seventh-day sabbath be not required by Moses Law it is not by your own confession required by the Law of Nature or the Law of Christ and that it is not required by Moses Law I have proved and shall prove further by this Argument If believing Gentiles are commanded to keep the seventh-day sabbath by vertue of Moses Law then they are commanded by that Law Exod 20. But the believing Gentiles are not required by that Law Exod. 20. to keep the seventh-day sabbath Ergo believing Gentiles are not required by Moses Law to keep the seventh-day sabbath Here Dr. Chamberlain forbears to respond to Mr. Ives his Arguments and thereupon Mr. Tillam takes upon him the place of a Respondent whose Answers follow Mr. Tillam For my part I am against this Syllogistical way of Disputation and I had though you and that Gentleman that stands by you * Meaning Mr. Denn had been against all Academical wayes and rules of Disputation also Mr. Ives Truly Sir we had more reason to think you should be FOR such a way of Disputation then you had to think we were against it because you pretend to make use of so much in your late book however See the Epistle give me my liberty to argue this way as I have given Doctor Chamberlain and when it comes to your turn to oppose take what way you will so you prove the thing denyed I pass not in the mean time answer my Argument Mr. Tillam I pray repeat it again Mr. Ives The Argument is as before If believing Gentiles by vertue of Moses Law are commanded to keep the seventh-day Sabbath then they are commanded by that Law Exod. 20. But believing Gentiles are not commanded by that Law Exod. 20. Ergo the believing Gentiles are not commanded by vertue of Moses Law to keep the seventh-day Sabbath Mr. Tillam The Gentiles were bound to keep the Law that was given by God to Israel and particularly that of the seventh-day Sabbath and yet not by Exod. 20. ONELY for they were commanded in Exod 16. also Mr. Ives My Argument doth not say they were bound by the 20th of Exod. ONELY but that if they are bound by Moses Law 〈◊〉 you say they are then they are bound by that Text Exod. 20 where the sabbath is required among other Laws to be observed 〈◊〉 but that the same things might be required elsewhere now if I prove this Text in Exod. 20. doth not command the believing Gentiles to keep the seventh-day sabbath then I have taken away the force of those Arguments you urge from thence in the behalf of it Mr. Tillam Well then I say the believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh-day sabbath by vertue of the Command Exod 20. Mr. Ives I prove the believing Gentiles by that Text are not bound to keep the seventh-day sabbath by this Argument If that Law that requireth the Observation of the seventh-day sabbath Exod. 20. be nor in force to believing Gentiles then believing Gentiles are not bound by that Law Exod. 20. to observe the seventh-day sabbath But that Law that requireth the Observation of the seventh day sabbath Exod. 20. is not in force to the believing Gentiles Ergo believing Gentiles are not bound by that Law Exod. 20. to keep the seventh-day sabbath Here Mr. Tillam refused to answer to the Argument because he would not be tyed to deny Maâ—or or Minor and therefore one among the Company calls upon Mr. Ives to prove the Minor viz. That the Law that requireth the Observation of the seventh day sabbath Exod. 20. is not in force to believing Gentiles Mr. Ives Well because I would improve the time for Edification though here I might break off and forbear to argue when my Respondent shall refuse to answer yet be cause I am desired by some that stand by I shall prove that that Law is not in force which I thus do If that Law which commandeth the observation of the seventh-day sabbath Exod. 20. be in force unto believing Gentiles then the punishment due to the Transgression of that Law by the Law-Makers appointment is in force unto the believing Gentiles also But the punishment due to the transgression of that Law by the Law-Makers appointment is not in force to the believing Gentiles Ergo that Law Exod. 20. that commandeth the Observation of the seventh-day sabbath is not in force to the believing Gentiles Here Mr. Tillam refuseth to answer and therefore one that stands by denyeth the Minor and prayes Mr. Ives to prove it Mr. Ives I prove the Minor viz. That the punishment that the Law-maker appointed to the breach of the Sabbath required Exod. 20. is not in force If the punishment due to the transgrassion of that Law Exod. 20. be in force to the believing Gentiles by the Law makers appointment then the Law-maker hath appointed some to other to inflict it But the Law-maker hath appointed none to inflict it Ergo the punishment due to the transgression of that Law Exod. 20. is not in force to the believing Gentiles by the Law-makers appointment If we look into the Law of Moses we shall find that whosoever did any work upon the Sabbath day was to be put to death Exod. 35.1 2. and Exod. 31.14 15. And when they had found a man breaking this Law in gathering sticks upon the Sabbath day they brought him to Noses and Aaron and to as the Congregation to see what should he done unto him Num. 15.32 33 34 35 36 and they put him in ward for it was not yet declared what should be done unto him then the Lord said unto Moses Thâ— mâ—n shâ—â—â— die the death 〈…〉 all the multitude 〈◊〉 him with â—ones without the hoâ—â— are we find a Law given to keep the Sabbath â—od 20. a punishment assigned by the Law-maker which is Death Exod. 31.14 15. the manner of â—e execution if prescribed by God Num. 19.35 â—â—ich is stoning with stones the Executioners of this â—â—nishment are likewise appointed by the same Law which is all the multitude And let all the MULTITUDE stone him with stones c. Jer. 35 36. â—w if the seventh day sabbath be in force by vertue of Moses Law then it followeth that the same punishment is in force the same Executioners are appoinâ—d unless that any body can shew where God hath freed the transgressors from the penalty of it or hath appointed any other punishment then what is appointed 〈◊〉 the Law of Moses Mr. Ives Because Sir you will not answer this Argument by denying either Major or Minor I shall 〈◊〉 on to prove that 〈◊〉 which seems most doubtful which is the Minor Proposition vz. That the Law-maker hath not appointed any to inflict the punishment provided in Moses Law for the seventh-day Sabbath breaking upon believing Gentiles If the Law-maker hath appointed any to inflict the punishment which by Moses Law was to be inflicted noon Sabbath-breakers it is either the civil Magistrate or the Ministers
of the Gospel or the Multitude But the Law-maker hath not appointed any of these Ergo. Under the Law the Sabbath-breaker was to stoned to death by the MVLTITVDE and if that Law the seventh-day Sabbath be in force the MULTITUDE then by the same Law 〈◊〉 MULTITUDE are to stone the seventh-day 〈◊〉 hath breakers to death Mr. Tillam I declare that the Law given by God 〈◊〉 Moses upon Mount Sinai is in force to all believing Gentiles and thus I prove it Whosoever doth expect the sun of righteouâ—ness to arise with healing under his wings thâ—â— are bound to observe the Law of Moses Mal. 2 3 4. Remember the law of Moses my servant which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel with the statutes and judgements So that the reason why Christians are bound and encounâ—ged to keep it is because it is the Law of the ten Commandments And here I might framâ— a Syllogism but I will not take that conrse And I might say That Law which contained these two causes that faith Thou shalt not kilâ— and Thou shalt not commit adultery is the Royaâ— Law and that that law is the law of the ten Commandments and so consequently requireth the keeping of a Sabbath day Mr. Ives I do perceive that Mr. Tillam either will noâ— or cannot answer my Argument else surely he would not have forgotten the place of a Respondent and argue in stead of answering For it 〈◊〉 evident that he waves the strength of my Arâ—ments and proposeth Arguments of his own 〈◊〉 to little purpose Surely this is true for there is neither Argument nor Answer in what Mr. Tillam last urged 〈◊〉 is no Answer for he doth not so much as 〈◊〉 any notice of Mr. Ives his Argument one way 〈…〉 other Again there is no Argument that conâ—â—udes any thing in question if those broken speeches 〈◊〉 violating the rules of Disputation may be 〈◊〉 with the name of Arguments For first there is not one word of the seventh-day 〈◊〉 in the Argument he would seem to make 〈◊〉 Mal. 4.2 3 4 no nor in the text it self 2. There is not one word of believing Gentiles which are the subjects in the question neither in be text nor the argument 3. The promises and excouragements which are 〈◊〉 to those that keep the Law of Moses mentioned in Mal. 4. are as well made to the keeping the ceremonial as the moral part of Moses Law for the text saith they were to keep that Law with the statures and judgements given in Horeb. Now if by this text the