Publishing Committee · Rochester, N. Y. · Jul 4, 1854
THE PERSONAL COMING OF CHRIST.
By True Gospel Faith
WILL Christ come personally? is the question now under consideration. We do not inquire whether he will come again in some sense, for this is readily admitted by all the sects and expositors of the day. They believe, talk and write about the coming of the Lord; but when they, or very many of them are interrogated about what kind of a coming it will be, they express doubts about it, or are confident it will not be a personal, but a spiritual coming. Hence, Dr. Beecher, in a discourse delivered in London, at the time the Christian Alliance, or World's Convention, met there, said, "Under Pagan Rome, three fourths of the people were without education; the consequence was, the Empire fell; but now universal education will prevail; the people are rising in their strength to promote this cause—it will go on. The knowledge of the Lord will fill the earth. In this will he manifest the coming of the Son of man." This is the belief of nearly all who hold to the theory of the temporal millennium. They do not believe in the personal coming of the Lord, but admit that he will come spiritually, or, as Dr. Beecher says, by filling the earth with the knowledge of the Lord.
Our faith is, that the second appearing of Christ will be as literal, real and personal, as was his first. That this faith rests not on the opinions of men, but the immutable word of God, will appear evident from the following testimony:
Matt. xxiii, 39. "For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." Observe the expression, "see me," clearly shows that Christ meant himself. Keep this fact before the mind, and follow the Saviour to Mount Olivet, where he renews this same conversation about his coming, and hear what he says: "And they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory." Matt. xxiv, 30. Similar words are used in answer to the High Priest at the time of Christ's trial: "I say unto you, hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." Matt. xxvi, 64. Now, just so certain as Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of man, uttered these words, just so sure will he be seen coming in the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. Is Christ only spiritually seated on the right hand of power? If so, then he will come spiritually; for the same one who is seated there will come; but if he is, in fact, seated at the right hand of God, or power, then he will, really, come again. The most infallible evidence can be given, that he is really seated there; hence it is absolutely certain that Christ himself will come again.
1 Cor. xi, 26. "For as often as ye do eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come." This testimony clearly proves that the same person who died will come again. Well, did the body, the corporeal, the physical part, the whole Man Christ Jesus, die? He did. Then the conclusion is unavoidable, that the same identical Jesus who died will come again.
1 Thess. i, x. "And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus." Here we are clearly taught that the very same personage who "was raised from the dead" is in heaven, and will come again. If, as Dr. Beecher says, filling the world with the knowledge of the Lord, is his coming, then, according to Paul, knowledge was raised from the dead, ascended to heaven, and will come again; and the same absurdity belongs to every theory of a spiritual coming of the Lord.
Acts i, 11. "This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." "This same Jesus"—not another, or a spiritual or moral influence but this same Jesus who was born in Bethlehem, was baptized in the Jordan, who preached and wrought miracles in the cities of Israel, was crucified on Calvary, was interred in Joseph's new tomb, who rose from the dead the third day, who appeared to his disciples, and ate and talked with them, who led them to Bethany, and while in the act of blessing them, was taken up into heaven—this same Jesus will come again; and those who deny it contradict the testimony of the angels, whom God sent from heaven to bear witness to this fact. See Acts i, 9-11.
1 Thess. iv, 16. "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven." All that constitutes him "the Lord," is embraced in the term, "himself." And this word, "himself," most incontrovertibly proves that all that constitutes Jesus the Son of man, or Lord, whether physical or spiritual, will descend from heaven, or be revealed in that event which the scriptures call, the second appearing, coming, or revelation of the Son of man, or Lord Jesus Christ.
From this testimony, and a very great amount more of a similar character that might be given, it is certain that the personal coming of Christ is a clearly revealed doctrine of the Bible. No truth is more fully and clearly taught in that Book, than this. Hence those who believe it should not waver in their faith, but should hold fast their confidence firm unto the end, knowing that in this respect they are standing in the true grace of God, or the truth.
THE RESURRECTION.
All who acknowledge the authenticity of the Bible, hold, in some sense, to the doctrine of the resurrection. This they are constrained to do; for no doctrine is more plainly taught in that book. But notwithstanding this general admission, a variety of views are entertained relative to its real character.
