HISTORY
OF
THE SABBATH
AND
FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK.
BY J. N. ANDREWS.
SECOND EDITION—ENLARGED.
STEAM PRESS
OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION,
BATTLE CREEK, MICH.:
1873.
PREFACE.
The history of the Sabbath embraces the period of 6000 years. The seventh
day is the Sabbath of the Lord. The acts which constituted it such were,
first, the example of the Creator; secondly, his placing his blessing
upon the day; and thirdly, the sanctification or divine appointment of
the day to a holy use. The Sabbath, therefore, dates from the beginning
of our world’s history. The first who Sabbatized on the seventh day is
God the Creator; and the first seventh day of time is the day which he
thus honored. The highest of all possible honors does, therefore, pertain
to the seventh day. Nor is this honor confined to the first seventh day
of time; for so soon as God had rested upon that day, he appointed the
seventh day to a holy use, that man might hallow it in memory of his
Creator.
This divine appointment grows out of the nature and fitness of things,
and must have been made directly to Adam, for himself and wife were then
the only beings who had the days of the week to use. As it was addressed
to Adam while yet in his uprightness, it must have been given to him
as the head of the human family. The fourth commandment bases all its
authority upon this original mandate of the Creator, and must, therefore,
be in substance what God commanded to Adam and Eve as the representatives
of mankind.
The patriarchs could not possibly have been ignorant of the facts and the
obligation which the fourth commandment shows to have originated in the
beginning, for Adam was present with them for a period equal to more than
half the Christian dispensation. Those, therefore, who walked with God in
the observance of his commandments did certainly hallow his Sabbath.
The observers of the seventh day must therefore include the ancient
godly patriarchs, and none will deny that they include also the prophets
and the apostles. Indeed, the entire church of God embraced within the
records of inspiration were Sabbath-keepers. To this number must be added
the Son of God.
What a history, therefore, has the Sabbath of the Lord! It was instituted
in Paradise, honored by several miracles each week for the space of forty
years, proclaimed by the great Law-giver from Sinai, observed by the
Creator, the patriarchs, the prophets, the apostles, and the Son of God!
It constitutes the very heart of the law of God, and so long as that law
endures, so long shall the authority of this sacred institution stand
fast.
Such being the record of the seventh day, it may well be asked, How came
it to pass that this day has been abased to the dust, and another day
elevated to its sacred honors? The Scriptures nowhere attribute this work
to the Son of God. They do, however, predict the great apostasy in the
Christian church, and that the little horn, or man of sin, the lawless
one, should think to change times and laws.
It is the object of the present volume to show, 1. The Bible record of
the Sabbath; 2. The record of the Sabbath in secular history; 3. The
record of the Sunday festival, and of the several steps by which it has
usurped the place of the ancient Sabbath.
The writer has attempted to ascertain the exact truth in the case by
consulting the original authorities as far as it has been possible to
gain access to them. The margin will show to whom he is mainly indebted
for the facts presented in this work, though it indicates only a very
small part of the works consulted. He has given the exact words of the
historians, and has endeavored, conscientiously, to present them in such
a light as to do justice to the authors quoted.
It is not the fault of the writer that the history of the Sunday festival
presents such an array of frauds and of iniquities in its support. These
are, in the nature of the case, essential to its very existence, for the
claim of a usurper is necessarily based in fraud. The responsibility for
these rests with those who dare commit or uphold such acts. The ancient
Sabbath of the Lord has never needed help of this kind, and never has its
record been stained by fraud or falsehood.
J. N. A.
_Battle Creek, Mich., Nov. 14, 1873._
CONTENTS
PART I.—BIBLE HISTORY.
PAGES.
CHAPTER I.
THE CREATION, 9-13
CHAPTER II.
THE INSTITUTION OF THE SABBATH, 13-32
CHAPTER III.
THE SABBATH COMMITTED TO THE HEBREWS, 33-44
CHAPTER IV.
THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT, 44-50
CHAPTER V.
THE SABBATH WRITTEN BY THE FINGER OF GOD, 51-64
CHAPTER VI.
THE SABBATH DURING THE DAY OF TEMPTATION, 64-82
CHAPTER VII.
THE FEASTS, NEW MOONS, AND SABBATHS, OF THE HEBREWS, 82-92
CHAPTER VIII.
THE SABBATH FROM DAVID TO NEHEMIAH, 92-109
CHAPTER IX.
THE SABBATH FROM NEHEMIAH TO CHRIST, 109-114
CHAPTER X.
THE SABBATH DURING THE LAST OF THE SEVENTY WEEKS, 115-157
CHAPTER XI.
THE SABBATH DURING THE MINISTRY OF THE APOSTLES, 158-192
PART II.—SECULAR HISTORY.
CHAPTER XII.
EARLY APOSTASY IN THE CHURCH, 193-203
CHAPTER XIII.
THE SUNDAY-LORD’S DAY NOT TRACEABLE TO THE APOSTLES, 204-228
CHAPTER XIV.
THE FIRST WITNESSES FOR SUNDAY, 228-243
CHAPTER XV.
EXAMINATION OF A FAMOUS FALSEHOOD, 243-258
CHAPTER XVI.
ORIGIN OF FIRST-DAY OBSERVANCE, 258-281
CHAPTER XVII.
THE NATURE OF EARLY FIRST-DAY OBSERVANCE, 282-308
CHAPTER XVIII.
THE SABBATH IN THE RECORD OF THE EARLY FATHERS, 308-331
CHAPTER XIX.
THE SABBATH AND FIRST DAY DURING THE FIRST FIVE CENTURIES, 332-368
CHAPTER XX.
SUNDAY DURING THE DARK AGES, 368-398
CHAPTER XXI.
TRACES OF THE SABBATH DURING THE DARK AGES, 398-432
CHAPTER XXII.
POSITION OF THE REFORMERS CONCERNING THE SABBATH AND FIRST DAY, 432-446
CHAPTER XXIII.
LUTHER AND CARLSTADT, 446-459
CHAPTER XXIV.
SABBATH-KEEPERS IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY, 459-470
CHAPTER XXV.
HOW AND WHEN SUNDAY APPROPRIATED THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT, 470-479
CHAPTER XXVI.
ENGLISH SABBATH-KEEPERS, 479-492
CHAPTER XXVII.
THE SABBATH IN AMERICA, 493-512
HISTORY OF THE SABBATH.
PART I—BIBLE HISTORY.
CHAPTER I.
THE CREATION.
Time and eternity—The Creator and his work—Events of the first
day of time—Of the second—Of the third—Of the fourth—Of the
fifth—Of the sixth.
Time, as distinguished from eternity, may be defined as that part of
duration which is measured by the Bible. From the earliest date in the
book of Genesis to the resurrection of the unjust at the end of the
millennium, the period of about 7000 years is measured off.[1] Before the
commencement of this great week of time, duration without beginning fills
the past; and at the expiration of this period, unending duration opens
before the people of God. Eternity is that word which embraces duration
without beginning and without end. And that Being whose existence
comprehends eternity, is he who only hath immortality, the King eternal,
immortal, invisible, the only wise God.[2]
When it pleased this infinite Being, he gave existence to our earth. Out
of nothing God created all things;[3] “so that things which are seen
were not made of things which do appear.” This act of creation is that
event which marks the commencement of the first week of time. He who
could accomplish the whole work with one word chose rather to employ six
days, and to accomplish the result by successive steps. Let us trace the
footsteps of the Creator from the time when he laid the foundation of the
earth until the close of the sixth day, when the heavens and the earth
were finished, “and God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it
was very good.”[4]
On the first day of time God created the heaven and the earth. The earth
thus called into existence was without form, and void; and total darkness
covered the Creator’s work. Then “God said, Let there be light; and there
was light.” “And God divided the light from the darkness,” and called the
one day, and the other night.[5]
On the second day of time “God said, Let there be a firmament [margin,
Heb., expansion] in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters
from the waters.” The dry land had not yet appeared; consequently the
earth was covered with water. As no atmosphere existed, thick vapors
rested upon the face of the water; but the atmosphere being now called
into existence by the word of the Creator, causing those elements
to unite which compose the air we breathe, the fogs and vapors that
had rested upon the bosom of the water were borne aloft by it. This
atmosphere or expansion is called heaven.[6]
On the third day of time God gathered the waters together and caused the
dry land to appear. The gathering together of the waters God called seas;
the dry land, thus rescued from the waters, he called earth. “And God
said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the
fruit-tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon
the earth: and it was so.” “And God saw that it was good.”[7]
On the fourth day of time “God said, Let there be lights in the firmament
of the heaven, to divide the day from the night; and let them be for
signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years.” “And God made two great
lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule
the night; he made the stars also.” Light had been created on the first
day of the week; and now on the fourth day he causes the sun and moon
to appear as light-bearers, and places the light under their rule. And
they continue unto this day according to his ordinances, for all are his
servants. Such was the work of the fourth day. And the Great Architect,
surveying what he had wrought, pronounced it good.[8]
On the fifth day of time “God created great whales, and every living
creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after
their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was
good.”[9]
On the sixth day of time “God made the beast of the earth after his
kind, and cattle after their kind, and everything that creepeth upon the
earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.” Thus the earth,
having been fitted for the purpose, was filled with every order of
living creature, while the air and waters teemed with animal existence.
To complete this noble work of creation, God next provides a ruler, the
representative of himself, and places all in subjection under him. “And
God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them
have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and
over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing
that creepeth upon the earth.” “And the Lord God formed man of the dust
of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and
man became a living soul. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in
Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground
made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and
good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the
tree of knowledge of good and evil.” Last of all, God created Eve, the
mother of all living. The work of the Creator was now complete. “The
heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.” “And God
saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.” Adam and
Eve were in paradise; the tree of life bloomed on earth; sin had not
entered our world, and death was not here, for there was no sin. “The
morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy.”
Thus ended the sixth day.[10]
CHAPTER II.
THE INSTITUTION OF THE SABBATH.
Event on the seventh day—Why the Creator rested—Acts by which
the Sabbath was made—Time and order of their occurrence—Meaning
of the word _sanctified_—The fourth commandment refers the
origin of the Sabbath to creation—The second mention of the
Sabbath confirms this fact—The Saviour’s testimony—When did
God sanctify the seventh day—Object of the Author of the
Sabbath—Testimony of Josephus and of Philo—Negative argument
from the book of Genesis considered—Adam’s knowledge of the
Sabbath not difficult to be known by the patriarchs.
The work of the Creator was finished, but the first week of time was
not yet completed. Each of the six days had been distinguished by the
Creators work upon it; but the seventh was rendered memorable in a very
different manner. “And on the seventh[11] day God ended his work which
he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he
had made.” In yet stronger language it is written: “On the seventh day he
rested, and was REFRESHED.”[12]
Thus the seventh day of the week became the rest-day of the Lord. How
remarkable is this fact! “The everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of
the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary.”[13] He needed
no rest; yet it is written, “On the seventh day he rested, and was
refreshed.” Why does not the record simply state the cessation of the
Creator’s work? Why did he at the close of that work employ a day in
rest? The answer will be learned from the next verse. He was laying the
foundation of a divine institution, the memorial of his own great work.
“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.” The fourth
commandment states the same fact: He “rested the seventh day; _wherefore_
the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.”[14]
The blessing and sanctification of the seventh day were because that God
had rested upon it. His resting upon it, then, was to lay the foundation
for blessing and sanctifying the day. His being refreshed with this rest,
implies that he delighted in the act which laid the foundation for the
memorial of his great work.
The second act of the Creator in instituting this memorial was to place
his blessing upon the day of his rest. Thenceforward it was the blessed
rest-day of the Lord. A third act completes the sacred institution. The
day already blessed of God is now, last of all, sanctified or hallowed
by him. To sanctify is “to separate, set apart, or appoint to a holy,
sacred, or religious use.” To hallow is “to make holy; to consecrate; to
set apart for a holy or religious use.”[15]
The time when these three acts were performed is worthy of especial
notice. The first act was that of rest. This took place on the seventh
day; for the day was employed in rest. The second and third acts took
place when the seventh day was past. “God blessed the seventh day, and
sanctified it: because that in it he _had_ rested from all his work.”
Hence it was on the first day of the second week of time that God
blessed the seventh day, and set it apart to a holy use. The blessing and
sanctification of the seventh day, therefore, relate not to the first
seventh day of time, but to the seventh day of the week for time to come,
in memory of God’s rest on that day from the work of creation.
With the beginning of time, God began to count days, giving to each an
ordinal number for its _name_. Seven _different_ days receive as many
different _names_. In memory of that which he did on the last of these
days, he sets that day apart by _name_ to a holy use. This act gave
existence to weeks, or periods of seven days. For with the seventh day,
he ceased to count, and, by the divine appointment of that day to a holy
use in memory of his rest thereon, he causes man to begin the count of a
new week so soon as the first seventh day had ceased. And as God has been
pleased to give man, _in all_, but _seven_ different days, and has given
to each one of these days a name which indicates its exact place in the
week, his act of setting apart one of these by name, which act created
weeks and gave man the Sabbath, can never—except by sophistry—be made to
relate to an indefinite or uncertain day.
The days of the week are measured off by the revolution of _our earth_ on
its axis; and hence our seventh day, as such, can come only to dwellers
on this globe. To Adam and Eve, therefore, as inhabitants of this earth,
and not to the inhabitants of some other world, were the days of the week
given to use. Hence, when God set apart one of these days to a holy use
in memory of his own rest on that day of the week, the very essence of
the act consisted in his telling Adam that this day should be used only
for sacred purposes. Adam was then in the garden of God, placed there by
the Creator to dress it and to keep it. He was also commissioned of God
to subdue the earth.[16] When therefore the rest-day of the Lord should
return, from week to week, all this secular employment, however proper
in itself, must be laid aside, and the day observed in memory of the
Creator’s rest.
Dr. Twisse quotes Martin Luther thus:
“And Martin Luther professeth as much (tome vi. in Gen. 2:3).
‘It follows from hence,’ saith he, ‘that, if Adam had stood in
his innocency, yet he should have kept the seventh day holy,
that is, on that day he should have taught his children, and
children’s children, what was the will of God, and wherein his
worship did consist; he should have praised God, given thanks,
and offered. On other days he should have tilled his ground,
looked to his cattle.’”[17]
The Hebrew verb, _kadash_, here rendered _sanctified_, and in the fourth
commandment rendered _hallowed_, is defined by Gesenius, “To pronounce
holy, to sanctify; to institute any holy thing, to appoint.”[18] It
is repeatedly used in the Old Testament for a public appointment or
proclamation. Thus, when the cities of refuge were set apart in Israel,
it is written: “They appointed [margin, Heb., sanctified] Kedesh in
Galilee in Mount Naphtali, and Shechem in Mount Ephraim,” &c. This
sanctification or appointment of the cities of refuge was by a public
announcement to Israel that these cities were set apart for that
purpose. This verb is also used for the appointment of a public fast,
and for the gathering of a solemn assembly. Thus it is written: “Sanctify
[_i. e._, appoint] ye a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the elders
and all the inhabitants of the land into the house of the Lord your God.”
“Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify [_i. e._, appoint] a fast, call a
solemn assembly.” “And Jehu said, Proclaim [margin, Heb., sanctify] a
solemn assembly for Baal.”[19] This appointment for Baal was so public
that all the worshipers of Baal in all Israel were gathered together.
These fasts and solemn assemblies were sanctified or set apart by a
public appointment or proclamation of the fact. When therefore God set
apart the seventh day to a holy use, it was necessary that he should
state that fact to those who had the days of the week to use. Without
such announcement the day could not be set apart from the others.
But the most striking illustration of the meaning of this word may be
found in the record of the sanctification of Mount Sinai.[20] When God
was about to speak the ten commandments in the hearing of all Israel, he
sent Moses down from the top of Mount Sinai to restrain the people from
touching the mount. “And Moses said unto the Lord, The people cannot
come up to Mount Sinai; for thou chargedst us, saying, Set bounds about
the mount, and _sanctify it_.” Turning back to the verse where God gave
this charge to Moses, we read: “And thou shalt set bounds unto the people
round about, _saying_, Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up into
the mount or touch the border of it.” Hence to sanctify the mount was to
command the people not to touch even the border of it; for God was about
to descend in majesty upon it. In other words, to sanctify or set apart
to a holy use Mount Sinai, was to tell the people that God would have
them treat the mountain as sacred to himself. And thus also to sanctify
the rest-day of the Lord was to tell Adam that he should treat the day as
holy to the Lord.
The declaration, “God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it,” is not
indeed a commandment for the observance of that day; but it is the record
that such a precept was given to Adam.[21] For how could the Creator “set
apart to a holy use” the day of his rest, when those who were to use the
day knew nothing of his will in the case? Let those answer who are able.
This view of the record in Genesis we shall find to be sustained by all
the testimony in the Bible relative to the rest-day of the Lord. The
facts which we have examined are the basis of the fourth commandment.
Thus spake the great Law-giver from the summit of the flaming mount:
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” “The seventh day is the
Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” “For in six days the Lord made heaven and
earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day:
wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.”[22]
The term Sabbath is transferred from the Hebrew language, and signifies
rest.[23] The command, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,” is
therefore exactly equivalent to saying, “Remember the rest-day, to keep
it holy.” The explanation which follows sustains this statement: “The
seventh day is the Sabbath [or rest-day] of the Lord thy God.” The origin
of this rest-day is given in these words: “For in six days the Lord
made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the
seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed
it.” That which is enjoined in the fourth commandment is to keep holy
the rest-day of the Lord. And this is defined to be the day on which
he rested from the work of creation. Moreover, the fourth commandment
calls the seventh day the Sabbath day at the time when God blessed and
hallowed that day; therefore the Sabbath is an institution dating from
the foundation of the world. The fourth commandment points back to the
creation for the origin of its obligation; and when we go back to that
point, we find the substance of the fourth commandment given to Adam:
“God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it;” _i. e._, set it apart to
a holy use. And in the commandment itself, the same fact is stated: “The
Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it;” _i. e._, appointed it to
a holy use. The one statement affirms that “God blessed the seventh day,
and sanctified it;” the other, that “the Lord blessed the Sabbath day,
and hallowed it.” These two statements refer to the same acts. Because
the word Sabbath does not occur in the first statement, it has been
contended that the Sabbath did not originate at creation, it being the
seventh day merely which was hallowed. From the second statement, it has
been contended that God did not bless the seventh day at all, but simply
the Sabbath institution. But both statements embody all the truth. God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; and this day thus blessed and
hallowed was his holy Sabbath, or rest-day. Thus the fourth commandment
establishes the origin of the Sabbath at creation.
The second mention of the Sabbath in the Bible furnishes a decisive
confirmation of the testimonies already adduced. On the sixth day of the
week, Moses, in the wilderness of Sin, said to Israel, “To-morrow is
the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.”[24] What had been done to
the seventh day since God blessed and sanctified it as his rest-day in
paradise? Nothing. What did Moses do to the seventh day to make it the
rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord? Nothing. Moses on the sixth day
simply states the fact that the morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath
unto the Lord. The seventh day had been such ever since God blessed and
hallowed the day of his rest.
The testimony of our divine Lord relative to the origin and design of the
Sabbath is of peculiar importance. He is competent to testify, for he
was with the Father in the beginning of the creation.[25] “The Sabbath
was made for man,” said he, “not man for the Sabbath.”[26] The following
grammatical rule is worthy of notice: “A noun without an adjective is
invariably taken in its broadest extension, as: Man is accountable.”[27]
The following texts will illustrate this rule, and also this statement of
our Lord’s: “Man lieth down and riseth not: till the heavens be no more,
they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.” “There hath no
temptation taken you but such as is common to man.” “It is appointed unto
men once to die.”[28] In these texts man is used without restriction,
and, therefore, all mankind are necessarily intended. The Sabbath was
therefore made for the whole human family, and consequently originated
with mankind. But the Saviour’s language is even yet more emphatic in
the original: “The Sabbath was made for THE man, not THE man for the
Sabbath.” This language fixes the mind on the man Adam, who was made of
the dust of the ground just before the Sabbath was made for him, of the
seventh day.
This is a striking confirmation of the fact already pointed out that the
Sabbath was given to Adam, the head of the human family.
“The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; yet he made the
Sabbath for man. God made the Sabbath his by solemn appropriation, that
he might convey it back to us under the guarantee of a divine charter,
that none might rob us of it with impunity.”
But is it not possible that God’s act of blessing and sanctifying the
seventh day did not occur at the close of the creation week? May it
not be mentioned then because God designed that the day of his rest
should be afterward observed? Or rather, as Moses wrote the book of
Genesis long after the creation, might he not insert this account of the
sanctification of the seventh day with the record of the first week,
though the day itself was sanctified in his own time?
It is very certain that such an interpretation of the record cannot be
admitted, unless the facts in the case demand it. For it is, to say the
least, a forced explanation of the language. The record in Genesis,
unless this be an exception, is a plain narrative of events. Thus what
God did on each day is recorded in its order down to the seventh. It
is certainly doing violence to the narrative to affirm that the record
respecting the seventh day is of a different character from that
respecting the other six. He rested the seventh day; he sanctified the
seventh day because he had rested upon it. The reason why he should
sanctify the seventh day existed when his rest was closed. To say,
therefore, that God did not sanctify the day at that time, but did it in
the days of Moses, is not only to distort the narrative, but to affirm
that he neglected to do that for which the reason existed at creation,
until twenty-five hundred years after.[29]
But we ask that the facts be brought forward which prove that the Sabbath
was sanctified in the wilderness of Sin, and not at creation. And what
are the facts that show this? It is confessed that such facts are not
upon record. Their existence is assumed in order to sustain the theory
that the Sabbath originated at the fall of the manna, and not in paradise.
Did God sanctify the Sabbath in the wilderness of Sin? There is no
intimation of such fact. On the contrary, it is mentioned at that time
as something already set apart of God. On the sixth day Moses said,
“To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.”[30] Surely
this is not the act of instituting the Sabbath, but the familiar mention
of an existing fact. We pass on to Mount Sinai. Did God sanctify the
Sabbath when he spoke the ten commandments? No one claims that he did.
It is admitted by all that Moses spoke of it familiarly the previous
month.[31] Does the Lord at Sinai speak of the sanctification of the
Sabbath? He does; but in the very language of Genesis he goes back for
the sanctification of the Sabbath, not to the wilderness of Sin, but
to the creation of the world.[32] We ask those who hold the theory
under examination, this question: If the Sabbath was not sanctified at
creation, but was sanctified in the wilderness of Sin, why does the
narrative in each instance[33] record the sanctification of the Sabbath
at creation and omit all mention of such fact in the wilderness of Sin?
Nay, why does the record of events in the wilderness of Sin show that the
holy Sabbath was at that time already in existence? In a word, How can a
theory subversive of all the facts in the record, be maintained as the
truth of God?
We have seen the Sabbath ordained of God at the close of the creation
week. The object of its Author is worthy of especial attention. Why
did the Creator set up this memorial in paradise? Why did he set apart
from the other days of the week that day which he had employed in rest?
“Because that in it,” says the record, “he had rested from all his
work which God created and made.” A _rest_ necessarily implies a _work
performed_. And hence the Sabbath was ordained of God as a memorial
of the work of creation. And therefore that precept of the moral law
which relates to this memorial, unlike every other precept of that law,
begins with the word, “Remember.” The importance of this memorial will
be appreciated when we learn from the Scriptures that it is the work of
creation which is claimed by its Author as the great evidence of his
eternal power and Godhead, and as that great fact which distinguishes him
from all false gods. Thus it is written:
“He that built all things is God.” “The gods that have not
made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from
the earth, and from under these heavens.” “But the Lord is
the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting King.”
“He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the
world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his
discretion.” “For the invisible things of him from the creation
of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things
that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead.” “For he
spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.” Thus
“the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things
which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”[34]
Such is the estimate which the Scriptures place upon the work of creation
as evincing the eternal power and Godhead of the Creator. The Sabbath
stands as the memorial of this great work. Its observance is an act of
grateful acknowledgment on the part of his intelligent creatures that he
is their Creator, and that they owe all to him; and that for his pleasure
they are and were created. How appropriate this observance for Adam! And
when man had fallen, how important for his well-being that he should
“remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” He would thus have been
preserved from atheism and from idolatry; for he could never forget that
there was a God from whom all things derived their being; nor could he
worship as God any other being than the Creator.
The seventh day, as hallowed by God in Eden, was not Jewish, but divine;
it was not the memorial of the flight of Israel from Egypt, but of
the Creator’s rest. Nor is it true that the most distinguished Jewish
writers deny the primeval origin of the Sabbath, or claim it as a Jewish
memorial We cite the historian Josephus and his learned cotemporary,
Philo Judæus. Josephus, whose “Antiquities of the Jews” run parallel with
the Bible from the beginning, when treating of the wilderness of Sin,
makes no allusion whatever to the Sabbath, a clear proof that he had no
idea that it originated in that wilderness. But when giving the account
of creation, he bears the following testimony:
“Moses says that in just six days the world and all that is
therein was made. And that the seventh day was a rest and a
release from the labor of such operations; WHENCE it is that we
celebrate a rest from our labor on that day, and call it the
Sabbath; which word denotes rest in the Hebrew tongue.”[35]
And Philo bears an emphatic testimony relative to the character of the
Sabbath as a memorial. Thus he says:
“But after the whole world had been completed according to the
perfect nature of the number six, the Father hallowed the day
following, the seventh, praising it and calling it holy. For
that day is the festival, not of one city or one country, but
of all the earth; a day which alone it is right to call the day
of festival for all people, and the birth-day of the world.”[36]
Nor was the rest-day of the Lord a shadow of man’s rest after his
recovery from the fall. God will ever be worshiped in an understanding
manner by his intelligent creatures. When therefore he set apart his
rest-day to a holy use, if it was not as a memorial of his work, but
as a shadow of man’s redemption from the fall, the real design of the
institution must have been stated, and, as a consequence, man in his
unfallen state could never observe the Sabbath as a delight, but ever
with deep distress, as reminding him that he was soon to apostatize from
God. Nor was the holy of the Lord and honorable, one of the “carnal
ordinances imposed on them until the time of reformation;”[37] for there
could be no reformation with unfallen beings.
