you deny the seventh day sabbath is intended in the second of James you may deny it Mr. Ives I do not deny it because I will deny it but I will deny it because I have reason to deny it Mr. Coppinger Well then I will prove that the seventh day sabbath is commanded in this text James the second thus If the Law in this text James the second be the whole of that Law which in the old Testament forbiddeth blasphemy murder and adultery for unto that Law the Apostle James alludeth when he saith We must fulfil it according to the Scriptures then the seventh day sabbath is included and required in this Law mentioned in this text James the second But the Law in this text James the second is the whole of that Law which in the Scriptures of the old Testament forbiddeth blasphemy murder and adultery Ergo the seventh day sabbath is included and required in this Law mentioned in this text James the second Mr. Ives I answer first by shewing that I may deny the Syllogism because it concludes not that which was formerly denyed for it is no more then what we have had over and over save that now instead of the word Scripture in the prosyllogism you add the Scriptures of the old Testament Secondly I further answer by denying the Consequence for though the Law mentioned in the second of James be the Law which in the old Testament forbiddeth blasphemy murder and adultery yet it doth not follow that every thing must be observed by the believing Gentiles that the Law in the old Testament requireth as for instance That Law in the old Testament that forbids murder and adultery did also command them that they should circumcise their Children and offer Sacrifices These were parts of that whole Law which in the Scriptures of the old Testament forbiddeth murder and adultery as appears Gal. 5. 〈◊〉 For I testifie to every man that is circumcised that he is a Debtor to do the WHOLE LAW Now who can deny but this whole Law did forbid murder and adultery But though we must abstain from these according to the Law of Nature and Christ doth it therefore follow that we must observe every part of Moses Law as that Argument supposeth For is not circumcising called a part of Moses Law John 7.23 and sacrificing is called a part of that Law Mat. 8.4 and is not honouring the father and mother called Moses Law Mark 7. Now may not a man as well reason thus If we must keep all that Law which in the old Testament Forbiddeth murder and adultery and disobedience to parents then we must keep circumcision and offering of sacrifices for these are parts of that whole Law of which the Law that forbiddeth murder and adultery and disobedience to Parents 〈◊〉 a part I say is not this the same with Mr. Coppinger we must keep ALL that Law saith 〈◊〉 which in the old Testament forbiddeth murder and adultery Ergo we must keep the seventh day sabbath Mr. Coppinger I will prove that the whole Law in this text Jam. 2. doth exclude Ceremonies thus If the whole Law there mentioned be that Law that Christians were to preach and practise then it doth exclude Ceremonies But the whole Law mentioned in this text Jam. 2. is that whole Law that Christians were to preach and practise Ergo the Law mentioned in this text doth exclude Ceremonies Mr. Ives If it excludeth ceremonies then it excludeth your former Argument which saith We are bound to keep the whole of that Law which in the Scriptures of the Old Testament did forbid murder and adultery and also it excludeth your interpretation of whole Law in Jam. 2. For we cannot keep the whole Law according to the Scriptures of the Old Testament in an old Testament sence but we must observe the ceremonial as well as the moral part for the old Testament law in which murder and adultery were forbidden had ceremonies commanded also so that you have confuted your self Mr. Coppinger My Argument is of force unless you prove the sabbath is excluded from this word whole Law Mr. Ives It is not of force unless you prove the seventh day sabbath is included for â— am Râ—spondent and do deny it to be included and do expect your proof for you confess some part of the whole Law is excluded Mr. Coppinger If believing Gentiles cannot keep the whole Law in the second of James according to the Scripture unless they keep the seventh day sabbath then the seventh day sabbath is included in this text Jam. 2. But believing Gentiles cannot keep this law in the second of James according to the Scripture unless they keep the seventh day sabbath Ergo the seventh day sabbath is included in this text Jam. 2. Mr. Ives I deny the Minor Mr. Coppinger If the Scripture in this text intend the Scriptures of the old Testament onely then they cannot keep this Law except they keep the seventh day sabbath But the scriptures in this text respects the scriptures of the old Testament onely Ergo they cannot keep this Law according to the Scriptures except they keep the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives Your former Argument was of scriptures in general and this Argument restrains scriptures onely to the old Testament now the new Testament is scripture as well as the old and therefore Peter saith of some That they wrested Pauls writings as they did other scriptures so that if we can keep the law that James injoyns according to the scriptures of the new Testament we shall do well But secondly this