One class hold that all the resurrection the Bible teaches, is, a moral or spiritual change of heart, from sin to holiness, in which the affections of the creature are raised from things earthly and sinful, to things heavenly and divine. That this glorious change is compared to a resurrection, or is metaphorically spoken of as such, we readily admit; but that it is the prime signification the Bible gives of the term, we deny, and shall endeavor to disprove before closing this article.
Another class hold that the resurrection taught in the Bible, consists in the separation of the soul from the body at death, and its ascension to heaven. Admitting that this hypothesis of separation and ascension is correct, it is not a resurrection, but a deliverance from the body, and an ascension. But as the Scriptures, instead of proving the separation of the soul from the body at death, and its ascension to heaven, teach that the whole man, soul and body, dies and sleeps in death, until the resurrection; consequently, this hypothesis of the resurrection is absurd in the extreme.
Another theory of the resurrection is, the descent of the soul from heaven, or its return from hades, to be joined with its resurrected body, in the morn of the resurrection day. Those entertaining this view hold that the soul is the "man proper," or the real man; hence this union of which they speak, at the resurrection, is not a resurrection of the real man, but only a resurrection of an unimportant appendage (not a part) of the man proper, and a simple reunion of this appendage (the body) of the man proper with the real man. But the theory of the soul going to heaven or hades at death, being false, the doctrine of the resurrection which is based upon it, as a matter of course, is also incorrect.
Another class, and we think they are a large majority over all the others, entertain vague ideas of the resurrection. They will tell you that they believe in the resurrection, but question them relative to its real nature, and they will express their doubts. They cannot think it possible or probable that the real body that dies and is buried, the identical person, will be raised; but they think it possible that something will come out of the earth; it may be a spiritual character, having the form of the body which died: this they think will constitute what the Bible calls the resurrection. But press them on the matter, and they will frankly confess that they know but little if anything correctly about the resurrection; consequently they have no faith in this glorious doctrine. This we say is the deplorable ignorance and unbelief of the great mass of professed Christians, on this fundamental Bible doctrine: and the lamentable evil, in a great measure, may be justly charged to the erroneous dogmas of the immortality of the soul, its departure from the body and ascension to heaven, at death. Remove these errors, and teach the bewildered people the truth relative to the soul, &c., and they would as a matter of course, soon become intelligent and consistent in their faith in the resurrection.
The true Bible doctrine of the resurrection, however much it may be opposed to the vain philosophy and confused doctrines of men, consists in raising from death to life, the entire man, or all that constitutes him such. To sustain this position, we offer the following Bible evidence. And,
1. The resurrection of Christ. Did Christ die? All readily admit, that his body did, and the Scriptures expressly say, that his "soul" was made an "offering for sin"—that "he poured out his soul unto death"—that his "soul was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death"—and that "his soul was not left in hell," or, correctly, the grave. That the very same Jesus that died, was raised from death to life, is evident from his own words. After his resurrection, he said to his disciples, "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I, MYSELF." Luke xxiv, 39. This word, myself, is full of meaning and interest. It clearly and incontrovertibly identifies Jesus after the resurrection, with Jesus before the crucifixion: they are one and the same person, I, myself, with no other difference than he was mortal before death, but immortal after death: "he dieth no more," "but ever liveth."
Well, what has the resurrection of Christ to do with the resurrection of the saints? Much every way. In the case under consideration, it most conclusively proves the identity of the person that will be raised, with himself before death; and what is true of one is true of all the saints. But how is this proved by the resurrection of Christ? By his being the "first fruits of them that slept." "Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the *firstfruits170of them that slept." 1 Cor. xv, 20. What were the first-fruits in the type? "When ye shall reap the harvest, then ye shall bring a sheaf, (or handful—margin,) of the first-fruits of your harvest unto the priest." Lev. xxiii, 10. The first-fruits then, in the type, were a choice specimen of the harvest, or whole crop: as was the handful or specimen, so would be the whole harvest. Hence, Christ, the antitype, in the resurrected state, is a true specimen and pledge of the real character of what his saints will be, when raised from the dead. And as Christ himself rose, so every saint, him or herself, who sleeps in Jesus, will be raised from death to life in the first resurrection. That the whole, entire person will be raised, is as certain as that Christ was raised, or that the real wheat, of which the sheaf or handful was the first-fruits, was gathered in the general harvest.
