Medium; as a Lord and King of the Church, and so of all the Institutions, and particularly of the Seventh-day-Sabbath, (for which they were as Zealous as the Author, as necessary and permanent) and says he himself, is Lord of the Sabbath; and so had Authority to abrogate that day, or establish it as he pleased; which seems to imply this much: You are ever and anon carping at my Disciples, and especially at me, as though their, and mine, Actions, were Profanations of the Sabbath: But I would have you to know, that I have a Sovereignty over it, and can dispose of it as I please; and make things that are not Lawful on the Seventh to be Legitimate: Which we look upon as a hint of its Abrogation shortly after.  
Especially considering what Christ did, or caused to be done on that day in another place, viz. John 5.8. where having cured the impotent Man at the Pool of Bethesda, he commands him to rise, to take up his Bed, and walk: Now we know that bearing of Burdens on the Sabbath day, is expressly forbid, Jer. 17.21, 22, 24, 27. and there are Promises made unto them, that would obey that Command, and bear no Burdens; and Threats denounced against them that should contradict it; serving to confirm the Defence of bearing Burdens on that day. Accordingly Nebemiah was strict in its Observance, Neh. 13.19. and the Jews themselves were very nice in this particular, and very severe in their Punishment of such Bearers, by Whipping and by Death, (as that great Hebraick Critic Dr. Lightfoot informs us.) Yet here our Lord expressly commands the Healed Person to take up his Bed and walk, that is, to carry it either to his own House, or to some other convenient place; for so he did in obedience to this Command, v. 10. Whereat the Jews were very highly offended, and condemned it as an unlawful Act, and sought to persecute and kill Christ for enjoining of it, v. 16. Now we would inquire, to what end our Lord Christ did enjoin this Person to carry such a Burden on the Sabbath? If it be said, it was to try his Faith and Obedience, or clearly to evince the Perfection of his miraculous Cure, or both of these: 'Tis replied, that these things could be as well done without the carriage of his Bed: He might have gone every where, and proclaimed his Cure, and his Restorer; he might have done it by leaping, dancing and praising God; as the Cripple in Acts 3. Wherefore 'tis probably apprehended by learned Men, that it was a practical Proof of his being Supreme Lord of the Sabbath, and of his Authority to change the old day into another of his own appointment, and this was a real blow begun to be given to it.  
Besides all that was said against these his Arguments for the Seventh day, to be the Lords day meant in the Revelation: 'Tis observable that the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used but once more in the New Testament; and that is, 1 Cor. 11.20. where the Sacrament of our Saviour's Body and Blood is called the Lords Supper; in which it is clear, it signifies both his Authoritative Institution thereof, and that his own Death is signified thereby: The Lord is both the Institutor thereof, and his Death the thing commemorated thereby: And therefore Reason, and comparing Scripture with Scripture, would require that it should be so understood here also; even as a day of his own Institution, as the Son of Man: For so he appeared to John to be in the Vision. And so St. John calls him, Rev. 1.13. and so a day for his own Commemoration, even of his Resurrection, viz. the First day of the Week; which none deny to be that day. And 'twas on that day whereon the Author of the Revelations, saw the Lord Jesus walking in the midst of the Golden Candlesticks, with the Seven Stars in his Right Hand; that is, with his Orthodox and Zealous Ministers, receiving their Light and Heat from him, the Sun of Righteousness; And then diffusing it abroad in the Churches, or in the midst of the Congregations; which we know the Orthodox Fathers, throughout all Ages of the Church, have principally done upon the First day of the Week, the day of the Resurrection: And so the future Practice of the Church, proves the Lord's day to be the First day of the Week. Again, St. John calls this the Lords day, after his Resurrection; and our Saviour tells him Verse 18. I am he that liveth and was dead, and behold I live forevermore: Implying, that as after his Incarnation, Obedience, Death, Resurrection, Ascension, Session on the Right Hand of God, and Mission of the Holy Ghost; all the former carnal and ceremonial Administrations vanished, and a new Government, new external Modes of Worship, were introduced, which were properly the Lords and bear the Stamp of his Authority, as Mediator, as God-Man, over the Church and all her Ordinances: So this was also the Day of his own Institution, after his Humiliation and Exaltation, for the Celebration of his new Institutions; the other being excluded with the former Appendices thereto. What follows under this Head, being what has been spoken to before, and is frequently inculcated (as of great Moment for him) as the Moral Law, as the now changing of the Sabbath; mere Pretences of the other party, etc. as being but a little better than the begging the Question, and taking that for granted, which we utterly deny: These I tacitly pass by, and leave the Judicious Reader to judge, if after all has been said, it be not far more probable that the Lords day, spoken of in the Revelations, is the First day of the Week; (as all Scholars and Churches almost, have hitherto believed) than the Seventh day thereof, which a very few, scarce deserving the Title of Number, have pitched upon, as a Prop to their tottering Seventh-day-Sabbath.   

SECT. XV.  
THere are other Texts which he produces, Page 69.70. as Rom. 14.5, 6. Gal. 4.9, 10, 11. Col. 2.16, 17. from whence we hold and contend the Seventh day, to be everlastingly excluded from the Christian future Sabbath; the chief being the Two latter of these. We say in Gal. by Days are meant the Jewish Seventh day; because the Apostle mentions their Months, that is, their Observance of the New-Moon Festivals; Times: Which some apply to Easter, Pentecost, Feast of Tabernacles, etc. and Years; which some think is meant of the yearly Feast of Atonement and Expiation. Or it may be understood of the year of Jubilee, (if not the Great Jubilee every Fiftieth year, yet the less of every Seventh year;) which St. Paul probably observed them very Superstitious in: But whatever the Difference may be in the particular Applications of these Terms, yet they generally hold, the more rare or seldom Jewish Festivals to be meant; and by Days then, what other Festival of the Jews can be understood, but the Seventh day? If he do not mean their Weekly Sabbath by Days, it cannot well be conceived what it should be: We doubt not but by the latter Three Expressions, Months, Times and Years, are meant Jewish Festivals: And why Days should not signify the same, cannot well be imagined. Besides, we find that these Galatians were greatly infected with the false Leven of Judaical Doctors, who taught them to observe Circumcision, etc. as is seen clearly by the Epistle, and seems to be the chief occasion of Writing it; to turn them from, and sortify them against, such false Doctrines, and dangerous Observances. And therefore hence we conclude St. Paul condemns the Galatian Church, for keeping the Seventh-day-Sabbath, as well as other Judaical Rites and Festivals; and tells them he is afraid he had bestowed his labour in vain upon them.  
In that Text to the Colossians, we have the Observance of Sabbaths expressly spken of; and thereby St. Paul discarded from their Observance, as Shadows, which were to vanish when Christ the Body was come: By which we contend, is meant the Weekly-Sabbath; because that in the Scripture, is Chief, Mostly, if not Solitarily the Acceptation thereof: And we have heard him again and again, asserting that 'tis the Intent of this Word every where. And I believe so, whenever it stands absolutely, as here without some Annexion or other to alter its Signification. And what Reason can be given why here it should not so be understood? that only here, and no place else in the Bible, it should not be taken for the Weekly-Seventh-day? Moreover, here the Apostle seems plainly to intent their Annual, Monthly, and Weekly Festivals; their Annual, by Holy days; their Monthly, by New Moons; and so their Weekly, by Sabbaths: And there was no Weekly Festival, but the Seventh-day-Sabbath. Or if by holiday we apprehend the Generality of Jewish Festivals, because they were all Holydays as long as their First Institution lasted; yet than he condescends to some Particulars of them, as the Monthly and Weekly, which then must necessarily include the Sabbath; because that was a Jewish Holiday. Yet again, If we should grant, that under the last word Sabbaths, any other Festivals may be included or meant: Yet certainly the Weekly-Sabbath cannot be excluded, being the most famous Analogate comprehended under it; and therefore in such an Expression, cannot be excepted; though sometimes the most famous Analogate be only meant, and excludes all others; yet never is it itself not intended in such Propositions. Withal, as we said before of the Galatian Church, so we do of the Colossian; 'twas infected by false Teachers, that would make a Mixture of the Jewis, and Christian Religion, and would have Moses' Rites to be kept with Christ's Ordinances: And they know well enough, that by Sabbaths was meant the Seventh day; seeing 'tis always so accepted. Whence we may well conclude, that here is an express exiling the Seventh-day-Sabbath out of the Church of Church. Heretofore we were called upon to show one Text in which the Seventh-day-Sabbath was abrogated, and now we bring an express literal one; yet it will not do, but many Objections are brought in against it: Which we shall successively consider and traverse.  
