Part 61
_Obj._ 3. It is farther objected, that when the observation of the Sabbath was enjoined, God bade the Israelites, in Deut. v. 15. to _remember that_ they were _servants in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord_ their _God brought_ them _out thence through a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm_; and _therefore commanded them to keep the Sabbath-day_.
_Answ._ To this it may be replied,
1. That God’s bringing his people out of Egypt, is no argument that this is a part of the ceremonial law, which was given soon after that time. For we read in the preface to the ten Commandments, of his bringing his people out of the land of Egypt; which is assigned as a reason why they should observe all the Commandments. Therefore it might as well be inferred, that they are all a part of the ceremonial law, as that the fourth Commandment is so; because enforced by the same motive.
2. Though this particular reason is given to induce the Israelites to observe this Commandment, and it is in a more especial manner, applied to that dispensation of providence which they were lately under; yet this could not be said to take place in the first institution of the Sabbath, if we suppose that it was instituted before Moses’s time, which we shall endeavour to prove under a following head.
3. This particular reason, taken from their having been _servants in Egypt_, is added to enforce the obligation laid on masters, to let their servants rest on the Sabbath-day; namely, because they themselves were once servants in Egypt, without any regard had herein to the matter of the Commandments, or any intimation that it is a branch of the ceremonial law.
II. We shall now consider when this law, relating to the observation of the Sabbath, was first given. There are various opinions about this matter.
1. Some think the Sabbath was first instituted when God spake to Israel from mount Sinai; inasmuch as it is one of the ten Commandments, which God gave them from thence[214].
But to this it may be replied, that the Sabbath was observed some days before Israel came into the wilderness of Sinai, viz. when they were in the wilderness of Sin. Thus Moses, when speaking concerning their gathering twice as much _manna_ as was usual, the day before the Sabbath, assigns this is as a reason for it, _To morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord_, Exod. xvi. 13. And that this was before they encamped at mount Sinai, appears from hence, namely, that it is said, that _they came into the wilderness of Sin on the fifteenth day of the second month_, ver. 2. Whereas they did not come into the wilderness of Sinai, till the _third month_, chap. xix. 1. Therefore,
2. Others fix the Epocha of the giving this law, from their coming into the wilderness of Sin; this being the first time, in which the Sabbath is expressly said to be observed, in scripture.
But to this it may be replied; that nothing can be justly inferred from the mode of expression, used by Moses in this scripture, as though it argued the giving a new law, that had not been before observed; but only the putting them in mind of the observation of that day, which had, for some time been disregarded; and accordingly it is assigned as a reason of their gathering twice the quantity of manna on the sixth day, which supposes that they knew before hand, that they were to rest on the seventh; though it is highly probable, that the observation of this Commandment had been neglected, for some years past while they were in Egypt; and it may be, that they were not suffered, by those who held them there in bondage, to observe this, and many other of the divine laws. Nevertheless, the memory of the Sabbath was not wholly lost among them, which Moses puts them now in mind of.
The most probable opinion therefore relating to the institution of the Sabbath, is, that it was given to man from the beginning; which may be argued,
(1.) From the reason annexed to the Commandment, to wit, God’s resting from his work of creation; and it immediately follows, that when he rested from his work, he blessed and sanctified the seventh day; that so man might celebrate and commemorate his power and glory displayed therein, Gen. ii. 1, 2, 3.
_Obj._ To this it is objected; that God’s blessing and sanctifying the seventh day, may be understood _proleptically_, as denoting, that at first he sanctified, or ordained that it should be a Sabbath, to his people in the following ages; and that this did not take place till Moses’s time; and accordingly they suppose, that he having been speaking of the creation of the world, and God’s resting from his work, gives them to understand, that this was the reason of the law, which was now given them, concerning the observation of the Sabbath, which they never heard of before.
_Answ._ But to this it may be replied, That this sense of the text will appear very absurd to any unprejudiced person; since if God’s resting from his work, which is mentioned immediately before, as the reason of his sanctifying the seventh day, is to be taken literally, why must his sanctifying the Sabbath be taken figuratively? if the one be an account of what was just done, why should the other be an account of what was not to take place till two thousand and five hundred years after?
(2.) If God had a church in the world, and public worship was performed by them from Adam to Moses’s time, then, there were set times, in which they were to meet together for that end, and consequently a Sabbath, which was equally necessary for the good of the church, in foregoing as well as following ages; and therefore we cannot suppose that it should be denied that privilege then, which had been granted it ever since; or, that from Moses’s time they should be obliged to celebrate the glory of God, as their Creator, sovereign Ruler, and bountiful Benefactor; and that a seventh part of time should be allotted them for this service, by his express command, and yet he should lose the glory, and his people the advantage arising from it, before that time.
