Tracts on the Sabbath

by Unknown

Obj. We who believe are entered into rest, of which the Sabbath was but a type, as appeals by the words of the Apostle in Heb. 4:3.

Ans. If eternal rest by faith be the antitype of the Sabbath, the Sabbath ceased to be in force to every man so soon as he believed; which is ridiculous to think, and contrary to the current of Scripture. But the Apostle saith, We who believe do enter into rest; for he that is entered into his rest is ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labor therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the example of unbelief. Heb. 4:10, 11. Mind this chapter well, and I am persuaded you will see that the drift of the Apostle, in mentioning the seventh day here, is but to amplify and set forth that perfect rest which they that believe do and shall enjoy, of which the land of Canaan was but a type; and to show that God's rest was before the Land of Canaan, and that there yet remains a rest to the people of God. As God did rest the seventh day from all his works, so they that enter into rest do cease from their own works, as God did from his. And this is not as soon as men believe, for the Apostle provokes himself and others which were believers to labor to enter into it. And therefore, if you will have the Sabbath, a type from this Scripture, though it is nowhere so called, it must be a type of eternal rest, which saints do enter into when they cease from their own works, as God did from his. And that will not be till they lay down this tabernacle, which will not affect the thing asserted. And indeed I cannot deny but the Sabbath is an earnest of that rest, and saints that are spiritual in the observation of it find it so, and of great use to put them in mind of that glorious rest, as the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper put us in mind of the sufferings of Christ; so this being a day of rest and delight, being striped of all worldly incumbrances, and devoted to the Lord, to pray unto him, and to praise his holy name, to meditate upon heaven and heavenly glory.

Obj. But many say, If the Sabbath be in force, then the penalty must needs be so, and then those that do not keep it must be stoned; therefore this opinion is dangerous, and will lead saints to destroy one another.

Ans. This is a very showy objection, but indeed it is a very weak one. I do not find that any more than one was stoned, and it was for presumptuous breaking of the Sabbath. But suppose that penalty be in force; every saint is not a magistrate to put it in execution. If a saint should kill a man, saints as they are saints are not to execute him; all that they can do is to endeavor his repentance, but it belongs to the true magistrate to inflict the punishment. The penal laws of God take hold of presumptuous sinners, not for sins of ignorance, and therefore it is not to be thought that any punishment will be inflicted upon any for a breach of the Sabbath till it be universally acknowledged. So then, if God hath annexed the penalty of death to the breaking of it, doubtless it will be just. But we find in Nehemiah's time, that although they had made a market-day of the Sabbath, treading of wine-presses, lading of asses, and selling of all manner of provisions upon it, yet he doth but contend with them. He contends with the Jews of Jerusalem, the nobles of Judah, and the men of Tyre, but inflicts no punishment on either. Neh. 13:15-17, 21. But what a strange thing is this, that men should count it a dangerous opinion, to hold that the Sabbath is in force, because of the penalty! Suppose it be so; the same may be said of the rest of the commandments. For instance, the first commandment is, Thou shalt have no other gods before me; he that worshiped a strange god was to be put to death. Now, shall we not own this commandment, because the breakers of it were so punished? Again, He that sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. Now, is there any danger in the owning of this commandment, Thou shalt do no murder, because the punishment is in force? Again, the fifth commandment is, Honor thy father and thy mother, but he that cursed father or mother was to be put to death. Now, shall we not honor father and mother, and so shall we break this commandment, because this punishment belongs to the breakers of it? So this objection is of no weight or use at all, except it be as a bear-skin put upon the truth to frighten children away, lest they should look into it.

Obj. But we do not find any of the apostles urge this commandment in any of their epistles, namely, that the Sabbath day should be observed.

Ans. Neither do we find the apostles urging the first, second, or third commandment in particular, as laid down in the table, but they are frequently urged in the general, as in Rom. 7:12, 13:8-10, and generals comprehend particulars. James saith, Whosoever shall keep the whole law, yet offend in one point, is guilty of all; and he proves it thus, Because he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill; now, if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. The same argument may be drawn from the thing in hand. He that saith, Do not commit adultery, saith also, Keep the Sabbath; now, if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou break the Sabbath, thou art become a transgressor of the law. James 2:10, 11. And Paul saith, Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God. 1 Cor. 7:19. John saith, in his first epistle, chapter 5:2, 3, By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep his commandments; for this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments, and his commandments are not grievous. And if the apostles had not spoken a word to this commandment, in general or in particular, it is no ground for us to lay it by, except the observation of it were forbidden, because it is so plainly commanded by God, explained by Christ, observed by his disciples, both before and after his death, as was said before, and will farther appear by and by.

Obj. But we do not find that any of the churches kept the Sabbath.