Sabbath be enjoyned it is no otherwise enjoyned then as it was among other Statutes given in 〈◊〉 of which the ornaments of the Priests was one Exod. 29.9 and the burnt-offerings another Lev. 3.17 both which are called perpetual statutes as any body may see that consults the texts 4. If the Sabbath be required in this text Mâ— 4. where there is an exhortation to keep the Lawâ— Moses c. it is required of none but â—ews wâ— are granted in the explanation of the Question 〈◊〉 be under that Law as appeareth vers 4. Remeâ—ber YE the law of Moses which I commandeâ— unto him in Horeb for ALL ISRAEL with 〈◊〉 statutes and judgements So that this text omâ— proves what is granted viz. that all Israel 〈◊〉 under the Law given in Horeb but is far enougâ—â— from proving that believing Gentiles are bound 〈◊〉 observe that Law and farther from answering 〈◊〉 Ives his Argument which because Mr. Tillam said nothing to it Mr. Ives proceeded Mr. Ives If God hath appointed the same punishmeâ—â— to be inflicted upon the seventh-day â—â—abbathâ—â— breaker in the times of the Gospel as he diâ—appoint should be inflicted upon the Jews Sabbath-breakers in the times of the Law I dâ—demand of all this Assemble since Mr. Tillam doth refuse to answer who it is that God hathâ—â— appointed to punish the breach of the seventh-day Sabbath among the believing Gentiles 〈◊〉 the times of the Gospel whether it be 〈◊〉 Civil Magistrate or the Gospel-Minister 〈◊〉 whether every man shall rise up and kill his brother because he doth not keep the seventh-day sabbath And although Mr. Tillam will not nor cannot answer this Argument yet hath he the boldness to say that they are all Atheists Papists Prelates Ranters Quakers and some Notionists that gainsay the seventh-day sabbath as appears by his Book page 6. Hereupon Mr. Tillam was provoked to answer Mr. Tillam As for my Book there is no such thing in it if there is it is the Printers Errata and therefore you that have a minde to know the truth thereof together with other things therein contained you may buy it at Livewel Chapmans in Popes-head-alley or aâ— Mr. Eversdens at the Greyhound in Pauls Church-yard Mr. Ives It is strange you should be ignorant of your own book and as â—rappe that the Printer should erre so foully as to put an Argument of five or fix lines in your book if it were not in the copie and that it is in the book I shall shew you Hereupon Mr. Iveâ— took Mr. Tillams book out of his pocket and read these very words before all the people viz. that Gods precept seconded by his practice gives such full honour to the Sabbath that I hear of none but Atheists Papistâ— Prelates Ranters Quakers and some Notionists that deny it Mr. Ives having read these passages to the people Mr. Tillam desireth Mr. Ives to hand the book to him which Mr. Ives did and when Mr. Tillam had read those passages he gives this answer Mr. Tillam It is true I mention these persons in my book but I do not compare all that deny the seventh-day-sabbath to such but all that deny A sabbath Mr. Ives Sir that cannot be because both Papistas and Prelates do acknowledge A Sabbath or a time to worship and further you allude to the sabbath that God commanded and seconded by his practise which was say you the seventh-day and thereupon tell your Reader that you hear of none save Atheiâ—â—s Papists Prelares Ranters c. that deny IT meaning the seventh-day sabbath as any body may perceive that reads your Book therefore Sir I cannot but wonder that you should be so confident in your opinion as thus to judge and censure those that are contrary minded since you hereby refuse to answer my Argument and to assign who the Law-maker hath appointed to execute the punishment which he hath assigned in the Law of Moses for sabbath-breaking since you say both that law and the punishment annexed to it is in force to the beleeving Gentiles Mr. Tillam Well then I will answer you and I do say that the great law-giver himself shall punish the breach of the seventh-day sabbath Mr. Ives I demanded who the lawgiver hath appointed under him to execute this punishment for so runs the Argument viz. he hath appointed some or other c. and you answer He will do it himself if this answer had been
of value you should have denyed the Major which faith if the punishment be in force c. then the Law-maker hath APPOINTED some or other to inflict it here you might have denyed the Consequence and have told us that the punishment might he in force though mone were appointed because the law-maker might do it himself but this is not to the Question because the Question now is Who the law-maker hath appointed c. Mr. Tillam Well then I shall answer further That sometime the law-maker doth punish immediately and sometimes by his destroying Angel and sometimes by men and they are properly men who are Magistrates in his Congregation in the Church when he shall fulfil that prophesie of restoring Counsellors as at first and Judges as at the beginning It is observable that though Mr. Tillam saith The punishment is in force yet he hath not assigned who IS to inflict it but in stead thereof tells us first that God doth sometimes punish immediately to this it may be replyed that when he punisheth immediately it is when those whom he hath appointed to punish do not do their duty Secondly He tells us that sometime God doth punish the transgressors of his Law by his destroying Angels 〈◊〉 which it may be answered that this is most commonly when the Magistrates and Ministers of Justice do neglect to punish transgressors according as they ought yet this hinders not but all this while some are appointed to punish the seventh day Sabbath breakers if it ought to be kept by the Law of Moses Thirdly Mr. Tillam saith God appointeth men to punish the breach of the seventh-day Sabbath and these men he saith are Magistrates in the Church c. but withal he adds that such Magistrates shall be when the Prophesie of restoring Counsellors as at first and Judges as at the beginning shall be fulfilled But doth not this very saying leave Mr. Ives his Question unanswered For the Question is Who God HATH appointed c. and the Answer is That there SHALL be Magistrates in the Church when the forementioned Prophesie shall be fulfilled but who then shall do it now is the Question because the Text cited by Mr. Tillam that exhorts to remember the Law of Moses doth also call upon the same people at the same time to remember the Statutes and JUDGMENTS so that if beleeving Gentiles ARE bound to observe the Law of Moses they ARE bound to observe the JUDGMENTS also So that Mr. Tillam may as well put off the observation of the Statutes as the observations of those Judgments God would have inflicted on the transgressors of his Statutes and it will not serve his turn to wait till God restoreth such men for the Law that commandeth the seventh day Sabbath of all the Congregation of Israel doth command all the Congregation to stone the Sabbath-breakers to death being lawfully convicted before a Magistrate of the fact So that if Moses Law that requireth the observation of the seventh-day Sabbath be in force to the Congregations of beleeving Gentiles as it was to the Congregations of circumcised Jews and the same punishment as hath been argued be in force to the one as well as the other then by the same Law the beleeving Congregations among the Gentiles are bound having convicted any among them of Sabbath-breaking to stone such a man to death now though such Congregations that do not keep the seventh-day Sabbath by vertue of Moses Law are not tyed thus to do yet all of Mr. Tillams opinion I mean all such Congregations that hold themselves bound by Moses Law to keep the seventh-day Sabbath I say all such Congregations stand bound to stone that member to death that shall be found to break it having lawfully convicted him by two or three witnesses neither have they any other rule by that Law to put away such an evil or such an evil doer from among them and this would hold good in all respects if God should at any time bring a Magistrate of the Commonwealth to be a member in Mr. Tillams Church then by his own grant if they shall convict a member for Sabbath-breaking before such a Magistrate then such a Magistrate by Moses Law ought to judge him guilty of death and then it roundly followeth that all Mr. Tillams Congregation must stone that man with stones till he die to put away the evil from among them Who then can be true to this seventh-day Sabbath-keeping principally as bound to it by Moses Law but they must also submit their necks to such a yoke as this which is not consistent with that Law of love and charity which ought to be preferred among Christians in the times of the Gospel Thus having given a faithful account of the Arguments and Answers urged by Dr. Chamberlain and Mr. Tillam and Mr. Ives the first day I shall now proceed to the Arguments and Answers insisted on by both sides the next day which was on Friday 7 of Jan. 1658. The people being assembled Mr. Ives