But man did not continue in his uprightness. Paradise was lost, and Adam
was excluded from the tree of life. The curse of God fell upon the earth,
and death entered by sin, and passed upon all men.[38] After this sad
apostasy, no further mention of the Sabbath occurs until Moses on the
sixth day said, “To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.”
It is objected that there is no precept in the book of Genesis for the
observance of the Sabbath, and consequently no obligation on the part
of the patriarchs to observe it. There is a defect in this argument not
noticed by those who use it. The book of Genesis was not a rule given
to the patriarchs to walk by. On the contrary, it was written by Moses
2500 years after creation, and long after the patriarchs were dead.
Consequently the fact that certain precepts were not found in Genesis
is no evidence that they were not obligatory upon the patriarchs. Thus
the book does not command men to love God with all their hearts, and
their neighbors as themselves; nor does it prohibit idolatry, blasphemy,
disobedience to parents, adultery, theft, false witness or covetousness.
Who will affirm from this that the patriarchs were under no restraint
in these things? As a mere record of events, written long after their
occurrence, it was not necessary that the book should contain a moral
code. But had the book been given to the patriarchs as a rule of life,
it must of necessity have contained such a code. It is a fact worthy of
especial notice that as soon as Moses reaches his own time in the book of
Exodus, the whole moral law is given. The record and the people were then
cotemporary, and ever afterward the written law is in the hands of God’s
people, as a rule of life, and a complete code of moral precepts.
The argument under consideration is unsound, 1. Because based upon
the supposition that the book of Genesis was the rule of life for the
patriarchs; 2. Because if carried out it would release the patriarchs
from every precept of the moral law except the sixth.[39] 3. Because
the act of God in setting apart his rest-day to a holy use, as we have
seen, necessarily involves the fact that he gave a precept concerning
it to Adam, in whose time it was thus set apart. And hence, though the
book of Genesis contains no precept concerning the Sabbath, it does
contain direct evidence that such precept was given to the head and
representative of the human family.
After giving the institution of the Sabbath, the book of Genesis, in its
brief record of 2370 years, does not again mention it. This has been
urged as ample proof that those holy men, who, during this period, were
perfect, and walked with God in the observance of his commandments,
statutes and laws,[40] all lived in open profanation of that day which
God had blessed and set apart to a holy use. But the book of Genesis also
omits any distinct reference to the doctrine of future punishment, the
resurrection of the body, the revelation of the Lord in flaming fire,
and the Judgment of the great day. Does this silence prove that the
patriarchs did not believe these great doctrines? Does it make them any
the less sacred?
But the Sabbath is not mentioned from Moses to David, a period of five
hundred years, during which it was enforced by the penalty of death.
Does this prove that it was not observed during this period?[41] The
jubilee occupied a very prominent place in the typical system, yet in the
whole Bible a single instance of its observance is not recorded. What is
still more remarkable, there is not on record a single instance of the
observance of the great day of atonement, notwithstanding the work in the
holiest on that day was the most important service connected with the
worldly sanctuary. And yet the observance of the other and less important
festivals of the seventh month, which are so intimately connected with
the day of atonement, the one preceding it by ten days, the other
following it in five, is repeatedly and particularly recorded.[42] It
would be sophistry to argue from this silence respecting the day of
atonement, when there were so many instances in which its mention was
almost demanded, that that day was never observed; and yet it is actually
a better argument than the similar one urged against the Sabbath from the
book of Genesis.
The reckoning of time by weeks is derived from nothing in nature, but
owes its existence to the divine appointment of the seventh day to
a holy use in memory of the Lord’s rest from the six days’ work of
creation.[43] This period of time is marked only by the recurrence of the
sanctified rest-day of the Creator. That the patriarchs reckoned time by
weeks and by sevens of days, is evident from several texts.[44] That they
should retain the week and forget the Sabbath by which alone the week is
marked, is not a probable conclusion. That the reckoning of the week was
rightly kept is evident from the fact that in the wilderness of Sin on
the sixth day the people, of their own accord, gathered a double portion
of manna. And Moses said to them, “To-morrow is the rest of the holy
Sabbath unto the Lord.”[45]
The brevity of the record in Genesis causes us to overlook many facts of
the deepest interest. Adam lived 930 years. How deep and absorbing the
interest that must have existed in the human family to see the first man!
To converse with one who had himself talked with God! To hear from his
lips a description of that paradise in which he had lived! To learn from
one created on the sixth day the wondrous events of the creation week! To
hear from his lips the very words of the Creator when he set apart his
rest-day to a holy use! And to learn, alas! the sad story of the loss of
paradise and the tree of life![46]
It was therefore not difficult for the facts respecting the six days of
creation and the sanctification of the rest-day to be diffused among
mankind in the patriarchal age. Nay, it was impossible that it should be
otherwise, especially among the godly. From Adam to Abraham a succession
of men—probably inspired of God—preserved the knowledge of God upon
earth. Thus Adam lived till Lamech, the father of Noah, was 56 years of
age; Lamech lived till Shem, the son of Noah, was 93; Shem lived till
Abraham was 150 years of age. Thus are we brought down to Abraham, the
father of the faithful. Of him it is recorded that he obeyed God’s voice
and kept his charge, his commandments, his statutes, and his laws. And
of him the Most High bears the following testimony: “I know him, that he
will command his children and his household after him, and they shall
keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment.”[47] The knowledge
of God was preserved in the family of Abraham; and we shall next find
the Sabbath familiarly mentioned among his posterity, as an existing
institution.
CHAPTER III.
THE SABBATH COMMITTED TO THE HEBREWS.
Object of this chapter—Total apostasy of the human family in
the antediluvian age—Destruction of mankind—The family of Noah
spared—Second apostasy of mankind in the patriarchal age—The
apostate nations left to their own ways—The family of Abraham
chosen—Separated from the rest of mankind—Their history—Their
relation to God—The Sabbath in existence when they came forth
from Egypt—Analysis of Ex. 16—The Sabbath committed to the
Hebrews.
We are now to trace the history of divine truth for many ages in almost
exclusive connection with the family of Abraham. That we may vindicate
the truth from the reproach of pertaining only to the Hebrews—a reproach
often urged against the Sabbath—and justify the dealings of God with
mankind in leaving to their own ways the apostate nations, let us
carefully examine the Bible for the reasons which directed divine
Providence in the choice of Abraham’s family as the depositaries of
divine truth.
The antediluvian world had been highly favored of God. The period of
life extended to each generation was twelve-fold that of the present age
of man. For almost one thousand years, Adam, who had conversed with God
in paradise, had been with them. Before the death of Adam, Enoch began
his holy walk of three hundred years, and then he was translated that he
should not see death. This testimony to the piety of Enoch was a powerful
testimony to the antediluvians in behalf of truth and righteousness.
Moreover the Spirit of God strove with mankind; but the perversity of
man triumphed over all the gracious restraints of the Holy Spirit. “And
God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every
imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” Even
the sons of God joined in the general apostasy. At last a single family
was all that remained of the worshipers of the Most High.[48]
Then came the deluge, sweeping the world of its guilty inhabitants with
the besom of destruction.[49] So terrible a display of divine justice
might well be thought sufficient to restrain impiety for ages. Surely the
family of Noah could not soon forget this awful lesson. But alas, revolt
and apostasy speedily followed, and men turned from God to the worship
of idols. Against the divine mandate separating the human family into
nations,[50] mankind united in one great act of rebellion in the plain
of Shinar. “And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower,
whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be
scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” Then God confounded
them in their impiety and scattered them abroad from thence upon the face
of all the earth.[51] Men did not like to retain God in their knowledge;
wherefore God gave them over to a reprobate mind, and suffered them to
change the truth of God into a lie, and to worship and serve the creature
rather than the Creator. Such was the origin of idolatry and of the
apostasy of the Gentiles.[52]
In the midst of this wide-spread apostasy one man was found whose heart
was faithful with God. Abraham was chosen from an idolatrous family, as
the depositary of divine truth, the father of the faithful, the heir of
the world, and the friend of God.[53] When the worshipers of God were
found alone in the family of Noah, God gave up the rest of mankind to
perish in the flood. Now that the worshipers of God are again reduced
almost to a single family, God gives up the idolatrous nations to their
own ways, and takes the family of Abraham as his peculiar heritage.
“For I know him,” said God, “that he will command his children and his
household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do
justice and judgment.”[54] That they might preserve in the earth the
knowledge of divine truth and the memory and worship of the Most High,
they were to be a people walled off from all mankind, and dwelling in a
land of their own. That they might thus be separated from the heathen
around, God gave to Abraham the rite of circumcision, and afterward to
his posterity the whole ceremonial law.[55] But they could not possess
the land designed for them until the iniquity of the Amorites, its
inhabitants, was full, that they should be thrust out before them. The
horror of great darkness, and the smoking furnace seen by Abraham in
vision, foreshadowed the iron furnace and the bitter servitude of Egypt.
The family of Abraham must go down thither. Brief prosperity and long and
terrible oppression follow.[56]
At length the power of the oppressor is broken, and the people of God
are delivered. The expiration of four hundred and thirty years from the
promise to Abraham marks the hour of deliverance to his posterity.[57]
The nation of Israel is brought forth from Egypt as God’s peculiar
treasure, that he may give them his Sabbath, and his law, and himself.
The psalmist testifies that God “brought forth his people with joy, and
his chosen with gladness: and gave them the lands of the heathen: and
they inherited the labor of the people: that they might observe his
statutes, and keep his laws. And the Most High says, “I am the Lord
which hallow you, that brought you out of the land of Egypt, _to be your
God_.”[58] Not that the commandments of God, his Sabbath and himself, had
no prior existence, nor that the people were ignorant of the true God and
his law; for the Sabbath was appointed to a holy use before the fall of
man; and the commandments of God, his statutes and his laws, were kept by
Abraham; and the Israelites themselves, when some of them had violated
the Sabbath, were reproved by the question, “How long refuse ye to keep
my commandments and my laws?”[59] And as to the Most High, the psalmist
exclaims, ”Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst
formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting,
thou art God.”[60] But there must be a formal public espousal of the
people by God, and of his law and Sabbath and himself by the people.[61]
But neither the Sabbath, nor the law, nor the great Law-giver, by their
connection with the Hebrews, became Jewish. The Law-giver indeed became
the God of Israel,[62] and what Gentile shall refuse him adoration for
that reason? but the Sabbath still remained the Sabbath of the Lord,[63]
and the law continued to be the law of the Most High.
In the month following their passage through the Red Sea, the Hebrews
came into the wilderness of Sin. It is at this point in his narrative
that Moses for the second time mentions the sanctified rest-day of the
Creator. The people murmured for bread:
“Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread
from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a
certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they
will walk in my law, or no. And it shall come to pass, that
on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in;
and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily.... I have
heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto
them, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning
ye shall be filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am the
Lord your God. And it came to pass, that at even the quails
came up, and covered the camp; and in the morning the dew lay
round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up,
behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round
thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground. And when the
children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is
manna; for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them,
This is the bread which the Lord hath given you to eat. This is
the thing which the Lord hath commanded, Gather of it every
man according to his eating, an omer for every man, according
to the number of your persons; take ye every man for them
which are in his tents. And the children of Israel did so, and
gathered, some more, some less. And when they did mete it with
an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that
gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according
to his eating. And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the
morning. Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but
some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred worms,
and stank; and Moses was wroth with them. And they gathered
it every morning, every man according to his eating; and when
the sun waxed hot, it melted. And it came to pass, that on the
sixth day they gathered twice as much bread,[64] two omers for
one man; and all the rulers of the congregation came and told
Moses. And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath
said,[65] To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the
Lord: bake that which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye
will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up to be kept
until the morning. And they laid it up till the morning, as
Moses bade; and it did not stink, neither was there any worm
therein. And Moses said, Eat that to-day; for to-day is a
Sabbath unto the Lord:[66] to-day ye shall not find it in the
field. Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day,
which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none. And it came
to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh
day for to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto
Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?
See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore
he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye
every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the
seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day.”[67]
This narrative shows, 1. That God had a law and commandments prior to
the giving of the manna. 2. That God in giving his people bread from
heaven designed to prove them respecting his law. 3. That in this law was
the holy Sabbath; for the test relative to walking in the law pertained
directly to the Sabbath; and when God said, “How long refuse ye to
keep my commandments and my laws?” it was the Sabbath which they had
violated. 4. That in proving the people respecting this existing law,
Moses gave no new precept respecting the Sabbath, but remained silent
relative to the preparation for the Sabbath until after the people, of
their own accord, had gathered a double portion on the sixth day. 5. That
by this act the people proved not only that they were not ignorant of
the Sabbath, but that they were disposed to observe it.[68] 6. That the
reckoning of the week, traces of which appear through the patriarchal
age,[69] had been rightly kept, for the people knew when the sixth day
had arrived. 7. That had there been any doubt existing on that point, the
fall of the manna on the six days, the withholding of it on the seventh,
and the preservation of that needed for the Sabbath over that day, must
have settled that point incontrovertibly.[70] 8. That there was no act
of instituting the Sabbath in the wilderness of Sin; for God did not
then make it his rest-day, nor did he then bless and sanctify the day.
On the contrary, the record shows that the seventh day was already the
sanctified rest-day of the Lord.[71] 9. That the obligation to observe
the Sabbath existed and was known before the fall of the manna. For the
language used implies the existence of such an obligation, but does not
contain a new enactment until after some of the people had violated the
Sabbath. Thus God says to Moses, “On the sixth day they shall prepare
that which they bring in,” but he does not speak of the seventh. And on
the sixth day Moses says, “To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto
the Lord,” but he does not command them to observe it. On the seventh day
he says that it is the Sabbath, and that they should find no manna in the
field. “Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the
Sabbath, in it there shall be none.” But in all this there is no precept
given, yet the existence of such a precept is plainly implied. 10. That
when some of the people violated the Sabbath they were reproved in
language which plainly implies a previous transgression of this precept.
“How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?” 11. And that
this rebuke of the Law-giver restrained for the time the transgression of
the people.
“See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth
you on the sixth day the bread of two days:[72] abide ye every man in
his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.”[73] As a
special trust, God committed the Sabbath to the Hebrews. It was now given
them, not now made for them. It was made for man at the close of the
first week of time; but all other nations having turned from the Creator
to the worship of idols, it is given to the Hebrew people. Nor does this
prove that all the Hebrews had hitherto disregarded it. For Christ uses
the same language respecting circumcision. Thus he says, “Moses therefore
gave unto you circumcision; not because it is of Moses, but of the
fathers.”[74] Yet God had enjoined that ordinance upon Abraham and his
family four hundred years previous to this gift of it by Moses, and it
had been retained by them.[75]
The language, “The Lord hath given you the Sabbath,” implies a solemn
act of committing a treasure to their trust. How was this done? No act
of instituting the Sabbath here took place. No precept enjoining its
observance was given until some of the people violated it, when it was
given in the form of a reproof; which evinced a previous obligation, and
that they were transgressing an existing law. And this view is certainly
strengthened by the fact that no explanation of the institution was given
to the people; a fact which indicates that some knowledge of the Sabbath
was already in their possession.
But how then did God give them the Sabbath? He did this, first, by
delivering them from the abject bondage of Egypt, where they were a
nation of slaves. And second, by providing them food in such a manner as
to impose the strongest obligation to keep the Sabbath. Forty years did
he give them bread from heaven, sending it for six days, and withholding
it on the seventh, and preserving food for them over the Sabbath. Thus
was the Sabbath especially intrusted to them.
As a gift to the Hebrews, the Creator’s great memorial became a sign
between God and themselves. “I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign
between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that
sanctify them.” As a sign, its object is stated to be, to make known
the true God; and we are told why it was such a sign. “It is a sign
between me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the
Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was
refreshed.”[76] The institution itself signified that God created
the heavens and the earth in six days and rested on the seventh. Its
observance by the people signified that the Creator was their God. How
full of meaning was this sign!
The Sabbath was a sign between God and the children of Israel, because
they alone were the worshipers of the Creator. All other nations had
turned from him to “the gods that have not made the heavens and the
earth.”[77] For this reason the memorial of the great Creator was
committed to the Hebrews, and it became a sign between the Most High and
themselves. Thus was the Sabbath a golden link uniting the Creator and
his worshipers.
CHAPTER IV.
THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT.
The Holy One upon Mount Sinai—Three great gifts bestowed upon
the Hebrews—The Sabbath proclaimed by the voice of God—Position
assigned it in the moral law—Origin of the Sabbath—Definite
character of the commandment—Revolution of the earth upon
its axis—Name of the Sabbatic institution—Seventh day of the
commandment identical with the seventh day of the New Testament
week—Testimony of Nehemiah—Moral obligation of the fourth
commandment.
And now we approach the record of that sublime event, the personal
descent of the Lord upon Mount Sinai.[78] The sixteenth chapter of
Exodus, as we have seen, is remarkable for the fact that God gave to
Israel the Sabbath; the nineteenth chapter, for the fact that God gave
himself to that people in solemnly espousing them as a holy nation unto
himself; while the twentieth chapter will be found remarkable for the act
of the Most High in giving to Israel his law.
It is customary to speak against the Sabbath and the law as Jewish,
because thus given to Israel. As well might the Creator be spoken
against, who brought them out of Egypt to be _their_ God, and who styles
himself the God of Israel.[79] The Hebrews were honored by being thus
intrusted with the Sabbath and the law, not the Sabbath and the law and
the Creator rendered Jewish by this connection. The sacred writers speak
of the high exaltation of Israel in being thus intrusted with the law of
God.
“He showeth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments
unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for
his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord!”
“What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of
circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them
were committed the oracles of God.” “Who are Israelites; to
whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants,
and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the
promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning
the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.
Amen.”[80]
After the Most High had solemnly espoused the people unto himself, as
his peculiar treasure in the earth,[81] they were brought forth out of
the camp to meet with God. “And Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke,
because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof
ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.”
Out of the midst of this fire did God proclaim the ten words of his
law.[82] The fourth of these precepts is the grand law of the Sabbath.
Thus spake the great Law-giver:—
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt
thou labor, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the
Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work,
thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy
maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within
thy gates: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth,
the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day:
wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
The estimate which the Law-giver placed upon his Sabbath is seen in that
he deemed it worthy of a place in his code of ten commandments, thus
causing it to stand in the midst of nine immutable moral precepts. Nor
is this to be thought a small honor that the Most High, naming one by
one the great principles of morality until all are given, and he adds no
more,[83] should include in their number the observance of his hallowed
rest-day. This precept is expressly given to enforce the observance of
the Creator’s great memorial; and unlike all the others, this one traces
its obligation back to the creation, where that memorial was ordained.
The Sabbath is to be remembered and kept holy because that God hallowed
it, _i.e._, appointed it to a holy use, at the close of the first week.
And this sanctification or hallowing of the rest-day, when the first
seventh day of time was past, was the solemn act of setting apart the
seventh day for time to come in memory of the Creator’s rest. Thus
the fourth commandment reaches back and embraces the institution of
the Sabbath in paradise, while the sanctification of the Sabbath in
paradise extends forward to all coming time. The narrative respecting
the wilderness of Sin admirably cements the union of the two. Thus in
the wilderness of Sin, before the fourth commandment was given, stands
the Sabbath, holy to the Lord, with an existing obligation to observe
it, though no commandment in that narrative creates the obligation. This
obligation is derived from the same source as the fourth commandment,
namely, the sanctification of the Sabbath in paradise, showing that it
was an existing duty, and not a new precept. For it should never be
forgotten that the fourth commandment does not trace its obligation to
the wilderness of Sin, but to the creation; a decisive proof that the
Sabbath did not originate in the wilderness of Sin.
The fourth commandment is remarkably definite. It embraces, first,
a precept: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy;” second, an
explanation of this precept: “Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy
work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it
thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy
man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that
is within thy gates;” third, the reasons on which the precept is based,
embracing the origin of the institution, and the very acts by which it
was made, and enforcing all by the example[84] of the Law-giver himself:
“for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that
in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the
Sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
The rest-day of the Lord is thus distinguished from the six days on
which he labored. The blessing and sanctification pertain to the day of
the Creator’s rest. There can be, therefore, no indefiniteness in the
precept. It is not merely one day in seven, but that day in the seven on
which the Creator rested, and upon which he placed his blessing, namely,
the seventh day.[85] And this day is definitely pointed out in the name
given it by God: “The seventh day is the Sabbath [_i. e._, the rest-day]
of the Lord thy God.”
That the seventh day in the fourth commandment is the seventh day of the
New-Testament week may be plainly proved. In the record of our Lord’s
burial, Luke writes thus:—
“And that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on.
And the women also which came with him from Galilee, followed
after, and beheld the sepulcher, and how his body was laid.
And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and
rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment. Now upon
the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they
came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they had
prepared, and certain others with them.”[86]
Luke testifies that these women kept “the Sabbath day according to the
commandment.” The commandment says, “The seventh day is the Sabbath of
the Lord thy God.” This day thus observed was the last or seventh day
of the week, for the following[87] day was the first day of the week.
Hence the seventh day of the commandment is the seventh day of the
New-Testament week.
The testimony of Nehemiah is deeply interesting. “Thou camest down also
upon Mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them
right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments: and
madest known unto them thy holy Sabbath, and commandedst them precepts,
statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant.”[88] It is
remarkable that God is said to have made known the Sabbath when he thus
came down upon the mount; for the children of Israel had the Sabbath in
possession when they came to Sinai. This language must therefore refer
to that complete unfolding of the Sabbatic institution which is given in
the fourth commandment. And mark the expression: “Madest known[89] unto
them thy holy Sabbath;” not madest the Sabbath for them: language which
plainly implies its previous existence, and which cites the mind back to
the Creator’s rest for the origin of the institution.[90]
The moral obligation of the fourth commandment which is so often denied
may be clearly shown by reference to the origin of all things. God
created the world and gave existence to man upon it. To him he gave life
and breath, and all things. Man therefore owes everything to God. Every
faculty of his mind, every power of his being, all his strength and all
his time belong of right to the Creator. It was therefore the benevolence
of the Creator that gave to man six days for his own wants. And in
setting apart the seventh day to a holy use in memory of his own rest,
the Most High was reserving unto himself one of the seven days, when he
could rightly claim all as his. The six days therefore are the gift of
God to man, to be rightly employed in secular affairs, not the seventh
day, the gift of man to God. The fourth commandment, therefore, does not
require man to give something of his own to God, but it does require that
man should not appropriate to himself that which God has reserved for his
own worship. To observe this day then is to render to God of the things
that are his; to appropriate it to ourselves is simply to rob God.
CHAPTER V.
THE SABBATH WRITTEN BY THE FINGER OF GOD.
Classification of the precepts given through Moses—The Sabbath
renewed—Solemn ratification of the covenant between God and
Israel—Moses called up to receive the law which God had written
upon stone—The ten commandments probably proclaimed upon the
Sabbath—Events of the forty days—The Sabbath becomes a sign
between God and Israel—The penalty of death—The tables of
testimony given to Moses—And broken when he saw the idolatry of
the people—The idolaters punished—Moses goes up to renew the
tables—The Sabbath again enjoined—The tables given again—The
ten commandments were the testimony of God—Who wrote them—Three
distinguished honors which pertain to the Sabbath—The ten
commandments a complete code—Relation of the fourth commandment
to the atonement—Valid reason why God himself should write that
law which was placed beneath the mercy-seat.
When the voice of the Holy One had ceased, “the people stood afar off,
and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was.” A brief
interview follows[91] in which God gives to Moses a series of precepts,
which, as a sample of the statutes given through him, may be classified
thus: Ceremonial precepts, pointing to the good things to come; judicial
precepts, intended for the civil government of the nation; and moral
precepts, stating anew in other forms the ten commandments. In this brief
interview the Sabbath is not forgotten:—
“Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou
shalt rest; that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son
of thy handmaid, and the stranger, may be refreshed.”[92]
This scripture furnishes incidental proof that the Sabbath was made
for mankind, and for those creatures that share the labors of man.
The stranger and the foreigner must keep it, and it was for their
refreshment.[93] But the same persons could not partake of the passover
until they were made members of the Hebrew church by circumcision.[94]
When Moses had returned unto the people, he repeated all the words of
the Lord. With one voice all the people exclaim, “All the words which
the Lord hath said will we do.” Then Moses wrote all the words of the
Lord. “And he took the book of the covenant and read in the audience of
the people: and they said, All that the Lord hath said will we do, and
be obedient.” Then Moses “sprinkled both the book and all the people,
saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto
you.”[95]
The way was thus prepared for God to bestow a second signal honor upon
his law:—
“And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount,
and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law,
and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach
them.... And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered
the mount. And the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai,
and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he
called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud.[96] And the
sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire on the
top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. And
Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into
the mount; and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty
nights.”[97]
During this forty days God gave to Moses a pattern of the ark in which to
place the law that he had written upon stone, and of the mercy-seat to
place over that law, and of the sanctuary in which to deposit the ark.
He also ordained the priesthood, which was to minister in the sanctuary
before the ark.[98] These things being ordained, and the Law-giver about
to commit his law as written by himself into the hands of Moses, he again
enjoins the Sabbath:—
“And the Lord spake unto Moses saying, Speak thou also unto
the children of Israel, saying, Verily my Sabbaths ye shall
keep; for it is a sign between me and you throughout your
generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth
sanctify you. Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore; for it is
holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put
to death; for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall
be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be done;
but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord:
whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be
put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the
Sabbath to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations,
for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the
children of Israel forever: for in six days the Lord made
heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was
refreshed. And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of
communing with him upon Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables
of stone, written with the finger of God.”[99]
This should be compared with the testimony of Ezekiel, speaking in the
name of God:—
“I gave them my statutes, and showed them my judgments, which
if a man do, he shall even live in them. Moreover also I gave
them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they
might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them.... I am the
Lord your God: walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments,
and do them; and hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign
between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your
God.”[100]
It will be observed that neither of these scriptures teach that the
Sabbath was made _for_ Israel, nor yet do they teach that it was made
_after_ the Hebrews came out of Egypt. In neither of these particulars
do they even _seem_ to contradict those texts that place the institution
of the Sabbath at creation. But we do learn, 1. That it was God’s act
of giving to the Hebrews his Sabbath that made it a sign between _them_
and himself. “I gave them my Sabbaths TO BE a sign between me and them.”
