The Law of God

ALL the objections which are urged against the ten commandments are aimed at the fourth commandment. Were it not for this, few of them would be put forth. And they are not generally intended to have any effect on any other. Thus it is claimed that there is no precept for keeping the Sabbath until the Israelites were brought out of Egypt, nor any record of anybody keeping it previous to that time. If this were true, and if it did furnish evidence against the Sabbath, what shall we say of the third commandment? For there is not a hint concerning it or its violation till after the exode. But two positions can be taken respecting it by opposers of the law:—

(1) That it was then necessarily of force, though not mentioned, as the name of God was as "holy and reverend" as now; and as much to be honored us now. This we accept; and the conclusion follows that a law is proved to exist where the reason is proved to exist. But we have positive proof that the service was a sacred, sanctified institution from the creation of the world; and therefore the duty to "keep it holy" also existed. It was "made for man"; Mark 2:27; and as it was made at the time of creation, of course it was sanctified, or "set apart" for man at that time. This is conclusive.

(2) The absence of any mention of profanity, or of taking the name of God in vain in the book of Genesis, may be offered as evidence that it, with the other parts of the ten commandments, were not binding until the exode, and then only binding on the Jews. But besides the evidence offered on the other commandments, we have proof direct and positive against this objection. In Lev. 18 the Lord gave instructions to Israel to avoid the ways of the Canaanites, among which is the following: "Neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God." "For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which were before you, and the land is defiled." Verses 21, 27. And in Deut. 18, speaking of the sins committed by the nations Canaan, he said: "Because of these abominations the Lord doth drive them out from before thee."

Now apply to these declarations the words of Paul to the Romans: "Where no law is, there is no transgression and sin is not imputed when there is no law." But sin was imputed to them, and among their sins was the violation of the third commandment. They were guilty of profaning the name of God. Therefore they knew of the existence of such a law, though we have no record of its having been given.

4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, 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 manservant, nor thy maidservant, 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.

The following remarks from the pen of Elder J.N. Andrews, are worthy of careful consideration:—

"In the absence of direct testimony either way, it is by no means certain that 'holy men of old' did not regard the Sabbath. We read of their reckoning time by weeks, and by seven of days. Gen. 29:27, 28; 8:10, 12. The reckoning of time by weeks is not derived from anything in nature, and can be traced to but one source, to wit: the six days' worth of creation, and the rest of the seventh. It is not very likely that the work of creation should be remembered and commemorated, and the rest and sanctification of the holy Sabbath should be forgotten.

But were it possible to show a violation of the Sabbatic institution in the patriarchal age, it would no more destroy the sacred character of that institution than a plain violation of the institution of marriage on the part of some of the patriarchs affects the sacredness of the marriage institution." Mal. 2:14, 15; Gen. 2:21-24; Matt. 19:4-8; Mark 10:6-8, compared with Gen. 16; 25:6; 29:30.

Inasmuch as the sole aim of objectors and opposers is to disprove the obligation of the Sabbath, both in the patriarchal age and in our own, we might reasonably expect to find some reason urged against this institution and its commandment which would not rest against the other commandments. But this is not the case. To the contrary there is more and stronger evidence in its favor than can be found in favor of most of the other precepts of the decalogue. And only one other, the seventh, has equal evidence of having been given to man before his fall from innocence.

Before the law was given on Sinai the Lord expressed his intention to prove the people whether they would walk in his law or no. The proof was furnished by testing them on the Sabbath. On six days the manna fell, and on the seventh day, the Sabbath, it was withheld. When the people gathered a double portion on the sixth day, and the rulers told Moses, he said, "To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord." But some of the people went out on the seventh day to gather, and the Lord reproved them, saying, "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." Ex. 16:23, 28, 29. This proves beyond all controversy that the law of the Sabbath existed before it was given on Sinai.

It is supposed by some that the Sabbath originated at that time, in the wilderness; that here it was first consecrated and enforced. If this were the case we should reasonably expect to find here some reason for its consecration; some reason why the seventh day was chosen in preference to any other day of the week. But we do not find it. The only reason given in Ex. 16 for resting on the seventh day is, that God had a law which required it. But why such a law was enacted, and why it embraced the seventh day, Ex. 16 does not inform us. For this information we must appeal to other scriptures. And we are not left at a loss in this respect; Gen. 2:3, and Ex. 20:8-11, are full and explicit on this point.

