THE JEWS SABBATH ANTIQUATED, AND THE LORDS DAY INSTITUTED By DIVINE AUTHORITY.  
OR, The Change of the Sabbath from the Last to the First Day of the Week, asserted and maintained by Scripture-Arguments, and Testimonies of the Best Antiquity; with a Refutation of sundry Objections raised against it.  
The Sum of all Comprised in Seven Positions.  
By EDM. WARREN Minister of the Gospel in COLCHESTER.  REV. 1.10. 
I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Athanasius in Hom. de cement. ad init.  
Imprimatur, EDM. CALAMY.  
LONDON, Printed by David Maxwel, for W. Weekly of Ipswich, and are to be sold by John Rothwel, at the Fountain in Cheapside, and also by Nath. Web, and Will. Grantham, at the Black Bear in Paul's Churchyard, 1659.   

To the Right Worshipful JOHN GURDON Esq Justice of Peace in the County of SUFFOLK.  
HONOURED SIR,  
THe design of this Dedication is not so much to shelter the ensuing Treatise under the protection of your name (let it stand or fall at the bar of Scripture and right reason) as to show my real and unfeigned gratitude for the many and much-obliging favours you have been been pleased to heap upon me, both while I lived under your roof, and since my removal to a more public station: I thought thus with myself, It is the first, and likely to be the last time of my appearing in Print, therefore the best and fittest season to signify my due resentment of your love and friendship, which from first to last, since my acquaintance with you, I have experienced so firm and constant; as also to show the precious esteem I still have of you and your pious Family, which as I found, so I left most religiously devoted to the practice of the truth here pleaded for, the keeping holy of the Lords day, the undoubted Christian Sabbath; it is verily no small joy to me in these days of liberty and looseness to find any (especially of your rank) walking in this truth of Christ. Go on (dear Sir) in this good old way of truth and holiness, be you still a friend to this good day [the Lords Day] and the Lord will be a friend to you in in an evil day, yea, in that great day of his appearing, Concerning which, as Paul prayed for Onesiphorus and his household [the Lord grant that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day] so prays for you and yours  
The Unworthiest of Christ's Ministers EDM. WARREN.   

A Word by way of Preface to the Courteous Reader, With a Word of Advice to my Christian Friends and Hearers, in and about the Town of Colchester.  
Good Reader,  
I Shall not tyre thy patience with any tedious Prefatory Discourse, only hint a Word or two concerning the occasion of this Treatise, with the Method observed in the composure of it; about a year and half since, or something more, amidst that African brood of Erroneous Books which the lawless liberty of the Press has Midwived into the world, came forth a Treatise swelling as, with a Timpany of vain glorious confidence for the Jews Saturday-Sabbath; so no less opprobious contempt of the Lords day, our Christian Sabbath. The Author of it Mr. Tho. Tillam by Name, by Profession an Anabaptist, was pleased in Print to found a challenge and provoke me to the combat in answering of it. It was some time before I was fully resolved what to do, the sense of my own Insufficiency bespoke my silence, and willed me rather to sit still in obscurity, than venture abroad to the view of a captious and quarrelsome World: Besides, my Pastoral charge and Preaching-work would scarce afford me that leisure which others of more natural promptness and dexterous parts and gifts might well enough spare for such an Employment: But on the other hand the spreading of this Jewish Leaven, together with the pressing Importunity of some Christian Friends persuaded me to undertake this work, which accordingly I did, and after I had spent much time and written many sheets in answering this Author Page by Page, I found his Method so confused, his excursions so many, his eructations of putrid choler and calumny so bitter, that I had not the patience to follow him any longer in that wildgoose-chase, but laid all aside, and resolved upon a new Method; namely, to assert the Truth thetically in distinct Positions, and answer his most material Arguments as Objections against it. He would fain persuade silly people, That Antichrist changed the Sabbath, and goes about to prove it from Dan. 7. where we read of a little horn that thought to change Times and Laws; and with this little horn he makes a loud noise up and down his Book. But who told him that this horn was Antichrist? Our best Expositors take it to be meant of Antiochus Epiphanes, and indeed Dan. 8. clearly proves it. But what desperate insolency is this, to take the crown of Christ and set it upon the head of Antichrist? Is not the change of the Jewish Law attributed to Christ, Hebr. 7.12. and did he not also change their times and seasons of worship? was their weekly Sabbath exempted? I pray where or how? not by the fourth Commandment, for we have proved that the seventh day from the Creation was never the substance of that precept; nor by any clause in the New Testament, for there it is rather repealed. 'Tis true, the Moral duty of rest, remains still in a holy day of weekly recourse, according to the Commandment, but the old Sabbath being of a shadowy nature in the after observation (if not in the first Institution) of it, is certainly done away by Christ the substance of all Legal shadows; yet not simply, but in way of exchange for a new day of the same number, though not of the same shadowy nature.  
What I have argued for the change of the day is sufficiently authorized by the Scriptures, the Fathers, and our own judicious Divines. My Arguments are but few in number; more might have been added but for oppressing the Reader's either purse or patience. Mr. Cawdrey and Mr. Palmer have largely handled, what I have but briefly touched. If what I have written be answered with scurrilous gibes, and railing Rhetoric, as Mr. Jenisons Book was, My next answer shall be nothing but silence and contempt; which I the rather hint, because the Adversary has threatened a Reply before he read my Book; right or wrong, it seems he is resolved to have the last word, for which I purpose never to contend. If I know my own heart, 'tis truth, not triumph that I seek and thirst after; truth I say, grounded upon the Scriptures, sealed with the blood of Martyrs, attested by the Primitive Fathers, and maintained by the pens of the most Reformed Writers; such is the truth here asserted, and I shall own nothing as an Answer to it, but that which fully answers all these.  
Now my Christian Friends and Brethren, I beseech you love and live this truth; stand to it, stand for it, and stand in it as long as you live. Take heed of corrupt Books and broachers of error; you may be too credulous, too cautelous you cannot be. Let neither the pompous Phrases, nor proud threats of men either allure you, or affright you from the truths of God. T. T. abounds in both these Artifices; charming some with his Rhetoric, scaring others with his Bulls and big words, as he does William Sloat by name, leaving him (as his Printed Book speaks) under the unpardonable sin to the judgement of the great day: and yet this William Sloat is known to be a man of sober conversation, professing Repentance towards God, and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ; only he must be expunged out of the Catalogue of Christians for not being able to keep the Jews Sabbath, and damned to the fiery furnace of Hell, because he could no longer dance after this man's Pipe, or bow down to Images that he has set up in his fancy; Opinions I mean. To conclude, I beseech you, Christians for the Lords sake, and your souls sake hold fast the Good Old Truths of Christ in this hour of England's temptation, and cleave to that Good Old Cause the (Christian Sabbath) which the rigid Prelatical party sought to subvert by the Book of Sports, and many pernicious Pamphlets and practices, till the wrath of God broke out upon the land in those late bloody showers, the Remembrance whereof methinks should daunt the heart of the most Goliah-like Adversary, that shall dare to draw the sword of defiance the second time against this Christian Cause: If any will be so foolhardy as still to fight against God and the Lamb, in profaning, and teaching others to profane his day, by working, as formerly some did by sporting; yet be exhorted all you that fear God and love the Lord Jesus to keep holy the Lord's day, making it no otherwise a working-day, then by working out your salvation with fear and trembling, which is the humble and hearty advice of  
Yours in all Gospel-Offices EDM. WARREN.   

A TABLE of the Contents.  

Position 1. 

THe Sabbath made alterable (as to the day) in the first institution of it, evidenced by three Arguments.  
Arg. 1. From the time when it was instituted: Viz. after the fall. Adam sinned the same day in which he was created, proved by five Arguments, page 1. to 7.  
Two Objections answered to p. 17.  
Arg. 2. From the command by which it was instituted, p. 17. to 21.  
Arg. 3. From the ground or occasion, on which it was instituted, either God's providence or promise, p. 21. to 32.  
Seven Considerations premised to clear it, p. 33, 34, 35.  
Two Scruples resolved p. 37, 38, 39    
Position 2. 

THat the Old Sabbath was further manifested to be alterable (as to the day) in the second Edition of the Sabbath. For, 

1. It was never propounded as the substance of any moral Law: Here the fourth Commandment is vindicated at large p. 46. to 58.  
2. It seems to be pointed at as a sign in the Ceremonial Law p. 70.    
Sundry Objections answered p. 59 to 70 & 78.    
Position 3. 

THe Old Sabbath was further evidenced to be alterable in the after-Observation of it p. 78 to 83.    
Position 4. 

THat the Sabbath was actually altered and changed from the Last to the First day of the Week, by the authority of Christ; upon the account of his Resurrection, etc. Four main Arguments to prove it.  
Arg. 1. From the New Creation, p. 83 to 90.  
Arg. 2 From the New Covenant: The Covenant changed in a threefold expressure of it, in the Mandatory, the Promissory, and shadowy part, p. 90. to 105.  
The Old Sabbath proved to be of a shadowy nature, from Col. 2.16, 17. p. 106, 107, 108.  
Four Objections answered from p. 109 to 112.  
Arg. 3. From the Introduction of a new rest, Hebr. 4. explained and vindicated, to p. 122.  
Four Objections answered to p. 130.  
Arg. 4. From the designation of a new day with the discharge of the old.  
The old seventh day Sabbath is discharged from Obligation under the Gospel, p. 130. to 138  
Four Objections removed.  
The First day of the week is designed for a day of weekly solemn Worship. For, 

1. This is the day above all others on which (in the vacancy of the old seventh day) God hath set his mind in the Law p. 158, 159.  
2. This is the day above all days on which Christ has set his special mark in the Gospel. A sevenfold mark he has set upon it.    
1. His resurrection from the dead this day, p. 161. to 169.  
2. His frequent apparitions on this day p. 169. to 175.  
Four Objections silenced.  
3. His gracious speeches and actions at those apparitions:  
4. The Mission of the Holy Ghost this day: The day of Pentecost proved to be the first day of the week. p. 179. to 187.  
Two Objections answered.  
5. The Inscription of Christ's blessed name on this day, 'tis the Lord's day p. 190, 191, 192.  
Three Objections answered.  
6. The Apostles and Apostolical Church's observation of it, Acts 20.7. cleared. Six Objections satisfied.  
7. Apostolical prescription about it, 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. Four Objections answered to p. 214.    
The Best Antiquity for the Change of the Day. 

TEstimonies of the Ancients. 1. Ignatius. 2. Justin Martyr. 3. Dionysius. 4. Tertullian. 5. Origen. 6. Cyprian. 7. Athanasius. 8. Hilary. 9 Ambrose. 10. Hierome. 11. chrysostom. 12. Augustine. 13. Eusebius, from p. 216. to 232. Opposite Testimonies answered, to p. 245.    
Position 5. 

THe Lord's day the Christian Sabbath, proved, and Cavils refuted, from p. 236. to 242.    
Position. 6. 

THe Sabbath gins in the morning, Four Objections answered, from p. 242. to 246.    
Position 7. 

THe Lord's day must be kept holy to the Lord. Rules of Direction: 

1. For Preparation to the Sabbath.  
2. Sanctification of it.  
1. By holy rest, from our own works, words, and thoughts.  
2. By holy work, both in private and in public, from p. 246. to the end.        

ERRATA.  
PAge 4. Marg. for John 29. read John 19 p. 54. marg. for evening Communicant, r. Evangelical Communicant. p. 80. for merval, r. marvel. p. 86. l. 5. for latter, r. letter. p. 91. marg. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 97. for must with a promise, r. meet with a promise. p. 107. for ●●brae and praeterita, r. umbra & praeteritae. p. 109. after it is very questionable, add I say. p. 126. marg. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 132. for stay, r. stop. p. 180. l. 1. r. wonderful, p. 181. l. 5. for there r. their. p. 182. l. 9 r. where. ibid. for some, r. come. for were r. was. p. 192. for constitution, r. contestation, p. 194. l. 31. add the p. 216. marg. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Other false spellings and false pointings there are, which the Reader is requested to look upon, rather as Errors of the Press, than the Pen, yet no other than such as are common and ordinary in all Treatises printed in the Author's absence.   


POSITION I. That the Old Sabbath (as to the Day) was made Alterable and Changeable in the First Instituon of it.  
FOr the confirmation whereof we shall consider 

1. The Time when it was Instituted.  
2. The Command by which it was Instituted.  
3. The Ground upon which it was Instituted.    
1. First, let us soberly examine the time when it was instituted; the obscurity whereof may easily be gathered from the variety of opinions and apprehensions about it. Some think the first foundation of it was laid upon mount Sinai, induced thereunto by those words of Nehemiah, Thou camest down upon the mount, 
Nehem 9.13, 14.  and madest known to them thy holy Sabbath by the hand of Moses thy Servant. Others have traveled a little beyond the mount, and have found (as they suppose) the first footsteps of a Sabbath in the wilderness of Sin, at the first falling of Manna. 
T. T. p. 71.  Mr. Tillam, with some others, is confident that it was instituted before the fall of man, and founded upon mount Paradise; not a little abusing that Scripture to prove it, Psal 87.1. God's foundations are in the holy mountaint. Belike he would insinuate, with Tostatus and some other Popish Authors, that Paradise was some mountainous place (a fancy purposely devised by them to shelter Enoch from the flood:) But this is to build castles in the air; such notions may pass for glorious truths among Vulgar heads, when judicious pens have branded them as Popish Legends. For the opinion itself, viz. That the Sabbath was first instituted in Paradise before the fall of man, we shall in due time discover the weakness of it, and give satisfying answers to all the seeming arguments brought to support it. But first I shall propose, and endeavour to prove a Counter position, namely, that it seems more consonant to Scripture, to affirm, that the Sabbath was instituted (though in the beginning) yet after the fall, in man's corrupt and vitiated estate. The probation whereof depends much (though not altogether) upon the decision of that often canvassed question, Whether our first Parents sinned the same day on which they were created? I shall not be so peremptory as to pass a damnatory sentence upon those that are for the negative; yet after some study and inquiry into Scriptures and Authors about it, I am inclined to undertake the affirmative, namely, That our first Parents were created and corrupted, 
Gen. 1. & 2 ch. compared with chap. 3.1.  made and marred, alive and dead in one and the same same day; which seems very probable by this, that as soon as Moses had spoken of their creation, without mention of any other thing considerable, he passes to their defection. This is no singular notion, but the generally received opinion of ancient and modern times. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  The Greek Churches and Fathers were so almost universally of this persuasion, that it is well known to have been their common sentence, speaking of Adam, The same day he was created he fell. Among the Latins Augustine and Bernard were also of the same mind; 
August. de genes. ad lit. lib. 9 c. 4. Bern. l 4.8.  and among our own writers, Reverend Mr. Cawdrey, and Mr. Palmer incline this way: Dr. Willet, Mr. G. Walker, Mr. H. Broughton have strenuously argued it from Scripture. I shall but hint a few of the many Scripture-arguments, that have been and may be alleged to this purpose.  
1. From the testimony of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath told us expressly, that the Devil was a murderer (or manslayer) from the beginning, a liar and the father of lies; 
John 8.34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  not from the beginning of the world's creation, but of man's creation, which most properly and precisely implies the sixth day, wherein the Serpent beguiled our first Parents by lying, and murdered them. That word (from the beginning) is the same in the Syriack version which is used Gen. 1. and it usually refers to some date of time within the creation, as the learned in that Language observe. This cannot be denied, that when our Saviour affirms the Devil was a murderer from the beginning, we must lay it as near the beginning as we may, without crossing other texts of Scripture: now it crosses not a tittle of Scripture to state it on the sixth day; nay it consents with other Scriptures; for  
2. The verity of Gods threatening seems to put it out of question that Adam sinned and was slain by the Serpent on the sixth day; for let the words be well weighed, In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. 
Gen. 2.17. Die quo Deus condidit redemit & hominem, i. e. sexta feria. Bern.  I demand whether this sentence were fully executed on the first Adam in the day that he sinned? or whether in his and our behalf it were not also verified on the second Adam in the day that he suffered? If the latter be granted (as it cannot well be denied) than it will rationally follow, that the second Adam suffering and dying on the sixth day of the week, the first Adam also sinned on the sixth day, in which he was created. 
a John 29. v. 14, 15, 16. compared with Mat 27.46, 50.  That Christ suffered the sixth day, needs no dispute. 
b Rom. 5 14. That the Holy Ghost speaks so sparingly of the state of innocency, evidently shows that it lasted but a very little while. Mortons' threefold state, ep. to the Reader. In all reason (as another says) if Adam had stood long, his good deeds as well as his evil deeds had been committed to history, especially how he kept his first Sabbath; which had been an excellent pattern to posterity. But not a syllable of this in Scripture.  Most probably therefore the first Adam, the figure of him that was to come (and that in respect of this point) sinned and fell on the sixth day; and so the Divine threatening was punctually fulfilled. The force of this argument cannot without shameful wrangling be evaded: For to say that this may as well state the fall on that day seven-night as on the first sixth day, is to say little to the purpose. For by the same rule you may as well carry it to that day three weeks, or that day month, yea that day twelvemonth, and so in infinitum. I should rather think, that since by Christ's sufferings it appears that Adam sinned on a sixth day; and our Lord affirms that the Devil was a manslayer from the beginning; that therefore certainly our first Parents fell on the first sixth day. Some have not unfitly observed a remarkable conformity betwixt the sin and curse of Adam, and the sufferings of Christ, in many concurrent circumstances. As our Saviour's agony in the garden, answering to Adam's sin in the garden; his bloody sweat, to the curse of eating bread in the sweat of our brows; his crown of thorns, to the curse of thorns; his suffering upon a tree, to their sin in eating of the tree, etc. a fit subject for a devotional pen. But that which I insist upon as argumentative is only the day in which out Lord suffered and died, which in my judgement doth much help to determine the day in which Adam sinned.  
3. The parley betwixt the woman and the serpent insinuates as much; for both the serpent's demand and the woman's reply speak plainly that as yet they had not tasted the sweets of Paradise: 
Gen. 3.1.  Hath God said ye shall not eat of every tree of the Garden? The serpent had not been subtle to ask whether that might be done which had been done already; and the woman's replying in the future tense, we may, or shall eat hereafter, makes it more probable that as yet they had not eaten. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  And it is utterly improbable that they would have continued a whole day in the Garden, in the midst of all that delicious fruit, and not have tasted of some. Besides, the tree of life being sacramental (as Augustine says, 
Erat homini in lignis aliis alimenium, in hoc verò Sacramentum, Aug. de Gen. ad lit.  in other trees there was nourishment, in this a Sacrament) may it not well be thought that if Adam had stood the first Sabbath, he had tasted of the tree of life? Doubtless he had observed all the ordinances of the day. But that he had not yet touched that tree, is evident from that speech of God, where he resolves upon his speedy banishment out of Paradise, 
Gen. 3.22.  lest (says the Lord) he put forth his hand to the tree of life, and eat and live for ever; which had been spoken too late, if he had already done it.  
4. The policy and activity of Satan in contriving of mischief may assure us that he was tampering with our first parents betimes, partly that he might take the advantage to shake them before their habits of grace were settled and confirmed by exercise (as new-planted trees are more easily plucked up at first, then after they are more deeply radicated;) but principally, that by poisoning the fountain of mankind before any streams issued from it, he might the more easily and certainly corrupt the whole current of man's posterity. Such as have been taught by sad experience how crafty an adversary that old serpent the Devil is, cannot but subscribe to the validity of this argument.  
5. To all these I may add the circumstance of time when these malefactors were brought to the bar, and arraigned for what they had done; viz. in the cool of the day, Hebr. in the wind of the day, 
Gen. 3.8.  in the wind after midday, as Hierom renders it, or in the Eventyde, 
a Adversus haereses lib 5. cap. 15. ad fin.  as Irenaeus. Now it is very observable (says a late Worthy) that this is the first evening mentioned after the creation of Adam, 
Mr. Robert's myster. & medulla. Bibl. p. 39  and the covenant made with him. Adam was arraigned and sentenced towards the evening of the sixth day, therefore he sinned the same day.  
As for that of the Psalmist, Adam being in honour loàged not a night, 
Psa. 49.12.  but was like the beasts that perish (for so it is in the Hebrew word for word) although I will not restrain it to the first Adam, for (as learned Ainsworth observes) it may be meant both of the first man Adam, who continued not in his dignity, 
Annot. in locum  and his posterity also; yet it doth most singularly point at him, and is most pregnantly applicable to him, as being in the greatest honour that ever man was in upon earth, Lord of all the lower world, and father of all mankind. 
c Exod. 23.8. Deut. 19.4. 2 Sam. 17. Psal. 30.5.  And the word baal jalin does properly signify to lodge or tarry for a night. What if it be in the future tense, as. T.T. suggests, yet as 
d Dr. Twiss  great a Rabbin as himself has told us that it is nothing strange for the future tense (the structure of the words requiring it, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Assimulatus fuit.  as here it does, the next word being of the preter tense) to signify the time past. Again, what if the context does not in every circumstance suit with Adam? Is it any unusual thing (especially in the book of Psalms) for one and the same sentence to point at several persons? How often are David and Christ both intended in the same place; yea, where every thing spoken of the one does not agree to the other? The adversary might therefore have spared that passage, that this text cannot be applied to Adam, because 'tis said, v. 19 He shall go to the generation of his fathers, unless I could show him what fathers Adam had to go to. 
p. 10.  I will answer his Dilemma with another; when he himself says, that innocent Adam had all the Ten Commandments written in his heart, let him tell me, what father and mother had Adam to honour in a second. Table sense? But to let that pass, enough is said (if this text was silent) to make it more than probable, that the transgression of our first parents presently followed their creation, i.e. the same day. To be sure there is more evidence of truth in it then all his objections to the contrary are able to obscure. Indeed his confidence is great, but we shall now scan his evidence, and accordingly judge of his confidence.  
He argues, [That man, 
T.T. Obj. 1.  yea and the Angels also stood in their integrity with the clo sure of the sixth day, for then all things were very good, Gen. 1.31. And no sooner did the sixth day end, and the seventh begin, but God rested, and sanctified his holy Sabbath, and was refreshed, and exceeding well satisfied with the goodness of his creatures, which must needs precede sin.  
This great argument has many little ones in the belly of it, and accordingly I shall return several answers to it.  
Whereas he dictates, Answ. 1 That man had not sioned in the closure of the sixth day, for then all things were very good: I answer, the word than is an addition to the text; And therefore the whole weight of his argument hanging upon this wooden pin of his own making, must needs fall to the ground. 'Tis a conclusion founded upon a fallacy, which the Logicians call a Fallacy of composition, when those things are jumbled together which ought to be taken asunder; for the detection whereof let it be considered, that in the text alleged, Gen. 1.31. there be two distinct clauses; first, God's approbation of his works, He saw every thing that he made, and behold it was very good. Secondly, the conclusion of the day; and the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Now to take these two clauses conjunctly, which are related distinctly, and to argue (as this Author does) that man had not sinned on the sixth day, for then all was very good, is a mere sophism, such as every puny in Logic is able to resolve; for why might not God's approbation be given forth in the morning or forenoon of the sixth day, and time enough left before night for sin to creep into the world? To clear this, let it be noted, 
See Dr. willet's Hexapla in Exod. 31.  That although God was pleased to parcel out his work into six distinct days, yet he measured not every day's work by the hourglass of time as we creatures do, but what he did on each day was done in an instant. He did but speak the word and it was done, he commanded and it was created. 
Psal. 33.9. Psa. 146.5.   
This is evident from principles of reason as well as from the forementioned places of Scripture; for creation is the production of something out of nothing, or that which is as much as nothing. Now betwixt the being of something and nothing there can be no intermediate state, and consequently no imaginable space of time, but an imperceptible moment: Hence that received maxim, that Creation is in an instant. Now to accommodate this to the work of the sixth day, consisting of man and beasts; certainly the forming of these creatures being momentaneous in the sense above mentioned, took up but little of the day. I can see no colour of reason to the contrary, but our first Parents might be created, and the whole creation completed in the fore part of the sixth day. And doubtless, as soon as the creation was ended, the divine approbatiom was added; And God saw that it was good. For surely as soon as the creature was, the Creator saw what it was, and he saw it to be good, for he made it good. And although the conclusion of the day be presently added, yet 'tis without dispute, that many other things were transacted (though not expressed in the first Chapter) before the close of the sixth day: as the naming of the creatures, the joining of our first parents together in marriage, and disposing of them in the garden, yea the giving of the Law, and in all likelihood the breaking of it too. And so the first knot is untied.  
Whereas he adds, Answer 2 That as soon as the sixth day ended, and the seventh began, God rested and sanctified the Sabbath; I answer, This Assertion is built upon a very uncertain, if not a false supposition, viz. That the order of the words and Chapters is exactly answerable to the order of the things done. Whereas in the judgement of the learned here is a manifest dislocation or misplacing of the sacred story, as to the order of things; for if we regard the exact order of things done, the second chapter of Genesis would begin at the fourth verse, as learned Junius affirms: And the second and third verses would come in at the end of the third Chapter, 
Junij Praelect. in Gen. 2.  and so the mention of the Sabbaths institution would follow the description of Adam's sin; as an acute 
* De. Lightfoot's Harmony of the Old Testa. and he gives this solid reason why the words stand as they do, and why the mention of the Sabbath is set down before Adam's fall, viz. because the Holy Ghost would dispatch the general history of the first seven days together without the interposition of any particular story.  Writer of our own hath observed. But because the adversary will say these are but humane fancies, let us see whether they have not sure footing in the Word itself. To this purpose let the Reader turn to Genes. 2. and view the texture and composure of the whole Chapter. In the three first verses you have an account of God's finishing the heavens and the earth, as also his resting on the seventh day. From the third to the eighth verse you have the creation of Vegetables, herbs and plants, which was the work of the third day. From ver. 8. to ver. 15. you have the planting of the garden, and adorning of it with trees and rivers; which (if it were a work of creation) was done before the seventh day, though it be not mentioned till after it. Again, ver. 7. you have the forming of the man, and from ver. 18. to 22. the framing of the woman; as a also the creating of birds and beasts, and the naming of the creatures, which you see are all mentioned after the seventh day, yet all, or most of them done on the sixth. So that should we strictly cleave to the letter, 
In Scriptura non est prius & posterius. The order of time is not always kept in Scripture, but sometimes that is placed first which was done last, & contrà.  and believe that all things were done in the same order as they are here set down, we must believe that herbs and plants, birds and beasts, man and woman were all created after the creation was ended, and God had rested the seventh day. Yea, if the literal and historical order of the words must be maintained, how will T.T. make good his Mount-paradise-notion? For according to the order of the words, Paradise was not planted till after the Sabbath. How then could Adam keep his first Sabbath in Paradise? Viderit ipse. Hitherto therefore he must of necessity yield a transposition; that is, that although these things be mentioned after the seventh day, yet they were done before it, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Haec est un● de regulis ad intelligendam Scripturam sanctam necessariis. Luth. loc. come. p. 75.  and here set down by way of Postscript: Now let us see what may be said for that which follows, ver. 16.17. compared with the three last verses; you have the woman given in marriage to the man, and the Creator's Law touching the forbidden fruit given in charge to both; and that all this was done on the sixth day will be readily granted. Well then, Chap. 3. you have the story of the Serpent's temptation, the transgression of our first parents, their conviction in the cool of the day, and lastly their expulsion out of Paradise; and the juncture of all this lying so close to the story of the sixth day, Chap. 2. that unless you purposely loosen the connexion, you may rationally look upon it as one and the same day's work. And verily methinks the Serpents first onset sounds as if there were very little distance of time between God's giving the Law, and Satan's tempting the woman to break it, Gen. 3.1. Yea, hath God said ye shall not eat of every tree in the garden? a very abrupt motion, if it had not been made immediately upon the giving of the Law. The words are (as one observes) a form of speech used by one who standing aloof, and overhearing what was forbidden, 
Mr. Walker, Doctrine of the Sabbath.  doth presently step in and ask if it were not so as he took it to be: and besides, the woman's answer (as was hinted before) being in the future tense, we may, or shall eat hereafter implies that they had scarce eaten as yet. So that all circumstances considered, it more than probable, that this third Chapter is nothing but an history of what was done on the sixth day. And so the mention of the Sabbath in the beginning of the second Chapter, may well enough (in order of things) take place at the end of the third, and then it will roundly follow, That the first sin went before the first Sabbath.  
As to that which is further alleged, Exod. 31.17. Ans. 3 That on the seventh day God rested, and was refreshed. I answer, It is only a Metaphorical expression; for we may not think that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth fainted, or was weary in the works of the Creation, or that he needed any rest or respiration. But when the Holy Ghost speaks to us men, he delights to speak after the manner of men, respecting more the weakness of our capacity, than the exactness and propriety of the Phrase. In a word, suppose God's resting and being refreshed on the seventh day intimate some delightful satisfaction, like that which men take in things that refresh their souls, yet it follows not that this satisfaction was taken in the creatures, but rather in Christ, who had now undertaken God's satisfaction for man's transgression. And this indeed is a sweet refreshing (as to a guilty creature) so to an angry God: and in this sense the Scriptures do sweetly harmonise, 
Isai. 42.1. Mat. 3.17. Mat. 12.18.  unanimously testifying that our blessed Redeemer is the person in whom the eternal God delighteth, in whom the Father is well-pleased. As for the other Scriptures which T.T. crowds in for company-sake in his Margin, as Job 38.7. Luke 2.13. the one speaking of the Angel's song at the Creation of the earth, the other of their joyful Hymn at the birth of Christ, I wonder how they make for his purpose, to prove that man had not sinned before the Sabbath. But impertinent quotations are no rarities in his book; he would make a glorious show of Scripture, to dazzle the eyes of the simple, when the Scriptures he citys are neither in sense nor sound applicable to his purpose; which if it be not packing sophistry, let the world judge. Well, his first tripartite argument is weighed, and found to light. And hitherto (for aught appears to the contrary) the first Sabbath was not before sin.  
I proceed to the second.  
2. 
T. 'tis. Argum.  [Some time (says he) must be allowed for the sin of Angels and after that for the parley with the woman; and it was no little space wherein Adam gave significant names to the creatures.]  
For the Angel's sin, Ans. 1 to guess precisely at the time of it, is neither easy nor necessary: And in disputes of this nature we must be wise to sobriety, not to curiosity; 
a 1 Tim. 3.6.  pride was a principal ingredient in their sin, and 
b Job 4.18.  God charged them with folly for their pride; how much more folly shall sinful man be found guilty of, who in the pride of his foolish heart shall presume to be wise above that which is written? 
Some think that place, Luke 10.28. may refer to the first fall of the Angels, being mentioned as a check to the disciples, ready to be lifted up with pride at the success of their ministry. Ne factis miraculis superbirent discipuli, adduxit Domiws exemplum Satanae, etc. Stella in loc.  However it is most consentaneous to Scripture, and Reason to conceive that the Angels (being spiritual substances) must in their actings, whether good or evil, be proportionable to their beings. And sin being a spiritual evil, how quick a progress it might make in such creatures, let any man judge who can but compare things spiritual with spiritual. To me it is no great difficulty to apprehend, that in a very few moments, by an aspiring thought, legions of Angels might become legions of Devils. Especially being (for aught I know) linked together in a conjoined apostasy.  
For Adam's naming the creatures, this also might soon be dispatched, Answ. 2 considering that not every individual creature (as T.T. would have it) but only the birds and beasts were made to pass before Adam; of which there are not many kinds, 
Primi parentes insignes Philosophi. Luther, in G●n. Cap. 1.  and not many of a kind created at first. And doubtless it cost Adam no study to impose significant names upon them. He had natural Philosophy enough concreated with him to know the properties and qualities of the creaures; 
1 Kin. 4.33, 34  and he needed no dictionary to find out suitable names for them. If Solomon after the Fall were so well read in the book of the creatures, that he could write a complete Commentary upon it from the Cedar to the Hyssop, what shall we think of Adam before the Fall? But to put all out of doubt, 
Dr. Twisse moral of the Sabbath, p. 51.  that the naming of the Creatures took up no long time is evident; for they were all named before Eve was form, Gen. 2.19, 20. So as all this might be done before noon, and time enough left before night for the acting of that fatal tragedy, the Fall of Man, as a judicious Writer concludes.  
For the parley betwixt the Woman and the Serpent, Answ. 3 we have no reason to judge that long, when the Scripture cuts it so short. Questionless the Serpent was not only a subtle but a nimble disputant; and it was his policy to be as quick as he could, that the woman might be conquered before she had time to recollect herself. Besides, in the judgement of most Interpreters, she began to stagger and give ground at the first assault. So that all this Author's conjectures laid together are too weak to bear the weight of that confident conclusion, Nothing is more certain than that the Highest himself did both sanctify and celebrate the first Sabbath, and that before sin. 
p. 11.  I may well say, nothing is more uncertain. I have given some Scripture-arguments already to make it more than probable; I shall add more in the third branch, to make it little less than infallible, that man fell on the sixth day. For the present I shall only cast in one Argument against the supposed institution of the Sabbath in Paradise,  
If the Sabbath was instituted in Paradise, Argu. then Adam did observe, and was bound to observe the first Sabbath in Paradise: But neither of these can be proved from Scripture: Therefore, etc.  
1. That Adam did unquestionably observe the first Sabbath in Paradise, cannot be demonstratively proved from Scripture. This is undeniable, that whenever, or wherever he kept his first Sabbath, he did it in imitation of God's example: Now how could he rest a whole day by God's example, till God had fully completed the first seventh day's rest for his example? 
Eph. 5.1.  Imitation of God being a subsequent, not a concomitant act, a following of him as dear children, not a fellow-acting with him. I can therefore see no congruity in that passage of T.T. where he reasons thus against reason; 
p. 54.  Certainly if Adam were a follower of God as a dear child, he must needs keep the Sabbath with his Father. With his Father! how then could he follow him? Certainly God went before, if Adam followed him as a dear child. I cannot conceive how he could possibly keep a Sabbath that God himself had not first blessed and sanctified to that end. I may upon better grounds suppose (with a late renowned Champion in this controversy) that God alone kept the first Sabbath (as Christ alone the first Lord's day) that he might afford Adam an example, 
Mr. Cawdrey's Sab. rediu. p. 3. cap. 1.  as of working six days, by his being exercised six days in the work of creation, so of resting the seventh in its next weekly return, and so successively week after week. But it will be said, if Adam were bound to keep the first Sabbath, we are bound to believe he did keep it: Therefore a word or two of that.  
2. If he were bound, I demand, quo jure, by what Law? By the Law written in his heart? why then was he bound to keep a Sabbath before there was a Sabbath to keep? for the Law was graven in his heart on the sixth day, as a branch of that 
* Eph. 4.24. Col. 3.10.  divine image of God concreated with him, Whereas the Sabbath (to be sure) was not instituted till the seventh day, if then. Besides, the Law written in the table of Adam's heart was the same (in this Author's judgement) which was afterwards written in Tables of Stone, that is, the fourth Commandment: which (if we take his and Mr. Brabournes Comment upon it) prescribes six days for labour before a seventh of rest. Now this order Adam could not possibly observe for the first week, being created but on the sixth day. He must therefore look out some other Law, and where he will find it I cannot see, unless in Gen. 2.3. and he must be very sharp-sighted to find any thing there that looks like a Law binding our first Parents to observe the first Sabbath. For let the words be well pondered, And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, 
Gen. 2.3. Opened.  becase in it he had rested from all his works which he had created and made. Whence we may clearly gather, 
'Tis not said because he should rest, but had rested.  that God's resting on the seventh day was in order of time before his blessing and sanctifying of the day: as those words ver. 2. On the seventh day God rested from all his works which he had made, 
See Mr. White of Dorchester Gen. 2.  imply the making of the works before God's resting; so ver. 3. He blessed and sanctified the seventh day, because in it he had rested, must needs intimate, that God's resting on the seventh day went before his sanctifying of the day, or setting it apart for a Sabbath: Not long before I grant, 
As Chap. 1. where Moses relates God's six days works as finished by him, then followeth the blessing upon them. So in the 2. Chap. he makes the blessing to follow upon Gods resting, as before upon his working.  but evidently long enough to discharge our first parents by virtue of those words from any obligation to keep the first Sabbath. And whereas T.T. argues, that the Sabbath was made for man, and if Adam were a man, the Sabbath was made for him; I grant the whole argument, only with this distinction, That although it was made for man, yet it follows not that it was made for man as soon as man was made. Neither has he alleged any one text of Scripture (Valeat quantum valere potest) of sufficient evidence to support his grand conclusion, That the seventh-day-Sabbath was instituted and observed in pure Paradise. Which if it 
b Yet I grant it not.  should be granted him, yet his feeble cause would receive no invincible strength by it. For although it would prove a Sabbath, and a weekly Sabbath, one day in seven to be moral and perpetual (which I deny not) (and herein I could join issue with the contrary-minded) yet what is this to the perpetuity and immutability of that old seventh day? since in the judgement of all Interpreters, both ancient and modern (except Jews) only one day in seven, or a seventh part of weekly time is here perpetually established, that old seventh day only temporarily, and during the state of the old world. So chrysostom; Here (says he,) from the beginning God has intimated to us this doctrine, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Chrysost. Hom. 19 in Gen. 2.  instructing us to set apart one day in the circle of every week for spiritual exercises. Note by the way, he says not it is expressly determined here, (that is, left for the fourth Commandment) but it is intimated and implied here. And the like says Junius. But to draw to a conclusion; I suppose it is more than probably demonstrative (If I may so speak without a Soloecism) that the old Sabbath was instituted (though in the beginning) yet after the Fall, in man's corrupt estate, when he had put off his public capacity as the representative of mankind, and was looked upon as a single person, yea a sinful person, and one that stood in need of a Redeemer; and so the day must needs be alterable, as shall be shortly argued and evinced. However, if we should suppose the date of the Sabbaths institution to be utterly uncertain, as the institution of Sacrifices is, I see not but this may argue (as to the day) mutability stamped upon it. It is true, the solemn worship of God is unalterable, as long as there is a God to be worshipped; but the old way of worship by Sacrifices was mutable from the very first original of it. Thus I grant the time of worship, 
Rom. 12.1. Chrys. in Hebr. Hom. 11. Basil. in Isai. c. 20.  the Sabbath itself, being an inseparable adjunct of solemn worship, is perpetual; but the old day, the seventh from the Creation; was made mutable in the first institution of it. Indeed in some sense we have sacrifices still, spiritual sacrifices; and we have a Sabbath still, yea 
* Mat. 24.20.  a literal Sabbath: But old Sabbaths and old Sacrifices being twins, (though both honourable, and serviceable in their generations) yet like Hypocrates twins they lived together and died together, and let both together in God's name be buried in the grave of Christ, so as never to rise again. 
2 Cor. 5.15, 17.  But let our Gospel-worship and Gospel-Sabbath take life from our Saviour's Resurrection, which brought with it a new Creation, a new World, making all things new, as the Apostle speaks.  
2. That the old seventh day was made alterable in the first institution, will further appear, if we consider the Law or command by which it was instituted; which is not where to be found but in Gen. 2.3. As for the Law written in Adam's breast, it is too dark to ground an institution upon. We must have a Law written in God's book. And there is no other that I know of but Gen. 2.3. which if I grant the Adversary to be a command (for some do stiffly deny it) yet I must be bold to tell him, it is but a consequential command: For although it be said, God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; yet it is not said, Let man sanctify it. Here is included God's example, but no express command. And if the New Testament do not afford us as much warrant for the Lord's day as this amounts to, I will yield the Cause. But of that hereafter. Let the Reader only take notice (by the way) how mortally T. T. hath wounded his own cause, 
Pa. 36.  by exclaiming so bitterly against Consequences. He calls it Philosophy, and the deceit of men to establish Ordinances by Consequences. Why let me ask him, Was the Patriarchal Sabbath for above two thousand years together an Ordinance of God? for my part I never doubted of it. But he can never make it good without a Consequence, he must make a new Bible first; for express command there is none, only God's example, which without a precept is not always binding. And so (to use his own words) the Lord hath disappointed the devices of the crafty, and snared him in his own wisdom, he digged a pit for the Lord's day, and his Saturdays Sabbath is fallen into it, help it out how he can. For his life he can find no more in Gen. 2. then an implicit command for that old seventh day. And now the next question will be, Whether it be a temporary, or a perpetual precept? If perpetual, it must be moral. But that it cannot be by his own rule; for he has fairly granted, That a Moral Law is not merely good because commanded, but therefore commanded because it is good: understand it of a Moral natural Law. Now I beseech you, Sir, what natural goodness was there in the seventh day more than in the sixth or fifth? Is one day in itself any better than another as to God? And as to man, if any day had been naturally or morally good above the rest, 
Gen. 1.28. Psal. 8.56.  in all reason it had been the sixth day, on which God made man, crowned him with his blessings, and gave him dominion over his creatures; or the first day, in which he made the heavens, the Angels, and the elements. Therefore his threefold mystery to the seventh-days morality, is but a threefold miserable mistake, to make the best of it.  
1. That it was written in innocent Adam's heart; for which he citys Rom. 2. where there is not a word of any such thing. 
●. 10.11.   
2. That it was afterwards written in Tables of stone; for which he quotes Gal. 3.19. as little to his purpose as the other.  
3. That it is also written in the fleshly tables of renewed hearts: which the experience of almost all renewed hearts in heaven and earth does contradict. For to speak in the language of Eliphas, 
Job 5.1. S. Paul Col. 2.16, 17.  Call now if there be any that will answer thee; and to which of the Saints wilt thou turn? either Scripture-Saints, 
Cyprian cp. ad Fidum. 59 Chryso. Tom de Res.  or Church Saints? Ask S. Paul, S. Cyprian, S. Chrysostom, S. Augustine, and they will tell you that your antiquated Sabbath was so far from being written in their hearts, that they have written against it with their pens. 
August. de lit. & Spir. c. 14.  Turn over the works of the eminent Fathers, whose books neither you nor I are worthy to bear, and their writings are so voluminous that we are not able to bear them. 
Mr. Cawdrey. Mr. Palmer. Mr. Sheph. Mr. Byfield. Mr. White of Dorch. and the whole Assembly of Divines Confe. of faith. Chap. 21.  Add to these, the most judicious, pious and zealous Ministers and Martyrs of Christ, who have lived and died within the compass of these sixteen hundred years; and most, if not all of them, will tell you, That they never owned your Saturday-Sabbath; they lived without it, died without it, and are (I doubt not) gone to their everlasting rest in heaven without it. Besides, how many faithful witnesses of late years has the Lord raised up to bear testimony against it? of whom I suppose the greatest part are yet alive, though some are fallen asleep. In a word, 
God has promised to write his laws in the hearts of all his people. Jer. 31.33. Hebr. 8.10, Char. 16. But not one of ten thousand has the Saturday-Sabbath written in his heart; therefore it is now none of God's laws.  how many precious, gracious and pious Christians are yet upon earth, men and women redeemed from the earth, and crucified to the world (of whom the world is not worthy) who look upon your Sabbath as a cipher? can freely labour and travel upon it, buy and sell upon it, and that after accurate inquiries about it; and to this day their consciences never reproached them, their hearts never smote them for it? what will you say all these are Hypocrites, unrenewed, unsanctified ones? This were to condemn the generation of God's Children, and Canonize yourself, with your few misled associates, for the only Saints in Christendom; which I would hope you dare not do, though I know you dare as much as another.  
Well, the adversary is brought to this Dilemma; Either God has no people in the world but such as are of his persuasion, or his moral and immutable Laws are not written in their hearts, or the Saturday-Sabbath is none of those Laws. The last is the likeliest in the judgement of any indifferent Reader; let his cause be tried where he pleases, either at Nature's tribunal, or the throne of Grace in the hearts of believers, and he will be cast at both. Nature is both blind and dumb in the business; and if he plead the law of Grace (which is rectified and refined nature) the whole Christian world will give in evidence against him. A Sabbath, a day of holy rest, indeed it will own, and one day of seven in proportion; but the particularity of the day, the seventh from the Creation, it utterly disclaims. And where he will find advocates for it, but either among the unbelieving Jews, or a few misbelieving Christians Judaizing, I know not. Therefore surely it is no ingredient of God's moral and immutable Laws. The conclusion than is, that it was but a temporary precept by which it was established, which some call ceremonial, others had rather term it positive, but none perpetual, unless such as are more apt to say anything then able to prove it when then have said it. We deny not the fourth Commandment to be a perpetual precept; but we are now speaking of Gen. 2. which at most is but a positive Law; and positive precepts are alterable at the lawgivers pleasure: yea, though they were given in Paradise, as the precept concerning the forbidden fruit, though it were given before the fall, and should undoubtedly have bound Adam and all his posterity if he had not fallen; 
Gen. 2.17.  yet now it binds none, neither should it if the tree were known. So also that positive law of keeping and dressing the Garden, 
Mr. ●● Strange.  which to Adam was a binding precept, yet now it is wholly abrogated in the letter of it, or else (as one says) we must all tag and rag turn gardeners. True, there was something moral, and of the law of nature in that precept, 
Yates Model of Divin. Haec lex naturalis est conjunctam habens designationem diei ceremonialem, quia verò partim naturalis partimque (ut loquuntur Scholae) positiva est. Propterea discrimen oportet in eo ordine adhiberi, quod enim naturale est, puta diem septimum quemque Deo sacrum esse illud permanet, quod positivum, nempe illum diem qui septimus est creationis esse Diem Sabbathi hoc mutatum est. Juni prae'ec. in Gen. 2. p. 27.  man must always be exercised and employed, the earth (his store-house) must also be his workhouse; Idleness and happiness could never consist together. But that his employment must be limited to the culture of a Garden that was merely positive. The like may be said for the Law of the Sabbath (supposing not granting it had been given in paradise) that man should celebrate a Sabbath was moral and perpetual, but that it must be on the seventh day from the Creation, was merely positive, temporary, and alterable at the lawgivers pleasure.  
And this may serve as a proper Engine to undermine that grand argument founded on the institution of marriage. P. 155. The Sabbath is a precept (saith he) as ancient, as Universal as marriage, both were instituted in paradise for Adam and all his posterity.  
Ans. We grant that the institution of marriage was made in pure paradise, which ever since has made it honourable amongst all men, Heb. 13.4. And thus far we also grant the first institution is a perpetual obligation, viz. That one man is bound to one woman; yet I hope no man is tied by that first institution to make choice of this or that particular woman; but he is at liberty to marry whom he lists (provided it be in the Lord;) so also admitting the Sabbath to be instituted in paradise; yet I can see no reason why it should limit us to that particular day, but (that notwithstanding) we may observe any other day that shall appear to be of the Lords appointment, as the first day of the week infallibly is, and therefore it bears the Lords name, being styled the Lords Day by way of eminency. Indeed now the day is fixed, and we cannot choose another, nor change it to another, 
Psa 118.29. Rev. 1.10.  for reasons hereafter to be rendered. But enough is said to prove the command (whatever it was, whereby the old Sabbath was instituted) to be but temporary, though it had been given in Innocency. A positive precept given in innocency might suffer much alteration by man's apostasy: 
Mr. Sheph. Thes. 17.19.  For (to borrow the words of a reverend Author) the sin of man made the Lord repent that ever he had made man, and consequently that ever he made the world for man; which might be a sufficient ground of the Lawgivers pleasure to alter and change the day stated upon the world's Creation, to another day stated upon the world's Redemption, of which the Lord will never repent. Now if a precept or institution given before the fall might be mutable at the Law giver's pleasure, how much more this of the seventh day which was rather imposed since the fall, as the institution of Sacrifices, the prohibition of blood, etc. 
Gen. 9.4.   
3. That the old seventh day was made alterable in the first institution of the Sabbath, is most of all evident from the ground or occasion upon which it was instituted; and this is hinted unto us in those words, Gen. 2.2. 
See Ainsworth annot. in Gen. 2.2  On the seventh day God ended his works which he had made, and rested the seventh day, wherefore he blessed and sanctified it. Now it much concerns us to inquire in what sense the Lord is said to have ended his works on the seventh day? since we must not imagine with Hierome and Catharinus that God made any new creatures on the seventh day; for doubtless the creation was finished on the sixth day. How then it is said, on the seventh day God ended his works? Why, without resting and torturing the words, as some do, we may understand it in one or both of these two respects; either 

1. In respect of Providence: or,  
2. In respect of the Promise.    
1. In respect of Providence; 
So judicious Mr. White in Gen. 2.  and why may not this be the meaning of the holy Ghost, That on the seventh day God was pleased by a signal hand of Providence to perfect his works of Creations, either by establishing them to continue as they do this day, or at least by manifesting their accomplishment in his rest and cessation from Creating-work? Take the word (Ended) in this sense, and so it informs us, that the ground of Gods sanctifying the seventh day, was not simply his rest upon that day but also the reason of that rest, 
Heb. 4. v. 3.4.  namely the finishing of his works, witnessed by his resting, as the Author to the Hebrews plainly intimates. And not only that, but also the result and consequent of both, namely the dignifying and honouring of that day above all other days for the time being, by crowning it with the accomplishment of the greatest work then made, or manifested to be made perfect. 
Isa. 58.3.  Hence the seventh day was styled, The Honourable of the Lord; not that in itself one day is more honourable and observable than another, but that which differences the one from the other, and dignifies one above another, is Gods casting honour upon it by some memorable work of Providence, either begun or finished upon that day. Upon which account most of the Jews Festivals were instituted; as their Passeover in the 14th of Abib; 
Leu. 23.5. Esth. 9.21.  the Feast of Purim on the 14th of Adar; like our Gunpowder-treason-day, on the 5. of November: because the noble acts of God have been done upon these days. And this was a main ground of their weekly Sabbath upon the seventh day; being a day crowned with the greatest work then visible, a work manifested to be finished on the seventh day, by Gods resting on that day. Yet this must be noted, that the finishing of God's work did not make the day more honourable than others by any natural necessity, but only by positive right and equity. There was no necessary and natural cause why the seventh day, on which the work was declaratively ended, should be more honourable than the sixth day, on which it was really ended and finished, only it was Gods will and pleasure to have it so. Having premised this by the way; now let us see how the old Sabbath was founded upon the finishing of his works: As thus; That day which God hath honoured and crowned with the accomplishment of the greatest work, must be the day of solemn worship or Sabbath-day: But the seventh day from the Creation was thus honoured and crowned in the Cradle or infancy of the world: Therefore that day must be the Sabbath day, viz. till a greater work take place. And then the argument will conclude as strongly for the change of the day, as ever it did for the choice of it.  
For we shall argue thus; If the ground of stating the Sabbath on the seventh day were applicable to another day, than the Sabbath in the first groundwork of it was alterable to another day: But the ground of stating it upon that old seventh day was applicable to another day, therefore, etc.  
The consequence is clear as the Sun; for as it is with duties, so with days of worship; the grounds upon which they are settled being applicable to other times and places, the days and duties themselves have always been movable and circumstantially mutable also; as that duty of reverencing of God's Sanctuary (which is mated and coupled with keeping his Sabbaths) the ground of it being applicable to the Temple as well as the Tabernacle, 
Levit. 19.30.  the duty itself was also movable from the Tabernacle to the Temple, although the first were only in being when the precept was given. And the like must be said of the Sabbath: The consequence hath evidence enough in itself to every vulgar eye. If the foundation be movable, so is the building. If the Assumption be questioned, viz. That the ground of fixing the Sabbath on the seventh day was movable and applicable to another day, we shall thus confirm it; The ground of fixing the Sabbath on the old seventh day was Gods honouring and advancing that day above all other days (for the time being) by his most eminent work of Creation, manifested to be accomplished on that day; therefore when another day shall be crowned with the accomplishment of a more eminent Creation, the same ground and reason which cast the Sabbath on the old day will unavoidably carry it to the new. Now the work of Redemption is a new Creation, 2 Cor. 5.17. and it was long ago prophesied, that as the 
a Hag. 2.9.  glory of the second Temple should out shine that of the first, so the glory of this new Creation should excel that of the old, and comparatively eat out the memory of it. 
b Isai. 65.17.  Behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, says the Lord, and the old shall not be remembered nor come into mind. Not that the Lord would simply and absolutely have the memory of the Creation to be lessened, but respectively and in comparison of Redemption,; it must not be obliterated, but only subordinated: retained and remembered it must be still, but as a lesser work than Redemption, and as a lesser good to us, as the Law is to the Gospel, or the Old Testament to the New. Redemption must be owned as the greater and better work, in as much as Spiritual things are better than Natural, and Gods last works are his best; the first being only preparative to the last, as Dr. Sibbs excellently observes. 
Mat. 16.26. Mark 8.36.  And verily he that shall question whether Redemption be a greater and better work than Creation, knows little what a Redeemer is, or what the ransom of an immortal soul is worth. 
See Mr. Phil. Goodw. Dies Dominic. rediu. pa. 11.12, 13.  I should think, as man's gaining the world cannot recompense the loss of his soul, so Gods creating of the world doth not equalise Christ's redeeming the soul. In creating the world indeed the Lord has done much for me; but in shedding his precious blood, in conquering sin and death, he hath done more than if he had created another world for me. Let the redeemed of the Lord say so; yea, the work is not only better to me, but greater in itself too. In creation there was but a words speaking, and the work was presently done; 
2 Cor. 5.21. Gal. 3.13. See more in Dr. Gouge Heb. 9 S. 63.  but in Redemption there was doing and dying; God must come down from heaven, God must be made man, yea, God-man must be made sin and a curse for me. Here was a work exceeding wonder. Besides, in the work of Creation there was nothing to with stand: But in the work of Redemption here was Justice against Mercy, wrath against pity. In a word, in the Creation God brought something out of nothing, but in redemption he hath out of one contrary brought another, good out of evil, life out of death. Is not thy soul ravished, Christian, at these discoveries of wisdom, grace and power shining forth in thy souls Redemption? Canst thou see the like in the world's Creation? Is there not more glory in one Christ then in many worlds? What a sapless, unsavoury question therefore to a soul that knows any thing of Christ, 
Pa. 130.  is that which T. T. propounds; Who told thee the work of Redemption was the greater work? A question more beseeming a Jew then a Christian. But the answer is ready at hand; He that hath told me the heavens are the works of his 
a Psalm 8.3.  fingers, and Redemption the work of his 
b Isal. 52.9, 10.  arm, his outstretched, unbared arm, hath sufficiently taught me that Redemption is the greater work, a work of greater might, I am sure of greater mercy. And so for his next question, If it be the greater work, who told thee that it deserves the honour of the day? I answer, a wiser and better man than you or I, that man after Gods own heart, who was most likely to know the mind of the Lord, he has foretold it in that 118th Psalm, when by a prophetic spirit foreseeing the glory of the resurrection day as a day amongst the seven days, like the Sun amongst the seven planets, he accordingly salutes it with a magnificent Title, This is the day which the Lord hath made, yea magnified; for the word signifies not only to make, but to magnify and advance above all others: 
c 1 Sam. 12.6. And such was the power of God in raising Christ, hat the Psalmist cries our, it is marvellous in our sight. Acts 4.10.11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est vel imus vel summus lapis. Arretius in 1 Pet. 2.7. Mat. 11.11.  As by the same word the Lord is said to advance Moses and Aaron, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  that is, to lift them up in dignity and preeminency above the rest of the people. Thus he foresaw that the Lord would magnify and exalt the resurrection day; and why? Because on this day the most glorious work of redemption was to be accomplished, the stone which the bvilders resused being made the head of the corner, i. e. to perfect and complete the fabric of the new Creation. And thus is the resurrection-day prophetically crowned with honour above all other days, Old Sabbath and all: For the work crowns the day, and the greater the work the greater the day. And therefore although the last day of the week were the greatest in dignity during the supereminency of the old Creation, yet when a greater work was to be finished, the day on which it was to conclude must without dispute be the greater day. As John Baptist being the last and greatest of the prophets, yet was less than the least in the Kingdom of heaven; so I may say of the Old Sabbath, the greatest day under the Old Testament, yet it must veil and stoop when the Sun of righteousness shines forth in a new day under the New Testament. Surely the second Creation must have a Sabbath of commemoration as well as the first, or else God should magnify his lesser work of Creation above his greater work of Redemption. And thus I suppose I have made good my Position both Logically and Theologically, that the old seventh day was alterable in its first institution, since the same ground of stating the Sabbath at first upon that day might be a sufficient ground of translating it to another day, as now it is; and that by Divine Authority, as shall be seen hereafter.  
The adversary has no considerable weapons to oppose this truth withal, but what have been already beaten out of Mr. Brabourns hands, and are sufficiently blunted by others; or if any new ones be added, we shall now try what metal they are made of. Obj. 1 
T.T. p. 7.   
The seventh day (says he) was set apart in memorial of the most glorious work of Creation; the benefit whereof being extended to us, 
p. 69.  engageth us to that day still. And again; The world being created not only for Israel but for all people, I appeal to all conscientious Christians, whether all mankind be not bound to that very day who enjoy the benefit of the Creation. (By the way let me tell him, when I read his insulting challenge, I expected Scripture-arguments, and not popular appeals.) But to let him swim in his own element, the sum of his appealing (for arguing I cannot call it) amounts but to this, that if the old seventh day were set apart in memory of the Creation, which every Christian (as a creature) is bound to commemorate, than the day is unchangeable, & perpetually to be observed.  
But to this I answer; The consequence is sick and crazy, Answer. and therefore it can produce but a weak conclusion. For first, the Covenant of grace (I suppose) is as ancient as the old Sabbath, I am sure as eminent a mercy as the occasion of the Sabbath: And doubtless to every truehearted Christian the memory of God's Covenant is and aught to be as precious as the memory of the world's Creation; yet I hope he will not say that circumcision and sacrifices, (the old memorial of the Covenant) are therefore still in force, or aught to be still in use among Christians who are interested in that Covenant. And the like may I say of the Saturday-Sabbath: Let none object the disparity between the Old Sabbath and circumcision, for they are both clad in a livery of the same colour, in many things they do much resemble one another. Was 
a Gen. 17.11.  circumcision a sign betwixt God and the seed of Abraham? so was the 
b Exod. 31.17.  old Sabbath betwixt God and the house of Israel. Was 
c Gen. 17.7.  circumcision a perpetual Covenant with Abraham's seed in their generation? So also was the 
d Exod. 31.16.  Sabbath to be kept as a perpetual Covenant throughout their generations.  
In a word, was 
e Gen. 17.14.  circumcision so exacted, that whosoever was uncircumcised must be cut off from the house of Israel? why, so also was the old 
f Exod. 31.14.  Sabbath, whosoever doth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among the people. Again, let none tax me with incongruity in comparing the old Sabbath and sacrifices together; for the Lord of the Sabbath himself hath taught me to lay them in an equal balance, who when the Pharisees clamoured his Disciples for Sabbath breaking, stops their mouths with that 
g Hos. 6.6. Mat. 12.7. Pluris apud De 'em salus mortalium quàms crifis. iapecudum. Muscul. in Loc.  Scripture, The Lord will have merey and not socrifice: That is, the necessities of men relieved, rather than the supposed letter of the Law observed. In my poor judgement it is very considerable, that such a person, at such a time, should match the Sabbath day and sacrifices together; for it was not the Sabbath in general, but the Sabbath day which was then under dispute. Surely there was some mystery in this Divinity of our Saviour. But this may suffice for a first answer; As the Covenant of grace is perpetually to be commemorated, but not by circumcision and sacrifices, the old memorial of it; so the work of creation is continually to be had in remembrace, but not by the old Sabbaths celebration: For we say, as the new Covenant must have new signs, so the new creation a new Sabbath. And  
2. A new day might keep alive the memory of the old Creation, 
Meditatio & celebratio operum Dei non minus alio die quàm septimoficri potest. Ursin.  although it be primarily intended as a memorial of redemption. And this double honour is put upon the Lord's day, as the first day of the week, it commemorates the world's redemption, as the seventh day in weekly recourse it calls to mind the world's Creation. For in labouring six days, and resting the seventh weekly, we recognize Gods working six days, and resting the seventh originally. And here I may as rationally as T.T. appeal to any ingenuous Christian, if the Old Sabbath served the Jews as a means to keep them mindful both of the world's Creation, and their redemption from Egypt; why may not our Lord's day Sabbath be the Christians memorandum, both of the world's Creation, 
Deut. 5.15.  and his Redemption from hell? Of the last most directly indeed, and that most deservedly, being the greatest work and the richest mercy; For although 'tis true, to have an earth to tread upon, an air to breath in, light to look upon, creatures to live upon, are excellent mercies; yet to have an angry God reconciled, a sinful nature repaired, Death and Hell vanquished, Heaven and glory purchased and assured, is infinitely more blessed, more beneficial. To conclude; If I must consecrate a weekly Sabbath to the Lord, what day more proper, more suitable, more significant, then that which bears a lively inscriptior of the Lord my Redeemer, not without some commemoration of God my Creator?  
But the old seventh day may still he retained in memory of the Creation, and the Lords day be celebrated too in memory of Redemption (though not as a Sabbath;) both days may lovingly live together among Christians redeemed from the earth. Obj 2 
T.T. p. 61, 62.   
To this I may easily answer without any great study, Answ. that the constant celebration of two days in a week is more than the Law requires, or the Gospel allows. More than the law requires; for that calls but for one day in seven; Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, not sabbath-days. 
Exod. 20 8.  Again, six days shalt thou labour, not five days. Chrysostom's descant upon it is very pithy: 
Tom. 5. p. 5 23.  The week contains seven days (says he;) Now see how the Lord hath distributed these days; he hath not taken the greatest part to himself, and left us the least, neither has he taken half, and left half, requiring three for himself, and leaving us but three; no, the Lord is more liberal, he hath given thee six, and taken but one for himself So he. And indeed the Law saith the same. I know it is disputed whether these words (six days thou shalt labour) be preceptive or permissive only: but to me it is past dispute that they carry a preceptive force; for the injunction of working six days is delivered in the same commanding terms, v. 9 with the inhibition of work on the seventh day, v. 10. T. 'tis. gloss therefore falls to the ground, 
Exod., 20.9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exod. 10.10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Six days shalt thou labour, that is, God gives thee leave (says he;) as if it were but a bare permission. Or, six days thou wilt labour; pointing out the creatures earthly inclination, as if there were a prediction in the words. But let me advise him in the fear of God to read over the Commandment once more, not as he would have it, but as it is in the Original (since he professes skill in the language of Canaan;) and then I shall ask him, whether those words verse 10. (On the seventh day thou shalt do no work) be not imperative? If so, why not also these (Six days shalt thou labour) since the form of speech is one and the same? It nothing helps him, that the word is otherwise translated Exod. 31.15. six days may work be done; for whatever the translation be, the tense is the same; and it may as well be rendered (shall) as (may.) And so learned Ainsworth reads it. And thus his Critical flourish proves but an empty flash. For my part I look upon these words (Six days shalt thou labour) as having the force and virtue of a precept and command in them; not directly enjoining us to labour upon any day (for that belongs rather to the 8th Commandment;) but enjoining us such a proportion of time, 

