The Doctrine of the Sabbath, Thesis 147 – Thesis 165
Thesis 147.
There is a Law made mention of, Iam. 2.10. whose parts are so inseparably linked together that whosoever breaks any one is guilty of the breach of all, and consequently whosoever is called to the obedience of one, is called to the obedience of all, and consequently all the particular Jaws which it contains are homogeneall parts of the same Totum or whole law: If it be demanded, What is this Law? the answer is writ with the beams of the Sun, that 'tis the whole morall Law contained in the Decalogue: For 1. The Apostle speaks of such a Law which not only the Jews but all the Gentiles are bound to observe: and for the breach of any one of which, not only the Jews but the Gentiles also were guilty of the breach of all, and therefore it cannot be meant of the ceremoniall Law which did neither binde Gentiles or Jews at that time wherein the Apostle writ. 2 He speaks of such a Law as is called a royall Law, and a Law of liberty, vers. 8.12. which cannot be meant of the ceremoniall Law in whole or in part, which is called a Law of bondage, not worthy the royall and kingly spirit of a Christian to stoop to, Gal. 4.9. 3. 'Tis that law by the works of which all men are bound to manifest their faith, and by which fa…h is made perfect, vers. 22. which cannot be the Ceremoniall nor Evangelicall, for that is the Law of faith: and therefore it's meant of the Law morall. 4. 'Tis that Law of which, Thou shalt not kill nor commmit adultery are parts, vers. 11. Now these Laws are part of the Decalogue only, and whereof it may be said, he that said Thou shalt not commit adultery, said also, Remember to keep the Sabbath holy: and therefore the whole Decalogue, and not some parts of it only, is the morall Law, from whence it is manifest that the Apostle doth not speak (as M. Primrose would interpret him) of offending against the Word at large, and of which the Ceremoniall Laws were a part,Prim. part. 2. cap. 10. S. 15. but of offending against that part of the word, to wit, the morall Law, of which, he that offends against any one is guilty of the breach of all; hence also, his other answer fals to the dust, viz. that the fourth command is no part of the Law, and therefore the not observing of it is no sinne under the New Testament, because it was given only to the Jews and not to us: for if it be a part of the Decalogue, of which the Apostle only speaks, then 'tis a meer begging of the question to affirm that it is no part of the Law of Christians: but we see the Apostle here speaks of the Law, and the Royall Law, and the Royall Law of Liberty: his meaning therefore must be of some speciall Law which he cals foreign The Law: now if he thus speaks of some speciall Law, what can it be but the whole Decalogue, and not a part of it only? as when he speaks of the Gospel foreign, he means not some part, but the whole Gospel also: and if every part of the Decalogue is not morall, how should any man know from any Law or rule of God what was morall, and what not; and consequently what is sinful, and what not? if it be said, the light of nature; we have proved that this is a blind and corrupt-Judge, as it exists in corrupt man: if it be said by the light of the Gospel, this was then to set up a light unto Christians to discern it by, but none to the Jews while they wanted the Gospel, as dispensed to us now: many morall Laws also are not mentioned in the Gospel, it being but accidentall to it to set forth the Commandements of the Law.
Thesis 148.
If Christ came to fulfill and not to destroy the Law, Mat. 5.17. then the Commandement of the Sabbath is not abolished by Christs comming; if not one jot, prick or tittle of the Law shall perish, much lesse shall a whole Law perish or be destroyed by the comming of Christ.
Thesis 149.
