The Second Exercitation

(1) Of the Original of the Sabbath; the importance of this Disquisition (2) Opinion of some of the Jewish Masters about the Original of the Sabbath that it began in Mara. (3) The Station in Mara and the Occurrences thereof; Tacitus noted, Exodus 15:25, 26. Jews Exposition of it. (4) This Opinion refuted by Testimonies and Reasons. (5) Another Opinion of the Antient Jews about the Original of the Sabbath; and of the Mahumetans. (6) Opinions of Christians about the Original of the Sabbath proposed. (7) That of its Original from the Foundation of the World, asserted. The first Testimony given to it, Genesis 2:2. Vindicated. Exceptions of Heddigerus answered. (8.) What intended by sanctifying and blessing the seventh Day. (9) Other Exceptions removed. Series and Dependance of the Discourse in Moses cleared. The whole Testimony vindicated. (10) Hebrews 4:3, 4. Vindicated. (11) Observation of the Sabbath by the Patriarchs before the giving of the Law. Instances hereof collected by Manasse Ben Israel. Farther confirmation of it. (12) Tradition among the Gentiles concerning it. Sacredness of the septenary Number. (13) Testimonies of the Heathen collected by Aristobulus, Clemens, Eusebius. (14) Importance of these Testimonies examined and vindicated. (15) Ground of the Hebdomadal Revolution of time. Its Observation Catholick. (16) Planetary Denominations of the Dayes of the Week, from where. (17) The contrary Opinion of the Original of the Sabbath in the Wilderness proposed, and examined. (18) First Argument against the Original of the Sabbath, Answered, &c.

§. 1 Having fixed the Name, the Thing it self falls nextly under Consideration. And the Order of our Investigation shall be, to enquire first into its Original, and then into its Causes. And the true stating of the former will give great light into the latter, as also into its Duration. For if it began with the World, probably it had a cause cognate to the Existence of the World, and the Ends of it, and so must in Duration be commensurate to it. If it ows its Rise to succeeding Generations, among some peculiar sort of men, its Cause was arbitrary and occasional, and its continuance uncertain. For every thing which had such a Beginning in the Worship of God, was limited to some seasons only, and had a Time determined for its Expiration. This therefore is first to be stated. And indeed no Concern of this Day has fallen under more diligent, severe, and Learned Dissertations. Very Learned men have here engaged into contrary Opinions, and defended them with much Learning and Variety of Reading. Summa sequar Vestigia rerum; and shall briefly call the different Apprehensions both of Jews and Christians in this matter to a just Examination. Neither shall I omit the consideration of any Opinion, whose Antiquity or the Authority of its Defenders did ever give it Reputation, though now generally exploded; as not knowing in that Revolution of Opinions which we are under, how soon it may have a Revival.

§. 2 The Jews that we may begin with them, (with whom some think the Sabbath began) are divided among themselves about the Original of the Sabbath no less than Christians; yes, to speak the Truth, their Divisions and different Apprehensions about this matter of Fact, have been the occasion of ours; and their Authority is pleaded to countenance the mistakes of others. Many therefore of them assign the Original, or first Revelation of the Sabbath, to the Wilderness Station of the people in Mara; others of them make it Coaeval with the World. The first Opinion has countenance given to it in the Talmud. Gemar. Babylon. Tit. Sab. cap. 9. and Tit. Sanedr. cap. 7. And the Tradition of it, is embraced by so many of their Masters and Commentators, that our Learned Selden, de Jur. Gen. apud Heb. lib. 3. cap. 12, 13, 14. contends for it, as the common and prevailing Opinion among them; and indeavours an Answer to all Instances or Testimonies, that are or may be urged to the contrary. And indeed there is scarce any thing of moment to be observed in all Antiquity as to matter of Fact about the Sabbath, whether it be Jewish, Christian or Heathen, but what he has heaped together, or rather treasured up in the Learned Discourses of that third Book of his Jus Gentium apud Hebraeos. Whether the Questions of Right belonging thereunto, have been duly determined by him, is yet left to further enquiry. That which at present we are in the consideration of, is the Opinion of the Jews about the Original of the Sabbath at the Station of Marah, which he so largely confirms with Testimonies out of all sorts of their Authors, and those duly alledged according to their own Sense and Conceptions.

§. 3 Mara was the first Station that the Children of Israel fixed in, in the Wilderness of Shur, five days after their coming up out of the Red Sea. Before their coming here, they had wandered three days in the Wilderness without finding any water until they were ready to faint. The report of this their thirst and wandering was famous among the Heathen, and mixed by them with vain and monstrous fables, one of the wisest among them puts as many lies together about it as so few words can well contain. Effigiem says he, Animalis quo monstrante errorem sitimque depulerant, penetrali sacravere (Tacitus, Histor. lib. 5). He feigns that by following some wild asses they were led to waters, and so made an end of their thirst and wandering, on the account whereof they afterwards consecrated in their temple the image of an ass. Others of them besides him say that they wandered six days, and finding water on the seventh, that was the occasion and reason of their perpetual observation of the seventh day's rest. In their journey from the Red Sea to Mara they were particularly pressed with wandering and thirst (Exodus 15:22). But this was only for three days, not seven. They went three days in the Wilderness and found no water. The story of the ass's image, or head consecrated among them, was taken from what fell out afterwards about the Golden Calf. This made them vile among the nations, and exposed them to their obloquy and reproaches. Upon the third day therefore after their coming from the Red Sea, they came to Mara, that is the place so called afterwards from what there befell them. For the waters which there they found being [in non-Latin alphabet] bitter, they called the name of the place [in non-Latin alphabet] or Bitterness. Here they came on the third day. For although it is said, that they went three days in the Wilderness and found no water (Exodus 15:22), after which mention is made of their coming to Mara, v. 23, yet it was in the evening of the third day; for they pitched that night in Mara (Numbers 33:8). Here after their murmuring for the bitterness of the waters, and the miraculous cure of them, it is added in the story, There the Lord made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them; And said, If you will diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord your God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to all his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of those diseases upon you which I have brought upon the Aegyptians; for I am the Lord that healeth you. v. 26.

It is said that he gave them [in non-Latin alphabet]; the words whereby sacred ordinances and institutions are expressed. What this statute and judgement were in particular, is not declared. These therefore are suggested by the Talmudical masters. One of them they say was the ordinance concerning the Sabbath. About the other they are not so well agreed. Some refer it to the fifth commandment of honouring father and mother; others to the ceremonies of the Red Heifer with whose ashes the water of sprinkling was to be mingled; for which conjecture they want not such reasons as are usual among them. The two first they confirm from the repetition of the law (Deuteronomy 5:14, 15). For there those words, as the Lord your God commanded you, are distinctly added to those two precepts, the fourth and fifth, and to no other. And this could arise from no other cause, but because God had before given them to the people in Mara, where he said he had given them [in non-Latin alphabet]; that is the ordinance and law of the Sabbath, and the judgement of obedience to parents and superiors. This is one of the principal ways whereby they confirm their imaginations. And fully to establish the truth hereof, Baal Hatturim, or the small Gematrical Annotations on the Masoretical Bibles adds, that in those words [in non-Latin alphabet] the final numeral letters, make up the same number with [in non-Latin alphabet], the name of the place where these laws were given. And this is the sum of what is pleaded in this case.

§. 4 But every one may easily see the vanity of these pretences, and how easy it is for any one to frame a thousand of them who knows not how better to spend his time. Aben Ezra and Abarbinel both confess that the words used in the Repetition of the Law (Deuteronomy 5) do refer to the giving of it on Mount Sinai. And if we must seek for especial reasons of the inserting of those words, besides the sovereign pleasure of God, they are not wanting which are far more probable than these of the Masters. (1) The one of these Commandments closing up the first Table concerning the worship of God, and the other heading the second Table concerning our duties among our selves and towards others, this memorial, as the Lord your God commanded you, is on that account expressly annexed to them, being to be distinctly applied to all the rest. (2) The Fourth Commandment is as it were Custos primae Tabulae, the keeper of the whole first Table, seeing our owning of God to be our God, and our worship of him according to his mind, were solemnly to be expressed, on the day of rest commanded to be observed for that purpose; and in the neglect whereof they will be sure enough neglected; from where also a remembrance to observe this day is so strictly enjoined. And the Fifth Commandment is apparently Custos secundae Tabulae; as appointed of God to contain the means of exacting the observation of all the duties of the second Table, or of punishing the neglect of them and disobedience to them. And therefore, it may be the memorial is not peculiarly annexed to them on their own distinct account, but equally upon that of the other Commandments whereunto they do refer. (3) There is yet an especial reason for the peculiar appropriation of these two precepts by that memorial to this people. For they had now given to them an especial typical concern in them, which did not at all belong to the rest of mankind who were otherwise equally concerned in the Decalogue with themselves. For in the Fourth Commandment, whereas no more was before required but that one day in seven should be observed as a sacred rest, they were now precisely confined to the seventh day in order from the finishing of the Creation; or the establishing of the Law and Covenant of Works; or a day answering thereunto. For the determination of the day in the hebdomadal revolution, was added in the Law Decalogical, to the Law of Nature. And this was with respect to, and in the confirmation of that ordinance which gave them the seventh day Sabbath in a peculiar manner; that is the seventh day after six days raining of Manna (Exodus 16). And in the other, the promise annexed to it of prolonging their days, had peculiar respect to the Land of Canaan. There is neither of these, but is a far more probable reason of the annexing those words, as the Lord your God commanded you, to those two Commandments, than that fixed on by the Talmudical Masters. Herein only I agree with them; that both these Commandments were given alike in Mara; and one of them I suppose none will deny to be a principal dictate of the Law of Nature. For the words mentioned, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] an ordinance and a statute, the meaning of them is plainly expounded, v. 26. God then declared this to them as his unchangeable ordinance and institution, that he would bless them on their obedience, and punish them upon their unbelief and rebellion, wherein they had experience of his faithfulness to their cost. The reader may see this fiction farther disproved in Tostatus on the place, though I confess some of his reasons are inconstringent and frivolous.

Moreover this station of Mara, was on or about the twenty fourth day of Nisan or April. And the first solemn observation of the Sabbath in the Wilderness was upon the twenty second of Jiar, the month following; as may easily be evinced from Moses' Journal. There were therefore twenty seven days between this fictitious institution of the Sabbath, and the first solemn observation of it which was at their station in Alush, as is generally supposed, certainly in the Wilderness of Sin, after they had left Mara and Elim, and the coast of the Red Sea; whereunto they returned from Elim (Exodus 16:1; Numbers 33:8, 9, 10, 11). For they first began their journey out of Egypt on the fifteenth day of Nisan; or the first month (Exodus 12:37; Numbers 33:3). And they passed through the Sea into the Wilderness, about the nineteenth day of that month, as is evident from their journeyings (Numbers 33:5, 6, 7, 8, 9). On the twenty fourth of that month they pitched in Mara; and it was the fifteenth day of Jiar, or the second month, before they entered the Wilderness of Sin, where is the first mention of their solemn observation of the Sabbath, upon the occasion of the gathering of Manna. Between these two seasons three Sabbaths must needs intervene; and those immediately upon its first institution, if this fancy may be admitted. And yet the rulers of the congregation looked upon the people's preparation for its observation as an unusual thing (Exodus 16:22). Which could not have fallen out, had it received so fresh an institution.