is but semper Idem the same over and over what we had before Thirdly I deny the consequence of the Major Proposition for believing Gentiles may keep the whole law Jam. 2. according to the scriptures of the old Testament in a new Testament sence and yet not keep the seventh day sabbath Who is there but may perceive Mr. Coppinger runs in a Ring which Logicians call Circular Disputation Again Mr. Coppinger hath confessed that ceremonies are abolished therefore it cannot in all points be kept according to the scriptures of the Old Testament Mr. Coppinger If believing Gentiles are bound to keep the whole law in the second of James according to the old Testament and the old Testament requireth the keeping of the seventh day sabbath then it followeth that they cannot keep the whole law unless they keep the seventh day sabbath But believing Gentiles are bound to keep the whole law according to the old Testament and the old Testament requireâ— the keeping of the seventh day sabbath Ergo. Mr. Ives I deny both Major and Minor For First it doth not follow that because I muâ—â— keep the law in the second of James according to the old Testament that therefore I must keeâ— the sabbath required in the old Testament 〈◊〉 more then because I must forbear killing as it 〈◊〉 written in the old Testament that therefore must circumcise according to the old Testament But
may be the same when the Law is not the same Mr. Coppinger As to your first instance namely that the seventh yeer was commanded for a Mora reason I answer This was not an universal reason for the text faith That the poor of THY people may eat which was not for all and as to your second instance I confess the reason doth remain and is universal viz. That God doth sanctifie us and therefore I say the Law remains that we should sanctifie Gods Ministers still Mr. Ives As for your Answer to my first instance it doth signifie little for I say refreshing the poor is a moral and universal duty and if than the seventh yeer of rest was commanded for the benefit of their poor and cattle then by your Argument if the reason of this Law viz. that the poor should be refreshed do remain then it must needs follow by your Logick thaâ— the seventh yeer sabbath must remain as well as the seventh day sabbath And as touching your answer to my second instance I must tell you that in your Answer you have confuted your self for you confess the reason of the Law remains which was given to Israel for sanctifying the priest Secondly you say that the Law remains that we must sanctifie Gods Ministers then by your favour if you can make the reason of the Law for sanctifying the Priest the sons of Aaron a reason why you should sanctifie not the same but another Priesthood then I may make the reasons for sanctifying the seventh day sabbath serve for the sanctifying not the same but another day Mr. Coppinger So you may if you can prove the abolishing of the seventh day sabbath as I can prove the abolishing the Levitical Priesthood Mr. Ives Then you have confuted your self again and answered your own Argument for your Argument was that where-ever the reason of a Law remains there the Law remains and you have confessed that the reason of the Law doth remain why God would have Israel sanctifie the Priest the sons of Aaron and now in your last answer tell me That that Priesthood is abolished So then if I could never shew you that the seventh day sabbath was abolished yet I have confuted your Argument by shewing that the reason of a Law doth remain when the Law doth not remain and you have confessed both for you say that the reason why Israel was to sanctifie that Priesthood is the same still viz. because God sanctifies his people and you confessed the Law is not the same for you say The Priesthood is abolished But lastly I have shewn you in the former Disputation that the seventh day sabbath was abolished as well as the Levitical Priesthood by an Argument which you could not answer which I raised from that text Col. 2.16 17. with which I shall conclude this Disputation Let no man therefore judge you in meats or in drinks or in respect of a holy day or of the new moons or of the SABBATH days which are ASHA DOW of things to come but the body is of Christ Thus having given a faithful account of all the Arguments and Answer that were insisted on in the several Disputations without omitting of any one text of Scripture Argument or Answer that was urged on either side I shall leave the whole to the judgement of those that are impartial desiring of God that it may answer the ends for which it is sent forth into the world which is the glory of Almighty GOD and the establishment of the Weak which is all that is herein aymed at by thy Friend J. I. FINIS POST-SCRIPT READER I Thought good to give notice that at the end of this last Dâ—spute I promised that which is now by the Providence of GOD performed viz. an acâ—ount of all the Arguments and Answers insisted on in the several Disputations this promise being made publickly before the meeting was dissolved Doctor Chamberlain and Mr. Tillam and Mr. Coppinger being then present at which time Doctor Chamberlain told me That if I would print but two Arguments that he would send to me with Answers to them I might print what I would I thereupon told him that I would not onely print and answer his two