repeateth the Question which take as followeth Mr. Ives The Question agreed to be further disputed this day is Whether all beleeving Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh-day Sabbath and I shall desire that whoever shall speak this day to this question either as Opponent or Respondent may apply themselves to the right rules of Disputation Mr. Tillam As to the question stated I do freely assent to the terms agreed on and do say that all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh-day Sabbath but as to your other Motion viz. that we observe the Rules of Disputation this I told you yesterday and do tell you again that such a way of Disputation is vain Philosophy and the device of mans wisdom and therefore I shall not be tied to any such Method Mr. Ives Sir I do not tie you to this or that way only I think you mis-apply Scriptures when you bring them to prove that making Syllogisms is unlawful when such forms of Arguing are frequently found in Scripture however Sir give me leave to use it till I am perswaded of the unlawfulness of it and I shall give you your liberty to prove either by Syllogisms or by plain Texts That all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh-day sabbath Mr. Tillam There is no plain Text that in so many words proves the Proposition Mr. Ives If there be no plain text to prove the Proposition then you must prove by consequence which is upon the matter the same with Syllogising and therefore I wonder you should be so much against such a way of discourse Mr. Tillam I am not against Consequences or Inferences from Scripture though I am against disputing in Mood and Figure Mr. Ives If you will not dispute by Mood and Figure then I shall tie you to bring plain Texts for what you affirm Mr. Tillam There is not a Text saith in so many words as I have told you that believing Gentiles are bound to keep
bound either by the Law of Nature Moses or Christ to keep the seventh-day sabbath Ergo All beleeving Gentiles are not bound to keep the seventh-day Sabbath It was answered yesterday that beleeving Gentiles were bound by the Law of Moses to keep the seventh-day sabbath some Arguments were then urged to prove that beleeving Gentiles are not bound by Moses Law to keep the seventh-day sabbath the last of which Arguments did relate to the 20 of Exodus which I thus framed and do again urge it that it may be answered If that Law Exod. 20 which requireth the observation of the seventh-day sabbath be in force to the beleeving Gentiles then the punishment due to the trasgression of that Law by the Law-makers appointment is in force to the beleeving Gentiles also But the punishment due to the transgression of that Law Exod. 20. by the Law-makers appointment is not in force to the beleeving Gentiles Ergo That Law Exod. 20. that requireth the observation of the seventh-day sabbath is â—ot in force to beleeving Gentiles Dr. Chamberlain As to the Law of Nature Moses and Christ 〈◊〉 do not think there is so many Law-givers as 〈◊〉 have so many distinctions but I do own 〈◊〉 20 of Exodus for a binding Law because 〈◊〉 Saviour saith Mat. 5. I am not come to destroy 〈◊〉 Law c. Now then If not one jor or tittle 〈◊〉 the Law shall fail then not the sabbath and consequentially not the punishment annexed â—worâ— the breach of it for without punishment 〈◊〉 Law is of no force for the strength of the 〈◊〉 being for the curbing of sinful Nature is 〈◊〉 no use unless there be a punishment and â—ithout it the Law would lose its force and â—â—gor and the execution of this Law is in the â—nd of such Magistrates as are Administrators â—â—der Christ Mr. Ives The Dr. should have directed his answer to my Argument by assigning a punishment appointed by the Law-maker to be inflicted upon beleeving Gentiles for not keeping the seventh-day sabbath but in stead thereof he confessth that the Law is of no force without a punishment well then by his own confession if there be no punishment to be inflicted upon the beleeving Gentiles then the Law that commands if any such there be hath lost its force and vigor and that the punishment is not in force I prove by this Argument If the punishment due to the breach of the seventh-day sabbath required Exod. 20. be in force by the Law-makers appointment to beleeving Gentiles then the Law-maker hath appointed some or other to inflict it but he hath appointed none to inflict it Ergo. Dr. Chamberlain I shall find out a better answerer then my self and that is the Apostle Paul Rom. 13. and 1 Pet. 2.13 1 Pet. 4.15 in which text an evil doer is the general word and all evil doing is punishable by the Magistrates these are Sermons preached by Paul and Peter Mr. Ives My Argument was If the punishment in the LAW be in force then God hath appointed some or other to inflict it and if he hath I desired the Doctor to assign who God had appointed to inflict that punishment upon beleeving Gentiles which was appointed in the Law for seventh-day sabbath breakers and in stead thereof he cites several texts which we well knew before none of which requireth the Magistrate to punish the beleeving Gentiles with death for not observing the seventh-day Sabbath For first here is no mention made of the Sabbath nor of the punishment what it should be Secondly If by the Magistrates punishing all evil must be meant all the evils against the first Table as well as the Second then the Magistrate may and must determine all Doctrinal truths and punish such as shall err from his determination which the Dr. will not allow Thirdly the Dr. hath at one blow given away the Cause which the good people of this land have contended for in blood for this many yeers * Which is that they might have liberty to worship God according to their Consciences and that the Magistrate may not be a judg in Spirituals to punish with death or imprisonment all that differ from him in matters of faith or worship And lastly It is a begging the Question to take it for granted that Sabbath-breaking I mean the seventh-day Sabbath-breaking is an evil before it be proved to be so Dr. Chamberlain I shall own and have printed that Magistrates are allowed of God to punish the duties of the first and second Table only with this caution that he is not to apply Legal punishments to Gospel sins nor Gospel punishments to Legal sins and this I have proved out of the evidences of Peter and Paul so that as the Magistrate is to punish all outward Idolatry Swearing and Blasphemy so also the Sabbath but not that which is of mans invention but the seventh-day Sabbath which the Lord sanctified and for which he calls himself Lord of sabbaths and Christ was both a keeper and preacher of this Sabbath Mat. 12. now then for a man to keep nine of the Commandments and say the seventh-day sabbath which makes up the tenth is of no force is against Christ Mr. Ives I have offered that if the Magistrate be to punish all Idolatry by Gods appointment and also the breach of the seventh-day sabbath then he must also judg what is Idolatry and what is Sabbath-breaking and if so the Dr. may not be long before he be convicted For Idolatry is not only worshipping false Gods but the true God in a salfe manner But secondly Idolatry was in the Law punishable with death and the sabbath-breaker was to be stoned to death Now if the Law of Moses be in force and the punishment thereof in force against those that keep not Saturday-sabbath and as you have said the Civil Magistrate is to inflict it then according to your opinion the Reason why we live is because of the wickedness of the Civil Magistrate for if the Civil Magistrate did but that which you call his duty we should all of us by your Opinion be stoned to death before to morrow morning that do not keep the Saturday-Sabbath Where then is our Christian Liberty for by the Law of Moses I must be put to death for not keeping the Jews Sabbath if this opinion be true though 〈◊〉 conscience I am perswaded that it is a weak and â—â—ggerly Element unto which I ought not to be in â—â—ndage and yet so indulgent are men to their opiâ—â—ons that having once espoused them they will mainâ—â—in them maugre the liberty of all the conscientious â—â—ople in the Land I and their own liberty too for 〈◊〉 the same Rule the Magistrate may put a man 〈◊〉 death that doth not keep the Jews Sabbath for 〈◊〉 the Magistrate ought to do if he should be of 〈◊〉 Doctors opinion and hold that the seventh-day â—abbath required in the Law ought to be kept and 〈◊〉 at the punishment annexed