'Tis true indeed, that by Law and Prophets is sometimes meant their whole doctrine, both ceremoniall, and morall, and propheticall, which Christ fulfilled personally, but not so in this place of Matthew; but by Law is meant the morall Law, and by Prophets those propheticall illustrations and interpretations thereof, in which the Prophets do abound▪ for 1. The Lord Christ speaks of that law only, which whosoever should teach men to break and cast off, he should be least in the Kingdom of Heaven, Matth. 5.19. but the Apostles did teach men to cast off the Ceremoniall Law, and yet were never a whit lesse in the Kingdom of Heaven. 2. He speaks of that Law by conformity to which all his true Disciples should exceed the righteousnesse of Scribes and Pharisees: but that was not by being externally ceremonious or morall, but by internall conformity to the spiritualnesse of Gods Law, which the Pharisees then regarded not. 3. Christ speaks of the least Commandements, and of these least Commandments, foreign, now what should those least Commandements be, but those which he afterward interprets of rash anger, adulterous eyes, unchaste thoughts, love to enemies? &c. which are called least, in opposition to the Pharisaicall Doctors conceits in those times, who urged the grosse duties commanded, and condemned men onelyonly for grosse sins forbidden; as if therein consisted our compleat conformity to the Law of God: and therefore by the least of those Commandments is meant no other then those which he afterward sets down in his spirituall interpretation of the Law, vers. 21. never a one of which Commandments are Ceremoniall, but morall Laws; and although Mr. Primrose thinks that there is no connexion between the seventeen, and the other expositors verses of the Law which follow, yet whosoever ponders the Analysis impartially, shall finde it otherwise: even from the 17 Verse to the end; the conclusion of which is, to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect, who is never made a pattern of perfection to us in ceremoniall, but only in morall matters: 'tis true indeed (which some object) that there is mention made of Altar and Sacrifice, vers. 23 which were ceremonials: but there is no Law about them, but only a morall Law of love is thereby prest with allusion to the ceremoniall practice in those times: he speaks also about divorce, but this is but accidentally brought to shew the morality of the Law of adultery; the Law of retaliation wants not good witnesses to testifie to the morality of it, but I rather thinke 'tis brought in to set forth a morall Law against private revenge. Our Saviour indeed doth not speak particularly about the law of the Sabbath, as he doth of killing and adultery, &c. but if therefore it be not morall because not spoken of here, then neither the first, second, or fift command are morall, because they are not expresly opened in this Chapter; for the scope of our Saviour was to speak against the Pharisaicall interpretations of the Law, in curtalling of it, in making grosse murder to be forbidden, but not anger; adultery to be forbidden, but not lust; which evil they were not so much guilty of in point of the Sabbath: but they rather made the Phylacteries of it too broad by overmuch strictnesse, which our Saviour therefore elsewhere condemns, but not a word tending to abolish this Law of the Sabbath.
Thesis 150.
If therefore the Commandment is to be accounted morall, which the Gospel reinforceth, and commends unto us (according to Mr. Primrose principles) then the fourth Commandment may wel come into the account of such as are morall; but the places mentioned and cleared out of the New Testament evince thus much: The Lord Jesus comming not to destroy the Law of the Sabbath, but to establish it: and of the breach of which one Law he that is guilty, is guilty of the breach of all.
Thesis 151.
If the observation of the Sabbath had been first imposed upon man since the fall, and in speciall upon the people of the Jews at mount Sinai, there might be then some colour and reason to cloath the Sabbath with rags, and the worn-out garments of ceremonialnesse: but if it was imposed upon man in innocency not only before all types and ceremonies, but also before all sin: and upon Adam as a common person, as a Commandement not proper to that estate, nor as to a particular person and proper to himselfe: then the morality of it is most evident; our adversaries therefore lay about them here, that they might drive the Sabbath out of Paradise, and make it a thing altogether unknown to the state of innocency: which if they cannot make good, their whole frame against the morality of the Sabbath, fals flat to the ground; and therefore it is of no small consequence to clear up this truth, viz. That Adam in innocency, and in him all his posterity were commanded to sanctifie a weekly Sabbath.
Thesis 152.
One would thinke that the words of the Text, Gen. 2.2, 3. were so plain to prove a Sabbath in that innocent estate, that there could be no evasion made from the evidence of them; for it is expresly said, that the d…y the Lord rested, the same day the Lord blessed and sanctified; but we know he rested the Seventh day immediatly after the Creation, and therefore he immediately blessed and sanctified the same day also: for the words runne copulatively, he rested the Seventh day, and he blessed and sanctified that day; but its strange to see not only what odde evasions men make from this cleare truth, but also what curious Cabilismes and fond interpretations men make of the Hebrew Text, the answer to which learned Rivet hath long since made, which therefore I mention not.
