02.03. The Sabbath: To whom was the Law of the Sabbath Given?
CHAPTER III
TO WHOM WAS THE LAW OF THE SABBATH GIVEN?
It is maintained that the Sabbath was given to all men, and was, therefore, intended to be a universal law. Of course the purpose of this argument is to find that the removal of the law given at Mt. Sinai can have nothing to do with the cessation of the Sabbath.
1. The first proof of the correctness of this position usually relied upon, is the numerical argument. A careful gleaning of the whole of the Scriptures is made and the number of times which the Sabbath is commanded, in one way or another, is stated. This is done to show the importance of the institution in the mind of the Author.
Surely this is a work of gratuity. If we could so far forget our logic as to imagine the possibility of maintaining any proposition in this way, we could easily find that almost every requirement of the Old Testament was intended for all men. Sacrifices, circumcision, new moons, sabbatical years, and almost the entire law has been required with equal emphasis. No one doubts that the Sabbath was binding on the people to whom it was given, and that it was to continue in force till it should be taken out of the way by the same authority which gave it.
2. But the great argument is derived from the statement of the Master: "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." Mark 2:27. They repeat this very frequently, with very telling effect, at least on themselves. And yet everything that was said of the Sabbath in this respect could have been said with equal propriety concerning every other Old Testament requirement. Every decree that God ever gave to the race, or any portion of it, was given to man, or made for man. But there is nothing in it to show that it was intended for all men. This is a rule in hermeneutics, agreed to by all who have really studied that science: Nothing should ever be applied to any subject not before the mind of the author at the time of writing or speaking. Indeed, the first thing that the exegete has to do in beginning his work, is to determine the purpose of the author, so that in the work of interpretation he may never go beyond that purpose in his exegesis.
Now with that rule before us, let us turn and see if Jesus was intending to say anything respecting the extensiveness of that institution. The question was, had his disciples violated that commandment? If we know the law in the matter, we know they had not. And as for their traditions, Jesus cared nothing. But while he and his disciples were free from transgressions of the law, they were not. They had violated that commandment, and excused others in doing the same. They had done so, too, when they had regarded it necessary to sustain life, or even to remove suffering. And yet upon such a basis as that, no law should be violated. One who was the Lord of the Sabbath might do so, for he would be unerring in his opinion of the necessity of the case. Hence he adds: "The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." The argument, then, of Jesus stands:
My disciples have violated no law. See Mat 12:7.
You agree that human life is more than keeping the Sabbath, and if there is therefore ever a conflict between the two, the Sabbath will have to give way; and
I am the Lord of the Sabbath, and can therefore dispose of it as I please. Hence it will appear to every careful reader that in making Mark 2:27 testify on the subject of the extent of the Sabbath, they have done violence to one, of the most fundamental rules of interpretation; that they have insisted on a meaning that was not in any way before the mind of the Lord when the language was employed.
It now seems proper that I should state some reasons for denying the proposition. This I must do very briefly:
1. The Scriptures directly state that they were only given to ancient Israel. If this be true, the question ought to end. For if He who gave the Sabbath says it was only intended for the descendants of Jacob, no true believer will dare affirm the proposition which we now oppose.
Exo 34:27 : "And the Lord said unto Moses, write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have commanded a covenant with thee and with Israel." No man, not even Adventists, deny that this covenant commanded, contained the Sabbath. Hence this law was given to Moses and the people of Israel. If this law belonged to others, what emphasis could have been placed on its being the property of Moses and that people?
Exo 31:13; Exo 31:16-17 : “Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you." … "Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed."
Now whatever was a sign between God and his people was not equally intended for other people. God gave to Abraham and his seed the sign of circumcision. But if that mark had been put upon all other peoples, it would not have been a sign between God and the seed of Abraham. So with the law of the Sabbath, it could not have been a sign between God and that people if it had been given to others as well as to them. Hence, its being a sign is certain proof that it was not intended for any other nation.
Deu 4:8 : "And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law which I set before you this day? " This question can only be answered in the negative "No nation." It was intended to affirm that no nation was in possession of this law. With this statement men ought to be satisfied, so that when God says no other nation possesses this law the whole question should be dropped.
Deu 5:3 : "The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day."
Now when God is said to have made that covenant with that people only, and not even with their fathers, it must be a strange form of faith that will contradict him by saying that he did make it with their fathers, and not only with them, but with all men and for all time. But someone may say that this covenant here spoken of, did not contain the Sabbath. This, however, is not correct. Read right along and see what the covenant was that was only given to them and not even to their fathers.
Coming to Deu 5:15, we read: "And remember that thou wart a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched-out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day." This not only Shows that the Sabbath was not given to others but why it was given to the Israelites.
A second reason for believing that God only intended the Sabbath for the descendants of Jacob, is that it is never spoken of as in any way connected with any duty which He required of the Gentiles. They are never reproved for not having kept it. And yet it is certain that they never kept it.
He reproved the Jews for the want of faithfulness to that commandment; why not condemn the Gentiles for like negligence? He reproved them for their many sins; he judged them for their wickedness and maltreatment of Israel; for their idolatry; for their adultery and sodomy; for their want of natural affection. Nay more, He shows clearly the ground of their responsibility. But never does He reprove them for not observing the Sabbath. Now, upon the hypothesis that this law was given to them, these things are inexplicable.
The Sabbath could not be kept by those who live in cold climates. This will be seen in the nature of the institution.
No work should be done.
Exo 20:10 : “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 manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates." See Deu 5:14.
They were to abide in their places.
Exo 16:29 : “See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of I wo days: abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day."
They must not even kindle a fire on the Sabbath.
Exo 35:3 : "Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitation upon the Sabbath day."
The penalty for violating the law of the Sabbath was death.
Exo 31:14-15 : "Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you. Every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."
Exo 35:2 : “Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work therein shall be put to death."
Num 15:32-36 : "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the Lord said unto Moses: The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." No one claims that such a law could be observed in this climate, say nothing of the Laplands, or the great area of northern countries. Hence, we are compelled to say that the law was not intended for any but those living in a land where the people could keep the law as it was given, or that its rigor has since then been abated, and that, too, by the same authority that gave it being. Has the law been abated in its rigor, and yet left standing? Here the Bible is silent. It is commonly said that the law of the Sabbath now stands, but the penalty has been changed or taken away. But of all this, the Bible knows no more than it does of pilgrimages to Mecca. Jesus taught that not one jot or tittle of the law should in any wise pass till all should be fulfilled. Hence, the only way for these penalties to disappear can be found in the removal of the law as a whole. The penalties stand or fall with the law itself. From all this, it is just as evident as it can be, that the law was given to the Israelites and to them alone. They were in a land where it might be observed. And they were expected to remain there. So far we are warranted in saying:
There is no account of the law having been given to any other people than the descendants of Jacob.
It is plainly stated that it was not even given to their fathers. Hence, that it was given alone to those who came out of Egypt, and to their children forever throughout their generations.
No Gentiles could be held responsible for a law that was never given to them. This accounts for the fact that they were never reproved for having disobeyed the law of the Sabbath.
The penalties of the law could only be removed by the authority which enacted them. God gave them, and he alone could remove them. Hence, as long as the law remained, even picking up sticks on the Sabbath must be punished with death.
It is left for us to see in the further discussion of the subject, how the penalties of that law were removed by the law being taken out of the way and nailed to the cross of Christ.