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-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-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-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-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
hast heard and lived ver 35. Unto THEE it was shewed c. and ver 36. Out of heaven He made THEE to hear His voice So that Israels Law in which the Sabbath was contained was made for man and yet not for every man Again God saith It is not good that man should be alone Gen. 2.18 here the Lord made a woman for Adam but would it not be ridiculoâ—â— to reason thus Whatever the Lord made for Adam every man is bound to keep would it not then for low that Paul and all other men sin that have 〈◊〉 wives because the woman was made for Adam not this as good Logick as Mr. Tillams who saith The Sabbath was made for man and therefore every man is bound to keep it Mr. Tillam If that Text alleadged by you Deut. 5. be understood of Adam then you have over thrown your Argument yesterday wherein you denyed the extent of the Law of Moses to all men Mr. Ives It is true that if Adam or the word man be always understood for every individual man then my saying that God gave the Law in Sinaâ— unto MAN doth overthrow what I said yesterday and to day too but this is begging the Question and taking it for granted that where-ever any thing is spoken of or to MAN or HOMO that it is to be understood of every man then which nothing is more false as I have already shewn Mr. Tillam As to what you objected from Gen. 8.21 I answer that by Gods cursing the ground for MANS sake it is to be understood of all men universally because all men sinned in Adam Mr. Ives 〈◊〉 say again that God did not curse the ground 〈◊〉 the sin of Noah but for the wickedness of that 〈◊〉 and therefore Noah is excepted when God 〈◊〉 the ground was cursed for mans sake he 〈◊〉 of Noah Thee have I sound upright in this â—eneration therefore you see that a thing may 〈◊〉 done for MANS sake when it is not done or the sake of every man So the Sabbath â—ight be made for man and yet not for every individual man as hath been already shewn once and again Mr. Tillam Noah was under the curse being made a prisoner in the Ark whereas otherwise he should have been free and every man feels the curse of Adam upon him Again to the Text Deut. 5. when the Word saith he spake to man he means that he did not speak to children The question was not Whether Noah did not in some measure suffer by reason of the Deluge but whether this curse was for his sake Good men may suffer in a common calamity when the calamity may not be for their sakes but for the sake of those wicked men among whom they dwell Again How could it be a curse for Noah to be saved in the Ark I confess this is such a Paradox that the world never heard of before And whereas it is said God spake with man Deut. 5. to signifie that he did not speak to children Weâ—â— then it follows from hence that MAN is noâ— always taken for every son and daughter of Adamâ— as Mr. Tillam hath been pleading but as God 〈◊〉 said to speak to man by way of distinction from children so as hath been said he is said to speaâ— to MAN when he did speak to Israel by way 〈◊〉 distinction from all other Nations in the world 〈◊〉 hath already been plentifully shewed Mr. Tillams second Argument If the Gentiles that could not be Prosolyteâ— nor joyned to the Jewes were bound to keeâ— the seventh-day Sabbath then all men weâ—â— bound to keep the seventh-day Sabbath buâ— that such Gentiles are so bound I prove out oâ— Esai 56.5 6. Thus saith the Lord to the Eunuch that keep my Sabbath c. And let not the son of the stranger that is joyned to the Lord say The Lord hath surely separated me c. Mr. Ives I answer first These terms in the Text arâ— like the term MAN which you last insisted on and how can an universal Proposition be concluded when the premises are but indefinite But secondly As this Text doth not respect all men so it doth not relate to beleevers in Gospel times which is the thing you are to prove and that this Text doth not relate to beleevers in Gospel times there are these Reasons in the Text it self First Because it respects the time in which Sacrifices and burnt-Offerings were to be offered ver 7. where God tells these men whoever they are that if they do the thing that pleaseth him that their Burnt-Offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon his Altar c. Secondly This saying in Esay doth not respect those strangers that should be Proselyted 〈◊〉 the Christian Religion in the time of the Gospel but such as were Proselyted to the Jews Religion in the time of the Law for it is said that even them he viz. God will bring to to his holy mountain and make them joyful in his house of prayer ver 7. 