Thesis 153.
The words are not thus copulative in order of story, but in order of time; I say not in order of story and discourse; for so things far distant in time, may …e coupled together by this copulative particle And, as Mr. Primrose truly shews, Exod. 16.32, 33. 1 Sam. 17.54. but they are coupled and knit together in respect of time; for it is the like phrase which Moses immediatly after useth, Gen. 5.1, 2. where tis said, God created man in his Image, and blessed them, and called their names, &c. which were together in time; so tis here, the time God rested, that time God blessed; for the scope of the words, Gen 2.1, 2, 3. is to shew what the Lord did that seventh day, after the finishing of the whole creation in six dai…s, and that is, He blessed and sanctified it. For look as the scope of Moses in making mention of the six daies orderly, was to shew what God did every particular day; so what else should be the scope in making mention of the seventh day, unlesse it was to shew what God did then on that day? and that is, he then rested, and blessed and sanctified it, even then in that state of innocency.
Thesis 154.
God is said, Gen. 2.1, 2, 3. to blesse the Sabbath as he blessed other creatures, but he blessed the creatures at that time they were made, Gen. 1.22, 28. and therefore he blessed the Sabbath at that time he rested; Shall Gods work be presently blessed, and shall his rest be then without any? Was Gods rest a cause of sanctifying the day many hundred yeers after (as our adversaries say) and was the…e not as much cause then when the memory of the creation was most fresh, which was the fittest time to remember Gods work in?Prim. part. 2. cap. 1. S. 14. M. Primrose tels us that the creatures were blessed with a present benediction, because they did constantly need it; but there was no necessity (he saith) that man should solemnize the seventh as soon as tis made; but as we shall shew that man did then need a speciall day of blessing, so tis a sufficient ground of believing that then God blessed the day when there was a full and just, and sufficient cause of blessing, which is Gods resting; it being also such a cause as was not peculiar to the Jews many hundred yeers after, but common to all mankinde.
Thesis 155.
The Rest of God (which none question to be in innocency immediatly after the creation) was either a naturall rest (as I may call it) that is, a bare cessation from labour, or a holy rest, i. a rest set apart in exemplum, or for example, and for holy uses; but it was not a naturall rest meerly: for then it had been enough to have said, that at the end of the sixt day God rested; but we see God speaks of a day▪ the seventh day. God hath rested with a naturall rest or cessation from creation ever since the end of the first sixt day of the world untill now; why then is it said that God rested the seventh day? Or why is it not rather said that he began his rest on that day, but that it is limited to a day? Certainly this argues that he speaks not of naturall rest meerly, or that which ex natura re… follows the finishing of his work, for it's then an unfit and improper speech to limit Gods rest within the ci…cle of a day; and therefore he speaks of a holy rest then appointed for holy uses as an example for holy rest; which may well be limited within the compasse of a day; and hence it undeniably follows, that if God rested in innocency with such a rest; then the seventh day was then sanctified, it being the day of holy rest.
Thesis 156.