Arguments but also God assisting I would answer what other Arguments that either be or any of them should send to me provided they sent them within fourteen dayes after and for this 14 dayes I staid 21 days in all which time I heard not a word from any of them â—o nor so much as an excuse from Doctor chamberlain though he did publickly challenge me to answer his two Arguments and as faithfully promise to send them to my house which I wonder at seeing he hath divers times past by my door since then as I have been informed and yet never so much as left a word about it This I am provoked to certifie lest any that heard this promise from Doctor Chamberlain should think that I had received his Arguments and concealed them the thought of any such thing is far enough from the heart of him that is London March 17. 1658 9. Thy Friend in the Truth JER IVES An Appendix to the former Disputations I Have annexed this insuing Appendix for the information fo the weak and those that are not acquainted with the Laws and Terms of Disputation and it may also serve for the general use of all that do desire to be satisfied in the present controversie who perhaps may not have leasure or patience to read all the foregoing Arguments and Answers urged in the preceding Disputations and herein I shall observe this method First I shall lay down all those Arguments that I have ever met with which are levied for the defence of the Saturday-Sabbath with brief Answers thereunto Secondly I shall urge the Reasons why I am perswaded the Saturday-sabbath is not in force to the beleeving Gentiles Thirdly I shall shew some Reasons for the justifying the present practise of the Christians in their Religious observations of the first day of the week otherwise called the Lords-day And first to the first namely the Arguments that are urged by some Judaizing Christians for the defence of the seventh-day sabbath and they are of three sorts the first sort are taken from the Scriptures the second from some Reasons in Nature and the third sort of Reasons are taken from Tradition I shall plainly and briefly speak first to the first viz. those Arguments that are alledged for the Saturday-sabbath ouâ— of the Scriptures and these are some taken from Texts out of the Old and some from Texts out of the New Testament I shall first begin with those Arguments urged for the defence of the seventh-day sabbath out of the old Testament and they are of two sorts first such as are taken from example and secondly such as seem to be grounded upon a command Argum. 1 The first Reason is taken from Gods example Gen. 2.2 And God rested the seventh-day c. and
secondly I deny the Minor and so That James doth not require the keeping of the whole Law according to the old Testament Mr. Coppinger I prove the Minor thus They that break one point of the Law in the old Testament they are guilty of the whole and cannot fulfil this law But he that breaks the seventh day sabbath breaks one point of the Law in the old Testament Ergo. Mr. Ives I deny the Major and say A man may break some points of the law contained in the Old Testament and yet keep this Law required in Jam. 2. Mr. Coppinger If you can prove that we can keep the law according to the old Testament and not keep the seventh day sabbath you do something Mr. Ives Your answer is impertinent for the proof doth lie upon you Secondly you cannot prove we can keep the Law according to the old Testament unless we are circumcised doth it follow that then wee must be circumcised But thirdly if I can prove that believers may keep the law in Jam. 2. according to any scripture without keeping the seventh day sabbath it is sufficient Mr. Coppinger The strength of my Argument lyeth in this That believers must keep the Law according to the scriptures of the old Testament which they could not do without keeping the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives And the strength of my Answer lyeth in this That then they must be circumcised otherwise they cannot keep the whole Law according to the old Testament to which you make no Reply Mr. Coppinger I argue further If Christian Gentiles are bound to keep the whole Royal Law as it is laid down in this text Jam. 2. then they are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath But Christian Gentiles are bound to keep the whole Royal Law as it is laid down in this text Jam. 2. Ergo Christian Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath This Argument contains two Parts The one is That Christian Gentiles are bound to keep this law Jam. 2. The other is That this Law contains the seventh day sabbath First he speaks to Christians in general therefore to Gentiles Because he calls them Brethren and writeth to them as Believers and tells them that if they kept the Royal Law according to the scripture they should do well and withal tells them that whosoever shall keep the whole Law and yet offend in one point is guilty of all Secondly That the seventh day sabbath was a point of this Law I thus reason If the Apostle refers them to the Scriptures of the old Testament and they could not keep the Law according to the old Testament except they keep the seventh day sabbath then the seventh day sabbath is one point of this law Jam. 2. But the Apostle refers them to the scriptures of the old Testament and they could