This act of committing to them the Sabbath has been noticed already.[101]
2. That it was to be a sign between God and the Hebrews, “that they
might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them.” Wherever the word
LORD in the Old Testament is in small capitals, as in the texts under
consideration, it is in the Hebrew, Jehovah. The Sabbath then as a sign
signified that it was Jehovah, _i. e._, the infinite, self-existent
God, who had sanctified them. To sanctify is to separate, set apart, or
appoint, to a holy, sacred or religious use.[102] That the Hebrew nation
had thus been set apart in the most remarkable manner from all mankind,
was sufficiently evident. But who was it that had thus separated them
from all other people? As a gracious answer to this important question,
God gave to the Hebrews his own hallowed rest-day. But how could the
great memorial of the Creator determine such a question? Listen to the
words of the Most High: “Verily my Sabbaths,” _i. e._, my rest-days, “ye
shall keep; for it is a sign between me and you.... It is a sign between
me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made
heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.”
The Sabbath as a sign between God and Israel, was a perpetual testimony
that he who had separated them from all mankind as his peculiar treasure
in the earth, was that Being who had created the heavens and the earth
in six days and rested on the seventh. It was therefore the strongest
possible assurance that he who sanctified them was indeed Jehovah.
From the days of Abraham God had set apart the Hebrews. He who had
previously borne no local, national or family name, did from that time
until the end of his covenant relation with the Hebrew race, take to
himself such titles as seemed to show him to be their God alone. From
his choice of Abraham and his family forward he designates himself as
the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob; the God of the Hebrews,
and the God of Israel.[103] He brought Israel out of Egypt to be _their
God_,[104] and at Sinai did join himself to them in solemn espousal. He
did thus set apart or sanctify unto himself the Hebrews, because that
all other nations had given themselves to idolatry. Thus the God of
Heaven and earth condescended to give himself to a single race, and to
set them apart from all mankind. It should be observed that it was not
the Sabbath which had set Israel apart from all other nations, but it
was the idolatry of all other nations that caused God to set the Hebrews
apart for himself; and that God gave to Israel the Sabbath which he had
hallowed for mankind at creation as the most expressive sign that he who
thus sanctified them was indeed the living God.
It was the act of God in giving his Sabbath to the Israelites that
rendered it a sign _between them and himself_. But the Sabbath did not
derive its existence from being thus given to the Hebrews; for it was the
ancient Sabbath of the Lord when given to them, and we have seen[105]
that it was not given by a new commandment. On the contrary, it rested at
that time upon existing obligation. But it was the providence of God in
behalf of the Hebrews, first in rescuing them from abject servitude, and
second, in sending them bread from heaven for six days, and preserving
food for the Sabbath, that constituted the Sabbath a gift to that
people. And mark the significancy of the _manner_ in which this gift was
bestowed, as showing who it was that sanctified them. It became a gift
to the Hebrews by the wonderful providence of the manna: a miracle that
ceased not openly to declare the Sabbath every week for the space of
forty years; thus showing incontrovertibly that He who led them was the
author of the Sabbath, and therefore the Creator of heaven and earth.
That the Sabbath which was made for man should thus be given to the
Hebrews is certainly not more remarkable than that the God of the whole
earth should give his oracles and himself to that people. The Most High
and his law and Sabbath did not become Jewish; but the Hebrews were made
the honored depositaries of divine truth; and the knowledge of God and of
his commandments was preserved in the earth.
The reason on which this sign is based, points unmistakably to the true
origin of the Sabbath. It did not originate from the fall of the manna
for six days and its cessation on the seventh—for the manna was given
thus because the Sabbath was in existence—but because that “in six days
the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was
refreshed.” Thus the Sabbath is shown to have originated with the rest
and refreshment of the Creator, and not at the fall of the manna. As an
INSTITUTION, the Sabbath declared its Author to be the Creator of heaven
and earth; as a _sign[106] between God and Israel_, it declared that he
who had set them apart was indeed Jehovah.
The last act of the Law-giver in this memorable interview was to place in
the hands of Moses the “two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written
with the finger of God.” Then he revealed to Moses the sad apostasy of
the people of Israel, and hastened him down to them.
“And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two
tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were
written on both their sides: on the one side and on the other
were they written. And the tables were the work of God, and the
writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables.... And
it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he
saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and
he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the
mount.”
Then Moses inflicted retribution upon the idolaters, “and there fell of
the people that day about three thousand men.” And Moses returned unto
God and interceded in behalf of the people. Then God promised that his
angel should go with them, but that he himself would not go up in their
midst lest he should consume them.[107] Then Moses presented an earnest
supplication to the Most High that he might see his glory. This petition
was granted, saving that the face of God should not be seen.[108]
But before Moses ascended that he might behold the majesty of the
infinite Law-giver, the Lord said unto him:—
“Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will
write upon these tables the words that were in the first
tables, which thou brakest.... And he hewed two tables of stone
like unto the first; and Moses rose up early in the morning,
and went up unto Mount Sinai, as the Lord had commanded
him, and took in his hand the two tables of stone. And the
Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and
proclaimed the name of the Lord. And the Lord passed by before
him.”
Then Moses beheld the glory of the Lord, and he “made haste and bowed his
head toward the earth and worshiped.” This interview lasted forty days
and forty nights, as did the first, and seems to have been spent by Moses
in intercession that God would not destroy the people for their sin.[109]
The record of this period is very brief, but in this record the Sabbath
is mentioned. “Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou
shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.”[110] Thus
admonishing them not to forget in their busiest season the Sabbath of
the Lord.
This second period of forty days ends like the first with the act of
God in placing the tables of stone in the hands of Moses. “And he was
there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat
bread, nor drink water. And he[111] wrote upon the tables the words of
the covenant, the ten commandments.” Thus it appears that the tables of
testimony were two tables of stone with the ten commandments written upon
them by the finger of God. Thus the testimony of God is shown to be the
ten commandments. The writing on the second tables was an exact copy of
that on the first. “Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first; and
I will write,” said God, “upon these tables the words that were in the
first tables, which thou brakest.” And of the first tables Moses says:
“He declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform,
even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.”[112]
Thus did God commit to his people the ten commandments. Without human
or angelic agency he proclaimed them himself; and not trusting his most
honored servant Moses, or even an angel of his presence, himself wrote
them with his own finger. “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,”
is one of the ten words thus honored by the Most High. Nor are these two
high honors the only ones conferred upon this precept. While it shares
them in common with the other nine commandments, it stands in advance of
them in that it is established by the EXAMPLE of the Law-giver himself.
These precepts were given upon two tables with evident reference to the
two-fold division of the law of God; supreme love to God, and the love
of our neighbor as ourselves. The Sabbath commandment, placed at the
close of the first table, forms the golden clasp that binds together both
divisions of the moral law. It guards and enforces that day which God
claims as his; it follows man through the six days which God has given
him to be properly spent in the various relations of life, thus extending
over the whole of human life, and embracing in its loan of six days to
man all the duties of the second table, while itself belonging to the
first.
That these ten commandments form a complete code of moral law is proved
by the language of the Law-giver when he called Moses up to himself
to receive them. “Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I
will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I
have written.”[113] This law and commandments was the testimony of God
engraven upon stone. The same great fact is presented by Moses in his
blessing pronounced upon Israel: “And he said, The Lord came from Sinai,
and rose up from Seir unto them: he shined forth from Mount Paran, and
he came with ten thousands of saints: _from his right hand_ went a fiery
law for them.”[114] There can be no dispute that in this language the
Most High is represented as personally present with ten thousands of his
holy ones, or angels. And that which he wrote with his own right hand is
called by Moses “a fiery law,” or as the margin has it, “a fire of law.”
And now the man of God completes his sacred trust. And thus he rehearses
what God did in committing his law to him, and what he himself did in its
final disposition: “And he wrote on the tables, according to the first
writing, the ten commandments, which the Lord spake unto you in the mount
out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the Lord
gave them unto me. And I turned myself and came down from the mount, and
put the tables in the ark which I had made; and there they be, as the
Lord commanded me.” Thus was the law of God deposited in the ark beneath
the mercy-seat.[115] Nor should this chapter close without pointing out
the important relation of the fourth commandment to the atonement.
The top of the ark was called the mercy-seat, because all those who had
broken the law contained in the ark beneath the mercy-seat, could find
pardon by the sprinkling of the blood of atonement upon it.
The law within the ark was that which demanded an atonement; the
ceremonial law which ordained the Levitical priesthood and the sacrifices
for sin, was that which taught men how the atonement could be made. The
broken law was beneath the mercy-seat; the blood of sin-offering was
sprinkled upon its top, and pardon was extended to the penitent sinner.
There was actual sin, and hence a real law which man had broken; but
there was not a real atonement, and hence the need of the great antitype
to the Levitical sacrifices. The real atonement when it is made must
relate to that law respecting which an atonement had been shadowed forth.
In other words, the shadowy atonement related to that law which was shut
up in the ark, indicating that a real atonement was demanded by that
law. It is necessary that the law which demands atonement, in order that
its transgressor may be spared, should itself be perfect, else the fault
would in part at least rest with the Law-giver, and not wholly with the
sinner. Hence, the atonement when made does not take away the broken
law, for that is perfect, but is expressly designed to take away the
guilt of the transgressor.[116] Let it be remembered then that the fourth
commandment is one of the ten precepts of God’s broken law; one of the
immutable holy principles that made the death of God’s only Son necessary
before pardon could be extended to guilty man. These facts being borne
in mind, it will not be thought strange that the Law-giver should reserve
the proclamation of such a law to himself; and that he should intrust
to no created being the writing of that law which should demand as its
atonement the death of the Son of God.
CHAPTER VI.
THE SABBATH DURING THE DAY OF TEMPTATION.
General history of the Sabbath in the wilderness—Its violation
one cause of excluding that generation from the promised
land—Its violation by their children in the wilderness one of
the causes of their final dispersion from their own land—The
statute respecting fires upon the Sabbath—Various precepts
relative to the Sabbath—The Sabbath not a Jewish feast—The man
who gathered sticks upon the Sabbath—Appeal of Moses in behalf
of the decalogue—The Sabbath not derived from the covenant
at Horeb—Final appeal of Moses in behalf of the Sabbath—The
original fourth commandment—The Sabbath not a memorial of the
flight from Egypt—What words were engraven upon stone—General
summary from the books of Moses.
The history of the Sabbath during the provocation in the day of
temptation in the wilderness when God was grieved for forty years with
his people may be stated in few words. Even under the eye of Moses,
and with the most stupendous miracles in their memory and before their
eyes, they were idolaters,[117] neglecters of sacrifices, neglecters of
circumcision,[118] murmurers against God, despisers of his law[119] and
violators of his Sabbath. Of their treatment of the Sabbath while in the
wilderness, Ezekiel gives us the following graphic description:—
“But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness:
they walked not in my statutes, and they despised my judgments,
which if a man do, he shall even live in them; and my Sabbaths
they greatly polluted: then I said, I would pour out my fury
upon them in the wilderness, to consume them. But I wrought
for my name’s sake, that it should not be polluted before the
heathen, in whose sight I brought them out.”[120]
This language shows a general violation of the Sabbath, and evidently
refers to the apostasy of Israel during the first forty days that Moses
was absent from them. God did then purpose their destruction; but at the
intercession of Moses, spared them for the very reason assigned by the
prophet.[121] A further probation being granted them they signally failed
a second time, so that God lifted up his hand to them that they should
not enter the promised land. Thus the prophet continues:—
“Yet also I lifted up my hand unto them in the wilderness,
that I would not bring them into the land which I had given
them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all
lands; BECAUSE they despised my judgments, and walked not in my
statutes, but polluted my Sabbaths: for their heart went after
their idols. Nevertheless mine eye spared them from destroying
them, neither did I make an end of them in the wilderness.”
This language has undoubted reference to the act of God in excluding all
that were over twenty years of age from entering the promised land.[122]
It is to be noticed that the violation of the Sabbath is distinctly
stated as one of the reasons for which that generation were excluded from
the land of promise. God spared the people so that the nation was not
utterly cut off; for he extended to the younger part a further probation.
Thus the prophet continues:—
“But I said unto their children in the wilderness, Walk ye
not in the statutes of your fathers, neither observe their
judgments, nor defile yourselves with their idols: I am the
Lord your God; walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments,
and do them; and hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a
sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord
your God. Notwithstanding the children rebelled against me:
they walked not in my statutes, neither kept my judgments
to do them, which if a man do, he shall even live in them;
they polluted my Sabbaths: then I said, I would pour out my
fury upon them, to accomplish my anger against them in the
wilderness. Nevertheless I withdrew mine hand, and wrought for
my name’s sake, that it should not be polluted in the sight
of the heathen, in whose sight I brought them forth. I lifted
up mine hand unto them also in the wilderness, that I would
scatter them among the heathen, and disperse them through the
countries; because they had not executed my judgments, but had
despised my statutes, and had polluted my Sabbaths, and their
eyes were after their father’s idols.”
Thus it appears that the younger generation, which God spared when he
excluded their fathers from the land of promise, did, like their fathers,
transgress God’s law, pollute his Sabbath, and cleave to idolatry. God
did not see fit to exclude them from the land of Canaan, but he did
lift up his hand to them in the wilderness, that he would give them up
to dispersion among their enemies after they had entered the land of
promise. Thus it is seen that the Hebrews while in the wilderness laid
the foundation for their subsequent dispersion from their own land; and
that one of the acts which led to their final ruin as a nation was the
violation of the Sabbath before they had entered the promised land. Well
might Moses say to them in the last month of his life: “Ye have been
rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you.”[123] In Caleb
and Joshua was another spirit, for they followed the Lord fully.[124]
Such is the general history of Sabbatic observance in the wilderness.
Even the miracle of the manna, which every week for forty years bore
public testimony to the Sabbath,[125] became to the body of the Hebrews
a mere ordinary event, so that they dared to murmur against the bread
thus sent from heaven;[126] and we may well believe that those who were
thus hardened through the deceitfulness of sin, had little regard for
the testimony of the manna in behalf of the Sabbath.[127] In the Mosaic
record we next read of the Sabbath as follows:—
“And Moses gathered all the congregation of the children of
Israel together, and said unto them, These are the words which
the Lord hath commanded, that ye should do them. Six days shall
work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an
holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work
therein shall be put to death.[128] Ye shall kindle no fire
throughout your habitations upon the Sabbath day.”[129]
The chief feature of interest in this text relates to the prohibition
of fires on the Sabbath. As this is the only prohibition of the kind in
the Bible, and as it is often urged as a reason why the Sabbath should
not be kept, a brief examination of the difficulty will not be out of
place. It should be observed, 1. That this language does not form part
of the fourth commandment, the grand law of the Sabbath. 2. That as there
were laws pertaining to the Sabbath, that were no part of the Sabbatic
institution, but that grew out of its being intrusted to the Hebrews,
such as the law respecting the presentation of the shew-bread on the
Sabbath; and that respecting the burnt-offering for the Sabbath:[130] so
it is at least possible that this is a precept pertaining only to that
nation, and not a part of the original institution. 3. That as there were
laws peculiar only to the Hebrews, so there were many that pertained to
them only while they were in the wilderness. Such were all those precepts
that related to the manna, the building of the tabernacle and the setting
of it up, the manner of encamping about it, &c. 4. That of this class
were all the statutes given from the time that Moses brought down the
second tables of stone until the close of the book of Exodus, unless the
words under consideration form an exception. 5. That the prohibition
of fires was a law of this class, _i. e._, a law designed only for the
wilderness, is evident from several decisive facts.
1. That the land of Palestine during a part of the year is so cold that
fires are necessary to prevent suffering.[131]
2. That the Sabbath was not designed to be a cause of distress and
suffering, but of refreshment, of delight, and of blessing.[132]
3. That in the wilderness of Sinai, where this precept respecting fires
on the Sabbath was given, it was not a cause of suffering, as they were
two hundred miles south of Jerusalem, in the warm climate of Arabia.
4. That this precept was of a temporary character, is further implied
in that while other laws are said to be perpetual statutes and precepts
to be kept after they should enter the land,[133] no hint of this kind
here appears. On the contrary, this seems to be similar in character to
the precept respecting the manna,[134] and to be co-existent with, and
adapted to, it.
5. If the prohibition respecting fires did indeed pertain to the promised
land, and not merely to the wilderness, it would every few years conflict
directly with the law of the passover. For the passover was to be roasted
by each family of the children of Israel on the evening following the
fourteenth day of the first month,[135] which would fall occasionally
upon the Sabbath. The prohibition of fires upon the Sabbath would not
conflict with the passover while the Hebrews were in the wilderness; for
the passover was not to be observed until they reached that land.[136]
But if that prohibition did extend forward to the promised land, where
the passover was to be regularly observed, these two statutes would often
come in direct conflict. This is certainly a strong confirmation of the
view that the prohibition of fires upon the Sabbath was a temporary
statute, relating only to the wilderness.[137]
From these facts it follows that the favorite argument drawn from the
prohibition of fires, that the Sabbath was a local institution, adapted
only to the land of Canaan, must be abandoned; for it is evident that
that prohibition was a temporary statute not even adapted to the land of
promise, and not designed for that land. We next read of the Sabbath as
follows:—
“And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto all the
congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them, Ye
shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am holy. Ye shall fear
every man his mother, and his father, and keep my Sabbaths:
I am the Lord your God.... Ye shall keep my Sabbaths, and
reverence my sanctuary: I am the Lord.”[138]
These constant references to the Sabbath contrast strikingly with the
general disobedience of the people. And thus God speaks again:—
“Six days shall work be done; but the seventh day is the
Sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no
work therein: it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your
dwellings.”[139]
Thus does God solemnly designate his rest-day as a season of holy
worship, and as the day of weekly religious assemblies. Again the great
Law-giver sets forth his Sabbath:—
“Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you
up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone
in your land, to bow down unto it; for I am the Lord your God.
Ye shall keep my Sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary: I am the
Lord.”[140]
Happy would it have been for the people of God had they thus refrained
from idolatry and sacredly regarded the rest-day of the Creator. Yet
idolatry and Sabbath-breaking were so general in the wilderness that the
generation which came forth from Egypt were excluded from the promised
land.[141] After God had thus cut off from the inheritance of the land
the men who had rebelled against him,[142] we next read of the Sabbath as
follows:—
“And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they
found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day. And they
that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and
Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward,
because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the
Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death;
all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the
camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp,
and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded
Moses.”[143]
The following facts should be considered in explaining this text: 1. That
this was a case of peculiar guilt; for the whole congregation before
whom this man stood in judgment, and by whom he was put to death, were
themselves guilty of violating the Sabbath, and had just been excluded
from the promised land for this and other sins.[144] 2. That this was
not a case which came under the existing penalty of death for work upon
the Sabbath; for the man was put in confinement that the mind of the
Lord respecting his guilt might be obtained. The peculiarity of his
transgression may be learned from the context. The verses which next
precede the case in question read thus:—
“But the soul that doeth aught presumptuously, whether he be
born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord;
and that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Because
he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his
commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity
shall be upon him.”[145]
These words being followed by this remarkable case were evidently
designed to be illustrated by it. It is manifest, therefore, that this
was an instance of presumptuous sin, in which the transgressor intended
despite to the Spirit of grace and to the statutes of the Most High. This
case cannot therefore be quoted as evidence of extraordinary strictness
on the part of the Hebrews in observing the Sabbath; for we have direct
evidence that they did greatly pollute it during the whole forty
years of their sojourn in the wilderness.[146] It stands therefore as
an instance of transgression in which the sinner intended to show his
contempt for the Law-giver, and in this consisted his peculiar guilt.[147]
In the last month of his long and eventful life Moses rehearsed all the
great acts of God in behalf of his people, with the statutes and precepts
that he had given them. This rehearsal is contained in the book of
Deuteronomy, a name which signifies second law, and which is applied to
that book, because it is a second writing of the law. It is the farewell
of Moses to a disobedient and rebellious people; and he endeavors to
fasten upon them the strongest possible sense of personal obligation to
obey. Thus, when he is about to rehearse the ten commandments, he uses
language evidently designed to impress upon the minds of the Hebrews a
sense of their individual obligation to do what God had commanded. Thus
he says:—
“Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in
your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do
them. The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. The
Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even
us, who are all of us here alive this day.”[148]
It was not the act of your fathers that placed this responsibility upon
you, but your own individual acts that brought you into the bond of this
covenant. You have personally pledged yourselves to the Most High to
keep these precepts.[149] Such is the obvious import of this language;
yet it has been gravely adduced as proof that the Sabbath of the Lord
was made for the Hebrews, and was not obligatory upon the patriarchs.
The singularity of this deduction appears in that it is brought to bear
against the fourth commandment alone; whereas, if it is a just and
logical argument, it would show that the ancient patriarchs were under no
obligation in respect to any precept of the moral law. But it is certain
that the covenant at Horeb was simply an embodiment of the precepts of
the moral law, with mutual pledges respecting them between God and the
people, and that that covenant did not give existence to either of the
ten commandments. At all events, we find the Sabbath ordained of God
at the close of creation[150] and obligatory upon the Hebrews in the
wilderness before God had given them a new precept on the subject.[151]
As this was before the covenant at Horeb it is conclusive proof that the
Sabbath did no more originate from that covenant than did the prohibition
of idolatry, theft or murder.
The man of God then repeats the ten commandments. And thus he gives the
fourth:—
“Keep the Sabbath day, to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God
hath commanded thee. Six days thou shalt labor and do all thy
work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God:
in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy
daughter, nor thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thine
ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that
is within thy gates; that thy man-servant and thy maid-servant
may rest as well as thou. And remember that thou wast a servant
in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee
out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched-out arm:
therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath
day.”[152]
It is a singular fact that this scripture is uniformly quoted by those
who write against the Sabbath, as the original fourth commandment;
while the original precept itself is carefully left out. Yet there is
the strongest evidence that this is not the original precept; for Moses
rehearses these words at the end of the forty years’ sojourn, whereas the
original commandment was given in the third month after the departure
from Egypt.[153] The commandment itself, as here given, contains direct
proof on the point. Thus it reads: “Keep the Sabbath day, to sanctify
it, As the Lord thy God HATH COMMANDED thee;” thus citing elsewhere for
the original statute. Moreover the precept as here given is evidently
incomplete. It contains no clue to the origin of the Sabbath of the Lord,
nor does it show the acts by which the Sabbath came into existence.
This is why those who represent the Sabbath as made in the wilderness
and not at creation quote this as the fourth commandment, and omit the
original precept, which God himself proclaimed, where all these facts are
distinctly stated.[154]
But while Moses in this rehearsal omits a large part of the fourth
commandment, he refers to the original precept for the whole matter, and
then appends to this rehearsal a powerful plea of obligation on the part
of the Hebrews to keep the Sabbath. It should be remembered that many of
the people had steadily persisted in the violation of the Sabbath, and
that this is the last time that Moses speaks in its behalf. Thus he says:—
“And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt,
and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a
mighty hand and by a stretched-out arm: therefore the Lord thy
God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day.”
These words are often cited as proof that the Sabbath originated at the
departure of Israel from Egypt, and that it was ordained at that time as
a memorial of their deliverance from thence. But it will be observed, 1.
That this text says not one word respecting the origin of the Sabbath
or rest-day of the Lord. 2. That the facts on this point are all given
in the original fourth commandment, and are there referred to creation.
3. That there is no reason to believe that God rested upon the seventh
day at the time of this flight from Egypt; nor did he then bless and
hallow the day. 4. That the Sabbath has nothing in it of a kind to
commemorate the deliverance from Egypt, as that was a flight and this
is a rest; and that flight was upon the fifteenth of the first month,
and this rest, upon the seventh day of each week. Thus one would occur
annually; the other, weekly. 5. But God did ordain a fitting memorial
of that deliverance to be observed by the Hebrews: the passover, on the
fourteenth day of the first month, in memory of God’s passing over them
when he smote the Egyptians; and the feast of unleavened bread, in memory
of their eating this bread when they fled out of Egypt.[155]
But what then do these words imply? Perhaps their meaning may be more
readily perceived by comparing them with an exact parallel found in the
same book and from the pen of the same writer:—
“Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of
the fatherless; nor take a widow’s raiment to pledge; but thou
shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt, and the Lord
thy God redeemed thee thence; therefore I command thee to do
this thing.”[156]
It will be seen at a glance that this precept was not given to
commemorate the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage; nor could
that deliverance give existence to the moral obligation expressed in
it. If the language in the one case proves that men were not under
obligation to keep the Sabbath before the deliverance of Israel from
Egypt, it proves with equal conclusiveness in the other that before that
deliverance they were not under obligation to treat with justice and
mercy the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow. And if the Sabbath
is shown in the one case to be Jewish, in the other, the statute of the
great Law-giver in behalf of the needy and the helpless must share the
same fate. It is manifest that this language is in each case an appeal
to their sense of gratitude. You were slaves in Egypt, and God rescued
you; therefore remember others who are in distress, and oppress them not.
You were bondmen in Egypt, and God redeemed you; therefore sanctify unto
the Lord the day which he has reserved unto himself; a most powerful
appeal to those who had hitherto persisted in polluting it. Deliverance
from abject servitude was necessary, indeed, in each case, in order that
the things enjoined might be fully observed; but that deliverance did not
give existence to either of these duties. It was indeed one of the acts
by which the Sabbath of the Lord was given to that nation, but it was
not one of the acts by which God made the Sabbath, nor did it render the
rest-day of the Lord a Jewish institution.
That the words engraven upon stone were simply the ten commandments is
evident.
