Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n word_n world_n worship_n 425 4 6.6052 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A26918 The divine appointment of the Lords day proved as a separated day for holy worship, especially in the church assemblies, and consequently the cessation of the seventh day Sabbath : written for the satisfaction of some religious persons who are lately drawn into error or doubting in both these points / by Richard Baxter. Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1671 (1671) Wing B1253; ESTC R3169 125,645 262

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

THE Divine Appointment OF THE Lords Day Proved As a separated Day for Holy Worship especially in the Church Assemblies And consequently the Cessation of the Seventh day Sabbath Written for the satisfaction of some Religious Persons who are lately drawn into Error or doubting in both these Points By Richard Baxter Rev. 1. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Loras Day Col. 2. 16 17. Let no 〈◊〉 judge you in Meat or in Driak or in respect of an Holy day or Feast or of the New 〈◊〉 or Sabbaths which are a shadow of things to come but the Body is of Christ. LONDON Printed for Nevil Simmons at the three Crowns near Holborn Conduit 1671. THE PREFACE Reader IF thou think this Treatise both superfluous and Defective when so many larger have better done the work already I shall not at all gainsay the latter nor much the former The reason of my writing it was the necessity and request of some very upright Godly persons who are lately faln into doubt or Errour in point of the Sabbath day conceiving that because the fourth Commandment was Written in Stone it is wholly unchangeable and consequently the seventh day Sabbath in force and that the Lords day is not a Day separated by God to holy Worship I knew that there was enough written on this Subject long agoe But 1. Much of it is in Latine 2. Some Writings which prove the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath do withal treat so loosly of the Lords day as that they require a Confutation in the latter as well as a commendation for the former 3. Some are so large that the persons that I write for will hardly be brought to read them 4. Most go upon those grounds which I take to be less clear and build so much more than I can do on the fourth Commandment and on many passages of the old Testament and plead so much for the old Sabbatical notion and rest that I fear this is the chief occasion of many peoples Errours who when they find themselves in a wood of difficulties and nothing plain and convincing that is pleaded with them do therefore think it safest to stick to the old Jewish Sabbath The friends and acquaintance of some of these persons importuning me to take the plainest and nearest way to satisfie such honest doubters I have here done it according to my judgement not contending against any that go another way to work but thinking my self that this is very clear and satisfactory viz. to prove 1. That Christ did Commission his Apostles to Teach us all things which he commanded and to settle Orders in his Church 2. And that he gave them his spirit to enable them to do all this Infallibly by bringing all his words to their remembrance and by leading them into all truth 3. And that his Apostles by this spirit did de facto separate the Lords day for holy Worship especially in Church-Assemblies and declared the cessation of the Jewish Sabbaths 4. And that as this change had the very same Author as the Holy Scriptures the Holy Ghost in the Apostles so that fact hath the same kind of proof that we have of the Canon and the integrity and uncorruptness of the particular Scripture Books and Texts And that if so much Scripture as mencioneth the keeping of the Lords day expounded by the Concent and Practice of the Universal Church from the dayes of the Apostles all keeping this day as holy without the dissent of any one Sect or single person that I remember to have read of I say if all this History will not fully prove the point of fact that this day was kept in the Apostles times and consequently by their appointment then the same proof will not serve to evince that any text of Scripture is Canonical and uncorrupted nor can we think that any thing in the world that is past can have Historical proof I have been put to say somewhat particularly out of Antiquity for this evidence of the fact because it is that which I lay the greatest stress upon But I have not done it so largely as might be done 1. Because I would not lose the unlearned Reader in a Wood of History nor overwhelm him instead of edifying him 2. Because it is done already in Latine by Dr. Young in his Dies Dominica under the name of Theophilus Loncardiensis which I take to be the moderatest soundest and strongest Treatise on this subject that I have seen Though Mr. Cawdry and Palmer joyntly have done well and at greater length and Mr. Eaton Mr. Shephard Dr. Bound Wallaeus Rivet and my dear friend Mr. George Abbot against Broad have said very much And in their way Dr. White Dr. Heylin Bishop Ironside Mr. Brierwood c. 3. I chose most of the same Citations which Dr. Heylin himself produceth because he being the man that I am most put to defend my self against his confessions are my advantage 4. And if I had been willing I could not have been so full in this as the Subject will bespeak because I have almost eleven years been separated from my Library and long from the neighbourhood of any ones else I much pitty and wonder at those Godly men who are so much for stretching the words of Scripture to a sense that other men cannot find in them as that in the word Graven Images in the second Commandment they can find all set Formes of Prayer all composed studyed Sermons and all things about Worship of mans invention to be Images or Idolatry and yet they cannot find the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath in the express words of Col. 2. 