Besides these Masters themselves and Raski in particular, who in his Comment on the place, promotes this Fancy, grants that Abraham observed the Sabbath. But the Law and Ordinances hereof they say he received on peculiar Favor, and by especial Revelation. But be it so; it was the great Commendation of Abraham, and that given him by God himself, that he would command his Children and Household after him to keep the Way of the Lord (Genesis 18:19). Whatever Ordinance therefore he received from God of any thing to be observed in his Worship, it was a part of his Fidelity to communicate the knowledge of it to his Posterity, and to teach them its Observance. They must therefore of necessity on those mens Principles, be instructed in the Doctrine and Observation of the Sabbath before this pretended Institution of it. Should we then allow that the Generality of the Jewish Masters and Talmudical Rabbies, do assert that the Law of the Sabbath was first given in Mara; yet the whole of what they assert, being a mere curious groundless conjecture, it may and ought to be rejected. Not what these men say, but what they prove, is to be admitted. And he who with much diligence has collected Testimonies out of them to this purpose, has only proved what they thought, but not what is the Truth. And upon this fond Imagination is built their General Opinion, that the Sabbath was given only to Israel, is the Spouse of the Synagogue, and that it belongs not to the rest of mankind. Such Dreams they may be permitted to please themselves withal. But that these things should be pleaded by Christians against the true Original and Use of the Sabbath is somewhat strange. If any think their Assertions in this matter to be of any weight, they ought to admit what they add thereunto; namely, that all the Gentiles shall once a Week keep a Sabbath in Hell.

§. 5 Neither is this Opinion among them Universal. Some of their most famous Masters are otherwise minded. For they both judge that the Sabbath was instituted in Paradise, and that the Law of it, was equally obligatory to all Nations in the World. Of this mind are Maimonides, Aben-Ezra, Abarbinel and others. For they expressly refer the Revelation of the Sabbath to the Sanctification and Benediction of the first seventh Day (Genesis 2:2). The Targum on the Title of Psalm 92 ascribes that Psalm to Adam, as spoken by him on the Sabbath Day. From where Austin esteemed this rather the general Opinion of the Jews, Tractat. 20. in Johan. And Manasse Ben Israel, Lib. de Creat. Problem. 8. proves out of sundry of their own Authors, that the Sabbath was given to, and observed by the Patriarchs, before the coming of the people into the Wilderness. In particular that it was so by Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph, he confirms by Testimonies out of the Scripture not to be despised. Philo Judaeus, and Josephus, both of them more ancient, and more learned than any of the Talmudical Doctors, expressly assign the Original of the Sabbath to that of the World. Philo calls it, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], The Day of the World's Nativity. And [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], A Feast not of One City or Country, but of the whole World, De Opificio Mundi; & de Vita Mos. lib. 2. To the same purpose speaks Josephus lib. 2. cont. Appion. And the words of Abarbinel are sufficiently express in this matter; [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. He sanctified and separated the seventh Day to Glory and Honor, because on its approach the work of Heaven and Earth was perfected and finished — Even as a man when he has performed an honourable Work, and perfected it, maketh a Banquet and a day of feasting. And yet more evident is that of Maimon. Tract. Ridush. Hachodesch. cap. 1. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. The vision or sight of the Moon is not delivered to all men, as was the Sabbath Bereschith, or in the Beginning. For every man can number six (Days) and rest on the seventh. But it is committed to the House of Judgement (the Sanhedrims) (that is to observe the Appearances of the Moon) and when the Sanhedry declareth and pronounceth that it is the New Moon, or the beginning of the Month, then it is to be taken so to be. He distinguisheth their Sacred Feasts into the Weekly Sabbath, and the New Moons, or those that depended [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] upon the Appearing of the New Moon. The first he calls [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; Sabbath Bereschith, the Sabbath instituted at the Creation; for so from the first of Genesis they often express technically the work of the Creation: This he says, was given to every man; for there is no more required to the due Observation of it in point of Time, but that a man be able to reckon six Days, and so rest on the seventh. But now for the Observation of the New Moons, all Feasts that depended on the variations of her Appearances, this was peculiar to themselves, and the Determination of it left to the Sanhedry. For they trusted not to Astrological Computations merely, as to the Changes of the Moon, but sent Persons to sundry high places to watch and observe her first Appearances, which if they answered the general established Rules, then they proclaimed the Beginning of the Feast to be. So Maimon. Ridush, Hackodesh, cap. 2.

And Philippus Guadagnolus Apol. pro Christiana Relig. Part. 1. cap. 8. shews that Ahmed Ben Zin, a Persian Mahumetan whom he confutes, affirmed, that the Institution of the Sabbath was from the Creation of the world. This indeed he reflects upon in his Adversary with a saying out of the Alcoran Azoar. 3. where those that Sabbatize are cursed; which yet will not serve his purpose. For in the Alcoran respect is had to the Jewish Sabbath, or the seventh Day of the Week precisely; when one day of seven only is pleaded by Ahmed to have been appointed from the foundation of the world. I know some Learned men have endeavoured to elude most of the Testimonies which are produced to manifest the Opinion of the most ancient Jews in this matter; but I know also that their Exceptions might be easily removed, would the nature of our present Design admit of a Contest to that purpose.

§. 6 We come now to the consideration of those different opinions concerning the original of the Sabbath which are embraced and contended about among learned men, yes and unlearned of the present age and church. And rejecting the conceit of the Jews about the Station in Mara, which very few think to have any probability attending it, there are two opinions in this matter that are yet pleaded for. The first is, that the Sabbath had its institution, precept, or warranty for its observation in Paradise before the fall of man, immediately upon the finishing of the works of creation. This is thought by many to be plainly and positively asserted, Genesis 2:2, and our Apostle seems directly to confirm it, by placing the blessing of the seventh day, as the immediate consequent of the finishing of the works of God from the foundation of the world, Hebrews, Chap. 4, 5, 6. Others refer the institution of the Sabbath, to the precept given about its observation in the Wilderness of Sin (Exodus 16:22, 23, 24, 25, 26). For those who deny its original from the beginning, or a morality in its law, cannot admit that it was first given on Sinai, or had its spring in the Decalogue, nor can give any peculiar reason why it should be inserted therein, seeing express mention is made of its observation some while before the giving of the law there. These therefore make it a mere typical institution given, and that without the solemnity of the giving other solemn institutions, to the church of the Hebrews only. And those of this judgment some of them contend that in those words of Moses, Genesis 2:3, And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his works, a Prolepsis is to be admitted; that is, that what is there occasionally inserted in the narrative, and to be read in a parenthesis, came not to pass indeed until above two thousand years after, namely in the Wilderness of Sin; where, and when, God first blessed the seventh day and sanctified it. And the reason given for the supposed intersertion of the words in the story of Moses, is, because when it came to pass indeed, that God so blessed the seventh day, he did it on the account of what he was then relating of the works that he made, and the rest that ensued thereon. Others give such an interpretation of the words as that they should contain no appointment of a day of rest; as we shall see. Those who assert the former opinion deny that the precept, or rather directions about the observation of the Sabbath given to the people of Israel in the Wilderness of Sin (Exodus 16), was its first original institution; but affirm that it was either a new declaration of the law, and usage of it to them, who in their long bondage had lost both its doctrine and practice, with a renewed reinforcement of it, by an especial circumstance of the Manna not falling on that day; or rather a particular application of a catholic moral command to the economy of that church, to whose state the people were then under a Praeludium in the occasional institution of sundry particular ordinances, as has been declared in our former Exercitations. This is the plain state of the present controversy about the original of the Sabbath, as to time and place, wherein what is according to truth, is now to be enquired after.

§. 7 The opinion of the institution of the Sabbath from the beginning of the world, is founded principally on a double testimony, one in the Old Testament, and the other in the New. And both of them seem to me of so uncontrollable an evidence, that I have often wondered how ever any sober and learned persons undertook to evade their [illegible]rce or efficacy in this cause. The first is that of Genesis 2:1, 2, 3: That the heavens and the earth were finished and all the host of them; and on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. There is indeed somewhat in this text, which has given difficulty to the Jews, and somewhat that the Heathen took offence at. That which troubles the Jews is, that God is said to have finished his work on the seventh day. For they feared that somewhat might be hence drawn to the prejudice of their absolute rest on the seventh day, whereon it seems God himself wrought in the finishing of his work. And Hierome judged that they might be justly charged with this consideration. Arctabimus, says he, Judaeos, qui de otio Sabbati gloriantur, quod jam tunc in principio Sabbatum dissolutum sit; dum Deus operatur in Sabbato complens opera sua in eo, & benedicens ipsi diei, quia in illo universa complevit. We will urge the Jews with this, who glory of their Sabbatical rest, in that the Sabbath was broken or dissolved from the beginning; while God wrought in it, finishing his work, and blessed the day, because in it he finished all things. Hence the LXX read the words by an open corruption, [in non-Latin alphabet]; on the sixth day; wherein they are followed by the Syriac and Samaritan Versions. And the Rabbins grant that this was done on purpose, that it might not be thought that God made any thing on the seventh day. But this scruple was every way needless. For do but suppose, that [in non-Latin alphabet] which expresseth the time past, does intend the Praeterpluperfect Tense, as the Praeterperfect in the Hebrew must do, where occasion requires, seeing they have no other to express that which at any time is past by; and it is plain that God had perfected his work, before the beginning of the seventh day's rest. And so are the words well rendered by Junius; Quum autem perfecisset Deus die septimo, opus suum quod fecerat. Or we may say, Compleverat Die septimo.

That which the Heathen took offence at, was the rest here ascribed to God; as though he had been wearied with his work. Hence was that of Rutilius in his Itinerary;

Septima quaeque Dies turpi damnata veterno Ut delassati mollis imago Dei.