1. Some think it must be understood of Ceremonial Sabbaths only; because else 'twould reach the First-day-Sabbath, as well as the Seventh. But there is no fear of that, for the First day is never called Sabbath in the Scripture; and therefore cannot be meant; and we say the Seventh-day-Sabbath, was both positive and ceremonial, for he himself allows it to signify the eternal Rest above. 2. He Objects that one place names no Sabbath, but only Days; the other indeed names Sabbaths, (which he would have interpreted Weeks, for which I can see no Reason; but much against it; and therefore shall say nothing till he produce his Reasons for it.) And all the weight of this Argument is but a silly Conjecture of the meaning of the word Sabbaths: But we have seen before, that this is not a silly Conjecture, but grounded upon the very usual Acceptation of the Word, upon the Connection of the adjoined things, upon the State of the Churches unto whom he writ; and upon the design of his Epistles to them. But I am sure what follows, is not so much as a Conjecture, but a very great Oversight; for he tells us, that he finds the word (Sabbaths) in the Plural Number, no where in the New Testament ascribed to the Seventh day. It was then because he would not be at the pains to sinned it; for 'tis in all these places, Mat. 12.5, 10, 12. Mark 3.4. Luke 4.31. and 6.2, 9 In all these places he will find it so; and in the Original Greek, the word is Sabbaths, without a Verbal Superaddition of days; which he himself must be enforced to acknowledge, spoke of this day.  
3. The Seventh day he faith was never in Question in any of these Epistles, and if there be no such Question about altering it, how can such a Sense be imposed, etc. Just so I may say the New-Moon Observation, and the Annual Festivals, are not where questioned in these Epistles; (nor any where else that I remember, expressly to be lain aside) How therefore can such a Meaning be put upon Years and Months, as to include the Judaical? seeing Sabbaths are as plain and clear for the Seventh days, as any of the former, for what they are understood here. We have still the Thred-beaten Plea of the Moral Law introduced and improved; when I assert, that neither he nor all the World can ever prove the Seventh-day-Sabbath to be part of the Moral Law, Quatenus Moral. His Fourth Answer plainly confounds Sabbaths with Years and New-Moons; which the Apostle clearly distinguishes, and of all the rest I may truly say, they are but mere ungrounded Conjectures, to baffle an express Text of Scripture: But here he has a very strange Fancy, That by Days may be meant the First day; because the Heathen worshipped the Sun on that day: And so then every day; because the Heathen worshipped distinct Idols every day: And so we should have no Consecrated day at all, neither First nor Seventh, nor any other. All the rest that follows here, are but (as he expresses) his own Thoughts, and as well grounded, as that Thought of his, That the First day was not observed by Christians: When yet we have found them several times associated on that day; and Christ appearing several times in the midst of them; and at Troas Assembled on that day; and St. Paul Preaching and Administering the Lords Supper to them, and therein to Harmonise with the Church of Galatia; (which I suppose proved against Objections) neither of which can be said concerning the Seventh day: Only there were Assemblies of the Jews on that day; and St. Paul took the Advantage on these days to Preach to them. But what is this to Christ's Disciples and Followers? We may therefore (according to his own Rule, That which appears not, is not at all) conclude, that the Seventh day was never observed by the Disciples and Followers of Christ, after his Resurrection, as a day consecrated to Public Worship; because we never read in the Scripture, that they did so meet. Whereas the contrary is seen by the First day. So I dismiss this Thought, and the others as no more likely.  
5. He farther saith that 'tis uncertain, and therefore as such, I o'er look it. 6. He saith from Paul's constant keeping the Seventh-day-Sabbath, that he cannot be supposed to condemn his own constant Practice: But how he did this, we have already seen; and therefore shall not stop here. 7. That St. Paul commends the Whole Moral Law, as Just, Holy and Good; and therefore can never be thought to condemn it here. Here we have anew theatrized the Moral Law, which we acknowledge the Apostle doth strenuously urge, and never opposed any one Tittle thereof. But yet he here decries the Seventh-day-Sabbath, as very consistent with, and agreeing to all his Zeal for the Moral Law; because that was never of the Substance of it: Neither is it either Holy or Just, or Good: (I mean not in, and of itself; as all that is truly and naturally Moral is; but by Gods commanding it: We acknowledge it to be positively Moral.)  
8. The last Answer, is from Math. 24.20. Pray you that your Flight be not in the Winter, nor on the Sabbath-day. Upon which place he lays so great a Stress, as to suppose it a sufficient Proof for the Observation of the Seventh day, as our bounden Duty. For here he takes for granted, that this Sabbath here spoken of, is the Seventh day; that the Flight here spoken of, is that (at nearest) of the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, about Forty Years after Christ: And therefore our Saviour knowing what a great Trouble of Spirit 'twould be to gracious and devout Souls, to be forced to flee for their Lives on that day, whereon they should have been Glorifying their God, and Refreshing their own Souls in Religious Duties, and Holy Communion with the Father and the Son; He exhorts them to Pray against such an Evil, thereby implying (as he would have it) the Continuance of that Sabbath; and his own Confirmation thereof till then, and so forever. Wherein (I think) I have (I am sure I intended to have) given all the strength of what he hath written from hence, and not concealed or lessened any whit of it. Unto which I proceed to answer that,  
1. Some understand this to be a proverbial kind of Speech, to express the Difficulty and Irksomeness of a thing; that 'twill be as tedious as a Journey in a Cold, Snowy, Dirty Winter; or as a Flight to a superstitious Jew upon a Sabbath-day. 2. Others apprehend it to be spoken to the Disciples in this Sense, Pray that your Flight may not be on the Seventh-day-Sabbath; Because thereby you will greatly offend the superstitious Jews, who will deem you as Profaners of that day hereby, and so will be so far from Pitying and Relieving you, that they will hate and michief you all they can: As we know the Jews were great Enemies to them, because they were so to their Ceremonial Worship (as they deemed them) and to their Sabbaths too; and hence were so far from sheltering them from, that they betrayed them to, and delivered them up into the Hands of Heathenish Persecutors. 3. It may well be interpreted specifically of a Sabbath, and not numerically of the Seventh day only: And so 'tis as if our Lord had said, pray that on what ever day your Solemn Rest for Religious Worship, and Divine Service shall be; that on that day your Flight may not be; for 'twill then be very grievous, and more intolerable, than on any day of the Week: And so includes, yea, primarily intends the First day, the Dominical day. But 4. To be as fair as we can with him, and to grant all that he does desire, we will suppose that our Saviour did mean by his words, what they, 'tis most probable, did understand by them, even the Seventh day, to be that Sabbath on which they were to deprecate their Flight: Yet this will be also far enough from so clear a Proof for him as he imagines. For we know 'tis usual in the Holy Writers, to speak of Evangelical days, and of the Worship of God in them, under Legal Metaphors; to wit, by Sacrifices, by erecting of Altars, by coming up to the Temple, etc. as all that know the Style of the Prophets, cannot but be acquainted with; because these were then the Services which that People performed, and they knew no other; and probably would not have endured the mentioning of any other. So here, our Saviour speaks indeed literally of the Seventh-day-Sabbath, because the Jews and his Disciples (who were Jews) knew yet of no other, neither were prepared to hear of the future substituting of another day in its place. Yet this does no more confirm the Seventh day to be the future Sabbath, than those other Scriptural Say, do the Ceremonial Rites to be the Evangelical Worship; or the external Modes of serving God in the times of Reformation, and when the Body and Substance of these Signs and Figures were exhibited.  
