THE 4th COMMANDMENT AND ITS OBSERVANCE.

Southland Times, Issue 21894, 21 December 1932, Page 9

THE 4th COMMANDMENT AND ITS OBSERVANCE.

To the Editor. Sir,—And in those days were many Pharisees or those more careful of the “OUTWARD” forms than the Spirit of “Religion”—of “Religion” rather than of “PIETY”; but these were not nearly as numerous as their brethren of today! ! !—A thought suggested by a pointed remark made by one of the latter in a public conveyance, and by the huge amount of newspaper correspondence upon the “observance of the Sabbath” Ist or 7th day of the week, etc., etc. Now, what is the position? To enable them to keep fit and strong —physically and spiritually—and so to victoriously fight their way through a difficult and hostile country to their final objective, the Almighty gave to the Jews “THE LAW,” composed of divers ordinances of which “The Ten Commandments” were part only, the whole forming nothing less than a “Penal Code” of the most stringent nature, which like all such must be construed strictly—reading into it nothing which is not there. Take for example that part of the law which has come to be known as “the fourth Commandment,” and which has beeen so much in evidence locally and elsewhere, recently and for months past. To the simple minded it would appear strange that there could have beeen so much controversy upon it for the situation appears abundantly plain, and we are led to wonder whether the controversialists, or any of them have taken the trouble to read the Commandment. What does it say? Just this:— There are seven days in the week; on six of these seven days Thou shalt work, but on the remaining day of the seven—WHlCH MUST NATURALLY AND OF NECESSITY BE THE SEVENTH—thou shalt rest. Exod. C. 20 v.v. 9 and 10; C. 23 v. 12; C. 35 vv.1.2.3. The particular days of the week to be set aside for work and rest respectively are not specified and we must notread into the Commandment what we personally think ought to be there or by reference to some other portion of Scripture we think is there, or any other matter whatever. It must be construed just as it stands; and thus the Lord’s day of Rest or the Sabbath may —so far as the Commandment goes, and we are concerned, LAWFULLY BE OBSERVED ON ANY ONE OF THE SEVEN DAYS OF THE WEEK according to one’s conscience, circumstances and necessity. Naturally every reasonable being must appreciate the convenience of universal uniformity in its observance— Christ’s disciples observed it on the Ist day, and this for the sake of public, civic and national convenience was adopted by Decree by the Emperor Constantine somewhere about A.D. 300, and since then by all civilized people. But presently someone, anxious to found yet another Sect, comes along and says to her friend “Oh! I say! Let us found a new Sect! What matter to us what other people have said and done for ages, and are still saying and doing! We must be different from all the rest and we will observe the Sabbath on Saturday the 7th instead of Sunday the Ist day of the week. Won’t that make a stir? I’ll be treasurer and pastor and make and care for the collection, and you shall be the congregation and have a pew all to yourself! Oh! won’t that be nice?” And thus, in that spir.'. which begets all schism—* Egoism—came into being another new Sect now known as “the Seventh Day Adventists.

We are all agreed, I suppose, that the 7th day was sanctified at the very beginning of time, but the observance of the Ist day instead of the 7th makes no infringement of the law itself, nor would it have done so had any other day been selected. The change which has been made from the day on which the world was finished to that on which Christ completed the work of redemption answers but to the other changes which have been made in that spiritual process by which the Gospel perfects and fulfils the law. So, be all this as it may, the matter is of Academic interest only for whatever the law may have been, and the correct construction thereof what it may, the law has been perfected and fulfilled in Christ—the Pharisaical observance “of days and months and years,” and the Pharisees themselves rebuked “the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath day” and again and more emphatically still “The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath!”

What say ye to that, Mr Pharisee? Was not the Mosaic Law repealed by the new Law of Christ? And was it not the latter law to which St. Paul refers in Gal. C.6.V.2. “Bear ye one another’s burdens and so fulfil the Law of Christ?”—which means the “WHOLE” Law of Christ:—“Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart and all thy mind and all thy soul and all thy strength and thy neighbour as thyself,” and this embraces all other laws and ordinances. And if a man keep this law he will have no other Gods; Will make no graven image nor bow down nor serve them; Will not take the name of the Lord In vain; Will remember the Sabbath day; Will honour his father and mother; Will not kill; Will not commit adultery; Will not steal; Will not bear false witness; Will not covet anything that is not his. A man with God’s commandments and love in his heart will be clean in body, mind and soul; will scorn a lie; be full of love for his fellowman, courteous, considerate and chivalrous to all; IN SHORT, HE WILL BE THE VERY MODEL OF A PERFECT CHRISTIAN GENTLEMAN, and to repeat, will keep “THE LORD’S Sabbath—day—though, possibly, at times that day, Mr, Mrs and Miss McParisee, may not be “YOUR” Sabbath day.—l am, etc. ARTHUR E. SYKES.