A SABBATH ARGUMENT OF FOUR WORDS.
This is direct and simple. It is easily remembered. It covers the whole question; and it rests upon the highest authority. The four words are, “Was made for man.” These words were spoken specifically of the Sabbath day. They were spoken by the One who made the Sabbath, and who has declared himself the Lord of the Sabbath, and therefore knows of what He speaks. How many foolish notions and false arguments respecting the Sabbath these words strike down at one blow! In the first place, the Sabbath “was made.” It was founded upon some definite and distinct act, or acts. It did not spring up by the will of man, nor grow up from any involuntary custom or chance action of men without object or design. But it was made. These thoughts give rise to a number of other questions. If it was made, by whom was it made? For whom was it made? Why was it made? When was it made? and by what act was it made? One of these questions two of the four words already quoted fully and definitely answer: “The Sabbath was made for man.” But now comes the plea to which so many resort in order to discard the Sabbath; that is, that the Sabbath was made for the Jews alone, and was confined to that people, and therefore I am not required to keep it. That is a very strange plea. God, we may be sure, does not make anything for anybody but that which is for his good, and which he needs. Man therefore needs the Sabbath which God has made for him. And the experience of the human family uniformly proves that man needs it as a period of relaxation and cessation from toil, physically and mentally, and certainly he needs it morally and spiritually for the benefit of his higher nature. In the face of Christ’s declaration that the Sabbath was made for man, any man by asserting that it was made for the Jews alone not only contradicts the words of the Saviour, but stultifies himself by virtually declaring that he is not included in the human family, and has none of those elements of being referred to, which are worthy of care and cultivation. But how does it happen, then, that we are so much worse than the Jews that such a blessing as the Sabbath should be given to them, and such a benefit be conferred upon them, and withheld from us? Is God thus partial? Paul asks in amazement, “Is He the God of the Jews only? is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.” Rom. 3:29. The Sabbath was made for man. The word “man” is here used in its natural and unlimited sense. The Sabbath is a world institution, designed for all men; for all need it. And “there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him.” Rom. 10:12. Still the idea cleaves to many minds that if a man is a Christian, he need not keep the Sabbath. But why, not? What is there about the Sabbath that is unchristian? Is it the One who made the Sabbath? “Without Him [the Word, Christ, says John] was not anything made that was made.” John 1:3. When one begins to follow Him who declares himself to be “the Lord of the Sabbath,” should he think he is not included among those for whom the Sabbath was made, and to whom it was given? We have glanced at the benefits the Sabbath is designed to confer upon us. But what relation do we show that we sustain to God by keeping it? What is the attitude that we show on our part to God by its observance? God himself, by His prophet, answers this question fully; and it ought to stir every heart that professes to love and serve Him. See His admonitory instruction in Isaiah 58, the last two verses of which chapter read as follows: “If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath [that is, cease to trample it in the dust], 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.” Isa. 58:13, 14. A more searching test on the Sabbath question, it seems to us, can hardly be brought to bear upon any one than is involved in this scripture; for the reading shows that the honor of God is involved in our practice on this question: “If thou . . . call the Sabbath . . . the holy of the Lord, honorable; and shalt honor Him,” etc. One of our ministers some years ago was taken to task with the question whether or not the whole object of law was not for the good of the one of whom obedience was required, or rather, this was his assertion with which he intended to nullify the objection we make to the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week; for, urged the objector, would not a person derive just as much benefit from resting the first day of the week as from resting on the seventh? Would he not derive as much good from the latter as from the former? and as the object of the law is for the good of those who obey, why does not the first day answer the purpose of the law as well as the seventh? What a low and limited and material view of the Sabbath is this! What must be the working of the mind of the objector who conceives that the object of the law and the lawgiver is only to work for the material side of his subjects in the administration of his government! There is a much higher consideration than this to be taken into account. God must have some regard to his own standing in this matter; and in his answer the minister took this into account. No, said the minister, that is not the primary nor the leading object of law, to benefit the subject, but it is the honor of the lawgiver. Then he quoted Isa. 58:13, 14. This honor must be secured and maintained at all hazards. And when the Lawgiver of the Sabbath gave a law demanding the observance of the seventh day, and one or any number of His subjects undertake to change that and substitute the first day of the week, such a course is not honoring the Lawgiver, but nullifying all His authority, and as far as in his power turning everything back to antinomianism and chaos. So the Lord says that we, by turning away our feet from the Sabbath, and refraining from our own pleasure, calling the Sabbath a delight, not doing our own ways, nor finding our own pleasure, nor speaking our own words, honor the Lord; and the converse of all this is equally true, that by not doing these things, we dishonor the Lord. So the question for every one to decide for himself on this question is, Do I desire to honor the Lord? or am I willing to dishonor Him: to judge His law and turn against Him? How can any Christian have any other purpose or desire but to honor the Lord? And who could deliberately decide to take a course that He declares would be to His dishonor? “If then I be a father, where is mine honor? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the Lord.” Mal. 1:6. “Them that honor me I will honor.” 1 Sam. 2:30. And so the promise in Isa. 58:14 is, “I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth [raise thee to the highest exaltation known to men], and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father [bestow upon thee the blessings of the heavenly kingdom].” Can any promise exceed this?