The sense of this expression we shall afterwards explain. In the mean time it is certain that the word here used does often signify only to cease, or give over without respect either to weariness or rest; as Job 32:1; 1 Samuel 25:9. So that no cause of offence was given in the application of it to God himself. However Philo, lib. de Opific. Mund. refers this of God's rest, to his contemplation of the works of his hands, and that not unmeetly as we shall see. But set aside prejudices and preconceived opinions, and any man would think that the institution of the Sabbath is here as plainly expressed as in the Fourth Commandment. The words are the continuation of a plain historical narration. Having finished the account of the creation of the world in the first chapter, and given a recapitulation of it in the first verse of this, Moses declares what immediately ensued thereon; namely the rest of God, on the seventh day, and his blessing and sanctifying that day whereon he so rested. That day which he rested he blessed and sanctified; even that individual day in the first place, and a day in the revolution of the same space of time for succeeding generations. This is plain in the words, or nothing can be thought to be plainly expressed. And if there be any appearance of difficulty in those words, he blessed and sanctified it, it is wholly taken away in the explication given of them by himself afterwards in the Fourth Commandment, where they are plainly declared to intend its setting apart and consecration to be a day of sacred rest. But yet exceptions are all put in to this plain open sense of the words. Thus it is lately pleaded by Heddigerus Theol. Patriarch. Exercitat. 3. sect. 58. Deus Die septimo cessaverat facere opus novum, quia sex diebus omnia consummata erant. Ei diei benedixit eo ipso quod cessans ab opere suo, ostendit, quod homo in cujus creatione quievit, factus sit propter nominis sui glorificationem; quod cum majus fuerit caeteris quae hactenus creata sunt, vocatur benedictio; eundem diem cui sic benedixit sanctificavit, quia & illo die, & reliquo toto tempore constituerat se in homine sanctificare tanquam in corona & gloria sui operis. Sanctificare enim est, eum qui sanctus est, sanctum dicere & testari. Dies igitur & tempus sanctum erat & agnoscebatur, non per se, sed per sanctitatem hominis, qui in tempore se sanctificat, & cogitationes, & studia, & actiones suas Deo, qui sanctus est, vindicat & consecrat. I understand not how God can be said to bless the seventh day, because man who was created the sixth day was made for the glory of his Name. For all things, as well as man, were made for the glory of God. He made all things for himself (Proverbs 16:4). And they all declare his glory (Psalm 19). Nor is it said, that God rested on the seventh day from making of man, but from all the works that he had made. Grant man who was last made, to have been the most eminent part of the visible creation, and most capable of immediate giving glory to God, yet it is plainly said that the rest of God respected all the works that he had made, which is twice repeated; besides that the works themselves are summed up into the making of the heavens and earth and all the host of them. And wherein does this include the blessing of the seventh day? It may be better applied to the first, wherein man was made; for on the seventh God did no more make man, than he did the sun and moon, which were made on the fourth. Nor is there here any distinction supposed between God's resting on the seventh day, and his blessing of it, which yet are plainly distinguished in the text. To say he blessed and sanctified it, merely by resting on it, is evidently to confound the things that are not only distinctly proposed in the text, but so as that one is laid down as the cause of the other. For because God rested on the seventh day, therefore he blessed it. Nor is the sanctification of the day any better expressed. God, says he, had appointed on that day and always to sanctify himself in man as the crown and glory of his work. I wish this learned man had more clearly expressed himself. What act of God is it, that can be here intended? It must be the purpose of his will. This therefore is given us as the sense of this place. God sanctified the seventh day, that is, God purposed from eternity to sanctify himself always in man, whom on the sixth day he would create for his glory. These things are so forced, as that they scarcely afford a tolerable sense.

§. 8 Neither is the sense given by this author and some others of that expression to sanctify, that is to declare or testify any person or thing to be holy, being spoken by God, and not of him objectively, usual or to be justified. In reference to God, our sanctifying him or his name, is indeed to testify or declare his holiness, by our giving honor and glory to him, in our holy obedience. But as to men and things, to sanctify them is either really to sanctify them by making them internally holy, or to separate and dedicate them to holy uses; the former peculiar to persons, the latter common to them with other things made sacred, by an authoritative separation from profane or common uses, to a peculiar, sacred, or holy use in the worship of God. And the following words in our author, that the day is sanctified and made holy not in itself, but by the holiness of man, are any more to the purpose. For as man was no more created on that day than the beasts of the field, so that from his holiness no color can be taken to ascribe holiness to the day; so it is not consistent with what was before asserted, that the sanctification intended is the holiness of God himself as declared in his works; for now it is made the holiness of man.

The sense of the words is plain, and are but darkened by these circumlocutions. The Jews do well express the general sense of the words when they say of the day, that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], it was divided or distinguished from the common nature of things in the world; namely, by having a new sacred relation added to it. For that the day itself is the subject spoken of, as the object of God's blessing and sanctification, nothing but unallowable prejudice will deny. And this to be the sense of the expressions, both the words used to declare the acts of God about it do declare.

He blessed it. God's blessing, as the Jews say, and they say well therein, is an addition of good. It relates to some thing that has a real present existence, to which it makes an addition of some farther good, than it was before partaker of. Hereof, as we said, the day in this place was the direct and immediate object; God blessed it. Some peculiar good was added to it. Let this be inquired into what it was, and wherein it did consist, and the meaning of the words will be evident. It must be somewhat whereby it was preferred to, or exalted above other days. When any thing of that nature is assigned, besides a relation given to it to the worship of God, it shall be considered. That this was it, is plain from the nature of the thing it self, and from the actual separation and use of it to that purpose which did ensue.

The other word and sanctified it, is farther instructive in the intention of God, and is also exegetical of the former. Suppose still, as the Text will not allow us to do otherwise, that the day is the object of this sanctification, and it is not possible to assign any other sense of the words, but that God set apart by his institution that day to be the day of his worship, to be spent in a sacred rest to himself; and this is declared to be the intendment of the word in the Decalogue, where it is used again to the same purpose: for none ever doubted but that the meaning of and he sanctified it, therein, is any other, but that by his institution and command he set it apart for a day of holy rest. And this signification of that word is not only most common, but solely to be admitted in the Old Testament, if cogent reason be not given to the contrary; as where it denotes a dedication and separation to civil uses, and not to sacred, as it sometimes does, still retaining its general nature of separation. And therefore I will not deny but that these two words may signify the same thing, the one being merely exegetical of the other; He blessed it, by sanctifying of it: as Numbers 7:1, and he anointed them and sanctified them: that is, he sanctified them by anointing them; or by their unction set them apart to a holy use, which is the instance of Abarbinel on this place. This then is that which is affirmed by Moses. On the seventh day after he had finished his work, God rested or ceased from working, and thereon, blessed and sanctified the seventh day, or set it apart to holy uses for their observance, by whom he was to be worshipped in this world, and whom he had newly made for that purpose. God then sanctified this day, not that he kept it holy himself, which in no sense the divine nature is capable of; nor that he purified it, and made it inherently holy, which the nature of the day is incapable of; nor that he celebrated that which in it self was holy, as we sanctify his name, which is the act of an inferior towards a superior; but that he set it apart to sacred use authoritatively; requiring us to sanctify it in that use obedientially. And if you allow not this original sanctification of the seventh day, the first instance of its solemn, joint, national observation is introduced with a strange abruptness. It is said (Exodus 16), where this instance is given, that on the sixth day the people gathered twice as much bread as on any other day, namely two omers for one man; which the rulers taking notice of, acquainted Moses with it, v. 22. And Moses in answer to the rulers of the congregation who had made the information gives the reason of it; To morrow, says he, is the rest of the holy Sabbath to the Lord, v. 23. Many of the Jews can give some color to this manner of expression; for they assign as we have showed, the revelation and institution of the Sabbath to the station in Mara (Exodus 15), which was almost a month before. So they think that no more is here intended but a direction for the solemn observance of that day which was before instituted, with particular respect to the gathering of manna, which the people being commanded in general before to gather, every day according to their eating, and not to keep any of it until the next day, the rulers might well doubt whether they ought not to have gathered it on the Sabbath also; not being able to reconcile a seeming contradiction between those two commands, of gathering manna every day, and of resting on the seventh. But those by whom the fancy about the station in Mara is rejected, as it is rejected by most Christians, and who will not admit of its original institution from the beginning, can scarce give a tolerable account of this manner of expression: without the least intimation of institution and command, it is only said, to morrow is the Sabbath holy to the Lord; that is for you to keep holy. But on the supposition contended for, the discourse in that place with the reason of it is plain and evident. For there being a previous institution of the seventh day's rest, the observation whereof was partly gone into disuse, and the day it self being then to receive a new peculiar application to the Church state of that people, the reason both of the people's fact, and the rulers' doubt, and Moses's resolution is plain and obvious.

§. 9 Therefore granting the sense of the words contended for, there is yet another exception put in, to invalidate this testimony as to the original of a seventh day's sabbatical rest from the foundation of the world. And this is taken not from the signification of the words, but the connexion and disposition of them in the discourse of Moses. For suppose that by God's blessing and sanctifying the seventh day, the separation of it to sacred uses is intended, yet this does not prove that it was so sanctified immediately upon the finishing of the work of creation. For say some learned men, those words of v. 3, And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made, are inserted occasionally into the discourse of Moses; from what afterwards came to pass. They are not therefore, as they suppose, a continued part of the historical narration there insisted on, but are inserted into it by way of Prolepsis or Anticipation, and are to be read as it were in a Parenthesis. For supposing that Moses wrote not the Book of Genesis until after the giving of the Law, which I will not contend about, though it be assumed gratis in this discourse, there being a respect had to the rest of God when his works were finished in the institution of the Sabbath, upon the historical relation of that rest Moses inserts what so long after was done and appointed on the account thereof. And so the sense of the words must be: that God rested on the seventh day from all his works that he had made; that is the next day after the finishing of the works of creation; therefore, two thousand four hundred years after, God blessed and sanctified the seventh day, not that seventh day whereon he rested, with them that succeeded in the like revolution of time, but a seventh day that fell out so long after, which was not blessed nor sanctified before. I know not well how men learned and sober can offer more hardship to a text, than is put upon this before us, by this interpretation. The connexion of the words is plain and equal. And the heavens and the earth and all the host of them were finished; and God had finished on the seventh day all his work that he had made; and he rested the seventh day from all his work that he had made; and God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it God rested from all his work which he had created and made. You may as well break off the order and continuation of the words and discourse in any other place, as in that pretended. And it may be as well feigned that God finished his work on the seventh day, and afterwards rested another seventh day; as that he rested the seventh day, and afterwards blessed and sanctified another. It is true there may be sundry instances given out of the Scripture of sundry things inserted in historical narrations by way of Anticipation, which fell not out until after the time wherein mention is made of them: but they are mostly such as fell out in the same age or generation; the matter of the whole narration being entire within the memory of men. But of so monstrous and uncouth a Prolepsis as this would be, which is supposed, no instance can be given in the Scripture, or any sober author; especially without the least notice given that such it is. And such schemes of writing are not to be imagined, unless necessity from the things themselves spoken of, compel us to admit them; much less where the matter treated of, and the coherence of the words, do necessarily exclude such an imagination, as it is in this place. For without the introduction of the words mentioned, neither is the discourse complete, nor the matter of fact absolved. And what lies against our construction and interpretation of these words, from the arguments insisted on to prove the institution of the Sabbath in the Wilderness, shall be afterwards considered.

