Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heaven_n	earth_n	great_a	work_n	7,005	5	5.2212	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30704	The judgment of Mr. Francis Bampfield late minister of Sherborne in Dorsetshire for the observation of the Jewish, or seventh day Sabboth with his reasons and Scriptures for the same, sent in a letter to Mr. Ben of Dorchester : together with Mr. Ben's sober answer to the same and a vindication of the Christian Sabboth against the Jewish : published for the satisfaction of divers friends in the west of England.	Bampfield, Francis, 1615 or 16-1683.; Benn, William, 1600-1680.	1672 (1672)	Wing B624; ESTC R22838	34,738	95

I have given you the sence wherein I conceive the words are to be understood Thus We must not understand this properly according to the Letter for the infinite glorious divine essence ceaseth no more to work than he ceaseth to be God neither doth he rest as man doth because he is weary Isa 40.28 We are therefore to understand his ceasing to Create from the works of providence ordering and disposing all thing that he hath made he never resteth according to that Joh. 5.17 Having thus given you the sense now I shall give you my Reasons why I conceive that this example of Gods resting is not alledged here to lay an obligation upon the Conscience that the same day wherein he rested which was the last of seven ought to be observed for ever 1. First It seems to me to relate to what God himself did rather then any way propounded as an argument to prove that for which you urge it I will give you a parallel Scripture wherein the Example of the Lord Jesus is thus to be understood 1. Cor. 11.23 We have there the institution of the Lords Supper when and how it was instituted repeated out of the Evangelists and Christs example is related as to the time when that it was not only in the night but in that particular night in which he was betrayed now this is not recorded as a binding rule for our imitation for then night Administrations should not onely of absolute necessity be observed but that particular night in which he was betrayed which is commonly called with us Thursday night which is more then ever I heard that any one practised as a necessary duty I am sure the Apostle Paul did not Acts 20.7 This example of Christ then seems to be historically related and whether the like may not be said of Gods example in the Commandment let it be considered But 2. Secondly though Gods exemple be historically related yet it must be acknowledged to be related for some special end and purpose As the example of Christ in the forementioned Scripture was without all doubt mentioned upon the highest ground of reason which to speak of here though it might be of good use yet it would be a digression from the matter in hand And the special end and purpose why Gods example is here related seems to be this even to shew that what is required in the Commandment is equal and reasonable and for mans good The holy Laws of God are often called Judgments as for other Reasons so specially I think for this to shew that God requires nothing but what is just and equal Thus God reasons the case with those Ezek. 18 25. Hear ye me O house of Israel are not my waies equal and therefore certainly the sence of the Argument from Gods example which doth best shew the equity of the Commandment and to be for the good of those that observe it is the best and truest sence Now to argue that because God wrought the six first days of seven and then rested the last of seven this carries no convincing reason with it that therefore we ought first to work six days of the week and then to rest the last day of the week and to keep it holy to the Lord. Reason right Reason if that alone were to judge would rather judge it fit to keep the first of seven holy to the Lord and seeing by Divine allowance we have six for one take the six last to our selves In reason we may hope that the work on Earth will speed best when our work for Heaven is done first But now to argue from Gods example that it bindeth neither to the first of seven nor to the last of seven but to one of seven carries very great reason in it For if the great God who needs not one moment either for rest or for work who never fainteth who never is weary wrought six days and rested one how much more should poor frail man hold that proportion who by reason both of bodily weakness and spiritual wants needs such a competency of time both for his worldly imployment and Soul refreshments and thus much you say your self hath been already noted Thus you have my reason why I conceive there is nothing in Gods example that affords any help to afford your Proposition 3. Thirdly I find as little in Gods blessing and sanctifying the Sabbath-day for that which you alledge it 1. First To give the sence he sanctified it i. e. separated it from common use to be filled up with such duties as he appoints and then blessed it i. e. appointed it to be a day of blessing A day naturally considered is capable of no other blessing but only to be a means of blessing according to Divine appointment but his blessing and sanctifying it secures the blessing to the right observers of it Now for my reason why herein I dissent from you 't is this He blessed and sanctified it but not as it was the last day of seven but as it was the day of his Rest declaring thereby Creation-work to be perfected Neither was his resting so far as I can see the ground of his blessing and sanctifying it but as considered in conjunction with the reason of his Rest his finishing the Creation and also with the result and consequence of his Rest viz. his magnifying and honouring that day for the time being above all other dayes for the greatest work then in being Whether this blessing be applicable to no other day but this as you say it is not in the third Branch of the first Reason for the confirming your Proposition shall be considered of when it comes to be spoken to in order as it stands in your Paper and I hope to make the contrary to appear at least it appears so to me 4. Fourthly To mention it once again though it was hinted before in the very conclusion of the Commandment vers 11. though the last of seven is mentioned in the same verse in the words immediately foregoing it is not said I mean in that place that he blessed and sanctified the seventh day though it be said that he did bless it Gen. 2. in the sence that is given above but he blessed and sanctified the Sabbath day What should be the reason of the suddain change of the expression I conceive it may be this and I think it may not be unworthy of your serious consideration it may be this I say Because the Command for the Sabbath-day was to be of a larger extent than the last day of seven I cannot but think that if God had intended to bind his Church in all ages to the end of the world to the last day of seven as you conceive he hath done he would have fixed upon that day in the conclusion of the Commandment Thus Sir I have given you my reasons why I dissent from you in that sence which you give of the Commandment in your Proposition And why I

