p. 1 | History of the Sabbath by John Nevins Andrews

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Feb 11, 1862

History of the Sabbath.

By John Nevins Andrews

THE SABBATH DURING THE LAST OF THE SEVENTY WEEKS.

(Continued.)

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?" Mark vi, 1-6.

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 they asked 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 those 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 that God was his Father, making himself equal with God." John v, 1-18.

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, 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. Compare Jer. xvii, 21-27, with Neh. xiii, 15-20. (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 [Gen. ii, 1-3; Ex. xx, 8-11; Isa. lvi; lviii, 13, 14; Eze. xx]; and as our Lord had most expressly recognized their authority [Gal. iv, 4; Matt. v, 17-19; vii, 12; xix, 17; Luke xvi, 17], 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." John v, 19.

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 made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath-day?" John vii, 21-23.

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, 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." Jno. ix, 1-16.

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 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 hands on her; and immediately she was made straight, and glorified God. And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus 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 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 that 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." Luke xiii, 11-17.

This time a daughter of Abraham, that is, a pious woman [1 Pet. iii, 6], 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 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." Luke xiv, 1-6.

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 [Matt. xxiii, 23]; 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 Sabbath 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 the 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." Matt. xxiv, 15-21.

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. Dan. ix, 26, 27. 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 encompassed by armies." Luke xxi, 20. The fulfillment of this sign is recorded by the historian Josephus. After stating that Cestius, the Roman commander, at the commencement of the Roman contest between the Jews and the Romans, encompassed the city of Jerusalem with an army, he adds:

"Who, had he 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."—Jewish War, book II, chap. xix.

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."—Jewish War, book II, chap. 20.

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."—Eccl. Hist., book III, chap. v.

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 the 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 even to take their clothes, sufficiently attests the importance of the first of these petitions, and the tender care of Jesus as 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 that 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."—Jewish War, book II, chap. xix.

The law of Moses required the presence of every male in Israel at this feast in Jerusalem [Deut. xvi, 16]; and thus, in God's providence 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.

Thus remarks Mr. Crozier in the Advent Harbinger for Dec. 6, 1851: "The reference to the Sabbath in Matt. xxiv, 20, only shows that the Jews who rejected Christ would be keeping the Sabbath at the destruction of Jerusalem, and would in consequence, add to the dangers of the disciples' flight, by punishing them perhaps with death for fleeing on that day."

And Mr. Marsh, forgetting that Christ forbade his disciples to take anything with them in their flight, uses the following language: "If the disciples should attempt to flee from Jerusalem on that day and carry their things, the Jews would embarrass their flight and perhaps put them to death. The Jews would be keeping the Sabbath, because they rejected Christ and his gospel."—Ad. Harbinger, Jan. 24, 1852.

These quotations betray the bitterness of their authors. In honorable distinction from these anti-Sabbatarians, the following is quoted from Mr. William Miller, himself an observer of the first day of the week:

"Neither on the Sabbath-day.' Because it was to be kept as a day of rest, and as servile work was to be done on that day, nor would it be right for them to travel on that day. Christ has in this place sanctioned the Sabbath, and clearly shows us our duty to let no trivial circumstance cause us to break the law of the Sabbath. Yet how many who profess to believe in Christ at this present day, make it a point to visit, travel and feast on this day! What a false-hearted proclamation must that person make who can thus treat with contempt the moral law of God, and despise the precepts of the Lord Jesus! We may here learn our obligation to remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy."—Exposition of Matt. xxiv, p. 18.

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 upon which made them forget the religious observation [of the Sabbath] made them too hard for their enemies in the fight.”—Jewish War, book II, chap. xix.

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 them in Jerusalem:

“But when the robbers perceived this unexpected retreat of his, they resumed their courage, and ran after his 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 at Scopus, and as he went off farther next day, he thereby invited the enemy to follow him, who still fell upon the hindermost and destroyed them.”—Jewish War, book II, chap. xix.

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. 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.

J. N. A.

(To be Continued.)