to it ought to be inflictâ— I say by the same Rule a Magistrate may 〈◊〉 a man to death that is not perswaded to 〈◊〉 this seventh-day Sabbath another Maâ—state otherwise minded may put men of the Doctors â—â—inion to death because they do not keep the first day â—abbath which he holds himself in conscience bound 〈◊〉 see as strictly kept as the other doth his Saturday Sabbath Dr. Cham. I am not a Judge of Magistrates but do submit unto them secondly let none be afraid of this text for he that is in Christ is above the Law and it was not made for him for he that is in Christ cannot sin Neither do I say that the Magistrates have power to punish spiritual sins with legal punishments but spiritual sins with spiritual punishments and this they may very well do if they have but good Ministers to instruct them Mr. Ives If the Magistrate must punish all evil according to your sence of that text then he must punish spiritual as well as corporeal Idolatry when the Offendor shall be convicted of it and he must punish it according to his Judgement and Conscience so that if it be the Magistrates Duty to take away the lives of their Subjects for not observing the seventh-day Sabbath it follows roundly that the reason why we live is because of the wickedness of the civil Magistrate a wickedness if the Doctors opinion be true for which both Magistrates and People should die without mercy if once a Magistrate should be set up that is of the Doctors perswasion But the main stress of my Argument lyeth in this That God never appointed the Gentile-Magistrates to execute the punishment which he in the Law did command should be inflicted upon those that broke the seventh-day sabbath required in Exod. 20. and to this the Doctor hath given no answer save that the Magistrate is to punish all evil c. but he hath not shewn us that seventh-day sabbath-breaking is an evil nor that the Magistrate is to punish it according to Moses Law if it were an evil which are the two main things that have been objected to which he hath given no kinde of Answer though they have been urged to him once and again But instead of answering tells us that none should be afraid of the text I suppose he means the texts in the Law that threaten the breach of the seventh-day Sabbath with death his reason is because he that is in Christ is above the Law and 〈◊〉 was not made for him for he that is in Christ cannot sin c. If this be true that those that are in Christ are above the Law and that the Law was not made for them I wonder why the Doctor should keep such a stir to engage believers to observe the Law and the seventh-day Sabbath which he calls a part of the Law And if they that are in Christ as he saith cannot sin then it follows that either none are in Christ but those that keep the Jewish Sabbath or if they may be in Christ that do not keep it then it is no Sin not to observe it since if the Dr. saith true they that are in Christ cannot sin so that one absurd opinion is the cause of many for is it not absurd to say that those that are in Christ cannot sin and afterwards charge believers in Christ with 〈◊〉 for not observing the seventh-day Sabbath Dr. Cham. Mr. Ives hath been calling upon me to assigne who God hath appointed to execute the punishment which by Moses Law was due to the seventh-day sabbath-breakers I further answer That if the Magistrate must punish the breach of all Law then of the seventh-day Sabbath anâ— whereas Mr. Ives saith that then the Magistrate must judge what is Idolatry and Sabbath breaking if he must punish all transgression relating to these Laws I answer that it is no great matter to be 〈◊〉 judge since the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 6 4 Set them to judge that are least esteemed in the Church now if the weakest are to be chosen for Judges such Magistrates will not suffer their eyes to be blinded with gifts and he will inflict punishment upon false witnesses especially when such Magistrates are assisted with Gods Ministers To some of the forementioned passages answer hath been made in that Mr. Ives hath told the Dr. that his urging the text that saith the Magistrate is to punish all evil is impertinent till he hath proved the seventh-day sabbath breaking an evil and if that could be done yet this text doth not prove that the Magistrate is bound to punish it by stoning the offender to death which Dr. Chamberlain saith is a punishment yet in force to the beleeving Gentiles And whereas Mr. Ives desired the Dr. to assign who should judge he most impertinently cites 1 Cor. 6.4 and tells us that the weakest in the Church should be chosen Judges Well then if the weakest should be chosen Judges c. I demand Whether they should be chosen out of that Church whereof Dr. Chamberlain is a member or out of a Church that is not of his minde about the seventh-day sabbath If out the Church that are of his minde and whereof he is a member then we are all to be stoned to death without mercy or to keep his seventh-day sabbath though it be never so much against our Consciences but it shall ever be a part of my Letany From such Magistrates and Ministers of Justice Good Lord deliver us But if they should be chosen out of a Church that is not of the Doctors mind about the seventh-day Sabbath then it cannot reasonably be imagined that such Magistrates would put that Law in execution that saith the seventh-day Sabbath-breaker shall be stoâ—ed to death while the Magistrate himself doth tolerate the breach of it And lastly whosoever doth but read 1 Cor. 6. 4. and compares it but with the occasion for which the Doctor cites it which is to shew whom God hath appointed to execute the punishment the Law of Moses hath assigned for Sabbath-breakers they will see that the Doctor hath manifested so much weakness that if weakness were a fit qualification for a Judge as he saith it is he hath bespoke himself worthy of a Judges place before all the Poople for if the weakest are to be chose Judges I know not where we should meet with a fitter man then the Doctor who hath so unfitly apply'd the Apostles words to the case in hand Here the Doctor leaves off and Mr. Tillam undertakes to answer to Mr. Ives his insuing Arguments Mr. Ives I am now to proceed to another Argumnâ—â— to prove that believing Gentiles are not bound to keep the seventh day Sabbath VVhich I thus do If believing Gentiles are bound to keep thâ— seventh-day sabbath then they are bound by that text Jam. 2. where you say the whole Law is required to be kept But the believing Gentiles are not bound to keep the seventh-day sabbath
necessity for me to hate God or my neighbour Ergo There is no absolute necessity to break the law in Nature Mr. Coppinger I deny the Major for though there be no necessity for a man to hate God or his neighbour it doth not therefore follow that there is no absolute necessity to break the law in nature Mr. Ives I prove the Major thus If all the law written in the heart be contained in loving God and my neighbour then it followeth that if there be no absolute necessity to hate either God or my neighbour that then there is no absolute necessity to break a law in nature But all the law written in the heart is contained in loving God and my neighbour Ergo It followeth that if there be no absolute necessity to hate God and my neighbour then there is no absolute necessity to break a law in nature Mr. Coppinger I answer first that there may be a breaking of the letter of the Law as that of murder and adultery and stealing as for instance Abraham was commanded to sacrifice Isaak contrary to the letter of the law which saith Thou shalt not kill Secondly David was guilty of murder and adultery in the matter of Uriah and Bathsheba for which by the letter of the law he was to die the death yet there was a necessity for him to live and be saved from the punishment contrary to the letter of the law Again thirdly The Israelites robbed the Egyptians contrary to the Law that saith Thou shalt not steal and yet were justified though the Law saith The wicked borrow and pay not again yet the Israelites did borrow of the Egyptians and payed not again Fourthly and lastly They were not to take a wife that was a whore under the law and yet Hosea was commanded by God to take a wife of whoredoms Hos 1.2 By all which it appears that there may be an absolute necessity to break a Moral law in the letter of it Mr. Ives I answer first you have not answered to my Syllogism which saith There can be no absolute necessity to hate God or my neighbour for none of these instances that you have insisted on do shew any such thing for there is nothing of hating God or my neighbour in any of them being truly considered as I shall presently make appear Secondly You tell us there may be a necessity to transgress the letter of the Law and for that you urge several Texts when as my Argument was not grounded upon the letter of the law but rather upon the Spirit of it viz. the law written in the heart so that the instances have not answered the Argument however I shall answer the instances and first you say that there may be an absolute necessity to commit murder adultery and stealing c. To which I answer that this is such a piece of Divinity that the world did never hear of before and the first instance you assign is Abrahams being commanded of God to offer up his son Isaak c. To which I answer that if Abraham had killed Isaak it had not been murder first because he did not hate his son in his heart while he was going to offer him according to the