§. 10 The testimony to the same purpose with the former, taken out of the New Testament, is that of our Apostle; Heb. 4:3, 4. For we who have believed do enter into rest; as he said, as I sware in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest; although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he speaks somewhere concerning the seventh day in this wise: And God rested on the seventh day from all his works. Having insisted at large on this place, with the whole ensuing discourse in our exposition of the chapter itself, I shall here but briefly reflect upon it, referring the reader for its full vindication to its proper place. The present design is to convince the Hebrews, of their concernment in the promise of entring into the rest of God; namely that promise and rest which yet remained, and were prophesied of, Psalm 91. To this purpose he manifests, that notwithstanding any other rest of God, that was mentioned in the Scripture, there yet remained another rest for them that did, or would believe in Christ through the Gospel. In the proof and confirmation hereof he takes into consideration the several rests of God, under the several states of the Church which were now passed and gone. And first he fixes upon the sabbatical rest of the seventh day, as that which was the first in order, first instituted, first enjoyed or observed. And this he says ensued upon the finishing of the works of creation. This the order of the words and coherence of them require. Although the works were finished from the foundation of the world, for he speaks concerning the seventh day on this wise; the works and the finishing of them did not at all belong to the Apostle's discourse or purpose, but only as they denoted the beginning of the seventh day's sabbatical rest. For it is the several rests of God alone, that he is enquiring after. The first rest mentioned, says he, cannot be that intended in the Psalm; because that rest began from the foundation of the world; but this mentioned by David is promised, as he speaks, so long a time after. And what was this rest? Was it merely God's ceasing from his own works? This the Apostle had no concernment in. For he treats of no rest of God absolutely, but of such a rest as men by faith and obedience might enter into. Such as was that afterwards in the land of Canaan; and that also which he now proposed to them in the promise of the Gospel; both which God calls his rests, and invites others to an entrance into them. Such therefore must be the rest of God here intended; for concerning his rest absolutely, or his mere cessation from working, he had no reason to treat. For his design was only to show, that notwithstanding the other rests that were proposed to men for to obtain an entrance into them, there yet remained another rest to be entred into, and enjoyed under the Gospel. Such a rest therefore there was instituted and appointed of God, from the foundation of the world immediately upon the finishing of the works of creation; which fixes immoveably the beginning of the sabbatical rest. The full vindication of this testimony, the reader may find in the exposition itself, whither he is referred. And I do suppose that no cause can be confirmed with more clear and undeniable testimonies: the observation and tradition of this institution, whereby it will be farther confirmed, are next to be enquired after.

§. 11 That this divine original institution of the seventh day Sabbath was piously observed by the Patriarchs, who retained a due remembrance of divine revelations, is out of controversy among all that acknowledge the institution itself; by others it is denied that they may not be forced to acknowledge such an institution. And indeed it is so fallen out with the two great ordinances of divine worship before the giving of the Law, the one instituted before the Fall, the other immediately upon it, that they should have contrary lots in this matter; namely sacrifices, and the Sabbath. Sacrifices we find constantly observed by holy men of old, although we read not of their express institution. But from their observation we do, and may conclude that they were instituted, although that institution be not expressly recorded. The Sabbath we find expressly instituted, and therefore do, and may justly conclude that it was constantly observed, although that observation be not directly and in terms remembered. But yet as there is such light into the institution of sacrifices as may enable us to justify them by whom they were used, that they acted therein according to the mind of God, and in obedience to his will, as we have elsewhere demonstrated; so there want not such instances of the observation of the Sabbath, as may confirm the original divine institution of it, pleaded for. This therefore I shall a little enquire into.

Many of the Jewish Masters, as we observed before, ascribe the original of the Sabbath to the statute given them in Mara (Exodus 15). And yet the same persons grant that it was observed by the religious Patriarchs before, especially by Abraham, to whom the knowledge of it was granted by peculiar privilege. But these things are mutually destructive of each other. For they have nothing to prove the institution of the Sabbath in Mara, but those words of v. 25. [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], there he gave him a statute and a judgement; and it is said of Abraham, that he taught his household and children after him to keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgement (Genesis 18:19). If then the observation of the Sabbath be a statute or ordinance, and was made known to Abraham, it is certain that he instructed his household and children, all his posterity, in their duty with respect thereunto. And if so, it could not be first revealed to them at Mara. Others therefore of their Masters do grant, as we observed also, the original of the Sabbath from the Creation, and do assert the patriarchal observation of it upon that foundation. The instances I confess which they make use of, are not absolutely cogent, but yet considered with other circumstances wherewith they are strengthened, they may be allowed to conclude to an high probability. Some of them are collected by Manasse Ben Israel; Lib. de Creat. Problem. 8. says he, Dico quemadmodum traditio creationis Mundi penes Abrahamum & ejus posteros tantum fuit; ita etiam ex dictamine Legis naturalis Sabbatum ab iis solis cultum fuisse. De Abrahamo dicit sacra Scriptura, Observavit cultum meum. ([⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩]) Genesis 26:5. Quo loco custodia Sabbati intelligitur. De Jacobo idem affirmant veteres, ex eo loco quo dicitur venisse ad Salem, & castra posuisse e regione vel ad conspectum civitatis; ([⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩]) Genesis 33:18. Quia enim Sabbatum, inquiunt, instabat, non licebat ei ulterius proficisci, sed subsistebat ante urbem. Idem asserunt de Josepho, quando dicitur jussisse servis suis ut mactarent & praepararent, id propter Sabbatum factum fuisse. Ad hoc refertur in sera & Rabba Mosem petiisse a Pharaone in Aegypto, ut afflicto populo suo permitteret uno die cessare a Laboribus; eoque impetrato, ex traditione elegisse Sabbatum; ex his omnibus colligitur Sabbatum ante datam Legem observatum fuisse. So far he. Of the observation of the Sabbath by the light of nature we shall treat afterwards. As to the instances mentioned by him, that concerning Abraham is not destitute of good probability. That expression [⟨in non-Latin alphabet⟩], and kept my charge, seems to have peculiar respect to the Sabbath, called elsewhere the charge of God. Hence some of those among Christians who contend for the wilderness original of the Sabbath, yet grant, that probably there was a free observation of it among the Patriarchs, from the tradition they had of the rest of God upon the Creation of the world. So Torniellus, Annal. Vet. Test. Suarez. de Religione, lib. 2. cap. 1. s. 3. Prideaux Orat. de Sabbat. For as there is no doubt but that the Creation of the world was one of the principal articles of their faith, as our Apostle also asserts (Hebrews 11:3), so it is fond to imagine that they had utterly lost the tradition of the rest of God upon the finishing of his works; and it may easily be conceived what that would influence them to, should you suppose that they had lost the remembrance of its express institution, which will not be granted. What therefore may be certainly judged or determined of their practice in this matter, shall be briefly declared.

That all the ancient Patriarchs, before the giving of the Law, diligently observed the solemn worship of God in and with their families, and those under their rule, or any way belonging to their care and disposal, both their own piety forbids us to question, and the testimony given them, that they walked with God, and by faith therein obtained a good report, gives us the highest assurance. Now of all obedience to God faith is the principle and foundation, without which it is impossible to please him (Hebrews 11:6). This faith does always, (and must always so do) respect the command and promise of God, which gives it its formal nature. For no other principle, though it may produce the like actions with it, is divine faith, but what respects the command and promise of God, so as to be steered, directed, guided, and bounded by them. To this solemn worship of God which in faith they thus attended to, some stated time is indispensably necessary. And therefore that some portion of time should be set apart to that purpose, is acknowledged, almost by all, to be a dictate of the law of nature; and we shall afterwards prove it so to be. What ground have we now to imagine, that the holy men of old were left without divine direction in this matter? That a designation and limitation of this time was or would have been of great use and advantage to them, none can deny. Considering therefore the dealings of God with them, and how frequently he renewed to them the knowledge of his will by occasional revelation, it cannot be supposed that divine grace was wanting to them herein. Besides in what they did in this kind, they are expressly said to keep the way of the Lord (Genesis 18:19), and in particular, his charge, his commandments, his statutes and his laws (chap. 26:5), which comprise all the institutions and ordinances of divine worship. That they did any thing of themselves, from their own wisdom and invention in the worship of God, is no where intimated; nor are they any where commended on the account thereof: yes, to do a thing in faith, as they did whatever of this kind they did, and that as a part of the worship of God, is to do it upon the command of God. And the institution mentioned, upon the reason of God's rest joined with it, is so express, as that none can doubt a practice conformable to it, by all that truly feared the Lord, although the particulars of it should not be recorded.

§. 12 It was from no other original, that the tradition of the sacredness of the septenary number, and the fixing of the first period of time, (next to that which is absolutely natural and appearing so to the senses, of night and day, with the composition of the night and day into one measure of time, which was also from the original creation and conjunction of evening and morning into one day) to a septenary revolution of days, was so catholic in the world; and that both among nations in general, and particularly among individual persons, that were enquiring and contemplative. Not only that sort of philosophers who expressed their apprehensions mystically by numbers, as the Pythagoreans and some of the Platonists, who from hence took the occasion of that way of teaching and instruction, esteemed the septenary number sacred, but those also did so, who resolved their observations into things natural or physical. For in all their notions and speculations about the Pleiades, and Triones in heaven; lunar changes, sounds of instruments, variations in the age of man, critical days in bodily distempers, and transactions of affairs private and public, they found a respect thereunto. It must therefore be granted, that there is a great impression left on the whole creation of a regard to this number, whereof instances might be multiplied. The ground hereof was no other but an emanation from the old tradition of the creation of the world, and the rest that ensued on the seventh day. So say the ancient verses which some ascribe to Linus, others to Callimachus.

In seven all things were perfected, in the starry heavens, which appear in their orbs, or circles, in the rolling or voluble years. This was the true original of their notions concerning the sacredness of the number seven. But when this was obscured or lost among them, as were the greatest and most important sacred truths communicated to man, in his creation, they, many of them retaining the principle of the sacred number, invented other reasons for it of no importance. Some of these were arithmetical, some harmonical or musical notions. But were their reasons for it never so infirm, the thing itself they still retained. Hence were their notations of this number; it was termed by them the Virgin, and Pallas; and [in non-Latin alphabet], which sacredly is, says Hesychius, [in non-Latin alphabet], the number of seven. It is hard to give any other account, from where all these conceptions should arise, besides that insisted on. From the original impression made on the minds of men by the instruction of the law of creation, which they were made under, and the tradition of the creation of the world in six days, closed with an additional day of sacred rest, did these notions and obscure remembrances of the specialty of that number arise. And although we have not yet enquired what influence into the law of creation, as instructive and directive of our actions, the six days' work had, with its consequential day of rest; yet all will grant, that whatever it were, it was far more clear and cogent to man in innocency, directly obliged by that law, and able to understand its voice in all things, than it could be to them who by the effects of it made some dark enquiries after it; who were yet able to conclude, that there was somewhat sacred in the number of seven, though they knew not well what.

§. 13 Neither was the number of seven only in general sacred among them, but there are testimonies produced out of the most ancient writers among the heathens, expressing a notion of a seventh day's sacred feast and rest. Many of these were of old collected by Clemens Alexandrinus, and by Eusebius out of Aristobulus, a learned Jew. They have by many been insisted on, and yet I think it not amiss here once more to report them. The words of Aristobulus wherewith he prefaceth his allegation of them are in Eusebius, Praepar. Evangel. lib. 13. cap. 12. speaking of the seventh day; [in non-Latin alphabet]. Homer and Hesiod taking it out of our books do openly affirm that it is sacred. That what they affirm herein was taken from the Jewish books I much question; nor do I think that in their time, when the law only was written, that the nations of the world had any the least acquaintance with their writings; nor much, until after the Babylonish captivity, when they began to be taken notice of; which was principally diffused under the Persian Empire, by their commerce with the Graecians, who enquired into all things of that nature, and that had an appearance of secret wisdom. But these apprehensions, whatever they were, they seem rather to have taken up from the secret insinuations of the law of creation, and the tradition that was in the world, of the matter of fact. Out of Hesiod therefore he cites the following testimonies.

