Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. To keep holy or sanctify the Sabbath is to appropriate it to sacred purposes; and the purport of this commandment is, that as the Sabbath properly signifies rest and leisure from servile work, and at the same time is used to denote the seventh day, which God at the beginning of the present worldly system consecrated to holy rest, to enjoin by a special precept the duty of hallowing it by a total suspension of all labour, both personal and domestic. The word "Remember" implies that it was well known and recognized.
Verse 10. But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God literally, a Sabbath to the Lord thy God;
i.e., a rest from labour and consecrated to religion.
In it thou shalt not do any work literally, 'Thou shalt not do every work:' but the meaning undoubtedly is, 'thou shalt do no work,' conformably to a well-known rule in Hebrew grammar, relating to the interpretation of all with a negative (Ewald, sec. 576).
(thy cattle - i:e., the beasts employed in the service of man - "the ox and the donkey" are specified elsewhere (Deuteronomy 5:14). The horse, the use of which was prohibited in the law, is not mentioned. Ewald thinks the camel is included in the "cattle." Thus, the lower animals were allowed to participate in the privileges of the Sabbath in common with their owners. With the exception of the Jewish code, it does not appear that the useful animals ever obtained the benefit of any legal enactments. The principle of humanity to beasts of labour was never assumed as a basis of legislation in any of the national codes of the ancient world.
Nor thy stranger - i:e., foreigner. The mention of a stranger being to observe a Sabbath is a proof that the command of a Sabbath is not merely Jewish, as has frequently been asserted. No stranger could join in eating the Passover without being circumcised, and thereby initiated into Judaism: but a stranger might, nay, was obliged, as the commandment runs, to keep the Sabbath, though he had not been circumcised. The reason of this remarkable distinction is, that circumcision was a national, and the Sabbath a universal institution: the former was given in command to Abraham, and obligatory only on his descendants; while the latter was given to Adam, the father of all mankind (Kennicott). [The Septuagint, however, has proseelutos-one who, though uncircumcised, had become a worshipper of the true God (see the notes at Exodus 12:19; Exodus 12:45; cf. Exodus 22:21; Deuteronomy 10:19; Deuteronomy 31:12, where gar is used for an uncircumcised person). But generally the distinction is sufficiently marked by the sacred historian employing gar for a sojourner or proselyte, and thoshab for a foreigner].
Within thy gates, х bish`aareykaa (H8179)] (cf. Deuteronomy 5:14). This expression occurs in the original form, as well as in the recapitulation of the law; and yet it is objected by Davidson (Introduction) that it was inapplicable in the desert. But it is a wide and comprehensive phrase, used with reference to habitations both in settled and nomadic life: the gate of a palace (Esther 2:19; Esther 2:21), of the temple (Ezra 8:5; Ezra 8:10; Ezra 8:19), of a city (Genesis 23:18; Joshua 2:7), as well as of a camp (Exodus 32:26-27), though neither of a house nor a tent. [The Septuagint has: ho proseelutos, ho paroikoon en soi, dwelling with you].
Verse 11. For in six days the Lord made, х `aasaah (H6213), not baaraa' (H1254), created]. The operation referred to in this passage-namely, the making of the "heaven," or firmament, "the earth," "the sea, and all that in them is" - is that described, Genesis 1:6-27. The words which were spoken by Yahweh Himself, and afterward given by Him as a permanent record on stone, do not assert that the work of creation was begun and entirely completed in six days. Only so much of the creative process is referred to as related to the law of the Sabbath, the six days of the Adamic creation. In other words, the object of the passage is not to touch upon anything that might, or might not, have taken place in the universe, or even on this globe, prior to the first day of the Adamic creation; its specific design is to determine that nothing was done after the sixth day.
The reason assigned for the sanctification of the Hebrew Sabbath is here enjoined on the ground not only of the divine conduct in 'resting on the seventh day, but in blessing and hallowing it;' whereas it is enforced, Deuteronomy 5:15, upon the Israelites from a consideration of their release from Egyptian bondage. And hence, it has been maintained that Moses is not the author of the Pentateuch, since these two motives are widely different, and that there is reason to conclude that this verse, which refers to so remote an era, is a gloss or comment introduced by some later hand. But there is no external evidence furnished, either by Hebrew MSS. or versions, for the hypothesis that this passage was a later interpolation, nor is there any internal proof on the ground of discrepancy; because the enforcement of the Sabbath by two different motives does not constitute two discordant precepts; and it is far from being unusual with the sacred writers to adduce a secondary reason, as if it were one, in urging preceptive truths which had been previously announced.
The law of the Sabbath was constituted a memorial of creation: and hence, the reason here assigned must be considered as demonstrating its universal obligation. It is not a reason applicable to any one age, or to one class of men more than to another. All classes of men are bound to obey and glorify the Creator; and the devout observance of the Sabbath is one of the methods divinely appointed for that end. This statute of religion, then, as thus enforced, maintains its primordial character even when incorporated with the code of Sinai. For the physical rest, though necessarily made prominent in the prohibitory form of the enactment (and, forming part of the law of the land, was severely punishable, Numbers 15:32), did not certainly comprehend the whole or the chief object of the institution. Such abstinence from 'any manner of work' would not be equivalent to 'keeping holy the Sabbath day.' It is a part-an important, but not the principal, end of it, which was to afford an opportunity of worshipping God (pp. 9, 28, 29).
The prohibition of "any work" appears absolute; but our Lord explained and proven that the degree of restriction admitted of considerable latitude; for instance, works of necessity and mercy were in full accordance with the spirit and design of the commandment (Matthew 12:11; Luke 14:5). In this respect it is a moral precept, adapted to the character of intelligent creatures, and founded on their relations to the Creator. It has been said, indeed, this commandment alone, of the ten words, is partly moral and partly positive, because it has a small addition of positive precept in the case of a specified time for religious duties. But such an addition cannot affect the real character of the commandment-for although a circumstance may be appended to or conjoined with it, it still remains intrinsically moral, being in its own nature of eternal and immutable obligation.
This seems to be a juster and more correct view than that of Owen and others, who represent the Sabbath as a positive and ceremonial institution, having a moral purpose in it: for if it be not pre-eminently moral in its principle, how comes it to have been placed in the center of the Decalogue? 'Where throughout this code,' says Dr. Richard Hamilton ('Horae et Vindiciae Sabbaticae), 'is the statute of religion, if it be not in its fourth precept? Where else is it written, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart?" (Matthew 22:37.) Not in those which precede it: they are only interdicts upon Polytheism, idol-worship, and profanity. Not in those which follow; because they only regard the ethics of man, and of man in the present state. But "on those two commandments," or summaries and heads of commandments, "hang all the law and the prophets." Here it is to be found, if found at all.'
Hengstenberg ('Lord's Day'), after adverting to Bengel's remark, that the subject of the Sabbath occupies a considerable portion of the evangelical history, says, 'This fact is of no small importance. It can scarcely be supposed that the Lord would have taken so much care to correct the erroneous opinions which prevailed in his time as to the Sabbath, if this had been in its essence an Old Testament institution. But He distinctly declared that "the Sabbath was made for man" - man in general.'