3. That this house of Prayer was not Christ's spiritual house the Church of the New Testament appears by Christ's own words Mat. 21.12 13. And Jesus went into the temple of God and cast out all them that sold and bought and overthrew the tables of the mony-changers and the seats of them that sold doves and said to them It is written My house shall be called the house of prayer but ye have made it a den of theeves So that it appears plainly by the words of Christ that this house of which the Prophet speaketh was the material temple which they had made a house of merchandize by buying and selling in it and not the spiritual House of Christ in the New testament Mr. Tillam I say the time spoken of in Esay 56. is the Gospel-times because in the first verse it speaks of a Salvation to come and a Righteousness to be revealed secondly because it speaks of Eunuchs that were to be joyned to the Lord which could not respect the times of the Law because in the Law Deut. 23.1 it is said that an Eunuch shall not enter into the Congregation of the Lord. Mr. Ives I answer first by concession that the time spoken of in the first verse is the Gospel-times but the Text doth not say they shall keep the sabbath when those times come but the Promises of the Benefits that should accrew to them by Christ as his coming used as motives to stir up the people to do the things that were THEN required as appears vers 1. Thus saith the Lord Keep judgement and DO justice FOR my salvation is at hand TO come as if the Lord had said You that do expect benefit by the salvation TO come in the Gospel must be very careful to do those things that are commanded in the Law And whereas it is said that this must needs respect Gospel-times because the Eunuch is said to be admitted which could not be under the Law I answer first
Act. 21. be of a Ceremonial Law yet it is sufficient to shew that since the whole Law doth comprehend both Morals and Ceremonials that believing Gentiles who are not circumcised are not bound to keep the while since they are excused from observing the Ceremonial part of it by this text Act. 21. And whereas Mr. Tillam saith that if the Epistle of James were writ to believing Jews then here would be one Law for the believing Jews â—nother for the beleeving Gentiles To this I answer â—hat it doth not follow that because this Epistle was â—riten to Jews that THEREFORE there should be 〈◊〉 Law for them and another for the Gentiles but â—econdly this absurdity if it be an absurdity â—â—ay as well be drawn upon the text because it is â—â—id Jam. 2. that the Epistle was writ to the Twelve Tribes scattered abroad c. which were Jews And lastly it hath already been shewn that some â—hings were injoyned upon Paul that was a Jew which ought not to be injoyned upon the beleeving Gentiles Mr. Tillam Whereas Mr. Ives chargeth my Book for allowing that which I now call confusion I answer that I confess when I was first perswaded of the seventh-day sabbath I did also acknowledge the first day of the week but it was upon the reason of antiquity for as much as the seventh-day and the first day were both observed in the first three hundred yeers but when I observed the same contention about Easter-day I was convinced and I do now beleeve that the first day of the week is in common with all other days and whereas Mr. Ives saith the Apostles preached in the Synagogues on the Sabbath days and in the Christian assemblies on the first-days of the week I do say that that they never met in any Christian assemblies upon the first day of the week and Mr. Tinaâ— calleth the first day of the week the sabbath Act. 20.7 Mr. Ives I answer to the last first Whereas you 〈◊〉 Mr. Tindal calleth the first day of the week 〈◊〉 sabbath so he doth also call that day 〈◊〉 which John received his Revelation the Sunday which other translations call the Lordâ— day by which it appears that without confusion Mr. Tindal thought the Apostles might observe both days as the state of Christian â—â—fairs then stood and as your self have confesse that both the Sabbath-day and the Lords-daâ— were observed in the three first Centuries And if Mr. Tindals Authority may be allowed then the first day of the week is the Sabbath-day and then what becomes of your seventh day sabbath unless you will keep two sabbaths so that sinâ—â— you have cited Mr. Tindal let Mr. Tindal 〈◊〉 the Controversie who by your own confession caâ—â— the first day of the week the sabbath Again when I said the Apostles did meet on both days without confusion which you said they could not I spake this to shew what Christians may do in point of condescention to one another and also to shew that if meeting on both days was a practise which you say is full of confusion that then your Book was not empty of confusion in allowing both the one and the other though you now deny it Mr. Tillam It is a great confusion for one part of an â—ssembly to meet upon one day and another â—â—rt to meet upon another and if any of our â—â—iends do so they do evil for they ought all 〈◊〉 meet at one place and at one time and to â—â—rry one for another and not to vary hours â—uch less days Mr. Ives I still think I have reason for my opinion viz. that those that do pretend to keep the â—eventh-day may keep the first day of the week â—o the Lord without being guilty of sin and confusion although your sabbath now under debate were true but enough of this I shall â—herefore proceed to another Argument to â—rove that all beleeving Gentiles are not commanded to keep the seventh-day sabbath which I thus do If the seventh-day sabbath was a Law to none but Israel and such as were proselyted to their Religion then all beleeving Gentiles are not commanded to observe it But the seventh-day sabbath was a Law to none but Israel and such as were proselyted to their Religion Ergo. The Minor I thus prove That Law which was given as a sign between God and Israel was a Law to none but Israel But the seventh-day sabbath was given as a sign between God and Israel Exod. 31.15 17. Ergo The seventh-day sabbath was a Law to none but Israel Mr. Tillam To the sabbaths