THE two main defects of wit, to which all others may be reduced, are Error and Ignorance; by Igno­rance we know not things neres­sary; by Error we know them falsely. Ig­norance is a privation, Error is a positive act. From Ignorance springs Vice, from Error Heresy. Error in Judgment is worse than Error in Practice, for then the Conscience takes part with Sin, and a man thinks he ought to do what he doth.

Every Error is a plot of the Devil to sup­press some Truth, and is very spreading & infectious: this is the most remarkable evil our blessed Saviour takes notice of, Mat. 24 and that no less than three times ver. 5, [Page 2]11. 24. This is that against which the pri­mitive Fathers spent most of their painful writings; and all the primitive Churches to whom the Apostles wrote Epistles, are ex­presly warned, either Positively to stand fast in the truth, to hold fast their Profession; or Negatively to beware of, and to avoid False-teachers, & not to be carried about with divers and strange Doctrines, as here in my Text.

I shall not spend time about those needless disputes that have been maintained concerning the Author of this Epistle, which have taken their rise from some Greek Co­pies of the New-Testament, wherein the name of Paul is not prefixed to this Epistle; this may be sufficient for us, that whoever was the Amanuensis, the Holy Ghost was the Dictator: The clear evidence whereof it carries fully in it self, being calculated to discover unto the believing Hebrews, that they had not lost by renouncing Judaism for Christianity, seeing the whole Oeconomy of Moses was designed but to lead them to the Lord Jesus Christ, and to be Perfected in Him, He being the Truth and Substance of all those shadows, and to shew them the Transcendant excellency of Christ's Person, both in regard of his Deity and Humanity, and of his Offices; as a Prophet exceeding [Page 3] Moses, as a Priest exceeding Aaron, and as Priest and King exceeding Melchizedeck; and thro' the whole there are such heavenly Precepts and Doctrines according to godli­ness intermixed, that I say the epistle it self declares its divine original contrary to Mar­cion, Arius, and some other Hereticks who rejected it.

I shall pass by what preceeds my Text in this Chapter, & Consider these words (not as they may stand in relation to what goes before, or follows, but) absolutely as they are in themselves. And here we have,

(1) A Dehortation, be not carried about with divers & strange Doctrines: The Doctrines of Christ being immutable, it is but necessary to dehort his Subjects from all mutation or defection, as the Apostle does here, that they should not be wheeling and whirling about (as the word signifies) with an unstable & unconstant motion of Judgment, Faith & Practice. About such erroneous Doctrines which are vain rules to lead to Christ, and are different in nature from Christ's one and the same Rule; and these Doctrines are very numerous and various, strange and untrue, taught by false Brethren and Sedu­cers, to the wounding of the Church, and destruction of Souls.

[Page 4] (2) A Reason wherewith this debortation is urged, for it is a good thing that the heart be established with Grace. It is good in its self, and it is good to the subject of it. The goodness of heart-establishment unto God being no less than full & compleat Salvation of the Soul, 1 Cor. 15 58, 2 Pet. 3. 17. 18.

2 Thes. 2 2. Be not soon shaken in mind nor be troubled Eph. 4. 14. That we henceforth be no more Children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of Doctrine, by the sleight it men and cunning raftiness whereby they lie in wait to aeceive [...] Tim. 1. 13. Hold fast the form of sound words, &c.

The Devil has his Subtilities & Fallacies and false Doctrines, by which he seeks to deceive (we [...] possible) the very Elect: Spirion of error to corrupt the integrity of our Faith Be will tell men of new Lights and new Doctrines concealed from the pri­mitive Christans, [...] for these last times; Paul warns the Corinthians of this [Page 5] practice of Satan, 2 Cor. 11. 3. I fear lest by any means, as the Serpent beguiled Eve through Subtilty, so your minds should be Corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. There are TABATHETOU SATANA, Rev. 2. 24 Depths and whirlpools of errors, into which he would plunge the Souls of men And that Christians may stand it out against this assault, they must labour to be well grounded & established in the Truth; get their wills exercised to be able to discern 'twixt Truth and Error. They must not be Children in understanding, ever learning, never coming to the knowlege of the Truth. What saith David? Be not like the Horse and Mule that have no understanding; the Horse is ready for every Rider; the Mule is ready for every Burthen; but Christians should know what to believe, and from whom to receive it, They must learn of the Apostle how to try and reject these false Doctrines, and such as bring and teach them 2 Cor. 11. 4. If he that comes Preaches another Jesus, whom we have not Preached; that can shew you a more perfect Sayiour, than our Gospel hath taught you, or if ye receive another Spirit, which ye have not received, gain more sanctifying Grace by their new light and notions, than what the Ordinances of God have already offered to you, & (if you be true Christians) [Page 6] wrought in you; or if they teach you ano­ther Gospel, which you have not accepted, a more blessed Doctrine, and way to Hea­ven, than you have been taught, ye might well bear with them: but this they cannot do, therefore hearken not unto them.

I shall for prosecution of this Doctrine, endeavour briefly to shew,

• I. What Doctrines may be called strange Doctrines, and why.
• II. What it is to beware of these strange Doctrines.
• III. Why Christian Professors should beware of such Doctrines and labour for establishment.
• IV. What are these particular, strange Doctrines that the Church in this Day, and especially in this Place, should beware of. And then Con­clude with a short Application.