It cannot be shewn that ever God made himself an example of any act, but that in the present example there was and is a present rule, binding immediatly to …ollow that example: if therefore from the foundation of the world, God made himself an example in six daies labour and in a seventh daies rest, why should not this example then and at that time of innocency be binding? there being no example which God sets before us, but it supposeth a rule binding us immediatly therunto? The great and most high God could have made the world in a moment or in a hundred years, why did he make it then in six daies, and rested the seventh day, but that it might be an example to man? Its evident that ever since the world began, mans life was to be spent in labour and action which God could have appointed to contemplation only; nor will any say that his life should be spent only in labour, and never have any speciall day of rest (unlesse the Antinomians, who herein sin against the light of nature) if therefore God was exemplary in his six daies labour, why should any think but that he was thus also in his seventh daies rest? Pointing out unto man most visibly (as it were) thereby on what day he should rest: A meet time for labour was a morall duty since man was framed upon earth, God therefore gives man an example of it in making the world in six daies: A meet time for holy rest, the end of all holy and honest labour, was much more morall (the end being better then the means) why then was not the example of this also seen in Gods rest? M. Ironside indeed is at a stand here,Irons. Q. 1 cap. 4. and confesseth his ignorance In conceiving how Gods working six daies should be exemplary to man in innocency, it being not preceptive but permissive only to man in his apostasie. But let a plain analysis be made of the motives used to presse obedience to the fourth command and we shall finde (according to the consent of all the Orthodox not prejudiced in this controversie, that Gods example of working six daies in creating the world, is held forth as a motive to presse Gods people to do all their work within six daies also; and the very reason of our labour and rest now, is the example of Gods labour and rest then, as may also appear, Ex. 31.17. And to say that those words in the Commandment (viz. Six daies thou shalt labour) are no way preceptive but meerly promissive, is both crosse to the expresse letter of the text, and contrary to morall equity to allow any part of the six daies for sinfull idlenesse or neglect of our weekely work, so far forth as the rest upon the Sabbath be hindered hereby.
Thesis 157.
The word Sanctified is variously taken in Scripture, and various things are variously and differently sanctified: yet in this place when God is said to sanctifie the Sabbath, Gen. 2.2, 3. it must be one of these two waies: either, 1. By infusion of holinesse and sanctification into it, as holy men are said to be sanctified: Or, 2. By separation of it from common use, and dedication of it to holy use, as the Temple and Altar are said to be sanctified.
Thesis 158.
God did not sanctifie the Sabbath by infusion of any habituall holinesse into it, for the circumstance of a seventh day is not capable thereof, whereof only rationall creatures, men and Angels are.
Thesis 159.
It must therefore be said to be sanctified in respect of its separation from common use, and dedication to holy use, as the Temple and Tabernacle were, which yet had no inherent holinesse in them.
Thesis 160.
Now if the Sabbath was thus sanctified by dedication; it must be either for the use of God or of man, i. either that God might keep this holy day, or that man might observe it as a holy day to God, but what dishonour is it to God to put him upon the observation of a holy day? and therefore it was dedicated and consecrated for mans sake and use, that so he might observe it as holy unto God.
Thesis 161.
This day therefore is said to be sanctified of God that man might sanctifie it and dedicate it unto God; and hence it follows, that look as man could never have lawfully dedicated it unto God, without a precedent institution from God, so the institution of God implies a known command given by God unto man thereunto.
Thesis 162.
'Tis therefore evident that when God is said to sanctifie the Sabbath, Gen. 2.2, 3. that man is commanded hereby to sanctifie it,Jun. in Gen. 2. and dedicate it to the holy use of God: Sanctificare est sanctifica … mandare, saith Iunius: And therefore if M Primrose and others desire to know where God commandeth the observation of the Sabbath in Gen. 2.2. they may see it here necessarily implied in the word Sanctifie: And therefore if God did sanctifie the Sabbath immediatly after the creation, he commanded man to sanctifie it then; for so the word Sanctified is expressely expounded by the holy Ghost himself, Deut. 5.15. We need not therefore seek for wood among trees, and enquire where and when and upon what ground the Patriarchs before Moses observed a Sabbath, when as it was famously dedicated and sanctified, i. commanded to be sanctified from the first foundation of the world.
Thesis 163.
Our adversaries therefore dazled with the clearnesse of the light shining forth from the text, Gen. 2.2. to wit, that the Sabbath was comman…ed to be sanctified before the fall, do fly to their shifts and seek for refuge from severall answers; sometimes they say 'tis sanctified by way of destination, sometimes they …ell u… of anticipation, sometime they think the Book of Genesis was writ after Exodus, and many such inventions; which because they cannot possibly stand one with another, are therefore more fit to vex and perplex the mind, then to satisfie conscience; and indeed do argue much uncertainty to be in the mindes of those that make these and the like answers, a… not knowing certainly what to say, nor where to stand: yet let us examine them.
Thesis 164.