_Obj._ It is objected to this, that the scripture is wholly silent as to this matter, and therefore nothing can be concluded in favour of the argument we are maintaining.
_Answ._ Some think that the scripture is not wholly silent as to this matter; but that it may be inferred from what we read in Gen. iv. 3, 4. in which it is said, that _in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought an offering unto the Lord_; which was, doubtless, an instance of public worship. We render the words _in process of time_; but they may, with equal justice, be rendered, as it is observed in the margin, _at the end of days_; that is, at the end of that cycle of days which we generally call _a week_, or on the seventh day; then the offering was brought, and the solemn worship performed, and hereby the Sabbath sanctified according to God’s institution. But if this argument be not allowed of, it does not follow that the scripture’s not mentioning their observing a Sabbath, gives us just ground to suppose that they did not observe any. It might as well be argued, that because the scripture speaks very little of any public worship performed before the flood, that therefore there was none in the world; or, that because we do not read of the church’s observing a Sabbath, and many other parts of instituted worship all the time of the judges, which is said to be _about the space of four hundred and fifty years_, Acts xiii. 20. therefore it follows that a Sabbath, was not observed by them, during the whole of that interval, and all instituted worship was wholly neglected.
The next thing to be inquired into is, whether the Sabbath was instituted before or after the fall of our first parents? And it may be observed; that it appears to have been instituted before their fall; because the reason of its institution was God’s resting from his work of creation, of which we read before the account of their fall, as appears from the scripture before mentioned.
_Obj._ It is objected that Adam in innocency had no manservant nor maid-servants, nor stranger within his gate; and therefore was not in a capacity of observing this Commandment.
_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That before the world was increased, our first parents might observe the principal thing contained in this Commandment, by setting apart a day for religious worship: and when the world increased, the other part of the Commandment, which was only circumstantial, might take place. And, indeed, this objection might be as much alleged against Adam’s being obliged to yield obedience to the fifth, seventh, and eighth Commandments, as against his obeying the fourth.
III. It is farther observed, in this answer, that the day which we call a seventh part of time, was the seventh day of the week, from the beginning of the world, till the resurrection of Christ; and the first day of the week, ever since, to continue to the end of the world; which is the Christian Sabbath, or the Lord’s day. That the seventh day of the week was observed as a Sabbath, at first, is taken for granted; and we do not find that it was abolished by a positive law, so that there should be no Sabbath; but the day was changed, by substituting another in the room of it. If, according to the fourth Commandment, there is to be but one Sabbath in the week, and the other six days thereof are allowed for our own lawful employments; and if the first day of the week can be proved, as we shall attempt to do, to be the Christian Sabbath, then it follows, that the seventh day ceases to be a Sabbath.
It may be, indeed, observed, from several ecclesiastical writers, that some in the three first centuries, observed, both the seventh and the first day of the week. As for the apostles, they often assembled with the Jews, in their synagogues, on the seventh day, Acts xiii. 14. and xvii. 2. but this was done with a design to propagate the Christian religion among them, which could not, with equal conveniency, be done on other days. And the church afterwards met together on that day, as well as the Lord’s day, apprehending that though it was not now to be reckoned God’s holy day, or the Christian Sabbath; yet it was expedient, that hereby they should keep up the memory of his having, on that day, finished the work of creation; and others kept it as a day of fasting, accompanied with other religious exercises, in memory of Christ’s lying that day in the grave. But this can hardly be justified in them. However, it is evident that they did not pay the same regard to it as the Lord’s day, nor style it God’s holy day, nor the Christian Sabbath, by way of eminency. And some have expressly intimated, that whatever regard they paid to the seventh day, or what assemblies soever they held for worship therein, they did not observe it in the same way as the Jews did[215]; neither were they obliged to hold meetings on that day, as they were on the Lord’s day, it being, in part, left to their discretion; and it was supposed, that they had sufficient leisure from their secular callings; and therefore might attend to the worship of God on that day, as an opportunity offered itself; though they did not count it equally holy with the Lord’s day; nor were they obliged, when the worship was over, to abstain from their secular employment[216]. But this I only mention occasionally, to obviate an objection taken from the practice of some of the ancient church, in observing the seventh day of the week, which does not much affect the cause we are maintaining, our design being to prove that the first day of the week is ordained to be the Christian Sabbath.