being a sign I answer that it is either of things past or of things present or of things to come if of things past then it is a sign of the Creation of the world or else it is a sign of his sanctifying presence which I have found in this observation but that the seventh-sabbath is a sign of good things to come I utterly deny Again If the sabbath was a sign so were all the Commandments and therefore its being a sign doth not make it void any more then the rest of the Commandments which are also called signs Mr. Ives Whereas Mr. Tillam saith the Sabbath was a sign of the Creation I say it was not for though Heaven and Earth be exprest in the command of the sabbath yet the sabbath is no where said to be given them for a sign that God made Heaven and Earth for though God's resting the seventh-day be a reason why Israel should rest yet this rest is no where called a sign of the Creation But there is more reason to beleeve from the text that it was one of the signs of the Covenant that God in a special manner had made with that people See Exod. 31 16 17. Eze. 20.12 But further is it not more rational to beleeve that the six days should be a sign of Gods creating Heaven and Earth then the seventh day on which he did not work which at the most can but signifie to us that then or on that time God rested from all his work But whoever considers of the signes that God gave to Israel shall find that they were given them to distinguish that people from all people in the world and therefore Mr. Ainsworth observes upon Exod. 13.9 The Jews saith he used on other dayes to wear their Phylacteries on their arms or foreheads for a Sign or a Token to them as the Lord commanded but they laid them by upon the sabbath because say they the sabbath it self is a signe And therefore Josephus calls it A Law peculiar to that People De bello lib. 2. cap. 16. And to this agrees the saying of Nehemiah Chap 9.13 Thou camest down upon mount Sinai and spakest with them the house of Israel and madest known to them thy Holy Sabbath Again whereas Mr. Tillam saith that the whole Law of the Ten Commandments was a Signe and therefore we may as well lay aside all upon the account of their
it no breach of a Law and so likewise upon the sabbath-day a man might lead an oxe or an ass to watering and not break it though it be a moral law but if the men in this generation may do that which the Jews and Disciples might not lawfully do on the sabbath-day then you have taken off my exceptions Mr. Ives Whereas you speak of a necessity to break a moral law when God countermand c. I answer that then it is not murder in Abraham to slay Isaak or theft in Israel to take from the Egyptians because they had an immediate law from heaven commanding those very particular things but doth it follow that this law given to Abraham was binding to all or that Gods allowing of Israel to spoil the Egyptians should give me an allowance to spoil my neighbour and would it not be a sin contrary to nature for me to sacrifice my child having no command because Abraham would have sacrificed his child by a command and in like manner there can be no moral necessity to break a moral law by your own confession without an immediate and particular command in the case as Abraham had in the case of Isaak and Israel in the case of spoyling the Egyptians Now then if the seventh-seventh-day sabbath be moral as you say it is then you can have no moral necessity by your own confession to break it unless you have an immediate countermand from Heaven so to do Now then since you say the law for the seven-day sabbath is a moral law how do you make it appear that God gave you an allowance to open your shop the next day after you challenged me to dispute for the seventh-day sabbath which was the sabbath-day you now plead for and whereas you did pretend a necessity so to do I demand Whether God ever gave you a command in obedience to which you did open your shop upon the seventh-day sabbath since you your self say that there must be a countermand to justifie the doing any thing that contradicts the letter of a moral law now you have broke the letter of the law which you say is moral and where is your countermand from God so to do And for the instances that you bring of mens leading an oxe to water upon the sabbath-day 〈◊〉 was not a moral necessity for they might have let the oxe stayed without water if the law for the seventh-day sabbath had been a moral law they ought not to have broken it to save the life of their oxe no more then a man may worship an Idol to save his own life and the life of his cattle so that this very instance confutes your opinion that the seventh-day sabbath is not a moral law Mr. Coppinger As touching my opening shop upon the seventh-day which I say is the sabbath Mr. Ives did allow me so to doe because I was under some promises to do some business that day in relation to my trade But suppose I did that which was unlawful this doth not prove what Mr. Ives saith that he may break the sabbath however this is reflection and uncharitableness Again I say the moral law makes no difference between murder and killing for it is written Exod. 20. Thou shalt not kill c. so that Abraham was a breaker of that law by going about to kill Isaak Also if a childe were born and the seventh-day of the week happened to be the eighth day after the birth then it was no breach of the law to circumcise the child but Mr. Ives hath broken his promise in