Besides, we say our Saviour did very well foresee that many of his Disciples (as we know the Churches of Galatia, and Colosse; and those of Jerusalem, with James did) would many years after his Decease, dote upon the judaical Ceremonies, and would reverence them out of Conscience to God, their Author and Imposer; And so also on the judaical day. And therefore our Lord fore-apprehending this, bids them to deprecate their Flight on such a day, which their own Conceits and false Apphrehensions of things, would make more grievous and burdensome to themselves; not his Injunctions, or the real Obligation of the day. And there is nothing more common than this way of speaking according to men's Apprehension of things, without any the least Approbation of that Apprehension. So we find our Saviour speaking in his Discourses of the Jews Circumcision, very commendably and honourably; yet I hope this did not confirm it for the future. But here it may be objected, But he did not Prophesy of its future Observance, or require any thing of them, upon a Supposition of its Continuance afterwards; and therefore this is nothing to the purpose. But we know he could not but foresee that they would observe it, and keep it up in the Churches after his Departure from them and its Abrogation; and so these Speeches of his would then be upon Record, and probably made a Plea for its Use: (especially seeing he never did, as I remember, speak any thing against it, or expressly of its future Extrusion out of the Churches) Which Speeches of his cannot Authorise their future Practice Neither can our Saviour's foresight of their superstitions and mistaken Observance of the Seventh day, and his Command for their Ease-sake upon that Prevision, authorise the Continuance thereof. Therefore seeing there are so many Solutions given to this Plea, against the Apostles meaning of the Seventh day; when he condemns them for their Observance of Days and Sabbaths; (whereof some one may be deemed sufficient; but much more all together:) It cannot by any impartial, judicious Person, be thought of any Prevalency to evade an express Prohibition of the Apostle, of the Observance of that day; which we contend his Prohibition of Sabbaths to be; the Seventh being the most famous of all Sabbaths: Being that which is mostly, if not only intended by that Expression in Scripture, and in that very word, whereby the Holy Ghost in the New Testament, intends and means the Seventh-day-Sabbath.   

SECT. XVI.  
HE gins Page 75. to betake himself to the Command itself, and would from thence collect an absolute Necessity of the perpetual Observance of the last day of the Week; asserting the Morality of the whole Command, and endeavouring from some Passages and Letters of that Law, to ratify his own Opinion herein. Therefore I shall take leave with as much Brevity and Plainness as I can, to give my weak Thoughts about it; and leave it to the Learned and Judicious to determine. Here we must premise a Distinction or two: 1. Between Moral and Positive; between that which is Good, Just and Holy in itself; which emerges from the right Constitution of the rational Creature, and so would be a Duty, if 'twere never externally enjoined by God; And that which has no such innate Goodness, neither would have been performed as a Duty by Man, were it not imposed by a superadded Precept. 2. Between that which is Purely, Naturally and Absolutely Moral in itself, and that which is Secondarily, Respectively and Positively Moral: The former is that spoken of above; the latter is that which, though the rational Creature could not of itself have judged a Duty, yet when 'tis once imposed by Command, and so revealed to be the Legislator's Pleasure, there is discerned in the thing itself, a very great Equity, Goodness and Suitableness to God's Glory, or the Creatures Good, or both: As in the case of Tithes, or the Tenth of every Man's Estate to be devoted to Pious Uses, for the Maintenance of the Worship of God, and of those that are by him called thereto, and employed therein: Though the Light of Nature could not primarily, and from itself, have discovered and devoted this very precise proportion to the immediate Service of God as absolutely necessary; Yet when God does once require it, it must needs close with it, as very reasonable and just, that God, who gives all, and whose all is, should have the Tenth part devoted and separated to his own Service: So that the Goodness of this, does not only arise from the Will of the Legislator, but also from the Nature of what is required, when 'tis once discerned to be the Legislator's Pleasure. So that it is neither purely positive, nor yet primarily Moral, discovered only by the Promulgation of the Legislator; and then embraced at, and acknowledged to be most just and good by the Creature, from whom 'tis required: Whereas, what is purely positive, has nothing just or good in itself; nor discernible after its Imposition. 3. In the Fourth Command we must distinguish between; 1. The Duty commanded; 2. the Explication of the Duty; and 3. the Arguments and Motives thereto. And so, without any more nice Distinctions we proceed by God's Assistance to our Apprehensions about this Matter.  
1. The Duty Commanded, or the Substance of the Fourth Command, which is in the first Words of that Command, Remember the Sabbath-day, (or the Day of the Sabbath,) to keep it holy, (or to sanctify it:) Where we acknowledge the Rest, or the holy Rest, to be primarily and absolutely Moral, which this right Judgement of the rational Creature dictates, directs to, as that which it owes to its Creator, Preserver, and Benefactor; even a set and solemn Time separated and devoted to the immediate Service, Praises and Adoration of God; who, because of his own Infinite and Incomparable Excellencies, deserves all their Praises and Adoration; and because of their own innumerable and inestimable Benefits received from him, merits all their Love and Observance: Which Employment, the rational Creature would acknowledge to be the most noble and excellent, the most happy and blessed that it can be employed in, being the Employing of the most noble Faculties of the Soul, in their most excellent Acts, about the most raised and glorious Object: This, I say, the true Light of Nature would direct unto; and so is purely moral: But whether it would have directed to a Separation of a whole entire Day thereto, I cannot resolve: Though this also may be most probable; being a Time so limited, measured and distinguished, by the antecedent and subsequent Darkness; or by the Presence, Light and Motion of the Sun in the Hemisphere. But here, I believe, we may take for granted, that the rational Creature in its Rectitude, would have actually consecrated to so divine Worship, and employed in divine Worship, all that Time that could have been duly and conveniently spared from the Refreshment of the Body, and those due Preparations, which must be made for his decaying outward Man; so that Adam would have subserviated, (had he stood in his Innocence) all his tilling of the Garden, all his eating, drinking and sleeping; all the Recruits of his Body, to the solemn Manner, as that which was the End of his being; the due of his God from him, and the highest and most blessed Employment of himself. This, I say, would have been, had he beenleft to the Dictates of his own Knowledge, which was given him of God, of himself, and of his Engagements to the Author of his being, and well-being; and not been prescribed by a Precept from his Lord and Sovereign. But however, this all must acknowledge, that a Time of Rest, (For that's the english of Sabbath) to be set apart and sanctified to the immediate Service of the most high and munisicent God, is purely moral: And it may be also thought, that an entire Day may bid fairly for it. And this, I say, is the Substance of this Precept, and really moral.  
But here, before I proceed, I must obviate a little Criticism, which the Author here seems to lay a great Stress upon; and that is about ה (hè) in the Original, which he would fain have to be very emphatical, and to signify, That, by way of Eminency here in this Verse, the beginning of the Command, the Words are Remember the Day of Rest. (Eth Jom Hasshabbath.) I would inquire of him, whether this rendering of these Words, be not as proper, as any he can render it by: Whether the Day of Rest, be not so proper, as the Day of a Rest, or the Day of that Rest. For every one that hath but peeped into the Hebrew Bible, very well knows that that Letter ה, serves many times, if not most times, only for a Letter and Ornament of writing, without any Signification whatever: And, whether I render it by an English Particle or no, he cannot blame me; if I will, he hath no Reason to quarrel me, if I render it A or The; nor I, much, to quarrel him, though he chooses to translate it That. For neither A, nor The, nor That, are found in the Original; but are only English Particles: And, I would fain know what Emphasis the same Hebrew Particle hath before [Shamajim, Aretz, and I am] Heaven, Earth and Sea; and whether the Translation either without a Particle, or with that which carries no Emphasis, be not far better than the Translation with an Emphatical one: As for Example, the Lord made Heaven and Earth and Sea, or the Lord made the Heaven, the Earth and the Sea, are not better than, the Lord made that Heaven, that Earth and that Sea; for if we take this Particle That, Emphatically, it seems to signify, that there are more Heavens (for we suppose the visible Heaven or inferior one, is here meant) and Earth's and Sea's, than One; and that 'tis Emphatically and Eminently meant of those in the in Command, beyond the others; whereas there is no other Heaven, Earth, or Sea, but what is meant in the Command; and therefore would be very impertinently rendered by an Emphatical That. From whence I would ask this Gentleman; what reason there is why ה before Sabbath, and Shebigni, should be more Emphatical, than before those other Words in the same Command: Sure that Opinion wants solid and deep Foundations, that must be upheld by such superficial and weak ones. Thus much for the first part of the Command, the Substance and unquestionably moral Part thereof.  