commandment therefore this instance doth not touch the Argument which saith there is no necessity to hate God or my neighbour But secondly God commanded Abraham by an immediate Law from Heaven otherwise Abraham could not have pretended to any necessity that would have justified him in this act neither could he have been judge of this necessity unless God had required it so â—hat here was no necessity for Abraham to murder because of this commandment therefore the instance is impertinent Again as touching the case of David in the matter of Uriah there was no moral necessity laid upon any to break a moral law because David was not put to death for and if there had been such a necessity how doth this reach the Argument that saith there is no necessity to hate God or my neighbour for the people did neither hate God nor their neighbours in that they did not take away the life of their King for what he did against Uriah the Hittite And for your instance in the case of the Israelites stealing from the Egyptians which you say God allowed of c. I answer That first there was no absolute necessity for them to spoyl the Egyptians and so consequently no necessity to break a law in nature by hating either God or their neighbour But secondly God gave Israel favour in the sight of the Egyptians and thereupon the Egyptians let them have jewels of silver and jewels of gold voluntarily and the Israelites did not take them by force therefore there was no breach of a law in nature But lastly had they taken these things by force it had not been a breach of a law in nature because that nature hath taught her children to seek for repairs of those that have impaired them to take it per force where it cannot be had by fair means thus God as well as Nature by a more then ordinary instruction tells the people of Israel that they should spoil those that spoiled them which was but a just retribution upon the Egyptians agreeing with the law and light of Nature Otherwise it is a sin to steal upon the pretence of the greatest necessity hereupon Agur saith Prov. 30.8 9. Give me not poverty lest I be poor and steal and take the name of my God in vain And for your last instance of the Prophet Hosea his taking a wife of whoredoms which you say is contrary to a law I answer first that it is not contrary to the law that is in the heart because that law cannot always distinguish between a whore and a chast woman though it was contrary to the law of Israel Then secondly though a man could distinguish between the one and the other yet there is no moral necessity for a man to take the whore and leave the chaste woman But thirdly whereas you say God commanded the prophet to take a wife of whoredoms I answer that this is not spoken of carnal adultery for the text doth not say he was commanded to take a wife that was a whore but a wife of whoredoms viz. a wife from a people that were guilty of great whoredoms in departing from the Lord aâ— appears verse the second Mr. Coppinger I make no necessity of a mans own making but I say God can dispense with the breach of moral laws by giving a countermand and then the breach of the sabbath is no breach though the Priests in the law profaned it yet they were blameless in like manner if God make a law that a man shall not shed innocent blood yet Cods precept to Abraham makes it no breach of a moral law and so likewise in the other cases of the Egyptians stealing and the Prophets taking a wife of whoredoms I say these countermands make
Jews and Gentiles in point of precept Mr. Ives It is both in the 15 of the Acts and 21 of the Acts and I can assigne other places but first I say it is in Acts the 21. 20 21 22 23 24 25. verses the words are these Thou seest brother how many thousands of the Jews there are which BELIEVE and they are all zealous of the Law And they are informed of thee that thou teachest all the Jew which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses saying That they ought not to circumcise their children neither to walk after the customs What is it therefore the multitude must needs come together for they will hear that thou art come Do therefore this that we say to thee We have four men which have a vow upon them them take and purifie they self and be at charges with them that they may shave their heads and all may know that those things whereof they were informed concerning thee are nothing but that thou thy self also walkest orderly and keepest the law But as touching the Gentiles which believe we have written and concluded that they observe no such things c. Whence I observe these two things First that here was an Injunction laid upon Paul and other believing Jews that was not laid upon the believing Gentiles that they were believing Jews see verse 20. that this Injunction was not laid upon believing Gentiles see verse 25. where the Gentiles that believe are expresly forbidden such Observations Secondly these were no mean persons that did enjoyn these things but they were a holy Convocation of Apostles and Elders among whom the Holy Ghost was president as appears Acts 15.28 compared with Acts 21 25. So that if ever there was an unerring Council in the world this was one who were guided by the Holy Ghost that was sent to lead into all truth and therefore it is horrible presumption to think that these did erre and yet these do enjoyn such things upon the believing Jews that they expresly charge the believing Gentiles not to observe Mr. Coppinger These Jews that they advise him to condescend unto they were such as had conspired the death of Paul and therefore in point of prudency they advise him to condescend unto them Secondly this could not be a precept because the text saith That they offered an Offering according to the Law verse 26. now to enjoyn such a thing as this would be to deny Christ come in the Flesh and therefore it was no other then a prudent advice that the Apostles and Elders gave to Paul to save his life from those Jews that had conspired his death Mr. Ives If the words to the Jews verse 24. are but a bare advice then we may say so of their precepts to the Gentiles verse 25. and of all others that we like not Secondly whereas you say They were Jews that did conspire Pauls death and therefore they advised Paul thus to do to save himself from their malice and fury I answer that these were believing Jews that were zealous of the Law and not those unbelieving Jews that went about to kill him verse 31. which unbelieving Jews went about to kill him notwithstanding this condescention to the Law therefore the condescention was for the sake of the Jews that believed and not for the sake of those that conspired his death But thirdly whereas he saith the Apostles did advise Paul to condescend but did not enjoyn it for if they had enjoyned him to observe the Law of purification then they did enjoyn him to do those things which by consequence did deny Christ come in the flesh To which I answer that according to Mr. Coppingers Notion upon the text they did ADVISE Paul to do that which by consequence did deny Christ come in the flesh and so the absurdity falls nigh-hand as heavy upon him as he would make it to fall upon me for is it not a great piece of wickedness for any body to give advice or to take advice supposing it to be but a bare advice which by consequence denies Christ come in the flesh meerly to save themselves from persecution Now therefore supposing with Mr. Coppinger that it is but an Advice which the Apostles and Elders give Paul I demand whether it be a good or a bad advice Mr. Coppinger As Circumstances might be an advice may be good and as Circumstances may be an advice may be bad Mr. Ives But as this case was circumstanced was the advice good or bad Mr. Coppinger The advice may be good when it is given to a good end the same advice may at some times be bad when the like end is not intended Mr. Ives We must not do evil that good may come 〈◊〉 so that they ought not to advise Paul to do that which you say denyed Christ come in the flesh upon the pretence of saving Pauls life Mr. Coppinger I say as Circumstances may be a man may be advised to do that which at another time under other circumstances may not be done Mr. Ives But I pray speak to the Case in hand was this advice good or bad which the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem gave Paul This Question Mr. Ives put over and over to Mr. Coppinger who though he said that it was but an advice which the Apostles and Elders gave to Paul yet he would not answer whether it was a good or a bad advice Mr. Coppinger If I should grant that this WAS a precept that the Apostles and Elders gave to Paul yet this doth not prove that there IS NOW a difference in point of precept though there was then for my Argument speaketh of the present tense viz. that there IS no difference between the believing Jews and believing Gentiles in point of precept and this text onely speaks of what WAS. Moderator Sir the Scripture ought to be our rule and I humbly conceive that we know not what is a duty but by reading of the Scriptures and therein finde what was a duty Mr. Ives First I answer to Mr. Coppinger by shewing him that in his Argument he told us that there was no difference between believing Jews and believing Gentiles in point of precept either in Acts 15 or Acts 21. So that if this precept was but for that age or for that particular occasion yet I have confuted his Argument because his Argument saith Acts 15 and Acts 21. assignes no difference Secondly this precept was to bind Jews under the like circumstances to the worlds end which under no circumstance could bind the Gentiles because the Apostles and Elders by the assistance of Gods holy Spirit did expresly charge the Gentiles to observe no such thing Thirdly how far the observation of the Law of Nazarenes was a type of Christ I am not so well acquainted with it as to give an exact account yet this I know That when it was most in force it was but a voluntary service as appears Num. 6. So that if any man