That the resurrected body of Christ is a sure pledge that the saints will be like him, is evident from the following and like scriptures: "Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like his glorious body." Phil. iii, 21. "It doth not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be like him." 1 John iii, 2.
2. The declarations of Paul in 1 Cor. xv. The resurrection of the saints, forms the subject of discourse of the greater portion of the chapter. That the whole man, and not the body exclusively, will be raised, is evident from the following expressions: "But every man [not body, exclusively, but the whole man] in his own order: Christ the first fruits afterwards they [not simply their bodies, but they] that are Christ's at his coming." Verse 23; "What advantageh it me, if the dead rise not? Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die." Verse 32.
We will paraphrase this last verse according to its true meaning: If the dead rise not, it is folly for me to suffer for Christ; for he is an impostor, and is yet dead; therefore we may as well eat and drink, take our fill of this world's pleasures and gratifications, and when we die that will be our everlasting end. This is the true light of the text, if the whole man and not simply his body, is the subject of conversation. But the following is the manner the text should read, if nothing but the body is meant:
What advantage will it be to my body to suffer, if it will have no resurrection. It is true, my soul will live forever, whether my body is raised or not. But if my body is never to be raised, it may as well eat and drink, and go to destruction at once (while my soul goes to glory) as to suffer for Christ, with the vain hope of a resurrection.
Thus it will be seen, that to make good sense of the Apostle's language in this case, we must understand him to teach the resurrection from death to life of the whole man.
Again, [Verse 35,] "But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?" In order to make good sense of this text, we must understand it to teach the resurrection of the whole man. If not, it should read, How are the bodies of the dead raised up? and with what bodies do the bodies of the dead come? which would be absurd in the extreme.
These questions, "How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?" Paul, in part, answers thus: "Thou fool! that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die; and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare (i. e., naked) grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: but God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body." Verses 36-38.
The meaning of the figure seems to be this: As no crop of any kind of grain can reasonably be expected until the seed is put into the earth, so the saints (with the exception of those who will be alive at the coming of Christ) need not expect eternal life, or to be gathered in the glorious harvest of the great day, without following their Lord, Christ the first-fruits, through death.
Again, as the seed that is sown, is the old grain or body, and not the new grain or body that springs from the old; so the old, infirm, weak and mortal bodies of the saints, are not the new, powerful, honorable, spiritual, immortal and glorious BODIES that will be raised.
Further, As the bare (which means naked) or real grain—not the chaff, nor straw, but all that constitutes it grain—is sown; so man—all that constitutes him such—falls under the power of death.
Further, As the real grain—not merely the chaff, straw or husks, but all that belongs to the grain—springs from the original seed sown in the earth; so the whole man—not simply the body, an appendage to the "man proper," but all that constitutes the man—springs to life, from the power of death and the grave, in the resurrection morn. It would be no more absurd to suppose that the real wheat comes from the old stock reserved in the granary, and is united with the new straw that springs from the earth, than to say that the soul comes from heaven, hades, or any other place, and is united with the body, when it rises from death. If the whole man dies and rises from the dead, then the figure is appropriate, and full of beauty and meaning, but otherwise, the reverse is the case.
Finally, As every seed produces "its own body," i. e., wheat will not produce rye, nor rye wheat, nor corn oats, nor barley wheat, &c., but every seed its own body, or the real grain in appearance, name and nature; so the identical person—not another being, or a shadow, a ghost, a shell, or an unintelligent and unimportant appendage of the "man proper," but the same person that fell under the power of death—will be raised to life; with the glorious change in the saints from mortality to immortality. Did Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the holy patriarchs, prophets and apostles die?—They will be raised and identified in the resurrection, as distinctly after as before, in the future world as in the present. And what is true of these worthies is true of all the saints. In a word, we may as well dispense with the resurrection, as to deny the identity of those who will be raised.
But this identity is made absolutely certain, by further declarations of Paul, found in the chapter under consideration. He says, "So is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body: it is raised a spiritual body." Verses 42-44. Here the pronoun, "It," as used in these three cases, places the identity of the person before and after the resurrection, beyond dispute. The "it" that died is the same "it" that rises—with the exception of the glorious change named, from corruption to incorruption, from weakness to power, and from a natural to a spiritual body. And, whatever ideas may be entertained about the "spiritual body," it should be remembered, that it will be like Christ's glorious body, and that he said he had flesh and bones; hence the spirituality of the resurrected body or person will not destroy its reality or identity with the body or person in the mortal state.