[in non-Latin alphabet]. The first, the fourth, and the seventh day is sacred.

Again,

[in non-Latin alphabet]. The seventh again, the sacred or illustrious light of the sun.

And out of Homer;

[in non-Latin alphabet]. Then came the seventh day that is sacred.

Again;

[in non-Latin alphabet]. It was the seventh day wherein all things were finished, or perfected.

Again,

[in non-Latin alphabet]. We left the flood of Acheron on the seventh day.

Whereunto he subjoins an ingenious exposition about the relinquishment of the oblivion of error, by virtue of the sacredness of the number seven.

He adds also out of Linus.

[in non-Latin alphabet]. The seventh day wherein all things were finished.

Again,

[in non-Latin alphabet], [in non-Latin alphabet]. The seventh day among the best things, the seventh is the nativity of all things. The seventh is among the chiefest; and is the perfect day.

Again,

of which before.

The same testimonies he repeats again in his next chapter out of Clemens, with an alteration of some few words not of any importance: and the verses ascribed to Linus in Aristobulus, are said to be the work of Callimachus in Clemens, which is not of our concernment. Testimonies to the same purpose may be taken out of some of the Roman writers; so Tibullus giving an account of the excuses he made for his unwillingness to leave Rome,

Aut ego sum causatus aves, aut omina dira Saturni sacra me tenuisse Die.

Either I laid it on the birds; (he had no encouraging augury,) or that bad omens detained me on the sacred day of Saturn. *Lib. 1. Eleg. 3.*

§. 14 I shall not from these and the like testimonies contend that the heathens did generally allow and observe themselves one day sacred in the week. Nor can I grant on the other hand, that those ancient assertions of Linus, Homer, and Hesiod, are to be measured by the late Roman writers, poets or others, who ascribe the seventh day's sacred feast to the Jews in way of reproach; as Ovid;

—nec te peregrina morentur Sabbata. Stay not (your journey) for forraign Sabbaths.

And

Culta Palaestino septima festa viro; The seventh Day Feast observed by the Jew.

Nor shall I plead the Testimony of Lampridius concerning the Emperour Alexander Severus going to the Capitol, and the Temples on the seventh Day; seeing in those times he might learn that Observance from the Jews, whose customs he had occasion to be acquainted with. For all antient Traditions were before this time utterly worn out, or inextricably corrupted. And when the Jews by their conversation with the Romans, after the Wars of Pompey, began to represent them to them again, the generality despised them all, out of their hatred and contempt of that people. And I do know, that sundry learned men, especially two of late, Gomarus and Selden have endeavoured to shew, that the Testimonies usually produced in this case do not prove, what they are urged for. Great pains they have taken to refer them all to the sacredness of the septenary number before mentioned, or the seventh day of the Month, sacred, as is pretended, on the account of the Birth of Apollo, whereunto indeed it is evident that Hesiod has respect in his [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. But the Authority of Aristobulus and Clemens is not to be despised. Something they knew undoubtedly of the state of things in the world in their own days, and those that went before. And they do not only instance in the Testimonies before rehearsed, but also assert, that the sacredness of one of the seven days was generally admitted by all. And the Testimonies of Philo and Josephus are so express to that purpose, as that their force cannot be waved, without offering violence to their words. The words of Philo we expressed before. And Josephus in his second Book against Appion, says positively, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]. There is neither any City of the Greeks, nor Barbarians, nor any Nation whatever, to whom our custom of Resting on the seventh day is not come. And this in the words foregoing he affirms to have been [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], from a long time before, as not taken up by an occasional acquaintance with them. And Lucian in his Pseudologista, tells us that Children at School were exempted from studying, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], on the seventh days. And Tertullian in his Apologie, cap. 16. tells the Gentiles of their Sabbaths or Feasts on Saturday. But yet as was intimated, I shall grant, that the Observation of a Weekly Sacred Feast is not proved by the Testimonies produced, which is all that those who oppose them do labor to disprove. But I desire to know from what Original these Traditions were derived, and whether any can be assigned to them, but that of the Original Institution of the Sabbatical Rest. It is known that this was common among them; that when they had a general Notion or Tradition of any thing, whose true Cause, Reason, and Beginning they knew not, they would faign a Reason or occasion of it, accommodate to their present Apprehensions and Practices, as I have elsewhere evinced and cleared. Having therefore among them the Tradition of a seventh days' Sacred Rest, which was originally Catholick, and having long lost the Practice and Observance of it, as well as its Cause and Reason, they laid hold on any thing to affix it to, which might have any Resemblance to what was vulgarly received among them, or what they could divine in their more curious speculations.

§. 15 The hebdomadal revolution of time generally admitted in the world, is also a great testimony to the original institution of the Sabbath. Of old it was catholic, and is at present received among those nations, whose converse was not begun until of late, with any of those parts of the world, where there is a light gone forth in these things from the Scripture. All nations, I say, in all ages have from time immemorial, made the revolution of seven days to be the first stated period of time. And this observation is still continued throughout the world, unless among them, who in other things are openly degenerated from the law of nature; as those barbarous Indians who have no computation of times, but by sleeps, moons, and winters. The measure of time by a day and night is directed to sense, by the diurnal course of the Sun. Lunar months, and solar years, are of an unavoidable observation to all rational creatures. From where therefore all men have reckoned time by days, months, and years, is obvious to all. But from where the hebdomadal revolution, or weekly period of time should make its entrance, and obtain a catholic admittance, no man can give an account, but with respect to some impressions on the minds of men from the constitution and law of our natures, with the tradition of a sabbatical rest instituted from the foundation of the world. Other original, whether artificial and arbitrary, or occasional, it could not have. Nothing of any such thing, has left the least footsteps of its ever being in any of the memorials of times past. Neither could any thing of so low an original or spring, be elevated to such an height, as to diffuse it self through the whole world. A derivation of this observation from the Chaldaeans and Aegyptians, who retained the deepest tincture of original traditions, has been manifested by others. And so fixed was this computation of time on their minds, who knew not the reason of it, that when they made a disposition of the days of the year into any other period on accounts civil or sacred, yet they still retained this also. So the Romans, as appears by the fragments of their old kalendars, had their Nundinae which were days of vacation from labor, on the eighth, or as some think the ninth days recurring, but yet still made use of the stated weekly period. It is of some consideration in this cause, and is usually urged to this purpose; that Noah observed the septenary revolution of days, in sending forth the Dove out of the Ark (Genesis 8:10, 12). That this was done casually is not to be imagined. Nor can any reason be given why, notwithstanding the disappointment he met with, the first and second time, he should still abide seven days before he sent again, if you consider only the natural condition of the Flood, or the waters in their abatement. A revolution of days, and that upon a sacred account, was doubtless attended to by him. And I should suppose that he still sent out the Dove the next day after the Sabbath, to see as it were, whether God had returned again to rest in the works of his hands. And (Genesis 29:27) a week is spoken of as a known account of days or time. Fulfill her week; that is, not a week of years, as he had done for Rachel; but fulfill a week of days in the festivals of his marriage with Leah. For [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] can have no other sense, seeing [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] of the feminine gender relates to Leah, whose nuptials were to be celebrated, and not to [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] a week, which is of the masculine. And it was the custom in those ancient times of the world, to continue the celebration of a marriage feast for seven days, or a week: as (Judges 14:12, 15, 17) the seven days of the feast, is spoken of as a thing commonly known and in vulgar use.

§. 16 Let us therefore consider what is offered to weaken the force of this observation. It is pretended that the ancient heathen, or the contemplative persons among them, observing the unfixed, various motions of the seven planetary luminaries, as they used and abused it to other ends, so they applied their number and names to so many days, which were thereby as it were dedicated to them, which shut them up in that septenary number. But that the observation of the weekly revolution of time was from the philosophers, and not the common consent of the people, does not appear. For those observed also the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and yet made that no rule to reckon time or days by. Besides the observation of the site and positure of the seven planets as to their height or elevation with respect to one another, is as ancient as the observation of their peculiar and various motions. And upon the first discovery thereof, all granted this to be their order: Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Sol, Venus, Mercury, Luna. What alteration is made herein by the late hypothesis, fixing the Sun as in the center of the world, built on fallible phenomena, and advanced by many arbitrary presumptions, against evident testimonies of Scripture, and reasons as probable as any are produced in its confirmation, is here of no consideration. For it is certain that all the world in former ages was otherwise minded. And our argument is not taken in this matter from what really was true, but from what was universally apprehended so to be. Now from where should it be, that, if this limiting the first revolution of time to seven days proceeded from the planetary denominations fixed to the days of the year arbitrarily, the order among the planets should be so changed, as every one sees it to be? For in the assignation of the names of the planets to the days of the week, the midst is taken out first, and so the fourth in order inclusive falls to be next, until the whole cycle be finished. Some would take the reason hereof from the proportion of harmony, some from the diurnal ascension of the planets, which is ridiculous. So Dio Cassius in the thirty seventh book of his Histories, the third of them that remain, treating of the taking of Jerusalem by Pompey on the seventh day of the week, when the people out of their superstition made not their wonted resistance, enquires on that occasion, of the reason of the assignation of the planetary names to the days of the week, which he affirms to have had its original from the Egyptians. And two reasons he tells us that he had heard of the especial assignation of their several names to the several days, in the order wherein they are commonly used. The first is that it was taken from the harmony [in non-Latin alphabet] or the musical note of Diatessaron. For beginning, says he, with Saturn in the highest sphere, and so passing to the fourth in order, it is the Sun, and so throughout in the whole revolution. His other reason is that taking the day and night, beginning with the first hour, and assigning the name of a planet to each hour, beginning with Saturn for the reason before mentioned, and the succeeding hours to the other planets in their order; so renewing the numerations to the end of the four and twenty hours, the first hour of the next day falls to the Sun; and so of the day following to the Moon, and the remainder to the other planets in the order commonly ascribed to them. What there is in these conjectures, I know not: but both of them give the precedency of the first days, as they are fixed, to that which in the true and natural order of the days is the last. There is a good account given us of this matter by Johannes Philoponus; [in non-Latin alphabet], or de Creation. Mund. lib. 7. cap. 14. [in non-Latin alphabet]. This, says he, is consented to among all men, that there are only seven days, which by a revolution into themselves, compose the whole of time; whereof we can assign no other reason, but that only which is given by Moses; the Grecians indeed ascribe the seven days to the seven planets, the first to the Sun, the second to the Moon, the third to Mars, the fourth to Mercury, the fifth to Jupiter, the sixth to Venus, the seventh to Saturn; and hereby they first acknowledge that there are but seven days whereof all time consists; but farther they can give no reason, why the days are so disposed of to the planets. For why did they not rather constitute twelve days, from the twelve parts of the Zodiac through which the Sun passing perfects the year? Nor can any reason be assigned from the motions of the planets, why any one of the days is inscribed to any of them. It is most likely therefore that the Gentiles, as they without just reason or cause dedicate the planets by the names of Daemons and Heroes, so when they observed that there were seven days acknowledged by all, and that the planets were so many in number, they did according to their pleasure in the two equal numbers, assign one day to one planet, another to another; to which he adds truly: [in non-Latin alphabet]. Only the great Moses being divinely inspired has delivered to men the true reason of the septenary number of the days. So far he. There seems to be some reason for assigning the conduct of time to the Sun, or calling the first day by his name, as also of adjoining the Moon to him in the next place. For the succession of the Sun though created the fourth day, in point of use, to that diffused light which was created the first day, with its being the instrumental cause and measure of every day, with the tradition of the appointment of Sun and Moon to rule and distinguish times and seasons, with the sensible effects and operations of them, might easily give them the preeminence by common consent in giving names to the days of the week. The other names were added and applied according to some prevailing fictions concerning the planets, and their respect to men and their actions. But the hebdomadal period of time was fixed long before the imposition of those names prevailed among the Grecians and the Romans, which perhaps is not very anciently, as Dio thinks, though they derived them from the Chaldaeans and Egyptians. And that the acknowledgement of seven days gave occasion to fix to them the names of the seven planets, and not that the observation of the seven planets gave occasion to compute the days of the world by sevens, is manifest from hence; in that many nations admitting of the hebdomadal revolution of time, gave the days in it quite other names, as various reasons or occasions did suggest them to them. In the ancient Celtic or German tongue, and all languages from there deriving, the Sun and Moon only on the reasons before mentioned giving name to the leading days of the week, the rest of the days are distinguished and signalized with the names of the conductors of their first great colonies, in the north-western parts of the world. For to fancy that Tuisco is the same with Mars, Wooden with Mercury, Thor with Jupiter, and Frea with Venus, is to fancy what we please, without the least ground of probability. Nor did the Celts ever call the planets by those names; so that if there be any allusion in those names to those of the Grecians and Romans, it was not taken from their natural speculation about the planets, but from the pleasing fictions about deified heroes, wherein they were imitated by most nations of the world. The English and Dutch have taken in Saturday from Saturn; other nations of the same extract retain their own occasional names. The observation therefore of the seven planets gave neither rise, reason, cause, nor occasion, to this original period of time in a hebdomadal revolution of days. And hence Theophilus Antiochenus, lib. 2. ad Antolychum affirms, that all mortal men agreed in the appellation of the seventh day, whose testimony is of good force, though himself mistake the original of that appellation. For he tells us that [in non-Latin alphabet]; by an error common to many of the ancients, who could not distinguish between [in non-Latin alphabet] and [in non-Latin alphabet]. It is also to this purpose observed by Rivet and Selden from Salmasius, out of Georgius Syncallus, in his Chronologie, that the Patriarchs reckoned the times, or distinguished them [in non-Latin alphabet], by weeks only. This therefore is to me no small evidence of the institution and observation of the Sabbath from the foundation of the world. For hence did this periodical revolution of time prevail among the nations, even those who had not the least converse with, or knowledge of the Jews or their customs, after the command and observation of it was renewed among them. Not that this evidence is of itself a sufficient testimony to its original institution, nor that going before; but that the piety of the Patriarchs, and traditions of the apostate Gentiles, do confirm the time of that institution, which is so expressly recorded.