1. It is said of the first tables:—
“And the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye
heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye
heard a voice. And he declared unto you his covenant, which he
commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote
them upon two tables of stone.”[157]
2. Thus the first tables of stone contained the ten commandments alone.
That the second tables were an exact copy of what was written upon the
first, is plainly stated:—
“And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone
like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the
words that were in the first tables, which thou breakest.” “And
I will write on the tables the words that were in the first
tables which thou breakest, and thou shalt put them in the
ark.”[158]
3. This is confirmed by the following decisive testimony:—
“And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the
ten commandments,” margin, Heb., “words.” “And he wrote on the
tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments
[margin, words], which the Lord spake unto you in the mount,
out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and
the Lord gave them unto me.”[159]
These texts will explain the following language: “And the Lord delivered
unto me two tables of stone written with the finger of God; and on them
was written according to all the words which the Lord spake with you in
the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.”[160]
Thus God is said to have written upon the tables according to all the
words which he spoke in the day of the assembly; and these words which
he thus wrote, are said to have been TEN WORDS. But the preface to the
decalogue was not one of these ten words, and hence was not written by
the finger of God upon stone. That this distinction must be attended to,
will be seen by examining the following text and its connection:—
“THESE WORDS the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the
mount, out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the
thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And
he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto
me.”[161]
THESE WORDS here brought to view as written by the finger of God after
having been uttered by him in the hearing of all the people, must be
understood as one of two things. 1. They are simply the ten words of
the law of God; or, 2. They are all the words used by Moses in this
rehearsal of the decalogue. But they cannot refer to the words used in
this rehearsal; for, 1. Moses omits an important part of the fourth
precept as given by God in its proclamation from the mount. 2. In this
rehearsal of that precept he cites back to the original for that which
is omitted.[162] 3. He appends to this precept an appeal in its behalf
to their gratitude which was not made by God in giving it. 4. This
language only purports to be a rehearsal and not the original itself;
and this is further evinced by many verbal deviations from the original
decalogue.[163] These facts are decisive as to what was placed upon the
tables of stone. It was not an incomplete copy, citing elsewhere for the
original, but the original code itself. And hence when Moses speaks of
THESE WORDS as engraven upon the tables, he refers not to the words used
by himself in this rehearsal, but to the TEN WORDS of the law of God, and
excludes all else.
Thus have we traced the Sabbath through the books of Moses. We have found
its origin in paradise when man was in his uprightness; we have seen the
Hebrews set apart from all mankind as the depositaries of divine truth;
we have seen the Sabbath and the whole moral law committed as a sacred
trust to them; we have seen the Sabbath proclaimed by God as one of the
ten commandments; we have seen it written by the finger of God upon
stone in the bosom of the moral law; we have seen that law possessing
no Jewish, but simply moral and divine, features, placed beneath the
mercy-seat in the ark of God’s testament; we have seen that various
precepts pertaining to the Sabbath were given to the Hebrews and designed
only for them; we have seen that the Hebrews did greatly pollute the
Sabbath during their sojourn in the wilderness; and we have heard the
final appeal made in its behalf by Moses to that rebellious people.
We rest the foundation of the Sabbatic institution upon its
sanctification before the fall of man; the fourth commandment is its
great citadel of defense; its place in the midst of the moral law beneath
the mercy-seat shows its relation to the atonement and its immutable
obligation.
CHAPTER VII.
THE FEASTS, NEW MOONS AND SABBATHS OF THE HEBREWS.
Enumeration of the Hebrew festivals—The passover—The
pentecost—The feast of tabernacles—The new moons—The first and
second annual sabbaths—The third—The fourth—The fifth—The sixth
and seventh—The sabbath of the land—The jubilee—None of these
festivals in force until the Hebrews entered their own land—The
contrast between the Sabbath of the Lord and the sabbaths of
the Hebrews—Testimony of Isaiah—Of Hosea—Of Jeremiah—Final
cessation of these festivals.
We have followed the Sabbath of the Lord through the books of Moses. A
brief survey of the Jewish festivals is necessary to the complete view of
the subject before us. Of these there were three feasts: the passover,
the Pentecost, and the feast of tabernacles; each new moon, that is,
the first day of each month throughout the year; then there were seven
annual sabbaths, namely, 1. The first day of unleavened bread. 2. The
seventh day of that feast. 3. The day of Pentecost. 4. The first day of
the seventh month. 5. The tenth day of that month. 6. The fifteenth day
of that month. 7. The twenty-second day of the same. In addition to all
these, every seventh year was to be the sabbath of the land, and every
fiftieth year the year of jubilee.
The passover takes its name from the fact that the angel of the Lord
passed over the houses of the Hebrews on that eventful night when the
firstborn in every Egyptian family was slain. This feast was ordained in
commemoration of the deliverance of that people from Egyptian bondage.
It began with the slaying of the paschal lamb on the fourteenth day of
the first month, and extended through a period of seven days, in which
nothing but unleavened bread was to be eaten. Its great antitype was
reached when Christ our passover was sacrificed for us.[164]
The Pentecost was the second of the Jewish feasts, and occupied but a
single day. It was celebrated on the fiftieth day after the first-fruits
of barley harvest had been waved before the Lord. At the time of this
feast the first-fruits of wheat harvest were offered unto God. The
antitype of this festival was reached on the fiftieth day after the
resurrection of Christ, when the great outpouring of the Holy Ghost took
place.[165]
The feast of tabernacles was the last of the Jewish feasts. It was
celebrated in the seventh month when they had gathered in the fruit
of the land, and extended from the fifteenth to the twenty-first day
of that month. It was ordained as a festival of rejoicing before the
Lord; and during this period the children of Israel dwelt in booths
in commemoration of their dwelling thus during their sojourn in the
wilderness. It probably typifies the great rejoicing after the final
gathering of all the people of God into his kingdom.[166]
In connection with these feasts it was ordained that each new moon,
that is, the first day of every month, should be observed with certain
specified offerings, and with tokens of rejoicing.[167] The annual
sabbaths of the Hebrews have been already enumerated. The first two of
these sabbaths were the first and seventh days of the feast of unleavened
bread, that is, the fifteenth and twenty-first days of the first month.
They were thus ordained by God:—
“Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first
day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses.... And in
the first day there shall be an holy convocation, and in the
seventh day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no
manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man
must eat, that only may be done of you.”[168]
The third in order of the annual sabbaths was the day of Pentecost. This
festival was ordained as a rest-day in the following language:—
“And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an
holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein;
it shall be a statute forever in all your dwellings throughout
your generations.”[169]
The first day of the seventh month was the fourth annual sabbath of the
Hebrews. It was thus ordained:—
“Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh
month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath,
a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. Ye
shall do no servile work therein; but ye shall offer an
offering made by fire unto the Lord.”[170]
The great day of atonement was the fifth of these sabbaths. Thus spake
the Lord unto Moses:—
“Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a
day of atonement; it shall be an holy convocation unto you....
Ye shall do no manner of work; it shall be a statute forever
throughout your generations in all your dwellings. It shall be
unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in
the ninth day of the month at even, from even unto even, shall
ye celebrate your sabbath.”[171]
The sixth and seventh of these annual sabbaths were the fifteenth and
twenty-second days of the seventh month, that is, the first day of the
feast of tabernacles, and the day after its conclusion. Thus were they
enjoined by God:—
“Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have
gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto
the Lord seven days; on the first day shall be a sabbath, and
on the eighth day shall be a sabbath.”[172]
Besides all these, every seventh year was a sabbath of rest unto the
land. The people might labor as usual in other business, but they were
forbidden to till the land, that the land itself might rest.[173]
After seven of these sabbaths, the following or fiftieth year was to
be the year of jubilee, in which every man was to be restored unto
his inheritance.[174] There is no evidence that the jubilee was ever
observed, and it is certain that the sabbatical year was almost entirely
disregarded.[175]
Such were the feasts, new moons, and sabbaths, of the Hebrews. A few
words will suffice to point out the broad distinction between them and
the Sabbath of the Lord. The first of the three feasts was ordained in
memory of their deliverance from Egyptian bondage, and was to be observed
when they should enter their own land.[176] The second feast, as we have
seen, could not be observed until after the settlement of the Hebrews
in Canaan; for it was to be celebrated when the first fruits of wheat
harvest should be offered before the Lord. The third feast was ordained
in memory of their sojourn in the wilderness, and was to be celebrated
by them each year after the ingathering of the entire harvest. Of course
this feast, like the others, could not be observed until the settlement
of the people in their own land. The new moons, as has been already
seen, were not ordained until after these feasts had been instituted.
The annual sabbaths were part and parcel of these feasts, and could
have no existence until after the feasts to which they belonged had
been instituted. Thus the first and second of these sabbaths were the
first and seventh days of the paschal feast. The third annual sabbath
was identical with the feast of Pentecost. The fourth of these sabbaths
was the same as the new moon in the seventh month. The fifth one was
the great day of atonement. The sixth and the seventh of these annual
sabbaths were the fifteenth and twenty-second days of the seventh month,
that is, the first day of the feast of tabernacles, and the next day
after the close of that feast. As these feasts were not to be observed
until the Hebrews should possess their own land, the annual sabbaths
could have no existence until that time. And so of the sabbaths of the
land. These could have no existence until after the Hebrews should
possess and cultivate their own land; after six years of cultivation, the
land should rest the seventh year, and remain untilled. After seven of
these sabbaths of the land came the year of jubilee.
The contrast between the Sabbath of the Lord and these sabbaths of
the Hebrews[177] is strongly marked. 1. The Sabbath of the Lord was
instituted at the close of the first week of time; while these were
ordained in connection with the Jewish feasts. 2. The one was blessed
and hallowed by God, because that he had rested upon it from the work
of creation; the others have no such claim to our regard. 3. When the
children of Israel came into the wilderness, the Sabbath of the Lord
was an existing institution, obligatory upon them; but the annual
sabbaths then came into existence. It is easy to point to the very
act of God, while leading that people, that gave existence to these
sabbaths; while every reference to the Sabbath of the Lord shows that
it had been ordained before God chose that people. 4. The children of
Israel were excluded from the promised land for violating the Sabbath
of the Lord in the wilderness; but the annual sabbaths were not to
be observed until they should enter that land. This contrast would
be strange indeed were it true that the Sabbath of the Lord was not
instituted until the children of Israel came into the wilderness of
Sin; for it is certain that two of the annual sabbaths were instituted
before they left the land of Egypt.[178] 5. The Sabbath of the Lord was
made for man; but the annual sabbaths were designed only for residents
in the land of Palestine. 6. The one was weekly, a memorial of the
Creator’s rest; the others were annual, connected with the memorials
of the deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt. 7. The one is termed
“the Sabbath of the Lord,” “my Sabbaths,” “my holy day,” and the like;
while the others are designated as “your sabbaths,” “her sabbaths,” and
similar expressions.[179] 8. The one was proclaimed by God as one of
the ten commandments, and was written with his finger in the midst of
the moral law upon the tables of stone, and was deposited in the ark
beneath the mercy-seat; the others did not pertain to the moral law, but
were embodied in that handwriting of ordinances that was a shadow of
good things to come. 9. The distinction between these festivals and the
Sabbaths of the Lord was carefully marked by God when he ordained the
festivals and their associated sabbaths. Thus he said: “These are the
feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, ...
BESIDE the Sabbaths of the Lord.”[180]
The annual sabbaths are presented by Isaiah in a very different light
from that in which he presents the Sabbath of the Lord. Of the one he
says:—
“Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto
me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I
cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your
new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth; they are a
trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.”[181]
In striking contrast with this, the same prophet speaks of the Lord’s
Sabbath:—
“Thus saith the Lord, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my
salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that
layeth hold on it; that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it,
and keepeth his hand from doing any evil. Neither let the son
of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak,
saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people;
neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. For thus
saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths, and
choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a
place and a name better than of sons and of daughters; I will
give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. Also
the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the Lord,
to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his
servants, every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting
it, and taketh hold of my covenant; even them will I bring to
my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer;
their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted
upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called a house of
prayer for all people.”[182]
Hosea carefully designates the annual sabbaths in the following
prediction:—
“I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast-days, her
new moons, and HER sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.”[183]
This prediction was uttered about B. C. 785. It was fulfilled in part
about two hundred years after this, when Jerusalem was destroyed by
Nebuchadnezzar. Of this event, Jeremiah, about B. C. 588, speaks as
follows:—
“Her people fell into the hand of the enemy, and none did help
her: the adversaries saw her, and did mock at HER sabbaths....
The Lord was as an enemy; he hath swallowed up Israel, he
hath swallowed up all her palaces; he hath destroyed his
strongholds, and hath increased in the daughter of Judah
mourning and lamentation. And he hath violently taken away his
tabernacle, as if it were of a garden; he hath destroyed his
places of the assembly; the Lord hath caused the solemn feasts
and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the
indignation of his anger the king and the priest. The Lord hath
cast off his altar, he hath abhorred his sanctuary, he hath
given up into the hand of the enemy the walls of her palaces;
they have made a noise in the house of the Lord, as in the day
of a solemn feast.”[184]
The feasts of the Lord were to be holden in the place which the Lord
should choose, namely, Jerusalem;[185] and when that city, the place
of their solemn assemblies, was destroyed and the people themselves
carried into captivity, the complete cessation of their feasts, and, as a
consequence, of the annual sabbaths, which were specified days in those
feasts, must occur. The adversaries mocked at her sabbaths, by making a
“noise in the house of the Lord as in the day of a solemn feast.” But
the observance of the Lord’s Sabbath did not cease with the dispersion of
the Hebrews from their own land; for it was not a local institution, like
the annual sabbaths. Its violation was one chief cause of the Babylonish
captivity;[186] and their final restoration to their own land was made
conditional upon their observing it in their dispersion.[187] The feasts,
new moons, and annual sabbaths, were restored when the Hebrews returned
from captivity, and with some interruptions, were kept up until the
final destruction of their city and nation by the Romans. But ere the
providence of God thus struck out of existence these Jewish festivals,
the whole typical system was abolished, having reached the commencement
of its antitype, when our Lord Jesus Christ expired upon the cross. The
handwriting of ordinances being thus abolished, no one is to be judged
respecting its meats, or drinks, or holy days, or new moons, or sabbaths,
“which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” But
the Sabbath of the Lord did not form a part of this handwriting of
ordinances; for it was instituted before sin had entered the world, and
consequently before there was any shadow of redemption; it was written
by the finger of God, not in the midst of types and shadows, but in the
bosom of the moral law; and the day following that on which the typical
sabbaths were nailed to the cross, the Sabbath commandment of the moral
law is expressly recognized. Moreover, when the Jewish festivals were
utterly extinguished with the final destruction of Jerusalem, even then
was the Sabbath of the Lord brought to the minds of his people.[188]
Thus have we traced the annual sabbaths until their final cessation, as
predicted by Hosea. It remains that we trace the Sabbath of the Lord
until we reach the endless ages of the new earth, when we shall find the
whole multitude of the redeemed assembling before God for worship on each
successive Sabbath.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE SABBATH FROM DAVID TO NEHEMIAH.
Silence of six successive books of the Bible relative to
the Sabbath—This silence compared to that of the book of
Genesis—The siege of Jericho—The standing still of the
sun—David’s act of eating the shew-bread—The Sabbath of the
Lord, how connected with and how distinguished from the annual
sabbaths—Earliest reference to the Sabbath after the days of
Moses—Incidental allusions to the Sabbath—Testimony of Amos—Of
Isaiah—The Sabbath a blessing to MANKIND—The condition of being
gathered to the holy land—Not a local institution—Commentary
on the fourth commandment—Testimony of Jeremiah—Jerusalem to
be saved if she would keep the Sabbath—This gracious offer
despised—The Sabbath distinguished from the other days of the
week—The Sabbath after the Babylonish captivity—Time for the
commencing of the Sabbath—The violation of the Sabbath caused
the destruction of Jerusalem.
When we leave the books of Moses there is a long-continued break in the
history of the Sabbath. No mention of it is found in the book of Joshua,
nor in that of Judges, nor in the book of Ruth, nor in that of first
Samuel, nor in the book of second Samuel, nor in that of first Kings.
It is not until we reach the book of second Kings[189] that the Sabbath
is even mentioned. In the book of first Chronicles, however, which as
a narrative is parallel to the two books of Samuel, the Sabbath is
mentioned[190] with reference to the events of David’s life. Yet this
leaves a period of five hundred years, which the Bible passes in silence
respecting the Sabbath.
During this period we have a circumstantial history of the Hebrew people
from their entrance into the promised land forward to the establishment
of David as their king, embracing many particulars in the life of Joshua,
of the elders and judges of Israel, of Gideon, of Barak, of Jephthah,
of Samson, of Eli, of Naomi and Ruth, of Hannah and Samuel, of Saul, of
Jonathan and of David. Yet in all this minute record we have no direct
mention of the Sabbath.
It is a favorite argument with anti-Sabbatarians in proof of the total
neglect of the Sabbath in the patriarchal age, that the book of Genesis,
which does give a distinct view of the origin of the Sabbath in Paradise,
at the close of the first week of time, does not in recording the lives
of the patriarchs, say anything relative to its observance. Yet in that
one book are crowded the events of two thousand three hundred and seventy
years. What then should they say of the fact that six successive books
of the Bible, relating with comparative minuteness the events of five
hundred years, and involving many circumstances that would call out a
mention of the Sabbath, do not mention it at all? Does the silence of
one book, which nevertheless does give the institution of the Sabbath
at its very commencement, and which brings into its record almost
twenty-four hundred years, prove that there were no Sabbath-keepers prior
to Moses? What then is proved by the fact that six successive books of
the Bible, confining themselves to the events of five hundred years, an
average of less than one hundred years apiece, the whole period covered
by them being about one-fifth that embraced in the book of Genesis, do
nevertheless preserve total silence respecting the Sabbath?
No one will adduce this silence as evidence of total neglect of the
Sabbath during this period; yet why should they not? Is it because that
when the narrative after this long silence brings in the Sabbath again,
it does this incidentally and not as a new institution? Precisely such
is the case with the second mention of the Sabbath in the Mosaic record,
that is, with its mention after the silence in Genesis.[191] Is it
because the fourth commandment had been given to the Hebrews whereas no
such precept had previously been given to mankind? This answer cannot be
admitted, for we have seen that the substance of the fourth commandment
was given to the head of the human family; and it is certain that when
the Hebrews came out of Egypt they were under obligation to keep the
Sabbath in consequence of existing law.[192] The argument therefore is
certainly more conclusive that there were no Sabbath-keepers from Moses
to David, than that there were none from Adam to Moses; yet no one will
attempt to maintain the first position, however many there will be to
affirm the latter.
Several facts are narrated in the history of this period of five
centuries that have a claim to our notice. The first of these is found
in the record of the siege of Jericho.[193] By the command of God the
city was encompassed by the Hebrews each day for seven days; on the
last day of the seven they encompassed it seven times, when by divine
interposition the walls were thrown down before them and the city taken
by assault. One day of this seven must have been the Sabbath of the
Lord. Did not the people of God therefore violate the Sabbath in their
acting thus? Let the following facts answer: 1. That which they did in
this case was by direct command of God. 2. That which is forbidden in
the fourth commandment is OUR OWN work: “Six days shalt thou labor, and
do ALL THY WORK; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy
God.” He who reserved the seventh day unto himself, had the right to
require its appropriation to his service as he saw fit. 3. The act of
encompassing the city was strictly as a _religious_ procession. The ark
of the covenant of the Lord was borne before the people; and before the
ark went seven priests blowing with trumpets of rams’ horns. 4. Nor could
the city have been very extensive, else the going round it seven times on
the last day, and their having time left for its complete destruction,
would have been impossible. 5. Nor can it be believed that the Hebrews,
by God’s command carrying the ark before them, which contained simply the
ten words of the Most High, were violating the fourth of those words,
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” It is certain that one of
those seven days on which they encompassed Jericho was the Sabbath; but
there is no necessity for supposing this to have been the day in which
the city was taken. Nor is this a reasonable conjecture when all the
facts in the case are considered. On this incident Dr. Clarke remarks as
follows:—
“It does not appear that there could be any breach in the
Sabbath by the people simply going round the city, the ark in
company, and the priests sounding the sacred trumpets. This was
a mere religious procession, performed at the command of God,
in which no servile work was done.”[194]
At the word of Joshua it pleased God to arrest the earth in its
revolution, and thus to cause the sun to remain stationary for a season,
that the Canaanites might be overthrown before Israel.[195] Did not this
great miracle derange the Sabbath? Not at all; for the lengthening of
one of the six days by God’s intervention could not prevent the actual
arrival of the seventh day, though it would delay it; nor could it
destroy its identity. The case involves a difficulty for those who hold
the theory that God sanctified the seventh part of time, and not the
seventh day; for in this case the seventh part of time was not allotted
to the Sabbath; but there is no difficulty involved for those who believe
that God set apart the seventh day to be kept as it arrives, in memory
of his own rest. One of the six days was allotted a greater length than
ever before or since; yet this did not in the slightest degree conflict
with the seventh day, which nevertheless did come. Moreover all this
was while inspired men were upon the stage of action; and it was by the
direct providence of God; and what is also to be particularly remembered,
it was at a time when no one will deny that the fourth commandment was in
full force.
The case of David’s eating the shew-bread is worthy of notice, as it
probably took place upon the Sabbath, and because it is cited by our
Lord in a memorable conversation with the Pharisees.[196] The law of the
shew-bread enjoined the setting forth of twelve loaves in the sanctuary
upon the pure table before the Lord EVERY Sabbath.[197] When new bread
was thus placed before the Lord each Sabbath, the old was taken away to
be eaten by the priests.[198] It appears that the shew-bread which was
given to David had that day been taken from before the Lord to put hot
bread in its place, and consequently that day was the Sabbath. Thus,
when David asked bread, the priest said, “There is no common bread under
mine hand, but there is hallowed bread.” And David said, “The bread is
in a manner common, especially [as the margin has it] when THIS DAY
there is other sanctified in the vessel.” And so the sacred writer adds:
“The priest gave him hallowed bread; for there was no bread there but
the shew-bread, that was taken from before the Lord, to put hot bread
in the day when it was taken away.” The circumstances of this case all
favor the view that this was upon the Sabbath. 1. There was NO COMMON
bread with the priest. This is not strange when it is remembered that
the shew-bread was to be taken from before the Lord each Sabbath and
eaten by the priests. 2. That the priest did not offer to _prepare_ other
bread is not singular if it be understood that this was the Sabbath. 3.
The surprise of the priest in meeting David may have been in part owing
to the fact that it was the Sabbath. 4. This also may account for the
detention of Doeg that day before the Lord. 5. When our Lord was called
upon to pronounce upon the conduct of his disciples who had plucked and
eaten the ears of corn upon the Sabbath to satisfy their hunger, he cited
this case of David, and that of the priests offering sacrifices in the
temple upon the Sabbath as justifying the disciples. There is a wonderful
propriety and fitness in this citation, if it be understood that this act
of David’s took place upon the Sabbath. It will be found to present the
matter in a very different light from that in which anti-Sabbatarians
present it.[199]
A distinction may be here pointed out, which should never be lost
sight of. The presentation of the shew-bread and the offering of burnt
sacrifices upon the Sabbath as ordained in the ceremonial law, formed
no part of the original Sabbatic institution. For the Sabbath was made
before the fall of man; while burnt-offerings and ceremonial rites in the
sanctuary were introduced in consequence of the fall. While these rites
were in force they necessarily, to some extent, connected the Sabbath
with the festivals of the Jews in which the like offerings were made.
This is seen only in those scriptures which record the provision made for
these offerings.[200] When the ceremonial law was nailed to the cross,
all the Jewish festivals ceased to exist; for they were ordained by
it;[201] but the abrogation of that law could only take away those rites
which it had appended to the Sabbath, leaving the original institution
precisely as it came at first from its author.
The earliest reference to the Sabbath after the days of Moses is found in
what David and Samuel ordained respecting the offices of the priests and
Levites at the house of God. It is as follows:—
“And other of their brethren, of the sons of the Kohathites,
were over the shew-bread, to prepare it every Sabbath.”[202]
It will be observed that this is only an incidental mention of the
Sabbath. Such an allusion, occurring after so long a silence, is decisive
proof that the Sabbath had not been forgotten or lost during the five
centuries in which it had not been mentioned by the sacred historians.
After this no direct mention of the Sabbath is found from the days of
David to those of Elisha the prophet, a period of about one hundred and
fifty years. Perhaps the ninety-second psalm is an exception to this
statement, as its title, both in Hebrew and English, declares that it was
written for the Sabbath day;[203] and it is not improbable that it was
composed by David, the sweet singer of Israel.