not keep the law according to the old Testament unless they kept the seventh day sabbath Ergo they could not keep the whole Law Jam. 2. unless they kept the seventh-day sabbath Mr. Ives I have answered to this Argument over and over and therefore I shall take a little time to speak a few words more and then I shall desire we may go to a fresh Argument First then this word whole Law it either respects the whole Law that the Jews were to observe or the whole Law that Christians are to observe if the whole Law here respect the Law that the Jews were to observe then if we should be bound to that we should be bound to observe Ceremonies as well as Morals for thus whole Law is understood both in the Old and New Testament when it relates to the Laws the Jews were to keep as appears Gal. 5.3 compared with 2 Chron. 33.8 where God tells Israel that he will never remove them if they will keep the WHOLE law with the Statutes and Ordinances But secondly This word whole law doth relate to the Law of liberty which believers are to keep which is opposed to the yoke of bondage as appears by comparing James 1. ver 25. with James 2 and 12 where he bids them so speak and so do â—s those that should be judged by the Law of liberty which is opposed to the Law of Moses for that it is called a yoke of bondage So that here is not one word of the seventh day sabbath but indeed of a royal Law and a Law of liberty which Christians are bound to keep according to the Scriptures in doing by all men as they would be done untoâ— for what Law soever Christ hath commended and confirmed to us out of the Scriptures of the old Testament these laws indeed we must keep according to the Scriptures of the old Testament but Christ hath not confirmed the Saturday sabbath and therefore we are not to look into the old Testament for our information therein Any otherwise then as the fourth Commandment enjoyns A time to worship and so hath something in it that is of use unto all Mr. Coppinger I come now to a second Argument to prove that all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath If Christian Jews are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath and there is no difference between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles then all Christian Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath But Christian Jews are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath and there is no difference between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles Ergo all Christian Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives I demand what you mean when you say There is no difference between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles do you mean no difference in point of precept or in point of priviledges Mr. Coppinger I mean no difference in point of Nations Mr. Ives This is no answer to the question my question is about difference in precepts or priviledges Mr. Coppinger I answer that there is no difference between the believing Jews and Gentiles in point of precept Mr. Ives Then I deny the Minor there is a difference in point of precept Mr. Coppinger Then you grant the Major that saith If believing Jews are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath then all believing Gentiles are bound to keep the seventh day sabbath Mr. Ives If the Antecedent were true the Consequence would not follow and therefore I do not grant the Major however I desire you to prove that part of the Minor as you have explained it that saith Believing Jews and believing Gentiles are all one in point of precepts Mr. Coppinger If there be a difference between believing Jews and the believing Gentiles in point of precept it is either mentioned in the 15 of the Acts or the 21 of the Acts or you must assigne some other text where there is a difference between Jews and Gentiles in point of precepts But it is not in the 15 of the Acts not the 21 of the Acts and you cannot assigne any other place Ergo there is no difference between
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
ver 3. God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it Because that in it he rested from all his work which God had created and made whence those things are urged first That God sanctified this day therefore all beleeving Gentiles ought to sanctifie it Secondly This was spoken while Adam was in innocencie and so consequently to all his posterity Ans To which I answer first that Gods example unless we have a command doth not binde all the world for God sanctified the Priests and the Temple and the Altar and yet we are not bound to sanctifie them See for this purpose Exod. 29.44 2 Chron. 