Further proof we deem unnecessary at this time, though a very great amount more might be given: it is found on many pages of the sacred Volume. Read it with care; and believe and rejoice in the blessed assurance that the time is not far distant when the Lord himself shall descend from heaven in all his glory, and the dead in Christ will be raised first, or awake to everlasting life and glory, and with the living who will be changed in a moment, be caught up to meet their descending Lord. Believe that it will be a reality, not a phantom, but what it says it will be, and live according to your faith, and when the glad day shall come, with the victorious and immortal throng you will sing the song of triumph:—
"O grave! where is thy victory?" —True Gospel Faith.
ONE OF MR. MILLER’S FIRST AUDIENCES.
About the time Mr. Miller began to write on the advent near, as he was passing down the Hudson River to New York in a steamboat, he was standing near a company of gentlemen who were conversing respecting the wonderful improvements of the day, when one of them remarked, that it was impossible for things to progress for thirty years to come, in the ratio they had done; for man would attain to something more than human.
Mr. Miller told him that it reminded him of Daniel xii, 4; ‘Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.’ A pause ensued, when Mr. M. continued, and observed that the improvements of the present day were just what we should expect at this time, as a fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy. He then commenced with the 11th chap. and comparing prophecy with history, showed its fulfillment thus far, while all listened with the most close attention.
He then told them he did not intend to trespass so long on their patience, and leaving them, walked to the other end of the boat. He had no sooner arrived there, then the entire company followed him, and wished to hear more on the subject. He accordingly went through with the 2d chap. of Dan., in the same manner, and fearing he should be tedious, broke away from them, and went down into the cabin. The entire company followed, and continued the conversation. He then went through with the 7th 8th and 9th of Dan. They then wanted to know if he had ever written on the prophecies. He told them he had, and distributed among them what copies he had of the first pamphlet he wrote on the subject. This was one of his first audiences, and men of the highest standing were astonished listners to his discourse; but the result of that interview can only be known in that great day.
[The following is an extract from a discourse by Seth Williston, written in 1813. It may be just to state that he advocates a transfer of sanctification from the seventh to the first day of the week, though this does not affect the force of his remarks in regard to the institution, moral nature and perpetuity of the weekly Sabbath of the fourth commandment.]
“THE Scriptures,” or, as it is literally, the writings, do evidently in this place mean those holy writings, which we call the word of God. The Old Testament scriptures were written before the coming of Christ. To these he repeatedly referred for the proof of his Messiahship, and of his doctrines. Jesus Christ most certainly treated those writings as being the inspired word of God, and a perfect standard of truth; by which everything relating to him and his kingdom, should be tried and determined. The holy scriptures, including both Testaments, make a rich store-house, from which the man of God is thoroughly furnished to every good work. Here he may learn what to believe about God, his law, his government, and his grace. Here he may learn the whole of his duty, both towards God, his fellow-men, and himself. If he is ever at loss on any point, let him immediately repair to those divine oracles, and he will here become acquainted with the decisions of Him who cannot err. Let him studiously and prayerfully search the scriptures, even as they search the mines for silver, and as they dig for hid treasures, and he will not fail to find instruction.
This passage has not been chosen at this time, with a view to prove the divine inspiration of the scriptures; or to show the importance of reading them; or to point out the manner in which this duty should be performed, though these things would naturally grow out of the text; but it is my design in this, and in several succeeding Discourses, to obey the command of Christ in the text, to “search the scriptures,” and to confine the search to one particular point, viz., the weekly Sabbath. By going through with the Bible, with our eye fixed upon this one object, we shall be likely to obtain more distinct views of it, than we should, if our attention were divided among a variety of objects. The inspiration of the scriptures will be taken for granted; and the importance of hearing what God himself has said about his Sabbath, cannot be disputed.
Let us, my hearers, in the very outset of these Discourses, feel how solemn a thing it is to come to inquire at the oracles of the living God. A humble and a solemn frame of mind becomes us while making these inquiries, and while we listen to hear what God the Lord shall speak. Let it be remembered, that we are come to inquire on a very practical subject. If the Lord has made a Sabbath, he has made it to be remembered, and to be171kept holy. Therefore let us hear the will of God with an obedient ear.