16. nor the other Texts which I have cited nor can they find the Institution of the Lords day in all the Texts and Evidences produced for it But though Satan may somewhat disturbe our Concord and tempt some mens Charity to remissness by these differences he shall never keep them out of Heaven who worship God through Christ by the Spirit even in spirit and truth Nor shall he I hope ever draw me to think such holy persons as herein differ from me to be worse than my self though I think them in this to be unhappily mistaken much less to approve either of their own separation from others or of other mens condemning them as Hereticks and inflicting severities upon them for these their opinions sake THE CONTENTS CHAP. 1. THE state of the Question with the summary proof of the Divine separation of the Lords Day page 1. CHAP II. That Christ commissioned his Apostles as his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and to deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches p. 5. CHAP. III. Christ promised his Spirit to his Apostles to enable them to do what he had commissioned them to do by leading them into all truth and bringing his words and deeds to their remembrance and by guiding them at his Churches Guides p. 9.
that he shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you John 17. 8. I have given to them the words which thou gavest me and they have received them V. 17 18. 〈◊〉 then through thy truth thy word is truth As thou hast sent me into the world so have I also sent them into the world And for their sakes I 〈◊〉 my self that they also might be sanctified through the truth Matth. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and loe I am with you alwayes to the end of the world Acts 1. 4. And being assembled together with them commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem but wait for the promise of the Father which ye have heard of me For John truly baptized with water but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many dayes hence V. 8. But ye shall receive Power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you and ye shall be witnesses uitto me both in Jerusalem and to all Judaea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost parts of the earth By these Texts it is most evident that Christ promiseth the Apostles an extraordinary Spirit or measure of the Spirit so to enable them to deliver his Commands and execute their Commission as that he will own what they do by the guidance thereof and the Churches may rest upon it as the Infallible revelation of the Will of God CHAP. IV. Prop. 3. Christ performed all these promises to his Apostles and gave them his Spirit to enable them for all their commissioned work This is proved both from the fidelity of Christ and from the express assertions of the Scripture He is faithful that hath promised Heb. 10. 23. Titus 1. 2. God that cannot lye hath promised 2 Cor. 1. 18. As God is true Rev. 6. 10. H w long O Lord Holy and True Rev. 19. 11. He was called faithful and true Rom. 3. 4. Let God be true and every man a lyar 1 John 5. 10 He that believeth not God hath made him a lyar John 20. 22. He breathed on them and saith unto them Receive ye the Holy Ghost Acts 2. Containeth the Narrative of the comeing down of the Holy Ghost upon them at large Acts 15. 28. seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Heb. 2. 4. God also bearing them witness both with signs and wonders and with divers mighty works and distributions of the Holy Ghost according to his own will 1 Pet. 1. 12. The things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the Gospel unto you by the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven Rom. 15. 19 20. Through mighty signs and wonders by the power of the Spirit of God so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ. Read all the Texts in Acts and elsewhere that speak of all the Apostles Miracles and their giving of the Holy Ghost c. And 1 Cor. 7. 40. Acts 4. 8 31. Acts 5. 3. 6. 3. 7. 51 55. 8. 15 17 18 19. 9. 17. 10. 44 45 47. 11. 15 16 24. 13. 2 4 9 52. 16. 6. Rom. 5. 5. 9. 1. 1 Cor. 2. 13. 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Cor. 12. Eph. 4. 7 8 c. 3. 