seventh day sabbath Ergo all believing Gentiles are bound to observe the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives Pray explain what you mean when you say Christ DID teach it do you mean before his death or after Mr. Coppinger I do mean that Christ did teach the seventh day sabbath upon the Mount Mat. 5. VVhence I thus argue If Christ in his Sermon upon the Mount did preach the seventh day sabbath then all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath But Christ in his Sermon upon the Mount did preach the seventh day sabbath Ergo all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives I tell you Sir that this is not fair arguing when both Propositions are justly to be denyed however I deny the Consequence for it doth not follow that if Christ did preach the seventh day sabbath upon the Mount that therefore all believing Gentiles are bound to observe it for I shall shew some things that Christ commanded to be observed upon the Mount that Mr. Coppinger himself saith Believing Gentiles are not bound to observe Mr. Coppinger I shall prove that all that Christ did preach upon the Mount and taught others to preach believing Gentiles are bound to observe If all that Christ taught upon the Mount and commanded others to teach was to abide as long as the Sun and Moon and Heaven and Earth remain then all the believing Gentiles are bound to observe all that Christ taught upon the Mount But all that Christ taught upon the Mount and commanded others to teach was to abide as long as Heaven and Earth Sun and Moon remains Ergo all the believing Gentiles are bound to observe all that Christ taught upon the Mount Mr. Ives I deny the Minor all that Christ taught upon the Mount is not to abide as long as Heaven and Earth remain Mr. Coppinger Then you must shew us something that Christ did teach upon the Mount and command others to teach that is not binding Mr. Ives That I shall do therefore pray look into Mat. 5.23 24. Christ there commands that a man should leave his gift at the Altar and go and be reconciled to his brother and then Christ commands him to come and offer his gift these are commands given upon the Mount Secondly they are such commands as he bids others to do and teach ver 19. for they were to do and teach the least of those commandments Thirdly these commands that are taught upon the Mount are not all in force to believing Gentiles because that command of leaving the gift at the Altar and coming to offer it upon the Altar is not now in force therefore all that Christ commanded in his Sermon upon the Mount is not of force to believing Gentiles Mr. Coppinger The word altar and gift is variously taken as Heb. 13.10 We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat that serve the tabernacle and so likewise the word gift is variously taken as Christ is called The Gift of God Rom. 6.23 and Paul tells the Corinthians they came behind in no Gift 1 Cor. 1.7 and Phil. 4.7 Not because I desire a Gift and to this agree all Interpreters that gift and altar in this fifth of Matthew and 23 24. is taken allegorically Mr. Ives I answer to the last first that Mr. Coppinger doth abuse Interpreters or else he never read any for I challenge him to shew me any one Interpreter that ever understood altar and gift in Mat. 5. allegorically It is true that they sometimes make a spiritual application of these words but they all with one consent understand the words literally But secondly Mr. Coppinger hath shewed us that altar and gift is variously understood but hath not out of this variety told us which of these senses should be put upon altar and gift in this fifth of Matthew But thirdly I do challenge Mr. Coppinger or any man else to shew me that a gift at the altar is ever understood allegorically throughout the Scriptures from the Creation of the world to the death of Jesus Christ And lastly that Christ doth here intend a literal altar appears if we do but consider Mat. 8.4 where we shall finde that what Christ taught upon the Mount he exhorts the man that was cured of his Leprosie to observe for as soon as Christ descended from the Mount he cleans'd the Leper and then commanded him to offer a gift as Moses had commanded which could not be understood allegorically Mr. Coppinger The text that you last urged doth speak of a gift but not of an altar and the text under debate speaks of a gift and an altar Secondly This Christ bid the Leper do that it might be a Testimony of him to the Priest that so if the Priest should ask him how he was cleansed or who did cleanse him he might hereby have an opportunity to testifie Christ unto the Priest and tell him that Jesus of Nazareth made him whole * This cannot be the true sence of the Lepers shewing himself to the Priest for a Testimony but rather it was in observation of Moses Law which did command the Lepers to shew themselves to the Priest that the Priest having viewed the Leper he might give a Testimony to the people That this man was now fit to go abroad who before had dwelt in an out-house See Lev. 14. Mr. Ives I answer to your last first That if Christ did command the Leper to shew himself to the Priest and offer an offering according to the Law then let the end for which he did it be what it will your Argument is confuted for here is some part of the Law commanded by Christ before his death that is not binding to the believing Gentiles since the resurrection But secondly whereas you say that this text Mat. 8.4 speaks of a gift but not an altar I answer that I never heard that the Priest in Moses Law did ever offer a gift without an altar my reason is because Christ saith Mat. 23.19 That the altar sanctifieth the gift therefore this gift spoken of Mat. 8. must needs be a gift to be offered upon an Altar as well as that gift spoken of Mat. 5. Mr. Coppinger If you look into the text it is said The Leper was to offer as Moses commanded now if we will see how Moses commanded the Leper to offer let us read Lev. 14.4 5 6 7. we shall there read of the Priests taking two birds and his killing one of them over running water and that he did dip the living bird in the blood of that which was killed and then the Priest was to let the living bird fly away into the open field this indeed was to be done for the cleansing the Leper but here is not one word that the Priest was to offer any thing upon the Altar in all this Chapter Mr. Ives Have a care Sir what you say utter nothing rashly for if you look but into the 20 verse of this
14 of Leviticus you shall see that the Priest was to offer the burnt Offering and the meat Offering upon the ALTAR and the Priest shall make an Atonement for him and he shall be clean Mr. Coppinger But what if here was an Altar this was spoken by Christ to the leper after he came off the mount but our difference lay about the meaning of the word Altar and Gift in Christs Sermon upon the Mount Mat. 5. Mr. Ives I pray Sir confess your Errour for shame for is it not a shame for you to to tell us that Christ commanded the Leper to offer his Gift without an Altar when Christ bid him offer it as Moses commanded and when you turned to the Law of Moses did you not say the Priest was to offer without an Altar and now I shew you that the Priest did offer upon the Altar for the clensing of the Leper you put it off and tell me What if there were an Altar it is not to your purpose why did you not say so at first and save us this labour but give me leave to tell you again that it is to my purpose to shew you the Errour of your Argument for if Christ commands the Leper to observe all those ceremonial observations for his clensing then is your Argument false that saith All things that Christ commanded us in his Sermon upon the Mount all believing Gentiles are bound to observe to the end of the world but you say this that Christ commands the Leper to do was not on the Mount but as soon as he came off the Mount this you say is nothing to Gift and Altar mentioned in Mat. 5. in his Sermon upon