§. 17 It remaineth that we take a view of the opinion advanced by many learned men in opposition, to what we have been pleading for. And this is, that the command concerning the Sabbath was peculiar to the Jews alone, and that it was given to them in the wilderness, and not at all before. Many of the Jews as was declared, are of this judgement, and from there call the Sabbath the Bride of their nation, that which God gave to them as he did Eve to Adam, and to no other. Abulensis contends for this opinion in his Comment on Exodus 16, who is followed by some expositors of the Roman Church; and opposed by others, as Cornelius à Lapide, &c. The same difference in judgement is found among the Protestant divines. The Dissertations of Rivet and Gomarus on this subject are well known. The controversy being of late renewed, especially among some of the Belgick divines, I shall take under consideration the arguments of one of them who has last of all defended this cause, and weigh of what importance they are; separating as much as we can, between the matter of our present dispute, which is the original of the Sabbath, and that of the causes of it which we shall nextly enquire into.

§. 18 The design is to prove that the Sabbath was first given to the Jews and that in the wilderness. And to this purpose, first having repeated the words of the fourth Commandment, he adds, Quis vero dicere audebit, verba haec convenire in hominem ab initio Creationis, sicut hic statuitur? (that is by his Adversary) an illi incumbebat opus & quidem servile, idque per sex dies? an ipsi erant servi & ancillae? an jumenta requietis indigentia? an peregrini inter portas ejus? quis non videt ad solum Israelitarum statum in toto illo praecepto respici? Ita Calvinus in Gen. 2. Postea in lege novum de Sabbato praeceptum datum est, quod Judaeis & quidem ad tempus peculiare foret; fuit enim legalis ceremonia, spiritualem quietem adumbrans, cujus in Christo apparuit veritas. Quo nihil efficacius dici poterat.

Hanc vero praecepti mentem esse patet ex aliis Testimoniis Scripturae apertissime, in quibus Judaeis tantum datum esse Sabbatum constanter docetur. Exodus 16:29. Videte quod Jehovah dedit vobis illud Sabbatum; idcirco dat vobis cibum bidui. Et Ezekiel 20:12. Sabbata dedi eis, ut essent signum inter me & ipsos ad sciendum me Jehovam sanctificare ipsos. Denique Nehemiah 9:14. Sabbatum quoque sanctum notum fecisti eis; quum praecepta statutaque & leges praeciperes eis per Mosem servum tuum. In quibus locis uniformiter docetur tanta cum emphasi, per Mosem deum dedisse Judaeis Sabbatum, non ergo aliis gentibus datum fuit; aut ipsis etiam per Majores ipsorum ante illud tempus ab origine Mundi. Disquisit. cap. 2. p. 50.

An. It is by all confessed, that the command of the Sabbath in the renewal of it in the wilderness, was accommodated to the paedagogical state of the Church of the Israelites. There were also such additions made to it, in the manner of its observance, and the sanction of it, as might adapt its observation to their civil and political estate, or that theocratical government which was then erected among them. So was it to bear a part in that ceremonial instruction which God in all his dealings with them intended. To this end also the manner of the delivery of the whole Law, and the reservation of its tables in the Ark were designed. And divers expressions in the explicatory part of the Decalogue have the same reason and foundation. For there is mention of fathers and children to the third and fourth generation, and of their sins; of the land given to the people of God in the fifth; of servants and handmaids in the tenth. Shall we therefore say, that the moral Law was not before given to mankind, because it had a peculiar delivery for special ends and purposes to the Jews? It is no argument therefore, that this command was not for the substance of it, given before to mankind in general, because it has some modifications added in the Decalogue to accommodate it to the present Church, and civil state of the Hebrews, as likewise had the fifth command in particular.

(2.) For those expressions insisted on, of work, servile work, work for six days, of servants and handmaids, of the stranger within the gates, they were necessary explications of the command in its application to that people; and yet such as had a just proportion to what was enjoined at the first giving of this command; occasioned from the outward change of the state of things among men, from what it was in Innocency. For in that state God designed man to work, and that in the tilling of the ground, while he abode in it (Genesis 2:15). He put the man in the garden, [in non-Latin alphabet] to work in it; the same word whereby work is enjoined in the Decalogue. And whereas God had sanctified the seventh day to be a day of rest, and thereon put man into the garden, [in non-Latin alphabet] to till it, by work and labor; he did virtually say to him as in the command, [in non-Latin alphabet]. Six days shall you labor, and do all your work. Neither was this in the least inconsistent with the condition wherein he was created. For man being constituted and composed partly of an immortal soul, of a divine extract and heavenly original, and partly of a body made out of the earth, he was a middle creature between those which were purely spiritual as the angels, and those which were purely terrestrial, as the beasts of the field. Hence when God had made man, [in non-Latin alphabet] of dust from out of the earth, as all the beasts of the field were made; and had given him distinctly [in non-Latin alphabet], a breath of life in a distinct substance answerable to that of the angels above, whose creation was not out of any pre-existing matter, but they were the product of an immediate emanation of divine power, as was the soul of man; there was no meet help to be associated to him in the whole creation of God. For the angels were not meet for his help and individual converse, on the account of what was terrene and mortal in him. And the beasts were much more unsuited to him, as having nothing in them to answer his divine and more noble part. And as his nature was thus constituted, that he should converse, as it were amphibiously, between the upper and inferior sort of creatures; so he was divided in his work and operations suitably to the principles of his nature and peculiar constitution. For they were partly to be divine and spiritual, partly terrene and earthly, though under the government of the sovereign divine principle in him. Hence it was required that in this condition, being not absolutely fitted as the angels for constant contemplation, that he should work and labor in the earth, while he continued in it, and his terrene part not refined or made spiritual and heavenly. This made a certain time of rest necessary to him, and that upon a double account flowing from the principles of his own nature. For his earthly constitution could not always hold out to labor with its own satisfaction, and his intellectual and divine part was not to be always diverted, but to be furthered in and to its own peculiar operations. This made a sacred rest necessary to him. And in that addition of sweat and travail which befell him in his labor afterwards, that was not a new course of life enjoined him, but a curse was mixed with that course and labor which was originally allotted to him. So then, although there is a different manner of working more necessary, and supposed in the giving of the Law, than was at the first institution of a sabbatical rest, yet the change is not in the Law or command for labor, but in the state or condition of man himself.

The same may be spoken concerning the addition about servants and handmaids; for in the state of Innocency there would have been a superiority of some over others, in that government which is oeconomical or paternal. Hence all duties of persons in subordination, are built on the law of nature; and what is not resolved thereinto, is force and violence. And herein lies the foundation of what is ordained with reference to servants and strangers, which is expressed in the fourth Commandment, with an especial application to the state of the Judaical Church and people. Therefore although there should have been no such servants or strangers, as are intended in the Decalogue, in the state of Innocency, when we plead that the Law of the Sabbath was first given; yet this proves no more, but that this precept in the renovation and repetition of it to the Jews, was accommodated to the present state of things among them; that state being such as had its foundation in the law of creation itself.

The places adjoined of Exodus 16:29, chapter 31:17, Ezekiel 20:12, do prove sufficiently and undeniably, that in the Mosaical paedagogie, the observation of the seventh day, being precisely enjoined, there were additions of signification given to it, that is to the seventh day precisely by divine institution, as among them it was to be observed. And therefore to the utmost extent of the determination of the day of rest, to the seventh day precisely, and all the significancy annexed to it, to that people, we acknowledge that the Sabbath was absolutely commensurate to the Church state of the Jews, beginning and ending with it. But the argument hence educed; namely, that God gave the Sabbath, that is the law of it, in a peculiar manner to the Jews, therefore he had not given the same law for the substance of it before, to all mankind, is infirm. For God gave the whole Law to the Jews in an especial manner, and enforced the observation of it with a reason or motive peculiar to them, namely, I am the Lord your God which brought you out of the land of Egypt out of the house of bondage; and yet this Law was before given to them who never were in Egypt, nor never from there delivered. And upon the account of this peculiar appropriation of the Law to the Jews, it is spoken of in the Scripture in places innumerable, as if it had been given to them only, and to no others at all. So speaks the Psalmist (Psalm 141:19), [in non-Latin alphabet] declaring his words to Jacob, his statutes and judgements to Israel. Where only [in non-Latin alphabet] and [in non-Latin alphabet] the ceremonial and judicial laws are intended, so by [in non-Latin alphabet] his words, and that [in non-Latin alphabet] the ten words, as Moses calls the Decalogue. And of them all the Psalmist adds v. 20, [in non-Latin alphabet] he has not done so to any nation; namely, not in the same manner; for none will deny, but that nine precepts at least were given to all mankind in Adam.