Eph. 4.28. Among the Jews when holy days were so frequent, there was never any weekly holy day ordained to go cheek by jowl with the Sabbath: But their holy days were either monthly or yearly. Mr. George Abbot. p 118.  
Periculum mortis tollit Sabbathum, & necessitas non habet ferias.   (six days together) within the compass of which our labours must be confined. 'Tis as if the Lord had said, Thou shalt not ordinarily labour more nor less than six days together, nor rest more or less than one in seven ordinarily. That God was pleased to appoint the Jews a greater number of holy days, as Passeover, Pentecost, etc. and so a lesser number of working-days, was only in extraordinary cases, as our fasting-dais and thanksgiving-days are. The fourth Commandment was to be the standing rule only for ordinary time both of weekly work and weekly rest. And as those words (on the seventh day thou shalt do no work) hinder not but soldiers in time of war may fight a battle, and Citizens in case of fire breaking out may quench the flames upon the Sabbath day; 
It was never the Apostles meaning, nor in their power, when God by a perpetual Law had given us six days for labour, and destined a seventh for rest, to turn it into five day's labour, and two day's rest. Idem ibid.  the precept interdicting only the servile works of our ordinary callings: In like manner these words (six days shalt thou labour) hinder not but in case of extraordinary judgements, or unusual mercies, we may set apart days of prayer and of praise: but ordinarily and weekly to keep two days of rest, and leave but five days for labour, is utterly inconsistent with the fourth Commandment. And here a word with our new Sabbath-keepers at Colchester; you are erroneously taught to think you are bound in conscience to rest from labour two days every week, else you are woeful earthworms, miserable worldlings dunghill drudges, and what not? Now I beseech you bring conscience to the rule; hath not God said, six days shalt thou labour? and will you listen to man contradicting God, and telling you, nay, thou shalt labour but five days only? What Antichristian usurpation and Tyrannical imposing upon men's consciences is this, to tell them in Print, (as T.T. does) It is not one day in seven will serve your turn when the books shall be opened? Why, 
p 3.  Why, what are those books? Shall not the book of the law be one of them? And what is written there? How readest thou? Is it not plain, six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work? Blot this clause out of God's book, 
Deut. 12.32.  or alter the figure, and write five instead of six. And be sure God will blot out thy name out of the book of life. Consider this, you that suffer your consciences to be mancipated and enslaved to the dictates of Man. Either you must make the week longer by a day, or confess, in limiting conscience to five days only for labour, you break the Law under a pretence of keeping it; yea, you totally make void the Commandment of the living God, in subverting the equity of it; this is one thing The letter of the Law will bear but one day in seven for holy rest; yea, the liberty of the Gospel will allow no more ordinarily. 
Rom. 3.21.  For do we by faith make void the law? God forbidden. Nay, rather we establish the law: Yet if we allow but five days in the week for labour, we must unavoidably make void the law in this particular. And besides, the observation of days, legal days, is disputed against by the great Apostle, as contrary to Christian liberty. It is but a poor evasion to say, 
Col. 2.16. Gal. 4. ●0. compared with Gal. 5.1.  The Apostle speaks only of festival days, Passeover, Pentecost, and the like; for if these were inconsistent with Gospel-liberty (as the adversary grants) how much more two days every week? which amount to more at the years end then all those Jewish festivals twice told. 
The Church in the Apostles time had no other holy day besides the Lord's day. And the fourth Commandment enjoins the labour of six days. Mr. Perkins in Galat.  Let him therefore sadly consider the dangerous consequences of his error, forcing him at once both to break the bonds of Christian unity, and the bounds of Christian liberty; yea, to render the golden yoke of Christ's Gospel heavier than the Iron yoke of Moses Law. But his wretched design is visible, in pressing two days in a week he would suppress one. The old seventh day must be kept as a Sabbath, the Lords day only as a Church holiday, or State holiday rather, for he calls it man's Sabbath. But I beseech you, what has man to do to appoint a weekly holiday, contrary to Gods express command of six days for labour? If the Lords day be of man's making, you sin in keeping of it. 
Psalm 118.24.  But if it be a day of Gods making (as the Scripture says) than you sin in keeping any other weekly day besides it. And to close all, let me add this which will not easily be answered; To keep the old seventh day as a Sabbath in memory of the Creation, and the Lords day only as a lesser holiday in memory of Redemption, is to place the greater honour upon the lesser work, and to profess that we are less engaged to Christ for shedding his blood to redeem the world, then to God the Father for speaking the word to create the world; which how it can stand with that Gospel-precept of honouring the Son as we honour the Father, 
John 5.23.  let any sober Christian judge. Thus we have considered the ground of the Sabbaths institution in the first sense, as Gods ending his work may be understood in respect of Providence. But  
2. Secondly and chief, God may be said to have ended his work on the seventh day, in respect of the promise then manifested to have been given by Christ's actual undertaking the work of his Mediatorship, and the Father's rest or complacency in that blessed undertaking of the Son. And here I doubt not but we shall make it appear by the light of God's candle shining in the Scriptures, that the first institution of the seventh day was founded not so much upon the memory of the Creation, as upon the first publication of Christ in the promise; and than it will undeniably follow, that the day was made mutable in the first foundation of it. For a day fixed upon the making of a promise must needs be changed upon the making good of that promise. To make way for the framing of my argument, I shall premise these seven considerations:  
1. That man sinned and fell the same day on which he was created, as has been already argued, and shall be further proved in the close of this position: neither should it seem improbable or incredible to any, that so goodly a building should be raised and ruinated both in one day; considering the foundation of it stood upon the tottering Sands of freewill, not the impregnable rock of freegrace and Christ's righteousness.  
2. As man fell suddenly, so Christ was promised seasonably and early. The merciful Lord would not let the Sun go down upon his wrath; but in the cool of the day, while the wound of man's fall was yet fresh and bleeding, he gave him that sovereign plaster in the promise, 
Gen. 3.15.  The seed of the woman shall bruise the Serpent's head.  
3. That the fall of man brought corruption and confusion upon the whole Creation, 
Gen. 3.17, 18. Rom. 8.21, 22.  subjecting it to the curse of God, the consequences whereof are misery and vanity.  
4. That therefore when it is said, Gen. 2.2. On the seventh day God ended or perfected his work (for so the word may be rendered, and so it is, Ezek. 16.14.) it may well bear this construction, that upon the seventh day, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  by the actual undertaking of Christ (newly promised to bring about man's redemption, 
So 2 Chron. 4 12.  and the world's restauration, the creatures were brought into a better state than they were in before, 
See more of this in that learned Treatise of Mr. G Walker, entitled the Doctrine of the Sabbath.  as corrupted and defaced by the sin of man. This is certain, that upon the sixth day the creation was dispatched and fully perfected, as to natural perfection. Therefore when it is said, on the seventh day God perfected his works, it may well be understood of a further and higher degree of perfection, even that which was supernatural, showing a higher and more excellent end of all things created then that which at first they were created unto. At least it implies such a perfection as consisted in the creatures restauration by the mediation of Christ, which made way for the setting of all to rights again. A most blessed and seasonable transaction for a sin-shattered world, which had certainly been demolished and lain buried in its own ruins, had not the blessed Son of God put to his gracious helping-hand. These are no humane fancies, for 
a Colos. 1.17. Heb. 1.3. Psal. 75.3.  the Scriptures do abundantly testify that the Lord Christ is the great supporter and repairer of the Creation; without whom we have reason to think that the Sun would not shine one day, nor the world stand one moment. Hence  
5. It follows that God rested on the seventh day: That is, not only ceased from his work, but found rest in his Son; he rested and was refreshed, Exod. 31.17 that is, with a rest full of sweetness and delight, such as he finds only in Christ in whom his soul delighteth, Isai. 42.2. And hence again it is said,  
6. That God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; how did he bless it, but by ordaining it as a day of Grace and spiritual blessings to the souls of his people during the Old Testament? Now this kind of blessing was utterly inconsistent with that covenant of works made with Adam in the state of innocency; there was no Grace, no Christ in that Covenant: But all spiritual blessings flow from Christ that fountain of the Gardens. 
Eph. 1.3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Therefore blessed be God says that blessed Apostle) who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly things in Christ Jesns. Did the Lord than ordain the seventh day to be a day of spiritual blessings to the souls of his people? Why still this strongly argues that Christ in the promise lay at the bottom of that day in the first designation of it; for he was that blessed seed in whom it was all along promised that the nations and families of the earth should be blessed. I would ask T.T. and his followers whether the blessings which they expect by virtue of the old Sabbaths Institution be new Covenant-blessings? If so, than they cannot deny but the day thus blessed was bottomed upon Christ, The foundation of the new Covenant. 
a Isai. 42.6.  I say upon Christ in the promise, that renowned promise of blessed memory, the seed of the woman shall bruise the Serpent's head; which promise was first made to Adam the father of men, Gen. 3.15 and afterwards renewed to 
b Gen. 12.3. & c. 18.22. & c. 28.4.  Abraham the father of the faithful; then to David and others in after-ages, till at last it was fully accomplished by the most glorious resurrection of Christ from the dead, whereby he trod on the Serpent's head, and all to-bruised it. This consideration will out deep in the adversaries cause: and to set the better edge upon it, let it be further considered.  
7. And lastly, the Holy Ghost has fully assured us, that Christ in the promise was of the same antiquity with the confessed ground of the seventh day's Sabbath. 
c Heb. 3.3, 4.  The Apostle confesses that one ground or occasion of singling out that precise seventh day was Gods ending his work, evidenced by his entering upon his rest. And when this was done, the same Apostle in the same place informs us, the works (says he) were finished from the foundation of the world. Now hear another Apostle (guided by the same Spirit) speaking of Christ in the same terms, not differing in a tittle, 
d Revel. 13.8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Observe the difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the one signifies from, the other before, Joh. 17.24. Eph. 1.4.  Thus he styles him the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world: he does not say the Lomb slain before the foundation of the world, as if it intended Christ in the eternal purpose of God; but from the foundation of the world, which clearly speaks Christ in the promise of Godfrom the beginning.  
Now by the footsteps of these two Texts compared, how visibly may we trace the Antiquity of Christ in the promise, and find a Saviour promised before a Sabbath instituted? The seventh day-Sabbath was instituted upon Gods finishing of his works; now as the works were finished from the foundation of the world, so Christ was slain from the foundation of the world; slain, I say, in respect of his Father's promise, and his own personal beginning to undertake that work which he was to perform in a way of suffering and dying; so that when the Father ended his work of Creation, the Son entered upon his work of redemption, and thereby added a further perfection to the first work, Whereupon God rested the seventh day and blessed it: That is, appointed it for a day of spiritual blessings, upon the account of Christ the promised and blessed seed. All which particulars premised, it will be a truth of unquestionable evidence, that the institution of the old seventh day, was founded and bottomed upon Christ in the promise. And now a dim eye may easily discern mutability lying at the very foundation of the day; and thus it may be demonstrated: A day founded upon Christ in the promise must necessarily be changed when the promise shall be fully accomplished: Argum. But the old seventh day was founded upon Christ in the promise, as appears by the premises: Therefore, etc.  
The proposition needs no confirmation; or if it does, take it thus: If the greatest duty founded upon Christ in the promise was to vary and change with the promise, how much more the day? For instance, the great duty of believing in the Lord Jesus; It cannot be denied but one and the same Christ was the object of saving faith in all ages, before the law, under the law, and under the Gospel. 
Heb. 13.8. Rev. 1.8.  Christ Jesus the same yesterday, to day and for ever; being he which was, and which is, and which is to come. And so the faith of Gods elect which was, and is, and is to come, looks to the same object. But yet according to the different state of the object, the eye of faith has had a different and various aspect. Old Testament-believers who went before looked to him that should come after; we that come after in the New Testament, look to him that is gone before. As long as Christ was in the promise they believed in the Messiah to come; now the promise is fulfilled, we believe and know that the Son of God is come. And though still we look for his second coming to judge the world, 
1 Joh. 5.20.  yet his first coming to save the world by his blessed Incarnation, his bitter Passion, and glorious resurrection, we no longer expect as to come, but look upon as already come and gone. Well then, you see how this great duty of believing circumstantially varies and changes with the promise; and why? because it was founded upon Christ in the promise. And verily, if the old Sabbath had the same foundation (as we have proved) than it must admit of the same variation. As long as Christ continued in the promise, the seventh day from the Creation was the Sabbath day; but now the promise is accomplished the 
* Note that well.  day must be altered; for the first foundation upon which it stood is removed. And as we cannot now call that true faith which looks upon the Messiah as yet to come, in the sense above mentioned; so neither can we count that the true Sabbath which leans upon the promise of a Messiah to come. Look to it, if you keep the old seventh day you must keep Christ still in the old promise, and together with the Jew's Sabbath profess the Jews faith, the twelfth Article of whose cursed Creed is this; I believe with perfect faith that the Messiah is yet to come. 
Buxtorf. Synag. c. 1. p. 4.  And thus deluded creatures may see what they have gotten by siding with forlorn infidels against the principles and practices of the Christian world. But I must here resolve a scruple or two, and then I shall put a period to this first part.  
You will say, if the old seventh day were founded upon Christ in the promise, 
Scrup. 1.  than it must have been changed as soon as Christ was manifested in the flesh.  
It follows not, 
Resol. 1.  for the promise was not fully accomplished when Christ was manifested in the flesh, but when he was justified in the spirit by his resurrection from the dead, then indeed it was completely fulfilled, as Paul and Barnabas do plainly testify to the Jews at Antioch, 
Act. 13.32, 33.  Acts 13. The promise which was made unto our fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their Children, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adimpleoit. Arius Mont.  in that he hath raised up Jesus again. So that the day of Christ's resurrection was infallibly the day of the old Sabbaths expiration; for then the promise upon which it was founded was fully accomplished; of which more hereafter.  
But will not this argument overthrow the duty as well as the day the Sabbath itself as the old seventh day? 
Scrup. 2   
Not in the least; 
Resol.  for a Sabbath or day of rest in general is moral-natural, and so perpetual; but the fixing of it on that precise seventh day was merely positive, if not ceremonial: Therefore the particular day may be and is cashiered, and yet the duty (Sabbath or holy rest) still retained; as the duty of solemn fasting is still in force, although the particular day in which the Jews were appointed to fast is abolished, viz. 
f Levit. 16.29. & ch. 23.27, 29. See Dr Downam Christian Sanc. p. 8, 9  the tenth day of the seventh month. And why may not the duty of solemn resting, as well as the duty of fasting, stand in the fall of the day? That which was circumstantial and shadowy is done away, but that which was substantial and moral still remaineth. And thus we have by Scripture-light found the old Sabbath (as to the day) alterable and changeable in the first institution of it; and have added something by way of overplus, for the actual change of the day: I shall now conclude this first position with the accommodation of an Historical passage recorded by Ammianus Marcellinus concerning Julian the Apostate; 
Ammian. Mar●●l Hist. lib. 23.  it is to this purpose: That he (the said Julian) out of enmity to the Christians, projected the rearing up of the Jewish ceremonies, that he might supplant the new religion by the old; and to that intent he encouraged them to rebuild their Temple at Jerusalem, and sent one Alypius into those parts, furnished with treasure to forward the work; 
Hocque modo elemento destinatius repellente cessavit inceptum.  but no sooner had the workmen attempted to lay the foundation, then certain balls of fire bursting out from beneath dissolved their work, and made them desist from their enterprise. I shall personate none in the application of this, only this I shall say in general, that as the Jews Temple was destroyed on their 
g Dion fol. 748.  Sabbath day; so their Sabbath, yea, their whole Civil and Church-State was dissolved together with their Temple. And this grounded confidence I have, that whoever shall rear up that antiquated, seventh day, with a design to supplant the new Sabbath by the old, he shall meet with such Sanctuary-fire, such Scripture-light and evidence breaking out from under the foundation of the old day, as shall either burn his fingers, or (which is all the hurt I wish him) enlighten his conscience, that he shall see his error, and confess (as 
h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. quod Christus fit Deus.  he said of the Temple) that no power or policy of man is able to raise what Christ hath razed.   

POSITION II. That the old Sabbath (as to the day) was further manifested to be alterable in the second edition of the Sabbath.  
I Am not ignorant that as the Sabbaths First Institution is much disputed, so the Second Edition (as to time and place) may be much controverted also. But taking it for granted (as I do) that the first institution lay near the world's foundation, than the second Edition of it will be found in the wilderness of Sin at the falling of Mannah, or upon mount Sinai at the giving of the Law, Nehem. 9.13. And here we meet with a double argument to make it further evident that the old seventh day was alterable, or liable to change.  

1. First, Because it was never propounded as the substance of any moral Law.  
2. Secondly, It seems to be pointed at as a sign under the ceremonial Law.   
1. First, That the old seventh day from the Creation was never propounded as the substance of any moral law, that is, so as the day could not be changed, but there must also of necessity be a change of the Law in the substantials of it. For the clearing of which let it be premised, that whereas the fourth Commandment is the only precept in the Decalogue which concerns the Sabbath:  
First, I do most freely grant, that the fourth Commandment is a moral and perpetual precept, yet not moral natural (unless it be in the first clause concerning a day of rest in general) but rather moral positive, and in the substance of it perpetual. I say in the substance of it, because it is the judgement of some learned and godly, that the whole Decalogue, as well as the fourth Commandment, was in some circumstances peculiar to the Jews by reason of the time, place, and people to whom it was delivered: But the substance of it is common to all, like as almost all Scripture is for substance common, and for circumstance proper and peculiar, because much of it was written occasionally, as Mr. Abbot observes. Now that which is circumstantial and occasional in a moral Law may be mutable and yet the substance of the Law be perpetual; as the preface prefixed to the first Commandment, and the promise annexed to the fifth, being both circumstantially peculiar to the Jews, were in that respect mutable, yet the Commandments themselves remain immutable, and belong to us as well as to them. So in this fourth Commandment, that which indirectly and occasionally respected the Jews might admit of a circumstantial alteration, and yet the Commandment itself in all the substantials of it be as much in force to us as ever it was to them; that is, for such a numeral day, though not the same individual day, for one day in seven though not the old seventh, which might be, and (for aught I can see to the contrary) is changed upon a double account; in respect of the promise upon which it was instituted, as a ceremonial (at least) a temporary ordinance, and in respect of the precept by which it was observed, as an occasional circumstance. 
In the substance of it.  And therefore we need not (as some do) make the Commandment partly moral and partly ceremonial, but grant it wholly moral, and hold the day mutable, as indirectly and occasionally pointed at as the Land of Canaan was in the fifth commandment. And thus the change of the day is no prejudice at all to the morality of the Commandment, as not being of the substance of it. Indeed to have altered the number from one day of seven, to one day of ten, or from one of seven to two of seven ordinarily, had been to wound the precept in the substantials of it, and in plain terms to blot out one of God's ten Commandments; not so, to alter the day from one seventh to another seventh, which was but a circumstantial variation. To those that affirm the fourth Commandment to be temporary in reference to the proportion of one day in seven, because in that point we grant it positive, I have only this to say, that we judge it not to be merely positive, but moral positive, and so perpetual, as the event hath proved it. For although the particular day were changed by the resurrection of Christ, yet the proportion of one day in seven has been still preserved inviolable by the practice of the Apostles and Churches ever since. And (as one well observes) not other solid reason can be rendered why the Apostles and primitive Churches should weekly celebrate the day of Christ's resurrection, if it had not been in reference to the fourth Commandment: had not their consciences been under the binding power of this precept, why might they not have done by the resurrection day, as after ages have by the Incarnation, the Passion or the Ascension day, have kept it once a year only, not once a week, as they did, and we do? But this by the way, to illustrate my concession, which is this, that the fourth Commandment for the substance of it, that is for a Sabbath in general, yea, a seventh day Sabbath, and that of God's appointment, is a moral and perpetual precept, this I freely grant and firmly believe. But  
2. That the old seventh day is either in part or in the whole, 
De substautia praecepti non est ut septimum diem precise quo etiam Deus cessavit ab operibus sanctificemus, sed dicm quieti consecratum à Deo ipso mediatè vel immediatè. Zanch. in praec. 4.  the moral substance of this Commandment, or that the morality of the law-lyes in the particularity of the day, this I utterly deny. And I shall (with the rest of my Brethren) affirm and maintain the contrary as an undoubted truth of God: Namely, that the fourth Commandment doth principally, and properly (and as the moral substance of it) prescribe only such a proportion, one day in seven at God's appointment, to be spent in holy rest; not this or that particular seventh day unless it be indirectly and occasionally. To explicate this, the second commandment is usually and aptly alleged as a commentary upon the fourth; the form of worship and the time of worship being nearly allied to each other. Now as in the second Commandment, we have the rule of solemn worship in general, without specifying the particular ordinances of worship, whether sacrifices and offerings, as under the Law; or Prayer, Preaching, Baptism, and breaking of bread, as under the Gospel; all which we re consequentially enjoined in the second Commandment, but neither of them directly: in like manner, in this fourth commandment we have a rule for the solemn time of worship a seventh day, or one in seven at God's appointment; But whether it should be reckoned from the world's Creation, or from Christ resurrection is not here determined; particular duties of worship, and the particular day of worship being to vary and change with the different age and state of the Church. The wisdom of the Lawgiver has so contrived these two Commandments, that both the day and the duties (as occasionals) might be changed without any change of his moral and immutable Laws.  
But there is native light and evidence enough in the fourth Commandment itself to convince us of this truth. 
Prov. 6.23.  For (as Solomon says) the Commandment is a Lamp and the Law is light. Only we must look to the sense, and not wholly liften to the sound of the letter; for in all laws the meaning of the Lawgiver, 
Isai. 8.20 Non in verbis sed insensu, non in superficie sed in medulla, non in foliis sed in radice ratiovis. Hieron. in G●l. 2. & Tertull. de Carne Chrsti.  and the sense of the Law is to be respected, not the letter only as he says well, the mind of God is not so much in letters and syllables, as the sense and meaning: Not in the outside but in the pith and marrow; not in the leaves of words, but in the root of reason, for which we must dig deep by serious study and prayer, before we can discern it. Now if laying aside all prejudice, we would thus look into this perfect Law of liberty, as those that look to be judged by it another day, Jam. 2.12. I doubt not but we shall find one day in seven (at God's choice) not the old Seventh day, to be the soul and substance of it; which that it may the better be demonstrated, I shall for methods sake distribute this fourth Commandment into these four parts.  

1. 
Exod. 20.8.  The preceptive part; Remember the Sabbath, or day of rest, to keep it holy.  
2. 
V 9.10.  The directive part, Six days shalt thou labour, but a seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, etc.  
3. 
V 11.  The argumentative part, For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the seventh.  
4. The benedictive part, or the conclusion, Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and sanctified it.   
Now if all these four parts of the Commandment be directly for a seventh day in number or proportion, and but indirectly occasionally and consequentially, for a seventh day in order, than the substance of the Commandment is for one day of seven, not the last of seven. But the premises are true, and to demonstrate their truth, let us come to trial.  
1. We shall examine the Preceptive part, Remember the Sabbath day, or day of rest, to keep it holy. This I hope is not be restrained to the old seventh day: Sabbath and seventh day cannot be terms convertible here, for then there were a tautology in the Commandment, as Mr. Cawdrey observes. It were as if God should say, Remember the seventh day Sabbath, the seventh day is the Sabbath; which is such a flat tautology, as the God of Wisdom will never own in so short a sum of words; No, it's evident that hitherto the precept is comprehensive and large, not limited to one day more than another; for Sabbath day (if you will hear the Hebrew word speak English) is no more but a day of rest, and that is any day set apart for solemn worship by divine authority. It is applicable to the first day of the week as much as ever it was to the last. A judicious Author does piously and pithily illustrate it by that second table precept, Honour the King; 
Mr. Bernard late of Batcomb. 1 Pet. 2.17.  If Saul be King, honour him, if he be dead or displaced, and David be King, than honour King David. To neither of them directly, but successively, and consequentially it might be accommodated to both. So, remember the day of rest to sanctify it, while the old seventh day was the day of rest, the Jews were bound to sanctify that; If that be changed, and the first day of the week be chosen in its room, we are as much bound to sanctify that, and this by the same law; for as the change of the person took not away the precept of honouring the King, 
Hac enim ratione nos quoque proeceptum hoc servamus, dum sanctificamus diem dominicum, quia hic quietis nobis est dies sicut Judaels fuit septimus. Zanch. in praec. Col. 2. Syg.  so the change of the day made not void the command of sanctifying the Sabbath. And thus, as learned Zanchy tells us; We Christians keep the Sabbath as much as ever the Jews did in keeping holy the Lord's day, which is a day of holy rest as well as their was. For if it be a day of holy rejoicing, it must needs be a day of holy rest, since it is both improper and impossible to keep a set or solemn day as a day of holy rejoicing in Christ, and at the same time to follow our worldly employments; worldly labour, and the sweat of the brow has too much of the curse in it, to consist with a day of thanksgiving or holy rejoicing in the lord 
The Scripture frequently calls festival days Sabbaths; and if Sabbath be a sit name for other days of the same nature, Why not for this?  And therefore I cannot but wonder that T.T. who grants the Lords day to be a day of rejoicing, according to that of the Psalmist, Let us rejoice and be glad therein, should deny it to be a Sabbath or a day of holy rest, as he wickedly and profanely doth, calling a man's Sabbath; discovering his enmity against the thing by carping at the name, yea condemning of it; why has he the face to call the Jewish festivals, Sabbaths, or days of rest, as being either fasting days, or feasting days, and yet deny the Lords day this titular honour? 
Inenaem. Phil. p. 74.  Is it a day of less account than the Passeover day, Pentecost day, Expiation day, and other Ceremonial days which the Scripture terms Sabbaths? 
How suitable is a name of rest to a day of rest as the Lords day is?  Nay, I have already proved, that it is greater than these, yea greater than the old Sabbath itself; therefore sure its a day of rest, as shall be farther proved in the close of this Treatise. And if this be a day of holy rest, it is as much intended in these words, Remember the Sabbath day to sanctify it, as ever the Jews Sabbath was.  
But the seventh day was Sabbath day when the Law was given, Obj. therefore it is to be understood of that day and none but that.  
You may as well say, Answ. the fifth Commandment, Honour thy father and mother, is to be understood of such particular parents as were then living, and none but them: And then the Quakers will have a fine plea for their barbarous rudeness and unmannerly behaviour towards superiors. Tell them of honouring their parents; that's a wilderness-duty, may they say, it intended only the Israelites parents, now 'tis a dead letter and out of date. As simple and sottish a plea as this would be, yet it is no better to say the fourth Commandment intended only the Jews Sabbath, and the old seventh day, because that was only in being when the precept was given. Alas! that was merely occasional and accidental to the Commmandment, not at all of the essence or substance of it. True, that was the only weekly Sabbath then, but it was not always so to be, as the event hath proved. But the truth is, this first clause, Remember the Sabath day to keep it holy, did directly point at no peculiar day more than another; but being the law of nature, it only requires a day of rest in general to be sanctified; to wit, what day soever it fall upon. And this is very considerable, since in the judgement of all the learned and godly, 
Deut. 5.12.  the prime morality and main substance of the Commandment lies in this clause. And hence it is observed that Moses in the repetition of the Law inserts this memorable parenthesis, when he had said, 
See Mr. Shepheard. Thes. 122 and Dr. Twiss Sect. 6.  Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it, immediately he adds these words (as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee) between the preceptive and the following parts; intimating, that the substance of the command lies mainly (though not only) here. Well, a day of rest must be sanctified sometimes, 
* Natura dictat aliquan to vacuam quieti diem. Gerson.  the light of nature teaches it, and the law of God requires it. But the next question will be in what proportion and number of days it must be stated, how seldom or how often it must return? If this be left to man's determination, there will be nothing but confusion, superstition, or irreligion. One man perhaps will contend that one day in a 
* As the eighth day of every month was observed by the Grecians, and the ninth day by the Romans. Plutarch in vita Thes. & Macrobius Saturn. lib. 1. c. 16.  month is sufficient; another a little more devout, will say, nay, it must be once a fortnight at least, a third with T.T. will run into another Ebionitish extreem, and exact two days in a week (though he bear little good will to one of them.) Well, to end the strife, we must consult the Divine oracle, to the law and to the testimony, have recourse to the Commandment in the second part of it.  
2. The Directive part, in these words (six days shalt thou labour, but the seventh day is the Sabbath to the Lord thy God) as if the Lord had said, Your Sabbath shall be once a week, or one day in seven, at my appointment; this agrees best with the order of the precept: The law of nature being settled in the first clause, that a day of rest must sometimes be kept, and kept holy, the very next scruple is about the number, how often it must be kept, whether once a quarter, or once a month, or once a week? The order whether it shall be the first or last day of such a number, is not the next inquiry; in all reason, the number and proportion must first be stated. For the order presupposes the number, the month must be agreed upon before the day of the month, and the week before such a day of the week. And accordingly this positive directory is given us, to point out the number principally: Six days shalt thou labour but a seventh day is the Sabbath; that is, your Sabbath shall be neither a daily, nor a monthly, nor a yearly, but a weekly Sabbath. The Phrase is exclusive, as one observes, implying thus much, thou art not to keep the sixth day or one of six, 
Dies septimus & ipse unus est dierum qui omnes septem sunt. August. de Oen. ad lit. l. 4. c. 18.  or the tenth day, or one of ten, but the seventh day, that is one of seven, or one in a week. The term seventh is opposed to all other numbers, either ninth, tenth, or twentieth; as also to the six working-days, which clearly intent such a number, as six in seven, and so the seventh day is as much as one in seven. Six days shalt thou labour but a seventh day is the Sabbath; a seventh, what seventh? pray note it, the Lord says not, the seventh from the Creation, he nameth no day, if he had, the law had been limited to that day; but because the lawgiver intended to choose a new day, and not to change his old law, you see he has left it in large and general terms, neither can it be restrained to one day more than to another. To make it plain by a similitude or two; Suppose a rich man who has seven Lambs, in a way of unusual bounty make such a proposal as this to his poor neighbour, I will freely give you six of them, upon condition you keep the seventh for me, not naming which seventh, must he necessarily intent one seventh more than another? I should rather think no, but any one of the seven, being left to his own liberty to choose which he pleases. Or thus, Suppose a liberal Master who has seven pounds to dispose of, indent thus with his Servant, I freely give or lend thee six of them, provided thou improve the seventh for me; What, must he needs intent this or that special seventh, (supposing some piece of gold among the rest?) Certainly no, every man may know his meaning, by the seventh pound he intends one pound of seven. The accommodation is easy and apposite; the bountiful and blessed God freely bestows six days in the week upon his creature man, reserving the seventh to himself, that is one in seven at his own choice and appointment: This is the direct and principal intendment of the Law. Though I deny not that the old seventh day was indirectly and occasionally here pointed at, as a seventh day then under Divine sanction, and the Jews were bound by this Commandment to keep that day, as by the fifth commandment they were bound to honour their particular parents then living, yet both these being but occasional circumstances, might be and were altered without any impeachment to the morality of these Commands. The altering of a mutable circumstance either of time, place or person, is far from abolishing the substance of a law; indeed if the Sabbath had been changed (as I said before) either to the sixth day, or the tenth day, the whole frame of the Commandment had been broken and shattered; but in the change of one seventh day to another, upon a sufficient ground, and by a sufficient authority; the substance of the Law suffers not at all; the substance of it is for one day in seven directly and no more; the seventh day is the Sabbath. To those forementioned vulgar cases I will add some Scripture-instances for the further clearing of it. As thus, why may not the seventh part of man's time, and the tenth part of his temporals be understood in a parallel sense? 
Levit. 27.30. Deut. 18.21.  Now one part of ten. is principally intended in the Law of tithes, surely when God commandeth the tenth, any man will think he hath more respect to the number then the order; such a proportion, than such a particular in it: Although indeed (as judicious Mr. Cawdrey notes) in one particular there was a law to restrain it to the last of ten; of all their  the tenth that came under the rod was holy to the Lord; which law, as he says well, 
Levit. 27.23.  need not have been added, if the general law for tithes had intended the last of ten. And this is the very case here, one day in seven is chief and directly intended in this law of the Sabbath, 
The seventh day in every week Christ hath now limited by his Apostles to the Lords day. Mr. Perkins in Gal. 4.10.  neither can any more be well gathered from it, unless some other law be produced to restrain it to the last of seven as once it was, or to the first of seven as now it is restrained; some other law I say, for there is no such particular restriction in theh fourth Commandment. For I pray observe this, the Commandment doth not point out the day by way of institution, but only prescribe the observation of it; supposing it either as already instituted, or to be instituted elsewhere, either in the Old Testament or the New. Again, to that which others have gathered to my hand, let me add one Scripture-instance more; why may not that tribute of time which God calls for, and that tribute of their lands which Joseph compacted for with the Egyptians, be taken in a like sense, since the things themselves are not much unlike? 
Gen. 47.24.  You shall give the fifth part of your increase to Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own. 
V 27.  And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day that Pharaoh should have the fifth part; that is, such a part in proportion, one part in five, 
The Gram matical construction of the Commandment will bear this sense, and enforce no more than a seventh in proportion, and if other arguments must sway the sense, what better arguments than the analogy of other Scriptures and the received Principles of religion, both which carry it for a seventh day in proportion, not the old seventh day. Irenaeus Phil.  you shall have four, and Pharaoh shall have one. And truly varying but the circumstances, me thinks the Lord speaks much to the same effect in this fourth Commandment. Six days shalt thou labour, but a seventh, or the seventh is the Sabbath; that is, dividing the week into seven parts, thou shalt have six of them for thy common work, and I will have one in seven for my solemn worship: He does not say the seventh day from Creation, that was ordered elsewhere Gen. 2. But a seventh in proportion directly, this or that seventh indirectly, and by consequence only.  
Yea to proceed to demonstration, that this is unquestionably the mind of God may be thus made out.  
This proportion is not where directly stated by a perpetual precept, unless it be in this fourth Commandment: Therefore it must be so determined here.  
That it must be somewhere determined, is evident, because it is substantially profitable to Religion, the glory of God and the good of souls; (as Mr. Cawdrey has invincibly argued) for if men were left to their own liberty to choose their own proportion, in all probability, Religion would be substantially prejudiced and damnified by it; either it would be starved with too little, or surfeited with too much Sabbath-time; either Popery would create almost every day in the week a holy day, or profaneness would be content with one day in a month: Let sinful man have liberty to pluck up God's bounds, and alter his proportion either one way or other, and experience will soon show the inconvenience of it: Let it be altered from one of seven to one of ten or twenty, and what a deadly blow to Religion would that be? Yea, let the alteration be on the other hand, from one of seven to two of seven, may we not justly suspect more prejudice than profit by such an alteration? Would not one sabbath be able to justle out another, and one day disturb the holy rest of another? Truly as our Saviour speaks in another case: 
Luke 19.30.  No man can serve two masters, but either he will have the one, and love the other, or hold to the one and despise the other. So we may probably think in this case, no man can ordinarily observe two Sabbaths in a week, but either he will slight the one to keep the other, or it may be in a little time slight both and keep neither. 
Whether the Sabbath should be kept once a week or once a month cannot be gathered from any plain or perpetual precept, unless from the fourth Commandment: Gen. 2. is not plain and direct; Exod. 16.15. no perpetual precept. The Old Testament affords no other but the fourth Commandment for one day in seven, as direct.  Altar God's proportion which way you will, and religion will be substantially damnified by it, but no such damage arises from the change of the particular day for another and a better; since God and the soul have the same proportion still (one day in seven) though the old seventh day be displaced. Therefore I conclude, the proportion and not the particular day is directly determined in this moral and perpetual law, for elsewhere it is not. As for the particular day, whether first or last of seven it falls under the proportion, as having a seventh part of time appointed falling upon it and no otherwise. But I might have spared this argument, for the term, seventh day, is large enough in itself, since it is not said, the seventh day from the Creation or any other period or date of time, but seventh day in general. And what high presumption is it in T.T. to restrain the word seventh, where no reason doth constrain? What's this but to limit the holy one of Israel, 
Isalm 119.96.  to clip the wings of God's Commandment, and narrow it up to his own notion, when the Commandment in itself is exceeding broad? but to proceed,  
3. Let us consult the argumentative part of the precept, viz. that which contains the principal argument and reason to enforce the Sabbaths observation, and that is God's example in these words, (for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the seventh day:) as if the Lord had said, the reason why I would have you observe the forementioned proportion of weekly time, six days for labour, and a seventh for rest, is this, because I myself kept this proportion in the beginning of time, working six days and resting but one in seven.  
Note it well God's example is not propounded as an argument for the seventh day from Creation directly, but more generally for a seventh day in proportion, For the example can intent no more than the foregoing clause, of which it is brought as a reason, and that is no more but one day in seven directly, not appropriated to any particular day, as we proved before.  
But that special seventh day is intimated in God's exampie, Obj. for God not only rested one day in seven, but the last of seven and the seventh from Creation.  
What then? Answ. Does it therefore unavoidably follow, that we must observe the same day? the same singular seventh day we cannot observe, for that is past and gone, therefore it must be such a seventh day, in likeness and correspondency to that, and why not such a seventh in number, or one in seven, as well as such as seventh for order, or the last of seven? If you say, the last of seven is intended in the argument of God's example; I answer, every circumstance in an argument is not argumentative; and although that day be intimated in the example, yet it is not so much argumentatively as historically propounded? An example is not to be necessarily imitated in every circumstance of it. I will make it plain by a parallel and pertinent instance; I hope you will grant, that we are as much bound to imitate the example of Christ in the celebration of the supper, as the example of God the Father in the observation of the Sabbath; we have a plain command for it, Do this in remembrance of me. What then? does it therefore follow that we are tied to the same night in which Christ was betrayed? For this is mentioned in the words of institution, and that expressly; 
1 Cor. 11.23.  I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you? that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed tock bread, etc. Mark it, here is Christ's institution and example recommended to us as a rule to guide our practice; and in the proposal of his example, not only the season (in the night) but also the punctual circumstance of it (the same night in which he was betrayed) is set down; what follows from hence? Is this a good argument for Easter-Communions, 
Haec verba historic am tantummodò relationem, nequaquam verò determinatum de tempore mandatum continent Gerar. de S. C Loo. Com. p. 536.  ot after supper-Sacraments? No such matter, for these circumstances are but historically in timated, not argumentatively propounded; yet this I must needs say, we may as well argue for sacrament-celebration the same night in which Christ was betrayed and no other, as for Sabbath-observation the same day, in which God rested and no other. However, 
If any one ask why we continue the name of the Lords supper, and not the time? we answer. 1. Because we keep it as the Lords supper, not our own supper. It retains the name from the first administration. 2. Because we celebrate it in the evening, though not of the day.  this is argumentum ad hominem For T.T. is a great stickler for night-celebration of the supper, and frequently tells us in his book, That Antic hrist changed the Lords suppertime, as well as the Lords Sabbath-time: And I think as much the one as the other. But by the way let me tell him that in arguing for the night from Christ's example, 
See Mr. Phil, Goodwin Evening Communicant ad finem.  he runs himself upon an inevitable necessity of concluding for the same night, in which Christ was betrayed, or else his argument runs a ground, and concludes just nothing; for the same night as well as the night is put into the words of institution: Although I judge that neither the one nor the other is obligatory, because both were occasional. Christ instituted the supper in the evening indeed because it was immediately to succeed the Passeover, which was an evening ordinance, and the same evening or night in which he was betrayed, because the next day he was to suffer. Both these were occasional, and therefore neither of them perpetual; and besides, we may well conceive that our Lord did this in the evening, and after the Passeover, to signify the abolishing both of the  and the evening; and to leave the time free to his Church ever after, as a late Writer has judiciously observed. Let not the Reader call this a digression, 
Non est ociosum quia non infructuosum loqua citas nulla in aedificatione turpis, Tertull. de patientia.  for there is properly no digression in that which may conduce to edification; neither is it impertinent as long as it is not unprofitable. But to return to our argument, suppose the old seventh day were indirectly and circumstantially commended to the Jews by God's example, yet it follows not that the same day is still in force to us, because circumstantials in a moral law (as we said before) are changeable without any change in the substance of the law: I do not say they are abrogable as ceremonies, but alterable as circumstances; they may be changed for better things, and not a tittle of the law annulled, but rather fulfilled by it; according to that of our Saviour, till heaven and earth pass one jot, 
Mat. 5.18.  or one tittle shall not pass from the law till all be fulfilled. I say, the law is not destroyed, but rather fulfilled by the varying of some circumstances, as by changing their typical deliverance from Egypt, into our spiritual deliverance from sin; and the land of Canaan meant in the fifth Commandment into England where we dwell. And because the fourth Commandment and the fifth are near neighbours, methinks the one may fairly expound the other. It cannot be denied, 
Ephes. 6.3. The Apostle in repeating that promise leaves out the words (which the Lord thy God giveth thee) because they were more appropriate to the Jews, and to us the argument is entire without them, See Weems. Chris, Syn.  that the promised land intended occasionally in the fifth Commandment was the land of Canaan; neither do I deny, that the day on which God is said to rest in the fourth Commandment was the seventh day from Creation; yet all will grant that the argument or inducement of the fifth Commandment is not to be restrained to that land only, for than it were no argument at all to us. Now I would ask any rational man, why the argument of this fourth Commandment should be limited to that particular day from Creation, more than the argument of the fifth Commandment to that particular land of Canaan; since both the one and the other are but occasionally insinuated? And to limit the inducement of a moral law to an occasional circumstance, is the ready way to evacuate and make void the whole law. But we shall put it out of all doubt, that God's example here propounded is only for one day in seven directly, substantially and properly; for the old seventh only consequentially, indirectly or occasionally; and that by a double consideration.  