that he promised to discourse the Argument he insisted on the last day but doth not Mr. Ives I answer to the last first that I have not broken any promise that I made for I laid down one general Argument which was the same I went upon the last day which I am yet prosecuting And secondly You did also agree that I should urge new Arguments if I pleased as well as those which had been formerly urged and whereas you charge me with reflections and uncharitableness I answer that what I spake did relate to the dispensation that Mr. Tillam gave you to open shop upon your sabbath after you had ingaged to dispute for it And I say if the seventh-day sabbath be moral then he could not dispense with your opening shop upon it for by this rule a man may plead a necessity to break moral laws although he hath no countermand from God so to do whereas you say I did allow you to open shop I answer So I might because I am so far from judging the observation of the saturday-sabbath a moral duty that I judge it no duty at all therefore I might dispense with your working upon it but how could Mr. Tillam that beleeves with you that the command for the seventh-day is moral give you a dispensation so to do and further how could your conscience dispense with such an action as to open your shop the next Saturday sabbath that came after you had ingaged in publick to dispute the morality of that day And whereas Mr. Coppinger saith the Moral law makes no difference between murder and killing he might as well have said that the moral law makes no difference between fornication and lying with a woman then which nothing is more absurd For the Moral law doth not call all killing murder though murder be killing he might as well have said because stealing is taking that therefore there is no difference between stealing and taking Here Mr. Tillam desireth liberty to speak for himself touching what Mr. Ives had objected against him for allowing Mr. Coppinger to open shop upon their Sabbath Mr. Tillam Mr. Ives hath done like cursed Cham in uncovering his brothers nakedness however I went to bid Mr. Coppinger shut up his shop beâ—ing very much troubled all that night about it and he answered me that if he should shut up shop he should be accounted broke which would be a scandal to his profession further he told me that he was under some promises which he was to perform relating to his trade however he told me he would do not work but what was of necessity to fulfil his promise and gave the like charge to his servants also Mr. Ives What if Mr. Coppinger had made a promise to murder or worship an Idol should he have broken these laws to keep his promise in like manner if working upon the Saturday-sabbath be a breach of a moral law as he saith it is then there is no reason why his promise should absolve him in the one rather then in the other and truly after this rate it is an easie matter for a man to make promises and thereby if this kind of arguing be good absolve himself from obeying any moral precept And whereas Mr. Tillam saith he went to Mr. Coppinger the night before to desire him to shut up his shop the next day I answer that what Mr. Tillam did after we parted
15. compared with Act. 21. Now if the Holy Ghost had said in the case of days You may keep every day alike except the seventh day sabbath then there had been somewhat in your instance otherwise the instance confirms the Argument Mr. Coppinger Here the Apostle doth refer the Observation of days to their own mind and so he doth the eating of all things therefore Mr. Ives hath done my work for me by assigning Acts 15. where blood and things strangled and things offered to Idols are excepted If then I shew that the seventh-day sabbath is as expresly and particularly excepted I have answered his Argument by his own confession and that it is excepted you may see in Jam. 2. and Mat. 5.17 18. Mr. Ives That which you promised was That you would shew as particular an exception of the seventh-day sabbath out of every day as I had shewn you against eating all things and instead thereof you assigne me two general texts where the whole Law and every jot and tittle of the Law is required to be kept and observed both which texts have been denyed to include the seventh-day sabbath to be in force because offering of sacrifices is required in the fifth of Matthew as well as other things where Christ bids those to whom he preached to go and be reconciled to their brother and then come and offer their gift which Law is not binding to the believers in these days But is it not strange that a man in his right wits should tell us That he would assigne a text where the sabbath was excepted out of this word every day in as express terms as blood and things strangled are excepted out of every thing and instead of a particular exception he produceth two general texts that have not the least word of a Sabbath in them but doth not this leave the Argument unanswered for by the same rule he can say That the seventh-day sabbath is not intended in this text when the Apostle saith We may observe every day alike I say by the same rule and with much more strength of reason it may be denyed that the sabbath is included in those general terms All the Law and the whole Law but sure I am that it was never heard of that such general texts were ever called express and particular exceptions against a general term in a Syllogism by any that ever understood the difference between a