But before we enter on that subject, it may be necessary, to prepare our way for it, to premise,
1. That it does not, in the least, derogate from the honour and glory of God, to change the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week. It would, indeed, derogate from the glory of God, if he should take away one Sabbath, and not institute another in the room of it; for then he would lose the honour of that public worship, which he has appointed to be performed on that day.
Moreover, if there be a greater work than that of creation, to be remembered and celebrated, it tends much more to the advancing the glory of God, to appoint a day for the solemn remembrance thereof, than if it should be wholly neglected. And to this we may add, that if all men must honour the Son, even as they honour the Father, then it is expedient, that a day should be set apart for his honour, namely, the day on which he rested from the work of redemption, or, as the apostle says, _ceased from it, as God did from his_, Heb. iv. 10.
2. It was expedient, that God should alter the Sabbath, from the seventh to the first day of the week; for,
(1.) Hereby Christ took occasion to give a display of his glory, and in particular of his sovereign authority, to enjoin what time he would have us set apart for his worship under the gospel-dispensation, as well as what worship he will have performed therein; and to discover himself to be, as he styles himself; _The Lord of the Sabbath day_, Matt. xii. 8.
(2.) We, in the observation thereof, signify our faith, in a public manner, that Christ is come in the flesh, and that the work of our redemption is brought to perfection; and consequently, that there is a way prepared for our justification and access to God, as our God, in hope of finding acceptance in his sight.
3. All the ordinances of gospel-worship have a peculiar relation to Christ; therefore it is expedient that the time in which they are to be performed, under this present gospel-dispensation, should likewise have relation to him; therefore that day must be set apart in commemoration of his work of redemption, in which he finished it, and that was the first day of the week.
This leads us to consider, what ground we have to conclude that the Sabbath was changed, from the seventh to the first day of the week after the resurrection of Christ. And this will appear,
(1.) From the example of Christ and his apostles, who celebrated the first day of the week as a Sabbath, after his resurrection. Thus we read in John xx. 19. that _the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut, where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst of them, and said, Peace be unto you_. And ver. 26. _After eight days_, or the eighth day after, inclusive, _again his disciples were within; then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst and said, Peace be unto you_. Where we may observe,
[1.] That it was not merely an occasional meeting, but a fixed one, which returned weekly. Therefore they met eight days after, or the following first day of the week; which was the second Christian Sabbath.
[2.] On both these days of their meeting together for public worship, Christ appeared in the midst of them, and spake peace unto them; which includes his owning the day, and confirming their faith in the observation of it as a Sabbath, for the future.
_Obj._ It is objected, that the reasons of the apostles’ meeting together on the first day of the week, was for fear of the Jews; and not because it was substituted in the room of the seventh day, as a Sabbath perpetually to be observed.
_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that they did not meet together for fear of the Jews; but when they were assembled, the doors were shut for fear of them. Besides, it may be farther replied, that the fear of persecution would have been no warrant for them, not to keep the seventh-day-Sabbath, or to substitute another day in the room of it. To all which we might add, that they might more securely meet together on the seventh day of the week, than on any other day, if they were afraid of disturbance from the Jews; for then they were engaged in worship themselves; and, it is probable, would be rather inclined to let them alone, for want of leisure, to give them disturbance in their worship.
(2.) It farther appears, that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, in that this was a day, in which the church met, together with the apostles, for solemn public worship. Thus we read in Acts xx. 7. that _upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them_. Where we may observe,
[1.] That it was not a private, but a public meeting of the church; for it is said, that the disciples, that is, the church, met together.
[2.] It was not a day occasionally appointed by the apostle, but the stated usual time of their meeting; for it is not said Paul designed to preach to them on that day, and therefore they met together; but when they came together, _on the first day of the week_, that is, on the day of their usual meeting, _Paul preached unto them_.
[3.] The apostle had been with them some days before; for it is said in the foregoing verse, that _he abode there seven days_. Why did they not meet together, and he preach to them the day before, to wit, the seventh day of the week, on which day he was with them; but because that was no longer a Sabbath, but changed to the first day?
[4.] The end of their meeting was to break bread. Now, though the word is to be preached in season and out of season; yet no day is so proper to break bread on, or celebrate the Lord’s supper, as that on which he rose from the dead. Besides, when a day is particularly described as that which is set apart for solemn worship, such as preaching and breaking of bread is supposed to be, that must be understood to be the Sabbath.
[5.] They could not be said now to meet together for fear of the Jews, as was before objected to their observing the first Sabbath; for it was at Troas, where the Jews had nothing to do, nor could they persecute them; for it was a church of converted Gentiles.
