THE SABBATH OF THE LORD.
By M. C. W.
THE CHRISTIAN DISPENSATION.
How does the Sabbath of Jehovah stand in the Christian dispensation? It is marked with divine honors in the Patriarchal and Levitical dispensations, especially marked at their beginning and close. Is the Sabbath equally binding in the Christian dispensation? Are its sanctity and perpetuity and unchangeableness as strongly marked? Or, is here the period when the rest-day of God, holy and sanctified, loses its sacredness, and is changed or repealed? We shall find as we examine the record that testimony is neither wanting nor inconclusive. We showed in our last how Jesus lifted the Sabbath from the place it had fallen; how he removed from it the superstitions and traditions of the Jews, and placed it where the law of the Sabbath placed it,—a boon of blessing to mankind. It was lawful—"conformable to law"—to do well on the Sabbath-day. And this truth he enforced with the implied fact that he was its Creator, hence its Lord, and therefore knew the object for which the Sabbath was given,—for man and not against him. Matt. 12:1-12. Again: Our Saviour came as the Mediator of the new covenant (Heb. 9:15), a covenant, it is true, as old as the first promise (Gen. 3:15), confirmed by an oath to Abraham (Gen. 22:15-18), but now to be manifested and sealed to the nations through the death of Christ. Matt. 26:26-29. The covenant was then complete; no man can disannul or add thereto. Gal. 3:15. Not one single moral duty originates this side of that event that did not exist before. And anything presented as duty by any man or men, which dates subsequent to the death of Christ, is will-worship, which makes void the commandments of God. Before Christ sealed this covenant by yielding his life, he presented, amplified, and emphasized its principles. And it concerns us here to know as to how he treated the Sabbath precept, and the law of ten words of which the Sabbath commandment was a part. Did he abrogate it or amend it? He could certainly know what men would say in later times in regard to the change of the Sabbath, and could foresee the divisions in the Christian world concerning it; did he anticipate all this? He did, most emphatically. His language cannot be misunderstood or misinterpreted without wrestling the Scriptures. In the very first year of his ministry, in his longest recorded sermon, we find these words:—152"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Matt. 5:17, 18. Rotherham translates the passage: "Ye may not think that I came to put down the law or the prophets: I came not to put down, but to fulfill. For, verily! I say to you, Till whensoever the heaven and the earth may pass away, one least letter or one point in no wise may pass away from the law till whensoever all may be done." The Revised Version: "Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets; I came not to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all things be accomplished." The Emphatic Diaglott: "Think not that I have come to subvert the law, or the prophets: I have come, not to subvert, but to establish. For, indeed, I say to you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one iota or one tip of a letter shall by no means pass from the law, till all be accomplished." Campbell and Macknight's translation is, "I am come not to subvert, but to ratify." All these translations give just the same sense; and nothing could be proved more clearly than are the following points:— 1. Christ did not come to destroy, subvert, dissolve, demolish, put down, nullify, or abrogate the law of God. We are forbidden even to think that such was his purpose. 2. He came to fulfill the law. Fulfill, says Worcester, is "to perform what has been prophesied, promised, desired, commanded, or intended." The only way, then, in which Christ could fulfill the law, was to obey the law, to perform what is commanded therein. An instance of this use of the word as applied to law is found in Gal. 6:2: "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." To fulfill the law of Christ is to do the law of Christ. To fulfill God's law is to obey that law. And this Christ did. He says: "I have kept my Father's commandments" (John 15:10); "I came down from Heaven not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me" (John 6:38). And this obedience was foretold through the psalmist by the Spirit of Christ (Ps. 40:8): "I [the Son] delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart." Christ came to obey, keep, establish, ratify the law of God. 3. The unchangeableness of the decalogue does not have reference to underlying principles alone, but to the very smallest details. Not a jot—the smallest Hebrew letter, yodh—nor a tittle—a little point which served to distinguish one letter from another—could pass away. That is, not one single change in the letters or words of that law should take place which would in any wise alter its meaning or force. "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." Luke 16:17. 4. "Till all be fulfilled," or "accomplished," has reference to the prophets. Not one jot or tittle should pass from the law till all that the prophets foretold was fulfilled, or accomplished. How long a time is this?—To eternity. The Spirit of Christ foretold through the prophets the sufferings of Christ and the glory which should follow. 