_Answer._ The scribes and pharisees said so, indeed, and that his bed was a burden; but they were very unfit judges, they being ignorant of the right manner of observing the Sabbath, and seeking likewise to take advantage against Christ in his words and actions. Their saying the man's bed was a burden, and that it was unlawful for him to carry it, doth prove no more that was it so, than their saying that the disciples did break the Sabbath in plucking the ears of corn, and Christ in healing the diseased. But was not this a work of mercy, the man having been lame so long in the porch now being cured? Was it not meet that he should be released from the place, and take his bed with him to lay on at night? (for it is likely he had no other.) And who can say that it was a burden? In some countries that which they call a bed is no heavier than a good cloak or coat. But consider what gross wickedness naturally flows from this opinion. The objectors themselves, and all, must acknowledge that the whole law was in force till the death of Christ--the very shadows, till he nailed them to his cross; then the fourth commandment doubtless was in force. Now, to say that Christ broke it, and taught men so, is to say that Christ sinned, and taught men to sin, (for sin is the transgression of the law,) and this roots up redemption by Christ; for if Christ was a sinner, he could not be a Saviour. He had not been a meet offering for the sins of others; he had been a sinner himself. But he was offered up a Lamb without spot, (Heb. 7:26, 1 Peter 1:19,) and was made sin for us, that knew no sin, (2 Cor. 5:2;) and therefore this objection is made so gross, that every sincere heart that sees the tendency of it will not touch it; and indeed I had not mentioned it here, but that many through weakness have taken it up as a sufficient ground to prove the making void of the Sabbath, for want of looking into the bottom of it.