2. We have the Explication of that Part of the Command in its following Words. Six Days shalt thou labour and do all thy Work; and the Day, the Seventh, a Sabbath to the Lord thy God; (is or shall be, or both) a Sabbath to the Lord, that is dedicted to the Worship and Service of Him. Thou shalt do no Work; thou nor thy Son, nor thy Daughter, etc. Where we have one Day in Seven, or of Seven, declared and signified to be that Day of Rest, or Holy Sabbath, which was commnded in the Beginning. And here our Authors contend, and worthily, that this Seventh Day in this Peace, is not an Ordinal Seventh Day, that is, the next Day after the former Six Days: But rather a Proportional (If I may so express it) Day, or a distributed part of the Seven; that is, that of Seven days God will have one entire day to be sanctified to him and his Service, without specifying what day of the Seven it should be. And I am sure he has no reason nor ground from the Command hitherto, to except against this understanding of the Seventh day. In this Explication of the Command we have two things.  
1. The Portion of Time, or the Part of the days that God will have sanctified to an Holy Rest; the Seventh. 2. How he will have the Rest observed: By an Abstinence of all sorts of Persons from earthly and worldly Employments, (except such as do not interfere with its due Sanctification) that they may be wholly in Body and Soul busied in his Service; as is clearly enjoined in that word in the Substance of the Command, (to Sanctify it.) As to this Seventh part of time so sanctified and separated to Divine Service, this is not Primarily and Purely Moral; though we acknowledge it to be Secondarily and Positively so: Not such a measure of Time as the Wisdom of Man in Innocency would have precisely separated to Divine Worship; and not one day more, nor one day less, of all the Weekdays. I think I have shown before, that the light of Nature would have separated and dedicated all to the solemn Service of God; all the time that it could spare from the due Recruits of Nature; Which I doubt not but in an Estate of Innocency, would have been a greater Measure and part of Time than the Seventh: For now we find by Experience, that even after the Fall, since that the Earth is cursed for our Sins, and requires a great deal more Labour and Time to be lain out upon it, for the Production of our necessary Sustinence, than before the Fall: Now that our weak, crazy and distempered Bodies call for a great deal more Care and Time for their Sustentation, their Recruits and Reparation, than when they had a perfect Temperature, were completely Healthy, Strong and Immortal, in Innocency; and many other Civil, Domestic Affairs take up, and must have, a great deal of our time, which would have exacted none of it in Innocencency: And yet we experience (I say) that six in seven allotted us for these things, are sufficient enough; and we can very well spare a Seventh day for the solemn Service of God, without any Detriment to our Bodies, or our civil Concerns: Yea, and have many other Seasons and good Opportunities given us to serve God in: And doubtless had God seen fit to have required the sixth part of our time; it would have been so also. Wherefore I conclude, that the seventh part of the Week, or one day of the Seven, is not primarily Moral; because the light of Nature could not have precisely dictated it to us: Which methinks I could demonstrate by this Supposition; Suppose a Person that is against the Morality of the Sabbath, that judgeth no day of the week more Holy than another, should by Providence be thrown among Mahonietans or Heathens, and preaching the Gospel to them, should be Instrumental to convert any of them to the Christian Faith: I assert, that in such a case (and he would certainly be horribly uncharitable that should judge the contrary) if they did keep all the rest of the Moral Precepts with a sound Faith in Christ they would infallibly be saved, though they never separated one day of the week entirely to God's Worship and Service: But now if they did allowedly live in any Breaches of the other Commands; (yea supposing some of them should never have been expressly taught them by their Converter) as if they did not acknowledge the only true God in their Souls; if they did worship Idols; if they did Swear Falsely or Vainly; if they were Rebellious and Undutiful to Parents and Magistrates; if they lived in Hatred, and were Cruel; if in Wantonness, and were Lascivious; in Theft, and Cozenage; or were Oppressing, in Lying, Slandering, and False Witnessing; or in an inward Love and Delight in any of these Sins, they should certainly Perish: And why? But because all the other Commands are primarily Moral; and this of the seventh part of time is not so: Yea in, keeping the other Commands, they keep the Morality of this also; Commands, they must separate time to the performance of that Divine Service, which is the prime Morality of the fourth Precept. Thus I think 'tis clear, that the Sanctification of one Seventh day of the week, is not absolutely and primarily Moral; but yet it may also be concluded, to be secondarily and positively so; that is, that upon the Revelation of the Will of the Legislator and his Injunction, the rational Creature closes with it, as that which is Holy, Just and Good; as that which is infinitely reasonable; for what can be more so, than that is seventh part of time should be devoted to his Service, whose all our time is; especially when it is also for the Creature's chief good.  
3. We have the Reasons to inculcate its Observation: 1. The Legislator's own Example, because he was six days in creating the World, and ceased from those works on the Seventh day, rested on the Seventh day: and 'tis hence only, in all this Command, that they can have any show or ground to plead for the last day, or the Seventh day of the week, to be the Sabbath or Rest that God did command; which is no way cogent, because it may be meant a Seventh day, by way of part or portion, and not the Seventh day of order nor in number of the week. And it may be thus understood, Because I was six dyas in making the World, and then rested; so shall you be six days busy in your common lawful Employments; and then a Seventh you shall consecrate to me and my Worship. So that in this Sense it doth not enjoin the last day, the Seventh day of the week in order, but a Seventh day in proportion of time: For which we have this to lead, That seeing God's Example is made the great Fundamental Argument of the Seven-day-Rest, it should hence follow, that if Adam had exactly followed the Pattern, than the Sixth day of the week would bid fairest for the day of Rest of all the Seven, because than Adam must have worked six days before his Holy Rest, as God did; and then being created, as we may suppose, about the latter end of the sixth day of the Creation, he must have wrought the day following (which is the Seventh) and so the five other days following, and rested upon the Sixth day as his first Sabbath; for that would have been the day after his six days Labour or Work: For 'tis clear, that the Seventh day after the beginning of the Creation, (though it were so with respect to God's Works; yet) 'twas the very next day after Adam was; and could not but be within a very few hours (if hours) after his Creation; seeing it begun in the Evening: And so Adam and Eve were so far from an exact Imitation of God in the Observance of the first Sabbath, that in his particular they were contrary thereto; for God wrought six days first, and then rested the Seventh; but Adam rested his first day, and then wrought the six days following: God's Rest was in the Conclusion of his Work; and Man's Rest was in the beginning of his Work, in his first seven days; which I think somewhat enervates this solitary Plea they have here for the last Week-day-Sabbath. But yet we will Suppose that in this Clause, God did there enjoin the last day of the Creation-week to be the Sabbath; but then we say this is purely Positive, and no way Moral at all, neither Primarily nor Secondarily; for it is were so, the Morality thereof must arise from the Reason that is given for it, viz. God's Example; even because he made his work of Creation in six days, and rested on the Seventh: But this is no way cogent, or (rather) Moral, not such a thing as the light of Nature would engaged us to: For 1. God is not to be imitated by us in all that he does; neither could the rational Creature conclude upon God's Revelation of his having ended his work on the Seventh day, that therefore he must work six, and rest the Seventh, without an express Injunction; which therefore God gave here. 2. If we could suppose, that such a Collection of imitating God, could have been apprehended by Man, without Relevation; then the Sixth day of the week, would by him be pitched upon for his own Sabbath of Rest; because the Sixth day of the following week would have been his Seventh day after his Six days working, as before. 