As the Sabbath was made for man, and as the whole human race have needed all its blessings ever since it was instituted in Paradise, it is reasonable to conclude that God designed that it should be as strictly observed in one dispensation as in another. We do not see any good reasons why the Jews should keep it any more strictly than Christians. We design to show that there is perfect harmony in all the testimony of both Testaments relative to the observance of the Holy Sabbath. We are aware that every means has been, and will be tried to make it appear that we should not observe the Sabbath. Some assert that we cannot keep the letter of the Sabbath law. It is common for one class of our opponents to refer to certain restrictions laid upon the Jews in the wilderness, which are no part of the great Sabbath commandment, and which we will notice hereafter, to prove that we do not, and cannot observe the Sabbath. And then some even go so far as to try to make it appear that Christ and his apostles departed from the letter of the Sabbath law.—Their reasonings from false premises are well calculated to deceive, confuse the mind, and lead precious souls from the truth of the Bible on this subject.
The fourth commandment of the Decalogue is the great Sabbath law. It is the standard to which the testimony relative to the Sabbath, in both Testaments, should be brought and carefully compared. With the right view of this commandment, a harmony may be seen throughout the divine testimony on this subject.
"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." Ex. xx, 8—10.
The great God appointed six days for man to labor, and do the work necessary to obtain a livelihood. This labor is called "thy work." But on the seventh day he designed that man should rest from this world's toil and care, and engage in the service of his Creator. The Sabbath law does not require us to become stationary and inactive on the seventh day. When we speak of the Sabbath law, we refer only to the fourth commandment which God spake with an audible voice, and engraved in the tables of the covenant. The words, "let no man go out of his place on the seventh day," Ex. xvi, 29, were spoken in reference to the children of Israel not going out into the field to gather manna on that day, as they did the six preceding days. Afterward the Jews did go out of their places on the Sabbath, not to do servile labor, but to worship God. On the Sabbath they had "an holy convocation," a religious assembly. Lev. xxiii, 3; Acts xv. 21. And farther, the priests were required by God to offer on the Sabbath, even more offerings than on the other six days.
"And on the Sabbath-day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth-deals of flour for a meat-offering, mingled with oil, and the drink-offering thereof. This is the burnt-offering of every Sabbath, beside the continual burnt-offering, and his drink-offering." Num. xxviii, 9, 10.
The law that came by Moses, which he wrote in the book of the covenant, did not require the priests to violate that law uttered by the voice of Jehovah, and engraven in the tables of the covenant. Therefore the labor of the priests in presenting offerings before the Lord on the Sabbath, was not the labor prohibited by the fourth commandment, called "thy work." Again, male children born on the Sabbath were, according to the law of Moses, circumcised the following Sabbath, "the eighth day." See Lev. xii, 1—3; Luke i, 59. No reasonable person, with any knowledge of the Bible, will say that this was a violation of the Sabbath law. This view of the subject shows clearly the true import of the words "labor" and "thy work" in the fourth commandment. Six days are allotted to us to attend to that work necessary to this life; but the seventh is the Rest-day, in which we are required to rest from our own labor, and engage in the service of God.
It is said that the law of the Sabbath forbids kindling fires on the seventh day. To this we reply, that the great Sabbath law, the fourth commandment, says nothing concerning kindling fires. The children of Israel in the wilderness were not only forbidden to go out into the field to gather manna on the Sabbath, but, also, to pick up sticks to kindle a fire to cook it, and to wash their clothes on that day. "Bake that ye will bake to-day, [sixth day,] and seethe that ye will seethe." Ex. xvi, 23.—They were a strong healthy people, free from disease, and were in a mild climate. It is said of them, [Ex. xv, 26,] "I am the Lord that healeth thee." Also, [Ps. cv, 37,] "And there was not one feeble person among their tribes." Their clothes were miraculously preserved, and their food was given them from heaven. As they were instructed to cook their manna on the sixth day, and therefore had no use for fires on the seventh, to kindle fires on the Sabbath for that purpose, would have been a plain violation of the fourth commandment.
We are differently situated. Our constitutions and climate require the heat of fire on the Sabbath a portion of the year.—We kindle a fire on the seventh day as an act of mercy and necessity, the same as we would water an ox or a horse, or lift a sheep from a pit. Such acts, the "Lord of the Sabbath" pronounced "lawful." But it is evidently wrong, and a violation of the Sabbath, to neglect to make those necessary preparations for the rest of the Holy Sabbath, which can be consistently made on the sixth day. The Sabbath law forbids our doing on the seventh day that which can be done on the sixth, and also what is not really an act of mercy and necessity. But merciful acts, such as relieving the distress of man or beast, which cannot be done on the sixth day, are "lawful," on the seventh. A reasonable and Scriptural view of the Sabbath law does not require us to suffer cold or hunger; for the law is "holy," "just," and "good."
But among the many positions of our opponents, which are perfectly destructive of each other, perhaps no one is more at variance with the Bible, and more wicked in the sight of heaven, than that which charges the Son of God with Sabbath-breaking. He says, "I have kept my Father's commandments."—But this view contradicts Jesus, and charges him with violating the fourth. It also contradicts the testimony of the beloved disciple.