The son of the Shunammite woman being dead, she sought the prophet
Elisha. Her husband not knowing that the child was dead said to her:—
“Wherefore wilt thou go to him to-day? It is neither new moon,
nor Sabbath. And she said, It shall be well.”[204]
It is probable that the Sabbath of the Lord is here intended, as it is
thrice used in a like connection.[205] If this be correct, it shows
that the Hebrews were accustomed to visit the prophets of God upon that
day for divine instruction; a very good commentary upon the words used
relative to gathering the manna: “Let no man go out of his place on the
seventh day.”[206] Incidental allusion is made to the Sabbath at the
accession of Jehoash to the throne of Judah,[207] about B. C. 778. In the
reign of Uzziah, the grandson of Jehoash, the prophet Amos, B. C. 787,
uses the following language:—
“Hear this, O ye that swallow up the needy, even to make the
poor of the land to fail, saying, When will the new moon be
gone, that we may sell corn? and the Sabbath, that we may set
forth wheat, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and
falsifying the balances by deceit? that we may buy the poor for
silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes; yea, and sell the
refuse of the wheat?”[208]
These words were spoken more directly concerning the ten tribes, and
indicate the sad state of apostasy which soon after resulted in their
overthrow as a people. About fifty years after this, at the close of the
reign of Ahaz, another allusion to the Sabbath is found.[209] In the
days of Hezekiah, about B. C. 712, the prophet Isaiah uses the following
language in enforcing the Sabbath:—
“Thus saith the Lord, Keep ye judgment and do justice; for my
salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that
layeth hold on it; that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it,
and keepeth his hand from doing any evil. Neither let the son
of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak,
saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people;
neither let the eunuch say, Behold I am a dry tree. For thus
saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths, and
choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant,
even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls,
a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters; I
will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut
off. Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to
the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord,
to be his servants, every one that keepeth the Sabbath from
polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; even them will
I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house
of prayer; their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall
be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called a
house of prayer for all people. The Lord God which gathereth
the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him,
beside those that are gathered unto him.”[210]
This prophecy presents several features of peculiar interest. 1. It
pertains to a time when the salvation of God is near at hand.[211] 2. It
most distinctly shows that the Sabbath is not a Jewish institution; for
it pronounces a blessing upon that man without respect of nationality
who shall keep the Sabbath; and it then particularizes the son of the
stranger, that is, the Gentile,[212] and makes a peculiar promise to him
if he will keep the Sabbath. 3. And this prophecy relates to Israel when
they are outcasts, that is, when they are in their dispersion, promising
to gather them, and _others_, that is, the Gentiles, with them. Of course
the condition of being gathered to God’s holy mountain must be complied
with, namely, to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, and to
keep the Sabbath from polluting it. 4. And hence it follows that the
Sabbath is not a local institution, susceptible of being observed in the
promised land alone, like the annual sabbaths,[213] but one made for
mankind and capable of being observed by the outcasts of Israel when
scattered in every land under heaven.[214]
Isaiah again presents the Sabbath; and this he does in language most
emphatically distinguishing it from all ceremonial institutions. Thus he
says:—
“If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy
pleasure on my holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the
holy of the Lord, honorable; and shalt honor him, not doing
thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking
thine own words: then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord;
and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the
earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father;
for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.”[215]
This language is an evangelical commentary upon the fourth commandment.
It appends to it an exceeding great and precious promise that takes hold
upon the land promised to Jacob, even the new earth.[216]
In the year B. C. 601, thirteen years before the destruction of Jerusalem
by Nebuchadnezzar, God made to the Jewish people through Jeremiah the
gracious offer, that if they would keep his Sabbath, their city should
stand forever. At the same time he testified unto them that if they
would not do this, their city should be utterly destroyed. Thus said the
prophet:—
“Hear ye the word of the Lord, ye kings of Judah, and all
Judah, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, that enter in by
these gates: Thus saith the Lord: Take heed to yourselves,
and bear no burden on the Sabbath day, nor bring it in by the
gates of Jerusalem;[217] neither carry forth a burden[218]
out of your houses on the Sabbath day, neither do ye any
work, but hallow ye the Sabbath day, as I commanded your
fathers. But they obeyed not, neither inclined their ears,
but made their necks stiff, that they might not hear, nor
receive instruction.[219] And it shall come to pass, if ye
diligently hearken unto me, saith the Lord, to bring in no
burden through the gates of this city on the Sabbath day, but
hallow the Sabbath day, to do no work therein; then shall
there enter into the gates of this city kings and princes
sitting upon the throne of David, riding in chariots and on
horses, they, and their princes, the men of Judah, and the
inhabitants of Jerusalem; and this city shall REMAIN FOREVER.
And they shall come from the cities of Judah, and from the
places about Jerusalem, and from the land of Benjamin, and
from the plain, and from the mountains, and from the south,
bringing burnt-offerings, and sacrifices, and meat-offerings,
and incense, and bringing sacrifices of praise, unto the house
of the Lord. But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the
Sabbath day, and not to bear a burden, even entering in at the
gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; then will I kindle a
fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of
Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched.”[220]
This gracious offer of the Most High to his rebellious people was not
regarded by them; for eight years after this Ezekiel testifies thus:—
“In thee have they set light by father and mother: in the midst
of thee have they dealt by oppression with the stranger: in
thee have they vexed the fatherless and the widow. Thou hast
despised mine holy things, and hast profaned my Sabbaths....
Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine
holy things: they have put no difference between the holy
and profane, neither have they showed difference between
the unclean and the clean, and have hid their eyes from my
Sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.... Moreover this they
have done unto me: they have defiled my sanctuary in the same
day, and have profaned my Sabbaths. For when they had slain
their children to their idols, then they came the same day into
my sanctuary to profane it; and, lo, thus have they done in the
midst of mine house.”[221]
Idolatry and Sabbath-breaking, which were besetting sins with the
Hebrews in the wilderness, and which there laid the foundation for their
dispersion from their own land,[222] had ever cleaved unto them. And now
when their destruction was impending from the overwhelming power of the
king of Babylon, they were so deeply attached to these and kindred sins,
that they would not regard the voice of warning. Before entering the
sanctuary of God upon his Sabbath, they first slew their own children in
sacrifice to their idols![223] Thus iniquity came to its hight, and wrath
came upon them to the uttermost.
“They mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and
misused his prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against
his people, till there was no remedy. Therefore he brought
upon them the king of the Chaldees, who slew their young men
with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no
compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that
stooped for age: he gave them all into his hand. And all the
vessels of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures
of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king, and of
his princes; all these he brought to Babylon, and they burnt
the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and
burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all the
goodly vessels thereof. And them that had escaped from the
sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to
him and his sons until the reign of the king of Persia.”[224]
While the Hebrews were in captivity at Babylon, God made to them an offer
of restoring them to their own land and giving them again a city and a
temple under circumstances of wonderful glory.[225] The condition of that
offer being disregarded,[226] the offered glory was never inherited by
them. In this offer were several allusions to the Sabbath of the Lord,
and also to the festivals of the Hebrews.[227] One of these allusions
is worthy of particular notice for the distinctness with which it
discriminates between the Sabbath and the other days of the week:—
“Thus saith the Lord God: The gate of the inner court that
looketh toward the east, shall be shut THE SIX WORKING DAYS;
but on the Sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the
new moon it shall be opened.”[228]
Six days of the week are by divine inspiration called “the six working
days;” the seventh is called the Sabbath of the Lord. Who shall dare
confound this marked distinction?
After the Jews had returned from their captivity in Babylon, and had
restored their temple and city, in a solemn assembly of the whole people
they recount in an address to the Most High all the great events of
God’s providence in their past history. Thus they testify respecting the
Sabbath:—
“Thou camest down also upon Mount Sinai, and spakest with them
from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws,
good statutes and commandments: and madest known unto them thy
holy Sabbath, and commandest them precepts, statutes, and laws,
by the hand of Moses thy servant.”[229]
Thus were all the people reminded of the great events of Mount Sinai—the
giving of the ten words of the law of God, and the making known of his
holy Sabbath. So deeply impressed was the whole congregation with the
effect of their former disobedience, that they entered into a solemn
covenant to obey God.[230] They pledged themselves to each other thus:—
“And if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals on
the Sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on
the Sabbath, or on the holy day; and that we would leave the
seventh year, and the exaction of every debt.”[231]
In the absence of Nehemiah at the Persian court, this covenant was in
part, at least, forgotten. Eleven years having elapsed, Nehemiah thus
testifies concerning things at his return about B. C. 434:—
“In those days saw I in Judah some treading wine-presses on the
Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also
wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they
brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; and I testified
against them in the day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt
men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner
of ware, and sold on the Sabbath unto the children of Judah,
and in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the nobles of Judah,
and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and
profane the Sabbath day? Did not your fathers thus, and did
not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city?
yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the Sabbath.
And it came to pass, that, when the gates of Jerusalem began
to be dark before the Sabbath,[232] I commanded that the gates
should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened
till after the Sabbath: and some of my servants set I at the
gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the Sabbath
day. So the merchants and sellers of all kind of ware lodged
without Jerusalem once or twice. Then I testified against them,
and said unto them, Why lodge ye about the wall? if ye do so
again, I will lay hands on you. From that time forth came they
no more on the Sabbath. And I commanded the Levites that they
should cleanse themselves, and that they should come and keep
the gates, to sanctify the Sabbath day. Remember me, O my God,
concerning this also, and spare me according to the greatness
of thy mercy.”[233]
This scripture is an explicit testimony that the destruction of Jerusalem
and the captivity of the Jews at Babylon were in consequence of their
profanation of the Sabbath. It is a striking confirmation of the language
of Jeremiah, already noticed, in which he testified to the Jews that if
they would hallow the Sabbath their city should stand forever; but that
it should be utterly destroyed if they persisted in its profanation.
Nehemiah bears testimony to the accomplishment of Jeremiah’s prediction
concerning the violation of the Sabbath; and with his solemn appeal in
its behalf ends the history of the Sabbath in the Old Testament.
CHAPTER IX.
THE SABBATH FROM NEHEMIAH TO CHRIST.
Great change in the Jewish people respecting idolatry and
Sabbath-breaking after their return from Babylon—Decree
of Antiochus Epiphanes against the Sabbath—Massacre of a
thousand Sabbath-keepers in the wilderness—Similar massacre at
Jerusalem—Decree of the Jewish elders relative to resisting
attacks upon the Sabbath—Other martyrdoms—Victories of Judas
Maccabeus—How Pompey captured Jerusalem—Teaching of the
Jewish doctors respecting the Sabbath—State of the Sabbatic
institution at the first advent of the Saviour.
The period of almost five centuries intervenes between the time
of Nehemiah and the commencement of the ministry of the Redeemer.
During this time an extraordinary change came over the Jewish people.
Previously, they had been to an alarming extent idolaters, and
outbreaking violators of the Sabbath. But after their return from Babylon
they were never guilty of idolatry to any extent, the chastisement of
that captivity effecting a cure of this evil.[234] In like manner did
they change their conduct relative to the Sabbath; and during this
period they loaded the Sabbatic institution with the most burdensome and
rigorous ordinances. A brief survey of this period must suffice. Under
the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, the king of Syria, B. C. 170, the Jews
were greatly oppressed.
“King Antiochus wrote to his whole kingdom, that all should be
one people, and every one should leave his laws: so all the
heathen agreed according to the commandment of the king. Yea,
many also of the Israelites consented to his religion, and
sacrificed unto idols, and profaned the Sabbath.”[235]
The greater part of the Hebrews remained faithful to God, and, as a
consequence, were obliged to flee for their lives. Thus the historian
continues:—
“Then many that sought after justice and judgment went
down into the wilderness, to dwell there: both they, and
their children, and their wives, and their cattle; because
afflictions increased sore upon them. Now when it was told
the king’s servants, and the host that was at Jerusalem,
in the city of David, that certain men, who had broken the
king’s commandment, were gone down into the secret places in
the wilderness, they pursued after them a great number, and
having overtaken them, they camped against them, and made war
against them on the Sabbath day. And they said unto them, Let
that which ye have done hitherto suffice; come forth, and do
according to the commandment of the king, and ye shall live.
But they said, We will not come forth, neither will we do the
king’s commandment, to profane the Sabbath day. So then they
gave them the battle with all speed. Howbeit they answered them
not, neither cast they a stone at them, nor stopped the places
where they lay hid. But said, Let us die all in our innocency:
heaven and earth shall testify for us, that ye put us to death
wrongfully. So they rose up against them in battle on the
Sabbath, and they slew them, with their wives and children, and
their cattle, to the number of a thousand people.”[236]
In Jerusalem itself a like massacre took place. King Antiochus sent
Appollonius with an army of twenty-two thousand,
“Who, coming to Jerusalem, and pretending peace, did forbear
till the holy day of the Sabbath, when taking the Jews keeping
holy day, he commanded his men to arm themselves. And so
he slew all them that were gone to the celebrating of the
Sabbath, and running through the city with weapons, slew great
multitudes.”[237]
In view of these dreadful acts of slaughter, Mattathias, “an honorable
and great man,” the father of Judas Maccabeus, with his friends decreed
thus:—
“Whosoever shall come to make battle with us on the Sabbath
day we will fight against him; neither will we die all, as our
brethren that were murdered in the secret places.”[238]
Yet were some martyred after this for observing the Sabbath. Thus we
read:—
“And others, that had run together into caves near by, to keep
the Sabbath day secretly, being discovered to Philip, were
all burnt together, because they made a conscience to help
themselves for the honor of the most sacred day.”[239]
After this, Judas Maccabeus did great exploits in defense of the Hebrews,
and in resisting the dreadful oppression of the Syrian government. Of one
of these battles we read:—
“When he had given them this watchword, _The help of God_,
himself leading the first band, he joined battle with Nicanor.
And by the help of the Almighty they slew above nine thousand
of their enemies, and wounded and maimed the most part of
Nicanor’s host, and so put all to flight; and took their money
that came to buy them, and pursued them far; but lacking
time, they returned: for it was the day before the Sabbath,
and therefore they would no longer pursue them. So when they
had gathered their armor together, and spoiled their enemies,
they occupied themselves about the Sabbath, yielding exceeding
praise and thanks to the Lord, who had preserved them unto that
day, which was the beginning of mercy distilling upon them.
And after the Sabbath, when they had given part of the spoils
to the maimed, and the widows, and orphans, the residue they
divided among themselves and their servants.”[240]
After this the Hebrews being attacked upon the Sabbath by their enemies,
defeated them with much slaughter.[241]
About B. C. 63, Jerusalem was besieged and taken by Pompey, the general
of the Romans. To do this, it was necessary to fill an immense ditch,
and to raise against the city a bank on which to place the engines of
assault. Thus Josephus relates the event:—
“And had it not been our practice, from the days of our
forefathers, to rest on the seventh day, this bank could
never have been perfected, by reason of the opposition the
Jews would have made; for though our law gives us leave then
to defend ourselves against those that begin to fight with
us, and assault us, yet does it not permit us to meddle with
our enemies while they do anything else. Which thing when the
Romans understood, on those days which we call Sabbaths, they
threw nothing at the Jews, nor came to any pitched battle with
them, but raised up their earthen banks, and brought their
engines into such forwardness, that they might do execution the
next days.”[242]
From this it is seen that Pompey carefully refrained from any attack upon
the Jews on each Sabbath during the siege, but spent that day in filling
the ditch and raising the bank, that he might attack them on the day
following each Sabbath, that is, upon Sunday. Josephus further relates
that the priests were not at all hindered from their sacred ministrations
by the stones thrown among them from the engines of Pompey, even “if
any melancholy accident happened;” and that when the city was taken and
the enemy fell upon them, and cut the throats of those that were in the
temples, yet did not the priests run away or desist from the offering of
the accustomed sacrifices.
These quotations from Jewish history are sufficient to indicate the
extraordinary change that came over that people concerning the Sabbath,
after the Babylonish captivity. A brief view of the teaching of the
Jewish doctors respecting the Sabbath at the time when our Lord began his
ministry will conclude this chapter:—
“They enumerated about forty primary works, which they said
were forbidden to be done on the Sabbath. Under each of these
were numerous secondary works, which they said were also
forbidden.... Among the primary works which were forbidden,
were ploughing, sowing, reaping, winnowing, cleaning, grinding,
etc. Under the head of grinding, was included the breaking
or dividing of things which were before united.... Another
of their traditions was, that, as threshing on the Sabbath
was forbidden, the bruising of things, which was a species of
threshing, was also forbidden. Of course, it was violation of
the Sabbath to walk on green grass, for that would bruise or
thresh it. So, as a man might not hunt on the Sabbath, he
might not catch a flea; for that was a species of hunting. As a
man might not carry a burden on the Sabbath, he might not carry
water to a thirsty animal, for that was a species of burden;
but he might pour water into a trough, and lead the animal to
it.... Yet should a sheep fall into a pit, they would readily
lift him out, and bear him to a place of safety.... They said
a man might minister to the sick for the purpose of relieving
their distress, but not for the purpose of healing their
diseases. He might put a covering on a diseased eye, or anoint
it with eye-salve for the purpose of easing the pain, but not
to cure the eye.”[243]
Such was the remarkable change in the conduct of the Jewish people toward
the Sabbath; and such was the teaching of their doctors respecting it.
The most merciful institution of God for mankind had become a source
of distress; that which God ordained as a delight and a source of
refreshment had become a yoke of bondage; the Sabbath, made for man in
paradise, was now a most oppressive and burdensome institution. It was
time that God should interfere. Next upon the scene of action appears the
Lord of the Sabbath.
CHAPTER X.
THE SABBATH DURING THE LAST OF THE SEVENTY WEEKS.
Mission of the Saviour—His qualifications as a judge of
Sabbatic observance—State of the institution at his advent—The
Saviour at Nazareth—At Capernaum—His discourse in the
corn-field—Case of the man with a withered arm—The Saviour
among his relatives—Case of the impotent man—Of the man born
blind—Of the woman bound by Satan—Of the man who had the
dropsy—Object of our Lord’s teaching and miracles relative to
the Sabbath—Unfairness of many anti-Sabbatarians—Examination of
Matt. 24:20—The Sabbath not abrogated at the crucifixion—Fourth
commandment after that event—Sabbath not changed at the
resurrection of Christ—Examination of John 20:26—Of Acts
2:1, 2—Redemption furnishes no argument for the change of
the Sabbath—Examination of Ps. 118:22-24—The Sabbath neither
abolished nor changed as late as the close of the seventy weeks.
In the fullness of time God sent forth his Son to be the Saviour of the
world. He who fulfilled this mission of infinite benevolence was both the
Son of God and the Son of man. He was with the Father before the world
was, and by him God created all things.[244] The Sabbath being ordained
at the close of that great work as a memorial to keep it in lasting
remembrance, the Son of God, by whom all things were created, could not
be otherwise than a perfect judge of its true design, and of its proper
observance. The sixty-nine weeks of Daniel’s prophecy being accomplished,
the Redeemer began to preach, saying, “The time is fulfilled.”[245] The
ministry of the Saviour was at a time when the Sabbath of the Lord had
become utterly perverted from its gracious design, by the teaching of
the Jewish doctors. As we have seen in the previous chapter, it was to
the people no longer a source of refreshment and delight, but a cause of
suffering and distress. It had been loaded down with traditions by the
doctors of the law until its merciful and beneficent design was utterly
hidden beneath the rubbish of men’s inventions. It being impracticable
for Satan, after the Babylonish captivity, to cause the Jewish people,
even by bloody edicts, to relinquish the Sabbath and openly to profane
it as before that time, he turned their doctors so to pervert it, that
its real character should be utterly changed and its observance entirely
unlike that which would please God. We shall find that the Saviour never
missed an opportunity to correct their false notions respecting the
Sabbath; and that he selected, with evident design, the Sabbath as the
day on which to perform many of his merciful works. It will be found that
no small share of his teaching through his whole ministry was devoted
to a determination of what was lawful on the Sabbath, a singular fact
for those to explain who think that he designed its abrogation. At the
opening of our Lord’s ministry, we read thus:—
“And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee;
and there went out a fame of him through all the region round
about. And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of
all. And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up;
and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the
Sabbath day, and stood up for to read.”[246]
Such was the manner of the Saviour relative to the Sabbath. It is evident
that in this he designed to show his regard for that day; for it was not
necessary thus to do in order to gain a congregation, as vast multitudes
were ever ready to throng his steps. His testimony being rejected, our
Lord left Nazareth for Capernaum. Thus the sacred historian says:—
“But he, passing through the midst of them, went his way, and
came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on
the Sabbath days. And they were astonished at his doctrine; for
his word was with power. And in the synagogue there was a man
which had a spirit of an unclean devil; and he cried out with
a loud voice, saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with
thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth; art thou come to destroy us? I
know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God. And Jesus rebuked
him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the
devil had thrown him in the midst, he came out of him, and hurt
him not. And they were all amazed, and spake among themselves,
saying, What a word is this! for with authority and power he
commandeth the unclean spirits, and they come out. And the fame
of him went out into every place of the country round about.
And he arose out of the synagogue, and entered into Simon’s
house. And Simon’s wife’s mother was taken with a great fever;
and they besought him for her. And he stood over her, and
rebuked the fever; and it left her; and immediately she arose
and ministered unto them.”[247]
These miracles are the first which stand upon record as performed by the
Saviour upon the Sabbath. But the strictness of Jewish views relative to
the Sabbath is seen in that they waited till sunset, that is, till the
Sabbath was passed,[248] before they brought the sick to be healed. Thus
it is added:—
“And at even when the sun did set, they brought unto him all
that were diseased, and them that were possessed with devils.
And all the city was gathered together at the door. And he
healed many that were sick of divers diseases, and cast out
many devils; and suffered not the devils to speak, because they
knew him.”[249]
The next mention of the Sabbath is of peculiar interest:—
“At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath day through the corn;
and his disciples were an hungered, and began to pluck the ears
of corn, and to eat. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said
unto him, Behold thy disciples do that which is not lawful
to do upon the Sabbath day. But he said unto them, Have ye
not read what David did, when he was an hungered, and they
that were with him; how he entered into the house of God, and
did eat the shew-bread, which was not lawful for him to eat,
neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath day the
priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?
But I say unto you that in this place is one greater than
the temple. But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will
have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the
guiltless. For the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath
day.”[250]
The parallel text in Mark has an important addition to the conclusion as
stated by Matthew:—
“And he said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not
man for the Sabbath; therefore the Son of man is Lord also of
the Sabbath.”[251]
The following points should be noted in examining this text:—
1. That the question at issue did not relate to the act of passing
through the corn on the Sabbath; for the Pharisees themselves were in the
company; and hence it may be concluded that the Saviour and those with
him were either going to, or returning from, the synagogue.
2. That the question raised by the Pharisees was this: Whether the
disciples, in satisfying their hunger from the corn through which they
were passing, were not violating the law of the Sabbath.
3. That he to whom this question was proposed was in the highest degree
competent to answer it; for he was with the Father when the Sabbath was
made.[252]
4. That the Saviour was pleased to appeal to scriptural precedents for
the decision of this question, rather than to assert his own independent
judgment.
5. That the first case cited by the Saviour was peculiarly appropriate.
David, fleeing for his life, entered the house of God upon the
Sabbath,[253] and ate the shew-bread to satisfy his hunger. The
disciples, to relieve their hunger, simply ate of the corn through which
they were passing upon the Sabbath. If David did right, though eating
in his necessity of that which belonged only to the priests, how little
of blame could be attached to the disciples who had not even violated a
precept of the ceremonial law? Thus much for the disciples’ satisfying
their hunger as they did upon the Sabbath. Our Lord’s next example is
designed to show what labor upon the Sabbath is not a violation of its
sacredness.
6. And hence the case of the priests is cited. The same God who had said
in the fourth commandment, “Six days shalt thou labor and do all THY
work,” had commanded that the priests upon the Sabbath should offer
certain sacrifices in his temple.[254]
Herein was no contradiction; for the labor performed by the priests upon
the Sabbath was simply the maintenance of the appointed worship of God
in his temple, and was not doing what the commandment calls “THY WORK.”
Labor of this kind, therefore, the Saviour being judge, was not, and
never had been, a violation of the Sabbath.
7. But it is highly probable that the Saviour, in this reference to the
priests, had his mind not merely upon the sacrifices which they offered
upon the Sabbath, but upon the fact that they were required to prepare
new shew-bread every Sabbath; when the old was to be removed from the
table before the Lord and eaten by them.[255] This view of the matter
would connect the case of the priests with that of David, and both would
bear with wonderful distinctness upon the act of the disciples. Then
our Lord’s argument could be appreciated when he adds: “But I say unto
you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.” So that if the
shew-bread was to be prepared each Sabbath for the use of those who
ministered in the temple, and those who did this were guiltless, how free
from guilt also must be the disciples who, in following HIM that was
greater than the temple, but who had not where to lay his head, had eaten
of the standing corn upon the Sabbath to relieve their hunger?
8. But our Lord next lays down a principle worthy of the most serious
attention. Thus he adds: “But if ye had known what this meaneth, I
will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the
guiltless.” The Most High had ordained certain labor to be performed upon
the Sabbath, in order that sacrifices might be offered to himself. But
Christ affirms upon the authority of the Scriptures,[256] that there is
something far more acceptable to God than sacrifices, and that this is
acts of mercy. If God held those guiltless who offered sacrifices upon
the Sabbath, how much less would he condemn those who extend mercy and
relief to the distressed and suffering, upon that day.
9. Nor does the Saviour even leave the subject here; for he adds: “The
Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; therefore the Son
of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” If the Sabbath was _made_, certain
acts were necessary in order to give existence to it. What were those
acts? (1) God rested upon the seventh day. This made the seventh day the
rest-day or Sabbath of the Lord. (2) He blessed the day; thus it became
his holy day. (3) He sanctified it, or set it apart to a holy use; thus
its observance became a part of man’s duty toward God. There must be a
time when these acts were performed. And on this point there is really
no room for controversy. They were not performed at Sinai, nor in the
wilderness of Sin, but in paradise. And this is strikingly confirmed by
the language here used by the Saviour: “The Sabbath was made for THE man,
not THE man for the Sabbath;”[257] thus citing our minds to the man Adam
that was made of the dust of the ground, and affirming that the Sabbath
was made for him; a conclusive testimony that the Sabbath originated in
paradise. This fact is happily illustrated by a statement of the apostle
Paul: “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the
man.”[258] It will not be denied that this language has direct reference
to the creation of Adam and Eve. If then we turn back to the beginning,
we shall find Adam made of the dust of the ground, Eve taken from his
side, and the Sabbath made of the seventh day.[259] Thus the Saviour,
to complete the solution of the question raised by the Pharisees,
traces the Sabbath back to the beginning, as he does the institution of
marriage when the same class proposed for his decision the lawfulness of
divorce.[260] His careful statement of the design of the Sabbath and of
marriage, tracing each to the beginning, in the one case striking down
their perversion of the Sabbath, in the other, that of marriage, is the
most powerful testimony in behalf of the sacredness of each institution.
The argument in the one case stands thus: In the beginning God created
_one_ man and _one_ woman, designing that they two should be one flesh.