3. God's making of the World, in six days, was a pure Revelation; for Man could never have known it of himself; no not in the Estate of his pure Knowledge: Because, for aught he could know, God might have made the World simultaneously, all at once, or by one word speaking; for he knew he might so have done, if he had pleased; he could not know that God did gradually, or progressively make the Creatures; much less that he took up six days for it, neither more nor less: Indeed the Order, and Method, the Time and Duration of the work of Creation, must be by Revelation to Man, seeing he was created the last of all the Creatures: So that in this respect 'tis not Moral; neither could it ever be the Dictate of Man's Mind. 4. God cannot properly Rest, because he cannot be said properly to Labour: Rest properly is a Refreshment after Weariness, Isa. 40.28. The everlasting God, the Creator of the Ends of the Earth, fainteth not, neither is weary. Consequently neither resteth; for he does all he does with an infinite Facility, and perfect Immobility; and takes no more pains in creating the World, than in creating a Fly; that is, none at all. And besides, as before, God works still in his works of Preservation and Providence, which are altogether as Great and Glorious, and some of them more Great Glorious, than were the works of Creation: So that in this respect this Argument is not Moral; not such a Motive as could have been found out by the Mind of Man. Lastly, If this were such a cogent Reason in itself, or a Moral Motive for the Sanctification of the Seventh day, in the Repetition of the Fourth Command, why is it not so much as mentioned? For Deut. 5. 13-15. there is not a word concerning it; but whereas in the other Commands all the Motives that were used, and adjoined to them in their first Edition, are here again repeated; yet this is quite and clean left out in this second Edition of the Fourth Command; and in lieu thereof, their mighty and wonderful Deliverance out of the Land of Egypt is inserted, that 'twas therefore because he saved them, that he commanded them to keep the Sabbath-day. What this should signify I cannot well see, unless God would hereby teach us, that the Salvation of his Church is a far more great and glorious work in itself, and far more beneficial and happy to us, than that of the Creation, (for the Deliverance of Israel out of Egypt by the hand of Moses, was a Type of the Deliverance of the universal Church from the Devil, from Sin, from Hell, from the Curse, from Death and the Grave; by our Lord Jesus Christ) and that when this shall be completed (as we know 'twas at our Savour's Resurrection, it being the Conclusion of his Estate of Humiliation by which he purchased our Salvation, and an entrance into his Glorification, where he would procure it, apply, and effect it) than the Reason annexed to the Fourth Command from the ceasing the Works of Creation, should (in a sense) be lain by; and that of the Redemption of the Church be substituted in its place: And so consequently as the Seventh-day-Sabbath was observed in Commemoration of the works of Creation, until a more admirable work of God should be accomplished; so the first day ever after should be the Holy Rest; when that Supreme of all the works of God, our Redemption, should be rested from on that day. I do verily believe Gods neglecting the works of Creation, and substituting that of the Church's Redemption, as the gread Foundation and Reason of keeping the Holy Rest, here in Deut. declares this unto us.  
But I refer it to wiser Heads: Only from what has been here spoken, I will conclude, that this part is purely Positive; both the Seventh Week-day-Sabbath, and this Motive upon which 'tis grounded, God's working six days and resting the Seventh, which is a Motive to us to observe it, as well as it seems a Reason in God to require it. Wherefore here I would fain demand of this Gentleman, why he should be so exceedingly Zealous for the Perpetuity of the Seventh-day-Sabbath, when 'tis both a Ceremonial and Positive Precept: Ceremonial, as it signifies Gods own Rest from his Works past; and as it signifies our future Rest in Heaven from all our Labours in this present Life: And purely Positive, seeing all the former Ceremonial and Positive Precepts concerning Worship, are abolished by the coming of Christ: Why should this then solitarily be excluded, and stand in its Strength and Vigour, when all its other Companions are thrown to the Ground and vanish? I know no reason, but because this was written by the singer of God upon stone. But this altereth not the nature of the Command itself; neither can it from hence plead a greater Privilege; for all the former had God for their Author as well as this, and God's Mouth is as Authoritative as his Finger: Wherefore we may well conclude, that seeing there is no reason can be given, why the Seventh-day-Sabbath should not recede and give place, as well as all other Ceremonial and Positive Precepts to our Lord Christ at his coming, and his new, and more glorious Administrations; that it is, and aught to be, excluded with them, and give place to a more glorious day, in Commemoration of a more glorious work, and Gods resting from it: Even the first day, our Lords glorious triumphing day.  
The other two reasons of this Fourth Command follow, which are Gods Blessing the Sabbath day, and Hallowing it. Where 'tis worthy our Observance (though this Author deems it a Triffe) that 'tis the Sabbath day, not the Seventh day of the Week, that is here blessed and hallowed: As if God would hint, that the Sabbath, upon what day soever (of his own Appointment) should be Blessed; even the first as well as the Seventh day of the Week, when in the latter days his Sons glorious Rest should Authorise that day; and as it should alter all other Ceremonial and positive Ordinances of his own Appointment, so also this Ceremonial and Positive day, into that other, which with all the other Ordinances and Institutions of the Blessed Redeemer, should last to the end of the World. From which Discourse concerning the Nature of the Fourth Command, all that follows in his third or fourth Pages after, is sufficiently answered, and so his next answer to another Objection against his Opinion, P. 82.   

SECT. XVII.  
THUS by God's Help, and (I hope) his Guidance, I have considered all his Arguments that he urges for his Sabbatarian Opinion; and have shown their Invalidity and Weakness: And all the Solutions that he brings to disannul all our Proofs for the Dominical Tenet; and suppose that I have vindicated ours from all his Attempts, and shown how they remain solid and substantial. Other things which follow, being but Appendices to this Discourse, and not of so great Moment, I shall but touch upon them. As Page 83. about the Beginning of the Sabbath. He would have it to begin at Even; and we willingly grant him, that the Seventh-day-Sabbath did so; for it began when God had ended his Works of Creation, which was the Evening before the Sunrising of the Seventh Day. But, I judge that now the best Time to begin our Lord's Day with, is in the Morning; because, 1. 'Twas on that Time of the Day, early in the Morning, about Break of day, that our Lord Jesus rested from his Work of Redemption: Wherefore, if the foregoing Evening of the Old Testament-Sabbath, was its most convenient Beginning; because than God ended his Work of Creation, and rested then: So he Morning-Light of the First Day, is the most convenient Time for its Beginning; because than God rested from his much more Glorious, and really (in his Humanity) Laborious Work of our Redemption. 2. Because the Holy Scripture expressly gins it thus, placing the Conclusion of the Seventh Day at the beginning of the Morning of the First Day, Mat. 28.1. In the End of the Sabbath as it began to dawn toward the First Day of the Week; and consequently then that Day began. 3. Because 'tis the most convenient Time; because most observable, less liable to Profanations, upon the account of Mistakes; and so to turbulent Spirits, less obnoxious, etc. but this is not so substantial a Dispute. Let every Person give up and consecrate the whole Lordsday to the Service of God; I mean, the whole Artificial Day; or rather the whole lightsome Part thereof; and then let him begin either at Even or Morning; I doubt not, but if it be conscientiously done in the Name of Christ, God will accept him. But, there he must not scandalise others by doing Common or Mechanic Works upon the following Evening of that Day; which the Generality of Christians, among whom he lives, account as Sacred.  