The scheme of the following Discourses is, to search the Bible from the beginning to the end, to see what the Sabbath is—what it is to sanctify it, and what it is to profane and pollute it—and to become acquainted with the scripture history of the sanctification, and profanation of the Sabbath, that we may learn the feelings of the Divine-Law-giver towards both; and that we may discover their different influence on the state of religion in general, and on the interests and prosperity of nations. None of those passages, which are considered as capable of materially aiding us in these inquiries, will be designedly passed over. After a new text on the subject is introduced, it is proposed to make such remarks and practical observations, as are suggested by it; and then proceed to the next in order, which treats on the subject of the holy Sabbath.
Without any further introductory remarks, suffer me to enter on my proposed plan, accompanied with your fervent prayers, that both the preacher, and his hearers, may be led into the truth; and that through the truth we may be sanctified.
The first information which we have about the weekly Sabbath, is Gen. ii, 2, 3.
“And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made: and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh-day and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work, which God created and made.”
On this passage it may be observed, 1. That the weekly Sabbath is not a human institution. It was God, the Creator of the world, who instituted it. 2. He gave sanction to the institution by his own example. Six days did the Creator work; but on the seventh-day he rested from all his work. 3. The weekly Sabbath is a very early institution. It was appointed and observed at the end of the very first week of time. It is no part of the law of ceremonies, which law was occasioned by the entrance of sin; for the Sabbath was established before sin had entered, and would have been obligatory on Adam and his offspring if sin had not been known among them. Therefore the abolition of the law of ceremonies does not affect the weekly Sabbath, though it does away those sabbatical institutions, which originated with the ceremonial law. These Sabbaths, which were purely Jewish, in their original, must have been the sabbath referred to by the apostle in his epistle to the Galatians, chap. iv, 10, 11: “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.” This distinction between days, made by the ceremonial law, must have been what Paul had in view, Rom. xiv, 5, 6. “One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike.”
On the passage before us we proceed to observe, 4. That God did two things to the Sabbath, to distinguish it from the other days of the week; 1st. He sanctified it, and 2ndly. He blessed it. The Lord has made the Sabbath a holy day; and when we keep it holy to the Lord, he makes it a day of blessing; i. e., a day in which he will, in a peculiar sense, meet with us and bless us; and cause the sanctified day to be very useful to our best, our immortal interests.
Objection. But how can time be sanctified? how can a day be holy? Ans. 1st. It is the language which God himself uses, and therefore cannot be foolish. 2ndly. No one supposes that time itself is capable of holy affections: nor does the holiness of the Sabbath consist in our having holy affections on that day. Such affections we are required to have every day in the week; and such affections Adam and Eve had continually until they fell; but even then they were required to sanctify the seventh day, in distinction from the other days. Holy affections are implied in an acceptable sanctification of the Sabbath; but this is not all. We answer, 3dly. The holiness of time consists in its being separated from secular business and worldly concerns to the immediate service of God. The temple was called a holy place, because, in distinction from other houses, it was the Lord's house; it was the house of prayer. It was profaned by being made a house of merchandise, as well as by being made a den of thieves. In the same sense in which the temple was a holy place, the Sabbath is a holy day—a day separated from the business and avocations of this life, to the service of God in devotional exercises and religious duties.
“And it came to pass, that on the sixth-day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man: and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath said, Tomorrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord; bake that which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning. And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade, and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. And Moses said, Eat that to-day; for to-day is a Sabbath unto the Lord: to-day ye shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none. And it came to pass there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth-day the bread of two days: abide ye every man in his place; let no man go out of his place on the seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day.”
