The Doctrine of the Sabbath, Thesis 166 – Thesis 169
Thesis 166.
It cannot be denied but that it is a usuall thing in Scripture to set down things in way of Prolepsis and Anticipation, as they call it, i. to set down things aforehand in the history, which many years hapned and came after in order of time, but there is no such Prolepsis or Anticipation here (as our adversaries dream) so that when God is said to sanctifie the Sabbath in Genesis, the meaning should be, that this he did 2500. years after the creation, for this assertion wants all proof, and hath no other prop to bear it up, then some instances of Anticipations in other places of Scripture: the Jesuites from some unwary expressions of some of the Fathers, first started this answer, whom Gomarus followed, and after him sundry others prelatically minded: but Rivet, Ames, and others have scattered this mist long since, and therefore I shall leave but this one consideration against it, viz. That throughout all the Scripture we shall not finde one Prolepsis, but that the history is evident and apparently false, unlesse we do acknowledge a Prolepsis and Anticipation to be in the story: so that necessity of establishing the truth of the history, only can establish the truth of a Prolepsis in the history: I forbear to give a taste thereof by any particular instances, but leave it to triall; bu… in this place alledged of Gen. 2.2. can any say that the story is apparently false, unlesse we imagine a Prolepsis? and the Sabbath to be first sanctified in mount Sinai, Exod. 20. for might not God sanctifie it in Paradise, as soon as Gods rest, the cause and foundation of sanctifying of it, was existing? will any say with Gomarus that the Sabbath was first sanctified,Gomar. Inv. Se…. & Orig. Sab. 126. Exod. 16. because God blessed them so much the day before with Manna, whenas in the Commandment it selfe, Exod. 20. the reason of it is plainly set down to be Gods resting on the seveth day, and sanctifying of it long before?
Thesis 167.
There is not the least colour of Scripture to make this blessing and sanctifying of the day to be nothing else but Gods magnifying, and liking of it in his own mind, rejoycing and as it were glorying in it,Prim. part. 2. cap. 2. S. 1. when he had rested from his works, and yet M. Primrose casts this block in the way for the blind to stumble at, supposing that there should be no such Anticipation as he pleads for: for surely if God blessed and sanctified the day, it was a reall and an effectuall sanctification and blessing, but this magnifying and glorying in it, in Gods minde, is no reall thing in the blessed God, he having no such affections in him, but what is said to be in him that way is ever by some speciall effects: the simple and pure essence of God admitting no affections, per modum affectus sed affectus, as is truly and commonly maintained.
Thesis 168.
If God sanctified and commanded Adam to sanctifie the Sabbath, it was either that he himselfe should observe it personally, or successively in his posterity also: now there is no reason to thinke that this is a command peculiarly binding Adam himselfe only, there being the same cause for his posterity to observe a Sabbath, as himselfe had, which was Gods example of labour and rest; and if this was given to his posterity also then it was a morall duty, and not a point of meer order proper to Adam to attend unto: yet Mr. Primrose for feare lest he should shoot short in one of his answers,Prim. part. 2. cap. 2. S. 5. wherein he tels us, that it did derogate much from the excellency of Adams condition to have any one day for God appointed unto him:Prim. part. 2. cap. 2. s. 19. yet here notwithstanding hee tels us, that if God had appointed such a day, it was no morall thing, nor yet a ceremony directing to Christ, but only as a point of order, which God was pleased then to subject him unto: and that a man may as well conclude that it was a morall thing to serve God in Eden, because it was a place which God had appointed Adam to serve him in, as the seventh day to be morall because it was the time thereof: but this assertion is but a meer foreign; for the text tels us expresly, that God did both blesse and sanctifie the Seventh day in a speciall manner, as a thing of common concernment, but is never said to blesse and sanctifie the place of Eden. All men in Adam were made in the image of God, and was there but one thing in innocency wherein God made himself eminen…ly exemplary in labour and rest? & shal we think that that one thing was rather a point of order proper to Adam, then a part of Gods image common to all? the appointment of that royall seat of Eden, was an act of heavenly bounty, and therfore might well be proper to him in that estate; but the appointment of the time for Gods speciall honour, was an act of justice, made and built upon a rule of common equity, as may appear out of the second edition of this Law in the fourth Commandment, and therefore might well be morally binding unto all, and not a point of meer order only for Adam to observe.
Thesis 169.
If Adam had stood, all mankinde might, and perhaps should have observed that particular seventh day for ever on earth: but look as Adam observed it not meerly because it was That Seventh (as hath been shewn) which was but secundarily and as it were accidentally morall: but because it was the Seventh day appointed of God, which is firstly and primarily morall: so although we now do not observe that Seventh day which Adam did, yet the substance of the morality of this command given unto him is observed still by us, in observing the Seventh day which God hath appointed, to which the equity of this command bindes generally all mankinde: hence therefore it is of little force which some object, that if the Commandment to man in innocency be morall, that then we are bound to observe the same Seventh day, which Adam in innocency did: this is oft laid in our dish; but the answer is easie from what hath been said.