The marriage relation therefore was designed to unite simply two persons,
and this union _should_ be sacred and indissoluble. Such was the bearing
of his argument upon the question of divorce. In relation to the Sabbath,
his argument is this: God made the Sabbath for the man that he made of
the dust of the ground; and being thus made for an unfallen race, it can
only be a merciful and beneficent institution. He who made the Sabbath
for man before the fall saw what man needed, and knew how to supply that
want. It was given to him for rest, refreshment, and delight; a character
that it sustained after the fall,[261] but which the Jews had wholly lost
sight of.[262] And thus our Lord lays open his whole heart concerning
the Sabbath. He carefully determines what works are not a violation of
the Sabbath; and this he does by Old-Testament examples, that it may be
evident that he is introducing no change in the institution; he sets
aside their rigorous and burdensome traditions concerning the Sabbath,
by tracing it back to its merciful origin in paradise; and having thus
disencumbered the Sabbath of Pharisaic rigor, he leaves it upon its
paradisiacal foundation, enforced by all the authority and sacredness
of that law which he came not to destroy, but to magnify and make
honorable.[263]
10. Having thus divested the Sabbath of all Pharisaic additions, our Lord
concludes with this remarkable declaration: “Therefore the Son of man is
Lord also of the Sabbath.” (1) It was not a disparagement to the Sabbath,
but an honor, that God’s only Son should claim to be its Lord. (2) Nor
was it derogatory to the character of the Redeemer to be the Lord of the
Sabbath; with all the high honors pertaining to his messiahship he is
ALSO Lord of the Sabbath. Or, if we take the expression in Matthew, he is
“Lord EVEN of the Sabbath day,” it implies that it is not a small honor
to possess such a title. (3) This title implies that the Messiah should
be the _protector_, and not the _destroyer_, of the Sabbath. And hence
that he was the rightful being to decide the proper nature of Sabbatic
observance. With these memorable words ends our Lord’s first discourse
concerning the Sabbath.
From this time the Pharisees watched the Saviour to find an accusation
against him of violating the Sabbath. The next example will show the
malignity of their hearts, their utter perversion of the Sabbath, the
urgent need of an authoritative correction of their false teachings
respecting it, and the Saviour’s unanswerable defense:—
“And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:
and behold there was a man which had his hand withered. And
they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath
days? that they might accuse him. And he said unto them, What
man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and
if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will he not lay hold
on it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than
a sheep? Wherefore, it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath
days. Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And
he stretched it forth; and it was restored whole, like as the
other. Then the Pharisees went out and held a council against
him, how they might destroy him.”[264]
What was the act that caused this madness of the Pharisees? On the part
of the Saviour, it was a word; on the part of the man, it was the act of
stretching out his arm. Did the law of the Sabbath forbid either of these
things? No one can affirm such a thing. But the Saviour had publicly
transgressed that tradition of the Pharisees that forbade the doing
of anything whatever toward the healing of the sick upon the Sabbath.
And how necessary that such a wicked tradition should be swept away,
if the Sabbath itself was to be preserved for man. But the Pharisees
were filled with such madness that they went out of the synagogue and
consulted how they might destroy the Saviour. Yet Jesus only acted in
behalf of the Sabbath in setting aside those traditions by which they had
perverted it.
After this, our Lord returned into his own country, and thus we read of
him:—
“And when the Sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the
synagogue; and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From
whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this
which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are
wrought by his hands?”[265]
Not far from this time we find the Saviour at Jerusalem, and the
following miracle was performed upon the Sabbath:—
“And a certain man was there which had an infirmity thirty
and eight years. When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had
been there now a long time in that case, he saith unto him,
Wilt thou be made whole? The impotent man answered him, Sir,
I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the
pool; but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me.
Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk. And
immediately the man was made whole, and took up his bed and
walked; and on the same day was the Sabbath. The Jews therefore
said unto him that was cured, It is the Sabbath day: It is
not lawful for thee to carry thy bed. He answered them, He
that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed,
and walk. Then asked they him, What man is that which said
unto thee, Take up thy bed, and walk?... The man departed and
told the Jews that it was Jesus, which had made him whole. And
therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay
him, because he had done these things on the Sabbath day. But
Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not
only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his
Father, making himself equal with God.”[266]
Our Lord here stands charged with two crimes: 1. He had broken the
Sabbath. 2. He had made himself equal with God. The first accusation is
based on these particulars: (1) By his word he had healed the impotent
man. But this violated no law of God; it only set at naught that
tradition which forbade anything to be done for curing diseases upon the
Sabbath. (2) He had directed the man to carry his bed. But this as a
burden was a mere trifle,[267] like a cloak or mat, and was designed to
show the reality of his cure, and thus to honor the Lord of the Sabbath
who had healed him. Moreover, it was not such a burden as the Scriptures
forbid upon the Sabbath.[268] (3) Jesus justified what he had done by
comparing his present act of healing to that work which his Father had
done HITHERTO, _i. e._, from the beginning of the creation. Ever since
the Sabbath was sanctified in paradise, the Father, by his providence,
had continued to mankind, even upon the Sabbath, all the merciful acts
by which the human race has been preserved. This work of the Father was
of precisely the same nature as that which Jesus had now done. These
acts did not argue that the Father had _hitherto_ lightly esteemed the
Sabbath, for he had most solemnly enjoined its observance in the law
and in the prophets;[269] and as our Lord had most expressly recognized
their authority,[270] there was no ground to accuse him of disregarding
the Sabbath, when he had only followed the example of the Father from
the beginning. The Saviour’s answer to these two charges will remove all
difficulty:—
“Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say
unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth
the Father do; for what things soever he doeth, these also
doeth the Son likewise.”[271]
This answer involves two points: 1. That he was following his Father’s
perfect example, who had ever laid open to him all his works; and hence
as he was doing that only which had ever been the pleasure of the Father
to do, he was not engaged in the overthrow of the Sabbath. 2. And by the
meek humility of this answer—“The Son can do nothing of himself, but what
he seeth the Father do”—he showed the groundlessness of their charge of
self-exaltation. Thus, in nothing was there left a chance to answer him
again.
Several months after this, the same case of healing was under discussion:
“Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and
ye all marvel. Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision
(not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers); and ye on
the Sabbath-day circumcise a man. If a man on the Sabbath day
receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be
broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every
whit whole on the Sabbath day?”[272]
This Scripture contains our Lord’s second answer relative to healing the
impotent man upon the Sabbath. In his first answer he rested his defense
upon the fact that what he had done was precisely the same as that which
his Father had done _hitherto_, that is, from the beginning of the
world; which implies that the Sabbath had existed from the same point,
else the example of the Father during this time would not be relevant.
In this, his second answer, a similar point is involved relative to the
origin of the Sabbath. His defense this time rests upon the fact that
his act of healing no more violated the Sabbath than did the act of
circumcising upon the Sabbath. But if circumcision, which was ordained
in the time of Abraham, was older than the Sabbath—as it certainly was
if the Sabbath originated in the wilderness of Sin—there would be an
impropriety in the allusion; for circumcision would be entitled to the
priority as the more ancient institution. It would be strictly proper
to speak of the more recent institution as involving no violation of an
older one; but it would be otherwise to speak of an ancient institution
as involving no violation of one more recent. The language therefore
implies that the Sabbath was older than circumcision; in other words,
more ancient than the days of Abraham. These two answers of the Saviour
are certainly in harmony with the unanimous testimony of the sacred
writers, that the Sabbath originated with the sanctification of the
rest-day of the Lord in Eden.
What had the Saviour done to justify the hatred of the Jewish people
toward him? He had healed upon the Sabbath, with one word, a man who had
been helpless thirty-eight years. Was not this act in strict accordance
with the Sabbatic institution? Our Lord has settled this point in the
affirmative by weighty and unanswerable arguments,[273] not in this case
alone, but in others already noticed, and also in those which remain to
be noticed. Had he left the man in his wretchedness because it was the
Sabbath, when a word would have healed him, he would have dishonored the
Sabbath, and thrown reproach upon its Author. We shall find the Lord of
the Sabbath still further at work in its behalf in rescuing it from the
hands of those who had so utterly perverted its design; a work quite
unnecessary, had he designed to nail the institution to his cross.
The next incident to be noticed is the case of the man that was born
blind. Jesus seeing him said:—
“I must work the works of him that sent me whilst it is day;
the night cometh when no man can work. As long as I am in the
world, I am the light of the world. When he had thus spoken
he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he
anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, and said unto
him, Go wash in the pool of Siloam (which is by interpretation,
Sent). He went his way therefore, and washed, and came
seeing.... And it was the Sabbath day when Jesus made the clay
and opened his eyes.”[274]
Here is the record of another of our Lord’s merciful acts upon the
Sabbath day. He saw a man blind from his birth; moved with compassion
toward him, he moistened clay and anointed his eyes, and sent him to
the pool to wash; and when he had washed he received sight. The act was
alike worthy of the Sabbath and of its Lord: and it pertains only to
the opponents of the Sabbath _now_, as it pertained only to the enemies
of its Lord _then_, to see in this even the slightest violation of the
Sabbath.
After this we read as follows:—
“And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath.
And behold there was a woman which had a spirit of infirmity
eighteen years, and was bowed together, and could in no wise
lift up herself. And when Jesus saw her, he called her to him,
and said unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity.
And he laid his hands on her; and immediately she was made
straight, and glorified God. And the ruler of the synagogue
answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on
the Sabbath day, and said unto the people, There are six days
in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be
healed, and not on the Sabbath day. The Lord then answered
him and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the
Sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him
away to watering? And ought not this woman, being a daughter of
Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be
loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day? And when he had said
these things, all his adversaries were ashamed: and all the
people rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by
him.”[275]
This time a daughter of Abraham, that is, a pious woman,[276] who had
been bound by Satan eighteen years, was loosed from that bond upon the
Sabbath day. Jesus silenced the clamor of his enemies by an appeal
to their own course of action in loosing the ox and leading him to
water upon the Sabbath. With this answer our Lord made ashamed all his
adversaries, and all the people rejoiced for all the glorious things
that were done by him. The last of these glorious acts with which Jesus
honored the Sabbath is thus narrated:—
“And it came to pass as he went into the house of one of
the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath day, that
they watched him. And, behold, there was a certain man before
him which had the dropsy. And Jesus answering spake unto the
lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the
Sabbath day? And they held their peace. And he took him, and
healed him, and let him go; and answered them, saying, Which of
you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not
straightway pull him out on the Sabbath day? And they could not
answer him again to these things.”[277]
It is evident that the Pharisees and lawyers durst not answer the
question, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath day? If they said, “Yes,”
they condemned their own tradition. If they said, “No,” they were unable
to sustain their answer by fair argument. Hence they remained silent.
And when Jesus had healed the man, he asked a second question equally
embarrassing: Which of you shall have an ox fall into a pit and will
not straightway pull him out on the Sabbath? They could not answer him
again to these things. It is apparent that our Lord’s argument with the
Pharisees from time to time relative to the Sabbath had satisfied them
at last that silence relative to their traditions was wiser than speech.
In his public teaching the Saviour declared that the weightier matters
of the law were judgment, MERCY, and faith;[278] and his long-continued
and powerful effort in behalf of the Sabbath, was to vindicate it as a
MERCIFUL institution, and to rid it of Pharisaic traditions, by which it
was perverted from its original purpose. Those who oppose the Sabbath are
here guilty of unfairness in two particulars: 1. They represent these
Pharisaic rigors as actually belonging to the Sabbatic institution. By
this means they turn the minds of men against the Sabbath. 2. And having
done this they represent the effort of the Saviour to set aside those
traditions as directed to the overthrow of the Sabbath itself.
And now we come to the Saviour’s memorable discourse upon the mount of
Olives, on the very eve of his crucifixion, in which for the last time he
mentions the Sabbath:—
“When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso
readeth, let him understand), then let them which be in Judea
flee into the mountains: let him which is on the house-top
not come down to take anything out of his house; neither let
him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give
suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the
winter, neither on the Sabbath day; for then shall be great
tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world
to this time, no, nor ever shall be.”[279]
In this language our Lord brings to view the dreadful calamities of the
Jewish people, and the destruction of their city and temple as predicted
by Daniel the prophet;[280] and his watchful care over his people as
their Lord leads him to point out their means of escape.
1. He gives them a token by which they should know when this terrible
overthrow was immediately impending. It was “the abomination of
desolation” standing “in the holy place;” or, as expressed by Luke, the
token was “Jerusalem compassed with armies.”[281] The fulfillment of this
sign is recorded by the historian Josephus. After stating that Cestius,
the Roman commander, at the commencement of the contest between the Jews
and the Romans, encompassed the city of Jerusalem with an army, he adds:—
“Who, had he but continued the siege a little longer, had
certainly taken the city; but it was, I suppose, owing to the
aversion God had already at the city and the sanctuary, that
he was hindered from putting an end to the war that very day.
It then happened that Cestius was not conscious either how the
besieged despaired of success, nor how courageous the people
were for him; and so he recalled his soldiers from the place,
and by despairing of any expectation of taking it, without
having received any disgrace, he retired from the city, without
any reason in the world.”[282]
2. This sign being seen, the disciples were to know that the desolation
of Jerusalem was nigh. “Then,” says Christ, “let them which be in Judea
flee into the mountains.” Josephus records the fulfillment of this
injunction:—
“After this calamity had befallen Cestius, many of the most
eminent of the Jews swam away from the city, as from a ship
when it was going to sink.”[283]
Eusebius also relates its fulfillment:—
“The whole body, however, of the church at Jerusalem, having
been commanded by a divine revelation, given to men of approved
piety there before the war, removed from the city, and dwelt
at a certain town beyond the Jordan, called Pella. Here, those
that believed in Christ, having removed from Jerusalem, as if
holy men had entirely abandoned the royal city itself, and
the whole land of Judea; the divine justice for their crimes
against Christ and his apostles, finally overtook them, totally
destroying the whole generation of these evil-doers from the
earth.”[284]
3. So imminent was the danger when this sign should be seen that not a
moment was to be lost. He that was upon the house-top could not even
come down to take a single article from his house. The man that was in
the field was forbidden to return to the house for his clothes. Not a
moment was to be lost; they must flee as they were, and flee for life.
And pitiable indeed was the case of those who could not flee.
4. In view of the fact that the disciples must flee the moment that the
promised token should appear, our Lord directed them to pray for two
things: 1. That their flight should not be in the winter. 2. That it
should not be upon the Sabbath day. Their pitiable situation should they
be compelled to flee to the mountains in the depth of winter, without
time to even take their clothes, sufficiently attests the importance
of the first of these petitions, and the tender care of Jesus as the
Lord of his people. The second of these petitions will be found equally
expressive of his care as Lord of the Sabbath.
5. But it is replied that this last petition has reference only to the
fact that the Jews would then be keeping the Sabbath strictly, and as
a consequence the city gates would be closed that day, and those be
punished with death who should attempt to flee; and hence this petition
indicates nothing in proof of Christ’s regard for the Sabbath. An
assertion so often and so confidently uttered should be well founded in
truth; yet a brief examination will show that such is not the case. 1.
The Saviour’s language has reference to the whole land of Judea, and not
to Jerusalem only: “Let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains.”
The closing of the city gates could not therefore affect the flight of
but a part of the disciples. 2. Josephus states the remarkable fact that
when Cestius was marching upon Jerusalem in fulfillment of the Saviour’s
token, and had reached Lydda, not many miles from Jerusalem, “he found
the city empty of its men; for the whole multitude were gone up to
Jerusalem to the feast of tabernacles.”[285] The law of Moses required
the presence of every male in Israel at this feast in Jerusalem;[286]
and thus, in the providence of God, the disciples had no Jewish enemies
left in the country to hinder their flight. 3. The Jewish nation being
thus assembled at Jerusalem did most openly violate the Sabbath a few
days prior to the flight of the disciples; a singular commentary on their
supposed strictness in keeping it at that time.[287] Thus Josephus says
of the march of Cestius upon Jerusalem that,
“He pitched his camp at a certain place called Gabao, fifty
furlongs distant from Jerusalem. But as for the Jews, when they
saw the war approaching to their metropolis, they left the
feast, and betook themselves to their arms; and taking courage
greatly from their multitude, went in a sudden and disorderly
manner to the fight, with a great noise, and without any
consideration had of the rest of the seventh day, although the
Sabbath was the day to which they had the greatest regard; but
that rage which made them forget the religious observation [of
the Sabbath] made them too hard for their enemies in the fight;
with such violence therefore did they fall upon the Romans, as
to break into their ranks, and to march through the midst of
them, making a great slaughter as they went,”[288] etc.
Thus it is seen that on the eve of the disciples’ flight the rage of the
Jews toward their enemies made them utterly disregard the Sabbath! 4.
But after Cestius encompassed the city with his army, thus giving the
Saviour’s signal, he suddenly withdrew it, as Josephus says, “without any
reason in the world.” This was the moment of flight for the disciples,
and mark how the providence of God opened the way for those in Jerusalem:—
“But when the robbers perceived this unexpected retreat of his,
they resumed their courage, and ran after the hinder parts of
his army, and destroyed a considerable number of both their
horsemen and footmen: and now Cestius lay all night at the camp
which was at Scopus, and as he went off farther next day, he
thereby invited the enemy to follow him, who still fell upon
the hindmost and destroyed them.”[289]
This sally of the excited multitude in pursuit of the Romans was at the
very moment when the disciples were commanded to flee, and could not but
afford them the needed facility of escape. Had the flight of Cestius
happened upon the Sabbath, undoubtedly the Jews would have pursued him
upon that day, as under less exciting circumstances they had a few days
before gone out several miles to attack him upon the Sabbath. It is seen,
therefore, that whether in city or country, the disciples were not in
danger of being attacked by their enemies, even had their flight been
upon the Sabbath day.
6. There is therefore but one view that can be taken relative to the
meaning of these words of our Lord, and that is that he thus spake,
out of sacred regard for the Sabbath. For in his tender care for his
people he had given them a precept that would require them to violate
the Sabbath, should the moment for flight happen upon that day. For the
command to flee was imperative the instant the promised signal should
be seen, and the distance to Pella, where they found a place of refuge,
was at least sixty miles. This prayer which the Saviour left with the
disciples would cause them to remember the Sabbath whenever they should
come before God. It was therefore impossible that the apostolic church
should forget the day of sacred rest. Such a prayer, that they might not
at a future time be compelled to violate the Sabbath, was a sure and
certain means of perpetuating its sacred observance for the coming forty
years, until the final destruction of Jerusalem, and was never forgotten
by that early church, as we shall hereafter see.[290] The Saviour, who
had taken unwearied pains during his whole ministry to show that the
Sabbath was a merciful institution and to set aside those traditions by
which it had been perverted from its true design, did, in this his last
discourse, most tenderly commend the Sabbath to his people, uniting in
the same petition their own safety and the sacredness of the rest-day of
the Lord.[291]
A few days after this discourse, the Lord of the Sabbath was nailed to
the cross as the great sacrifice for the sins of men.[292] The Messiah
was thus cut off in the midst of the seventieth week; and by his death he
caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease.[293]
Paul thus describes the abrogation of the typical system at the
crucifixion of the Lord Jesus:—
“Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against
us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way,
nailing it to his cross.... Let no man therefore judge you in
meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new
moon, or of the sabbath days; which are a shadow of things to
come; but the body is of Christ.”[294]
The object of this action is declared to be the handwriting of
ordinances. The manner of its abrogation is thus stated: 1. Blotted out;
2. Nailed to the cross; 3. Taken out of the way. Its nature is shown in
these words: “Against us” and “contrary to us.” The things contained in
it were meats, drinks, holy days [Gr. ἑορτης a feast day], new moons and
sabbaths.[295] The whole is declared a shadow of good things to come;
and the body which casts this shadow is of Christ. That law which was
proclaimed by the voice of God and written by his own finger upon the
tables of stone, and deposited beneath the mercy-seat, was altogether
unlike that system of carnal ordinances that was written by Moses in a
book, and placed in the side of the ark.[296] It would be absurd to speak
of the tables of STONE as NAILED to the cross; or to speak of BLOTTING
out what was ENGRAVED in STONE. It would be blasphemous to represent
the Son of God as pouring out his blood to blot out what the finger
of his Father had written. It would be to confound all the immutable
principles of morality, to represent the ten commandments as “contrary”
to man’s moral nature. It would be to make Christ the minister of sin, to
represent him as dying to utterly destroy the moral law. Nor does that
man keep truth on his side who represents the ten commandments as among
the things contained in Paul’s enumeration of what was abolished. Nor is
there any excuse for those who would destroy the ten commandments with
this statement of Paul; for he shows, last of all, that what was thus
abrogated was a shadow of good things to come—an absurdity if applied to
the moral law. The feasts, new moons, and sabbaths, of the ceremonial
law, which Paul declared to be abolished in consequence of the abrogation
of that code, have been particularly noticed already.[297] That the
Sabbath of the Lord is not included in their number, the following facts
evince:—
1. The Sabbath of the Lord was made before sin entered our world. It is
not therefore one of those things that shadow redemption from sin.[298]
2. Being made FOR man before the fall it is not one of those things that
are AGAINST him and CONTRARY to him.[299]
3. When the ceremonial sabbaths were ordained they were carefully
distinguished from the Sabbath of the Lord.[300]
4. The Sabbath of the Lord does not owe its existence to the handwriting
of ordinances, but is found in the very bosom of that law which Jesus
came not to destroy. The abrogation of the ceremonial law could not
therefore abolish the Sabbath of the fourth commandment.[301]
5. The effort of our Lord through his whole ministry to redeem the
Sabbath from the thralldom of the Jewish doctors, and to vindicate it as
a merciful institution, is utterly inconsistent with the idea that he
nailed it to his cross, as one of those things against man and contrary
to him.
6. Our Lord’s petition respecting the flight of the disciples from Judea,
recognizes the sacredness of the Sabbath many years after the crucifixion
of the Saviour.
7. The perpetuity of the Sabbath in the new earth is not easily
reconciled with the idea that it was blotted out and nailed to our
Lord’s cross as one of those things that were contrary to man.[302]
8. Because the authority of the fourth commandment is expressly
recognized after the Saviour’s crucifixion.[303]
9. And finally, because the royal law which is unabolished embodies the
ten commandments, and consequently embraces and enforces the Sabbath of
the Lord.[304]
When the Saviour died upon the cross the whole typical system which
had pointed forward to that event as the commencement of its antitype,
expired with him. The Saviour being dead, Joseph of Arimathea went in
unto Pilate and begged the body of Jesus, and with the assistance of
Nicodemus, buried it in his own new tomb.[305]
“And that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on.
And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed
after, and beheld the sepulcher, and how his body was laid.
And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and
rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment. Now upon
the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they
came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they had
prepared, and certain others with them.”[306]
This text is worthy of special attention. 1. Because it is an express
recognition of the fourth commandment after the crucifixion of the Lord
Jesus. 2. Because it is the most remarkable case of Sabbatic observance
in the whole Bible. The Lord of the Sabbath was dead; preparation being
made for his embalming, when the Sabbath drew on it was suspended, and
they rested, says the sacred historian, according to the commandment. 3.
Because it shows that the Sabbath day according to the commandment is the
day before the first day of the week; thus identifying the seventh day
in the commandment with the seventh day of the New-Testament week. 4.
Because it is a direct testimony that the knowledge of the true seventh
day was preserved as late as the crucifixion; for they observed the day
enjoined in the commandment; and that was the day on which the Most High
had rested from the work of creation.
In the course of the day following this Sabbath, that is, upon the first
day of the week, it was ascertained that Jesus was risen from the dead.
It appears that this event must have taken place upon that day, though it
is not thus stated in express terms. At this point of time it is supposed
by many that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day of
the week; and that the sacredness of the seventh day was then transferred
to the first day of the week, which thenceforth was the Christian
Sabbath, enforced by all the authority of the fourth commandment. To
judge of the truthfulness of these positions, let us read with care each
mention of the first day found in the four evangelists. Thus writes
Matthew:—
“In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the
first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary
to see the sepulcher.”
Thus also Mark writes:—
“And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene and Mary the
mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that
they might come and anoint him. And very early in the morning,
the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulcher at the
rising of the sun.... Now when Jesus was risen early the first
day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene.”
Luke uses the following language:—
“And they returned and prepared spices and ointments, and
rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment. Now upon
the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they
came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they had
prepared, and certain others with them.”
John bears the following testimony:—
“The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when
it was yet dark, unto the sepulcher, and seeth the stone taken
away from the sepulcher.... Then the same day at evening, being
the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the
disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus
and stood in their midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto
you.”[307]
In these texts the foundation of the “Christian Sabbath” must be
sought—if indeed such an institution actually exists—for there are no
other records of the first day which relate to the time when it is
supposed to have become sacred. These texts are supposed to prove that at
the resurrection of the Saviour, the first day absorbed the sacredness
of the seventh, elevating itself from the rank of a secular to that of
a sacred day, and abasing the Sabbath of the Lord to the rank of “the
six working days.”[308] Yet the following facts must be regarded as very
extraordinary indeed if this supposed change of the Sabbath here took
place:—
1. That these texts should contain no mention of this change of the
Sabbath. 2. That they should carefully discriminate between the Sabbath
of the fourth commandment and the first day of the week. 3. That they
should apply no sacred title to that day; particularly that they should
omit the title of Christian Sabbath. 4. That they should not mention the
fact that Christ rested upon that day; an act essential to its becoming
his Sabbath.[309] 5. That they do not relate the act of taking the
blessing of God from the seventh day, and placing it upon the first;
and indeed that they do not mention any act whatever of blessing and
hallowing the day. 6. That they omit to mention anything that Christ did
to the first day; and that they even neglect to inform us that Christ so
much as took up the first day of the week into his lips! 7. That they
give no precept in support of first-day observance, nor do they contain a
hint of the manner in which the first day of the week can be enforced by
the authority of the fourth commandment.
Should it be asserted, however, from the words of John, that the
disciples were on this occasion convened for the purpose of honoring the
day of the resurrection, and that Jesus sanctioned this act by meeting
with them, thus accomplishing the change of the Sabbath, it is sufficient
to cite in reply the words of Mark in which the same interview is
narrated:—
“Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat,
and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart,
because they believed not them which had seen him after he was
risen.”[310]
This testimony of Mark shows that the inference so often drawn from the
words of John is utterly unfounded. 1. The disciples were assembled
for the purpose of eating supper. 2. Jesus came into their midst and
upbraided them for their unbelief respecting his resurrection.