To imagine that the Book of Genesis was writ after Exodus, and yet to affirm that the Sabbath in Genesis is said to be sanctified and blest, only in way of destination, i. because God destinated and ordained that it should be sanctified many years after; seems to be an ill favoured and mishapen answer, and no way fit to serve their turn who invent it: for if it was writ after Exodus; what need was there to say that it was destinated and ordained to be sanctified for time to come? when as upon this supposition the Sabbath was already sanctified for time past, as appears in the story of Exodus 19.20. And therefore M. Primrose translates the words thus, that God rested, and hath blessed and hath sanctified the seventh day, as if Moses writ of it as a thing past already; but what truth is there then to speak of a destination for time to come? I know Iunius so renders the Hebrew words, as also the word Rested, but we know how many waies some of the Hebrew …enses look, nor is it any matter now to trouble our selves about them, this only may be considered; That it is a meer uncertain shift to affirm that Genesis was writ after Exodus; M. Ironside tels us he could give strong reasons for it, but he produceth none; and as for his authorities from humane testimonies, we know it is not fit to weigh out truth by humane suffrages; and yet herein they do not cast the scale for Genesis to be writ after Exodus; for although Beda, Abulensi…, and divers late Jesuites do affirm it; yet Eusebius, Catharinus, Alcuinns, a Lapide, and sundry others, both Popish and Protestant writers, are better judgmented herein; and their reasons for Genesis to be the first-born as it is first set down, seem to be most strong: The casting of this cause therefore depends not upon such uncertainties; and yet if this disorder were granted, i… will do their cause no good, as, if need were, might be made manifest.
Thesis 165.
M. Ironside confesseth, That Gods resting and sanctifying the Sabbath, Irons. Q. 1 cap. 4.are …etaneous, and acknowledgeth the connexion of them together at the same time, by the c…pulative And, and that as God actually rested, so he actually sanctifed the day: but this sanctification which he means is nothing else but destination, or Gods purpose and intention to sanctifie …t afterward: so that in effect this evasion amounts to thus much, viz. that God did actually purpose to sanctifie it, about 2500. years after the giving of the Law, but yet did not actually sanctifie it, and if this be the meaning, it is all one as if he had said in plain terms, viz. that when God is said to sanctifie the Sabbath, he did not indeed sanctifie it, only he purposed so to do, and although M. Primrose and himself tels us that the word sanctifie signifies in the Originall some time to pr…pare and ordain: so it may be said that the word signifies sometimes to publish and proclaim: if they say that this latter cannot be the meaning, because we reade not in Scripture of any such proclamation that this should be the Sabbath, the like may be said (upon the reasons mentioned) concerning their destination of it thereunto: Again, if to sanctifie the day be only to purpose and ordain to sanctifie it, then the Sabbath was no more sanctified since the Creation, then ab aeterno, and before the world began, for then God did purpose that it should be sanctified: but this sanctification here spoken of seems to follow Gods resting which was in time, and therefore it must be understood of another sanctification then that which seems to be before all time: again as God did not blesse the Sabbath in way of destination, so neither did he sanctiffe it in way of destination: but he did not blesse it in way of destination, for let them produce but one Scripture where the word blessed is taken in this sence, for a purpose only to blesse: indeed they think they have found out this purpose to sanctifie in the word sanctified. Isa. 13.3. but where will they finde the like for the word blessed also? for as the day was blessed so it was sanctified, and yet I think that the Medes and Persians in Isa. 13.3. are not called Gods sanctified ones, because they were destinated to be sanctified for that work, but because they were so prepared fo… it as that they were actually separated by Gods word for the accomplishment of such work: but our adversaries will not say that God did thus sanctifie the Sabbath in Paradice by his word: and yet suppose they are called his sanctified ones in way of destination, yet there is not the like reason so to interpret it here, for in Isa. 13.3. God himselfe is brought in immediatly speaking, before whose eternall eyes all things to come are as present, and hence he might call them his sanctified ones, but in this place of Gen. 2.2. Moses (not God immediatly) speaks of this sanctifying in way of Historicall narration only; this destination which is stood so much upon is but a meer imagination.