He seems Page 84. to imply, that there should be Morning and Evening religious Service every Day in public: But there is scarcely any preaching Minister can have so much Leisure, beside his own personal and domestical Devotions: And beside our People will not attend it every day; and then the proper public Duty of the Sabbath, to be but once, and begin about Noon. I, for my Part, believe the Times of public Worship on the Lord's-day are most conveniently ordered already: Twice, once in the Morning about Nine; and so in the Evening about Two. An Interval being for the Refreshment of the outward Man, and Recruits of the Spirit, for a more vigorous and enlarged serving of God in the Evening: Beside, we know in the Country, 'tis convenient to keep some Persons at home; or one Person, when Houses are solitary and liable to Injury, by those who should know them totally destitute of an Inhabitant; and in Country and City, Families that have Children, which must be kept at home, either through Weakness, or such as would disturb the Congregation by their Presence, must have some one or other to take care of them: Now in such Cases, one Servant or Person, may be at home in the Morning, and another in the Evening; and so all partake of the public Worship every Lord's-day; which could not so conveniently be done by one single assembling the Congregation: But however to meddle herein, would be very impertinent, and would rather savour of a restless Fancy (to say no worse) than of a peaceable and prudent Spirit.  
The other Pages home to the 90th. I overlook; because in them I find, either such things as do not belong to the Sabbath, nor to this Controversy at all: Or if they do, they are such as are written already, (at least the Substance) and answered.   

SECT. XVIII.  
HE produces, Page, 90. the Argument of Tradition from the Apostles in the universal Church these 1600 Years, for the Observance of the Lord's-day. Whereto his Answer is, that no Tradition can add to, take from, lay aside, or alter any Word of Christ, or Duty of Man. But, yet such a perpetualand epidemical Tradition may serve for a good subservient Proof for that which is founded upon, and deduced from Scripture; as the case is here; for we have proved by many Arguments from Scripture, the Abolition of the Seventh-Day-Sabbath, and the ratification of the Lord's-Day.  
He answers to such a general and lasting Tradition for the Sanctification of the Lord's-day: That he has already proved that the Seventh Day is the Lord's-day spoken of, Rev. 1.10. But I think, I have disproved that Proof.  
Page 91: He himself recurs to Tradition, and undertakes to prove that throughout several Centuries there have been Churches, who assembled themselves themselves for religious Worship on the Seventh Day. And, so this is set as a Bar against, and a Counterplea to that Prime, Primitive and universal Tradition for the Lordsday: To which, I answer in general: 1. That a few Exceptions against a general Rule, do rather confirm than weaken it. 2. Every Antiquity or Tradition will not, cannot, serve to prove either Practice or Doctrine to be commendable or orthodox, nor derogate from what is so. For, the Denial of the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ is as ancient as the Apostles Days; in which Corinthus was such an Heretic; and the Ebionites, Photinians and Arain's have handed down that damning Doctrine to our Socinians. 3. Scarce any Church, since the Apostles Days, have been without out their Flaws, in Doctrine or Worship or both; and we doubt not, but this hath been one of them, if it can be proved to be practised. 4. In many Churches, where they did observe the Seventh-day, as a Day of public Assemblies; yet in them the Lord's-day was also kept and observed; and that too, as the chief Day: For on the Lord's-day all, in general, were engaged to wait upon God's public Worship, not so on Saturdays. On the Lord's-day all the Ordinances of the Gospel were administered, not so on Saturdays: And so still the Lordsday had the Pre-eminence even in those very Churches: Which general Answers may be enough to stop the Mouths of all his ancient Witnesses: Yet, I will take a little Pains, and employ a little Time, to inquire into the Particulars; for I think they neither deserve nor require much of either. As to his first Instance, if all the following be such, I am sure they are stark naught; yea, they are not at all. For, he asserts, that in the Apostles times the Seventh Day was observed as the public Day of divine Worship: Here he must meau by Christins, or else he trifles: But he can never find in all the Scripture, that in the Apostles Days there was ever one Society of Christians gathered on the Seventh Day: Indeed, St. Paul did go on that Day into the Assemblies of the Jews, to preach the Gospel to many of them, which he could not conveniently do on any other Day: But never did he invite any to keep that Day, never did he assemble afterward on that Day; when he was separated from their Synagogues finding them imperswasible and obstinate. But, now we can produce several Christian-Assemblies on the First day, the Lords day, after our Saviour's Resurrection, in which our Lord appeared to them: And 'twas then their Custom to Assemble, and bring their Public Alms to the Public Treasure; wherefore I cannot but marvel at this bold Assertion.  
The Basis of traditionary Structue, being so visibily sunk and come to nought, makes me suspect that the erected Stories thereof, will tumble and fall: So that 'tis clear, we have the Apostle Examples, the Churches Use in their days, and their Commands against the Seventh day, and for the Lords day, as a sufficient Demur to all his future Tradition: Into which I now descend, and must say that I have searched the Magdeburgenses for his Quotations, but cannot find them where he quotes them; and therefore believe that the Author used either another Edition, or another that is various either in the Bulk, or in the Pages. I found in them the Eliberine Council, but there he Twenty Third Canon hath nothing of a Fast upon a Sabbath day. As to the other Authors, I have them not, and know not where to get them, that I might peruse them; neither is it needful; for the matter of these Quotations, makes very little for his Cause: For whoever considers them, will find, 1. That very many, if not most of them, declare the Establishment and Separation of the Dominical day for Divine Service. 2. That another great part of them, prove the Observation or keeping both of the Dominical day, and the Sabbath, in very many of the Churches. 3. These tell us that the Sabbath was kept as a Fast, by the most (if not by all) of the Churches that kept it; and the Lordsday as a Festival, which all our Ecclesiastical Writers acknowledge as before: And so evince that it was not kept with so equal Authority as the Lords day. (So does Dr. Young at large) which also shows that they never observed it as the ancient Sabbath; or 'twas enjoined in the Fourth Command: But upon a new Account, or for a new Reason; even because our Lord Christ lay dead in the Grave on that day; Therefore they would Fast and Humble themselves, because their Lord and Saviour was on that day in his lowest Humiliation: (So far were they from this Gentleman's Opinion, that his State of Death was his Rest after his Work of Redemption) and they would observe the First day with Praises and Holy rejoicings, as the Christian Festival; because 'twas the Lord's day of Triumph over his Enemies, even of his Resurrection. These include the greatest part, by far, of his Historical Examples, and a very few are left which do not expressly acknowledge these things: And they that do not express them, may well be thought to include them. I mean, though some of these Quotations do not verbally tell us that when they kept this Sabbath, they also kept the Lords day, yet it may well be presumed they did so; seeing 'twas the common Practice of such Churches, to observe both of them in the foresaid manner. Such an one, for Example, is that of Socrates Scholasticus, who tells us (for I have examined him, and find he does verbatim tell us) in a manner all the Churches in the World do Celebrate, and Receive the Holy Mysteries, every Sabbath day after other: Yet the People inhabiting Alexandria and Rome, of an old Tradition, do not use it. Yet doubtless, they also observed the Lordsday, seeing 'twas that which Constantine, had before by Edict enjoined the Churches to do. And he saith in the very next Page, and in the same Chapter of this Quotation, that at Caesarea in Cappadocia, and at Cyprus, the Priests and Bishops do Preach and Expound Holy Scripture at Evening-Prayer, on the Saturdays and Sundays by Candlelight; and therefore we may well presume that the other Churches did, which before he spoke of: These being some of these all. As for his Historical Account, when the Lord's day was brought into Scotland, viz. An. 1208. It may be very well answered, that the initiating, or bringing in of the Dominical day, does not refer to the day itself, but only to the Authority that introduced it; even that in that Year it began to be Established by the Authority of a Council; which before it had not been: Or if it refer to the day itself, it may not simply be understood, as if that day were never taken notice of at all in Scotland, as a Sanctified day: (For who ca believe this? seeing 'twas all along observed by the rest of the Churches, as his own Quotations acknowledge.) But respectively, as now 'twas by Authority enjoined to be strictly kept and sanctified, and to be solitarily separated to Divine Service: Whereas before, they were Lose and Profane in their Carriages upon it. All which is most probable, and very well concurs with the truth of the History. And therefore this History does not, nor that of England's late due Observance of the Lords day; or their keeping Markets on that day, etc. till the same Century, or any other evacuate the Series of an Universal and Constant Tradition for the Lord's day: For even in these Nations, the Lords day might be then acknowledged to be the day of Divine Worship; though not so strictly and duly kept; as we know in this very last Century among ourselves, Plays, Interludes, all manner of Sports, selling of things in our very Streets, have been permitted and practised. Yet still the Lords day acknowledged in the Church to be the day of Divine Worship. And it cannot well be supposed that those Christian Churches, (as England and Scotland) who observed the Seventh day, because on it our Saviour lay in the Grave (not because 'twas commanded in the Fourth Precept, nor because 'twas the Creator's Rest after his Work) should altogether neglect and disregard the First day, seeing 'twas the day of his Conquest, and the Entrance into his Glorious Exaltation. This I thought convenient to say to those Historical Collections of his, and must leave a more particular and exact Answer of them to those who have better Helps, and more Leisure to examine them.  