I. I am to shew, What Doctrines may be called strange, and why. The word Doctrine in general signifies what ever is taught, any manner of Instruction, whether true or false, wholesome or poysonous; but more particu­larly, it is taken,

1. Sometimes in a good Sense, and so it signifies the Instruction of the Church in that Truth which is according to Godliness, 1 Tim. 4. 13. Give attendance to Doctrine, And this is sometimes called,

[Page 7] (1) The form of Doctrine. A phrase which expresseth the efficacy of Divine Doctrine in the hearts of Believers; it changes and fashions their hearts into its own likeness, by imprinting upon them (thro' the Spirit of God) those very Graces of Faith, Hope, Love and Obedience which it teacheth and requireth; the Doctrine of the Gospel is a Mould, and the hearer is the Metal, which when it is melted and cast into the Mould, it receives its Form and Figure, See Rom. 6, 17. But ye have obeyed from the heart, that form of Doctrine which was delivered you. In the Original it runs thus, The mould of Doctrine, into which you were delivered. Hence in Jam. 1. 21, It is called an Ingrafted Word. It turns the heart and life of the Hearer into its own nature, as the Stock does the Cion that is Ingrafted into it.

(2) The Doctrine of Christ. i e. Such doctrine is hath Christ for the Author of it, for the matter, the scope and the end of it. Heb: 6. r. The beginnings of the Doctrines of Christ. i. e. Which cometh from Christ, teacheth Christ, and leadeth the Soul to Christ; no other Doctrine availeth; no Doctrine diverse from that which Paul taught, 1 Tim. 1. 3.

(3) The Doctrine of Godliness. That Doctrine of Grace, which teacheth us the way how to worship God aright, and makes us true [Page 8] Worshippers, i e. Godly Persons, 1 Tim 6. 30 The Doctrine which is according to Godliness.

(4) Uncorrupt, wholesome, sound, such Doctrine as is not mixt with the leaven of Error, but is in it self pure, and makes the receivers of it sound in the Faith, uncorrupt in Manners, and qualifyed for eternal Hap­piness, [...]. 2 7, 8.

2. The word Doctrine is sometimes taken in an Evil sense; for false & erroneous Tenets, taught & spread by such as are indued with a lying Spirit, and by God's just Judgment given over to strong Delusions; and when taken thus,

(1) It is called the Doctrines of Men. Such Opinions and Tenets as have none other than men for the Authors of them, without any ground from the word of God, Col. 2. 22. After the Doctrines of men; these are also called the Precepts of men, Mat. 15 9. But in vain do they worship me teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men.

(2) Doctrines of Devils. Such erroneous Opinions as come from Satan as Author, & keep the receiver of them fast in his Snares, 1 Tim. 4. 1. They shall give heed to Doctrines of Devils. i. e. Doctrines suggested by Satan, and published by the Art and Cunning of infernal Spirits. It is in this latter sense, the word is here to be taken, viz. for all false [Page 9] corrupt & erroneous Doctrines, which come from the father of lies. However vile men are or may be imploy'd as Instruments in the spreading and teaching of them. And well may such be called strange Doctrines, for they are quite foreign to whatever the bles­sed Spirit of grace and truth ever taught; they are such as the Word of God knows nothing of; such as the Church of God col­lectively, & the personal experience of the Children of God severally are strangers un­to. The Spirit of God is properly called the Spirit of Truth, Joh 16. 13. And the Word of God is called the word of Truth, Joh 17. 17 & Jam. 1. 18. And the Church of God is the pillar & ground of Truth, 1 Tim. 3. 15. And the glorious Head and King of the Church (who himself is the Way, the Truth & the Life) hath promised that every Member of it, shall be guided into all Truth, Joh. 16. 13 And therefore all such Doctrines as are either contrary unto, or inconsistent with truth, are wholly strange to what either the Word & Spirit of God teach, or the Church & People of Christ embrace & Entertain.

I proceed to shew,

II. What it is to beware of these strange Doctrines. And,

[Page 10] 1. It forbids intimate Conversation with such persons as do Profess them. Christians must not receive them or entertain them with a friendly freedom, 2 Joh. v. 1c, 11. If there come any unto you & bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed, a partaker of his evil deeds. Such as bring any contrary Doctrine, must not be harboured or coun­tenanced; even nor so much as by an incou­raging Salutation, left hereby we involve our selves in the participation of their guilt. Nay, we must purposedly & carefully avoid such, Rom 16 17. Mark them which cause divi­sions & essences, contrary unto the doctrine which ye have learned & avoid them. In these words the Apostle lays down Two Precepts to Christians, with respect unto such as would innovate & reach another Doctrine broach­ing Opinions that [...] contrary, or at least besides the pure and Apostolick Doctrine of the Gospel, & so make divisions & factions amongst them. And first, Such are to be marked: The word signifies such a marking as a [...] man [...] that standeth on a Tower to [...] the Enemy; he marks [...] all comers & goers, & gives notice accordingly for the treaty of the Place. The [...]. They shou'd be avoided or declined. [...] Christians should turn away from [Page 11] them, and shun their Society, that they may be ashamed.