1. Because it is here urged as a reason of what went before.  
2. Because the reason of this reason is chief for one day in seven.   
1. This example of God (in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the seventh day) is alleged as a reason of the forementioned clause (six dayss shalt thou labour, but the seventh is the Sabbath) so much is clearly employed in the connexive or causal particle, For; six days shalt thou labour and rest a seventh, For so did Jehovah thy God: Now the reason annexed to any rule must (if there be any amiguity in it) be expounded by the rule, the rule must not be interpreted by the reason; for the rule is not brought for the reason, but that for the rule: Therefore as the former receives strength by the latter, so the latter must receive light from the fotmer. Now the standing rule for the weekly Sabbath is this, Six days shalt thou labour, but a seventh is the Sabbath. Here the term seventh is general, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Indifferently signifies a seventh or the seventh; a and the being particles proper to the English tongue are defective in the Hebrew and Latin. To supply which defect the schools distinguish of Diet septimus formaliter, and Dies septimus materialiter.  as was noted before. 'Tis not said, this or that seventh, but leftat large. And where God has left a latitude, we may not dare to put a limitation, that were to enclose Gods Common, and entrench upon his Royalty: Well, than the Rule being only express for a seventh day in general, the reason or argument here brought to persuade to the observation of such a general seventh, is taken from God's example, who also rested a seventh day; which although it were the last of seven, yet being only alleged as a reason of the forementioned rule, it can signify no more than the rule itself of which it is a reason: And so it is clear, that the sense of this latter clause (in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the seventh) must be only according to the sense of the former clause (six days shalt thou labour, but a seventh is the Sabbath) that is, a seventh in proportion directly. And thus the first day of the week is as much the Sabbath of the fourth Commandment to Christians, as ever the last of the week was to the Jews, being one day in seven as well as that. To dispute for the same day on which God rested, and infer a necessity of observing that day, because we must observe that proportion, is to argue à dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter, a well known fallacy. For the argument is only direct for such a proportion (six for labour and a seventh every week for rest) not this or that seventh from any prefixed period.  
2. Let us look into the reason of this reason, and then the case will be yet more clear, the reason or equity of any law is the life and strength of the law. And it is the design of God's wisdom in imposing laws upon his creatures to propose such reasons in those laws as shall make them appear congruous and suitable to those common principles of right and equity, 
Psalm 119.18. Rom. 7.12. Deus ideò leges suas judicia vocat quod aequiffima sunt quae praescribit.  impressed upon the creature. And hence God's laws are so often styled, Judgements, because in all things they are just and equal; and certainly that sense of the argument which doth most show the equity of the Commandment is the best and truest sense. Now let us consider the equity that God's example carries with it in reference to the aforesaid proportion of six days for labour, and one in seven for rest. As thus, if the great God who needs not a moment of time either for work or rest, (as being neither subject to weakness nor weariness) if he, I say, were pleased when he had work to do (even a world to make) to take six days for his work, and one in seven for rest, how much more should we men still hold to this proportion, who by reason of corporal weakness and spiritual wants need such a competency of time, both for secular employments and soul refreshments? Thus there is convincing strength of reason and equity in it. But now to argue for the particular day; God wrought first six days, and then rested the last of seven, therefore we must first work and then rest, has no such argumentative force in it, especially to us Christians, who living under a Covenant of pure grace do rather work by rest, than rest by works; and therefoe (the Sabbath being suitable to the Covenant) we may rather judge it equitable to begin the week with a day of rest, and work the six days after, then to work the six first days, and then rest the last seventh. Even dim-eyed nature judges it most equal to 
a A Jove principium.  begin with God, 
b Supervacua necessariis post-ponenda sunt. Senec. ep. 49.  and give the precedency to things most necessary; and grace both not gainsay it but rather approve it; for is it not most reasonable that I should serve my gracious Lord in the duties of his worship, because I serve myself in the works of my calling? But the truth is, God's example is neither directly for first or last of seven, but for one in seven perpetually. The force of God's argument lies in this, that we should dedicate one day in seven to rest, for six working days indulged to ourselves. And herein we imitate God's example in labouring six days and resting one in seven weekly. For farther satisfaction in this argument let the ingenuous Reader consult Mr. Cawdrey, and Mr. White of Dorch. two burning and shining Lights, who have gone before me: if any little spark be here added, let the Father of lights have all the glory.  
4. And lastly let us come to that which for memories-sake I call the benedictive part of the Commandment (wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, etc.) observe the phrase, not seventh day but Sabbath day or day of rest is blessed. 
The Commandment both opens and shuts, gins and ends with the term Sabbath day, not seventh day.  Certainly, if the foregoing argument drawn from God's example had intended only the seventh day from Creation, this conclusion flowing from that argument had fallen upon that day also; but we see the term is evidently changed, that we may not mistake God's meaning by a supposed strictness in the term seventh day; see how the Lord condescends to our weakness writing Sabbath day or day of rest instead of seventh day: The Word Abbath like a finger points both forward and backward, directiug us how to expound the whole precept in a large, and not in a limited sense. Doubtless if the Lord God had intended to tie up his Church in all ages to the seventh day from the Creation, he would have fixed the command upon that day only, especially in the conclusion of it; why should not that precise day be mentioned here as well as in the Institution, Gen. 2. There he is said to bless and sanctify the seventh day, here only the Sabbath day: a more probable reason to me is not imaginable than this, the Commandment is of a larger extent than the Institution. And besides, the Institution of the old day, Gen. 2. was but temporary and mutable, whereas the precept itself is more and perpetual; see then how wisely the Lord our Lawgiver has contrived it, that it should not be restrained to that particular seventh day. To conclude with this conclusion, the whole weight and stress of the Commandment you see leans upon large and general terms; the Preceptive part is for a day of rest in general, the Benedictive part is of the same latitude; and although the seventh day be placed in the middle betwixt both, yet it is not fixed upon one day more than another, unless it be occasionally, which indeed is no fixure at all; what hinders therefore but the whole substance of the precept may stand in the fall of the day, since it was never incorporated into the moral substance of this or any other command. It is (I must needs say) a truth to me as evident as the light itself, that the fourth Commandment in all the substantials of it makes as much for the Lords day (being one in seven of God's appointment) as ever it did for the old Sabbath? And here I cannot sufficiently admire and adore the depth of Divine wisdom that the ever glorious God foreseeing and foreappointing the change of the day, took care to contrive and pen the commandment in such expressions as might aptly suit the old day while it lasted, and as equally sort with the new, now it is substituted in the room of the old. That the Jews (upon the discovery of so happy a change) might not loathe their old Sabbath, the precept was occasionally and circumstantially fitted to that, and that we Christians having a new, might not be limited to the old it is substantially adapted to this. I shall need add no more, if men did not wilfully wink, I should think here were light enough in this Lamp of the Law to convince them. As for the adversaries objections scattered here and there in his book, they vanish like so many vapours before the Sun being brought forth and tried by the evidence of this truth.  
To assert the whole Law's morality, 
T.T. Obj. 1. p. 14. Answ.  and yet plead the Sabbaths mutability, scarce savours of rationality.  
These are fine words but feeble arguments, and indeed his book is full of them. But to answer his Jingle; if by Sabbath he mean the seventh day from Creation, what irrationality is it to plead the mutability of that day, and yet hold the morality of the Law? Since that day was never a tittle of the Law's morality? Neither can he affirm it without gross absurdity; prove it, I am sure he cannot by all his sophistry.  
If God by a positive moral law bind all men in all ages to such a particular day as himself appointed, Obj. 2 
p. 119.  then either they must prove that God hath made his moral law mutable by appointing some other day, or else restore the seventh day-Sabbath.  
What pitiful chopped Logic is this? Ans. Why, can the particular day be no where appointed but in the moral law? his not he himself often affirmed, that it was instituted elsewhere? And must the moral law needs go to wrack when a new day is appointed? Let him first prove that the old day was any essential part of the moral law, till I see that I may safely affirm, that in the change of the day as an occasional circumstance, the substance of the law remains unchangeable, as a man may change his old clothes for new, yea and alter his temperament too, and yet be still the same man, as long as for substance he has the same soul and body.  
Some do assert (but not for want of ignorance) that 'tis not that special seventh day, Obj. 3 
pa. 47.  but a seventh day that is enjoined; whereas we have not only the pattern in the mount; namely, the precise time of God's rest to point out the day, but (to end all cavil) he points twice in the Commandment to that very day on which he rested, by the Emphatical demonstrative particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; so that 'tis not a seventh, but Hashebigni the seventh day; therefore they had need make sure of a very clear word for the change of the day, for fear of being left speechless at the day of Judgement.  
And so he runs on to th' end of the page, spinning a large web, but when all comes to all, it is but a cobweb, we shall sweep it down by degrees. And  
If by the assertors of the forementioned truth, Answ. 1 he mean (as needs he must) those that maintain the fourth Commandment to be moral for one day in seven, not the old seventh day, then let me tell him, his charging them with no want of ignorance, argues in himself no want of impudence; for upon whom does this arrogant censure fall, but upon all the Learned, Zealous, and pious servants of God (called Puritan) who have encountered the rigid prelatical party in this controversy? as 
a p 73.  Dr. Bound, 
b Hexap in Gen p 43.  Dr. Willet, 
c Sect. 6.  Dr. Twiss, 
d Dies Domin. l. 1. c. 10  Dr. Young, 
e Mosaic. Sab. p. 70.  Mr. Bernard of Batcomb, 
f in Gen. 2. & moral. of the fourth Co.  Mr. White of Dorch. 
g Doctr. of the Sab. vind. p. 236  Mr. Byfield, 
h of the Sab. p. 78.  Mr. Fenner, 
i Declar. the Sab. p. 101.  Mr. Cleaver, 
k p. 6. & 36.  Mr. Sprint, 
l part 2. c. 7. throughout.  Mr. Cawdrey and Mr. Palmer, and whom not of savoury name in the Church of Christ? do they not all affirm the same thing? That the Comandment is substantially moral for one day in seven, not that old seventh day? and must all these modern worthies be branded for mere ignoramus? And not only these but all the Ancients too, whose testimony they have all along cited? Surely this man is very wise in his own conceit, that he can thus look upon the greatest lights of these latter days as fools and dunces. But I shall not answer him in his folly, therefore to proceed.  
Whereas he objects that we have God's pattern in the mount (the precise time of his rest) to point out the day; Answ. 2 
As in the first Institution of the supper Christ made use of unleavened bread, yet his example binds us only to the use of bread, not that which is unleavened. So for the first Institution of the Sabbath, God rested on the seventh day from Creation; yet his example binds us only to a day of that number, not that particular day. See the new Annot. in Exod. 20. & Attersolls new Cou.  I answer as before, that God's pattern or example is directly propounded in the Commandment, to point out the proportion not the particular day. The proportion, I say, of one day in seven for rest in opposition to six working days. And therefore the number of Gods working days is specified in the example, as well as the day of his rest, (for in six days the Lord made Heaven, Earth, and Sea, and rested the seventh day) plainly intimating, that the main force of the example is to bind us to such a number of days, six for labour and one in a week for rest, not such an order as first or last of seven. Or admit there were some thing else in it; namely, that indirectly and occasionally it did lead the Jews to that old seventh day, that is, during the significancy of that day, and the supereminency of the first Creation; yet when a new Creation is finished and a new rest from a greater work manifested upon another day, that indirect and occasional force of the example for the old day, must needs be out of force to us, being subordinated and swallowed up by the glory of a greater work and a better rest upon another day. And that without any violation of the precept at all, yea or the example either, in the direct scope of it for one day in seven. A new day might be and is instituted, and yet the main scope both of the precept and example still observed, in our labouring six days and resting every seventh. Only that which was circumstantial and occasional, is altered upon the account of the new Creatio or Redemption, which comparatively was to put out the memory of the old Creation, as it is plain, Isai. 65.17. And that thus it should be, that the occasional force of God's example (as to the old day) should be out of force to us, and yet a weekly Sabbath to be still observed by the moral and direct force of the command, me thinks it is not obscurely signified in the Commandment itself, if we do but compare two places together, Exod. 20. with Deut. 5. at the first giving of the Law in thunder and terror, 
Exod. 20.11. compared with Deut. 5.15.  the Sabbath is wholly enforced from the Creation, and God's example in resting from that work, as was said before; but in the repetition or second-giving of the law by the hand of Moses, a typical mediator, Deut. 5. you see the reason from the Creation is quite left out, and the Sabbath is altogether enforced by a type of our Redemption, viz. their deliverance from the Egyptian bondage, Remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, 
Mr. G. Abbot Vindic. Sabb. a most accurate Treatise never yet answered. So also see learned Ainsworth in Exod. 20.  and the Lord brought thee thence by a mighty hand, therefore he commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day; lively intimating, (as a learned Author observes) the subsistence of the fourth Commandment under the Gospel, and the binding authority of it by the incorporation of a new reason drawn from our Redemption or spiritual deliverance by Christ, instead of the old reason drawn from the Creation, which is here utterly omitted. And (as he says well) it is worthy to be considere, whether such a repetition of the fourth Commandment (not Seorsim, or by itself alone, but together with the whole decalogue in its proper place and order) with such a material omission or alteration be not very significant? and what can it more properly signify then this, that under the second and best dispensation of the Law (that is under the Gospel) the main argument for our weekly Sabbath should be the work of Redemption? Surely their deliverance from Egypt literally considered, was not comparable to the work of Creation, that it should here be propounded as the reason of the Sabbath, and the other left out; but as a type of the most glorious and gracious work of Redemption there was much weight in it. And if the type itself were thus significant, Argum. 
a minori.  as to carry the force of a reason for the weekly Sabbath, setting aside the Creation, how much more should the antitype, which excels all types in glory, as much as the Sum does the shadow?  
It will perhaps be objected, That this argues the perpetuity of the old seventh day under the Gospel.  
I answer, No, it quite overthrows it, for in as much as it signifies the weekly celebration of a Sabbath in memory of Redemption, rather than of Creation, it evidently implies, that when this greater work should be finished the memory of the Creation upon which the old day was fixed, should be swallowed up by the work of Redemption, and then the day itself must unavoidably be changed. It's true, while the type lasted, and Redemption was rather figured then fulfilled, the old day was still to be obseved; but when the type should give place to the truth, the day also which went along with the type must necessarily expire with it. At least our spiritual Redemption by Christ being much more glorious than their typical and temporal deliverance from Egypt, must needs eat out the memory of the Creation, and so translate the day, by antiquating the argument of it, viz. the indirect force of God's example in resting upon that day. I do not say, the direct and principal force of the example (for one day in seven) is evacuated. But rather that this number and proportion being still observed by the Apostles in a new day, strongly argues, that the inserting of the forementioned argument instead of God's example, does only make void the circumstantial force of the example (for the old seventh day) not the substantial and moral equity of it for one day in seven. Quod orat respondendum.  
As for the Hebrew Article or Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with which he makes such a noise, Answ. 3 
By the same rule we must in the next verse translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those heavens and that earth as though there were some others, Num. 18.26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  who knows not that it is more frequently a cipher then a figure, serving rather for ornament, then for argument, and to fill up the sentence then to form the sense? Mr. White of Dorch. has given many clear instances where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prefixed to a numeral, notes nothing at all, and if need were I could add twice as many more; let these two suffice, the tithes or tenth part has ha' set before it, yet it signifies indefinitely one part of ten. 
b Ezek. 5. v. 2.12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bp. White p. 183.  So Ezek. 5. it is no less than four times prophets hair without any Emphasis at all, denoting only one part of three; and I see no reason why it might not also signify one day of seven in the Commandment. I wonder T.T. will trouble the world with such common cirtifismes; sure he cannot be ignorant that this was Bp. Whites notion long before it was his. And the truth is, that unhappy proverb may be written upon many of his arguments. The Bishop's foot hath trodden here; yet this is the man that cyres down Bishops (as every coward will draw his sword upon a conquered enemy) when there is no truth in me if the weapons with which he fights against the truth be not the very same which they form against their Puritan adversaries. What shameful hypocrisy is this? But suppose the Particle ha' in this place be Emphatical, yet why must it needs point out the day on which God rested? Why, not rather such a day in proportion? Therefore instead of ending all cavils, this is but a mere cavil.  
Oh but he blessed it and sanctified it, says the Objector.  
Ans. This is either an ignorant or an impudent cavil; for there is but one it in the clause, and that refers to the word Sabbath, and not the seventh day, and so I make bold to retort his own words with a little addition. Take heed of adding to the commandment of the living God to serve your own turn, or putting seventh day instead of Sabbath day, for fear of being left speechless at the day of Judgement.  
As for those that suppose a seventh day is the morality of the fourth Commandment, 
T. T. Obj. 4. p. 47.  they will never help themselves by it, for if it be a seventh it cannot be a sixth or an eighth or any other number.  
This shaft seems to be taken out of T. Bs. or James Ockfords' Quiver, who argued at the same rate, Answ. and are sufficiently answered by others: The sum of what hath been said is this; That the Lords day ay in one account be termed the first day of the week or the 8th day, 
As 2 Pet. 2.5. compared with 1 Pet. 3.20. Noah is styled the 8th person as one that made up the number of eight, although in respect of dignity he was the first person.  and yet in another account the seventh day. And it is a pithy saying of Mr. Shepheard: If the Lord's day may be styled the first day of the week in one respect, and yet the eighth day in another respect, why may it not in a third respect put on the name sevent day? and so Mr. Cawdrey seconds him as Adam, says he, (excepting but the first seventh day) might be said to work the first six days and rest the seventh, so supposing Christ kept the first Lord's day, we may be said ever after to work six days and rest the seventh. And that thus it was (says another) in the account of the primitive Christians, appeareth 1. Cor. 16.2. upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay be him in store as God hath prospered him; to wit, 
So Mr. Sheph. Octavus dicitur quod cum aliis septem servatus fuit. Beze in locum. So also Act. 20 6.7. where no day but the first of the week is thus disposed of, to be the seventh day. G. A.  in the six foregoing work days. In a word, although our Christian Sabbath be the first day of the week in order, yet it is still the seventh in number, having six working days going before it in one week, and following it in another continually, and this satisfies the Commandment.  
The like may be said for that notion of a seventh part of time which they confess to be purely moral. 
T.T. Ob. 5. p. 47.  If so, than no other but simply the seventh part must from week to week be devoted to God's worship; for when ever the seventh part of time is altered, 
p. 117.  the morality must needs be destroyed. Which is thus pieced up in another page. The wisest Christian in the world cannot contrive a change of the day but he must destroy the morality of the law; 
This Objection was long ago started by Mr. Primrose in his zeal against the English Puritans. part 2. ch. 7. p. 162,  for let him change it to a sixth day, and that cannot be a seventh part of time; let him translate it to the eighth day, and then seven days pass without any one Sabbath; let him keep the seventh or the eighth or first, at his change of the day, and then he keeps two Sabbaths within the compass of seven days.— This is his Gordian knot, but we need not cut it, it is easily untied. For  
A seventh part of time (which here he derides as a notion, Answ. 1 when as a 
p. 43.  little before it was his own concession) we grant indeed to be moral, yet not moral natural, if he intent that by purely moral, but we say it is moral positive. And to grant him as much as we can, 
If moral natural be taken for that which is known by the light of nature without revelation, so one day in seven is not purely moral. But if it be taken for that which nature informed by a written word, judges most agreeable to moral and religious equity so we may grant it.  we also affirm, that a seventh part of time must be perpetually devoted to God from week to week, that is one part of seven. Neither did this proportion receive any interruption by the change of the day; for the Jews Sabbath (being in use while Christ lay in the grave) was the seventh part of time for the week going before the resurrection, and the Lords day was the seventh part of time for the week following the resurrection, what inconvenience in all this? Answ. 2  
If by the seventh part of time simply considered he will needs understend the last of seven in order, he must first convince us, that this is the morality of the Commandment; which if (by working miracles in Logic and Divinity) he can do, yet it will at no hand follow, that the altering or adjourning of this proportion from the last to the first day of the week was any violation of the precepts morality. In this case (as one says) alteration is no dissolution, no more then to adjourn the Parliament to another time, is to dissolve the Parliament. Besides, an extraordinary case can be no violation of an ordinary rule. As the Sun's standing still in Joshuahs', and going back in Hezekiahs' time, which did undoubtedly alter the settled course of time, for man had more than six parts, and God had less than simply a seventh part of time for those two weeks; yet being extroardinary cases they were no infringement of that ordinary standing rule for a seventh part of time from week to week. So here supposing some variation, in the ordinary course of time at the first change of the day, yet being by a person extraordinary (the Lord of glory who made the law and is above the law) as also upon an occasion extraordinary (his resurrection from the dead) who would dare to say, as this objectour does, that the morality of the law was hereby destroyed?  
Whereas he further suggests, That if the Sabbath were translated to the eighth or first day, Answ. 3 
This was T. Brabourns Objection. p. 178.  then seven days must pass without any one Sabbath; it is already answered, there is not the least necessity of that; for as the Paschal supper was in use till the Gospel-supper was instituted, so was the old Sabbath till the Lords days was consecrated by the Lord's resurrection. Hence the holy women are commended for keeping it; 
Luk. 23.56.  they were (as one says) commended for keeping the Jews Sabbath before Christ's resurrection, 
Note that.  but never were any commended for keeping it after his resurrection. Hitherto therefore it appears, what feeble, unjointed, unsinnewed shadows of arguments this Author pleases himself, and perverts the simple withal. Neither  
Is there any strength in that which comes up in the rear, Answ. 4 that whoever should keep the old seventh day, and the first day of the week at the change of the day, he must keep two Sabbaths within the circuit of seven days. What then? as long as these two Sabbaths fell in two several weeks, this broke no squares in the morality of the law; for the Commandment is only for one day of seven in the circle of every week. 
Levir. 23.15. Deut. 16.9. Luk. 18.12.  Hence the Sabbath (being the boundary of weekly time) is sometimes termed week, intimating, that as it was ever a seventh day Sabbath, so also a weekly Sabbath; one day in a week, and but one in a week ordinarily. And this rule was exactly kept in the change of the day; for as there were two Sabbaths, so two distinct weeks in which the forementioned proportion of six days for work, and one for rest was punctually observed. In a word, the supposed disorder objected against the change of the day, is but a dart fling against heaven, a cavil raised against Christ and his blessed Apostles, who were well enough able to answer it, and so are we also, building upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, 
Ephes. 2.20.  and Jesus Christ the chief cornerstone; who when he was made the head of the corner did crown the Resurrection-day above all other days; intimating as much by an illustrious Prophet, Psalm 118.24. and expounding it by his inspired Apostles both in their doctrine, Acts 4.11. and their practice, Acts 20.7. so that the Lords day having Christ himself for its cornerstone, Prophets and Apostles for its foundation, we may look upon all objections of this nature, as groundless and graceless cavillations, which like proud waves dashing against the rock dissipate themselves with their own fury. 
Mark 2.28.  Sure we are, that the Lord Jesus being Lord of the Sabbath, had power to change it, and in the change it was fit the Sabbath should wait upon him who was Lord of it, not he upon it. And if the order or constituted course of time received some small interruption (for once) by the change of the day, yet it was no more than what had happened twice before, viz. upon the standing still and going back of the Sun, 
Joshu. 10.13. Isai. 38.8.  far less events than the glorious shining forth of the Sun of righteousness after a three days, eclipse in the chambers of death.  
He has but one discharge more against the truth; and then all his powder is spent to no purpose. He charges our doctrine with a gross absurdity as thus, Obj. 6 
p. 116.  That we render God's reason of Janctifiing-the Sabbath in this wise; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the first day, Wherefore the Lord blessed the first day for his Sabbath, and sanctified it.  
But we answer, Answ. this pretended absurdity is a mere calumny; we are not so destitute of reason as to render God's reason in such a misshapen form; we only argue thus, that we must sanctify one day in seven, because God did so. As for the particular day whether first or last of seven, we ground it not directly either upon the precept or example of God; but we say it is instituted elsewhere. And when we have found the institution or designation of the Lords day somewhere else (as shortly we shall) we only go to the Commandment as a rule for the observation of it, and accordingly we urge conscience with God's example, not as directly pointing out the day (for so it was never intended) but as persuading us to such a proportion (one day in seven) of his own appointment. And therefore we reject all his lame consequences, That unless we will cast this absurdity upon God, we must cast off the fourth Commandment, at least the reason of it must be rejected, etc. These are his own coined suppositions, our conclusions are nothing akin to these wild inferences, as any man may see that has but half an eye in this controversy. As for those popular passages up and down his book, That if the day be changed more than a tittle of the Law is abrogated; I look upon them as words ' of course (which in a Controversy weigh no more than a feather) yea, as beggarly fallacies, for they all along beg the question, taking that for granted, which hath been sound whipped with a denial by sundry learned pens, viz. that the seventh day from the Creation was ever an express tittle of the Commandment; a seventh day in a week indeed is more than a tittle of the Law, and this number is still continued in the observation of the Lords day all the Christian world over: And I doubt not but it shall continue to the end of the world, although the old day be changed; as in the celebration of the Passeover the precise order of time was sometimes altered; for whereas the fourteenth day of the first month was the time appointed at first, 
Exod. 12.18.  yet Hezekiahs' great  was kept on the fourteenth day of the second month. 
2 Chron. 30.5.  Where you see the precise individual day altered upon occasion; yet the number (the fourteenth day) still observed. 
See this illustration further cleared by Mr. G. Abbot. p. 37. and Mr. Walker. p. 49.  So upon a greater and better occasion the Sabbath is altered (as to the day) yet the seventh day in number still kept entire in this, as the fourteenth in the other. And so the Sabbath now as well as the Passeover then, for substance preserved; notwithstanding the circumstantial and occasional change of the day. And thus through the conduct of my gracious Guide leading me by Scripture light, and the footsteps of my dear companions in the cause of Christ, I have safely passed the pikes of opposition, and vindicated this royal law from the false glosses and erroneous discants of the adversary, carrying this conclusion all along before me as a truth triumphing over all contradiction, That the old seventh day was never propounded as the substance or special subject of any moral law. I shall but touch upon the second.  
2. That it seems to be pointed at as a sign under the ceremonial law, yea it does more than seem so, if the text be impartially viewed, Exod. 31. from v. 13. to v. 18. where we find a special charge imposed upon the Jews to observe the Sabbath, and that upon sundry considerations.  
1. From the end of it. Verily my Sabbath ye shall keep for it a sign between me and you, 
V 13.  throughout your generations to know that I am Jehovah that sanctifieth you, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  for so the words run in the Hebrew. And this is farther explicated. v. 
V 14.  14. ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore, for it is holy, or holiness to you; thereby expounding what was meant by his sanctifying of them in the verse before: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  As if the Lord had said, the keeping of my Sabbaths shall be a distinctive badge and cognisance of your Covenant-holiness, 
Sabbathum est signum quod Deus Israclem sanctificat, ut Sabbathum sanctifionvit, scil. segregando eosex Gentibns profanls in peculiarem sibi popnlum. Lavat in Exek. Hom. 26.  a sign that I do sanctify you and separate you to myself above all the people of the earth, for an holy and peculiar people: for as the Lord is said to sanctify the Sabbath, so also to sanctify Israel; that is, by separating it from all other days, and them from all other nations to be holiness to himself. And this is the first special reason why they should keep the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a sign or mark of distinction to difference them from the rest of the profane world.  
2. From the peril of profaning it. v. 14.15. Every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death, for whosoever doth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from amongst his people, etc. A law shortly after executed in the letter of it, by stoning to death one that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day; 
Numb. 15.36.  which rigour (for aught I can find to the contrary) lasted no longer than the Israelites peregrination in the wilderness, where (as one says) an extraordinary strict rest was imposed upon them, because they were extraordinarily accommodated for it. Being (as the Saints in heaven are) immediately at Gods finding, having Mannah without means daily provided for them; and hence it is said, Numb. 15.32. While the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day, and stoned him to death: Note the Phrase, while they wore in the wilderness, not elsewhere; for when they were out of the wilderness we never read of the like punishment inflicted. It seems then that this strict kind of rest and rigour was restrained to that time and place only.  
3. Another argument to enforce their observation of the Sabbath, is taken, from the moral equity of it, verse 15. Six days may work be done, but the seventhis the Sabbath: As if the Lord had said, ye may well afford me one day in seven, since I have given you six in seven. And this again is reinforced by God's example in the latter part of v. 17. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the seventh day, Now it concerns us to inquire in this context what was proper to the Jews, and what common with them to us? What is moral and perpetual, what judicial or ceremonial and temporary? For that morals and judicials are here mingled together none can deny; and the difficulty will be, how to sever the one from the other, and to show in what sense the Sabbath was made a sign; what the significancy of it was; and especially what kind of sign, whether a permanent sign, as the Rain bow, or a transient sign, as the cloudly pillar in the wilderness. There are sundry sorts of signs spoken of in Scripture, I shall only instance in those that are of prime note, and pertinency to resolve the case in hand.  
1. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Josh. 4.6, 7. So also the Passeover was and the Lords supper is a sign being both memorative Exod. 12.26. Mat. 26.26. 1 Cor. 11.24.  There are remembrancing signs, as the twelve stones taken out of Jordan (for every tribe one) were set up as a sign to after-ages, for a memorial to the childen of Israel that the waters of Jordan were cut off before the ark. And such a kind of sign, it is commonly thought the Sabbath was a memorial of the Creation. But that it is so propounded or intended here, cannot easily be proved, since the Lord does not say, I have given you my Sabbaths as a sign that I created the world, but for a sign that I the Lord do sanctify you. And although it be added, v. 17. It is a sign betwixt me and the Children of Israel for ever; 
Ainach majoris distinctionis & pausae est accentus. Buxtorf. Thes. Gram.  for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth etc. Yet it is not said, it shall be a sign, that in six days the Lord made heaven and earth. For there is a notable pause in the middle, which divides the sentence and the sense also. The seventeenth verse contains two distinct arguments, or reasons why they should keep the Sabbath.  
1. Because it was a sign. 2. Because it was set apart upon the occasion of God's work and rest in the beginning.  
2. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Joh. 2.3. 1 Joh. 3.18.  There are indicating or evidencing signs; such are the Characters of saving grace. But neither can this be the sense of the word sign in this place. It is a sign that I the Lord do sanctify you: What savingly? why then all were Israel that were of Israel, for the Sabbath was given to all; neither was it so much their keeping the Sabbath as Gods giving them a Sabbath to keep which is here made a sign: Witness Ezekiel, Moses his interpreter. I have given them my Sabbath for a sign, 
Ezek. 20.13.  to know that I the Lord do sanctify them. Therefore  
3. There are distinguishing, or differencing signs, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  such as do visibly mark out a people for God's peculiar, select and sanctified ones, above all other people of the earth. And in this sense the Sabbath is here given the Jews as a sign, a sign of his sanctifying them, that is in one word (as Calvin speaks) a sign of his segregating and singling them out from the rest of the nations, as his peculiar people. 
Siquis un● verbo reddere vellet sanctificare est segregare. Cal. Praelec. in Ezek. 20. Ita Simler. in Exo: Levit. 21.8. ch. 2.32.  So also Simlerus, and to the same effect is that of Lavater aforementioned. The Sabbath was a sign of Gods sanctifying them, as the Sabbath itself was sanctified; that is separated from other common days, and set a part for holy ends and uses. And so the Word sanctify is usually, if not only taken in Scripture, when it is applied to the whole bulk, or body of a people (as here it is:) Well, the Sabbath was given to the people of Israel as a sign of Gods sanctifying them; but how long, throughout their generations. That is, during the Oeconomy of the Law, as long as the people of Israel should be the only peculiar people of God. 
Exod. 12.14.  The very same Phrase is used concerning the Passeover, ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations by an ordinance or ever; which clearly speaks it a temporary ordinance. But  
Secondly, We must distinguish of Sabbaths as well as of signs; very briefly, the Word Sabbath signifies one of these three things; either 

1. The moral duty; holy rest, or  
2. The penal rigour of that rest, or  
3. The precise day of rest, Now    
1. It cannot be meant of the moral duty simply considered, since that extends beyond their generations, for there remaineth a rest, 
Heb. 4.9, 10.  or keeping of a Sabbath, to the people of God still: neither  
2. Can itwell be understood of that penal rigour, resting from all work upon pain of corporal death; for this in all likelihood lasted not out half their generations, being calculated chief for their wilderness estate as was saidbefore. Therefore  
3. It must be the precise day of rest (the old seventh-day-Sabbath) or nothing, which is here set as a sign throughout their generations; and this I take to be the true intent of the Holy-Ghost both here and Ezek. 20. The case seems clearly to me to be stated in this wise: The old seventh day was at first given to Adam and his posterity as the only true Sabbath during the pre-eminency of the Creation, and Christ in the promise; and that it was conscientiously kept by the holy Patriarches for some ages after I doubt not (though some of the Ancients seem to deny it) but to be sure, in tract of time the sinful race of Adam, forsaking the true God, did also forget the true Sabbath. Now when it pleased God out of that degenerate lump of mankind to form Israel, or the seed of Abraham a peculiar people to himself, he gave them his old Sabbath again in a new Edition. That (among other ends) it might be a visible sign to distinguish them from the rest of the world. Other nations, no doubt, had their Sabbaths as well as their gods; but as Israel must serve the only true God, so they must also observe the (then) only true Sabbath: 
Ezod. 31.13.  So much is employed in the text, Verily my Sabbath ye shall keep, saith the Lord. The Word my is Emphatical, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  it points at the precise day of God's appointment, the seventh and last day of the week; therefore this, and mainly this was made a sign of Gods sanctifying the Jews throughout their generations; which being so, how evidently doth it follow, that the day was designed for change, and that now it is certainly changed by the will and appointment of God? For if the Jews generation be extinct, and they that were once the people of God, have now a Lo-ammi written upon them, 
Ho. 11.20. 1 Thes. 2.15, 16.  Ye are none of my people, how shall that day any longer stand as a Sabbath, which was given them as a sign of their being the peculiar people of God, and that for a season only till their generations were expired. 
Maledic domine Nazarais. Lord curse the Christians, is one of their daily imprecations, vid Trapp. in Hosea.  Either let the adversay say, the blaspheming Jews (who power out daily curses instead of prayers) are still the Covenant-people of God, in so much as still they retain that Saturday-Sabbath, (And then he shall speak like a true Jew indeed) or let him confess, their saturday-Sabbath (which was once the crown of their glory) is now no better than the badge of their blasphemy, whereby they would make the world believe, that they are still the sanctified people of God, though they trample underfoot the blood of his Son whereby they should be sanctified. I speak not this, as insulting over the misery of the Jews, but as lamenting the sin of apostate Christians, who take up that day as a badge of their Saintship, which the infidel Jews wear as a badge of their blasphemy and enmity against Christ and Christians. Indeed it was once an illustrious sign of their sanctification; but it was limited to their generations, as the Passeover was, and therefore if the one be expired, so is the other upon the same account. And in this respect I dare boldly affirm, and I doubt not to maintain it, that it is every whit as lawful for a Christian to celebrate that old Sacrament, the Passeover, as to observe the old Sabbath. For the one was as well a sign as the other, and the one was ordained for a season as well as the other. There are a few feeble objections to face this argument, but the bare repetion (with the premises) will be sufficient refutation of them  
1. The seventh day being a sign, makes it not a ceremony; 
T.T. Obj. 1. p. 18.  for Christ was a sign, Isai. 7.14. Luk. 2.34. the Saints are set for signs, Isai. 8.18. So is the holy Spirit, 1 Joh. 4.13. yea, for the same sign as the Sabbath is, etc.  
He might have added that circumcision, Answ. 
Exod. 13.9. Rom. 4.11.  and the Pass over also were signs; but then he had spoiled his argument; for it is certain, that both these were ceremonial, yet doubtlesss it had been more proper and pertinent to have compared the old Sabbath with other old Ordinances then to have thus equalised it with Christ and his blessed spirit. But to answer his instances, Christ was propounded as a sign of Confirmation, Isai. 7. as a sign of Contradiction, or a sign to be spoken against, Luke 2. The Saints were set for signs of Wonder, Isai. 8. The holy spirit for a Witness, and not properly a sign; now what cognation and alliance is there betwixt these and the old Sabbath? which (as to the day) was a distinguishing sign, and that for a season only; therefore temporary, I will not say ceremonial.  
The Sabbath is set for a sign of things past (as the world's Creation) not of good things to come, Obj. 2 as the ceremonial Sabbaths.  
So also are the annual Sabbaths, Answ. 
Deut. 16.1. etc.  Passeover and Pentecost, ordained in memorial of things past, as their deliverance from Egypt, and the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai; yet both are abolished, although I grant the Sabbath was never abolished. or abrogated as to the substance of it; only altered in respect of the circumstance.  
If the morality of the Sabbath cease by being a sign, Obj. 3 upon the same account must the whole law cease to be moral, since God's spirit hath set it also for such a sign, Deut. 8.6. Thou shalt bind it as a sign upon thine hand. But  
This is frivolous, for every child can distinguish between the book and the binding of it. Answ. 
Numb. 15.38, 39, 40.  The law itself was not a sign, but the binding it on their hands, and that for a remembrancing sign only, the proper use of their fringes and Phylacteries. By the way (if I mistake not) here is a plain contradiction: for a little before he had argued, that the Sabbath was such a sign as the holy spirit is, and now he makes it such a sign as the wearing of the law upon their hands was: If one of these be true, the other must needs be false; for the one is internal, the other was external and visible only. And this is the Goliahs' sward he talks of, wherewith  
He fights with his own fancy; Answ. 2 for who of sound judgement ever affirmed that the morality of the Sabbath must cease as a sign? still he runs upon his ol mistake, that the old seventh day was the morality of the Sabbath, which we have constantly denied and disproved.  
The term, seventh day, is not set for a sign, but the term, Obj. 4 
p. 19  Sabbath.  
The Word Sabbath is very often, Answ. 
Levit. 19.3. Isai. 1.13. Lam. 1.7. Mat. 12.5.11. Mark 1.21. Luk. 4.31. Acts 13.14. Chap. 17.2.  (though not always) put for the old seventh day especially when it is used in the plural number as here it is. Therefore I conclude, as before, that the day and not the duty is he set for a temporary sign, the duty no otherwise then as it is peculiarly related to the day. 'tis not a Sabbath in general, much less the Commandment concerning a weekly Sabbath, but the old Sabbath then in use which was given the Jews as a sign, and so designed for change; for change, I mean in respect of the time, not of the thing; according to that of Augustine, who writing against Faustus the Manichee (who sought to overthrow the faith of Christians, by maintaining that Moses and Christ were opposite in their Doctrines, alleging among other things, that there was one tradition of Moses, another of Christ concerning the Sabbath) answers him thus: Their doctrine was not divers, 
Non diversa doctrina, sed diversum tempus. August. contra Faust. Man lib. 16. cap. 28.  only the time or day was different; intimating, that Moses and Christ were both for a weekly Sabbath, but Moses for the last, Christ for the first day of the week. And thus we have made good the second Position,  
That the old Sabbath being made alterable in the first Institution, was further manifested to be alterable in the second Edition of the Sabbath. A few words shall suffice for the third.   

POSITION III. That the Old Sabbath was yet further evidenced to be alterable and changeable in the after Observation of it.  
FOr proof whereof, I shall only cite the practice of our blessed Saviour, in which the Adversary glories most, as if it made only for him. 'tis his ground argument for the perpetuity of the old seventh day, that Christ did most of his cures and famous miracles on that day. Now learned Chemnitius takes the same argument, and turns the edge of it against him thus: 
De abrogatione Sabbathi Mosaici & dictis docuit Christus & libertatem factis sapivo testatam fecit cum Sabbathis sanaret, etc. Chemn. Examen. Concil. Trident. cap. de Festis ubiplura.  The Lord Jesus both by word and deed hath taught us, that the Mosaical Sabbath was to be abrogated, not only in that he proclaimed himself Lord of the Sabbath, but in that he often witnessed his liberty, and power over it by sundry of his cures performed on that day. Some instance in the cure of the man born blind, John 9.6, 7, 14. Others in the miraculous cure of that cripple or impotent man, John 5 whereas Dr. Lightfoot learnedly observes, there was the most apparent sign towards the shaking, and alteration of the Sabbath (as to the day) that we meet withal in the New Testament till the alteration itself came. To this purpose let the context be duly considered, and we shall find two things observable in it.  
1. What our Saviour did on the Sabbath day, he healed a long languishing malady, a disease of 38. years standing.  
2, What he said upon this occasion: and that  
1. To the man his patiented.  
2. To the Jews his persecutors, who call him in question about it. To the man he said, Take up thy bed and walk. Now the question is, why our Lord should enjoin this man to carry his bed on the Sabbath day, the express letter of the law prohibiting the bearing of any burdens on that day? T. T. Supposes that it was either for the confirmation of the miracle to show the perfectness of the cure, 
Jerem. 17.21. p. 21.  or for the publication of God's glory; but it is answered, that both these might have been done as well by his walking upon his feet and leaping, as in the like case we read elsewhere; or at least by bearing his bed the next day. 
Act. 3.8. so ch. 14, 10.  There was therefore certainly more in this Command then what did barely refer, either to the confirmation of the miracle or the publication of God's glory, in that sense supposed; and what it was the above mentioned Author does thus resolve us, namely that it was. 
See Dr. Lightf. Harm. of the 4 Evang. p. 3. in John 5.   
Partly in respect of the man.  
Partly in respect of the day.  
In respect of the man, it was to try his faith and obedience, whether upon the bare word of Christ he would venture upon so hazardous an action.  
In respect of the day, it was to show Christ's power and authority over the old Sabbath, that as elsewhere in restoring the man sick of the Palsy, he not only showed his power over the disease in healing it, but also over sin in forgiving it. So it pleased him here at one and the same time to show his Divine power over the distemper in curing it, and his sovereignty over the Sabbath in dispensing with it and disposing of it as he thought good. 'Tis objected against this by T. T. (whose usual trick it is to clamour where he cannot answer) That in argueing thus we join with the blasphemous Pharisees in charging our Saviour as a Sabbath-breakere. Obj  
But we easily clear opur blessed Saviour, and quit ourselves of this false and injurious charge, affirming, That our Lord could be no more taxed for Sabbath breaking in requiring this man to bear his bed on the Sabbath-day, than God himself in Commanding Joshuah to march about Jericho seven times on the same day. He did not hereby transgress the Law, but shown his sovereignty over the day; which will the better appear if we consider.  
What he says to the Jews in answer to their cavils about it.  
In the sequel of the Chapter; where all along we may observe, how he justifies his act by asserting his power; He tells tehm verse 17 that he had the same authority over the Sabbath that the father had, The Father worketh hitherto and I work. This answer refers chiefly to that part of the objection which lay against his healing on the Sabbath day: and it is continued to verse 20. Then he answers more directly to that other part of their accusation, his supposed violation of the Sabbath, in giving the man a dispensation to carry his bed, verse 20 The father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doth; yea he will show him greater things than these that ye may mervel. Greater works then these; why, (as the forementioned Author speaks) they were great things that our Saviour had now done, in curing a desperate disease and dispensing with the Sabbath, but he must do yet greater Works than these, 
v. 16.  namely raise the dead, and change the Sabbath, that Jewish Spirits might mervel. The Jews persecuted him because he had done these things on the Sabbath day, that is, healed the man, and commanded him to carry his bed. 
So the word judgement is used Psalms 9.11. Psalm 94.15. Isai 28.6. Jerem. 33.15. John 8.16.  Now in answer to these two particulars, he tells them, that the Father would show him greater works than these, for verse 21. As the Father raiseth the dead, so the Son; And verse 22. The father judgeth no man, but hath committed all Judgement to the Son that is government, or Legislative power about the affairs of men, and in particular about the disposal of the Sabbath, which was now under dispute. They carped and cavilled at his present carriage towards the Sabbath; He tells them, that he had authority to do what he did, yea and more than that came to, for all judgement was committed into his hands, to do some greater things then barely to dispense with the Sabbath, and something at which the Jews should marvel; and for which all should honour the Son as they honour the Father; Verse 23 That as the Father was honoured in giving the Law, so should the Son be honoured in giving the Gospel; and as the Father was honoured in appointing the old Sabbath, so should the Son in ordaining a new Sabbath, not in confirming the old (as T. T. would have it;) for so the Son is not honoured even as the Father was honoured. 
pa. 145.  For the Father was honoured as the institutor of a Sabbath, therefore so, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, even so must the Son be honoured. The argument is very ponderous, if we consider the scope of our Saviour's oration, which was to justify what he had done on the Sabbath-day. To this purpose he pleads his designment to do greater things than these, and some greater thing in reference to command and disposal over the Sabbath; which was the thing in question. And this plea he proves by his power to raise the dead, and to dispose of all things in a way of judicature or government under the new Testament, as the Father had done under the Old; and to this intent, that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father; which being spoken with reference to the Sabbath, and to his present dispensing with it, doth plainly speak his intention to alter and change it.  
Again, here is one thing more observable, namely, that Christ's power to raise the dead, and his power to dispose of the Sabbath, are carried along both together in this discourse. And the one is made an argument of the other; plainly intimating the change of the day upon the resurrection, upon his own resurrection in the first place, which is hinted at (verse 26.) and others with himself at his resurrection; according to that ancient prophecy, Thy dead men shall live, 
Isai. 26.19. Mat. 27.52, 53.  together with my dead body shall they arise; which was fulfilled when our Saviour risen from the dead.  
So that all things considered, here is a most pregnant Scripture to prove that it was our Redeemers purpose to alter the Sabbath: And therefore (as in Preface to such a thing) he both gives the man a commission to carry his bed on that day, and pleads for what he had done by his divine authority, as beginning to shake the day, which within two years after was to be unhinged and actually changed for another; at least it speaks his power to alter it. And he that shall dare deny this, must make Christ Jesus the Lord inferior to David the servant; for even David had power to alter a circumstance in the Law of Moses; 
1 Chron. 23.24, 25, 26.  ordaining that the Levites should officiate at twenty years old, 
Numb. 4.3. Numb. 8.24.  when as Moses had appointed that they should not officiate till 25. or 30. yet when the reason of the Mosaical ordinance ceased, and the Ark had rest, you see David changes that order. And if David, who was but a mere man (though a King and a Prophet) might alter a circumstance about the Priesthood; 
Isai. 9.6. Revel. 15.3. Mat. 28.18.  how much more might the Lord Jesus, (who is the mighty God, King of Saints, and King of Nations, having all power in heaven and earth put into his hands) altar a circumstance concerning the Sabbath, by translating it from the last to the first day of the week?  
Well, if he had power to alter it, than it was alterable; which was the thing to be proved. If it be said, the question is not, what the Lord could do, but what he did; whether he did indeed alter the Sabbath as to the day: I answer, we shall put this question out of question in the next Position.   

POSITION IU. That the Old Sabbath was actually altered and changed from the last to the first day of the week, by the authority of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; and that upon the noble account of our Redemption, manifestly accomplished by his most glorious resurrection from the dead on that day.  
FOR the Confirmation whereof, I shall, First, propound some Scripture-Arguments; Secondly, Produce some Authentic Records of antiquity: both which we shall find harmoniously concurring in all the three branches of this Position.  
First, That the day is certainly changed.  
Secondly, That this change was occasioned by our Saviour's most glorious Resurrection.  
Thirdly, That this was done by the Sovereign authority of Christ himself, either immediately in his own person, or mediately by the prescript and practice of his inspired Apostles; either or which will be sufficient.  
We shall begin with Scripture-proof and argument; in way of Preface whereunto let it be premised, that this truth is not Syllabically, and totidem verbis, in so many words at length set down in Scripture; neither needs it, considering, the question in not about the change of the septenary number (one day in seven) but the order only (the last for the first of seven:) and besides, it is not the Lords method and manner of speaking in many other New Testament-cases (as Church-Government, Family-worship, and sundry others) which were plain enough in the Old Testament) to express himself in full sentences, but very briefly, in short hints and touches, here a little, and there a little, to exercise the ingenuity of believers, not to satisfy the curiosity of Cavillers. The Scriptures were no more designed to answer all the cavilling questions of wanton wits, than the Sun was made for them to see that shut their eyes: yet I deny not the sufficiency of Scripture-light to make us wise unto salvation; only we must not presume to give laws to Heaven, and teach the Lord how to speak: But 
a Hebr. 12.25.  see that ye refuse not him that speaketh from heaven; that speaketh, I say, not only by express word, but by his 
b V 24.  blood, or death, and so also by his 
c Joh. 2.19, 21. Rom. 1.3, 4.  resurrection from the dead, by the 
d John 15.26.  mission of his Spirit, by the unction and inspiration of his Apostles, whose writings are his words, their counsels his commands, their pattern and practise his 
e 1 Cor. 14.37.  precept; 
f Luke 10.16.  for he that heareth them heareth him; therefore let him that hath an ear hear the voice of Christ, yea, though he open his mouth in a parable to carnal reason, 
g Psalm 78.1. Mat. 13.9, 35.  as it seems he does even in some of his Gospel-law: yea, let us hear Christ speaking by his Spirit (I mean the spirit of Prophecy breathing in the Old Testament) for 
h Rev. 19.10.  the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of Prophecy; nay, let us learn to spell his word out of his works, for his 
i John 5 36. ch. 10. 25.  works do testify of him. In a word, consider it is 
k Luke 11.49.  Wisdom itself that uttereth her voice in the written word; and she useth to speak [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] much in a little; yea, to speak by 
l Mat. 22.32. Acts 14.47.  arguments couched in Scripture, as well as express affirmations; and what those Scripture-arguments are which speak the change of the Sabbath (as here stated) we come now to show.  
The first may be taken from the new Creation, Arg. 1 or reparation of the world by Christ: as thus, 
Incongruum erat veteris Creationis Sabbathum novae Creatimi. Ligh●f. Horae Hebr. p. 321. ubi plura.  The new Creation must have a new Sabbath, or set-day of Commemoration: now this new Creation came in by Christ's resurrection: Therefore a new Sabbath. The form of this argument, I grant is not found in Scripture, but the force of it is; as shall be seen in the proof of each proposition.  
1. That the new Creation must have a Sabbath of Commemoration. This may not only be gathered from parity of reason, but plain Scripture prophecy: I might recite that forementioned famous Text in Isai. ch. 65. 17. Behold I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former shall no more be remembered, i. e. in respect of solemnity (for otherwise remember the work of Creation we do and must) but not as the greater work; for look as the Jews 
m Isai. 43.18, 19 Jer. 16.15, 16. & ch. 23. 7, 8.  deliverance out of Egypt was subordinated by their after-deliverance out of Babylon, so is the work of Creation by that of Redemption, whereby the world (at least the Church) was put into a new frame and form; 
Anno Mundi changed for Anno Domini.  upon the account whereof as the year of the world was worthily changed for the year of our Lord, so was the old Sabbath for the Lords day. But that which I would further argue from Isai. 65. is this: The old Sabbath cannot stand with the new Creation, therefore it must have a new, or none: 
This was touched before Posit. 1.  that there should be none at all, none but old Anabaptists, Familists and Atheists will affirm. And that the old cannot stand is evident, because the foundation on which it stood (the memory and celebrity of the world's Creation) is swallowed up by the glory of a greater work; 
Sicuti Sol exoriens stellis eripit suum fulgorem. Calv. in Loc.  and we cannot possibly retain that old seventh day, but we must memorise our Creation above our Redemption, our being above our well-being; which were expressly to contradict this ancient promise and Prophecy.  
If it be objected, that this Scripture is not yet fulfilled, because the Apostle says, 
2 Pet. 3.12.  we look for new heavens and a new earth, viz. at the end of the world:  
I answer; Although it shall then receive a further accomplishment in the latter, yet inchoatively and sufficiently (as to the thing in question) it was fulfilled long ago, even before the name [Jew] was laid aside, and the name [Christian] take up; 
Isai. 65.15. So ch. 62. 2.  for let the context be minded, vers. 15. the Prophet foretells the rejection of the Jews, and the change of their name for the Christian name; Ye shall leave your name for a curse to my people, 
Ac si Dominus diceret, non amplius nomen Judaerum celebrabitur, amittetis regnum & Sacrdotium, & celebrabitur nomen Christianorum. Luther.  for the Lord God will slay thee, and call his servants by another name; and then v. 17. he intimates the coming in of this new name as a consequent of the new Creation; For behold I make new heavens, etc. So that these new heavens must be created before the Disciples were called Christians, Acts 11.26. and so far accomplished then as to outshine the first Creation, the supereminency whereof was the foundation on which theold seventh day stood, I may therefore safely conclude, The old Sabbath cannot possibly stand with the new Creation, unless some new device can be found out to make an old house stand without a foundation.  
But yet further; that the work of the new Creation must necessarily draw after it a new Sabbath, will more evidently appear if we look to the next Chapter, 
Isai. 66. opened  where this Evangelical prophet seems rather to write an history than a prophecy of the new world under the Messiah; describing it  
1. By its new inhabitants, or Church-members, namely the 
n Verse 12.18, 19, 20.  Gentiles.  
2. By its new Church-officers, under those old titles of 
o V 21.  Priests and Levites; I will also take of them (meaning the converted Gentiles) for Priests and for Levites, saith the Lord.  
3. By its new seasons of solemn worship, under those old terms of new Moons and Sabbaths; Verse. 23 It shall come to pass that from one new Moon to another, 
New Moons and Sabbaths by a figurative kind of phrase (two words used to express one and the same thing) are here put for the ordinary stated seasons of solemn worship in general. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2 Kings 4.23. Ezek. 46.1.  or from month to month (as in the Hebrew) and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come and worship before me, saith the Lord; that is, all sorts of men, without exception, exemption or exclusion of any. Now let us see what may be argued from this Scripture: that the Prophet here points at Gospel-times is plain enough, yea, the whole succession of Gospel-times: for the things here prophesied of are such as run parallel with the Church state of the Gentiles, and the constituting of a public Ministry chosen from among them. Again, that new things are here intended by these old names, is without dispute; a Gospel-ministry by Priests and Levites, (distinct from the Levitical priesthood) and why not by Sabbaths and new Moons, select seasons of worship under the Gospel, distinct from those under the Law? For that it cannot be meant of the old Sabbath, and Old Testament-times of worship, may be thus demonstrated: That interpretation which would render the Prophet Isaiah a false Prophet cannot be true; But to interpret this prophecy (from month to month, and from Sabbath to Sabbath all flesh shall come and worship before the Lord) of the Jews Saturday-Sabbath, would render the Prophet Isaiah a false Prophet, since the experience of these sixteen hundred years can testify, that no flesh at all, (or none to speak of) have owned that day as a day of solemn worship, but expound it of the Christian Sabbath, and so it holds true to a tittle; for the first day of the week has been owned and observed by all Churches, in all ages, ever since the Sun of righteousness arose on that day: and thus what the Lord foretold by his Prophet he has fulfilled by his Providence, and this spirit of Prophecy proves the testimony of Jesus. And so (I suppose) we have found even Old Testament-proof of a New Testament-Sabbath; or (which comes all to one) the ordinary stated season of solemn worship under the Gospel distinct from that under the Law; and all this in close connexion with the new Creation: for verse 22. it is said, As the new heavens and new earth which I will make shall remain before me, so shall your name and your seed remain; and then presently it follows, from month to month, and Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come and worship before me, saith the Lord. Thus the Major or first Proposition is made good, that the new Creation must have a new Sabbath.  
2. Now for the second, That Christ by his resurrection brought in the new Creation, we may appeal to that of the Apostle, Hebr. 9.26. where our Saviour's death and suffering is stated upon the end of the world; and if the old world ended with his death, the new must needs come in with his resurrection from the dead, whereby he brought in a new generation, (the outcasts of the Gentiles) and so a new creation of the same kind mentioned in 
a Isal. 41.19, 20 Ephes. 2.10, 11  Isaiah; That the income of the Gentiles was to take its rise from our Lord's resurrection, is not obscurely signified by himself, in that 
b Mat. 12.39.40  sign which he gave the Jews, the sign of the Prophet Ionas (who was the Prophet of the Gentiles; 
Fatentur ipsi Judaei regnum Messiae inchoandum à resurrectionemortuorum & renovatione mundi. Lightf. Hor. Hebr. ) hereby he did not only point at his own resurrection (as one observes) but also secretly gall the Jews with an intimation of the calling of the Gentiles, (upon his resurrection) as the Ninivites were called upon Jonahs' resurrection from the grave of the Whalesbelly. And thus some expound that place, Thy 
c Isal. 26.19.  dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise, as referring not only to the corporal resurrection of 
d Mat. 27.53.  those that came out of their graves at Christ's resurrection, but also to the calling and quickening of the poor dead Gentiles, who are said to be 
e Ephes. 2.5, 6.  quickened together with Christ, and raised up together with him. Again, that the new creation (both as to persons and things) follows upon Christ's resurrection, may be gathered from that 
f 2 Cor. 5.17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  known Text of Scripture; If any man be in Christ, he is a new Creation (as in the Greek) old things are passed away, behold all things are become new; The Apostle seems to argue from things to persons; 
* A new name. Acts 11 26. A new Jerusalem Rev. 3.12.2 new song, Isal. 42.10 a new Testament, Heb. 8.13 all things new, Rev. 21.5 See Dr. Gouge Progress of providence p. 9  All things in Christ are become new, a new Jerusalem, (a new Church) a new Covenant, new Ordinances, new Heavens and a new earth; therefore all his followers must be new creatures; and this he infers from verse 15 inasmuch as Christ died for us and risen again: and we may place the accent upon his rising again, as in another case the Apostle does, 
g Rom. 8.34.  It is Christ that died, yea rather that is risen again. There is a [rather] put upon the resurrection of Christ, in comparison of his death and passion, so there, in point of justification; and so it may be here in respect of this new creation. As to persons it is plain, for how is any man a new creature but by being in Christ? And how are we in Christ but by 
h Gal. 2.20.  faith? And what is the object of this faith? Let the same Apostle resolve us; 
l Rom. 10.9. ch. 4 24. See DeTwiss p. 97. S. 5.  If thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Josus, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead. And so the Argument will hold good back again from persons to things, still the resurrection of Christ carries the main stroke in the work of the new creation, which inevitably antiquates the old, and introduces a new Sabbath.  
Against this 'tis faintly objected, 
T. T. Obj. p. 134.  True, all old sins are passed away, and all old Ordinances, curses and Covenants; but the old Sabbath still remains.  
He has fairly granted what he would have denied, Answ. and wounded his cause in seeking to heal it: For, if all old ordinances be done away (as he yields from 2 Cor. 5.17.) let him show where the old Sabbath is exempted, that being also an old ordinance by his own confession.  
For a conclusion of this argument, I shall refer the learned Reader to that little (but pithy) Tractate of Athanasius, concerning the Sabbath and circumcision; where he may find the same thing argued in the same form as here; for alleging the Scriptures speaking of a double world, or a twofold Creation, the first ending at our Saviour's passion (when the Sun without any eclipse went out of itself,) the second beginning with his resurrection, he reasons thus about it; As the old Sabbath was appointed to be kept in memory of the first Creation, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  so do we celebrate the Lords day as a monument of the second reparation; 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  concerning which Paul speaks, If any man be in Christ he is a new Creation; indeed case long as the first Creation was in force (says he) the Sabbath was observed, 
c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  but a new generation succeeding (according to that of the psalmist, this shall be written for the generation to come) it was now no longer necessary that this new people should observe the end of the first Creation, but rather the beginning of the second, he means the Lords day: and what opinion he had of the Divine Authority of this day, appears by that which follows; 
d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  For this cause Christ having repaired the Creation made in six days, instituted or set apart that day to this reparation (that is, to the memory and solemnity of it) concerning which the Holy-Ghost forespoke in the Psalm, This is the day which the Lord hath made. Thus good old Athanasius; whose word (I suppose) will be of some weight with such as have but read his Creed.  
And thus the first Argument concludes, having both the seal of Scripture-Authority, and the stamp of venerable antiquity upon it, to warrant it for sound and good. We proceed now to a second:  
From the new Covenant it may be form thus; Argum 2 The old Covenant in the special (at least) in all the symbolical and shadowy branches of it, was changed by Christ when the new Covenant was fully exhibited: But the old Sabbath (in respect of the day) was a special, yea a symbolical and shadowy branch of the old Covenant: Therefore it was unquestionably altered and changed by Christ, when the new Covenant was fully exhibited, viz. at his resurrection from the dead.  
This Argument (how new soever it may seem at first) upon trial will be found true (I doubt not) in every material term and tittle of it; for that our blessed Lord Jesus has changed the old Covenant (I mean the Covenant of grace, as to the 
a Rom. 7.6. ● Cor. 3.6.  oldness of the letter and manner of dispensing it) and that by erecting and exhibiting a new and a better Covenant, is plainly avouched in the New Testament, 
b Hebr. 8.13.  in that he saith a new Covenant, he hath antiquated, or made the first old, etc. And that the old Sabbath was a special branch, or ordinance appertaining to that antiquated Covenant, may be clearly gathered from the old Testament, not only as it grew at first out of the root of that old promise, Gen. 3.15. but in that afterwards it symbolised with that old Covenant by the accession of a 
c Deut. 5.15.  type, and so visibly participated of the nature of it, that it had the very 
d Exod. 31.16.  name [Covenant] imparted to it, and that in a 
e Gen. 17.13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So in both places.  like notion with circumcision; For thus says the Lord, the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath for a perpetual Covenant throughout their generations; perpetual as circumcision was; throughout their generations, only in respect of the particular sign and season, throughout all generations, in respect of the general substance and thing, to wit, Sabbath and Sacrament: for so still we have the Sacrament of circumcision in Baptism, and the Sabbath of the old seventh day in the Lord's day. But that which I chief take hold of in Exod. 31. the term [Covenant;] hear the old Sabbath is called by the name of the old Covenant, therefore sure it was near akin to it, a special branch, yea, a shadowy branch of it, as we shall shortly see; and being so, how naturally will it follow, that the Covenant being changed in respect of the form, there must also of necessity be a change of the Sabbath in respect of the time or day, and that by the same Authority? that as the old Covenant had the old seventh day and old Sacrament-seals annexed to it, 
See Widley's Treatise of the Sabb. p. 34.  so the new Covenant might have new seals and a new day; even as in contracts and Covenants renewed betwixt man and man, 'tis required, that as they be new drawn, so also new dated, and new sealed.  
To prevent mistakes (by the way) let this be hinted, that I do not here intent any change of the Covenant in respect of the essence and substance of it; for I grant that when the Holy-Ghost speaks of the new Covenant as distinct from the old, it is not to be understood in respect of the matter and substance, but circumstance, and manner of expressure; as the same Commandment is said to be both 
e 1 John 2.7, 8.  old and new, and the same way to heaven both 
f Hebr. 10.20.  new and 
g Hebr. 13.8. Rev. 13.8.  old; or as the same moon for substance is said to be new or old in respect of accidental changes: only this must be added, that the new Covenant 
h 2 Cor. 3.10.  excels and outshines the old in glory, as far as the Sun at midday outshines the moon at midnight; and consequently it darkens all the ordinances of the old Covenant, yea necessitates a change in them correspondent to the change of the Covenant itself; and accordingly such a change of the Sabbath I do here assert, not in respect of the substance or duty [holy rest] but the circumstance of time, the day upon which that duty was formerly fixed and stated. And that such a change of the Covenant there is, and such a change of the Sabbath by one and the same Christ, 
i Hebr. 12.24.  mediator of the Covenant, and 
k Mark 2.28.  Lord of the Sabbath, and both these occasioned by the exhibition of a new and a better Covenant upon his glorious resurrection from the dead, we come now to demonstrate. To this purpose we shall reflect upon the old Covenant in a threefold Covenant-expressue of it, and show what a visible change Christ has made in it, and how inseparably the change of the Sabbath is interwoven with it.  
1. In the mandatory part of it, I mean the Decalogue, or law of the ten Commandments; that this was a 
l Jep. 31.31.32 Deut. 5.2. ch 29.1. 1 Kings 8, 9.21 2 Chron. 6.11. Psalm 105.11  piece of the old Covenant promulgated upon Mount Sinai I suppose none will question: And that even this has undergone not only mitigation, but some kind of mutation, by our glorious Gospel-law-giver none need to question; only we must state it warily and soberly, not affirming with the blundring Antinomians hand over head, that the law of Moses is outlawed and abrogated without any distinction. This were to coin a lie to confirm the truth of God; for it is certain that those lively 
m Acts 7.38.  Oracles 
n Ex. 20.1.  propounded by God himself upon Mount Sinai, and afterwards expounded by Moses and the Prophets in the Old Testament, by 
o Mat. 5.21. to the end.  Christ and his 
p Rom. 7.12, 14 ch. 13.8, 9, 10. Ephes. 6.1, 2, 3. James 2.8, 9, 10 12. 1 John 2.9, 10  Apostles in the New, are still in force under the Gospel, not only as declarative of the law of nature, but as positively preceptive also in the matter and substance of them, yea as perpetually directive as a rule of life and obedience, both in respect of duties to be performed, and sins to be avoided. As to have the only true God and no other to be our God; to worship this only true God with his own prescribed worship and no other; to use his holy name most reverently and religiously; to sanctify his holy Sabbath; to honour Father and Mother; to avoid Idolatry, Blasphemy, Murder, Adultery, Theft, etc. These are as much duties and sins under the Gospel as ever they were under the Law; and in this sense the Moral law is 
q Rom. 3.31. 1 Cor. 9.21.  established by Christ, and 
r Mat 5.17, 18. Christus finisest legis Rom. 10.4. sed finis persiciens, non intersiciens. August in John tract. 55. Tom. 9  ratified even to a tittle. You will ask me then wherein les the change? I answer, not in the substance, but in some circumstantials peculiar to those times, and appropriate to that people (the Church of the Jews) (for as I hinted before, almost all Scripture had some circumstantial peculiarity and propriety to those times and that people to whom it was immediately given, and so had the Decalogue.) 'Tis true, in the substance and morality of it it was equally calculated both for Jews and Christians, yet some particulars in it, in regard of circumstance either direct or indirect, were proper to the Jews only; as the preface to the first Commandment (I am the Lord which brought thee out of the land of Egypt) which in the letter of it concerns not us; for literally and properly we were never in Egypt, not in bondage there: so also the promise annexed to the fifth commandment, which in the particularity of it belonged to the Jews only, pointing at the land of Canaan. The like may be said for the positive part of the second Commandment touching God's worship (as then) by ceremonial observances; as also the positive part of the fourth Commandment, which occasionally and indirectly prescribed the celebration of the Jews seventh day, and that with this additional circumstance (within thy gates;) all these were adjuncts of the old Covenant, and appropriate to the Jews. Now the new Covenant taking in 
s Isai. 2.3. See Mr. Roberts on the Covenant; and Mr. Abbot against Broad.  Gentiles as well as Jews, must necessarily vary these circumstantials in the moral law, by construing them in a new Covenant-sense, to accommodate it to these new confederates, as thus; by changing their temporal deliverance from Egypt's thraldom, into out spiritual deliverance from the thraldom of sin and Satan; the land of Canaan, into any other part of the earth where the heirs of the promise shall dwell; their legal worship, into our Gospel-worship; their gates, into our jurisdictions; in a word, their seventh day into our seventh day, which (analogically at least) is as much intended by [seventh day] in the fourth Commandment, as England by Canaan in the fifth Commandment.  
If it be demanded, when, and by whom this change was introduced? I answer, by the blessed Mediator of the new Covenant, and that immediately upon his resurrection from the dead; for than he was given both for a 
t Isal. 42.6.  light and a Covenant to the Gentiles; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Mas. 28, 19, 20. Mark 16.15. Luke 24.47. John 20.23.  then was the Church's Charter (formerly confined among the Jews) graciously extended to the Gentiles; than it was that our Lord was pleased to issue forth that high commission (as one calls it) for the discipling of all the Gentiles by Baptism, and so bringing them into Covenant; requiring his Apostles to tender the whole Covenant to them both, in the promises and the precepts of it: and the fore as the Prophet Jonah shortly after his resurrection went to Nineveh, so Jesus Christ after his, to Galilee; where (according to fore-appointment) he gave his disciples a solemn meeting, and laid a solemn charge upon them, to teach the Gentiles to observe whatsoever he had commanded them. Now if the precept of the Sabbath were included among the rest of those commands (as 'tis like it was) it must be in such a sense as would comport with their new Covenant-state; which must needs exclude the old seventh day, since that was a branch of the old Covenant peculiar to the Jews, and urged upon them by such a reason or enforcement as in the letter of it concerned not the Gentiles at all, viz. their deliverance out of Egypt, Deut. 5.15. Mystically indeed it concerned us as well as them (as implying out Redemption by Christ) but in that sense it quite carries away the Sabbath from their old seventh day, in as much as the accomplishment of our Redemption fell upon the first day of the week, viz. by the glorious resurrection of our Saviour; but for which, we had remained still in the Egypt of our 
u 1 Cor. 15.17  sins, as the Apostle witnesseth. And here I cannot but note, how emphatically the truth answers the type; 
w Deut. 5.15. c. 6.21. & 9.26. Exod. 24.8. ch. 15.1, 21.  for look as Israel was redeemed from Egypt with a mighty hand, not as captives, but as conquerors, with the ruin and spoll of their enemies; so were the elect redeemed by Christ, not barely in a way of ransom by the price of his blood, but in a way of rescue and conquest by the hand of his power; as in the day of his triumphant resurrection, concerning which the Prophet seems to speak, 
x Isai. 53.13.  I will divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he hath poured out his soul unto death. Thus in substance there is an admirable similitude betwixt the type and the Antitype: yea, the very circumstance of time is considerable; for upon search into Scripture I believe it will be found, that their deliverance out of Egypt was on the first day of the week, in memorial whereof they kept the feast of unleavened bread 
y Exod. 15.3, 4 5. with  because they came forth with their 
z Exod. 12.6.  unleavened lumps, being thrust out in haste; that it was upon the first day of the week appears from the twelfth chap. where the Passeover is fixed upon the 
a Exod. 12.6.  fourteenth day of the month, than it was first instituted and celebrated: now the fourteenth day of the month must needs be the second Sabbath of the month, even of the month Abib, answering to our March, which was here made the beginning of months, or the first month in the year: From the Creation of the world till now they began their year with the month Tisri or September; 
See Dr. Lightfoots glean on Exod. p. 20.  but here, upon a work greater in figure (as representing our Redemption by Christ about the same time of the year) the beginning of their year is changed to Abib, and the Passeover being killed the fourteenth day at even, the midnight following the first born of Egypt were slain. But yet still Israel is in Egypt, only their longs girt, 
V 11.  and shoones on their feet ready to departed; and see how it follows: The Egyptians being dreadfully alarmed by the death of the firstborn, resolve to be troubled no longer with such fatal Guests, and therefore in a great hurry they pack them away, entreat and importune them to be gone; Pharaoh did not more force them to stay before, then now to departed. But Israel must not go , they must be well paid for their hard service; some time must be spent in borrowing the Egyptians Jewels: by that time they were furnished for their journey, we may suppose it was well towards the morning, and now all the Armies of the Lord march out of Egypt in the 
b Levit. 26.4, 5.  sight of all the Egyptians; this was on the 
c Numb. 33.3.  fifteenth day of the first month, the morrow after the Passeover; and the fourteenth dcay being the Sabbath, this must needs be the first day of the week, which was afterwards kept as a solemn Festival, and called the 
d Levit. 23.6, 7. Numb. 28.17. Deut. 16.3.  feast of unleavened bread, in which they were to have a holy convocation, and to do no work. To this the Apostle plainly alludes, 
e 1 Cor. 5.7, 8.  Christ our Passeover was sacrificed for us, wherefore let us keep the feast: he points at the feast of unleavened bread: Paul was an excellent Critic, he understood these sacred mysteries, he knew Christ's Passion and humiliation was our Passeover, which lasted as long as he lay in the grave, being under the pains 
t Acts 2.24.  or sorrows of death, and the day of his resurrection answering to the first day of unleavened bread (which originally was on the first day of the week;) here upon he concludes, let us keep the feast; I will not say here is a precept for the Christian Sabbath, but drawing aside the veil from Moses face, this I may safely say, here is a proof of it, and a plain argument for it; for Israel's Redemption from Egypt, and our Redemption from death and hell, being both on the first day of the week completed; and the former of these (in the type) being alleged as the reason of the fourth Commandment, with a total omission of the Argument drawn from the creation, Deut. 5.15 and that in the repetition or second promulgation of the Law, seems to speak plainly what I allege it for, that the accomplishment of that type states the Sabbath on the day of Christ's resurrection, which all the four Evangelists tell us as the first day of the week. But  
2. Let us pass on to the promissory part of the Covenant, and see if some change be not made there also, and whether the change of the Sabbath be not necessitated by it. I shall only instancei n that fundamental and complexive promise of Christ, who was indeed the sum and substance of all the rest, for 
f 2 Cor. 1.20.  in him they are all; Yea, and in him, Amen. And therefore we must with 
g Bphes. 2.12. Una fuit promissio, sed saepius sancita Beza. in Loc.  promise in the singular number, when mention is made of Covenants in the plural; to intimate, that all the periods and promises of the old Covenant did concentre and meet together in that grand promise of the Messiah. He was both the 
h Gen. 3.15.  seed of the Woman, the 
i Gen. 22.18.  seed of Abraham, the seed 
k Psalm 122.10, 11, 12.  of David, the seed of Mary, or son of the 
l Isai. 7.14.  Virgin; and to say the truth, all these after-promises were but as so many Commentaries upon that first promise, The seed of the woman shall bruise the Serpent's head. Now as long as Christ was tendered in that old promise, the old Covenant was still in force, 
The old Covenant was a Covenant of promise, the new Covenant is Covenant performance.  and together with it the old Sabbath in we. But the promise being once performed, Christ fully exhibited, and a new Covenant established, the old (as to the expressure of it) was instantly changed, Hebr. 8.13. and together with it the old Sabbath, which had neither birth before, nor being after it (unless for a season, in condescension to the infirmity of the Jews, whose weak eyes could not endure the bright Sun shine of the Gospel all at once:) Now if it be demanded when and where we shall state the accomplishment of that old Covenant, and the establishment of the new: I answer, both upon te resurrection of Jesus Christ, the first day of the week. For,  
First, Then and thereby was the grand Covenant-promise performed: As the Apostle assures us in that forementioned Text; 
m Act. 13.32, 33  We declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made to our fathers, God hath fulfilled the same to us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second Psalmm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Christ in his resurrection was as it were begotten 
n Rev. 1.5.  from the dead, and brought forth of the womb of the earth. And here the very particular day of his resurrection is specified, as the day on which the promise was eminently fulfilled; what promise? Why, the term is comprehensive, and so includes (at least) that original promise of Christ's bruiling the Serpent's head; which being an act of his Kingly Office, not of his Priesthood, was most formally executed in his Resurrection; whereby he triumphed in his own person over sin, death and the Devil, upon the account whereof the Apostle cries 
o 1 Cor. 15.54, 55. Rom. 8.34, 37.  Victory. Some indeed to attribute Christ's victory and conquest to his death upon the Cross, because 'tis said, Colos. 2.15. Having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing ever them in it. Which [it] say they, refers to the Cross, verse 14. but the Text seems to be mistranslated: For according to the 
* Not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In semertpso, so the Siryack, so Yertul. de Trin. Origen ep. ad Rom. co. 5. August. ep 59 Hier. in Co. Theodor. ibid. Promeruit in cruse, sed postca peregit. Zanch. in loc.  Greek it should rather be rendered He spoiled Principalities and powers, and made a show of them, openly triumphing over them in himself. So the Ancients universally read it; and so our worthy translators in the Margin; referring it to Christ himself not to the Cross; for although he merited his victory by his passion on the Cross, yet he did not execute it till his resurrection from the dead, when God brought him forth from the prison of the grave, and 
p Acts 10.39, 40.  shown him openly, though not to all: he died a sufferer, but risen a conqueror, not only clothed with honour and immortality, but armed with 
q Mar. 28.18. Philip. 2.9.  power and principality, he was 
r 2 Cor. 13.4.  crucified through weakness, but he liveth by the power of God; Having the keys of death and hell resigned up to him as trophies of his Triumphant resurrection: so himself speaks, 
f Rev. 1.13.  I am he that liveth and was dead, and am alive forevermore, and have the keys of death and hell: And again, 
t Ephes. 4.8, 9  When he ascended up on high, be led captivity captive. Note that; he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? Christ then did not so much lead captivity captive when he descended into the lower parts of the earth, as when he ascended thence, when he divided the spoil with the mighty, as the Prophet; or when he spoiled principalities and powers, as the Apostle speaks; at what time he was proclaimed 
u Rom. 14 9  Lord of quick and dead; Namely at his resurrection from the dead. I writ not this to derogate in the least from the meritorious death of our dear Redeemer: I can through the grace of God read infinite w love, and 
x John 3.15.  eternal life in his death but the hope and assurance of both is built upon his resurrection: and therefore when the Apostle would set the door of 
y 1 Pet. 1.3, 4.  hope wide open to us, he shows us an empty sepulchre, and tells us with the Angel, he is 
z 1 Cor. 15.17, 18, 19  risen; otherwise our faith and hope were vain. The promise is the ground and anchr-hold of our hope, and that as performed by our Lord's resurrection, whereby he bruised the Serpent's head, i.e. broke his power. 
Acts 26.6, 7, 8, 9  Now I say that promise Gen. 3.15. was the ground of flating the Sabbath upon the old seventh day, God blessed the day for Christ's sake; and (I doubt not) this was the use which old Testament-believers ever made of that old Sabbath, to look to Christ in it, and seek communion with God through Christ, and expect the Spiritual blessings lodged in the institution by Christ the promised and blessed seed. And as long as Christ was only promised, the Sabbath ran along with him in the promise upon that day for many ages; but now the promise being performed, 
See Mr. G. Walkerp. 35, 36  and Christ exhibited a perfect and complete Redeemer, and that upon the day of his resurrection (which was the greatest day of his appearing in the nature of man upon earth) how can it otherwise be but the Sabbath should also advance forward together with the Lord of the Sabbath, 
See also more of this Posit. 1. Branch 3.  from the last to the first day of the week? Especially considering that,  
Secondly, Then also the new Covenant was erected and established, even the Covenant pointed at by the Prophet, I will make an everlasting Covenant with you, 
Isal. 55 3.  I will give you the sure mercies of David; which the Apostle applies exprosly to Christsresurrection, and bottoms in there. As concerning that he raised him from the dead, 
Acts 13.34.  now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wife, I will give you the sure mercies of David, which if we take in the verse before, nominating the very day, Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee, will amount to this argument; That the new Covenant, in the last and best exhibition of it, was ultimately established by Christ's resurrection on the first day of the week: whence the inference is easy, That therefore then and thereby the old Covenant, in the promissory part of it, was altered and changed (Christ freely promised into Christ fully manifested,) and if so, who shall rob us of this conclusion. That the Sabbath was actually changed from the last to the first day of the week, upon the account of our blessed Lords resurrection? Mistake me not, the Argument concludes not the dissolution, but the translation of the Sabbath from one day to another; translated from the last day of the week it must needs be, because the promise which settled it at first upon that day is performed; and stated upon the first day of the week it is, because the performance of the promise fell upon that day, not by chance, but by special Providence, to fulfil that prophecy. 
Psalm 118.24  This is the day which the Lord hath made.  
3. And chief, this truth will be yet more obvious to every eye that shall view the change of the Covenant in the shadowy part of it, 
Heb. 8.5. ch. 10.1.  I mean those ordinances and institutions appertaining to the old Covenant, which were shadows of things to come; that these are antiquated and extinguished by Christ, and that upon the account of a new Covenant established, is unquestionably clear from that forecited Scripture, Heb. 8.13. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 James 4.14.  In that he saith a new Covenant, he hath made the first old: Now that which decayeth and waxeth old, is ready to vanish away: Where among other things the Holy-Ghost seems to imsinuate the shadowy nature of the old Covenant, setting forth the deficiency of it by a metaphorical expression of vanishing, or disappearing, viz. as the shadow disappears when the substance or body comes in place; so that if the old Sabbath were of a shadowy vature, 'tis clearly gone. But here lies the knot of the question, which (yet) in the judgement of the most and best interpreters is dexterously decided in that vulgar Text, Coloss. 2.16. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or new Moon, or Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. In the exposition of which Scripture I conceive there have been two great extremes; for some in opposing Judaisme from hence, have opened a gap to Libertinism, by condemning all difference of days under the Gospel: others in going about to stop that gap have made a Bridge to bring in Judaisme again. I shall equally shun both extremes, hoping to find truth in the middle: And therefore,  
First, I shall premise this as a sure foundation, That the Sabbath indefinitely considered, as abstracted from the precise seventh day, 
Isai. 56.6, 7, 8. Is a plain prophecy of a Sabbath under the Gospel. So is Mat. 14.20. See both opened and vindicated by Mr. By field, p. 220, etc.  was never a shadowy ceremony, but was and is a moral and perpetual duty incumbent upon all the people of God to the end of the world; for not only Scripture, but even Nature itself teacheth us that as there is a supreme God, so this God must be worshipped with solemn worship, and that therefore there must be some solemn time set apart for his worship, and this time not less than a whole day together, yea a day of frequent return, and this day a day of rest from worldly labour; (for worshipping-time and working time are utterly inconsistent.) All this may be fairly deduced from the dictates of Nature: Indeed as to the punctual proportion of time, whether it should be one day of six, or one of seven, Nature (which doth not so well discern of numbers) cannot so positively determine: and therefore in this case where the instinct of nature fails us, 
Praxis san●lorum interpres praeceptorum, had wont to pass for a principle and maxim in Divinity.  the instruction of Discipline (as one calls it) relieves us. By which I understand both the prescript of God's law, and the practice of his Church (especially Apostolical practice) which is the best and clearest commentary upon the Divine precept: Now both these determine the proportion of one day in seven for the ordinary season of solemn worship; and the last limits it to the first of seven, as shall be seen hereafter. That the law of God, even the fourth Commandment (which was the tenth part of Jehovahs' will published at Mount Sinai) is directly for one day of seven, not the last of seven, or the seventh from Creation, I have proved before; and that in this point it is moral and perpetual (although not moral-natural) may be briefly hinted here. I shall offer but one Argument for it, 