"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law; for sin is the transgression of the law. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin." 1 John iii, 4. 5.
This testimony proves that if Jesus did depart from the letter of the Sabbath law, then he was a sinner, for "sin is the transgression87of the law." But as "in him is no sin," it follows that he did not transgress the law, as he declares; "I have kept my Father's commandments."
It is said that Jesus departed from the letter of the law in healing the sick on the Sabbath, and that he taught by example, as well as precept, that it was "relaxed." One thing is certain, he either kept the Sabbath law, or he broke it. If it is said that he observed it, then it is worse than idle to talk of his departing from its letter, and relaxing it. But if it is said that he did not observe it, but transgressed the Sabbath law, then Jesus is charged with being a sinner; for "sin is the transgression of the law." Christ was made under the law, [Gal. iv, 4.] and observed even the law of Moses up to the day of his crucifixion. He urged its observance upon his disciples. "The scribes and the Pharisees," said he, "sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do." Matt. xxiii, 2, 3. As Moses' law extended to the cross, this injunction was to be obeyed till that time. Those who teach that the Sabbath is merely a Jewish institution, and that it was abolished at the cross, should know that, in that case, it continued in full force until the crucifixion; for Christ and his apostles were to observe the law of Moses, until the hand-writing of ordinances was nailed to the cross. Again, those who hold that the Sabbath law was abolished at the cross, virtually admit that it was in force up to that point of time. But if Jesus had the power and the right to relax it, and if he exercised that power in doing it away, and taught that it was done away, by healing the sick on the Sabbath, then it is unwise to talk of its being abolished afterward, at the cross. For a law that is not in force cannot be abolished.
The wicked Pharisees charged the disciples with Sabbath-breaking, when they plucked the ears of corn, and ate to satisfy hunger, as they, with their Master, were on their way to the synagogue. But did Jesus teach that they had a right to break the Sabbath? Far from it. He referred them to what David did when he was hungry, also to the work of the priests, on the Sabbath, who were "blameless;" and then declared his disciples "guiltless." David and the priests were "blameless" on no other ground than this; what they did was no violation of the law. The disciples were "guiltless" on the same ground. The Bible nowhere forbids eating on the Sabbath when hungry. When Jesus was asked, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath-days," he replied:—
"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." Matt. xii, 11, 12.
The word lawful signifies "agreeable to law; conformable to law." [Webster.] When used by our Saviour in Matt. xii, and Luke xiv, it signifies conformable to the Sabbath law. Jesus did not give them a new Sabbath law, neither did he intimate that the fourth commandment was "relaxed." But he exposed the hypocrisy of those who falsely charged him with Sabbath-breaking, and declared that well-doing, that is, healing the sick, relieving dumb beasts in distress, or eating when hungry, was "lawful." The blind Pharisees, who rejected the first Advent to their own damnation, declared that those merciful acts which Christ performed on the Sabbath were "not lawful." Christ, on the other hand, pronounced such well-doing "LAWFUL." Those who teach that Jesus departed from the letter of the Sabbath law are on the side of the Pharisees, and their sin is worse, inasmuch as their blasphemous charge is against greater light. Christians should be on the side of Christ. Amen.
It is said that the "impotent man," to whom Christ said, "Rise, take up thy bed and walk," broke the Sabbath. This is but a repetition of the false charge made by the Jews, who were ever watching for a chance to accuse Christ. We reject their testimony, and choose to believe Christ. The healed impotent man walking with his bed was not for any selfish end, but for the glory of God. Such acts are not prohibited by the fourth commandment. Two of the prophets speak against bearing burdens on the Sabbath; but when their testimony is examined it will be seen that they refer to burdens of merchandise, such as "sheaves," "wine, grapes and figs." See Jer. xvii, 19—25; Neh. xiii, 15.
Finally, it is said that the penalty for violating the Sabbath is done away, therefore the Sabbath law does not exist. To this we reply, that temporal death never was the full and final penalty for Sabbath-breaking. The fourth commandment says nothing concerning it. Under the "ministration of condemnation" and "death," [2 Cor. iii.] by the services of Moses' law, the transgressor of the law of God was put to death. Why? Because, under that "faulty" ministration there was no atonement for such sinners. But under the "ministration of the Spirit," while Jesus is our sacrifice and priest, MERCY, the excellency and glory of the "ministration of the Spirit," pleads for the transgressor of the law of God, that he may be spared, and turn and live. This is why the stoning system was done away, with the other laws of Moses, at the cross. But if temporal death was the full penalty for violating the law of God, then he who broke the Sabbath, murdered, or committed adultery, only had to be stoned to death to fully satisfy the law. And in the judgment such sins cannot appear against him, for the law was fully satisfied when he suffered temporal death. But the penalty for transgressing God's holy law was, and still is, Eternal Death. "Sin is the transgression of the law," and "the wages [penalty] of sin is death."