2. It forbids Reading and Studying the Books that contain them. Satan hath his Scribes as well as his Teachers. And tho' neither the Magistrate should faithfully Suppress, nor the Consciences of Printers prevent the Im­pression & Publication of such Books, as are put forth in the defence of strange doctrines, yet this very Apostolick Precept, forbids the Entertainment of them by Christians. Per­sons may as safely receive the Author, as his Book; and are as liable to be Ensnared by the latter as the former: Nay, such as Buy & Study them, are the greatest Incou­ragers of them; and it is practically a bid­ding the Author, God speed. If the workman is to be discountenanced & avoided, purely for his works sake, then much more should the work it self be rejected & shunned. Such Books are but baits cast by the Devils fisher­men to catch unwary & unstable Souls; and such as lay hold of them, are in very great danger of being taken.

3 It forbids a personal Attendance on the Ministry of such as teach false Doctrines. If we are not to receive or entertain the Persons of such Teachers in our houses, far less are we to present our persons in the Place or House of their Worship. As the Doctrines [Page 12] are strange, so They that bring them (how­ever they may appear, or whatever they may pretend) are not Shepherds but Strangers, and the Sheep of Christ should be far from hearkening to the voice of such. This mark Christ gives us of his Sheep, Joh 10. 5. And a stranger will they not follow; but will flee from him, for they know not the voice of strangers.

4. It forbids especially all inward Consent of Soul unto such Doctrines as true. Be not car­ried away, says my Text, be not removed from the Truth, by embracing Errors. This is the principal thing that Satan & his In­struments drive at in the teaching & spread­ing of them, to deceive men by them; by parting with the truth for them: And if once the Soul come to embrace error for truth, it will call evil good; Conscience it self will take part with fin. Error in practice will follow Error in principle; and the person at the same time falsely conceit himself to be doing nothing but duty.

III. I am to give the Reasons of the Doctrine. Or, shew Why Christian Professors should be­ware of strange Doctrines, and labour for Estab­lishment in the Truth. Now because the next Head will require some considerable time, I shall do little more than Name these. And Christian Professors shou'd beware of strange Doctrines, &c.

[Page 13] 1. Because it is inconsistent with their very Profession to do otherwise. Christians profess to receive that and only that Gospel which the Apostles preached, and that without either adding to, or diminishing from di­vine Revelations; now to give heed to strange Doctrines, is inconsistent with this profession, for it is no less than a perverting the Gospel of Christ, & a removing or turn­ing to another gospel, Gal. 1. 6, 7.

2. Because it is inconsistent with their own best interest. The Apostle tells us that if any Man, nay were it possible that an Apostle of Christ, or an Angel of God, should come from Heaven and teach strange Doctrines, he should be accursed, Gal. 1. 8, 9. and if the Teacher is cursed then certainly he that is taught is in great hazard; he that submits to such a Teacher is a partaker of his evil deeds, & consequently will share with him in the Curse. And besides, where Persons do not conscientiously take heed to them­selves, God is sometimes provoked judicially to give them over to strong delusions to be­lieve lies, 2 Thes. 2. 11.

3. Because not to do thus is to gratify Satan and reproach Christ in the highest degree. For to give heed to false Doctrines, is to give the father of lies that credit which is due only to God, and to reject the record God [Page 14] hath given in his Word as if he were a liar.

4. Because not to do thus is very endangering to the Souls of our Posterity. If Parents are poisoned, the Children are exceedingly ex­posed to infection; Children have common­ly a great deal of charity for their Parents, and therefore take up with the Principles of their Ancestors upon trust, and consequent­ly Parents had need see to it that their Tenets be Orthodox. But I must hasten,

IV. To shew what those particular strange Doctrines are, which professed Christians at this day, and particularly in this place, should espe­cially beware of. I shall mention Eight, and give a brief confutation to each of them.

I. To deny the morality of the fourth Com­mandment is a very strange doctrine. There are a sort of creatures risen up, who (in o­pen defiance to the great God and all good order) live in the constant breach of an ex­press divine Law, by denying the morality of the fourth Commandment, & cashiering it among other Levitical Rites and Cere­monies. For confutation of this Error, we may here,

Note, That all the Laws given in the old Testament, are to be distinguished in regard of their continuance, into these two sorts, viz.

(1) Perpetual, binding all men in all ages.

[Page 15] Or,

(2) Temporary, binding only such as lived before the Resurrection of Christ; for the Will of the Legislator (which is the very o­riginal of all that force, extent, and conti­nuance that the Law hath) was that some Precepts should be observed only till the Resurrection of the promised Messiah, and no longer, and that others should continue in force from the first promulgation of them to the end of time. Now the Question is, Which of these kinds is the fourth Com­mandment of? and to this I answer, That it belongs to the former sort, and is bind­ing to all men in all ages; as may appear by considering the following particulars.

[1] Consider Adam had no Precept given him in innocency, but what was of perpetual obli­gation: But this Precept was then given un­to man, therefore it is perpetual; the major proposition is evident thus, that all the Pre­cepts then given to Adam were moral and not ceremonial, for there was then no sin, and so no need of a Saviour, & consequent­ly no use of ceremonies to signify the one or typify the other; and the minor is plain from Gen 2. 2.