Rom. 7.12. Morale est mandatum quatenus praecipit ut è septem diebus unum consecremus cultui divino; & proinde quatenustale mandatum est nunquam fuit abrogatum, nec abrogari patest. Z●●ch. in precept. 4. p. 595.  
Ut aelique dies in septimana fit deo dedicata, praetum est stabile & aeternum. Jac. de Valen. adv. Judaeos. q. 2. Nobis cum veteri populo quoad hanc partem communis est necessius Cal●. in praec. 4. Item Luther. Quoad observationem unius dieiiu singulis hebdomadis, Sabbatum nonest legis Ceremonialis, sed moralis, qua immota ao perpetua est. Ravanel. Bibl.   grounded upon that Scripture-aphorism, That Commandments is holy, just and good; these are the vudeniable Characters of a moral and immutable law. Now if the proportion of one day in seven for holy rest be holy, just, and good, it must needs be moral and perpetual, and so must the precept itself that prescribes it. But this proportion is holy, just, and good. Grant it to be just, and you cannot deny it to be holy; grant it good, and you cannot deny it to be just. Now let me reason the case with any religious soul, yea, with any rational man; Is it not a point of moral equity to pay tribute out of all our times to the Lord of time, who holds our souls in life, and in whose hands both our times and our breath are? do we owe him a piece of every day, and shall we grudge him a day of every week? when he has given us six, can we in equity deny him one? Not that I take upon me to demonstrate the equity of this number by the light of Nature, or to the light of Nature; for as I said before, Nature is blind in these things; but I presuppose Nature and Reason informed by divine discovery, and acquainted with the written word. Surely such as have read and pondered Gods liberal grant of six days to man, cannot but yield his demand to be very reasonable, requiring but one in seven for himself. Thus in respect of God. Again, in respect of Man; Is it not just and meet, that since Man's life upon earth is a pilgrimage, and he has no abiding City here, but looks for one above, therefore he should not spend all his time, and thoughts and studies about the trifles of the world, but (as some time every day) so also some one day every week, retire from the world, and draw near to God, to seek communion with him, with whom he looks to live for ever? Again, in respect of servants and ; is there not grand equity and reason that one day in a week they should enjoy some relaxation from their painsul servitude and bondage? that thy poor drudging servant especially (who bears God image as well as thyself) should have a breathing-time, a day of weekly rest for his wearied body, and one holy day in a week for his precious soul? Can we in equity afford them less? when we have had six day's service from them, can we find in our wretched hearts to grudge the Lord one? True, you will say there is much equity in this, that some time in general should be set apart for holy rest; but what necessity of such an exact proportion? why one day of seven more than one of ten, or two of seven? I answer as before; A natural necessity we do not pretend; but a Scriptural necessity there is why we should be tied to this proportion, and not to any other: and herein lies the moral and religious equity of it, as thus; The written word informs me that there are but four main divisions of time, and these of Gods own making, viz. days, weeks, months, years, and I am convinced that Man cannot make perfecter distributions of time than God himself hath made: since therefore there must be a time or season of solemn worship, it must of necessity be taken out of one of these; it must be either a day out of a week, or a day or week out of a month, or a month out of a year; less than a day out of a week I cannot yield, since I cannot so much as pretend that lest is sufficient for God and my soul, when more may conveniently be had. Again, a week out of a month, or a month out of a year, I cannot subscribe unto as either convenient or equal, 
See Iren. philal. u●● plur.  since experience tells me that the necessities both of civil and soul-affaires require a mutual interchange of speedier dispatches, and quicker returns: therefore I must conclude, God's proportion is most just and equal when all is done, viz. one day of seven, and but one of seven ordinarily; two days in a week, or out day in two weeks, I find no rule for in the written word. God's first division of time was into days, and his first multiplication of days into weeks; and ever since his select portion has been one day in the circle of every week. This was the constant tribute paid him under the Old Testament on the last day, and under the New Testament on the first day of the week: this therefore is moral and perpetual, being of Gods own assignation, of the Churches constant observation, and in itself the most exact proportion; consequently the Commandment in this respect must needs be moral: the rather, because in all this there can beno ceremony; the number of seven is generally taken for a number of perfection, but who ere fancied it to be of a ceremonlous signification? What type or ceremony can there be imagined in seven more than in six? to make types of mere figures is such a kind of Cabalism, as I suppose never came into any sober mind. But here I must resolve a scruple or two:  
The Jews seventh day was ceremonious, 
Scrup. 1. See Dr. wiles on Exod. ●o & Dr. Twiss. p. 74.  as the learned generally assert; and if so, why not one day in seven also? If the particular day were shadowy, why not the proportion also?  
It follows not at all, unless you will say, 
Resol.  that those particular Sacraments under the law [Circumcision and the Passeover] being ceremonial; make the like number of Sacraments under the Gospel, viz. [Baptism and the Lords Supper] ceremonial too; the reason is alike in both, for the Ceremony stood not in the proportion or number, but in the particularity, or nature of that day and those duties.  
But you have formerly granted, 
Scrup. 2.  that the fourth Commandment did point at that particular seventh day under the term [seventh day] therefore the fourth Commandment was in that respect ceremonial.  
I have indeed granted, 
Res.  that the Commandment did indirectly and occasionally point at that precise seventh day, but not particularly, only within the general scope of it, or as a general rule equally communicable to that day (as being elsewhere appointed of God) while it stood; and to our day now it is substituted in the room of that by the same Divine appointment. And if this were heedfully observed, the scruple were soon answered. But here lies the mistake, men would fain screw in the seventh day from that presixed period of creation into the heart of the Commandment, and make that seventh day and a seventh day of equal dimensions, which can never be, unless they will render the Commandment ceremonial; whereas to affirm, as I do, that the Commandment indirectly pointed at that day (as being then under Divine Sanction) does no more place a ceremony in the fourth Commandment, than it does in the fifth, to say, that by Father and Mother were meant not only natural, but civil and Ecclesiastical parents, and occasionally such as were Typical; as not only the Priests and Levites, but Moses and Aaron also who were to be honoured by virtue of the fifth Commandment and that as Fathers in a figutative sense: From which instance thus much is manifest, that a moral precept may occasionally point at something ceremonial and yet retain its own morality. So that neither a Sabbath, nor a weekly Sabbath were ever shadows of things to come. But  
Secondly, That Sabbath and particular seventh day which the Jews observed was certainly of a shadowy nature, 

Dr. Tailor observes in his Christ revealed p. 4.  

1. That as the body is the cause of the shadow, so was Christ of the ceremonies.  
2. As the shadow represents the shape, motions and actions of the body, so did the legal shadows resemble Christ in his actions and passions, and I add, why may not both these be affirmed of the old Sabbath. For 