because as I said your Paper gives me no occasion to say any thing of it However this I must say for the proof of what hath been said I cannot but assert this that it is an Article of my Faith that the Lord Jesus rose again the third day 1 Cor. 15.4 Luk. 32. Mat. 16.21 and that as certain it is that the first day of the week after his Passion week is and was the third day after his Passion the Lord of Life laid down his life and was obedient unto death the sixth day of the foregoing week which with us is called Friday lay in the Grave the remaining part of that day that night and all the seventh day when the old Sabbath I think was buried with him and then that night and arose early the next morning which was the first day of the week after his Passion so that his blessed body continued in the Grave two whole nights one whole day and some part of the two other dayes the sixth and the first of the week following in all about thirty six hours And this was accounted three dayes and three nights according to the allowed Dialect of that Nation as one of the most learned in the Jewish Antiquities I think this Nation affordeth by several instances makes good And indeed there seems to be something in the Scripture for it Esthers Fast was for three days and three nights yet on the third day after her Feast began she presents her self before the King and invites him to a Banquet Est 5.1 This then is evident the Resurrection of Christ notwithstanding any thing that I think can be said against the Translation was upon the first day of the week besides what hath been said already the Scripture is express for it Luk. 24.13 The same day i. e. the day of Christs Resurrection the two disciples were travelling to Emaus and vers 21. they say this day was the third day thus the Resurrection of Christ being upon the first day of the week though to speak properly it was not so much the ground as the occasion of the choice of the day because then it was manifested that the price of our Redemption was both paid and accepted the day of Christs Passion could not give the like occasion because though the price was paid the Surety was not discharged the Grave was a part of his humiliation he was not raised from all the sorrows of death till he was raised from the Grave Acts 2.24 And as the day of Christs Passion could not for this cause give this occasion for the change of the day so neither could the day of his Ascension On that day indeed he entred into the place of Rest to sit down on the right hand of the Father but it was on the day of his Resurrection that he entred into the state of Rest and this day as I said on the first day of the week gives as fair and strong a ground for fixing of the day of holy Rest on the first day of seven as Gods resting from the work of the Creation did for fixing it at first upon the last of seven If it be said by this means we blot out the memory of the Creation which ought not to be done Is is true it ought not to be done that marvelous great work comes within the compass of that Text Psalm 111.4 which ought to be had in remembrance and the serious consideration of it is a great relief in difficult cases for what cannot he do that made Heaven and Earth of nothing Thus they reason their hearts into a believing frame Psalm 124. ult that their hope and their help did stand in the name of the Lord that made Heaven and Earth we ought therefore as Elihu saith to magnifie God in his works which men behold Joh. 36.24 25. Only the work of Redemption ought more especially to be remembred as the more glorious and indeed the most glorious work as therefore the work of Creation ought not to be forgotten so the change of the day gives no cause for it for as the first day of seven preserveth the memory of our Redemption so one of seven preserveth the memory of our Creation only preeminence is given to the work of our Redemption But it will still be enquired where is the word of Institution I Answer 't is acknowledged that as I said before I find no express word for the Institution of the last day of seven so we have no express word in so many letters and words or syllables for the Institution of the first day of seven but we have several particulars which not taken apart but laid altogether will clearly and I think undeniably imply it and which was observed in the fourth Proposition which way soever God speaks his minde to us we ought not to despise him that speaks from Heaven Now among all these particulars I desire these may be in all sobriety and seriousness taken into consideration 1. The first is this which I think none will deny that Jesus Christ the Mediator had power to change the day I do not I dare not say that he hah power to change the moral substance of the Commandment for it was not in his Commission He came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil it not to change the day from one of seven but that he had power to change from one day of seven to another day that Text which you quote three several times sufficiently proves it He is Lord of the Sabbath i. e. of the day and might do with his own what he pleaseth even as he was Lord of the Vineyard and might let it out to what Husbandmen he pleased Matth. 21. and that which we read John 5. carries a probable appearance that even then he began to manifest that he had a purpose to change the day for there we read that having healed the poor diseased man who had been bedrid for thirty eight years together he bids him take up his bed and walk but why did he so this was expresly against the letter of the Law there was no necessity of it for the evidencing of the Miracle that might have been done by his leaping and walking and the like was Acts 3. and Acts 14. he might have gone home and come again for his bed the next day Why then might it not be to shew that he had power and authority over that day equal to what he had over the desease To this purpose it is worthy our observation that all along in that chapter he justifies his Acts against the cavilling Jews by asserting his power as may be seen verse 17. to the end of verse 22. As it appears by this that he had power to change the day what if it should be said that he did according to his power actually change the day though when and how it be not recorded Let the fifth Proposition be consulted for this there it appears that there was word for