[2] It is apparent that it was the real inten­tion of the supreme and absolute Lawgiver, that this Precept should bind all men to the Worlds end. [Page 16] For how could the great God declare his mind in this behalf more plainly than by equalling it in all things with those Precepts which all men must own to be of everlast­ing obligation. And by separating it wholly from, nay exalting it far above all those which are on all hands acknowleged to be but Temporary.

(1) This Precept was promulgated in the same majestick manner, with the same voice, at the same time, and in the same place that the other nine were.

(2) It was delivered to the same Person, to be laid up in the same Ark, and so is a part of the same Covenant, whence those Tables are called the Tables of the Covenant, and that Ark the Ark of the Covenant. Whence it may be thus argued.

What Commandment soever is a part of eternal Covenant, and is by God graced and commended with all those signs of com­mendation wherewith all the rest are gra­ced, cannot be made of less continuance than the rest (whose perpetuity is signified by their being written on Tables of Stone, and being laid up in the Ark.)

But thus it is with respect to the fourth Commandment. Therefore, &c.

(3) The blessed God himself hath separated this from all temporary Precepts, by giving [Page 17] it those privileges, as it were, and notes of honour, which all of them wanted; and he hath equalled it with the perpetual & ever­lasting Precepts, by communicating to it all those testimonies of force and continuance which they had; therefore we are bound to believe it was his holy will that this should continue in force as much and as long as the rest, even to all men in all ages till time shall be no more.

[3] Consider how unreasonable, nay what a vile reflection it is on the Divine Wisdom, for any to think that God would put a ceremo­nial and temporary law in the very midst of moral and perpetual Precepts, and urge it with more reasons, words, repetitions and particulars than any of those morals, as he plainly doth in Exod. 20. 8, 9.

[4] Consider to deny the morality & perpa­tuity of this Precept, is to take away one of the ten and so leave but nine, which is con­trary to the express word of God, in Deut. 10. 4. And he wrote on the Tables according to the first writing, the ten Commandments, which the Lord spake unto you in the mount, &c. And how our Adversaries can answer this I know not, unless they betake themselves to the same poor shift with the Papists, who when they raze out the second Commandment, be­cause it is expresly against their Idolatry, [Page 18] they divide the tenth into two to maintain the number.

[5] Consider all those Laws in the Jewish Church, that were ceremonial and temporary, were accomplished in Christ, and abrogated by him; but it was not so with respect un­to this Commandment, for we find plainly that this Precept was still to continue in force under the Gospel; as appears briefly by these things,

(1) The Prophet [...] foretelling the days of the Gospel when Christ should be [...] ( Isai. ch. 56.) he pronounces a blessing on them in those days that keep the Sabbath from polluting it, ( v. 2.) nay he puts the keeping of the Sabbath for the whole obedience of the Covenant ( v. 6) which he would never do had it been no more than temporary.

(2) We accordingly find our blessed Sa­viour himself, when speaking of those days wherein all the ceremonial Law was dead and buried, viz several years after his own Resurrection & Ascention, when Titus Ves­pasian should destroy Jerusalem, he says, Mat. 24. 20 Pray that your flight be not in the winter, nor on the Sabbath day, plainly shew­ing that the Sabbath was to continue after the legal Ceremonies ceased,

[Page 19] (3) The same point concerning the per­petuity of this Law is plainly confirmed by James after Christ's Ascention: see Jam. 2 to where he says, He that keepeth the whole Law, and faileth but in one point, is guilty of all. Whence we may thus reason, The whole Law, and every part of it, was in force when James wrote this Epistle, for how can a man break a Law that is abrogared, or be guilty of all by breaking any one point, if the whole, and every point of it he not e­qually in force. Now this Epistle was writ­ten by James to such as lived under the Gospel. Wherefore at that time and to those Persons, the whole Law, & every part and point of it was in force And if any doubt what James means by the Law, it is plain he meaneth the decalogue or ten Com­mandments, thus, He that speaketh of a whole Law, and after instanceth in particu­lar members of the Law, must needs mean the whole number of Precepts, whereof these two bro't for instance are members and parts. Now for instance James brings in two members of the decalogue. There­fore by the whole Law, and each point, he must needs mean the decalogue and every precept thereof, as still farther appears by his manner of speaking and reasoning, when as says thus, He that said, Thou shalt not [Page 20] commit adultery, said also, Thou shalt not kill, if then thou commit not adultery, but killest, thou art a transgressor of the Law. Here we have an imperfect syllogism, or a plain Enthymem, and a proposition must needs be understood to make up the Argument, and having one proposition and the conclusion, no man that hath reason can choose but add the propo­sition understood, thus or to this effect, viz. What things were spoken by the same Law­giver, do bind so equally, that though a man keep one of them, and yet break ano­ther, he is a transgressor of that Law given by that Lawgiver. Now these two, thou shalt not commit adultery, and thou shalt not kill, were so spoken: And may not one add to the same proposition, but this, thou shalt sanctify the Sabbath, was so spoken, & so con­clude. Therefore if thou keep all the rest and break this, thou art a transgressor. It is therefore from this place clearly manifest, that the fourth Commandment as well as any other point of the Law is now in force.

There is one Argument that has some shew of weight, which some make use of to overthrow this truth of the perpetuity of the fourth Commandment, viz.