1. It was occasioned at first by Christ, as the shadow is by the body. B. Christ I say in the promise.  
2. It shadowed out something of Christ and the ancients generally understood it as a shadow of his rest that day in the grave.      being instituted at first with reference to Christ, as all other shadows were, and having an accessary type afterwards affixed to it: And of this we may safely expound that forementioned Text, Colos. 2.16. Let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or now moon, or Sabbaths, which were shadown of things to come but the body is of Christ. The only question is, whether their weekly Sabbath were here intended? Some are jealous lest in pressing it so far, it should prove prejudicial to our weekly Christian Sabbath; but this is meet causeless jealously. For let us but ponder the scope of the place, and it will appear, that the Apostles design is not to levelly Christian days and duties, but such as the Jews observed, and would have intruded together with circumcision and other legal rites into the Church of Christ. This is evident, [for he writes both against distinctions of meats and days:] Now under that clause of [meats and drink] shall we say he condemns all distinctions of meats and drinks in matters of religion? What of bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper too? or in disputing against the Jews Sacraments, especially circumcumcision, does Paul strike at all Sacraments, what baptism and all? no, 'tis aparent that in all those three Texts usually alleged Rom. 10.5, 6 Gal. 4.10. Colos. 2.16. He cries down the Ordinances of the Law, or old Testament not the institutions of the Gospel. Look what the Jewish fals-teachers cried up, St. Paul cries down i e. their Sabbaths and their Sacraments. 'Tis not likely that they ever pleaded for the Christian Sabbath, (the first day of the week) and therefore 'tis most improbable that the Apostle in opposing them should implead that. In a word, 
Dies Dominicus non est umbrae rerum futurarum sed rei praeterita, viz. gloriosae Christi resurrectionis grata Recordatio. Brochmand. Syst. Theol.  the Sabbaths here specified were a shadow of things to come, whereas the Lords day (as one well observes) is only a memorial of something past, to wit, the glorious resurrection of Jesus Christ. So that to argue from hence against all difference of days under the Gospel (as the old Anabaptists and Familists do) is evidently to stretch the Text beyond the stapse; But to urge it against all the Jews Holidays, (their weekly Sabbath and all) is not at all to force it. For  
First, The Apostle seems to speak distinctly, and distributively, enumerating the several sorts of days in observation among the Jews, Holiday, New moons, Sabbaths, and the gradation from yearly holy-days, to monthly new Moons, and from them to weekly Sabbaths is visible enough to such as are not blinded with prejudice. See Mr. Shepheard, Thes. 20. part 2.  
Secondly, The plural term [Sabbaths] is usually put for the singular, the Sabbath or seventh day now under dispute. Yea I cannot find any one Text in all the new Testament, where it is applied in the same number to any other day or Sabbath, but the old seventh-day-Sabbath. 
* Math. 12.1.5.10.12. Mark 1.21. ch. 2 24. ch. 3. v. 2. Lu. 4.31. ch. 13 v. 10. Acts 13, 14. in all these Texts 'tis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Seven or eight times the same word (as it is here set down in the plural number) is used for that old weekly Sabbath; and not so much as once for any yearly Sabbath, therefore inall reason that precise weekly Sabbath must be here (I won't say in eluded only) but principally intended.  
Thirdly, 
* 2 Kin. 4.23.  even in the old Testament, where ever New Moons and Sabbaths go coupled together (unless the phrase be figurative, 
1 Chro. 23.31. 2 Cron. 1.4. ch. 8.13. & ch. 31 v. 3. Nehem. 10.33. Ezek. 45.17. Hos. 2.11. Amos 8.5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  as in Isai. 66.23.) the Jews weekly Sabbath is denoted by it, as appears by those several Scriptures cited in the margin, in most of which their annual Sabbaths are excepted, and distinguished by another name scil. [Feasts,] to which answers the words holiday in this place, Colos. 2.16. For indeed the word in the original signifies a feast, or festival day. Thus let Scripture expound Scripture, and truth will be truth, in spite of error: take the whole sentence together, holiday, new Moon, Sabhaths, and (if it be an Old Testament-phrase) it always implies the old seventh day-Sabbath; or take the words [Sabbaths] singly by itself, and (if it be a New Testament-term) as 'tis like it is) it ever (I think I may truly say ever) signifies the same seventh day, unless when it is put for the week, which here it cannot be. The conclusion than is undeniable, that the Jews seventh day Sabbath was a shadowy Sabbath, and therefore it cannot be our Christian Sabbath, for what have we to do with shadows under the Sunshine of the Gospel? under the clear and bright discoveries of Christ, 
2 Cor. 3.18.  when we may with open face, as in a glass, behold the glory of the Lord. Oh, that the spirit of truth would take away that vail that lies upon the hearts of men, that vail of error and darkness which keeps out the light of this truth; for a truth it is, a plain truth, as plain as Scripture can make it, that the Sabbaths here mentioned were a shadow of things to come; and I have made it evident, that the old Sabbath (as to the day) is here chief intended: it is not necessary that I should trouble the Reader to tell him my judgement what kind of shadow it was, or what was shadowed by it in particular, whether Christ's rest that day full and whole in the grave, or his rest the next day from the grave, or a believers rest in Christ a complete Saviour: But this is certain, a shadow it was, of which something in Christ was the body; and the body being come the shadow must be gone. And so I might proceed to another argument, but I must first remove some objections wherewith the Adversary has endeavoured to block up our way, But all in vain:  
First he tells us, 
T.T. Obj. 1. p. 23.24, 25.  'tis evident at first sight, that only such Sabbaths are ceased as were shadows of good things to come; but the seventh day was never such a Sabbath: A sign indeed of good things past and present it was, but never termed a shadow of things to come.  
This proceeds upon his accustomed fallacy, Answ. (petitio principij) a begging of the thing in question; for he would make us believe, that the old seventh day was none of the Sabbaths here intended, which if we deny (as we do) than he has lost his conclusion, for in this very Text it is termed a shadow of things to come; what if we grant it a sign of something past? so were the annual Sabbaths (as he calls them) Passeover, Pentecost, etc. the one of their preservation in Egypt, the other of the giving of God's law; yet both shadows of things to come, or else the Apostle was much mistaken.  
The blessed Spirit by two other terms declares clearly what Sabbaths are ceased: Ob. 2 1. Such as were against us. 2. Contrary to us; and such were those annual Sabbaths, requiring great labour and travel, in coming three times a year from all parts to Jerusalem; the seventh day-Sabbath was never in the least against us, nor contrary to us, unless so far as we are against God, and contrary to him, as 'tis elsewhere added.  
'Tis very questionable, Answ. 1 whether these three annual Festivals, Passeover, Pentecost, and the feast of Tabernacles be ever termed Sabbaths in Scripture; indeed the Sabbatical years (as every seventh year, and every fiftieth year) ae five or six times termed 
a Levit. 25.8. etc. 26.34, 35, 43.  Sabbaths; 
2 Chron. 36.21.  but the Jews themselves could never say these were against them or contrary tot hem, the one being a year of rest to their lands, the other a year of release to their servants.  
The weekly Sabbath or seventh day directly intended in the fourth Commandment (I grant) is unto againt us, Answ. 2 neither are we against it, we own it, we observe it, and shall do (I trust) till we enjoy our everlasting Sabbath in Heaven. But  
The seventh-day-Sabbath imposed upon the Jews (or rather the hand-writing of Ordinances (not God's hand-writing but Moses hand writing) was in some sense against us Gentiles, and contrary to us) as it was a piece of that old partition-wall which separated the Jews from the Gentiles, and occasioned 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Compare Col. 2.14. with Ephes. 2.14, 15, 16. See the Dutch Annot.  enmity between them; that such a division or partition-wall there was we read in Ephes. 2. whereby the Jews and Gentiles were parted, and shut up as it were one from another, that there was no correspondency between them; and the symbol of this separation was the old Sabbath, whereby the Jewish Nation was distinguished from all other people in the world, as we shown before out of Exod. 31. Now the Lord Jesus came to take down this separation wall, and to make up a Union betwixt Jew and Gentile; and this he did, partly by his death, (blotting out the hand writing of Ordinances, or law of Commandments contained in Ordinances) and partly by his 
e Acts 4.11. Ephes. 2.20.  resurrection, where he was made the cornerstone of his Father's house, to unite both parts of he building together, that all might be 
d Gal. 3.28.  one in Christ Jesus: This I take to be the sense of the place.  
But the Prelates have perverted the Text, Obj. 3 
T. T.  for unto the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which only signifies Sabbaths) they have deceitfully added days, as though there were no Sabbath but Sabbath: days; they have destroyed the Apostles scope by their addition of days.  
The pious and judicious Translatours have rightly rendered it [sabbath-days] for so the word is used in all those other texts above mentioned, 
p. 136. Answ.  yea, when there is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 joined with it; and the like I have observed in 
e Dialogue with Trypho.  Justine Martyr, 
f Hom. de sement.  Athanasius and other expert Grecians, who do generally dispute against the Jews weekly Sabbath under the term which is here used; therefore this Author does most unworthily and wrongfully charge those worthy instruments (who made the Scriputres speak true English) with fraud and deceit; God will one day require an account of these hard speeches, yea, scoffs and impious slanders. But he has not done yet.  
Whereas by this bold and absurd addition some would cast off the seventh day as Ceremonial, Obj. 4 who yet plead strongly for the morality of the Sabbath; it is very considerable, that this Text toucheth not the day at all, but the duty, that is, the Sabbath; for the Apostle mentions not the day or time as a shadow, but [Sabbaths.]  
None but a bold and absurd Anabaptist would call this an absurd addition, Answ. 1 for it is the usual and proper Translation of the word elsewhere; and if he should read it thus; let no man judge you in meat or drink, or in respect of a festival day, or a new Moon, or the Sabbath day; it were no wrong to the Text, for so we read the same word, Mat. 12.1. Understanding it of the old Sabbath day. Answ. 2  
The duty of holy rest in general is not here intended at all; for that is usually intimated in a word of the singular number, and stands firm in the fourth Commandment, as also 
g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Mat. 24.20. 'Tis only the particular day!, or the respective limitation of the duty to that day that is here reckoned among the shadows of things to come: look how their festival days are called shadows, so is their Sabbath; not the moral duties required on those days (as solemn 
h 2 Chron. 30, 21, 22. Neh. 8.6.  worship, praise, and thanksgiving) for then it were a sin to keep a day of thanksgiving) but the set days, together with the ceremonial duties which they were accustomed to, a re here discharged, and the like I may say of their weekly Sabbath. And therefore his conclusion will not hold, That we may as warrantably reject the moral law, upon that expression of the law being changed, as the seventh day upon this word of Sabbaths being a shadow: The distinction of moral and ceremonial may as well be applied to Sabbaths, as laws; and till he can prove that the old seventh day is excepted from these shadowy Sabbaths, as we can prove the moral law to be from that which was mutable, he must confess it was but a shadow, and so either abrogated or altered, or both; as the ceremonial 
i H. br. 7.12.  law and the priesthoods were; and if so, let him judge whether the Apostles rule ought not to be regarded, Let no man judge you in respect of shadowy Sabbaths; and let T. T. timely bethink himself how he will answer the breach of this rule at the Bar of Christ, when his own book shall (without repentance) be brought in as a bill of indictment against him, for judging, censuring, condemning, not only faithful Ministers and Christian-people, but Magistrates, Princes, Parliaments, (charging them with little less than the sin against the Holy-Ghost) because forsooth they disown the brat of his brain, 
p. 50.  and reject the Saturday-Sabbath: let this unjust judge take heed he be not judged with a witness: I shall ere long read him a sharp sentence out of Justin Martyr. But first I shall endeavour to convince him by two or three Arguments more, That the Sabbath is certainly changed from the last to the first of the week, and that by Divine Authority.  
Christ ending his work, Arg. 3 
ad hominem.  and entering into his rest, lays the foundation of a new Sabbath, upon the day of his rest; But he ended his work and entered into his rest upon the first day of the week (by his resurrection from the dead) Therefore then, and thereby he laid the foundation of a new Sabbath upon that day of his rest.  
Both feet of this argument stand upon Scriputre-ground, or the grant of the adversary, as shall appear in the prosecution of it.  
First, That our blessed Redeemers ending his work and entering into his rest laid the foundation of a new Sabbath seems to be the Apostles conclusion, Hebr. 4.9.10. There remaineth therefore the keeping of a Sabbath (as the Tranlators render it in the Margin) to the people of God, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for he that hath entered into his rest, (that is Christ) hath ceafed from his works, as God did from his own works. That it is spoken of Christ, T. T. plainly grants, 
p. 141.  yea peremptorily determines in these words, It is Christ only whose intrance into rest is here intended, and therefore there remaineth the keeping of the Sabbath to the people of God: A Sabbath I should rather say. I may lawfully proceed upon his own grant, and so wound him with his own weapon. For however he wrists this Scripture, and uses it as a shield to defend his, Saturday-Sabbath, I believe upon trial it will be found a sword to destroy it. Which will the better appear, if we look into the contents of the third and fourth Chapters and withal have an eye to the scope of the whole Epistle, which will be an excellent key to unlock this intricate Text. Briefly to touch upon the general scope; it is very probable that these Christian Hebrews were about casting off the Ordinances and worship of the New Testament, and revolting from Christ to Moses; for the prevention and cure of which Apostasy, St. 
* For if the cloth may be known by the l●st (as M. Ward was wont to say) the Epistle is most likely to be his, the phrase and style being very agreeable to his other Epistles.  Paul is inspired by the Holy Ghost to write this Epistle, wherein his main design is to dissuade them from this sin, as appears by several passages sparsed here and there; as ch. 4.14. Where he exhorts them to hold fast their profession and observe it well, ch. 7, 8, 9 When he had argued, that upon the coming of Christ there was to be change of the Priesthood and Law of old-Testament, worship-hereupon he concludes, ch. 10. Let us hold fast the professio of our faith without wavering; and verse 38. If any man draw back my soul shall have no pleasure in him; That is, if any man draw back from Gospel-ordinances, to abrogated Legal rites: therefore again ch. 12. v. 25. 26, 27. See that ye refuse not him that speaketh, whose voice shakes not only earth but Heaven also: Which shaking signifies the removing of things that are made (that is, Old-Testament-Ordinances, such as were alterable) that the things which cannot be shaken may remain, that is, Gospel-institutions. Having found out his main mark which he aims at (namely to dissuade them from Apostatising to legal worship, and persuade them to persevere in Gospel-worship) let us consider in the next place, 
See Mr. Carter on Heb. 6.  what arguments he uses to prevail with them herein.  
First, Inasmuch as the Ordinances of the Old Testament were given by Angels, and by the hand of Moses, a Typical Mediator; therefore in the two first ch. he sets forth the excellency and dignity of Christ above Angels, proving him to be the very Son of God; and then ch. 3. he prefers him before Moses; inasmuch as Moses was but a Servant in God's house, but Christ a Son, yea, the ownet and builder of the house; and such a builder as made not only the little house) the Church,) but the great house (the world) also, ch. 3. v. 4. therefore they had little reason to return from Christ to Moses.  
Secondly, Having thusprepared them, he falls upon his intended subject viz. A serious dissuasive from Apostasy: And because they were about to cast off the Solemn worship of the new Testament (for 'tis expressly said ch. 10. v. 25. That the manner of some was to forsake the assembling of themselves together) (which assemblies in the Churches of Christ were always upon the first day of the week;) therefore to Preach down this sin, among others, the Apostle takes a Text out of Psalm 95. and spends the best part of two chapters in the opening and applying of it. The words you have at large, ch. 3. v. 7, 8, 9 Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith, to day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, etc. His voice, that is, the voice of Christ our great Prophet spoken of before; and that upon his own day, his day of grace in general, and his day of Solemn worship in particular; for so it follows in that Psalm, Let us how down and worship before him. And let it be noted, the words cited out of the Psalm are not so much David's exhortation to the people of his time, as a prophetical prediction of Gospel-times; 
Plalm 95. 6, 7. Isaiah 2.3.  wherein he brings in the people of God (as also the Prophet Isaiah does) mutually inviing and calling upon one another to hear the voice of Christ, yea to come and worship before him; else how could the Apostle apply it to these Christians? Further, oh. 3. v. 12. he advises them to take heed of an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God, i. e. by forsaking his Ordinances and worship, and in particular his day of solemn worship, of which David here seems to spea; lest they should provoke God by their Apostasy, as Israel did by their infidelity; till he swore against them in his wrath that they should not enter into his rest; whose sin and punishment is further exemplified to the end of that chapter.  
Now because it might be thought that God's oath did only concern the Israelites exclusion out of Canaan, the Holy Ghost informs us, that there was a Prophecy in that History, and a promise in that Threatening. Therefore we are admonished, ch. 4.1. To fear lest a promise being left us of entering into rest any of us should seem to come short of it. But how does the Apostle ground his admonition? What need Christian's fear? Yes good reason, for v. 2. To us was the Gospel preached as well as unto them. Therefore having the like privileges we may expect the like punishment, if we pervert those privileges, or Apostatise from them through unbelief; for that was Israel's undoing, the word Preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it, v. 2. hence they fell short of God's rest in Canaan, which was a type of our eternal rest in Heaven, into which none but believers do enter, v. 3. For unbelievers are out off by God's oath; as it follows, I have sworn in my wrath 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nota jurantis. 1 Sam. 14.45. Psalm 89.35. Jer. 38.16.  if they shall enter; that is, they shall not enter; the sense must be supplied thus, if ere they come there, let me not be reputed a God of truth.  
Thus far we have traced the Apostles argument, and found it mainly tending to this, to caution these Hebrews against Apostasy, and against infidelity as the root of that Apostasy; against Apostasy I say, not from Moses (for they were 
* Acts. 21.20. They were all zealous of the law.  tenacious enough that way) but from Christ and his institutions, and probably from the Christian Sabbath, which some conceive to be the day pointed at by David.  
But because they were apt to think that the day, and the rest of which David spoke, was the old seventh day, and the rest of Canaan, (which they were but too much devoted to;) to root out this conceit, in the following verses the Apostle removes these two supposed rests, and plainly shows that neither the one nor the other could be intended either by David or himself.  
First, It could not be 
* Exod. 35 2.  meant of the old seventh day (which is sometimes styled a Sabbath of rest;) For although the works were finished from the foundation of the world, and God did rest the seventh day from all his works; yet in this place again he saith, if they shall enter into my rest, v. 4, 5. His argument stands thus; David expressly mentions a day and a rest to some (so much the word shall implies) [if they shall enter] but the rest of the old seventh day was already entered into, three thousand years before David's time, even from the foundation of the world; 
See dr. Gouge Comment. on the Hebr.  Therefore that could not be this. The force of the argument lies in this; that things spoken of different times, whereof the one is of time past, the other of time to come, cannot be the same: for instance, that 
* Ezek. 34.24. & ch. 37.25.  David who died many hundred years before Christ cannot be the same David who is promised to be a Prince amongst Christians. So here, the day, or rest of which David speaks being to come, and not then entered into, could not be the rest of the old seventh day, since that was entered into long before, even from the foundation of the world. This is the true and genuine sense of those words [although] and [again.]  
Although is a discretive term, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or a note of distinction, importing thus much; that albeit there is mention made of a day of rest in the beginning of the world, yet it is as another distinct day and rest that is here intended. So also this Adverb [again] is to be taken of another rest-day then that which is mentioned in the former verse; for although the old seveuth day were spoken of by Moses as the first and most famons rest in the beginning, yet now [again] so many thousand years after that David speaks of another rest, if not another rest-day; and if any Sabbath or day of rest be here intended either by David or Paul, it will certainly prove fatal to the old Sabbath: for I would humbly propose this quere to the consideration of the learned, Whether the Psalmists intimation that there should be a day of solemn worship under the Gospel; and the Apostles assumption, that it could not be meant of the old seventh day, will not amount to this conclusion, that the old seventh-day-Sabbath is to be no day of rest or solemn worship under the Gospel. If T.T. quarrel at this conclusion, let him thank himself for the premises (one of them at least;) for he grants a moral rest or Sabbath to be here meant) and I will thank the Holy-Ghost and S. Paul for the other, for they have assured me that the seventh day from the Creation could not be meant by David; no nor  
Secondly, The rest of Canaan neither in the sense above mentioned: for although that be sometimes termed the 
* Deut. 12.9. Josh. 1.15.  rest which God gave Israel under the conduct of Jesus or Joshua; yet says the Apostle, v. 8. If Jesus had given them rest, (that is, if he had given them the rest of which David here speaks,) then would he not afterward have spoken of another day: where note by the way, 'tis a day of rest which the Psalmist seems to scope at, else why should the Apostle thus interweave the one with the other, If Joshuah or Jesus had given them rest then would he not afterwards have spoken of another day?  
Note again, the same Argument is here used against the supposed place of rest that was urged before against their conceived time of rest (the old seventh day;) both these were entered into long before David's time, whereas he spoke by the spirit of prophecy concerning things to come a long time after: and hereupon the Apostle concludes, There remaineth therefore a rest, or the keeping of a Sabbath to the people of God, distinct and different from the old Sabbath, yet not much unlike it in respect of the ground of it; for he that hath entered into his rest hath ceased from his works, as God did from his own works. And this is spoken only of Christ, says T.T. Be it so, than I hope our proposition will not offend him, that when our blessed Lord Jesus ended his work, and entered into his rest, he laid the foundation of a new Sabbath on that day of his rest: only 'tis like this word [new Sabbath] will stick in his stomach; yet it needs not, for we cannot put (the old Sabbath) into the Apostles conclusion, because he himself puts it out of the premises. But we shall not wrangle about words; by new Sabbath I mean only a new Sabbath-day; and for peace-sake I am content the proposition should pass in these terms; The day on which Christ ended his works, and entered into his rest, must be our Christian Sabbath day. The assumption follows:  
Secondly, That Christ ended his work, and entered into his rest, by his resurrection from the dead on the first day of the week: for proof whereof we may proceed upon another of the Adversaries Principles; for thus he argue; Christ's entering into his rest on the seventh day: 
T.T. p. 144, 145.  Our dear Redeemers soul was no sooner separated from his body, but his better part immediately entered into glory, and soon after his blessed body was laid to rest in the grave. Where although I cannot but mind him of his gross mistake about the circumstnace of time (for 'tis evident that as our blessed Redeemers soul entered into Paradise on the sixth day, (the same day that he died) witness his words to the dying thief; this day thou shalt be with me in Paradise;) so also his sacred body was interred the same day, even 
a Mark 16.42. Luke 23.53, 54.  the day before the Sabbath, not on the seventh day, as this sophister would make silly people believ: e) yet I shall take him at his word in the main of his argument, namely, that when our Saviour entered into his glory, he entered into his rest: But I assume, By his resurrection from the dead on the first day of the week our Lord entered into his glory; and for this I have his own word more than once or twice; in the 24 of Luke he overtakes the two Disciples going to Emmaus, and as they were talking together with sad hearts about the sufferings and the death of Christ, and also relating what they had heard (but could hardly believe) concerning his resurrection, he takes them up with a sharp rebuke, 
b Luke 24.25, 26.  O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the Prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? to enter into his glory, you will say, that is to be understood of his ascension into Heaven; nay, verily he spoke it of his resurrection from the dead, where their chief doubt lay; and so himself expounds it, for the same day at night he appears to the rest of his Disciples, and these among them, preaching the same Doctrine, and saying, 
c V 46.  Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; this was that he had so often inculcated before his death, 
d Math. 16.21. ch. 17. 23. Mark. 9.31. ch. 10. 34. Luke 9.22. ch. 18. 31, 32, 33.  That he must go up to Jerusalem, and suffer and die; that all things which were written in the prophets concerning him should be accomplished, that he should be delivered up to the gentiles, that they should crucify and kill him, and that the third day he should rise again according to the Scriptures: so that what one Text speaks of his suffering and entering into glory, others interpret of his dying and rising again the third day; and that Christ by his resurrection entered into his glory, cannot with any colour of reason be denied: surely when he entered into his Kingdom he entered into his glory; but by his resurrection from the dead he entered into his Kingdom, being solemnly invested with Kingly power and sovereignty, 
c Math. 28.18.  Having all power in Heaven and earth put into his hands, and 
f Rev. 3.7.  the keys of David, the Government of the Kingdom laid upon his shoulders, to dispense laws, pronounce pardons, pass sentence of life and death, 
g John 20.23.  to bind and lose at his princely pleasure. In a word, it was by his glorious resurrection from the dead, that God 
h Psalm 2.6, 7.  set him as King upon his holy hill of Zion, saying, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee. Christ's resurrection-day was in a special manner his Coronation-day; and as earthly Princes are wont on their Coronation-dayes to show themselves to their subjects in all their royalty, casting about their silver and gold; so the Lord Jesus delights on this day to manifest himself to the souls of his people, scattering his precious gifts and graces in the assemblies of his Saints: for as this is the day which the Lord hath made, so 'tis the day in which he himself was made 
i Rom. 14.9.  Lord of the living and the dead; 
k Acts 2.36. ch. 3. 15. & ch. 5. 30, 31.  Lord and Christ Prince of life, King of Heaven and earth; a King indeed he was in the 
l Math. 2.2.  cradle, a King on the 
m ch. 27. 37.  Cross; but never so much or so manifestly a King upon earth, as when he conquered that King of terrors, and carried away 
n 1 Tim. 6.16.  that incomparable Title, the blessed and only potentate, the King eternal and immortal, 
o Rom. 6.9.  who dyeth no more, death hath no more dominion over him. He that shall deny Christ's entering into glory by his resurrection, will rob him of much of his glory; 'tis true, he entered not into the place of glory (in his whole person) till his ascension; but into the state of glory he entered by his resurrection: if the bodies of the Saints shall be raised in 
p 1 Cor. 15.43.  glory, how much more was the blessed body of Jesus Christ? If the glory of the stars be such, what is the glory of the rising Sun? But I must not expatiate here, a word more and I have done; He that hath entered into his rest hath ceased from his works, as God did from his; whence I gather, that it is not only Christ's rest, but the reason of that rest (the consummation of the work of redemption) which occasions our Sabbath; as Gods finishing the work of Creation did the old Sabbath, Hebr. 4.3 4. And this the word Rest implies, being a demonstrative proof of the accomplishment of the work; for even a wise man, if he undertake a work, will not rest till it be finished; or if he do, he is 
p Luke 14.29.30.  laughed at for his lost labour: and therefore much more when the alwise God is said to rest, may we conclude, his work is perfected. To speak properly (if rest imply only a cessation from work) we cannot say that God rested from his work of Creation on the seventh day more than he has done ever since, or Christ from his work of redemption: therefore we must take in the consummation of each work, as the ground of each rest; otherwise all the time after should be of equal account with the last day in respect of Creation, and with the first day in respect of Redemption: Now the question will be, when the work of Redemption was consummate and complete? Doubtless, not till the top-stone was laid, till Christ was made the head of the corner; which the 
q Act. 4.10, 11.  Apostle assures us was by his resurrection from the dead; for if this had not been done, the work had been all to do again: If Christ had suffered, died, and been swallowed up of death and corruption in the grave, and never risen again, then had we remained still in our sins, and all our preaching of Christ, and faith in Christ had been vain, 1 Cor. 15.17. It was by our Saviour's joyful resurrection, therefore that the work of our Redemption was manifestly accomplished, and hereupon Christ rested from his work, as God did from his: and as when God rested from the work of Creation, he appointed a Sabbath, although he did not rest from works of Providence; in like manner Christ hath appointted a Sabbath upon his resting from the work of Redemption by price, although he doth not rest from the work of Redemption by power, till all his enemies by vanquished, and all his elect saved, as a 
* Dr. Cheynels Treatise of the blessed Trinity. pag. 403.  learned Author speaks. And so much for this Argument on Hebr. 4. only some objections Treatise of the must be removed; for T.T. takes this Text of Scripture and woefully wrists it to his own and others misguidance, in countenance of the Saturday-Sabbath; I shall briefly answer his several Arguments, as objections against what has been spoken.  
The polluting of God's seventh-day-Sabbath was woefully Israel's sin, Obj. 1 
T.T. p. 141.  for which the Lord destroyed them in the wilderness, as 'tis plain, Ezek. 20.13. And this being compared with the Apostles admonition to these Christians, plainly points out the Sabbath which remains to the people of God: he sets forth Israel's sin and sorrow on this wise; although God finished his work from the foundation of the world, and thereupon speaks, Gen. 2. Yet neither the glory of his wonderful Creation, or authority of his institution could engage them to follow his Example; but so highly did they provoke him, especially in polluting his Sabbaths, that he swore in is wrath they should not enter into his rest, etc. Wherefore the Apostle concludes in applying all to believers, exhorting them (in the use of that means which Israel neglected) to enter into the eternal rest, lest any should fall after the example of Israel's unbelief (or disobedience, as the Greek signifies:) and then he concludes Magisterially, Christians believe it, this is the sum of the Apostles admonition. But I must tell him, they had need of a very strong faith that can believe such incongruous stuff as this is. For,  
Although it be granted that Sabbath-breaking were one of I sraels sins in the wilderness, Answ. 1 yet it will not follow that this sin is here intimated by the Apostle as the cause of their ruin, but rather the sin of unbelief. For so 'tis expressly affirmed, ch. 3. v. 18.19. To whom swore he that they should not enter, into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. So ch. 4. v. 2. v. 6. v. 11. And whereas T.T. tells his Reader, that the word signifies disobedience; I must tell him, it is his mistake to render it so in this place; for it agrees not with the scope of the context, which is to dissuade them from unbelief as the root of Apostasy, ch. 3. 12. Take heed Brethren of an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God: where the 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. v. 18.19.  word doth properly and without all question signify unbelief. And the Apostles rendering of the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) which signifies either unbelief or disobedience, by another word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) which signifies unbelief only, v. 18.19. does evidently speak his meaning, namely, that we should take heed of falling by Israel's example of unbelief, which is the mother of all 
* John 16.8, 9  vice, as faith is the mother of grace: And therefore ch. 4. v. 1. he cautions us to fear lest a promise being left, any of us should seem to come short. Now the promise is the ground of Faith, as the precept is of obedience. I conclude therefore, it is not so much Israel's disobedience as Israel's unbelief upon which the stress of the argument is laid.  
To take the Apostles admonition as a caution against the neglect of the old Sabbath, is utterly to mistake his main mark and scope: For his grand design is to prevent their Apostasy from Christ and his Gospel, not from Moses and his law: And I am persuaded, if any Sabbath-breaking be here intended, it is to deter them from the breach of the Christian Sabbath.  
To understand this Scripture (there remaineth the keeping of a Sabbath to the people of God) of the old seventh-day-Sabbath, Answ. 3 is utterly to invalidate the Apostles argument; because it confounds that distinction of rests on which he grounds his argument. For 'tis evident, 
See Mr. White of Dutch. in this Tex. p. 230  the Apostle speaks of several and distinct rests, and insists most strongly upon the opposition between Moses words, Gen. 2. and the words of David, Psalm 95. (not Psalm 45. as T.T. misquotes it) and makes it most manifest that David could not mean the rest of the Sabbath, of which Moses speaks, Gen. 2. for Hebr. 4.3. thus he reasons: David speaks of a rest to come, but Moses speaks of a rest past, therefore David cannot mean the rest of the old Sabbath, of which Moses speaks, which was entered into so long before. And verse 5. he takes up the same opposition again, [and in this place (i. e. of David) again if they shall enter] who sees not a manifest opposition betwixt these two [have entered] and [shall enter?] That word [although v. 3.] relates not to the sin of Israel, but the saying of David. And thus this Authors first fancy is battered: There remaineth therefore the keeping of a Sabbath to the people of God; but no: the old Sabbath.  
'tis set down in the Margin of our Bible's [the keeping of a Sabbath] whence they would evade the seventh-day Sabbath, Obj. 2 
T.T.  although the Dictionaries and Lexicons render ib plainly the keeping of the Sabbath.  
The Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Answ. without an Article, and therefore this is a mere causeless cavil: and as for Lexicons that render the Greek into Latin, I suppose be will find neither a nor the in any of them; for these are English particles: and as for Latin Dictionaries, he may look long enough before he will find the word in any of them, for 'tis a pure Grecism. And thus I think he has showed his Scholarship with a witness: No wonder such an accurate Critic casts odium upon the Translatours; 'tis much he does not give us a Bible of his own making.  
The Scripture gives full evidence, Obj. 3 
p. 144.  that Christ entered into his rest the true seventh day (he means the old seventh day) when he had finished his great work of Redemption: and for this he citys Acts 2.26. where 'tis said, his flesh did rest in hope.  
The* word signifies only thus much, Answ. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  his flesh did remain in hope, and it may be as well rendered, remain, as rest. It implies no such thing as Sabbatical rest. 
He citys Job 17.3. for Job 3.17 an argument he is not infallible.  As for Job 3.17. which he misquotes again, it makes nothing for his purpose: All that it speaks, is this, There the wicked cease from troubling, and there the weary are at rest. Teaching us, that the grave is a place of rest from external impressions of violence and cruelty, as also from trouble, labour and sorrow to the people of God. They shall rest in their beds, says the Prophet: Yet I hope he will grant the grave is a softer bed to Saints than it was to our Saviour; for as he took away the sting of death by dying and rising again, so also the horror of the grave by being buried. Certain it is, that Christ's burial was a part of his humiliation, and while he lay in the grave he lay under the sorrows, pains or chains of death, as the Holy Ghost witnesseth. 
Acts 2.24.  And who ever doubted but our Saviour's durance in the Sepulchre was penal, 
Even the Lutherans (who attribute more than is meet to the burial of Christ, as they do to his body) do confess that it was a part of his humiliation, and that hereby he underwent that penalty, Gen. 3.19. vide Gerh. Supplem. ad Chem. Harm. p. 230.  as well as his death upon the Cross? How then did he rest from the work of Redemption, as long as he lay under the arrest of death in the prison of the grave? Certainly all his humiliation work was Redemption-work from his Birth to his burial: and (setting aside his Crucifixion) we have reason to think our Redeemer was not so much humbled all the three and thirty years of his life, as the three days and three nights after his death, while he lodged in the heart of the earth: Before he was but as the Sun in a cloud, but now as the Sun under a total Eclipse, as to the view of the world. And doubtless for the blessed Son of God, and Lord of Glory, to lie down in the 
a Psalm 22.15. Ephes. 4 9  dust of death, and suffer himself to be trampled under the feet of that Tyrant, was no small degree of abasement. But to be sure, whatever our blessed Redeemers rest were before his Resurrection, either that of his Soul in glory, or the other of his body in the grave, it could make nothing for the Saturday-Sabbath; for neither of these rests were entered into on the seventh day, but both on the sixth day. The 
b John 19 v. 14 31.42.  day before the Sabbath he was crucified, and the same day he was buried; otherwise how is it said, That he risen again the third day 
c 1 Cor. 15.4.  according to the Scriptures? Methinks this should make the Objector blush to look back upon his anti-scriptural conclusion, That Christ entered into his rest on the true seventh-day-Sabbath; expounding it of his rest in the grave. But a word with you Sir; did the Lord Jesus indeed enter into that rest of the grave the seventh day of the week? why than it seems he risen again from the dead the second day, and rested but two days and two nights in the grave; and had he not need be greater than an Angel that shall take upon him to coin such new Creeds, and preach such new Gospels, for sear of the Apostles 
d Gal. 1.7, 8.  Anathema? To salve this he tells us p. 145. that our Saviour's body was laid to rest in the Sepulchre in the close of the sixth day. Very good! Why then does he say in the next page, that he entered into this rest on the seventh day? Thus at once he contradicts both himself and the Scriptures. But to conclude; this author has little reason to vaunt and glory (as he does) in this new invention: For, to make Christ's rest in the grave a ground of the weekly Sabbath, is neither proper in respect of the thing, nor proportionable in respect of the time. For the thing itself, how altogether improper and incongruous is it, to keep a weekly festival in memory of our Saviour's Funeral? to make that day a day of rejoicing which was rather a day of mourning? For so the Ancients held it, and therefore kept it as a Fast, ergo not as a Sabbath; for the Sabbath was ever reckoned among the solemn 
c jer. 23.2, 3.  Feasts of the Lord; which one consideration is sufficient to show the judgement of antiquity in this controversy. For they kept the 
* Diem Solis laetitiae indulgemus. Tertul. Apol. c. 36. Sabbato usque ad galli cantum jejunium producite, et illucescente uno Sabbatorum (qui est dominicus) desinite. Constit. lib. 5. c. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiphan. lib. ●3. & Tom. 3. Haeres. 75.  Lords day as a day of spiritual joy and gladness, and spent the whole Saturday (the time of Christ's lying in the grave) in Fasting and mourning; alleging, for their practice that speech of our Saviour, When the Bridegroom is taken from them then shall they fast, Luke 5.35. Again, it holds no proportion in respect of the time, for our Saviour lay three days and three nights in the grave; therefore this can be no pattern for a weekly Sabbath. I doubt the best of our new Sabbath-keepers would be weary of resting so long at a time. But the stress of T. 'tis. Argument is laid upon Christ's entering into rest, therefore there remaineth the keeping of a Sabbath to the people of God; and here I shall lay the stress of my answer, having manifestly proved that Christ's entrance into rest was not on the seventh day, no not in this authors own new notion of rest. And whereas he adds, that the taking down of our Saviour's body from the Cross, and laying it in the sepulchre in the close of the sixth day, was providentially ordered: I answer, true, providentially indeed; for hereby the Holy Ghost has admirably provided against this future error of raising the old seventh-day-Sabbath from the dead, and building it up anew upon the grave of Christ, where it rather lies buried never to rise again. For if the blessed body of Christ were laid in the grave on the sixth day, than he entered not into that rest, (nor indeed any rest at all) on the seventh day. But on the first day of the week he entered into his true rest, and ceased from his work of Redemption, as God the Father did the seventh day from his work of Creation; therefore there remaineth the keeping of a Sabbath to the people of God upon the day of Christ's resting from his work, the day of his rising from the dead. And we have grand reason to think that Christ had a significant meaning in prolonging his Resurrection to the third day, which was the first of the week; as the Father had in lengthening out the Creation to the seventh day, which was the last of the week. For as the Father could have created the world in a moment, so could the Son have quickened and raised himself from the grave assoon as he was in it, either the same day, or the seventh, if he had pleased: But he purposely and providentially passed over that day, and crowned the first of the week with the glory of his resurrection; which plainly speaks it his will and pleasure to make that day the day of our weekly rest, in which our Lord himself rested from his greatest work.  
Oh! But Christ rested not on the day of his Resurrection, Obj. 4 
T. T. p. 120.  for he journeyed fifteen miles that very day, which was no fair precedent for celebrating a Sabbath. And again, he traveled fifteen miles upon this supposed new Sabbath; and this not to any Church-meeting, but from Jerusalem (where most of his disciples were) purposely joining with the two disciples that were journeying on foot seven miles and a half into the Country. He means the disciples going to Emmaus, Luke 24.13, 14. This is his last refuge, and 'tis a very sorry one. For  
First, This travel was without labour; and if he had journeyed that day from earth to Heaven, and back again from Heaven to earth, it had been no impeachment to his holy rest, any more than the motion of an Angel sent upon God's errand would be a profanation of his Sabbath: certainly the body of Christ at his resurrection was a glorious body, and able to move from earth to Heaven, as some think, in a moment. And whether he did not locally (though not so solemnly as afterwards) ascend into Heaven, and descend again, the very day of his resurrection, is disputed by some. I shall not positively assert it, but modestly propound it to further inquiry, whether those words, 
a John 20.17.  Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father; but go and tell my brethren I ascend; do not seem to imply that even now in the morning of the resurrection-day he was about to ascend; and whether the same day at night returning again, and bidding them touch or 
b Luke 24.39  handle him do not argue that now he had ascended? Again, whether those words, 
c Eph. 4.8, 11.  When he ascended up on high, he gave gifts unto men, some Apostles, some Prophets, etc. must be necessarily limited to his last ascension; or whether they may not be construed of some former ascension? Since it seems those gifts were given upon the very day of his resurrection; for then (
d John 20.  towards the evening or end of that day) the Gospel-Ministry was constituted; then the Apostles received their mission and commission, 
e v. 19  As my Father hath sent me even so send I you: 
f v. 21.  whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted, and whose soever sins ye retain they are retained. Yea, than they received the 
g v. 22.  Holy Ghost, For he breathed on them, and saith unto them, receive ye the Holy Ghost. I shall not determine where our Saviour had his usual residence during those 40. days betwixt his resurrection and last ascension, whether in Heaven or on earth; curiosity I abhor in the mysteries of Christ; and what I have here offered is in humility, and sobriety of spirit, with submission to better and riper judgements. Let not this digression be counted a transgression; or if it be, pardon it. To return to my answer, this is most certain, that although the body of Christ after his resurrection remained a real and true body, yet it was a 
h Luke 24.37.  spiritual, a splendid and glorious body, free from that corpulency, that lumpishness, that subjection to weariness and other infirmities that these vile bodies of ours are clogged and encumbered withal; this is manifest by his marvellous apparitions upon earth, and his glorious 
i Acts 1.9, 10. 1 Pet. 3.22.  ascension into Heaven; when he mounted himself in the Chariot of that cloud, in which he road in Triumph into glory; now motion is no hindrance to the rest of a glorified body, such as Christ's was when he arose from the dead; therefore although he were in action and motion on the resurrection day, yet he did not labour.  
His joining with those two Disciples travelling to Emmaus, was a work of Charity and Piety. Ans. 2, For their hearts were sad and ready to sink under their own fears: 
Luke 24.17.  And this blessed Physician came to comfort them, and confirm them in the belief and assurance of his resurrection: They were his poor distracted, dejected, timorous disciples, and whom should he visit but such? Say they were going from Jerusalem (that bloody City) suppose they were straying like sheep without a Shepherd, yet the Lord Jesus that great Shepherd of the sheep being now brought again from the dead, 
Hebr. 13.20.  would not leave them wandering in a wilderness, but fetch them home to their fold again: And it was no secular employment, but a Sabbath days work, for he spent the time in opening Scripture, preaching and proving his resurrection, till their cold and dead hearts were so quickened and warmed, that they did even burn within them; in a word, it was a Sabbath day's journey. But leaving the Adversary to solace himself with these sapless notions, and trifling objections; we proceed to a fourth Argument.  
From the designation of a new day upon the discharge of the old; Arg. 4 we shall couple both together, and cast it into this form. The old seventh day Sabbath is discharged from obligation or observation under the new Testament, and a new day of the same number (the first of the week) designed, deputed, and determined for the Christians weekly day of Solemn worship under the Gospel, and that by the Lord of the Sabbath; Therefore the Sabbath is altered and changed from the last to the first of the week, by no less than Divine authority. The consequent cannot be denied, if the Antecedent be granted; and granted it must be when proved by Scripture, as it shall be in each particular (I hope) to full satisfaction.  
1. That the old seventh day is discharged, disannulled, and abolished for ever being a Sabbath more to the people of God in Gospel-times; this we have proved in part already from Colos. 2.16 to which may be added, Gal. 4.10, 11. 
See the new Annotations on this place.  Ye observe days, and months, and times, and yees, I am afraid of you, etc. See how zealously this great Apostle and Doctor about days, decries all legal distinctions of days? by four distinct phrases he enumerates all the solemn Festivals in use among the Jews, and opposeth the observation of them all in Christian Churches. Read the words either backwards or forwards; the first clause (Ye observe days) must in all reason refer to their observation of the Jews weekly Sabbath day. For if by years we are to understand either their sabbatical years, or rather their yearly Sabbath, called the day of atonement; and by times or seasons their annual Feasts of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles; and by Months, their monthly Feasts called New-moons; what can be meant by days in this retrograde order but their weekly seventh day? What days were in request among the Jews of quicker return than their monthly days, besides their weekly Sabbath day? That which persuades me that the Apostle does here unquestionably intent the old seventh-day is:  
1. The Correspondency of this Text with that Calendar or Chapter of day's Levit. 23. where Moses sets down all their solemn Feasts or holy-days, eight in number; reckoning the weekly Sabbath among the rest of those Ceremonial Festivals, and putting that first as the Apostle does here, then proceeding to speak of the rest, much after the same order here observed. This Text comprehends all the days and times mentioned in that catalogue.  
2. The plain parallel betwixt this place and Colos. 2. which may may be seen in the scope of both Epistles compared together. These two Churches it seems were sick of one and the same disease, as appears by the same Symptoms in both, the disease was Judaisme, wherewith they were dangerously infected by the breath of false teachers crept in among them, who beguiled them with 
a Colos. 2.4.  enticing words, and sought to 
b Gal. 1.5.  pervert the Gospel; namely by persuading them to mingle Law and Gospel together, by retaining the customs of Moses together with the commands of Christ; 
Colos. 2.12.16 Gal. 4.10. ch. 5. 2, 3, 6, 12, 13.  and that especially in two points, viz. Circumcision, and Observation of legal days, and among other days the old seventh-day, which (together with circumcision) was cried up among the Colossians, as was showed above, and therefore by good consequence among the Galatians also, since they were men of the same gang that had been tampering here as well as there; I mean Jewish false teachers, the Doctors of circumcision; and their Doctrine was alike; yea the days for which they contended were alike both here and there, days, or Sabbaths sorted out by themselves, 
The old seventh day is here meant, though it be not mentioned expressly.  and distinguished from new moons and other Festivals; therefore undoubtedly the old seventh-day was the main. This together with circumcision were those legal and mosaical customs which the Jewish Zealots laboured tooth and nail to propagate in all the primitive Churches, especially where there were any convert Jew's. But St. Paul like a resolute champion of Christ's cause opposes himself against these growing errors wherever he came, insomuch that he began to be voiced and cried up, or rather cried down as the great stickler against Moses; Therefore when he came to Jerusalem St. James tells him, that the Judaizing weak brethren were 
c Acts 21.21.  informed of him, how that he taught the Jews who were among the Gentiles (that is the Christian Churches) to forsake Moses, and not to walk after the customs; and by and by when (to stay the Mouths of these weak Christians) he goes into the Temple to purify himself, the Jews which were of Asia make a loud out cry against him, V 28 saying, Men of Israel, help: this is the man that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place. By which Testimonies 'tis evident, that St. Paul was a rigid Nonconformist, and that he did mightily cry down the customs of Moses in all Christian Churches. If you ask me, what customs? I answer they are not particularly mentioned; only these two Epistles do witness that he had decried circumcision, the old Sabbath, and other days and rites of legal worship, therefore in all likelihood these were some of those condemned customs. And hereupon it seems the old Ebionites rejected Paul's writings, rating him as an 
* Apostatam legis eum dicentes. Iren. lib. 1. ch. 26.  Apostate because he wrote against the customs of Moses, chief circumcision and the old Sabbath, both which the Ebionites eagerly contended for; and therefore they were branded for Heretics to all succeeding generations, and well they deserved it. But it may be demanded, by what warrant did St. Paul cry down these Mosaical customs, and upon what ground? I answer, his warrant was 
e Gal. 1.1. he that raised Christ from the dead gave him his commission.  signed in Heaven, and his ground was good; For the Lord Jesus himself was designed to change these customs; so much St. Steven does upon the matter affirm, for he was accused for saying, That 
f Acts 6.14.  Jesus of Nazareth should change the customs which Moses had delivered. Mark the expression, the very word [change] is brought in as an Article against this blessed Martyr. The only crime they had to lay to his charge was this, that he should say Jesus of Nazareth should change the customs which Moses had desivered. 'Tis true, they accused him for speaking blasphemy against Moses law (and therefore they are called 
g V 13.  false witnesses, or false accusers) but like enough that which they called blasphemy St. Steven had spoken; very like in his dispute with the 
h V 9, 10.  Libertines, Cyrenians, and Alexandrians he might speak something to this effect; that Christ should destroy the Temple, and change the law and ordinances which Moses had given them. Whether he did affirm it or no, the thing itself is a certain truth; the Lord Jesus has changed the Traditions of Moses; he has changed the 
i Heb. 7.12.  law, and the Priesthood, the Covenant, and the Seals of the Covenant; circumcision for Baptism, the Passeover for the Lords Supper; the typical 
k Mal. 1.11. John. 4.21.  place and times of worship; all things liable to change he has certainly changed, and among the rest the old Sabbath, which was mutable from the beginning, as we have showed elsewhere. But I conceive St. Steven had indeed asserted this truth; for being charged with it, does he deny it? No, he rather stands to maintain and justify it ch. 7. 
* V 47.  and accordingly God justifies him, by making his face to shine before the Council like the face of an 
l ch. 6. 15.  Angel; for indeed it was the Doctrine of an 
m Dan 9.26.27  Angel which he had delivered: and, to come to some issue, that which I would further observe is this; St. Paul (although at that time neither Saint nor Paul) was present at the Martyrdom, if not the trial of Steven and did 
n Acts 22.20. ch. 26. 10.  consent to his death, and doubtless he could not but know the cause for which he suffered; which was partly this, 
Reader, note this as a convincing argument, that a Sabbath or day joined with other Jewish holy-days, yet distinguished from them, can be no other than their seventh day Sabbath and this is often condemned never commanded, in all the new Testament, therefore thou must make a new Gospel if thou wilt maintain that old Sabbath.  for saying that Jesus of Nazareth should change the customs which Moses had delivered; a truth sealed with the blood of this Protomartyr. Now I would offer it to further consideration, whether this might not be one ground of this great Apostles after zeal against the Ordinances, Rites, and Customs which Moses had delivered, and in particular circumcision and the old Sabbath But I shall not go by guess and conjectural probability. Thus much I infer from the premises, as matter of certainty, The customs which Paul taught people to cast off were the customs delivered by Moses, Acts 21.21. which were destinated to be changed by Christ Acts 6.14. But Paul taught people to cast off circumcision and the old Sabbath Colos. 2.12.16. Gal. 4.10. ch. 5. 2. Therefore these were the customs delivered by Moses and destinated to change by Christ. That circumcision was, none Question; but the scruple is about the Sabbath; for it may be objected, the Sabbath was long before Moses time, as old as Adam, Apostate Adam at least; I answer, so also circumcision was long before Moses time, being given at first to 
o Gen. 17.9, 10 Acts 7.8.  Abraham; yet circumcision is said to be given by 
p John 7.22.  Moses, because he was the first that wrote of it; and the like may be said for the old Sabbath, which was one of those customs delivered or made known by the hand of Moses, Neh. 9.14. and ranked with the rest of those ceremonial festivals Levit. 23. But to be sure, whatever St. Steven in his dispute with the Libertines and Cyrenians asserted; St. Paul in his Epistles to the Colossians and Galatians hasevidently concluded the discharge of the old seventhday.  
T. T. has little to say to Gal. 4. only this; 
* p. 23.  That Paul does not here condemn the observation of all days etc. only beggarly seasons and elements.  
Neither do we say, that all days are here condemned or disallowed. The Lord's day (the first day of the week) we are sure is not, for this was established by this very Apostle in these very Churches of 
q 1 Cor. 16.1, 2.  Galatia; and to condemn this had been to cross his own Ordinance. But we say, all Judaical days (for days, months, years do all refer to that specialty, Jewish solemnities) are here discharged and condemned, and among the rest the old seventh day. And as for the objectors Minatory charge, If any man be so bold to call this a beggarly element, at his peril be it. Let the Holy Apostle answer it: He had best tell St. Paul, at your peril be it Paul, if you dare call the old Sabbath a shadow of things to come, or a 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  poor Rudiment (for so he may qualify the terms if he please) but where lies the peril? Why not the old Sabbath a poor rudiment? he hints this as his reason, (Because God instituted and observed it) Observed it! how did God observe it? Take heed of unbeseeming terms. When we speak of the glorious God, we had need speak as the Oracles of God: Observation does imply obligation. And how can this stand with the sovereignty of God? But I suppose his meaning is, that God rested the seventh day; what then? Therefore it was no rudiment, had nothing Typical, or ceremonial in it. It follows not. 
Psam 132.8. 2 Chron. 6 41.  How often is God said to rest in Types of Christ? is not the Tabernacle styled, God's rest? And the Temple, and the Temple Worship? are not 
t Gen. 8.21. Exod. 29.18. Numb. 15.3.  Sacrifices and oblations called a Savour of rest unto God? not that God's soul rested in any of these rests (properly) nor the people of God neither: But he rested in Christ, and so did they; in these things only as Types or prefigurations of Christ to come. And thus he is said to rest on the seventh day: We have proved before that man sinned and fell the sixth day, and that Christ was promised, and actually invested in the office of Mediatorship before the Sabbath was instituted: And hereupon God rested the seventh day, not only from the work of Creation, but from the weight and burden of Adam's sin. For God complains of sin as a heavy 
u Isai 1.14. Amos 5.2.13.  burden, and as the sins of the old world are said to 
* Gen. 6.6.  grieve him at his heart, so no doubt did the sin of Adam. But Christ interposing to make reconciliation, God rested the seventh day and was refreshed. Exod. 31.17. That the old Sabbath was instituted after the fall, (besides what has been formerly alleged) appears plainly from that of our Saviour. 
x Mark 2.28.  The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath: For man; that is for man in misery, (not man in innocency) for the context speaks of necessitous indigent man; man subject to hunger, and thirst, and want. 'tis spoken upon the occasion of the hungry disciples plucking the ears of Corn, and eating out of pure necessity on the Sabbath day. The Pharisees presently censure them as Sabbath breakers, 
Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath day having power to dispose of it at his pleasure.  but says the Lord of the Sabbath, you quarrel without cause, For the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath; That is, the Sabbath was made for the good and benefit of man in misery; Principally for the good of his sick and sinful soul, but partly for the support of his weak and frail body also, that it might rest and be refreshed with convenient food, Physic and the like; which clearly argues, that the Sabbath was made, ordained, and instituted after man was in necessity and misery, namely after Adam's fall; and therefore 'tis said, That God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it. Gen. 2.3. Blessed it, how, not with natural blessings, that the Sun should shine brighter, or the weather be fairer that day than another; No, the blessings of the Sabbath were of another nature spiritual blessings; such as were suitable to the state of fain man; such as God has pronounced Fallen man blessed withal, otherwise the institution had never concerned any one man since the fall. How could it, if the blessings contained in it had been nothing but Paradise blessings? But we shall not inculcate former arguments; only add one consideration more to make it further manifest, that God's rest on the seventh day was partly (if not chief) in relation to Christ the promised Messiah. 'tis a saying of the Hebrew Doctors, and it agrees well with the 
a Heb. 2.10. Rev. 5.11, 12, 13.  Scriptures, that the world itself had not been made but for the Messiah; For all things were made by him and for him: and he is the 
b Heb. 1.2.  heir of all things and that as Mediator; and we have reason to think, that God's heart were more set upon Christ when he set up this visible frame of Heaven and earth, then upon all the world besides. How unlikely therefore is it that the glorious Creator should set apart a day of rest, till the grand design upon which his thoughts had run from all eternity, and which was chief in his eye when he made the world, (the glorifying of himself in his Son, by investing him with the government of the world, and putting him as heir of all things into actual possession of his hereditary Dominions) had some actual inchoate existence? 'Tis clear, that God did not rest from his other works of Creation till he had made man; because till then he had not attained his subordinate end of making the rest of his creatures: and 'tis credible, that he would not rest, after he had made man, till he had made Christ Mediator, and put the government of all upon his shoulders; because till then he had not attained his ultimate end, for which he made man and all the rest of the world besides. Certain it is, that the Creation was made but mutably perfect at first and therefore it cannot be conceived how God could keep a settled rest the seventh day, till he had settled and established the Creation on Christ the rock, 
c Deut. 32.4.  whose work is perfect: And this I conceive to be the true and undoubted sense of that saying, Gen. 22. On the seventh day God ended, Finished, or perfected, his work; namely, by establishing it upon Christ that sure foundation; 
1 Peter 4.18.  hence he is styled a faithful Creator, in that he did not leave his work of Creation in a mutable estate (as Masons and Carpenters when they have built their houses leave them without any further care what becomes of them) but as a faithful Creator 
* God was not the author or approver of man's falbut only the orderer and over ruler of it to bring good out of evil.  he over ruled the Fall of Adam for a greater good, namely for the establishment of his mutable work, by bringing in Christ the right heir, setting him as 
e Ps. 8.6. Herald 2.8. 1 Cor. 15.24  Lord over all the works of his hands, putting all things under his feet, making him 
f Josh. 3.11. Neb. 9.6. Dan. 10.14, 15. Acts 10.36.  Lord of the whole world and of all things therein, to whom doth appertain the Dominion of the Heavens and the Heaven of Heavens, the earth and all that is therein. Thus on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made, or perfected his work which he had made: That which he had made perfect at first with mutable perfection, he now perfected again by a further degree of supperadded perfection; namely by the promise of Christ and his personal undertaking as Mediator, by whom all things 
g Col. 1.16.  consist: And accordingly God rested the seventh day, (not in the changeable Creature) but in Christ the rock, and so the Sabbath was stated on the seventh day upon the account of Christ in the promise, upon the performance of which promise the seventh day ceases to be any longer a day of rest. But enough is said to show the discharge of the old seventh day from obligation under the new Testament. We shall only remove some of the Adversaries chief objections, and then lay down our grounds for the Christian Sabbath.  
He objects, Obj. 1 The Father's institution of the seventh day, which makes it as perpetual as the Ordinance of marriage. But  
This is fully answered in the first Position; Answ. where we have proved, that the Father's institution of the old seventh day was upon such grounds as exposed it to alteration. Thither I refer the Reader, and shall follow the objector to his next Argument.  
From the Son's confirmation of the seventh day. Obj. 2 Christ has confirmed it (says he) 1. 
T. T. p. 72. to p. 79.  By his words. 2. By his works. By his words more generally, among the rest of his royal Laws which he hath ratified even to a point or Tittle, Math. 5.18. Teaching his Apostles to do the like, Rom, 3. James 2.10. More particularly, by proclaiming himself Lord of the Sabbath day Mark 2.28. As if he had said, the Sabbath is mine, I am Lord of it, I made it for Man, and having given him a precept and pattern to sanctify it, I shall not make myself a precedent to profane it: Now that which Christ lays claim to as Lord, must needs be confessed his: Therefore do we celebrate the holy Supper because 'tis the Lord's Supper. Again, Math. 24.20. He instructs his disciples to pray that their flight might not be on the Sabbath day, namely forty years after his death, at what time all Ceremonies were abolished by Apostolical proclamation. And as thus he has owned the seventh day Sabbath by his words, so he has also crowned it by his worked etc.] This is the main strength and force of his Argument; But alas! it is to feeble to fetch life into a dead Sabbath that has lain sixteen hundred years in the grave; we shall discuss every particular in it, and return several answers to it.  
We grant indeed that the Lord our Lawgiver has ratified his royal Moral Law even to a point or a tittle, Answ. 1 inasmuch as he came to fulfil the Law, not to dissolve and destroy it. But how is every tittle to be taken? Not strictly and graphically for every vowel, point and prick of a letter in the Law; but for the substance and least matter of it, the least Commandment in it; so our Saviour expounds himself, Matth. 5.19. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least Commandments and teach men so, shall be least in the Kingdom of God; teaching us, that by [jot or tittle of the Law verse 18.] he meant the least Commandment of the Moral Law v. 19 Thus also St. James ch. 2.10. He that shall offend in one point is guilty of all. By one point he means any one precept or Commandment in the Decalogue. He explains himself by the reason rendered verse 11. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill: As if he had said, the same God that gave one Commandment gave all, therefore when any one point or precept is violated, the contempt reflects upon the whole Law, the least sin being an affront to God's sovereignty. So then the sense of both places is the same; the least point or precept of the Moral Law is in force under the Gospel; and if the least, much more the fourth Commandment, which indeed is none of the least. But what of all this? The fourth Commandment is established by Christ, therefore the seventh day in weekly succession from the Creation; the Consequence is infirm. For that day was never directly stated in the Commandment; the fourth Commandment says not, Thou shalt keep holy the last day of the week, and not the first, but a seventh day Sabbath, or one in seven: the old seventh day may be and is repealed; and yet the Commandment ratified to a tittle in the matter; yea in the very letter of it evangelically considered; to wit, as it is explained by Christ according to the will of God, though not the carnal reasonings of men. But of this formerly.  
That Text Mark 2.28. rightly interpreted makes nothing for the old Sabbath, but much against it. For these words [The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath day] do speak Christ's power to alter and change it, not his purpose to establish & confirm it under the Gospel, 'tis a title much like that Math. 21. where he styles himself Lord of the vineyard; as having power to let and lease it out to other Husbandmen, Mark 12.9. 
Dominus rectè dicitur alicujus rei, qui in illam jua & potestatem habet extollendi & immutandi Aretius in Luc. 6. Christ was Lord of the Sabbath, that is had power to change the day: Engl. Annot. in Mar. 2.  Luke 20.15.16. And thus he was Lord of the Sabbath, having authority to alter and adjourn it to another day: the Sabbath was the vineyards Landmark, or the Churches distinctive limit, & he that had power to transplant the vineyard, had no less power to transpose the Sabbath. He was Lord of the vineyard and Lord of the Sabbath in a like notion. Suppose it spoke, as the objector speaks, [I am Lord of the Sabbath, the Sabbath is mine] yet still the same sense recurres, is it not lawful for me to do what I will with my own? As our Lord speaks in another case Math. 20.15. The Temple was his as well as the Sabbath, Mal. 3.1. and styled his 
a Ps. 132.14.  rest forever, and his 
b Isai 56.7.  house of prayer for all people (more than I remember, was ever said of the seventh day Sabbath) yet the Temple is destroyed: and as Christ never meant to tie up his Gospel worshippers to that typical place of worship, so neither to that typical time of worship. He was Lord of both while they lasted, that he might dissolve both when their season was expired, that he might legally and ex officio give his people a discharge from both. As for the Author's crafty collation of these two expressions [Lord of the Sabbath day] and [Lords Supper] whereby he would insinuate the equal authority and perpetuity of that Legal Sabbath with this Evangelical Sacrament, it savours of more sophistry than solidity of Argumentation: let the unlearned know, that as the terms are different in the Greek, so the phrase in our English Dialect imports different things; 'tis one thing to call Christ Lord of this or that, another thing to say 'tis the Lords; to say he was Lord of the Sabbath, and that before his death, is nothing so much as to to say, this is the Lords Supper, and that after his resurrection; The former imports the office or authority of Christ, the latter implies his Ordinance: And let the objector know, that this Epithet [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] is never used but twice in the new Testament; namely for the Lords Supper & the Lords day Rev. 1.10. The Holy Ghost never vouchsafed to honour the Saturday Sabbath with this Evangelical title. But of that in convenient time and place, we are now discussing Mark 2. where Christ (while the old seventh day was in force) professes himself Lord of it; which plainly intimated his Lordship, Dominion and sovereignty over it, that he had authority to displace it, and dispose of it, as himself thought good; the Coherence carries it clearly this way. The disciples through the Pharisaical carping and misprision of their adversaries, were condemned for Sabbath-breaking, because they had plucked a few ears of corn and dressed them for their dinner on the Sabbath day, which was a work of mercy and pure necessity (hunger and emptiness constraining them to it) and so no breach of the Sabbath. 
Hospin. de orig. Fest. cap. de Sab.  But the malicious Pharisees (whose traditions had taught them, that to crop an herb, to pill an onion, to roast an apple, to kill a flea, 
Metens vel tantillum reus est, & vellere spicas est species Messionis. Maim. Ichabb. vide Lightf. Horae Hebraic. in Math. 12.  much more to pluck ears of corn and rub them in their hand (which they looked upon as a kind of reaping & threshing) were unlawful and sinful actions on the Sabbath day) presently take occasion to condemn the disciples for Sabbath-violation: Well; our Saviour justifies his disciples and wipes off the charge of their accusers by this argument ver. 27. The Sabbath was made for man (that is miserable fallen man) not man for the Sabbath. Therefore the Son of man (the Messiah) is also Lord of the Sabbath day; as if he had said, 
Cùm post lapsum institutum fuit Sabbaturn lege & conditione quae Christum jam promissum hominisque lapsum respexerit; non potuit Sabbatum non sub potestate & domini; filii hominis, id est, seminis promiss● subjici, ab co ordinandum & disponendum prout ip si visum ac provisum fuerit. Idm. Ibid.  'tis your error to think that all works of mercy and necessity are unlawful on the Sabbath day, for the Sabbath was made and instituted at first for man, subject to necessity and misery, namely by such a law as related to the fall of man and the promise of the Messiah; therefore the Son of man is also Lord of the Sabbath day; That is, it falls under my dominion and disposal as the Son of man: The phrase is observable, he says not The Son of David, but, The Son of man; the Mediator pointed out in the promise made to Adam the first man; even he is Lord of the Sabbath day, or has dominion over it, being at first the foundation of it. This is the most probable interpretation, if we take the Son of man here for Christ. But very many Learned Writers take it for man or mankind in general, as it is sometimes used, 
Fillive hominis i.e. homo. Zanch in praec. 4.  Psal. 8.5. Isai. 65.2. And then the meaning may be this, that in case of urgent and pungent necessity, (as extreme hunger, peril of life, health or the like) every, or any son of man is Lord of the Sabbath day, having liberty to dress or prepare food, to take physic, to refresh and repair nature; 
Fillive hominis tam de Christo quàm de quovis Christiuno homine intelligi potest. Gualther. in Loc. item Ravanel. in verb. dominus.  necessity (as we use to say) knows no law, that is, no positive Law; provided it be not a necessity contracted by idleness or improvidence. This is the exposition of some very learned and godly; and it seems to suit well with the case of the disciples, as also the context v. 27. The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath: Therefore (viz. in case of pure necessity) the Son of man, or mankind, is Lord of the Sabbath day. Take it in which sense we will, it makes nothing for the Saturday Sabbath. The objectors notion is altogether incoherent both with the sense of the Text, and scope of the context: but to proceed.  
Touching that Text Math. 24.20. Ans. 3 Pray that your flight be not in the Winter, nor on the Sabbath day. I have two things to answer.  
1. By way of supposition: supposing it were meant of the Jews Sabbath, it would signify no more but this, that it would be superstitiously kept among the unbelieving Jew's forty years after our Saviour's death, (as it is to this day) and therefore pray that your flight may not be either in the winter, when it will be doleful dirty; or on the Sabbath, when it will be dangerous travelling through the coasts of Judea, and bring you into peril of persecution by your own countrymen, which was one of Paul's perils 2 Cor. 11.26. For although by that time the disciples were sufficiently instructed in their Christian liberty, that their flight was as lawful on that day as another, and therefore they could not fly with scruple of conscience, yet the superstitious Jews (to whom such flight might be offensive) in all reason would Shimei-like, bark at such harmless passengers, if not by't and snap them. And whereas it is objected, 
T.T. p. 78.  That it cannot be rationally conceived, that the Jews instead of securing themselves should trifle away their time in persecuting the Christians. This objection is answered by himself in the very next words almost: For, says he, the Jews were so superstitious that they durst not fight for their life; Then I may well infer, that 'tis most likely they were also so zealous that they would persecute any who should fly for their life, if they themselves would rather die then fly, or fight for their lives (as he suggests) much more would they hinder the flight of others. So that if the old Sabbath were intended by our Saviour, it was rather with a note of dislike then approbation; as foreseeing that through the superstition of the Jews it would be an occasion of persecution to his servants, as it had often been to himself. Supposing I say (for I grant it not) that the Jews Sabbath was here meant, it must be construed in such a sense; namely, that they are counselled to deprecate their flight on that day for the better avoiding of bodily calamities; for in reference to that day we cannot so much as suppose any soul distress incident to the disciples by reason of such flight; we cannot conceive how they should be straightened in conscience out of any religious respect to that day at the siege or sacking of Jerusalem, since the adversary himself confesses, That all ceremonies were then abolished by Apostolical proclamation; For which he citys Colos. 2.16, 17. Which Text does irrefragably prove the repeal of the old Sabbath, as was said before. And thus he is caught in his own trap. But  
2. By way of affirmation, I assert, That these words of our blessed Saviour (pray that your flight be not on the Sabbath) are to be understood of our Christian Sabbath, the first day of the week; not directly indeed, but by very good consequence, as Mr. Cawdrey and Mr. Byfield do convincingly argue it. For (says the one) our Saviour does here speak of a Sabbath indefinitely, and a Sabbath to be observed long after his death, even at the destruction of Jerusalem; and this was spoken to his disciples apart from the multitude, says the other v. 3. and the period of time here pointed at was forty years after his death, when the Jewish Sabbath was gone, and the Gospel sufficiently published, whereby the ceremonial Law was evacuated, and become not only dead but deadly. Not that the old Law of a Sabbath (the fourth Commandment) was then out of force, but the Law of the old Sabbath. And then the conclusion is this, Christ shows a Sabbath to continue and a religious respect due to a Sabbath still after his death; yet not the Jews Sabbath, therefore he intended the Christian Sabbath to be observed according to the fourth Commandment. As for the Jews Sabbath 'tis certain, that it was void at this point of time; yea long before this forewarned flight, the Apostles and Christians had their assemblies apart from the other Jews, and kept the Lords day, the first day of the week; as on the Great day of Pentecost, Acts 2. and at Troas Acts 20.7. And although sometimes the Apostles did preach on the seventh day, yet as Mr. C. notes, it was only before the time mentioned Acts 20 never after, and only in other Cities abroad, not at Jerusalem; for there we never read a word of the Sabbath in all the story of the Acts. I conclude therefore, with that reverend Author, that no reason can be given why our Saviour in this prophetical caution should regard the Jewish Sabbath, but altogether the contrary, in regard the Christians inhabiting in Jerusalem and the Coasts about Judea preferred the Lord's day before it; and it would be grievous to gracious hearts to have their holy rest interrupted with the noise of warlike tumults, and the hurry of a tumultuous flight; well might the disciples be taught to pray, Lord, when ever we be driven from the place of our Residence, let it not be on a day of holy rest, for that would be as uncomfortable to our souls as a winter's flight would be cumbersome to our bodies? Not that it would be sinful or unlawful (when life lay at stake) to fly on the Sabbath; for to save a man's life is a sabbath-days duty, and a matter of far greater moment then to lead a beast to the water, or pull an ox out of a pit, both which are allowable: it may therefore be scored down among the rest of T. 't's. errors and oversights, that he makes it a sin to fly on the Sabbath day, when peril of life puts a man upon it, for h● terms it, a dishonour to God and profaning his sacred season; 
p. 77.  and yet he says in the next page, That had their flight been on the Sabbath, as long as they carried nothing, they could not be counted Transgressor's; Which may pass for another of his contradictions. But for a closure to this answer, we have deliberately weighed our Saviour's words and sayings concerning the Sabbath, but cannot find that ever he spoke one word or one syllable, in countenance of the old seventh day, as the Sabbath of Christians; his words prove no such thing. And lastly  
Whereas his works are pleaded as the crown of that day, Answ. 4 I am content (if the author think good) to venture the whole weight of the cause in this bottom. That day which Christ has crowned with his greatest wonders is to be most highly esteemed among Christians. 'Tis his own grant, 
p. 78.  and 'tis a truth; now let him have but a little patience, and we shall prove by undeniable Arguments, that in this respect the first day of the week carries away the Crown from all other days, old Sabbath and all. If Christ's resurrection, his often apparitions, the mission of his Spirit, the inspiration of his Apostles, the conversion of three thousand souls ot once, be worthy the name of wonders, surely the first day of the week is a day of wonder, a day of honour and renown above all the days that ever the Sun shone upon: The most glorious day that ever God created, the most solemn day that ever the Church celebrated; a day that has crowned Christ, and a day that Christ himself has crowned with the greatest glory of any day that ever dawned upon the world. 
Rom. 1.4.  I speak but the words of truth and soberness; 
Luke 13.32. Psalm 118.24. Joh. 20.22, 23. Cant. 3.11.  the Lords day is no day of small things; 'tis the day of the Lords power, the day of his perfection, the day of his praise and glory, the day of his bounty and blessing, the day of his espousals and of the gladness of his heart, which can be understood so properly of no day as of this (the Resurrection day). Let profane Esau's despise it, and proud Notionists oppose it at their peril; 
Behold King Solomon with the crown wherewith his mother crowned him in the day of his espousals and in the day of the gladness of his heart; never was Christ more visibly Crowned by his Church then on the Lord's day, which also was the day of his espousals when he was made sure to his Church by a sure Covenant, even the sure mercies of David Hos. 2.19, 20. Acts 13.34.  but let neither of them blame me, if I honour and esteem it above all days, till they can show me another day which the Saviour of the world has honoured and exalted above it. Never tell me of one or two miracles wrought on the seventh day (yet I desire to adore Christ in all his miracles) but show me such a confluence of wonders and wonderful transactions wrought by him whose name is wonderful on that day, as on this, and I will confess I have lost the day. Alas! It cannot be, that one transcendent act (the Resurrection of the Lord Jesus from the dead, the finishing act of our Redemption) weighs down all the honour of the seventh day, with advantage; 'Tis objected, that our Saviour was pleased to put forth his Divine virtue on the seventh day in sundry miracles, miracles of healing and the like; I answer, 'Tis very true, and to him be all the glory. But if it were an honour to that day that our Heavenly physician healed the sick, what a Crown of glory was it to his own day, that he raised the dead? Yea that being dead he raised himself from the dead? so also if he dignified the seventh day by casting out unclean Spirits; how much more the first day by sending his holy Spirit? If his preaching in the Synagogues were an honour to the seventh day; how much more his presenting himself, in that great Assembly of Divines twice (at least) on the first day of the week? Did Christ ever rise from the dead on the seventh day? Did he ever appear to his disciples on that day? Did he breathe forth the blessed Spirit on that day? Did he ever preach a Sermon (after his Resurrection) on that day? But I need go no further; here is light enough if men had but eyes; I hope by this time the Objector sees the invalidity of his second Argument; that which he calls the Sons confirmation. He proceeds to a third, from the Spirits approbation of the seventh day.  
What ever the blessed Spirit shall approve of, Obj. 3 we may rest upon it as an infallible truth: 
T. T. p. 81. to 94.  But he has highly approved of the seventh day; witness, first his high applause of the pious women's resting on the seventh day according to the Commandment, Luke 23. ult. Which although it were after Christ's crucifixion, yet St Luke was not inspired to write his Gospel till after his ascension. Secondly, The Spirits glorious manifestation, and mighty operation on the day of Pentecost Acts 2. Which he would fain persuade us to be the seventh day. Thirdly, The Spirits constant appellation, calling the seventh day, and none but that, the Sabbath day etc.] Here is a great show of Argument, but it signifies little and concludes nothing, when it comes to scanning. For  
Although it seem to be spoken in praise of these holy women, Answ. 1 that they rested the Sabbath-day according to the Commandment, yet (as was elsewhere noted) this was before our Saviour's resurrection, not after: And how ever they are commended for keeping the Sabbath before Christ's resurrection, yet others are condemned, or sharply blamed for observing days (the seventh day not excepted) after Christ's ascension; I mean (as the Apostle does) Jewish days, Gal. 4.10. O but St. Luke wrote not his Gospel till after the ascension: Answer. What then? was the old Sabbath therefore in force at that time? by the same rule he may conclude the Passeover (mentioned by the same Evangelist in the 
* ch. 22, v. 7.  foregoing Chapter) was then in force too: We are to judge of these women's practice according to the date of their act, not according to the date of the Evangelists book. Besides some take these words to be no commendation, but a bare historical narration: And if the particular day be here intended, as referring to the Commandment they conceive it may be spoken signantèr, and (according to the original) the Text may be rendered thus; they returned and prepared spices and ointments 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and rested that Sabbath day indeed according to the Commandment; that is, they rested indeed that Sabbath day, but never after (upon that day) according to the Commandment. Again, others expound it thus, it was not the particular day on which the Sabbath was then kept, so much as their 
* Mr. Collier against Fisher p. 13, 14.  manner of keeping it which is look at in referring to the Commandment; and so the commendation pitches rather upon the quomodo than the quando; therefore it is not said, they rested the seventh day (as T.T. prints it) but they rested the Sabbath day, or day of rest according to the Commandment, the most that can be made of it is this, that 'tis a commendable thing to dedicate a day of rest to religious and holy rest.  
The Spirits appellation argues not his divine approbation; Answ. 2 my meaning is, The Holy Ghosts often (I cannot say always) calling the seventh day, Sabbath day, proves not his approbation of that day for our Christian weekly holiday under the Gospel, because under the same name and title he has been pleased to disown that day, Colos. 2.16. No matter though it be sometimes called Sabbath after it was discharged, for so is circumcision called circumcision, and the other Festivals of the Jews (Pentecost especially) called 
* 1 Cor. 16.8.  Pentecost, long after it was degraded from the dignity of a solemn Festival; as a man may be called by his proper name afer he is dead and buried. And so I might proceed to the refutation of his next notion about the feast of Pentecost; viz. That it fell that year on the Saturday or seventh day; but this shall receive a more full answer in a more fit and proper place. His fourth and last Argument for the seventh day, is from the Saints observation; which runs chief upon the practice of Paul; it would be too tedious to transcribe his whole story. Take the strength of it as it follower in this plausible Objection.  
As it was Christ's constant custom to celebrate the seventh day Sabbath Luke 4.18. So it was Paul's Acts 172. Obj. 4 and such as his custom was, such was his commission: and we must be followers of Paul as he was of Christ 1 Cor. 11.1. 'tis his own rule, Philip. 4.9. Those things which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do; Only it must be understood with these limitations, that Paul's practice be plain, possible, peaceable, Evangelicall and unrepealed; for we may not follow Paul in his compliance with the Jews in ceremonials, no not to gain the Jews. But his practice in observing the seventh day was truly Evangelical, and never in the least tittle repealed, nor altered; neither was it his single practice, but the custom of all his companions and associates Acts 13.13, 14. ch. 15.40.16, 13, 17, 24. And that not only among the Jews but the Gentiles also Acts 13.42. ch. 18.4. Therefore he did it not to please the Jews, but purposely for a pattern to the Gentiles: Hence he exhorts the Corinthians (Gentile Churches) to follow him as he followed Christ; and it was at Corinth that he kept the Sabbath Acts 18. Therefore this was the pattern wherein he would have them be his followers, and us also, for the Epistle is written to us as well as to them, 1 Cor. 1.2. Thus he pleads Paul's custom, and adds, It was his constant custom; and whereas (says he) it is made a great Argument for the observation of the first day, that Paul preached once that day Acts 20.7. it is as clear Paul preached every Sabbath-day Acts 18.4. Only the Translators have not dealt so clearly (upon which account among others he charges them with sin yea with inexcusable sin, p. 139.) because Acts 20.7. they render the word (preaching) for the greater advancement of the first day, whereas Acts 18.4. they call it (reasoning) to obscure the seventh day, although the Greek word be the same in both places. Then he frames an objection against himself (which he can never an swear)  
Obj. Paul only took that opportunity to preach to the people. To which he answers, 1. They that object thus speak without book, 2. They make the Apostle a constant dissembler. 3. They may as warrantably lay this crime to Christ himself, (that he took such opportunities, and not in conscience of the Sabbath). Thus he words it out, and casts seducing glosses upon the sacred Scriptures, to beguile unstable souls; but I shall endeavour to undeceive him and others by sundry answers to his specious Argument.  
The proposition upon which he argues (that we must follow Paul as he followed Christ) is true in a Scripture sense, Ans. 1 but his exposition and application of it is false; for if he take Paul's following of Christ materially, for his doing the same things that Christ did (as it seems he does) and then argue universally from it (as he must if he will make any thing of it) his conclusion will contradict himself; for he has granted some exempt cases wherein Paul's practice does not bind us, and yet his practice therein was materially the same with Christ's; and I will give him some instances to put it out of question, that in some cases Paul did what Christ did, and yet we are not bound to do as Paul did. 
Luke 2.42. John 2.13 ch. 5.1. ch. 7.10.  For example, our Saviour Christ used at the solemn festivals of the Jews to go up to Jerusalem (as at the feast of Passeover, Pentecost and the rest) and Paul did the like; He hasted to be at Jerusalem at the Feast of Pentecost, 
Acts 18.21. ch. 20.16.  and I must by all means (says he) keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem. So that, if to practise the same things in any kind that Christ did, be to follow Christ, herein Paul was a follower of Christ; yet I hope it follows not that herein we must be followers of Paul, unless he would have us all turn Jew's. The like I may say concerning the Jews Sabbath: if he object against the parallel, and say it will not hold, because those other Festivals are repealed, but so is not the seventh day: I reply, let him show me a repeal for the one, and I suppose I can show him as good a repeal for the other. His grand objection is, That the seventh day was never expressly repealed; I answer no more was Pentecost: Where does the Holy Ghost say in express terms, Pentecost is abrogated: if he say it is included among the rest of those holidays Gal. 4. Colos. 2. I will ask him, how can he tell that, as long as it is not expressly named? If he say it is employed, I answer so is the seventh day, and then we are agreed. Nothing can be objected against this answer, for the instance I have given is plain and pertinent. And although I am fully convinced that Pentecost is abrogated as well as the Saturday Sabbath (and that as well as this) yet I am persuaded if a man listed to be contentious, he might make as much ado about the Feast of Pentecost, and have as much to say for it from the practice of the Apostle, as can be said for the Saturday Sabbath, yea more; for whoever heard St. Paul say of the Sabbath, as he says of Pentecost, I must needs keep the Feast? If he had said as much of the seventh day I should have thought he had made conscience of keeping it, which doubtless he did not, or he would never have omitted it at Troas, as it seems he did Acts 20.7. where he tarried seven days, and not a syllable of keeping the seventh day; but the first day of the week.  
But says the Objector, it was Christ's custom to celebrate the seventh day Sabbath, and so it was Paul's. Christ as his custom was went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day Luke 4.16. And Paul as his manner was did the same thing. Christ's custom herein was the very same with Paul's. Answer, 
'tis not said that Paul observed their Sabbaths; but he went into their Synagogues, and reasoned with them three Sabbaths.  If we should grant him his Argument he would get nothing by it. For it makes as much for the Jews Synagogues as the Jews Sabbath. And what would follow from hence? Suppose there were a Synagogue of the Jews in Colchester, as there is at Amsterdam; will he say that Christians are bound in conscience to frequent it because Christ as his custom, and Paul as his manner was frequented their Synagogues? If Paul did it from a principle of conscience, or obedience to the Law, as Christ did, I see not how he can avoid it; but if Paul did it only in a way of Christian prudence, to win the Jews, he has lost his Argument; for the like I say of the Sabbath.  
Whereas he further dictates, Ans. 2, That it was both Christ's and Paul's constant custom to observe the seventh day; I answer, if by constant he mean continual, I deny both, for however our blessed Saviour during his state of humiliation, observed that day while he lived, yet he never owned it after his resurrection from the dead, no not once (that we can find) during all those forty days between his Resurrection and Ascension, which made up almost six weeks. In which space he often appeared to his disciples on the first day of the week, instructing them in the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. But not once did he show his blessed face, or ever open his mouth all that while on the seventh day that we read of; which doubtless he would have done, and we should have heard of it, had it been his pleasure to have the Sabbath continued on that day after his resurrection, as it was before. And as for St. Paul, (whatever his custom was among the Jews) 'tis certain that among the Christian Gentiles separated from the Jews he kept the first day of the week, Acts 20. and taught others to keep it 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. But not a word of keeping the seventh day in all his Epistles.  
'tis as falsely as boldly asserted, Ans. 3 That Paul did constantly observe the seventh day both among Jews and Gentiles. The places alleged prove no such thing; 'tis said indeed Acts 13.42. that the Gentiles besought Paul to preach the next Sabbath day, when almost the whole City came together to hear the word of God; and Acts 18.4. He reasoned in the Synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks: But what Gentiles were these? Not Gentile-Churches distinguished from the Jews, but either Jewish proselytes Acts 13.43. Or Pagan Gentiles mingled among the Jews; and admitting some Christian converts among them, yet still they were such as had no Church-assemblies by themselves, but frequented the Synagogue-assemblies, where the Jews observed not other Sabbath but the seventh day Acts 13. ch. 17. ch. 18. And therefore as long as the Jews were tractable Paul and others frequented their Synagogues on their Sabbaths, not out of any religious respect (on his part at least) to the Jews Sabbath but merely for the opportunity of their assemblies; upon which account he also went up to Jerusalem at their other Festivals; as 'tis said, ch. 18. He hasted to be at Jerusalem at the Feast of Pentecost: What meant Paul's hasting thither, says chrysostom? Why, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 43. in Act. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Idem.  it was not for the Feasts sake, but for the multitudes sake, than met together; he hasted thither to preach the word. So here it was not out of any devotion either to the Jews Sabbath or their Synagogue, that he reasoned with them everly Sabbath-day (as long as they would hear reason) but because of the concourse of people then and there assembled: As, if there were a Synagogue of the jews in London, a Minister of Christ might occasionally visit it on their Saturday-Sabbath to dispute with those infidels and convince them that Jesus is the Christ; yet be far enough from owning either their Synagogue, or their Sabbath; and that Paul's practice among the Jews and such Gentiles as the Text speaks of, amounts to no more than this; 
1 Cor. 9.20.  namely an occasional act or at most a prudential act (Whereby to the Jews he became as a Jew, that he might win the Jews, and to them under the law, as though he were under the Law) is evident, because when he saw no hope of winning them to the faith of Christ, but they grew obstinate and refractory, contradicting, blaspheming, and openly opposing the Gospel, yea persecuting those that embraced it, Paul and his converts, now no longer frequent their Synagogues, but separate themselves and join in Christian assemblies by themselves. 
Acts 17.4, 5. Acts 19 9 ch. 18.17.  Thus the believing Jews and Proselytes of Thessalonica, so also those at Ephesus, and at Corinth when they opposed themselves and blasphemed, Paul shook his raiment against them, to signify that God had now shaken them off, and he would have no more to do with them; and after this, Acts 18.6. we hear no more of his preaching on the Jews Sabbath. For when the Churches of Christ were separated from the Synagogues, they kept the first day of the week, passing by the Jewish Sabbath. The converted Gentiles we are sure did so Acts 20.7. And whereas 'tis objected, That this was but once, whereas 'tis clear that Paul preached every Sabbath day. I answer, if this were true, yet the consequence (that therefore the Jews Sabbath was more respected by Paul then the Lords day) is utterly false. For one single instance of Apostolical practice in a Gentile Church, will weigh down a hundred in a Jewish Synagogue, since among the Jews the Apostle became all to all that he might win some. Whereas among the Gentiles his practice was purely Evangelical. And to turn the point of the Argument against the Objector; we must be followers of Paul as he was of Christ. Now Christ celebrated the first day of the week in a pure Gospel Church, John. 20.26. And never the seventh day (after his resurrection) and as Christ did, so did Paul, Acts 20. and as he did, so must we. Himself grants that we must follow Paul only in such practices as were Evangelical and unrepealed. Now the first day of the week is such. Purely Evangelical, and never yet repealed, therefore he must eat his words or yield his cause. As for the old seventh day it was both legal (according to his principles, it must be an appendix to the Covenant of works being instituted before the fall, when there was no Gospel, therefore purely legal) and according to my principles, partly legal (as circumcision was) therefore repealed among the rest of those legal days of worship: Colos. 2. for though he cannot read the repeal there, yet through mercy I and others can. Or if it be not repealed, it is expired, and was never revived by Apostolical practice or precept in any one Christian Church. I have given him one instance of a Christian Church meeting on the first day of the week to worship Christ, let him show me but such another for the Jews Sabbath among the Gentiles, & erit mihi magnus Apollo. Ans. 4  
Paul's practice among the Jews (in things temporary) is no pattern for the Gentiles. 
a Acts 21.25  St. James tells him, that whatever they did among the Jews in respect of legal customs, (to win upon their weakness). yet as toucking the Gentiles which believed they had written and concluded that they should observe no such thing. And what if Paul did observe the seventh day among the Jews; must this needs conclude against the change of the Sabbath, from the last to the first day of the week? he may as well say, the Apostles 
b Acts 16.3.  circumcising of Timothy to gratify the Jews, disproves the changing of circumcision into baptism. If it be Objected, that the consequence is not good because however Paul circumcised Timothy the better to win upon the Synagogue Jews (who 
c Acts 10 28.  would have no familiar converse with uncircumcised Gentiles) yet he would by no means yield to have 
d Gal. 2.3, 4, 5.  Titus circumcised in compliance with the Jews in Christian Churches. I answer, the very same may I affirm touching the Jews Sabbath, which however it might be tolerated for a while in the Synagogues, yet it was never allowed in the Churches of Christ among the Gentiles, nor ever practised without reproof, as in Gal. 4. or if it were, I desire to see the place, and the proof, which I confess I am yet to seek.  
'tis no less notorious an untruth, that not only Paul, Answ. 5 but all his companions kept the seventh day: Some of them might possibly attend him to the Synagogue, but few of that train which accompanied him to Troas, Acts 20.5. Where he celebrated the Lords day and Lords Supper among the disciples. As for the women which on the Sabbath day resorted to the rivers side, where prayer was wont to be made, they were Jewish proselytesses (witness their meeting on the Jewish Sabbath) Lydia to be sure was so, for she was a worshipper of God before Paul came there, but unbaptised if not unconverted till then. What he would make of this meeting by the river's side, I know not, unless it be to furnish his Sabbath-keepers with meditations, as he seems to speak in the close of his book p. 144. which shows his high esteem of Rivers, and ponds and such like watery places. 
De bello Jud. lib. 7. ch. 24.  'tis a wonder he forgot Josephus his story concerning that River in Palestina, called the Sabbatical River, which being dry six days, used to fill up its channel, and run very swiftly the seventh day; from whence the Jewish Rabbins plead stoutly for their Saturday Sabbath: But as one answers them wittily out of Galatinus; in case that River whiles it was in being was a good Argument that the Jews Sabbath was to be observed; now, since there is no such River to be found, it is a better Argument that their Sabbath is not any where to be regarded. Mr. Brabourn and he had best go on Pilgrimage to find out that famous river; I dare say it would be a more taking Argument among simple people for the Saturday Sabbath then any they have yet alleged.  
For his quarrel with the reverend Translators, Ans. 6 I tell him again 'tis causeless: What if they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, preaching, Acts 20.7. and reasoning, Acts 18.4. or, disputing, as it is rendered, Acts 19.9. Sure they saw good ground for this variation: Though the word be the same, yet the scope of the Texts is not the same; for Acts 20. Paul was among Christians, and Christians that came together to communicate at the Lords table, and that's no time to dispute, but to believe, to act faith, and not reason, therefore well is it said there; Paul preached to them; some quickening Sermon doubtless to excite their Sacramental graces. But Acts 18. he was among a company of unbelieving, wrangling Jews, and there they do well to render it reasoning; 
Mark 9.34. Acts 17.17.  which (unless the context carry it another way) is the most apt and usual signification of the word. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  The very art of reasoning [Logic] has its name from this compound. What rashness therefore and sinful saucy boldness is it in this Author, to throw dirt in the faces of those eminent instruments (the Translators of the Bible) charging them with inexcusable sin because they cross his humours and erroneous conceits?  
To say, Answ. 7 as we do, that Paul took the opportunity of the old Sabbath to preach to the people, is not to render him a constant dissembler, as he reproachfully accuseth us; but to commend him as a diligent dispenser of the word of truth, who for the quicker progress of the Gospel, was willing to embrace all opportunities; to preach in season and out of season wherever he came. Neither is it to speak without book, as we shown above; nor does it charge Christ with any criminal imputation; he kept the Sabbath (while it was in force) from a principle of conscience, in obedience to the Law, Paul from a principle of Christian prudence and indulgence, the better to promote the Gospel; and so his custom was not formally the same with Christ's, neither does his custom argue his commission, unless it be in things Moral and Evangelical, and among the Gentiles, 
* Ro. 11.13. ch. 15.16. Gal. 2.7. 1 Tim. 2.7.  to whom he was chiefly sent as a commission-officer of Christ, to preach the Gospel of the uncircumcision. Lastly, Paul's reasoning in the Jews Synagogue at Corinth, and that every Sabbath (till he were persecuted) and his general precept to the Corinthians, and other Christians to be followers of him, is as good a plea for the Synagogue, as the seventh day; and indeed a Jews Sabbath, and a Jews Synagogue would do well together. So that (all objections to the contrary notwithstanding) it remains a firm and  truth of God, that the old seventh day is discharged, from being a Sabbath, or day of weekly solemn worship to the people of God.  
Now by way of Transition to the second branch of my Argument [that the first day of the week is designed for a day of weekly solemn worship under the Gospel] I would remind the Reader of what was premised and proved before; viz. That the Law of the fourth Commandment (for the proportion, of six working days, and a seventh every week for solemn worship, ordinarily) is still in force under the Gospel. Which being made good, and the old seventh day manifested to be void, one Argument will put it out of all question, that the first day of the week, is the only day of weekly worship to be observed under the Gospel. As thus:  
That day of the week upon which above all others (in the vacancy of the old seventh day) God has set his mind in the Law; and upon which, above all other days Christ has set his mark in the Gospel, must needs be the Christians weekly day of solemn worship, or Sabbath day.  
But the first day of the week (the old seventh day being void) is the day above all others in the week upon which God has set his mind in the Law; and upon which above all other days, Christ has set his mark in the Gospel: Therefore, The first day of the week must needs be the Christians weekly day of solemn worship or Sabbath day.  
The proposition is undeniable; for what better warrant can be pretended for a weekly Sabbath, than God's mind or will in the Law and Christ Mark in the Gospel?  
The Assumption is all that requires proof, namely, [That the seventh day being void, the first day of the week is the day above all others upon which God has set his mind in the Law, and Christ his mark, his signal mark in the Gospel] Both which shall be distinctly and demonstratively proved, by Scripture-consequence and evidence.  
1. That (the seventh or last day of the week being void, as we have proved) the first day of the week is the only day, upon which it appears that God has set his mind in the Law; I mean, the Law of the fourth Commandment, which may be thus made out. It was the mind and pleasure of God, that the proportion stated in the Commandment, (six days in the week for civil employment, and one for sacred and religious rest) should be observed in all ages, 
Exod. 35.2. Ezek. 46.1. See Mr. Gawdrey p. 1. ch. 9 S. 53. and part 3. ch. 3.  both under the Law, and under the Gospel. Now the seventh day which was observed under the Law, being discharged; there is no other day but the first day of the week on which Gods proportion can be preserved and perpetuated without intermission and interruption. [For take any other day, as the second, or third, or fifth, or sixth, and there would be loss of time; it would not be (for once at least) one day in seven, but one of some other number; and besides, the six working days would not come all together, but some of them would go before the day of rest, and others would come after it, in one and the same week. Both which would offer violence to the Holy Commandment, which as it requires but one day in a week for religion, to six for worldly business, and allots six for worldly business to one for religion ordinarily; so it takes order that the six working days must go together, and the day of rest not come between them in the same week, but either go before, or follow them. Now in pitching upon the first day of the week both these were punctually observed at the first change of the day; for in the revolution of twice seven days there were two days for religion, the last of the first seven, and the first of the latter seven; and in each revolution the six working days are all together]. And thus it is still successively week after week; and thus it shall be perpetually (I question not) to the last week of the world; for I am assured that the old seventh day is void, and I am fully convinced that (whatever the Lord Christ could have done) we cannot make choice of any other weekly day of worship, but the first of the week, to hold up the morality of the fourth Commandment; which as the above mentioned Author (at whose torch I have lighted my candle) observes, is a thing worthy of special note, any may afford a satisfying reason, why there is no express institution of the first day of the week in the new Testament viz. Because the virtue of the fourth Commandment doth of itself fall upon that day, the former being void, being the only day capable of keeping up God's proportion perpetually determined in the Commandment; yet I confess (as formerly) that the Commandment does not directly institute the day, but falls upon the observation of it, and supposes the institution; neither do I urge it directly for the designation of the day; for the first day of the week is not expressly mentioned in the fourth Commandment, (no more is the last day of the week neither) (but a seventh day is; which although (as I said before) it could not be restrained to one day more than another; yet my meaning was, and is, that it could not be so tied to the last of seven, as not to be applied to the first of seven, if God so pleased. Briefly, this argument concludes rather for the observation, than the designation of the first day day of the week, as the only day upon which (in the vacancy of the old Sabbath) God has set his mind in the Law. And good reason. For  
2. This is the day, upon which, above all other days Christ has set his mark, his special, signal, characteristical mark in the Gospel, to mark it out for a day of weekly solemn worship under the new Testament. A sevenfold mark he has set upon it, which the malice of men and devils shall never be able to obliterate. As  
1. His glorious Resurrection upon this day. 2dly. His several veral Apparitions. 3dly His gracious actions and speeches at those apparitions 4th The Mission of his Holy Spirit on this day. 5th The inscription of his own blessed name upon it. 6th His Apostles and Apostolical Church's observation of it. 7th Their prescription about it. Of which I shall treat in order, as they lie, answering all objections that oppose themselves against this conquering truth of Christ.  
1. What a mark of honour, yea, what a crown of glory is it to this day, that it had the favour above all the days of the week to be Christ's resurrection-day? The Sun in the firmament arises and shines upon other days as well as this, but the Sun of righteousness never arose upon any day but this, and if we will believe the Holy Ghost, the institution of the day had its foundation here. 
Psalm 118.22, 23, 24.  For the discovery whereof I shall once more desire the Reader to turn to that Text, Psam 118. The stone which the bvilders refused is become the headstone of the corner, 
So 1 Pet. 2.7.  this is the Lords doing and it is marvellous in our eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made, etc. The Apostle Peter expounds this Text and applies it to Christ Acts 4.11. where, (speak. to Caiaphas and the rest of the Council who went for bvilders) he boldly tells them, This is the stone which ye bvilders refused; which is become the head of the corner; he speaks it of Christ and of Christ's resurrection; for v. 10. he had spoken of their refusing him in his Crucifixion, and Gods exalting him in his resurrection. Whom ye crucified and whom God raised from the dead. Thereby making him both a cornerstone, and head of the corner; Head of all principality and power. Coloss. 2.10. head (or Lord) of the living and the dead, yea, head of Heaven and earth, having all power in Heaven and earth then given to him. Matth. 28.18. Thus of David's prophetical prediction. Next let us consider his application of it; 1. In respect of the deed done; 2. In respect of the day on which it was done. 3. In respect of the duty of that day.  
1. The deed or work done (the raising of Christ from the dead) he magnifies as the Lords own act, his marvellous stupendious act; This is the Lords doing and it is marvellous in our eyes, v. 23. No wonder, for indeed this was the greatest wonder the ever was wrought in the world, concerning which we may say as Moses in another case, Ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, 
Deut. 4.32.  since God created man upon the earth, and ask from the one side of Heaven to the other, whet her there hath been any such things as this great thing is or hath been heard like it? That one by his own power should raise himself from the dead, no history no chronicle can parallel it. So wonderful was our Saviour's resurrection, that it challenges wonder even from his enemies. behold ye despisers and wonder, 
Acts 13.41.  Says the Apostle; wonder, at what? Why at God's raising Christ from the dead, of which he had treated before, verse 36, 37.  
2. The Psalmist applies it further to the day on which this work of wonder was wrought. This is the day which the Lord hath made; and mark the connection, the day depends upon the deed or work done. Factum domini (as one says) facit diem domini. The Lord's deed makes it the Lords day: Here the institution of the day is undeniably founded upon the resurrection of Christ; upon this account 'tis styled the day which the Lord hath made, because the stone, cast aside of the bvilders (Christ crucified) was made the head of the corner; that is, raised from the dead, as St. Peter expounds, and as Christ's resurrection was the Lords own doing, so the Psalmist foresaw that the resurrection-day would be a day of the Lords own making. If it be objected, So is every day. I answer but not every day alike. For look as it was in the works of Creation, all were God's works, all of his making; but man (the masterpiece) more especially, of whom it may be said with an accent, this is the creature which God had made; so here, all the days in the week are of Gods making, but this in the Text above all; the Holy Ghost sets an Emphasis upon it, This is the day which the Lord hath made: Made 1 How made? not by was of Creation, so 'twas made before, Gen. 1. But by way of institution; The day which the Lord hath made. What has he made it? A working-day, so it was before, if therefore he has made it any thing, it must be a holy solemn day, a day more solemn and sacred than all the days that God ever made before. And so the word signifies, not only to makes but to magnify, 'tis equivalent to sanctify.  
3. The Psalmist proceeds to the prophetical delineation of the duties of this day, Let us be glad and rejoice therein; Yea he brings in the Church shouting and singing Hosannas to Christ on this day, v. 26. 
a Math. 21.9.  Blessed is he that cometh to us in the Name of the Lord: As when the 
b Zech. 4.7.  Temple was finished, the headstone was brought forth with shouting, crying grace, grace, thereunto. So here, when the work of our redemption should be finished, and Christ exalted as head and cornerstone of his Church by his triumphant Resurrection, the Holy Ghost intimates the solemn gratulation, and public praise that the Church should offer on that day. So we are to understand the next words, were (as 
c Isal 56.7. Mal. 1.11.  usually) New Testament-worship is set forth in an old Testament-dress, v. 27. God is the Lord which hath she wed us light, (light indeed when the Sun of righteousness arises) he has made it a day of light and gladness to poor self-condemned sinners; therefore bind ye the sacrifice with cords to the horns of the altar: That is, offer to the Lord the sacrifice of public praise and thanksgiving, verse 29. Oh give thanks unto the Lord, for he is good, his mercy endureth for ever! So that, 'tis evident, a day of solemn worship is here intended, and Christ's resurrection day is principally pointed at, as a day which the Lord would institute and a day which the Church should celebrate; Saying, This is the day which the Lord hath made, let us be gland and rejoice therein. What a plain Scripture-proof is this of Divine authority of the Lords day? So plain that the adversary is forced to grant it. 
page 61.  It must needs be meant of Christ's resurrection-day, says he; and when he wrote his first book, he excited Christians to the weekly celebration of it: Whereas in a late railing pamphlet since he seeks to smother the light and evidence of this Text by a silly evasion, that the Psalmist speaks not of every first day of the week, but Easter-day, as may be conjectured. But I shall easily shake off this slight exception. Away with conjectures, let us search the Scriptures; what day does the Holy Ghost in Scripture call Christ's resurrection-day? Ask Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John they'll tell you, 
Math. 28.1. Mark 6.2. Luke 24.1. John 20.1, 19  'tis the first day of the week; the day of the year is never mentioned, nor the day of the month on which Christ arose, but the day of the week only, to teach us doubtless that Christ's resurrection-day must be no yearly, or monthly, but a weekly solemnity. Good reason, that the work of Redemption should have as frequent a commemoration, as the work of Creation had. Now ponder this, good Reader; and the Lord print it upon thy heart; the day of the Saviour's Resurrection prophetically extolled in the old Testament, as the day which the Lord hath made, is historically noted down in the New Testament as the first day of the week; and now we shall draw an argument which I hope will be an arrow of conviction to the contrary-minded, the rather because it comes out of Gods own quiver; thus the day of Christ's resurrection is the day which he Lord hath made for duties of solemn worship; but the first day of the week is the day of Christ's Resurrection; therefore the first day of the week is the day, which the Lord hath made for duties of solemn worship. The proposition is warranted by the Testimony of the Psalmist, the assumption is confirmed by the harmony of all the four Evangelists, the conclusion therefore will stand, as long as the world stands; namely, that the first day of the week is a day of divine institution; marked out by the finger of God, the spirit of Christ for a day of solemn weekly worship under the Gospel. For, as I hinted before, the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. 
* Acts 1.16. 2 Tim. 3.16. 1 Pet. 1.11. and ch. 3.19. Rom. 15.4.  It was by the spirit of our great Prophet, that all the Prophets of old did speak: Like stars they all borrowed their light from this Sun; they were irradiated and inspired by Christ; and when a holy Prophet foretells, such a thing shall be, we may as confidently build upon it, as if Christ himself had said, I will have it so. For indeed it is the voice of Christ that speaks in the old Testament, as well as in the new: And possibly this may be one reason why the Lord Christ has spoken so little in the Gospel concerning some new Testament-ordinances (as the Lord's day for one) namely, because the Prophets had spoken so much before; and Christ would not take off his people from the study of the old Testament, upon which the authority of the new does so much depend. Me thinks, as to the controversy of the Christian Sabbath, this should abundantly satisfy any sober Christian; that the day of Christ's resurrection was prophesied of by David and others, as a day which the Lord would make and institute, and accordingly practised by the inspired Apostles upon the first day of the week, and this practice perpetuated by the Church of Christ, the Catholic Church in all ages since for above sixteen hundred years. What can be objected with any colour of reason against so clear a truth?  
Christ hath not left one syllable for the institution or celebration of this day. 
T.T. p. 120. Answ.   
Not one syllable? Why did he not grant before, that Psalm 118. compared with Acts 4. Must needs be meant of the resurrection-day; and does not the spirit speak expressly, 
Mr. Perkins in his cases of conscience argues for the Christian Sabbath from this text. Cyprian, Austin and Ambrose, and all the ancients who have ever cited or saluted this place, Psalm 118. do expound it and understand it of the Lords day. See Mr. L. strange.  This is the day which the Lord hath made? Is it a day of the Lords making and will he make nothing of that? What else can be made of it, but a prediction of a Divine institution which is equivalent to a precept especially when expounded by Apostolical practice, as this has been. Let it be seriously considered, in what other sense can a day (made long before in respect of Creation) be styled the day which the Lord hath made, than in respect to a divine institution? An institution than it is, and the occasion of it Christ's resurrection which was the concluding act of our Redemption; and what an impression of glory does this stamp upon the day, above all the days that God ever made, the seventh day and all? As some * years' are crowned with God's goodness above others, so days also. The work crownes the day, as I have often said; and the greater the work, the greater the day, now that work in which God is most glorified in all his attributes must needs be the greatest work; such is the work of Redemption; 
Quasi hactenus nullus fuerit in orbe dies. Mollerus in Loc.  therefore the day set apart in commemoration of it, must wear away the crown from all other days. Such is Christ's resurrection-day, therefore Emphatically styled, The day which the Lord hath made; as if there had never been a day in the world till this day dawned at the rising of the Sun of righteousness, never such a day. 'tis worthy to be noted, what a wonderful concurrence of remarkable periods of time met together at our Saviour's resurrection, both in respect of the year and the day. 
Is. 61.2. ch. 63.34. John 4.34, 35. Heb. 2.14, 15.   
1. The year was a Sabbatical year, the year of Jubilee, as may be gathered from scripture; which if it make nothing for the Christian Sabbath, yet it makes much against the Jews Sabbath, themselves being witnesss. For the Hebrew Doctors have spoken rarely to this purpose, even to the admiration of considerate Christians. The Divine Majesty, say they, will be to Israel in a Jubilee Freedom, Redemption and finisher of Sabbaths. H. Broughtons' Sinai-sight.  
2. The day of our Lord's Resurrection was a remarkable day in many respects. As  
1. It was the eighth day in a continued reckoning of days, and eight was a number of greater prefection than seven in some respect; witness Circumcision, which was so strictly tied to the eighth day, 
John 7.22. Sacramentum hoc suit diei illius octavi, quo dominus resurrexit ad justificationem nostram. Ep. ad Fid. ita Aug. de Gelebr. Pasch.  that if it had fallen on the weekly Sabbath it must not be omitted for the Sabbaths sake. The ancients insist much on this. Circumcision on the eighth day was a type of that eighth day on which our Lord risen again for our justification, says Cyprian.  
2. Christ's resurrection was also on the third day after his passion, which himself foretold as the day of his perfection. For so some expound that saying of his, The third day I shall be perfected, Luke 13.32. Besides, this third day was a day of 
* Ho. 6.2. Lu. 24.46.  note in the Law and the Prophets, a day appointed, and appropriated to the Messiah, signally marked out in the Calendar of the Prophets and figured by many famous Types; as that of Isaac, who was virtually 
a James 2.21.  offered and restored again the 
b Gen. 22.4.  third day (as it may be computed) and that in a kind of 
c Heb. 11.19.  figure, as the Apostle intimates. So also Hezskiah who was in account a dead man, and on the 
d 2 Kings 20.5.  third day miraculously revived again. So 
e Jonah 2.10. Math. 12 40. See Ainsw. in Gen. 22.  Jonah and others: from which instances the Rabbins it serms could conclude Christ's Resurrection on the third day; There be many a three days, say they, in Scripture, of which one is the Resurrection of the Messiah.  
3. Christ's Resurrection was on the first day of the week, as the Evangelists unanimously testify. Which although it be termed by the blaspemous Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the nazarenes day (in a way of reproach) yet in Scripture-account, it is a day of greatest renown, being the first in order in the Creation, and the first in dignity by our Saviour's resurrection. The first-fruits of time, and the firstborn of days; and accordingly the only day in which our Lord became the 
f 1 Cor. 15.20.  first-fruits of them that slept, and the 
g Col. 1.18.  first born from the dead, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence.  
4. To all these may be added what some have probably argued; that this first day of the week was our blessed Redeemers Birthday, as well as his Resurrection day, yea the day of his Ascension into Heaven, as well as the mission of his Spirit; but this I leave to Mr. Aspinwal to make good: Only thus much I dare assert, that the day of our Saviour's resurrection, the first day of the week is the fittest for the commemoration of his Nativity, Passion, Ascension, and all other blessed transactions in the work of our Salvation. For the Resurrection of Christ implies all the rest, but is not necessarily of them: And if the Lord Jesus had not risen from the dead; what benefit had we had, either by his birth, life, death or burial? or being dead and buried, how had he ascended, and the Spirit (the Comforter) descended, unless he had first been raised from the dead? Besides his Resurrection and Ascension are computed 
h Luke 24.26. Eph. 4.8, 9, 10. See Dr. Twisse p. 117. Sect. 5. 1 John 20.17.  in Scripture as one complete motion. As his dying and continuing under the power of death for a time, were but one entire work of Redemption: For however after his resurrection he stayed a sew days here upon earth to confirm the faith of his followers, and settle the affairs of his Kingdom, yet he was no sooner risen but presently he speaks of his ascending; and indeed his rising was in reference to his ascending partly, if not a part of it: It was the first step of his triumphant passage into his kingdom and glory. So that in a right sense very Lords day is our Christmass-day, Easter-day, Ascension-day, Whitsunday, and all; my meaning, that in a right celebration of our Christian Sabbath, we solemnize the memorial of all these blessed ingredients in the work of our Redemption. We need not contend for an annual Solemnisation of our Saviour's birthday, resurrection-day, ascension-day; neither need we fear oblivion of these gracious and glorious mysteries, if the Lords day were duly observed. We cannot better keep alive the memory of these mercies, than by keeping a day in commemoration of them once a week; and no day so fit as the Lords day, in which we have the sum of all: A day that brought forth the greatest good to fallen man of any day, even a complete Redeemer; who on this day redeemed us with triumph from the tyranny of Satan, the dominion of death and hell; and 
k John 10.25. ch. 14. 19  restored us to life and Salvation, yea, assured it unto us. Therefore I conclude with that renowned father; the Lords day was declared by the Lord's Resurrection to be the Christians day; 
Dies Dominicus Christi resurrectione declaratus est, & ex illo caepit habere festivitatem suam. August Ep. 119. ad Jan. item de Civitate Dei. lib. 22. cap. ult. & Serm. 15. de verb. Apost.  and from that very time it began to be celebrated as the Christian man's Festival: or rather with that of the Psalmist, This is the day which the Lord hath made. 'Tis no day of man's making, if the God of truth may be believed. 'Tis a plant of the Lords own planting, therefore the Devil and all his instruments shall never be able to pluck it up. Neither can all the men, nor all the Churches in the world alter it to another day. And how remarkable is it that the Church for sixteen hundred years should not where offer or attempt to alter it, but in all places, and all ages observe it? What does this speak, but the Divine authority of it, by which men's Spirits have been awed, and their hands tied from such presumptuous undertake; the truth is (as I noted before) 'tis built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Jesus Christ (by his resurrection) being the chief cornerstone. And because nothing can ever fall out in this world comparable to Christ's Resurrection in glory and power, therefore no day can be set up like unto this, neither can it be changed for any other. 
See Dr. Bound lib. 1. p. 47.  No man can translate the work, therefore no man can translate the day: The like cause can never be offered to change this day which at first occasioned the choice of it. Therefore it must and shall remain, till the end of all things; men do but kick against the pricks in opposing the Lords day; they that would raze out the remembrance of this day, must first pick out Christ's mark which he has wrought into it by the work of Redemption, and so blot out the testimony of all the four Evangelists concerning Christ's Resurrection the first day of the week, together with the prophecy of the Psalmist; which if they dare do, Yet  
2. We have another conspicuous mark to note it by above all other days in the week, namely our Saviour's frequent apparitions on this day; after his Resurrection from the dead. Here let it be observed,  
First, That these glorious apparitions of our now glorified Redeemer, were no common favours, but choice and special evidences of his owning providence, both as to persons and times. For as he appeared not to all sorts of persons, but to some select 
* Acts 10.41.  chosen witnesses, who were either eminently devoted to his service, or designed to teach others; so neither did he make his appearance to those persons every day, but principally and most usually upon the day designed by the Prophets to his worship and service, and now consecrated by his blessed Resurrection; mostly vouchsafing his gracious visits to holy men in holy time; such (at least) as were so, or should be so.  
Secondly, Although it be 
* Acts 1.20.  said, that he was seen of his Apostles forty days between his Resurrection and ascension; yet it cannot be construed thus, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theophyl.  that he was seen every day during those forty days; but only thus, that there were so many days between his Resurrection and Ascension, in which he was sometimes seen. And this is all that the Greek will bear, for it is not [in forty day's] but [by forty day's] that is, by the space of forty days at times; for sometimes he disappeared.  
Thirdly, However it may be supposed that our Saviour did appear on other days (as once he did upon a working day) yet not other day of the week has the honour to be denominated, as the day of his appearing, but the first day of the week only: 'Tis never said, he appeared on the second or third day, much less the last day of the week or the seventh day; but the first day of the week is expressly and emphatically noted by name. 
* John 20.19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'tis not barely said, [the same day] but [the same day being the first of the week.  That same day, that first day of the week came Jesus and stood in the midst of his disciples, as if he would have it specially noted.  
Fourthly, 'tis evident that our Lord appeared often on this day gracing it with his beatifical presence above all days. In the 
a Joh. 20.14, 15.16.  morning to Mary Magdalen, and the rest of the holy 
b Math. 28.9.  women, who, when they saw him, fell at his feet and worshipped him; and in the evening of the same day to the eleven disciples, and 
c Lu. 24.33.36.  them that were with them gathered together in a way of Church. 
d John 20.19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  assembly, and this assembly convened it seems by our Saviour's own means, who appearing to Mary commanded her to carry tidings to his disciples of his joyful Resurrection. However a Christian assembly it was, and the first that enjoyed the presence of Christ after his death and Resurrection; than it follows, 
John 20.26.  After eight days the disciples were within again, and Thomas with them, than came Jesus and stood in the midst [after eight days] that is, as some would have it, after the daylight of the eighth day was past, or as the Geneva-translation reads it, eight days after; or, after eight days were come; that is on the eighth day: Which reckoning the Resurrection-day inclusively, was just that day seven-night, or the next first day of the week, there are six working-days in the week, and Sabbath and Sabbath make eight, now Christ appeared the first; 
See Mr. L'strange p. 73.  and the next succeeding, which was the eighth day so the ancients generally expound it: It is necessary that this should be the Lords day says cyril, and Nazianzen made an oration on purpose for it, styling it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the new Lords day, because it was the first Lord's day solemnised in the weekly revolution after the Resurrection-day. We shall clear it by Scripture, when we come to answer the Objections; mean while let it be noted, that this was the second solemn apparition of our blessed Saviour, after he risen from the dead; for the next mentioned by this Evangelist is said to be the third time that he shown himself; which what else can it signify to us, 
John 21.14.  but that he appeared not between those two first days? not on the seventh day, nor on any of the other six; he was absent all the week and appeared to none (except to some single persons as Peter) he made no public apparitions at solemn assemblies but upon his own day.  
Now methinks ingenious Christians should thus reason within themselves; certainly 'tis written for our instruction, that the Lord Jesus risen from the dead on this day, that in the morning of the day he shown himself to the holy women; that the same day at evening [being the first day of the week] the disciples were assembled, and Jesus came and stood in the midst, and after eight days again i.e. that day senven-night (for though part of the former and part of the latter day made it eight days, yet could it be but seven nights if we count it by nights, according to the account of natural days, such as the days of the week are) surely these things are not written in vain; that our Saviour should solemnly show himself in a Christian assembly on the very day of his Resurrection, and that there was no other apparition till that day seven night; this not doubt was of purposed providence, to give original to that Ordinance of the Lords day which accordingly has been observed ever since. St. Paul makes it one Argument (in conjunction with others) of his Apostleship, that Christ had appeared to him. 
* 1 Cor. 9.1. ch. 15. 8, 9  Am not I an Apostle, have not I seen Christ Jesus our Lord? And may not I in consociation with other arguments (as prophetical prediction Psalm 118. and Apostolical practice Acts 20. allege this as one proof of our Christian Sabbath? That Christ Jesus our Lord was often seen upon it, seen in assemblies of his Saints, seen in his royal robes, in his state of immortality, and not only seen but heard, preaching peace to poor sinners; opening Scriptures, cheering, quickening warming cold, dead, sad hearts; for when the disciples saw him they were 
* Luke 24.32. John 20.21.  glad, and their hearts did burn within them, while he opened the Scriptures to them; and all this on the first day of the week. 'tis true after this double apparition, our Saviour appeared on a working day, as the disciples were a fishing, and that was the third time of showing himself or the third day of his appearing. 
John 21.3.14.  But what of this, The disciples were sufficiently confirmed in the authority and solemnity of the Lords day by the two former apparitions; therefore well might Christ appear the third time upon a working day and countenance worki-day-business by his presence, to teach his disciples and us that every day is not a Sabbath day. But this fishing-day is not named; it might as well be on the Jews Sabbath as any other day of the week, for aught appears to the contrary in the Text; yet I do not say, it was; I will not speak, where the Scripture is silent.  
How often the first day of the week was celebrated by our Saviour between his Resurrection and ascension, is not punctually set down in Scripture. Junius is confident for every week. But there is good evidence for the two first, and none against the three last. Much may be said for that famous apparition on a Mountain in Galilee; which learned Lightfoot, 
Math. 28.16, 17, 19, 20.  Fenner and others conclude without doubt to have been on the first day of the week. 
Mar. 16.15, 16.   
Now the ascension-day draws on, and Christ withdraws his Corporal presence from his disciples, but on the day of Pentecost he visits them again by his spiritual presence. Acts 2. And that this also was on the first day of the week shall be fully cleared, when we come to the fourth mark:  
Lastly, 
Rev. 1.10.  Some years after all these it pleased the Lord Jesus to appear again on this day: Namely, to his servant John in the Isle of Patmos, (little paradise we may call it; for the presence of Christ makes a wilderness a paradise, especially so much of his presence as this blessed Apostle now enjoyed; more than ever was vouchsafed to any man upon earth, since Christ went up to Heaven) I was in the spirit, says he, upon the Lord's day; what then? Why v. 12. I saw seven Golden Candlesticks; and v. 13. In the midst of them one like the son of man; So like him that indeed it was the son of man, the man Christ Jesus; on the Lord's day than John saw Jesus Christ in the midst of his Churches, filling them with his blessed presence, that day above all others; and holding the stars in his right hand; that is, holding forth Heavenly light, by the Ministry of the word on that day especially; this John saw, and this he is commanded to set down in writing verse 19 and accordingly written it is, and written for our learning, upon whom the ends of the world are come. And what may we learn from it? Surely this at first view. viz. That in St. John's time the Golden Churches of Christ were wont to meet, Gospel-Ministers to preach, and Christ himself to be present with them by his spirit on the Lord's day. And this is written for a pattern to after-ages, and there is a 
* Verse 3.  blessing pronounced on those that read and keep the things that are written in this book. Blessed be Christ for this blessed book; here we have another glorious appearance of Christ on the Lord's day (not to one man only, or one Church only, but seven Churches, in which no doubt there were more than seven thousand souls) and that this Lord's day was also the first day of the week none but peevish spirits ever questioned. Ignatius who was trained up in the School of this great Apostle (and in all reason was most likely to know his terms) 
* Epist. ad Magnes.  clearly makes it a weekly holiday observed by Christians in the room of the abrogated Sabbath of the Jews. Yea, the Lords day was never taken for other, than the first day of the week by any Christian writer in any age, since the days of St. John till this last age of liberty and lies, that ever I could see or learn. Fathers, Councils, Schoolmen, ancient, modern writers, (two or three of this generation excepted) do constantly understand it of Christ's Resurrection-day, the first day of the week; and one would think the constant Dialect of the Church of Christ a sufficient Dictionary to interpret a word or phrase in Scripture, especially in such a sense as does not cross but correspond with Scripture. So does this, for how agreeable to Scripture is it to take the Lords day for that day which the Lord hath made? Besides 'tis observable, that this same beloved disciple, who was so exact in penning the first apparition John 20. is a spectator of the last Rev. 1. and just as he had related, that he sees this; the circumstances are remarkable. John 26.19, 26. Christ appears in the midst of the disciples; and Rev. 1.13. in the midst of the Candlesticks, or Churches; John 20.19. he appears upon the Resurrection-day arguing his Resurrection; and Rev. 1.18. repeating the same argument, Saying, I am he that liveth and was dead, and have the keys of death and hell: To say no more, John 20. he appeared on the first day of the week, and here again upon the day under a new name (the Lord's day) because it appeared by his Resurrection and former apparitions to be the day which the Lord had owned above other days, yea the day which the Lord had made and instituted. Thus we see how Christ's often appearing on this day tends to the further marking out of the day. But this mark is sorely shot at; objections come thick: but short answers will serve, when nothing is objected, but what has been answered by others; or nothing to any purpose.  
He is not ashamed to say, 
T. T. Obj. 1. p. 121.  I believe it will be found upon inquiry that Christ never appeared to any assembly, no not any one first day; for it is most certain, that the day upon the Scripture-account gins with the evening. Now upon the Resurrection-day we find Christ at the village seven miles from Jerusalem, when it was towards evening and the day far spent Luke 24.29, 30. after which he supped with the two, which took up some time, than they returned that seven miles and a half to Jerusalem on foot; so that by that time they came there, the day must be quite spent; and though 'tis said he appeared the first day at evening, yet the first day was then as fully ended as the Sabbath at sunset when they brought their sick, which was forbidden on the Sabbath-day; Mark 1.32.  
Christ appeared in the morning of the Resurrection-day as well as at evening; very early, as well as very late; Ans. 1 
Math. 28.9. Mark 16.9. Discourse of the instic. dignity and end of the Lords day. p. 33  to teach us that the whole day is his; 'tis the day which the Lord hath made, not a piece of the day. Thus I remember Dr. Hakewil long ago stopped the mouth of this objection, Christ appeared to his Apostles at night (says he) to instruct them and teach us, that even then it ceaseth not to be the Lords day.  
'tis so fare from certain, that the day in Scripture-account gins in the evening, that 'tis certainly false, Ans. 2 as shall appear hereafter. The instance of the disciples, returning from Emmaus to Jerusalem, and that late, makes much against himself. For, as late as it was in the evening before they got home (the later the better, as to the case in hand) yet the Holy Ghost does not call it the second, but the first day of the week. John 20.19. the same day at evening being the first day of the week, note it well: First, The Evangelist calls this time of evening the same day in which Christ arose from the dead. Secondly, He calls it the first day of the week; by which two expressions he puts the matter out of all doubt, that this evening was a part of the first day of the week. Thus the Holy Ghost provides against future errors. Let the objector now blush to consider, how shamefully he has given the lie to the spirit of truth 1. In affirming that Christ never appeared to any assembly, any one first day of the week. 2 That the first day was then fully ended, fully ended? then the Evangelist was much mistaken to tells us it was the same day; he should rather have said the second day, or the next day:] Mark 1.32. does (at most) but speak the opinion and practice of the degenerate Jews; who, if they stated the end of the Sabbath at the sunset evening by a traditional account (and therefore brought not their sick to be healed till the Sun was down) yet their superstitious opinion proves not that according to the true scriptural account the Sabbath began and ended at evening. Besides it is but a bare conjecture, that they brought their sick to be healed no sooner, out of respect to the Sabbath; 
* See Tremel. his Annot. in Math. 12.8. and Ainsworth in Ex. 20.10.  for they held that peril of life doth drive away the Sabbath. Some think the only reason why they came no sooner was, because they had no sooner intelligence of our Saviour's Miraculous healing power; But to end the controversy, however the Jews Sabbath might be supposed to begin and end at evening, yet 'tis apparent that the first day of the week ended not with the Sun-set-evening; because it is expressly said in this very chapter Mark. 1.35. That the morning of it was a great while before day. Thus 'tis said of Christ, that in the morning rising up a great while before day, (or 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  greatly in the night as the Greek has it) he departed into a solitary place to pray. And this was on the morrow of the Sabbath as the context shows. So that if it were the morning of the day while it was yet night, long before sunrising, than it could not be the evening or end of the day till long after the Sunsetting; so Math. 28.1. John 20.1.  
As for Christ's second apparition, Obj. 2 'tis expressly said it was after eight days and therefore could not be on the first day of the week. John 20.26.  
Why, Ans. did he never read that 
* Mark 8.31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Vide Bez. Calv. Rollock, Piscat. Jansen. upon the places. See Mr. Cawdry p. 4. ch. 1. The reckoning of these eight days is inclusive, see the like Lu. 9.28. compared wi●h Mat. 17.1. See Dr. Gouge Sabb. Sanct. p. 21.  Scripture, That the son of man must suffer and after three days rise again? After three days, therefore it could not be the third day, does that follow? As much as this; after eight days therefore it could not be the eighth day, or the first day of the week Mr. Sprint p. 138. Observes that 'tis as if the Evangelist had said, the eighth day after by an Hebraism; quoting the like speech Luke 1.59. ch. 2.21. or after the eighth day was come. Thus the like expression is used Jer. 25.12. When seventy years are fulfilled the people shall return; that is on the seventieth year; so Acts 2.1. When the day of Pentecost was fulfilled, i. e. Fully come. This appears to me to be the vulgar acceptation of the phrase, as in a like case, Math. 27.63. the chief Priests and Pharisees told Pilate that Christ should say while he was yet alive, after three days I will rise again; wherefore they entreat him of all loves, that he would command the sepulchre to be made sure till the third day. Whence 'tis evident, that by this phrase [after three days] they understood Christ's purpose of rising [on the third day] otherwise they would have desired a guard for a longer space than three days.  
Christ was ever seen of some or other of his disciples forty days. Acts 1, 2, 3. Obj. 3  
That Christ was seen by the space of forty days implies not that he was seen every day of the forty; only that he stayed forty days before he ascended and appeared at times, as was said before; besides we are not now arguing his apparitions to single persons only, but assemblies.  
Oh! Obj. 4 But the disciples were assembled only for fear of the Jews, not to celebrate the Sabbath in honour of Christ's Resurrection, for they believed not that he was risen, the women's tidings therefore seemed idle tales to them.  
The privacy of their meeting and shutting the doors was indeed for fear of the Jews. Ans. 1 But why they should fear the Jews more on those two days than any other, I see no reason, neither can it be any reason of their then assembling.  
'tis probable; Ans. 2 that their first assembly was not (on their parts) out of any religious respect to the day, for as yet they understood not that it was, or was to be the Christian Sabbath, (therefore some of them were travelling into the country Luke 24. for fear of the Jews too it may be, 
Math. 28.13, 14, 15.  because the lying soldiers had given it out that the disciples came by night and had stolen away the body of Jesus) yet on God's part in assembling them, and on Christ's part in appearing to them, there was doubtless some special respect to the day which they understood afterwards, and therefore the Evangelist is so precise in the notation of it; for John 20.1. having spoken of the first day of the week verse. 19 he reduplicates it most emphatically, saying, the same day then in the evening, that day being the first day of the week (as if he would be loath to be mistaken in that point of time) and though for the present the Apostles might be ignorant of their own practice, what it tended to (as Mary was when she poured the box of ointment on our Saviour's head, that she did it for his burying) yet afterwards, by Christ's second apparition that day seven-night, they were better instructed, witness their after-assembling on that day Acts 2. and Acts 20. to conclude this; why our blessed Saviour should neglect the Jews Sabbath and afford his-glorious presence in Christian assemblies on the first day of the week thus often and thus eminently, but to establish the day for sacred assemblies, and to teach us on what day especially we may expect his presence and blessing, I confess I am to seek: And although this mark may seem obscure to persons possessed with prejudice, yet the objectors attempts to deface it are utterly invalid: he has indeed trampled upon it with the Prelates old shoes (for his objections are the very same which the Prelatical party (so much defied by himself) urged long ago) but he cannot tread out the divine impression which Christ has stamped upon it. The apparitions of Christ on this day do further tend to mark out the day especially in a joint consideration with the next scripture-mark viz.  
3. The gracious speeches, actions, and transactions of Christ at his several appearings, tending partly to prove his Resurrection, the ground of our hope and the hinge of the day, to this purpose we may observe how sweetly our gracious Redeemer condescended to his poor doubting staggering disciples, manifesting himself even to all their senses, to their hearing by his heavenly voice, to their seeing by his visible presence, yea, to their feeling by offering his sacred body to be touched and handled by them; and partly to dignify his Resurrection-day; distinguishing it from all other days by Sabbath-exercises; As  
1. By his heavenly instructions; opening the Scriptures, 
Luke 24.46.  and preaching peace to his disciples; and to us as well as them; having slain the enmity by his Cross, 
Eph. 2.16, 17.  he came and preached peace; and this day he came with his Olive branch in his mouth, saying; peace be unto you.  
2. By giving forth commissions to his Apostles John 20, 19 As my father hath sent me, so send I you; whose sins ye remit they are remitted, etc. And then breathing upon them the Holy Ghost.  
3. By convincing demonstrations of his Resurrection, to strengthen the faith of Thomas; John 20.26. to which some add.  
4. His celebration of the sacred supper according to that promise, I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, 
Mark 14.25.  until that day I drink it new in the kingdom of God. That is, after I rise from the dead, which therefore 'tis like, that then he did. Yea, than he broke bread, and was known of the disciples in breaking of bread as he sat with them, 
Luke 24.30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  (not at meat as we read it) the word only implies his gesture of sitting. However, his first and second apparition together with the forementioned great transactions of instructing, inspiring blessing, sending his Apostles on this day, and performing most of these at their solemn meetings, do argue more for this day than any other; that it is the day which Christ has selected and sealed for the religious assemblies and Sabbath-exercises of his Church in all future ages to the end of the world. But I must contract.  
4 Another indelible mark of honour fixed upon the first day of the week, is The mission of the Holy Ghost, or sending the promise of the father, as a princely largess, or royal gift of Christ upon his Coronation-day; 
Luke 24.40. John 15.26. Acts 1.4. ch. 2. 33.  such a gift as was never given before, but when God gave his Son Jesus Christ. God so loved the world that he gave his son; and Christ so loved the world that he gave his spirit. And as Christ was given according to the fullness of the promise upon the day of his Resurrection; so was the blessed spirit of promise upon the day of Pentecost. And the same wonderful providence that ordered the Resurrection of Christ to fall upon the first day of the week, did also take order for the sending of the spirit on the same day. For that the day of Pentecost Acts 2.1. was the first day of the week, as it is generally taken for granted by Christian writers, so it may be evidently proved by the Scriptures. I shall not puzzle the Reader with perplexing intricacies, nor lead men into labyrinths to find out the truth: Let plain Scripture determine the matter, look to the statute-lawes of Moses concerning the feast of Pentecost Exod. 34.21, 22. Six days shalt thou work but on the seventh day thou shalt rest both in earing-time and in barvest, and thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the first-fruits of Wheat-harvest Levit. 23.10, 11, 12, 15, 16. When ye be come into the land which I give you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, than ye shall bring a sheaf of your first-fruits of your harvest unto the Priest, and he shall wave it together with the offering of a lamb without blemish; on the morrow after the Sabbath he shall wave it; and ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the Sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf, seven Sabbaths shall be complete even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath ye shall number fifty days, So Numb. 28.26. and more fully Deut. 16.9. Seven weeks shalt thou number unto thee, begin to number the seven weeks from such time as thou beginnest to put the sickle to the Corn. From the harmony of which four texts it appears, that this feast had three significant names which were all made good at that solemn Pentecost Acts. 2.  
1. 
Deut. 16.10.  It was called the feast of weeks, or of sevens; because from the waving of the sheaf, thehy reckoned as many weeks to this feast, as there be days in the week; namely seven weeks. Which evidently shadowed out some weekly Festival under the Gospel; the day whereof was denoted by that dya of Pentecost, Acts 2.  
2. 
Exod. 23.16. Levit. 23.10.  It was called the feast of first-fruits, and of harvest, because as they began their harvest upon the first of the fifty days when they offered the sheaf of first-fruits, so they had ended it upon the fiftieth day (which was properly the Feast-day) upon which they offered the wave-loaves. and indeed these fifty days, or seven weeks, 
Levit. 23.17.  were the appointed weeks of their harvest, by the offering of the sheaf at the beginning of their harvest there after fruits were sanctified, and the offering of the loaves on the fiftieth day was not only an eucharistical oblation, but also a token of the harvest's being finished and ended.  
3. It is called the Feast of Pentecost, because it was ever kept the fiftieth day; the fiftieth day, how reckoned? From the morrow after the Sabbath (that is, the first day of the week) but what mark had they to know this morrow by? Moses tells them; When you shall reap the harvest of yur land; or, when you begin to reap it, for so 'tis expounded in Deuteronomie. 
Deut. 16.9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Begin to number the seven weeks from such time as thou beginnest to put the sickel to the corn: In the Hebrew it runs thus, from beginning to put the sickle into the standing corn, thou shalt begin to number the seven weeks: So that when they began their harvest, they must begin their account of the fifty days, and the first of the fifty was the morrow of the Sabbath, or the day following the Sabbath (namely, the first day of the week) and as they began, so they must end the account on the same day; as the first, so the fiftieth day (or day of Pentecost) must be on the morrow of the Sabbath, Levit. 23.15, 16. and this is enjoined by the express command of God to be observed as a statute forever throughout their generations, this is the plain Scripture-account, and who can but observe the wisdom of God in it, in ordering the matter thus, that this Feast of weeks should never fall upon the seventh day, but ever upon the first of the week; (the morrow after the Sabbath, or the day immediately following it) if at least his statute-law had been observed?) What else could this presignify (as learned Dr. Usher speaks) but that under the state of the Gospel the solemnity of the weekly service should be celebrated upon that day?  
Now I hope that famous Pentecost Acts 2.1. will be no Parable, although we state it (according to the Divine oracle) upon the first day of the week, the morrow after the Jews Sabbath, we need no Almanacs to help us here, the Bible is sufficient.  
And because the Sabbatrians stand so much upon supposed mysteries in the Feast of Pentecost, according to their traditional account; I shall acquaint them with the real mysteries of Christ accomplished exactly according to this true scriptural account, 
See Dr. Usher  there they may see the type and the truth admirably concurring. For as at the time of the Passeover 
a 1 Cor. 5.7.  Christ our Passeover was Sacrificed for us, and lay in his grave the whole Sabbath following; so on the morrow after the Sabbath (when the sheaf of first-fruits was offered to God) Christ risen from the dead, and became the 
b 1 Cor. 15.20.  first-fruits of them that slept, 
c Math. 27.52, 53.  many dead bodies of Saints that slept arising likewise after him. From thence was the count taken of the seven Sabbaths or fifty days, 
Numb. 28.26. Exod. 34.22.  and upon the morrow after the seventh Sabbath (which was our Lord's day) was that famous feast of weeks that day of Pentecost Acts 2.1. upon which day the Apostles having themselves received the first-fruits of the spirit, 
Acts 2.1.4, 5, 41.  begat three thousand souls with the word of truth, and presented them as the first-fruits of the Christian Church unto God, 
James 1.18. Rev. 4.14.  and unto the Lamb; and from that time forward doth Waldensis note, that the Lords day was observed in the Christian Church in the place of the Sabbath. 
In his learned letter to Dr. Twisse p. 91.92.  Thus Dr. Usher that Library of learning. If it be objected, that in this discourse he states Christ suffering at the feast of the Passeover, and so falls in which the vulgar opinion which takes the morrow after the Sabbath Levit. 23. For the morrow after the Passeover-Sabbath; I answer that cannot be, for he had declared before, that the Sabbath there intended is the ordinary weekly Sabbath and the morrow after it the first day of the week and he citys Isychius and Rupertus as interpreting it so before him to whom I shall mae bold to add [Nazianzen] who was before them all; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orat. in Sanct. Pentecost  and in his 44th oration (speaking of the Feast of Pentecost) [This nation says he (meaning the Jewish nation) uses to consecrate to God, not only the first of their fruits, and firstborn; but the first-fruits of their days and years also. Thus the illustrious number of seven has carried the honour of Pentecost; for seven being composed upon its self makes fifty, wanting but one day which we have taken from this future age, being both the eighth and the first day.] His phrase is something dark, but his argument is clearly this, that the Jews Pentecost was fain to be beholding to the Christians eighth day, or first day of the week to make up the complete number of fity days. (And the like he says a little before concerning their Jubilee every fiftieth year) for seven times seven, makes but forty nine; to perfect the number therefore they borrowed the first day of the week and so consecrated to God the first fruits of their days, as well as of their land. So that this computation of the fifty-dayes to Pentecost from the morrow of the weekly Sabbath wants no authority to back it, neither humane nor Divine. But the plain word of God is our best warrnat and methinks that should satisfy. Dr. Twiss was no child at argument, nor one that would be satisfied upon slight grounds; but upon Bp. Ushers discovery of this truth by the  Scripture-evidence, he professes that he had received great 
* In his printed letter to Bp. Usher.  satisfaction; and acknowledges that the mystery of the feast of first-fruits was opened to the singular advantage of the honour of the Lords day.  
The only material objection against this interpretation, is the judgement of Mr. Ainsworth, and the English Annotatours, who take the Sabbath Levit. 23. For the Passe-over-Sabbath; 'tis true, they do so; but herein they are led by the common opinion of the Hebrew Doctors, who indeed are excellent guides, when they keep the beaten road of Scripture (and sometimes to direct us at a doubtful turning) but here it may be proved, that they themselves are out of the way, I do not say, our Christian writers, but the Hebrew Doctors, who in many things did make void the Commandments of God by their own traditions, and if there be any mistake, let it lie at their doors. And cerainly a mistake there is in this point. For that the morrow after the Sabbath could not be meant of the Passeover-Sabbath is clear; For  
First, It must be such a morrow after the Sabbath as must never fall upon the weekly Sabbath; the reason is plain, because it was the beginning of their harvest, when they put their sickle to the corn, or harvested their harvest Le. 23.10. which they are expressly forbidden to do upon their weekly Sabbath. Ex. 34.21, 22. Six days shalt thou labour, but on the seventh thoushalt rest both in earing-time and harvest. And see how this is coupled with the feast of first-fruits in the very same place, Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, etc. Now observe it, if the morrow after the Sabbath Levit. 23. had been the morrow after the Passeover-Sabbath, this would often have fallen upon the weekly Sabbath. For the Passe-over-Sabbath being fixed upon a certain day of the month viz. the 15th of Nisan, when ever this 15th of Nisan fell upon the Friday, the morrow after it must needs be on the Saturday, and so they must begin to reap their harvest upon the weekly Sabbath against an express command of God. The Hebrew Doctors foresaw this inconvenience, and had no other way to salve it, but by affirming, 
* See Ainsworth in Levit. 23.  that this reaping did drive away the Sabbath, and that it was lawful on the Sabbath-day: A most impious opinion. For it crosses the very letter of God's Law; In earing-time and in harvest thou shalt rest.  
Secondly, The morrow after the Sabbath at the beginning of their account, must be such a morrow as concludes it, Levit. 13.15, 16. therefore it could not be the morrow of the Passeover-Sabbath, or any Festival-Sabbath; for there was no such Sabbath at the end of the account, whatever there was at the beginning of it.  
Thirdly, The Passeover-Sabbath was fixed to a certain day of the month, 
* Numb. 28.17.  namely the fifteenth day of the first month; and thus all their other Festivals, they had their fixed days. But this feast of Pentecost is not where affixed in all the books of Moses to any one certain day of the month (nor indeed could it be, unless God should make a ceremonial Law to cross the Law of nature, or rather to limit the course of divine Providence, to ripen their corn just against such a day of the month) which (as Dr Usher observes) is a very great presumption that the Feast of Pentecost was a movable Feast, (namely as to the day of the month) but  as to the day of the week; so varying that it might always fall upon the day immediately following the ordinary Sabbath.  
Fourthly, The Anti-type is the best key to unlock the type. And this is clear in the new Testament; for that Christ was our first-fruits in reference to his Resurrection, St. Paul assures us, 1 Cor. 15.20. and that he risen from the dead on the morrow after the weekly Sabbath, all the 4 Evangelists do inform us. And T. T. has granted us, that these things must be punctually fulfilled by Christ, as well in the time as in the type. From his own grant therefore I conclude; That the day of first-fruits was the first day of the week, therefore so was the day of Pentecost, to the everlasting honour of that Lords day and the glory of God the Holy Ghost who sanctified it by his presence and power; sending down a new supply of tongues from Heaven (as if all the tongues upon earth were not sufficient) to sound forth the praises of our Redeemer, and spread his Gospel all the world over upon the first day of the week, as an earnest whereof there was a glorious beginning made this day, the Gospel being now published to some of all nations; for there was now a great concourse, even of every nation under Heaven, met at Jerusalem, Acts 2.5. and at this meeting three thousand souls converted, and baptised v. 41. a double baptism was indeed dispensed this day, the Apostles were now baptised with fire, and three thousand converts with water. Which was such a solemnity as the Church of God never saw the like from that day to this.  
I need say no more, 
T. T. p. 81.  the adversary confesses that this was the most glorious Sabbath that ever Church enjoyed. Only he would fain persuade himself and others that it was the Saturday-Sabbath; but herein he befools himself, and deceives others. His Grammar, Logic, and Arithmetic never falled him more than in this point. See what a Grammarian he is! Mr. Aspinwal had objected that the word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] translated [fully come] should rather be rendered [fully past] to which T. T. learnedly replies, that the Greek (being a Gerund in do) signifies [fulfilling] now I confess 'tis the first time that ever I heard of a Greek Gerund in do; it may be this author learned some Latin-Greek-Grammar, while he was a Roman-Catholick. I wish he do not stick too much in the Gerund in do still. One passage in his book renders it a little suspicious, as p. 146 [Letoy us, says he, celebrate the seventh-day-Sabbath, a day of delights to the Lord, and so obtain meercy for the Sabbath-pollution of our days of ignorance] What does he hope to obtain mercy by doing? Nay, than I do not much wonder at his zeal for the Saturday-Sabbath, I rather wonder he does not cry up the old Covenant again. To trace him yet further; he is a little out in his Arithmetic too. For in beginning the count of the fifty days on a Saturday he gins at the wrong end, making the last day of the week to be the first of the week, the seventh day the eighth day, the first day the second day, the sixth day the last day against his own professed principles; and is not here strange confusion? Let me ask him in good earnest if the seventh day were the first day in all those seven weeks, Deut. 16. how was the fourth Commandment kept all that while, which according to his opinion, will brook no other weekly Sabbath but the last of the week? Thus for his Arithmetic. Now for his Logic: But here he is quite lost; his Conclusions are flat Contradictions, and his his best Arguments Barbarous absurdities: I do him no wrong, let the Reader judge.  
I Affirm, says he, Object. 1 
Pag. 22. of his last book.  (with the most Learned of this Age) That the Sabbath from whence our Reckoning arises (Levit. 23.11, 15.) was not the weekly Sabbath, but the first day of the Passeover-Feasts. And a little before he calls it, The Passeover, on the morrow of which Sabbath the waving of the Sheaf was exactly accomplished in Christ by the Crucifying Priests, who waved him between Heaven and Earth upon the sixth day of the week, from which day began the Count of the Apostles Pentecost, punctually beginning and ending upon the Seventh-day-Sabbath.  
Here are strange mysteries indeed! First, Answ. he states the Crucifixion of Christ on the morrow of the Passeover-Sabbath, and yet he had argued before. That Christ was crucified on the Passeover-Sabbath itself; upon the day called Good Friday, says he, was our First-fruits waved by the Priests upon the Cross: And what day that was, he tell us, namely, The fifteenth of Nisan, which was the first day of the Passeover-Feast, say his Learned Authors. And I affirm with them, says the Objector, That this was the Sabbath, Leu. 23. So that to make good his cross conceits, he would have Christ crucified two days together, namely, on the Passeover Sabbath, and the morrow after it, that is, Friday and Saturday; which exceeds the cruelty of the crucifying Priests themselves.  
Secondly, To salve this sore the coins another conceit, namely, that the Passeover-day, and the Passeover-Sabbath were all one: 
Pag. 83.84  For thus he argues in his first book [The Israelites were appointed to bring (on the morrow after their Passeover-Sabbath) a Sheaf of their First-fruits to be waved by the Priests before the Lord, and from that day to count seven weeks: And here let the believer (who sees all Types ended in Christ) with confidence behold his dying Redeemer, as the undoubted Sheaf of First-fruits waved upon the Cross by the Crucifying Priests the very morrow after he had eaten the Passeover.] As if the morrow after the Passeover-Sabbath were all one with the morrow after the Passeover. Whereas the Learned Authors, whom he citys, will tell him, That the Passeover-day was no Sabbath, but a half-holiday, Ainsw. Leu. 23.5. But here again he is at odds with himself, for in his last book he boasts of his concurrence with the most Learned of this Age, saying, I affirm with them, That the Sabbath (Leu. 23.) is not the weekly Sabbath, but the first day of the Passeover-feast, that is the fifteenth day, as they affirm; therefore it could not be the fourteenth day. And if he wikll contradict himself, who can help it?  
Thirdly, Another gross Error is this, That he makes Christ the Anti-type of the First-fruits in reference to his Death, and quotes 1 Cor. 15.23. to prove it; which speaks expressly of his Resurrection. What shameful abuse of Scripture is this?  
The morrow after the Sabbath on which the account began, Object. 2 is known by three things, First, by the Sickles entering into the Corn, Deut. 16 9 Secondly, by the waving of the First-fruits, Leu. 23.11. Thirdly, by offering the same day a Lamb without Spot, Leu. 23.12. Now all these were punctually fulfilled in Christ on the day caleld Good Friday: Then the Sickle was put to him to cut him down, than he was Waved on the Cros, than this Lamb without spot was offered; from which day the holy Sabbath is the first of the account, and at the end of seven full weeks the same day that began did end the account.  
All this may be answered in a word. The Type and the time (to use his own language) hold no proportion. For the Sickle must be put to the Corn, the First-fruits Waved, and the Lamb offered the morrow after the Sabbath, Leu. 23.10.12. Whereas Christ suffered and died the day before the Sabbath, and not upon that day which he counts the morrow after the passeover-Sabbath (for then he must have been crucified upon the Saturday) but upon that which he calls the Passeover-Sabbath itself, namely, the fifteenth day of the Month. And here let him see how he hath lost his Cause, and his Credit too: For, I hope, he will stand to the judgement of Mr. Ainsworth and the English Annotators (else why does he cite them;) now they both affirm, That the Passeover Sabbath must be the fifteenth of Nisan, and the morrow after it (from which they began to reckon) must needs be the sixteenth day. From which they reckoned Exclusively (from the night of the sixteenth day, says Mr. Ainsworth Law. 23.15) Now Christ suffered upon the Friday, which was the fifteenth day, and the supposed Passeover-Sabbath. The next day (being the Sabbath) was the sixteenth of Nisan, from which day (namely when the day was ended) they must begin to reckon the fifty days to Pentecost, and so it falls pat upon the first day of the week; and thus T. T. reckons in his first book, excluding the morrow after the Passeover-Sabbath from being one of the fifty days. And so against his will he must be forced to begin upon the first day of the week, and that day that gins the account must needs end it; and so his confidence is utterly dismounted. Indeed in his last book he gins to reckon the sixteenth day Inclusively; but in the very next page he contradicts himself again, (leaving out the morrow after the Passeover-Sabbath as none of the number) a just jugment of God to make men fight with themselves, when they would fight against his Truth.  
The Waving of the First-fruits, Answ. and putting the Sickle into the Corn, are Erroneously and falsely applied to the death of Christ; they do both more properly relate to his Resurrection. The Resurrection of the Just at the last day is resembled to reaping, Matth. 13.39. The Harvest is the end of the world, and the Reapers are the Angels. Now Christ by virtue of his Resurrection was the First-fruits of that harvest, The First-fruits of them that sleep, 1 Cor. 15. The waving of the First-fruits under the Law did Typify Christ's rising from the dead, and presenting himself alive before God upon the day of his Resurrection. Again, the offering of the Lamb without Blemish, Leu. 23.12. makes not that day a Type of our Saviour's dying day; for it was their daily offering, and upon the last of the fifty days they were to offer seven Lambs without blemish, Levit. 23.20. Yet Christ died but once, and by that one offering hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified, Heb 9.28. ch. 10 14.  
But Mr. Jemison has prevented me in this Argument, and to give him his due he has done worthily in it, as to the substance of what he hath written. To conclude, after all attempts to the contrary, the glory of the Spirit's Mission rests upon the First day of the week: This day the Church of Christ was visited from on high, the promise of the Father was sent, Acts 1.4. The blessed Spirit came, the Disciples were assembled, Peter preached, thousands converted and Baptised, Acts 2. and all this is written for our instruction. Why the Church assembled (as Mr. Sprint argues) why on that day? Why the holy Ghost? Why Preaching? Why Conversion, and administration of Sacraments? Why the Promise of Christ accomplished, all on this day? but still to declare the will and Ordinance of Christ in blessing and sanctifying this day to his Church; and so marking it out for a day of public solemn worship, as a day in all its Prerogatives superlative above other days, the day of our Saviour's Resurrection, by which we are Justified; the day of the holy Spirits Descension, by whom we are Sanctified.  
Fifthly, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Andr. Caesar.  Another signal mark, is the inscription of his royal name upon it whose day it is, Rev. 1.10. 'tis styled the Lords day. Surely 'tis some additional honour to this illustrious day, that as it was the first day of time mentioned the beginning of the first book of the Bible, so it is the last day of same noted in the beginning of this last book of the Bible, to the praise of him who is our Alpha and Omega; the very name speaks Christ the Author of it, if not his Resurrection (whereby he was declared both Lord and Christ) the occasion of it. The ancients had it in singular esteem for the very name sake. 'tis an elegant and pious poem which I find written upon it by Sedlius, an ancient Christian Poet who was but a few years 
* Vid. Sixti Senesis Biblioth. sanct. p. 308.  Jerome's Junior.  
Caeperat intereà post tristia Sabbata felix  
Irradiare dies, 
Libr. 5. Carm.  Culmen qui nominis alti  
A domino dominante trahit, primusque videri  
Promeruit nasci mundum, atque resurgere Christum.  
In English thus,  
After sad Sabbaths th'happy day'gan dawn,  
Whose lofty name from Lord of Lords is drawn;  
A blessed day, that first was graced to see  
Christ's Rising and the world's Nativity!  
But we have more ancient Records than this, appropriating the title of Lords day to our Christian Sabbath. 
Omnes ferè sacrae Scripturae interp etes, tam veteres quam Recentiores de primo dïe hebdomadis intelligunt. Wallaeus dissert. de 4. prae: cap. 6. p 150.  Ignatius (who lived in St. John's time) makes it a weekly holy day of the Christians observed in the room of the Jews Sabbath: So Tertullian, Atharasius, Hierom, Austin, who not? By this title we may trace it down from the Apostles times through the Ocean of the Fathers, Councils, Schoolmen to this present age, wherein we live. And to come to Scripture; there seems to be much in that which Beza observes out of an ancient Greek manu-script, wherein that first day of the week 1 Cor. 16.2. is expressly called the Lords day; and the Syriack translation tells us, 
* Institut. Theol. loc. 48. de cana. Dom.  that the Christians meeting together to receive the Lords Supper 1 Cor. 11.20. was upon the Lord's day: And Bucanus saith, this Sacrament is called the Lords Supper, as in respect of the institutor and the end of it, 
I had rather interpret the Lords day by the Lord's Supper than as Bucan. does the Lord's Supper by the Lord's day.  so also in respect of the day on which it was wont to be administ; viz. The Lord's day, citeing that Text Acts 20.7. and hence also the ancients styled it, Dies panis, the day of bread, because the Churches of Christ ever used to break bread on this day. But to end all disputes, if Scripture may be safely interpreted by Scripture, and dark places by plain ones, then let us expound the Lords day Rev. 1.10. by the Lord's Supper 1 Cor. 11.20, Here let the reader take notice, that the blessed Spirit of God (who had his choice of words, and never spoke any thing but upon admirable reason) never vouchsafed this title of honour in the new Testament, but only to the Supper and the day; the Lords Supper and the Lords day. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Cor. 11.20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Rev. 1.10.  Neither can any third Text be produced, where this Epithet is applied to any thing else. Now the phrase being the same (and thus singular) the sense must needs be the same. Look therefore in what notion the Supper is the Lords Supper, in the same sense is the day (styled the Lords day. The supper is the Lords, because the Lord Christ instituted it, yea and substituted it in the room of the Passeover; and why not the day His, 
* So Mr. Perkins in his cases of conscience.  because he instituted, and substituted it in the room of the old Sabbath? 'tis evidently a day of Christ's institution, a day of the Lords own making, and with reference to his Resurrection, he made it such a day of the week, not such a day of the year as we proved before in a word, let any other day be set up in constitution with the first day of the week, for the title of Lords day, and we shall easily nonsuit it, Our Saviour's birthday bids fair for it. Obj. 1 
T.T.  Answ.  
Then it must be a day of divine institution, which I hope he will not say.  
But I answer further, if the day of Christ's nativity, or any other day besides the first day of the week had been devoted to Christ, and intended by John in this place, he had spoken very obscurely to say, I was in the spirit on the Lord's day; he would rather have said, I was in the spirit on one of the Lords days. 
Annot. ad loc.  But to put this fancy to flight, observe the day here dignified with this magnificet title must needs be some noted day, the circumstances of time, place, and person are set down (as Beza observes) the better to conciliate credit to the truth of these heavenly visions; therefore all (but that of the place) have an eminent badge of cognizance upon them; John was a known person; and the Lords day (with an emphatical Article, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a well-known day doubtless, he that relates to others such a thing done such a day, presupposes the day sufficiently and certainly known; for a doubtful circumstance darkens a story, and draws a curtain in stead of opening a casement to give light to the matter; now let us put it to the question; what day was more eminently and unquestionably known in all the Churches of Christ than the first day of the week? Which the Secretaries of Christ (all the four Evangelists) had so exactly noted, and the Psalmist so prophetically extolled, as a day of the Lords making? St. John could not but know that these seven Churches knew the first day of the week to be Christ's Resurrection-day, and neither he nor they could be ignorant that Christ's Resurrection-day was the day which the Lord had made, and what's that but the Lord's day? As for our Saviour's Birthday (although it were a day of wonderful mercy) yet it is left in great obscurity, not one of the Evangelists marking it out by name; neither can it be so clearly resolved, either what day of the 
* Unless the adversary will grant Mr. A. that it was the first day of the week.  week, or what day of the month, or what month of the year, nor hardly what year of the world our Saviour was born in, but it may be matter of controversy. See divers disputes about it in Dr. willet's Hexapl. on Dan. chapter 11.  
If John intends any single day, 'tis most likely to be the seventh day which was anciently styled the Lords holy day, Obj. 2 Isai 57.6. and is declared by Christ to be his day, Mark 2. last. and no other day throughout the Gospel does he declare to be his. This he and Mr. Braburn in contradiction to the whole Christian world) would fain persuade us that the Lords day which St. John speaks was the old Sabbath. But  
He may as well say that the Lords Supper which St. Paul speaks of was the old Passeover, Ans. 1 since that was the 
* Exod. 12.11. Luke 22.20.  Lord's Supper in the old Testament, as much as the seventh day was the Lord's Sabbath.  
Christ never declared the seventh day to be the Lords day, Ans. 2 although he declared himself to be Lord of the Sabbath-day. My meaning is, that he never owned the seventh day as the Author and institutor of it in a strict Evangelical sense, neither could he, for it was instituted long before. Heb. 4.4. therefore (let it be well considered) the Lord's day (Rev. 1.10) for this very reason cannot possibly be understood of the Jews Sabbath, because it is such a Lords day as relates peculiarly to the Lord Christ; not as the Lord our Creator; but the Lord our Redeemer; to Christ actually exalted to be Lord over all; relates to him, I say, as the Lords Supper does; not only as his by possession, but his by institution: for these two (and these only) the Supper and the day are called [the Lords] in Scripture. The Greek word is used but twice in all the new Testament, only these two have the honour to be matched in this glorious appellation; and we must interpret the one by the other, therefore, if the Lords Supper be a Gospel-ordinance and institution of Jesus Christ, so is the Lords day; This parallel will pinch the adversary, he cannot so much as pretend that the seventh day, (nor indeed any other day but the first of the week) was instituted by Christ, so as to be equalised in phrase with that pure Evangelicall ordinance the Lords Supper. There is a vulgar objection abroad, that every day is the Lords day; therefore this Text makes as much for an every-day-Sabbath as the weekly Lords day Sabbath. But the answer is easy, they may as well say every Table is the Lords table, and every Supper the Lords Supper, and so turn levellers of days and duties together. Well, we have brought it to this issue, that there is a day, a special day under Gospel (but not Jew's seventh day) which the Lord Jess has instituted and owned above all days by stamping his own most blessed name upon it, (as upon his sacred Supper) and this we are sure can be no other than the first day of the week.  
The objector (fearing belike that the former shift would fail him) has another evasion to second it, Obj. 3 namely that old thread bare Notion of Gomarus. I rather think (says he) that the Lords day which S. John spoke of was the Lord's Judgment-day, which the Lord himself calls his day, Luke 17. Phil. 1.16. And so he dreams that the day on which S. John dated his Epistles to the seven Churches, was the day of Judgement.  
But,  
This (as one sayes0 is void of all judgement: Answ. 
See Mr. Ley Sund. Sab.  For in the readiest construction of the words S. John spoke of a day that was in being before the Vision came, and so known that the Reader might take notice when it came. But the day of Judgement is not yet come (unless it be to such dreamers) and so utterly unknown to man, that our Saviour hath taught us, 
Mat. 24.36 Mark. 13.32  Of that day and hour knoweth no man: no, not the Angels in heaven, but my Father only. The prooses he alleges are impertinent; for although the day of Judgement be styled the day of the Lord (appellatively.) yet is it never termed the Lords day (denominatively) as Mr. Cawdrey might have taught him, if he had not thought himself too wise to learn of his betters. Thus all his cloudy notions are scattered, and the Lords day (Rev. 1.10.) discovered by evidence of Scripture and Antiquity to be the first day of the week.  
Now as the blessed Martyr Ignatius exhorteth, Let every one that loves the Lord Jesus Christ keep holy the Lord's day. Let the zeal of Primitive Christians herein provoke us to holy emulation. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ignat. ad Magnes. Plinius sub Trajano scripsit, Solitos hoc stato die convenire Christianos ante lucem, carmenque Christo quasi Deo Communi voce dicere; postea Sacramento se obstringere ne scelus aliquid, ne furta, ne latrocinia, ne adulteria committerent. Magdeb. Cent. 2. c. 6.  Even a Heathen could observe how those precious morning stars used to meet early on this day and sing Hymns to Christ: an not only to sing his praises, but to celebrate his holy Supper (the Lord's Supper upon the Lord's day doubtless) binding themselves in a holy Covenant to hate and fly sin. And 'tis known to have been the common question put to Christians by Pagan persecuing Governors [Dost thou observe the Lords day?] the usual answer was [I am a Christian, I dare not intermit it.] This was wont to be the distinguishing Shibboleth, the cognizance of Christians in the purest times of Christinity. O blessed souls! because they were Christians they durst not intermit the Lords day; no, though they lost their dearest lives for keeping of it. How ill do they deserve the Name of Christians in these days, who make no Conscience of this day; yea, who have the impudence to Preach against it, Writ against it, Work upon it as if it were a common day. I remember what the holy Apostle spoke in a like case to those that polluted the Lords Table, using it as if it were their own table, What, have ye not houses of your own or eat and drink in? 
1 Cor. 11.22  or despise ye the Church of God? The like may I say to all prophaners of the Lords day, Have ye not days enough of your own to work and to play in? or despise ye the Lord's day? Is it a sin, a prooking sin, to use the Lords Table as if it were your own table, to eat Sacramental Bread as if it were common bread? and is it no sin to use the Lords day as a common day, as if it were your own day? Why, is it not parallel in phrase with the Lords Supper? Is not the Lords Name and Superscrition found upon the one as well as the other? I charge thee therefore (Reader) in the Name of the Lord Jesus so visibly graven upon this day, render to Christ the things that are Christ's: Be assured the Lord will not hold thee guiltless for taking his Name in vain, and spending his time in vain; his time (I mean) upon which he has stamped his noble and royal Name. This is the fifth Mark or Seal of the day, The Inscription of Christ's glorious Name upon it.  
6. The sixth is, The Apostles and Apostolical Church's observation of it. The holy Apostles were men intimately acquainted with the Secrets of Christ (being most of them trained up in his School) and personally conversant with him by the space of 
a Acts 1.3  forty days between his Resurrection and Ascension; as 
b Drut. 9.11  Moses was forty days with god upon the Mount. Besides, they had immediate Inspiration, and authoritative Mission from Christ himself to manage the public affairs of his Kingdom. Our Saviour made them a kind of Letter of Attorney (as one speaks) to speak and act in his Name, as if he himself had been personally present, 
c John 20.21.  As my Father sent me so send I you: and 
d Luke 10.16. Non minùs ratum est quod Apostoli dictante S.S. P. tradiderunt, quàm quod ipse Christus tradidit. Cyprian.  he that heareth you heareth me. Neither does this extend only to their Verbal preaching, but to their visible preaching also, their practice I mean (at least in things Evangelical and of moral, general, perpetual concernment to the Churches of Christ) otherwise why is their practice propounded as our Pattern? 
e Philip. 3.17,  Walk as ye have us for an ensample. And, 
f Philip. 4.19.  Those things which ye have seen in me do. And again, Be 
g 1 Cor. 11.2.  followers of me as I am of Christ, says the great Apostle. Yea, not only the Apostles themselves, but the first Churches planted by them are imitable patterns to other Churches, especially in things apperteining to the public exercise of Gospel-worship: 
h 1 Thes. 2.14.  we may exemplify both together in the observation of the Lords day; not once, but often; not by single persons only, but by sundry Churches and Church-assemblies met on this day. That general Assembly, Acts 2.1. when they were all together with one accord, we have already proved to have been upon this high and holy day: and how they keep it we have seen, and how God crowned it with the effusion of his holy Spirit, as also the Conversion of souls is further considerable. For 'tis very probable, that not only the three thousand (Acts 2.41.) but the other five thousand also (Acts 4.3.) were all converted upon this day of Pentencost. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 3.1. notes identity of time as 2 Sam. 21.9. Deut. 25.5. and the ninth hour ch. 3. hath reference to the third hour, ch. 2. See. Dr. Lightfoots Harm. in Acts.  For it was but the third hour of the day, or nine a Clock in the morning when the first Sermon was preached which brought in the three thousand (Acts 2.15.) and at the ninth hour, that is about three a clock in the afternoon, Peter and John went into the Temple, Acts 3.1. wrought a glorious miracle, preached another powerful Sermon, which gained five thousand more (Ch. 4.) such a Spirit of Conversion was never poured out upon any day, as this. Well might the Holy Ghost call it 
i Psalm 120.3.  the day of the Lords power; the adversary acknowledges, it was spoken of this very day.  
Again, As this Church at Jerusalem, so the Churches of Corinth and Galatia kept this day too, as shall presently appear from 1 Cor. 16.2. and so the Church of Troas in Phrygia, (Acts 20.7.) which was a neighbour Church to them of Galatia: And the like may be said for the seven Churches of Asia; for upon the Lord's day St. John saw them all in a vision, and saw Christ in the midst of them; saw him, as the Saints have been wont to see him in his glorious go in the sanctuary, walking amidst his golden Candlesticks, 
Psalm 68.14. Isai. 30.20.  with stars in his hand, that is, Gospel-Ministers, shining like stars in the Firmament of the Church and diffusing the light of the glorious Gospel in the actual exercise of their Ministry on this day especially. Yea upon this day John himself was ravished in spirit, which made the place of his exile like Paul's third Heaven to him, now I demand how this could come to pass, that so many several Churches, as the Church at Jerusalem, Corinth, Galatia, Troas, Ephesus Thyatira and the rest (many of which were at a great distance one from another) should so unanimously consent and concur in keeping this day, if the Apostles by the authority of Christ had not settled it, as an Ordinance in all Christian Churches. Let any rational man tell me how all these Apostolical Churches should so early, and in the beginning of their plantation consent together to keep the same day, unless they had been directed by their first founders the holy Apostles themselves. Add to this, the joint and uniform practice of all Christian Churches in all succeeding ages since; and he has hardly the faith of a Christian, if the reason of a man, that dares so much as question the divine authority of the Lords day; for whence came this universal agreement all the Christian world over, that all the Churches of Christ should so early, so 
* Even Herericks themselves and such as were for the Jews Sabbath (as Ebion and his followers) did always observe the Lords day also; Euseb. lib. 3. and so do the Ethiorick Churches to this day as Dr. Heiten testifies.  universally, so constantly observe this day, (not one Church ever attempting to alter it) but from some authority superior to the Churches themselves? Certainly such customs as were never ordained by Christ, or his Apostles were never observed by all Christian Churches throughout the world, as the Lords day hath been. Such unity of custom, in universality of place, with perpetuity of practice, all meeting together in that which has some footing in Scripture must needs argue a divine institution; yea, if there had been no express Scripture testimony of the Apostles practice and observation of it; as our Divines do solidly argue for the baptism of infants, although there be no express precept, nor express example of it found in Scripture, yet the grounds and reasons of it being found in Scripture, with the general practice of the Church concurring we dare not but own it and maintain it. How much more the Lords day? yea, if there had been neither precept nor practice of it in Scripture; as long as the grounds of it are laid in Scripture; namely a Moral law for the substance of it (as one day in seven) and a prophecy for the particularity of the Church, without any contradiction till these last disputing days, wherein men are grown so bold as to deny principles. I do the rather instance this, because I have to deal with an Anabaptist, who confidently calls the baptiseing of grown persons 
* Let him show me one Scripture for that, if he can either precept or precedent for the baptiseing of such at years of diferetion as were born of Christian parents; To tell us of the Apostles baptiseing men and women is no news; but were they such men and such women as are plunged now adays, no verily, they were not born of baptised Christian parents as blessed be God we are.  born of Christian parents a flourishing truth after it has been convicted and condemned by the learnedest pens in Christendom for a foolish error. But to come to that I aim at; let me advise this man in cool blood to ask his own conscience this question; namely, whether or no, if he could find in Scripture express Apostolical practice (consequential proof satisfies me and others) for infant-Baptisme, he would not own it, as an Ordinance of Christ? Or thus, whether (if the Holy Ghost had expressly affirmed in Scripture that in the Apostles times baptism was (once at least) administered to infants in a solemn assembly of Christians. Paul himself being present and actually assisting in the administration) his own conscience would not tell him, nay then surely infant-baptism is an Ordinance of Christ? Let him say the same concerning the celebration of the first day of the week. For the Holy Ghost has expressly declared, that this day was solemnly kept at Troas, Paul himself being present and principally engaged in the work of the day. For let the Text be consulted; Acts 20.6, 7, 8. We came to Troas in five days, where we abode seven days, and upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together (or were gathered together in a Church-assembly) to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to departed on the morrow, and there were many lights in the upper room where they were assembled together; and there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus etc. Here note  
1. 
Una Sabbati, id est, Die domini●●, & dies dominica recordatio dominicae resurrectionis, Ven. Beda. In Acts 20. Tom 5.  When this solemn assembly met together; on the first day of the week, says the Text. The day which all the Evangelists witness to be Christ's Resurrection-day. This day than the disciples were congregated: But why the first day of the week? Why not th' elast day of the week, which was the Jews Sabbath: strange, if that had been the Christian Sabbath, that these primitive Christians had not have met on that day, especially since it was but the day before! yet more strange, that we read not a word of Paul's keeping it, since he tarried at Troas seven days. But most of all, that we read not one word in all the New Testament of his owning that day in any Christian Church at all; only the first day of the week; a fair argument that the day was changed upon the account of our Saviour's Resurrection.  
2. The Church is assembled on the first day of the week, but how? Privately, it may be: No, publicly and openly (as those times would bear) yea, probably the company was very numerous; for it seems the room below would not hold them, but they were fain to get up into the windows three stories high, as Eutychus did, Acts 20.8. doubtless it was no small appearance. Well  
3. Here is a full assembly met upon the first day of the week, but why then? To break bread, says the Text, to receive the Eucharist, says the Syriack translation; that is, to 
* Math. 26.26, Acts 2.46. 1 Cor. 11.24.  receive the Lords Supper upon the Lord's day. The Lord's Supper? What without preparatory prayer and other Sabbath-exercises; that had been but a faint devotion, will some say, Mr. Shepard answers it well. Breaking of bread is here put 