the Mount I answer That the difference in places especially so little difference as between Christs being on the Mount and off from the Mount could not make a difference in his commands Secondly it cannot reasonably be imagined that Christ would command the Leper to do any thing when he came off the Mount that was contradictory to what he did command when he was upon the Mount therefore I have great reason to believe that the Altar that he commands them to offer their Gift on in Mat. 5. in his Sermon upon the Mount is the material Altar like unto that which he bids the Leper offer his Gift on as soon as he comes off from the Mount Mat. 8. and this I the rather believe because that there is no text from the beginning of the Bible to the death of the Messiah that speaks of an allegorical Altar Mr. Coppinger It may be understood allegorically in this place though it might not be understood so in the old Testament as for instance the Apostle speaks of a text out of the Psalms in the third of the Romans where he saith They were all goâ—â— out of the way c. where he useth those general terms in a sence differing from the old Testament Mr. Ives I answer first That the Apostle doth not â—ut any other sence upon those words then David puts upon them in the Psalms secondly if he did that is no rule for you as for instance David saith in the sixteenth Psalm that God will not leave his soul in hell c. this the Apostle saith Act. 2.31 that David spake of the resurrection of Christ so in like manner though I may restrain a text when God restrains 〈◊〉 and allegorize a text when the holy Ghost â—oth warrant me may I therefore allegorize a â—ext when I have no warrant as you do this 〈◊〉 Mat. 5. which I shall leave to the Assembly 〈◊〉 judge whether the gift and altar upon which Christ commands the gift to be offered be allegorical or literal And if it be spoken of a â—aterial altar then have I confuted your Argument by shewing that some things that Christ commanded in his Sermon upon the Mount are not in force to all believing Gentiles to the end of the world Moderator I pray Sir if you have another Argument â—rge it briefly for I perceive the time is expired that you agreed to break off at Mr. Coppinger I shall then briefly urge one Argument which take as followeth If the seventh day sabbath was of force before the death of Christ to believing Gentiles then it is of force still But the seventh day sabbath was of force before the death of Christ to believing Gentiles Ergo it is of force still Mr. Ives SIR I wonder that you make Arguments that have not one true Proposition in them for this is like the last both Propositions being false however prove the Minor It is observable that Mr. Coppinger in the last Dispute before this did affirm That all the Gentiles were bound to keep all the ceremonies of the Law of Moses now then if this be a good Argument why we must keep the seventh day sabbath now because we were to keep it before the death of Christ then we must be circumcised and offer sacrifices for the same reason because he himself did confess that those things the Gentiles were bound to observe before the death of Christ Mr. Coppinger If the Reason of a Law doth remain the same that it was before Christs death the Law doth remain the same But the reason of the seventh day sabbath doth remain Ergo the Law for the seventh day sabbath doth remain Mr. Ives I deny the Major for that which you call the reason of a Law may remain the same when the Law doth not remain and for this I shall give you two instances instead of many The first is Exod. 23.11 there you shall find that the reason why God would have Israel to keep the seventh year for a sabbath in which â—hey should not gather that which grew of its â—own accord it was for the good of the poor â—hat the poor of thy people might be refreshed Exod. 23. now a man may as well say he must let his and lie every seventh year because the reaâ—on remains viz. That he may refresh the poor of his people as he may say he must keep the â—eventh day sabbath because the reason of that Law is in force which is That his stranger and â—ervant and cattle may be refreshed But further there is another reason urged why we must keep the Law that commands he seventh day sabbath and that is say you because we believe as well as the Jews that God made heaven and earth in six dayes and â—ested the seventh therefore we as well as the Jews must work six dayes and keep the Saturday or seventh day sabbath I say this conseâ—ence doth not follow for the reason why â—srael was commanded to sanctifie the priests â—he sons of Aaron was because the Lord their God did sanctifie them Lev. 21.8 now though I do believe with Israel that the Lord doth sanctifie me yet I am not bound for this reason to sanctifie the priests the sons of Aaron thuâ— you see by these two instances that the reason of a Law
why beleeving Gentiles should keep the Sabbath is taken from the command in Exod. 20.8 9 10 where God requireth Israel to keep the seventh-day sabbath therefore Gentile beleevers are bound to keep it I answer That this Law was given to none but Israel as appears Psal 137.19 20. He hath given his Laws to Jacob his statues and judgments to Israel be hath not done so to any Nation Again the Apostle tells us Rom. 2. That the Jews were under the Law but the Gentiles were without the Law Argum. 3 The Gentiles must keep all the nine commandments therefore they must keep the seventh-day sabbath I answer They are bound to all the nine expresly and particularly by the light of Nature and the Law of Christ but they are not so bound to the seventh-day sabbath Again that Law of the fourth Commandment binds us as to A time to worship though not that time of the seventh-day But secondly might not these men as well object this against the Apostle who expresly complains of the Gentiles for the breach of all the nine Commandments but not a word that they did not keep the seventh-day sabbath as I shall shew by and by which doubtless he would have had an occasion to have done had the seventh-day sabbath-breaking been a breach of a Moral Law as well as the other nine precepts Argum. 4 Another Argument is taken from the Reasons of the Law given to Israel which are first God gave this as a Reason why Israel should rest the seventh-day because in six days he made Heaven and Earth therefore if this Reason be beleeved by Christian Gentiles then this Law should be observed by them Secondly God commanded Israel to rest the seventh-day because it was the sabbath of the Lord their God therefore if Jehovah be the Lord our God his sabbath must be our sabbath Thirdly God did command this duty for the good of our servants and cattle therefore if we will shew mercy to them we must keep the seventh-day sabbath I answer to the first that the Reason of a Law may be universal and always remain when the Law doth not remain as for instance the Reason why God would have the people of Israel to sanctifie the Priests the sons of Aaron was because he was the Lord that did sanctifie them Levit 21. 8. Now I hope all Christian Gentiles beleeve that God doth sanctifie them but doth it therefore follow that because God doth sanctifie beleeving Gentiles that therefore they must sanctifie a Levitical Priesthood Secondly The place of Israels worship was called the house of the Lord God doth it therefore follow that beleeving Gentiles must therefore sanctifie that place because God is the God of the Gentiles no more doth it follow that because the seventh-day was the sabbath of the Lord God that therefore the beleeving Gentiles must observe it Thirdly Whereas it is said we must rest the seventh-day that we may shew mercy to our servants and cattle I answer we can do that by resting the first day of the week as well as by resting the seventh Secondly If because that we must shew mercy be a Reason why we should keep the seventh-day sabbath because Israel was to keep it for that Reason then we must also drink deeper of this cup of Judaism and keep the seventh-yeer sabbath because that was commanded for the benefit of the poor Exod. 23.11 That the poor of thy people may eat c. So that the Reasons of a Law may have a being when the Law hath none as appears by the Reason of the sanctifying the Priest it was because God sanctifies the people yet though we do beleeve that God doth sanctifie us yet we are not therefore to sanctifie the Legal Priesthood in like manner though we do beleeve with Abraham Isaak and Jacob that God made Heaven and Earth in six days and rested the seventh yet this is no Reason why we rather then they should observe that day any more then why we should observe the other Judaical Laws whose Reasons are still the same though the Laws are changed Argum. 