That by our practice we declare our selves now not bound to do the thing re­quired in this Precept, nay that we are [Page 21] bound not to do it; Inasmuch as our Sabbath is not the Seventh, but the Highth from the Creation. To which it may be Answered.

That this Fourth Commandment does not require us to Rest, and Sanctify the Se­venth, from the Creation, nor from any o­ther period of Time, but alone the Seventh Day after Six of Labour, or coming betwixt Six of Labour; in a setled Course of num­bering from any Period that God should ap­point; and so in the meaning of the Com­mandment, we now do, and ever must Rest the Seventh Day: For that is the Seventh in order of numbering, which doth still come betwixt Six, having Six before it, and Six after it continually, & so our Day of Rest hath, and therefore we also Rest the Seventh Day. It is true indeed the Period, from which the Christian Church taketh the beginning of her Account is not the same, but another different from that which was the beginning of the Jewish Account; for they reckoned from the beginning of the Creation, & so for­ward: We from the Resurrection of Christ, and so forward; but ours is as truely and surely the Seventh, as theirs, tho' reckoned from another Period; and as to the Period, from whence the account must be made, we have no word at all of it in this Precept. The Law-giver saith not, Six Days from the [Page 22] Creation thoushalt labour, & the seventh from the Creation is the Sabbath of the Lord, in it thou shalt do no work: but, Six days shalt thou labour: And he faith not afterwards, The Lord blessed and sanctified the seventh day from the Creation, but the Sabbath day, that is the seventh after six of labour Indeed the Lord by a special institution giv­en to Adam, Gen. 2. 1. had for the times before Christ appointed that they should reckon from the Creation, which was the cause of the special institution, but this is no part of the Commandment; and the pe­riod from which we take the beginning of our account hath as Divine and as Special an Institution, as shall appear anon.

II. The denial of the Change of the Sabbath, from the Last to the First day of the Week, un­der the Gospel is a strange Doctrine: And the falshood of this may appear from the fol­lowing particulars.

(1) We have sever ai intimctions of this change of the Day in the Old Testiment. The Jewish Sabbath was the Seventh in order from the Creation, and so the one immediately fol­lowing it was the eighth day in the same order of reckoning; now let us but take no­tice what special regard was had to an eighth day under the legal dispensation, [Page 23] and see what may to our present purpose be deduced from it; and we find Circumoi­sion was to be performed on the eighth day, Gen 17 12. The firstlings of the slocks and berds were to be seven days with the dam, and on the eighth day to be given to God. In cleansing the Leprosy, the person was to carry out of his Tent seven days, and on the eighth day he was to come and offer his gifts according to divine Institution, Lev. 14. 10. So at the feast of In-gathering, on the first day was to be a Sabbath, and on the eighth day a Sabbath, Lev. 23. 39. concern­ing which we may particularly remark both the numbers as holding forth a Sabbath to some, which should be both the first & the eighth day, the first in the weekly account, and the eighth, as following the seventh which was the Jewish Sabbath. But to come to that which is yet more plain, in Numb. 19. 12, to 36. we have the manner of the least of Tabernacles, during seven days and the particular offerings of every day, then in v. 35. we find that the eighth day was a great holiday; now as the offering referred to Christ as the substance, why not this eighth day also? the whole intimating to us, that after the Messiah should offer up Himself once for all, the eighth day, i. e. the day after the seventh which was the Jewish [Page 24] Sabbath, should be the Day whereon should be a solemn Assembly. Again farther, Our blessed Saviour calls himself the Tem­ple, and he was no doubt prefigured by it; now we find in 2 Chron 7. 8. that Solomon kept the feast of dedication seven days, and in ver. 9. On the eighth day they made a solemn assembly; intimating that when Christ, the true Temple, should by his own power be raised up, then the eighth day, i. e. the day after the Jewish seventh, should be obser­ved, and that not only once but continually, as we see in the Ordinance of the new Tem­ple. Ezek. 43. 27. And when these days are expired, it shall be that on the eighth day and so forward, the priests shall make their burnt offer­ings on the altar. Thus also in the restoring of Religion to its primitive purity under the reign of good Hezekiah, the Priests on a first eighth day sanctify the Porch, and on a second eighth day made an end of sancti­fying the Lord's house, 2 Chron. 29. 17. And so Christ the true Temple sanctified himself, and compleatly finished his work on an eighth day, i. e. the day after the Jewish Seventh-Day-Sabbath. But because this may be looked upon as no conclusive way of arguing (tho' for my own part I cannot see what could be held forth or intimated by such a special regard had to the eighth [Page 25] day under the Law, if it had not a look to­wards such a change of the Day) I shall past it, and leave my undigested thoughts to the correction of the learned and judicious.

(2) We have this change of the Day expresly mentioned by the Apostle, in Heb. 4. where we have these things.

[1] Mention is made of the Seventh­Day-Sabbath, together with one reason of its institution, ver. 4. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.

[2] He tells us of another day ( viz. dis­tinct from the seventh day before-mention­ed) that was spoken of, ver. 8.

[3] He more particularly tells us what day that other day is, namely, the Day wherein Christ rested from his Work, which was the first day of the week, whereon by his Resurrection he compleated the Work of Redemption.