§. 19 It is added by the same Learned Author; Praeterea (p. 51.) si quies scptimi diei omnibus ab origine mundi hominibus injuncta fuisset, non autem solis Israelitis à Tempore Mosis, deus non solum Israelitas ob neglectum illius praecepti sed & Gentiles, semel saltem eadem de causa reprehendisset. Cum vero Israelitas ea de causa reprehendat saepissime,Gentiles tamen nuspiam reprehendere hoc nomine legitur, qui propter peccata in legem naturalem commissa toties & tam acriter à Deo reprehenduntur. Luculentum ejus rei exemplum est; Nehem. 13. Tyrii asserunt Hierosolymas & omnes res venales quas vendebant ipso Sabbato Judaeis, & quidem Hierosolymis. v. 16. Non tamen Nehemias peccati violati Sabbati reos arguit Tyrios sed Judaeos. v. 17. Tyrios autem clausis portis pridie Sabbati à vespera usque urbem excludit, & ita compeseit, & tandem à muris urbis abigit. v. 19, 20, 21. Si vero Tyrii hi una cum Judaeis lege Sabbati Communi praecepto fuissent obstricti; nunne à viro sanctissimo ejus peccati nomine quoque reprehensi fuissent? quod tamen factum non apparet. Quum praeterea Scriptura impia Gentilium festa, graviter reprehendat, an sancti Sabbati neglectum, si id quoque ipsis observandum fuisset, tam constanti silentio dissimulasset?

The force of this Argument consists in this Assertion, that whatever we find God did not reprove in the Gentiles, therein they did not sin, nor had they any Law given to them concerning it, [〈◊〉] not in Adam; which will by no means be granted. For,

(1.) The times are spoken of wherein God suffered them to walk in their own ways, and winked at their ignorance. Hence as he gave them no reproofs for their sins, by his revealed Word, so those which he gave them by his Providence, are not recorded. We may not therefore say, they sinned in nothing, but what we find them reproved for in particular.

(2.) Other instances may be given of sins against the light of nature among the Gentiles, and that in things belonging to the second Table, wherein that light has a greater evidence accompanying it, than in that of the first, the first precept only excepted, which yet we find them not rebuked for. Such were the sins of concubinacy and fornication.

(3.) After the renovation, or giving of this command to the Jews, it was the duty of the nations to whom the knowledge thereof did come, to take up the observation of it. For it was doubtless their duty to join themselves to God and his people, and with them to observe his statutes and judgments; and their not so doing was their sin, which as is pretended they were not reproved for, or God was not displeased with them on that account.

(4.) The publication of God's commands, is to be stated from his giving of them; and not from the instances of men's transgressing of them. Nor is it any rule, that a Law is then first given, when men's sins against it are first reproved. For the instance insisted on, of Nehemiah and the Tyrians, with his different dealing with them and the Jews about the breach of the Law of the Sabbath, Chap. 13. it is of no force in this matter. For when the Tyrians knew the command of the Sabbath among the Jews, which was a sufficient revelation of the will of God concerning his worship, it was their duty to observe it. I do not say, that it was their duty immediately, and abiding in their Gentilism to observe the Sabbath according to the institution it had among the Jews; but it was their duty to know, own, and obey the true God, and to join themselves to his people, to do and observe all his commands. If this was not their duty upon that discovery and revelation, which those had of the will of God who came up to Jerusalem, as they did concerning whom we speak, then was it not their sin to abide in their Gentilism; which I suppose will not be asserted. It was therefore on one account or other, a sin in the Tyrians to profane the Sabbath. It will be said, why then did not Nehemiah reprove them as well as he did the Jews? The answer is easy. He was the head and governor of the state and polity of the Jews, to whom it belonged to see that things among them were observed and done according to God's Law and Appointment: and this he was to do with authority, having the warrant of God for it. With the Tyrians he had nothing to do; no care of them, no jurisdiction over them, no intercourse with them, but according to the Law of Nations. On these accounts he charged not them with sin, or a moral evil, which they would not have regarded, having no regard to the true God, much less to his worship; but he threatened them with war and punishment for disturbing his government of the people according to the Law of God.

It is well observed, that God reproved the profane feasts of the Heathens; and therein unquestionably the neglect of them that were of his own appointment. For this is the nature and method of negative precepts; and condemnatory sentences in divine things, that they assert what is contrary to that which is forbidden, and recommend that which is opposite to what is condemned. Thus the worship of God according to his own institution is commanded in the prohibition of making to ourselves, or finding out ways of religious worship and honor of our own. For whereas it is a prime dictate of the Law of Nature, that God is to be worshipped according to his own appointment, which was from the light of it acknowledged among the Heathen themselves, it is not anywhere asserted or intimated in the Decalogical compendium of it, unless it be in that prohibition. It suffices then, that even among the Gentiles, God vindicated the authority of his own Sabbaths, by condemning their impious feasts and abominable practices in them.

§. 20 By the same Learned Writer, p. 52, the testimony of the Jews in this case is pleaded. They generally affirm, that the Sabbath was given to them only, and not to the rest of the nations. Hence it is by them called the Bride of the Synagogue: nor do they reckon the command of it among the Noachical precepts, which they esteem all men obliged to, and whose observation they imposed on the Proselytes of the Gate, or the uncircumcised strangers that lived among them. No, they say, that others were liable to punishment if they did observe it. For that part of the command, nor the stranger that is within your Gate, they say intends no more, but that no Israelite should compel him to work, or make any advantage of his labor; but for himself he was not bound to abstain from labor, but might exercise himself therein at his own discretion for his advantage. These things are pleaded at large, and confirmed with many testimonies and instances by the Learned Selden; and from him are they again by others insisted on. But the truth is, there is not any thing of force in the conceits of these Talmudical Jews in the least to weaken the principle we have laid down and established. For,

(1.) As has been showed, this opinion is not indeed catholic among them; but many, and those of the most learned of the masters do oppose it; as we have proved already. And others may be added to them, whose opinion although it be peculiar, yet it wants not a fair probability of truth. For, they say, that the first part of the precept, Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy, has respect to the glorifying of God on the account of his original work and rest. This therefore belongs to all mankind. But as for that which follows about the six days' labor, and the seventh day's cessation or quiet; it had respect to the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt, and their deliverance from there, and was therefore peculiar to them. So R. Ephraim in Keli Jacar. And hence it may be, the word, Remember, has respect to the command of the Sabbath from the foundation of the world. And therefore when the command is repeated again, with peculiar respect to the Church of Israel, as the motive, from the Egyptian bondage and deliverance is expressed; so the caution of remembering is omitted (Deuteronomy 5:12), and transferred to this other occasion; Remember that you were a servant, v. 15.

(2.) The sole foundation of it is laid in a corrupt and false tradition or conceit, of the giving of the law of the Sabbath in Mara; which we have before disproved, and which is despised as vain and foolish by most learned men.

(3.) The assertors of this opinion do wofully contradict themselves, in that they generally acknowledge that the Sabbath was observed by Abraham, and other Patriarchs, as it should seem, at least four hundred years before its institution.

(4.) It is none of the seven, called, Noachical precepts; for they contain not the whole law of nature, or precepts of the Decalogue, and one of them is ceremonial in their sense; so that nothing can from there be concluded against the original or nature of this law.

(5.) That an uncircumcised stranger was liable to punishment if he observed the Sabbath, is a foolish imagination, not inferior to that of some others of them, who affirm that all the Gentiles shall keep the Sabbath, one day in seven in Hell.

6. For the distinction which they have invented, that a Proselyte of the Gate might work for himself, but not for his master, it is one of the many whereby they make void the law of God through their traditions. Those who of old among them feared God, knowing their duty to instruct their households or families, that is, their children and servants, in the ways and worship of God, walked by another rule.

§. 21 It is further pleaded by the same Author, p. 53, that the Gentiles knew nothing of this Sabbatical feast, but that when it came to their knowledge they derided and exploded it as a particular superstition of the Jews. To this purpose many instances out of the historians and poets, who wrote in the time of the first Roman Emperors, are collected by Selden, which we are again directed to. Now it could not be, but that if it had been originally appointed to all mankind, that they should have been such strangers to it. But this matter has been discoursed before. And we have showed that sundry of the first writers of the Christian Church were otherwise minded; for they judged and proved, that there was a notion at least of the seventh day's sacred rest, diffused throughout the world. And they lived nearer the times of the Gentiles' practice, than those by whom their judgment and testimony are so peremptorily rejected. It is not unlikely, but that they might be mistaken in some of the testimonies whereby they confirm their observation; yet this hinders not, but that the observation itself may be true, and sufficiently confirmed by other instances which they make use of.

For my part, as I have said, I will not, nor for the security of the principle laid down, need I to contend, that the seventh day was observed as a sacred feast among them. It is enough that there were such notices of it in the world, as could proceed from no other original, but that pleaded for, which was common to all. The Roman writers, poets and others, do speak of, and contemn the Judaical Sabbaths, under which name they comprehended all their sacred feasts and solemn abstinences. Hence they reproached them with their Sabbatical fasts; of which number the seventh day hebdomadal Sabbath was not. But they never endeavoured to come to any real acquaintance with their religious rites, but took up vulgar reports concerning them, as did their historians also, who in the affairs of other nations are supposed to have been curious and diligent.