The Scriptures declare that “with God all things are possible;” yet this
statement is limited by the declaration that God cannot lie.[311] Does
the change of the Sabbath pertain to those things that are possible with
God, or is it excluded by that important limitation, _God cannot lie_?
The Law-giver is the God of truth, and his law is the truth.[312] Whether
it would still remain the truth if changed to something else, and whether
the Law-giver would still continue to be the God of truth after he had
thus changed it, remains to be seen. The fourth commandment, which is
affirmed to have been changed, is thus expressed:—
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.... The seventh day
is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.... For in six days the Lord
made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and
rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath
day, and hallowed it.”
If now we insert “first day” in place of the seventh, we shall bring the
matter to a test:—
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.... The first day is
the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.... For in six days the Lord
made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and
rested the first day, wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath
day, and hallowed it.”
This changes the truth of God into a lie;[313] for it is false that God
rested upon the first day of the week and blessed and hallowed it. Nor
is it possible to change the rest-day of the Creator from that day on
which he rested to one of the six days on which he did not rest.[314] To
change a part of the commandment, and to leave the rest unchanged, will
not therefore answer, as the truth which is left is still sufficient to
expose the falsehood which is inserted. A more radical change is needed,
like the following:—
“Remember the Christian Sabbath, to keep it holy. The first day
is the Sabbath of the Lord Jesus Christ. For on that day he
arose from the dead; wherefore he blessed the first day of the
week, and hallowed it.”
After such a change, no part of the original Sabbatic institution
remains. Not only is the rest-day of the Lord left out, but even the
reasons on which the fourth commandment is based are of necessity
omitted also. But does such an edition of the fourth commandment as
this exist? Not in the Bible, certainly. Is it true that such titles
as these are applied to the first day? Never, in the Holy Scriptures.
Did the Law-giver bless and hallow that day? Most assuredly not. He did
not even take the name of it into his lips. Such a change of the fourth
commandment on the part of the God of truth is impossible; for it not
merely affirms that which is false and denies that which is true, but it
turns the truth of God itself into a lie. It is simply the act of setting
up a rival to the Sabbath of the Lord, which, having neither sacredness
nor authority of its own, has contrived to absorb that of the Bible
Sabbath itself. Such is the FOUNDATION of the first-day Sabbath. The
texts which are employed in rearing the institution upon this foundation
will be noticed in their proper order and place. Several of these texts
properly pertain to this chapter:—
“And after eight days again his disciples were within, and
Thomas with them; then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and
stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.”[315]
It is not asserted that on this occasion our Lord hallowed the first
day of the week; for that act is affirmed to date from the resurrection
itself on the authority of the texts already quoted. But the sacredness
of the first day being assumed as the foundation, this text furnishes the
first stone for the superstructure; the first pillar in the first-day
temple. The argument drawn from it may be thus stated: Jesus selected
this day as the one in which to manifest himself to his disciples; and
by this act strongly attested his regard for the day. But it is no small
defect in this argument that his next meeting with them was on a fishing
occasion,[316] and his last and most important manifestation, when he
ascended into Heaven, was upon Thursday.[317] The act of the Saviour in
meeting with his disciples must therefore be yielded as insufficient
of itself to show that any day is sacred; for it would otherwise prove
the sacredness of several of the working days. But a still more serious
defect in this argument is found in the fact that this meeting of Jesus
with his disciples does not appear to have been upon the first day of
the week. It was “after eight days” from the previous meeting of Jesus
and the disciples, which, coming at the very close of the resurrection
day, could not but have extended into the second day of the week.[318]
“After eight days” from this meeting, if made to signify only one week,
necessarily carries us to the second day of the week. But a different
expression is used by the Spirit of inspiration when simply one week is
intended. “After seven days” is the chosen term of the Holy Spirit when
designating just one week.[319] “After eight days” most naturally implies
the ninth or tenth day;[320] but allowing it to mean the eighth day, it
fails to prove that this appearance of the Saviour was upon the first
day of the week. To sum up the argument: The first meeting of Jesus
with his disciples in the evening at the close of the first day of the
week was mainly if not wholly upon the second day of the week;[321] the
second meeting could not have been earlier in the week than the second or
third day, and the day seems to have been selected simply because that
Thomas was present; the third meeting was upon a fishing occasion; and
the fourth, was upon Thursday, when he ascended into Heaven. The argument
for first-day sacredness drawn from this text is eminently fitted to
the foundation of that sacredness already examined; and the institution
of the first-day Sabbath itself, unless formed of more substantial
frame-work than enters into its foundation, is at best only a castle in
the air.
The text which next enters into the fabric of first-day sacredness is the
following:—
“And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all
with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound
from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the
house where they were sitting.”[322]
This text is supposed to contribute an important pillar for the first-day
temple. On this wise it is furnished: The disciples were convened on this
occasion to celebrate the first-day Sabbath, and the Holy Spirit was
poured out at that time in honor of that day. To this deduction there
are, however, the most serious objections. 1. That there is no evidence
that a first-day Sabbath was then in existence. 2. That there is no
intimation that the disciples came together on this occasion for its
celebration. 3. Nor that the Holy Spirit was then poured out in honor of
the first day of the week. 4. That from the ascension of Jesus until the
day of the Spirit’s outpouring, the disciples had continued in prayer
and supplication, so that their being convened on this day was nothing
materially different from what had been the case for the past ten or more
days.[323] 5. That had the sacred writer designed to show that a certain
day of the week was honored by the events narrated, he would doubtless
have stated that fact, and named that day. 6. That Luke was so far from
naming the day of the week that it is even now a disputed point; eminent
first-day authors[324] even asserting that the day of Pentecost that year
came upon the _seventh_ day. 7. That the one great event which the Holy
Spirit designed to mark was the antitype of the feast of Pentecost; the
day of the week on which that should occur being wholly immaterial. How
widely, therefore, do those err who reverse this order, making the day
of the week, which the Holy Spirit has not even named, but which they
assume to be the first day, the thing of chief importance, and passing in
silence over that fact which the Holy Spirit has so carefully noted, that
this event took place upon the day of Pentecost. The conclusion to which
these facts lead is inevitable; viz., that the pillar furnished from this
text for the first-day temple is like the foundation of that edifice,
simply a thing of the imagination, and quite worthy of a place beside
the pillar furnished from the record of our Lord’s second appearance to
his disciples.
A third pillar for the first-day edifice is the following: Redemption
is greater than creation; therefore the day of Christ’s resurrection
should be observed instead of the day of the Creator’s rest. But this
proposition is open to the fatal objection that the Bible says nothing
of the kind.[325] Who then knows that it is true? When the Creator
gave existence to our world, did he not foresee the fall of man? And,
foreseeing that fall, did he not entertain the purpose of redeeming man?
And does it not follow that the purpose of redemption was entertained in
that of creation? Who then can affirm that redemption is greater than
creation?
But as the Scriptures do not decide this point, let it be assumed that
redemption is the greater. Who knows that a day should be set apart for
its commemoration? The Bible says nothing on the point. But granting
that a day should be set apart for this purpose, what day should have
the preference? Is it said, That day on which redemption was finished?
It is not true that redemption is finished; the resurrection of the
saints and the redemption of our earth from the curse are included in
that work.[326] But granting that redemption should be commemorated
before it is finished, by setting apart a day in its honor, the question
again arises, What day shall it be? The Bible is silent in reply. If
the most memorable day in the history of redemption should be selected,
undoubtedly the day of the crucifixion, on which the price of human
redemption was paid, must have the preference. Which is the more
memorable day, that on which the infinite Law-giver gave up his only and
well-beloved Son to die an ignominious death for a race of rebels who
had broken his law, or that day on which he restored that beloved Son to
life? The latter event, though of thrilling interest, is the most natural
thing in the world; the crucifixion of the Son of God for sinful men may
be safely pronounced the most wonderful event in the annals of eternity.
The crucifixion day is therefore beyond all comparison the more memorable
day. And that redemption itself is asserted of the crucifixion rather
than of the resurrection is an undoubted fact. Thus it is written:—
“In whom we have redemption through his blood;” “Christ hath
redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for
us, for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a
tree;” “Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy
blood.”[327]
If, therefore, any day should be observed in memory of redemption,
unquestionably the day of the crucifixion should have the preference.
But it is needless to pursue this point further. Whether the day of the
crucifixion or the day of the resurrection should be preferred is quite
immaterial. The Holy Spirit has said nothing in behalf of either of these
days, but it has taken care that the _event_ in each case should have
its own appropriate memorial. Would you commemorate the crucifixion of
the Redeemer? You need not change the Sabbath to the crucifixion day.
It would be a presumptuous sin in you to do this. Here is the divinely
appointed memorial of the crucifixion:—
“The Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took
bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said,
Take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you; this do in
remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup,
when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my
blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do
shew the Lord’s death till he come.”[328]
It is the death of the Redeemer, therefore, and not the day of his death
that the Holy Spirit has thought worthy of commemoration. Would you also
commemorate the resurrection of the Redeemer? You need not change the
Sabbath of the Bible for that purpose. The great Law-giver has never
authorized such an act. But an appropriate memorial of that event has
been ordained:—
“Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus
Christ, were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried
with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised
up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also
should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted
together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the
likeness of his resurrection.”[329]
To be buried in the watery grave as our Lord was buried in the tomb,
and to be raised from the water to walk in newness of life, as our Lord
was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, is the divinely
authorized memorial of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And let it be
observed, it is not the day of the resurrection, but the resurrection
itself, that was thought worthy of commemoration. The events which lie at
the foundation of redemption are the death, burial, and resurrection, of
the Redeemer. Each of these has its appropriate memorial; while the days
on which they severally occurred have no importance attached to them. It
was the death of the Redeemer, and not the day of his death, that was
worthy of commemoration; and hence the Lord’s supper was appointed for
that purpose. It was the resurrection of the Saviour, and not the day of
the resurrection, that was worthy of commemoration; and hence burial in
baptism was ordained as its memorial. It is the change of this memorial
to sprinkling that has furnished so plausible a plea for first-day
observance in memory of the resurrection.
To celebrate the work of redemption by resting from labor on the first
day of the week after six days of toil, it should be true that our
Lord accomplished the work of human redemption in the six days prior
to that of his resurrection, and that he rested on that day from the
work, blessing it, and setting it apart for that reason. Yet not one of
these particulars is true. Our Lord’s whole life was devoted to this
work. He rested temporarily from it indeed over the Sabbath following
his crucifixion, but resumed the work on the morning of the first day of
the week, which he has never since relinquished, and never will, until
its perfect accomplishment in the resurrection of the saints and the
redemption of the purchased possession. Redemption, therefore, furnishes
no plea for a change of the Sabbath; its own memorials being quite
sufficient, without destroying that of the great Creator. And thus the
third pillar in the temple of first-day sacredness, like the other parts
of that structure which have been already examined, is found to be a
thing of the imagination only.
A fourth pillar in this temple is taken from an ancient prophecy in which
it is claimed that the Christian Sabbath was foretold:—
“The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone
of the corner. This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our
eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice
and be glad in it.”[330]
This text is considered one of the strongest testimonies in support of
the Christian Sabbath. Yet it is necessary to assume the very points
that this text is supposed to prove. 1. It is assumed that the Saviour
became the head of the corner by his resurrection. 2. That the day of
his resurrection was made the Christian Sabbath in commemoration of
that event. 3. And that this day thus ordained should be celebrated by
abstinence from labor, and attendance upon divine worship.
To these extraordinary assumptions it is proper to reply: 1. There is
no proof that Jesus became the head of the corner on the day of his
resurrection. The Scriptures do not mark the day when this event took
place. His being made head of the corner has reference to his becoming
the chief corner stone of that spiritual temple composed of his people;
in other words, it has reference to his becoming head of that living
body, the saints of the Most High. It does not appear that he assumed
this position until his ascension on high, where he became the chief
corner stone in Zion above, elect and precious.[331] And hence there
is no evidence that the first day of the week is even referred to in
this text. 2. Nor is there the slightest evidence that that day or any
other day was set apart as the Christian Sabbath in memory of Christ’s
resurrection. 3. Nor can there well be found a more extraordinary
assumption than that this text enjoins the Sabbatic observance of the
first day of the week!
This scripture has manifest reference to the Saviour’s act of becoming
the head of the New-Testament church; and consequently it pertains to
the opening of the gospel dispensation. The day in which the people of
God rejoice, in view of this relation to the Redeemer, can therefore be
understood of no one day of the week; for they are commanded to “rejoice
EVERMORE;”[332] but of the whole period of the gospel dispensation. Our
Lord uses the word day in the same manner when he says:—
“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and
was glad.”[333]
To assert the existence of what is termed the Christian Sabbath on the
ground that this text is the prediction of such an institution, is to
furnish a fourth pillar for the first-day temple quite as substantial as
those already tested.
The seventieth week of Daniel’s prophecy extends three and a half years
beyond the death of the Redeemer, to the commencement of the great work
for the Gentiles. This period of seven years through which we have been
passing is the most eventful period in the history of the Sabbath. It
embraces the whole history of the Lord of the Sabbath as connected with
that institution: His miracles and teaching, by which it is affirmed
that he weakened its authority; his death, at which many affirm that
he abrogated it; and his resurrection, at which a still larger number
declare that he changed it to the first day of the week. We have had the
most ample evidence, however, that each of these positions is false; and
that the opening of the great work for the Gentiles witnessed the Sabbath
of the fourth commandment neither weakened, abrogated, nor changed.
CHAPTER XI.
THE SABBATH DURING THE MINISTRY OF THE APOSTLES.
The knowledge of God preserved in the family of Abraham—The
call of the Gentiles—The new covenant puts the law of God into
the heart of each Christian—The new covenant has a temple in
Heaven; and an ark containing the great original of that law
which was in the ark upon earth—And before that ark a priest
whose offering can take away sin—The Old and New Testaments
compared—The human family in all ages amenable to the law of
God—The good olive tree shows the intimate relation between the
church of the New Testament and the Hebrew church—The apostolic
church observed the Sabbath—Examination of Acts 13—The assembly
of the apostles at Jerusalem—Sabbatarian origin of the church
at Philippi—Of the church of the Thessalonians—Of the church
of Corinth—The churches in Judea and in many cases among the
Gentiles began with Sabbath-keepers—Examination of 1 Cor. 16:1,
2—Self-contradiction of Dr. Edwards—Paul at Troas—Examination
of Rom. 14:1-6—Flight of the disciples from Judea—The Sabbath
of the Bible at the close of the first century.
We have now traced the Sabbath through the period of its especial
connection with the family of Abraham. The termination of the seventy
weeks brings us to the call of the Gentiles, and to their admission to
equal privileges with the Hebrew race. We have seen that with God there
was no injustice in conferring especial blessings upon the Hebrews, and
at the same time leaving the Gentiles to their own chosen ways.[334]
Twice had he given the human family, as a whole, the most ample means
of grace that their age of the world admitted, and each time did it
result in the almost total apostasy of mankind. Then God selected as
his heritage the family of Abraham, his friend; and by means of that
family preserved in the earth the knowledge of his law, his Sabbath, and
himself, until the coming of the great Messiah. During his ministry, the
Messiah solemnly affirmed the perpetuity of his Father’s law, enjoining
obedience, even to its least commandment;[335] at his death he broke
down that middle wall of partition[336] by which the Hebrews had so long
been preserved a separate people in the earth; and when about to ascend
into Heaven commanded his disciples to go into all the world and preach
the gospel to every creature; teaching them to observe all things which
he had commanded them.[337] With the expiration of the seventieth week,
the apostles enter upon the execution of this great commission to the
Gentiles.[338] Several facts of deep interest should here be noticed:—
1. The new covenant or testament dates from the death of the Redeemer.
In accordance with the prediction of Jeremiah, it began with the Hebrews
alone, and was confined exclusively to them until the expiration of the
seventieth week. Then the Gentiles were admitted to a full participation
with the Hebrews in its blessings, being no longer aliens and foreigners,
but fellow-citizens with the saints.[339] God entered into covenant this
time with his people as individuals and not as a nation. The promises of
this covenant embrace two points of great interest: (1) That God will
put his law into the hearts of his people. (2) That he will forgive their
sins. These promises being made six hundred years before the birth of
Christ, there can be no question relative to what was meant by the law
of God. It was the law of God then in existence that should be put into
the heart of each new-covenant saint. The new covenant, then, is based
upon the perpetuity of the law of God; it does not abrogate that law, but
takes away sin, the transgression of the law, from the heart, and puts
the law of God in its place.[340] The perpetuity of each precept of the
moral law lies, therefore, at the very foundation of the new covenant.
2. As the first covenant had a sanctuary, and within that sanctuary an
ark containing the law of God in ten commandments,[341] and had also
a priesthood to minister before that ark, to make atonement for the
sins of men,[342] even thus is it with the new covenant. Instead of the
tabernacle erected by Moses as the pattern of the true, the new covenant
has the greater and more perfect tabernacle, which the Lord pitched and
not man—the temple of God in Heaven.[343] As the great central point
in the earthly sanctuary was the ark containing that law which man had
broken, even thus it is with the heavenly sanctuary. “The temple of God
was opened in Heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his
testament.”[344] Our Lord Jesus Christ as a great High Priest presents
his own blood before the ark of God’s testament in the temple in Heaven.
Respecting this object before which he ministers, let the following
points be noted:—
1. The ark in the heavenly temple is not empty; it contains the testament
of God; and hence it is the great center of the sanctuary above, as the
ark of God’s testament was the center of the sanctuary on earth.[345]
2. The death of the Redeemer for the sins of men, and his work as High
Priest before the ark in Heaven, have direct reference to the fact that
within that ark is the law which mankind have broken.
3. As the atonement and priesthood of Christ have reference to the law
within that ark before which he ministers, it follows that this law
existed and was transgressed before the Saviour came down to die for men.
4. And hence, the law contained in the ark above is not a law which
originated in the New Testament; for it necessarily existed long anterior
to it.
5. If, therefore, God has revealed this law to mankind, that revelation
must be sought in the Old Testament. For while the New Testament makes
many references to that law which caused the Saviour to lay down his life
for sinful men, and even quotes from it, it never publishes a second
edition, but cites us to the Old Testament for the original code.[346]
6. It follows, therefore, that this law is revealed, and that this
revelation is to be found in the Old Testament.
7. In that volume will be found, (1) The descent of the Holy One upon
Mount Sinai; (2) The proclamation of his law in ten commandments; (3) The
ten commandments written by the finger of God upon two tables of stone;
(4) These tables placed beneath the mercy-seat in the ark of the earthly
sanctuary.[347]
8. That this remarkable Old-Testament law which was shut up in the ark
of the earthly sanctuary was identical with that in the ark in Heaven,
may be thus shown: (1) The mercy-seat which was placed over the ten
commandments was the place from which pardon was expected, the great
central point in the work of atonement;[348] (2) The law beneath the
mercy-seat was that which made the work of atonement necessary; (3)
There was no atonement that could take away sins; it was only a shadowy
or typical atonement; (4) But there was actual sin, and hence a real
law which man had broken; (5) There must therefore be an atonement that
can take away sins; and that real atonement must pertain to that law
which was broken, and respecting which an atonement had been shadowed
forth.[349] (6) The ten commandments are thus set forth in the Old
Testament as that law which demanded an atonement; while the fact is ever
kept in view that those sacrifices there provided could not avail to
take away sins.[350] (7) But the death of Jesus as the antitype of those
sacrifices, was designed to accomplish precisely what they shadowed
forth, but which they could not effect, viz., to make atonement for
the transgression of that law which was placed in the ark beneath the
mercy-seat.[351]
We are thus brought to the conclusion that the law of God contained in
the ark in Heaven is identical with that law which was contained in the
ark upon earth; and that both are identical with that law which the new
covenant puts in the heart of each believer.[352] The Old Testament,
therefore, gives us the law of God and pronounces it perfect; it also
provides a typical atonement, but pronounces it inadequate to take away
sins.[353] Hence what was needed was not a new edition of the law of God;
for that which was given already was perfect; but a real atonement to
take away the guilt of the transgressor. So the New Testament responds
precisely to this want, providing a real atonement in the death and
intercession of the Redeemer, but giving no new edition of the law of
God,[354] though it fails not to cite us to the perfect code given long
before. But although the New Testament does not give a new edition of the
law of God, it does show that the Christian dispensation has the great
original of that law in the sanctuary in Heaven.
9. We have seen that the new covenant places the law of God in the heart
of each believer, and that the original of that law is preserved in the
temple in Heaven. That all mankind are amenable to the law of God, and
that they ever have been, is clearly shown by Paul’s epistle to the
Romans. In the first chapter, he traces the origin of idolatry to the
willful apostasy of the Gentiles, which took place soon after the flood.
In the second chapter, he shows that although God gave them up to their
own ways, and as a consequence left them without his written law, yet
they were not left in utter darkness; for they had by nature the work
of the law written in their hearts; and dim as was this light, their
salvation would be secured by living up to it, or their ruin accomplished
by sinning against it. In the third chapter, he shows what advantage
the family of Abraham had in being taken as the heritage of God, while
all other nations were left to their own ways. It was that the oracles
of God, the written law, was given them in addition to that work of the
law written in the heart, which they had by nature in common with the
Gentiles. He then shows that they were no better than the Gentiles,
because that both classes were transgressors of the law. This he proves
by quotations from the Old Testament. Then he shows that the law of God
has jurisdiction over all mankind:—
“Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to
them who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped,
and all the world may become guilty before God.”[355]
He then shows that the law cannot save the guilty, but must condemn them,
and that justly. Next, he reveals the great fact that redemption through
the death of Jesus is the only means by which God can justify those who
seek pardon, and at the same time remain just himself. And finally he
exclaims:—
“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea,
we establish the law.”[356]
It follows, therefore, that the law of God is unabolished; that the
sentence of condemnation which it pronounces upon the guilty is as
extensive as is the offer of pardon through the gospel; that its work
exists in the hearts of men by nature; from which we may conclude
that man in his uprightness possessed it in perfection, as is further
proved by the fact that the new covenant, after delivering men from
the condemnation of the law of God, puts that law perfectly into their
hearts. From all of which it follows that the law of God is the great
standard by which sin is shown,[357] and hence the rule of life, by which
all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles, should walk.
That the church in the present dispensation is really a continuation of
the ancient Hebrew church, is shown by the illustration of the good olive
tree. That ancient church was God’s olive tree, and that olive tree has
never been destroyed.[358] Because of unbelief, _some_ of its branches
were broken off; but the proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles does
not create a new olive tree; it only grafts into the good olive tree
such of the Gentiles as believe; giving them a place among the original
branches, that with them they may partake of its root and fatness.
This olive tree must date from the call of Abraham after the apostasy
of the Gentiles; its trunk representing the patriarchs, beginning with
the father of the faithful;[359] its branches, the Hebrew people. The
ingrafting of the wild olive into the place of those branches which were
broken off, represents the admission of the Gentiles to equal privileges
with the Hebrews after the expiration of the seventy weeks. The
Old-Testament church, the original olive tree, was a kingdom of priests
and an holy nation; the New-Testament church, the olive tree after the
ingrafting of the Gentiles, is described in the same terms.[360]
When God gave up the Gentiles to apostasy before the call of Abraham, he
confounded their language, that they should not understand one another,
and thus scattered them abroad upon the face of the earth. Standing over
against this is the gift of tongues on the day of Pentecost, preparatory
to the call of the Gentiles, and their ingrafting into the good olive
tree.[361]
We have followed the Sabbath to the call of the Gentiles, and the opening
events of the gospel dispensation. We find the law of God, of which the
Sabbath is a part, to be that which made our Lord’s death as an atoning
sacrifice necessary; and that the great original of that law is in the
ark above, before which our Lord ministers as high priest; while a copy
of that law is by the new covenant written within the heart of each
believer. It is seen, therefore, that the law of God is more intimately
connected with the people of God since the death of the Redeemer than
before that event.
That the apostolic church did sacredly regard the Sabbath, as well as
all the other precepts of the moral law, admits of no doubt. The fact
is proved, not merely because the early Christians were not accused of
its violation by their most inveterate enemies; nor wholly by the fact
that they held sin to be the transgression of the law, and that the
law was the great standard by which sin is shown, and that by which sin
becomes exceeding sinful.[362] These points are certainly very decisive
evidence that the apostolic church did keep the fourth commandment. The
testimony of James relative to the ten commandments, that he who violates
one of them becomes guilty of all, is yet another strong evidence that
the primitive church did sacredly regard the whole law of God.[363] But
besides these facts we have a peculiar guaranty that the Sabbath of the
Lord was not forgotten by the apostolic church. The prayer which our Lord
taught his disciples, that their flight from Judea should not be upon the
Sabbath was, as we have seen, designed to impress its sacredness deeply
upon their minds, and could not but have secured that result.[364] In the
history of the primitive church we have several important references to
the Sabbath. The first of these is as follows:—
“But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in
Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and
sat down.”[365]
By invitation of the rulers of the synagogue, Paul delivered an extended
address, proving that Jesus was the Christ. In the course of these
remarks he used the following language:—
“For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because
they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are
read every Sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning
him.”[366]
When Paul’s discourse was concluded, we read:—
“And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles
besought that these words might be preached to them the next
Sabbath.[367] Now when the congregation was broken up, many of
the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas:
who speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace
of God. And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city
together to hear the word of God.”[368]
These texts show, 1. That by the term Sabbath in the book of Acts is
meant that day on which the Jewish people assembled in the synagogue
to listen to the voices of the prophets. 2. That as this discourse was
fourteen years after the resurrection of Christ, and the record of it
by Luke was some thirty years after that event, it follows that the
alleged change of the Sabbath at the resurrection of Christ had not,
even after many years, come to the knowledge of either Luke or Paul.