On this passage we observe, 1. That the apostasy has not done away the obligation to sanctify the weekly Sabbath. The same hallowed day, of which we read before the fall of man, we here find again; and it still remains a holy day. 2. From this passage we learn, that it is our duty to remember during the week, that the Sabbath is coming, and be so prepared for it, as not to be obliged to earn, or look up, or be engaged in any great labor in preparing our food on this day. The portion of the manna, which was to be the food of the Sabbath, they were directed to gather, and bake, or seethe, on the day which preceded it. It is lawful to eat on the Sabbath as we do on other days; but not to gather. 3. The Lord's great concern for his holy day was strikingly manifested by his giving a double portion of the manna on the preceding day, and withholding it on that day; and by his preserving that which was laid up the day before from breeding worms and becoming loathsome, as it did when it was at other times kept over night. 4. We are taught by this portion of Scripture, that we need not be afraid of being impoverished by a holy resting one day every week. “See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days.” Let it never be forgotten, that it is the LORD who has given us the Sabbath. And let it be remembered, that it is the same Lord that gives us our bread, and who supplies all our needs: We may therefore rest assured, that six days in the week are sufficient to procure the bread of seven. To disbelieve this, is to deny the providence of the Lord of the Sabbath, and is deeply tinctured with atheism. 5. We see that men are prone to seek gain on the Sabbath-day by doing the work of the week, notwithstanding they may have been strictly cautioned against it. Some of the people went out on the seventh day to gather. The Lord was greatly displeased with the disobedient and covetous spirit which they manifested. “And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?”
Let us now turn our attention to the fourth commandment. It is contained in Ex. xx. 8–11.
“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: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”
Observe, 1. The weekly Sabbath is placed among the ten commandments, which are the summary of the moral law. In this respect it is honored above the sabbatical years; or the three annual feasts, the new moons, and such like institutions. These commandments were written with the finger of God on tables of stone, to denote their preciousness, importance, and durability. It showed that these commandments were to last to the end, without waxing old and vanishing away. The command to sanctify one day in the week, has the same honorable place, as the command to worship Jehovah alone; or as the command to honor our parents, and the command to do no murder.
Objection. It cannot in itself be wrong to work on one day, more than to work on another; therefore the requirement to keep holy one particular day in the week, cannot be of a moral nature.
Let the objector remember, that the other nine commands of the decalogue are evidently of a moral nature, and this, which enjoins the observance of a weekly Sabbath, was placed among them by the Divine Law-giver himself; neither ought we to suppose, that it was an oversight in him to place it where he did. He who lays his hand on the Sabbath, to drive it out from among the perpetually binding laws of God, let him beware what he does. Let him review the matter—let him not think that in this he is doing God service!
A word more on the moral nature of the Sabbath. The first commandment teaches, that we are under moral and indispensable obligation to love God supremely. The second commandment requires, that we worship him, and him alone. If it is our duty to love and worship our Creator, it is a matter of moral obligation to take some time from other concerns for this worship. It is essential to a godly life, that some portion of time every day should be redeemed from secular duties for the duties of devotion; and the all-wise God has seen, that it was absolutely necessary for the best good of the human race, and especially for the promotion of godliness, that one day in seven should be a day of worship. The obligation to keep holy the Sabbath, is as great as the obligation to seek the preservation and advancement of the cause of true religion in the world.
2. You notice, that the commandment, requiring the observance of the Sabbath, is introduced with the caution not to forget it—“Remember the Sabbath day.” It should be remembered all the week, that after so many days the Sabbath will return again; and we should feel ourselves bound to shape our business through the week, so as to be in the best manner prepared for its return. And the caution at the beginning of the commandment, requires us to know when the holy day has returned, and to conduct ourselves accordingly.
3. In looking over the commandment we notice, that all our work must be done in the six days before the Sabbath. By our work, is not meant works of darkness (which are forbidden on all days,) but secular work, pertaining to things of this life.
4. Notice, On the Sabbath we may not do any work, i. e., any kind of this secular business. It would have made the commandment too long, if all kinds of worldly employments had been particularized; but they are all included—they are all forbidden to be done on the consecrated day. “Thou shalt not do any work.”
5. It cannot but be noticed, that the commandment binds us to use all our influence and authority, to preserve the Sabbath from being profaned by others. If we have sons and daughters, men-servants and maid-servants, horses, or cattle, we are required to see to it, that the Sabbath is not profaned by any of them.
6. This commandment seems to imply, that keeping holy the seventh day was an acknowledgment of God, as the Creator of the world; and of consequence, that the refusing to keep it holy, would be a denial of the God who is above. Let this thought weigh on all our minds. When we conduct as though there were no weekly Sabbath, we conduct as though there were no God—no Creator of the world.