5. But this Proposition is confessed by all Christians CHAP. V. Prop. 4. The Apostles did actually separate and appoint the first day of the Week for holy Worship especially in Church-Assemblies Here the Reader must remember that it is 〈◊〉 matter of fact that is to be proved in the proof of this Proposition and that all till this is clearly and undenyably proved so that the whole Controversie resteth upon the proof of the fact That indeed The Apostles did separate 〈◊〉 set apart this day for ordinary publick Worship And in order to the fuller proof of this I have these 〈◊〉 Propositions to prove Prop. 1. Matter of past fact is to be known to us by History Written Verbal or Practical This is evident in the nature of the thing History is the Narration of facts that are past We speak not of the fact of meer natural agents but of Moral or humane facts It may be known without History what Eclipses there have been of the Sun what changes of the Moon c. But not what in particular Morals have been done by man The necessity of other distinct wayes of knowledge are easily disproved 1. It need not be known by Divine supernatural Revelation Otherwise no men could know what is past but Prophets or inspired persons nor Prophets but in few things For it cannot be proved that God ever revealed to Prophets or inspired persons the general knowledge of things past but only some particulars of special use as the Creation to Moses c. so that if Revelation by Inspiration Voice or Visions were necessary Scripture it self could be understood by none but inspired persons or that had such revelation 2. It is not known by Natural Causes and by arguing from the Natural Cause to the Effects It is no more possible to know all things past this way by knowing the Causes than all things future Therefore it must be ordinarily known by Humane report which we call History or Tradition Prop. 2. Scripture History is not the only certain History much less the only credible Without Scripture History we may be certain that there was in 1666. a great Fire in London and a great plague in 1665. and that there were Wars in England 1642 1643 c. and that there have been Parliaments in England which have made the Statutes now in force and that there have been such Kings of England for many Ages as our Records and Histories mention c. Prop. 3. Scripture History is not the only certain History of the things of the Ages in which it was written or of former Ages much less the only credible History of them We may know by other History certainly that there were such persons as Cyrus Alexander c. That the Macedonians had a large extended Empire that the Romans after by many Victories obtained a spacious Empire that there were such persons as Julius Caesar Augustus Tiberius Nero Cicero Virgil Horace Ovid c. Prop. 4. Scripture History is not the only means appointed by God to help us to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical matters of fact transacted in Scripture times 1. For if Humane History be certain or credible in other cases it is certain or credible in these There being no reason why these things or much of them should not be as capable of a certain delivery to us by humane History as other matters As that there were Christians in those times may be known by what Tacitus Suetonius c. say And the antient Writers oft appeal in many cases to the Heathens own History And no man pretendeth as to the Civil matters mentioned in the Scriptures that no other History of the same is credible or
CHAP. IV. Christ performed all these Promises to his Apostles and gave them his Spirit to enable them to all their commissioned work p. 11 CHAP. V. The Apostles did actually separate and appoint the first day of the Week for Holy Worship especially in Church Assemblies Which is explained in several subordinate Propositions And proved 1. By Scripture 2. By unquestionable History And the validity of this proof evinced and the denyers of it proved to subvert the Churches certainty of greater matters p. 12 CHAP. VI. This act of the Apostles appointing the Lords Day for holy Worship was done by the especial inspiration and guidance of the Holy Ghost p. 69 CHAP. VII Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. proved Where is shewed how far the fourth Commandment is abrogated and all the Law of Moses p. 71 CHAP. VIII Of the Beginning of the Day p. 91 CHAP. IX How the Lords Day should be kept Of the length of the time and the Objection about weariness p. 93 CHAP. X. How the Lords Day should not be spent or what is unlawful on it Of worldly business Of recreations of Idleness c. p. 108 CHAP. XI What things should not be scrupled as un lawful on the Lords Day p. 129 CHAP. XII Of what importance the due observing of the Lords Day is Many great Reasons for it p. 139 CHAP. XIII What other Church Festivals or separated Dayes are lawful p. 148 THE CONTENTS OF THE Appendix CHAP. I. An Answer to certain Objections against the Lords Day p. 157 CHAP. II. An Answer to more Arguments for the seventh day Sabbath p. 180 CHAP. III. Whether the seventh day Sabbath be part of the Law of Nature or only a Positive Law p. 202 CHAP. IV. Whether every word in the Decalogue be of the Law of Nature and of perpetual obligation And whether all that was of the Law of Nature was in the Decalogue p. 214 CHAP. V. Whether the truest Antiquity be for the seventh day Sabbath as kept by the Churches of Christ p. 220 The Divine Appointment of the LORDS DAY proved as a separated Day for holy Worship especially in the Church-Assemblies And