Ans. That is no proof that they did not keep it. But it is clear that the church of Jerusalem kept it, though it is not plainly expressed, for they were so zealous for the very customs, that Paul is counseled to purify himself, lest they should be offended at him. Acts 21:21, 24. Now, if they were for the observation of those things that were but shadows, there is no doubt but they were very strict for the observation of the Sabbath. And there was such offence taken against Paul for preaching against circumcision and the customs, that we need not question, if the Sabbath had been preached against, but we should have heard a great noise of it in the Scriptures, and seen strong convincing reasons why it was abolished. And it is as clear that the apostles kept the Sabbath after the resurrection of Christ as before. Paul went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and sat down, and after the reading of the law preached the gospel, and told them of the ignorance of those that dwelt at Jerusalem of the voice of the prophets which were read every Sabbath day. And the Gentiles besought him that these words might be spoken to them the next Sabbath. And the next Sabbath came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. Acts 13:14, 15, 42, 44. So that it is clear, that the Sabbath was Paul's resting-day and preaching-day, both to the Jews and Gentiles, that being the day that the Gentiles used to hear; and though they had a desire to hear the same words again, yet it must be next Sabbath; and Paul fulfills their desire, and preaches to them the next Sabbath, and almost the whole city came to hear. Can we think, if there had been no Sabbath, that Paul would have countenanced them so in their ignorance? Or, if the first day had been a day that was observed, would he not have told them so, that they might have heard the word before the next Sabbath. And when Paul came to Philippi, a Gentile city, mind what is said in Acts 16:12, 13, We were in that city abiding certain days, and on the Sabbath day we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made, and we sat down and spake unto the women that resorted thither. The seventh day hath its title still, as is said by the Spirit in Acts; speaking of certain days, this is singled out and called the Sabbath day, with an account how they spent it, and the blessing they received upon it; they resorted to the place of prayer, and there they preached, and the Lord opened Lydia's heart to attend to the words of Paul. And in Acts 17:2, it is said, That Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures. And when Paul came to Corinth, which was a Gentile city, and found Aquila, a Jew, and his wife Priscilla, and because they were of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought, for by occupation they were tent-makers, he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath day, and persuaded the Jews and Greeks. Acts 18:2-4. So that it is manifest, that the Greeks kept the Sabbath as well as the Jews, and that though Paul wrought at his trade and made tents, yet he rested every Sabbath day; and as we have an account how he spent his time, namely, in working at his trade, so we have an account how he spent his time on the Sabbath. Now, if it be such a strong argument for the observation of the first day, because Paul preached upon it once; what is this for the observation of the seventh day, that Paul did not only preach constantly upon it, but wherever the Spirit speaks of it he calls it the Sabbath day, without the least hint that he did so out of condescension to the weakness of others? And let it be shown by the Scriptures that the apostles did countenance and own any shadow that was done away, as they owned and countenanced the keeping of the Sabbath, and we may follow the apostles as they followed the Lord in this matter, though we have no express word that the churches kept it. And, indeed, I think I may say in this case, as the Apostle said in another, that it would have been superfluous for the apostles to have told any people in their time that such and such a church kept the Sabbath; it being a truth not so much as questioned, that we hear of, but Jews and Gentiles both observed it. But now I cease answering objections, as I have spoken to those that are the most material of them that I have heard, and I shall proceed to another ground.

8. Consider the bondage and slavery that both man and beast would be in if this doctrine were received for truth. Would it not now, however have the tendency to bring the world more to atheism? Some men would not allow themselves nor their servants time to rest, or hear the word of God, if they were persuaded that there was no Sabbath; yea, and the greater part of saints are left to the mercy of merciless men, most of them being children, and wives, and servants; and they cannot challenge a day in seven, or a day in seventy, as their right to rest upon, and to worship the Lord in, from any commandment of God, if this doctrine be true, that the Sabbath is abolished. And were this but to bring a yoke of bondage upon us, that neither we nor our fathers were able to bear, we should not so much as take notice at this time how it goes in probability, for the way of numbering is by sevens.

But some will say, It is good to observe one day in seven, though it be not a constant day. This will be confessed, for one to observe one day, and another to observe another day, while others are for a seventh day to be constantly observed. But why not the seventh day which God hath commanded, for the seventh day is the Sabbath? It plainly appears, that there is something of the table-law yet upon the table of the hearts of most men, though worn by much transgression; for men generally plead to have one day in seven to rest in, and yet because of custom they contend against this holy, just law of God, that was made in mercy for man. I am persuaded in my very heart, and that not without good ground, that if the seventh day had been observed as the first day is, no man that owns the Scriptures would have questioned whether it ought to be observed or not, or at least no opposition would have been made against it; and when all is said, custom and worldly interest are the two great things that stand in opposition to it.