[4] He fairly intimates the appointment of this other Day in commemoration of the Son's resting; and that by giving us the like reason for the appointment of this other (or first) Day as there was for the seventh; the reason of God's appointing the seventh day, was his resting from his Works of Creation; and there is a like reason for appointing the first day, which was the day of Christ's [Page 26] Resurrection, namely, the Son of God's resting from his suffering works about man's Redemption, into which rest he is said to enter, and which we are more rearly con­cerned to remember, ver. 10. For he that is entred into his rest, hath ceased from his works, as God did from his. From all which we may argue thus. If God in his word hath spo­ken of another day, besides the seventh day Sabbath, & hath expresly told us what day that is, namely, the Day on which Christ a­rose; and hath given the like reason for observing this day, as he did for that of the seventh day Sabbath; then the Sabbath, by God's own appointment, is changed from the day on which God rested from the work of Creation, to the day on which Christ rested from the work of Redemption, i.e from the Seventh to the First day of the Week. But the former is true, as appears by what hath been already observed from Hebrews, chap. 4. Therefore, &c.

(3) In the New Testament we have one par­ticular Day ascribed to the Lord Christ, as his Day in a peculiar manner beyond other days. Rev. 1. 10. I was in the spirit on the Lord's day. Now there is but one other phrase in the New Testament like this, and it is in 1 Cor. 11. 20. This is not to eat the Lord's Supper: And such as are acquainted with [Page 27] the original, know this phrase to be singular like that of the Lord's-Day: It is called the Lord's Supper, as opposed unto and contradistinguished from that phrase, v. 21. ( his own Supper) which was not set apart from other suppers, and common use, as this was, and these two being by one particular phrase expressed, the one may be easily expounded by the other, viz That some one particular Day is called the Lord's-Day, for the very same reasons for which that particular Sup­per is called the Lord's-Supper, namely, Because the Lord Jesus Christ hath sepa­rated and set apart this Day to his special Service and Worship (therein distinguishing it from other days) for the remembring the work of Redemption, and His Resur­rection till he come; as also to set forth the honour of the Mediator, and that it may be enrolled among the Ordinances of the New Testament; for these Reasons then is a particular Day called the Lords-Day, be­cause it is a special Day, set apart for the Lords use, of special Signification, and for a special End. But now that which remains, is to shew what Day this is, or to prove that this is the First day of the Week; in Order to which, Note, that the day here spoken of, is a special Day, then known to the Church; otherwise John would not have given it such [Page 28] a denomination: It was a Day known sin­gularly to relate to Christ, and pointing at something in Christ; and that it is the First Day of the Week, may be Cleared thus.

It must be either the first Day of the Week, or some other, but it is none other, therefore &c. If it be any other, then it must be sup­posed one of these two, viz. Either not any particular day of the week, but any special time of Christ's appearing or manifesting himself; or else the Jewish Sabbath day; now neither of these can be meant by the Lord's Day.

(1) Not the former: For such a day of Christ's special appearing not being named here, it would leave the Church at the ut­most uncertainty to know what day was hereby intended; whereas the very scope and design of mentioning this Day is to point it out from other days; besides, if it were any such day, it would point at no one day; for there are many times of Christ's appearing; or even thus it would most di­rectly point (it at any) to the first day of the week, as a day (well known to the Church) whereon Christ most frequently after his Resurrection appeared to his Disciples.

(2) Nor the letter, to wit, the Jewish Sab­bach day, as appears,

[Page 29] 1. In that it is ever called the Sabbath, and still retained this name in the New­Testament.

2. Because the Jewish Sabbaths were then annulled, Col 2. 16. and therefore cannot be called the Lord's Day.

3. Because this phrase (the Lord's Day) in the New Testament, looks to Christ as having its name some way from him, which cannot be said of the Jewish Sabbaths: It points at an ordinance of the New Testa­ment, whereas the Jewish Sabbaths had res­pect to Old Testament ordinances. It re­mains therefore that it must be the first day of the week, for no other can lay claim to it; and this will still farther appear if we compare it with Hebrews 4, the practice of the Apostles, and after them of the ancient Fathers.

(1) Compare it with that in Heb. ch. 4. here we have a particular Day, which is peculi­arly called the Lord's Day, and there we are told of another day distinct from the se­venth day spoken of, and clearly mention­ed with a peculiar reference unto Christ, viz. that Day on which he entered into his rest, which was the first day of the week; Now if in one place a day be peculiarly called the Lord's, and in another place we are informed that the first day of the week [Page 30] is a day spoken of as [...] relating to Christ, being the day [...] which he rose, it is hence evident [...] the Lord's Day is that very Day, Namely, the First Day of the Week.