5 The next Arguments follow from the Scriptures of the New Testament and they are such as pretend to command and example even as the former I shall first speak to those Texts that are cited to prove that the seventh-day sabbath was commanded in the New Testament and the first is Mat. 5.17 18. the words are these Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil For I say unto you that till Heaven and Earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled Whence it is inferred that the seventh day sabbath was a part of the Law and therefore it should remain as long as Heaven and Earth remain I answer first that offering of sacrifices is also a part of this Law but doth it follow therefore that beleeving Gentiles must offer sacrifices to the end of the world and that offering of sacrifices is a point of this Law see v. 23 24. where our Lord as truly commands that a man should come and offer his gift upon the Altar after he is reconciled to his brother as he doth injoyn any other duty the like he commands of the leper that was cleansed Mat. 8. â— Secondly Christ saith the same thing of the Prophets as well as of the Law that they shall not pass away till they are fulfilled and yet many of them were fulfilled in Christs time Thirdly Christ saith of his own words Matth. 24.35 That Heaven and Earth shall pass away but his word shall not pass and yet the 34 ver saith that that Generation should not pass away till all those things were fulfilled The meaning then was clearly this that rather then either the Law or his word should pass unfulfilled Heaven and Earth should pass which doth in no wise argue that all the Law and Prophets should remain unfulfilled till the Heavens should be no more for the Text tells us He came to fulfil the Law and Prophets so that if all the Law and Prophets be unfulfilled Christ did not answer the end of his coming and if any be fulfilled then ALL the Law must not last till the Heavens be no more and if any be fulfilled then the seventh-day sabbath may be fulfilled since the sabbath is called a shadow of good things to come Col. 2.16 17. However if any of that Law Mat. 5. be fulfilled by Christ no man can conclude reasonably from that Text that the seventh-day sabbath is in force Lastly Though all this Law Mat. 5. was in force before Christs death yet we are freed from the Law by the death of Christ Rom. 7.2 3 6. therefore no Argument can be drawn from this Text to prove the seventh-day sabbath unless Christ or his apostles had reinforced the observation of it after his Resurrection Argum. 6 I come now to
view Rom. 1.25 The Gentiles who had not the law of Moses broke the first Commandment in that they worshippâ—d the Creature MORE then the Creator Rom. 1.25 which was against the first Commandment that faith We must have no other Gods bus one They broke the second Commandment in that they did change the glory of the incorruptible God into an IMAGE made like corruptible man Rom. 1.23 They broke the third Commandment in that they blasphemed the name of God Rom. 2.24 But no mention of their breach of the fourth Commandment They broke the fifth Commandment in that they were disobedient to Parents Rom. 1.30 They broke the sixth commandment in that they were guilty of murder Rom. 1.29 They broke the seventh Commandment in that they were guilty of fornication and unlawfull lusts Rom. 1.26 29. They broke the eighth Commandment therefore the Apostle admonisheth the converted Gentiles Ephes 4.17 28. that they which had stolen should steal no more shewing that in the dayes of their Gentile vanities they walked not according to the light of nature Again they broke the ninth Commandment 2 Tim. 3.3 without natural affection truce-breakers FALSE accusers They brake the tenth Commandment in that they were guilty of covetousnesse Rom 1.2 How often are the Gentiles charged with these sins both in the Old and New Testament and yet they are never charged by the Law of Nature for seventh day Sabbath breaking and therefore Josephus tells us that the Mations did imitate and learned to keep a Sabbath of the Jews for saith he our custome hath spread it self among the Nations c. clearly proving that the light of Nature never taught the Gentiles to keep the seventh day sabbath Lib. 2. contr Appion Again secondly the Gentiles could not keep the seventh day by the light of Nature because they are not exactly able to compute the seventh day from the Creation by reason that the Sun stood still in Joshua's time and hasted not to go down for a whole day and likewise the Sun went backwards ten degrees in Hezekiahs time which was almost half a day by reason whereof the light of Nature was never able to make a perfect account of the seventh day from the Creation Thirdly a man cannot know the seventh day from the fourth but by tradition therefore the knowledge of the seventh day is not moral as for instance Suppose a man sick of a violent distemper that bereaveth him of his sences when he comes to his former understanding he will know his duty touching all the nine precepts and also touching the setting apart some time to serve God but as touching this seventh day he cannot know this but by the help of tradition having lost his account in the time of his sickness which shews that the seventh day is not commanded by the light of Nature because by that light a man cannot know the seenth day from the fourth or eighth Again this Reason is further illustrated by the Travels of Sir Francis Drake who lost a whole day and so did all their company before their return for England so the Dutch in their Western Discoveries by reason of the varation of Longitudes and Latitudes they had lost a day before they returned which they had never been informed in but by the help of tradition which shews that Nature could not instruct the Gentiles in the knowledge of a seventh day Now these and the like cases puts an absolute necessity upon the world to be ignorant of this Law therefore it cannot be moral The second Argument which I urge to prove that the seventh day sabbath is not in force to the believing Gentiles is Because they are not commanded by Moses Law to keep the seventh day sabbath My Reasons are first because this Law was not given to any Nation but Israel Psalm 147.19 20. Rom. 2.14 the Gentiles had not the Law c Secondly if Moses Law be in force then the punishment due to the breach of the seventh day sabbath is in force which was That the Congregation should stone the Oftender to death Num. 15.35 which I have shewn in the forementioned Disputations cannot reasonably be imagined to consist with Gospel-liberty Thirdly if Moses Law be in force to require any thing of the Gentiles that is not expresly and particularly required of them by Christ or his Apostles then we may by the Argument of Moses Law take a liberty to innovate what Judaical Ceremonies we shall at any time have a mind unto Argum. III I come now to the last Argument viz. That the Gentiles are not required by Christ to keep the seventh day sabbath First because he hath not expresly required any such thing in all the New Testament nor have any of his Apostles to whom he delegated a power to preach the Laws of the New Testament ever declared any such thing But secondly the Apostle tells us That the sabbath was a shadow of good things to come Col. 2.16 27. Which must needs be understood of sabbath days as our Translators have rendered it First where-ever the word sabbaths is otherwise understood the Holy Ghost for the help of our understanding adds either that it is a sabbath for the LAND when he means yearly sabbaths or else if they were festival sabbaths he refers us to the Feasts which-ought to be so sanctified But secondly where-ever sabbath is joyned with new moons and feasts there it is always understood of the sabbath days because all their other sabbaths were included in their feasts except the seventh day sabbath See for this purpose Exod. 34.18 19 20 21 22 23. Lev. 23.3 4. Ezek. 45.17 and 2 Chron. 8.13 Thirdly the sabbath day was called a signe by Moses Exod. 31.17 Again my third Reason why Christ hath not commanded the believing Gentiles to keep the seventh day sabbath is Because the Apostle calls all the times that the Jews observed in the Law weak and beggerly elements among which the seventh day sabbath was accounted see Gal. 4.9 10 11. Now the Jews days were their weekly Sabbaths their moneths were their new Moons Numb 28.11 Num. 10.10 2 Chron. 8.13 Exod. 23.12 their times were three in the years Exod. 23.14 15. Deut. 16. from the first to the fourth was the feast of the Passover from the ninth verse to the thirteenth is mention made of the feast of harvest or feast of weeks and from the thirteenth verse to the 26 you may read of the feast of boothes or tabernacles which were their times that they observed Then they observed years which shews that this was spoken of the Jews since as Tacitus faith No Nation wasted whole years as the Jews did and that they were by the Law to keep years as well as days and moneths and times appears by the text Lev. 25. where every seseventh year and every year of Jubilee was commanded to be observed Now if they had no time which they observed but days moneths times and years and all these were