The Law of Exodus 20 by W. M. Healey

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Jul 3, 1901

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 27, No. 27.

The Law of Exodus 20

By W. M. Healey

REVIEW OF MR. GAMBLE’S BOOK.—NO. 2.

The Law of Exodus 20.

(Concluded from last week.)

AGAIN Mr. Gamble says: “I do not know of a book on the Sabbath question that correctly sets forth even the Bible teaching of the Sabbath, much less that gives a correct general survey of the field.”—Sunday the True Sabbath of God, p. 15.

Thus all the books and arguments which others have made for Sunday-keeping are ignored. This is the way it always is with opposers of the Word of God. The latest writer against the Bible always assumes that those who have gone before him have not succeeded in overthrowing it; hence the demand for another effort.

Mr. Gamble claims that the law of Exodus 20 was done away at the cross; so we do not have to keep the annual sabbaths. There would be no gain in doing away with that law for that purpose; for the Decalog of Exodus 20 makes no mention of those annual days. They were never commanded by it; but the weekly rest-day was. But if that law was done away at the cross, and another was given after the resurrection of Christ, notice the conditions: There would be a period of about three days when there would be no law against murder, theft, adultery, etc.; for one law perished at the cross, when Christ died on Friday; the other did not begin to come into effect till after His resurrection. And when it did come, it was against the same acts as the one abolished, and according to Mr. Gamble, does not even differ on the Sabbath question; for he claims the seventh day is the Sabbath, and that is just what the old Decalog said.

This author says the commandments were the covenant God made with Israel. This is a great mistake. Deut. 4:13 says it is God’s covenant which He commanded them. The covenant He made with them was an agreement on their part to keep these commandments, and on God’s part to bless them. Moses says it was “made with you concerning all these words.” Ex. 24:8. Under the new covenant the law is to be written in the heart. The covenant or contract is new, but the law is the same. Heb. 8:10; 10:16.

On page 187 of Mr. Gamble’s book he says, when speaking of the parable of the wicked husbandmen, “When Christ in the above parable said, ‘The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you,’ He clearly intimated that He would take away their church, with its Sabbath

and sacraments.” Then the Sabbath belonged to the kingdom; the kingdom was the vineyard in the parable. It (the kingdom) was taken away from that people and given to another people. It was the same vineyard the wicked men had that was given to another people.

Still commenting on the parable, Mr. Gamble says, page 188, “Christ taught the removal of their Sabbath and the institution of another.” Having said that the Sabbath belonged with the kingdom that was given to them, he next has a different Sabbath. This would be a change in the kingdom; whereas the kingdom was not changed, but those who had it in charge were changed. We read, “They say unto Him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.” Matt. 21:41.

Reference is made on page 186 to Psalms 118; and after mentioning the prophecy of Christ as the Corner-stone, these words are quoted: “This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.” He argues that this applies to the resurrection day. Admit that it does, and all his Sabbath sacredness is taken away from it. There is no intimation of rest, to say nothing of command. It reads, “We will rejoice and be glad in it.”

Commenting on the prophecy of the second chapter of Hosea, especially verse 11, which reads, “I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts,” Mr. G. says, page 175, “So if He shall abolish that law of commandments, He certainly will not do so until He is ready to have it followed by another and better one.” It seems as if Mr. Gamble must have overlooked the reason why God was going to take all these away from His people. Verse 4 says it was because “they be the children of whoredoms.” In verse 3 the Lord says of them, when threatening to take away these things, that it will “strip her naked.” The fault was not with what God was going to take away; but the people were not fit to have these blessings. They were to be taken away because of their sin. Mr. Gamble says the Lord was going to take them away and give the people something better.

According to this, God takes from the sinner what He gave him before he sinned, and gives him something better. If this were true, the more men sin the better it is for them. This doctrine, though unreasonable, if not blasphemous, is by no means new. It was taught in Eden. The serpent told Eve that if she would eat of the forbidden fruit—sin against God—the old conditions would be changed; she would be wise, and have things much better.

Again he says, page 177, “God does not move backward, but forward. Each dispensation is an advance upon the preceding one.” But according to his theory, God gave man the “Sunday-Sabbath” in Eden, then permitted it to be lost, and now has restored it again for the Christian age. Where is the advance? They have the same day. If a man loses a piece of money for years, and then finds the piece again, is he better off? Has he gained by it?—Nay, but he has been a loser; for he has no more money, and has been deprived of the use of it all the time it was lost. So if the Sabbath was lost for many centuries and then found, man has not gained, but the church is the worse for having been deprived of its blessings.

But his reasoning (?) is even worse than that; for when the patriarchal dispensation passed away, at the time of Moses, God, according to Mr. Gamble, but not according to the Lord’s Word, gave the people annual sabbaths in the place of the Edenic Sabbath. This would prove that the annual ones were better than the other; for he says that each change is for the better,—“Each dispensation is an advance upon the preceding one.”

May the Lord open the blind eyes, and help all to see clearly His Word of eternal truth, and then give strength to walk in it.

God is not an experimenter; man is. God always does the right thing—the best thing—the first time. He gave the holy Sabbath, the seventh day, in Eden; and He never changed His mind, much less His rest-day. He would need to create the world over, and rest on another day, to do that. At Sinai God repeated the Sabbath law, and began by saying, “Remember,” which shows that they had had previous knowledge of it. Here God gave other laws, and among them were those for the annual days of rest. But His Moral Code, the Ten Commandments, went on just the same. As a nation the Israelites had ceremonies and laws peculiar to themselves. But the Ten Commandments were applicable for all time, to all people, and can not be changed.

The Sabbath is always the same. It is the day on which God rested from the creation of the world, and is to keep ever before His people the great truth that our God is the Creator. It was given in Eden, and was kept by the patriarchs, and by the Israelites before and after reaching Sinai. It was especially marked in the wilderness, and the true day pointed out, by withholding the manna on it for forty years.

From that time till the present the Jews all over the world have carefully preserved the reckoning of the Sabbath time. But in Heb. 4:6 we are told that they have not entered into its rest because of unbelief. In verse 2 we read, “Unto us was the Gospel preached, as well as unto them.” In verse 9 it is declared, “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.” The same Gospel that was preached to them is preached to us; and the same rest that was taught to them is given to us. It is not a new rest, but a rest that “remaineth;” that is, it continues from them, and will ever continue, without change. W. M. HEALEY.