Charles Hodge
An edited extract from Hodge’s Systematic Theology, vol 3.
The Sabbath was instituted from the beginning of the world and all generations are obliged to keep it.
1. This may be inferred from the nature and the design of the institution.
It is a generally-recognised principle that those commands of the Old Testament which were addressed to the Jews as Jews, and were founded on their special circumstances and relations, passed away when the Mosaic economy was abolished; but those founded on the unchangeable nature of God, or on the permanent relationships between men, are of permanent obligation. There are many such commands which bind men as men: fathers as fathers, children as children, and neighbours as neighbours.
It is perfectly apparent that the Fourth Commandment belongs to the latter class. It is important for all men to know that God created the world, and therefore is a transcendent personal being, infinite in all His perfections. All men need to be arrested in their worldly career and to be called upon to pause and turn their thoughts Godward. It is incalculably important that men should have time and opportunity for religious instruction and worship. It is necessary for all men, and even servile animals, to have time to rest and recover their strength. The rest of each night is not sufficient for that purpose, as physiologists assure us and as experience has demonstrated. Such is obviously the judgement of God.
It therefore appears, from the nature of this commandment as moral, and not positive or ceremonial, that it is original and universal in its obligation.
A positive command is not binding by its nature, but purely by the will of God, Ed.
No one assumes that the commands, “Thou shalt not kill”, and, “Thou shalt not steal”, were first announced by Moses and that they ceased to be obligatory when the old economy passed away.
A moral law is one that binds from its own nature. It expresses an obligation arising either out of our relations to God or out of our permanent relations to our fellowmen. It binds whether formally enacted or not. There are no doubt positive elements in the Fourth Commandment as it stands in the Bible. It is positive that a seventh, and not a sixth or an eighth part of our time should be consecrated to the public service of God. It is positive that the seventh day of the week under the Old Testament and the first under the New should be thus set apart, rather than any other. But it is moral that there should be a day of rest and a cessation from worldly duties. It is of moral obligation that God and His great works should be remembered at stated times. It is a moral duty that the people should assemble for religious instruction and for the united worship of God. All this was obligatory before the time of Moses, and would have been binding if he had never existed. All that the Fourth Commandment did was to put this natural and universal obligation into a definite form.
2. The original and universal obligation of the law of the Sabbath may be inferred from its having found a place in the decalogue.
As all the other commandments in that fundamental revelation of the duties of men, to God and to their neighbour, are moral and permanent in their obligation, it would be incongruous and unnatural if the Fourth should be a solitary exception. This argument is surely not met by the answer given to it by the advocates of the opposite doctrine. The continued obligation of the Sabbath, they say, is valid only on the assumption “that the Mosaic law, because of its divine origin, is of universal and permanent authority”. May it not be as well said that, if the command, “Thou shalt not steal”, is still in force, the whole code of the Mosaic law must be binding? The Fourth Commandment is read in Christian churches whenever the decalogue is read, and the people are taught to say, Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.
3. Another argument is derived from the penalty attached to the violation of this commandment.
“Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore, for it is holy unto you: everyone that defileth it shall surely be put to death” (Ex 31:14). This penalty did not follow the violation of any law which was merely ceremonial or positive. Even the neglect of circumcision, although it involved the rejection of both the Abrahamic and the Mosaic covenant and necessarily resulted in the forfeiture of all the benefits of the theocracy, was not made a capital offence. By being thus distinguished, the law of the Sabbath was raised far above the level of mere positive enactments. A character was given to it, not only of primary importance, but also of special sanctity.
4. We accordingly find that in the Prophets, as well as in the Pentateuch and the historical books of the Old Testament, the Sabbath is not only spoken of as “a delight”, but also its faithful observance is predicted as one of the characteristics of the Messianic period.
Thus Isaiah says, “If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on My holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour Him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it” (Is 58:13,14).
The prophets predicted that, under the Messiah, the true religion was to be extended to the ends of the earth. But the public worship of God was by the Jewish law tied to Jerusalem. That law was neither designed nor adapted for a universal religion. To those, therefore, who believe that the Sabbath was a temporary Mosaic institution, to pass away when the old economy was abolished, it is altogether incongruous that a prophet should represent the faithful observance of the Sabbath as one of the chief blessings and glories of the Messiah’s reign.
These considerations, apart from historical evidence or the direct assertion of the Scriptures, are enough to create a strong presumption that the Sabbath was instituted from the beginning, and was designed to be of universal and permanent obligation. Whatever law had a temporary ground or reason for its enactment was temporary in its obligation. Where the reason for the law is permanent the law itself is permanent.