1 Peter 1:10, 11. Isa. 53 reveals Christ's sufferings; Isa. 63:1-4; 65:17; 66:22, 23; Jer. 31:35-37; Isa. 51:6, 7; Dan. 2:44; and 7:27, reveal the glory and the eternity of that glory. Through ceaseless succession of Sabbaths, perennial months, and never-ending years, as long as sun and moon shall last, or the great white throne of God endures, the law of Jehovah remains unchanged and unchangeable. Eternity will be an abiding evidence both to the verity of the prophetic word, and the immutability of God's law. Jesus could have expressed in no stronger way the unchangeableness of the moral law. 5. Jesus then declares that whosoever broke or should teach to break one of the least of God's commands, was unworthy of his kingdom; or, as Campbell renders, "of no esteem." That the decalogue is the law under consideration is shown in verses 21-32. Our Lord's regard for the Sabbath is shown in his observance of that day at the public assemblies of the people at the place of worship. Luke 4:16, 31. But this specific testimony is no more needed than is a testimony to show that he honored father and mother, or kept the third commandment. He kept God's law (John 15:10); therefore he kept all the law. If Christ transgressed a single command of God's law, he was a sinner (James 2:8-12); for sin is the transgression of the law. 1 John 3:4; Rom. 7:7. But Jesus did not transgress a single precept; he "did no sin." 1 Peter 2:22. Christ is our example in righteousness; and that example is evidence of the perpetuity of the Sabbath law. The apostle says that He left "us an example, that ye should follow His steps; who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth." 1 Peter 2:21, 22. "He that saith he abideth in Him ought himself also so to walk, even as He walked." 1 John 2:6. Is he who would transgress the third, or fifth, or seventh commandment a follower of Christ? Is not the fourth of the same law? Did not the same God give them, at the same time, in the same manner? Did not our Saviour regard the fourth equally with the others? Christ magnified and honored the law, and therefore magnified and honored the Sabbath. This was predicted by the prophet: "The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law and make it honorable." Isa. 42:21. He magnified it by his teaching. He showed that it referred not to overt act alone, but to inward motive and cherished thought. Matt. 5:21-32. He honored the law by his dying in the sinner's stead, to release the sinner from the claims of the law. If the law could have been set aside, Christ need not have suffered; but by his death he showed that the law of God is so holy, so immutable, that nothing but the death of the Son of God, the Being without sin, who became sin for us, could release us from its claims. He died, not to confirm man in transgression, but to redeem him from sin. Matt. 1:21; Titus 2:13. And he who continues in sin while professing Christ, holds the Redeemer before the world as "the minister of sin." "God forbid," say you? Then walk in faithful obedience to all of God's precepts. How a Christian can look upon the suffering One of Calvary without seeing additional light and holiness in the law of God, how he can despise that law in whole or in part, which Christ honored, we cannot understand. Do we admire Christ's character? It was only the personification of God's law, or God's righteousness worked out. The law is the perfect rule. Jesus is the perfect Example worked out through faithful adherence to the perfect rule. The holy women, after the sealing of the covenant by the death of Christ, kept "the Sabbath-day according to the commandment." Luke 23:56. Simply note: 1. This Sabbath was the seventh day of the week; for the next day after was "the first day of the week." Luke 24:1. 2. It was the same Sabbath commanded in Ex. 20:8-11; for it was "according to the commandment." 3. It was the Sabbath of the Lord, the creation Sabbath, the seventh-day Sabbath; for that was the Sabbath of the commandment. Compare Ex. 20:8-11 and Gen. 2:2, 3. The next day was one of bustle and activity,—not kept in any way as a Sabbath. Upon it the disciples traveled (Luke 24:13-35); they believed not that Christ had risen (Mark 16:10); they passed the day in doubt and fear and anxiety, till its long hours wore away. Then, while gathered in their common abode (Acts 1:13), with closed doors for fear of the Jews (John 20:19), Jesus the Risen appears; but are they prepared to receive him? Have they gathered to celebrate his resurrection? Are they keeping the first new Sabbath? Far from it. They are partaking of their evening meal when Jesus appears; and instead of hailing him, they were terrified and affrighted (Luke 24:36, 37), and merited well the upbraiding from Jesus, because of their unbelief. Mark 16:13, 14. The first day of a cycle could not be the Sabbath. The labor comes first necessarily. The second day could, but the cycle of days then would be only two the second being the Sabbath. The rest-day of the week, or cycle of seven, can only be the seventh. There is no ground for inference even in the Gospels that the first day of the week became the Sabbath. It is simply impossible. The day is not even mentioned till after the covenant is sealed, too late to be connected with that covenant; and no sacredness of any kind attaches to its character or mention. But for the law of God, of which the seventh-day Sabbath is a part, we have the positive denial of our Saviour as regards any change; his positive affirmation that no change will ever take place; his precept to keep the commandments (Matt. 19:17); his example to all believers in all time; and all this testimony intensified, magnified, and emphasized by his death upon the cross. Certainly no stronger testimony could be given. A captious critic could ask no more; a believing child would be content with much less. They will not ask, "Have any of the rulers believed?" or, What do the doctors say? but, What did my Lord command? How did he walk? We find the Sabbath firmly established at the beginning of the Christian dispensation; we will consider it further in our next. M. C. W.