7.16 Secondly whereas it is said this was spoken to Adam and therefore to all the world I answer that all that was commanded Adam did not bind all the world at all times as appears by the commandment given to Adam to eat of the tree of life Gen 2. and to forbear the tree of knowledge of good and evil these Laws are not now binding to all the world and yet they were given to Adam and so to all men had they continued in that estate So indeed Adam should have imitated God had he continued in innocency in keeping a perpetual sabbath for he should not have laboured to add any cubits to the stature of that perfect happiness no more then God wrought to add any thing to the six days work which was made perfect and good for Adam was only to dress and keep what was already made as God keeps and preserves the world by his Providence in this fence God works hitherto 〈◊〉 Christ saith John 5.17 and in some such cases Adam should have imitated his Creator if he had not sinned But thirdly these words And God sanctified the seventh-day are urged by Moses in Gen. 2. as a Reason why the Israelites in his time did keep the sabbath rather then to shew that God sanctified the seventh-day for Adam and his Posterity in innocencie my reasons are first because all the Patriarks from Adam to Moses did not keep the seventh-day sabbath which was two thousand yeers and upwards and in all this long tract of time not one word of the 7th-day sabbath-keeping or breaking Secondly Josephus himself a learned Jew speaking of this rest faith That Gods resting on the seventh day was the reason why the Israelites reposed or rested upon that day Lib. 1. Cap. 2. Now had the Jews understood the seventh-day had been sanctified before Moses Josephus would have mentioned it in his History of Amiquities from Adam to Moses as well as other things especially considering the great occasion which he had to defend the Antiquity of the sabbath from the great reproach that was cast upon it by Appion of Alexandria who tells the Jews that their sabbath was derived from the Egyptian word Sabbo which signifieth a disease in the Privy parts which saith he the Jews were smote with after they had travelled six days from Egypt whereupon they were forced to rest the seventh-day and therefore called it a Sabbath from the name of the disease which they called Sabbo Now Josephus could not have a better Argument to have vindicated the Jews sabbath against Appions foul aspersions but by shewing to the world that the sabbath was kept from the Creation of the world unto that time and not taken up by the Jews in the wilderness after they came out of Egypt Now though Josephus doth vindicate the sabbath from being derived of the Egyptian word Sabbo by shewing that it was derived from the Hebrew word Sabbath which signifieth rest yet he never vindicateth the Jews Sabbath from that other Allegation of Appions viz. that the first beginning of it was in the wilderness after that Israel came out of Egypt as any one may see that reads Josephus against Appion Lib. 2. which clearly shews that the sabbath was not kept before Israel came into the wilderness Thirdly The Scripture usually speaks at this rate for there is such a kind of expression used by Moses in this very chapter Gen. 2.11 where he tells us of the river Pison that compasseth the whole land of Havilah where there is gold c. not that this land was so called in Eden while Adam was in innocencie for Havilah was not born till after the flood by whose name this land was known and called and yet Moses by anticipation calls it the land of Havilah with reference unto that name which 1600 yeers afterwards it did receive and that Havilah was not born till after the flood appears Gen. 10.7 and that the flood was more then 1600 yeers after the Creation appears not only by what the Scriptures tell us but by the consent of Christian writers see August de Civitate Dei lib. 15. cap. 20. and lib. 15. cap. 12 14. and yet Moses calls a Country by this name in his describing of the garden of Eden which was no otherwise true but with respect to what it was afterwards called in like manner Moses saith God sanctified the seventh-day Gen. 2.3 which also refers to the Law that God gave to Israel by the hand of Moses for the sanctifying of it And lest this seem strange I shall give you another Text that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand see therefore Exod. 16.32 33 34. In the 32 verse the Lord did command that an Omâ—â— of the Manna should be put in a pot to be laid before the testimony of the Lord and the 34 v. saith That as the Lord commanded Moses so Aaron laid it up before the testimony of the Lord which was no otherwise true but with respect to what was done afterwards for as yet there was no Ark nor Testimony made as appears if we consider that at this time the Israelites were sojourning in the wilderness of Sin and the command for the Ark and the making of the Tabernacle was not given till they came to Sinai Exod 25.10 at which time the Testimony was given to them and yet mention is made of this before so in like manner when Moses saith Gen. 2. That God did sanctifie the seventh-day he is to be understood in the same sense as the other Text is understood where it is said Aaron laid up the Manna before the Testimony which relates to what was afterwards done when the Law was given even after the same manner doth Moses speak in Gen. 2. when he faith God did sanctifie the seventh-day not that he did sanctifie it in Eden any more then Aaron laid up the Manna in the wilderness of Sin before the Testimony but that he did sanctifie it when he gave his Law to Israel and this is further confirmed by what hath been spoken viz. that from the Creation of the world to the time of Moses which was above two thousand yeers there is not one word mentioned of the seventh-day sabbath though occasionally there is mention made of all other moral duties Argum. 2 The next Reason that is rendred
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