particular and a general term Mr. Coppinger The texts I named tell us that the whole Law is to be observed and every tittle of it till it be fulfilled and the seventh-day sabbath was included therefore if any man teach otherwise he teacheth contrary to sound Doctrine And as touching bringing gifts to the Altar and offering sacrifices mentioned in that Text Matt 5. these things Christ hath fulfilled and nailed to his Cross * And lyet when Mr Ives did dispute the next time with Mr. Coppinger he said That Altar was not understood for a literal Altar But said The Altar and the Gift in Mat. 5. was both to be understood Allegorically and yet here he doth confess that the text speaks of such an Altar and such a Gift that were types of Christ and that ended at his death Compare therefore this saying with his Argument upon the fifth of Matthew in the next ensuing Dispute if not they shall remain as long as Heaven and Earth remain and so must the seventh-seventh-day sabbath unless Mr. Ives can shew us that it is fulfulled by Christ and that because it hath Heaven and Earth for its reason Mr. Ives All this while there is no particular exception made against my former Argument from the fourteenth of the Romans as you promised me but instead thereof you repeat the text Mat. 5. whence you infer That Heaven and Earth shall pass before the law shall pass till it be fulfilled of which law the sabbath say you must needs be a part What if that were granted doth that prove that all the law mentioned in Mat. 5. is in force have not you confessed that offerings mentioned in the same chapter were fulfilled and abolished by Christ which very Confession of yours hath made the text uncapable to do you that service for which you cited it For how can any man safely conclude any particular proposition to be binding from a general text when he himself shall say Some things intended in that general text cannot be concluded from it as binding so that the Argument yet remains unanswered viz. That believers have no tie upon them by vertue of Moses law to observe one day above another and therefore they are not tied by Moses law to keep the seventh-day sabbath And though we have this freedom by Christ from the Mosaical institutions it doth not therefore follow as some fondly do imagine that therefore we are not to set apart a time under the Gospel to worship and serve God Somewhat hath been spoken to this in the former Dispute with Mr. Tillam and more shall be spoken in the insuing Appendix But we proceed to the next Argument Mr. Ives Because Mr. Coppinger confessed that if the seventh-day sabbath was fulfilled by Christ 〈◊〉 the Altar and Gifts mentioned in Mat. 5. that then we were not to observe it otherwise it was to continue I shall therefore shew that the seventh-day sabbath is fulfilled by Christ thus If the seventh-day sabbath be a weak and beggerly Rudiment then Christ hath fulfilled it But the seventh-day sabbath is a weak and beggerly Rudiment Ergo Christ hath fulfilled it Mr. Coppinger I deny the Minor The seventh day is not a weak and beggerly Rudiment Mr. Ives If all the times commanded in the Law of Moses are weak and beggerly Rudiments then the seventh-day sabbath is a weak and beggerly Rudiment But all the times comanded in the Law of Moses are weak and beggerly Rudiments Ergo the seventh-day sabbath is a weak and beggerly Rudiment Mr. Coppinger I deny the Minor all the times commanded to be observed in the law are not weak and beggerly Rudiments Mr. Ives If there was no time commanded to be observed in the Law but dayes months times and years and all these were weak and beggerly Rudiments then all the times commanded in the law were weak and beggerly Rudiments But there was no time commanded to be observed in the law but days months times and years and all these were weak and beggerly Rudiments Ergo all the times commanded in the law were weak and beggerly Rudiments Mr. Coppinger I deny the Minor and put you to prove that the days months times and yeers that were commanded to be observed in the Law were weak and beggerly Rudiments Mr. Ives This I shall do from Gal. 4.9 10 11. the words are these How turn ye again to those weak and beggerly Rudiments whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage Ye observe days and months and times and yeers I am afraid of you lest I have
the sixth Argument and that is drawn from Mat. 24.20 ver where Christ bids the Disciples pray that their flight was not on the Sabbath day whence it is inferred that if Christ would not have had the sabbath sanctified after his Resurrection he would never have cautioned his Disciples to pray that their flight was not upon the seventh day sabbath which was a Prophesie to be fulfilled after the Resurrection I answer that this proves no more that Christ would have the sabbath sanctified by the beleeving Gentiles then it proves he would have the winter time sanctified for he likewise bids them pray that they might not fly in the winter Secondly if the sabbath had been in force they might fly to save their lives on the sabbath and therefore that could not be the reason why they should pray they might not fly upon the sabbath for if Christ a allowed his Disciples to walk through the corn-fields upon the sabbath and pluck the ears of corn to satisfie a little hunger he would not if the sabbath had been in force have judged it a breach of the sabbath for them to fly to save their lives Thirdly The reason why