He gives us Page 102. Thomas Aquinas' Opinion concerning the Fourth Command, (whom I suppose to be the same Thomas before quoted for the same) that some part of it is Moral, and some Ceremonial, etc. Which Opinion of his, how heterodox soever the Author deems it, I doubt not, but it is very Orthodox, and the Truth of God clearly evinced by the Light of Nature: And that no Person shall ever be Condemned for not observing a Seventh day of the Week, (much less for not observing the Last day of the Week) entirely to God's Worship and Service, without the Revelation of the Fourth Command to him; no more than he shall be Condemned for not believing in the Lord Jesus, without the Revelation of the Gospel.   

SECT. XIX.  
BUt enough of this before, which invites me to reflect upon one Particular which I intended to have replied to, in its proper place: But I know not how 'twas then neglected, which is Page 79. An Answer to another Objection against the Morality of the Seventh-day-Sabbath, viz. That the Decalogue in not at all in force to the Gentiles: Which Objection methinks, should not be so crudely produced, nor in such an unlimited and unqualified manner; for I dare to assert, That that One, whoever he was, that this Author intends, does hold that the Decalogue in one respect does, and in another does not oblige the Gentiles. That it does oblige them as to the Morality and Substance of every one of the Ten Commands, (the Fourth not excepted) That it does not oblige them, as those Ten words were Engraven on Tables of Stone, as they were delivered to the Israelites upon the Mount, in such a dreadful and formidable manner, as Moses was the Receiver of them from God's Hand, and their Conveyer to the People: Which to be his Sense, his very Production of the Preface for his Argument, sufficiently proves. Which (we doubt not) is a most Orthodox Opinion; and not only the Judgement of One, but of almost (if not altogether) all our learned and solid Divines. For, how can that oblige the Getiles, which they never heard, nor were in a Possibility to know? As Millions of them never were; and Millions more may never be: Who never heard of a Deliverance from Egypt, nor of a Moses, nor of a burning Mountain, nor of horrible Thundrings and Lightnings, nor of such a Deliverance of that Law? And the Gentiles, who have, by God's gracious and blessed Providence, these things brought to their Cognizance, are not obliged to them, as given by Moses, but as given by God; not to them, as delivered out of the Land of Egypt, and out of the House of Bondage, which was peculiar only to the Israelites and those that came out with them; not to them, as having a share and Possession in the Land of Canaan, (the Motive to the Fifth Command,) for that was only peculiar to the Israelites: So than the Decalogue does not oblige all Mankind, as 'twas given to the Israelites, and as urged upon them with their singular and peculiar Obligations, but as 'twas engraven upon the Humane Nature in our first Creation, as the moral Perfection of the rational Creature, so it obliges all the Gentiles, as well as the Jews. His Argument of the Deliverance of the then whole visible Church, is a Mistake; for there were some of the visible Church, who were not among them, as Jethro, Moses' Father-in-Law; and we believe more with him, seeing he was a great Man, or a Priest of Midian, Exod. 3.1. whose Faith in, and Worship of the True God are clearly seen, Exod. 18.8, 12. Wherefore this Deliverance of the Jews, could not so effect them or appertain to them: But, suppose that these Motives could have a typical and remote Influence, and lay some kind of moral Obligations upon the Heathens that may have the Tidings thereof sent among them, it cannot be well imagined how it could ever affect, or be a Motive to those Nations that never had the least Notice thereof; and consequently, the Decalogue, thus given by Moses, is not in force toward the Gentiles as such; for so 'twould equally oblige them all.   

SECT. XX.  
AND thus I have passed through all his Book that concerns the Sabbath; and have done what God hath enabled me to show the Weakness and Non-Conclusion of all his Arguments, having endeavoured to look into the Depth, and find out the Strength of every one of them: And on the other hand, to confirm and establish ours against all his Endeavours to undermine and baffle them. And, might here have concluded; but shall not till I have shown him the Tradition of the Lords-days-Rest down along from the Apostles Time, home to the Conclusion of the Fourth Century; which is the purest Antiquity, and enough for our purpose, being found in the most ancient orthodox Fathers, and spoken of as the Practice of the Church of God in their Days, whom I shall but name, and set down the Time of their flourishing in the Church, referring the Reader to Dr. Young, and Mr. Warren, to find out their Quotations thus.  
Ignatius Co-temporary with the Apostles.  
Justin Martyr in the Year 160.  
Dionysius Bp. of Corinth near the same time.  
Tertullian Anno. 200. Origen 226. Cyprian Martyr An. 250. Athanasius An. 326. Hilary 355. Ambrose 374. Hierome 385. Chrysostom 398. Augustine in their Time. Eusebius (saith my Author) testifies, 'twas observed all the World over. And Bp. Andrews (as I have read him) in his Speech against Thrask a Sabbatarian, in the Star-Chamber, avows it on his Credit, that there is not any Ecclesiastical Writer, in whom 'tis not found. Viz. The sacred Observance of the Lord's Day, that is, the First Day of the Week. Which Testimonies of so many excellent Doctors (yea, saith Bp. Andrews of all eminent Doctors) of so many great and flourishing Churches, carry much more Weight with them, than all his Collections can pretend to do against them.  
As touching Easter and its Observance, that is no Part of this Controversy; therefore I shall only say, that I am no Zealot for its Observance, and am persuaded it has less Grounds for its Celebration than any other of those Festivals which are appropriated to our Lord, and in Commemoration of his Birth, of his Manifestation, of his Ascension, of his Mission of the Holy Ghost, because the Lord's Day is a constant Memorial of that Resurrection, being that Day of the Week whereon he rested from all the Work of his Redemption: wherefore, seeing there is a weekly religious and solemn Commemoration thereof, there must needs be the less Cause for an Annual. As for the other Festivals which are appropriated to mere Men, and dedicated to their Remembrance and Praise; as I have nothing to say for them, so I think it neither prudent nor seasonable to say any thing against them. But, let him that keepeth a Day, keep it to the Lord, and he that keepeth not a Day, unto the Lord let him not keep it: And let both maintain the Unity of the Spirit, in the Bond of Peace.  
Here I hoped to have annexed my Epilogue, but some Passages in the Discourse of Easter, do require a little Animadversion. As when,  
He tells us, Page 134. (which he had done several Times before) that the Change of the Seventh Day to the First, was introduced by the Bp. of Rome, and so imposed by him upon the other Churches, which he thinks evidenced by his former Collection. But, 1. We have seen it observed before there was a Bp. of Rome, and he received it from the Assemblies of the Disciples and Christians just upon our Saviour's Resurrection, and in the Apostles Days. 2. We have seen it observed by very great Churches in the Purity of the Roman Faith, and the Moderation of the Roman Ecclesiastical Government, when either the Roman Bishop did not pretend to any Authority over them; or if he did, they rightly and stoutly resisted and refused it: And therefore 'twas rather an universal Reception of all the Churches conjunctly, as from the Apostles and scriptural Authority; than any Imposition of Rome upon them.  