Thus prayer is put for the whole worship of God.  
Gen. 4.26. ch. 12.8. Acts 2.21. Rom. 10.12, 13.   Synecdochically, the part for the whole; there is no more reason to exclude prayer, preaching, singing of Psalms, because these are not mentioned, than to exclude drinking of wine in the Sacrament (as the blind Papists do) because neither is that expressed, but breaking of bread only. So that the first day of the week in effect is called the day of meeting to break bread, which was ever accompanied with prayer, preaching and other holy exercises. Now (as the  
* Thes. 35.  Author observes) if ever the Saints used to break bread on any other day, yet the day is never mentioned as a special time for such a purpose; nor do we find in all the Scriptures a day distinctly mentioned for holy duties (as this first day of the week is) wherein a whole Church meet together for such ends, but that day was holy: The nameing of the particular day for such ends, implies the holiness of it. Well, the Saints at Troas meet on this day to receive the Sacrament.  
But,  
4. Have they no Sermon? yes, and Paul himself preaches it v. 7. And continued his speech till midnight, and about break of day he departed: Which yields us two notes, one, that the first day of the week is no travelling day. St. Paul would not, we are sure he did not travel this day, but the day after; another, that the first day of the week is a solemn holiday, to be spent in spiritual exercises and Sabbath-day duties, as preaching, hearing, praying, conferring, breaking of bread, in commemoration of Christ, his death and Resurrection. Why else does the Holy Ghost story this down so exactly and precisely? Is it not written for our learning upon whom the ends of the world are come? Yea doubtless for our learning; that we might forecast our journeys and other affairs in such sort, as to keep holy the Lord's day, and not entrench upon it by travelling or the like; thus we have plain Apostolical practice for the observation of this day. But see how this clear Text and truth is cavilled at.  
This meeting of the Saints at Troas was occasional; Obj. 1 
T.T. p. 123.  Answ. and what was the occasion of it, he intimates in the next words viz. Paul's departing by Sea.  
This is a sorry shift, for the Text says not, that the disciples were assembled by reason of Paul's departure the next day; but they were assembled this day to break bread without the least reference to Paul's journey the day following. So that this Church-meeting was not occasional, but a thing usual upon the first day of the week. And the context clearly implies, that the putting off of Paul's journey till the next day was occasioned by the Church's meeting this day, not this meeting by his departure the next day; for the Apostle seems to stay purposely and wait seven days among them; that he might have a public opportunity of preaching and communicating with them upon the usual day of their public assemblies; which appears by this convention to have been the first day of the week, here was therefore nothing occasional in all this solemnity; neither the assembly, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  nor Sacrament, no nor the Sermon neither; but only the length and continuance of the Sermon till midnight; this indeed was occasional, by reason of St. Paul's departure on the morrow, so the Text itself imports; Paul being to departed on the morrow preached and continued his Sermon till midnight; he preached a long Sermon, because it was his last Sermon, he was like to preach among them.  
The Saints assembled and broke bread every day, Obj. 2 Acts 2.26. therefore they may as well plead for an every day Sabbath as for the first day Sabbath from Acts 20.7.  
It cannot be proved by Scripture that the Lords Supper is an every day's Supper, Answ. or that ever it was celebrated on any day (after the first institution) but upon the Lord's day; which may be reckoned as a special prerogative of this day above the Jews Sabbath, and all other days: The Lord's day and the Lords Supper are Scripture-companions. Acts 2.26. is misquoted; I perceive this Author uses to quote Scripture at a venture; but I suppose he means (Acts 2.46.) and there indeed we read of the Saints continuing daily with one accord in the Temple, and 
* Domi frangebant portionem. Syriack verse.  breaking bread from house to house; but to take this for Sacramental bread, and make it their daily bread, is to mistake the matter quite. For although verse 42. speak of bread Sacramentally broken, yet verse 46. the phrase is quite altered, and the 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  word signifies ordinary bread, or common food; Piscator understands it of bread broken in a way of Charity, or dealing their bread to the hungry, as it is 
* Isai 58.7.  elsewhere expressed.  
If breaking of bread had been a service peculiarly designed for the honour of the first day, Obj. 3 the Apostle would not have deferred it till the second day, till after midnight. verse II.  
Neither does it appear that he did defer it till after midnight. For Eutychus dropped asleep in Sermon-time, Answ. verse 9 and the Sermon lasted but till midnight verse 7. and as soon as Eutychus caught his fall (no doubt) Paul hasted to raise him again, And when he was come up again, he broke bread verse 11. 
Part 3: Thes. 63.  all this while it might not be midnight, for after all this he talked a long while, even till break of day. Besides (as Mr. Shephard observes) the Lord's Supper might be administered before Paul's Sermon. And that breaking of bread verse 11. might be common bread; some ordinary repast for Paul after his long preaching, and before his long journey. And the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) implies as much, and hence also 'tis spoken of one man principally; When he had broken bread, and eaten &c. however 'tis expressly said v. 7. that the disciples were assembled together (ex more says 
* Ad locum.  Pelican) after their wont manner) to break bread upon the first day of the week; and their purpose shows, what was their usual practice.  
The disciples came not together till towards evening, Obj. 4 for as soon they are met, we read of lights in the upper room, and this is no fair precedent for keeping a Sabbath  
They must needs be come together before Candle-lighting, Answ. 1 by is own principles; otherwise, how is it said, they were assembled the first day of the week, since he holds that the day gins and ends with the Sunset evening?  
The text saith not, Answ. 2 they met in the evening of the first day, but on the first day; and it might be in the morning, for aught appears to the contrary. The lights in the upper room are gue not that it was late in the day before they assembled, but long in the night before Paul ended his Sermon. Besides, supposing they came not together till towards the close of the day (remembering still what perilous persecuteing times those were) yet out of question the former part of the day was spent in religious exercises, otherwise the disciples had rushed very rudely upon that sacred and solemn ordinance of the Lords Supper. We should count them but sorry Christians that should dare to come reaking out of the world, from their Merchandise, or shops, or fields, or farms to sit down, as guests at the Lords table.  
The Saint's example at Troas doth no more oblige us to their time, Obj. 5 than their meeting in an upper chamber doth tie us to the like place.  
If time and place be equal circumstances in religion, Answ, 
See Mr. Woo of the Sab.  than the old Prelatical Argument were good; as, the true worshippers of God are not tied to worship him either in Jerusalem or any other peculiar place, but must worship him in spirit and in truth in all places; so neither are they tied to any time of worship, but may pray continually. But this principle is out of plea now, and I am persuaded in urging of it the objector fights against conscience and struggles against his own convictions. For he has elsewhere maintained time and place to be unequal circumstances, and if not equal, why does he argue from the one to the other? But the truth is, he has no game to play but what the Anti-Sabbatarian Prelatists have played and lost before him. Only one card more, which was none of their pack.  
Examples do only allow us a liberty; Obj. 6 
page 13. of his Pamphlet.  nothing but a clear command can oblige us to a duty. For instance, community of goods is the Saints liberty, because it was practised; but liberality of our proper substance is a duty; because it is commanded. Saints may freely feast before Communion because we have Apostolical precedent, but all true disciples must break bread, because we have Evangelical precept; so we have liberty to meet the first day, because we find the Saints at Troas then (occasionally) assembled: but we are tied in duty to celebrate the seventh day Sabbath, because it is commanded  
If this rule were as true as it is false, Answ. 1 he might blot out all the examples of the Saints recorded in Scripture. For what are they good for? To allow us a liberty only? Why that we had before. Had we never heard of the Saints meeting and Paul's preaching on the first day of the week, yet I hope we had had free liberty to meet and worship on that day nevertheless; what follows now? Why, by this Doctors new divinity (absit blasphemia verbo) the Holy Ghost has inserted this story in vain. This leaf (yea and twenty more) might have been left out of the Bible without loss. See the poison of a rotten error!  
'Tis no less false, Answ. 2 that nothing but a clear command can oblige us to duty. What must we limit the holy one of Israel? must he deliver his mind and will, only by way of precept? May he not do it as well by promise, or prophesy or proportion or consequence? Must we teach the Lord how to teach us our duty? pray what express command was there to sanctify the Sabbath, or what example of any one man that did sanctify it, for 2000 years after the Creation? I mean in express terms. Was it never a duty therefore till the Commandment came, and is not Apostolical example with a consequential command, a sufficient rule for the observation of the Lords day? He argued before for the Jews Sabbath; that we must be followers of Paul as he was of Christ, how much better may we urge the same argument for the Lords day? As thus, Christ was present upon this day in the assembly of his disciples, and kept it like a Sabbath, John 20.19.26. and so Paul, Acts 20.7. and we must follow Paul, as he did Christ; therefore we must keep holy the Lord's day, the first day of the week; here the practice being Evangelical, the consequence is the more Logical. But to the objection; is nothing to be esteemed of divine institution, and so of obligation to conscience, but what has a clear command in Scripture? 
Mat. 21.25, 26. with verse 32. Mark 11.30, 31. Luke 20.5, 6.  what then will he say to Sacrificing before the Law? Where do we find any Commandment to sacrifice, before we find Abel sacrificing? Or to look to the Gospel in the first dawning of it. What express command was there for the baptism of John? Yet the poor Publicans and the people generally held it to be from Heaven (although the chief Priests and Elders believed him not) because they held John as a Prophet; yet (which is remarkable) they had no precept but only John's practice to warrant it; and which is yet more remarkable, our blessed Saviour approves this their belief of John, and his baptism, and condemns those that rejected it as a human institution. In like manner we may safely imitate those contemned Publicans in believing the Lords day to be from Heaven by divine institution, and not of men by human ordination, suffering Paul's practice as an Apostle to overrule us herein, 
See Mr. Abbot p. 66. Math. 11.11.  as John Baptist as a Prophet did them (the least Apostle of Christ being greater than John the Baptist) and in so doing we need not question Christ's approbation. Express precept indeed we have none in the new Testament; but that which is better than a precept, says Dr. T wiss, viz. the practice of the Apostles and Churches: For had the Apostles commanded it, and the Churches not practised it, their Commandment had been obnoxious to various interpretations, whereas their establishing it the facto in practice among the Churches is less liable to contradiction, if men were not given up to a Spirit of contradiction. Yet this must be added, and cannot well be denied; 
Divino Spiritu: agebantur Apostoli non minus in sacris institutionibus quàm in ipsa Doctrinâ Evangelij. Ames. Medul. p. 359. Acts 1.2. so the Prophets were commanded. Zech. 1.6. Joh. 10.22.  that the Apostles and Apostolical Church's practice (other arguments concurring) supposes and argues that there was a command, although there be no specification of it in Scripture; for the Apostles did nothing in ordering the Church, but from and by Christ, either by precept or example, or divine inspiration; and their very inspiration was virtually preceptive. For 'tis said, That through the Holy Ghost Christ gave Commandments to his Apostles whom he had chosen; That is, he gave them Commandments by inspiring, and breathing the Holy Ghost upon them; which was upon the day of his Resurrection. Yea 'tis more than probable that they had a special warrant from Christ in express charge concerning the celebration of this day. For, 
Acts 1.3.  of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God Christ spoke unto them (namely by way of Commandment) after his Resurrection; but the Lords day and the worship therein performed, as it was in the Apostles days and ever since, is one of those things which appertain to the kingdom of God; therefore of this Christ spoke by way of Commandment to his Apostles. If it be said, that the Lords day is not there expressed; I answer, no more are any other of those particulars appertaining to the kingdom of God which he spoke, 
See Mr. Bernard of the Christian Sab. p. 134.  therefore it cannot be excluded, till it can be proved, that the keeping of this day to the honour of Christ is none of the things which pertain to the kingdom of God.  
Again, The Commandments, Acts 1.2. are such as Christ would have his disciples teach his people to observe, Math. 28.18, 20. now we find the Churches of Christ observing this day. Acts 20.7. 1 Cor. 16.2. and the Apostle observing it with them, yea, prescribing duties to them on this day. 1 Cor. 5.4, 11, 20. which was on the Lord's day, according to the Syriack; but 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. is express: and the Apostle telleth the Corinthians, 
1 Cor. 14.37.  That the things he wrote unto them were the Commandments of God; therefore the practice of the Apostles and Churches planted by them implies a command, Yea  
All Scripture-examples in moral or religious actions fall under the Government of the Ten Commandments: Answ. 3 Now the fourth Commandment having the government of time for weekly solemn worship, and the Apostle Paul tarrying a whole week at Troas, and observing the first day of the week only for solemn worship, it cannot be imagined but this observance was in obedience to the fourth Commandment; and so of the exigency of the Apostles Commission, not of the Liberty; consequently it is the Saints duty, not their liberty.  
The remainders of the Objection about community of goods and Love-Feasts are mere impertinencies, to plead for these in the peace & settlement of the Church, is to put a plea in the mouths of Levellers, Libertines and Epicures. Community of goods was never the Saint's Liberty, but in the Church's 
a Act. 4.34, 35 36, 37 compared with Act. 8.3, 4.  extreme poverty and persecution, and then it was rather duty than liberty: and if ever the Church of God should be in the like state of extremity, she is bound to follow that Original Copy; but this can hardly be supposed.  
And as for Love-feasts. I suppose the Author is to seek for Apostolical precedent to warrant them, whatever he says: 'Tis true, they were practised in the Apostles times, but never approved, nay they were sharply 
b 1 Cor. 11.21. Judas ver. 12.  reproved, as also the Jews Sabbath and observation of other Legal days were, Gal. 4.10.  
Thus we have made good the sixth Mark for the Lords day; namely, the Apostles and Apostolical Church's observation of it.  
7. Seventhly and lastly, we shall add this to all the rest, The Apostles Prescription about it.  Et quae non prosunt singula, juncta juvant. 
Though either or these particulars singly considered may be thought too weak, yet I am assured, that all of them jointly combined will be too strong for the gates of hell to prevail against; this last will add some strength to all the rest. I shall ground it upon that noted Text, 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. Now concerning the Collection for the Saints, as I have given order to the Churches of Galatia, even so do ye; Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. Here we have to observe,  
1. An Apostolical Ordinance, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, As I have ordained, so do ye. He does not counsel them to do it, but commands them, and by his power Apostolical he enjoins them to do it; and if Paul ordained it, certainly he had it from Christ, for he tells them, 
1 Cor. 11.23.  That what he delivered to them, he received from the Lord; and the things that he wrote to them were the Commandments of the Lord, 1 Cor. 14.37.  
2. The thing enacted by this Ordinance, and that is, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, collecta. See Dr. Day his Sermons on this Text.  Collection for the Saints. The word seems to be a metaphor taken from gathering of fruits, or glean in harvest or rather (as Beza notes) from gathering of a shot at a banquet or friendly meeting; as men invited to a Feast or Banquet use to make a purse, and cast in every one his shot to gratify the poor servants that belong to the house; So the Apostle requires these Corinthians when they meet together at the Feast of the Gospel, especially that heavenly Banquet of the Lords Supper, the Feast of the great King, that then they cast in something to make a purse for the poor servants of Christ, in testimony of their thankfulness to the Master of the Feast, This some take to be the sense of the word; it signifies such a Collection or Contribution as men use to make when they meet at a Feast, and it suits well with the next Particular.  
3. The time stated for such Collection; The first day of the work, 
Diem caetus designat. P. Matt. ad loc. Tum solitos fuisse convenire apparet. Act. 20 7. Beza.  the day designed for their solemn Assemblies, and that solemn Ordinance of the Lords Supper, as was proved before Acts 20.7. Hence in Justin Martyr's time, and ever since the Churches of Christ have walked according to this rule, annexing their charitable contributions to the celebration of the Lords Supper. But still the great Question is unresolved, will some say, namely, Why the Apostle should limit this duty or work of mercy to the first day of the week? Some answer it thus; The Apostle therefore mentions the day, 
S. M. Cawdrey  because there is a special motive in it to stir up their charity; being a day wherein they had received such inestimable bounties from the hands of God, as the resurrection of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and the like. Now I confess there is much weight in this answer. 'Tis the fittest time to express our thankfulness to God, wherein we commemorate his greatest loving kindness to us. Chrysostom is very clear in his Commentary upon this Scripture. [Upon the first day of the week let every one lay by him in store, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrysost. Orat. 43. in 1 Cor. 11.  etc.] See how he exhorts from the very time, (says he) for that very day were sufficient to induce them to charity; for call to mind (saith he) what you got on that day; for unutterable good things, even the root and rise of our life arose on that day: Nor in that respect only is the time proper to quicken charity, but because it hath rest also, and relaxation from labour or abruption of business; for the soul being discharged from labours becomes in a better frame and preparation to take pity; and more than all this, the communicating on this day in the Sacraments, so dreadful and immortal puts the mind in great forwardness, etc.  
This exposition of Chrysostoms' as it may deservedly challenge respect for the antiquity of it, (being above twelve hundred years old) so much more for the truth of it, being so agreeable to the Text itself. For observe it well. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid.   
First, He calls the first day of the week Christ's Resurrection day, and a little before [the Lords day].  
Secondly, He concludes it was a Sabbath day or day of rest from labour and workaday business. And to my apprehension this is clearly employed in the Text. For upon this day the Apostle would have them contribute to the poor members of Christ as God had prospered them; to wit, in the six foregoing work-days which argues a recollection and thankful calling to mind the blessing of God upon their weekday labours, and what can be more Sabbath like? Besides the Greek word is emphatical, [as God hath prospered] so we read it, but it may be rendered thus, [as God hath given a good journey] or [a good voyage] plainly intimating that upon every first day of the week they had rest and respite from their worldly employments, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Rom. 1.10.  something like that of a traveller at his journey's end, or a mariner when his voyage is over, and he's at rest in his harbour.  
Thirdly, He counts the first day of the week their Sacrament-day; as indeed it was; and the collection here enjoined, speaks as much: And doubtless this was a powerful argument to prompt them to liberality: It were sordid ingratitude to spare a penny from the poor, when a man considers that God hath not spared the precious blood of his Son. Besides all this, the first day of the week was the day of their solemn assemblies, for prayer, preaching prophesying, singing of Psalms and other religious exercises; all which were as fire to kindle their compassions towards their distressed brethren; every word of God, every Sermon, every prayer, every Psalm that was sung might add some fuel to that Heavenly flame of their brotherly love and Charity; and for these causes the Apostle chose that time as the most select and choice opportunity to put them upon the practice of that duty. But here we are waylaid with Objections.  
If any can discern the Sts. assembling (1 Cor. 16.) it must be by some other light than God's word. Obj. 1 
T. T.   
I hope he will grant this text to be God's word, Answ. and then if he have but eyes, here is light enough. For let him look upon the words once again. What does Paul prescribe here? Collections or contibutions to the poor Saints. But who must contribute? every one. how must they contribute? by way of casting into the common treasury; so much the 
* Bucan concludes from hence that the Apostle gave order, there should be common aerarium a common treasury in the Church. Loc. 42. de Ministerio.  word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] implies verse 2. and why so? That there might be no gatherings, when Paul came. Which there must needs have been, if every man had kept his contribution at home in his own Coffer. So that it must be both a general and a public contribution. Therefore it must be in a public congregation. And why all this upon the first day of the week? Why not upon some other day but to mark out this day above others for the weekly season of solemn assemblies, as also to move them by the day to the duty, What need there any mention of the first day of the week, if they had not held their meetings on that day, and if there had not been some special argument in the day to persuade them to the duty?  
Paul does not enjoin them to lay it before the Deacons, Obj. 2 but let every one of you lay by himself in store as God hath prospered him; That is, at his own house in the poors box etc.  
At his own house? Answ. How then could it be avoided, but there must have been gatherings at Paul's coming? Which the Text forbiddeth. The Apostles care was to have their collections ready i. e. in a public stock or bank against his coming, lest haply they of Macedonid coming along with him (to whom it seems he had boasted of the Corinthians forwardness) should find them unprepared; 
* 2 Cor. 9.3, 4.  and so both he and they should be ashamed of his boasting.  
That phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is translated [by himself] may as well be rendered [of himself] that is, Answ. 2 sponte sua, of his own accord: And so Musculus interprets it; when 'tis said, 
Puta illud in Graco 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non esse positum pro apud se seponat, sed hoc sensu quisque vestrûm suapta sponte. i e. in caetu sacro thesaurizans cui proposito nonsatisfecisset si quisque aqud se domi reposuisset, etjusmodi namque reposita tum demum collidenda essent cum ipse ad eos venisset, quod vitari volehat. Wolph. Museul. ad Loe.  let every one lay by, treasuring up in store, 'tis not meant let every one lay by himself apart and privately, but at your public meetings casting it into the public treasury of the Church and that freely of his own good will; [That there may be no gatherings when I come] whereas if every one had laid by in private only at his own house, there would have been need of gatherings at his coming; the thing which he takes special care to prevent; it seems the Apostle came but seldom, and could not tarry long when he came, for he had the care of all the Churches upon him, especially the Gentiles the world through 2 Cor. 11.28. His work was to gather and govern Churches, he must not therefore spend his time in gathering monies, or going from house to house to call for every man's weekly contribution; this had been a leaving the word of God to serve tables, as the other Apostles said in a like case, Acts 6.2.  
The survey the Apostle exhorts every man to take of his own estate that he might give thereafter, Obj. 3 does notably overthrow the conceit of a first-day-Sabbath, for he order every man to lay by in store as God hath prospered him; that is according as his yearly revenue increaseth or his weekly trade proves more or less gainful. If the first day had been a Sabbath, the Apostle (knowing the proneness of our nature to mind earthly things) would never have put them upon the consideration of their outward estates,  
That the first day of the week is a Sabbath, Ans. 1 or day of rest, is no conceit, but a Scripture-truth; as it shall ere long appear to the shame of such reviling adversaries.  
2. That upon this day they must take a survey of their estates, because they must give according to their estates and incomes, is a conceit indeed; there is no colour of consequence in it; for I hope they might take their survey on the Saturday night; no necessity of deferring it to the Lords day. Suppose a Minister of Christ should urge this Apostolical ordinance still (as I am informed Mr. White of Dorchester did) pressing his people to contribute and lay up something in a common stock every first day of the week for the relief of the poor; and that according as God should bless and prosper them in their callings the week before? Does it follow that therefore when the people are assembled together on the Lord's day they must make the Church their Countinghouse, or (before they come there) turn over their shop-books in stead of their Bibles? What a ridiculous inference were this? Good husband's (I should think) would end the week and their work together; good Christians (to be sure) will do so and not make the Lords day their counting-day, a recounting-day indeed they may and must make it; to recount the blessings of providence in a way of praise and thankfulness and this is a Sabbath-day duty, as appears by that 
* Psalm 92.  Psalm for the Sabbath. But further, to dash this dream of the adversary, let him consider that (in effect) as much is 
* Ez. 46.5, 6.  said of the Sabbath in the old Testament, as (here) of the Lords day; and it may be 'tis meant of the Lords day-Sabbath.  
'tis further objected, That Paul's Epistle was read in these Churches on the Sabbath-day, Saturday he means, and then the Apostle exhorted them to Charity, and would have it to be their first work the next day while the sweet sense of the Epistle was upon their Spirits, etc. But,  
This is frivolous; For Gal. 4.10. The Apostle had utterly condemned the Saturday-Sabbath among the rest of those legal days; and that he should build again the things he had destroyed, we are not so much as to suppose.  
Now take the sum of all: On the first day of the week our Saviour was raised from the dead; on this day he often appeared after his resurrection; sent his holy Spirit on this day after his ascension, and stamped his own blessed name upon it; on this day the Saints assembled, the Apostles preached, the Sacraments were administered, Charities Collected; and concerning this day the Holy Prophets prophesied; what day was ever marked out with more shining and illustrious Characters?   

