THE LAW AND THE SABBATH
Love Upholds the Law
Coming back to Jesus’ declaration that the commandments are based on love to God and love to man, and that “on these two commandments hang all the law,” we find that, according to Jesus, these two commandments do not dispose of any part of the law, but uphold all the law. The first four commandments define our duty to God, based on love. If a man loves the Lord with all the heart, he will not have other gods, will not bow to images, and will not profane the Lord’s name or the Lord’s holy day. And if a man loves his neighbor as himself, he will not murder, steal, lie, or practice the violation of any of the others of the last six commandments. But the principles of divine love must first be implanted in his heart, because the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God. It would seem from this that a feeling of rebellion against the commandments of God is a sure sign that carnality still dominates the heart.
Since the commandments are spiritual and based on love, they can never fail because “love never fails.” (1 Corinthians 13:8, A.S.V.) Paul further declares, “Love is the fulfilling of the law.” Romans 13:10. This statement simply means that love is the carrying out of that which the law embodies by the way of love to God and man. When Cain violated these principles, his wretchedness led him to say, “My punishment is greater than I can bear.” Genesis 4:13. It is the purpose of the gospel not to give license to violate these principles, but so to infuse man’s heart with love for his fellow men that he will be led to respect these principles. This is the love that is “the fulfilling of the law.”
As long as human social relations remain, as long as the commandment “Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself” is a Christian duty, the last six of the Ten Commandments will remain not abolished. The only way to abolish these commandments would be to abolish the social relations between man and man-and then there would be no possibility of violating them.
Man was made with a capacity not only for social fellowship with others but also for spiritual fellowship with God. The maintenance of this fellowship involved certain principles which, if observed, would ensure its uninterrupted continuity. On the other hand their violation would destroy this fellowship and separate man from God. We need only to refer to what came to our first parents in the Garden of Eden to prove that this is true. We cannot get into the kingdom by good works, but we can shut ourselves out by bad works. To Adam and Eve disobedience (Romans 5:19) proved to be the bad works which shut them out from Eden.
Some modern teachers claim that the Ten Commandments “governed Israel’s moral life,” and that they came to an end, together with the typical and ceremonial laws which pointed forward to the death of our Lord. It seems unaccountably strange that it will be persistently taught that the moral principles of these commandments neither originated nor applied before Sinai but existed only between then and the cross. Why do not the supporters of this teaching recall that when Cain murdered his brother, he was held under condemnation? Why do they not recall that when Joseph was urged to violate the principle of the seventh commandment, he protested, saying, “How then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?” Why can they not understand that it never. has been right to have other gods, adore images, and desecrate the Lord’s name and day? Why can they not understand that it has never been right to dishonor parents, kill, commit adultery, steal, lie, and covet? Why can they not see that Jesus never brought these principles to an end at the cross, or then after a time legislated again nine of them back into force again? We can illustrate the folly of this argument by supposing that one of a man’s ten fingers is giving him trouble, and he wishes to get rid of it. Suppose he goes to a doctor and makes his wishes known. Suppose the physician should argue like this: “The only way I can get rid of the troublesome finger is to cut off all ten and later stick nine of them back on.” Sounds foolish, doesn’t it? But what about the argument that God abolished all ten of the commandments at the cross to get rid of the “troublesome” Sabbath Commandment and then reinstated nine of them later on? This is exactly what the no-Sabbath advocates contend. It does seem that any honest truth seeker could understand that these men are wrong and only trying desperately to get around the truth.
The commandments are enduring principles based on love relations between man and man, and man and his Maker; and from the very beginning God never intended that man should have other gods, worship images, or profane the Lord’s name or the Sabbath, all of which stand for the recognition of God as Creator. As long as these relationships between God and man last, these principles will exist. The only way to abolish the commandments which unfold these principles would be to abolish the relationships between God and man. Certainly the coming of Jesus into the world never disrupted or destroyed these love relations. How, when “love is the fulfilling of the law,” can grace be opposed to love, and love be opposed to grace? Such is not the truth. How can a man preach the love of God with one breath and the abolition of the Ten Commandments with the next? How can such preaching be the truth if love is the fulfilling of the law? Love carries out what it says. Then as long as the commandments remain, the seventh-day Sabbath must remain, since it is one of the commandments of this law of love.