§. 22 Indeed after the Conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey, when the People of the Jews began to be known among the Romans, and to disperse themselves throughout their Provinces, they began every day more and more to hate them, and to cast all manner of reproaches on them without regard to Truth or Honesty. And it may not be amiss here a little (by the way) to enquire into the Reasons of it. The principal cause hereof no doubt, was from the God they worshipped, and the manner of his Worship observed among them. For finding them to acknowledge and adore one only (the true) God, and that without the use of any kind of Images, they perceived their own idolatry and superstition to be condemned thereby. And this had been the condition of that people under the former Empires, of the Chaldaéans, Persians, and Grecians. God had appointed them to be his witnesses in the world, that he was God, and that there was none other. Isaiah 44:8, 9, 10: "You are my witnesses, is there a God besides me, there is no God, I know not any." As also chapter 43:10–11, 12: "You are my witnesses, that before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be any after me, I even I am the Lord, and besides me there is no Savior; therefore you are my witnesses, says the Lord, that I am God." This greatly provoked, as other Nations of old, so at length the Romans, as bidding defiance to all their Gods, and their Worship of them, wherein they greatly boasted. For they thought that it was merely by the Help of their Gods, and on the account of their Religion, that they conquered all other Nations. So Cicero (Orat. de Respon. Harusp.): "Quam volumus ipsi nos amemus, tamen nec numero Hispanos, nec robore Gallos, nec calliditate Poenos, nec artibus Graecos, sed pietate & religione, atque hac una sapientia, quod deorum immortalium numine omnia regi, gubernarique prospeximus, omnes gentes nationesque superavimus." Let us love and please ourselves as we think meet, yet we outgo neither the Spaniards in number, nor the Gaules in strength, nor the Africans in craft, nor the Grecians in Arts; but it is by our Piety and Religion, and this only Wisdom, that we refer all to the Government of the immortal Gods, that we have overcome all Countries and Nations. And Dionysius Halicarnassaeus (Antiquit. Rom. lib. 2), having given an account of their Sacred Rites and Worship, adds that he did it [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], that those who knew not before the piety or Religion of the Romans, might not now think it strange, that they should have such success in all their Wars. To be judged and condemned in those things by the contrary witness of the Jews, they could not bear. This made them reflect on God himself, as the God which they worshipped. They called him incertum, and ignotum, affirming the Rites of his Worship to be absurd, and contrary to the common consent of mankind, as Tacitus expressly (Hist. lib. 5). The best they could afford when they spoke of him was, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉], whoever he be. And Tully will not allow that it was any respect to their God, or their Religion, which caused Pompey to forbear spoiling the Temple when he took it by force: "Non credo," says he, "religionem impedimento praestantissimo Imperatori fuisse, quod victor ex illo fano nihil attigerit" (Orat. pro Flacc.), whereunto he adds as high a reproach of them and their Religion as he could devise. "Stantibus Hierosolymis, pacatisque Judaeis, tamen istorum religio sacrorum, à splendore hujus imperii; gravitate nominis nostri, majorum institutis abhorrebat; nunc vero hoc magis, quod illa gens, quid de nostro imperio sentiret ostendit armis, quam cara diis immortalibus esset, docuit, quod victa est, quod clocata, quod servata." While Jerusalem stood (that is, in its own Power) and the Jews were peaceable, yet their Religion was unworthy the splendor of this Empire, the gravity of our Name, and abhorrent from the Ordinances of our Ancestors; how much more now, when that Nation has showed what esteem it has of our Empire by its Arms; and how dear it is to the immortal Gods, that it is conquered, and set out under Tribute. The like reflections, yes worse, may be seen in Trogus, Tacitus, Plutarch, Strabo, and Democritus in Suidas with others.

§. 23 Another Ground of their Hatred was, that the Jews while the Temple stood, gathered great sums of money out of all their Provinces, which they sent to the Sacred Treasury. So the same Person informs us in the same place: "Cum Aurum Judaeorum nomine, quotannis ex Italia, & ex omnibus vestris Provinciis Hierosolymam exportari soleret." Out of Italy and all other Provinces of the Empire, there was Gold wont to be sent by the Jews to Jerusalem; as now the European Jews do contribute to the maintenance of their Synagogues in the same place; and this is acknowledged by Philo (Legat. ad Caium) and Josephus (Antiqui. lib. 14, cap. 11) to have been yearly a very great sum. But by his Judaeorum nomine, he seems not only to express that the Returns of the Gold mentioned were made in the name of the Jews, but also to intimate, that it might be raised by others also, who had taken on them the profession of their Religion. For this was the third and principal cause of their Hatred and Animosity, namely that they drew over multitudes of all sorts of persons to the profession of the Law of Moses. And a good work this was, though vitiated by the wickedness and corrupt ends of them who employed themselves therein, as our Savior declares (Matthew 23:15). This greatly provoked the Romans in those days, and on every occasion they severely complain of it. So Dio Cassius speaking of them adds, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]: And this kind of men (that is men of this Profession, not natural Jews,) is found also among the Romans; which though they have been frequently punished, yet have for the most part increased, so as to take the liberty of making Laws to themselves. For their punishments, an account is given us in Suetonius in Domit. and others, of the Inquisition and Search, made after such as were circumcised. And as to their making of Laws to themselves, he respects their Feasts, Sabbaths, Abstinencies, and such like Observances as the Jews obliged their Proselytes to. In like manner complains Juvenal,

Romanas autem soliti contemnere Leges Judaicum ediscunt, & servant ac metuunt jus Tradidit arcano quodcunque volumine Moses.

Contemning the Roman Laws, they learn the Rites and Customs of the Jews, observing and learning the whole Right or Law delivered in the secret Writing of Moses. Seneca is yet more severe. Cum interim usque eo sceleratissima gentis consuetudo convaluit, ut per omnes jam terras recepta sit: Victi victoribus leges dederunt. The custom of this wicked Nation has so far prevailed, that it is now received among all Nations: The conquered, have given Laws to the Conquerors. And Tacitus, Pessimus quisque spretis religionibus patriis tributa & stipes, illuc (that is to Jerusalem) congerebat. The like revengeful Spirit appears in those Verses of Rutilius lib. 1. Itinerar. though he lived afterwards under the Christian Emperors.

O utinam nunquam Judaea victa fuisset Pompeii Bellis, imperioque Titi; Laetius excisae pestis contagia serpunt Victoresque suos natio victa premit.

But it is not unlikely, that he reflects on Christians also.

§. 24 We may add hereunto, that for the most part the conversation of the Jews among them was wicked and provoking. They were a people that had for many Generations been harrased and oppressed, by all the principal Empires in the world; this caused them to hate them, and to have their minds always possessed with revengeful thoughts. When our Apostle affirmed of them, that they pleased not God, and were contrary to all men (1 Thessalonians 2:15), he intends not their opposition to the Gospel, and the Preachers of it, which he had before expressed; but that envious contrariety to mankind in general, which they were possessed with. And this evil frame, the Nations ascribed to their Law it self. Moses novos ritus contrariosque caeteris mortalibus & gentibus indidit, says Tacitus. But this most falsly; no Law of man ever taught that benignity, kindness, and general usefulness in the world, as theirs did. The people themselves being grown wicked and corrupt, pleased not God, and were contrary to all men. Hence they were looked on as such, who observed not so much as the Law of Nature towards any but themselves; as resolving

Quaesitum ad fontem solos diducere verpos.

Not to direct a thirsty person to a common Spring if uncircumcised. From where was that censure of Tacitus, Apud ipsos fides obstinata, misericordia in Promptu, adversus omnes alios hostile odium. Faithful and merciful among themselves, towards all others they were acted with irreconcilable hatred; which well expresseth what our Savior charged them with, as a corrupt principle among them (Matthew 5:43), You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy. Into which two sorts they distributed all mankind; that is in their sense, their own countrymen and Strangers.

Their corrupt and wicked conversation also made them a reproach, and their Religion contemned. So was it with them from their first Dispersion as God declares (Ezekiel 36:20), When they entred to the Heathen whither they went, they profaned my holy name, when they said to them, these are the people of the Lord. And their wickedness increased with their time; for they still learned the corrupt and evil Arts, with all ways of deceit, used in the Nations where they lived, until for the crimes of many, the whole Nation became the common hatred of mankind. And, that we may return from this Digression, this being the state of things then in the world, we may not wonder, if the Writers of those days were very supinely negligent, or maliciously envious, in reporting their ways, Customs, and Religious Observances. And it is acknowledged that before those Times, the long course of Idolatry and Impiety wherein the whole world had been ingaged, had utterly corrupted and lost the Tradition of a Sabbatical Rest. What Notices of it continued in former Ages, has been before declared.

§. 25 But it is further pleaded (p. 54.) that indeed the Gentiles could be no way obliged to the Observation of the fourth Commandment; seeing they had no Indication of it, nor any means to free them from their Ignorance of the Being of any such Law. That they had, and had lost the knowledge of it, in and by their Progenitors, is rejected as a vain pretence. And so much weight is laid on this consideration, that a demand is made of somewhat to be returned in answer, that may give any satisfaction to conscience. But I understand not the force of this pretended Argument. Those who had absolutely lost the knowledge of the true God, (in and by their Progenitors) as the Gentiles had done, might well also lose the knowledge of all the concernments of his Worship. And so they had done, excepting only that they had traduced some of his Institutions, as Sacrifices, into their own Superstition; and so had they corrupted the use of his Sabbaths into that of their Idolatrous Feasts. But when the true God, had no other acknowledgements among them, but what answered the Title of the Unknown God, is it any wonder that his ways and Worship might be unknown among them also? And it is but pretended that they had no Indication of a Sabbatical Rest, nor any means to free them from their Ignorance. Man's duty is both to be learned and observed in Order. It is in vain to expect, that any should have Indications of an holy Rest to God, before they are brought to the knowledge of God himself. When this is obtained, when the true God upon just Grounds is owned and acknowledged, than that some time be set apart for his solemn Worship, is of Moral and Natural Right. That this is included in the very first notion of the true God, and our dependance upon him, all men do confess. And this principle was abused among the Heathen to be the foundation of all their stated Annual, or Monthly Sacred Solemnities, after they had nefariously lost the only Object of all Religious Worship. Where this Progress is made, as it might have been, by attending to the directive Light of Nature, and the impressions of the Law of it left upon the souls of men, there will not be wanting sufficient Indicatives of the meetest season for that Worship. However these things were, and are to be considered and admitted in their Order; and with respect to that Order is their Obligation. The Heathen were bound first to know and own the true God, and him alone; then to worship him solemnly; and after that, in order of Nature, to have some solemn time separated to the Observance of that Worship. Without an Admission of these, all which were neglected and rejected by them, there is no place to enquire after the Obligation of an Hebdomadal Rest. And their Non-observance of it was their sin, not firstly, directly, and immediately; but consequentially, as all others are that arise from an Ignorance or Rejection of those greater Principles whereon they do depend.

§. 26 The trivial exception from the difference of the meridians is yet pleaded also. For hence it is pretended to be impossible, that all men should precisely observe the same day. For if a man should sail round the world by the East, he will at his return home have gotten a day by his continual approach towards the rising Sun. And if he steer his course Westward, he will lose a day in the annual revolution, as it is gotten the other way; so did the Hollanders An. 1615. And hence the posterity of Noah, gradually spreading themselves over the world, must have gradually come to the observation of different seasons, if we shall suppose a day of sacred rest required of them, or appointed to them. Apage Nugas. If men might sail Eastward or Westward, and not continually have seven days succeeding one another, there would be some force in this trifle. On our hypothesis, wherever men are, a seventh part of their time, or a seventh day is to be separated to the remembrance of the rest of God, and the other ends of the Sabbath. That the observance of this portion of time shall in all places begin and end at the same instants, the law and order of God's creation will not permit. It is enough that among all who can assemble for the worship of God, there is no difference in general, but that they all observe the same proportion of time. And he who by circumnavigation of the world, (such rare and extraordinary instances being not to be provided for in a general law) gets or loses a day, he may at his return with a good conscience, give up again, what he has got, or retrieve what he has lost, with those with whom he fixes. For all such occasional accidents are to be reduced to the common standard. All the difficulty therefore in this objection relates to the precise observation of the seventh day from the creation; and not in the least to one day in seven. And although the seventh day was appointed principally for the land of Palestine, the seat of the church of old, wherein there was no such alteration of meridians; yet I doubt not, but that a wandering Jew might have observed the foregoing rule, and reduced his time to order upon his return home. What other exceptions of the like nature occur in this cause, they shall be removed and satisfied in our next inquiry, which is after the causes of the Sabbath; and the morality of the observation of one day in seven.