He has a strange Notion, Page 130. (as it appears to me) which is, that first Rome endeavoured to introduce the Observation of the Passover upon the Lordsday; and so the weekly Holy Rest upon that day; which to my Apprehension, implies that Rome herself observed the Passover; Lordsday, before she did the weekly. Whereas 'tis clear, that Rome observed the first day of the week, because 'twas the Dominical day, the day of our Lord's Resurrection; whereas the proper Paschal-day was two or three days before the Lord's day: And therefore in Honour to that day, did the Bishop of Rome require Easter to be kept; and not ordained Easter Firstday, as a Shooe-horn to bring in the weekly first day after. Moreover in those Churches wherein they dissented from Rome, as to the day of Easter, they concurred with her in the weekly Lordsday: So that the Lordsday was weekly observed by them, before Easter was kept upon that day; and therefore the yearly first day could not be an usherer in of that weekday which was before it.   

SECT. XXI.  
AS the Conclusion and Result of all this Discourse, I think, I have shown, that the Lord Christ did not make the World; that Jehovah was not Christ before the World; that he never instituted the Seventh day, nor rested on it, till his Incarnation; nor being Christ really till then; that he gave not the Commands on Mount Sinai: Neither were they there given to the Gentiles, but to the Jews only, and those mixed People that came out of Egypt: That the Ten Commands were confirmed by our Lord Christ in his Sermons and Discourses; but the Seventh-day-Sabbath never so much as mentioned by him in them all; as that which was no part at all of the Moral Law; but purely positive, both in itself, and in its Grounds and Motive upon which 'tis founded, and imposed upon its Observers in the Old Testament; and therefore was liable to be changed with the other positive and ceremonial Precepts of the Law of God; that our Lord Christ indeed observed it in his own Person in the Flesh, because he was made under the antecedent Law of all the Ceremonies and Mosaical Administration, and observed them all as well as the Sabbath; but yet he then spoke, and did such things as declared its approach to Dissolution and its Non-Morality; that he rested no more in the Grave on the Seventh day, than he did on the Cross on the Sixth, when he hung dead thereon; but the day of his Rest from the work of Redemption, was the first day of the week; which day he supremely honoured above all the days of the week, by his Resurrection thereon from the Dead; by his several Appearances thereon to his Disciples after his Death; by his most gracious Discourses thereon unto them (which he never did, nor made, on the Seventh day after his Resarrection) and by the Mission of the Holy Ghost upon his Disciples thereon: Upon which account St. John calls it the Lords day, and by all the Churches ever since, that Lords day has been taken to be the first day of the Week: That the Apostles and Believers kept the Lord's day, or the first day of the week as their religious Rest; and met together on that day as the day of their public Assemblies, and we never read of any Assemblies on the Seventh day, save those of the Jews (our Lords Enemies) in their Synagogues, to whom Paul went to preach the Gospel then and there; but when he experienced their desperate Obstinacy; left that time, and those Synagogues, and we never read that ever on that day he joined with any religious Society; after that at Troas he preached and administered the Sacrament to the Believers on the first day, the Lords day; and that the Holy Ghost does call the first day of the week the Lords day, being the day of the Redeemer's Rest from a far more glorious, laborious, gracious and beneficial, Work, than that of the Creation: And that there is an express Prohibition of the Seventh-day-Sabbath in St. Paul's Epistles; and consequently, seeing the positive Morality of one day in Seven in the Fourth Command, is of perpetual Obligation to the Churches; therefore the first day must be that day, and the Sabbath was excluded, that the Lords day might succeed, and that the Promises made to the Rest of one day in Seven in the Command, are made to, and entailed upon the first day of those Seven now, as they were upon the last of them, before its Expiration; and that a due Observation thereof, shall have a gracious Acceptation with, a bountiful Remuneration from our God and our Saviour, according to all the Blessed Experiences of the strict and conscientious Observers thereof. That there is a more express and peremptory Abolition of this Sabbath in the Scriptures of that Apostle, than there is, or can be found in them for the Cessation of many other particular, positive and ceremonial Institutions; which yet Christians in general (and this Gentleman in particular) disregard as dissolved and vanished: And I profess, if I could see but half so much in the Second Command, to prove a Form of Prayer to be the Pesel there forbidden, or at least included therein, I should utterly deny all Forms as Idolatrous (which now I dare not do; but in some cases hold them not only lawful, but necessary and Praiseworthy) or but half so much in any Line or Sentence of the New Testament against the use of the Lords Prayer in the public Congregation; I would never so use it more, but to my due power would endeavour its Banishment thence: If, I say, but half so much as I find expressed for the Seventh days Deposal; well may we wonder that in such things a Man sees what scarce no Man else ever did, in the word of God, and yet in this, that he should not see what almost every Man else can plainly discover.  
Wherefore I question not, but all our Divines and Ministers of Congregations, are sufficiently satisfied, that they serve God duly, as to the Circumstance of time on Lords days; and may, and do, in Faith, associate on the Lord's day, as the only Sacred day of the Week, with all other Christians in the Apostles days since our Saviour's Resurrection, home to this very Generation: And I cannot but hope that this piece, how specious soever it be, and with what confidence soever recommended; however backed with the Pretences of Divine Authority, of Jehovah's Will, etc. with pathetical Inculcations of those in multitudes of its Pages, for the Observance of the Seventh day will find but very few, if any, Proselytes among our common Professors; and, I am confident, none among our Wise, Stade, experienced Christians; or if any be in danger of Infection, I pray to God that this Reply, intended for this end, may be an Antidote to secure them. Lastly, it will be good Advice to this Gentleman, who hath caused the Expense of so much time in this Controversy, to bethink himself how his Opinion leads us to Judaize; and this work of his tends only to divide the Church, to stumble the Weak, to employ and please the Silly, Fantastical and Giddy in matters of Religion, to encourage the Profaners of the first day, or rather of the Lords day, to scandalise and grieve all, and therefore to cease from farther Attempts of this kind. And all I desire is, that the Reader would impartially compare what he has written for his Seventh day against the Lord's day; and what I have written for the Lords day, against his Seventh day; and beg Wisdom and Understanding from God to have a due Insight into, and draw a right Conclusion from both.   
FINIS.   

Books Printed for Samuel Clement at the Swan in S. Paul's Church- Yard.  
GOD's Revenge against Murder and Adultery, expressed in Thirty several Tragical Histories: Wherein are lively delineated the Various Stratagems, subtle Practices and deluding Oratory used by our Modern Gallants, in order to the seducing young Ladies to their unlawful Pleasures. To which are annexed the Triumphs of Friendship and Chastity, in some Heroical Examples and Delightful Histories. The whole illnstrated with about fifty Elegant Epistles, relating to Love and Gallantry. By Thomas Wright. M. A. of S. Peter's College in Cambridge.  
A Complete History of the Late Revolution, from the first Rise of it to this present Time; in Three Parts.  
The English Grammar, setting forth the Grounds of the English Tongue; and particularly its Genius in making Compounds and Derivatives, with many other Useful and curious Observations: Wherein are also explained the usual Abbreviations, the several hands used in Writing, and Characters in Printing, the Variety of Styles, the Art of true Pointing, and the Way to understand Books: With a Prefatory Discourse about the Original and Excellency of the English Tongue; and at the end an Alphabetick Collection of the Monosyllables, being a Treatise of Orthography for Writers, and of Rhymes for Poets. A Necessary Work in general for all sorts of Persons desirous to understand the Ground and Genius of the English, and very proper to prepare Young Men for the Latin Tongue. By Guy Miege, Gent.  
Cerevisiarii Comes: Or, the New and True Art of Brewing, Illustrated by various Examples in making Beer, Ale and other Liquors, so that they may be most Durable, Brisk and Fragrant; and how they may be so ordered, as to yield the greatest Quantity of Spirits in Distillation. To which is added, the right way to refine and bottle Beer and Cider; and a Cure for those that are Sick and Ropy, so as to return them to their internal Sanity; as also the true Method of manuring Lands and the Art of making Salt-Water fresh. All proved by Demonstration and Sound Philosophy, to be more agreeable to Man's Body than otherwise, and so not only sit for English Constitutions, but also for Transportation. Published for the fake of Variety, and therefore recommend to all that esteem demonstrated Truths before Notional Theory. By W. Y. worth, Medicin-Professor.