The Best Antiquity for the Change of the day.  
TO this Scripture-evidence for the change of the day, we shall now add something by way of Testimony from the Records of Antiquity. I may truly say, 'tis the glory of this truth, that besides Scripture authority, it has the most luculent Testimony in the writings of the Ancients of any paralel-truth controverted in these disputing times, we may trace it all along from age to age ever since the Apostles times; and with much contentment behold, how providentially it hath pleased the Lord to guide the pens of his faithful Martyrs and Ministers in their witness-bearing to this sacred truth; especially in the first five hundred years after Christ, wherein we shall find enough to silence the vain glorious vapourings of the adversary; who affirms, That the spotless spouse of Christ in her primitive purity and while she was decked with the Diadem of infallibility, 
T. T. p. 62. and 106.  (namely during the first three Centuries) did constantly observe both the seventh day and the first day of the week; yea for the first 400. years, if he may be believed. By the way, let the reader take notice of two considerable grants here.  
First, That the Church was decked with the Diadem of infallibility (as he calls it) for the first three hundred years.  
Secondly, That the Lords day was constantly observed during this state of the Church's infabllility. For both days were observed, says he. The Lord's day was indeed; besides his bare word I will bring sufficient witness for it. But the Jews Sabbath was not, (at least) not as a Sabbath, nor with equal solemnity as the Lords day, nor as of necessity (so it was ever condemned) and the Lords day was ever preferred before it, if not observed without it in the purest Churches, for the first two hundred years after Christ to say no more. Let us examine witnesses in order as they come.  
First, 
Ignatius.  Let us hear what Ignatius says, who lived some thirty years in the Apostles times, and in his Epistle to the Magnesians (in the Vulgar Edition) is brought in speaking to this purpose 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Let us therefore no longer keep the Jewish Sabbath as rejoicing in idleness (for it is written, He that will not labour, let him not eat; and in the sweat of thy brows shalt thou eat thy bread) But let every of us keep Sabbath spiritually, not in bodily ease but in the meditation of the Law; not eating meat dressed yesterday, or drinking lukewarm drinks, or walking out a limited space, nor in dance and senseless sport, but in admiration of the works of God; And setting aside the Sabbath, let every one that loves Christ keep holy the Lord's day; the Queen of days, the Resurrection day, the highest of all days. I do the rather insert this Testimony (though Dr. Usher except against this Edition of Ignatius his Epistles) because T. T. citys it also for the Saturday-Sabbath; only he mangles and misinterprets it; dealing with Ignatius as men use to deal with Magpyes slitting their tongues to make them speak what they would have them. Just thus he deals with this renowned father, severing the last clause from the rest of the sentence, and singling out a little piece of it to serve his own turn, for he insists only upon the last branch, and mistranslates it too, his words are these, Next after the Sabbath-day let every friend of Christ make the Lords day a Solemn festival. As if Ignatius had preferred the Jews Sabbath before the Lords day but by his favour, this clashes with the context; for in the foregoing words Christians are counselled no longer to keep the Jews Sabbath but to work upon it; for it is written, He that will not labour, let him not eat. Whereas on the contrary, all that love Christ are charged to keep the Lords day a solemn Festival; 
Exam. Concil. Trid. de dieb. Fest. p. 257.  being the Queen and princess of days. Besides, these words [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] are well rendered by, setting aside the Sabbath. So learned Chemnitius and others translate them. If any desire further satisfaction, I refer them to judicious Mr. Cawdrey, who has dexterously discussed this Testimony.  
The more 
* Approved by Dr. Twiss after it had been compared with a latin translation found in Caius Col. library in Cambrig and two other Manuscripts in Oxon the one in Magdal. the other in Balliot Coll. Library.  correct copy of Ignatius ' Epistle to the Magnesians presented by Dr. Usher as agreeable to the citations of Eusebius, Athanasius, and Theodoret has this material and remarkable passage in it. The Blessed Martyr speaking of the Jews converted to the Faith of Christ in his days, gives this most Christian Character of them. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ad Magnesian.  That they did no longer keep the Sabbath, but led their life according to the Lords day, in which our life arose, in which words.  
First, He expounds what St. John meant by the Lord's day, Rev. 1.10. namely, the day of our Saviour's Resurrection, and that not as an anniversary, but a weekly holiday contradistinct to the Jews Sabbath.  
Seconly, He acquaints us with the practice of the Church in those Apostolic times, which was, to observe the Lords day in stead of the old Sabbath. If the converted Jews did thus, how much more the Christian Gentiles? Therefore blessed Ignatius his preface to this discourse shall be my conclusion, by way of caution to my Christian brethren, 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Idem  Suffer not yourselves to be carried about with divers and strange doctrines; for if we shall still live according to the Jewish Law, we deny that we have received grace. And a little after, 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. ibid.  Since we are become the disciples of Christ, let us learn to live according to Christianity. For it is absurd to profess Christ and Judaize. For Christianity has not believed into Judaisme, but Judaisme into Christianity As for Ignatius' Epistle to the Philippians (which the adversary glories it is rejected as spurious and counterfeit; and indeed there is nothing of an Apostolical spirit breathing in it. See Mr. Perkins Praep. to the dem. of the problem.  
Our next witness is Justin Martyr; who lived in the very prime of the primitive times; about a hundred and fifty years after Christ's Nativity; 
Justin Martyr.  at 
* Vide Alfied. Chron. Patr. p. 450.  what time he wrote a learned Apology for the poor persecuted Christians to Antoninus pius the Emperor; wherein (among other things) he mentions the manner of their public meetings on the Lord's day; which he calls Sunday, because he had to do with a Pagan Emperor, his words are these.  
Upon the day called Sunday, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Apol 2. add Cal●.  all that abide within the cities or the villages do meet together in some place where the Records of the Apostles and the writings of the Prophets, as much as is appointed are read unto us. The reader having done, the Priest or Precedent ministereth a word of Exhortation, that we do imitate those good things which are there rehearsed; then standing up together, we send up our prayers to Heaven; which being ended, there is delivered unto us bread and wine with water. [Water to mingle with their Wine in those hot countries] of which (as he says a little before) none are allowed to partake but baptised persons, Believers, and [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] such as live according to the rule of Christ, After this, the Priest or Precedent offers up (as much as in him is) our prayers and thanksgivings to God, and all the people say, Amen: then those of the richer sort every one as his good will is, contribute something towards the relief of the poorer Brethren, etc.  
What an excellent pattern is here for after-ages? and how agreeable to the practice of the Apostles themselves? here we have public assemblies, prayer, preaching, reading the Scriptures, breaking of Bread, distributing to the poor, and all this upon the day called Sunday; that is, the Lords day; and why upon this day rather than any other? let Justin himself resolve this, as he doth in the next words. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ib.  On the Sunday (says he) we all make a public Assembly; in as much as it is the first day, in which God who changed the darkness and the first matter, made the world: and because on this day Jesus Christ our Saviour arose from the dead. For, on the day before Saturday they crucified him, and on the day following Saturday, which is Sunday appearing to his Apostles and Disciples, he taught these things. Here we have both the Doctrine and practice of the Lord's day in the purest times attested by this holy Man and Martyr; First, he informs us how they kept the day; and secondly, why they kept it; namely, because it was the first day, Christ's Resur, rection-day, and the day of his apparition to his Disciples, whom he taught and instructed so to do: it seems the holy Martyrs in the Primitive times were satisfied with these Scripture-Arguments for the Lords day, which now the wrangling wits and lusts of men do nothing, but storm against.  
But here it may be objected; 'tis true, here is plain and positive testimony for the observation of the Lords day; but here is nothing for the Negative; nothing against the old Sabbath. Why mightn ot both days be kept in Justin Martyrs time? does he ever deny that the Churches of Christ then kept the Saturday-Sabbath?  
I answer yes, his Testimony is as full against the Jews Sabbath, as for the Lords day, witness his Dialogue or dispute with Trypho that obstinate Jew. I shall recite a few passages of it verypregnant to this purpose: Trypho's grand Objection was this, 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 175. num. 30.  That the Christians did neither observe the Festival days, nor Sabbaths, nor Circumcision, and mereover that they placed their hope in a crucified man. Now see how the blessed Martyr answers him, partly by granting his Objection: For he tells him, 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 182. n. 10.  we also should verily observe your Circumcision, and Sabbaths, and all your Festival days, did we not know the reason for which these things were imposed upon you. And again, 
c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  If (says he) we patiently endure the most horrible torments that men and devils can devise to inflict upon us, why is it that we do not also observe your carnal Circumcision, and Sabbaths, and holiday which hurt us not? In which words he freely grants that the Christians in his time did not observe the Jews Sabbath; and although the Jews condemned them for it, yet he justifies them in it, and uses many Arguments to vindicate their nonobservance of it.  
As, 1. Because since the coming of Christ there is no need of it; no need of the shadow when the substance is come; yea there is no place left for it, 'tis done away by Christ; for in this sense (I take it) the Father here speaks; that 
d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  as the Sabbath together with Sacrifices, Oblations and Festival days began with Moses (he means, I suppose in the second Edition not the first Institution of them) so they were appointed by the Council of God the Father to cease and end with Christ: Where (by the way) observe, he useth the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) in the singular number, to show that it was the old seventh day Sabbath which he chief contested against, and indeed this was the string that Trypho chief harped upon; persuading Justin and his fellow Christians thus: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, first to be circumcised then to keep the Sabbath, and so he might obtain mercy; still it must be restrained to the Jewish Saturday-Sabbath matched with Circumcision, and orher Legal Ordinances; the Christian Sabbath is not the subject of this dispute, this then is his first Argument, the Christians neither did, nor could observe that old Sabbath, because it ended with Christ; And  
2. 
e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 187.  Because now there is a new Covenant, and a new Law gone out of Zion.  
3. 
f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 118.  Because the believing Gentiles may attain Gods heavenly inheritance without the observation of it.  
After the proposeal of these, and sundry other Arguments Trypho moves a Captious Query. viz. whether if a man that knew Christ and believed in him, still observed these legal customs, he could be saved? To which our zealous and pious Martyr returns this Christable, yet for midable answer. 
g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  In my Judgement (O Tripho) such a one shall or may be saved, provided he do not industriously labour to persuade others (especially those among the Gentiles that are converted to Christ) to observe the same things with himself, telling them that otherwise they cannot be saved. For such it seems he had but little Charity. Now to sum up all however the opinion and judgement of this ancient and eminent Father may be despised by scorners. Yet I hope his Testimony will be embraced by all soberminded Christians. And this we have both fully and faithfully transcribed. The conclusion is this, that the Churches of Christ in Justin Martyr's time had renounced the Saturday-Sabbath and celebrated the Sunday or Lords day for the day of weekly solemn worship, and this was long before Antichrist came to his throne; Which I the rather note as a seasonable check to that blasphemous, sacrilegious position of the adversary, viz. that the change of the Sabbath was an invention of Antichrist. Oh impudence! Was Justin Martyr (who shed his blood for Christ) a limb of Antichrist? Did he plead for Baal in asserting the observation of the Lords day, and rejection of the Jews Sabbath by all the Churches of Christ? Were the precious Saints and glorious Martyrs in those early days devoted to the inventions of Antichrist? Yea, in those bloody days, when for Christ's sake they were killed all the day long, and led like sheep to the slaughter? Yea, in those extraordinary apostolical days, while the Spirit of prophecy was yet breathing, and the power of miracles yet working in the Churches of Christ; witness Justin Martyr himself, who testifies 
h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Dial. cum Trypho. 191. See Mr. Baxter Spirits witness to the truth of Christianity. p. 21.  That even in his time the Devils did tremble at the name of Christ, and that being adjured by that sacred name, they became subject unto them. Yea, for some years after t his; for Tertullian, and after him Cyprian made public challenges to the Pagan persecuting rulers, to bring their possessed with Devils into the Christian assemblies, and if they did not cast them out, and make them confess themselves to be Devils and Christ to be the Son of God, they were content to suffer. Which may conciliate credit to the testimony (at least) of these renowned ancients, well, the change of the Sabbath is confirmed by the practice of the Church in Justin Martyrs time. And now we are upon the year of our Lord 160. 
Dionysius. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Euseb. l. 4. c. 22.  or thereabout. And here we meet with another testimony. Of  
Dionysius Bishop of Corinth, who in an Epistle of his Soter Bishop of Rome writes thus; we have spent, (or passed through to the end of it) the Lord's day, to day an holy day. Now to spend the Lords day throughout an holy day is not to spend any part of it in servilework, but to sanctify it as a Sabbath. But in regard this Testimony touches but one half of the question. I only touch upon it by the way, and proceed to a fourth, who speaks the truth and the whole truth.  
Tertullian by name, 
Tertullian. 4.  who flourished in the year of grace 200. or two hundred and four. His African phrase is somewhat dark, yet some light it affords us as to this controversy. In his book of the soldier's Crown, he speaks thus. On 
i Die dominico jejunare nefas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare. De Colon. Mil.  the Lord's day we hold it unlawful, either to fast or to pray, kneeling. And elsewhere he seems to intimate the reason of it; viz. 
k Diem solis laetitiae indulgemus; alia longe ratione quam religione solis; seeundo loco ab eis sumus, qui diem Saturni otio & viotui decernunt, exorbitantes & ipsi a Judaico more quem ignorant Apol. adv. Gent. c. 16. ●And ch. 3. de anima he speaks of the Lords days solemnities, namely, Scripturarum lectio, Psalmi cantus, adlocutiones & petitiones. reading the scriptures, singing of Psams, conference and prayer. Dominica solennia.  Because it was a day of joy and gladness. For upon the Sunday (says he) we give ourselves to joy, or gladness. Where note that in Tertullian's time also the title of Lords day (Rev. 1.10.) was appropriate to Sunday, which the primitive Christians so universally observed, that the Heathens began to calumniate them, as worshippers of the Sun. But Tertullian in this place clears them; For (says he) although upon the Sunday we give ourselves to gladness, yet it is for another fare wide reason, than in honour of the Sun. And again, in the second place are we from them (meaning the Jews) who appoint the Saturday to idleness and eating, wand'ring from the Jewish custom which they know not. In which words he gives us to understand that although the Christians (then) devoted the Lord's day to joy and gladness yet they made it not a playday, or a day of pampering their bodies and riotous feast (as the degenerate Jews did their Sabbath) but they spent it in the spiritual exercises of prayer and praise, they kept it as a solemn holy day; but how often? What once a year? Nay once a week as he testifies in the 14. ch. of his book concerning Idolatry where he speaks 
l Ethnicis sentel annuus dies quisque festus est; tibi vero octavus. Excerpe fingulas solennitates nationum & in ordinem texe, Pentecostem implere non poterunt. de Idol. p. 736. Edit. Basil. ●O melior fides nationum in suam sectam, quae nullam Christianorum selevitatem sibi vendicat non dominicam, non Pentecostem; etiam si nossent, nobiscunt non communicassent, ne Christiani viaerentur, nos ne Ethnici pronunciemur non veremur. Ibid.  thus to the Christian (who observed 52. Lord's days every year, whereas all the Annual festivities of Pagans came short of Pentecost or 50) To the Heathens every Festival is some annual day, but to thee every eighth day, etc. and here he takes up a sad complaint against some Apostatising Christians who kept heathenish holy-days, as if there were not Lords days enough in the year. O the Faith of the nations, better than ours to Wards their own sect; as who challenge not to themselves any Christian solemnity, not that of the Lords day, nor that of Pentecost. Did they know it, they would not communicate with us, lest they should seem Christians we christian's are not afraid to be accounted Heathens. Where two things are worthy of note. First that he styles the Lords day the Christians solemnity, or solemn day. Secondly, that he makes it the Christians livery or badge of cognizance. Therefore the Heathens would not keep it lest they should be taken for Christians, and indeed so it was the keeping holy of the Lords day was ever the distinguishing Character of a true Christian. Hence (as we noted before) the persecuting Pagans used to question the primitive Christians upon this interrogatory, hast thou kept the Lords day? 
Anno 303.  (Just as the bloody Papists in Queen Mary's time examined the Protestants about the Lords (Supper) and the common answer was, I am a Christian, I date not intermit it, for the Law admonishes me of it, 
Lex eos de eo agendo admonuisset seil. lex dei ut ipfis. martyrs exponunt num. 51. non ecclesia ut in Margin a Baronio annotatur. Num. 48. vide Theoph. Philokur. lib. ch. 4.  Namely, The law of God, of Christ and Christianity, which answer cost many a Christian his life, never were two truths more deeply died with the blood of Martyrs, than the Lords Supper and the Lords day have been; the one, under Popish, the other under Pagan persecution. But to return to our Author, Tertullian's Testimony is clear for the Christians keeping of the Lord's day: But did they not keep the Saturday-Sabbath too in his time? No, he denies that, once and again, as in the  Book concerning Idolatry: 
m Nobis quibus Sabbata extranea Sunt & Neomenia & seriae aliquando à Deo dilectae, Saturnalia & Januriae frequentantur? etc.  Shall we (says he) frequent Heathenish Festivals, to whom the Sabbaths, new Moons and Holy days (sometimes so dearly beloved of God) are strange: Strange through dis-use doubtless, not through ignorance, therefore 'tis clear they did not keep them. But more clear is that which he writes in his Apologetic against theGentiles, where he acknowledgeth, 
n Neque de victus exceptionibus, neque de solennitatibus dierum, neque de ipso signaculo corporis, neque de consortio nominis cum Judaeis agimus. p. 848.  That the Christians had no correspondence with the Jews, neither in difference of meants, nor solemnities of days, nor in signature of body (meaning Circumcision) nor in society of name: Mark it, they had nothing to do with the Jews in solemnities of days, i e. Jewish days; therefore not in the solemnisation of the seventh day; which Tertullian expressly calls [
* Lib. advers. judaeos. p. 125.  Sabbatum temporale, a temporary Sabbath] thus we have the practice of the Church in his time, adding further proof to the change of the day.  
Our next Author is Origen, whose testimony concerning the Lord's day is not to be contemned, however his judgement in all things-cannot be approved: We are not now pleading his Orthodoxy, but his veracity; he might err, but sure he would not lie; being so ready to die for Christ; let us hear what he has to say to this Christian cause, treating upon the story of the Israelites gathering a double portion of Manna on the sixth day, (because none was to be found on the seventh day;) 
o Quare ergo qua die caeperit Manna caelitus dari & volo comparare Dominicam nostram cum Sabbato Judaeorum. Ex divinis namque apparet Scriptures, quoth in die Dominica primo in terris datum est Manna. Sienim (ut Scriptura dicit) sex diebus continuis collectum est, septima autem die quae est Sabbati cessatum est, sine dubid initium ejus a die prima quae est dies Dominica fuit, quod si ex divinis Scripturis boc constat quod Die Dominica Deus pluit Manna de Coelo, & in Sabbato non pluit, intelligant Judaei jam tunc praelatam esse Dominicam nostram Judaico Sabbato, etc.  I demand (says he) when the Manna began to fall from heaven; and it is apparent from the Holy scriptures, that Manna was first given upon the Lord's day. For if (as the Scripture says) they gathered it six days together, and ceased the seventh, being the Sabbath day; without controversy, it began to fall on the first day, which is is the Lord's day; which being manifest from the Divine Scriptures, that upon the Lord's day God reigned Manna from Heaven, and upon the Sabbath none; let the Jews understand that even then our Lord's day was preferred before the Jewish Sabbath. And presently after he adds, Upon our Lord's day, the Lord always reins Manna from heaven; and what he means by Manna, he tells them; Viz. The heavenly Oracles, the Word read, and preached to the people; Where note, First, That he calls the seventh day the Jews Sabbath, 
In nostra enim Dominica die semper pluit Domnius Manua de coelo. Caelestia namque sunt eloquia ista, etc. Orlg. in Exod. 16. Hom. 7.  not the the Christians Sabbath. Secondly, He titles the first day of the week, the Lords day, and our Lord's day. Thirdly, he testifies that on this day the Church in his time had always Manna from Heaven in the public Ministry of the Word; and all this in opposition to the Jews Sabbath; which, what else can it signify but the change of the day? I might also allege that 23. Homily upon Humber's, where this Ancient Father calls the Lord's day our Christian Sabbath, and that in a literal sense, as being a day of rest or cessation [ab omnibus secularibus operibus] from all secular works, 
6. Cyptian. Hier. Cat. log. Nam quia octavus dies, i. e. post Sabbatum primus dies futurus erat quo Dominus resurgeret, & nos vivificaret & spiritualem nobis daret circumcisionem, hic dies octavus, i.e. post Sabbatum primus & Dominicus praecessit in imagine. C●pr. ep. 59 ad Fid.  which could not be meant of an every days Sabbath. But I pass on to the next Witness, namely;  
Cyprian who flourished about the year of Christ 250 or 54. and received the crown of Martyrdom under Valerianus. His words (to our purpose) are these. For because the eighth day; that is, the first after the Sabbath, was to be the day in which the Lord should arise, and quicken us, and give us the spiritual Circumcision, this eighth day, that is the first after the Sabbath, and the Lords day went before in the shadow, etc. Where observe, That he calls the first day of the week the Lords day, and that in reference to Christ's resurrection, secretly hinting the change of the day prefigured by Circumcision, which was tied to the eighth day, upon which the Infant being circumcised was accounted as a new creature, as if it were risen again from death to life; and this did typify our first Resurrection from the death of sin to the life of grace, by virtue of Christ's Resurrection, whose Resurrection-day is called the eighth day, John 20.26. Justin Martyr also insists upon this in his Dialogue with Trypho, and it was the judgement of the Fathers generally, that the change of the Sabbath was lapped up in that Sacrament of Circumcision.  
About the year of our Lord 326. Anhanasius shone like a star in the eastern Church. And his Testimony is clear as the light. 
p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Homil. de Cement. ad init.  Of old (says he) the Sabbath was in great esteem among the anients, but the Lord hath changed the Sabbath-day into the Lord's day. The Lord himself did it, says Athanasius, And again, Not we by our authority have slighted the old Sabbath, but in regard it did belong to the Pedagogy of the Law, when Christ the great master came in place, it became useless 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the candle is put out, when the Sun shines. What can be more plain? 'tis true, he seems to intimate that they did (then) occasionally meet upon the Jews Sabbath; but he gives a good account of it. 
q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Not (says he) as if we were infected with Judaisme, but therefore we meet upon the Sabbath, that we may worship the Lord of the Sabbath, not out of any religious respect to that false Sabbath (as he calls it) but merely in Devotion to Christ. whereas on the contrary they celebrated the Lord's day with an honourable esteem of the day, as it follows; 
r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. p. 839.  Therefore we honony the Lord's day because of the Lord's Resurrection. Thus far famous Athanasius; whose next neighbour was.  
Hilary a French divine; who livedi n the year 355. 
Hilarius. 8.  and left a most memorable record behind him of the Church's practice in his time, 
r Nos ectava die quae & ipsa prima est per fecti Sabbati festivi.tate laetamur plolog in Isalm. explan. p. 335.  Upon the eighth day (saith he,) which also is the first day, we rejoice in the Festivity of a perfect Sabbath. Where we have enough to answer the imputation of Novelty for calling the Lord's day Sabbath, however it was called, it seem it was kept as a Sabbath in Hilarie's time; yea, long before 'tis true, he calls it the 8th day also (though it have a weekly return in the number of seven) because counting on beyond the Jewish tale of weekly days, coming next after their seventh, it made the eighth. See Mr. Ley. Sunday a Sabbath.  
About the year 374. 
Ambrose 9,  Ambrose was Bishop of Milan and he also has set his hand and seal to this sacred truth in sundry of his writings in his commentary upon the Colossians, 
Or 377. accord to Chytraeus Chronol.  he expounds Ch. 2.17. Of the weekly Sabbath of the Jews; and parallels that place with Math. 12. The Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath day. And indeed the change of the Sabbath does most powerfully preach Christ's Lordship and dominion over it. Again, to show the high esteem that he and other Saints in his time had of the Lords day, he Rhetoricates thus upon it. 
s Dominica nobis ideo venerabilis atque solennis, quia in co Salvator velut Sol exoriens, discussis infernorum tenebris, luce Resurrectionis emicuit. de rat. Fest. Pent. Tom. 5.  To us the Lords day is therefore venerable and solemn, because thereon our Saviour as the rising Sun, having dispellea the darkness of death, shone forth by the light of his resurrection. And elsewhere 
t Dies Sabbati evat dierum Ordine posterior, sanctificatione legis anierior, sea ubi finis legis advenit (qui est Christus Jesus, Rom. 10.4.) & resurrectione sua octavam sanctificavit, caepit eadem prima esse quae octava est; habens ex numeriordine praerogativam, & ex resurrectione Domini sanctitatem.  The Sabbath day was the last in order of days but the first in sanctification under the Law; but when the end of the Law was come, to wit, Jesus Christ (Rom. 10.4.) and by his Resurrection had consecrated the eighth day, that which is the eighth, began to be the first, being dignified by the precedency of the number, and sanctified by the Resurrection of the Lord. Then speaking further by way of allusion to Luke 6. he adds; 
u Vbi Dies Dominica ●aepit praecellere qua Dominus Resurrexerit, Sabbatum quod primum erat, secundum haberi caepit a primo; prima enim requies Cessavit, secunda successit unde & ad Hebr. scribens Apostolus ait (post hac die) restat ergo requies populo Deim, requies ergo vera non in operis cessatione, sed in Kesurrectionis est tempore. Ambr. Enar. in Tit. Psalm. 47.  When the Lords day (on which our Lord arose) began to excel, the Sabbath which was the first began to be accounted the Second from the first. For the first rest ceased and the second succeeded. Whence, the Apostle writing to the Hebrews (Ch. 4.) speaks of another day; there remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. Therefore the true rest is not now in the cessation of the work (meaning the work of Creation) but in the time of the Resurrection. 'Tis as much, as if he had said; the true Sabbath is not now the seventh day or last day of the week, but the first day of the week; this is that other day mentioned, Heb. 4. this is the rest or Sabbatism that remaineth to the people of God. I do the rather cite these say of the two worthy Father Ambrose, because T.T. quotes him also for the Saturday-Sabbath; which he was a zealous disputer against. And although he preached on that day, it was but in preparation to the Lords day. 
Hierom 10. Anno 385.   
Hierom is the next writer of note and eminency in the Church of God, and he also speaks very honourably of the of the Lords day. In his book against Vigilantius, 
(w) Per unam Sabbati hoc est in die Dominico omnes conferre quae Hierosolymam in solatium dirigerentur, praecipit Paulus. Item ad Hedib. quaestio. 4.  the Apostle Paul (saith he) commanded almost all Churches that there should be collections for the poor upon the first day of the week which is the Lords day. And elsewhere he informs us. how it was observed by the religious in his time. 
x Dominicos dies orationi tantum & lectioni vacant. Ad Eustoch.  namely, That they designed the Lords day wholly unto prayer and reading of the holy Scriptures, For which he commends them, and by commending approves their practice. But of observing the Jews Sabbath he speaks not a word only he interprets Gal. 4.10. as a repeal of the Saturday Sabbath; and so does Tertullian also, Libr. 1. Contr. Marc. Ch. 20.  
After Hierom comes Chrysostom, 
Chrysostom 11. Anno 398.  a painful and powerful preacher in his time; and her how he thunders against Judaizing Christians: 
y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  I will close my Sermon (says he) with the words of Moses I call heaven and earth to witness against you, that if any of us present or those that are absent shall go to look upon the Trumpets or meet in the Synagogues, or go up to Matrona. (a Synagogue of the Jews two or three miles from Antiochia, in Daphne a pleasant village, as himself describes it elsewhere) or joy in their Fasts or partake of their Sabbaths, or perform any other Jewish custom, great or small: I am clear from the blood of you all; these words shall stand up in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and you, and if you obey, they shall give you great boldness; but if you disobey, or conceal any of them, that presume to commit such like things, they shall rife up as vehement witnesses against you, etc. See how zealous this holy man was against. Jewish rites and customs, and amongst the rest, against their Sabbaths. Neither was it blind zeal, but zeal according to knowledge, for he knew, and has told us, 
z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  That Paul persuaded the Churches of Christ to leave off Circumcision, to slight the Sabbaths and days (legal days he means) and all other ceremonials. And again, 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Christ has freed us from these Jewish observances; neither was his practice in these things intended for ouru pattern, for as he kept the  with the Jews, not that we should keep it with them, but that he might introduce the truth in stead of the shadow; in like manner he also endured Circumcision, and observed Sabbaths, and celebrated their Festivals, and did all these things at Jerusalem, but to none of these are we subject. Yet lest we should think Chrysostom an enemy to the Christian, as well as the Jews Sabbath; consider what he says in another place, treating of alms; where he occasionally touches that Text 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. concerning the collection for the Saints on the first day of the week and asks this question, what reason the Apostle had to command this day for the oblation of their alms? And answers it thus, 
b Hom. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Item 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ubi supre.  Because this day they did abstain from all works, and the Soul was more cheerful by the rest of the day, besides the good things received this day; for on this day death was destroyed, the curse was dissolved, sin vanquished, the gates of Hell broken in pieces, therefore (says he) if we so honour our Birthday's, how much more ought we to honour this day, which may well be called the Birthday of all Mankind? and how often does this Father call the First day of the week the 
c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In John 20. 1 Cor. 16.2.  Lords day? a royal day, a day of rest, and the like? so others extol it; Ignatius calls it, the Queen of days; the first day of the week, and the first day of the world; as truly the chiefest, as it is undoubtedly the first of days, says Eusebius a most Holy day, says Athanasius, higher than the highest, saith Nazianzen. So sincerely were the Ancients devoted to the solemnity of this day, that in honour of Christ the Author of it, they thought they could never sufficiently grace and garnish it with titles of pre-eminence.  
To perfect this Catalogue, Let us take in the Testimony of that renowned Austin, yea his judgement too, 
Augustine 12.  'tis worth the while to take a view of each; his testimony touching the Lord's day is plain. 
d Vos in dic quem dicunt Solis,  colitis; sicut autem nos cundem diom Dominicum dicimus, in eo quòd non solem sed Resurrectionem Domini veneramur. Contra Faust. Manich. lib. 18. cap. 5.  You saith he, (speaking to the Manichees) on the day called Sunday worship the Sun; but we call the same day the Lords day, because therein we honour not the Sun, but the Lords Resurrection, and how sound his judgement was in the Doctrine of the Christian Sabbath, appears by that which he speaks of the divine Authority of it; he assigns this as the reason, why it is called the Lords day, 
c Per Christum Factus est Dies Dominicus, Ep. 86.  because (as it is in the Psalm) the Lord hath made it; and it was made the Lords day by Christ Jesus the Lord: And that upon the occasion of his Resurrection, as he telleth us twice over; 
f Dies Dominicus Christi Resurrectione sacratus est. De Cir. Dei & Ep. 119. ad Januar.  The Lord's day was consecrated (says he) by the Lord's Resurrection; and concerning the Jews Sabbath he is as plain and peremptory, quisque illus diem observat tanquam litera sonat, carnaliter sapit; who ever keeps that day as the letter soundeth, he savoureth of the flesh: And again, Christ's doctrine is the same with Moses' concerning the Sabbath, but the time or day is different: It were easy, if it were not needless to add any more, here is a complete Jury already, yet let it not be thought superfluous, if one Witness more be called in.  
Eusebius by name, 
Eusebius 13.  whose Testimony concerning the universal observation of the Lords day all the Christian world over is worthy to be filled. We have it towards the end of his Oration of the praises of Constantine where magnifying Christ above all the gods and grandees of the Heathens, he speaks thus; 
g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Who (of all the gods or Heroes of the Gentiles) hath prescribed to all the Inhabitants of the world by sea and land, that coming together into one place, every week they should celebrate as Festival the Lords day; and appointed that as they feed their bodies with food, so they should refresh their souls with divine instruction? Thus he testifies the Observation of the Lords day all the world over, and that by theh appointment of Christ. But does he not also tell us of some (as the Ebionites) who had a religious esteem of the Saturday-Sabbath still, and accordingly kept both days? Yes, but he writes them down in the black Book, among the Heretics of that age, and so does Epiphanius too. Haeres. 30. Let us a little attend Eusebius in his Historical description of these Heretics, he observes, that their name was given them from the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies poor, 
Lib 3. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  because of the poverty of their understandings; 
h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the men being very silly, and their Heresy very senseless; for they did (saith he) entertain very mean and poor thoughts and opinions of Christ, holding that he was but a mere 
i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and a common man. Observe it well, The high opinion they had of the Saturday-Sabbath, was founded upon a low opinion of Jesus Christ, I wish the new Ebionites of this age do not still build upon the same foundation. Can men but see the Godhead and glory of Christ through the veil of his flesh, me thinks the change of the Sabbath should be no such paradox to them; especially to such as have felt his divine power in the change of their hearts. But to close all, let us briefly examine the opposite authorities produced in favour of this Ebionitish error.  
The first is Clemens Romanus, or he that writ the constitutions called Apostolical, who is thus presented in great pomp by our Antagonist. That blessed Clement (says he) whose name is written in the book of life, that elect vessel speaks thus; Let us keep holy the Sabbath in memory of the Creation, and the Lords day in memory of Christ's Resurrection. lib. 7. c. 24. Answ. 1  
The Author of those Constitutions was not that blessed Clement mentioned by Paul, but some bastard Clement of a later extraction, as our learned Dr. Fulk tells the Remish Annotators. 'Tis true, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians is generally repoted the Legitimate issue of that elect vessel. But let not this Author be angry, if I let the reader see his Legal-demain in ascribing the book of Constitutions to the same Clement, which none but Papists do, our 
* Vide Chmenis de lectione patrum & Perkins to Demont. Praep. of the ptobls.  Protestant writers I am sure are of another mind. 'Tis a pitiful forlorn cause that flies so often for sanctuary to the Bulwarks of Popery. But,  
If he will needs build upon the authority of these constitutions; let him take what follows in the same book, Answ. 2 
Hebdomas una est insignis & annus septimus, & mensis septimus & Sabbatum &c. iis omnibus praestat Dies Dominious Const. lib. 7 c. 36.  and much good may it do him. Por ch. 36. this elect vessel (as he calls him) prefers the Lord's day before the Jews Sabbath, and all other Jewish Festivities whatsoever, and herein he concurred with the rest of the ancients; whereas his Doctrine about the seventh day was but one Doctor's opinion.  
The next Testimony objected against us, is that of Eusebius; who reports a decree of Constantine the Emperor to establish the Lords day as the great holiday; Obj. 2 which the objector calls a presumptuous decree. Year Antichrist prevailed with Constamine (as he would make silly people believe) to change the Sabbath time into the first day. Page 113.  
The Lord rebuke thee thou false tongue! Answ. That the day was changed by a greater than Constantine even Christ himself, and his holy Apostles, we have I think made good by Scripture-Argument, and that this change was visible in the Church's practice long before Constuntine was born, we have manifestly proved by the testimony of the most ancient Fathers and eminent Martyrs. What if the renowned Emperor Constantine made a decree to establish the Lords day? Was he therefore the Author of the day or of the change? Sozomen tells us, that this Christian Emperor (as a tender Nursing Father to the Church of Christ) did also by a public Edict establish the Christian religion in all his dominions. 
Sozomen ib. 1. ch. 7.  But will any man (in his right wits) draw such a crackbraind Conclusion from hence; viz. That therefore Constantine was the Author of the Christian Religion? Understand (presumptuous man) that as the Christian religion was professed, so the Christian Sabbath was practised when there was no Christian Magistrate in the world, and that all the Christian world over, long before Constantine's time. Which one would think were enough to put to silence lying lips.  
O, Obj. 3 but Merator and Dr. Hen in tell us, that in the  Churches both days are still observed.  
True, Answ. but they tell us also (Dr. Heylin I am sure does) that both days are observed as Sabbaths, and accordingly called. For they call the Saturday the Jews Sabbath, and the Lords day the Christian Sabbath; so that what ever their practice be, 'Tis none of their pinciples, that the Saturday-Sabbath is the Christian Sabbath And as for their practice; 'tis little to be regarded, considering their corruption: For, together with the Saturday-Sabbath, they observe 
* Mr. Breerwoods' inquiries  circumcision too on the eighth day, with many other Jewish and Antichristian customs. Blessed be God, for that better light which shines in the Churches of Europe. The testimonies taken out of Socrates do only prove, that in his time (namely 400 years after Christ) some Churches did meet together and break bread on the old Sabbath. Which we deny not; only we say, that the Lords day had still the pre-eminence and that in four things, as learned Dr. Young has observed.  
1. That the Saturday-Sabbath was never the day of solemn assemblies in all Churches; for the constom of holding assemblies on that day never obtained in the Churches of Rome and Alexandria, as Sozomon testifies. 
lib. 7. c. 19  Whereas all Churches had their Church-meetings on the Lord's day, not one excepted.  
2. The Saturday or old Sabbath was never kept as a solemn Festival; for in many Churches it was a weekly Fastingday, and once a year in all Churches namely Easter-Eve, 
Constit. lib. 7. c. 24. and lib. 5. c. 15.  being the day of Christ's greatest abasement, while he lay in the grave, and under the sorrows of death; whereas every Lord's day throughout the year was held a solemn Festival, Constit. lib. 7. c. 31.  
3. All Ordinances were never administered with that uniformity on the old Sabbath as on the Lord's day, 
August. ep. 118. Socrates' lib 5. c. 22.  as the Ordinance of the Lords Supper, which in the purest Churches was appropriate to the Lords day, which was therefore called the day of bread, as we noted before. 
Athan. Apol. 2.  Hence that memorable passage of Athanasius, who being accused for Breaking a Communion-cup clears himself thus, That time instanced by his accusers was no Communion-time, for it was not the Lord's day.  
4. Their conventions on the old Sabbath were ever arbitrary, not urged as of necessity; unless by Ebion and his followers, who were therefore condemned, as Heretics. But the observation of the Lords day was ever held a Christian duty; and never were any stigmatised with that black brand of Heresy for observing of it; nay, it was the badge of Christianity, I am a Christian, I dare not intermit it, to all these I may add.  
5. The old Sabbath was never the Christian Sabbath or day of rest, but a working-day. So in Ignatius' time, 
Anno 314.  he counselled Christians to work upon it, and the Council of Laodicea made a decree to this purpose, That Christians ought not to Judaize and to rest from work on the Sabbath-day, but to prefer the Lords day before it, and to rest thereon from labour. In which words as Mr. Cawdrey well observes, this Synod did but expound the sentence of of holy Ignatius. I might instance also the Council at Eliberis, Carthage, Arragon, Mascon, Chalons and other both Fathers, Councils and Christian Emperors; but others have prevented me in this kind of Antiquity. So much for the fourth Position.   