(2) Let us consult the Practise of the Apostles in this matter. And in Joh. 20 19 we read of the Disciples being assembled together on the first day of the week, and that Jesus then came amongst them; and that eight days after they met again, which was another First day, and Jesus came to them, ver. 26. From which time it was set apart for the Lord & His Worship in the practise of the Church. For we find, in Act. 20. 7. Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow, & continued his speech un­til midnight. Which sets forth not only a meeting but an accustom of meeting & that for Preaching, Prayer, and celebration of the Lord's Supper; as appears in that Paul had been with them seven days, as in ver. 6. and yet we read of no solemn meeting but on the first Day of the week, and the last of the seven that he abode with them. It was not on the old Sabbath, the last day of the week, that the solemn Assembly for Worship was held, but the first day, which had it not been the Sabbath of the new ap­pointment, [Page 31] and of [...] essary observation un­to Christians, [...] have been most incon­venient for Paul [...] spent in religious exercises until [...], when the next morning he was to [...] his Journey. Again we find this same [...], 1 Cor. 16. 1. 2. ap­pointing the performance of a Sabbath days duty on the first day of the week; where he says, Now as concerning the collection for the Saints, as I have given order to the Churche; of Galatia, even so do ye: Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store as the Lord hath prospered him. Why does the Apostle give orders from the Lord to the Churches of Galatia and Corinth, & con­sequently to the other Churches of the Gen­tiles, for Collections on the first day of the week as God had prospered them on other days? — Because, on the other days they were allowed to follow their secular employ­ments, but on this day they we e called to honour God with their substance, by acts of Charity, and Alms deeds to the poor, which being a Sabbath days work, plainly intimates that he had also from the Lord given order for the observation of this First Day as the weekly Sabbath. It is alsof ar­ther observable, that though the Saints had meetings on other days, yet it is never said that they did meet on the second, third or [Page 32] fourth days, &c. but [...] first, which [...] is [...] peculiarity in [...] and [...] thereon.

From the [...] hath been said; I shall briefly [...] argument, and pass on to the Fathers.

Arg. If in the Apostle time, this Day was set apart for the Lord's Worship and Service, and in a special manner called His, as being kept to Him on a moral ground, Then we have warrant, and it is our duty to keep it for the same end and use: for, the practice of extraordinary men, ground­ed on moral and perpetual reasons, and such as were not peculiar to them as extraordi­nary, but are common to them and us (as the grounds & reasons of setting apart this day are, it being for the remembrance of His Resurrection, and the bringing in of a New World, and therefore, all did from the beginning; keep that day) are binding to us, as is manitest.

But the First Day of the Week was ap­pointed to be the Lord's-Day in the A­postles times, and singled out and set apart for His Service on a moral ground (for no ground peculiar to them can be given.)

Therefore certainly it must be our duty to keep it.

[Page 33] (3) Let us [...] look into the practice of the Fathers. And there is none of any Note in the ancient Christian, who doth not give an ample Testimony to the observation of the First-Day-Sabbath [...] Lord's-Day. And amongst the renowned witnesses of this Truth, let Ignatius speak, who ( Epist. ad Magnes. an 111.) thus charges us, Let every lover of Christ celebrate the Lord's-Day, which [...] consecrated to the Lord's Resurrection, at the Queen and Prince (i. e. the chief) of all other days. Justin Martyr in the end of his second Apology, says, That on that day which they call Sunday, were holden solemn Assemblies of all that lived both in Villages and Cities. Dionysius Bishop of Corinth, when he mentions Clements Epistle to the Corinthians, (in Euseb. hist. lib. 4. ch. 22.) saith, He kept holy the Lord's Day. Tertullian ( an. 200 deldol. cap. 14.) reckoneth the Lord's Day among the Christian solemnities. Origen ( an. 261. lib 8. contra Celsum) doth the like. When Eusebius (hist. lib. 3. cap. 21.) speaks of the Ebionites, he says, They observed the Lords Day after the same manner as the Church did in remembrance of the Lord's Resurrection. Whence it is plain that the Church did ce­lebrate the Lord's Day. Cyprian ( epist. 59. an. 380.) mentions this Day which he calls the first after the Sabbath. Basili [...] M. (de [Page 34] Spirit Sanct cap. 27) faith, the Church stand­ing up, made their supplications on the first day of the week; which he [...] the beginning of days. Chrysostom ( [...] eleemosyn an. 380.) saith, On the First Day of the Week, or the Lord's Day, the Christians ceased from all La­bour, that by their relaxation, the minds of the offerers might become more chearful. Ambrose (lib. 5. epist. 33) on the Lord's Day, after the readings, and treating of the Creed, commu­nicated Baptism to the Competents, i e to those who being instructed in the Christian Faith, sought Baptism. We meet with frequent mention made of this day, by Augustin, in Exist. 119. cap 1, 3 and in the end of those Books, De civit, Dei. lib 22. cap 30. also Serm. 15 de verb apostoli. & frequently elsewhere) Hilary saith, The Church doth joyfully celebrate a Festival on the eighth day, which also it self is the first of a perfect week. Prol. in psalm. A­mongst the Holy-days confirmed by the Laws of the Emperors, Valens, Theodosius, and Areadius, the Sundays, which their An­cestors rightly called the Lords-Days, were reckoued. Leo also and Athenius ordain, the Lord's Day to be always venerable and honoured. Thus one might go on to mult ply Testi­monies, to confirm this, from every age of the Church, down to this day. But what hath been cited, fully shews, that the Lord's­Day [Page 35] (or first day of the Week)) was always solemnly kept [...] Church; that on it the Church ceased from [...] Labours; on it solemn Assemblies were [...] on it the Scriptures were handled, and the [...] administred; on it the Church made supplications: And that so it hath been from the days of the Apostles: which being added to what was said before may serve [...]or a confutation to this second strange Doctrine. And so I shall proceed to the

III Strange Doctrine, viz To deny the Old Testament ten Commandments, or any part of the sacred Cannon This is so very gross and absurd that the [...] little to be said against it. We [...] Christ himself and his Apostles, frequently quoted Old Testament Texts to prove New Testament Doctrines; and explained and enforced the moral du­ties both to God and man, as they were laid down in the Old Testament, by new Arguments and Motives, and not only tell us that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable, 2 Tim. 3. 16 but denounce a most awful threatning against such as shall either add to, or diminish ought of the sacred Cannon, Rev. 22. 18, 19.