_Obj. 1._ It is objected, that the word which we render the _first day of the week_[217], might be rendered _one day_ of the week, or on a certain day.
_Answ._ Our translation of the Greek word, is by far the most proper, as all know, who understand that language. Besides, the same words are used in John xx. 1. and Luke xxiv. 1. in both which scriptures Christ’s resurrection is said to be _on the first day of the week_; how preposterous would it be, to render them, on a certain day of the week? and if they are, in those scriptures, and others that might be referred to, to be rendered, the first day of the week, as all allow they must, why should they be rendered otherwise in the text under our present consideration?
_Obj. 2._ It is farther objected, that their meeting together, on the first day of the week, to break bread, does not argue it to be a Sabbath; because formerly the Lord’s supper used to be administered whenever the word was preached, and that was on other days, besides the first day of the week; yea, we read, that in some ages of the church, the word was preached, and the Lord’s supper administered, every day.
_Answ._ To this it may be replied, That though the Lord’s supper may be administered on another day, yet this is said to be the day more especially appointed for this solemn ordinance, or for public worship, as has been already observed. Besides, though the Lord’s supper was administered on other days after this: yet it will be hard to prove that it was administered on any other day but the Lord’s day, in the apostles time.
(3.) The change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to the first day of the week, may be farther argued from 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2. in which the apostle says, As I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. _Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him; that there be no gatherings when I come._ In which words we may observe,
[1.] That there is a work of charity recommended; a duty most proper for the Sabbath, as a testimony of our thankfulness to God for spiritual blessings, held forth to, or received by us, on that day; and it is a day in which our hearts are most like to be enlarged to others, when most affected with the love of God to us. Those duties which the prophet recommends as suitable to a fast, which God had chosen, are very suitable to all public ordinances, and in particular to Sabbaths, namely, to _loose the bands of wickedness_, and to _undo the heavy burdens, and to deal forth bread to the hungry_, Isa. lviii. 6, 7. If the poor of the church were to be provided for, this was to be done, not by a private, but a public collection, whereby more might be raised, and no burden laid on particular persons. It is moreover said, that they were to _lay by as God had prospered them_; that is, not only in proportion to the increase of their worldly substance, or the success that attended their secular employments on other days; but their compassion to the poor ought to be enlarged, in proportion to the spiritual advantage they received from Christ, under his ordinances.
[2.] This was not to be done on one single first day of the week, but on the return of every first day; as all who read this scripture impartially must understand it[218]. Therefore it follows, that the first day of the week was a day in which the church met together for solemn, public, and stated worship.
[3.] It was not commanded only to this church at Corinth, but is agreeable to what had been commanded to _all the churches of Galatia_; therefore it follows, that the churches of Galatia were obliged to observe the first day of the week, as well as that at Corinth. And inasmuch as this epistle is directed to _all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ_, 1 Cor. i. 2. it may by a parity of reason, be applied to them; and accordingly it may be argued, that it was a universal practice of the church, at that time, to meet together for religious worship, on the first day of the week, which argument cannot but have some weight in it, to prove the doctrine that we are maintaining, relating to the change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to the first day of the week.
(4.) The change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to the first day of the week, farther appears, in that there is a day, mentioned in the New Testament, which is styled _the Lord’s day_. Thus it is said, _I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day_, Rev. i. 10. Where it may be observed,
[1.] That there is a peculiar claim that Christ lays to this day as his own, distinct from all other days. As the seventh day of the week was, before this, called, as it is in this Commandment, _The Sabbath of the Lord thy God_, and elsewhere, his _holy day_, Isa. lviii. 13. so there is a peculiar day which our Saviour, who is the Lord here spoken of, claims as his holy day. And what can this be, but that day which he has instituted in commemoration of his having finished the work of our redemption?
[2.] It may be farther observed, that when God is said to lay claim to things in scripture, it denotes, that they are of his appointment, and for his glory. Thus the bread and the wine in that ordinance, which Christ has appointed in remembrance of his death, is called _the Lord’s supper_, or _the Lord’s table_, denoting that it is an ordinance of his own appointment; in like manner _the Lord’s day_ may be fitly so called for this reason, as instituted by him.
The arguments that have hitherto been brought to prove that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, are principally such as are founded on a scripture-consequence. We shall now proceed to prove that this consequence is just, _viz._ that because the first day of the week was observed by our Saviour, his apostles, and the church in general, as the Lord’s day, that is, a day instituted by him, in commemoration of his having finished the work of our redemption; therefore we ought to observe it for that end. Here it may be considered,