they were to pray that they might not fly on that day was because the seditious Jews as stories make mention were so zealous of their sabbaths that if any for fear of an enemy should have offered to fly to save his life upon the sabbath the Jews themselves would have laid hands first upon him therefore Christ bids them pray that they may not fly then lest they should be in perils by their Countrymen as well as by the Romans who should invade them which perils of their own Countrymen they were not so likely to meet with in their flight upon another day Object But it is further Objected Why is that day called a sabbath day which was to come to pass after the Ascension if Christ would not have it observed I answer That it was ordinary for the Jews days to be called after the death of Christ by the old names they had before as the Passeover is frequently so called by the Apostles after those things were abolished Act. 12.3 Act. 18.21 Act. 20.16 and so 1 Cor. 16.8 Paul faith be will tarry at Ephesus till Pentecost so that Christs calling it by the name of the sabbath day doth no more prove it is in force then Paul's mentioning the feast of Pentecost proves that we ought to observe the feast of Pentecost Argum. 7 It is said after Christ was dead that the women prepared spices and oyntments and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment Luke 23.56 Therefore the sabbath day was a commandment in force after Christ was dead I answer First that these were not beleeving Gentiles which are the subjects under debate But secondly the Law of the New Testament was not established till Christs Resurrection when he faith Mat. 28.18 That all power in Heaven and Earth was given to him therefore no marvel that these were found in their Old Testament observations Thirdly It was no easie matter to take off the zeal even of beleeving Jews themselves from the Law of Moses after Christ was ascended you see this in Peter who was an eminent Apostle yet he had so much Conscience of the Law after the partition-wall was broken down that he would not eat with the Gentiles nor eat any thing which in the Law was common or unclean Act. 10.14.28 and so Act. 21.20 21. there were thousands of Jews that did beleeve that were zealous of the Commandments doth it therefore follow that those Commandments were in force in like manner it doth not follow that because these women kept the seventh day sabbath according to the command that therefore the Commandment for the sabbath was to be in force to beleeving Gentiles after Christs Resurrection Fourthly If this were a good Argument the Jewish women kept the Sabbath according to the Commandment after Christ was dead therefore the commandment is in force to beleeving Gentiles after his Resurrection would it not be as good an Argument for a man to say that Paul being a Jew kept the Feast of Pentecost after Christ was risen therefore beleeving Gentiles might keep the Feast of Pentecost since Christ is risen Argum. 8 Christ faith the sabbath was made for man Mark 2.27 which is to be understood of every man therefore it is a Law binding to beleeving Gentiles I answer First That all the whole Law of Israel was made for man doth it therefore follow that all that law was binding to beleeving Gentiles that all that whole law that was given upon the mount both Moral and Ceremonial was made for man see Deut 5.24 You have seen this day that God doth talk with MAN and he liveth Now God was said to speak to MAN in this place and yet this word man is restrained to the Nation of Israel unless any will be so absurd as to think that all the Laws given upon mount Sinai were for ever binding to all the world in like manner the sabbath might be made for man as the rest of the Jews Laws were which yet are not universally binding Secondly It is said That the woman was made for MAN which is the same and yet it may be good for a man not to touch a woman 1 Cor. 7.1 by which it appears that though a woman was made for Adam or man yet a man may lawfully live without a woman so though the seventh day sabbath was made for man which in Greek is Anthropos it doth no more follow that therefore every man must keep the seventh day then it follows that because a woman was made for man that therefore every man is bound to marry Argum. 9 The next Scripture levied for to prove that the seventh day sabbath is commanded is Heb. 4.9 there remains a rest or sabbalism for the people of God From whence it is urged first that the people of God must keep a sabbath therefore beleeving Gentiles being Gods people must keep a Sabbath Secondly That this is the seventh day appears say they because the Author to the Hebrews alludeth to the seventh day on which God rested ver 4. I answer First by concession that that sabbath or rest there mentioned the people of God both Jews and Gentiles shall keep and enjoy But secondly This is not the seventh day sabbath or rest first because the seventh day sabbath was a rest commanded but this is a rest or sabbath promised as appears verse the first Let us fear lest a PROMISE being left of entring into rest any should come short through unbeleef Secondly This could not be the seventh day rest because it is a rest only provided for beleevers to enter into but unbeleevers might enter into the seventh day rest and so might their cattle also therefore unbeleevers did not nor could not enter into this rest ver 11. Let us therefore labour to enter into that rest lest