3. That here was a remarkable opportunity to mention the change of the
Sabbath, had it been true that the Sabbath had been changed in honor of
Christ’s resurrection. For when Paul was asked to preach the same words
the next Sabbath, he might have answered that the following day was now
the proper day for divine worship. And Luke, in placing this incident
upon record, could not well avoid the mention of this new day, had it
been true that another day had become the Sabbath of the Lord. 4. That
as this second meeting pertained almost wholly to Gentiles, it cannot be
said in this case that Paul preached upon the Sabbath out of regard to
the Jews. On the contrary, the narrative strongly indicates Paul’s regard
for the Sabbath as the proper day for divine worship. 5. Nor can it be
denied that the Sabbath was well understood by the Gentiles in this city,
and that they had some degree of regard for it, a fact which will be
corroborated by other texts.
Several years after these things, the apostles assembled at Jerusalem
to consider the question of circumcision.[369] “Certain men which came
down from Judea,” finding the Gentiles uncircumcised, had “taught the
brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses
ye cannot be saved.” Had they found the Gentiles neglecting the Sabbath;
unquestionably this would have first called out their rebuke. It is
indeed worthy of notice that no dispute at this time existed in the
church relative to the observance of the Sabbath; for none was brought
before this apostolic assembly. Yet had it been true that the change of
the Sabbath was then advocated, or that Paul had taught the Gentiles to
neglect the Sabbath, without doubt those who brought up the question
of circumcision would have urged that of the Sabbath with even greater
earnestness. That the law of Moses, the observance of which was under
discussion in this assembly, is not the ten commandments, is evident
from several decisive facts. 1. Because that Peter calls the code under
consideration a _yoke_ which neither their fathers nor themselves were
able to bear. But James expressly calls that royal law, which, on his
own showing, embodies the ten commandments, a law of liberty. 2. Because
that this assembly did decide against the authority of the law of Moses;
and yet James, who was a member of this body, did some years afterward
solemnly enjoin obedience to the commandments, affirming that he who
violated one was guilty of all.[370] 3. Because the chief feature in the
law of Moses as here presented was circumcision.[371] But circumcision
was not in the ten commandments; and were it true that the law of Moses
includes these commandments, circumcision would not in that case be a
chief feature of that law. 4. Finally, because that the precepts still
declared obligatory are not properly either of the ten commandments.
These were, first, the prohibition of meats offered to idols; second,
of blood; third, of things strangled; and fourth, of fornication.[372]
Each of these precepts may be often found in the books of Moses,[373] and
the first and last ones come under the second and seventh commandments
respectively; but neither of these cover but a part of that which is
forbidden in either commandment. It is evident, therefore, that the
authority of the ten commandments was not under consideration in this
assembly, and that the decision of that assembly had no relation to
those precepts. For otherwise the apostles released the Gentiles from
all obligation to eight of the ten commandments, and from the greater
prohibitions contained in the other two.
It is evident that those greatly err who represent the Gentiles as
released from the obligation of the Sabbath by this assembly. The
question did not come before the apostles on this occasion; a strong
proof that the Gentiles had not been taught to neglect the Sabbath,
as they had to omit circumcision, which was the occasion of its being
brought before the apostles at Jerusalem. Yet the Sabbath was referred
to in this very assembly as an existing institution, and that, too,
in connection with the Gentile Christians. Thus when James pronounced
sentence upon the question, he used the following language:—
“Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which
from among the Gentiles are turned to God; but that we write
unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and
from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him,
being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.”[374]
This last fact is given by James as a reason for the course proposed
toward the brethren among the Gentiles. “For Moses of old time hath in
every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every
Sabbath day.” From this it is apparent that the ancient custom of divine
worship upon the Sabbath was not only preserved by the Jewish people and
carried with them into every city of the Gentiles, but that the Gentile
Christians did attend these meetings. Otherwise the reason assigned by
James would lose all its force, as having no application to this case.
That they did attend them strongly attests the Sabbath as the day of
divine worship with the Gentile churches.
That the ancient Sabbath of the Lord had neither been abrogated nor
changed prior to this meeting of the apostles, is strongly attested by
the nature of the dispute here adjusted. And the close of their assembly
beheld the Bible Sabbath still sacredly enthroned within the citadel of
the fourth commandment. After this, in a vision of the night, Paul was
called to visit Macedonia. In obedience to this call he came to Philippi,
which is the chief city of that part of Macedonia. Thus Luke records the
visit:—
“And we were in that city abiding certain days. And on the
Sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer
was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women
which resorted thither. And a certain woman named Lydia, a
seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshiped God,
heard us; whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto
the things which were spoken of Paul.”[375]
This does not appear to have been a gathering of Jews, but of Gentiles,
who, like Cornelius, were worshipers of the true God. Thus it is seen
that the church of the Philippians originated with a pious assembly of
Sabbath-keeping Gentiles. And it is likely that Lydia and those employed
by her in business, who were evidently observers of the Sabbath, were the
means of introducing the gospel into their own city of Thyatira.
“Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia,
they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews.
And Paul, as his manner was,[376] went in unto them, and three
Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures.... And
some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and
of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women
not a few.”[377]
Such was the origin of the Thessalonian church. That it was an assembly
of Sabbath-keepers at its beginning admits of no doubt. For besides the
few Jews who received the gospel through the labors of Paul, there was
a great multitude of devout Greeks; that is, of Gentiles who had united
themselves with the Jews in the worship of God upon the Sabbath. We have
a strong proof of the fact that they continued to observe the Sabbath
after their reception of the gospel in the following words of Paul
addressed to them as a church of Christ:—
“For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God
which in Judea are in Christ Jesus.”[378]
The churches in Judea, as we have seen, were observers of the Sabbath
of the Lord. The first Thessalonian converts, before they received the
gospel, were Sabbath-keepers, and when they became a Christian church
they adopted the churches in Judea as their proper examples. And this
church was adopted as an example by the churches of Macedonia and Achaia.
In this number were included the churches of Philippi and of Corinth.
Thus writes Paul:—
“And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having
received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy
Ghost; so that ye were ensamples to all that believe in
Macedonia and Achaia. For from you sounded out the word of the
Lord, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every
place your faith to Godward is spread abroad.”[379]
After these things, Paul came to Corinth. Here, he first found Aquila and
Priscilla.
“And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them and
wrought; for by their occupation they were tent-makers. And he
reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews
and the Greeks.”[380]
At this place also Paul found Gentiles as well as Jews in attendance
upon the worship of God on the Sabbath. The first members of the church
at Corinth were therefore observers of the Sabbath at the time when they
received the gospel; and, as we have seen, they adopted as their pattern
the Sabbath-keeping church of Thessalonica, who in turn patterned after
the churches in Judea.
The first churches were founded in the land of Judea. All their members
had from childhood been familiar with the law of God, and well understood
the precept, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Besides this
precept, all these churches had a peculiar memento of the Sabbath. They
knew from our Lord himself that the time was coming when they must all
suddenly flee from that land. And in view of this fact, they were to pray
that the moment of their sudden flight might not be upon the Sabbath; a
prayer which was designed, as we have seen, to preserve the sacredness of
the Sabbath. That the churches in Judea were composed of Sabbath-keeping
members, admits therefore of no doubt.
Of the churches founded outside the land of Judea, whose origin is
given in the book of Acts, nearly all began with Jewish converts.
These were Sabbath-keepers when they received the gospel. Among these,
the Gentile converts were engrafted. And it is worthy of notice that
in a large number of cases, those Gentiles are termed “devout Greeks,”
“religious proselytes,” persons that “worshiped God,” that feared God and
that “prayed to God alway.”[381] These Gentiles, at the time of their
conversion to the gospel, were, as we have seen, worshipers of God upon
the Sabbath with the Jewish people. When James had proposed the kind of
letter that should be addressed by the apostles to the Gentile converts,
he assigned a reason for its adoption, the force of which can now be
appreciated: “For Moses,” said he, “of old time hath in EVERY CITY them
that preach him, being read in the synagogue every Sabbath day.” The
Sabbatarian character of the apostolic churches is thus clearly shown.
In a letter addressed to the Corinthians, about five years after they had
received the gospel, Paul is supposed to contribute a fifth pillar to the
first-day temple. Thus he wrote them:—
“Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given
order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first
day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as
God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I
come.”[382]
From this text it is argued in behalf of the first-day Sabbath, 1. That
this was a public collection. 2. That hence the first day of the week
was the day of public worship in the churches of Corinth and Galatia. 3.
And therefore that the Sabbath had been changed to that day. Thus the
change of the Sabbath is inferred from the public assemblies for divine
worship on the first day at Corinth and Galatia; and the existence of
these assemblies on that day is inferred from the words of Paul, “Upon
the first day of the week, let every one of you lay _by him_ in store.”
What, then, do these words ordain? But one answer can be returned:
They ordain precisely the _reverse_ of a public collection. Each one
should lay by himself on each first day of the week according as God had
prospered him, that when Paul should arrive, they might have their bounty
ready. Mr. J. W. Morton, late Presbyterian missionary to Hayti, bears the
following testimony:—
“The whole question turns upon the meaning of the expression,
‘by him;’ and I marvel greatly how you can imagine that it
means ‘in the collection box of the congregation.’ Greenfield,
in his Lexicon, translates the Greek term, ‘_With one’s self,
i. e., at home_.’ Two Latin versions, the Vulgate and that
of Castellio, render it, ‘_apud se_,’ with one’s self; at
home. Three French translations, those of Martin, Osterwald,
and De Sacy, ‘_chez soi_,’ at his own house; at home. The
German of Luther, ‘_bei sich selbst_,’ by himself; at home.
The Dutch, ‘_by hemselven_,’ same as the German. The Italian
of Diodati, ‘_appresso di se_,’ in his own presence; at home.
The Spanish of Felippe Scio, ‘_en su casa_,’ in his own house.
The Portuguese of Ferreira, ‘_para isso_,’ with himself. The
Swedish, ‘_nær sig self_,’ near himself.”[383]
Dr. Bloomfield thus comments on the original: “παρ ἑαυτῶ, ‘by him.’
French, _chez lui_, ‘at home.’”[384]
The Douay Bible reads: “Let every one of you put apart with himself.”
Mr. Sawyer thus translates: “Let each one of you lay aside by himself.”
Theodore Beza’s Latin version has it: “_Apud se_,” _i.e._, at home. The
Syriac reads thus: “Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home.”
It is true that an eminent first-day writer, Justin Edwards, D. D., in a
labored effort to prove the change of the Sabbath, brings forward this
text to show that Sunday was the day of religious worship with the early
church. Thus he says:—
“This laying by in store was NOT laying by AT HOME; for that
would not prevent gatherings when he should come.”[385]
Such is his language as a theologian upon whom has fallen the difficult
task of proving the change of the Sabbath by the authority of the
Scriptures. But in his Notes on the New Testament, in which he feels at
liberty to speak the truth, he thus squarely contradicts his own language
already quoted. Thus he comments on this text:—
“Lay by him in store; AT HOME. That there be no gatherings;
that their gifts might be ready when the apostle should
come.”[386]
Thus even Dr. Edwards confesses that the idea of a public collection
is not found in this scripture. On the contrary, it appears that each
individual, in obedience to this precept, would, at the opening of each
new week, be found AT HOME laying aside something for the cause of
God, according as his worldly affairs would warrant. The change of the
Sabbath, as proved by this text, rests wholly upon an idea which Dr.
Edwards confesses is not found in it. We have seen that the church at
Corinth was a Sabbath-keeping church. It is evident that the change of
the Sabbath could never have been suggested to them by this text.
This is the only scripture in which Paul even mentions the first day of
the week. It was written nearly thirty years after the alleged change of
the Sabbath. Yet Paul omits all titles of sacredness, simply designating
it as first day of the week; a name to which it was entitled as one of
“the six working days.”[387] It is also worthy of notice that this is the
only precept in the Bible in which the first day is even named; and that
this precept says nothing relative to the sacredness of the day to which
it pertains; even the duty which it enjoins being more appropriate to a
secular than to a sacred day.
Soon after writing his first epistle to the Corinthians, Paul visited
Troas. In the record of this visit occurs the last instance in which the
first day of the week is mentioned in the New Testament:—
“And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened
bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days;[388] where
we abode seven days. And 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; and continued his
speech until midnight. And there were many lights in the upper
chamber, where they were gathered together. And there sat in
a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into
a deep sleep; and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down
with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken
up dead. And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing
him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him. When
he therefore was come up again, and had broken bread, and
eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he
departed. And they brought the young man alive, and were not
a little comforted. And we went before to ship, and sailed
unto Assos, there intending to take in Paul; for so had he
appointed, minding himself to go afoot.”[389]
This scripture is supposed to furnish a sixth pillar for the first-day
temple. The argument may be concisely stated thus: This testimony shows
that the first day of the week was appropriated by the apostolic church
to meetings for the breaking of bread in honor of Christ’s resurrection
upon that day; from which it is reasonable to conclude that this day had
become the Christian Sabbath.
If this proposition could be established as an undoubted truth, the
change of the Sabbath would not follow as a necessary conclusion; it
would even then amount only to a plausible conjecture. The following
facts will aid us in judging of the truthfulness of this argument for the
change of the Sabbath. 1. That this is the only instance of a religious
meeting upon the first day of the week recorded in the New Testament. 2.
That no stress can be laid upon the expression, “_when_ the disciples
came together,” as proving that meetings for the purpose of breaking
bread were held on each first day of the week; for there is nothing in
the original answering to the word “_when_;” the whole phrase being
translated from three words, the perfect passive participle συνηγμένων,
“being assembled,” and τῶν μαθητῶν, “the disciples;” the sacred writer
simply stating the gathering of the disciples on this occasion.[390] 3.
That the ordinance of breaking bread was not appointed to commemorate
the resurrection of Christ, but to keep in memory his death upon the
cross.[391] The act of breaking bread therefore upon the first day of the
week, is not a commemoration of Christ’s resurrection. 4. That as the
breaking of bread commemorates our Lord’s crucifixion, and was instituted
on the evening with which the crucifixion day began, on which occasion
Jesus himself and all the apostles were present,[392] it is evident that
the day of the crucifixion presents greater claims to the celebration
of this ordinance than does the day of the resurrection. 5. But as our
Lord designated no day for this ordinance, and as the apostolic church
at Jerusalem are recorded to have celebrated it daily,[393] it is
evidently presumption to argue the change of the Sabbath from a single
instance of its celebration upon the first day of the week. 6. That this
instance of breaking bread upon first-day, was with evident reference
to the immediate and final departure of Paul. 7. For it is a remarkable
fact that this, the only instance of a religious meeting on the first
day recorded in the New Testament, was a night meeting. This is proved
by the fact that many lights were burning in that assembly, and that
Paul preached till midnight. 8. And from this fact follows the important
consequence that this first-day meeting was upon Saturday night.[394]
For the days of the week being reckoned from evening to evening, and
evening being at sunset,[395] it is seen that the first day of the week
begins Saturday night at sunset, and ends at sunset on Sunday. A night
meeting, therefore, upon the first day of the week could be only upon
Saturday night. 9. Paul therefore preached until midnight of Saturday
night—for the disciples held a night meeting at the close of the Sabbath,
because he was to leave in the morning—then being interrupted by the fall
of the young man, he went down and healed him, then went up and attended
to the breaking of bread; and at break of day, on Sunday morning, he
departed. 10. Thus are we furnished with conclusive evidence that Paul
and his companions resumed their journey toward Jerusalem on the morning
of the first day of the week; they taking ship to Assos, and he being
pleased to go on foot. This fact is an incidental proof of Paul’s regard
for the Sabbath, in that he waited till it was past before resuming his
journey; and it is a positive proof that he knew nothing of what in
modern times is called the Christian Sabbath. 11. This narrative was
written by Luke at least thirty years after the alleged change of the
Sabbath. It is worthy of note that Luke omits all titles of sacredness,
simply designating the day in question as the first day of the week.
This is in admirable keeping with the fact that in his gospel, when
recording the very event which is said to have changed the Sabbath,
he not only omits the slightest hint of that fact, but designates the
day itself by its secular title of first day of the week, and at the
same time designates the previous day as the Sabbath according to the
commandment.[396]
The same year that Paul visited Troas, he wrote as follows to the church
at Rome:—
“Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful
disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things:
another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth
despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not
judge him that eateth; for God hath received him. Who art
thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master
he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up, for God
is able to make him stand. One man esteemeth one day above
another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be
fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day,
regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day,
to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to
the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to
the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.”[397]
These words have often been quoted to show that the observance of the
fourth commandment is now a matter of indifference; each individual being
at liberty to act his pleasure in the matter. So extraordinary a doctrine
should be thoroughly tested before being adopted. For as it pleased God
to ordain the Sabbath before the fall of man, and to give it a place in
his code of ten commandments, thus making it a part of that law to which
the great atonement relates; and as the Lord Jesus, during his ministry,
spent much time in explaining its merciful design, and took care to
provide against its desecration at the flight of his people from the land
of Judea, which was ten years in the future when these words were written
by Paul; and as the fourth commandment itself is expressly recognized
after the crucifixion of Christ; if, under these circumstances, we could
suppose it to be consistent with truth that the Most High should abrogate
the Sabbath, we certainly should expect that abrogation to be stated in
explicit language. Yet neither the Sabbath nor the fourth commandment are
here named. That they are not referred to in this language of Paul, the
following reasons will show:—
1. Such a view would make the observance of one of the ten commandments
a matter of indifference; whereas James shows that to violate one of
them is to transgress the whole.[398] 2. It directly contradicts what
Paul had previously written in this epistle; for in treating of the law
of ten commandments, he styles it holy, spiritual, just, and good; and
states that sin—the transgression of the law—by the commandment becomes
“EXCEEDING SINFUL.”[399] 3. Because that Paul in the same epistle affirms
the perpetuity of that law which caused our Lord to lay down his life for
sinful men;[400] which we have seen before was the ten commandments. 4.
Because that Paul in this case not only did not name the Sabbath and the
fourth commandment, but certainly was not treating of the moral law. 5.
Because that the topic under consideration which leads him to speak as he
does of the days in question was that of eating all kinds of food, or of
refraining from certain things. 6. Because that the fourth commandment
did not stand associated with precepts of such a kind, but with moral
laws exclusively.[401] 7. Because that in the ceremonial law, associated
with the precepts concerning meats, was a large number of festivals,
entirely distinct from the Sabbath of the Lord.[402] 8. Because that
the church of Rome, which began probably with those Jews that were
present from Rome on the day of Pentecost, had many Jewish members in its
communion, as may be gathered from the epistle itself;[403] and would
therefore be deeply interested in the decision of this question relative
to the ceremonial law; the Jewish members feeling conscientious in
observing its distinctions, the Gentile members feeling no such scruples:
hence the admirable counsel of Paul exactly meeting the case of both
classes. 9. Nor can the expression, “every day,” be claimed as decisive
proof that the Sabbath of the Lord is included. At the very time when
the Sabbath was formally committed to the Hebrews, just such expressions
were used, although only the six working days were intended. Thus it was
said: “The people shall go out and gather a certain rate _every_ day;”
and the narrative says, “They gathered it _every_ morning.” Yet when some
of them went out to gather on the Sabbath, God says, “How long refuse
ye to keep my commandments and my laws?”[404] The Sabbath being a great
truth, plainly stated and many times repeated, it is manifest that Paul,
in the expression, “every day,” speaks of the six working days, among
which a distinction had existed precisely coeval with that respecting
meats; and that he manifestly excepts that day which from the beginning
God had reserved unto himself. Just as when Paul quotes and applies to
Jesus the words of David, “All things are put under him,” he adds: “It
is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him.”[405]
10. And lastly, in the words of John, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s
day,”[406] written many years after this epistle of Paul, we have an
absolute proof that in the gospel dispensation one day is still claimed
by the Most High as his own.[407]
About ten years after this epistle was written, occurred the memorable
flight of all the people of God that were in the land of Judea. It was
not in the winter; for it occurred just after the feast of tabernacles,
some time in October. And it was not upon the Sabbath; for Josephus,
who speaks of the sudden withdrawal of the Roman army after it had,
by encompassing the city, given the very signal for flight which our
Lord promised his people, tells us that the Jews rushed out of the city
in pursuit of the retreating Romans, which was at the very time when
our Lord’s injunction of instant flight became imperative upon the
disciples. The historian does not intimate that the Jews thus pursued
the Romans upon the Sabbath, although he carefully notes the fact that a
few days previous to this event they did, in their rage, utterly forget
the Sabbath and rush out to fight the Romans upon that day. These
providential circumstances in the flight of the disciples being made
dependent upon their asking such interposition at the hand of God, it is
evident that the disciples did not forget the prayer which the Saviour
taught them relative to this event; and that, as a consequence, the
Sabbath of the Lord was not forgotten by them. And thus the Lord Jesus in
his tender care for his people and in his watchful care in behalf of the
Sabbath, showed that he was alike the Lord of his people and the Lord of
the Sabbath.[408]
Twenty-six years after the destruction of Jerusalem, the book of
Revelation was committed to the beloved disciple. It bears the following
deeply interesting date as to place and time:—
“I John, who also am your brother, and companion in
tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ,
was in THE ISLE that is called PATMOS, for the word of God, and
for the testimony of Jesus Christ. I was in the Spirit on THE
LORD’S DAY, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last; and, What
thou seest, write in a book.”[409]
This book is dated in the isle of Patmos, and upon the Lord’s day. The
place, the day, and the individual, have each a real existence, and not
merely a symbolical or mystical one. Thus John, almost at the close of
the first century, and long after those texts were written which are
now adduced to prove that no distinction in days exists, shows that the
Lord’s day has as real an existence, as has the isle of Patmos, or as had
the beloved disciple himself.
What day, then, is intended by this designation? Several answers have
been returned to this question. 1. It is the gospel dispensation. 2. It
is the day of Judgment. 3. It is the first day of the week. 4. It is the
Sabbath of the Lord. The first answer cannot be the true one; for it not
only renders the day a mystical term, but it involves the absurdity of
representing John as writing to Christians sixty-five years after the
death of Christ, that the vision which he had just had, was seen by him
in the gospel dispensation; as though it were possible for them to be
ignorant of the fact that if he had a vision at all he must have it in
the existing dispensation.
Nor can the second answer be admitted as the truth. For while it is
true that John might have a vision CONCERNING the day of Judgment, it
is impossible that he should have a vision ON that day when it was yet
future. If it be no more than an absurdity to represent John as dating
his vision in the isle of Patmos, on the gospel dispensation, it becomes
a positive untruth, if he is made to say that he was in vision at Patmos
on the day of Judgment.
The third answer, that the Lord’s day is the first day of the week, is
now almost universally received as the truth. The text under examination
is brought forward with an air of triumph as completing the temple of
first-day sacredness, and proving beyond all doubt that that day is
indeed the Christian Sabbath. Yet as we have examined this temple with
peculiar carefulness, we have discovered that the foundation on which it
rests is a thing of the imagination only; and that the pillars by which
it is supported exist only in the minds of those who worship at its
shrine. It remains to be seen whether the dome which is supposed to be
furnished by this text is more real than the pillars on which it rests.
That the first day of the week has no claim to the title of Lord’s day,
the following facts will show: 1. That, as this text does not define the
term Lord’s day, we must look elsewhere in the Bible for the evidence
that shows the first day to be entitled to such a designation. 2. That
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul, the other sacred writers who mention the
day, use no other designation for it than first day of the week, a name
to which it was entitled as one of the six working days. Yet three of
these writers mention it at the very time when it is said to have become
the Lord’s day; and two of them mention it also some thirty years after
that event. 3. That while it is claimed that the Spirit of inspiration,
by simply leading John to use the term Lord’s day, though he did in no
wise connect the first day of the week therewith, did design to fix this
as the proper title of the first day of the week, it is a remarkable
fact that after John returned from the isle of Patmos he wrote his
gospel;[410] and in that gospel he twice mentioned the first day of the
week; yet in each of these instances where it is certain that first-day
is intended, no other designation is used than plain first day of the
week. This is a most convincing proof that John did not regard the first
day of the week as entitled to this name, or any other, expressive of
sacredness. 4. What still further decides the point against the first
day of the week is the fact that neither the Father nor the Son have
ever claimed the first day in any higher sense than they have each of
the six days given to man for labor. 5. And what completes the chain of
evidence against the claim of first day to this title is the fact that
the testimony adduced by first-day advocates to prove that it has been
adopted by the Most High in place of that day which he once claimed as
his, having been examined, is found to have no such meaning or intent.
In setting aside the third answer, also, as not being in accordance with
truth, the first day of the week may be properly dismissed with it, as
having no claim to our regard as a scriptural institution.[411]
That the Lord’s day is the Bible Sabbath, admits of clear and certain
proof. The argument stands thus: When God gave to man six days of the
week for labor, he did expressly reserve unto himself the seventh, on
which he placed his blessing in memory of his own act of resting upon
that day, and thenceforward, through the Bible, has ever claimed it
as his holy day. As he has never put away this sacred day and chosen
another, the Sabbath of the Lord is still his holy day. These facts may
be traced in the following scriptures. At the close of the Creator’s
rest, it is said:—
“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.”[412]
After the children of Israel had reached the wilderness of Sin, Moses
said to them on the sixth day:—
“To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.”[413]
In giving the ten commandments, the Law-giver thus stated his claim to
this day:—
“The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.... For
in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all
that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord
blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.”[414]
He gives to man the six days on which himself had labored; he reserves
as his own that day upon which he had rested from all his work. About
eight hundred years after this, God spoke by Isaiah as follows:—
“If thou turn away thy foot from THE SABBATH, from doing thy
pleasure on MY HOLY DAY, ... then shalt thou delight thyself in
the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of
the earth.”[415]
This testimony is perfectly explicit; the Lord’s day is the ancient
Sabbath of the Bible. The Lord Jesus puts forth the following claim:—
“The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.”[416]
Thus, whether it be the Father or the Son whose title is involved, the
only day that can be called “the Lord’s day” is the Sabbath of the
great Creator.[417] And here, at the close of the Bible history of the
Sabbath, two facts of deep interest are presented: 1. That John expressly
recognizes the existence of the Lord’s day at the very close of the first
century. 2. That it pleased the Lord of the Sabbath to place a signal
honor upon his own day in that he selected it as the one on which to give
that revelation to John, which himself alone had been worthy to receive
from the Father.
PART II—SECULAR HISTORY.