POSITION V That the Lords day or first day of the week (commonly called Sunday) is the Christian Sabbath, or day of holy rest.  
THis does naturally result from the premises. For the day being changed, and yet the law concerning the Sabbath continued and established, the new day must needs be a day of rest, as it rests on the authority and morality of the fourth Commandment, and as it succeeds the old day in Sabbath-solemnity. Yet it is not so much the name as the thing that I contend for; For although I am fully convinced, that as our spiritual exercises are called Sacrifices, because they succeed in the place of the Jews Sacrifices, so, and much more significantly, may our Lord's day be termed Sabbath, because it 
* Succeeds I mean not in any ceremonious respect, but in relation to the fourth Commandment.  succeeds in the place of the Jews Sabbath; yet I had rather insist upon the thing than the name, because the one being proved the other cannot well be denied. No rational man will stick at nominal respect where there is a real right to it. A name of rest will be easily granted due to a day of rest, now that the Lords day is without dispute a day of rest, appears thus. 
Cum de re constat propier quam vorba dicuntur, de verbis non debore contendi, etc. August. count. Acad. l. 3. c. 13.   
First, As it is the day of our Redeemers rest from his painful work of Redemption, his rising from the dead was his resting from his work. By his Resurrection this day he entered into his rest; for hereby (as was said before) he entered into his glory; which will further appear by comparing two texts together; viz. John 7.39. with John 20.22. The first tells us, That the spirit was not yet given because Jesus was not yet glorified; therefore when the Spirit was given surely then Christ was glorified. Now the other Text informs us, That upon the day of Christ's Resurrection the Spirit was given, For he breathed on them and said, Receive the Holy Ghost. Now therefore undoubtedly the Lord of glory was crowned with glory; not that he entered into the place of rest and glory upon the day of his Resurrection, but into the state of rest and glory; the place is but accidental to the state; that which I modestly propounded to further inquiry, page 128. Namely, Whether Christ did not locally ascend into Heaven on the very day of his Resurrection; has been since concluded, and resolved in the Negative by a Reverend Brother from that Text of Scripture, Hebr. 9 12. by his own blood he entered once into the Holy place. Which seems to argue strongly, that our blessed High Priest entered once; and but once into Heaven. To which I do now freely subscribe, Errare possum, Haereticus esse nolo.  
Secondly, The Lord's day is a day of Religious Assemblies for solemn weekly worship, therefore also a day of religious rest from civil and secular employments. Since 'tis impossible for men to meet together about solemn Worship, and at the same time to follow their worldly occasions. observed as Sabbaths; as the Feast of unleavened bread. 
* Deut. 16.8.  On the seventh day shall be a solemn Assembly to the Lord thy God: thou sahlt do not work therein. And as the seventh or last, so also the first day of that Feast was to be a day of rest, because a day of Convocation; On the first day shall be a holy convocation, ye shall do no servile work therein, saith the Lord. 
Numb. 28.17, 18.  Now that first day of unleavened bread (being a memorial of their Redemption from Egypt) was typical of our Christian Sabbath, as was noted before. And besides, there being a moral equity in God's argument, that a day of holy Worship and holy Convocations must be a day of rest, it is as applicable to the Lords day as ever it was to any day, for we have abundantly proved, that this is a holy Convocation-day, and 'tis a good note that of Mr. Ainsworth on Deut. 16.8. That the Hebrew word Gnat-sereth, which we translate, solemn Assemblies, does also signify restraint from labour, whereby the Holy Ghost would teach us, that Holi days set apart for solemn assemblies must be days of holy rest and restraint from work. Such is the Lords day to us Christians, and no other day but that, a day of solemn Assembly it is, and has been from the Apostles days till now, yea a day of solemn Worship, therefore a day of rest or Sabbath day, yea a day of solemn weekly worship, therefore the undoubted Sabbath of the fourth Commandment, which is the standing rule for a day of weekly worship, and but a day ordinarily; for the Commandment numbers out six days in the week for worldly business, 
As when a man makes two Wills, the last does ipso facto make void the first, although there be no express clause to signify the repeal or revocation.  and one for religious exercises, neither more nor less. So that supposing there were no repeal of the last day of the week, yet the first day being instituted by Divine Authority, makes void the last, and taketh possession of its place by the warrant of the Divine Precept itself.  
Again, as the Ministry and the Sacraments appointed by Christ are used by virtue of the second Commandment; so the day appointed by Christ must be observed by virtue of the fourth Commandment: because this is the general scope both of the second and fourth Commandment, that we must observe all the Institutions of God from time to time.  
I might argue further from that prophetical speech of our Saviour, Matth. 24.20. where he presignifies to his Disciples, that there should be a Sabbath in force long after his death, at such time as the old seventh-day-Sabbath was either quite out of doors, or out of date at least: therefore he spoke of the Christian Sabbath which we are obliged both by Law and Gospel to observe.  
The Ancients indeed do seldom apply the title of Sabbath to the Lords day, yet sometimes they do. 
They were but too jealous of Judaizing in this particular. Orat. in Christi Resurrect. Ex illo Sabbato praesens hoc Sabbatum agnosce, etc. Sic qu● que ritè sanctificamus Sabbatum Domini Dicente Domino omne ●pus etc. Tract. de tempore, 152.  Gregory Nyssen is express, for having spoken of the old Sabbath, he presently adds, from that Sabbath acknowledge thou this present Sabbath (the Lord's day) this day of rest, which God hath blessed above other days: For in this the only begotten Son of God did truly rest from all his works. So also Austin (or he that writ the Book De tempore) having pleaded the due celebration of the Lords day, he concludes (with respect to the fourth Commandment concerning the Sabbath) so do we rightly sanctify the Sabbath of the Lord, as the Lord hath said, In it thou shalt do no work. Hence that Royal Edict of Charles the Great published in the year 789. We ordain (says he) according as it is commanded in the Law of God, that no man do servile work on the Lord's day; To which may be added the decree of King Edgar, expressly styling the Lord's day the Sabbath day; 
Diem Sabbati ab ipsa Die Saturni hora pomeridiara tertia usque in Lunaris diei dilaculum. festum agitari.  taking order that the Sabbath should be celebrated from Saturday three a clock in the afternoon till Monday morning at break of day; and this was in the year of Christ 959. seven hundred years ago, better Antiquity than any can be produced, or so much as pretended against this appellation: If it be objected, That this was in times of Popery: I answer, That even since the Reformation, the Lords day hath been frequently called by the name Sabbath: Those precious but persecuted Saints, 
To all these might be added the Church of England, Can. 70. So Hom. of time and place of prayer.  the Waldenses in a Catechism of theirs teach their children to call it by this name: And the holy Martyr Bp Hooper in his treatise on the ten Commandments uses the same Dialect, some scores more might be reckoned, if need were. But leaving these Authors, I return to the Objector, who sets all his wits a work to prove the Lords day a working day, most sinfully and shamefully abusing the Scriptures to this purpose. I am loath to slain my Paper with his profane Sophisms, yet lest his ignorant and erroneous Proselytes should take them for unanswerable Arguments. I shall briefly sum up all into one Objection and return several answers to it.  
Object. 
T.T. p. 14. of his Pamphlet.  In stead of that honour put upon the first day of the week: First, The Father wrought upon it, Gen. 1. and therefore we should be his followers as dear children, Ephes. 5.1.  
Secondly, The son traveled upon it, Luke 24.13, 15. And he hath given us an example that we should do as he hath done, John 13.15.  
Thirdly, The Saints cast their accounts upon it, 1 Cor. 16.2. And so may we.  
Thus he quotes Scripture to as good purpose as that Arch Sophister did, Matth. 4 But we shall answer him soberly though he deserve it not.  
Answ. 1. That which was the Father's working-day at the World's Creation, was the Sons Rest day from the work of Redemption, and we must not be sollowers of God in contradiction to Christ; or oppose the works of God against the Word of God, lest in stead of followers, as dear children, we be found fighters against him, as desperate enemies; the first day of the week was a common day when it was made at first (Gen. 1.) but since it is made again, and made a solemn day, a day of holy worship (Psal. 118.24) therefore not working day now, but to such as have no God to worship, or no hearts to worship him. God the Father wrought upon the first day of the week, yet Israel must not work on this day, once a year at least; Viz. on the day of unleavened bread, as often as it fell on this day, Numb. 23.18. why? because it was a day of holy Convocation, and so is every first day of the week to us; which (as some conceive) the Holy Ghost foretold long since by the Prophet Ezekiel saying, 
Ezek. 43.27.  It shall be that upon the eight day and so forward, the Priests shall make your  offerings upon the altar, and your peace-offerings, or thank offerings; and I will accept you, saith the Lord; 'tis a clear prophecy of Gospel-times, if not the special time of Gospel-worship, upon the eighth day, i.e. the first day of the week.  
Answ. 2. Touching our Saviour's travelling this day, I have answered before: That it was without labour (such as is the motion of immortal and glorified bodies) and therefore no Precedent for us, who dwell in these corruptible houses of clay: And I add moreover, That Christ's walking with his Disciples that day was no more an impeachment to the holy rest of the first day, than the Father's working every day to the Sabbatical rest of the seventh day: 'Tis our Saviour's own Argument, (in answer to a like objection) My Father worketh hitherto and I work: 
John 5.17.  That I termed this journey to Emmaus [a Sabbath-days journey] was in reference to the discourse by the way, not the length of the way: To which upon second thoughts I add this further answer, That 'tis very uncertain, whether Christ traveled all the way on foot to Emmaus, and back again: The Scripture is silent, and therefore we may not speak. The Objector indeed has it often up, That Christ traveled fifteen miles on his Resurrection-day: but he speaks without Book, and can never prove it by Scripture, for he might overtake the two Disciples near Emmaus, and how he came there we read not, neither can we tell how he conveyed himself back again to Jerusalem. Guesses and conjectures are no arguments.  
Answ. 3. That the Saints cast their accounts on this day, I utterly deny, we have nothing but the bold and bare word of the Objector to prove it, and let him not blame us, if we look not upon him, as such a Pythagoras, that his Ipse dixit should carry it.  
More might be added in pursuance and prosecution of this Thesis (that the Lords day is the Christian Sabbath) but Mr. Cawdrey, Mr. Bernard, Mr. Ley, and sundry others have spared me this labour.   

POSITION VI That the Sabbath gins in the Morning.  
THis Position hath been also handled and proved abundantly by others, chief by Mr. Cawdrey, and Mr. Pynchon, whose Arguments I judge unanswerable. 'Tis to me an unquestionable conclusion, That the Sabbath being a natural day consisting of 24 hours, it must begin and end as the natural day itself does. Now in Scripture-account the natural day gins and ends at or about midnight, that it gins in the dark night, is evident from that  place, Mark 1.35. Where we read of our Saviour's rising in the morning a great while before day; or while it was deep in the night. Hence also the evening of the natural day is reckoned from about noon or midday, Matth. 14.13. When the evening was come the Disciples came to Christ, 
The Scripture speaks of two evenings. Exod. 30.8. Chap. 16.12.  about sending away the multitude to seek their dinner in the Villages, and that this was not the sun-set-evening is clear; for after the multitude had dined and were dismissed, we read of another evening, v. 23. so that the former evening (all circumstances considered) must needs be about midday, therefore it must have a morning answerable to it, which must necessarily begin about midnight, when the 
a Jonah 4.7.  morning-Sun gins to ascend; as it does from midnight till midday, or 
b Prov. 4.18.  perfect day, and then it declines again, and the 
c Jer. 6.4.  shadows begin to be stretched out (called the shadows of the evening) till they fall into the darkness of the night, which is deepest at midnight.  
Against those that begin the natural day, and so the Sabbath at Sunset evening, we may object this, (which they can never answer) That by their reckoning, Christ must rise from the dead the second, not the third day after his burial. For 'tis clear that he was not buried or enclosed in the heart of the earth, till after the sunset evening. 
Matth. 27.57. Mark 15.42.  For Joseph went not to Pilate to beg the body, till the even was come; namely, the later evening which gins at Sunset, and after this, there were many things to be done before the blessed body of Christ was laid in the Sepulchre. As the 
(c) Mark 15.46.  buying of fine linen to wrap it in, besides the embalming or perfuming it with 
d John 19.40.  spices and odours, as the manner of the Jews was to bury. This (together with other Funeral rites) took up some time, so that it must needs be after Sunset before this sad Funeral was finished. Now if the Sabbath had begun with the Sunset evening, Christ's Resurrection-day being the morrow after the Sabbath, could be but the second day; whereas it is a great Article of our faith, grounded upon the 
e 1 Cor. 15.4.  Scriptures, That Christ risen from the dead the third day, to fulfil the type of Ionas.  
Further, however the Jews in later times begun their Sabbath at evening (as we grant they did) superstitiously reckoning their preparation-time part of their Sabbath-time, yet it is very considerable, that the Holy Ghost keeps a contrary account, stating the end of the Sabbath towards the dawning of the day following: as Matth. 28.1. in the end of the Sabbath which dawned towards the first day of the week: Now if the Sabbath ended at the dawning towards the next day, than it must needs begin about the same time the day before, and as the old Sabbath began and ended in God's account, so must the Lords day.  
In a word, how preposterous is it and incongruous both to Scripture and nature to begin the day at evening? how ill does this agree with those Texts of Scripture, that make the morning the first part of the day, and evening the last? The Angels we know are called 
f Job 38.7.  morning stars, not evening start, because they were created in the beginning of the Creation, and the days of the Gospel are called 
g Zech. 14.7.  evening (in the evening it shall be light) because they are the last days; according to the common Dialect of Scripture, 
h Psal. 5.3. Psal. 143.8 Gen. 49.27.  morning time is first, evening last, and evening never signifies early but late, because it is the later part of the day. But others have sufficiently cleared this truth already, to add any more were but to light a candle to the Sun. A word or two in answer to the Objections, and we have done.  
First, Object. 1 
T. T. p. 56.  We are told that Gen. 1. the day began at evening, for the darkness went before the light, and this darkness with the ensuing light (says the Objector) made the first day, and so the second, third, fourth, etc.  
This is a mere mistake; Answ. For we deny, that the first darkness, Gen. 1. was the evening or night of the first day, that darkness upon the face of the deep (for aught appears to the contrary) lasted not longer than a moment; the night of the first day was that which followed the light, after God had separated the light which he called day, from the darkness which he called night; to object the order of the words is vain, Moses himself takes off that Objection by inverting that order in the following words, for v. 4. he puts light before darkness, and day before night.  
The Ceremonial Sabbaths (because honoured as Sabbaths) were to begin at even, as 'tis said, Obj. 2 Levit. 23.32. From even to even shall ye celebrate your Sabbath.  
This law concerned only the day of atonement, Answ. which was an extraordinary Sabbath for rest and strictness, being their yearly Fast, wherein they were to afflict themselves by abstinence from 
i Joel 1.13. and 2.16.  sleep as well as food; and this is so far from proving that their weekly Sabbath began at even, that to me it is a good Argument to prove the contrary, for it looks like a particular exception from a general rule; and to specify the beginning of this extraordinary Sabbath at Even had been needless, if their ordinary Sabbaths had begun at the same time.  
Nehemiah caused Jerusalem's gates to be shut before the Sabbath, even while the declining Sun cast some obscurity on the city gates. Obj. 3 
Neh. 13. ●9.   
This was to prevent the profanation of the Sabbath the next day, Answ. and it were to be wished all Christian Magistrates would have the like care of the Lords day. Besides 'tis said, he caused the gates to be shut, when they began to be dark, and yet says the Text, this was before the Sabbath, which seems rather to intimate that in Nebemiahs' time, the Sabbath did not begin in the evening; otherwise (as Mr. C. notes) he had done it not before, but in the Sabbath.  
The precious women having attended our Saviour to his Sepulchre, returned and prepared spices and ointments, Obj. 4 and rested the Sabbath according to the Commandment.  
This (as we said before) was after the sunset evening besides the holy Women did not forbear to anoint the body of Christ that evening, because of the weekly Sabbath, Answ. but possibly because of the Jews Passeover-Sabbath, 
John 19.31.  or rather the Jews preparation to it; of which we read John 19.42. We are sure, 
Mark 16.2.  they came not to anoint him till the morning of the Resurrection-day; and it may be they stayed so long in conscience of the Sabbath, which was not ended till the morning after midnight; therefore 'tis most likely our Lord had taught them that the Sabbath gins and ends in the morning; if it had ended at Sunset, we may rationally think, they had visited the Sepulchre before they slept that night, and not have put it off till the next morning. As for those multiplied Scriptures that call for evening-sacrifices, Psal. 92 1. Isai. 30.29, they make as much for us, as for him; if not more: Since as we count the after-evening from sunset till midnight a part of the Sabbath, and spend it (our waking hours at least) in Sabbath-duties, repetition, meditation, prayer and praise; so we hold a preparation necessary the evening before. Of which in the next Position.   

POSITION VII. The Lord's Day must be kept holy to the Lord.  
THe very appellation of it together with the Observation of the Apostles and Primitive Christians is sufficient proof of this. 'Tis a pious and ponderous speech of a late worthy Writer, 
Dr. Cheynels Treatise of the Blessed Trinity, p. 402.  The approved practice of the primitive Christians declares the doctrine of the Apostles, and the doctrine of the Apostles shows what was the command of Christ the Lord of the Sabbath concerning the sanctification of the first day of the week, which is therefore called the Lords day, and the Christian Sabbath. If it be the Lords day (as we have proved) then let it be consecrated to the Lord as holy and honourable, 
Isai. 58.13.  even to that Lord whose name it bears, to him, I say, who hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, 
Rev. 19.16.  King of kings, and Lord of Lords; even the Lord of glory, a Lord as far above the greatest lords on earth, as they are above their meanest Subjects. 'Tis the Lord's day and therefore the Lords due; let us render to Christ the things that are Christ's: Why did the Lord make this day, but that all his faithful subjects and servants should keep it, and keep it holy to him that made it? O let the law of the living God over-awe our Consciences, which is still in force for a day of weekly worship at his appointment, and such we have proved the Lords day to be. More Arguments might be produced, But those already urged are sufficient to secure this truth from the dread of that downfall threatened by the Adversary. The Devil and his agents may puff at the Christian Sabbath, but confident I am, they shall as soon blow out the Sun with a pair of bellows, as totally extinguish this Ordinance of Christ: the chief ground of my confidence is the Word of God, upon which it is founded; and next to that the writings of the ancients, so many in several Countries, and several ages bearing witness as one man to this Christian cause, with whom although I would be loath to err in any thing, yet do I the less mistrust myself to err, while I keep them company, and do with more confidence look an adversary in the face, when my quiver is full of their Testimonies, as a late Author speaks on another occasion. To draw to a Conclusion, from Doctrinal Positions about the Christian Sabbath, we shall descend to some practical Directions; I cannot stand to speak fully and largely to the duties of the day, neither need I; other Treatises have done it already as Mr. Sprints, Mr. Shepherds, Dr. Gouges, but especially Mr. Philip goodwin's; only for the help of those that want those excellent helps, I shall hint a few things, and commit all to the blessing of him whose day and honour I have argued and contended for.  
Briefly, the practice of the Christian-Sabbath stands chief in two things, viz. In preparation to it, and sanctification of it.  
1. There must be solemn and serious preparation the evening before, to get our hearts into a Sabbath frame, this the Lord calls for in the very front of the Commandment, Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy, remember it before it comes, that you may keep it holy when it comes; this word [Remember] should be as a bell to toll us in from our Shops and Farms, to our Chambers and Closets, there to commune with our own hearts, to cast up our spiritual accounts, to call over our wants, and (if we have hearts) to weep over our week day sins, and stir up our selves to take hold of Christ, that we may make peace with God, they that have any acquaintance with heart-work, find it hard to have to do with a dusty world, full of sins and snares, and not be defiled or entangled with it; earthly things are apt to leave a tincture upon the most holy and heavenly hearts: There must therefore be a rubbing off this rust of the world, a washing these dirty hearts and hands before we are fit to draw nigh to God in solemn Worship; 
Exod. 19.14.  What were those Ceremonial washings of old, but emblematical predictions and documents of preparation to Gospel-worship? and (if I mistake not) something to this purpose is prophesied concerning the purest times and Churches in these later days. 
Rev. 15.2, 3.  Revel. 15. We read of those that had gotten the victory over the Beast and his Image, i. e. those that had shaken off the yoke of Antichristian Tyranny and Superstition, standing upon a sea of glass with the harps of God in their hands; those harps in their hands speak them in a posture of public worship. But what means their standing upon a sea of glass? Why among other things, I conceive, it alludes to that Laver or 
* 1 Kings 7.23.  sea in Solomon's Temple, in which the the Priests were wont to 
* 2 Chron. 4.6.  wash when they went to worship, and it may teach us thus much, that the people of God under the Gospel, as well as they under the Law, must wash before they worship, there must be some preparation.  
Secondly, the sanctification of the Sabbath follows, and this also consists in two things. Holy rest, and holy work. First, we must keep it as a day of holy rest to the Lord, resting from our own works, our own words, and our own thoughts.  
1. We are bound upon the Lord's day to rest and cease from our own works, whether works of labour, or works of pleasure, if I may so distinguish. The Lord's day must neither be our working-day, nor our playday; both these are prohibited by the letter of the fourth Commandment, and the analogy of that Text which seems to be written as a Commentary upon the Commandment, Isai. 58.13, 14. If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable, and shalt honour him; not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thy own words, etc. In which words we have the lively Picture and Portraiture of a true Sabbath, in both parts of it; it must be celebrated with rest from our own ways, works, words, pleasures, and this rest must be accompanied, with a spiritual rejoicing in God, and delight in his Sabbath, arising from an honourable esteem of the day, considering whose day it is, namely, the Lords. Now the scope of this Text is as applicable to our Christian Sabbath as ever it was to the Jews Sabbath, ours being first, a day of holy rejoicing in the Lord as well as theirs, Psal. 118.24. Secondly, a day which hath the Lord for its author as well as theirs. Thirdly, a day every whit as honourable as theirs, yea a degree above it, being instituted upon a more noble account, Viz. The most gracious and glorious work of Redemption. Fourthly, a day in all respects as holy as theirs, holy I mean, in respect of separation and dedication to holy duties, as prayer, preaching, breaking of bread, praise and thanksgiving, Acts 2.1. and 20.7. Psal. 118.27, 28. Therefore it must be kept with rest from accustomed labour and pleasure, as well as theirs, and that by virtue of the fourth Commandment, which requires the sanctifying of one day in seven of divine appointment as a Sabbath, with rest from servile works, and secular employments. And let it be further considered, both the fourth Commandment and the Prophet Isaiah in commenting upon it, do first and chief call for sanctity; Secondarily, for rest: First, Remember the Sabbath to sanctify it, then, Thou shalt do no work. Sanctification is required as the end, cessation from labour as the means; the one as principal, the other as accessary. Now both Prophets and Apostles have marked out the Lords day as a holy day, to be spent in holy duties of solemn worship, and that weekly; therefore by the Law of God and nature we are bound to keep it as a day of weekly rest, otherwise we separate the end from the means, which cannot be; rest from servile work being an inseparable adjunct to a day of solemn worship: What then shall we say to those that afterwarning make the Lords day either a common working-day, or a sporting day? the former I may fitly call the Devils workmen, who will one day pay them their wages; the other the flesh's Bondmen whose pleasure in the end will prove torment without end. The Lord awaken both to repentance better than that of Esau, whose sin (of the two) is greater than his, 
* Hebr. 12.16.  there are profane Esau's under the Gospel, and they are the worst of Esau's; there is also a sin called 
* Rom. 2.22.  Sacrilege condemned in the Gospel, and Sabbath-breaking is very like it; when sinners lay sacrilegious hands upon that which is consecrated to the Lord, for a sin much like to which Ananias and his wife were once stricken with sudden death, and how many such dreadful strokes have been felt and heard in these later days? I shall not repeat what has been already committed to record by others. Mr. Bernard, Mr. Byfield and sundry others have been serious observers of Gods heavy hand in this kind. I could say something of what I have seen with my own eyes, and heard with my own ears. But I shall forbear, 
Numb. 10.1, 2.  when men are struck dead in the very act of their sin, as Vzzah in touching the Ark, Nadab and Abihu in offering strange fire, when the sin and the judgement meet together, and do one point at the other, surely Gods hand is not to be slighted. Mr. Byfield has related many such tremendous strokes upon those that have presumed to work on the Lord's day, and ended their lives and their work together; having no more respite between their sin and their execution [or expiration] then with trembling lips to tell others the secret reflections of their own guilty Consciences, and how many Malefactors have we heard at their execution, bewailing their profanation of the Lords day, as the leading-cause of all their mischiefs and miseries? Now the Conscience of the sinner smarting under God's revengeful rod is many times like a finger to point out the sin for which God smites, as we see in the case of 
a Judges 1.7, 8.  Adonibezek. To be short, the exemplary judgements of God against this sin of Sabbath-breaking, falling in so great variety, and happening so thick together in many places, do call aloud to the inhabitants of the earth to 
b Isai. 26.9, 10.  learn righteousness; and it is doubtless our duty with humble reverence, and holy awfulness of the divine Majesty soberly to observe and improve them, inadvertency of God's judiciary proceed is a 
c Psal. 28.5. and 10.4, 5. Isai. 5.12.  sin frequently condemned in Scripture, and severely threatened. Reader, if neither Scripture-Arguments, nor exemplary judgements will reclaim thee from violation of the Lords day, proceed on in thy profaneness still; it may be the Lord will make thee the next example, to teach others what thou wilt not learn thyself.  
Something might also be added from Christian experience, 'tis observable, that when the Spirit comes effectually to convince of sin, commonly one of the first sins which the eye of enlightened Conscience fixes upon, is the neglect of the Lords day, and (conviction ending in conversion) one of the first duties which the soul comes seriously to close withal is the strict observing of the Lords day, grace works much this way, and does exceedingly dispose the heart to this duty; for which I dare appeal to the Consciences of many thousand living Witnesses.  
Add to this the spiritual profit and sensible growth of grace, with the sweet comfort and final peace experienced this way. Tell me, where does true Religion thrive better, and the power of godliness flourish and prosper more than in Families, City's Countries and Kingdoms where the Lords day is duly observed? on the contrary, where does superstition, irreligion, Atheism and profaneness abound more than where this day is neglected and vilified? 'tis a serious Observation of a learned 
* Dr. Hakewils discourse of the Institution, dignity, and end of the Lords day.  Author, concerning the ingress and progress of Popery in former times: Namely, That after-ages much degenerating from the simplicity of the Primitive times, so infinitely multiplied and magnified their holidays beyond all measure and reason, that the Lords day began to be slighted, and accounted with many a common Holiday, perchance inferior to some of their Saints days; which no doubt was a special occasion of that thick cloud of Superstition, which afterwards overshadowed the face of the Church; and in appearance the reducing of this day to its original honour would prove the readiest means to restore the Church again to her original lustre and beauty even in those places where that cloud is not yet dispelled, etc. But this by the way.  
Secondly, In order to the sanctifying of the Lords day, we must cease not only from doing our own works, but from speaking our own words. Good reason, for it is none of our own day, therefore let none say Our tongue is our own on this day. Christian, if thou canst not speak religiously on the Lord's day, learn to speak sparingly; rather be silent, then sinful in thy speeches. Valerius Maximus reporteth of Zenocrates, that being in company with some who used ill language he was very mute; and being asked the reason, he replied, It hath often repent me that I have spoken, never that I have held my peace. Thus much the Scripture teaches us, That in the multitude of words there wanteth not sin therefore 
d Prov. 17.27, 28.  he that spareth his words is wise. Indeed if a man speak of heavenly things on the Lords holy day he may with Paul continue his discourse till midnight, and never speak too much; but of earthly things we cannot speak too little; Oh that our hearts and lips were more heavenly on the Lord's day, that there might be more sprinklings of grace and heaven in all our Sabbath-day discourses! how much were it to be wished that on this day Christians would speak less of what they saw, more of what they heard in the public assemblies? Alas! should the Lord put that Question to many Christians now, which once he did on this day to the two Disciples going to Emmaus; What manner of communication is this that ye have one with another? how would it put some thousands to the blush, who have nothing but earth, or froth in their mouths?  
Thirdly, we must also lay a charge upon our hearts not to think our own thoughts on the Lord's day. 
Rom. 7.14.  For the Law of God is spiritual, and bindeth the heart from thinking, as well as the tongue from speaking, or the hand from working. Besides what vile hypocrisy is it to lay a restraint upon our words and actions, when in the mean time we give scope and liberty to our thoughts to wander after a thousand vanities? this is just like painted Sepulchers, fair without, but full of rottenness, and dead men's bones within. Further, our own vain and worldly thoughts are great distractions and obstructions to the duties of the day, 
Exod. 8.24.  like that plague of flies in Egypt, which was so vexatious that they could neither work, nor eat, nor drink, 
and 10.12.  but the Flies molested them. Such a plague is a worldly heart on the Lord's day, a man can neither pray, nor hear, nor meditate, but earthly thoughts pester and disturb him; yea, like that plague of Locusts that devoured all; earthly thoughts eat up all the pleasant fruit of Sabbaths and Sermons; 
Luke 8.14.  yea like thorns they choke the very seed of the Word and render it unprofitable: How highly does it concern us therefore on the Lord's day especially to look to our hearts? Now if ever Solomon's counsel is seasonable, 
* Prov. 4.23.  Keep thy heart with all diligence, Or, Cum omni custodiâ, with all keeping, as some read it; set guards and double guards upon it, for as Bernard truly speaks, Cord nihil fugacius, Nothing is more flitting than the heart of man; 'tis a wand'ring Dinah, we had need watch it warily, and check it speedily when it gins to hanker-after the world: In a word, to cure evil and earthly thoughts on the Lord's day, we should do well to awe our hearts with the apprehension of God's allseeing eye: 'Tis observable that our Lord appeared to his servant John upon his own day in a heart-searching-similitude, His eyes were as a flame of fire, 
Rev. 1.14.  not only burning in jealousy against sin and sinners, but bright and shining as the searcher of hearts and tryer of reins, by which title he then also styled himself. 
Rev. 2.23.  Consider Christian that on the Lords day especially thy heart lies under the view of that fiery flaming eye of Christ; therefore let thy thoughts be none but such as that pure and piercing eye will approve, and if Christ as the searcher of hearts be not awful to thee, yet me thinks Christ as the judge of secrets should. O let the terror of that last day work upon our hearts every Lord's day, the seat of the Judge is fitly resembled by a cloud, not a throne of silver or gold, but a cloud: 
Rev. 14.14.  Now as we know the clouds are storehouses of refreshing showers, so also of storms and tempests; and thus doubtless that day of the Lord will be as a day of refreshing to some, so a stormy day of tempests and terrors to others; and a great part of the tempest of that day will fall upon the thoughts and hearts of men, for 
* Eccles. 12. ult.  God will bring every secret thing into judgement; we must be accountable not only for idle words, but vain thoughts. And thus much of the first thing, we must keep the Sabbath as a day of rest, but we must not rest in this rest; we must not make it a Sabbath of idleness, but a Sabbath of holiness; we must not so much cease from working, as change our work; servile work for soul work, worldly employments for spiritual exercises: That is the next thing.  
2. To our holy rest we must join holy work, and this is either public or private; something indeed must be done in private before the public, our closet-devotions and Family, duties common to other days must not he omitted this day, but rather augmented; their Sacrifices under the Law were 
* Numb. 28.9.  doubled upon the Sabbath-day, and observe it, 
Exod. 3.7.  their first service was the burning of Incense before the lord 
Matth. 28.1. Mark 16.2. John 20.1.  Now prayer is our Incense, let this be our morning exercise in private. Seek the Lord, O my soul, seek him early, do as Mary Magdalen did, she was early up to seek him whom her soul loved; she was last at the Cross, and first at the Sepulchre, in the dawning, while it was yet dark, very early in the morning say the Evangelists. Oh that our love to Christ could keep pace with hers! Shall we love the world better than Christ? if we have a journey to go about worldly concernments we can set out betimes; oh that we were as wise for our souls, as we are for our bodies! let not sleep (that devourer of time) beguile us of our golden hours in the morning in which we are freshest and fittest for converse with God; let the sluggard that sleeps with the Sunbeams in his face remember that saying of Austin; If the Sun could speak, how roundly might it salute thee with this reproof? I laboured more than thou yesterday, and yet I am risen before thee to day. But this is too low an Argument, behold the Sun of righteousness is risen, and he risen early this day, therefore let us not sleep as do others, but say and sing with the Church, 
f Isai. 26. ●.  With my soul have I desired thee in the night, yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early.  
Having performed our morning exercises in private how cheerfully should we repair to the public Assemblies and draw nigh to God in public Ordinances, on this acceptable day, this season of grace, when Christ sits in State (as one speaks) scattering treasures of grace amongst hungry and thirsty Saints that are poor in Spirit, and wait for spiritual alms at the Throne of grace? 
g Psal. 84.1, 2.  How amiable are thy Tabernacles O Lord of Hosts! My soul longeth, yea even fainteth for the courts of the Lord: My heart and my flesh cryeth out for the living God. And again, 
h Psal 122.1.  I was glad when they said unto me, let us go into the house of the Lord. For the 
i Psal. 87.2.  Lord loveth the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob; and most sweetly the Prophet Isaiah (speaking of Gospel-times) 
k Isai. 2, 1, 2.  Many people shall go and say, Come and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob, and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths. A most lively prediction of our Christian solemn Assemblies, the select season of which is signified by t he practice of the Apostles and Primitive Saints to be the first day of the week; on this day they met to break bread, and Paul preached to them, Acts 20.7. on this day they were all together. with one accord in prayer, (Acts 2.1. with chap. 1.2, 4.) and at these meetings the Scriptures were read by the Apostles command, 
Tertul. Apol. cap. 39  Col. 4.16. 1 Thes. 5.27. to which may be added singing of Psalms, usual at their solemn Assemblies, 1 Cor. 14. an Ordinance by which God is much glorified, and the souls of his people sweetly cheered and refreshed; what greater act of honour can we do to the great God here on earth then publicly to praise him in the great Congregation? especially on the Lord's day, 
Psal. 111.1.  when all the Churches of Christ in the world join consort with us in this melodious duty? 
Hebr. 10.25.  Let us not therefore forsake the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; while we enjoy public Liberties and Ordinances, let us improve them; we know not how soon the songs of the Temple may be turned into howl, and Ichabod may be written upon all our Church-doors, the glory is departed from Israel; 
Lam. 1.4, 16.  the ways of Zion de mourn, because none come to her solemn assemblies. The Lord forbidden that ever we should live to see that woeful day, wherein we shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, but shall not see it: Let not our neglect of the Lords day provoke the Lord to deprive us of it; let us conscientiously wait upon God in Sabbath-Assemblies and public Ordinances, lest we be forced (for contempt of the public) to seek our bread in secret wand'ring up and down in caves and dens of the earth, destitute, afflicted; tormented, as we read of some, better than ourselves, Heb. 11.38, 39  
Lastly, The public solemnities of the day being ended, what remains but that we return again to our private exercises? searching the Scriptures concerning the truths taught in public, as the 
* Acts 17.11.  noble Bereans did; to which we may join Repetition and Conference, to whet the Word upon one another's hearts; let not our souls be weary of Sabbath-work, only take heed, as of resting in the rest, so also in the work of the day: for what one truly speaks of duties and actings of grace, [they are good duties and good graces, but bad Christ's] the like may I say of Sabbaths never so well kept, they are good Sabbaths, but bad Saviour's; let our rest and confidence be only in Christ, and to such as take him for their rest, his work is but recreation, and so indeed we should esteem it in a spiritual sense; not looking upon it as a sour task, or a rigid exaction, but calling the Sabbath a delight, we should keep it accordingly, even the whole day, with the whole man, as a day of delights to the Lord, being transported beyond flesh and the world, and having our conversation in heaven, as much as is possible for creatures clothed with flesh.  
To come to a closure, There is a double duty to be performed in private on the Lord's day, which I seriously advise Christians to make Conscience of; namely, the spiritual duty of meditation, and the celestial duty of praise.  
First, how seasonable it is on the Sabbath to meditate, not only on the Word, but the Works of God, appears from Psal. 92. which is a Psalm for the Sabbath-day: How does the Psalmist there search and dive into the wonderful works of God? Vers. 5. How great are thy works O Lord! and thy thoughts are very deep. Here we have a large field, works of Creation, and works of Providence; here our souls may wander from sea to land, 
See Mr. Baxter Saints everlasting Rest.  from earth to Heaven, from time to eternity; yea walk upon the Sun, Moon, and Stars, and enter into Heaven itself, the Paradise of God: How manifold are thy works, O Lord, in wisdom hast thou made them all! Every creature of God that we cast our eyes upon this day should be as a flower to feed our Meditations. I speak of cursory Meditation; or that which is occasional; one special use whereof is to feed our graces by our senses, and (as we are Christians) to conduct us to Christ by the view of all creatures and actions; when we look upon the Sun, it bids us look up to Christ the Sun of righteousness, every star may mind us of that star of Jacob, that bright and morning star; if we look upon our houses, Christ is the door; if upon our bodies, he is the head; if upon our clothes, he is the garment of salvation; if upon our friends and relations, he is our husband, our friend, our Lord, our Lawgiver, our King; if we walk, he is the way; if we read, he is the word; if we eat and drink, he is our food; if we live, Christ is our life: that is, a holy heart may make this spiritual use of all earthly objects and occasions to contemplate Christ in them; and if we improve not our senses this way, 'tis all one as if we were blind, or brutish.  
But besides this, there is a more distinct, deliberate, solemn and set meditation required on the Lord's day; and the work of Redemption being the occasion of the day, how should our hearts work upon this blessed subject! Come Christian, call in thy thoughts from all worldly concernments, and contemplate this rare contrivance of thy Redemption by Jesus Christ; ponder it deeply, get lively and strong apprehensions of it, that it may leave deep and lasting impressions upon thy soul; view over the several passages and transactions in this Masterpiece of all God's works; view it first in the platform, how gloriously was this laid, in the eternal projects and 
a Ephes. 1.4.  purposes of God's love! yea in that eternal promise passed between the Father and the Son, 
b Titus 1.2.  In hopes of eternal life which God that cannot lie, promised before the world began. Mark it, here was a promise, a promise of eternal life, made by God, by God that cannot lie, and that before there was a world, or man in the world. Oh the everlastingness, infiniteness, unsearchableness of this love of God that the everlasting God, the Majesty of heaven and earth should take care of me before the world was; that he should busy himself and his Son about a worthless wretched worm, born out of due time, the least of Saints, the greatest of sinners: O my soul admire, adore this first love, this free love of God and Christ!  
Next see the early discovery and shining forth of this mystery in the very morning of the world; no sooner is man fallen, but God reaches out a 
c Gen. 3.15.  promise to him, and (after many ages) sends his blessed Son out of his bosom to fulfil it; in the 
d Gal. 4.4.  fullness of time Christ comes; we could not come up to him, lo! he comes down to us, O see the King of glory stooping, bowing the Heavens to come down and dwell in a dungeon, to lodge amongst prisoners, and pitch his tent in the rebels camp. Think O my soul, how did the holy Angels wonder to see the King of Heaven stepping down from his throne to sit on his footstool; yea putting off (to the view) the robes of a prince, to put on the livery of a 
e Phil. 2.7, 8.  servant, and that, after treason had been stamped upon it, taking our nature, I mean, after it had been up in arms against God; not that he took the sin of our nature (he that could make our nature without sin, could also, and did take it without sin) but the shame of it he took, in that he took it, when it was under a cloud, under a blot before God and Angels. How does this express the love of Christ, a heart full of love to lost sinners! q. d. poor soult I cannot keep from you, I love your very nature, and will join it to myself, and so I may save you from sin and wrath, I care not if I become one with you, and dwell in your very flesh: My glory shall not hinder, I will rather veil it for a while, and take the form of a servant, and become of no reputation, than you shall perish for ever. Again, how does this speak the unspeakable love of God; 
See Mr. Ambrose looking to Jesus, p. 342.  as one sweetly observes, God did so love the very nature of his elect, that though for the present he had them not all with him in heaven, yet he must have their picture in his Son, to see them in, and love them in. O meditate much on this admirable strain of love till it melt thy heart and make it burn within thee!  
From the Incarnation of our blessed Saviour we may trace him through the several passages of his life, to his death and passion, and here with an eye of faith look upon him whom thou hast pierced, behold the man, as he said, even that man of sorrows, suffering, bleeding, dying on that tree of shame and ignominy; dwell upon the death of Christ till it put life into thy dead heart; then follow thy crucified Lord from the cross to the Sepulchre: and by the way ponder deeply the severity of God's justice, the sinfulness of sin, the love of Christ, and the worth of souls, which are not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Jesus Christ, 
1 Pet. 1.18, 19  as a lamb without blemish and without spot. Why did the Primitive Saints sacramentally show forth the Lords death, on the Lord's day, Acts 20.7. but to signify to us, that to contemplate and commemorate the death of Christ is a special duty of the day? So also his Resurrection, which was the great transaction of the day, therefore a proper subject for serious meditation. It is Christ that died yea rather that is risen again, and become the first-fruits of them that slept. Consider, O my souls the holy triumph of thy Redeemer this day, when he trod on the serpent's head, took from death its sting, from hell its standard! Suppose thou hadst stood by the Sepulchre, and seen the Sun of righteousness (covered with a cloud before) shining forth most gloriously in the morning of the Resurrection-day; how would this have raised, and ravished thy heart! How glad were the Disciples when they saw the Lord! so glad, that 'tis said, They believed not for joy: O the day of Christ's rising from the dead was a day of joy and gladness! 
John 20.20. Luke 24.41.  No day like this, when our surety was released, the Covenant and sure mercies of David confirmed, hope revived, heaven and eternal life assured.  
In the midst of these thoughts who can but cry out with the Apostle, O that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection! 
Phil. 3.10.  That I may feel the working of that mighty power which God wrought in Christ, 
Eph. 1.19.  when he raised him from the dead! O that the same 
* Rom. 1.4. and 6.4, 5.  spirit of holiness which quickened Christ from the dead this day (and so made the day holy) would also quicken my soul from the death of sin to the life of holiness, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so I also might walk in newness of life, being planted into the likeness of his resurrection, as also of his death.  
Our hearts being thus tuned by meditation, how should our tongues show forth the praises of our precious Redeemer! Let him have the praise and the glory of the whole work of our Redemption. Awake my glory, utter a song: Sing that Psalm of John the Divine, Unto him that loved us, 
Rev. 1.5, 6.  and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us Kings and Priests unto God, and his Father: To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Thus give unto Christ the glory of his death, yea the praise of his Resurrection, say with Peter, Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
1 Pet. 1.3, 4.  who  to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope, by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, reserved in heaven for us. Surely God requires a thousand thousand Hallelujahs for this blessed work of our Redemption; he calls upon all creatures to join with us in rejoicing upon this account: 
Isai. 44.23.  Sing O ye Heavens, for the Lord hath done it, shout O ye lower parts of the earth, break forth into singing ye mountains, O forest and every tree therein, for the Lord hath redeemed Jacob! Let us therefore devote ourselves more solemnly to this Angelical service; begin the day with prayer, and end it with praise, not only in public but in private. O that every house were in this respect a temple, that the songs of the Temple might be heard in all our tabernacles on the Lord's day, that the streets might ring with our praises, even the high praises of our Creator and Redeemer! 'Tis Scripture counsel, That we should speak to ourselves in Psalms, 
Ephes. 5, 19  and Hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in our hearts to the Lord, and singing with grace in our hearts; grace in the heart (as one says well) is the best tune to every Psalm. We must sing with the Spirit, as well as pray with the spirit. And therefore we should labour to be (with S. John) in the Spirit on the Lord's day. In a word, Christian prudence should direct us to choose out suitable Psalms for such a solemn day, Psal. 118. is very proper and pertinent, The stone which the bvilders refused is become the head of the corner; this is the Lords doing, and it is marvellons in our eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made, we will be glad and rejoice in it. God is the Lord which hath showed us light, etc. Thou art my God and I will praise thee: Thou art my God I will exalt thee; O give thanks unto the Lord for he is good, for his mercy endureth for ever. Thus much in brief concerning the prime duties of the day. I shall conclude all with the words of that Prince of English Poets: 

HERBERT.  
O day most calm and bright,  
The week were dark but for thy light.  
The other days and thou,  
Make up one man, whose face thou art,  
Knocking at heaven with thy brow,  
The working days are the backpart.  
The Sundays of man's life  
Thredded together on times string,  
Make bracelets to adorn the wife,  
Of the eternal glorious King.  
Thou art the day of mirth,  
And where the work-days trail on ground  
Thy Flight is higher as thy birth,  
O let me take thee at thy bound!  
Leaping with thee from seven to seven  
Till that we both being tossed from earth  
Fly hand in hand to heaven.     
FINIS.   

Books sold by John Rothwel at the Fountain in Goldsmith's Row in Cheapside.  
THe Use and Practise of Faith, or Faiths Universal usefulness, and quickening influence into every kind and degree of the Christian life: Delivered in the Public Lectures at Ipswich, by the late eminent and Faithful Servant of his Lord Mr. Matthew Laurence Preacher to the said Town 4ᵒ.  
Festered Conscience new lanced.  
The Good Master's Plea, and the Evil Servants Cavil.  
Orthodxal Navigation by Benjamin Hubbard.  
The Saints Rest in an Evil day, both in their dependence upon God, and assistance from him: Together with, Bowels of Mercy interceding for the Saints in danger. Or, Sacred Sympathy unsealed, by Alex. Pringle, late Minister of the Gospel at George's Southwark.  
The Universal Character, by which all Nations in the World may understand one another Conceptions, reading out of one common Writing their own Mother-tongues; an invention of general use, the Practice whereof may be atteined in two hours' space, observing the Grammatical Directions; which Character is so contrived, that it may be spoken as well as written; By Cave Beck, M. A.  
The same Book is also Printed in French for the use of that Nation.  
The Reign of Gustavus King of Sweden, son of Ericus, collected out of the Histories of those times, and offered to the service of these.  
A Sermon preached at the Funeral of Mr. Samuel Collins Minister of Braintree in Essex; By Matthew Newcomen, Minister of Dedham in the same County.  
The Saint's Delight in the Spring of Salvation, Or, Christ saving; Delivered in a Sermon at Gregory's by Paul's, the day of their solemn Weekly Lecture there, by Alex. Pringle late Pastor of Georges Southwark.