consequently the Cessation of the Seventh-day-Sabbath CHAP. I. Though the principal thing desired by the Enquirers is That I would prove to them the Cessation of the Seventh-day Sabbath yet because they cast off the Lords day which I take to be a far greater error and sin than the observation of both dayes and because that when I have proved the Institution of the Lords Day I shall the more easily take them off the other by proving that there are not two weekly dayes set apart by God for holy Worship Therefore I will begin with the first Question Whether the Lords day or first day of the week be separated by Gods Institution for holy Worship especially in publick Church-conventions Aff. And here for the right stating of the Question let it be noted 1. That it is not the Name of a Sabbath that we now meddle with or stand upon Let us agree in the Thing and we shall easily bear a difference about the name Grant that it is A day separated by Gods Institution for holy Assemblies and Worship and then call it a Sabbath or the Lords day as you please Though for my self I add That the Lords day is the name that the Holy Ghost hath set upon it and the name which the first Churches principally used and that they call it also sometimes by the name of the Christian Sabbath but that is only Analogically as it is resembled to the Jewish Sabbath and as they used the names Sacrifice and Altar at the same time for the Christians Commemoration of Christs Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and for the Table or as Dr. Young saith pag. 23. As in Scripture Baptism is called Circumcision And that very rarely too 2. That the Question of the manner of observing the Lords day and what exercises of Worship it must be spent in and what Diversions are lawful or unlawful as also when the day beginneth are not to be here medled with in the beginning but afterwards when the Divine Institution of the Day it self is first sufficiently proved Which is done as followeth Arg. That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son The Minor only needeth proof among Christians That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost The Minor which only needeth proof is thus proved That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles who had the Holy Ghost promised them by Christ and given them to lead them into all truth and to bring all his Doctrines to their remembrance and to teach the Churches to do all his Commands and to feed and guide and order them as his principal commissioned Church-Minister was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost But such is the first day of the Week Therefore the first day of the Week is separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost I have five Propositions now distinctly to be proved four for the proof of the Major and one for the proof of the Minor The first Proposition is That Christ commissioned his Apostles as his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches The second Proposition is That Christ promised them his Spirit to enable them to do what he had commissioned them to do by leading them into all truth and bringing his words and deeds to their remembrance and by guiding them as his Churches Guides The third Proposition is That Christ performed this promise and gave his Spirit accordingly to his Apostles to enable them to all their commissioned work The fourth Proposition is That the Apostles did actually separate or appoint the first day of the Week for holy Worship especially in Church-assemblies The fifth Proposition is That this act of theirs was done by the Guidance or inspiration of the Holy Ghost which was given them And when I have distinctly proved these five things no sober understanding Christian can expect that I should prove any more towards the proof of the Question in hand Whether the first day of the Week be separated by Gods
History assureth us that they did III. Nor have we any fuller Scripture proof that the Apostles used to require of those that were to be Baptized any more than a general Profession of the substance of the Christian faith in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Or of the ancient use of the Christian Creed either in the words now used or any of the same importance From whence many would inferr that any one is to be Baptized who will but say that I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God with the Eunuch Act. 8. 37. or that Christ is come in the flesh 1 Joh. 4. 