IV. Another strange Doctrine (and that which is the natural offspring of the former, [Page 36] as one Error [...] another) is, To assert the spirit [...], in opposition to the Scriptures [...] guide. This is a Doctrine [...] the spirit to it [...], the Spirit in [...] to the spirit in the heart, and [...] contradicts the Doc­trine of the Apostle Peter himself, who, tho he had both seen with his eyes the glories of a transfigured Christ, and heard with his ears that voice which came from the excel­lent Glory, yet declares the Word to be a more sure Testimony, 2 Pet. 1. 19. Farther we are not allowed to try the Word by any spirit, but we are enjoined to try the Spi­rits by the Word, and if they agree not with this there is no truth in them; and it is only to such as walk according to the rule of the Word that the Apostle hath pronoun­ced Peace, Gal. 6. 16. But this Error is suf­ficiently confuted by that in Mat. 6. 23. If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness? Whence these things are ob­vious to be collected.

(1) That it is possible the light within a man may be darkness; as the light which the Heathens had in them was, who had their understanding darkned, Ephes 4. 18.

(2) That if it be so, it is a miserable darkness. How great is that darkness?

(3) This light within (as being every [Page 37] man's pretence, [...] a false light, and in one contrary [...] must be tried; and then present [...] some cer­tain Rule, by [...] tried, (other­wise we shall never [...] from error and delusion) and [...] can be no other than the infallible Word of God. All that light is darkness which is not lighted at the Lamp of Scripture. So the Prophet ex­presly tells us, Isai. 8 20. If they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them.

V. Strange Doctrine is, To hold a state of sinless Perfection attainable in this life. This is contrary to the daily experience of the most holy men alive, to the positive declarations both of Old & New Testament Saints, and to the express Word of God, which declares, That the righteous man falls seven (i.e. often) times a day; That there is no man liveth and sinneth not; and that, In many things we offend all. It cannot be presumed, that any of these persons (who plead for such a Perfection) will dare to assert themselves more Holy than Paul; and tho' we should for once answer spiritual Fools according to their folly, and allow them to be full as Ho­ly as Paul was, vet this will not amount to such a sinless Perfection; unless they, by their inward light, contrary to Scripture, [Page 38] know what Paul was better than he did himself; for he fully disclaims Perfection, in Phil 312 and plainly declares Perfection to be reserved to a future State 1 Cor. 13. 9, 10, 12.

VI. Strange Doctrine is, To hold total and final apostasy [...] true Grace This is a Doc­trine wholly inconsistent with the nature of Divine Love which is as immutable as God Himself (Joh. 13 1 Whom he loves he loves to the end) It is contrary to the nature of the Covenant of Grace, which is an ever­lasting Covenant, Heb. 13 20. It opposes the Promise of God the Father to Christ. Isai 53 10 He shall see his seed. It destroys the nature and efficacy of Christ's Intercession which is perpetual, Heb 7. 25. It opposes and contradicts the Promise of God the Father, who hath declared, that He will never leave them nor forsake them; but keep them by his Power thro' Faith unto Salvation, Heb. 13 5 1 Pet. 1. 5. It is contrary to the express declaration of God the Son, that none shall pluck them out of his Hand, Joh. 10. 21. It casts the most horrid reflection on the Truth, Power, and Wisdom of God. And it is wholly destructive of the comfort of the Children of God. Nay it is at open wars with the last mentioned Error. What a dreadful delusion must that Creature be [Page 39] under, who looks upon himself, not only in a gracious State, but to have attained to Assurance, yea arrived even at sinless Per­section, and yet, after all, under a possioili­ty of Damnation at jast?

VII. Gtrange Doctrine is, To hold that hu­man learning is not a necessary qualification of a Gospel Minister. This is to be wise above what is written, and is a base reflection on the Infinite Wisdom of God, who hath al­ways accounted it necessary. Where can an instance be given of one person employ­ed by God in this Work, without this qua­lification? If they had it not in an ordinary way, did not God Himself give it in an ex­traordinary way, when he called & sent them Act. 2? And were it not for Human Learn­ing, where would these Persons been to seek for the Scripture? How could they had it in their own Mother's Tongue?

VIII. Strange Doctrine is, For private per­sons to hold it lawful for them to Preach and Administer the Sacraments of the New Testa­ment. I hope these Persons will not dare to deny the necessity of a Call and Com­mission to this Work, and that from God Himself, Rom. 10. 14, 15 Now if their Call be extraordinary, let them give the [Page 40] extraordinary [...] and confirmations of it which [...] have done, that have been [...] if it be an ordi­nary Gall, [...] by what or­dinary regular [...] they have received it, and give a sufficient proof of their other or­dinary qualification for this great and sa­cred Work.