Ex. 20:8-11 contains the fourth commandment in full. And in it are given both the reason, for the sanctification of the day, and the reason why the sanctity was placed on the seventh day. If the Sabbath was a Jewish institution, if it originated at or after the exode, and if it was founded on anything peculiar to that people in their history or experience, here is the place to look for the proof of it. But we do not find it. We find only a reference to the events of creation week as the reason for the institution of the Sabbath, and the rest of God from all his works of creation as the reason for blessing the seventh day in preference to any other day.

"The seventh day is the Sabbath [rest] of the Lord thy God." It is the Lord's rest, and the Lord's day. The reason is plainly given. "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 [literally, the day of the rest], and hallowed it."

"Wherefore" signifies "for this reason." The reason, and the only reason given in the Bible why the Lord blessed the Sabbath and consecrated it is that in it he rested from his work of creation. When he blessed and hallowed the day we learn from Gen. 2:3, "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." Here we have the time and the occasion of sanctifying of the Sabbath.

And this opens to us some important considerations. The Sabbath was not a Jewish, or national, or local institution, because it dates from creation, was God's own rest day, and has nothing in it peculiar to any one nation or people. It was not typical, as it was instituted before the fall of man, and therefore before types could have any significance. Its proper place is just where we find it, with moral laws—laws growing out of the action and will of God.

We would call special attention to this idea. All duties growing out of the action of God alone, are primary, and are properly considered moral. There are secondary truths growing out of a perversion of God's work, out of the rebellion of his creatures. And all institutions arising from these secondary relations are limited in their nature; they are positive or typical. No typical institution or merely positive duty can grow out of original relations, that is, out of relations existing from creation. This cannot be disputed. And it is equally evident that no moral obligation can originate in the action of the creature. All the types and shadows, and everything pertaining to a remedial system, have respect to man's condition as a sinner, and they would never have existed if man had not sinned. They owe their existence to man's rebellion against his Maker. Everyone can see at a glance that man, by sin, could not give rise to a moral relation or a moral duty. These grow out of the sole will and action of the great Moral Governor.

But the Sabbath was made before man fell; before sin existed. And of course if man had not fallen, if sin never had existed, the Sabbath would have been observed as a sacred institution, a perpetual reminder of the power and benevolence of the Creator. This consideration ought to convince all that the Sabbath is not a local, typical, or national institution, subject to change or abrogation as are all typical institutions.

But the objection is raised that though the Sabbath originated at creation, there was no commandment to enforce its observance until after the Jews were brought out of Egypt. There are three sufficient arguments against this objection.

1. The objection is erroneous because it assumes that there was no law given because no law is formally written in Genesis. But this assumption is contrary to reason and to established facts. Enoch walked with God, but we are not told that he either had or obeyed any law. Shall we therefore infer that no law was known or obeyed by him? Noah was righteous before God. How, or wherein, we are not told in the history of his life.

But the Scriptures inform us that righteousness consists in right doing. 1 John 3:7. Hence a rule of right, or law, was known by Noah. Also there is no mention of the third commandment, either of its obligation or violation, in Genesis, nor until it was spoken on Sinai. But the Canaanites were condemned for violating it; Lev. 18:21, 27; which proves that there was such a law though Genesis does not mention it. Therefore the objection is not valid.

2. We learn by Ex. 16 that God had a law which enjoined the observance of the Sabbath, not only before it was spoken on Sinai, but before the manna was given. For the reason and origin of this law we are referred to the work of creation, and to God's resting on, and sanctifying the seventh day.

3. In Gen. 2:3, we are informed that God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work. To sanctify means to set apart, or to appoint to a sacred of religious use.

The obligation of the Sabbath was fully established when, it was appointed to be sacredly observed; this is all that can be required to establish any institution. As this was done at the close of creation week, it fixes to a certainty the date of the origin of Sabbath obligation. And as "the Sabbath was made for man," the sanctification—the appointment or setting apart—was for man, for his observance. No other precept of the decalogue has so clear proof in favor of its having been given before the fall of man. The Sabbath institution was given to man while in a sinless state; it was suited to the condition of sinless beings. It existed in Paradise before it was lost, and will be kept according to the original design of its institutor—the Creator of heaven and earth—when paradise is restored.