2 3. But Historical evidence assureth us that it was usual in those times to require of men a more explicite understanding profession of the Christian faith before they were admitted to Baptisme And that they had a summary or Symbole fitted to that use commonly called The Apostles Creed at least as to the constant tenour of the matter though some words might be left to the speakers will and some little subordinate Articles may be since added And that it was long after the use to keep men in the state of Catechised persons till they understood that Creed And it is in it self exceeding probable that though among the intelligent Jews who had long expected the Messiah the Apostles did Baptize thousands in a day Act. 2. Yet where the Miraculous communication of the Spirit did not antecede as it did Act. 10. they would make poor Heathens who had been bred in ignorance to understand what they did first and would require of them an understanding profession of their Belief in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost which could not possibly if understanding contain much less than the Symbolum fid●i the Apostles Creed IV. Nor have we any Scripture proof except by inferring obedience from the precept that ever the Lords Prayer was used in words after Christ commanded or delivered it Whence some inferr that it should not be so used But Church History putteth that past doubt Other such instances I pretermit I think now that I have fully proved to sober considerate Christians that the matter of fact that the Lords day was appointed by the Apostles peculiarly for Church-Worship is certain to us by historical Evidence added to the historical intimations in Scripture as a full exposition and confirmation of it And that this is a proof that no Christian can deny without unsufferable injury to the Scriptures and the Christian cause CHAP. VI. Prop. 5. This Act of the Apostles appointing the Lords day for Christian Worship was done by the special inspiration or guidance of the Holy Ghost THis is proved 1. Because it is one of those Acts or works of their Office to which the Holy Ghost was promised them 2. Because that such like or smaller things are by them ascribed to the Holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. I● seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us when they did but declare an antecedent duty and decide a Controversie thereabout See also Act. 4. 8. Act. 5. 3. 6. 3. with 7. 55. Act. 13. 2 4. 16. 6 7. 20. 23 28. 21. 11. 2 Tim. 1. 14. Jud. 20. Act. 11. 12 28. 19. 21. 20. 22. 1 Cor. 5. 3 4. 14. 2 15 16. And 1 Cor. 7. 40. When Paul doth but counsel to a single life he ascribeth it to the Spirit of God 3. And if any will presume to say that men purposely indued with the Spirit for the works of their commission did notwithstanding do such great things as this without the conduct of that Spirit they may by the same way of proceeding pretend it to be as uncertain of every particular Book and Chapter in the New Testament whether or no they wrote it by the Spirit For if it be a sound inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly leave in writing to the Churches the doctrines and precepts of Christ Ergo whatever they have left in Writing to the Churches as the doctrine and precepts of Christ is Infallibly done by the Guidance of that Spirit Then it will be as good an inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly settle Church-orders for all the Churches universal●y ergo Whatever Church-orders they setled for all the Churches universally they setled them by the infallible guidance of that Spirit But this few Christians will deny except some Papists who would bring down Apostolical Constitutions to a lower rank and rate that the Pope and his General Council may be capable of ●●ying claim to the like themselves and so may make as many more Laws for the Church as they please and pretend such an authority for it as the Apostles had for theirs By which pre●ense many would make too little distinction between Gods Laws given by his Spirit and the Laws 〈◊〉 a Pope and Popish Council and call then all but The Laws of the Church Whereas there is no Universal Head of the Church but Christ who hath reserved Universal Legislation to Himself alone to be performed by himself personally and by his Advocate the Holy Ghost in his Authorized and Infallibly-inspired Apostles who were the Promulgators and Recorders of them All following Pastors being but as the Jewish Priests were to Moses and the Prophets the preservers the expositers and the applyers of that Law CHAP. VII Qu. 2. Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. I Shall here premise That as some superstition is less dangerous than prophaneness though it be troublesome and have ill consequents so the Errour of them who keep both daies as of Divine appointment is much less dangerous than theirs that keep none yea and less dangerous I think than theirs who reject the Lords day and keep the seventh day only Because these latter are guilty of two sins the rejecting of the right day and the keeping of the wrong but the other are guilty but of one the keeping of the wrong day Besides that if it were not done with a superstitious conceit that it is Gods Law in some cases a day may be voluntarily set apart for holy duties as daies of Thanksgiving and Humiliation now are But yet though the rejecting of the Lords day be the greater fault and I have no uncharitable censures of them that through weakness keep both daies I must conclude it as the truth that We are not obliged to the observation of the Saturday or seventh day as a Sabbath or separated day of holy Worship Arg. 1. That dayes observation which we are not obliged to either by the Law of Nature the Positive Law given to Adam the Positive Law given to Noah the Law of Moses nor the Law of Christ incarnate we are not obliged to by any Law of God as distinct from humane Laws But such is the observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath Ergo we are